How realistic is the Seaquest DSV submarine design?

[Whitestar]

I've often wondered how realistic the Seaquest DSV submarine design was.

Here are some attachments I've included:

https://www.pinterest.fr/pin/326651779206382460/

I would imagine that having windows on the sub would represent structural weakness and it's overall flatness design would make any kind of storage capacity to be a nightmare.

How realistic is the Seaquest DSV submarine design compared to it's real-life counterparts?

 

[256bits]

I would imagine that having windows on the sub would represent structural weakness and it's overall flatness design would make any kind of storage capacity to be a nightmare.

No more so than any other deviation from the basic best shape of a sphere( difficult to propel ) or a cylinder, such as where one would find things such as hatches. Maybe the glass for the window is of a different chemical composition from what we consider as glass.
Any flat surface would need beefy interior structural re-enforcement.

 

[Bandersnatch]

The shape looks like it would induce a lot of drag from turbulent flow, while the nose would generate lift.
I suppose windows are not a showstopper - the submersibles descending into the Mariana Trench had windows after all.

 

[Whitestar]

The shape looks like it would induce a lot of drag from turbulent flow, while the nose would generate lift.
I suppose windows are not a showstopper - the submersibles descending into the Mariana Trench had windows after all.

Really? How does the shape would induce tremendous drag from turbulent flow, considering it's sleek design?

 

[Bandersnatch]

I don't know about tremendous, but in general every shape deviation from the teardrop-shaped tube, i.e. every hole in the hull, every sharp corner or protrusion, will entrap the flow. That central bulb with its separation from the rest of the hull looks like the main offender here.

 

[Rive]

Seaquest DSV
3D models are better to explain the origin of the shape - it is not that bad.

From here

But:

..the ship has a crush depth of more than 9 km of water...

Sorry, but that makes it a big NO.
At that depth anything else but strictly circular cross sections for the pressure hull - no.

 

[BillTre]

Some of these deep ocean vehicles have a spherical pressure hull buried in an outer hull that could be designed to let it slip through the water with less turbulence.

 

[Whitestar]

I don't know about tremendous, but in general every shape deviation from the teardrop-shaped tube, i.e. every hole in the hull, every sharp corner or protrusion, will entrap the flow. That central bulb with its separation from the rest of the hull looks like the main offender here.

Interesting! So, there is a logical reason as to why real-life submarines are designed as cigar-like or teardrop-shape tubes, eh?

 

[russ_watters]

Really? How does the shape would induce tremendous drag from turbulent flow, considering it's sleek design?

Interesting! So, there is a logical reason as to why real-life submarines are designed as cigar-like or teardrop-shape tubes, eh?

It isn't sleek at all! Teardrop = sleek. Complicated shapes = not sleek.

I've often wondered how realistic the Seaquest DSV submarine design was.

How realistic is the Seaquest DSV submarine design compared to it's real-life counterparts?

The Seaquest DSV wasn't a "design" (as a submarine). It is, and should only be thought of as a piece of art.

 

[Vanadium 50]

So, there is a logical reason as to why real-life submarines are designed as cigar-like or teardrop-shape tubes, eh?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Albacore_(AGSS-569)

But I think your question is "why doesn't the fictional submarine look like real ones" rather than the reverse.

 

[Whitestar]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Albacore_(AGSS-569)

But I think your question is "why doesn't the fictional submarine look like real ones" rather than the reverse.

Noted, thanks!