SUBSIM Radio Room Forums - The ugliest sail ever...

SUBSIM Radio Room Forums (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/index.php)

- Dangerous Waters (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/forumdisplay.php?f=181)

- - The ugliest sail ever... (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=105011)

I have a question.

If you completely do a way with the sail, yes it houses mast and sensors, but what about entering and leaving port?
Where is the conning officer going to stand when maneuvering along side the pier. Also look at pictures of subs on the surface going through various canals or entering or leaving port with other ships around, they are really hard to sea, even in good light and conditions.
No doubt it is a great idea to rid subs of the drag of the sail, and nukes are not on the surface much, but I cannot figure out how to accommodate the needs when they have to be surfaced.

Ron Banks MMCM(SS), USN(Ret)

Quote:

Originally Posted by LoBlo

Well, the mast can easily be telescoped into the depth of the pressure hull. 30ft base telescope half extended with a 30ft interior telescope half extended would give a 30 ft reach. If strength and resonance is an issue one could choose high strength composite materials (modern day composites have 2-3 times the strength of titanium) which would provide more strength and decrease resonance. With 30 ft mast, periscope depths would be 30 ft mast + 33 ft to keel = 63 feet PD, roughly the same as some PD depths now if I understand correctly... and if BH is right the sail-less hull would be less prone to wave action. The captain would just have to except the fact that the design doesn't allow him to drive as fast with 'mastup'. Its the trade-off for better littoral maneuverability, shallower draft, less drag...

This might be OK if the masts in question were not hull-penetrating, i.e. if the "bomb-bay" is not part of the pressure hull. I wonder how they justify the part about the gain in speed and agility at shallow depth and high sea state.

TG

Reasons for a sail:

They house the mast's and antennas
They can be enclosed to protect those who are on watch from the bad weather
Without them the submarine would look wrong
Navigational lights are on the sail without them theres going to be plenty of collisisons

Just some of why sails are needed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oberon

I think the Russians come onto a good thing with their sail designs, short and streamlined is the way ahead in my opinion. Even the US has realised that now, the short slope at the base of the Virginia and Seawolf's sails are surely to improve the flow and stability of the sail. It probably won't be long before they slope it up like the sub at the start...I once designed a sub with a sail like that....long time ago....I also made the front sharp and pointed...which, now I realise, severely reduced the maximum depth for the design. Subsequent redesigns removed the pointed bow in favour of a more conventional shape, but kept the sloped sail. Looks like I wasn't alone in thinking that kinda sail might be something worth looking into...

So...if you're looking for other ideas US Navy? Drop us a line.... ;)

There most awesome sail design ever... heh heh... http://img381.imageshack.us/img381/1...002327ctx0.jpg :cool: :|\\

Quote:

Originally Posted by LoBlo

You can telescope a mast but only to a point. The BRA-34 radio masts we had did that. You have a hydrodynamic shpe on the lower half with a more cylindrical shape above. Regardless of the strength of the material (and I have no doubt that it COULD be constructed) you will have the harmonic resonace problems. Having it supported at one end, with water flowing around it, it going to make it 'twang' at a harmonic directly proportional to its length.

Speeds at PD are slow already. Having speed restricted even more would make most captains shudder. Subs are hard enough to control with as little way on the ship they have now. Imagine having to hover the whole time you are clearing a broadcast or using the ESM gear. A real heart stopper? Be at PD at night clearing a broadcast and have a ASW plane pop out of the cloud cover and hit you with its spotlight (yep, had that happen once). You WANT to have some speed on cause you have to go down FAST. Flooding negative on the hover system while you are waiting for these LONG multi-telescoping masts to retract BEFORE you can start really moving.. THAT would be a huge pucker factor.

Quote:

Originally Posted by timmyg00

Much better technical explanation than mine.... typical nuke... :roll: :up:

TG

You know us nukes... too dang technical for our own good.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bubblehead Nuke

I guess the only way to compare whether or not the benifits outweight the risk is to quantify the wave motion effects vs ship depth for a sailless design to see if its worth it or not... as well as quantifying the maneuverability gains...

... but know ones' going to be able to do that completely unless a full scale model is built. Even the navies LSV might not be effort to tell the real effects (as far and rough sea stability gained, versus rough sea shallowness *instability* penalties)...

... surely a full scale model is somewhere in the future

Quote:

Originally Posted by LoBlo

What the Navy needs is another USS Albacore to test designs like this!!

TG

Heres a question:

If they built a submarine without a sail how would it surface and allow the men to get out of the submarine at the north pole?

No sail means no break in the ice right? cause sometimes its only the sail that can get through right?

they use a long retractable chainsaw to cut a hole in the ice, and then fire a dud VLS TLAM into the ice to shatter it!:|\\