| 
 Hi Frank, 
I was pretty heavy into amateur astronomy in 
my life prior to submersibles, so have some knowledge on this.  First, the 
port would act like a lens only if it were shaped like a lens.  A bit 
thicker in the middle would not necessarily make it a lens.  It would 
depend upon the amount of curve and the shape of the curve.  Lenses (good 
ones) are specific geometric shapes such as parabola, hyperbola, etc.  If 
these shapes are not within specific tolerances, you get chromatic aberration, 
spherical aberration, and a buch of other nastyness that makes looking through 
them worthless.   
A plane disc viewport that was a little 
thicker in the middle would not be described as a stronger port as far as ASME 
PVHO is concerned.  While the port does not have to be scientifically flat 
(same thickness from edge to edge), you have to use the thinnest thickness to 
calculate the depth rating of the port, since that is it's weakest 
point. 
If the shape was such that the port acted as 
a lens, and assuming the shape was good enough that various aberrations were not 
present, then yes you would have to be at the focal point in order to see 
anything clearly.  This is most likely not going to be a comfortable 
viewing angle.  It's not like the lens is going to project a bigger image 
of the world into the interior of the sub.  If the port were 16 inches in 
diameter for example, it might be like looking through an 8 inch viewport.  
You will have to be some distance back, and your field of vision will 
significantly decrease because of that.  Unless the port is a perfect lens, 
as you view things further at the edges, the distortion gets worse. 
The port would not bring more light into the 
sub, it would simply focus it into a smaller area.  That smaller area would 
be brighter since the light rays woud be concentrated, however you are 
sacrificing field of view for brightness. 
Jon 
  |