You can make this stuff up, virtually every new ship that's come out of the yards has had some internal system go wrong. This is particularly acute with designs that were a result of the 'transformative era' of defense building. They're gonna have to cut a hole into the side of a brand new ship, which already has been plagued with electrical problems, to pull-out and replace the engine.
Second Zumwalt Destroyer Needs New Engine After Turbine Blades Damaged in Sea Trials
|A Grateful American|
"the meaning of life, is to give life meaning" ✡ I could explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you.
They placed guns on a ship that take no known ammunition. Then cancelled the ammunition development? Seriously, this is where my tax dollars go?
"I cannot imagine any condition which would cause a ship to founder. I cannot conceive of any vital disaster happening to this vessel. Modern shipbuilding has gone beyond that."
-Capt. Edward Smith
Used to be a USNI member and read a lot of their articles, about 8 years ago it just got too depressing... It's NOT USNI's fault, it's the Navy's fault.
I lost all my weapons in a boating, umm, accident.
|Step by step walk the thousand mile road|
Reminds me of the WWII subs with HOR engines.
We sent those subs into combat against the IJN with utterly unreliable engines. One sub limped home on the tiny auxiliary engine because all four HOR main engines failed.
You'd think the Navy would have learned that lesson.
Nice is overrated
"It's every freedom-loving individual's duty to lie to the government."
Airsoftguy, June 29, 2018
|Drill Here, Drill Now|
It failed during acceptance trials so don't accept it and stop paying bills, but be open to reconsidering once engines are replaced and ready for new acceptance tests.
Ego is the anesthesia that deadens the pain of stupidity
DISCLAIMER: These are the author's own personal views and do not represent the views of the author's employer.
Who pays for this new engine? Do Navy ships come with a 3yr/36k warranty?
There is no cure for stupidity, you either die from it or with it.
"Yidn, shreibt un fershreibt"
"The Nazis entered this war under the rather childish delusion that they were going to bomb everyone else, and nobody was going to bomb them. At Rotterdam, London, Warsaw and half a hundred other places, they put their rather naive theory into operation. They sowed the wind, and now they are going to reap the whirlwind."
|Son of a son |
of a Sailor
Damn. I haven't been in the shipbuilding/engineering loop for a while, but what happened to the GE LM2500's that served us so well?
I don't recall any major issues like this on the ships I served on (even though I was an OPS guy and not Engineering).
Floridian by birth, Seminole by the grace of God
I would think if it failed acceptance trials, the shipbuilder an/or engine manufacturer would be on the hook.
The wanted more power than the LM2500 can put out. GE has a new engine, the LM6000, but I think it's only recently been ported to marine use.
The engine in question is the Rolls-Royce MT30, a marine gas turbine engine based on Rolls-Royce Trent 800 aero engine. The MT30 retains 80% commonality with the Trent 800, the engine for the Boeing 777. The maximum power rating is 40 MW and minimum efficient power 25MW. To replace the engine as that it is so large, a special rail system is needed to remove the engine and put in a new one. That system hadn’t yet been designed when the Navy realized it needed one, so engineers had to finish the design and then install the system. WTF?
”At pretium libertatus“
امّا شما مشخص خواهد شد كه با همه شما را ملاقات کنند
|When you fall, I will be there to catch you -With love, the floor|
For now, because the engines are government-furnished equipment, the Navy will have to pay for the removal of the engine and the installation of the new one. If the problem turns out to be a Rolls-Royce manufacturing or quality assurance issue, the Navy could look to recoup that money from them.
|my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives|
Gas Turbines on every Naval surface combatant I have ever been on are removable throuh the intake ducting as a planned maintenance action. you dont need to cut a hole in the ship, the railings for removal are pre installed and it just take some chain falls and fittings.
removing and replacing takes about 2 days.
I have not been on the Zumwalt, but that is the procedure on the Spruance class, Ticonderoga class cruisers and all flights of DDG 51 class ships.
"I don't own the night, I only operate a small franchise" - Author unknown
|It's not easy being me|
Yeah, if it wasn't my tax dollars at work, I'd be laughing out loud at this!!! Jasper is a good option for many situations...
Flammable, Inflammable, or Nonflammable.......
Hell, either it Flams or it doesn't!! (George Carlin)
1.4 Billion and the fact that we have no ammunition for the AGS aside...
While I appreciate engineering, testing and growing pains with new "Models" and red-tape... My take away from this is in 8-10 years later we still do not have a ship capable of sending lead down-range. Maybe it just wasn't a priority, but damn that seems awfully long.
...Assembly of modules for Michael Monsoor began in March 2010 . The keel laying and authentication ceremony for Michael Monsoor was held at the General Dynamics-Bath Iron Works shipyard on 23 May 2013 . Michael Monsoor was launched on 21 June 2016. She was delivered to the Navy in April 2018...
Considering they hadn't come up with a engine rail system to do such a replacement and the unique single-deck house design of the class, I'm assuming they may have to cut through the hull. Hopefully, these things are considered during the design process however, those classes of ships you named were all designed back in the 70's & 80's, which was an entirely different era.
Images of the recent LCS-1 engine replacement come to mind.
|There is a world elsewhere|
The Brits new destroyers can't operate in the tropic. When the temps hit 120, the engine for the generators overheats.
The OEM stated, "well, you didn't specify it would need to function in those temperatures"
And who was the manufacturer? Rolls Royce
A well balanced breakfast being necessary to the start of a healthy day, the right of the people to keep and eat food shall not be infringed.
For the record, the problem part was the engine intercooler made by Northrop Grumman Marine.
|Powered by Social Strata|