Re: Control surface configurations (was: Typhoon)

[VBra676539@aol.com]

In a message dated 7/12/99 7:20:21 AM, rmorrisson@unidial.com writes:

<<Ok, does anyone want to talk about hull design?  I would like to bounce 
ideas off
someone who can help with my design.  I am aiming for an ABS approvable design
but don't necessarily want to go to the expense of actually getting the 
approval
for my personal craft.

Later,
Dick
>>

That's basically the way most of George Kittredge's boats were built. The 
design was approved, but the Bureau has to oversee construction of each and 
every molecule in order to bestow their A-1 with the cross. A less favored 
method is to do it yourself and go operational, thus proving the design. You 
can get the A-1 that way, but not the cross. The big thing is to create the 
QC package to capture all the data required during construction. Samples, 
Charpy, calculations, weld tests, x-rays & dye penetrant results, and all 
that, as well as the design package and all the drawings. Are Lloyd's any 
less expensive to use than ABS? Maybe Phil will chime in as I have not priced 
it. I just remember that George chose them in lieu of ABS for the K-600 due 
primarily to what he called "the awful expense" of the Bureau prelims (and 
because it was going to Europe, of course).

As to design, these folks are engineers, and they have approved some odd 
variants over the years. The most successful small submersibles in history 
are the Nektons and look at that bloody great battery box welded into the 
hull! Makes the engineers I know shudder a little bit, just to look at it. 
Not because it doesn't work, but because it DOES work. And beautifully. ABS 
will certify anything that works, I suspect, so long as it functions as 
predicted, is built as specified, and is approved in advance. And remember 
the old ironworker litany:  Build to spec, beat to fit, paint to match!

Vance