3 ms·
I'm not a marine anything, but I'd assume that the control system Wikipedia mentions are ballast tanks that need to reflect any change in load, load distribut
by usrusr 3y ago
I'm not a marine anything, but I'd assume that the control system Wikipedia mentions are
ballast tanks that need to reflect any change in load, load distribution and even wind load I'd guess. Sinking a little deeper won't do much to compensate increased load because the small surface area means little change in displacement per change in vertical position. Active trimming pumps.
- LorenPechtel 3y agoYes, but how is that all that complex by modern standards? Dealing with known weight, simply pump the right number of gallons. If your ship can change weight rapidly you might need some fairly big pumps. (I'm thinking of a warship--VLS equipped ships can throw an awful lot of weight into the sky awfully quickly. But on the flip side you can dispense with a whole bunch of stuff meant to deal with the missile exhaust--your VLS tubes go all the way through the ship, when the missile lights it simply blows a panel open on the bottom of the cell and the exhaust slams into the ocean. And it's a safety advantage to be able to jettison a missile without having to launch it or rig a crane.)
- usrusr 3y agoMore complex than a hull shape that is perfectly fine with just sinking in in a little deeper when load is added or redistributed. The control system you don't have or need is inherently less complex than the control system you do need. It's not exactly a problem impossible to solve, SWATH have already been operated half a century ago, but it seems to be rarely worth the effort.