Topic: Anyone build surface subs? (Read 1031 times)

offshore1987 · « **on:** March 27, 2012, 05:50:54 PM »

Hi all

Has anyone built a surface only sub? Just wonderin if anyone had. Would like to oneday build a sub but have it as a surface runner only ( not really into the cant see it under the water thing so much ) but love the look of a sub

All the best

Daniel

Subculture · « **Reply #1 on:** March 27, 2012, 05:57:16 PM »

Yes it's been done quite a bit. WWI and WWII designs work best for surface runners, most modern designs are optimised for operation underwater, whereas most earlier boats were the opposite- designed to spend the majority of their time on the surface and only dived to avoid attack.

You can see subs under the water just fine, providing the water is clear, swimming pools and spring fed lakes are perfect venues. Sailing submarines is a totally different experience to surface boats, more like sedate flying really (or not so sedate if you build something rapid).

arrow5 · « **Reply #2 on:** March 27, 2012, 06:57:23 PM »

And there are at least three Springer submarines .....if you don,t care about refined hull shape

I cant find the picture of the Beatles style Yellow Submarine Cue the music....all together now " we all live in a......"

Subculture · « **Reply #3 on:** March 27, 2012, 07:13:01 PM »

That was done by Bill Harris.

salmon · « **Reply #4 on:** March 27, 2012, 07:26:47 PM »

Yes there are very nice ones out there - do a google search for Gato Surface runner - or go here www.modelboatmayhem.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=3714.0
Great way to get started!

offshore1987 · « **Reply #5 on:** March 27, 2012, 08:38:23 PM »

Thanks guys

Would like todo something thats ww2 thats my fav type of sub, i did have a sheerline ohio but never got to use it in the water

plus the closes lake to me is salt water, and its not so clear, just something that stays on the top would suit me perfectly

I was hoping to try a models by design sub, i already have a few of there models and trust their skills, though the gato looks intresting :)

Thanks again

Daniel

raflaunches · « **Reply #6 on:** March 27, 2012, 08:46:58 PM »

Hi Daniel

I am currently building a WW1 K class submarine as a surface runner simply because for the moment I think it would be safer given the original vessels tendancy not to come back to the surface again. You can see my build so far in K-class Steam Submarines in the submarine section of the mayhem website.
I am using a deans marine hull but I did consider buying one of the models by design hulls but I visit Ron at Deans marine on a regular basis so it was easier for me to collect on one of my visits.
Good luck

Nick B

offshore1987 · « **Reply #7 on:** March 27, 2012, 09:08:10 PM »

Awesome thanks Nick i will have a ganders

Thanks

Daniel

bikerdude999 · « **Reply #8 on:** March 28, 2012, 02:05:13 AM »

I was going to build my Revell type VII as a surface runner, just wanted somethin to shadow my Revell corvette, then I thought with the low level of the deck on subs trying to make it water tight might be a problem and would probably be almost as easy to make it fully submersible!

Or if money is no problem OTW (I think) have a very interesting model of the French sub surcouf.

Subculture · « **Reply #9 on:** March 28, 2012, 01:22:43 PM »

Regarding watertight areas. One important difference between a submerging boat and one designed to remain surfaced is that the latter do not require enclosures that can withstand water pressure. That's an important distinction as you use designs which would normally be considered too flimsy for a working submarine. The lock and seal boxes available from Tesco etc. make a convenient water tight compartment with easy access.

Davy1 · « **Reply #10 on:** March 28, 2012, 01:44:17 PM »

I think you would be perfectly OK to use the Revell ones as surface runners.

I think I remember seeing a couple of nice ones at the Edinburgh sub day. They looked very good and I was quite surpised to find that they were surface runners. They looked "the business."

I can dig out some photos but I am sure someone else has done this on here. (Richard?)

David

offshore1987 · « **Reply #11 on:** March 28, 2012, 06:20:06 PM »

The revell does look a really nice kit, have been lookin up builds on youtube and running vids

I just dont know if it would be big enough ( for me ) liking the idear of tesco boxs, plus the perfect thing about surface only for me at least is that its only 2 channel

Maybe a new trend, surface subs

offshore1987 · « **Reply #12 on:** March 28, 2012, 08:31:35 PM »

Is the graupner artr new model there bringin out a surface only sub? Cant see anything about it diving on there website hmmm

http://www.graupner.de/en/products/02fea07f-6862-49f6-ba74-4ef1aed40441/2059/product.aspx

Daniel

RAAArtyGunner · « **Reply #13 on:** March 28, 2012, 09:42:37 PM »

Daniel

Looks like she submerges.

Under the image are a series of thumbnails, which if you click on them to enlarge the photos, shows the boat diving.

salmon · « **Reply #14 on:** March 28, 2012, 10:54:04 PM »

Daniel,
I too believe it does dive.
I know you mentioned you were around salt water, you can still use a diving sub in salt water. the trick is to leave a couple of inches or 5 centimeters above the water. In San Diego, CA. the local R/C club there, meet at a pond that is salt water. So it is available option if you decide to change from surface to stealth (minus antennae sticking up).
Peace,
tom

offshore1987 · « **Reply #15 on:** March 29, 2012, 04:14:53 PM »

Thanks raaatygunner

Salmon, thats good to know, i will probs oneday try a proper sub, but to start with just a surface sub would suit, plus saves on the bank account for the moment

Subculture · « **Reply #16 on:** March 29, 2012, 05:04:19 PM »

The cost involved in building a working sub greatly depends on the amount of work you can do yourself.

If you go out and purchase a nice GRP hull, dive module, new electronics etc. you can easily drop several hundred or even a couple of thousand pounds. On the other hand, if you have a decent set of hand tools, know how to use them and add a dollop of time and patience then the cost quickly falls, as the cost of materials is not that high.

A pressure hull can be constructed from PVC pipe, shaft seals can be purchased cheaply online, whilst the rest of the stuff you would need for a surface runner anyway.

Bob K · « **Reply #17 on:** March 29, 2012, 06:50:51 PM »

Good advice Andy. However, as a newbie to submarines, I can’t help thinking that as over 90% of the vessel is submerged you will indeed need a water tight compartment to house the electrics and controls. You will still require waterproof glands for control rods and prop shaft. You are very probably going to need a 40Mhz Rx/Tx unless you can devise a waterproof conning tower too as 2.4Ghz does not work close to or under the waterline.

It seems to me that you would already have most of what you need to make it at least dive dynamically. Just add extra servos for dive planes. The trouble with this trend is that this may lead you on to thinking maybe a pitch controller to keep it level, then later add a bladder and cheap pump and you have the full monty.

But what do I know, the only boat I have successfully submerged to date is my WW1 cruiser, and that was not intentional.

Subculture · « **Reply #18 on:** March 29, 2012, 06:58:48 PM »

Shafts filled with waterproof grease would be sufficient, in fact that works on subs too, you just have to refill them periodically and keep an eye on bearing wear. The water proof container can be quite flimsy in comparison to a diving boat, which is why I recommended the lock and seal boxes- they are totally tight, but if you used them for a diving boat, water pressure would distort them resulting in a change of trim/buoyancy.

Bob K · « **Reply #19 on:** March 29, 2012, 08:48:50 PM »

I can certainly recommend the lock and seal boxes you mentioned, although that is a plug for the supermarket I work for. (tee hee)
I just tested a small one to 'bath depth' and it was watertight, although would not risk it at sub depths.
Perhaps also a good idea for protecting the electrics of surface ships too?

Subculture · « **Reply #20 on:** March 29, 2012, 08:56:32 PM »

If you can afford the weight yes. A lot of warships I've observed can be a little tender, especially at the smaller scales and when they have plastic superstructures (twice the weight of wood).

offshore1987 · « **Reply #21 on:** March 29, 2012, 09:16:54 PM »

Thanks for the advice you two

its giving me alot to think about

I was thinkin of the fiberglass uboats ww2 because i could treat them as a normal boat. Sealing it up and making new openings on the decks, normal prop shafts, some led in her to sink her down to the waterline, maybe might work? Then she would be dry in the hull as a normal or at least hopefully like a normal boat unlike bobs lol

Daniel

Subculture · « **Reply #22 on:** March 29, 2012, 09:55:49 PM »

That will work, but the model will be pretty heavy- most GRP hulls are moulded to a larger scale than say the Revell boats.

offshore1987 · « **Reply #23 on:** March 30, 2012, 03:02:37 PM »

Heavyer the better

would probs opt for ballest that can be removed and installed at the lake side, plus the batterys

At the moment have still got to finish the tid, but once shes doen then i will be trying to build a sub, will be doing a step by step kinda thing on here

All the best

Daniel

News:

Author Topic: Anyone build surface subs? (Read 1031 times)