View Single Post
Old 12-08-2012, 11:14 AM
engineer_comp_geek's Avatar
engineer_comp_geek engineer_comp_geek is online now
Robot Mod in Beta Testing
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 22,590
Originally Posted by Elmer J. Fudd View Post
It's not really the size that would make it more sea worthy than it is the ratio of it's dimensions. You don't need to know how long a cubit is to know that the ark was six times longer than its beam. That's ridiculously unseaworthy for an unpowered vessel.
A cubit is just the length from a man's elbow to his fingertips. It's not an exact measurement, but it does give you a pretty close ballpark figure. The ark as described is maybe somewhere around 450 feet long or somewhere thereabouts, 75 feet wide, and 45 feet tall, but given the lack of a standard cubit, it could be anywhere from say 440 feet to 460 feet in length and still match the description. So yeah it's hard to say exactly what a cubit is, but we know the ark as described wasn't 200 feet long, nor was it 600 feet long. It was somewhere reasonably close to 450 feet long, which is pretty big.

This is a study of the ark's theoretical "safety". It isn't related to the TV show that I saw many years ago, but their description of the ship is very similar. They conclude that the ship was not "ridiculously unseaworthy" as you claim, but in fact was reasonably well constructed and could tolerate high winds and waves greater than 30m in height.

ETA: That link also discusses the structural integrity issue based on their assumptions of how the ship would have been constructed.

Last edited by engineer_comp_geek; 12-08-2012 at 11:17 AM.