CGI submarine I knocked up, ideas wanted

[Axeman3d]

Hi gang, used to be a regular here back when SHIII came out, and came back to check out the views on SH-V when it came out, then decided not to buy it just yet...:o

Anyway, for a laugh i make 3D models, and when I was bored today I decided I'd avoid the usual space ships and aircraft and instead build a submarine. Here's a couple of links, click to embiggen...

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4085/5078611244_276217d621_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/axeman3d/5078611244/)

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4071/5078494320_f8edb35cab_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/axeman3d/5078494320/)

The only other sub I've made was a Typhoon some years ago, using references from the web. This was made without using any real references or anything, I just wanted to build a sort of Russian looking sub. I guess it now sort of has elements of Russian, US and UK subs as well, as I was just sticking on bits here and there that looked nice to me. I suppose it's most like the new Borei class, but I was aiming part Typhoon and part Alfa, and this is where I ended up.

It's not super detailed or anything, just something to pass the time. I should have made some masts and bridge crew for the surface shot, since I went to the trouble of making it look like an old western photo of a Russian sub stopped on the surface. I also haven't decided yet where to put the fore diving planes, and thought you guys might have an opinion. Mount them on the sail and you get less noise near the bow sonar, but control is apparently more difficult at periscope depth and you need to faff around to get through ice. Just behind the sonar you get easier depth control but more noise near the sonar. What do you guys think? Ideas? Comments welcomed.

[ETR3(SS)]

Nice work!:yeah:I'd put retractable bow planes near the the dome at the same level as the stern planes.

[TLAM Strike]

Very nice.

Current and late cold war Russian subs (Akula, Borei and Yasen) mount their (non retractable) bow planes aft of the sonar dome at the same level as their aft planes. I would go with that.

http://img203.imageshack.us/img203/986/5sffb.th.jpg (http://img203.imageshack.us/i/5sffb.jpg/)

[Castout]

That looks super cool :yeah:

Any chance to put the torpedo tubse to midsection so that the bow sonar sphere has full dominion in the front? And make them at least 6 instead of four tubes?

Anyway it's already super cool as it is you've got talent there.

[Axeman3d]

Looks like aft of the sonar dome is the place for the planes then, I'll go for that. I thought they were still using retractable planes, but it's no issue and makes my life easier modeling it. I always thought that sail mounted planes looked cooler though...

Castout, I wanted to make a Russian style sub, and they tend to have their torpedo tubes exit at the front right above the sonar dome. I therefore stuck 6 x 533mm tubes on the front, although I was toying with the idea of putting a couple of the larger tubes (620mm?) that they use as well since they often mix them together.

Having the sonar fill the front and angled torp tubes at the sides is more an American innovation. I think it makes a lot of sense to give your primary sensors priority, particulary when your weapons are fully guided. No point having straight on tubes if you dont hear the bad guy coming.

What I think I'll do is build a hunter/killer today, and give it the full radome, side tubes and any other recent innovations I can find. Again, if anyone has any ideas that I can incorporate, I'm happy to hear them.

[Castout]

Anyway that's so gorgeous already . . . . . .! :yeah:

When you're done with the attack sub pls do share it with us to droll over together :DL

[TLAM Strike]

I wanted to make a Russian style sub, and they tend to have their torpedo tubes exit at the front right above the sonar dome.

The new Russian Yasen class submarine has the American style amidships tubes. :03:

Also the pod on the stern is a lot smaller now, just a tube like on US Subs. So uncool... :down:

[Axeman3d]

I have to agree, the pod was better looking. You knew you had a Russian sub when you saw that.

[krashkart]

That is a nice looking sub, Axeman. :yep:

[Axeman3d]

Alright, I've hit a problem building a nice SSN. If I build this, what will it look like? I dont want to just build another Virginia or Seawolf, but the only difference between Russian and US SSNs these days is really just the shape of the sail. To be honest, I think the smoothed shapes of the Russian conning towers looks better and more hydrodynamic. I want to include the following items...

1. mid section torp tubes to allow...
2. full bow front sonar, and
3. VLS launch tubes, either forward or aft of the sail.
4. towed and side sonars
5. pump-jet propulsor

Beyond that I'm not sure. Maybe some fancy diver system for special forces? Any ideas would be helpful, no matter how wacky. There's also another option, where we go completely space-age on it and do a future submarine where we're not so constrained by materials, etc. I made this one a couple of weeks ago, initially as a fighter or space ship but as it went on I made it more submarine-like. Hence the sub-aqua yellow paint job and the rather impeller looking engines...

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4076/4930785322_7df7786029_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/axeman3d/4930785322/)

Now obviously this is just a two man craft, but if this was the future SOCOM fighter, what would the mothership look like? Worth pursuing?

[TLAM Strike]

Might seem strange but for more 6th generation submarine look maybe consider VLS only. There has been talk outside of the Navy of using the VLS silos on the Ohio SSGNs for launching torpedoes.

An internal hanger below the waterline would be useful for SOF craft like on the Yankee Stretch. You can also stick one or two man SDVs in external lockers or push then out the torpedo tubes.

Also consider thinking smaller. In this age of defense cutbacks a smaller, cheaper SSN would be the route perhaps taken soon.

[Axeman3d]

OK, here's my attempt at a quick SSN design. It's not pretty or cool looking, but it makes sense to me. US subs have been getting slower, heavier and more shallow diving over the past 40 years, so i decided it was time to reverse that trend. This boat is designed for speed and deep diving, so i went with the classic 'body of revolution' shape and as clean and hydrodynamic lines as I could. Here's a couple of quick pics of the work so far...

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4103/5097050384_936beb2257_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/axeman3d/5097050384/)
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4084/5097050312_c62ec85c6d_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/axeman3d/5097050312/)

So there it is, a body of revolution shape rather like the experimental USS Albacore, fitted with a ducted prop and a smoothed out sail. It is about 8 meters shorter than the new Virginia class, but is nearly 2.5 meters wider across the beam which allowed me to fit 22 VLS tubes instead of the current 12 in use today. Along with the standard 4 midships mounted tubes this gives the sub a real flexible payload and lots of power.

I've still to add a few details, and it still doesn't have a towed array of any kind yet, but I'll fix that tomorrow. This is just to show what I have made today. Thoughts?

[TLAM Strike]

:o:o:o That's amazing!

I love it... :up:

What program are you using BTW?

[Axeman3d]

I use an older version of Lightwave 3D to do my models and animations. I cant afford the new version, but Sketchup cant do shapes like this easily and Blender does my head in.

[Axeman3d]

Well, I got a bit of stick on some forums for not making a futuristic enough submarine, so I tried again. This time I went deliberately a little overboard on the shape, and I've incorporated a few ideas which seem to be gaining credence. Here's the pics of the work in progress...

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1432/5101908879_e6ea27ce05_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/axeman3d/5101908879/)
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1421/5101908943_46be173994_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/axeman3d/5101908943/)
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1324/5101909009_77a9ebcb89_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/axeman3d/5101909009/)

Here's my thinking. At the front we have some fancy sonars and passive listening, then immediately behind that would be the bouyancy tank. From there to the conning tower will be weapons bays for modular systems and launchers which can be quickly reloaded or replaced to suit the mission. There are no standard torpedo tubes as such, everything is located in the launch bays.

At the rear you have the habital spaces and a nice platform for special forces to work from. You could moor habitats or SDS style subs no problem, and using helicopters would be easier too. At the rear you have the azipods for steering, fully steerable in X and Y access for thrust vectoring. Each contains several electrically driven impellers in a shaped tube to use pressure to assist in stopping the formation of bubbles which cause cavitation noise. At the rear of the pod an external housing funnels 'clean' water around the wake to further reduce turbulence and noise.

Anything you think I've done completely wrong, bearing in mind I'm just making this stuff up?

[ETR3(SS)]

OK, here's my attempt at a quick SSN design. It's not pretty or cool looking, but it makes sense to me. US subs have been getting slower, heavier and more shallow diving over the past 40 years, so i decided it was time to reverse that trend. Orly?:hmmm: Heavier? Yes they have because they have gotten larger. Slower? No, overall speed increased as new classes with more powerful reactor plants were produced. Shallow depths? Here the trend changes with the 688 having its max diving depth reduced to save on weight, but this also made it faster in return. The trend changes back with the Seawolf being made of HY 100 steel. But I like the subs your making, very cool!:yeah:

[Axeman3d]

My reading had made me think that from the Skipjack onwards, US SSNs got larger with no real increase in reactor power, so each successive class was more accomplished and stealthy, but a knot or two slower. Then when you hit the Los Angeles they also go backwards on depth to save cash and you end up with a quieter, slower, shallower diving sub. I dont think there's a lot in it, but until the hugely expensive Seawolf it's all backwards. On the Soviet side the only thing they didn't compromise on in their designs was speed and diving depth.

[ETR3(SS)]

My reading had made me think that from the Skipjack onwards, US SSNs got larger with no real increase in reactor power, so each successive class was more accomplished and stealthy, but a knot or two slower. Then when you hit the Los Angeles they also go backwards on depth to save cash and you end up with a quieter, slower, shallower diving sub. I dont think there's a lot in it, but until the hugely expensive Seawolf it's all backwards. On the Soviet side the only thing they didn't compromise on in their designs was speed and diving depth.Skipjack, Permit, and Sturgeon all used the S5W reactor plant giving them equal power. The speed variance between the three is up for debate. Honestly we don't know how fast each boat could go, but I've heard of the Skipjack going as fast as 40kts. So if that speed were true then certainly Permit and Sturgeon would be slower but not only due to more weight, they also were fitted with a different screw. One with it's focus more on stealth than raw speed. So my response stating that speed increased was based more on a 688-Skipjack speed comparison. The Permit could dive deeper than the Skipjack because it was the first boat made out of HY-80. Same with the Sturgeon, only it lost speed compared to the Permit due to it being larger. The 688 could still go deeper than a Skipjack but could also go faster again. So diving depth increases relative to that of the Skipjack. And then came Seawolf and like all things 80's (big hair) it came with a big price tag.

[TLAM Strike]

Well, I got a bit of stick on some forums for not making a futuristic enough submarine, so I tried again. This time I went deliberately a little overboard on the shape, and I've incorporated a few ideas which seem to be gaining credence. Here's the pics of the work in progress...

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1432/5101908879_e6ea27ce05_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/axeman3d/5101908879/)
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1421/5101908943_46be173994_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/axeman3d/5101908943/)
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1324/5101909009_77a9ebcb89_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/axeman3d/5101909009/)

Here's my thinking. At the front we have some fancy sonars and passive listening, then immediately behind that would be the bouyancy tank. From there to the conning tower will be weapons bays for modular systems and launchers which can be quickly reloaded or replaced to suit the mission. There are no standard torpedo tubes as such, everything is located in the launch bays.

At the rear you have the habital spaces and a nice platform for special forces to work from. You could moor habitats or SDS style subs no problem, and using helicopters would be easier too. At the rear you have the azipods for steering, fully steerable in X and Y access for thrust vectoring. Each contains several electrically driven impellers in a shaped tube to use pressure to assist in stopping the formation of bubbles which cause cavitation noise. At the rear of the pod an external housing funnels 'clean' water around the wake to further reduce turbulence and noise.

Anything you think I've done completely wrong, bearing in mind I'm just making this stuff up?

Looks nice but I don't like it because of its shape, seems incorrect for a submarine (the Mystic class DSRV was actually built out of three spheres encased in a large sewer pipe), remember a sphere is the optimal shape for a submarine. A square hull will have different amounts of pressure at different points causing a hull failure.

[Axeman3d]

After looking at the shape of the Astute class, I decided to throw out the classic sewer pipe and just make an interesting shape. I went for width rather than height so that I could fit the most vertical launch modular weapons systems for the smallest overall size, and to make piggy-back systems much easier to accomodate. My thinking was that it should be a littoral combat ship, designed for cruise missile and SpecOps missions, as well as the classic anti-ship role. Hence the modularity and azipod steering for improved manoueverability.

A sphere might be the best shape to resist pressure, but not the best for a usable submarine. The elongated body of revolution is probably the best in terms of speed, stealth and decent pressure resistance, which is why I chose it for my SSN. The current round ended sewer pipe shape popular with US subs is a compromised version of that to make it easier to fit habitable spaces inside, without the constantly changing width of the more efficient shape leaving gaps everywhere.

[TLAM Strike]

After looking at the shape of the Astute class, I decided to throw out the classic sewer pipe and just make an interesting shape. I went for width rather than height so that I could fit the most vertical launch modular weapons systems for the smallest overall size, and to make piggy-back systems much easier to accomodate. My thinking was that it should be a littoral combat ship, designed for cruise missile and SpecOps missions, as well as the classic anti-ship role. Hence the modularity and azipod steering for improved manoueverability.
That squared bow on the Astute is not part of the pressure hull so it can have that shape.

A sphere might be the best shape to resist pressure, but not the best for a usable submarine. The elongated body of revolution is probably the best in terms of speed, stealth and decent pressure resistance, which is why I chose it for my SSN. The current round ended sewer pipe shape popular with US subs is a compromised version of that to make it easier to fit habitable spaces inside, without the constantly changing width of the more efficient shape leaving gaps everywhere.
Well someone could make a more hydrodynamic outer hull built around a pressure resistant spheres or cylinders. If you look at a Russian sub Speed and Stealth are functions of the machinery and outer hull while the pressure resistance is a function of the inner hull.

[Axeman3d]

So what you're sayiing is, the external shape doesn't really matter. :DL

If it were to be a particularly deep diving sub I'd worry more about shape, but this is purely meant to be a weapons and spec op platform for littoral waters.

[ETR3(SS)]

Speaking from experience, a large flat deck is a very bad thing to have when in shallow water. Numerous times we've been sucked up to the surface while at a shallow depth. What happens is when near the surface the wave action across that flat deck creates a suction and so pulls the submarine upwards, the larger the flat area the larger the suction force. Just a bit of submarine knowledge I'd thought to share, not trying to stifle your imagination or anything.:)

[Axeman3d]

You're quite right, I can see how that would happen in any kind of decent swell. It's not something I had considered. Another rethink needed I think.

[Schwieger]

Well, it does have modern technology on it, so I'm sure what we're worring about can be countered :DL

[Axeman3d]

You're right, i could slap on another few thrusters or azipods to give it much more control. However, if i can sort it with a reshape I would be better doing that.

[Axeman3d]

Well, here's another attempt at a more futuristic sub. It has containerised weapon systems in the unmanned fore section, which can be swapped out at any time for other mission packs or weapons systems. Reloading would involve unplugging the empty and plugging in a new one, with the reloading of the packs being done ashore at your leisure. You could also have a dry dock or wet garage for minisubs, with a link to the inhabited rear section via a tunnel link.

I have yet to work out how I will propel this thing, I'm going to try a couple of ideas for this. Here's how it looks so far, length about 140m at this point. The weapons packs were based on 25 x Tomahawk missiles at 6.5m long (with boosters) and .52m wide. The body is much more hydrodynamic this time, less flat along the top and more futuristic looking for added effect.

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4041/5120297607_960b078b70_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/axeman3d/5120297607/)
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4066/5120297815_716cc2c3ee_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/axeman3d/5120297815/)
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4129/5120900918_1c169d6d94_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/axeman3d/5120900918/)

[TLAM Strike]

Very nice, looks like something that might do battle with the SeaQuest DSV.

Maybe add a pair of sea water intakes forward and a pair of exhausts aft for a pair of MHD.

[Axeman3d]

Yeah, thats the next move for this one.

[XabbaRus]

Cool

I was talking to Neal about having a sub design contest.

Something real too aprat from building the thing.

Have a set of specs and a team designs a sub. Best sub wins.

[Chad]

That'd be cool Xabba. I'd enter as long as Sledhammer is on my team :O:

[Axeman3d]

I'm all for it, but you would need to set rules and expectations. You might need to set categories such as era (WWII, Cold War, Future) or even type (SSN, SSK, SSBN, research).

[XabbaRus]

Well watch this space.

I was thinking modern era,

Littoral Combat,

Blue Water

Anti Surface

I wouldn't want to limit propulsion types, I would count on common sense for that one.

[TLAM Strike]

Cool

I was talking to Neal about having a sub design contest.

Something real too aprat from building the thing.

Have a set of specs and a team designs a sub. Best sub wins.

I'm game! :yeah:

Well watch this space.

I was thinking modern era,

Littoral Combat,

Blue Water

Anti Surface

I wouldn't want to limit propulsion types, I would count on common sense for that one.
Littoral and Blue Water are kinda polar opposites Xabba... :hmmm:

[Sledgehammer427]

That'd be cool Xabba. I'd enter as long as Sledhammer is on my team :O:

O_O
:D

[XabbaRus]

I was thinking for categories TLAM...