Re: Question? (and specs)

[Rick Lucertini <empiricus@sprint.ca>]

Martin Sanderse wrote:

> Alan D. Secor wrote:
> >
> > More interior room than what?  A Steel hull?  I don't see how.

If the steel hull has exterior bracing, which, by the way, usually doubles as a support framework for
peripherals, then, no, there is no real advantage space wise.  Except for the unusual built-in spaces
that can be easily formed by cutting ply sections.  Steel equivalent would be a nightmare in cost and
execution.

IMHO, ply offers a much greater playground for creative work.  I'd even like to plagiarize some of the
Star Wars space ship designs and see what happens - unmanned testing, of course.

> BTW, I
> > think
> > you said you knew of an actual design that used this method...any
> > references?
>
> Yes actually;
>
> >From "Manned Submersibles" by Busby

Thanks, Martin.  That's where I saw the reference all those years ago.  Has a cute picture, if I
remember correctly.

And, yes, do continue with the details if you have time.

> Submanaut
> 9.5 feet long
> beam 4.2 feet
> 4.75 high
> 3.ft draft
> 2.75 tons dry
> 200 foot operating depth
> collapse depth 2000 feet
> launched 1963
> hatch diameter 16.5 inches
> 24 man hours life support
> power 3.5 kwh
> speed 1.1 knots for 4 hours cruise  , 1.6 for 2 hours
> 1 pilot, one observer
> payload 1200 pounds
>
> elliptically shaped pressure hull, majot axis 96 inches, minor axis 42 inches, 128 rings
> of .75 inch plywoodbonded togehter.  The radial thickness is 4 inches plus .75 inches
> fibreglass for a total of 4.75 inches.  hatch of steel with a flat gasket.
>
> and so on.  . . .  I'd keep typing but I have to go to a meeting.
>
> If there is further interest I'll type out the rest tommorrow. Let me know.

--
Rick Lucertini
in Vancouver, Canada
empiricus@sprint.ca

"To a rational being it is the same thing to act according to nature and according to reason."

    Marcus Aurelius Antoninus, 121 - 180 a.d.