----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2005 10:29
PM
Subject: Re: Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] hull
test
Bill, Paul,
I don't think microwaves are used in underwater
communication, but I'm not positive. For local communicating
acoustic equipment is used. It is like radio communication but
instead of an electrical radio frequency carrier, it uses a high frequency
sound wave carrier. Mechanical not electrical, or sound wave not
electrical wave,
For a deep water test, if I ever had to do
another, I'd use a line for safety and to control decent, but also
a simple two wire cable connected to a magnetic drop weight
system. Something simple, controlled with a dry cell in a plastic
bag or something as simple as that. No need to get fancy but a magnetic
release with actual wires to the surface would be
best.
In large subs they do usually test manned since a
leak, or anything that is fixable, is dealt with as the test is in
progress. Also I remember reading somewhere that strain gauges are
placed in critical parts on the hull to monitor its performance. These
need to be tended to and monitored. They just pilot it down and watch to
see what is happening.
Dan H.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2005 4:39
PM
Subject: [Norton AntiSpam] Re:
[PSUBS-MAILIST] hull test
Boy I like Bill's idea of remote control of a few key
systems. Why not attach an umbilical for ballast control, leak
detectors and maybe an internal camera? One downside of a wire would
be coming up with the 300-1000 feet of cable needed. But you'd have,
in effect, a super-size ROV with optional human cargo. ;-)
Paul
On 10/26/05, Akins <lakins1@tampabay.rr.com>
wrote:
Your below post got me to wondering
Dan.
Since we use microwave transmissions for
underwater communications, why couldn't microwave
transmissions
be used to activate a remote control in a sub
the size of Carsten's so that a test line would only be there for
making
sure the sub did not drift away and for a
secondary backup. Would the microwave transmissions go thru the hull
and
the remote could be rigged to activate
the ballast pumps so the sub could surface
after the test depth and time were reached?
Would this be feasible or
practical?
Bill.
-----
Original Message -----
Sent:
Wednesday, October 26, 2005 8:12 AM
Subject:
Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] hull test
Silky,
A sub hull is a lot of
money and work to loose if you lower it to the bottom
for a test on
a line, with no person in it, but it's the safest way to test
a
personal sub. Of course testing in a pressure chamber would be
even
better but most small sub builders don't have or can't afford
this luxury.
Even with the risk of loosing the sub because of a
simple line malfunction,
a deep water test of the hull should be
done unmanned. After all, it's a
test to see if you'll be safe
diving in it.
A sub the size of Carsten's is not in this
category. I can only imagine the
feeling in Carstan's gut when
he does his tests, manning it himself. I have
a lot of faith
is the calculating skills of a man that can design and build
such a
project and I'm sure he's pretty confident he will have no problems
he can't solve as he goes, but we all know there is considerable
risk
involved.
P-subs should only be test proven
unmanned!
Dan H.
----- Original Message -----