Watching the current builders bring their subs
together is very motivational, but your ambient design is of
special interest to me. Ambient Rules!
:)
Not just a bit biased are we Doug? ;-) I've noticed over the months
that ambients tend to be viewed almost like ... [struggling for terms] Jr.
PSUBs or "almost" PSUBs, but not in a truly maligning way by any means.
I actually envy everyone who's building an ambient in terms of cost and
complexity. Generally speaking you'll have your boats in the water far
sooner and less-expensively than the rest of us. Because my planned
operational envelope is essentially the same as for ambients ... up where
there's light and the risks of bailout are less ... mine would be an ambient
were it not for my desire to have it hydrobatic. When I made the
transition to a 1-atm design, *everything* just got a whole lot more
complicated, costly and long-term. Therein lies my quandary.
It's a war between truly loving the image I have of what I want (my UPS)
in all its glorious complexity & capabilities and the desire not to have
to wait what I'm now projecting as a multiyear project, both in terms of
design and affordability, before actually getting wet. [minor tantrum in
the background ... pay no attention to the crazy hippie engineer]
I love the added time (72hrs) and depth capabilities (now 300' operation
range) that the transition to a steel pressure hull and 1-atm design
brought. Having a maximum diameter of 28" tapering to 18" for a pressure
hull (steel mummy-bag), means I also get a great safety margin in terms of
depth capacity (1200+') with the same 1/4" steel as larger diametered craft
with lower ratings. I also thoroughly enjoy the design process ...
[raising hand] "Hi. My name is Shawn. I'm a design addict."
I *know* it's a viable design and within my abilities to achieve eventually,
and I want it so bad I can taste it.
But, I'm also enough of a study of at least my own nature to also know
that the sooner I get something in the water, the less frustrating that path
will be ... and the greater the likelihood of my staying with it. So,
I'm seriously considering taking a sidetrip on my design path and building a
non-hydrobatic dry ambient version first. I can build and use the same
exostructure (thrusters, control surfaces, ballast system, etc.) but without
the pressure hull and life support requirements of the 1-atm design.
Since my design incorporates the ability to jettison everything from the
pressure hull except emergency ballast, theoretically, the transition from the
dry ambient to a 1-atm would be a matter of swapping out the pressure hulls
w/life support. Am I making sense? Thoughts, suggestions?
Warm Regards
Shawn