This subject is touched upon on many pages, in many remote corners of this web site cluster ------. For the convenience of potential investors, this page is aimed at gathering these widely scattered bits of information into a somewhat organized whole.
Somewhere out there, no doubt, there are a few who believe that, quite literally, the sky is falling - or about to. Certainly, the majority of the inhabitants of this planet apparently believe that, while the sky is not falling, temperatures and sea levels are rising (quite dramatically, in geological terms) and that there is going to be hell to pay - one way or another.
There are also a number of other threats to civilization, the environment, our species and our planet that are causing alarm among many individuals and groups. Whether this alarm is warranted or not is really beside the point. If one feels threatened, it surely is totally sensible and rational to take these threats (real or imagined) into account in one's day to day decisions.
Indeed many individuals are in increasing numbers, responding to the threats they percieve as the most imminent. Witness the sales growth in security systems, armoured private cars, safe rooms, emergency food rations, bunkers etc etc. For more in this vein, see:
From my perspective, the most pervasive threat to our future is the following. There are approximately 6.5 million people on this planet and this number is increasing rapidly. The vast majority of these people do not employ rational thought processes in many, if not most, of their decisions and choices. On the other hand, science and technology (by virtue of employing extremely rational and effective thought processes) is also producing more and more powerful products (from computers to cannons) in greater and greater numbers.
This combination of billions of irrational people and billions of the products of modern day technology is quite simply an explosive mix - like gasoline and oxygen. All that is required is a spark, from whatever source, to cause catastrophic consequences. Any of the other catastrophes looming on the horizon may provide such a spark.
If the sky is, in fact, falling and /or sea levels rising and /or some other global catastrophe is imminent, lifeboats are going to be required - in large numbers - to avoid more "Titanic" (in both senses of the word) disasters. It would appear then, not to be overly alarmist or totally -------- crazy, to suggest that, in the design construction and layout of any boat, some consideration should be given to the possibility (no matter how remote) of this boat being required to serve as a lifeboat.
The design requirements, for lifeboats aboard large vessels today, are relatively straight forward and not difficult to fulfill. They need to be capable of - being deployed rapidly and keeping a large number of persons afloat and alive (in , quite possibly, rough sea conditions) until help arrives.
Lifeboats, required for surviving the wide variety of catastrophes, which we may need to deal with on a moment's notice, need to satisfy these basic requirements - and a whole lot more. Help may not be arriving any time soon. In fact, help may be a very long time and / or distance away and, possibly, may never arrive at all. This wide spectrum of possible disasters creates a wide spectrum of design requirements - for such lifeboats. Some of these would seem to be:
> Survivability (staying afloat, upright and in one piece)
> Self sustainability (provisions for food, water, and energy - for the long run)
> Reliability
> Long range
> Comfort (both inshore and offshore)
> Speed (Both short distance and long distance and both inshore and offshore)
> Fuel economy
> Simplicity (for ease of maintenance and repair)
> Low tech (for ease of maintenance and repair)
> Shallow draft (for increasing the options for dealing with any number of threats)
Contrary to what one might imagine, fulfilling these requirements, does not make for a "specialized boat", which has become better and better at doing less and less - until it has become very good at doing nothing at all. In fact, fulfilling these requirement makes for a boat that is extremely good at doing many things (not necessarily global catastrophe related) - except, perhaps, turning heads (in the right direction) at the boat show.
On the other hand, boats, which focus more and more on generating "Wows!" at the boat show, do tend to become better and better at doing less and less - until they become very good for nothing at all. Most, no doubt, fail miserably as lifeboats and often fail miserably at other tasks, such as: providing a reasonable degree of comfort (without generators and air conditioners blasting away) providing mobility (without the necessity of dragging the fuel dock behind you) - and a host of other tasks.
It seems then, that a prospective boat buyer is faced with the relatively simple decision between impressing the neighbors or, in the event of some catastrophe, staying alive. Naturally, in conformity with the opinion I expressed earlier, the vast majority will, no doubt, opt for the former. I suspect, however, that there will be a few dissenters who choose the latter - enough anyway, to provide a handsome return for our investors - and, if it should turn out that "The sky really is falling", to provide a decent shot at survival for a few.