akhatri_aus
Born on October 06, 2013•704 Karma
There's still a cashier if you need one but there's hardly anyone at them, even if there's a queue to use the kiosks.
Ordering form the machine lets me choose English, and while most Finnish people understand English I feel bad when I have to use it.
(I'll be taking another round of language classes in a few months.)
That begs the question on whether it was more for publicity or it was actually intended to be used.
Would it be realistic to see that submarine in Thailand or on some video camera in an LA pool?
What? How did you come to this conclusion? They deliberately designed it to be 31cm so that it would fit through the narrowest parts they knew of (38cm? 35cm?), and it was obvious to you that it wouldn't fit?
A solid metal cylinder that can't bend had no chance at all to begin with. If a human cant go through without bending their body how can a cylinder containing a flat standing human get through? An engineer designing for this situation knows to optimise for the camera instead of the cave.
Do you see that diagram says "gap approx 40 cm"? Do you see that I already told you they deliberately designed their submarine to be 31 cm in diameter? Do you see that there's a chance that the oxygen tanks and their human chest combined are indeed more than 31 cm, and hence having to take them off might not say anything about whether a 31 cm tube will fit?
On the other hand you would need to squeeze a person in that submarine over the whole diving range. That would probably not help feeling them more comfortable.
Last not least in article you will find the quote "'The equipment he gave us is not practical for our mission,' Narongsak said Tuesday morning", that might prove my point.
Finally I don't get why you are arguing that the submarine is such a great idea when it's clearly not.
> That would probably not help feeling them more comfortable.
> that might prove my point.
All this doubt in your assessment and all of a sudden you deduce their plan is "bollocks"?
> I don't get why you are arguing that the submarine is such a great idea
Where did I argue a submarine is a great idea? Why must something either be "bollocks" or "a great idea"?
