Remember even the Nautilus and the Triton had a normal ships prow and they were ten years after the war. I think the Barbel was the first to have a whale shape and she was a diesel boat. No wait it was the diesel powered USS Albacore AGSS-569, built in 1953 as an experimental submarine hull with no torpedo tubes, http://www.ussalbacore.org/html/virtual_tour.html, because everyone refers to modern subs as Albacore hulls, right?

No wait ... What about the USS Blueback SS-581 ... http://www.omsi.edu/visit/submarine/

She says that she is the first battle ready tear drop design, but she was also diesel powered.

So it wasn't till the Skipjack SSN 585 that we have the modern teardrop whale shape most modern day nuc boats use. Then the problem of bow planes vs sail planes developed and still goes on today.

I think the delay had to do more with the manufacturing and design catching up after WWII. I'm sure this is the case with a lot of these things - the old doesn't die quickly! That and I'd probably note the Type XXI's lingering influence as a model to build on as well.

Delay...What ..Delay? http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v6...ngdane/477.gif

I don’t believe that the cut down superstructure aided the boat’s dive time much if any when comparing their shapes side by side.

Gato with old conning tower:

http://www.navsource.org/archives/08/08212a.htm

Pampanito with the new conning tower:

http://www.maritime.org/tour/tpier.htm

The old conning tower has nothing mounted on the forward part of conning tower to create drag.

I believe the new conning tower, which is a lot smaller, negates its smaller size by the addition of the forward AA gun deck, railings, and 20 mm gun.

I also think that the positioning and size of the main deck gun would have more effect on dive time as opposed to the reduced size of the conning tower.

IE: a better place for the main deck gun would seem to be aft of the conning tower as opposed to forward of the tower.

I think the difference in dive times chiefly involved the fact that a Gato class submarine had approximately twice the displacement of a Type VII u-boat. That's a lot of inertia to overcome, even going down.

That`s right - considering the size and weight, they could go down relatively quickly.
I guess the main reason for change of the tower`s shape might be functionality.

As for the bow - these boats were designed to run on surface. Submerging was just an option, most of the time was spent on the surface. From the practical point of view there was little sense in mounting other type of bow - it would improve the underwater performance which had to be poor anyway and make the surface performance worse, resulting in limited speed and range. Better hydrodynamic bow is good solution only if the boat is designed to spend more time submerged, than surfaced.

Here is a pic I took of the USS Cod in Cleveland. It is a Gato and the conning tower is quite huge. To give you a sense of scale here are some people I went there with, my dad is the taller guy in the picture he is about 6'1".

http://img441.imageshack.us/img441/9227/img2854zq7.jpg

Wow, that's really huge! I don't want to know how big the pre-war towers were.:o Just kidding: I really want to know!;)

Can you imagine being on this fleet boat in WWII in a Typhon/hurricane weather conditions ...

One boat in WWII, I think it was the Tinosa, lost two men, the OOD and one lookout in such conditions and I myself have been in the North Pacific in Force nine weather.

No fun on a rolly polly round bottom boat ... diesel boats were not allowed to submerge in inclimate weather ... due to batteries and electric motors can't protect you aginst a surge.

Actually that's the cut-down version. The original went all the way up around the persiscope shears. Check out these new pictures:
http://www.24flotilla.com/html/modul...wtopic&t=19511

I don't like the pre-war towers not only because they're huge but also because they always remind me of italian sub towers.:shifty:

Not fun I'm sure.

As long as I had a hot cup of coffee and was safely beneath the surface turmoil, I imagine it'd be a little more tolerable.

Amazing picture m8! But this is why I worry LOL.

That tower is huge, but even worse, VERY HIGH... :huh:

Think of the positive effects: Because the tower is pretty high you can look further.;)

Another good thing is dont expose the tower in bad weather like u boats.
and the radar could be used submerged at radar depth.

Another positive is it'll make a pretty silhouette against a sunset when you're trying to grab that killer screenie for the inevitable screenshot/competition threads.

;)