WHO SAYS THERE ARE NO REAL CHOICES IN SUBMARINE DESIGN?

Abstract

A paper by the author to the last submarine conference emphasised that submarine design is much more constrained than is the case generally for the design of complex surface ships. This is because comparatively the extent of the submarine solution space is usually considerably less and there is the need to go into more detail and achieve a more precise balance for any submarine design option very early in the concept phase. This tighter constraint applies to a greater degree even when compared to designing the most complex surface ships. However, there is a need also to counter the apparent corollary to the above, which might suggest the submarine designer is therefore not faced with a host of major design choices, as should be the case in a properly conducted concept phase for complex vessels. Interestingly, these many remaining choices are both highly interrelated and have to be made very early on, at least in order to achieve the synthesis of any distinct submarine design option. The paper also draws on the more general and extensive exposition presented in the recent Special Edition of the RINA Transactions, by the author, on the sophistication of early stages of design for complex vessels. The current paper therefore points out where designing for submarines is subtlety different to doing so for other complex vessels. This comparison is done before sequentially outlining some twenty significant generic submarine design choices. Finally, the paper points out that that sequential listing has itself, necessarily, by being sequential, thereby further simplified what remains a highly integrated and interactive set of choices.