US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
(OP)
The Independence class can only go at high speeds on a nice day:
https://www.navytimes.com/news/your-navy/2022/05/1...
The Freedom class is being scrapped. And it's not because they're old and worn out and there's a far better ship to replace them:
https://news.usni.org/2022/03/29/all-freedom-litto...
We can't leave these kids along for a minute!
spsalso
https://www.navytimes.com/news/your-navy/2022/05/1...
The Freedom class is being scrapped. And it's not because they're old and worn out and there's a far better ship to replace them:
https://news.usni.org/2022/03/29/all-freedom-litto...
We can't leave these kids along for a minute!
spsalso
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
On top of this it takes longer today to design and produce a new ship (or almost anything else for that matter) than it used to. Can you imagine what would've happened in WWII if it took as long as it does today to design new ships and aircraft?
Of course, in the case of the ships instead of building 1 of each design and testing them thoroughly they just went ahead and produced large numbers of them before they were proven! Of course what should the Navy or any of the other military branches care, their funding is almost limitless!
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
Maybe we should ask ourselves what Austal, an Australian company is doing designing our Navy ships? It doesn't seem like they would have the experience considering Australia as a country operates only 44 Navy ships with a very different mission than the USA's.
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
I would have thought that aluminum hulled warships would have been banned.
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
A black swan to a turkey is a white swan to the butcher ... and to Boeing.
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
The problem with sloppy work is that the supply FAR EXCEEDS the demand
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
The LCS named for my town, USS Tulsa was sponsored with a bunch of hoo-rah, and several officers visited the namesake town recently. Looks to be the Independence class (cracked hull).
The problem with sloppy work is that the supply FAR EXCEEDS the demand
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
Maybe it's to keep sea water from sloshing in and making a big mess. I note the SPOKESMAN pointed out that the problem was above the waterline, and that there's nothing to worry about (or, put another way: "...no cause for alarm...").
I just gotta wonder if it would be bad if one of the "side hulls" broke off. Above the waterline, of course.
spsalso
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
I've an associate who spent some time on military boats that might need to make approaching fast boats not be a problem. His opinion was that the 50 cal was the all around best tool for the job. Not too big. Not too small. Goldilocks likes it!
spsalso
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
The problem with sloppy work is that the supply FAR EXCEEDS the demand
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
I remember as a pre-teenager putting a glazing point into the hardened putty of my bedroom window. I guess I accidentally 'chipped' the glazing and a crack slowly formed. I marked and dated the progression over several weeks; my dad was less impressed.
Rather than think climate change and the corona virus as science, think of it as the wrath of God. Do you feel any better?
-Dik
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
If Hokie's correct, do you want all of them to 'break'? Maybe there are some lessons to learn... Did Australia design them? or just build them? If design, maybe the US should be looking at the differences. If just built them, they should also look at the differences. It's a lovely looking boat, almost stealthy.
Rather than think climate change and the corona virus as science, think of it as the wrath of God. Do you feel any better?
-Dik
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
Not just China... there may be the odd Canadian, too.
Rather than think climate change and the corona virus as science, think of it as the wrath of God. Do you feel any better?
-Dik
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
Rather than think climate change and the corona virus as science, think of it as the wrath of God. Do you feel any better?
-Dik
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
Rather than think climate change and the corona virus as science, think of it as the wrath of God. Do you feel any better?
-Dik
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
No. But China wonders how far the rot goes, and how much it may be to their advantage.
Wondering, of course, does not make it so.
spsalso
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
https://apnews.com/article/fb3c5f5bb2688593dadac51...
Dik, the HMAS Sheffield had a steel hull, but it was falsely reported that the Exocet missile which hit it made it burn because it was built of aluminum.
The littoral ships which Austal built were not designed or built in Australia, but rather in Mobile, Alabama, with lots of consultation witn the US Navy.
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
Then again, we also miscalculated the strength required to extend our own 110ft cutter fleet to 123 ft and all vessels had to be scrapped after conversion.
These problems are trivial, though. There is a specific problem in American shipbuilding and lays in the details. There is no ownership of the project, American shipbuilding is too compartmentalized and nobody cares about anything except their own tiny system.
This article is evidence.
https://gcaptain.com/rusting-fleet-top-us-navy-adm...
USA shipbuilders couldn't care less about what materials they spec on deck. Most of the rust stains on navy ships are around flanged pipe on deck and overboards. In past years flat faced flanges were specified on deck so and rubber spouts were installed on overboards so the water would drain away from the hull and minimize stains.
The problems with USA shipbuilding lay in the minor details. The LCS is a culmination of a lot of minor details.
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
were they designed in the US, too?Rather than think climate change and the corona virus as science, think of it as the wrath of God. Do you feel any better?
-Dik
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
Rather than think climate change and the corona virus as science, think of it as the wrath of God. Do you feel any better?
-Dik
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
Were they designed and built in the US?
Rather than think climate change and the corona virus as science, think of it as the wrath of God. Do you feel any better?
-Dik
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
Decades age the designers didn't know the design loads and knew that they didn't know.
Today they don't know the design loads, but think that they do.
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
Half of it is that any purchase is a political decision. The other half is that the end user has very little input into what will actually be delivered.
If you asked your medium experience grunt on the ground what they want to take the fight to the enemy you would be starting up the warthog production line. Once the politicians and headshed aviators get involved a single stealth aircraft gets purchased instead of 20 warthogs.
A navy which just gets what they want and that works is the Swedish Navy. The Danish also is functional and effective.
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MV_Liemba
not just scuttled, under water from 26 July 1916, until a British Royal Navy salvage team raised her and in 1927,
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
Here, by the way, is another triple expansion steam engine:
https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-xiUc7DMUNu8/X1G1rHuLOCI...
spsalso
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
The A-10 Warthog was a response to casualties in Vietnam. The Americans figured that about half of their aircraft lost were destroyed by small arms fire.
Question: Were the victims of small arms fire spread across all the aircraft types the Americans brought to Vietnam, or were they things that flew in range of Vietnamese small arms, like helicopters? How many F4s and B-52s were brought down by small arms?
Another question: The A-10 is supposed to be a successor to the Ilyushin Il-2 "Shturmovik". The "Shturmovik" happens to have been the most shot-down aircraft of WWII. How long would an A-10 survive in airspace occupied by hostile jet fighters, possibly using something other than small arms?
--
JHG
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
I’ll see your silver lining and raise you two black clouds. - Protection Operations
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
But another candidate was the A-1. Any of those three can deliver a lot of sadness to a column.
I suspect the A-10 was an Air Force response to an Army demand for a ground attack airplane. Odd, how the Army would want such a thing, as opposed to a Mach 2 fighter--go figure. Also contributing was the continuing threat of the Army taking over Air Force work by using helicopters. The Air Force got REALLY testy when the Army decided to get their own ground attack plane, the OV-10.
Love the A-10, but I think the Javelin (and etc) was the way to go, at least until the Russians got their act together. How they doin' on that?
spsalso
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&...
Perhaps it's old and worn out and can no longer produce required aircraft components.
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
Is that is battle damage fixability is utterly outstanding. They can swap wings about willy nilly. Engine changes take an hour.
The wall of lead is still an issue to modern aircraft and the Ukrainian's have been putting it to good effect. We also got taught to make up air Défense gravel pits by the Royal Engineers. Its basically a ditch with a focused up form at the bottom with plastic explosive. Then filled with gravel/small rocks. Then when the aircraft starts its attack run its fired and with any luck the aircraft flys through the upwards and downwards debris and the rocks take it out. Apparently it has been used with success with modernish hardware.
Someone also said that the A-10 is pretty robust to fragmentation surface to A-A and G-A missiles. So most manpads would need a very precise hit to take it out of the air.
Also the phycological effect they have is not to be under played. I saw a scramble of 4 of them in Kandahar, got told to stop and they came hurtling out the dispersal. Took off gear up and then at about 1200ft turn left and PPhruu the noise was incredible. They were 10 NM away and we had 2 garrtte turbines running on our J41 and headsets on and boy could you still hear them letting rip with that cannon. Everyone knows when they are out shopping.
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
"I do like the part about covering the cracks in the side shell with RTV, as long as it doesn't go beyond the crack and impede inspection for crack growth. Perhaps the side shell is non-structural, because I am not seeing how RTV fixes a structural crack. I suppose it hides it pretty well."
Maybe Phil Swift and Flex Seal could help out.
My other big question is why in the world do they think they can replace the A10 with the F35? Using a really expensive fighter with a troubled history for close ground support and exposure to ground fire is stupid. Also, the gun on the F35 has very limited capability vs the A10.
Kyle
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
I do think the Army should be in charge of ground attack airplanes: the "A" planes. Build what you want. Fly them when and where you want. Meet the ground-pounders later for beers and explain how good a job you did for your co-workers. If necessary.
Then the Air Force could use their "F" planes to take down any flying opposition to the A's.
spsalso
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies forum1529: Translation Assistance for Engineers Entire Forum list http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
John R. Baker, P.E. (ret)
Irvine, CA
Siemens PLM:
UG/NX Museum:
The secret of life is not finding someone to live with
It's finding someone you can't live without
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcoa_50,000_ton_for...
It was out of service from 2008 to 2012 for $100 million of repairs, but is now reported to have returned to service at the same location now operated by Howmet Aerospace.
https://archive.wksu.org/news/story/30777
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
I’ll see your silver lining and raise you two black clouds. - Protection Operations
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
The reason for close-in work by the A-10 is so the pilot can make immediate decisions NOW. If you don't need that, I'd go with those drones.
Divide the cost of an F-35 by the cost of an attack drone, and decide whether you'd rather attack with one plane or XXX drones.
spsalso
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
The problem with sloppy work is that the supply FAR EXCEEDS the demand
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
I’ll see your silver lining and raise you two black clouds. - Protection Operations
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
To destroy all Russian equipment in Ukraine. On land. In air. On water. This will likely demoralize any remaining Russian soldiers, and their enthusiasm to stay will be diminished.
Russia can still fire artillery and rockets from Russia into Ukraine. A problem is that of Ukraine firing back into Russia to destroy that equipment, too.
I do wonder where the "counter battery radar" is. Why is the Russian artillery (in Ukraine) not being taken out?
spsalso
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_victories...#
The question now is that destroying Russian assets still costs Ukrainian lives. How many Ukrainian lives is a Russian tank worth?
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
Since failing attackers often go on to defending their homeland the die is probably a bit weighted towards victory falling to the ultimate attackers. On the other hand, are attackers ever ultimately the winners of any conflict. How many conflicts have there been between England, France, Spain, Germany, Russia, Italy. Turkey, Israel, Egypt, Syria, Scotland, Wales ... yet they all continue to exist in various forms. Unless you kill every man and child, enslave all the women and plow salt into the fields, wars accomplish little in the long term scheme of things. Most results are temporary.
A black swan to a turkey is a white swan to the butcher ... and to Boeing.
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
Rather than think climate change and the corona virus as science, think of it as the wrath of God. Do you feel any better?
-Dik
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
They keep trying to "retire" them, no luck yet as far as I know. :)
The problem with sloppy work is that the supply FAR EXCEEDS the demand
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
Besides, anything that can take it like this is going to be hard to get rid of.
The A-10 is battle-hardened to an exceptional degree, being able to survive direct hits from armor-piercing and high-explosive projectiles up to 23 mm. It has double-redundant hydraulic flight systems, and a mechanical system as a backup if hydraulics are lost. Flight without hydraulic power uses the manual reversion control system; pitch and yaw control engages automatically, roll control is pilot-selected. In manual reversion mode, the A-10 is sufficiently controllable under favorable conditions to return to base, though control forces are greater than normal. The aircraft is designed to be able to fly with one engine, half of the tail, one elevator, and half of a wing missing. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairchild_Republic...
A black swan to a turkey is a white swan to the butcher ... and to Boeing.
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
Think they have also used them against ships.
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
The problem with sloppy work is that the supply FAR EXCEEDS the demand
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
Javelin in service since 1996. Doin' stuff.
spsalso
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
The AC-130 is functional only against targets that lack air power and anti-aircraft. One of the cases made for the A-10 is that it flies low and slow over the target and correctly identifies it. One of the AC-130's big moments was the strafing of the Doctors Without Borders hospital.
--
JHG
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
Does the A-10's 30mm cannon penetrate the armour of heavy tanks? I was under the impression that WWII guns and rockets actually were not effective against the later tanks. The Germans eventually mounted a 75mm cannon on their Hs-129s, but the aircraft absolutely required air superiority.
The problem the German tanks had in France in 1944 was the strafing of their fuel trucks.
--
JHG
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
The problem with sloppy work is that the supply FAR EXCEEDS the demand
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies forum1529: Translation Assistance for Engineers Entire Forum list http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
No, it does not. Tests were done with this gun against T-62's, and it did not, shooting on the frontal armor. The T-62 is now over half a century old. Of course, you can shoot off all the tracks on the sides, and you have a pretty useless tank. But THAT is not the answer to your question.
So, like many questions, yours develops subtleties.
The Javelin, however, appears to do a great job of defeating all tank armor.
Hence my suggestion of spreading Javelins around everywhere, and making tanks into very sad coffins. How many of those are in Ukraine today?
spsalso
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
The F35 has 200 rounds while the A10 can hold over 1100 rounds. That's not a lot of "Brrrrrt" time for the F35. One pass and the F35 is done.
There are also some interesting videos on Youtube on a channel called "grim reapers" where they simulate scenarios for the A10. One is the miles long Russian convoy in Ukraine. A few passes and the convoy is in serious trouble.
Another puts the A10 against a WW2 battleship. When using the gun, the A10 inflicts some damage but the wall of lead rips it to pieces. Standoff weapons like bombs and maverick missiles allow the A10 to inflict serious damage to the ship.
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies forum1529: Translation Assistance for Engineers Entire Forum list http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
The problem with sloppy work is that the supply FAR EXCEEDS the demand
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
John R. Baker, P.E. (ret)
Irvine, CA
Siemens PLM:
UG/NX Museum:
The secret of life is not finding someone to live with
It's finding someone you can't live without
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
Thx, JRB
The problem with sloppy work is that the supply FAR EXCEEDS the demand
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2000/may/18/armstrade.kosovo
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
A lot of the issue with the F35 is the "jack of all trades, master of none" aspect of trying to share a single chassis between a fighter (F35 A), STOVL CAS aircraft (F35 B), and carrier-based fighter (F35 C). It's less effective at any of its roles than a dedicated plane would be. A stealthy ground attack aircraft with heavy armor & redundancy like the A10 could be quite effective, but they didn't build that. They built a compromise that works better at shoveling money to Lockheed-Martin than any of its officially acknowledged roles.
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
That was to be an all things to all people plane, too.
At the time, I was working for the Navy. I got to yakkin' with an older co-worker (jeez, musta been 40, poor guy). Anyway, he opined that it was stupid to build an Air Force plane that had a structure that would allow a carrier landing. He mentioned adding a ton to pull it off--don't know how informed he was on that. He said, of course WE have to. But why THEM? Here we have a Navy guy expressing sympathy for the Air Force!
But it sure made sense. You design a plane for a task. Not ALL tasks. IF it can do something else well, great. See AC-130, mentioned earlier.
spsalso
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
A black swan to a turkey is a white swan to the butcher ... and to Boeing.
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
Unlike the Jaguar which was pretty much pants at every it was meant to do. Although at the end of life it apparently was ok at being the target designator for precision weapons delivered by other asset's.
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Dynamics–Grumman_F-111B
"The Air Force F-111A and Navy F-111B variants used the same airframe structural components..."
This would seem to fit what my Navy associate said.
spsalso
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/air-space-magazine/...
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies forum1529: Translation Assistance for Engineers Entire Forum list http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
"The F-111 that resulted first flew in December 1964. The F-111B flew in May 1965, but the navy said that it was too heavy for use on aircraft carriers.[15] With an unacceptable navy version,
F-111 could be a quirk. The swept wing required a stronger airframe than typical, so it could have been substantially the same, although there is the usual Navy version. The trunion added a lot of weight as well. I imagine it made for high operating costs. For whatever reasons, neither version was particularly successful and were not produced in great numbers.
I had a "close experience" with 2 x F-111s 2000 ft above the Freeport beach on the Texas Coast in the 70's. Well within the ADIZ and very low for them, they went from a smoke spot several miles ahead to in my face in a second. Passed me head on #1, then #2 a second later, at 500 feet or less to my right, heading southwest. Far too close for me. That left an impression. A deja vu every time I smell kerosene.
A black swan to a turkey is a white swan to the butcher ... and to Boeing.
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
I have no idea whether that was a compliment or insult!
My glass has a v/c ratio of 0.5
Maybe the tyranny of Murphy is the penalty for hubris. - http://xkcd.com/319/
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
The Jag only gets airborne due to the curvature of the earth and the ground dropping away from it. The only thing it can out climb is a Shackleton bomber.
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
Rather than think climate change and the corona virus as science, think of it as the wrath of God. Do you feel any better?
-Dik
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
Pants don't mean trousers in proper English. If you say it most would think you were talking about male underwear.
British Military kit
Pants: utterly useless rubbish that the G10 or clothing stores issue.
Gucci: utterly the best bit of kit you can get your hands on by any means including stealing it from allied forces or liberation from enemy.
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
https://pin.it/62iEPNy
A black swan to a turkey is a white swan to the butcher ... and to Boeing.
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
https://gcaptain.com/austal-usa-wins-u-s-coast-gua...
Has Austal produced a successful design yet?
They really should transfer the Littoral Combat ships to the USCG instead of building new ones.
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates
-Dik
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates
-Dik
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies forum1529: Translation Assistance for Engineers Entire Forum list http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
https://gcaptain.com/gao-study-finds-significant-r...
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
Note that the GAO uses "stability" instead of completeness, so it wasn't necessarily that the design was continually changing, but rather, the design was incomplete or incompletely analyzed or validated. And yes, the CG was responsible, but they gave the shipbuilder authorization to start production, even though parts of the design were incomplete or grossly immature, thereby risking massive rework or rebuild if the design needed to be changed because of noncompliance to requirements discovered later.
This is pretty common in high profile projects where the customer "bets on the come" to maintain an already slipped schedule. A previous company I worked at did the same, and had to suck up the spectacle of having to re-design a critical mask layer on our flagship microprocessor, all because they damned the torpedoes and refused to wait for the design rule check before starting fabrication. As it was, it cost them way more than the day it would have taken to run the design rule check.
TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies forum1529: Translation Assistance for Engineers Entire Forum list http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
But in this case I agree its to do with the process.
To be fair that report could have been written about every single project that British Aerospace has done for the last 50 years. And most military contracts.
Just as they near finishing it then some officer will want the new latest system fitted to it. And its a must have otherwise they will be obsolete before they even get wet.
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
Coast Guard Acquisitions: Opportunities Exist to Reduce Risk for the Offshore Patrol Cutter Program The source (GAO) uses the term this way "Proceeding towards OPC 3 construction before stabilizing the design". I read this as they started the construction with some of the design "preliminary". and are ready to start construction of the third cutter, with some of the design still preliminary.
Given the adders related to the cost of making changes at design, vs the cost of changes once everything is put together, (can be more than 1000:1) I hope as a tax payer the shipyard absorbs the costs of building on preliminary
drawings3D Model.RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
Here is an example of some world class ship construction done in the USA:
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&...
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2022/07/21/easte...
No steel building experience, a portfolio of failure, yet they get a contract under way transferred to them.
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
That's not quite accurate...
From your own article:
Austal has in the past focused on aluminum ship programs, including the Independence-variant Littoral Combat Ship and the Spearhead-class Expeditionary Fast Transport. OPC would be the first major contract for the yard’s steel shipbuilding line, after winning contracts for one floating dry dock and two towing and salvage ships in the last year.
John R. Baker, P.E. (ret)
Irvine, CA
Siemens PLM:
UG/NX Museum:
The secret of life is not finding someone to live with
It's finding someone you can't live without
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
John R. Baker, P.E. (ret)
Irvine, CA
Siemens PLM:
UG/NX Museum:
The secret of life is not finding someone to live with
It's finding someone you can't live without
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
They were designed and modelled in Europe.
There was loads of work in Scotland done on them in about 97 I think.
Swedish Dutch British design team...
They were built in USA ship yards but there was issues with that because those boats are metric through and through. In the end I think they got them powered up and took them across to Europe for fitting out because all the pipe work was DIN metric as well.
I don't think anyone has repeated the exercise but I could be wrong.
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
That guy who wrote your link is British qualified.
They had to be USA registered because they were for USA waters point to point without international transit legs. They weren't originally going to be built in the USA but then the required USA registration meant they had to be quite late on.
I am pretty certain they were completely metric boat design. Which must have caused major issues in a USA ship yard in the 90's
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
Now this is all Wikipedia talking, but it sure seems interesting and coincidental.
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
And the Jack tars are extremely buzzed up that Basystems has had nothing to do with it.
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/new-experimental-s...
spsalso
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates
-Dik
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
RE: US Navy litoral combat ships having engineering failures
Only reason why Boeing leads the world on financial screw up front is because the projects are bigger.
But stupidity BAE systems is world class.