sub build underway christmas 2011

hmm funny coming from a guy named Submarine Tom!!-
is your name misleading or what? go figure...

everything youve mentioned is theoretically possible--but not likely..btw have you ever been in a vessel-alone on 25 ft seas?..without power near a reef in -10 c water? Laughing--yea--sure ... thats less dangerous... have to really laugh at this again-


so uh- if you had an equal proportion of subs to yachts in the world- id wager there would be more yacht deaths...and far more plane crashes too! might want to think a little before you lecture me on the dangers of doing something...any chance your from connecticut?
so youve decided for me that i won't do a crush test? i think you ***-ume too much--but yea--if i die trying then great its better than lying in bed dying of old age while they are pumping drugs into you and wonderign what you did with your life--regret is a powerful depressant...
thank god i am 1 in 7 billion id hate to be like you other guys...
but sadly your mistaken there have only been about 200 other nutbars just like me prior...some dead true- but then again we wouldnt have submarines now would we-if all people thought like you did...

 

You do need scrubbers for 12 hours - go do the math on breathable atmosphere volume, CO2 build up and its effect on respiratory rate. A 50 ft LOA boat will have a pretty small internal volume if it's to be able to achieve neutral buoyancy when submerged. Depth of dive doesn't impact this for a 1 bar boat - and most boats run at 1 bar internally.

I've spent time in a big nuclear boat and I can tell you for sure that you will get a nasty motion in the wave affected zone. Even 20 m down in the Irish Sea (PD on a big boat) we had a bit of swell that had the planesman earning his pay to keep us at depth without exposing the bearing tube on the surface. Again, do some research, this is all information that's readily available.

The level of ignorance of some of the really basic and fundamental issues you have to tackle is astounding, and really quite worrying.

I have a dreadful feeling that you're going in to this without a clue as to some of the real, dynamic, problems associated with submarine design. They can be overcome with a rational approach, but first you have to recognise they are there and need addressing. I wish you well, but cannot help but think that you're dreaming and just don't want to face reality.

 

thanks for the post Jeremy--sorry you dont like subs...anyone out there know where to get a quick acting hatch? seems ill have to design one of those too unless i can find a quick acting dog style hatch...

 

How about fixed high density foam buoyancy to to sink to only 75-100ft. Then inflatable external rubber bladders that allow you to surface. So you only have two positions either at depth or surface?

If your living compartment gets breached, grab the pony and swim for the surface!

 

Jeremy--perhaps it may be you who needs to do the research and based on your previous posts its not I who shows lack of rudimentary knowledge- look up the UC3 nautilus--hmm surprise surprise--no scrubbers!! hmm what!!? no scrubbers? yep! and it has only a bit more volume if not the same--for that i CAN do the calcs for you and post them..same with the kraka--hmm no scrubbers?..yep! same with the freya- the Malen- and the list goes on...
so ...ive spent my time researching and 600 cubic ft of volume --maybe you need to do the math?--thats like a 20 ft by 7.5 pipe full of air-thats a lot of air to use--perhaps not 12 hours- but maybe- i dont aim to find out--becuase most dives-the batts will run out long before the air does...
and for the most part im using a snorkel for air most of the time - i never said i was going to stay down that long...but in a vessel that size it would take a day to suffocate...given no other oxygen use...you've expressed your opinions--im sorry but most of them have been without rudimentary knowledge of a pressure vessel type hull system..see you last posts...i responded--i dont care if you were working as foreman on the jules vernes Nautilus- that doesnt mean you know the engineering aspects of a sub...i may take risks but they are calculated ones.....facing reality is to say --i dont know..not to assume it wont or will work...why dont you prove to me what im doing WON'T work? you wont be able to- but thanks for playing along... Now is there anyone else here with anything positive to say??... you guys can try to stump me-try to say it wont work -or that ill die- whatever--in the end its not me who is afraid -it is you guys are afraid that i just might succeed..and dont think for one minute those posts were to do with ''care for my safety" there wouldn't be one among you who wouln't love to say--see i told you so!-should it fail! then you can feel self-important!

so would the real men who have something to contribute pls stand up?! i suppose its a losing battle to convince those who think they know so much about it--because they've never done it to have a reasonable conversation...this forum is peppered with people who love to try to stomp on others ideas--because they need to bring others down to feel good about themselves...all because YOU didnt have the guts to try and listened to what others said instead of using your own inner compass...hey keep the posts coming-i can do this point-counterpoint crap all day long...im really here not to argue whether it will or wont work or that it needs this or that-but to see if i can find someone knowledgeable about a good hatch system for this build-nothing more so form this point on unless you got info on that--ill just let you nego's spout off...

hatches anyone??

 

Ummm, tugboat, let me point out that *you* have never been anywhere in -10C water. I have never been anywhere in -10C water, and I have numerous voyages to Antarctica to my credit.

Think about it....

As for diving under icebergs, you are dreaming unless you think an ice cube or a bergy bit is an iceberg.

Third point, if you think 12 hours endurance underwater is enough to outwait a gale, you've never been in a gale. Some I've been through took over 6 days to blow past, and the wave heights were a lot bigger than 25'.

Your sub might be adequate for local coastal cruising but nothing more. If you venture into serious water with big ice, you're screwed.

WRT the engineering aspects, no comment. Not my field of expertise or interest. Good luck and don't take passengers with you.

PDW

 

PDW--i live in Canada-of course water freezes at 0 degrees in fresh water--i was making a point--it wasnt literal...but i have been IN just melted water swimming... not for long but went in! and i have been on water on the great lakes that might well have been under freezing temps due to wave action keeping it unfrozen...and the thermodynamic properties of the lakes here keep them cold but not frozen till mid winter. sometimes they dont freeze.

its quite possible to dive under a good berg...200 ft would be safe.. hmm even 150
they roll past nova scotia and newfoundland all the time--have i been to one?--no they are dangerous and can overturn easily...

if the gales are long ones- the idea is--if you submerge--you can outrun it--or if it lasts a long time- then yes-you run at snorkle mode- or surface and recharge --my alts will be heavy duty and two per each 300 amp hr set. so charge time is enough to cycle below and above in a storm...still safer than getting caught in a high windage vessel bobbing like a cork on the water..risking capsize-or a broach-where as the sub is mostly submerged--you might rock back and forth somewhat--but still safer than hoving to i suspect ..

anyway--ill let you know...i might bring someone else with me...who knows...people go on the UC3 all the time...everyone called him nuts too--of course now he has done three subs...and is bored it seems and is doing a private manned space flight--he just did the suborbitals-he is not an engineer either now everyone loves him even though he is more nuts now than ever before by this sites standards..and suicidal....


I am not sure where ill go--ill know when i build it ...

 

Lecture you? I wasn't even talking to you.

-Tom

 

Ok, I can't take it. Tugboat: Do you have a website to peruse? I know you have a YouTube video at the beginning of the thread, but I'm on a bandwidth restricted connection.

I think your project is great. I had thought about doing a sub for a while too and agree with some of your pro's.

I have my hands full (building connective beams for a catamaran right now), but would love to follow the progress in a non-video format.

 

Me too as my bandwidth also sucks.

I think he's severely underestimated the engineering and from his posts to date I really don't think he has a single clue about compressed gases and the effects of water pressure, but what the hell. As long as he's not going to kill anyone except himself and he bolts the EPIRB to the hull so it can't float to the surface and trigger a search, I could care less.

But tug, honestly, I think this is just a windup and it's not even April 1. You've never experienced a real gale at sea from your cavalier attitude to surviving one. You can't ride one out underwater with 12 hours endurance, it's not possible. You can't survive on the surface in 10 to 15m waves either. I've lost heavier equipment than your entire submarine, torn loose off the trawl deck just due to surge up the trawl ramp, in a heavy gale, and that on a 6500 tonne ship.

Stay coastal.

PDW

 

You do realize if the berg is 25' high over the water, the lowest point under water will be 200', and I have been through the ice. The water under the ice was 0 degrees C, as usual. Sudden implosion is a sight to see, even on land. I refer to tank car implosion.

Parlez vous francais? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_hci9vrvfw

 

The Alligator a civil war sub used a similar idea- having steel buoys attached...

 

Originally Posted by Submarine Tom

"Such a device could be a death trap."

That's one of the largest understatements I've ever seen.

This guy is one out of 7 billion, he's a nut bar and very dangerous to himself. He may or may not realize that but it really doesn't matter, he's going to do what he's going to do and likely die trying. He may come to his senses or all the criticism here may only motivate him to an earlier demise. He wont do an unmanned crush depth test, it's too expensive and too destructive.

Can you even imagine what it would be like to implode at 100 feet? That's 3 atmospheres. 70 feet LOA is about 1200 square feet of surface area exposed to the water outside. About 6000 pounds per square foot is about 7 million pounds of pressure squeezing the entire hull, roughly 3600 imperial tons. (It's actually more but I calculated for the one atmosphere "pressure" inside.) And if he makes it to his 200 foot target depth, it'll be double.

At least it'll be quick...

You will be alone right Tug?

-Tom

Tom- was this not you??...

 

yea --ive seen that one a hundred times--do you know why it imploded?--
yessir speak some french...toi aussi?

you might be right about the ice--i do want to see it--which is what draws me to wanting to have a way to go where a boat cant...

 

There are nor-easters here on the lakes- maybe never been through a gale at sea but this is the reason a sub is better...i think that you dont give me enough credit about compressed gases water pressure--etc....first off i wont be using compressed gases - secondly- ive researched for the last three years--about this stuff

each atm is exaclty 14.7 psi at sea level
therefore it turns out that at 33 ft below the ocean one sq inch of area is subjected to another 14.7 psi- one bar is 14.5 psi a slight diff...
this means that at 200 ft the vessel has an overall exerted pressure of 2910 tons of force over the area of the pressure hull....or that works out to
91.7 psi. however the pressure hull can withstand around 10 000 psi (ferro-cement)- in fact cement is much more stable as a compressive substance than steel is---this is why its used in buildings etc..but im not using standard concrete imusing a 9500 psi resistant polymer modified cement...add that to the mesh and you have a composite stronger than steel for compressive strength. i.e. steel buckles easier than concrete--making FC using this stuff stronger per lb. the reason that oil car imploded was because their was no reinforcing such as rings--given the instability of steel under pressure--it needs internal or external reinforcing rings and this is done on all military subs - even better- the defelction forces on a corrugated steel cylinder are even better...hence now you get pressure pipe wound with monofiliments or steel pipe.
--but pls be specific about what exactly your talking about---r u refering to compressed gases used for ballast?..or compression of gases under water pressure?..

how about i build it first then i ll know where i will go..based on the sea trials...?


well if i havent seen a gale yet--i will-- one way or another--if ya dont take some risks might as well sit in a bubble at home and die watching reruns of sienfeld...