Another Silly Submarine Thread

Yo Bob, did you see my last? sorry to put you on blast, but you seem like the guy to bounce ideas off of given your experience.

 

Finally got fusion 360 to download, so I'm going to use the plans I have to start playing around with the program tonight. The 1/96 scale Lionfish plans I have should be really cool for the purpose.

 

Fusion is Awesome. Still working on the kinks, but this system is great so far. Still haven't figured out how to import the plans to the program, but I'll keep tinkering

 

I wonder if this might help.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9FwUzGmIKpE

 

thanks, I'll check that out

 

There seems to be very little over how to build a submarine for battling purposes in any thread, there needs to be something over how to build one by someone that has actually built one. I would like to build one but really dont know where to start and think would take quite a while to figure out how to do it on my own dime and time.

 

I have seen and driven a sub. So here are my thoughts"
1. Crap load of money spent for a single shot in a battle.
2. Can't hit anything as you need to steer near shore and they don't turn worth a damn.
3. You have brought a knife to a gun fight. Not even a sharp knife, more like a marmalade spreading cheese wiz spooning knife...
4. Spend a crap load on the boat. Now add in cost of travel including hotel room. Time spent on trying to line up a single shot per battle. While everyone else is excited to recap the day's battles over dinner, you are trying to make your single shot in one of the battles sound like the best thing ever. Return on investment is terrible. "But", you say, " I built and battled a submarine! I proved it could be done."-- This will get you what we say in the south "bless your heart".
5. Want a challenge and still be able to shoot 50 bb's, build a destroyer and make it "effective". Once you do that, then maybe you get why we steer everyone away from subs - you will get frustrated and leave the hobby, we actually want you to be successful and build a ship that will let you participate in most battles.

 

Big Gun subs are worth it. I have built two for my self and helped build three for others and they are not for beginners, in some ways they are more complicated than a BB. The big mistake people make is a removable deck the whole length of the boat, my second sub only the center third had access and that was much easier to work with. Dynamic diving works great as long as there are no leaks. They are deadly if you can get to your target but have a high rate of do not return to port penalties. I will be building a sub later this year and I will try to post it as I go.

 

I am the type of person that likes a engineering challenges to me I find it fun and relaxing.

 

Any movement on your build? I'd be curious to see it if so. if not..... *prod* *prod* *prod*
Also. would you mind posting pics of your previous builds in "Stem to Stern"?

In other topics, I really liked reading all of the input from the "it's certainly cool, but this probably won't end well" crowd. So... for now I'm just thinking of getting one built, not for battling, and just seeing how a 1/144 sub goes together/dives/etc. I imagine that it would at least be amusing to see one unarmed in a convoy.

I've been hunting around for Argonaut plans for a bit during my downtime, and would love to scratch one together if I could find a set. I have found random side and top profile shots and a really blurry contour diagram, but would it be possible to say, slightly modify the Strike Models Narwhal plans to suit the task? I'm not seeing any major differences that could not be changed on the draft table. But I'm a dingbat, and with that, I request your input to become less of a dingbat on the matter.

 

I just started working on my Type IX and I am making the plug for the conning tower first. A vacuformed conning tower works great because it is light and adds no buoyancy but this sub is small so I hope it works. I will take some pic's soon and I sold my two sub's in 1997 but their pic's are on this site ( I400 and Surcouf ).

 

I'm planning on using a fair amount of vacuum forming if I can in the construction to lighten the upper works. is there a way to do that on our scale of production (ie: low numbers) in a cost effective manner?

 

and.... youtube. holy cow I am going to go ballistic with vacuforming now.

 

The other nice thing about vacuforming is once you make a plug you can easily replace parts that are beat up. you can also make the hull of a sub and cut out windows. We use to have special construction rules for subs like 1" below the deck for the penetrable area since the sub is almost completely under water at rest and dive planes are 200%. I have to reintroduce these rules because no one has built a sub in many years and they have been removed.

 

200%? are you referring to the surface area?

Also, do you have a comprehensive list of these rules handy? I'd like to peruse them if you wouldn't mind

 

Yes rudders are 25% over the size on the plans and dive planes are DBL the size on the plans. WWCC has a set of rules on line but not much on subs, I will change that. I plan on building at least 2 more subs now that there is the inter net (none when I built mine) you can find far more info to do research on.

 

I've sold the last set of I-400 components I made before selling the molds to Strike Models. I realized after building one I-400 from the OOP Battlers Connection hull 15 years ago that I have no inclination to build another sub, even though this hull has more volume due to being deeper and has reportedly been used for successful I-400s. My first I-400 was complex, time-consuming and useless in competition, although it dove and surfaced nicely using ballast tanks and CO2 capsules.

 

You're allowed to deepen the hull by some amount, right? Do you have any diagrams of your ballast system handy?
I ordered some plans from strike, and intend to give the Narwhal and I-400 a good look on paper.

 

Hey @Bob Pottle I have a copy of the Narwhal and I-400 plans and am giving them a look right now. the plans from Strike have two sets of rib outlines, one with 3/8" deeper draft, specified as a modification for big gun. what's the IRC rules regarding deepening Class 1 hulls to improve stability etc? I have read through the IRCWCC stuff and have not found a thing about it. is there a max? what are my parameters?

 

hulls can be deepened so as to maintain at least 1/2" freeboard in class 1 and 2. On my two little hulls I've made I have calculated the added keel depth allowing for the max weight and stretched the hull sections to make the boats look right above waterline and not too crazy below. Focus on getting the Texas 100%