Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

EPV for naval service

Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by DeV View Post
    So basically it would probably capsize an OPV sized vessel
    It would capsize an 8,000ton Type 45 destroyer - shit, I reckon it would drag a 65,000ton QE class aircraft carrier off to the left....

    Comment


    • In the case I'm most familiar with, we had 3 X 400kw and 1 X 100kw generator sets. The total on board electrical power was therefore 1.3 megawatts. A Japanese Ion Battery park for a 32 Mega watt wind farm seemed to cover an acre of units the size of large shipping containers. These were all arranged in open stowage with good ventilation. Ion batteries when discharging generate high temperatures and would add to the complexity for a ship. They have caused fires in transportation. As regards weight I'm not certain on large units , but the normal ion 12v battery weighs in at 13lbs in old money. If you take 1.3mw at 1,300,000 volts then it must be big. A nuclear submarine is around 22mw so the maths and problems are endless. We should drop this bright idea as NOT practical.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by ancientmariner View Post
        In the case I'm most familiar with, we had 3 X 400kw and 1 X 100kw generator sets. The total on board electrical power was therefore 1.3 megawatts. A Japanese Ion Battery park for a 32 Mega watt wind farm seemed to cover an acre of units the size of large shipping containers. These were all arranged in open stowage with good ventilation. Ion batteries when discharging generate high temperatures and would add to the complexity for a ship. They have caused fires in transportation. As regards weight I'm not certain on large units , but the normal ion 12v battery weighs in at 13lbs in old money. If you take 1.3mw at 1,300,000 volts then it must be big. A nuclear submarine is around 22mw so the maths and problems are endless. We should drop this bright idea as NOT practical.
        agreed!

        Comment


        • Originally posted by pym View Post
          I've quoted the power figures for the P60 engines, I've demonstrated the size of a wind turbine capable of equaling the output of the P60 engines. But you've ignored it.

          I'm going to spell this out once more - the P60 utilises 2x 5440kW engines. That's 10MW.

          A "small" wind turbine that generates 1/10 of the power of one of those engines - 500kW - has a blade 52 - 54 meters in diameter. That's 170+ feet. It's almost as long as the Peacocks.

          EWT’s DIRECTWIND 500 kW to 1 MW turbines deliver more power and uptime with the lowest cost of energy and highest return on investment, ideal for developing new distributed generation sites or repowering existing ones.


          As to the myriad of other issues, well, there's the drag involved, the weight, the effect on the centre of gravity, the cataclysmic effect it would have on the ships RCS and on its own ability to see. The wind will not be free when you're sailing against it. That and y'know conservation of energy, thermodynamics. Minor stuff like that.

          But do go on - maybe tell Elon Musk about the idea, surely his cars would benefit from a small wind turbine, after all wind is free right?

          Still though, it would make for entertaining winch training.

          FWIW a quick and possibly dreadful calculation, since I'm no engineer either: the P60's emergency backup generator is rated at 320kW - in order to provide 320kW for one hour with Li-Ion, you would be talking about approx two tonnes of Lithium Ion batteries. (Tesla's use a 85 kWh battery weighing in at 544 kg)
          At least they offer the 'service elevator' option, climbing the mast just got alot easier!

          Comment



          • P71 prototype revealed

            Comment


            • A great picture. Quite apt. That is a Vroon Jack-up Rig. It is literally a ship on four jackable legs. They are the company doing patrols with Vos Grace in the winter migrant patrols near Samos.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by na grohmití View Post
                Don't feed the troll.
                Hi Na Gromhití.....If you're directing your "troll" comment to me I'd like to assure you that I only comment on subjects which actually interest me and as I average a mere 50 posts a year your threshold for "trolling" seems a little on the low side.

                Comment


                • [QUOTE=ancientmariner;437202]A great picture. Quite apt. That is a Vroon Jack-up Rig. It is literally a ship on four jackable legs. They are the company doing patrols with Vos Grace in the winter migrant patrols near Samos.[/QUOT
                  Last edited by Laners; 1 February 2016, 17:44.
                  Don't spit in my Bouillabaisse .

                  Comment


                  • Single Engine running

                    Originally posted by DeV View Post
                    The NS routinely operate on single engines to reduce fuel costs.

                    If going down that route they would be better off with IMERC's Aeolus project
                    This was not without creating technical trouble for the ship running on one engine. In a given scenario, running on one engine, meant that the unloaded or engine with a trailing propellor, was cooler than the engine on load. If ordered to full speed to intercept a target, the full load on the cool engine often led to a ship becoming hampered by a blown cylinder on that engine. It was wise therefore to give the full load decision to the EO for equalisation of temperatures. In experiment we found 14knots on one engine ,used the same fuel as two engines delivering the same speed. After a blown cylinder problem my ships never patrolled on one engine except for docking in harbour. In general cold engines on first day of patrol need to be minded for the initial few hours to achieve optimum balances of temperature an expansions of materials.

                    Comment


                    • So what new roles potentionally for the MRV?

                      Comment


                      • Multi Role vessel, in our case ,needs to under take all tasks of an OPV. In addition carry out sanctioned roles of humanitarian aid in all areas including those with levels of conflict. Be capable of dealing with refugees both wounded and walking. Interface with other navies in resupply, air capability for land-on , fuel, vertrep. Capable of self defence and shore support if required. Transport troops over long journeys up to platoon plus size-say fifty. In emergency move up to company size unit in no great comfort. Provide a towing capability to an acceptable standard. Project National interest by "show the Flag" visits as requested. Provide an agreed container and vehicle capability.
                        Last edited by ancientmariner; 2 February 2016, 12:31.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by ancientmariner View Post
                          Multi Role vessel, in our case ,needs to under take all tasks of an OPV. In addition carry out sanctioned roles of humanitarian aid in all areas including those with levels of conflict. Be capable of dealing with refugees both wounded and walking. Interface with other navies in resupply, air capability for land-on , fuel, vertrep. Capable of self defence and shore support if required. Transport troops over long journeys up to platoon plus size-say fifty. In emergency move up to company size unit in no great comfort. Provide a towing capability to an acceptable standard. Project National interest by "show the Flag" visits as requested. Provide an agreed container and vehicle capability.
                          That sounds like a robust and sensible set of capabilities. The only addition I would suggest would be the capability to embark and host an FHQ Staff. That gives you the option of taking the lead for CSDP missions for instance which is a great way of garnering visibility and operational experience. There are some space penalties and it requires upgraded C2 facilities but both of these are useful across the range of capabilities mentioned above.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Medsailor View Post
                            That sounds like a robust and sensible set of capabilities. The only addition I would suggest would be the capability to embark and host an FHQ Staff. That gives you the option of taking the lead for CSDP missions for instance which is a great way of garnering visibility and operational experience. There are some space penalties and it requires upgraded C2 facilities but both of these are useful across the range of capabilities mentioned above.
                            I very much doubt that Ireland will ever lead a EUBG

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by DeV View Post
                              I very much doubt that Ireland will ever lead a EUBG
                              Not a BG lead but host platform for the Force Commander and his/her staff. When Sweden took command of EUNAVFOR Atalanta, their embarked FHQ was aboard a Dutch vessel. As I said, it can be demanding in terms of space and C3 facilities but given what is being described in terms of dimensions and capabilities, not too much of a stretch. And it's all stuff that can be used for the remainder of the mission set of the vessel at other times.

                              When we took the step of contributing initially Vessel Protection Dets and subsequently Enhanced Boarding Elements aboard Dutch vessels, that buy-in gave us a place at the table. Hosting the head honcho would give not only a place but a voice.

                              Comment


                              • RFT published for RoRo or similar merchant vessel to bring Irish elements of EUBG to Germany

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X