Submarine design from scratch

[gonzo]

Wet submarines are basically fairing and propulsion, so the structure can be rather flimsy.

 

[jehardiman]

Wet submarines are basically fairing and propulsion, so the structure can be rather flimsy.

Not really, after having built several they are actually a little harder to get right than an conventinal dry sub. Subs are all about weight and volume and a wet sub demands higher fidelity in those items than a dry sub. Really, for the optimum size and volume, a wet sub needs a rigid hull to mount things to in order to maxamize available internal volume. While a soft skin may seem to be a good idea, it is rather wasteful from a weight and internal volume perspective. Here is a graphic from 1993 when SUBHUMAN II was the Guiness record holder. OMER 5 now (2007) holds the record IIRC and they basicly have the same size, shape, and structure as the SUBHUMAN family but use a computer controled VPP instead of a fixed pitch CRP set.

 

[hoytedow]

Those were some great races.

 

[Leo Lazauskas]

Nothing per se, but if you undermine your national policies....you may have a visit from somebody from your nation. Zzz says he is from Turkey...but what if he is not...Does your national government want ANY individual who does not already have the capibility to be able build a X-craft or WWI or WWII capiable submarine? Would you hand that power over to a Anders Breivik? FWIW, I think Prof. Joubert way overstepped the bounds. Would you hand anyone a plan and say..."this is how you can kill 5,000 people"?

What do you consider "over-stepping the bounds", JH?

My program Michlet contains an example of a LA Class nuclear submarine.
The US Navy bought copies of the program and I have never heard any
complaint from any quarter in over 10 years, so I suspect the geometry itself
is no great secret.

 

[Submarine Tom]

No, I didn't misinterpret your rude, condescending, and spiteful comment that was off topic. If you see my subtle witty retort to your poor demagoguery as only a misunderstanding of your parroted virulent self-loathing it must be because you believe all the subterfuge, innuendo, and chicanery you read on wasted paper or seeping like pus from your monitor.

The United States has always welcomed and lit the path for those with the courage and energy to come to our shores and better themselves. But we can only illuminate the path. Those who sit in their own cesspools dug so deep that they cannot see the shining world that is offered to them if only they would step up into the world of enlightenment and bathe in the wellspring of liberty, equality, and justice must take that step themselves. Those who won't step up into enlightenment, those who revel in their own filth and can only randomly fling ordure in a pathetic attempt to coat everyone else in their misery; they must be dealt with commensurate with their offense against civility or humanity.

Temper, temper John.

Are you trying to hurt my feelings?

What I do feel is sorry for you.

Your interpretation of my comments is very revealing.

You may want to take a holiday or even get some help.

All the best my friend.

Cheer up.

And why not lighten up too?

Geez...

 

[El_Guero]

"calmate!"

Leo, I think you and others are misunderstanding what JH wrote.

It was not what he wrote that you should have read, it was what he implied and left unwritten.



IMHO.

 

[jehardiman]

What do you consider "over-stepping the bounds", JH?

My program Michlet contains an example of a LA Class nuclear submarine.
The US Navy bought copies of the program and I have never heard any
complaint from any quarter in over 10 years, so I suspect the geometry itself
is no great secret.

The devil is always in the details, and FWIW, the 688 class was a very compromise driven design, as most submarines are. So as far as the hull shape goes, any decent potential flow program will give you a better hull, but maybe not a better submarine. When they closed down Mare Island in 1994, there was a group of us who considered going down to Australia and fixing the Collins class (which as Joubert points out are POS boats, and not just because of poor systems management). Any nation with the industrial cabability to produce an internal combustion engine can build a first world diesel electric submarine...IF they know the important design details and where to focus thier attention. And that is what most of the tech restrictions are about, and were Joubert was too lose. A lot of submariners and civilian techs died and a lot of money was invested learning those hard lessions. Too many and too much for them to be cast free on the internet where anyone with an evil adgenda can easily discover them.

 

[Leo Lazauskas]

"calmate!"

Leo, I think you and others are misunderstanding what JH wrote.

It was not what he wrote that you should have read, it was what he implied and left unwritten.



IMHO.

No, I didn't misunderstand. I'm genuinely ignorant

 

[Leo Lazauskas]

The devil is always in the details, and FWIW, the 688 class was a very compromise driven design, as most submarines are. So as far as the hull shape goes, any decent potential flow program will give you a better hull, but maybe not a better submarine. When they closed down Mare Island in 1994, there was a group of us who considered going down to Australia and fixing the Collins class (which as Joubert points out are POS boats, and not just because of poor systems management). Any nation with the industrial cabability to produce an internal combustion engine can build a first world diesel electric submarine...IF they know the important design details and where to focus thier attention. And that is what most of the tech restrictions are about, and were Joubert was too lose. A lot of submariners and civilian techs died and a lot of money was invested learning those hard lessions. Too many and too much for them to be cast free on the internet where anyone with an evil adgenda can easily discover them.

Thanks.
I thought the electronics systems would be the ones to keep under wraps,
and not the (primarily) mechanical systems described by Joubert.
As for those with evil agendas? Well, if they are that evil they could probably
hire 15 year old hackers to get the data for them.

 

[michael pierzga]

Thanks.
I thought the electronics systems would be the ones to keep under wraps,
and not the (primarily) mechanical systems described by Joubert.
As for those with evil agendas? Well, if they are that evil they could probably
hire 15 year old hackers to get the data for them.

My father was an Electrical engineer and he spent his career working to keep electronics on submarines quite. As far as I know any competent NA can design a sub..making it silent is the black science. Evidently propellers and drive gear are top secret

 

[jehardiman]

Thanks.
I thought the electronics systems would be the ones to keep under wraps,
and not the (primarily) mechanical systems described by Joubert.
As for those with evil agendas? Well, if they are that evil they could probably
hire 15 year old hackers to get the data for them.

I see you really don't understand the logic behind a submarine as a weapon.

You need to get your head around the concept that an armed submarine is a weapon to take out soft targets, to sneek up on and murder ships that can't detect it. It doesn't need any electronics. This is why unrestricted submarine warfare was and still can be considered a war crime. An armed submarine is nothing more than a moveable minefield, no more, no less. In the hands of an anarchist it needs less electronics than a backpack bomb, it is just a more complex firearm hunting bigger targets.

It is only when a submarine becomes an instrument of national diplomacy and naval power projection does it need electronics...not to use as weapons, but to sense, process, detect, and localize other wepons. Only the "good guys" need to be able to do that, the "bad guys" don't.

But that doesn't mean that only "bad guys" are after submarine technolgy. From the US perspective, there are other threats, we are litterly under seige because it is cheaper to steal the information than accumilate the necessary data. One source claims 6 million probes and more than 6,080 attacks each day....much more than one 15 year old. And the reason for the old network admin adage that "there is no security like physical security".

 

[pdwiley]

I see you really don't understand the logic behind a submarine as a weapon.

You need to get your head around the concept that an armed submarine is a weapon to take out soft targets, to sneek up on and murder ships that can't detect it. It doesn't need any electronics. This is why unrestricted submarine warfare was and still can be considered a war crime.

Only if you're on the losing side of a war, though.

Which is why the Allied powers tried this charge on Admiral Raeder at the conclusion of WW2 but refused to admit into evidence that they, the USA in particular, was doing the exact same thing to the Japanese in the Pacific.

This, at least is Admiral Raeder's claim in his book 'The Battle For the Sea' (IIRC the title, my reference library is a bit scattered ATM).

I do wonder, sometimes, if the Japanese are waiting for an apology for the executions of their officers for waterboarding prisoners, now that the USA has decided this isn't torture after all..... since they now do it.

FWIW, before someone tries the usual anti-USA diversion, I'm not anti-USA. I'm anti-hypocrisy.

PDW

 

[daiquiri]

Yes, the line which separates the "good guys" from the "bad guys" is rather arbitrary, and often just temporary. But that's yet another topic, and I agree that it can lead to equally arbitrary political misuses and personal accusations during internet discussions.

 

[jehardiman]

Which is why the Allied powers tried this charge on Admiral Raeder at the conclusion of WW2 but refused to admit into evidence that they, the USA in particular, was doing the exact same thing to the Japanese in the Pacific.

Boy; do you need a history lesson.

Unrestricted submarine warfare is the assertion of a belligerent of his right to sink ANY vessel within a defined area without warning, this includes Neutrals. This has always been rejected out of hand because it is outside the Rules of War, especially with regard to the Neutrals. Note that arming or requireing reporting of submarines by belligerent merchant shipping removes the civilian protection given non-state ships by making them de-facto naval auxiliaries and rendering search, seizure, and submarine attack moot. Additionally, the basic arrangement of Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere ruled out the presence of Neutrals in those waters and the Japanese were non-signatories of the Geneva Conventions so a lot of bad things happend there when they subverted the rules of war.

Raeder was not indicted on the the basis of unrestricted submarine warfare, but rather on the wording of the 1st item of the Laconia Order (Italics mine).

All efforts to save survivors of sunken ships, such as the fishing out of swimming men and putting them on board lifeboats, the righting of overturned lifeboats, or the handing over of food and water, must stop. Rescue contradicts the most basic demands of the war: the destruction of hostile ships and their crews.

This was read to meant he ordered his boats to kill the crews, not just sink the ships. While the submarine warfare in the Pacific was waged in a similiar manner, the wording given US boats was "not to risk the ship" with the recovery of suvivors rather than a flat out rejection of the 2nd London Naval Treaty requirements.

 

[gonzo]

How about if you guys take your political argument to a different place and lets us discuss submarine design.
Thanks