Re: A Simpler Sub

[Rick Lucertini <nexus@intergate.bc.ca>]

Sean Walinga wrote:

> Hi Rick,
>     Let me gUEss...  You mUSt have an "A" type pERsonality!  I hope you aren't
> checking all of the emails for "bUOyancy" spelling errors...   :)

Me?  A type A, chest beating, dominant silverback?  Heck, no.  Anal retentive is all !!!

> Anyhow, can you tell us more of the SportSub? Why have they chosen that
> particular design?

As I remember, it was to cater to the tourism industry.  The Kent Markham design [Popular Mechanics,
June'71] allowed for easy access, in warm water, to the interior.  The bubble, of course, allowed the
occupants to enjoy the view, and, to communicate, without having to wear the usual scuba rig.

Ballast: this has been a topic for a while.  The SportSub has a special controller - electronic, I
think - that admits air as needed to maintain consistent volume within the cockpit.  Like Markham's
boat, the leg area is quite far down, certainly maintaining a long moment arm between the bubble and
the hard ballast at the bottom of the cockpit where the feet are.  While not allowing for much in the
way of hydrobatics, it provides security in terms of pitch and roll, both of which are minimized for
the tourist's comfort.  I took a course on submersible design by the fellow who designed the
controller.  It was proprietary information but, I got the impression it was a fairly simple thing to
put together.  Mind you, if it was, in fact, electronic, I have my suspicions about the reliability
u/w.  Unless sealed phenomenally well, electronics and sea water don't really go hand in hand.

In terms of an overflow valve for runaway ascents, I lean toward the paranoid - I dive with a dry
suit. I would have two, three-inch ball valves, one for each hand, mounted high up on a convenient
bulkhead.  Dumping air rapidly is critical, especially from a deep dive or after having stayed down
for a while [for non-divers: please become certified so we don't have to read about you in the
obituaries   8-(   ].

A point about lifting points: I was surprised when the designers of the SportSub told me that there's
no additional support for the lifting point other than the fibreglass it's imbedded in.  That's thick
glass, folks.  Don't know about any problems they may have had.  Perhaps they've changed things around
a bit since I last spoke with them.

There's only one criticism I can come up with - the boat suffers terribly in terms of hydrodynamics.
Deliberate?  Dunno . . .  But, IMHO, a sleek hull increases profit margins for the tourist company
[i.e.: saves on battery usage/life].  The side ports are hemispheres.  They could have been tear drops
for basically the same cost. The Germans did tank tests during "The War" and halved parasitic drag by
using the teardrop shape. Hull is boxy.  Why not have more window area if it's not supposed to move
fast?   Dunno . . .  Maybe, designing a sub with flat panels was so easy they just kept going for it.

Well, that's all, Folks !!!