sea frame · 2020. 2. 20. · welcome to our inaugural issue of seaframe—a publication that...

Summer 2005 Volume 1 Issue 1

FRAMESEAShips & Ship Systems Quarterly Publication

ENCAPSULATED PROPELLER

LIGHTENING THE LOAD

Innovative Process May Improve Performance and Save Money

Technology and Teaming Ease Shipboard Operational Logistics

USS VIRGINIAThe Science of Silence

P R E M I E R E E D I T I O N

Report Documentation Page Form ApprovedOMB No. 0704-0188Public reporting burden for the collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering andmaintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information,including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, ArlingtonVA 22202-4302. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to a penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if itdoes not display a currently valid OMB control number.

1. REPORT DATE 2005 2. REPORT TYPE

3. DATES COVERED 00-00-2005 to 00-00-2005

4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE SEAFRAME: Ships & Ship Systems Quarterly Publication Volume 1Issue 1

5a. CONTRACT NUMBER

5b. GRANT NUMBER

5c. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER

6. AUTHOR(S) 5d. PROJECT NUMBER

5e. TASK NUMBER

5f. WORK UNIT NUMBER

7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) SEAFRAME,Communications Division, Code 38,9500 MacArthurBlvd.,West Bethesda ,MD,20817-5700

8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATIONREPORT NUMBER

9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSOR/MONITOR’S ACRONYM(S)

11. SPONSOR/MONITOR’S REPORT NUMBER(S)

12. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT Approved for public release; distribution unlimited

13. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

14. ABSTRACT

15. SUBJECT TERMS

16. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF: 17. LIMITATION OF ABSTRACT Same as

Report (SAR)

18. NUMBEROF PAGES

28

19a. NAME OFRESPONSIBLE PERSON

a. REPORT unclassified

b. ABSTRACT unclassified

c. THIS PAGE unclassified

Standard Form 298 (Rev. 8-98) Prescribed by ANSI Std Z39-18

SEAFRAMEShips & Ship Systems Quarterly Publication

Charles (Randy) Reeves

Welcome to our inaugural issue of SEAFRAME—a publication thathighlights the Navy’s integrated efforts in supporting the fleet’s ships and

ship systems. The title “SEAFRAME” highlights our emphasis on functionalassessment in systems engineering. With new ship concepts using modular payloadsand being multi-mission capable, we focus on the sea frame and integration of pay-loads and combat systems to provide a total ship system.

We are nearly two years into the transformation of NAVSEA and its WarfareCenters from a collection of individual organizations, vying for work, into a nationallyfocused set of product areas aimed at doing the right work, in the right place, at theright time. One of 12 product areas, the Ships and Ship Systems (S3) Product Areaencompasses all platforms, systems, and components essential for the operation,mobility, and survivability of surface ships, submarines, boats and craft, and unmannedvehicles. It also includes systems and expertise essential for the platform, combat, andweapon systems integration. S3 is comprised of seven core equity areas that cross allNavy mission and warfare areas and support Sea Power 21.

Established in October 2003, the S3 Product Area has aligned its businessapproach to that of the Naval Sea Systems Command. Essential to any business, ourStrategic Plan was released in July 2004. Discussed in an article on page 2, this plan,which will be updated in September, sets the pace for the S3 efforts. Working with theWarfare Center Board of Directors (WCBoD), we have coordinated our planning withthe WCBoD integrated planning process, which lays out an annual cycle. Integral tothis process is the technical health assessment, a foundational process that maps thecore equities to the technical capabilities to the knowledge areas. We will use it inmultiple areas including strategic planning, business planning, and human capitalstrategy. Each product area director is responsible for accepting all work and assigningit to the appropriate Division or the “best athlete.” To accomplish this, the warfarecenters set up common processes and a web-based work assignment database (WAW).We have successfully implemented the data from’04; we are now working on ’05 dataand refining the process.

Probably the most significant change in the way we do business has been theaddition of a virtual organization of customer advocates. Established to represent ourcustomers’ best interests, these advocates focus on customer interface and customersatisfaction. An article on our customer advocates appears on page 3. A concept ofoperations for these customer advocates was signed with Carderock Division in April2005 and will be expanded to include the other Divisions supporting S3. Finally, aspart of the rollout of Task Force Lean at NAVSEA, each product area director is over-seeing Lean implementation in his/her area. Working closely with Task Force Lean,champions have been designated, and Lean implementation is accelerating. I have highhopes for what we can achieve through this process improvement effort.

The strategic plan, the customer advocates, the technical health assessment, andindeed, this publication all reflect our national focus on the S3 Product Area. If you’dlike to read more about the S3 Product Area and its business products, log onto www.nswcdc.navy.mil/S3. We are dedicated to ensuring full understanding of this new wayof doing business.

By Charles (Randy) Reeves

Ships and Ship Systems Product Area [email protected] (DSN 287)

S3 PAD Staff

Peter MontanaDirector, Work Assignment andTactical [email protected] (DSN 287)

Arnold OstroffDirector, Strategic [email protected] (DSN 443)301-227-5664 (DSN 287)

Kathryn CousinsExecutive [email protected] (DSN 287)

Transforming Our Business for the Customers

Ships & ship Systems NotePAD

Ships & Ship Systems (S3) Product Area Director (PAD)

Charles (Randy) Reeves

SEAFRAME Staff

Executive EditorJim Scott

Managing EditorLeslie Spaulding

Layout and DesignGloria Patterson

Writing/EditingWilliam PalmerYvonne Watson

PhotographyPam Lama

SEAFRAME is the official publicationof the S3 Product Area. It is publishedquarterly with appropriated funds in

accordance with NAVSO-P35. Any views and opinions expressed

are not necessarily those of theDepartment of the Navy.

Address correspondence andsubmissions to SEAFRAME,

Communications Division, Code 389500 MacArthur Blvd.

West Bethesda, MD 20817-5700 Attn: Jim Scott.

Fax to 301-227-4428 or [email protected].

The SEAFRAME staff reserves theright to edit or rewrite all

submissions.

1

SEA

FRA

ME

TABLE OF CONTENTS

NotePAD

S3 Director, Charles (Randy) Reeves Inside Front Cover

S3 BUSINESSThe Shape of Things to Come Page 2

CUSTOMER ADVOCACYCustomer Advocates Provide a Bridge Page 3

The Go-Between Organization Page 4

CORE EQUITIESCross-Product Area Collaboration Page 6

Validating Virginia Page 8

Lightening the Load Page 10

Enhanced Maintenance Page 11

An Evolution of Corrosion Control Page 13

Environmental Engineering Enables Fleet Page 15

Dynamic Shock Testing Page 16

The Science of Silence Page 18

TECHNOLOGY AND INNOVATIONEncapsulated Propellers Page 19

Logistics Made Easier Page 21

Multi-Agency Craft Conference Page 23

Call for Papers Page 24


Summer 2005 Volume 1 Issue 1

Cover design by Gloria Patterson

Each PAD is now required to develop strategic objectives,annual business plans, and long-range planning forinvestments.

In July 2004, the Ships and Ship Systems (S3)Product Area developed its inaugural strategic plan. Thatplan put forward six strategic goals (see box), which arecrucial to advancing the product area and the Navy’s SeaPower 21 vision.

Objectives were developed for each of the strategicgoals, and elements of the strategic plan were used thisyear to evaluate investment proposals. However, theenvironment is changing; and now, one year later, thestrategic plan must be reexamined to ensure that it stillprovides the best description of how the product area willsupport the Navy’s long-term needs. For that reason, weare embarking on a comprehensive process that will notonly reassess the strategic plan but also improve its align-ment to higher-level planning, customer plans andrequirements, and future investment needs.

An updated strategic plan will be issued this fall.Supporting its development will be an environmentalassessment and a business forecast. These efforts will

provide a better understanding of how changing externalfactors, customer needs, and workload requirementscould impact the product area. After the strategic plan iscompleted, a tactical plan will be prepared to translate thestrategic goals into annual planning guidance andresource needs. Finally, action plans for each of theobjectives will be developed and monitored on aquarterly basis.

This new planning process will also be coordinatedwith Warfare Center and Division planning efforts toensure synchronization of planning events and the bestuse of common information.

SEA

FRA

ME

2

ByArnold Ostroff

With the alignment of theWarfare Centers and establishment ofthe product area directors (PADs) in2003, many of the basic functions ofstrategic planning shifted from theWarfare Center Divisions to the PADs.

SIX STRATEGIC GOALS

1. High speed and maneuverable ships.

2. Ships and ship systems that improve warfighting performance through optimized manning.

3. Advanced electrical technologies that enable the transition to all-electric ships.

4. Ships and ship systems that provide improved payload capability and rapidin-theater changeout.

5. Enhanced survivability of ships and ship systems through advanced low observabilitytechnologies, damage tolerant designs, and automated system reconfigurability.

6. Highly sustainable and logistically supportedships and ship systems that enable Seabasing.

Ships Ship Systems

TheSHAPE

ofTHINGStoCOME

Planning the Way

for

Director of Strategic PlanningArnold Ostroff

[email protected] (DSN 443)301-227-5664 (DSN 287)

S3 BUSINESS

and

Area established a virtual organization of customeradvocates to serve as functional agents of the productarea directors (PADs), in an additional duty capacity.Their role is to interface with customers to develop aunified customer support approach that brings togetherefficient and effective combinations of technical capabilitiesthat span multiple divisions. They are responsible forthe management of relationships with the Warfare Centercustomers.

Before retiring as Commander, Naval Sea SystemsCommand, Vice Admiral Phillip Balisle stressed theimportance of customer advocacy to all NAVSEAcommands. Through customer advocacy, both NAVSEAand the Warfare Centers can operate as a seamless entitywithout encroachment or redundancy. As a result, thefocus of product area management can shift from sitelevel to a national level. Additionally, the resultingdisciplined approach to work assignment and improvedbusiness processes promotes efficiency.

Applied throughout the NAVSEA corporation forthe S3 Product Area, this approach provides one voice tothe customer, with each customer advocate overseeing allaspects of customer relationship management andcustomer satisfaction. These advocates serve to fullyunderstand customer needs and work with the organizations

3

SEA

FRA

ME

S3Provide

ByLeslie

Spaulding

Obtaining comprehensive customersupport will be easier for the NavyWarfare Center customer in the area ofships and ship systems. By mutualagreement with Carderock Division, theShips and Ship Systems (S3) Product

Bridge to

CUSTOMERADVOCATES

ProductArea

supporting ships and ship systems to ensure those needsare met with the best value solution. Part of that supportinvolves providing programmatic assessment and riskmanagement for the customer, as well as providingservices to customers by recommending appropriatemake/buy decisions for products and services. Theadvocates work closely with the customer and the line

CUSTOMER ADVOCACY

S3Customer Advocates

Lead, Customer Advocacy Pat Woody . . . . . . 215-897-8439 (DSN 443)

Submarine Customer Advocacy GroupLarry Tarasek . . . . 301-227-1623 (DSN 287)

In-Service Carriers Customer Advocacy GroupJim DiTaranto . . . . 215-897-1006 (DSN 443)

Future Carriers Customer Advocacy GroupReid McAllister . . . .301-227-5476 (DSN 287)

Ships Customer Advocacy GroupRich Stutchfield . . . 215-897-1439 (DSN 443)

Joint Programs Customer Advocacy GroupRon Warwick . . . . . 757-462-4073 (DSN 253)

NAVSEA/Multi-Platform Customer Advocacy GroupBill Compton . . . . . 215-897-7747 (DSN 443)

Science and Technology Customer Advocacy GroupDr. Joe Corrado . . . 301-227-1417 (DSN 287)

CAs Provide Bridge (Continued on page 5)

SEA

FRA

ME

4

SEA

FRA

ME

Customer advocates serveas functional agents of the productarea directors (PADs). Their role insupport of the PADs is to interfacewith customers to develop unifiedcustomer support approaches that

bring together efficient and effective combinations oftechnical capabilities that span multiple Divisions. Theyare responsible for the management of relationships withthe Program Executive Officer (PEO) or Warfare Centercustomers. In addition, they work with the PAD on workacceptance and assignment, as well as synergy and teaming.

SUBMARINECUSTOMERADVOCATE

ByWilliamPalmer

TheGo-Between Organization

Interfacing Technical Managers

Customersand

CUSTOMER ADVOCACY

with

5

SEA

FRA

ME

One such advocate is Larry Tarasek, the leadSubmarine Customer Advocate for the Ships and ShipSystems (S3) Product Area. The intent of the SubmarineCustomer Advocacy Group is to make the connectionbetween the submarine customers and the organizationsthat do the work for them. Major submarine customersinclude the Program Executive Office, Submarines; theUndersea Warfare Directorate; the Undersea TechnologyGroup; and the Submarine Design and Engineer Group.The tasks for these customers are accomplished by anygroup which can perform the right work, in the rightplace, at the right time. Usually, the work engages thetechnical abilities of the Carderock Division but canextend to any of the Warfare Center Divisions that satisfythe customer’s requirements for S3 products.

Tarasek’s main objective is to have the submarinecustomer advocates serve as the primary interface betweenthe customer and Warfare Center line organizations. Asecond objective is to oversee all aspects of customerrelationship management and satisfaction. Third, theseadvocates must understand customer needs and advocateon behalf of the customer within the Warfare Center. “Iview those top three as very important to what we do ascustomer advocates for submarines,” says Tarasek. “Theother key ingredient is, of course, to work with linemanagers to ensure that cost, schedule, and performanceare properly constructed, assigned, and supported. Thecustomer advocates enable customers to make one phonecall to get actions addressed.

Lead, Customer AdvocacyPat Woody

[email protected] (DSN 443)

Technical Point of ContactLarry Tarasek

Submarine Customer [email protected] (DSN 287)

CUSTOMER ADVOCACY

Trident (Ohio Class) Submarine.U.S. Navy Photo

managers within the Warfare Center to ensure theirrequirements, tasking, deliverables, work schedules, andfunding are properly constructed, assigned, and supported.

Customer advocacy within the NAVSEA enterpriseis an extension of the PAD concept. The customer advocatesare functional agents of these PADs. With customeradvocates, the PADs can execute their responsibility tomaintain discipline in the Warfare Centers’ work acceptanceand assignment process, eliminating unwarrantedduplication of work among its various organizations. Theactual execution and management of the work is stilldone within the various organizations; however, thecustomer advocates provide a bridge between the customerand the engineer or technologist, providing both effective-ness and efficiency in the process.

Within the S3 Product Area, the customer advocacyorganization is comprised of an overall lead for customeradvocacy and leads for each of the six groups:Submarines, Carriers (Future and In-Service), Ships, JointPrograms, NAVSEA/Multi-Platforms, and Science andTechnology. Each lead advocate is supported by a teamdedicated to the execution of the right work, in the rightplace, at the right time for the customer.

CAs Provide Bridge (Continued from page 3)

6

SEA

FRA

ME

CROSS-PRODUCT AREA

COLLABORATION

Special Operations Community

Interest

Engineers working in the Shipsand Ship Systems (S3) Product Area arecollaborating with engineers from severalother product areas. A “community ofinterest” (CoI) addresses the mission-related needs of the Special Operations

community. Warfare Center personnel, in alignment withseven of the 12 Warfare Center product areas, are currentlyworking closely with the Special Operations communityto lay the groundwork for a smooth and efficient way ofaddressing those customers’ mission requirements.Vision, goals, and a mission charter are currently underdevelopment.

An initial meeting in November 2003 includedthe S3 and Littoral Warfare Systems Product Areas, aswell as several Warfare Center PAD representatives on

site at U.S. Special Operations Command (USSOCOM).Motivated by a basic desire to meld the various groupstogether with those personnel who were aware of whatwork other sites were performing, the initial meetingaimed to determine what possibilities exist for collaboration.

Much of the value of this collaborative effortcomes from dialogue during meetings to discovercapabilities and technologies across the whole groupthat can be leveraged to assist USSOCOM. The initialfocus was to determine how the Warfare Centerscould best help develop craft and other technologiesor capabilities to better meet the needs of thewarfighter. The effort grew from that initial meeting,and now the product area representatives are becomingmore total warfare system oriented instead of beingsite oriented.

ByWilliamPalmer

CORE EQUITIES

of

7

SEA

FRA

ME

In June, the product areas pooled resources tofield an exhibit booth at USSOCOM’s AdvancedPlanning Brief to Industry. The exhibit highlighted thecollaborative response by the product areas toUSSOCOM’s mission requirements.

The overall purpose of the Special OperationsCoI is to provide technical and strategic leadership acrossthe Warfare Center for developing, applying, and fieldingsystems for the Special Operations Forces. The CoIalso fosters a spirit of cooperation, communication, col-laboration, and shared vision that ensures that thefull capabilities of the Warfare Center enterprise are lever-aged to the maximum extent possible.

This Warfare Center team has comprehensiveunderstanding of the unique requirements of the USSOCOMand is therefore able to develop and maintain a robustportfolio of knowledge areas, capabilities, and facilities.

Special Operations MK V.

Photo By John Garrett

Special Operations MK V.Combatant Craft, Carderock Division

Technical Point of ContactEdward Hatchell


Core Equity Leader, Ship Integration and DesignC.F. Snyder


CORE EQUITIES

and these maneuvers helped show how fast the ship couldanswer an engine bell and how quickly the ship couldslow down from a certain cruise speed.

Much of the information gathered from thesetrials will be directed to engineers and scientists tovalidate and refine, if necessary, a ship control simulationof the Virginia, the engineering of which is being doneby the Ships and Ship Systems (S3) Product Area.Researchers essentially viewed these maneuvers asvalidations of their simulation, giving them feedback onhow accurate the simulation is. The feedback is valuable,as it helps refine the program, making it more relevant tofuture submarines of the same class, as well as future subclasses and future modifications to the Virginia. So far,performance predictions have been very close to actualperformance, thanks in part to input from Seawolf andLos Angeles Class performance data.

To provide further real-world data for thesimulation, control surface effectiveness exercises werealso included in the boat’s trial schedule. Answers weresought to questions such as, what is the effect of using

8

SEA

FRA

ME

a certain speed, thereby definingthe turning performance of theship. Acceleration and decelerationmaneuvers were done in a sub-merged and surfaced condition,

VALIDATINGVIRGINIA

A series of at-sea trials recentlytested the capabilities of USS Virginia(SSN 774), the Navy’s newest submarineand first in its class. The trials validate thesubmerged operating envelope, or depth

and speed parameters within which the submarine muststay to ensure recovery in the event of a control surfacecasualty provided proper recovery actions are executed,as well as validate other guidance and performancecharacteristics critical to successful operation of the ship.

The first trial, held in November 2004, beganthe set of 3- to 4-day-long trials exclusively devoted tovalidating the boat’s operating parameters and the ship’sresponse to various casualty conditions. The trials alsolooked at how the ship responded to manipulating thecontrol surfaces. The results of these trials were used toadjust the operational guidance, making it more representativeof the actual performance of the ship.

A follow-on trial in February 2005 was muchmore of a characterization of the ship performance,establishing such data points as speed-vs.-propulsor rpm,torque, and horsepower. Maneuvering exercises were alsoconducted, further characterizing the boat’s turningperformance submerged and surfaced. One aspect thattest engineers aimed to measure was how much distancethe ship would take to turn in a certain direction going at

First-of-Class TrialsTest New Sub’s

Hydrodynamics,Maneuvering,

and Control Abilities

ByWilliamPalmer

CORE EQUITIES

only stern planes to maneuver the ship in the verticalplane. Trials with a simple agenda, such as changingcontrol surface angles (such as bow planes, stern planes,and rudder) and observing the ship’s response wereconducted. Engineers also sought to understand whetherthe ship would pitch up, pitch down, or go through aturn level with the rudder being deflected and all othercontrol surfaces neutral.

Other trials tested the ship’s emergency recoveryperformance using the Virginia’s split stern planes. Thestern planes are actually constructed as two pairs ofseparate control surfaces, two inner and two outercontrol surfaces with each pair individually controlledby the ship control system. Separate hydraulic controlsystems move the inner and outer surfaces in unison orindependently. If one pair of stern planes is jammed inan extreme position, this feature allows the use of theother pair of stern planes to counter the effects of thejam.

Software for the Virginia fly-by-wire controlsystem contained the “split stern planes mode,” whereby

9

SEA

FRA

ME

control of the inner stern planes can be assigned to onejoystick, and control of the outer stern planes can beassigned to the other joystick. This permits much morerealistic control situations for simulating a stern planejam for emergency recovery trials or for crew training.

Core Equity Leader, Hull Forms and PropulsorsDr. In-Young [email protected]

301-227-1578 (DSN 287)

Technical Points of ContactBrian Hill


Douglas [email protected]

301-227-1872 (DSN 287)

USS Virginia (SSN 774). Photo by General Dynamics Electric Boat

CORE EQUITIES

10

SEA

FRA

ME

Using Technology Teaming

AutomateShipboard

Operational Logistics

The Warfare Center MaterialHandling and Transfer (MHAT) team,established in FY00 to promote collaborationand integration of Operational Logistics(OpLog) system programs and initiatives,includes representatives from Philadelphia,

Carderock, Port Hueneme, Panama City, and Indian Head.MHAT-related efforts are primarily under the cognizanceof the Ships and Ship Systems (S3) Product Area but alsoimpact Littoral Warfare, Logistics and Maintenance, andOrdnance Product Areas. Members interface with the fleet,technical warrant holders, ship design/acquisition pro-gram managers, ONR and industry, and support OpLogIntegration Program, Seabase Logistics CONOPS, andrelated initiatives.

The term “operational logistics” describes themanagement and movement of material from factory toend user for naval operations. Many shipboard OpLogsystems (e.g., fork trucks, elevators, connected replenish-ment, etc.) have been used for more than 50 years. They

perform their intended mission utilizing extensivetime, manpower, and process workarounds, such asmaterial pre-staging. The result is an unbalanced system.Improvements in safety, operation, and reliability ofsystems have been made, but transformational change isnecessary to balance the system and meet future challenges.Ship acquisition programs and warfighting concepts, suchas Seabasing, will require increased throughput, flexibility,and reduced manning.

The goal is to respond to warfighter needs witha shipboard automated warehouse with an automatedinventory management system which locates commoditiesusing radio frequency identification (RFID) technology,selectively delivers items to an autonomous vertical/horizontal transport system, and transfers the load fordelivery to the end user. But how realistic and affordableare low maintenance, user-friendly shipboard applicationsof such systems? The ultimate answer will be determinedas technology evolves, but the Warfare Center is heavilyinvolved in the process as we move forward.

Programmable logic controllers being installed onmaterial handling systems enable network connectivityand provide interface for inventory management, prognosticmaintenance, and distance support. Shipboard demon-stration of RFID technology will be conducted this yearto assess total asset visibility systems. Joint ModularIntermodal Container engineering design models arebeing evaluated for optimization of prototype containersthat will standardize packaging, reduce waste dunnage,and optimize handling. Laser sensors replacing costly,

By Stephen Michetti

LIGHTENINGTHE LOAD Skin-to-skin transfer between SS Flickertail State (T-ACS 5) and SS Cornhusker State (T-ACS 6). U.S. Navy Photo

CORE EQUITIES

andto

11

SEA

FRA

ME

maintenance-intensiveelevator trunk proximityand limit switches arebeing evaluated toprepare for FY06 ship-board demonstration.Preliminary shipboardtesting was conductedon a simulated integratedlanding platform, aself-deploying floatingplatform used for ship

to LCAC/lighterage interface. Shipboard demonstrationswere also conducted to evaluate effectiveness of ashipboard crane pendulation control system used tostabilize loads for safe handling and to demonstrate thefeasibility of skin-to-skin operations. The next generationunderway replenishment “Heavy Unrep” system is beingdeveloped to increase throughput and improve safety.The Navy's Unrep site has a new receiving structure totest the Unrep Sliding Padeye later this year. Interfacewith new ship acquisition programs is accomplished toensure interoperability. Early involvement in Seabasing hasincluded technical paper presentations and the hosting ofworkshops.

The Warfare Center’s role in developing andassessing technology of these and other initiatives willcontribute to significantly improved shipboard operationallogistics systems that will enable the warfighter to bettermeet future challenges.

The next time you open a newspaperor turn on the television, you’ll encounternumerous advertisements for wirelessnetworking products, such as routers,cards, portable devices, and applicationsoftware. Similarly, chances are good that

Wireless ICAS Goes Live

ENHANCEDMAINTENANCE

By Walt

Kostyk

the last hotel, airport, or college campus you visited waswireless-enabled. You may even have set up a wirelesslocal area network (WLAN) in your own home. Wirelesstechnologies are quickly proliferating into mainstreamsociety. What you may not know is that the same thing isabout to happen in the fleet.

Engineers within the Ships and Ship Systems (S3)Product Area are prime movers behind this evolution.Over the last three years, they focused on developing andtesting wireless applications and products that enhancethe condition-based maintenance (CBM) capabilities ofthe Integrated Condition Assessment System (ICAS).Their efforts produced a wireless ICAS subsystem,known as the Wireless Enhancement of ICAS (WEI).This subsystem reduces the cost of data acquisition andempowers ships’ crews to reduce their maintenance burden.In late March 2005, the Navy achieved a significantmilestone in this area when ICAS and the WEI subsystemwere permanently activated aboard Ex-USS Paul F.Foster (EDD 964).

The ICAS/WEI installation aboard the ship is anexample of Warfare Center divisions sharing resources toachieve individual and mutual objectives. Thatinstallation will enable ship’s force to conserve resources

Technical Point of ContactStephen Michetti


Core Equity Leader, Machinery SystemsDonald Collins


n SS Flickertail State (T-ACS 5) and ). U.S. Navy Photo

CORE EQUITIES

Wireless ICAS (Continued on page 12)

12

SEA

FRA

ME

by automating shipboard maintenance processes andpreventing/diagnosing equipment failures.

This effort supports multiple core equities withinthe S3 and Surface Combat Systems Product Areas. TheFoster platform is a perfect setting for evaluating newdesigns and testing integrated solutions across the WarfareCenter enterprise. Already, there is interest in testingwireless calibration and advanced pressure sensors aboardEx-USS Foster. Additionally, Distance Support solutionsutilizing data and video acquired by the ICAS/WEIsuite will be developed to support the Surface WarfareLogistics and Maintenance Product Area. The platformwill also be used to test ICAS hardware and softwareinitiatives under the Products Approved for ShipboardServices (PASS) process. Testing aboard Ex-USS Fosterwill help evolve ICAS to meet the ever-evolving CBMneeds of the fleet.

The core ICAS network aboard Ex-USS Fosterconsists of three network switches redundantly connectedvia fiber-optic cable in Gigabit Ethernet and four ICAScomputers. A wired interface provides online ICAS accessto propulsion and electrical plant signals. The wirelessnetwork is made up of 18 WLAN access points, 27 network-capable application processors, and two wireless laptops.The application processors are permanently mounteddevices that collect online analog signal informationfrom the high-pressure air compressors, low-pressureair compressors, and one air conditioning plant. They alsoprocess wireless video from 12 fixed and pan/tilt/zoomcameras for safety and situational awareness purposes.The two wireless laptops are view ports for live video andICAS data, which can be utilized anywhere on the shipwhere there is wireless coverage. All wireless communi-cations are encrypted with a FIPS 140-2 Level II-certifiedsolution.

Additional wireless initiatives are currently beingplanned. For Ex-USS Foster, the remaining air conditioningplant will be instrumented in October/November 2005.Integration with selected combat systems and combatsupport systems will take place within this window, aswill linkage to the ship’s existing point-to-pointcommunication system. Installation of a WEI suite aboard

Wireless ICAS (Continued from page 11)

Ex-USS Paul F. Foster.U.S. Navy Photo

CORE EQUITIES

the X-Craft is taking place this summer. In addition to thewireless suite, this includes an enhanced ICAS graphicaluser interface designed to support unmanned engineeringspaces. Installation of WEI variants is also envisioned forthe Trident Warrior-05 exercise and the evolving remotemonitoring experiment.

13

SEA

FRA

ME

Fighting Corrison (Continued on page 14)

Corrosion is one of the Navy’sbiggest maintenance costs, and a 2002study by the National Association ofCorrosion Engineers supports that claim:DoD spends around $20 billion every yearin combating corrosion alone. The Navy

AN EVOLUTION OF CORROSION CONTROLResearchers Home in

on Ways

puts a lot of steel into the salt-water oceans of the world,and that’s an extremely harsh environment from a corrosionperspective, impacting safety, readiness of our fleetcomponents, and the cost of keeping components readyto fight. In the Ships and Ship Systems (S3) ProductArea, corrosion control work ranges from basic 6.1research to corrosion engineering and acting as in-service

ByWilliamPalmer

Technical Point of ContactWalt Kostyk


Core Equity Leader, Machinery SystemsDonald Collins


CORE EQUITIES

toFight Corrosion

14

SEA

FRA

ME

considerations, which is not possible at present, coatingsare formulated to address separate issues.

Environmental impact is another area of concernfor marine coatings. New environmental controls add tothe load with which coating formulators must deal.Coating manufacturers are increasingly required toreduce the volatile organic compound (VOC), hazardousair pollutant (HAP), and heavy metal content of theircoatings to prevent harmful release of these substancesinto the environment. Formulators are engaged in a tugof war as they deal with more stringent environmentalrequirements for the coatings and for increasing performanceproperties ship designers need.

Corrosion engineering also plays into a ship’sdesign, with the need to use new materials to embracepositive design benefits balanced against possiblenegative impacts on existing hardware. Such activitiesas material selection, design for corrosion control, alloycharacterization, and fleet problem solving help engineersmitigate down-time and asset degradation due to corrosion.

engineering agents to fleet assets. Corrosion engineers areactively involved in making an impact on such fleet-focused tasks as reducing time in a dry-docking period orhelping alleviate intense manual labor by Sailors in the fleetin conducting corrosion control onboard ship.

Coatings are the Navy’s primary weapon in thefight against corrosion. Various organizations within theS3 product area’s Structures and Materials core equity areworking to identify requirements for coatings and howthey should perform. Their role is assisting NAVSEA todevelop performance-based requirements, developqualification test protocols, and modify documentation toenable fleet implementation of new coating systems andprocesses. All manner of aspects are being studied, frommaintenance and removal to surface preparation techniques,coating life prediction, and maintenance processesassociated with the coatings.

Another aspect the group is studying revolvesaround how the coatings will be used. A coating appliedto the underwater portion of a ship’s hull has to bothprovide corrosion protection and resist fouling due tomarine plant and animal growth. The coating applied toa deck, by comparison, has to provide the same corrosionprotection, but also has to be resistant to ultravioletradiation and have acceptable non-skid properties. Thenthere’s the application of coating a seawater ballasttank, which has to resist corrosion associated with filland drain evolutions. Rather than formulate one coatingto resolve a myriad of corrosion and preservation

Technical Point of ContactRichard Hays


Core Equity Leader, Structures and MaterialsStephen Roush


Overall view of the near-ocean test lot and of ongoingmarine atmospheric exposure tests (close-up) beingconducted at the LaQue Center for Corrosion TechnologyKure Beach Marine Atmospheric Test Facility.Photos by Andrew Sheetz

CORE EQUITIES

Fighting Corrosion (Continued from page 13)

15

SEA

FRA

ME

(NAVSEA 05M4). The Ships and Ship Systems (S3)Product Area develops and assesses technologies thatsupport and sustain core processes and capabilities integralto fleet operation and training. This includes providingthe technological solutions that ensure Navy ships andsubmarines are designed and upgraded and can be operatedworldwide affordably and in compliance with all applicableenvironmental laws and regulations.

For many years, the Navy’s EnvironmentalProgram was executed with a focus on fleet modernizationand government-centric acquisition processes. However,changes in national defense policy, more stringent

The Chief of Naval Operation’s(CNO’s) Operational EnvironmentalReadiness Mission is the catalyst behindthe research, development, and testingof environmental technologies conductedby the Navy. Direction is provided byCNO’s Afloat/Shore EnvironmentalSystems Integration Branch (N452) andthe Navy’s Central Technical Authority(CTA) for Environmental Engineering

ENABLES FLEET

ENVIRONMENTALENGINEERING

ImprovingOperational Mission

Readiness

ByMary JoBieberich,Reprinted, in part, from Spring2005CurrentsMagazine

environmental regulations, and environmental budgetadjustments have shifted the focus of the program to fleetrecapitalization strategies and ship design processesembedded in acquisition reform.

The NAVSEA technical warrant holder forenvironmental systems is transforming the businesspractices of the Environmental Engineering Program andproviding the tools needed for sustained operations andoperational readiness in the legacy and future fleets.Among these tools are American Bureau of Shipping(ABS) Naval Vessel Rules (NVRs) for environmentalsystems developed for NAVSEA. NVRs will support thedesign and acquisition of naval combatant ships andcrafts by providing the technical basis and authorizationfor Navy and ABS certification of selected ship systems.To supplement the NVRs for environmental systems,NAVSEA is drafting design guidance for ship designagents, as well as updating the system performancespecifications, standards, and technical data that governshipboard environmental systems.

CORE EQUITIES

Mission Readiness (Continued on page 17)

16

SEA

FRA

ME

Shock TestsSemi-Active

Cabinet IsolationSystem Conducted

DYNAMICSHOCKTESTING

A team of engineers recentlyperformed shock testing of Enidine’sIntelligent Shock Mitigation andIsolation System (ISMIS) atDynamic Testing, Inc. (DTI), inRustburg, VA. The team conducted

the six-shot barge test series to determine whether theISMIS devices, integrated with a passive lateral isolationsystem, would effectively protect electronic equipmenthoused in a cabinet during a shock event at sea. Generally,test results showed that the system was successful inprotecting equipment in the vertical axis, but the lateralisolation system requires further testing before acceptableresponse to a shock event is realized.

To simulate a typical shock environment seen ona surface combatant, the equipment (including a standardcomputer, flat panel display, keyboard, and uninterruptiblepower supply) was installed in Automated DigitalNetwork System (ADNS) equipment racks. The ISMISdevices and the lateral isolation system bridge the inner

rack and the outer cabinet structure. Theouter cabinet was base-mounted to afrequency-adjustable steel platform,known as the deck simulator fixture(DSF). The DSF is fixed to the testingbarge, the floating shock platform (FSP).

To replicate a shock event, thebarge was towed to the center of thepond and subjected to a series of under-water explosions using 60-pound HBX-1charges at varying horizontal ranges. The

first shot represented a half-energy attack, while the restwere executed at the more severe, full-energy standoffdistance. Dynamic instrumentation including accelerometers,velocity meters, and displacement gages were utilized tomeasure the shock inputs and responses of the FSP, DSF,and isolated cabinet.

The ISMIS isolators themselves combine abifurcated coil spring in parallel with a fluid spring,configured with a semi-actively controlled valve. Toachieve the most effective mitigation of underwatershock inputs, this valve can be opened to soften the fluidspring or closed to stiffen it. The term “semi-active”indicates that the control system can only remove energyfrom the system and cannot add energy to it, thus enhancingits stability.

The lateralaspect of the inte-grated isolationsystem consisted of16 passive wire ropeisolators (four pervertical side) dovetailmounted on verticalsliders. The low-friction slides actto decouple thevertical and lateralmotions, allowing

Underwater explosion shock test of ISMISinstalled on a floating shock platform.

UERD Photo

By RebeccaBuxton

CORE EQUITIES

for

17

SEA

FRA

ME

Today, research emphasis is shifting from in-housetechnology development to surveying the industrial baseand assessing commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) technologiesthat will support Navy needs now and in the future atreduced life-cycle cost. This new role consists of applyingits expertise in ship systems and systems integration toassessing trends in environmental technologies atemerging and commercial stages, assessing the affordabilityand suitability of potential shipboard environmental solutions,selecting appropriate technologies for shipboard implemen-tation, and conducting performance tests and evaluations.

This resulting body of knowledge, combinedwith extensive experience in ship integration and installationrequirements, is providing valuable support to the technicalauthority in assessing the viability of commercial systemsand equipment to meet cross-platform environmentalrequirements for the Navy’s recapitalization process andthe future fleet. The assessment of COTS systems requiresan understanding of operational scenarios and the uniquerequirements of Navy ships. COTS environmental qualitysolutions intended for shore applications and commercialmarine vessels are not driven by space, weight, shock,vibration, electromagnetic interference, ship motion, orthe average operator skill level found on U.S. Navy ships.

The environmental engineering organizations atNAVSEA and the Warfare Centers refocused their engineeringsupport responsibilities and human resources to betteraddress operational mission readiness and environmentalstewardship and to reduce current program costs. Thisfocus included establishing the central technical authorityfor ship environmental engineering to provide programleadership, adopting the Navy’s strategic vision for fleetrecapitalization and new ship design, and assessing theindustrial base for waste management technologies suitablefor shipboard implementation. These actions are in concertwith the Navy’s national defense mission, environmentalreadiness goals, and business improvement initiatives andwill enable the Navy to comply with environmentalrequirements now and in the future.

Mission Readiness (Continued from page 15)

Technical Point of ContactMary Jo Bieberich


Core Equity Leader, Environmental Quality SystemsPeter McGraw


Core Equity Leader, Vulnerability and Survivability SystemsEric Duncan


the ISMIS devices and the wire rope lateral stabilizersto act independently.

Over the five full-energy shots, many parameterswere varied for comparison. The cabinet was oriented bothfront-facing the charge and side-facing the charge. For eachcabinet rotation the DSF was tuned to both 14-16 Hz and25 Hz to simulate two different frequency environments.Also, one test was conducted with the ISMIS devices pow-ered off eliminating the effects of the semi-active control.

From the measured test results, a number oftechnical conclusions were reached. First of all, theoverall survivability was not greatly reduced by testingthe ISMIS devices in a passive state; however, therewere noticeable differences in the character of theresponses since the energy is absorbed more efficientlyby the active ISMIS isolator. Rotating the cabinet, whilehaving the expected effects of switching the forward/aftand side-to-side responses, had little effect on the overallvertical responses of the inner, isolated rack. ChangingDSF frequency demonstrated that the higher frequencyenvironment results in a decrease in damage potentialimparted to the isolated equipment. The higher frequencygenerates motions that follow the rigid body motions ofthe FSP while the DSF oscillations dominate the equip-ment responses in the lower frequency case.

Overall, the ISMIS devices performed very wellcreating vertical response environments consideredbenign and acceptable for the survival of a shock event.The lateral isolation system, however, degraded over theseries of tests, producing unacceptable results in thelateral directions. Enidine, in conjunction with the Navyteam, is currently considering developing options forimproved lateral isolation. These include small HighEnergy Rope Mounts (HERMs), high frequency lateralisolation using Double Isolation Material (DIM) orSorbothane, and simple hard mounting. Tests with thevertical ISMIS device and one or more new lateralisolation devices are scheduled for summer 2005.Pending successful test completion, ISMIS cabinets willpotentially be included in a planned full ship-shock trialand eventually incorporated into the fleet.

Technical Point of ContactFrederick Costanzo


CORE EQUITIES

Shock Tests (Continued from page 16)

18

SEA

FRA

ME

THE

Since the 1950s, engineerswithin the Ships and Ship Systems(S3) Product Area have played a rolein submarine silencing. This involve-ment in ship design for the earlierclasses of submarines was mainlydriven by the development of ship

alterations (SHIPALTs) and provided individual silencingitems for incorporation into the fleet, as well as acting asa stealth consultant to Naval Sea Systems Command(NAVSEA) and their contracted design agents. With thedevelopment of the Los Angeles (SSN 688) and Ohio(SSBN 726) Classes, and to a much greater extent, theSeawolf (SSN 21) and Virginia (SSN 774) Classes, thisorganization became more involved in submarine designand quieting processes. This proactive approach narrowedthe gap between the R&D community and the shipconstruction community, primarily General DynamicsElectric Boat Corporation (GDEB) and NorthropGrumman Newport News (NGNNS), providing the Navy

with fleet operational readiness through utilizing cost-effective acoustic and non-acoustic silencing technologies.

To better realize the benefits of this cost-effectivebusiness approach, two significant acoustic teamingprocesses were formed. First, the Naval Maritime AcousticsConsortium (NMAC) stood up to ensure that acoustictesting services of the primary member organizationswould be provided to the NAVSEA customers in an efficientand cost-effective manner. The NMAC provides a cooperativerelationship so that the members can share resources todeliver timely and high-quality test and evaluation (T&E)products and services to NAVSEA customers involved infull-scale acoustic testing.

Secondly, the PMS450 Acoustical TrialsWorking Group (ATWG) stood up. The PMS450 ATWGwas established as an advisory board to provide technicaland programmatic guidance to the Virginia Class T&EManager (PMS450C2) in the successful planning andexecution of acoustic testing on Virginia Class submarines.The ATWG provides a forum for discussing acousticissues and requirements pertinent to the SSN 774 Classto assist the T&E manager in ensuring that acousticaltrial evaluations address appropriate issues andrequirements. Tangible benefits of this process ensurethat fully integrated test teams will be utilized for boththe Builder’s Underway Noise Survey (BUNS) andNAVSEA acoustical tests, that an integrated common testagenda will be used for both efforts, that a common dataacquisition system will be used, and that all parties willhonor the work product commitments that drive thedeliverables of either party.

By Paul Luehr,

Joyce Rogalski, Dr. Jan Niemiec,

andWilliam Palmer

Experts ExploreUnderwater

Signatures USS Virginia

SCIENCEOF SILENCE

CORE EQUITIES

of

19

SEA

FRA

ME

The recent completion of the USS VirginiaBUNS provided “real-world” proof that the months ofdemanding and complex planning efforts completed bythe members of the PMS450 ATWG resulted inunprecedented acoustic test efficiencies. This effortencompassed nominally eight days of at-sea testing withUSNS Hayes (T-AG 195), a mobile quiet research vesselinstrumented with technologically complex equipmentand used to accurately measure the acoustic signature ofU.S. Navy submarines. In addition, the SSN 774 wasequipped with an onboard data acquisition system. Thissystem, the Acoustical Trial Onboard MeasurementSystem (ATOMS), was interfaced with the Total ShipMonitoring System (TSMS) and successfully collectedall required structureborne and platform/sonar self-noisedata. Knowledge gained and lessons learned from theBUNS experience, as well as that of the recently com-pleted USS Jimmy Carter (SSN 23) acoustic testing, isbeing aggressively integrated into the test execution planfor the upcoming SSN 774 Pre-PSA (Post ShakedownAvailability) acoustic test.

Concurrently with these investigations, trialEM-05 was conducted in February 2005 at the SouthFlorida Test Facility (SFTF). The test was sponsored byPMS450C2 and involved SSN 774 for the purpose ofconducting electromagnetic (EM) silencing investiga-tions. Test planning and execution, coordination anddirection of efforts in test plan development, logisticsplanning, personnel allocation, and trial execution, EMdata acquisition, and tracking acquisition and analysiswere all provided by the Signatures, Silencing Systems,and Susceptibility Core Equity. This was a one-daymeasurement of opportunity that was conducted toinvestigate potential EM-related phenomena observedduring BRAVO trials. Lessons learned will be appliedduring the scheduled Virginia post-PSA EM trial.

Target strength analysis and signature controltechnologies, key areas of the Signatures, SilencingSystems, and Susceptibility Core Equity, have evolvedsince the early 1970s. Starting with the analysis ofmeasured data from large-scale physical models of fleetsubmarines at Lake Pend Oreille in Idaho, the programhas progressed to include theoretical analysis of scatter-ing physics, measurement of full-scale submarines, andthe development of a predictive modeling tool—knownas the Target Strength Predictive Model (TSPM). TheTSPM allows submarine designers to investigate theeffects of changing size, shape, and materials of structuralfeatures to achieve target strength reduction in a cost-effective way. The most recent examples of the use of the

In 1997, researchers perfected away to encapsulate submarine propulsorswithin a polyurea coating, using moldingand bonding procedures to duplicateexacting tolerances without machiningor hand finishing. Signatures, Silencing

TSPM include design of signature control technologies forthe Seawolf and Virginia Class submarines. For the firsttime the TSPM is being used to verify that the VirginiaClass meets key target strength performance parametersin lieu of performing a full-scale trial. This approachsaves the Virginia Program Office about $15 million inequipment and trial costs.

ENCAPSULATEDPROPELLERS

Innovative Approach

ByWilliamPalmer

Core Equity Leader, Signatures, Silencing Systems,and Susceptibility

Gary [email protected]

301-227-1895 (DSN 287)

Technical Point of ContactLarry Tarasek

Submarine Customer [email protected] (DSN 287)

May Help CreateSavings

Systems, and Susceptibility and Structures and MaterialsCore Equities were among the initial group that researched,

Technology & Innovation

Innovative Approach (Continued on page 20)

20

SEA

FRA

ME

tested, and perfected the encapsulation process. The processworked well and sponsors required rigorous testing priorto use on U.S. submarines. The latest iteration of thistesting is the installation of encapsulated propellers on a110-foot yard patrol craft (YP 677) stationed at theAnnapolis Naval Station.

Current encapsulation practices established bythis research group use a structural “core” with dimensionsloose enough for fast and inexpensive production. Thecore is processed to ensure bonding and then placed in amold. The space between the propulsor and the mold isfilled with polyurea, which, when cured, results in theoutside propulsor blade dimensions conforming to designtolerances without hand finishing. The polyurea can alsobe easily reworked, if required, due to in-service damage.This saves manufacturing time and cost because thepolyurea surface does not require precision machining.The precise hydrodynamic contour is molded in the coating.A second cost-saving and performance possibility thiscoating offers is that the traditional alloys used in propulsorcomponents, which are exposed long-term to sea water,could conceivably be replaced with a higher strength,ferrous-based “core,” which would reduce the cost ofmanufacturing the propulsor and offer increased perform-ance, among other advantages.

Impact damage to the coating was a majorquestion during development. Researchers determinedthat impact damage resulted in less deformation thannickel aluminum bronze and that, in the case of severeimpact, the encapsulation would remain in place despiteremoval of material from the leading edge, which wouldexpose the core. Encapsulated propeller components weresuccessfully installed on submarines as “skegs,” orprojections, welded to the submarine hull, and also onNew York City harbor tugboats. Even though a propellerblade sheared completely off the propeller hub duringwintertime ice-breaking operations, the encapsulated testsamples welded to the rudder frame stayed in place.

The current demonstration of two encapsulatedYP propellers consists of both American Bureau ofShipping-approved stainless steel and bronze base blades.These propellers were constructed several years ago andare now being used as a part of a Naval Academy TridentScholars project. A Naval Academy student scholar spentthe summer of 2004 learning propeller design, analysis,and testing techniques, and prepared a report based oncomparison of standard metal propellers to encapsulatedand carbon fiber propellers designed and built by the

Technical Point of ContactDr. Richard Szwerc


Director for Technology and InnovationDr. Joseph Corrado


A propeller blade during encapsulation process. Black fringeis mold used to form the shape of the encapsulation.Photo by Paul Coffin, Carderock Division

Port encapsulated propeller on YP 677. Installation is latest inseries of real-world demonstrations of encapsulated propulsorperformance. Photo by Ensign Christopher Wozniak

student. Personnel from the Structures and MaterialsCore Equity assisted through direct instruction to thestudent, as well as assistance in propeller design tech-niques, developing an appropriate test plan, and collectingtest data.

Innovative Approach (Continued from page 19)


SEA

FRA

ME

LOGISTICSMADE

EASIER

ByChris

Hatch

AdvancingDelivery Systems

“Navy After Next”

Marine units are conductingoperations in a hostile zone. Supplies arerunning low—the call goes out forresupply. Fifty miles away a ship pointsits bow towards shore and begins firingprojectiles. Rather than ordnance, this ship

is launching supply drones—unmanned gliders—filled withbetween 600 to 1,600 pounds of supplies, such as batteries,food, medicine, and other vital material.

The Advanced Logistics Delivery System(ALDS) could be the future of cargo delivery in hostileareas, says Patrick McGinnis, ALDS Launch ConceptsProject Management Team leader. “ALDS would provideincreased flexibility and pinpoint delivery of criticallogistics and supplies to deployed troops. The systemcould deploy from a sea base and deliver a non-stopstream of supply drones for two days straight to a dropzone under friendly control.”

In hostile environments, supplying deployedunits with necessary equipment can be tricky at best.Resupply efforts—often consisting of air drops and limitedin scale—depend on land bases and place more personnel

21

Artist concept of the Advanced Logistics Delivery System (ALDS)Carderock Division


Artist concept of an ALDSdrone launch.

Carderock Division

Artist concept of a drone in the glider configurationwith wings deployed after launch.

Carderock Division

21

the

for

Advanced Delivery Systems (Continued on page 22)

22

SEA

FRA

ME

in potential danger. ALDS would provide criticalsupplies more efficiently and remove personnel fromunnecessary harm.

The ALDS concept was initially developed inthe Naval Surface Warfare Center Carderock DivisionInnovation Center in 2002. Subsequently, the Office ofNaval Research (ONR) tasked the NAVSEA/ONRCenter for Innovation in Ship Design (CISD) todevelop innovative Seabasing concepts. ALDS wasfurther developed with team members from privateindustry and experts in power and energy storage,structural and mechanical dynamics, and linear motordesign from Carderock Division.

This sort of teamwork is becoming more andmore common within military design circles, accordingto CISD’s Colen Kennell. “Most of the people involvedhad never worked together before. They came togetherand in three months had a very workable design,” saysKennell. “Fostering this kind of collaboration is payingdividends.”

The idea for ALDS was to apply existing andfuture technologies to this forward thinking concept.Accordingly, it could be at least 20 years or more beforea functioning ship could be deployed, but advanceddevelopment of the concept allows Navy leaders to planfor the future.

Early design plans for ALDS portray a futuristiclooking vessel—part cargo ship, part aircraft carrier, andpart manufacturing plant. The most striking feature, asidefrom its tri-hull design, is the launch tube for the supplydrones, which projects 10 feet from the ship’s deck—almost like a circus cannon.

The ship and its mission, however, are nolaughing matter. As an integral part of “Future Navy’s”Seabasing concept, ALDS is a vital link to deployedunits. The ship is designed to be a completely self-containedunit. Packing supplies and even the construction ofdrones from raw materials would all be performed aboardship. Designers envision single-use drones launched fromthe bowels of the ship using electro-magnetic catapulttechnology, similar to that used on the Navy’s nextgeneration of aircraft carrier.

“You have to imagine a Mini Cooper travelingdown a football field and being airborne in one second,”says McGinnis. “Down range, our forces would cordonoff an area where the drones would make a controlledcrash landing. Once the deliveries have stopped, thetroops move in and pick up the supplies … you definitelywouldn’t want to be in the area when the supplies arecoming in.”

As impressive as the ALDS is, it is far fromfinished. Students from Virginia Tech are tackling thesystem from a fresh perspective and, according toKennell, have come up with some different conceptsfrom the initial designs. Potentially, these new designscould be melded with the existing concept, or replaceaspects of it altogether.

Technical Point of ContactPatrick McGinnis





Advanced Delivery Systems (Continued from page 21)

SEA

FRA

ME

Warfare CenterOld Dominion University

Team UpHost 8th Annual Event

The Warfare Center’s 8thannual Multi-Agency Craft Conference(MACC) was held at Old DominionUniversity’s (ODU) Frank BattenCollege of Engineering andTechnology May 16 through 20 in

Norfolk, VA. The Ships and Ship Systems (S3) ProductArea co-hosted the event with the Littoral WarfareSystems, Homeland and Force Protection, and OrdnanceProduct Areas also participating.

With more than 1,000 participants representing17 different countries, MACC 2005 once again success-fully provided a forum for open exchange and discussionabout boats and craft among the military, government,and commercial agencies in the maritime community.This year’s theme was “Technological Innovations/Tactical Applications.”

MACC 2005 wassponsored by the Naval SeaSystems Command ProgramExecutive Office Ships,PMS 325, the U.S. SpecialOperations Command,Program Executive OfficeMaritime, and the MarineCorps Supply Command.The conference’s primaryfocus is to promote dialogueon common issues unique toboats and craft in their service.

In the current andfuture global warfare theater,force protection, littoralwarfare, and limited conflict

MULTI-AGENCY CRAFT CONFERENCE

By Kristina

Smith Bowab

missions place vital emphasis on stealthier, more capablecraft. MACC 2005 examined emerging technology that isshaping combatant craft of the 21st century and exploredinnovations currently used in newly developed boats andcraft.

MACC 2005 included two days of keynotespeakers, technical presentations, exhibit booths, andstatic craft displays. Dr. Roseann Runte, ODU President;Bilyana Anderson, Deputy Program Manager, PMS 325;and Scott Littlefield, P.E., Director ONR/PEO Shipsmade keynote addresses. Members of the DoD craft


and

to

This Homeland Security boat was one of many in-waterdemonstrations for MACC attendees.Photo by Dolly Drab, Carderock Division

23

MACC Conference (Continued on page 24)

24

SEA

FRA

ME

CALL FOR PAPERS

The Ships and Ship Systems(S3) Technology Symposium is beingheld September 19 through 20, 2006, atthe Maritime Technology InformationCenter, West Bethesda, MD. This is anational forum sponsored by ASNE and

supported jointly by NSWC Carderock Division and theNAVSEA S3 Product Area Director.

The symposium committee is seeking technicalpapers. The theme is “Changes, Challenges, andConstants.” Abstracts are due not later than October 31,2005. For more information about submissions and the

Ships and Ship Systems Technology SymposiumTechnical Papers

“Changes, Challenges, and Constants”

By David Byers

Technical Point of ContactKristina Smith Bowab




symposium, please contact the following S3 TechnologySymposium Program Committee member:

community and industry supplied the con-ference with more than 40 boats for staticdisplays and in-water demonstrations.

Plans are in the works for MACC2006, tentatively scheduled for June 2006.For information on next year’s MACC,visit http:www.boats.dt.navy.mil/macc.htmlor contact Judy Tukey at 757-462-4114(DSN 253).

David [email protected]

301-227-1462 (DSN 287)

on Looking for

First floor exhibit area in Old Dominion University’s Constant Convocation Center. Photo by Dolly Drab, Carderock Division


MACC Conference (Continued from page 23)

This core equity provides facilities and expertise for research, development, design, human systems integration, acquisition support, in-service engineering, fleet support, integrated logistic concepts, and life-cycle management resulting in mission compatible, efficient and cost-effective environmental materials, processes, and systems for fleet and shore activities.

This core equity provides full-spectrum technical capabilities (facilities and expertise) for research, development, design, shipboard and land-based test and evaluation, acquisition

support, in-service engineering, fleet engineering, integrated logistic support and concepts, and overall life-cycle engineering.

This core equity provides full-spectrum capabilities (facilities andexpertise) for research, development, design,

testing, acquisition support, and in-serviceengineering to reduce vulnerability and improve

survivability of naval platforms and personnel.

This core equity specializes in research, development, design,testing, acquisition support, fleet guidance and training,

and in-service engineering for signatures on ships and ship systems for all current and future Navy ships and seaborne

vehicles and their component systems and assigned personnel.

This core equity applies specialized expertise for surface and undersea vehicle design including early concept development, assessment and selection of emerging technologies, integration of selected technologies into optimized total vehicle designs, and evaluation of those technologies and designs for cost, producibility, supportability, and military effectiveness.

This core equity provides the Navy with full-spectrum hydrodynamic capabilities (facilities and expertise) for research, development, design, analysis, testing, evaluation, acquisition support, and in-service engineering in the area of hull forms and propulsors for the U.S. Navy.

This core equity provides the Navy with specialized facilities andexpertise for the full-spectrum of research, development, design, testing, acquisition support, and in-service engineering in thearea of materials and structures.

P R E M I E R E E D I T I O N


sea frame · 2020. 2. 20. · welcome to our inaugural issue of seaframe—a publication that...

Documents