French submarines

Hi all,

Post pics, infos, details of your models here.
French models only please.

Thank you

Antoine.

http://img522.imageshack.us/img522/2825/france0nr.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

[Akula54]

Hi fellows !

This is my first and only sub, for the moment... :mrgreen:

Length: 1m77 (69.7")
Weight: 20Kg (44lbs)

Epoxy hull with static dive system by Engel's type piston pump.
The real one doesn't exist but it's inspired from the french SSK Narval class.

http://img134.imageshack.us/img134/2903/imgp16873ji.th.jpg (http://img134.imageshack.us/my.php?image=imgp16873ji.jpg)

http://img134.imageshack.us/img134/6331/imgp16937as.th.jpg (http://img134.imageshack.us/my.php?image=imgp16937as.jpg)

http://img134.imageshack.us/img134/1969/imgp16904yv.th.jpg (http://img134.imageshack.us/my.php?image=imgp16904yv.jpg)

French research submarine (kit)
http://upload4.postimage.org/1070311/Galathee114.jpg (http://upload4.postimage.org/1070311/photo_hosting.html)
Small sub with static diving equipment. Build with a kit in ~ 5 days (holidays)

[lowlow]

SSK Agosta (France, Spain, Pakistan)

http://upload4.postimage.org/1178936/quiz_no3.jpg (http://upload4.postimage.org/1178936/photo_hosting.html)

http://upload4.postimage.org/1178940/Rotationderscan16.jpg (http://upload4.postimage.org/1178940/photo_hosting.html)

http://upload4.postimage.org/1178942/Rotationderscan17.jpg (http://upload4.postimage.org/1178942/photo_hosting.html)

http://upload4.postimage.org/1178944/smagosta.jpg (http://upload4.postimage.org/1178944/photo_hosting.html)

[lowlow]

SS Narval (France)

http://upload4.postimage.org/1178963/Image_01.jpg (http://upload4.postimage.org/1178963/photo_hosting.html)

http://upload4.postimage.org/1178967/Planche1_a_.jpg (http://upload4.postimage.org/1178967/photo_hosting.html)

http://upload4.postimage.org/1178969/Planche1_b_.jpg (http://upload4.postimage.org/1178969/photo_hosting.html)

[Aeroengineer1]

Nice pics!

Adam

Scorpene

http://img473.imageshack.us/img473/3881/scorpenean3.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

SNA Améthyste

http://img221.imageshack.us/img221/334/rubissn9.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

[Subculture]

What are these boats like handling wise I wonder?

They seem to use small control surfaces like Russian boats.


Andy

the Rubis (Amethyste) and Scorpene classes are both small. They do not require large control surfaces to balance a greater moment of forces due to a large size.
Note that the lower rudders are even with the keel to ease the drydocking.

The use of the sail control surfaces will increase manoeuvrability and depth control during PD or Schnorkeling.

Note that with the help of a taller sail than the russian boats, these submarines can achieve better depth control when using the masts as they do not need to operate too close from the surface.

[WheelerDealer]

I thought bow planes were better when at PD ??

The problem of planes on the sail is their proximity of the water surface.
When you manage to deal with this limit and the fact that their position on the sail advantages the manoeuvrability, you can keep this design.
The french navy decided to go with this philosophy until the lastest SSBN class. Lets see if on the next SSN it will remain.

[lowlow]

With the experience of the Agosta class (bow planes design), they decided to place the foreplanes on the sail as the bow planes caused turbulence and noise for the passive sonar.

The sail surface control is efficient on the immersion and without action on the angle of diving... Sorry for this poor translate...

About the smaller lower rudder, it was not designed to ease the drydocking but in case of grounding. Another interesting feature of asymetrical rudders is in case of the jamming in the dive position of the aft planes : If you command a full turn, it will give a positive pitch to the submarine. A safety.


SNA Casabianca (Amethyste class)
http://upload4.postimage.org/1185789/photo08.jpg (http://upload4.postimage.org/1185789/photo_hosting.html)

SSK Carrera (Scorpene class)

http://upload4.postimage.org/1185845/1000785medium7rm.jpg (http://upload4.postimage.org/1185845/photo_hosting.html)

[lowlow]

Some french submarine looks like an aeroplane.... :P

http://upload4.postimage.org/1186325/getData1.jpg (http://upload4.postimage.org/1186325/photo_hosting.html)

Greetings Low Low...any more photos of Carrera?

Love that sail. Steve Reichmuth

[John Anderson]

[quote="lowlow"]With the experience of the Agosta class (bow planes design), they decided to place the foreplanes on the sail as the bow planes caused turbulence and noise for the passive sonar.

The sail surface control is efficient on the immersion and without action on the angle of diving... Sorry for this poor translate...


Okay a translation of this to plain English for LOWLOW no offense my firend.

Bow planes are more effective for precise depth control being furhter out on a moment arm like a teeter totter the further from the CG the more effect they have BUT there are tradeoffs for subs with this as with everything. Unless the planes are totaly retractable above a critcal speed it varies with hull and plane design as the planes change angle of attack the generate turbulence that you can hear over your sonar thus degrading your sensor suite performence, PLUS bow planes will put an angle on the boat agian related to being away from the CG.
Sailplanes because of flow masking off the hull and wake interference with the hull are not as precise in depth control at certain speeds again it varies from hull to hull and plane design. They are however primarily placed on the sail to remove the flow noise from the sensor area on SSN's.
LA's moved to bow planes tthat are totaly retractable for ICE penetration reasons with a short Sail Same with Seawolf and Virginia the newer US SSn's have a short sail com[pared to the earlier class subs they replaced.
They also have very little effect on the pitch of the boat as they are very close to or right at the CG of the hull thus depth changes are if executed by a competent helm team flat with no pitch change to speak of this is a distinct advantage for a SSBN it takes less time for the missle guidence platform to stabilize if it does not move to much in pitch and yaw. Of course as in most things in life this can also be achieved by pumping ballast fore and aft. Again the design and configuration depends on several facotrs, Noise, Speed tradeoff, Manuverability tradeoffs, Mission design statment, cultural factors both manpower for maintence and technology wise for construction and maintence and cost (perhaps the highest driving factor for smaller nations). Also as far as Asymetrical rudders go this pitch change is not always a good thing and could easily broach the ship if operating shallow. This however can be offset with sternplane strakes and sideplates or a combination of both as seen on many classes. Most SSBN's rudders are not symetrical look at theis arrangment on a late flight 640...

http://upload4.postimage.org/1188503/658sternshot.jpg (http://upload4.postimage.org/1188503/photo_hosting.html)

[lowlow]

You're right... :D

SSk Carrera

http://upload4.postimage.org/1192887/1000782medium2nr.jpg (http://upload4.postimage.org/1192887/photo_hosting.html)

http://upload4.postimage.org/1192900/le_carrera.jpg (http://upload4.postimage.org/1192900/photo_hosting.html)

Thank you Low Low for the Carrera. It does have all the character of typical modern subs, being that it is the latest interpretation of the theoretically optimum hydrodynamic shape. One primarily to reduce to a minimum any flow noise for sensor suite performance. But like all other similar submarines, we modelers must see our artistic duty and incorporate the subtle contours of this attractive shape to distinguish it from the other attractive shapes.

Submarine designers/builders have a difficult task, all knowing the theoretically optimum hydrodynamic shape but still creating a 'product' to sell too Naval services which offer not only the best performance, but offers a distinctive shape too. The German 212 shape, becoming the German style visual signature, vs. the French visual signature, vs the Russian visual signature. Sail shape and height determines the boats periscope depth. The taller the sail, the deeper the periscope depth, the potentially better handling control IE. Bow planes vs sail planes. Against this, is the demand to reduce the sail shape for active sonar, radar, & visual considerations. As optronic masts enter more and more, the rigid inflexible optics design demands are relaxed. Instead a optical visual device on top of a longer flexible vertical mast irregardless of any optics in the 'mast tube' - linked only by fiber optics. Optics greater in power & resolution than human optics. More squat sail structures and still able to employ very tall telescoping masts. Sail shape designs are on the verge of a radical departure. As the conceptions of the later Virginia sail designs show, but we still await to actually see. Tall sails could go at the beginning of the 21st cent., the way the ram bow disappeared at the end of the 19th. cent..

The new Barracuda French SSN from computer illustrations looks like a slightly smaller 'Astute' in general size, with the signature French curves, and with an X-stern! How serious is the X-stern feature at this design stage? If so, it would be the first nuclear powered attack submarine to incorporate an X-stern, more than a half century after the concept was successfully tested on Albacore, and commonly used every day on diesel and AIP submarines long since. Steve Reichmuth

[lowlow]

the french touch for the futur... :lol:

http://upload4.postimage.org/1202207/228.jpg (http://upload4.postimage.org/1202207/photo_hosting.html)


http://upload4.postimage.org/1202212/1989.jpg (http://upload4.postimage.org/1202212/photo_hosting.html)

[lowlow]

Argonaute 1929
http://img300.imageshack.us/img300/8320/argonaute1929a1fm8.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

Argonaute 1955
http://img134.imageshack.us/img134/1259/argo5ck3.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

That's for you Reichmuth :D