Navy's newest destroyer needs new engine replacement

July 11, 2018, 10:52 AM

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

quote:
Zumwalt-class destroyer Michael Monsoor (DDG-1001) will need to have a main turbine engine replaced before the ship can sail to San Diego for its combat system activation, after suffering damage to the turbine blades during acceptance trials, the Program Executive Officer for Ships told USNI News.

Rear Adm. William Galinis said today that Monsoor remained in Bath, Maine, for a post-delivery availability and that, “regrettably, coming off her acceptance trials we found a problem with one of the main turbine engines that drives one of the main generators; we’re having to change it out. So we’re working very closely with Bath Iron Works, with Rolls-Royce to get that engine changed out before she leaves Bath later this fall and sails to San Diego to start her combat system activation availability next year.”

After his remarks at a Navy League breakfast event, Galinis told USNI News that the MT30 marine gas turbine showed no signs of malfunctioning during the sea trials, but the damage was found in a post-trials inspection.

“The problem we had coming off of acceptance trials was actually the turbine blades – so think of a jet engine on the side of an airplane, the blades that you see – we actually had some dings, some damage to those turbine blades,” he said.
“We found that after the sea trial through what we call a borescope inspection, where we actually put a visual and optical device inside the turbine to kind of look at this. And we determined that it was best to change that turbine out before we actually transited the ship to San Diego.”

...

July 11, 2018, 10:59 AM

sigmonkey

FOD Kills.

July 11, 2018, 11:01 AM

Sock Eating Golden

They placed guns on a ship that take no known ammunition. Then cancelled the ammunition development? Seriously, this is where my tax dollars go?

July 11, 2018, 11:03 AM

stoic-one

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.

July 11, 2018, 11:17 AM

Sig2340

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.

July 11, 2018, 11:17 AM

tatortodd

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.

July 11, 2018, 11:30 AM

gpbst3

Who pays for this new engine? Do Navy ships come with a 3yr/36k warranty?

July 11, 2018, 11:40 AM

kz1000

------------------------------------------------------------------------
"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."
-Bomber Harris

July 11, 2018, 11:42 AM

wxdave

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).

July 11, 2018, 11:56 AM

BBMW

I would think if it failed acceptance trials, the shipbuilder an/or engine manufacturer would be on the hook.

quote:
Originally posted by gpbst3:
Who pays for this new engine? Do Navy ships come with a 3yr/36k warranty?

July 11, 2018, 11:56 AM

BBMW

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.

quote:
Originally posted by wxdave:
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).

July 11, 2018, 01:56 PM

CQB60

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?

July 11, 2018, 10:04 PM

rscalzo

quote:
Who pays for this new engine? Do Navy ships come with a 3yr/36k warranty?

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.

July 11, 2018, 10:20 PM

car541

quote:
Originally posted by corsair:
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.

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.

July 11, 2018, 10:24 PM

craglawnmanor

quote:
Originally posted by kz1000:

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...

July 11, 2018, 11:11 PM

Speedbird

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.

from Wikipedia:
Construction[edit]
...Assembly of modules for Michael Monsoor began in March 2010 .[9] The keel laying and authentication ceremony for Michael Monsoor was held at the General Dynamics-Bath Iron Works shipyard on 23 May 2013 .[10] Michael Monsoor was launched on 21 June 2016.[11] She was delivered to the Navy in April 2018...

July 11, 2018, 11:58 PM

corsair

quote:
Originally posted by car541:
quote:
Originally posted by corsair:
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.

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.

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.