We did it!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ed Rotondaro

DJ:

I find it strange that the Russians couldn't find a metal that was light enough given that they were among the first navies to use titanium double hulled submarines. They even came up with a special welding system (titanium can't be welded in oxygen) to construct the hulls. I believe the first such boats were the Typhoon class (Scott? details?).

---

Ed, I belive that the first submarine made witha titanium hull was the Alpha class. The real problem is the expence of the metal. IIRC titanium is about 3-5x more expencive than an equalivalent thickness of steel. Also Ed only the outer hull was steel.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by old_pop2000

I used to love Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea. Especially the flying submarine.

By the way, remember the IJN I-400 submarine.

---

Dennis:

Yes it could carry three disasembled float planes. Imagine surfacing and trying to launch them? Can you say dead?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by john964

Ed, I belive that the first submarine made witha titanium hull was the Alpha class. The real problem is the expence of the metal. IIRC titanium is about 3-5x more expencive than an equalivalent thickness of steel. Also Ed only the outer hull was steel.

---

John:

I'm not surprised about the expense, it's not a common metal for sure. I wasn't aware that these subs used two metals? Guess if you want a double hull, you have to save weight somewhere.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by djcyclone

I do not know if I would buy that it has been around since the 60's. Hell they where just figuring out VSTOL in the early 60's.

---

Actually I take that back. The idea has been around since WWI. The Germans where the first ones to develope a sea plane hanger on one of their WWI U Boats.

Of course the boat had to suface, and then open the hanger, pull the plane out, then assemble the plane, then put the plane into position so it can be catapulted into flight.

God only knows how long the entire process took, but everyone knows that during this process the boat is nothing but a floating target. Worked in WWI, but not in today's world.

Besides, the plane coulde only be used for scouting, and no weapons could be loaded for anything at all. The French and Japanese both had Submarines that where similar in design, but from what I understand, good ol Germany was the first one to do it.

By the time WW II came around, the scout was nothing more than a target for an actual aircraft, and so the process was pointless, because the sub could do other things rather than surface and launch "ONE" aircraft.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by djcyclone

Actually I take that back. The idea has been around since WWI. The Germans where the first ones to develope a sea plane hanger on one of their WWI U Boats.

Of course the boat had to suface, and then open the hanger, pull the plane out, then assemble the plane, then put the plane into position so it can be catapulted into flight.

God only knows how long the entire process took, but everyone knows that during this process the boat is nothing but a floating target. Worked in WWI, but not in today's world.

Besides, the plane coulde only be used for scouting, and no weapons could be loaded for anything at all. The French and Japanese both had Submarines that where similar in design, but from what I understand, good ol Germany was the first one to do it.

By the time WW II came around, the scout was nothing more than a target for an actual aircraft, and so the process was pointless, because the sub could do other things rather than surface and launch "ONE" aircraft.

---

The plane for the I-400 class Siran(?) could be assembaled in about 30min under normal conditions and when they put it on the catapult, the cat had 3 seperate shuttles so that the planes could be launched as rapidly as possable. The launching procedure would be like this plane #1 would be pulled out and assembled and then placed on the launch shuttle, while this was going on plane #2 would be pulled out and assembled. Then #1 would launch while #2 would be put on the shuttle and #3 would be pulled out and assembled.

As to weapons load the data is real sparce but one of the possable missions of the I-400's was to attack the Panama Canal lock gates with torpedos, So the planes would have to be able to fly with that kind of payload.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by john964

The plane for the I-400 class Siran(?) could be assembaled in about 30min under normal conditions and when they put it on the catapult, the cat had 3 seperate shuttles so that the planes could be launched as rapidly as possable. The launching procedure would be like this plane #1 would be pulled out and assembled and then placed on the launch shuttle, while this was going on plane #2 would be pulled out and assembled. Then #1 would launch while #2 would be put on the shuttle and #3 would be pulled out and assembled.

As to weapons load the data is real sparce but one of the possable missions of the I-400's was to attack the Panama Canal lock gates with torpedos, So the planes would have to be able to fly with that kind of payload.

---

Hi John,

Boyd and Yoshida's "The Japanese Submarine Force and World War II" describe the Seiran. They describe it as a dive bomber with a 1,400 hp engine, a range of 600 miles, a top speed of 255 knots, and a 250 kg bomb load. The plane could carry an 800 kg bomb if the main float was removed.

They have an appendix of flight operations and was surprised that there were 34 missions flown between Nov 1941 and Nov 1942. I'm not sure if that means if none were flown after that. Those boats flew the E14Y1 version of the Zero float plane.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by john964

The plane for the I-400 class Siran(?) could be assembaled in about 30min under normal conditions and when they put it on the catapult, the cat had 3 seperate shuttles so that the planes could be launched as rapidly as possable. The launching procedure would be like this plane #1 would be pulled out and assembled and then placed on the launch shuttle, while this was going on plane #2 would be pulled out and assembled. Then #1 would launch while #2 would be put on the shuttle and #3 would be pulled out and assembled.

As to weapons load the data is real sparce but one of the possable missions of the I-400's was to attack the Panama Canal lock gates with torpedos, So the planes would have to be able to fly with that kind of payload.

---

John:

There was even talk about using bio weapons from these planes, but IIRC, the I-400 or one her sisters was sunk and the project was shelved.

One thing that I am not quite sure about. I know that the USSR was planning on making this right before the government clapsed, but I do not know if they intended the aircraft to have pilotes.

I do not even know if we had UAV scouts by 1990. Even if we did have the technology by 1990, would it have been advanced enough to launch, and recover like they are being designed to do today?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by john964

The plane for the I-400 class Siran(?) could be assembaled in about 30min under normal conditions and when they put it on the catapult, the cat had 3 seperate shuttles so that the planes could be launched as rapidly as possable. The launching procedure would be like this plane #1 would be pulled out and assembled and then placed on the launch shuttle, while this was going on plane #2 would be pulled out and assembled. Then #1 would launch while #2 would be put on the shuttle and #3 would be pulled out and assembled.

As to weapons load the data is real sparce but one of the possable missions of the I-400's was to attack the Panama Canal lock gates with torpedos, So the planes would have to be able to fly with that kind of payload.

---

The biggest problem that I think they ran into, was where do you put the amunition. The Sub is already strapped for space, and so even if the aircraft does have bomb payloads, it would probably only have one. That was probably the biggest reason that these aircraft where used for scouting missions only.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ed Rotondaro

John:

There was even talk about using bio weapons from these planes, but IIRC, the I-400 or one her sisters was sunk and the project was shelved.

---

Another possable mission was to bomb the forrest of the north west with incenderies to try and start forrest fires. IIRC they tried this and succeded in starting several small fires but they were quickly put out.

As to the Bio-war attack the overiding problem that japanese were unable to solve was degradation of the agent in storage. IIRC the japanese were trying to use a mixed agent of small pox and anthrax but the agents would break down and become less and less deadly over time. I belive the weaponazation of anthrax was not developed untill the mid 50's by the US and USSR.