[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] inaccurate terms & inescapable that the Hunley was a hybrid.
Folks,
I think you guys are trying to hard to prove your
points. The Hunley was and worked, well, like the
Hunley. Unless there is a pertinant point that is
going to be useful for the group in this day and age
why go to this length to prove your points?
Is it a Dead Horse yet?
(http://www.psubs.org/ethos.html#e1)
Regards,
Ray
--- Akins <lakins1@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
> I will address your post Ian in the order of each of
> the points you raised.
>
> 1. I said..." An ambient sub allows water to enter
> its INTERIOR to dive.
> The Hunley did this with her open
> top and open to the hull
> interior ballast tanks".
>
> You said..."This is wrong, any sub which has VBT
> inside the pressure hull could
> meet this discription. And you you could build
> an ambient sub which
> doesn't let water into it's interior, so this
> seems irrelavent".
>
> I will address your above statement in two parts
> since you mentioned two subjects in it.
>
> Part 1. I am not wrong about the Hunley's ballast
> tanks allowing water to enter her hull's interior so
> she could dive. Her ballast tanks were open top and
> open to the sub's hull interior. You say any sub
> which has Hunley style tanks could meet this
> description?
>
> Well what other sub can you name that has
> such ballast tanks? Please name one other SUSPOSEDLY
> pressure hull, SUSPOSEDLY 1 atm sub that has Hunley
> style open top, open to the hull interior ballast
> tanks. Can you name even one?
>
> Part 2. So what if you can build an ambient sub
> which doesn't let water into it's interior? You can
> also build a sub heavy enough so it doesn't need
> ballast tanks and can be lowered and submerged by a
> crane. What has the possibility of building an
> ambient sub that
>
> doesn't let water into her interior have
> to do with the fact that most ambient subs DO let
> water into their interior. Just as the Hunley let
> water into her interior. So it is VERY relevant.
>
>
> 2. I said..."The water pressure entering the sub's
> interior when an ambient
> sub dives, compresses the atmosphere
> in the sub's interior just
> as it did with the Hunley".
>
> You said..."Yes, there would be a minor internal
> pressure increase from venting
> the tanks. (Also note water
> does NOT have to enter an ambient sub's
> interior for it to dive.)
>
> Another two part statement that I will address in
> two parts.
>
> Part 1. You agree that FLOODING (not venting, you
> got it backwards) the tanks would compress the
> atmosphere in the hull and make the atmosphere no
> longer 14.7 lbs per sq in inside the Hunley, and
> therefore she could NOT be 1 atm.
>
> You can look up websters dictionary if
> you want for the definition of venting.
>
> Part 2. Ambient subs have an always open to the
> water section in their hulls. I believe it is most
> common for water to enter an ambient subs interior
> for it to dive. I don't think anyone here will argue
> that it is most common and everyone knows what I
> meant.
>
>
> 3. I said..."An ambient sub uses air to force water
> out of the sub's INTERIOR
> to surface, just as they did with the
> Hunley".
>
> You said..."I don't believe this for a minute.
> How did they use air to force water
> out? Sailers breaking wind maybe? The bits about
> the Hunley's operation
> I've read about claim that they used a HAND PUMP to
> empty the ballast tanks"
>
> Your statement is in four parts so I will address it
> in four parts.
>
> Part 1. I am sorry you do not believe what is true.
>
> Part 2. You asked how the Hunley crew used their air
> to force water out of the ballast tanks. They did it
> by using the AIR in the sub that was compressed
> inside the hull to ALLOW them to pump the water out.
>
> When the water came into the hull, it
> compressed the atmosphere. It is true that they used
> a hand pump to force the water out again, but if the
> atmosphere had not been compressed by the water
> coming in, they would not have been
>
> able to pump the water out so that the
> atmosphere would expand again to 1 atm. Otherwise if
> the water had entered the sub WITHOUT compressing
> the atmosphere that would mean they would have had
> to lose air for the water to
>
> enter the sub. Then if they tried to
> pump the water out they would have had a vacumn in
> the sub corresponding to the water they pumped out.
> The vacumn would then preclude them pumping very
> much water out.
>
> So the air in the sub ALLOWED them to
> pump the water out. What other SUSPOSEDLY pressure
> hull sub do you know of that uses its compressed
> INTERIOR HULL air to allow you to pump out the
> water? None. Only the ambient subs
>
> use their INTERIOR HULL air along with
> an air tank of pressurized air to push the water out
> of the hull. The Hunley did not need an air tank of
> pressurized air. She used her own HULL PRESSURIZED
> AIR to ALLOW the water to be pumped out.
>
> The pressurized air in the Hunley's hull
> did not directly push the water out, but without it
> being pressurized they would not have been able to
> expell the water.
>
> Part 3. You said...."How did they use air to force
> water out? Sailers (sic) breaking wind maybe? Oh boo
> hoo, that was not a very nice thing to say and I
> think I will make a big deal about it and whine that
> you are not nice like you said about me
>
> for absolutely no reason. Very childish
> Ian. Everyone here knows exactly what you have said
> and what I have said and everyone here knows I am
> not rude, crude, abusive or not nice unless someone
> acts that way first. Then I will give it right back
>
> to them like I am giving it back to you
> now. So let's dispense with the personal attacks
> here against me by saying I ascribed you saying
> things that were not what you said and that I am not
> nice for doing it. I never said you said anything
> other than
>
> what you wrote for all to see here. I can
> admit when I am wrong and not take a cheap shot
> against someone to divert attention away from the
> fact that I was wrong like you did.
>
> Part 4. That is correct that they used a hand pump
> to pump the water out as I described in part 2.
>
>
>
> 4. You said...."Well there you go, you got 1 out 3"
>
> I believe I have proven that I
> "got" 3 out of 3 Ian.
>
> Let me ask you THIS question
> though, suspose I had only gotten 1 or 2 out of 3?
> That would still show the Hunley had attributes and
> qualities of an ambient sub design. So my point
> would be made that the Hunley had attributes and
> qualities
>
> of an ambient sub even if I had
> gotten just 1 or 2 wouldn't it? It would still have
> proved the Hunley had some attributes of an ambient
> sub wouldn't it? Proving my point that she had
> attributes of both an ambient and a pressure hull
> sub,
>
> and that she is therefore a
> hybrid of the two types.
>
>
>
> 5. You said..."There where (sic) a few other error
> in your text , but I can't bothered
> point them out at this point - most of them have
> been address in my
> other emails, as have most of your questions.
>
> Ian, there are so many errors in your text as to the
> facts, that I can't be bothered either to point
> them all out at this point. I have addressed the
> Hunley having attributes of ambient and pressure
> hull subs. I believe I have proven
>
> it with logic and reason AND been nice in doing so.
> The conclusion is inescapable. The Hunley was a
> hybrid
=== message truncated ===
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
************************************************************************
************************************************************************
************************************************************************
The personal submersibles mailing list complies with the US Federal
CAN-SPAM Act of 2003. Your email address appears in our database
because either you, or someone you know, requested you receive messages
from our organization.
If you want to be removed from this mailing list simply click on the
link below or send a blank email message to:
removeme-personal_submersibles@psubs.org
Removal of your email address from this mailing list occurs by an
automated process and should be complete within five minutes of
our server receiving your request.
PSUBS.ORG
PO Box 311
Weare, NH 03281
603-529-1100
************************************************************************
************************************************************************
************************************************************************