[PSUBS-MAILIST] publicity

Mon Jun 22 06:36:20 EDT 2020

 I do, I will have to dig them.
Jon

    On Sunday, June 21, 2020, 12:54:29 AM EDT, River Dolfi via Personal_Submersibles <personal_submersibles at psubs.org> wrote:  

 Jon,Do you have copies of the operations and maintenance manuals prepared for the K-600? Those would be an interesting read.
Thanks,
-River J. Dolfi
rdolfi7 at gmail.com

On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 11:47 AM via Personal_Submersibles <personal_submersibles at psubs.org> wrote:

Send Personal_Submersibles mailing list submissions to
        personal_submersibles at psubs.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
        http://www.whoweb.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/personal_submersibles
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
        personal_submersibles-request at psubs.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
        personal_submersibles-owner at psubs.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Personal_Submersibles digest..."

Today's Topics:

   1. Re: cable fittings (Steve McQueen via Personal_Submersibles)
   2. Re: publicity (Jon Wallace via Personal_Submersibles)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 2020 14:20:19 -0400
From: Steve McQueen via Personal_Submersibles
        <personal_submersibles at psubs.org>
To: Personal Submersibles General Discussion
        <personal_submersibles at psubs.org>
Subject: Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] cable fittings
Message-ID:
        <CAAGGCGyo=vLuw_1bBZa7fmo+4e8n-992xzdE4beGXDPvbf1wfQ at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

They have a pretty good online catalog that list all the specifications.

On Sat, Jun 20, 2020, 1:56 PM Rick Patton via Personal_Submersibles <
personal_submersibles at psubs.org> wrote:

> I have them down to call with that number on Monday.
> Thanks
> Rick
>
> On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 4:32 AM Steve McQueen via Personal_Submersibles <
> personal_submersibles at psubs.org> wrote:
>
>> Rick, have you research the Conax PG series? I am using PG5-500-A-N to
>> pass a 2 wire jacketed cable from my rear thruster through the hull. They
>> offer a pretty good variety in this series.
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 15, 2020, 1:28 PM Rick Patton via Personal_Submersibles <
>> personal_submersibles at psubs.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Just called Sealcon to confirm how they rate their strain
>>> relief fittings and they base it on line pull so the ones I have won't
>>> work. they said that they also sell a cable clip that attaches to the cable
>>> on the pressure side to keep it from extruding so I might but one of them
>>> and do some testing to see if this will be an option or not.
>>> jRick
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 6:00 AM Alan via Personal_Submersibles <
>>> personal_submersibles at psubs.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Ian,
>>>>
>>>> https://www.macartney.com/what-we-offer/systems-and-products/connectors/subconn/
>>>> I'm not sure how you get Psub discount. I got some through Jon the
>>>> facilitator / owner
>>>> of the group a long time ago.
>>>> He normally reads the emails & will comment if you have a question.
>>>> There may be an email link to Jon, or more info on the Psub web site.
>>>> He's based in NY, so just a submarine ride away!
>>>> Cheers Alan
>>>>
>>>> On 10/06/2020, at 1:07 AM, Ian Juby via Personal_Submersibles <
>>>> personal_submersibles at psubs.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> :O  That's them!  Subcon eh? I'll look them up. Psubs gets a discount?
>>>> How does that work?
>>>>
>>>> Ian
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Jun 8, 2020 at 6:46 PM Alan via Personal_Submersibles <
>>>> personal_submersibles at psubs.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Thanks Ian,
>>>>> I have those type of penetrators (below). Psubs gets a discount from
>>>>> subConn
>>>>> that makes them.
>>>>> Would be a bit difficult making them yourself & the bought ones have a
>>>>> securing
>>>>> device so they can't pull apart ( orange thing in photo).
>>>>> I agree that there wouldn't be much call for wet mating them, & that
>>>>> it would just
>>>>> be an opportunity for corrosion.
>>>>> Alan
>>>>>
>>>>> <image1.JPG>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 9/06/2020, at 5:43 AM, Ian Juby via Personal_Submersibles <
>>>>> personal_submersibles at psubs.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Rick,
>>>>> I saw your post and wanted to ask if you meant electrical or plumbing
>>>>> through hull connections. So I'm glad you reposted because I haven't been
>>>>> able to follow the thread, nor have I had the time to go back and look
>>>>> stuff up.
>>>>> When I was working R&D on our diver heater system, we used a
>>>>> watertight bulkhead connector for the shot line and remote control.
>>>>> Unfortunately, this was over 20 years ago and I was not the one who
>>>>> actually ordered the connector. So I innernets'd some pictures to try and
>>>>> hopefully find it again because I remember quite well what it looked like,
>>>>> its design and construction. The closest thing I could find was Teledyne
>>>>> Marine's "Wet mate" connectors:
>>>>> http://www.teledynemarine.com/electrical-wet-mate-connectors/
>>>>> I couldn't tell you the price, but I'm sure they weren't cheap. For my
>>>>> ROV project, I'm still in the rough design phase and I keep increasing its
>>>>> depth capabilities. So I'm just going to make my own through-hull
>>>>> connectors, and they will be similar to this design.
>>>>> The through-hull seal is accomplished by a simple and reliable o-ring
>>>>> (which doesn't appear in teledyne's picture). Basically, the rubber
>>>>> connector body is mounted to a brass threaded tube that goes through the
>>>>> bulkhead. The brass threaded tube has a seat for an o-ring which gets
>>>>> compressed by both the nut and external water pressure. Here, I drew a
>>>>> pretty picture:
>>>>>
>>>>> <bulkhead connector.jpg>
>>>>> I just realized I didn't mark the brass tube, but it's the part that
>>>>> goes through the bulkhead.
>>>>> The particular connector we were using only needed to go to like, 300
>>>>> feet. I believe we tested the heater unit to 300 psi and ironically, it was
>>>>> the swagelock fittings inside the unit that leaked - that electrical
>>>>> connector never leaked. We had I think 8 electrical connections passing
>>>>> through that? We could get the identical connector as a straight-through
>>>>> connector, and not an angled connector like my drawing.
>>>>> The pins and sockets were the solid style - in other words there was
>>>>> no splits to allow for expansion or contraction of the sockets or pins.
>>>>> This further added to the waterproof nature as now the wire (a possible
>>>>> leak point) was buried in solid rubber, behind a solid metal socket which
>>>>> itself was buried in solid rubber. Any water wicking along would have to
>>>>> travel 1/2" along the metal/rubber just to get past the socket.
>>>>> The connector body was a hard rubber, both the through-bulkhead block
>>>>> and the male connector. Under high pressures, the water can wick along the
>>>>> inside of the wires (between the copper and the outer insulation) or if you
>>>>> pass the wire through say, silicone rubber, it can wick along the junction
>>>>> of the outside of the wire and the encasing rubber. So the longer that
>>>>> travel distance is, the higher the pressure needs to be to force water
>>>>> through those avenues. That rubber block was only maybe 2 inches left to
>>>>> right in my drawing. I don't remember what pressures or depths it was rated
>>>>> for, but I guarantee you it could take a LOT of pressure. Mechanically
>>>>> (because the bulkhead hole was small) and in keeping watertight. The
>>>>> biggest risk for a leak was if the bulkhead got a scratch where the o-ring
>>>>> seated against it. I have no doubt that connector could have taken
>>>>> hydraulic pressures (thousands of PSI).
>>>>> I did not draw this in my pretty picture, but the head of the brass
>>>>> tube probably had multiple rings inside the rubber, both to get good
>>>>> mechanical locking between the rubber body and the brass body, and to make
>>>>> the greatest distance the water would have to travel to get around from
>>>>> outside to inside the tube, if it were to wick along the junction between
>>>>> brass and rubber. But I'm speculating there because I didn't cut one of
>>>>> those connector$ open to find out. Lest I get fired and stuff for
>>>>> destroying a connector worth hundreds of dollars, you know.  :D Just, when
>>>>> I go to make my own connectors, I'll be making the mounting tube like that,
>>>>> for those reasons. The rubber that made up the connector body filled
>>>>> everything, including right to the bottom of the brass tube.
>>>>> The nice thing about making your own connector as well is that you can
>>>>> make the electrical pins, sockets and wires any size you want to match your
>>>>> electrical current needs.
>>>>>
>>>>> These particular connectors could be plugged and unplugged underwater,
>>>>> but I suspect it would be very difficult to do as it would have to displace
>>>>> water or vacuum from the connector holes. But as you can see, the male pins
>>>>> had insulating rubber for a part of their length to maximize the distance
>>>>> the electricity would have to travel from pin to pin, thus maximizing the
>>>>> electrical resistance from pin to pin as well.
>>>>> Hope that helps,
>>>>> Ian
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Jun 8, 2020 at 12:09 PM Rick Patton via Personal_Submersibles <
>>>>> personal_submersibles at psubs.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I posted the other day about cable threw hull water tight fittings
>>>>>> and only got one response back and was hoping for more feed back as I know
>>>>>> most of you probably don't make your own so for the ones that buy them, is
>>>>>> Blue Globe the only player out there besides sealcon?
>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>> Rick
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Personal_Submersibles mailing list
>>>>>> Personal_Submersibles at psubs.org
>>>>>> http://www.psubs.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/personal_submersibles
>>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Personal_Submersibles mailing list
>>>>> Personal_Submersibles at psubs.org
>>>>> http://www.psubs.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/personal_submersibles
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Personal_Submersibles mailing list
>>>>> Personal_Submersibles at psubs.org
>>>>> http://www.psubs.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/personal_submersibles
>>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Personal_Submersibles mailing list
>>>> Personal_Submersibles at psubs.org
>>>> http://www.psubs.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/personal_submersibles
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Personal_Submersibles mailing list
>>>> Personal_Submersibles at psubs.org
>>>> http://www.psubs.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/personal_submersibles
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Personal_Submersibles mailing list
>>> Personal_Submersibles at psubs.org
>>> http://www.psubs.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/personal_submersibles
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Personal_Submersibles mailing list
>> Personal_Submersibles at psubs.org
>> http://www.psubs.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/personal_submersibles
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Personal_Submersibles mailing list
> Personal_Submersibles at psubs.org
> http://www.psubs.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/personal_submersibles
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.whoweb.com/pipermail/personal_submersibles/attachments/20200620/f7f775ee/attachment-0001.html>

------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 2020 14:47:17 -0400
From: Jon Wallace via Personal_Submersibles
        <personal_submersibles at psubs.org>
To: personal_submersibles at psubs.org
Subject: Re: [PSUBS-MAILIST] publicity
Message-ID: <c26e1ec6-7534-777c-ab58-d3ac56fe3c2e at psubs.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; Format="flowed"

Vance, your memory is excellent.? I opened up the documentation last 
night and started going through it again.? I need to put a timeline 
together since many of the documents are scattered chronologically, but 
as I said earlier, it's pretty obvious that it wasn't a good business 
relationship and in the end everything just fell apart.? I've got some 
interesting pictures of some early subs/experiments, also original 
negatives and even a few original Ektachrome slides (remember those??) 
of the K600 being hoisted by a crane.? I'm tempted to create a K600 
archive to memorialize the project on the website but I'm not sure 
anyone else is really interested in the history. I wonder how your 
memory corresponds to what I am seeing in the documents and if there are 
any details you might be able to fill in.

An outline:
2/19/76 - George Kittredge and SUB SERVICE of Alesund Norway represented 
by Robert Hartnett, and Leiv Busaet, enter into a contract for 
"...development of a small submarine having a maximum operating depth of 
six hundred (600) feet, to be designed for use in the oil industry or 
such other uses as may be profitable to SUB SERVICE and adaptable by 
KITTREDGE.? This submarine is known as the K-600 series submarine and 
shall include the current prototype K-600 and such modifications as are 
approved by KITTREDGE".

Interestingly, SUB SERVICE was not an incorporated business at this time 
with Hartnett and Busaet signing the contract in their individual 
capacities.? The contract was to be adopted by SUB SERVICE after 
incorporation.? Initial payment was $30,000 (equivalent to $130,000 
today) and he did not receive the balance until December 1980.? 
Kittredge wanted certification by ABS, SUB SERVICE insisted on Det 
Norske Veritas (now DNV-GL).? However Veritas appears to have been 
difficult to work with given some letters I have between Kittredge and 
Hartnett.? According to those letters Veritas was slow to respond to 
approval of plans and neither party had confidence that Veritas had 
enough experience with submarines to properly certify the vessel.? At 
one point Kittredge traveled to Oslo Norway and met directly with 
Veritas engineers and there is talk from Hartnett about Kittredge having 
to educate them in how to certify a submarine.? This must be why they 
ended up with Lloyds although I haven't seen any documents specifically 
addressing the change to Lloyds.

3/1/79 - Kittredge had a contract written to license manufacturing of 
the K-600 to SUB SERVICE anywhere in the world except USA.? It looks to 
me like this was initiated by SUB SERVICE, whom were seeking to partner 
with Offshore Inspection Ltd of Glasgow, Scotland, to manufacture, 
market, sell, and maintain K-600 submarines within UK and Ireland.? 
According to the contract, SUB SERVICE would produce ten K-600 vessels 
per year, for three years.? Kittredge would receive 20% of the 
construction costs for each submarine as well as an hourly wage for 
writing and producing operation and maintenance manuals.? SUB SERVICE 
was seeking a 50% profit margin on each submarine.? Stipulations, and if 
you knew George you likely aren't surprised by this, were that each 
manufacturing license required approval by Kittredege "...in writing on 
a submarine by submarine basis" and "...no modification whatsoever of 
the submarine known as the K-600 series without the consent in writing 
of KITTREDGE". Even though this is a contract created by Kittredge in 
response to a business proposal by SUB SERVICE, I do not have a signed 
copy of the contract.? And since no additional K-600's were ever 
produced I think we can conclude that he either never signed the 
contract or never gave approval for a license.? I suspect the former 
simply because by this time the submarine was physically complete but he 
still had not received the balance payment for the vessel.? My guess is 
he wasn't going to sign anything until he got final payment for the 
existing K-600 but had the contract drawn up as a carrot.

6/21/79 - The K-600 is approved for certification by Lloyds.

12/1/79 - SUB SERVICE tells Kittredge they have a buyer from England for 
the K-600 and two people want to travel to Maine to see the sub in 
operation.? The buyers arrive 12/10/79 and on 12/11/79 Kittredge 
launches the K-600 in Penobscot Bay and demos the submarine.? The men 
tell Kittredge they will be purchasing it from SUB SERVICE for $125,000 
and leave confident that the transaction will proceed.? Obviously it 
doesn't, however there's no documentation on who these folks represented 
or why the sale ultimately failed.

12/11/80 - After Many letters of promised dates for the payment balance 
and many letters to lawyers on both sides, SUB SERVICE takes delivery 
from Kittredge about 18 months after it was ready. At the same time, SUB 
SERVICE along with Kittredge met with Bath Iron Works in Maine and 
reached an agreement whereby BIW would manufacture 10 submarine basic 
hulls which Kittredge would finish and then ship to Europe.? It appears 
this never developed into a contract or production.

About a week later Kittredge wrote SUB SERVICE asking what their 
intention was for the other ten submarines they agreed to purchase in 
their original 1976 contract.? Kittredge added that he was willing to 
release them from the agreement if they would mutually release him from 
the agreement.? I have the release document that Kittredge had drawn up, 
not have a signed copy of it.? In 1982-83 SUB SERVICE had internal 
strife and Hartnett informs Kittredge he is taking legal action against 
some of the other owners over misplaced funds.? It's at this point I 
assume the company eventually failed.? Whether because of the release 
agreement or the failure of the company, no other K-600's were built.

As late as 1983, Hartnett was still writing Kittredge about potential 
K-900 and K-1000, seemingly ready to strike out on his own.? Kittredge 
responded at one point that he was 65 and retired.

Jon

On 6/18/2020 10:38 AM, via Personal_Submersibles wrote:
> Very cool. And I'm pretty sure George thought the Norwegian owners 
> were dreaming. Their idea was to put a sub on every rig complex in the 
> North Sea, and operate them with only small boats for comms and 
> support. They could have asked me. I'd have told them a little about 
> winter gales and 5-8 meter seas. Aside from a bad idea at the start, 
> what really happened was that ROV technology caught up. The oil 
> companies and engineers liked people in subs, but the lawyers and 
> insurance companies did not. George had a heck of a time reacquiring 
> the 600. It got hung up in legalese in Norway and was going to be 
> junked, or just stuck in a corner somewhere and forgotten. It was and 
> is (arguably) the nicest sub George ever built, so I was happy to see 
> it saved, and very pleased indeed when you snagged it.
> Vance
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.whoweb.com/pipermail/personal_submersibles/attachments/20200620/596311a4/attachment.html>

------------------------------

Subject: Digest Footer

_______________________________________________
Personal_Submersibles mailing list
Personal_Submersibles at psubs.org
http://www.whoweb.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/personal_submersibles

------------------------------

End of Personal_Submersibles Digest, Vol 84, Issue 52
*****************************************************

_______________________________________________
Personal_Submersibles mailing list
Personal_Submersibles at psubs.org
http://www.psubs.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/personal_submersibles

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.whoweb.com/pipermail/personal_submersibles/attachments/20200622/483f4f68/attachment-0001.html>