Engine/Power problems for Freedom (LCS-1)

page: 2
1
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 21 2013 @ 10:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


I was wrong above, It does not have VLS. Also I admit I have not been staying on top of it. I got out of the Navy in 08 @ 11 years, at that time getting orders to one of the LCS's was something I thought could help me make Chief. As an E6 my chances at BUDs was over, so with two EOOW letters, ESWS, MTS etc I thought it would have been a good thing to get on the latest and greatest as an LPO, at the time I payed very close attention to it, but not so much lately. Its been very cool talking with you about it, don't tell my wife but I kind of miss it lol




posted on Mar, 21 2013 @ 11:19 PM
link   
Oi! Zaphod!

I know this is entirely off topic, but I just heard the AF is letting a classified contract to develop a new type of jet engine. Did you and I ever discuss plasma enhanced airfoils?



posted on Mar, 21 2013 @ 11:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Bedlam
 


We have off and on occasionally. Interesting stuff, I want to learn more about it.



posted on Mar, 22 2013 @ 12:15 AM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


Hey, now they are going to plasma enhance a jet engine!

Sheath the turbines, cut down on the losses related to friction, also the insides of the combustor, get that gas flow supersonic lol. Spin the blades faster than you can imagine. They expect to get the exhaust velocity up quite a bit, also to improve the combustion. Can't wait to see how THAT one comes out.
edit on 22-3-2013 by Bedlam because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 22 2013 @ 12:21 AM
link   
reply to post by Bedlam
 


Wow. That has.....splat written all over it.
I can see some...interesting failure modes in there. I bet the sucker will go like a bat out of hell though, up until it stops working and itty bitty pieces are left.



posted on Mar, 22 2013 @ 01:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


Yeah like 'whoops, the plasma gadget is about to shut down...AIIIEEEE'

There's some reference info in the announcement, I'll see if I can find it on the net somewhere.



posted on Mar, 22 2013 @ 03:34 PM
link   
Meh, it's all pay-for sites. However, I did find something now unclassified that is very interesting. So since it's in the open, I'll point you to it rather than discuss it.

Google for contract AF131-002. Enjoy.

eta: although the RFQ only hums in 'plasma flow control' as a sort of side item, it's the topic of the contract, you'll note that they want 'laminar flow control, possibly by novel means'. The bid-out is a sham, LM already has it, this is pro forma. They're going to see if they can retrofit plasma sheathing to older airframes.
edit on 22-3-2013 by Bedlam because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 22 2013 @ 03:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Bedlam
 


TANKERS???? Holy crap are they insane???



posted on Mar, 22 2013 @ 04:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by Bedlam
 


TANKERS???? Holy crap are they insane???


Get your luck in for the buckin', cause it's gonna be a shaky ride. Retrofit gigs we worked on as test platforms have been like riding a favorite horse you haven't saddled for a couple of months, he's gonna test you a bit.

The flow control is not as...uniform...as you can get with a design that's built to work that way. Little eddies in the flow cause the surfaces to 'grab' randomly as the plasma exposes wing to uncontrolled laminar flow.

They think they've got it down, hell, maybe they can make it a bolt on.

As the Zen master said, "we'll see". It would be special if we could apply it to the passenger fleet.



posted on Mar, 22 2013 @ 05:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Bedlam
 


It would be amazing to see this retrofitted to the passenger fleet. But dear god, I can see amazingly bad things happening with this retrofit. We shall see, as you said. My mind is still boggling about this.



posted on Mar, 22 2013 @ 05:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


They must have made really big strides since the last time I worked on this as a semi-bolt-on. Really. Big. Strides.

It works way better as a design in. The last gen was actually sort of spiffy.

eta: two words: helicopter blades
edit on 22-3-2013 by Bedlam because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 22 2013 @ 05:35 PM
link   
reply to post by Bedlam
 


My fairly limited understanding of the whole thing can see where it would be a much better idea to build the capability into it from the start. This just hits me as insane as when they wanted to use tankers to refuel on the deck. Thank god they dropped that idea quickly. I'm just picturing a -135 with this bolted on and it continues to make my brain whimper.



posted on Mar, 22 2013 @ 05:43 PM
link   
So, an update on Freedom. Make that three outages. She left Pearl Harbor on the way to Guam. The latest one was yesterday. The first was March 16th for 10-12 minutes. The second was the same day, for 11 minutes. The latest one was the 21st, and only lasted 2 minutes.

Wow, they're doing awesome. And the PACFLT spokesperson continues to say these are nothing but growing pains for the "first in class" ship.



posted on Mar, 22 2013 @ 06:26 PM
link   
reply to post by Bedlam
 


You have a message.



posted on Mar, 22 2013 @ 07:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


Reminds me of that ST:TNG episode where the ship finally blew up after experiencing enough systems failures.

Wow, that ship would fill me with happy to be on. Hope they're doing LOTS of fire drills....



posted on Mar, 22 2013 @ 08:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Bedlam
 


And just think, this is probably the least of their problems. This ship is a disaster waiting to happen, and I agree. It would just fill me with great joy to get orders to her.



posted on Mar, 24 2013 @ 01:12 AM
link   
It sounds like the problem may be stemming from the water jet propulsion system. Either they have a water intake problem or they did not take the coanda effect into account when placing the exhaust system.

There are pretty much two rules to know when working with marine engines. One, water will always be attracted to heat. Two, a fluid jet will always be attracted to a nearby surface. If they think it is an exhaust problem, they have a poorly designed system.

Then again, they could be wrong. It could be something as simple as a bad seal or gasket, allowing a small amount of water up through the water intake and into the engine.



posted on Mar, 24 2013 @ 01:15 AM
link   
reply to post by allenidaho
 


The first power loss was caused by water down the exhaust to the generator. That's one of the problems identified with the ship (among a great many). I don't know if they have a fix yet, but apparently not, since it keeps happening. This makes something like five power losses I've heard of in the last couple of years, three on one leg of a deployment.



posted on Mar, 29 2013 @ 11:42 AM
link   


The U.S. Navy’s troubled Littoral Combat Ship, a vessel intended to be small and speedy for use in shallow waters close to shore, lacks the firepower it needs, a top U.S. navy commander said in a classified memo.



finance.yahoo.com...

Kind of funny to see this since we were just saying it. I cant see how a fleet admiral would want this ship in the battle group.

Side note;
I swear I thought it had a small 4-8 mag VLS system. Maybe I'm thinking of an early design proposal or something IDK. Given its speed and maneuverability I cant think of a logical reason not to have the capability to launch cruise missiles (even if limited). Maybe they thought if left out, given its electrical generation capabilities there is room to upgrade with a magnetic rail launcher in the future.

Can you guys post up some good reading on the plasma turbine? Everything I know about it seems like its a regular gas turbine with a specially designed combuster.





new topics
 
1
<< 1   >>

log in

join