Thats one big Sub
Aircraft Carrier Vs. Typhoon Class Submarine
Russian Kiev Class aircraft carrier Admiral Gorshkov is docked next to a Typhoon class submarine. The Typhoon class submarine are the submarine ever to be built, the above easily shows just how big they really are. The Admiral Gorshkov was sold to the Indian navy and is currently being refitted.
http://www.intrepidearth.com/tour/ra...php?loc=123006
Russian Kiev Class aircraft carrier Admiral Gorshkov is docked next to a Typhoon class submarine. The Typhoon class submarine are the submarine ever to be built, the above easily shows just how big they really are. The Admiral Gorshkov was sold to the Indian navy and is currently being refitted.
http://www.intrepidearth.com/tour/ra...php?loc=123006
Comments
Aircraft Carrier Vs. Typhoon Class Submarine
Russian Kiev Class aircraft carrier Admiral Gorshkov is docked next to a Typhoon class submarine. The Typhoon class submarine are the submarine ever to be built, the above easily shows just how big they really are. The Admiral Gorshkov was sold to the Indian navy and is currently being refitted.
http://www.intrepidearth.com/tour/ra...php?loc=123006
Naval architecture and navigation, subjects I have a "deep" interest in (entrance channel design).
For reference the Typhoon is 175m LOA, the Gorshkov is 273m LOA, the US Nimitz class is 333m LOA, the Emma Mærsk is 398m LOA (14,500 TEU), and the largest oil tankers are ~415m LOA (650,000 tonnes displacement at the summer load line departure condition (fully fueled)).
Also, anny ideas for an outrigger system for a canoe that will allow it to be rowed normally, yet when needed to have the added stability of the outrigggers for improved photography?
Mort: you spend a lot of time looking at sat data... I got engrossed in it the other day. Found my old house and retraced the drive to my grandmother's house 600 miles away. It was pretty cool remembering some of the features and noticing which ones aren't still there.
Three carriers and several Wasp class helicopter carriers sitting in Norfolk Naval Base... there is peace in the world.
http://www.dragonlng.co.uk/index.cfm
Frank: you wouldn't happen to know about a huge LPG (LNG, perhaps) carrier with four enormous tanks with dragon images painted on them, would you? The thing has pulled into port here a couple of times, but I have not had the time to drop by to read her name. It is huge, and always has a couple of patrol crafft guarding it 24/7, at least while in port.
Also, anny ideas for an outrigger system for a canoe that will allow it to be rowed normally, yet when needed to have the added stability of the outrigggers for improved photography?
Mort: you spend a lot of time looking at sat data... I got engrossed in it the other day. Found my old house and retraced the drive to my grandmother's house 600 miles away. It was pretty cool remembering some of the features and noticing which ones aren't still there.
Three carriers and several Wasp class helicopter carriers sitting in Norfolk Naval Base... there is peace in the world.
I'll try to help.
The 'dragon" designs suggest "Dragon LNG" which is in the LNG terminal business, or perhaps the PRC which is getting very big in commercial shipbuilding. Lloyds of London has the biggest database of commercial ships that I'm aware of (but of course then you would need the name of the ship).
On the canoe, I'm assuming you mean it would behave as a normal canoe during transit? And that once into position you would wish to stabilize against roll via pontoons or outriggers, a la catamaran or multihull geometry?
Monohulls, particularly canoes, are notorously unstable in roll, as perhaps you are aware. Roll RAO's for commercial ships are typically O(10) or so, while the other DOF's are typically O(1) or less. Canoes have a very low draft, relatively high CG (you + canoe), and the moment of inertia of the waterplane area isn't very efficient. So the solution is either to lower the CG (perhaps not very practical) or increase the moment of inertia of the waterplane area (i. e. like a SWATH ship or catamaran). The moment of inertia of the waterplane area is exactly the same as the moment of inertia of a structural beam, where wide flang (WF) or I-beams rule, since most of the material needed to resist bending (e. g. roll) is at the extremities.
So what I'd suggest are some lightweight aluminum poles that can be mounted on either side of your canoe, extending orthogonally several feet, with floatation attached at the ends, this floatation could even be inflatable if mounted/supported to the poles correctly. It is always a very good thing if the outrigging is braced in a triangular shape if possible (oriented vertically in this case (at least close to the mounting points), some synthetic lines would suffice for any horizontal bracing, if necessary). If you don't want additional lateral bracing get the largest thin walled aluminum poles that you can find.
Anyway, the simplest way to see what effect these outriggers will have is to assume a simplified rectangular shape for the waterplane of the canoe itself, it's moment of inertia will be LB^3/12, where B is the average wetted beam, and L is the overall wetted length. For the outriggers the moment of inertia will be ~NAD^2, where N is the number of outriggers (I'm assuming outriggers have symmetry about the canoe's CL for this simplification to be valid), A is the area of an outrigger, and D is the orthogonal distance of the outrigger from the canoe CL.
Hope I've been of some help, if I've misinterpreted your question, I can always try again!
My main purpose is to help stabilize while taking photos, and a secondary purpose is not to capsize when my passenger jumps when he sees the huge eels that will be accompanying us along the way!! They are huge and when they suddenly surface next to the boat, it can be quite a sight (they are over a meter long). We will be there to photograph the birds wintering there, but my friend is rather new to boats (first time in a canoe) and is a jumpy type, so I want to ensure that we don't take an unexpected swim.
http://www.yado.co.jp/kankou/kagosim...dak/ikedak.htm
http://www11.ocn.ne.jp/~kankou/kanko...ikedaunagi.jpg
http://www.cryptomundo.com/cryptid-universe/issie/
Naval architecture and navigation, subjects I have a "deep" interest in (entrance channel design).
For reference the Typhoon is 175m LOA, the Gorshkov is 273m LOA, the US Nimitz class is 333m LOA, the Emma Mærsk is 398m LOA (14,500 TEU), and the largest oil tankers are ~415m LOA (650,000 tonnes displacement at the summer load line departure condition (fully fueled)).
Yes, but how many LCC (Large Crude Carriers) have to be able to resist thousands of pounds per square inch of pressure on their hulls?
And speaking of tankers, when I was in the Navy on deployment to Japan, we pulled into a shipyard where a tanker was getting worked on while completely emptied out (no ballast or anything, you could see under the keel at the bow, and the entire screw and rudder were out of the water) next to the pier. Amazingly impressive, it's one thing to know a loaded LCC is like an iceberg with most of it's mass underwater; but to actually see one from standing next to it on the dock was like standing at the base of a large cliff. IIRC the full load draft was 68Ft.
I opened this thread hoping for pictures of an enormous sandwich. I have now been sadly disappointed.
Better now?