Starship = Submarine

Enterprise

Re: Starship = Submarine

Postby McAvoy » Mon May 13, 2013 8:31 pm

Captain Seafort wrote:
McAvoy wrote:Because I sleeper on a steel bed 3 feet wide by 6 six feet long with a locker underneath about a foot deep in a bunk three deep. Not to mention this was with 200 other guys. I never had a cabin. Only high ranking officers get wardrooms.


Were they arranged such that you'd have a six-man cabin if you defined "cabin" as "two stacks of bunks plus a six-foot by three-foot deck space with a curtain at each end"? I suspect that's the sort of arrangement Tyyr's thinking of. Also, I thought the bunks were narrower than you describe, so there's been a slight increase in personal space since the days of sail.


That would be the first time I ever heard someone calling two triple bunks as a cabin.

British ships could have narrower bunks but US ships are three feet wide.
"Don't underestimate the power of technobabble: the Federation can win anything with the sheer force of bullshit"
User avatar
McAvoy
Captain
Captain
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 1:39 am
Location: East Windsor, NJ

Re: Starship = Submarine

Postby McAvoy » Mon May 13, 2013 8:34 pm

Teaos wrote:It is my understanding that some models of Subs have people literally sleeping in anywhere there is 6 feet of horizontal space.


Hot racking is a term that means two people share a single bed at different times. So one is working while the other is sleeping. By the time the guy on duty goes to sleep the other is up and going on duty. The rack can still be warm from body heat.

Hot racking in surface ships means the person did not take a shower before getting the rack.
"Don't underestimate the power of technobabble: the Federation can win anything with the sheer force of bullshit"
User avatar
McAvoy
Captain
Captain
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 1:39 am
Location: East Windsor, NJ

Re: Starship = Submarine

Postby Captain Seafort » Mon May 13, 2013 8:54 pm

McAvoy wrote:That would be the first time I ever heard someone calling two triple bunks as a cabin.


I agree it's stretching the definition somewhat, but it affords a small degree more privacy than a barrack room arrangement, and given how fly-on-the-wall docs are be shot they can look more spacious and enclosed on screen than they actually are.
Only two things are infinite - the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the universe: Albert Einstein.

Across the Universe - Chapter 2 now up
User avatar
Captain Seafort
3 Star Admiral
3 Star Admiral
 
Posts: 14941
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 12:44 pm
Location: Blighty

Re: Starship = Submarine

Postby McAvoy » Mon May 13, 2013 9:15 pm

Image
"Don't underestimate the power of technobabble: the Federation can win anything with the sheer force of bullshit"
User avatar
McAvoy
Captain
Captain
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 1:39 am
Location: East Windsor, NJ

Re: Starship = Submarine

Postby Captain Seafort » Mon May 13, 2013 9:22 pm

Ours have got a slightly different arrangement. All the bunks are parallel, with each set of six are closed off with curtains. IIRC - my knowledge is mainly based on a few documentaries and a stay aboard HMS Bristol about a decade and a half ago.
Only two things are infinite - the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the universe: Albert Einstein.

Across the Universe - Chapter 2 now up
User avatar
Captain Seafort
3 Star Admiral
3 Star Admiral
 
Posts: 14941
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 12:44 pm
Location: Blighty

Re: Starship = Submarine

Postby McAvoy » Mon May 13, 2013 9:44 pm

In the US Navy, they arrange it so it fits. So this doesn't fully represent every ship. People like the middle rack but I always liked the top. I could sit up if I wanted to. My third deployment had me in between two I beams so I was extra privacy while sitting up.
"Don't underestimate the power of technobabble: the Federation can win anything with the sheer force of bullshit"
User avatar
McAvoy
Captain
Captain
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 1:39 am
Location: East Windsor, NJ

Previous

Return to ENT

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest