Train submarine

Discussion in 'Boat Design' started by mistereddb, Oct 26, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. JSL
    Joined: Nov 2012
    Posts: 811
    Likes: 64, Points: 28, Legacy Rep: 41
    Location: Delta BC

    JSL Senior Member

    I was on one of these train carrying submarines this summer but to be practical, the builder made it several kilometers long. Travelled under the English Channel.... took about 30 minutes. Known as the MV Chunnel
     
    Last edited: Nov 7, 2013
  2. mistereddb
    Joined: Oct 2013
    Posts: 45
    Likes: 0, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 10
    Location: Australia

    mistereddb Junior Member

    JSL
    I suppose if you did not live in Australia it would seem a bit academic if we had our fuel supply cut.
     
  3. Mr Efficiency
    Joined: Oct 2010
    Posts: 10,386
    Likes: 1,042, Points: 113, Legacy Rep: 702
    Location: Australia

    Mr Efficiency Senior Member

    As you yourself pointed out, a strategic fuel reserve would be a far more practicable solution. I'm pretty sure that applied during the 1939-45 war, I recall as a child not far from home were massive fuel storage tanks that were camouflaged during the war when Japanese attacks seemed imminent. No need for dream subs.
     
  4. mistereddb
    Joined: Oct 2013
    Posts: 45
    Likes: 0, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 10
    Location: Australia

    mistereddb Junior Member

    Well it was actually a 72 year old woman who lived in New York for twenty years who suggested that to me.

    Perhaps she is right I but I would love to see a trainsub help isolated communities have more prosperity if it was not too difficult.

    Still trying to get my head around the wetted surface resistance.
     
  5. NavalSArtichoke
    Joined: Oct 2013
    Posts: 431
    Likes: 9, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 83
    Location: GulfCoast

    NavalSArtichoke Senior Member

    You make it sound like Australia would only have a couple of sticks to burn if its fuel supply were cut off. What fuel supply is that?

    Australia mines a significant amount of coal annually and exports over half of what it mines, mostly to EastAsia. About 85% of the electricity produced in Australia is generated by burning coal. If Australia had to become self-sufficient in terms of energy, it has the domestic wherewithal to do so. Just ask the Germans: they know what to do with a lot of coal.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coal_in_Australia
     
  6. kerosene
    Joined: Jul 2006
    Posts: 1,285
    Likes: 203, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 358
    Location: finland

    kerosene Senior Member

    if its a liquid cargo ship then why does it need to be shaped like a train? Tanker sub could be made in much more sensible shape. Still idiotic but for sure easier to pull a hose on shore with a small tug vs. docking a 1km long worm.
     
  7. parkland
    Joined: Jul 2012
    Posts: 700
    Likes: 6, Points: 18, Legacy Rep: 40
    Location: canada

    parkland Senior Member


    How is a more expensive piece of equipment going to help anyone?
    A multi kilometer submarine is going to be easy to detect with modern technology.

    The wetted surface is just the surface area that is moving through water.
    Let's say you had a 1 meter x 10 meter x 1 millimeter steel sheet, and you pull it underwater behind a boat.
    Because it's only 1 mm thick, you'd think that it should more or less just slice through with minimal effort.
    You have to remember though, the 20 meters square of surface area, even though they aren't pushing water, or pulling it, they are sliding past water, which creates resistance on its own.
     
  8. NavalSArtichoke
    Joined: Oct 2013
    Posts: 431
    Likes: 9, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 83
    Location: GulfCoast

    NavalSArtichoke Senior Member

    You got to the party late, Kerosene.

    The vessel isn't shaped like a train, it's a tubular submersible which carries an actual train inside. When the vessel reaches port, it disgorges the train onto land, where some poor local schmucks get to unload it.
     
  9. SamSam
    Joined: Feb 2005
    Posts: 3,899
    Likes: 200, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 971
    Location: Coastal Georgia

    SamSam Senior Member

  10. Petros
    Joined: Oct 2007
    Posts: 2,934
    Likes: 148, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 1593
    Location: Arlington, WA-USA

    Petros Senior Member

    if it is below the surface would in not be a hazard to navigation? How would you keep it from being run down by a giant container ship? Or what would happen to it when it struck a submerged container tossed off a container ship?

    I think a barge and tug is far more efficient. cheap and easy to build using local materials. If you want your cargo easy to unload on a beach, how about making containers with built in balloon wheels that you wheel off the barge down a ramp and onto a beach?
     
  11. parkland
    Joined: Jul 2012
    Posts: 700
    Likes: 6, Points: 18, Legacy Rep: 40
    Location: canada

    parkland Senior Member

    If we're just talking about transporting fluids, could it not be a relatively thin skinned hull, with fluid bags inside the hull?
     
  12. SamSam
    Joined: Feb 2005
    Posts: 3,899
    Likes: 200, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 971
    Location: Coastal Georgia

    SamSam Senior Member

  13. mistereddb
    Joined: Oct 2013
    Posts: 45
    Likes: 0, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 10
    Location: Australia

    mistereddb Junior Member

    Generally when a country wants to attack another country they do not give them 12 months notice so they can develop various things like making oil out of coal which can be done as a last resort but is uneconomical compared to importing oil.

    As it is highly unlikely that anyone would try to cut off our supply it would be a waste of money having high tech subs just sitting around in case we needed them.

    Far better in my opinion to have 100 working trainsubs for the cost of one high tech sub as they would be very difficult to find even with the latest equipment but correct me if anyone can tell me how that can be done.

    Regarding it being a hazard to navigation I fully agree as it would be undetectable by radar so unless it was trying to evade an enemy it would have to emit a signal and have its own radar to watch out for other vessels.

    The present system works quite well as long as nobody decides to cut our fuel supply and then we have three choices.

    Suck up to a big power in the hope they would protect us.
    Do what Kevin was dreaming about, build $10b of high tech subs to protect our fuel supplies (but we are broke)
    Build the el cheapo train subs that would make friends by helping them to participate in world trade.
     
  14. parkland
    Joined: Jul 2012
    Posts: 700
    Likes: 6, Points: 18, Legacy Rep: 40
    Location: canada

    parkland Senior Member


    But the train subs would not be cheap, even if they were free, it looks like the fuel costs would be prohibitively expensive! Someone once told me that it costs the US military almost 80$ / gallon final cost to get fuel to a conflict zone. I don't know if that is true or not, but it's not like you just pull up you're war vehicles to the nearest corner gas station.
    Such a large sub would be easy as heck to detect, so why even bother? Just use a conventional surface vessel...

    Also a train in general isn't the best idea for transporting anything, IMO... all that extra weight of the frames and wheels could be product. Plus, rail lines going to the ocean would be a super easy target for military to destroy.
     

  15. parkland
    Joined: Jul 2012
    Posts: 700
    Likes: 6, Points: 18, Legacy Rep: 40
    Location: canada

    parkland Senior Member

    What about if it didn't have to be a submarine?

    Picture that rubber unit from 2 posts above; 2 of them, kilometers long, on each side of the train, and a semi rigid steel structure with tracks on it, so the train can drive on, and have giant rubber pontoons on each side. Have a spot with azipod drives mounted, and they just get powered from the engine, and have a car somewhere that is the "nautical control unit", with radar etc, and control the engines and azipods remotely.

    Those engines are already remotely operated, so it should be easy to do. Just install a giant switch, to go to either the wheels, or external connections going to the azipod drives. Then you'd need a remote controller to control the azipod functions.

    Every car would have to be secured down to the boat frame though, that would be a massive job.
     
Loading...
Forum posts represent the experience, opinion, and view of individual users. Boat Design Net does not necessarily endorse nor share the view of each individual post.
When making potentially dangerous or financial decisions, always employ and consult appropriate professionals. Your circumstances or experience may be different.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.