The Ship Model Forum

[quote="Anonymous"]You should look at Holland 1.

It's not like naval designers of 1890s had divined the superiority of the albacore shape and the naval designers of the next 50 years then forgot about it.

Early submarine hull forms were not advanced. They were impractical. Early submarines spent most of their lives on the surface. The teardrop shape offered atrocious sea keeping and was positively dangerous to surface navigation. That hull form was tried and discarded because everyone found that out. It was only later, when submarine actually spent most of their time underwater, that they actually had a right to even think about albacore hull again.[/quote]

I agree of course. I think we were just having a little fun with the issue of the hull design versus the WWI and II hull designs. No submarine hull design of that style was practicle until a submarine beacme a true submarine. It was not meant as a serious comment. But you are right in what you have said about the hull design of submarines.
:eyebrows:
Bob B.

You should look at Holland 1.

It's not like naval designers of 1890s had divined the superiority of the albacore shape and the naval designers of the next 50 years then forgot about it.

Early submarine hull forms were not advanced. They were impractical. Early submarines spent most of their lives on the surface. The teardrop shape offered atrocious sea keeping and was positively dangerous to surface navigation. That hull form was tried and discarded because everyone found that out. It was only later, when submarine actually spent most of their time underwater, that they actually had a right to even think about albacore hull again.

[quote="bengtsson"]The Hull form was decades and two world wars ahead of it's time. [/quote]

I would have to agree. A very modern looking sub for it's time. It would be interesting to see the interior layout.

The Hull form was decades and two world wars ahead of it's time. The real look of a submarine boat. Thanks for the nice photos! :big_grin: What type of propulsion machinery did she have?

Bob B.

[quote="MichelB"]She looks cool, sure!

I could of course make a crappy joke about it (but won't) but I guess you mean 1888... :cool_2:[/quote]

LOL!. You are right Michel. 1888.

Great photos :thumbs_up_1:
That's an excellent way to show off ones naval history, be nice to see an x-craft or alike in this country displayed as well!
Though of course we don't tend to have the weather! :censored_2:

She looks cool, sure!

I could of course make a crappy joke about it (but won't) but I guess you mean 1888... :cool_2:

In 1888 a Spanish Navy lieutenant, mostly on his own, built, launched and tested the, allegedly, first, or one of them, "real" submarine in the waters of Cartagena, Spain, where she sits now:


[img]http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l42/morsa03/DSC00889.jpg[/img]

[img]http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l42/morsa03/DSC00908.jpg[/img]

Wether the first or not, I thought it was worth letting you all know how she is displayed today.
Hope you like the pictures!.

Cheers.
Pachi.