Banner Ad 1

Is bigger BETTER?

Nautilus, Seaview, and more

Postby Carcharadon » Wed Mar 17, 2004 5:24 pm

Bob, if you look at the video where the sub is going left across your screen no down control is applied. It gets to full speed in about 3-4 seconds. Pretty much stays level. Now on the seven ft I’ll add extra wt in the front to help it submerge but otherwise it stays pretty much level. In the other segments of the 4ft video down is applied to submerge. You’ll also notice that my waterline is high. This is just a characteristic of a dynamic diver. If I run with a lower water line (sub sits higher) neither sub will submerge, and maybe then it tends to nose dive but I haven’t noticed since I want it to dive dive dive.
User avatar
Carcharadon
Registered User
 
Posts: 300
Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2003 9:10 am
Location: Savannah GA

Postby Captain Nemo12 » Wed Mar 17, 2004 8:57 pm

It seems that everybody is building the Disney Model, anyone building it with their own design of the sub? ???
280 meters.... and she's still in one piece!
-Jurgen Prochnow, Das Boot.

http://eisernwolf.blog.com
User avatar
Captain Nemo12
Registered User
 
Posts: 293
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2003 3:56 pm

Postby Carcharadon » Wed Mar 17, 2004 11:16 pm

The subs I made (7 ft., 4 ft.) are based on the Disney Nautilus. Because of the very fact that the propulsion mode (bilge pumps) eliminates the prop I would never consider my subs as a Disney replica. Even if I made an exact model it still could never be a Disney replica because it doesn't have a prop. Rather, I consider this design to be one interpretation of what Jules Verne might have envisioned for the Nautilus. Since I liked the Disney Nautilus as a submarine I thought it would be an interesting project to apply bilge pump propulsion or in other words a jet-propelled submarine. That is why I refer to the sub as a Jet Nautilus. So in a sense I did build the sub with my own design to some extent.

I want to apply this system to a more typical submarine for my next project. The Nautilus is a tough submarine to build. And I like all versions of the Nautilus but will admit that the Disney is my favorite.
User avatar
Carcharadon
Registered User
 
Posts: 300
Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2003 9:10 am
Location: Savannah GA

Postby Bob the Builder » Thu Mar 18, 2004 12:07 pm

Here, here!

I just love the Disney/Goff design. This decision would have been the same whether or not Verne had originally written his book.

I've got plans for a 1/48 scale ABC Nautilus version (that's going to be fun... anyone who's seen the series will know what I mean). If I ever get the time, I will attempt my own take on the Nautilus, but in the meantime, I've got three more projects waiting in the wings first.


Carcharadon,


I'm surprised that your model doesn't want to dive on it's own. I'd think that ballasted low such as yours are, they'd be even more prone to it. My model will dive when completely submerged under 3/4 throttle. If I didn't watch it closely, it could easily end up standing on its nose under eight feet of water.

I wonder what feature of the hull it is that causes the model to pull downwards? I'd think that with the upwards flare on the side keels it would tend to push UPWARDS under power...
Bob Martin,
RCSub homepage: http://www.rc-sub.com
User avatar
Bob the Builder
SubCommittee Member
 
Posts: 779
Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2003 9:40 am
Location: Naples, FL

Postby Scott T » Thu Mar 18, 2004 2:12 pm

Maybe the upward sweep of the side (keels) rails cause a low pressrue just like the curve of the propeller does as mentioned in another thread. Pulling the model down.
It does form a upside down wing shape if you think of the curve.
Maybe the teeth along the rails contribute to the down force.
User avatar
Scott T
SubCommittee Member
 
Posts: 558
Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2003 2:01 pm
Location: Oklahoma City, OK

Postby modelnut » Fri Mar 19, 2004 2:13 pm

I am not building a Disney/Goff NAUTILUS. Mine is or will be a Verne/Sharpe design.

Here are a few links to my mark#2. It suffered from a major design flaw and warpage. :(

http://groups.msn.com/Modeler....oID=275
http://groups.msn.com/Modeler....oID=276
http://groups.msn.com/Modeler....oID=277

My mark#3 will be similar but without those mistakes and hopefully without any new ones. :laugh:

-Leelan

P.S. BTW before anyone asks, the drawing behind the sub in the third link is just a go at the Extraordinary Gentlemen version of the NAUTILUS. I won't even try building that one until after this boat is safely built.
User avatar
modelnut
SubCommittee Member
 
Posts: 424
Joined: Sun May 25, 2003 4:38 pm

Postby Carcharadon » Fri Mar 19, 2004 4:13 pm

The mark#2 looks good, what is the major design flaw?


What will be different in the mark#3?
User avatar
Carcharadon
Registered User
 
Posts: 300
Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2003 9:10 am
Location: Savannah GA

Postby Captain Nemo12 » Fri Mar 19, 2004 11:36 pm

Nice pictures Leelan!

I liked the way you combined the DeepSea Designs look to the elevated spur design. The bow has a dangerous metallic look while the back is really in the fantasy genre, nice combination. I don't know what you think of this but in the Verne books, in one of the pictures, Aronnax was standing on the curved hull holding the raillings observing the sunset. But what if you made a floor for the deck and add photoectched raillings, I planning to add a styrene floor for my Nautilus's deck.

Image
A picture offered to me by the folks at tin-soldier.com NOTE: if the picture doesnt appear, I'll send it to you :D
280 meters.... and she's still in one piece!
-Jurgen Prochnow, Das Boot.

http://eisernwolf.blog.com
User avatar
Captain Nemo12
Registered User
 
Posts: 293
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2003 3:56 pm

Postby Captain Nemo12 » Fri Mar 19, 2004 11:36 pm

Nice pictures Leelan!

I liked the way you combined the DeepSea Designs look to the elevated spur design. The bow has a dangerous metallic look while the back is really in the fantasy genre, nice combination. I don't know what you think of this but in the Verne books, in one of the pictures, Aronnax was standing on the curved hull holding the raillings observing the sunset. But what if you made a floor for the deck and add photoectched raillings, I planning to add a styrene floor for my Nautilus's deck.

Image
A picture offered to me by the folks at tin-soldier.com NOTE: if the picture doesnt appear, I'll send it to you :D
280 meters.... and she's still in one piece!
-Jurgen Prochnow, Das Boot.

http://eisernwolf.blog.com
User avatar
Captain Nemo12
Registered User
 
Posts: 293
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2003 3:56 pm

Postby Captain Nemo12 » Fri Mar 19, 2004 11:39 pm

Hope these "two" posts ??? will give you some new ideas!
280 meters.... and she's still in one piece!
-Jurgen Prochnow, Das Boot.

http://eisernwolf.blog.com
User avatar
Captain Nemo12
Registered User
 
Posts: 293
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2003 3:56 pm

Postby Bob the Builder » Mon Mar 22, 2004 1:06 pm

Leelan,


What happened with your model that you needed to scrap her?

I'm sure any input that you can offer could help others making their own hulls.

The design looks great.
Bob Martin,
RCSub homepage: http://www.rc-sub.com
User avatar
Bob the Builder
SubCommittee Member
 
Posts: 779
Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2003 9:40 am
Location: Naples, FL

Postby modelnut » Mon Mar 22, 2004 3:44 pm

Design Flaw #1The first mistake was in gluing the two halves of my hull together. Since I intend to make a mold and pull at least two fibreglass hulls from it. It was only after I did that that some friends jumped in and said that it would be too difficult to mold the entire sub. It would be much better to make two molds of each half hull.

The second problem proceeded from the first. The glue I used to put the two halves together dried unevenly and put some complex warps in the tail and the ram.

Design Flaw #2 While working on the Mark2 I decided to go for the larger more authentic propeller. But it was too late to allow for it in the rudder design since I had already attached it to the hull.

All of this just gave me an out to go for the Mark3 with the more Vernian details.

But what if you made a floor for the deck and add photoetched raillings, I planning to add a styrene floor for my Nautilus's deck. -Captain Nemo12


I may do that. Especially since the model will be static for most of its time. I will make the railings removable. But this is way in the future.

List of mistakes to avoid:

The mistake I made with the Mark1 was in using Bondo as a surface for the hull. WAY TOO MUCH SANDING FOR MY APARTMENT! Right out into the trash!

The mistake with the Mark2 was in gluing the two sheets of plexiglass with contact cement - a glue that one would use when attaching wood veneer. It dried unevenly and pulled the plexiglass spine in opposing ways along the XYplane. If I had not have done this or if I had incorporated a straight steel spine, I would be left with an acceptable static model. As it is I won't take it any further until very much later.

That is the saga as it is today.

I have two plexiglass silhoettes that will allow for the 8.5cm propeller. They are cut and need some sanding of the rough edges. All I need do now is cut plastic bulkheads and foam to make it 3D.

AND I have decided to model the Salon windows as I make the foam hull instead of cutting them out of the finished fiberglass shell. This should give them more interest - as well as making the molding and casting much harder to do :p !

I don't expect to have much in the way of picture for months yet. But I will keep you informed.

AND I will continue to take any advice that is thrown my way!

-Leelan

P.S. Cap'n, the pictures did not make it to the BB. Could you send them?
User avatar
modelnut
SubCommittee Member
 
Posts: 424
Joined: Sun May 25, 2003 4:38 pm

Previous

Return to Television and Movie Submarines

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot]