Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Partially-Undersea Water Discus Hotel To Be Built In the Maldives

Soulskill posted about a year ago | from the i-saw-that-episode-of-firefly-too dept.

Technology 89

Zothecula writes "Polish architectural and deep-sea engineering company Deep Ocean Technology has inked a deal with Ridgewood Hotels and Suites Pvt. Ltd. to build its futuristic part-underwater Water Discus Hotel just off the shore of Kuredhivaru Island in the Maldives. 'The luminous hotel features two large disc-shaped lounges seven-meters above the water, housing a luxury restaurant and spa. The lounges are connected to a glass tunnel plunging 30-meters below the water, leading to 21 opulent bedrooms. Not only does the hotel look like a spaceship -- it actually moves like one, with the largest underwater saucer-shaped room able to slide to the surface in emergencies. 'If you need to replace a window for example, it's very difficult underwater,' explained Podwojewski. 'So we wanted to build a building that can surface any time for maintenance or safety.'"

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

First .... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43989109)

blbl blbl bble

Re:First .... (1)

YoungManKlaus (2773165) | about a year ago | (#43992679)

you misspelled "Frist!"

Jetsons! (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43989139)

That is some straight up Jetsons shit right there...

Re:Jetsons! (0, Offtopic)

Impy the Impiuos Imp (442658) | about a year ago | (#43989189)

Tbey're not doing this in the US, wherr environmental lawsuits and a required study would add millions and 8 years to the project. Especially if it were anywhere near a reef people actually wanted to see or swim to.

Look up and see the surface of what once was, as we sink ever further into irrelevancy.

I give you permission to downmod me: -1: The Truth Hurts

Re:Jetsons! (1)

Lunix Nutcase (1092239) | about a year ago | (#43989405)

How dare anyone prioritize the ecosystem that sustains life on earth over corporate profit margins. Fucking communists.

Re:Jetsons! (1)

GLMDesigns (2044134) | about a year ago | (#43989715)

Obviously governments always do what is good and rational, and corporations are always evil.

Re:Jetsons! (0)

some old guy (674482) | about a year ago | (#43990307)

Obviously governments and corporations are always evil.

FTFY

Re:Jetsons! (1)

GLMDesigns (2044134) | about a year ago | (#43990473)

Who, or what, isn't evil?

Re:Jetsons! (1)

mcvos (645701) | about a year ago | (#43994251)

Who, or what, isn't evil?

Ecosystems that sustain life aren't evil, so it makes sense to prioritize them.

Re:Jetsons! (1)

xelah (176252) | about a year ago | (#43993373)

You get the same problems with state-owned industries as with private ones. It's not a 'government vs private' problem. It's a problem of having the same people who benefit be the same people who have to decide whether the damage to others is large enough to stop the project. Neither private corporations nor governments should regulate themselves.

Re:Jetsons! (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43989621)

I give you permission to downmod me: -1: The Truth Hurts

Oh, ow, you're right, I had no idea what you said was true, and hearing it hurts me now.

Wait, no, it's the exact fucking opposite of that. Seriously, environmental impact studies are a bad thing? Go back to your corporate master and beg to be put out of your misery, you're obviously no good at pushing your master's agenda.

Re:Jetsons! (1, Interesting)

I'm New Around Here (1154723) | about a year ago | (#43989847)

Spoken by someone who lives in a house that was already built, on land that had to be cleared, in a natural ecosystem that had to be destroyed, and protected by systems that kill nature's attempts to recolonize.

Your hurt shows through remarkably.

Re:Jetsons! (2)

nospam007 (722110) | about a year ago | (#43990031)

You could travel to Europe, for example in Germany there are many hotels that are partially submerged right now.

Re:Jetsons! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43990781)

"Hurt" implies I am offended in some way by the original post. I am not. I am confused why Impy the Impiuos Imp thinks that pointing out the obvious would be an "inconvenient truth", but I'm certainly not hurt by it.

I am, however, curious why you think I am hurt by OP's post.

Re:Jetsons! (1)

I'm New Around Here (1154723) | about a year ago | (#43991475)

"Hurt" implies I am offended in some way by the original post. I am not. I am confused why Impy the Impiuos Imp thinks that pointing out the obvious would be an "inconvenient truth", but I'm certainly not hurt by it.

I am, however, curious why you think I am hurt by OP's post.

When you say things like:

Go back to your corporate master and beg to be put out of your misery,

it shows he touched something unpleasant in your being. Yes you were hurt.

But how about the rest of my post? You have your dwelling, the other businesses you patronize already have their buildings, so you don't want any one else to build something. Why? Because wildlife may be impacted? Maybe the fact that people can see the beauty of the wildlife will cause them to do more to preserve it. There's historical precedence for that influence on people, after all.

Re:Jetsons! (1)

Kythe (4779) | about a year ago | (#43994303)

it shows he touched something unpleasant in your being. Yes you were hurt.

Either that, or he's simply laughing at the OP's absurdity.

Re:Jetsons! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43989807)

I give you permission to downmod me: -1: The Truth Hurts

(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.

Either you have some sort of persecution complex, or you think saying this sort of thing makes even a tiny difference (in your favour) to the mods. Perhaps both.

The former is your own cross to bear, but I have to tell you that the latter just isn't true. Here's a friendly hint: a lot of mods (myself included), when they see any attempt to influence them, will give you a -1 out of sheer bloody-mindedness. Call me pompous, but they're my points to spend however I wish, dammit!

Re:Jetsons! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43990081)

I also use my mod points thusly:

"-1: User is dumb and makes his unconvincing points without strength or research".

I have modded down people who "agree" with me. If you can't make a point stick, a poorly-planned, evidence-free forum posting hurts your cause as much as it helps.

Re:Jetsons! (2)

I'm New Around Here (1154723) | about a year ago | (#43990173)

While I have done that a couple times, I would rather mod up people who make good arguments, even when I don't agree with them. I just had mod points yesterday (Monday really, but I was exhausted from an install), and modded down one guy who was just a dope, modded up three who I don't agree with, and one who I did agree with. I didn't plan it that way, but those three made good points and hadn't been modded up yet. Most of the great posts I did agree with had already been modded up to at least 3, and they didn't need any help from me.

Re:Jetsons! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43994307)

For me it's usually "-1: Poster says 'whoosh!' when someone doesn't get their stupid joke"

Re:Jetsons! (1)

Xwild (308492) | about a year ago | (#43991579)

undoing mod to wrong post

Re:Jetsons! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43989933)

There already are some underwater hotels in the US... unless you are trying to insist no other country should get them, or that no other country has interesting underwater sights...

Re:Jetsons! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43989975)

I'm sure you're right, nothing to do with building an expensive resort in a tropical island setting with nice reefs rather than on the Jersey Shore...

Re:Jetsons! (1)

Joe Tie. (567096) | about a year ago | (#43990963)

We? First and foremost we're human. Accidents of birth, where we are born and raised, really shouldn't matter that much to one's self image. Empires rise, empires fall. That's just the nature of things. Which ruler has claimed you as property shouldn't determine whether you applaud advancement in one area or another.

Re:Jetsons! (1)

cffrost (885375) | about a year ago | (#43993813)

Look up and see the surface of what once was, as we sink ever further into irrelevancy.

Sinking into irrelevancy is arguably better than sinking into the ocean. [wikipedia.org]

Re:Jetsons!.... Nope, Bioshock... (2)

David_Hart (1184661) | about a year ago | (#43989705)

That is some straight up Jetsons shit right there...

This looks more like the first step towards the underwater city of Rapture....

Ever17 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44003261)

A more straight-up comparison would be with Ever17.

Okay (2)

MightyMartian (840721) | about a year ago | (#43989149)

There's got to be a morning after
If we can hold on through the night
We have a chance to find the sunshine
Let's keep on lookin' for the light

Oh, can't you see the morning after
It's waiting right outside the storm
Why don't we cross the bridge together
And find a place that's safe and warm

It's not too late, we should be giving
Only with love can we climb
It's not too late, not while we're living
Let's put our hands out in time

There's got to be a morning after
We're moving closer to the shore
I know we'll be there by tomorrow
And we'll escape the darkness
We won't be searchin' any more
There's got to be a morning after

Re:Okay (1)

MightyMartian (840721) | about a year ago | (#43989215)

Offtopic? Boy oh boy, there sure are some youngins here.

Re:Okay (2)

sconeu (64226) | about a year ago | (#43989269)

+1 Poseidon Adventure...

Great cast....

* Ernest Borgnine
* Gene Hackman
* Roddy McDowall
* Red Buttons
and a cast of Thousands!!!!

Re:Okay (1)

PopeRatzo (965947) | about a year ago | (#43989799)

Great cast....

* Ernest Borgnine
* Gene Hackman
* Roddy McDowall
* Red Buttons

Every bit of scenery was consumed.

But the real lasting legacy of The Poseidon Adventure was the rash of bad clones it produced, including dozens of made-for-TV disaster movies that used stock footage and Darren McGavin. Ah, the '70s...good drugs and bad hair. A veritable golden age of awful.

and in tsunamis? (4, Interesting)

Isara (869637) | about a year ago | (#43989169)

I wonder how the whole thing will be able to move if there's a tsunami? Obviously above-ground hotels don't fare too well there either, but I'm interested in the mechanics of a partially-submerged structure being able to handle that kind of hit. Still, sounds like a cool place to visit.

Re:and in tsunamis? (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43989275)

According to some [tripadvisor.com] (especially one near the bottom), tsunamis are very rare, but there is no place on any of the Maldives high enough to get away from one. So I suppose this would be no more dangerous than any other hotel in the region.

Re:and in tsunamis? (1)

ShanghaiBill (739463) | about a year ago | (#43989389)

I wonder how the whole thing will be able to move if there's a tsunami?

A tsunami big enough to cause much damage is unlikely to be generated locally, so there would probably be an hour or more of warning. The biggest danger would be a tsunami generated by the fault-line of the "ring of fire" passing through Indonesia. That means it would most likely come from the east, so an obvious defense is to build the hotel on the western side of the island. The article doesn't say, and Google maps doesn't show an island named Kuredhivaru, so I don't know if that is what they are doing. But I am sure they thought of these things long before we did.

Re:and in tsunamis? (1)

Sechr Nibw (1278786) | about a year ago | (#43989603)

Re:and in tsunamis? (1)

Isara (869637) | about a year ago | (#43989649)

thanks to both of you. I'd hope that Ridgewood Hotels has done their research about all manner of potential catastrophes.

Re:and in tsunamis? (1)

dj245 (732906) | about a year ago | (#43993459)

I wonder how the whole thing will be able to move if there's a tsunami?

A tsunami big enough to cause much damage is unlikely to be generated locally, so there would probably be an hour or more of warning.

What would you do with your hour or more of Tsunami warning? The maximum natural elevation of the Maldives is about 8 feet above sea level. Apparently the elevation has been raised artificially in some areas, but I doubt it would be all that safe. I guess you could try to race out to sea (risky) or if you are a very lucky or rich person you could get in a plane and fly around until it passes. If the Tsunami is really bad you might not have a place to land, depending on the size of the plane.

Re:and in tsunamis? (1)

saveferrousoxide (2566033) | about a year ago | (#43989713)

I don't think that would be a problem at the water depth they're talking about. Even a very powerful tsunami would only be about a 3m wave at those depths.
Here's an interesting write up [bom.gov.au] about how tsunamis work.

Re:and in tsunamis? (1)

alexander_686 (957440) | about a year ago | (#43990067)

Just because I like working on the worse case scenarios. So, I think it would kind of depend on the evacuation plan / structural integrity of the ship / hotel.

It’s basically a very top heavy boat. So a 3 meter wave would not pick it up and throw it around but it might be enough to tip it. (which still may be safer than being on-shore)

Or maybe just enough stress to pop out some of the windows in the 21 underwater bedrooms.The structure would survive but how fast can you evacuate the people from below?

Re:and in tsunamis? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43989999)

Also some risk of being run into by a boat during a normal storm.

Re:and in tsunamis? (3, Informative)

I'm New Around Here (1154723) | about a year ago | (#43990095)

I don't think the Indonesia tsunami did any damage to those islands. The US military has a base, Diego Garcia, on the British islands a couple hundred miles to the south, and they saw no effect at all. Because tsunamis don't cross the ocean as a giant tumbling wave*. Those only build as they get to shallow water. And the islands are too abrupt to have a large shallows, so the ocean swells a few inches for a few minutes, then it's back to normal as the tsunami passes by.

*This is why it is no more correct to call these events a 'tsunami' than a 'tidal wave' like we did when I was a kid. The term 'tsu nami' actually means 'harbor wave', which is then meaningless out in the middle of the ocean. Generally, a tsunami is only destructive when it gets to shallows in front of land, and it doesn't matter if there is a harbor or not. So we should stop using the term, and find something more scientifically accurate.

Re:and in tsunamis? (1)

saveferrousoxide (2566033) | about a year ago | (#43990181)

How about a Rapid Ultra Low Frequency and Amplitude (Rulfa) wave when it's at sea and a Negatively Accelerating Wave With Rapidly Increasing Amplitude and Frequencey (Naw Wriaf) as it approaches shore?

Re:and in tsunamis? (1)

I'm New Around Here (1154723) | about a year ago | (#43990389)

'Rulfa' sounds good, but I'm not sure on the scientific accuracy of 'naw wriaf'. At first, only the front of the wave that is in the shallows slows, which is when the body and rear of the wave piles into it. Each part that gets to the shallows slows, but 'the wave' itself isn't slowing. And whether the wave slows or not, why would the frequency change? Two waves that are five minutes apart in the ocean, traveling the same speed, will hit land five minutes apart as well.

But with that being said, it is still more accurate than 'harbor wave' in all instances outside of a harbor.

Re:and in tsunamis? (1)

saveferrousoxide (2566033) | about a year ago | (#43997763)

only the front of the wave that is in the shallows slows, which is when the body and rear of the wave piles into it. Each part that gets to the shallows slows, but 'the wave' itself isn't slowing

True. I was imprecise in my language; I meant the foremost period of the wave.

Two waves that are five minutes apart in the ocean, traveling the same speed, will hit land five minutes apart as well.

False. The speed of the wave is determined by the depth of the water relative to the amplitude of the peak. As the wave approaches a shoreline, the first period will shorten and therefore the wave peaks will hit, probably dramatically, less than 5 minutes apart.

Re:and in tsunamis? (1)

I'm New Around Here (1154723) | about a year ago | (#44003689)

Ok, then I think we are on to something. If scientists can tell us Pluto is now a dwarf planet, they should be able to accept that tidal waves/tsunamis are now rulfas and naw wriafs.

Re:and in tsunamis? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43990923)

"Tidal wave" isn't actually that wrong. It isn't a classic breaking wave so much as it is a tide that just keeps coming in, and in, and in, and in...

Re: and in tsunamis? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43990151)

If they are underwater,I suspect they will be immune to the tsunami. I know it's a little different, but down in the gulf coast they will sink the casino ships when hurricanes come through if they can't get them out of port in time. It's apparently easier to refloat them than rebuild them.

Re: and in tsunamis? (1)

saveferrousoxide (2566033) | about a year ago | (#43990235)

They do that to protect against the wind, not so much the waves or, obviously, the rain.

Re:and in tsunamis? (1)

Mitreya (579078) | about a year ago | (#43991077)

I wonder how the whole thing will be able to move if there's a tsunami?

"During the last earthquake, Bob's zipcode changed six times"

Re:and in tsunamis? (1, Offtopic)

Mashiki (184564) | about a year ago | (#43991525)

Sounds cool, but I wouldn't travel to the maldives, especially with their rise in religious fascism including attacks on tourists who "don't conform to the rise of islamo-fascism.'

Re:and in tsunamis? (1)

manu0601 (2221348) | about a year ago | (#43991815)

A floating hotel seems rather secure in case of tsunami. The only risk is to be moved far away from its own postal address.

Search your feelings you know it to be true (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43989185)

I think it looks like kinda cloud city. Great place for a family reunion?

Re:Search your feelings you know it to be true (4, Funny)

ArcadeMan (2766669) | about a year ago | (#43989437)

Great place indeed, until the father shows up. He's always been kind of a dark figure.

Re:Search your feelings you know it to be true (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43989483)

"But you said it would only cost $1000 / per person!"

"I am altering the deal....."

Re:Search your feelings you know it to be true (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43994241)

"But you said it would only cost $1000 / per person!"

"I am altering the deal....."

... pray that I do not alter it again.

Well that certainly is... (2)

Idbar (1034346) | about a year ago | (#43989213)

Well, that's certainly a new low.

If you get the cheapest one, they may get you a room with no view, no windows and underwater.

Don't complain (1)

Pseudonymus Bosch (3479) | about a year ago | (#43990533)

My ultracheap rate only afforded me a room with windows... that could not be closed.

Re:Well that certainly is... (1)

rtb61 (674572) | about a year ago | (#43991653)

But you get to brag how much you paid each night for it. After all it is not about function it is all about posing like a douche. How much crap out there should simply be rated on douche value, rather than how many miles per hour it will go, how gallons of fuel per hour it will burn, how big it is to substitute for how small those that buy it are. Consume and pollute ratings for poseur value are really getting kind of sick and off putting.

Re:Well that certainly is... (1)

dintech (998802) | about a year ago | (#43993397)

Instead of partially-undersea, eventually it will be totally undersea. [bbc.co.uk]

The first part of Rapture [wikipedia.org] perhaps?

That hotel looks like the lair for a Bond villain. (2)

sconeu (64226) | about a year ago | (#43989285)

n/t

Blops 2? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43989333)

Someone alert the CoD fanboys. That stupid resort from the Black Ops 2 campaign is coming to life.

Looks like (1)

nitehawk214 (222219) | about a year ago | (#43989335)

Cloud City. Floating on the water instead of the air.

Errm ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43989347)

Won't the normal Hotels soon be partially-underwater in the Maldives?

Re:Errm ... (1)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | about a year ago | (#43989449)

That's exactly what I wanted to say. :-) I had a simple building technique to propose:

1) Build a normal hotel.

2) Wait thirty years.

3) Prophet! (*)

.

(*) Maldives are essentially Islamic.

You mean they are building Sealab 2021 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43989397)

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/a7/Sealab_2021.gif

Re:You mean they are building Sealab 2021 (1)

Master Moose (1243274) | about a year ago | (#43991107)

Fignuts!

Fantastic! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43989421)

Now they can start work on developing real life versions of those plasmids... I want ElectroBolt now!

Shouldn't the hotel be called Rapture? (1)

RevDisk (740008) | about a year ago | (#43989423)

Sorry, bit too obvious, couldn't pass it up. There's a lot of hotels and resorts on the planet, something for everyone. Hope their business makes it.

lung expansion (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43989491)

what happens if you hold your breath on the elevator ride up?

Underwater hotel? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43989623)

That's in-Kuredhivaru!

Another one? (2)

Animats (122034) | about a year ago | (#43990115)

Underwater hotels have been proposed many times, but no significant ones have actually been built. The Poseidon Underwater Resorts [poseidonresorts.com] has a web site that looks real, but it's total vaporware. Atlantis Palm Hotel [atlantisthepalm.com] in Dubai was going to build one to go with their water park, but it didn't get built either.

But there are some really good renderings [feedbox.info] .

Preparing for the future (1)

loufoque (1400831) | about a year ago | (#43990205)

Since with global warming and the rise of sea levels all of the Maldives will be underwater soon, I suppose this is a good idea to prepare for the future.

Re:Preparing for the future (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43991161)

Yeah, there's your daily dose of Irony, right there.

The Maldives are forecast to be underwater so just build the udnerwater hotel there and let the rising ocean level put it underwater. Much easier than building it and having to sink it.

Above? (1)

vawarayer (1035638) | about a year ago | (#43991253)

Link text says above water. I'm guessing it should read below

Didya' hear that one... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43992311)

You know, about the undersea lounge with a screen door on it?

replace window? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43992465)

this sounded really neat til he started talking about replacing a window.
Now that he's raised the prospect of a window breaking underwater, I know I'd never relax

Where's Andrew Ryan? (2)

KodePhreak (809614) | about a year ago | (#43992713)

Rapture awaits! =)

gotta get me a waterproof camera... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43993255)

1 - Buy waterproof HD camera and diving kit.
2 - Hide behind a big lump of coral overlooked by the honeymoon suite
3 - Wait for honeymooners to arrive
4 - ?
5 - Profit!

Wrong way around (2)

johnw (3725) | about a year ago | (#43993265)

This proposed hotel is the wrong way around. Instead of a restaurant above the water and bedrooms below, it would be much more sensible to have the restaurant and leisure facilities under water (where you can really appreciate the undersea views whilst you're awake) and the bedrooms above (so if the thing springs a leak in the middle of the night you don't all drown).

Necessity due to rising sea levels? (1)

fantomas (94850) | about a year ago | (#43993303)

Isn't the Maldives one of the places that are going to disappear due to rising sea levels? Probably need to build the hotel tough enough to take wave action from the open seas when there's no longer any land above sea level left there.

Not a: Necessity due to rising sea levels? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44003203)

Nope. The Maldives keeps whining, but when oceanographers went there and looked, they found the sea level was going down rather than up.

The real problem here is that their islands have a limited amount of fresh water, but they keep building hotels, using too much water, and then they blame climate change for that too.

Sunlight (1)

Captain Hook (923766) | about a year ago | (#43993861)

So to minimise the impact on the coral, they plan to mount the structure of a tripod arrangement.

Brilliant, now all they have to do is make the whole structure transparent so it doesn't block out the sun underneath the hotel and starve the coral of energy.

There is a reason coral only grows in shallow water.

Re: Sunlight (1)

Mohd Sharifuddin (2950647) | about a year ago | (#43994103)

We can see so many fish under water without snockling hehe

Quoting John Pina Craven (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43994187)

"What happens when you use land-based technology in the ocean?"

"You die."

From: The Silent War: The Cold War Battle Beneath the Sea

It's been done (1)

AgentSmith (69695) | about a year ago | (#43994217)

Plastic Beach

planning ahead (1)

tverbeek (457094) | about a year ago | (#43994653)

Considering that the Maldives themselves stand a chance of being half-underwater within 100 years, to the point that the president proposed that the country start shopping for a new homeland, this looks like someone planning for the future.

Two words (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43995185)

Caisson disease

Existing underwater palace: Jal Mahal in India (1)

MobyDisk (75490) | about a year ago | (#43998563)

There is a breathtaking "underwater palance" in india called the Jal Mahal. A few floors of it are underwater during the wet season. When I went there it was not open for tours although Wikipedia indicates that it now is open.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jal_Mahal [wikipedia.org]

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?