Is this a "first"? - AMPHISUB

[Guest]

The Germans had a tank that ran on land and under water, with a snorkel, the Americans had a DUKW that ran on top of land and water, and almost everyone has heard of the Amphicar. Now for something different; a land and water surface vehicle that submerges, and hopefully resufaces, using the RCABS.
I had planned to make a tank-like vehicle with the capability of submerging, when I saw the Nikko Land Shark at an R/C toy display. With half of my design plans already produced,I decided to convert this land/sea surface vehicle into a seaworthy submersible.
I'm well on my way to water test the conversion for trim and watertight integrity, but I want to know if this is a modeling "first", or if others have successfully launched an AMPHISUB? See photos on My" target="_blank">http://groups.msn.com/ArtBrod....Webpage

[novagator]

Thats Cool! http://www.subcommittee.com/forum/icon_cool.gif

Thats Cool!

[jeffrey j]

hi Art, thanks for the

hi Art, thanks for the link with the photos and hope you had a great birthday. Bet you didn't have this much fun in your teenage years...... Jeff

[Guest]

Second childhood is always better!

Second childhood is always better!

[raalst]

Art,

is the RCABS

Art,

is the RCABS large enough to support the portion of the
vehicle that should stick out of the water.
for starters, You should be able to lift the two
motors out of the water.

Nice project, anyway !

Ps did you know the germans also had a plan for
a fighter jet which could act as a dynamic diver
on the same turbine. just a thought if you ever
run out of projects

[Guest]

Ronald,
I didn't know about the

Ronald,
I didn't know about the fighter jet, but I think that might be a little too ambitious for a model project for me! Thanks for the info.
The Amphisub seems to be practical, so far. I'm not concerned about the RCABS. It has more potential than your calculations because my little pumps max out at 680mmHg which equals .9 bar, not the .3 bar of your unit, as reported on your NL post. My saddle tanks should be adequate, because I intend to run the Amphisub on the cement bottom of a pool, or at the next SubRegatta location, which is only 3 or 4 ft deep.
Empirically, I think a sub which is just slightly negatively buoyant, should be able to brought up from about 20ft depth. The pump is drawing air from a 1 bar source. What do you think? Can you calculate scenarios with different volumes of available air, and the weight of water displaced by the inflated bladder? I would be interested.
Art



Edited By Art Broder on 1098075769

[bob the builder]

Ps did you know the

Ps did you know the germans also had a plan for
a fighter jet which could act as a dynamic diver
on the same turbine. just a thought if you ever
run out of projects

I think the Americans had plans for such a craft as well. It was supposed to run off of three turbofans. The ballast tanks were actually the fuel tanks!

The idea was outlined in "Cold War Submarines", a book that Greg Sharpe recently lent me.

[raalst]

art,

I did not

[color=#000000]art,

I did not pose my question right.

I meant that while a sub has only to poke out the
conning tower above the water line, your vehicle
will have to be surfaced about half way.
This means you will need a lot of buoyancy to
compensate the weight of the part sticking out of
the water.

about the calculations ]http://www.subcommittee.com/forum/icon_cool.gif[/img]. But that should be enough (ignoring
factors like the stiffness off the bladder)

all this goes with the bladder and wtc equal size,
I have not figured out what the impact of the
relative sizes is (quantatively).
another thought experiment ]



Edited By raalst on 1098132353

[raalst]

Sorry, some more text ]

[color=#000000]Sorry, some more text ]

[scott t]

From the first picture of

From the first picture of your project I thought it was a hover
craft. Then I noticed the tracks underneath.

A submarine tank and submarine hovercraft both sound like great projects.

Great project waiting to see your progress.

Scott