Paul,
I want to thank you and the group in general for these very informative
responses. I will tell you that the learning curve in just a week?s time
(Hurricane interruption included) has been quite steep. Let me respond to some
of the things your posted.
?Some uninformed,
unproven comments:?
I disagree; your explanation on the dive planes demonstrates a thorough
understanding of the principals of hydrodynamics in this application, a very
informed opinion, and thank you. This is the second time I am caught off guard
regarding similarities to aerodynamics that I should have recognized, the
first being Chip and his static pressure pitot tube system.
Your comments caused me to immediately realize the necessity of a
locking mechanism (gust lock in aviation parlance) for surface travel. It is
precisely this type of ?real world? experience sharing that makes this type of
information group so valuable, and this before I have yet to pick up the first
book!
?I was wondering
too, have you talked to Pat Regan or looked at his Nautilus minisub? I
don't think he gives a lot of technical design info on his site but he'd
probably be happy to talk about it."
Yes, I have seen the minisub, and no I have yet to discuss it with him.
For now, I am limiting my information gathering to this group and the Internet
in general. I have spotted several modeling groups interested in the Nautilus
but their interests lie in accurate reproduction vs. real world
practicality.
As for the minisub, it started life as a typical 1 atm
pressure hull from the beginning and was given the Nautilus attire later. I am
sure that those of you with the Kittredge and other designs have as much to
offer in terms of information on submersibles in general. At some point, I
will approach him for his undeniable wealth of knowledge on the Disney-Goff
design. For now, my questions are being answered here, or I am being given
leads elsewhere.
Thanks again
Joe