Does anyone have any plans, detailed pictures, or full hull pictures of the French submarine Surcouf? Or does anyone know where I could get building plans for it?
In the File Manager, I have put a free set of Surcouf plans based on the original shipyard plans. They're in 1/96, but I'll get a set of 1/144 ones up.
Ralph Coles has molds for a Surcouf hull and has sold several, but I don't know if any models were completed. I started one but gave up after realizing there isn't enough room to make it a functioning combat ship. My I-400 came close to succeeding (it dove, resurfaced using CO2 and ballast tanks, and fired a BB cannon after resurfacing), but stability problems could not be overcome. Bob Pottle Nova Scotia
Hi, I replied to this thread early this morning but that and all my other morning posts disappeared within 2 hours. Ralph still makes Surcouf hulls. He'sold several but I recall hearing of only one that was completed, as a surface runner. I gave up on mine after installing rudder and prop shafts (one dummy shaft - no room for two motors!). After making a fiberglass deck (that hasn't been installed and needs hatches cut out) I got an I-400 hull and abandoned the Surcouf projeect. Contact me off forum if interested - it's been gathering dust for years and will be cheap! Bob
U571, Here is the link to the French National Archives: http://www.servicehistorique.sga.defense.gouv.fr/02fonds-collections/banquedocuments/planbato/planbato/central.htm The original builders plans for Surcouf are free to download. Along with Tugboat's resized, cleaned up versions you should be set with info for building a Surcouf model. But again I recommend you build your model in a scale larger than 1/144. Are you a member of a club? If not, and your not thinking about joining one in particular... I would consider starting your own if you really want to build a combat sub... not all current clubs are sub friendly. 1/144 scale seriously limits the usefulness of even a large sub like Surcouf. Building in a larger scale would allow you to arm more torpedo tubes ( Surcouf had something like 10 ) and possibly build an armed turret as well ( the ship had twin 8" guns too ).
No Mike, I didn't. I think it's clear even the largest sub allowed in 1/144 naval combat (I-400) is too small to be effective as a combat model unless the hull is deepened considerably. I deepened the OOP Battlers I-400 hull by adding another 1/2" of fiberglass after cutting it in two horizontally. Even that extra depth didn't solve the stability problems. I was able to install a pair of ballast tanks blown by CO2 from the same capsule that fired the custom-built, self-draining BB cannon in the hangar. The sub could do a static dive, resurface and fire, but was very unstable on the surface. In its only battle it heeled over at 45 degrees in a sharp turn and stayed there, rendering the gun ineffective beyond a few inches. After a lot of work the stability problem could not be eliminated. Part of it is physics - any size of submarine trimmed down to barely positive buoyancy is inherently unstable. Another problem is battery capacity. I tried a 6V 1.2Ah battery (the biggest that would fit in the hull and got only 10 minutes running time with two 280 motors. I removed one motor and got about 18 minutes before the battery and radio died. If Steve Hill and I make another I-400 hull this year it will have about 20% more volume ahead of amidships than the BC version, plus it will be deepened about 1" beyond scale. With the lead ballast another 1/2" deeper than in my modified BC hull we might get enough stability. (If you recall the 1/144 M1 someone built in the 1980s it was much wider and deeper than scale.) The I-400 hull is big enough to use as an unarmed convoy ship. With the ballast tanks removed from mine it can double the battery capacity and have a useful running time. Bob
Predread, A 1/72 scale Surcouf hull is available from Ralph Coles, complete with conning tower. Definitely big enough to be a diving and shooting sub. Also available is a 1/72 M1 (WWI British sub class with a single 12" gun). The M1 hull is much smaller than Surcouf, and probably only 15-20% bigger in volume than the 1/144 I-400. It could easily be built as an armed surface runner, and maybe as a armed diving model. Ralph recently got a set of 1/72 I-400 plans but is uncertain whehther to proceed with the project. If he doesn't I might tackle it next winter. Bob
Bob- Could you use small gears to drive both shafts on a single motor? What about alternative methods for cannon construction? Most of our cannons use copper for the barrels and such; has anyone experimented with making barrels out of some kind of hard plastic? I've seen magazines made out of plastic, so maybe a barrel would be viable. If most of the length was protected in the conning tower/hangar it should be safe from gunfire. Also, what about lowering the gun so that only the muzzle protruded from the tip of the bow (actually inside the hull)? That would put the gun a little bit lower in the ship, and should lower the center of gravity some, which would improve stability. Draining might be a bit of an issue, but perhaps you could attach small hoses to the gun that would allow them to train outside the hull.
I have some ideas for the stability issues, including setting heavy stuff low in the hull and using custom ballest chambers. I won't know if it works until I try it though, and I want to try it. Bob, I'll try to send another email. Basically, how much are you asking for the Surcouf hull.
Mike, I haven't received your email yet. $30 + shipping which I'll know when I package the hull and take it to the P.O. Probably less than $20. I'll toss in a pair of fiberglass ballast tanks I made but didn't install. Crzyhawk, I thought about gears but the I-400 steered OK with 1 working prop. I set the rudder trim a little off center to get it running straight. My I-400 has custom built fiberglass ballast tanks with some complicated brass tube and Clippard hose plumbing to equalise them port to starboard, allow CO2 in, and vent CO2 through MAV-2 valves run by microservos. The BB cannons are light weight and based on my design for DDs. There's a 1.5 unit spurt gun and a 1.0 unit single shot. Both are self-draining and fire through a hole in the aft end of the hangar. The design is almost straight, but with the magazine angled up a few degrees to allow water to run out the barrel, which is depressed a little below horizontal. It works fine and has been tested on resurfacing from a static dive. Barrel and mag are at the opposite ends of a T-fitting and the stem of the T holds a custom-made tapered interrupter pin. The pin has a hole drilled through its length so CO2 enters the mag through the pin after it's driven up between the BBs and prevents more than one being fired in the single shot cannon. For the spurt gun, the length of the chamber ahead of the pin can be built to hold different numbers of BBs. My spurt guns are built to fire 3 BB or 5 BB salvos, or the entire magazine load. Putting a gun in the bow might improve stability but it wouldn't be as effective. Range before water impact would decrease significantly in calm conditions because the barrel height would be at least 3/4" inch lower than a hangar gun's barrel. The weather in Nova Scotia tends to be windy so there are usually waves when we battle. A BB fired from a gun in the bow of a sub will almost always hit a wave before the target. Bob
Bob, I'll take it. Let me get the email to you so we can work out the payment arrangement. Good info on your I-400. Some great ideas, especially for the cannons.
Just curious, why did you use a ballast tank? Would it save space and weight to use a dynamic diving system?
Please tell me directly if the email system is still not working. (Tuggy & I tested it, but you never know...)
Gascan, I used a ballast system for a few reasons. I built a dynamic diving 1/72 sub and like any dynamic diver it had to have a fairly high speed to submerge. I figured with the slow max. speed allowed under IRCWCC rules I-400 could not generate enough flow over the planes to dive unless they were huge. I know some I-400 models using the BC hull have worked as dynamic divers but they may have an ESC aboard (to speed up when diving) or go faster than the 28 sec/100' allowed by the IRCWCC. An advantage of the static dive system is that the sub can completely submerge and sit on the bottom in a tight situation - say boxed in by surface ships and unable to move forward. My I-400 was designed mainly for use in convoy battles (ie IRCWCC 'Campaign Lite') where it would be a threat to slower convoy ships but if in danger could lie doggo in shallow water (where I could see it) and pop up and fire when a target came close. The final reason whas that I wanted to see if a working ballast system could be installed in such a small hull. Bob
The one sub I saw that used a dynamic diving system used non-scale planes made from clear plastic to develop the downforce.
