[PSUBS-MAILIST] New submarine

[Jim Todd]

Scott,
It sounds like a great project to design and build a sub with that deep capability.  The continental shelf is somewhat shallower than that, so generally you would have to get a good distance off shore for any deep dives (some exceptions).  That brings up the issue of longer distance sea transport and support.  It might be a good idea to identify specifically the dive sites you would want to go to, their depths, distance from shore, availability of sea transport and surface support (and cost), etc. 
Jim 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Apr 8, 2014, at 9:43 AM, swaters <swaters at waters-ks.com> wrote:
> 
> Hard to say, but I would think in designing this sub to go deep, that I would use it alot to go on deep dive and not many shallow dives.
> Thanks,
> Scott Waters
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my U.S. Cellular© Smartphone
> 
> "Sean T. Stevenson" <cast55 at telus.net> wrote:
>> On 2014-04-08 07:01, swaters wrote:
>> Is there any pictures of Karls boat? I appriciate the idea about the sphears Joe. 
>> 
>> What is a good safety rating on a 1000m sub in terms of design crush depth or rated vs crush ratio? 
>> Thanks,
>> Scott Waters
> 
> Bare ABS rules give you 1.25 over predicted failure.  1.5 - 2.0 is common in actual practice.  For a 1000m hull a 2.0 SF would necessitate a lot of extraneous material.  Perhaps take the service conditions into account? (i.e. will 1000m dives will be typical or exceptional?).
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20140408/0ab113d6/attachment.html>