WesWorld

http://www.armorama.com/modules.php?op=m…content&id=3348

Well okay then....................THAT jewel started development in 1936, and invoking the three year WW rule could push it back to 1933. I hope Hrolf doesn't mind, but he could now be the proud producer of the Landwasserschlepper Mark I.

_________________________________________________



Say goodnight, Gracie.

Goodnight.

H.

Quoted

Originally posted by Hrolf Hakonson
According to what I can find, the first LWS wasn't ordered until late 1940, to this point Germany has no particular reason to have ordered them (though they might be useful, I can't say that I've done so).

It was either the LWS or the Alligator. I chose the LWS as being more likely, since it was time coincident.

http://www.oldsubsplace.com/Snorkel%20development.htm

Snort tube was on Plunger as well as the USS Holland S-1.

As I mentioned early when setting up HEBCO, Simon Lake is/was familiar with the snort as a coincept.

Quoted

Several snorkel systems or snorkel-like systems were installed on board US submarines. Simon Lake used an engine exhaust system that utilized a pipe extending above the main deck aft. The Alligator (1862) had an ‘air tube’ to allow air to be drawn into the boat while it was submerged at a shallow depth. The CSS Hunley had a similar air tube system. John Holland’s Plunger (189 was to have a coiled hose system which had a float to permit air to be drawn in from a deeper depth than either the Alligator or Hunley.

How hard was it to run US main induction systems through a mast? Not very.

The main problem was making an exposed electrode salt water actuated air pressurized flap valve. Sound familar? It should. Hook that circuit rig up to a Westinghouse type deadman type railroad air brake setup in a U-shaped tube and you have the snort.

It is not something that was beyond US tech circa 1888 onward.

H.

Quoted

Originally posted by Kaiser Kirk
Probably not,

From the link you posted it took about a year of testing, then they made it operational and had two more years of tests. Not a huge development arc... though there is that point they were working from captured blueprints.

Thing was- Simon Lake didn't do it, the USN did not do it in this period- nobody except the Dutch did. The US did not do it until 1945, and then used captured tech to help.

I agree with you that in the RTL only ther Dutch tried it. What I failed to point out, I guess, is that the Germans took the simple float valve induction design that the Dutch used and improved it to contain an intake and exhaust circuit . It took them, the usual two years of development, you pointed out to rush it through. I'm surprised that they didn't use the flap valve and deadman brake principle themselves. You had German float valve exduction snorkels leaking like crazy during WW II or else the induction valves would pick the wrong time to seat snug and suddenly the boat crew would have a combo of CO poisoning and ruptured eardrum, what I call-"the slams".

The Westinghouse air circuit was just so obvious, where the same air that slammed the flap valves closed, also squirted the air into the boat to keep the crew from suffering "the slams". I'm surprised that nobody else thought of it.

That was what took the US a year and a half. Others found their own very similar solutions, once they figured out that you had to deal with that depressurization and oxygen starvation problem. I actually think the British beat the US to the solution by a year or so.

Here I just use a little HEBCO dramatic license. I know that Simon Lake used an exduction flap valve setup and and a mast main induction for some of of his homebuilts. Combine well-known railroad airbrake technology and a little simple electrical engineering to that Lake setup and voila.....WW Mudpuppy with a snort.

H.

Quoted

Originally posted by Kaiser Kirk
And thats what I'm not keen on.

I won't claim the schnorkel is not restricted to the Dutch, for one thing that logic would penalize all the countries advanced beyond historical. Thats not defensible.

However, if nobody had the thing except them, I rather expect a good storyline as to why it was developed a-historically and introduced by someone else.

In this case, it's a private company that pops up sporting it as part of an apparent mercenary op.

Well all I can say, is that I can refer you here:

http://wesworld.jk-clan.de/thread.php?threadid=6167&sid=

The models and devices include an accumulated ten to fifteen years of prototype bench-testing of the various technologies you see me have HEBCO throw at Xiang Xielaung. NOW they are building and using it.

H.

Quoted

Originally posted by Red Admiral
Italy invented the first modern Schnorkel in 1923 by Major Ferreti. The submarine H-3 was refitted with the equipment and conducted satisfactory trials in late 1925. The device was later installed on three submarines in the early 1930s for further trials. Although it worked the submarines had the equipment removed because there was no real operational need at the time and the Navy was concerned about the visible wake from the mast.

Learned something new. Wonder why the Regia Marina didn't realize the full tactical advantages? Did they not field trial under simulated war conditions?

http://www.sommergibili.com/indexen.htm