It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

does anybody see all surface warships becoming electric?

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 16 2005 @ 01:38 AM
link   
I was just wondering with the new CGX and DDX being electric, and I also think the intergrated power system is good to. I think it depends on how the DDX and CGX do once they come in to the fleet.




posted on Apr, 16 2005 @ 02:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by blue cell
I was just wondering with the new CGX and DDX being electric, and I also think the intergrated power system is good to. I think it depends on how the DDX and CGX do once they come in to the fleet.


Yes, the electricity could be used for various purposes, not just for propulsion.



posted on Apr, 16 2005 @ 11:27 AM
link   
I think that an all electric carrier would be cool I mean there all ready making the electro-magnetic catapult. With the Intergrated Power System it does just what it says it can move power to where its needed when its needed. And I think that makes for a pretty efficient ship, what do you guys think?



posted on Apr, 16 2005 @ 11:55 AM
link   
Yeah I think electric power systems are the future for almost all naval vessels. The advantages in acoustic signature, flexibility, and maintainability make their eventual adoption almost certain. With the onset of railguns and energy weapons on board naval vessels, it will become a requirement rather than a luxury.



posted on Apr, 16 2005 @ 05:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by xmotex
Yeah I think electric power systems are the future for almost all naval vessels. The advantages in acoustic signature, flexibility, and maintainability make their eventual adoption almost certain. With the onset of railguns and energy weapons on board naval vessels, it will become a requirement rather than a luxury.


Yeah and the great thing with directed energy weapons is they don't cost as much as land attack missiles. So you can get more bang for the buck so to speak.



posted on Apr, 16 2005 @ 09:12 PM
link   
Carries are fine having nuclear reactors onboard, fill that baby with some nuclear fuel and you don't have to worry about if for several years. Although for cruisers and destroyers electricity might be good.



posted on Apr, 17 2005 @ 01:06 AM
link   
I'm not sure that electric propulsion would work well on a aircraft carrier.
As far as acoustics on a aircraft carrier...this issue is a moot point ...when a catapult launchs ..down the track..with a screaming roaring jet strapped to it ..quietness becomes useless. Same thing with recovering airplanes...it is anything but a quiet evolution.
Other ships where quietness is a great asset like a destroyer equipped with sonar..or a submarine..the benifits of quiet engines will increase the effeciency of thier sonar..yes...definitely.
Newer advances in motor and bearing effeciency have made electric propulsion more viable...and desirable. Orangetom



posted on Apr, 17 2005 @ 05:40 AM
link   
british surface vessels allready have electric engines:

eg:

The Royal Navy has the type 23 frigate which has a CODLAG system:



CODLAG PROPULSION
The frigates are powered by a diesel-electric and gas (CODLAG) system, which consists of two Rolls Royce Spey SM1A 34000 hp gas turbines and two Alstom1.5 MW 4400 hp electric motors. There are also four Alstom 12 RP2000CZ 1.3 MW 7000 hp auxiliary diesels. Using the diesel-electric motors, the economical speed is 15 knots and the range is 7,800 miles. Maximum speed is 28 knots.




posted on Apr, 17 2005 @ 10:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by orangetom1999

As far as acoustics on a aircraft carrier...this issue is a moot point ...when a catapult launchs ..down the track..with a screaming roaring jet strapped to it ..quietness becomes useless. Same thing with recovering airplanes...it is anything but a quiet evolution.


Yeah but what I'm emphasing is that with the intergrated power system it makes ships more intergrated, you can do mutiple tasks with the IPS. But as you said it might not work on a carrier.



posted on Apr, 17 2005 @ 10:50 AM
link   
This link tells about the
IPS, as you can see it requires less manning because it requires less prime movers. Oh yeah and the navy has used electric drive for aircraft carriers orangetome and also reduced manning this could save the navy a lot of money. Read the link really intresting!



posted on Apr, 17 2005 @ 01:50 PM
link   
The US Navy may have tried electric drive for aircraft carriers but it is obvious for now that they have discarded it for steam power...whether nuclear or conventional. It is a bit ironic that for all the nuclear boasting ..they are just making steam in a nuclear tea kettle per se.
To date ...steam power is still raw brute force and lots of it when needed. Yes the main drawback with these systems is that they need lots of support equipment and manning. They are by comparison complex!!
Many surface destroyers etc..use gas turbines...turning reduction gears for torque and reduced speed/effeciency on the propeller shafts.
A ship with electric main engines would need some source of power to turn generators capable of meeting the electric demands of a main electric engine.
The main question as issue here is how effecient and powerful are the new generation of electric motors designed for main propulsion ..and also how effecient are the power generating systems??
Orangetom



posted on Apr, 18 2005 @ 05:14 AM
link   
the all electric ship has been researched for over 10 years. both the US and EU have active research and are a long way towards it, but still have some way to go, particularly in the areas of fuel cells and power density. It will eventuly happen



posted on May, 18 2005 @ 05:03 PM
link   
Maybe this
nuclear battery can be the mix between long lasting power combined with good effiency what do you guys think?



posted on May, 18 2005 @ 05:06 PM
link   
I can't imagine any solution available today or in the foreseeable future being better than nuclear power, at least for large ships.



posted on May, 18 2005 @ 07:47 PM
link   
I tend to agree. I witnessed the building of several nuclear cruisers here at the local shipyard...all of these have been retired now. Only the largest of surface ships and of course submarines are nuclear powered.
The Navy has found that for destroyers gas turbines are the way to go with variable pitch propellors..for maximum effeciency. On many commercial surface ships .particularly Diesel propelled vessels...variable pitch propellors have come of age. Twenty years ago..you didnt see many of these propellors but today they are rather common. Variable pitch allows one to get the most of effeciency from a propulsion system. Or conversely ..raw power or speed...if needed. Also many ocean liners now use electric propulsion in a rotatable propulsion system called a aziopod.(spelling) These ocean liners have diesel generators for the propulsion system. Lot of computer controls too.

This article about nuclear batteries is intresting and an arena with which I had never thought ..nuclear wise. I have however...thought of what kind of battery is used in space vessels...that go out into deep space...long term ...far away from this planet to eek out the last drop of energy from a solar pannel. It must be a battery which can survive extreams in temperature from well below zero..and I mean well below..to almost boiling on the other end of the extreame. Now that is some battery..to survive such a ordeal. Not something available at Radio Shack. When you realize what is at stake here you can understand why they assemble these sattelites in very hermetically controlled rooms...filtered air..and people suited up so as not to spread any foreign contaminants into these sattelites...even as much as a human hair. Quite a task to insure such quality control.

Thanks for the article ..on nuclear batteries..I will put in in my bookmark section for further reference and also add this information to my library of facts...

Thanks again,
Orangetom



posted on May, 18 2005 @ 07:51 PM
link   
the article was posted by Blue Cell..on the nuclear batteries. Please excuse the mix up..

Thanks,
Orangetom



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join