Submarine hulls

[aerohead]

Here is a smattering of different submarine hulls.Removal of the constant-velocity sections and joining nose to tail can be interesting.
Again,as with the airships,none of the manufacturers attempts to 'cheat' with the shape.Their speed,duration,and stealth are a function of the streamlined form.

[gone-ot]

...proverbial "stretched" raindrop shape(s).

[user removed]

I remember reading that article. I think the best sub got to 8 MPH. More into human powered aircraft at the time, gossamer Condor (in the smithsonian) Albatross (flew the English channel) and Penguin (which flew the mythical Daedalus-Icarus route). The Penguin was good enough to actually get some altitude and pulse and glide, giving the pilot a chance for a brief rest.

Edit;
I might be wrong on the Penguin, apparently it was solar powered.

Gossamer Condor - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Gossamer Albatross - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Gossamer Penguin - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

regards
Mech

[basjoos]

The main compromise on some of those hulls was to provide a flat surface on top for the double rows of missile launch tubes.

The reason these hull sections look different from the classic WW11 sub hull shape was the WW11 subs were diesel-electric and spent most of their time on the surface with occasional short dives, so their hull was optimized for performance on the surface and also to keep the bow wave from washing over the deck. When subs went nuclear they spent almost all of their cruise time underwater so their hulls could be optimized for underwater performance. When you watch them cruising on the surface, their bow wave rolls over the top of the hull.

[freebeard]

I believe submarines cruise most efficiently with only the conning tower or snorkel above water, similar to SWATH boat hulls.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by freebeard

I believe submarines cruise most efficiently with only the conning tower or snorkel above water, similar to SWATH boat hulls.

I think there's something to what you say.
Csaba Csere of CAR and DRIVER got to 'drive' a Los Angeles-Class Nuclear sub and he did mention that fully-surfaced,there was a sucking action which occurred at the air/water interface.Perhaps this goes away when the hull descends.With the sail/conning tower out of the water,the boat would lose nearly all of the sails hydrodynamic drag.

[user removed]

Originally Posted by basjoos

The main compromise on some of those hulls was to provide a flat surface on top for the double rows of missile launch tubes.

The reason these hull sections look different from the classic WW11 sub hull shape was the WW11 subs were diesel-electric and spent most of their time on the surface with occasional short dives, so their hull was optimized for performance on the surface and also to keep the bow wave from washing over the deck. When subs went nuclear they spent almost all of their cruise time underwater so their hulls could be optimized for underwater performance. When you watch them cruising on the surface, their bow wave rolls over the top of the hull.

The original "boomers" were attack sub hulls with an additional hull section added for the missiles.

regards
Mech

[freebeard]

he did mention that fully-surfaced,there was a sucking action which occurred at the air/water interface.Perhaps this goes away when the hull descends.

If you see a movie of a nuclear sub runing on the surface, there is a lot of water going over the bow. Like the one where James Bond was handcuffed to the railing.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by freebeard

If you see a movie of a nuclear sub runing on the surface, there is a lot of water going over the bow. Like the one where James Bond was handcuffed to the railing.

Oh yeah! The NAVY Dept. sent me some stock footage of their SEAWOLF submarine operations and there was a clip showing this.And this same footage has shown up in a number of movies.

[Xist]

I understand they are perfectly steady underwater, but rock heavily on the surface.