Quote:
|
The reason for the cylindricial hullforms that the USN uses is simply ease of construction. The ease of construction was considered more important increase in hull efficency. I can't remember the exact number but I know the Skipjack/Albacore hull form was less than 10% more efficent.
|
Yep, supposedly a sub can get away with stretching the ratio with only minor penalties in drag. The 'tapering' of the hull can be delayed a bit (to allow more of a cylindrical midsection instead of an immediate taper from the forward section) without excessive penatly as well. Here's the drag to lenght:width curve
Quote:
|
The 688 was designed around a propulsion plant. They wanted a boat that could run with the carrier fleet and act as a screening vessel, thus it had, at the time, the largest plant they could squeeze into a submersible hull. They could not make the hull larger in diameter due to metallugical and engineering technology at the time of ship design, so the made the space longer. With the length of the power plant and the ships center of gravity being the reactor vessel, the hull HAD to be so long to maintain stability.
|
I was a little disappointed when I heard that the VA class would have the dimensions that it did. 10.8 x 115 meters went back to the long skinny tube whereas the SW had been more squatty at 12.2 x 105 meters (I like the squatty look... seems more 'athletic/nimble/sturdy' imho). I've always figured that it was because the VA would be optimized for littoral waters and the extra 4.5 feet shaved off the diamter may be helpful... that's what I've always assumed anyway.