In whose navy do you want to serve today?
When I first wanted to write naval fiction, I had few realistic, stable, plausible, detailed shipboard environments within which to place my characters.
As a kid, I'd seen and been annoyed by Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea with the "Seaview's" inconsistent, oversized passageways (yes, I know the camera dollies needed space...), implausible and massive HVAC ducts, inexplicably absurd diving bell arrangement (no believable overhead winch), diving from the sub into the deep ocean with no apparent pressurization of the compartment (crew could come and go, opening compartment doors coming from those large, ventilated passageways...) and aft-facing, forward firing torpedoes-- but, I did like the Flying Sub.
I'd already for several years owned copies of or technical manuals describing Star Trek's USS Enterprise. I'd read Missile Base Beneath the Sea, seen Ice Station Zebra and Gray Lady Down (based on "Event 1000"), fallen in love with Space: 1999's Eagle Transporters, seen "UFO", and other shows, such as Battlestar Galactica.
I studied drafting/mechanical drawing (and quickly became bored when I could not learn the stuff that would help me design ships), built mockups of the Trek and VTTBOTS (sets made of computer punch cards) and walked my action figures about them. Off and on over the 1980-1984 years I taunted my to-be navy recruiters with my notional nuclear submarines (thanks to Revell's USS George Washington cutaway model which ROYALLY pissed of Admiral H.G. Rickover and others... and thanks to aluminum from a Coors can, I experimented and found that 7 blades flew faster and higher from my pencil tip than did other blade numbers (especially when the 7-bladed test nearly cut my face), and BOY did that irritate my recruiter who was a submariner, and who demanded "Where the HELL did you see THIS???!!! THIS IS UNITED STATES NAVY TOP SECRET INFORMATION!" (referring to the 7-bladed prop on the tail of my SSBN design.. and then I know I was on to something bigger than just subs and uniforms and glorified war documents)), been drawing my own versions of the ST space ships and suffering writer's block. (Of course, at that age I'd known nothing about the reasons behind the odd number of blades: the 7th blade canceled out certain annoying acoustical harmonics; I did, however, at the time know of oil-filled and spring-mounted "rafts" our anti-sound mounts that distanced the machinery platforms from the compressing hull; on my own, I pondered the possibility of the shipboard equivalent of "deceptive lighting": deceptive acoustics. I suspect subs and ships have the ability to "dial in" or disguise their noise by introduction of trawler and other acoustics by "re-tuning" combinations of machinery to emanate false signatures. Just an idea, since it makes no sense to have deceptive lighting that nowadays can be examined by optics if the acoustic don't jibe with the distant visual observations.)
So, I decided I'd design naval ships to complement my submarines (I've not posted the really earlier ones, shaped like the post WW II Guppy/Fleet Types, the Triton and Nautilus SSNs and VTTBOTS hulls), although I originally wanted to write Trek and submarine fiction.
Inspirations
For some reason, in 1986 the original concept drawings of the DDG-51 design won me over despite my initial interest in the DD-963 and CG-47 hulls. But, I'd even begun drawing my own versions (and mostly outlines) of the LHA and LPDs, all before graduating from high school. Then, a few years later, after a serendipitous visit to the base library at Naval Station Long Beach and my reading a naval architecture book ("Principles of Naval Engineering, showing the Spruance plant layout in a non-classified publication), and happening upon an earlier (but forgot-I-had at-home) copy of US Naval Institute Proceedings magazine (my own subscriptions I had in high school expired), I then glanced a copy of the updated DDG-51 concept art. While I was starting to like the new hull and superstructure lines, I read to my dismay that the ships would be built without hangar bays, purportedly to keep costs down, and because the accompanying CVNs would perform the parts storage and maintenance depot level work. Armed with some resentment and copies of the Spruance engineering plant layout (published in "Principles of Naval Engineering") I set out to be a one-person ship-designer, but I never completed the drawings before the real DDG-51 of any flight were built.
Fortunately, however, I didn't heavily display them in an "finished" state too soon (that is, before 2003). I still had yet to make several dozen more research efforts and purchase almost a dozen nautical books and many magazines years later to make my drawings a little more compelling. Because computers and databases were taking up more of my time between 1988 to 1996 (I wanted to transcribe my paper-based characters and ship compartments to Lotus Approach from 5.25 inch disks I'd used in an ancient Epson QX-10 of 1983), I ended up teaching myself computers and databases and then fixating on them, bouncing between learning more about computers and alternating between naval and Star Trek design activities. By 2000/2001, I returned to "the ship", after making a handful of database application interfaces to manage characters, ship's spaces, personnel attributes, and more. I imagine that were I still on active duty, my style of personnel management databases might have been keenly exploited (it's older than and similar to and far more in-depth than the JoeSailor.mdb file floating on the Internet). Well, I am building my own navy, hopefully one the world body can appreciate.
Major Bits about the Ships
All of my naval ships have a notional operational economical cruising radius of some 10,000 nautical miles and an abysmally uneconomical, battle-short, sustained-flank-speed endurance/radius of some 980 (nine hundred eighty) nautical miles, though depending on the engines' SFC (Specific Fuel Consumption), the ships should manage to sail up to 1,500 to 2,500 nautical miles at Flank Speed. Though designed with GE LM2500+ engines in mind, I debate whether or not to use the Trent/Westinghouse WR-21 engines. I suppose I was trying too hard to not deviate from what was "tried and true" from the USN perspective. However, the designs can accommodate the WR-21 and the fictional KWRR-40 (Kawasaki Westinghouse Rolls Royce) 40,000 SHP model engines. I am not sure if IHI (Ishikawjima Haruma Industries) of Japan would replace the Kawasaki part of my fictional nomenclature.
The CGHRD-1065 hull, as completed, is my 11th incarnation/revision of my initial forays into "redesigning" the Burkes to my own then-/ex-Sailor mind. I'd started them on grid paper, then yellow trace/vellum (it was cheaper than large sheets of grid, and facilitated my periodic revisions), then went back to grid paper years later. So, from 1986 until about 2000, there were numerous revisions (one through 10). The original two were on 1/4 inch grid. Both designs were of ships that were about 466 feel long overall, thanks to several erroneous or premature sources repeated by the industry observers. But, for me, it was good exercise to determine that I could pack in a lot of stuff into a hull of 466 feet length and 60 feet of beam. Later, I expanded the lengths, added the hangar bays (around 1990), made sure I had full-sized VLS both fore and aft (which I refer to as VLM for vertical launch missile system -- just to be different...) and then decided to make sure the stowed helos were not abreast of the VLM. I'd earlier in 1986 drawn on my ships dual, active fin stabilizers, since I was influenced by my then-permanent duty station, an FFG-7 class ship) that had one set amidships. They were nice to have, compared to other FFG-s to which I'd been loaned during their underway periods while my own ship was in restricted availability, essentially having no real need for a teletype- and photo-copier-repair qualified Radioaman. (Of the other two qualified people one was our chief, and the other was a watch supervisor, neither of which the other ships needed.)
Incidentally, when I began writing a tour book and Ship's Information Book for the "DDGS-65", I added a sister ship "Higgins", back around 1997. (Later, a real DDG-51 class Higgins was named.) Also, I'd created a Japanese class, Kato (pronounced Kah-toh, not Kay-toh), to do to my own -65 what the DDG-173 did to the DDG-51 class. Around 1990/1991, I'd designed onto the foc'sle a 203 mm gun; and fore and aft a twin full-sized VLS; amidships a nuclear-gas turbine hybrid plant (making the ship a CGN-222), with multiple (4) SH-60J helicopter spots in the hangar bay. The ship has 3 azimuthal propulsion pods. The forward superstructure is similarly bulky like the DDG-173. But, there is a large gap between the two superstructures, since the reactor obviates the need for forward air intakes and gas exhausts. That space could serve as the Amidships UnRep station. The pods, though, got the attention of the Funenokagakukan musuem librarian when he noticed the date of creation of the drawing/deck plans (being a date round 13 years prior, or about 1991). He smiled and nodded at the pods, the reactor, and the JSMDF-222 bits.
To this day, I have not stepped foot aboard any DDG-51 hulls -- not even on Fleet Week --and I discharged way back in 1988. Also, I didn't even have official duty or pre-commissioning unit access to them since the first hull commissioned after 1991, (years behind schedule, as is or can be typical of the first ship in a class). I relied only upon information accessible to the public, and without ever resorting to use of the Freedom of Information Act. All my resources were from libraries, book stores, or in one case, one of the prime builders' Commissioning Day packets typically handed out to visitors on Commissioning Day).
This first of my hull designs spanned from 1986 until 2005, partly because I had other hobbies (designing starships in the Star Trek universe, working out Warp Drive speed and distance tables, among other things...). I "tidied up" and made production ready this design in late 2002. As released in mid- 2003, the -1065 was designated as CGLW-1065, or Cruiser, Guided-Missile, Littoral. However, I despise the word "littoral" in the naval/power-projection context, so I made it" go away". Prior to that, it was "DDGLW-1065", "DDG-65", "DDG-65S" before I changed it. Around 2000 or 2001 I realized that my ships, if built as designed, would literally outclass the real DDG-51 hulls -- even the Flight IIA. It was that realization that motivated me to class them as "cruiser". However, "L" could have remained and been described as "Light", but as it could be too easily confused with "littoral.
The next hull, the CGHRD-1165, became a personal necessity as I feared/felt that my "unofficial, notional, non-architect positioned" CGLW-1065 hull might either embarrass or incense "real" engineers, the Navy, and maybe even some politicos, as well as retirees, enthusiasts, and others. This hull took me only ONE month's time, in January 2003. It was easier since the process of transferring lines, aligning the propeller shafts in 3-D position on 2-D paper were all still fresh in my mind. But, this ship got a new radar mast. I dispensed with the bulkhead-mounted planar radar faces partly to avoid potential (copyright or patent) issues with the makers of the real radars. Not that I was treading on patents, but that I also (emotionally) didn't want to perpetuate the SPY-1A-D radar system as drawn in publications. I decided to and rather prefer to find new takes on some of the existing things. In December 2004 I gave a copy to the Funenokagakukan maritime museum librarian who seemed quite taken by my 2 designs. (I'd also given away copies of the -1065, but not the -1165, to friends in various places.)
The third hull, the CGHID-1278, rose my designs to three, partly because I want to deprecate my CGHRD-1065; I wanted to have three "environments" for my fictional characters' naval action (this would facilitate 3 major points in the story arc); I wanted to finally incorporate/include azimuthal propulsion pods which I initially sketched around 1992, but never got around to until May/June 2005.
So, after I redesigned and cleand up my "Burke-deprecating" CGLW-1065, I retyped it as CGHLW-1065, then CGHRD-1065. CG is for Cruiser, Guided Missile". (By moral intent (not just real-world technology limitations -- limitations which I'll comfortably presume to be at least 30% below factual capabilities), the missiles aboard my ships are limited to sub-100-mile ranges for surface action and 25-50 for aerial action, this being my comment on Admiralty Law as regards International Law and nations border and minerals/resources rights, and to "deprecate" mission profiles where it is normally assumed inland targets will be "struck from the sea"...) LW was for littoral warfare. "H" is for Heavy, and RD is for Regional Defense. In my younger years the hull was to be DDG-65, then DDG-1065, but the real DDG-65 came into existence in the 1990s, and later, around 2002, I felt "destroyer" was way too bombastic (yes, I realize it comes from "Torpedo Destroyer", but there is no such specific mission profile for ships this large).
After completing my "almost-production-ready" images and labeling for the CGHRD-1065 at the end of December 2002, I immediately and for an entire month developed the CGHRD-1165, a more streamlined successor hull. I drew upon some sort of "Divine Wind inspiration" when I came up with the "pagoda mast" or pyramid-like structure, and this inspiration meshed with my 1992-ish notional design of a nuclear-powered cruiser. Interestingly, when I started buying UK-imported ship magazines, I'd started to see other nations' ships having radar masts similar to what I drew. I had forgotten that years prior that I had seen similar structures and masts on models. Fortunately, I did not heavily mimic them as I did with my -1065 design I rapidly designed the -1165 while my mind was still fresh with "nice to have/ought to have" features I didn't include in the -1065 design. The -1165 is finer (read: more faired or streamlined) and longer to exploit better hydrodynamics. (Note: the DDG-173 and DDG-177 beams are about 19.99 meters, or 65'-7"; the -1165 beam is 18.14 meters (59'-6") at deep draft and 17.68 meters (58'-0") at light draft.)
After I departed Tokyo in February 2005, I lamented international politics and struggled to find a better way to have my drawings exploited in such a way that I could be a paid participant. So, in May 2005, I designed my third, highly-detailed hull that would deprecate the "DDG-51" look-alike my -1065 is. The CGHID-1278 "FuLiang" (named after a girl I once corresponded with in China) is yet longer than the -1165, and is capable of carrying Asia-produced copies of the V-22 "Osprey". (Really, who's to say China won't clone the "V-22"? At the very least, modify it to escape patents lawsuits by making it smaller, and changing the mechanical aspects a bit...)
As if these were not enough, I then created a fourth design, the CGHRD-1095. This hull retroactively fits between the CGHRD-1065 and the CGHRD-1165. I so much want do "undo" some of the mechanical errors I let creep into the CGHRD-1065 design that I was driven in May 2006 to redraw the CGHRD-1065 with the new designator. However, incremental improvements in the sketch work (prior to actually drawing on the grid paper) became extremely exciting to the point I underwent some mild anxiety (attacks?) because I suddenly could not decide which improvements to keep without making the hull almost outclass the CGHRD-1165. So, the CGHRD-1095 retained shafts and gear boxes instead of obtaining azimuthal propulsion pods.
But, this design took on aspects of the UK, the French, German and Korean hull aspects. Most tellingly, by the astute observer, the engineering plant characterizes the hull to a great degree: It pays homage to the Russian engineers who designed a shipboard plant that can drie the ships' two propellers via any one or more of the 4 main engines. This is achieved by placing between the two main engine rooms a gearbox that has port and starboard gear sets that can transfer gearbox power to either sided of the ship. In my design, the forward engines' clutch assemblies attach to the separate propulsion gearbox. The engines abaft this gearbox have small shafts that transfer or receive power from the gearbox. So long as there is no major hull and shaft damage, one port and one starboard engine, or one engine alone, or two engines on one side of the ship can drive one or both propellers. Moreover, I designed each engine to be in a separate half of the engineering compartment. This is for vastly improved survivability to limit progressive flooding, to contain fires, and to reduce the amount of Halon gas needed to starve or put out one engine. Contrast this to the DDG-51 class which is typical of USN twin-modules on one shaft approach. That plant layout means no propulsion if the port engines are off-line and the starboard shaft is bent severely but the starboard engines are fine. They simply mechanically cannot deliver propulsion power to the opposite shaft. My arrangement disposes of that problem without having to install separate quantities of larger propulsion generators and isolation. This has the rather nasty potential to delay the pursuit for all-electric drive in some ships under the arguments of disposing of the propeller shafts, the leaky stuffing tubes and the shafts problematic inflatable seals, the risks of underwater explosions warping the shafts, and so on.
All my hulls prominently feature:
ooindenamashen... GAMBATE! In whose navy do you want to serve today?
No comments:
Post a Comment