Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] Re:SUBSAFE

[Ian Roxborough <irox@ix.netcom.com>]

On Sun, 23 Jun 2002 13:22:04 -1000
"Captain Nemo" <vulcania@hawaii.rr.com> wrote:

> What are some of the things you guys have thought of to ensure safety?

*Knowledge* seems to be a good one.

I've noticed, that every time I get a really good 
(normally $50+) submarine book, and I learn something
totally new, I seem to reduce my operational depth by
100 to 500 feet.  

I've just received the American Buteau of Shipping's
"Rules for Building and Classing Underwater vehicles,
Systems, and Hyperbaric Facilities", now I'm thinking
of reduce the operational depth of the fish sub to
350 feet.  I'd realy like to have a 'first sub' in the
900 to 600 feet operational depth range (I hope can do
this), but it's going to be easier, safer and probably
just as much fun to have a fished shaped sub that goes
to 350 feet (and I am willing to do this necessary).

Another thing that seems apparent, most roads leed back
to Kittredge.  I love designing subs and do it a lot, but
I've often found that many designs could be based on 
a G. Kittredge sub, a fish shaped psub could be built
around a Kittredge submarine and so could many of
the other sub designs I've seen in resent memory (if
would operated at the apporpate depth), I think all the
sub designs I've seen resently looked very stylish. 

Thanks for the feed back on the fish sub, by the way,
I'll post an updated design based on much of the feed 
back at some point soon.

Ian.

-- 
The moon ate the sun on Monday and it was an awsome sight to see.