US Navy investigates potential LCS class-wide design flaw

[daveman]

Seems like an electric propulsion system would have been far simpler, combining the power from turbines and diesels electrically instead of mechanically.

Seems you didn't read the article. The combination of powerplants was required to meet the 40knot speed requirement. There are no electric motors available today that can push a ship that size 40knots.

I tried to explain that, but he says it would work because of diesel electric locomotives

Yea he's a moron.

Stick to airplanes.

Stick to toy boats.

Esalla's not going to sleep with you.

 

[airplanemechanic]

Seems like an electric propulsion system would have been far simpler, combining the power from turbines and diesels electrically instead of mechanically.

Seems you didn't read the article. The combination of powerplants was required to meet the 40knot speed requirement. There are no electric motors available today that can push a ship that size 40knots.

I tried to explain that, but he says it would work because of diesel electric locomotives

Yea he's a moron.

Stick to airplanes.

Stick to toy boats.

Esalla's not going to sleep with you.

But he might sleep with you. Keep trying.

 

[daveman]

Seems like an electric propulsion system would have been far simpler, combining the power from turbines and diesels electrically instead of mechanically.

Seems you didn't read the article. The combination of powerplants was required to meet the 40knot speed requirement. There are no electric motors available today that can push a ship that size 40knots.

I tried to explain that, but he says it would work because of diesel electric locomotives

Yea he's a moron.

Stick to airplanes.

Stick to toy boats.

Esalla's not going to sleep with you.

But he might sleep with you. Keep trying.

I don't date morons. Looks like you're both out of luck.

 

[airplanemechanic]

Seems like an electric propulsion system would have been far simpler, combining the power from turbines and diesels electrically instead of mechanically.

Seems you didn't read the article. The combination of powerplants was required to meet the 40knot speed requirement. There are no electric motors available today that can push a ship that size 40knots.

I tried to explain that, but he says it would work because of diesel electric locomotives

Yea he's a moron.

Stick to airplanes.

Stick to toy boats.

Esalla's not going to sleep with you.

But he might sleep with you. Keep trying.

I don't date morons. Looks like you're both out of luck.

So you refuse to date your own kind? Hmm.

 

[daveman]

Seems like an electric propulsion system would have been far simpler, combining the power from turbines and diesels electrically instead of mechanically.

Seems you didn't read the article. The combination of powerplants was required to meet the 40knot speed requirement. There are no electric motors available today that can push a ship that size 40knots.

I tried to explain that, but he says it would work because of diesel electric locomotives

Yea he's a moron.

Stick to airplanes.

Stick to toy boats.

Esalla's not going to sleep with you.

But he might sleep with you. Keep trying.

I don't date morons. Looks like you're both out of luck.

So you refuse to date your own kind? Hmm.

Ahhh, the old "NO U!!" gambit, used with such effectiveness on 3rd-grade schoolyards everywhere. Brilliant.

Please tell me you don't work on airplanes that people fly on.

 

[esalla]

Seems like an electric propulsion system would have been far simpler, combining the power from turbines and diesels electrically instead of mechanically.

That makes zero sense, as all electric propulsion systems have mechanical parts

No shit, genius. Did you read the article? Did you comprehend it? They're trying to mechanically combine the output power from two diesel engines and two gas turbine engines through one complicated gearbox system. The gearbox is failing, and they don't understand why yet.

Imagine an electrical power plant with steam turbines and a large diesel generator. Are all the output shafts ganged together mechanically, or are the alternators from each unit ganged together electrically?

Hint: They're tied together electrically. Matter of fact, every generator online at any given moment feeding power to the national electrical grid are all tied together electrically...NOT mechanically.

My statement makes perfect sense. An electric drive system would be far simpler.

Dude there is no such thing as what you said which was. "combining the power from turbines and diesels electrically instead of mechanically." How does that happen?

So you have no idea what you are babbling about. But hey it sounded good right?

An electric ship can not charge at the charging station, they would need generators, batteries, and the fuel of an oil tanker to run these so it's impossible. So try again, this works in other situations because one oil drum of Uranium powers the ship for 20 years.

In WWII several classes of Destroyer Escorts used either diesel-electric, or turbo-electric drives without batteries or oil tankers to carry fuel. They displaced roughly a third of a LCS. It’s not new technology and generators coupled to electric motors are simpler and more fuel efficient than conventional geared drivetrains. That’s because the generators can always run at the optimum speed to power the motors.

Again the littoral ships have a high speed clutch bearing design flaw that encompasses the entire fleet of these ships. These ships can hit 50mph as designed. So the issue has nothing to do with either the diesel power or gas turbines, and if Daveman believes that his pieced together from the internet design is better than the current design and he is correct he will be a billionaire shortly. However all he is doing is quoting railroad technology that was invented 50 to 100 or even more years ago which has nothing to do with propelling a modern ship to 50mph today.

You are correct that electric ship power is not new, and for that reason precisely it has been tested and vetted as inefficient for various reasons, though it does work better in ships that have no need to be refueled as is the case with reactor equipped vessels, in submarines the electric motors can run off battery and be very quiet as there are no generators running to provide the power. So what works well in one situation does not necessarily work as well in another

Nuclear submarines don't ever run off batteries. the piles use radioactive hot water to heat non-radioactive cold water turning it into steam to turn a turbine that turn the prop and the exhaust steam from the turbine turns a generator to provide electrical power to the boat. That's the reason diesel electric boats are quieter than nuke boats when running on batteries. Don't you ever get tired of being wrong? Ten seconds of Google would stop you from looking like a fool.

He should take a little time to research before he posts. Most of the information is out there.

In fact, I would be happy to answer any submarine questions. I qualified in 1981 onboard an FBM submarine.

Qualified for what? Cook, laundry attendant, missile counter?

Again, a little research would do you some good.

To qualify on a submarine means having a working knowledge of every system on the boat and all damage control procedures and systems. You get signed off on every system, from NAV to propulsion, to supply requisitions. Then you have to stand in from of a board of both enlisted and officers and answer any question about anything on the boat. Then a walk-thru with the Capt. You would never be able to qualify.

I still have my "dolphins" and can still sign "SS" after my name on any military or veteran paperwork.

And every enlisted crewmember has a job, yours was what? Laundry like I said, or perhaps kitchen degreaser? Tell us pop

 

[esalla]

Seems like an electric propulsion system would have been far simpler, combining the power from turbines and diesels electrically instead of mechanically.

That makes zero sense, as all electric propulsion systems have mechanical parts

No shit, genius. Did you read the article? Did you comprehend it? They're trying to mechanically combine the output power from two diesel engines and two gas turbine engines through one complicated gearbox system. The gearbox is failing, and they don't understand why yet.

Imagine an electrical power plant with steam turbines and a large diesel generator. Are all the output shafts ganged together mechanically, or are the alternators from each unit ganged together electrically?

Hint: They're tied together electrically. Matter of fact, every generator online at any given moment feeding power to the national electrical grid are all tied together electrically...NOT mechanically.

My statement makes perfect sense. An electric drive system would be far simpler.

Dude there is no such thing as what you said which was. "combining the power from turbines and diesels electrically instead of mechanically." How does that happen?

So you have no idea what you are babbling about. But hey it sounded good right?

An electric ship can not charge at the charging station, they would need generators, batteries, and the fuel of an oil tanker to run these so it's impossible. So try again, this works in other situations because one oil drum of Uranium powers the ship for 20 years.

Since you know absolutely nothing about this subject, you should remain silent.

On edit:

But since you won't, let me illustrate your ignorance.

The top part is what the LCS ships have now, only they're far more complicated.

The bottom part is how diesel electric ship propulsion works. Generators convert mechanical power to electrical power, which then drives electric motors to spin propellers. In the case of these LCS ships, the main generator drive engines would be a combination of diesel and turbine engines. The power they produce is put on to an electrical bus. Far simpler than the mechanical gearbox they're currently using.

Here's a diagram showing diesel- and gas turbine-driven generators powering a ship:

There are no "electric" ships like your misunderstanding insists.

Again simpleton there is no way that these small ships can carry the fuel to run the generators. Carriers and subs run for 20 years on one Uranium sealed reactor load. Your diagram also lacks batteries for instant power and does not take into account the weight of the batteries or fuel. Also the diagram does not tell the range of the ship before needing refueling.

However if you could design ship power plants instead of copying nonsense from the net you would not be here but working on the failed design

You had your chance to not look like a moron.

You chose not to take advantage of it.

Renewed Interest in Diesel-Electric Marine Propulsion

Diesel Electric Drive
A well-proven commercial technology trickles down to private yachts.

Electrical Propulsion System in Ships

Your petulant foot-stamping does not alter reality. Stop posting in this thread, unless, of course, you want to look even stupider. I don't mind.

LOL, what is the range of your fictional all electric littoral ship?

You are posting random facts from the internet about a ship that only exist in your head.

Do you take meds for this?

It's obvious you know nothing about any of this. Stop insisting you do.

What's your solution? Build a propulsion system that gets used once then thrown away?

Actually you are the clown that insist he is capable of designing Navy ships not me.

So unless you are an engineer working for Huntington Ingalls or General Dynamics you are pulling your own pud.

Please continue.

PS Give the Navy a call and give them your plan, I hear that Admirals enjoy laughing

Still nothing from you but petulance. You sure do hate it when people don't automatically accept everything you say simply because you say it.

Meanwhile, in reality, you're wrong about diesel-electric ship propulsion, and your fragile ego simply can't accept that.

Sucks to be you.

Dude the first electric boat was made in 1839, there were diesel electric subs in WW2 used because there was no way to store enough air or Oxygen while submerged to power the diesels. You claim that I am wrong because I do not believe in your mythical power plant for littoral ships yet all the designers that have not built your wet dream agree with me that while it might be possible the range is too small. See kiddy electric power plants work just fine on nuclear ships and boats because millions of gallons of diesel are not needed which along with the generators and batteries severely increase weight decrease mobility and as said range.

Not that you can ever comprehend any of this.

Still throwing your tantrum, huh? Not at all surprising.

You seem to be stuck on batteries. Diesel-electric propulsion doesn't require them. (Hint: Every modern train is that burns fuel is diesel-electric. They don't have batteries to power the drive motors.)

You'd best be gettin' on the horn to the cruise line companies. Their diesel-electric cruise ships are more efficient than diesel-driven ships. Make sure you tell them how wrong they are. While you've got your phone handy, call all the railroads and tell them diesel-electric is dumb.

Meanwhile, you want to put a nuclear reactor on a surface combat vessel as small as an LCS?

Way dumb.

Actually diesel electric subs do require batteries and are equipped with batteries even when the power source is nuclear because battery power requires no moving parts to provide the electricity and in certain situations is quieter and far more stealthy. Diesel actually announces ones presence. However we are actually discussing a littoral ship that you want to re-engineer to be diesel electric. Why with your amazing brain aren't you designing power plants other than your fart machine.

Still haven't called the cruise lines and railroads? Slacker.

Diesel-electric subs do require batteries. Duh. Surface ships, having a ready supply of oxygen, do not.

And obviously, LCS don't require sonar stealth, or they would have been built diesel-electric with batteries. Again, duh.

Well I guess it's too bad that the engineers at Lockheed Martin, Huntington Ingalls and General Dynamics aren't as bright as you.

What you could do is patent your plan and sell it to the contractor for a billion or two

You seem almost stupid enough to work for the bureau

You, of all people, shouldn't be throwing around the s-word.

Called GE yet and told them they're building locomotives wrong?

LOL a locomotive is connected to the grid simpleton, have GE run wires thru the ocean to make your wet dream a reality

So you do work for the bureau, I knew it

Oh, my good Gaea. How damn stupid can you be? I'm getting tired of educating you; there's simply no ROI.

Diesel-electric locomotives have...can you guess what's coming?...a diesel engine driving an electrical generator. They don't require a connection to the grid. He's an image from How Stuff Works For Internet Retards:

This is the part where, if you had any self-awareness at all, you'd slink away in embarrassment.

But of course, you'll be back, claiming your astounding ignorance is MY fault.

I'm done with you.

Ah yea kid, they stop along the way for more fuel. Like a car on a highway, this is all part of the grid, when you get off grid there is nothing as in a ship at sea. The comical thing about you is that you seem to think you are brighter than the best ship engineers because you can copy and paste 100 year old information about frikin trains from the net. Do you really think that the Lockheed Martin engineers do not know this?

Now for the Littoral ship problems, they do not need new fuel or new power plants, they have malfunctioning clutch bearings in their transmissions. These are mechanical parts used for high speed gear changes to the propulsion shafts

Yawn

But then you are a super agent

It's funny -- you keep changing your story based on what I tell you.

You said trains are powered only by the electric grid. Now you say they stop for fuel.

You really are a ******* idiot.

Trains never get off grid kid, the rails connect cities even in the deep West. The sad thing is that you think locomotive tech is the same as maritime tech

 

[esalla]

Seems like an electric propulsion system would have been far simpler, combining the power from turbines and diesels electrically instead of mechanically.

That makes zero sense, as all electric propulsion systems have mechanical parts

No shit, genius. Did you read the article? Did you comprehend it? They're trying to mechanically combine the output power from two diesel engines and two gas turbine engines through one complicated gearbox system. The gearbox is failing, and they don't understand why yet.

Imagine an electrical power plant with steam turbines and a large diesel generator. Are all the output shafts ganged together mechanically, or are the alternators from each unit ganged together electrically?

Hint: They're tied together electrically. Matter of fact, every generator online at any given moment feeding power to the national electrical grid are all tied together electrically...NOT mechanically.

My statement makes perfect sense. An electric drive system would be far simpler.

Dude there is no such thing as what you said which was. "combining the power from turbines and diesels electrically instead of mechanically." How does that happen?

So you have no idea what you are babbling about. But hey it sounded good right?

An electric ship can not charge at the charging station, they would need generators, batteries, and the fuel of an oil tanker to run these so it's impossible. So try again, this works in other situations because one oil drum of Uranium powers the ship for 20 years.

Since you know absolutely nothing about this subject, you should remain silent.

On edit:

But since you won't, let me illustrate your ignorance.

The top part is what the LCS ships have now, only they're far more complicated.

The bottom part is how diesel electric ship propulsion works. Generators convert mechanical power to electrical power, which then drives electric motors to spin propellers. In the case of these LCS ships, the main generator drive engines would be a combination of diesel and turbine engines. The power they produce is put on to an electrical bus. Far simpler than the mechanical gearbox they're currently using.

Here's a diagram showing diesel- and gas turbine-driven generators powering a ship:

There are no "electric" ships like your misunderstanding insists.

Again simpleton there is no way that these small ships can carry the fuel to run the generators. Carriers and subs run for 20 years on one Uranium sealed reactor load. Your diagram also lacks batteries for instant power and does not take into account the weight of the batteries or fuel. Also the diagram does not tell the range of the ship before needing refueling.

However if you could design ship power plants instead of copying nonsense from the net you would not be here but working on the failed design

You had your chance to not look like a moron.

You chose not to take advantage of it.

Renewed Interest in Diesel-Electric Marine Propulsion

Diesel Electric Drive
A well-proven commercial technology trickles down to private yachts.

Electrical Propulsion System in Ships

Your petulant foot-stamping does not alter reality. Stop posting in this thread, unless, of course, you want to look even stupider. I don't mind.

LOL, what is the range of your fictional all electric littoral ship?

You are posting random facts from the internet about a ship that only exist in your head.

Do you take meds for this?

It's obvious you know nothing about any of this. Stop insisting you do.

What's your solution? Build a propulsion system that gets used once then thrown away?

Actually you are the clown that insist he is capable of designing Navy ships not me.

So unless you are an engineer working for Huntington Ingalls or General Dynamics you are pulling your own pud.

Please continue.

PS Give the Navy a call and give them your plan, I hear that Admirals enjoy laughing

Still nothing from you but petulance. You sure do hate it when people don't automatically accept everything you say simply because you say it.

Meanwhile, in reality, you're wrong about diesel-electric ship propulsion, and your fragile ego simply can't accept that.

Sucks to be you.

Dude the first electric boat was made in 1839, there were diesel electric subs in WW2 used because there was no way to store enough air or Oxygen while submerged to power the diesels. You claim that I am wrong because I do not believe in your mythical power plant for littoral ships yet all the designers that have not built your wet dream agree with me that while it might be possible the range is too small. See kiddy electric power plants work just fine on nuclear ships and boats because millions of gallons of diesel are not needed which along with the generators and batteries severely increase weight decrease mobility and as said range.

Not that you can ever comprehend any of this.

Still throwing your tantrum, huh? Not at all surprising.

You seem to be stuck on batteries. Diesel-electric propulsion doesn't require them. (Hint: Every modern train is that burns fuel is diesel-electric. They don't have batteries to power the drive motors.)

You'd best be gettin' on the horn to the cruise line companies. Their diesel-electric cruise ships are more efficient than diesel-driven ships. Make sure you tell them how wrong they are. While you've got your phone handy, call all the railroads and tell them diesel-electric is dumb.

Meanwhile, you want to put a nuclear reactor on a surface combat vessel as small as an LCS?

Way dumb.

Actually diesel electric subs do require batteries and are equipped with batteries even when the power source is nuclear because battery power requires no moving parts to provide the electricity and in certain situations is quieter and far more stealthy. Diesel actually announces ones presence. However we are actually discussing a littoral ship that you want to re-engineer to be diesel electric. Why with your amazing brain aren't you designing power plants other than your fart machine.

Still haven't called the cruise lines and railroads? Slacker.

Diesel-electric subs do require batteries. Duh. Surface ships, having a ready supply of oxygen, do not.

And obviously, LCS don't require sonar stealth, or they would have been built diesel-electric with batteries. Again, duh.

Well I guess it's too bad that the engineers at Lockheed Martin, Huntington Ingalls and General Dynamics aren't as bright as you.

What you could do is patent your plan and sell it to the contractor for a billion or two

You seem almost stupid enough to work for the bureau

You, of all people, shouldn't be throwing around the s-word.

Called GE yet and told them they're building locomotives wrong?

LOL a locomotive is connected to the grid simpleton, have GE run wires thru the ocean to make your wet dream a reality

So you do work for the bureau, I knew it

Oh, my good Gaea. How damn stupid can you be? I'm getting tired of educating you; there's simply no ROI.

Diesel-electric locomotives have...can you guess what's coming?...a diesel engine driving an electrical generator. They don't require a connection to the grid. He's an image from How Stuff Works For Internet Retards:

This is the part where, if you had any self-awareness at all, you'd slink away in embarrassment.

But of course, you'll be back, claiming your astounding ignorance is MY fault.

I'm done with you.

Ah yea kid, they stop along the way for more fuel. Like a car on a highway, this is all part of the grid, when you get off grid there is nothing as in a ship at sea. The comical thing about you is that you seem to think you are brighter than the best ship engineers because you can copy and paste 100 year old information about frikin trains from the net. Do you really think that the Lockheed Martin engineers do not know this?

Now for the Littoral ship problems, they do not need new fuel or new power plants, they have malfunctioning clutch bearings in their transmissions. These are mechanical parts used for high speed gear changes to the propulsion shafts

Yawn

But then you are a super agent

Ships are refueled at sea on a regular basis. So the idea that they are "off grid" where fuel is concerned is wrong.

Actually a small fast littoral ship is not going to be very stealthy if it is refueled by a TANKER in shallow enemy waters where it is designed to operate.

Yawn

You just can't help being wrong. The design spec for the LCS is an unrefueled range of 3,500 miles.

Not with bad clutches, and not with the mythical electric engines that only exist in your head

 

[esalla]

Seems like an electric propulsion system would have been far simpler, combining the power from turbines and diesels electrically instead of mechanically.

Seems you didn't read the article. The combination of powerplants was required to meet the 40knot speed requirement. There are no electric motors available today that can push a ship that size 40knots.

I tried to explain that, but he says it would work because of diesel electric locomotives

Yea he's a moron.

Stick to airplanes.

Stick to toy boats.

I think this is daves boaty

 

[WinterBorn]

Seems like an electric propulsion system would have been far simpler, combining the power from turbines and diesels electrically instead of mechanically.

That makes zero sense, as all electric propulsion systems have mechanical parts

No shit, genius. Did you read the article? Did you comprehend it? They're trying to mechanically combine the output power from two diesel engines and two gas turbine engines through one complicated gearbox system. The gearbox is failing, and they don't understand why yet.

Imagine an electrical power plant with steam turbines and a large diesel generator. Are all the output shafts ganged together mechanically, or are the alternators from each unit ganged together electrically?

Hint: They're tied together electrically. Matter of fact, every generator online at any given moment feeding power to the national electrical grid are all tied together electrically...NOT mechanically.

My statement makes perfect sense. An electric drive system would be far simpler.

Dude there is no such thing as what you said which was. "combining the power from turbines and diesels electrically instead of mechanically." How does that happen?

So you have no idea what you are babbling about. But hey it sounded good right?

An electric ship can not charge at the charging station, they would need generators, batteries, and the fuel of an oil tanker to run these so it's impossible. So try again, this works in other situations because one oil drum of Uranium powers the ship for 20 years.

In WWII several classes of Destroyer Escorts used either diesel-electric, or turbo-electric drives without batteries or oil tankers to carry fuel. They displaced roughly a third of a LCS. It’s not new technology and generators coupled to electric motors are simpler and more fuel efficient than conventional geared drivetrains. That’s because the generators can always run at the optimum speed to power the motors.

Again the littoral ships have a high speed clutch bearing design flaw that encompasses the entire fleet of these ships. These ships can hit 50mph as designed. So the issue has nothing to do with either the diesel power or gas turbines, and if Daveman believes that his pieced together from the internet design is better than the current design and he is correct he will be a billionaire shortly. However all he is doing is quoting railroad technology that was invented 50 to 100 or even more years ago which has nothing to do with propelling a modern ship to 50mph today.

You are correct that electric ship power is not new, and for that reason precisely it has been tested and vetted as inefficient for various reasons, though it does work better in ships that have no need to be refueled as is the case with reactor equipped vessels, in submarines the electric motors can run off battery and be very quiet as there are no generators running to provide the power. So what works well in one situation does not necessarily work as well in another

Nuclear submarines don't ever run off batteries. the piles use radioactive hot water to heat non-radioactive cold water turning it into steam to turn a turbine that turn the prop and the exhaust steam from the turbine turns a generator to provide electrical power to the boat. That's the reason diesel electric boats are quieter than nuke boats when running on batteries. Don't you ever get tired of being wrong? Ten seconds of Google would stop you from looking like a fool.

He should take a little time to research before he posts. Most of the information is out there.

In fact, I would be happy to answer any submarine questions. I qualified in 1981 onboard an FBM submarine.

Qualified for what? Cook, laundry attendant, missile counter?

Again, a little research would do you some good.

To qualify on a submarine means having a working knowledge of every system on the boat and all damage control procedures and systems. You get signed off on every system, from NAV to propulsion, to supply requisitions. Then you have to stand in from of a board of both enlisted and officers and answer any question about anything on the boat. Then a walk-thru with the Capt. You would never be able to qualify.

I still have my "dolphins" and can still sign "SS" after my name on any military or veteran paperwork.

And every enlisted crewmember has a job, yours was what? Laundry like I said, or perhaps kitchen degreaser? Tell us pop

Yes, every enlisted crew member has a job. In addition to that job you stand various watches, from security watch in port to other jobs underway. I stood sonar watch and helmsman/planesman watch. And every crew member has to qualify. It usually takes months, because your various jobs still have to be done.

 

[esalla]

Seems like an electric propulsion system would have been far simpler, combining the power from turbines and diesels electrically instead of mechanically.

That makes zero sense, as all electric propulsion systems have mechanical parts

No shit, genius. Did you read the article? Did you comprehend it? They're trying to mechanically combine the output power from two diesel engines and two gas turbine engines through one complicated gearbox system. The gearbox is failing, and they don't understand why yet.

Imagine an electrical power plant with steam turbines and a large diesel generator. Are all the output shafts ganged together mechanically, or are the alternators from each unit ganged together electrically?

Hint: They're tied together electrically. Matter of fact, every generator online at any given moment feeding power to the national electrical grid are all tied together electrically...NOT mechanically.

My statement makes perfect sense. An electric drive system would be far simpler.

Dude there is no such thing as what you said which was. "combining the power from turbines and diesels electrically instead of mechanically." How does that happen?

So you have no idea what you are babbling about. But hey it sounded good right?

An electric ship can not charge at the charging station, they would need generators, batteries, and the fuel of an oil tanker to run these so it's impossible. So try again, this works in other situations because one oil drum of Uranium powers the ship for 20 years.

In WWII several classes of Destroyer Escorts used either diesel-electric, or turbo-electric drives without batteries or oil tankers to carry fuel. They displaced roughly a third of a LCS. It’s not new technology and generators coupled to electric motors are simpler and more fuel efficient than conventional geared drivetrains. That’s because the generators can always run at the optimum speed to power the motors.

Again the littoral ships have a high speed clutch bearing design flaw that encompasses the entire fleet of these ships. These ships can hit 50mph as designed. So the issue has nothing to do with either the diesel power or gas turbines, and if Daveman believes that his pieced together from the internet design is better than the current design and he is correct he will be a billionaire shortly. However all he is doing is quoting railroad technology that was invented 50 to 100 or even more years ago which has nothing to do with propelling a modern ship to 50mph today.

You are correct that electric ship power is not new, and for that reason precisely it has been tested and vetted as inefficient for various reasons, though it does work better in ships that have no need to be refueled as is the case with reactor equipped vessels, in submarines the electric motors can run off battery and be very quiet as there are no generators running to provide the power. So what works well in one situation does not necessarily work as well in another

Nuclear submarines don't ever run off batteries. the piles use radioactive hot water to heat non-radioactive cold water turning it into steam to turn a turbine that turn the prop and the exhaust steam from the turbine turns a generator to provide electrical power to the boat. That's the reason diesel electric boats are quieter than nuke boats when running on batteries. Don't you ever get tired of being wrong? Ten seconds of Google would stop you from looking like a fool.

He should take a little time to research before he posts. Most of the information is out there.

In fact, I would be happy to answer any submarine questions. I qualified in 1981 onboard an FBM submarine.

Qualified for what? Cook, laundry attendant, missile counter?

Again, a little research would do you some good.

To qualify on a submarine means having a working knowledge of every system on the boat and all damage control procedures and systems. You get signed off on every system, from NAV to propulsion, to supply requisitions. Then you have to stand in from of a board of both enlisted and officers and answer any question about anything on the boat. Then a walk-thru with the Capt. You would never be able to qualify.

I still have my "dolphins" and can still sign "SS" after my name on any military or veteran paperwork.

And every enlisted crewmember has a job, yours was what? Laundry like I said, or perhaps kitchen degreaser? Tell us pop

Yes, every enlisted crew member has a job. In addition to that job you stand various watches, from security watch in port to other jobs underway. I stood sonar watch and helmsman/planesman watch. And every crew member has to qualify. It usually takes months, because your various jobs still have to be done.

So let me get this straight, you watched the sonar man or driver do his job, but never did anything. So your job was absolutely nothing which is what your ASVAB test scores qualified you for.

Well at least you are honest

Yawn

 

[WinterBorn]

Seems like an electric propulsion system would have been far simpler, combining the power from turbines and diesels electrically instead of mechanically.

That makes zero sense, as all electric propulsion systems have mechanical parts

No shit, genius. Did you read the article? Did you comprehend it? They're trying to mechanically combine the output power from two diesel engines and two gas turbine engines through one complicated gearbox system. The gearbox is failing, and they don't understand why yet.

Imagine an electrical power plant with steam turbines and a large diesel generator. Are all the output shafts ganged together mechanically, or are the alternators from each unit ganged together electrically?

Hint: They're tied together electrically. Matter of fact, every generator online at any given moment feeding power to the national electrical grid are all tied together electrically...NOT mechanically.

My statement makes perfect sense. An electric drive system would be far simpler.

Dude there is no such thing as what you said which was. "combining the power from turbines and diesels electrically instead of mechanically." How does that happen?

So you have no idea what you are babbling about. But hey it sounded good right?

An electric ship can not charge at the charging station, they would need generators, batteries, and the fuel of an oil tanker to run these so it's impossible. So try again, this works in other situations because one oil drum of Uranium powers the ship for 20 years.

In WWII several classes of Destroyer Escorts used either diesel-electric, or turbo-electric drives without batteries or oil tankers to carry fuel. They displaced roughly a third of a LCS. It’s not new technology and generators coupled to electric motors are simpler and more fuel efficient than conventional geared drivetrains. That’s because the generators can always run at the optimum speed to power the motors.

Again the littoral ships have a high speed clutch bearing design flaw that encompasses the entire fleet of these ships. These ships can hit 50mph as designed. So the issue has nothing to do with either the diesel power or gas turbines, and if Daveman believes that his pieced together from the internet design is better than the current design and he is correct he will be a billionaire shortly. However all he is doing is quoting railroad technology that was invented 50 to 100 or even more years ago which has nothing to do with propelling a modern ship to 50mph today.

You are correct that electric ship power is not new, and for that reason precisely it has been tested and vetted as inefficient for various reasons, though it does work better in ships that have no need to be refueled as is the case with reactor equipped vessels, in submarines the electric motors can run off battery and be very quiet as there are no generators running to provide the power. So what works well in one situation does not necessarily work as well in another

Nuclear submarines don't ever run off batteries. the piles use radioactive hot water to heat non-radioactive cold water turning it into steam to turn a turbine that turn the prop and the exhaust steam from the turbine turns a generator to provide electrical power to the boat. That's the reason diesel electric boats are quieter than nuke boats when running on batteries. Don't you ever get tired of being wrong? Ten seconds of Google would stop you from looking like a fool.

He should take a little time to research before he posts. Most of the information is out there.

In fact, I would be happy to answer any submarine questions. I qualified in 1981 onboard an FBM submarine.

Qualified for what? Cook, laundry attendant, missile counter?

Again, a little research would do you some good.

To qualify on a submarine means having a working knowledge of every system on the boat and all damage control procedures and systems. You get signed off on every system, from NAV to propulsion, to supply requisitions. Then you have to stand in from of a board of both enlisted and officers and answer any question about anything on the boat. Then a walk-thru with the Capt. You would never be able to qualify.

I still have my "dolphins" and can still sign "SS" after my name on any military or veteran paperwork.

And every enlisted crewmember has a job, yours was what? Laundry like I said, or perhaps kitchen degreaser? Tell us pop

Yes, every enlisted crew member has a job. In addition to that job you stand various watches, from security watch in port to other jobs underway. I stood sonar watch and helmsman/planesman watch. And every crew member has to qualify. It usually takes months, because your various jobs still have to be done.

So let me get this straight, you watched the sonar man or driver do his job, but never did anything. So your job was absolutely nothing which is what your ASVAB test scores qualified you for.

Well at least you are honest

Yawn

I guess you never served in the military? Or you would know what the term "standing watch" means in this context.

I was the sonar man on watch, and I drove the boat.

 

[WinterBorn]

My point was (and is), if you need to know something about nuclear submarines, just ask.

 

[westwall]

Seems like an electric propulsion system would have been far simpler, combining the power from turbines and diesels electrically instead of mechanically.

That makes zero sense, as all electric propulsion systems have mechanical parts

No shit, genius. Did you read the article? Did you comprehend it? They're trying to mechanically combine the output power from two diesel engines and two gas turbine engines through one complicated gearbox system. The gearbox is failing, and they don't understand why yet.

Imagine an electrical power plant with steam turbines and a large diesel generator. Are all the output shafts ganged together mechanically, or are the alternators from each unit ganged together electrically?

Hint: They're tied together electrically. Matter of fact, every generator online at any given moment feeding power to the national electrical grid are all tied together electrically...NOT mechanically.

My statement makes perfect sense. An electric drive system would be far simpler.

Dude there is no such thing as what you said which was. "combining the power from turbines and diesels electrically instead of mechanically." How does that happen?

So you have no idea what you are babbling about. But hey it sounded good right?

An electric ship can not charge at the charging station, they would need generators, batteries, and the fuel of an oil tanker to run these so it's impossible. So try again, this works in other situations because one oil drum of Uranium powers the ship for 20 years.

In WWII several classes of Destroyer Escorts used either diesel-electric, or turbo-electric drives without batteries or oil tankers to carry fuel. They displaced roughly a third of a LCS. It’s not new technology and generators coupled to electric motors are simpler and more fuel efficient than conventional geared drivetrains. That’s because the generators can always run at the optimum speed to power the motors.

Again the littoral ships have a high speed clutch bearing design flaw that encompasses the entire fleet of these ships. These ships can hit 50mph as designed. So the issue has nothing to do with either the diesel power or gas turbines, and if Daveman believes that his pieced together from the internet design is better than the current design and he is correct he will be a billionaire shortly. However all he is doing is quoting railroad technology that was invented 50 to 100 or even more years ago which has nothing to do with propelling a modern ship to 50mph today.

You are correct that electric ship power is not new, and for that reason precisely it has been tested and vetted as inefficient for various reasons, though it does work better in ships that have no need to be refueled as is the case with reactor equipped vessels, in submarines the electric motors can run off battery and be very quiet as there are no generators running to provide the power. So what works well in one situation does not necessarily work as well in another

Nuclear submarines don't ever run off batteries. the piles use radioactive hot water to heat non-radioactive cold water turning it into steam to turn a turbine that turn the prop and the exhaust steam from the turbine turns a generator to provide electrical power to the boat. That's the reason diesel electric boats are quieter than nuke boats when running on batteries. Don't you ever get tired of being wrong? Ten seconds of Google would stop you from looking like a fool.

He should take a little time to research before he posts. Most of the information is out there.

In fact, I would be happy to answer any submarine questions. I qualified in 1981 onboard an FBM submarine.

Qualified for what? Cook, laundry attendant, missile counter?

Again, a little research would do you some good.

To qualify on a submarine means having a working knowledge of every system on the boat and all damage control procedures and systems. You get signed off on every system, from NAV to propulsion, to supply requisitions. Then you have to stand in from of a board of both enlisted and officers and answer any question about anything on the boat. Then a walk-thru with the Capt. You would never be able to qualify.

I still have my "dolphins" and can still sign "SS" after my name on any military or veteran paperwork.

And every enlisted crewmember has a job, yours was what? Laundry like I said, or perhaps kitchen degreaser? Tell us pop

Yes, every enlisted crew member has a job. In addition to that job you stand various watches, from security watch in port to other jobs underway. I stood sonar watch and helmsman/planesman watch. And every crew member has to qualify. It usually takes months, because your various jobs still have to be done.

So let me get this straight, you watched the sonar man or driver do his job, but never did anything. So your job was absolutely nothing which is what your ASVAB test scores qualified you for.

Well at least you are honest

Yawn

I guess you never served in the military? Or you would know what the term "standing watch" means in this context.

I was the sonar man on watch, and I drove the boat.

Estella is a moron. They know nothing.

So were you a bubblehead, or on a DD?

 

[WinterBorn]

Seems like an electric propulsion system would have been far simpler, combining the power from turbines and diesels electrically instead of mechanically.

That makes zero sense, as all electric propulsion systems have mechanical parts

No shit, genius. Did you read the article? Did you comprehend it? They're trying to mechanically combine the output power from two diesel engines and two gas turbine engines through one complicated gearbox system. The gearbox is failing, and they don't understand why yet.

Imagine an electrical power plant with steam turbines and a large diesel generator. Are all the output shafts ganged together mechanically, or are the alternators from each unit ganged together electrically?

Hint: They're tied together electrically. Matter of fact, every generator online at any given moment feeding power to the national electrical grid are all tied together electrically...NOT mechanically.

My statement makes perfect sense. An electric drive system would be far simpler.

Dude there is no such thing as what you said which was. "combining the power from turbines and diesels electrically instead of mechanically." How does that happen?

So you have no idea what you are babbling about. But hey it sounded good right?

An electric ship can not charge at the charging station, they would need generators, batteries, and the fuel of an oil tanker to run these so it's impossible. So try again, this works in other situations because one oil drum of Uranium powers the ship for 20 years.

In WWII several classes of Destroyer Escorts used either diesel-electric, or turbo-electric drives without batteries or oil tankers to carry fuel. They displaced roughly a third of a LCS. It’s not new technology and generators coupled to electric motors are simpler and more fuel efficient than conventional geared drivetrains. That’s because the generators can always run at the optimum speed to power the motors.

Again the littoral ships have a high speed clutch bearing design flaw that encompasses the entire fleet of these ships. These ships can hit 50mph as designed. So the issue has nothing to do with either the diesel power or gas turbines, and if Daveman believes that his pieced together from the internet design is better than the current design and he is correct he will be a billionaire shortly. However all he is doing is quoting railroad technology that was invented 50 to 100 or even more years ago which has nothing to do with propelling a modern ship to 50mph today.

You are correct that electric ship power is not new, and for that reason precisely it has been tested and vetted as inefficient for various reasons, though it does work better in ships that have no need to be refueled as is the case with reactor equipped vessels, in submarines the electric motors can run off battery and be very quiet as there are no generators running to provide the power. So what works well in one situation does not necessarily work as well in another

Nuclear submarines don't ever run off batteries. the piles use radioactive hot water to heat non-radioactive cold water turning it into steam to turn a turbine that turn the prop and the exhaust steam from the turbine turns a generator to provide electrical power to the boat. That's the reason diesel electric boats are quieter than nuke boats when running on batteries. Don't you ever get tired of being wrong? Ten seconds of Google would stop you from looking like a fool.

He should take a little time to research before he posts. Most of the information is out there.

In fact, I would be happy to answer any submarine questions. I qualified in 1981 onboard an FBM submarine.

Qualified for what? Cook, laundry attendant, missile counter?

Again, a little research would do you some good.

To qualify on a submarine means having a working knowledge of every system on the boat and all damage control procedures and systems. You get signed off on every system, from NAV to propulsion, to supply requisitions. Then you have to stand in from of a board of both enlisted and officers and answer any question about anything on the boat. Then a walk-thru with the Capt. You would never be able to qualify.

I still have my "dolphins" and can still sign "SS" after my name on any military or veteran paperwork.

And every enlisted crewmember has a job, yours was what? Laundry like I said, or perhaps kitchen degreaser? Tell us pop

Yes, every enlisted crew member has a job. In addition to that job you stand various watches, from security watch in port to other jobs underway. I stood sonar watch and helmsman/planesman watch. And every crew member has to qualify. It usually takes months, because your various jobs still have to be done.

So let me get this straight, you watched the sonar man or driver do his job, but never did anything. So your job was absolutely nothing which is what your ASVAB test scores qualified you for.

Well at least you are honest

Yawn

I guess you never served in the military? Or you would know what the term "standing watch" means in this context.

I was the sonar man on watch, and I drove the boat.

Estella is a moron. They know nothing.

So were you a bubblehead, or on a DD?

I was a Bubblehead.

 

[westwall]

Seems like an electric propulsion system would have been far simpler, combining the power from turbines and diesels electrically instead of mechanically.

That makes zero sense, as all electric propulsion systems have mechanical parts

No shit, genius. Did you read the article? Did you comprehend it? They're trying to mechanically combine the output power from two diesel engines and two gas turbine engines through one complicated gearbox system. The gearbox is failing, and they don't understand why yet.

Imagine an electrical power plant with steam turbines and a large diesel generator. Are all the output shafts ganged together mechanically, or are the alternators from each unit ganged together electrically?

Hint: They're tied together electrically. Matter of fact, every generator online at any given moment feeding power to the national electrical grid are all tied together electrically...NOT mechanically.

My statement makes perfect sense. An electric drive system would be far simpler.

Dude there is no such thing as what you said which was. "combining the power from turbines and diesels electrically instead of mechanically." How does that happen?

So you have no idea what you are babbling about. But hey it sounded good right?

An electric ship can not charge at the charging station, they would need generators, batteries, and the fuel of an oil tanker to run these so it's impossible. So try again, this works in other situations because one oil drum of Uranium powers the ship for 20 years.

In WWII several classes of Destroyer Escorts used either diesel-electric, or turbo-electric drives without batteries or oil tankers to carry fuel. They displaced roughly a third of a LCS. It’s not new technology and generators coupled to electric motors are simpler and more fuel efficient than conventional geared drivetrains. That’s because the generators can always run at the optimum speed to power the motors.

Again the littoral ships have a high speed clutch bearing design flaw that encompasses the entire fleet of these ships. These ships can hit 50mph as designed. So the issue has nothing to do with either the diesel power or gas turbines, and if Daveman believes that his pieced together from the internet design is better than the current design and he is correct he will be a billionaire shortly. However all he is doing is quoting railroad technology that was invented 50 to 100 or even more years ago which has nothing to do with propelling a modern ship to 50mph today.

You are correct that electric ship power is not new, and for that reason precisely it has been tested and vetted as inefficient for various reasons, though it does work better in ships that have no need to be refueled as is the case with reactor equipped vessels, in submarines the electric motors can run off battery and be very quiet as there are no generators running to provide the power. So what works well in one situation does not necessarily work as well in another

Nuclear submarines don't ever run off batteries. the piles use radioactive hot water to heat non-radioactive cold water turning it into steam to turn a turbine that turn the prop and the exhaust steam from the turbine turns a generator to provide electrical power to the boat. That's the reason diesel electric boats are quieter than nuke boats when running on batteries. Don't you ever get tired of being wrong? Ten seconds of Google would stop you from looking like a fool.

He should take a little time to research before he posts. Most of the information is out there.

In fact, I would be happy to answer any submarine questions. I qualified in 1981 onboard an FBM submarine.

Qualified for what? Cook, laundry attendant, missile counter?

Again, a little research would do you some good.

To qualify on a submarine means having a working knowledge of every system on the boat and all damage control procedures and systems. You get signed off on every system, from NAV to propulsion, to supply requisitions. Then you have to stand in from of a board of both enlisted and officers and answer any question about anything on the boat. Then a walk-thru with the Capt. You would never be able to qualify.

I still have my "dolphins" and can still sign "SS" after my name on any military or veteran paperwork.

And every enlisted crewmember has a job, yours was what? Laundry like I said, or perhaps kitchen degreaser? Tell us pop

Yes, every enlisted crew member has a job. In addition to that job you stand various watches, from security watch in port to other jobs underway. I stood sonar watch and helmsman/planesman watch. And every crew member has to qualify. It usually takes months, because your various jobs still have to be done.

So let me get this straight, you watched the sonar man or driver do his job, but never did anything. So your job was absolutely nothing which is what your ASVAB test scores qualified you for.

Well at least you are honest

Yawn

I guess you never served in the military? Or you would know what the term "standing watch" means in this context.

I was the sonar man on watch, and I drove the boat.

Estella is a moron. They know nothing.

So were you a bubblehead, or on a DD?

I was a Bubblehead.

Which boat?

 

[westwall]

Seems like an electric propulsion system would have been far simpler, combining the power from turbines and diesels electrically instead of mechanically.

That makes zero sense, as all electric propulsion systems have mechanical parts

No shit, genius. Did you read the article? Did you comprehend it? They're trying to mechanically combine the output power from two diesel engines and two gas turbine engines through one complicated gearbox system. The gearbox is failing, and they don't understand why yet.

Imagine an electrical power plant with steam turbines and a large diesel generator. Are all the output shafts ganged together mechanically, or are the alternators from each unit ganged together electrically?

Hint: They're tied together electrically. Matter of fact, every generator online at any given moment feeding power to the national electrical grid are all tied together electrically...NOT mechanically.

My statement makes perfect sense. An electric drive system would be far simpler.

Dude there is no such thing as what you said which was. "combining the power from turbines and diesels electrically instead of mechanically." How does that happen?

So you have no idea what you are babbling about. But hey it sounded good right?

An electric ship can not charge at the charging station, they would need generators, batteries, and the fuel of an oil tanker to run these so it's impossible. So try again, this works in other situations because one oil drum of Uranium powers the ship for 20 years.

In WWII several classes of Destroyer Escorts used either diesel-electric, or turbo-electric drives without batteries or oil tankers to carry fuel. They displaced roughly a third of a LCS. It’s not new technology and generators coupled to electric motors are simpler and more fuel efficient than conventional geared drivetrains. That’s because the generators can always run at the optimum speed to power the motors.

Again the littoral ships have a high speed clutch bearing design flaw that encompasses the entire fleet of these ships. These ships can hit 50mph as designed. So the issue has nothing to do with either the diesel power or gas turbines, and if Daveman believes that his pieced together from the internet design is better than the current design and he is correct he will be a billionaire shortly. However all he is doing is quoting railroad technology that was invented 50 to 100 or even more years ago which has nothing to do with propelling a modern ship to 50mph today.

You are correct that electric ship power is not new, and for that reason precisely it has been tested and vetted as inefficient for various reasons, though it does work better in ships that have no need to be refueled as is the case with reactor equipped vessels, in submarines the electric motors can run off battery and be very quiet as there are no generators running to provide the power. So what works well in one situation does not necessarily work as well in another

Nuclear submarines don't ever run off batteries. the piles use radioactive hot water to heat non-radioactive cold water turning it into steam to turn a turbine that turn the prop and the exhaust steam from the turbine turns a generator to provide electrical power to the boat. That's the reason diesel electric boats are quieter than nuke boats when running on batteries. Don't you ever get tired of being wrong? Ten seconds of Google would stop you from looking like a fool.

He should take a little time to research before he posts. Most of the information is out there.

In fact, I would be happy to answer any submarine questions. I qualified in 1981 onboard an FBM submarine.

Qualified for what? Cook, laundry attendant, missile counter?

Again, a little research would do you some good.

To qualify on a submarine means having a working knowledge of every system on the boat and all damage control procedures and systems. You get signed off on every system, from NAV to propulsion, to supply requisitions. Then you have to stand in from of a board of both enlisted and officers and answer any question about anything on the boat. Then a walk-thru with the Capt. You would never be able to qualify.

I still have my "dolphins" and can still sign "SS" after my name on any military or veteran paperwork.

And every enlisted crewmember has a job, yours was what? Laundry like I said, or perhaps kitchen degreaser? Tell us pop

Yes, every enlisted crew member has a job. In addition to that job you stand various watches, from security watch in port to other jobs underway. I stood sonar watch and helmsman/planesman watch. And every crew member has to qualify. It usually takes months, because your various jobs still have to be done.

So let me get this straight, you watched the sonar man or driver do his job, but never did anything. So your job was absolutely nothing which is what your ASVAB test scores qualified you for.

Well at least you are honest

Yawn

I guess you never served in the military? Or you would know what the term "standing watch" means in this context.

I was the sonar man on watch, and I drove the boat.

Estella is a moron. They know nothing.

So were you a bubblehead, or on a DD?

I was a Bubblehead.

Which boat?

I have several friends who were bubblehead. Mostly attack subs, but one was on a boomer.

 

[WinterBorn]

Seems like an electric propulsion system would have been far simpler, combining the power from turbines and diesels electrically instead of mechanically.

That makes zero sense, as all electric propulsion systems have mechanical parts

No shit, genius. Did you read the article? Did you comprehend it? They're trying to mechanically combine the output power from two diesel engines and two gas turbine engines through one complicated gearbox system. The gearbox is failing, and they don't understand why yet.

Imagine an electrical power plant with steam turbines and a large diesel generator. Are all the output shafts ganged together mechanically, or are the alternators from each unit ganged together electrically?

Hint: They're tied together electrically. Matter of fact, every generator online at any given moment feeding power to the national electrical grid are all tied together electrically...NOT mechanically.

My statement makes perfect sense. An electric drive system would be far simpler.

Dude there is no such thing as what you said which was. "combining the power from turbines and diesels electrically instead of mechanically." How does that happen?

So you have no idea what you are babbling about. But hey it sounded good right?

An electric ship can not charge at the charging station, they would need generators, batteries, and the fuel of an oil tanker to run these so it's impossible. So try again, this works in other situations because one oil drum of Uranium powers the ship for 20 years.

In WWII several classes of Destroyer Escorts used either diesel-electric, or turbo-electric drives without batteries or oil tankers to carry fuel. They displaced roughly a third of a LCS. It’s not new technology and generators coupled to electric motors are simpler and more fuel efficient than conventional geared drivetrains. That’s because the generators can always run at the optimum speed to power the motors.

Again the littoral ships have a high speed clutch bearing design flaw that encompasses the entire fleet of these ships. These ships can hit 50mph as designed. So the issue has nothing to do with either the diesel power or gas turbines, and if Daveman believes that his pieced together from the internet design is better than the current design and he is correct he will be a billionaire shortly. However all he is doing is quoting railroad technology that was invented 50 to 100 or even more years ago which has nothing to do with propelling a modern ship to 50mph today.

You are correct that electric ship power is not new, and for that reason precisely it has been tested and vetted as inefficient for various reasons, though it does work better in ships that have no need to be refueled as is the case with reactor equipped vessels, in submarines the electric motors can run off battery and be very quiet as there are no generators running to provide the power. So what works well in one situation does not necessarily work as well in another

Nuclear submarines don't ever run off batteries. the piles use radioactive hot water to heat non-radioactive cold water turning it into steam to turn a turbine that turn the prop and the exhaust steam from the turbine turns a generator to provide electrical power to the boat. That's the reason diesel electric boats are quieter than nuke boats when running on batteries. Don't you ever get tired of being wrong? Ten seconds of Google would stop you from looking like a fool.

He should take a little time to research before he posts. Most of the information is out there.

In fact, I would be happy to answer any submarine questions. I qualified in 1981 onboard an FBM submarine.

Qualified for what? Cook, laundry attendant, missile counter?

Again, a little research would do you some good.

To qualify on a submarine means having a working knowledge of every system on the boat and all damage control procedures and systems. You get signed off on every system, from NAV to propulsion, to supply requisitions. Then you have to stand in from of a board of both enlisted and officers and answer any question about anything on the boat. Then a walk-thru with the Capt. You would never be able to qualify.

I still have my "dolphins" and can still sign "SS" after my name on any military or veteran paperwork.

And every enlisted crewmember has a job, yours was what? Laundry like I said, or perhaps kitchen degreaser? Tell us pop

Yes, every enlisted crew member has a job. In addition to that job you stand various watches, from security watch in port to other jobs underway. I stood sonar watch and helmsman/planesman watch. And every crew member has to qualify. It usually takes months, because your various jobs still have to be done.

So let me get this straight, you watched the sonar man or driver do his job, but never did anything. So your job was absolutely nothing which is what your ASVAB test scores qualified you for.

Well at least you are honest

Yawn

I guess you never served in the military? Or you would know what the term "standing watch" means in this context.

I was the sonar man on watch, and I drove the boat.

Estella is a moron. They know nothing.

So were you a bubblehead, or on a DD?

I was a Bubblehead.

Which boat?

USS James Madison SSBN 627 - Blue Crew

 

[WinterBorn]

Seems like an electric propulsion system would have been far simpler, combining the power from turbines and diesels electrically instead of mechanically.

That makes zero sense, as all electric propulsion systems have mechanical parts

No shit, genius. Did you read the article? Did you comprehend it? They're trying to mechanically combine the output power from two diesel engines and two gas turbine engines through one complicated gearbox system. The gearbox is failing, and they don't understand why yet.

Imagine an electrical power plant with steam turbines and a large diesel generator. Are all the output shafts ganged together mechanically, or are the alternators from each unit ganged together electrically?

Hint: They're tied together electrically. Matter of fact, every generator online at any given moment feeding power to the national electrical grid are all tied together electrically...NOT mechanically.

My statement makes perfect sense. An electric drive system would be far simpler.

Dude there is no such thing as what you said which was. "combining the power from turbines and diesels electrically instead of mechanically." How does that happen?

So you have no idea what you are babbling about. But hey it sounded good right?

An electric ship can not charge at the charging station, they would need generators, batteries, and the fuel of an oil tanker to run these so it's impossible. So try again, this works in other situations because one oil drum of Uranium powers the ship for 20 years.

In WWII several classes of Destroyer Escorts used either diesel-electric, or turbo-electric drives without batteries or oil tankers to carry fuel. They displaced roughly a third of a LCS. It’s not new technology and generators coupled to electric motors are simpler and more fuel efficient than conventional geared drivetrains. That’s because the generators can always run at the optimum speed to power the motors.

Again the littoral ships have a high speed clutch bearing design flaw that encompasses the entire fleet of these ships. These ships can hit 50mph as designed. So the issue has nothing to do with either the diesel power or gas turbines, and if Daveman believes that his pieced together from the internet design is better than the current design and he is correct he will be a billionaire shortly. However all he is doing is quoting railroad technology that was invented 50 to 100 or even more years ago which has nothing to do with propelling a modern ship to 50mph today.

You are correct that electric ship power is not new, and for that reason precisely it has been tested and vetted as inefficient for various reasons, though it does work better in ships that have no need to be refueled as is the case with reactor equipped vessels, in submarines the electric motors can run off battery and be very quiet as there are no generators running to provide the power. So what works well in one situation does not necessarily work as well in another

Nuclear submarines don't ever run off batteries. the piles use radioactive hot water to heat non-radioactive cold water turning it into steam to turn a turbine that turn the prop and the exhaust steam from the turbine turns a generator to provide electrical power to the boat. That's the reason diesel electric boats are quieter than nuke boats when running on batteries. Don't you ever get tired of being wrong? Ten seconds of Google would stop you from looking like a fool.

He should take a little time to research before he posts. Most of the information is out there.

In fact, I would be happy to answer any submarine questions. I qualified in 1981 onboard an FBM submarine.

Qualified for what? Cook, laundry attendant, missile counter?

Again, a little research would do you some good.

To qualify on a submarine means having a working knowledge of every system on the boat and all damage control procedures and systems. You get signed off on every system, from NAV to propulsion, to supply requisitions. Then you have to stand in from of a board of both enlisted and officers and answer any question about anything on the boat. Then a walk-thru with the Capt. You would never be able to qualify.

I still have my "dolphins" and can still sign "SS" after my name on any military or veteran paperwork.

And every enlisted crewmember has a job, yours was what? Laundry like I said, or perhaps kitchen degreaser? Tell us pop

Yes, every enlisted crew member has a job. In addition to that job you stand various watches, from security watch in port to other jobs underway. I stood sonar watch and helmsman/planesman watch. And every crew member has to qualify. It usually takes months, because your various jobs still have to be done.

So let me get this straight, you watched the sonar man or driver do his job, but never did anything. So your job was absolutely nothing which is what your ASVAB test scores qualified you for.

Well at least you are honest

Yawn

I guess you never served in the military? Or you would know what the term "standing watch" means in this context.

I was the sonar man on watch, and I drove the boat.

Estella is a moron. They know nothing.

So were you a bubblehead, or on a DD?

I was a Bubblehead.

Which boat?

I have several friends who were bubblehead. Mostly attack subs, but one was on a boomer.

Boomers were great duty. More time off than anywhere else in the Navy. But also more time at sea. Never stopping in ports and only rarely surfacing.

 

[westwall]

Seems like an electric propulsion system would have been far simpler, combining the power from turbines and diesels electrically instead of mechanically.

That makes zero sense, as all electric propulsion systems have mechanical parts

No shit, genius. Did you read the article? Did you comprehend it? They're trying to mechanically combine the output power from two diesel engines and two gas turbine engines through one complicated gearbox system. The gearbox is failing, and they don't understand why yet.

Imagine an electrical power plant with steam turbines and a large diesel generator. Are all the output shafts ganged together mechanically, or are the alternators from each unit ganged together electrically?

Hint: They're tied together electrically. Matter of fact, every generator online at any given moment feeding power to the national electrical grid are all tied together electrically...NOT mechanically.

My statement makes perfect sense. An electric drive system would be far simpler.

Dude there is no such thing as what you said which was. "combining the power from turbines and diesels electrically instead of mechanically." How does that happen?

So you have no idea what you are babbling about. But hey it sounded good right?

An electric ship can not charge at the charging station, they would need generators, batteries, and the fuel of an oil tanker to run these so it's impossible. So try again, this works in other situations because one oil drum of Uranium powers the ship for 20 years.

In WWII several classes of Destroyer Escorts used either diesel-electric, or turbo-electric drives without batteries or oil tankers to carry fuel. They displaced roughly a third of a LCS. It’s not new technology and generators coupled to electric motors are simpler and more fuel efficient than conventional geared drivetrains. That’s because the generators can always run at the optimum speed to power the motors.

Again the littoral ships have a high speed clutch bearing design flaw that encompasses the entire fleet of these ships. These ships can hit 50mph as designed. So the issue has nothing to do with either the diesel power or gas turbines, and if Daveman believes that his pieced together from the internet design is better than the current design and he is correct he will be a billionaire shortly. However all he is doing is quoting railroad technology that was invented 50 to 100 or even more years ago which has nothing to do with propelling a modern ship to 50mph today.

You are correct that electric ship power is not new, and for that reason precisely it has been tested and vetted as inefficient for various reasons, though it does work better in ships that have no need to be refueled as is the case with reactor equipped vessels, in submarines the electric motors can run off battery and be very quiet as there are no generators running to provide the power. So what works well in one situation does not necessarily work as well in another

Nuclear submarines don't ever run off batteries. the piles use radioactive hot water to heat non-radioactive cold water turning it into steam to turn a turbine that turn the prop and the exhaust steam from the turbine turns a generator to provide electrical power to the boat. That's the reason diesel electric boats are quieter than nuke boats when running on batteries. Don't you ever get tired of being wrong? Ten seconds of Google would stop you from looking like a fool.

He should take a little time to research before he posts. Most of the information is out there.

In fact, I would be happy to answer any submarine questions. I qualified in 1981 onboard an FBM submarine.

Qualified for what? Cook, laundry attendant, missile counter?

Again, a little research would do you some good.

To qualify on a submarine means having a working knowledge of every system on the boat and all damage control procedures and systems. You get signed off on every system, from NAV to propulsion, to supply requisitions. Then you have to stand in from of a board of both enlisted and officers and answer any question about anything on the boat. Then a walk-thru with the Capt. You would never be able to qualify.

I still have my "dolphins" and can still sign "SS" after my name on any military or veteran paperwork.

And every enlisted crewmember has a job, yours was what? Laundry like I said, or perhaps kitchen degreaser? Tell us pop

Yes, every enlisted crew member has a job. In addition to that job you stand various watches, from security watch in port to other jobs underway. I stood sonar watch and helmsman/planesman watch. And every crew member has to qualify. It usually takes months, because your various jobs still have to be done.

So let me get this straight, you watched the sonar man or driver do his job, but never did anything. So your job was absolutely nothing which is what your ASVAB test scores qualified you for.

Well at least you are honest

Yawn

I guess you never served in the military? Or you would know what the term "standing watch" means in this context.

I was the sonar man on watch, and I drove the boat.

Estella is a moron. They know nothing.

So were you a bubblehead, or on a DD?

I was a Bubblehead.

Which boat?

I have several friends who were bubblehead. Mostly attack subs, but one was on a boomer.

Boomers were great duty. More time off than anywhere else in the Navy. But also more time at sea. Never stopping in ports and only rarely surfacing.

Yeah, my attack friends were "3 knots to nowhere, no thanks!"

Thank you for helping keep this country safe!