• Peppycito@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        I can’t wait to see that thing in the water. I wonder if there will be any free board left with the amount of weight they’re putting in.

        • grue@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 days ago

          I have to admit, I haven’t been keeping up with their latest videos. I think the last I saw, they had fairly recently left Svalbard. So I have no opinion about “Uma 3.0,” but I was impressed with their various electric drive systems on the older iterations.

          • Peppycito@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 days ago

            I really only watch cruisers during their refit periods, so I have been paying attention. They gutted it and then built foam stringers and completely gassed the inside. Like, built another hull inside the boat. They were all proud that the boat was so strong now they wouldn’t need any bulkheads. Then they proceeded to put in plywood bulkheads. And a plywood dodger. And so many G10 backer plates on everything, bedded with massive gobs of thickened epoxy. All this isn’t bad in isolation, but it all adds up. They haven’t even started installing the systems yet and it seems heavy. Next they’ll put 7 thousand pounds of batteries. Really interested to see it launch. But they’re quite good at showing only what they want seen so it might not be the big reveal I’m waiting for.

            • grue@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              3 days ago

              Interesting.

              Well, at least it’s a monohull and not a catamaran so (to some extent) more weight just means less ballast needed and doesn’t really hurt… but the real test will be how high the center of gravity ends up being. Having it sit low on its lines at launch would be obviously a disaster, but even if it doesn’t it could still lack stability in a storm if it really ends up as overbuilt as you say it will.

              • Peppycito@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                3 days ago

                I’m certainly not a naval architect, but I haven’t heard them say they’ve talked to one. They haven’t removed any ballast yet to my knowledge, just keep adding more stuff. The proof of the pudding will be in the floating.

                • grue@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  3 days ago

                  IIRC they met at architecture school (regular architecture, not naval), so it may be a situation where they think they know just enough to be dangerous.

  • Spaz@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    4 days ago

    The plastic used in the solar and other components are derived from fossil fuels. If it means 100% Fossil Fuel Free Propulsion then that is awesome.

    • anomnom@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      Also in the first 2 minutes of the video it shows him stoking his wood boat stove.

      While that’s not fossil burning, it’s not great either. An RV heat pump would be a much better solution, but then he’d need much better insulation, maybe that’s his plan later.