SEA SWAT
Sea Base Defense LCS
Total Ship Systems Engineering 2003
TSSE Presentation Outline
Introduction
Conclusions
Manning
Requirements
& Design
Damage
Control
Combat
Systems
Electrical
Hull
Modularity
Propulsion
TSSE Knowledge Scheme
TS3000,
3001, 3003
TS4002,4003
Capstone Design Project
Realistic, Team-based Application
TSSE Courses
Systems Engineering Principles and Process
Integration Processes and Techniques
MS Degree (ME/Physics/ECE) — Foundation
Engineering Understanding of Major Elements
TS3002, 4000,
4001
2003 TSSE Faculty and Team
Faculty Members
Professor Fotis Papoulias
Professor Mike Green
Team Members
LT Rodrigo Cabezas, Chilean Navy
LT Jake Didoszak, USN
LT Colin Echols, USN
LTJG Zafer Elcin, Turkish Navy
LT Constance Fernandez, USN
LTJG Alper Kurultay, Turkish Navy
LT Scott Lunt, USN
LT Freddy Santos, USN
The Taskers
• Systems Engineering Analysis - Initial
Requirements Document (SEA-IRD)
• TSSE Faculty Capstone Design Project
Guidance
• N7 Preliminary Design Initial
Requirements Document (N7 PD-IRD)
Sea Power 21
Sea Shield
Sea Strike
Sea Basing
FORCEnet
Force Protection
Strike
Deploy and Employ
Intel, Surveillance,
Reconnaissance
Surface Warfare
Fire Support
Provide Integrated
Joint Logistics
Common Operational
and Tactical Pictures
Under Sea Warfare
Maneuver
Pre-Position Joint
Assets Afloat
Networks
Theater Air and
Missile Defense
Strategic
Deterrence
Sea Shield
Force
Protection
Surface
Warfare
Protect Against
SOF and Terrorist
Threats
Provide Defense
Against Surface
Threats
Mitigate Effects of
CBRNE
Conduct Offensive
Operations against
Surface Threats
Under Sea
Warfare
Theater Air and
Missile Defense
Neutralize Submarine
Threats in the
Littorals
Provide Self-Defense
Against Subsurface
Threats
Neutralize Open
Ocean Submarine
Threats
Counter Minefields
from Deep to Shallow
Water
Breach Minefields, Obstacles,
and Barriers from VSW to the
Beach Exit Zone
Conduct Mining Operations
Provide Defense
Against Air and
Missile Threats
Provide Maritime Air
and Missile Defense
Provide Overland Air
and Missile Defense
Conduct Sea-Based
Missile Defense
Sea Basing
Deploy and Employ
Provide Integrated
Joint Logistics
Close the Force &
Maintain Mobility
Provide Sustainment for
Operations at Sea
Integrate and Support Joint
Personnel and Equipment
Provide at Sea Arrival and
Assembly
Provide Sustainment for
Operations Ashore
Provide Afloat C2 Physical
infrastructure
Provide Focused Logistics
Provide AFSB Capability for
Joint Operations
Allow Selective Offload
Reconstitute and
Regenerate at Sea
Provide Shipboard and
Mobile Maintenance
Provide Force Medical Services
Provide Advanced Base Support
Pre-Position Joint
Assets Afloat
SEA SWAT Priorities
Provide Defense vs. Surface Threats
1
Provide Defense vs. Subsurf. Threats
2
Provide Maritime Air & Missile Defense
3
Detect Minefields Deep to Shallow Water
4
Open Ocean Submarine Threats
5
Submarine Threats in the Littorals
6
Protect against SOF & Terrorist Threats
7
Breach Minefields, Obstacles & Barriers
8
Provide Overland Air & Missile Defense
9
Conduct Mining Operations
10
Mitigate Effects of CBRNE
11
Conduct Offensive Operations vs. Surface
Sea SWAT
Priorities ISO
SEA SHIELD
12
10 %
20 %
30 %
40 %
50%
Requirements
Introduction
Conclusions
Manning
Requirements
& Design
Damage
Control
Combat
Systems
Electrical
Hull
Modularity
Propulsion
Design Project Guidance
…to produce a design for a ship or group of
ships to protect the ships of the Sea Base
while in the operating area
and
…protection of the airborne assets moving
between Sea Base and the objective
and
…protection of the surface assets moving
between Sea Base and the beach
Requirements Overview
• Protect the Sea Base
• Operate in Deep to Very Shallow Water
• Operate at 35 knots
• AW, SUW, USW/MIW capable
• Reduced Manning implemented
• Modular Design
Design Philosophy
Introduction
Conclusions
Manning
Requirements
& Design
Damage
Control
Combat
Systems
Electrical
Hull
Modularity
Propulsion
Overall Design Philosophy
Combat Systems Defensive
1
Modularity
2
3
4
5
6
Speed
Aviation Capability
Cost
Maintainability
Manning Reduction
Combat Systems Offensive
Indefinite Sustainment
Appearance
7
8
Design Philosophy
Priorities
9
10
10 %
20 %
30 %
40 %
50%
60%
Design Process
Conceptual
Ship Design
Detailed
Trade Off
Analysis
Initial
Trade Off
Analysis
Courses of Action
• COA #1:
Single Ship Concept
• COA #2:
Two-Ship Concept
• Trade-off analysis conducted to
determine which COA better meets
requirements
Trade-off Analysis Priorities
• Operational Flexibility (10%)
• Operational Capability (10%)
• Operational Availability (10%)
• Cost (15%)
• Space Availability (15%)
• Acquisition (40%)
(%) Weight of each priority
Cost Analysis*
Characteristics Single Ship
Two Ship
(SUW, AAW, &
USW/MIW)
(SUW,USW/MIW &
SUW/AAW)
Length
258 ft
249 ft
Beam
52 ft
50 ft
Draft
19.2 ft
18.5 ft
Power
39500 hp
36800 hp
Displacement
1626 LT
1454 LT
Est. Cost of Hull
$450 M
$425 M
Est. Cost of
Combat Systems
$225 M
$212.5 M
Total Est.
Acquisition Cost
$675 M
$637.5 M x 2 =
$1275 M
* Based on MAPC spreadsheet
Single Ship vs. Two Ships
Priority
Single Ship
Design
Two Ship
Design
Operational
Flexibility
.2
1
Operational
Capability
1
.2
Operational
Availability
.2
1
Cost
.75
.15
Space Availability
.15
.75
Acquisition
.5
.5
Total*
2.8
3.6
*Sum of the product of each priority weight and ranking
Ranking of five for top & one for bottom
Single Ship vs. Two Ships
Feasibility Study Results for Single and Two-Ship LCS Design
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
Single Ship
Tw o Ships
1.5
1
0.5
0
Oper
Oper
Oper
Flexibility Capability Availability
Cost
Space Acquisition
Availability
Total
Combat Systems
Introduction
Conclusions
Manning
Requirements
& Alternatives
Damage
Control
Combat
Systems
Next Speaker:
LT Rodrigo
Cabezas
Electrical
Hull
Modularity
Propulsion
Threats
Sea Base States
State I – Staging / Buildup State II – Ship-to-Shore /
(Op Area)
Ship-to-Obj. Maneuver
– ASCM
– Small boats
– Unconventional
ships/boats
– Submarines/UUVs
– Mines
–
–
–
–
–
Small boats
Mines
SAMs
Unguided munitions
Aircraft/UAVs
Threats (cont’d)
Sea Base States
State III – Sustainment
–
–
–
–
–
ASCM
Mines
Unconventional ships/boats
SAMs
Aircraft/UAVs
Initial Combat Needs Analysis
Aircraft
UAV’s
SAM’s
ASCM
USV’s
Small Boats
Submarines
UUVs
Mines
Associated
Threat
Multifunction
Combat
Radar
System
Air
Search
Radar
Surface
Search
Radar
Mine
Warfare
Package
Variable
Depth
Sonar
Torpedo
Early
Warning
Weapons Systems Trade Off
Scenarios
Threat
LCS self
defense
scenario
M1
Low &
Slow
ASCM
M1
Low &
Slow
ASCM
M1
Low &
Slow
ASCM
M2
Low &
Fast
ASCM
Scenario
Title
Description
Submarine
Launched M1
ASCM
Two LCS undergoing
ASW operations close to
SeaBase
2
Four Surface/Air
M1 ASCMs
LCS defending against
airplanes attacking
SeaBase
3
LCS Engaged by
M1 Coastal
batteries
4
LCS Engaged by
MIG-29 Carrying
T2 ASCM
1
Two LCS undertaking
mine sweeping to clear a
passage from SeaBase
to shore. Positioned 8
miles from shore
Two LCS are escorting
an ExWar ship,
Scenario 3 Simulation:
LCS engaged by coastal
batteries (ASCM)
Scenario Sensor Missile Gun Pra
S3: Scenario number 3
R1, R2: Sensor suites
D1, D2: Anti-missile Missiles
G1, G2: Guns
S3
S3
S3
S3
S3
S3
S3
S3
R1
R1
R1
R1
R2
R2
R2
R2
D1
D1
D2
D2
D1
D1
D2
D2
G1
G2
G1
G2
G1
G2
G1
G2
Pra: Probability of Raid Annihilation
0.927
0.965
0.936
0.942
0.952
0.942
0.942
0.959
Weapons Systems Trade Off
Concept
Coverage (2D/3D)
Frequency/Band
S2
S1
3D
3D
X Band
C or S
Antenna/Aperture Type Active Phased Passive
Radar example:
S2, S1 Radars
Probability of Sensor
Availability (RM&A)
Size/Weight Estimate
*Transition to Track
Time
*Minimum Range
(needs to match
weapon)
Electrical Power
Rqmts
Signature (RCS/IR)
contribution
Systems quantity
Complexity
0.95
20000
0.85
10000
1
4
50
250
350
200
1
2
1
3
3
1
Weapons Systems Trade Off
Radar example: non relevant parameters
S1
S2
Targets
Weapons Systems Trade Off
Radar example: relevant parameters
Trade-Off Radar suite
2.5
2
1.5
Score
System 1
1
System 2
0.5
0
Size
Track time
Power req
Quantity
Concept
Complexity
TOTAL
Mission packages
1. Ship’s payload limit: 160 LT (app)
2. Core package (CP)
•
Basic package (BP). Ship standard plus
self defense.
•
Surface Warfare package (SUWP)
3. Anti Air Warfare package (AAWP)
4. Anti Submarine/ Mine Warfare
package(ASW/MIWP)
5. Weapons systems Weight Limit:
•
CP + AAWP < 160 LT
•
CP + ASWP < 160 LT
Core Mission Package Systems
Basic Package
• Multi-Function Radar
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
(APAR)
Command and Control
System
EW Suite
Navigation Radar
EO/IR/UV/LLTV
Suite
Communications Suite
Hull Mounted Sonar
Real Time Degaussing
System
Core Package Systems (cont)
Basic Package
•Sea Ram
•Helicopter and
UAV capable
•Signature
management system
•Nixie
•Torpedo warning
receiver
•High precision
navigation system
•Etc.
Core Package Systems (cont)
SUW Package
• Harpoon Missiles
(x4)
• Mk III 57 mm
BOFORS gun
• Rigid Hull Inflatable
Boats (RHIB) (x2)
USW/MIW Mission Package
USW
• Mk 32 Mod 15 Torpedo
Launcher
• Mk 50 Torpedoes (x 6)
• Low Freq Active Towed
Sonar. (LFATS )
• LAMPS (aircraft sonar,
sonobuoy and torpedo
capable)
USW/MIW Mission Package
MIW
UUV
• Advanced Side Looking Sonar
•
•
•
•
•
•
(ASLS)
Mine-Hunting UUVs
Expendable Mine Destructor
(EMD)
Airborne Laser Mine Detector
System (ALMDS)
Rapid Airborne Mine Clearance
System (RAMICS)
Organic Airborne & Surface
Influence Suite (OASIS)
Airborne Mine Neutralization
System (AMNS)
AAW Mission Package
AAW
• Mk 41 8-cell Vertical
Launching System
• Evolved Sea Sparrow
Missile (x 32 using Mk
25 Quad-Pack)
Signatures
RCS
Freq: 1 GHz
Elev: 5 deg
Signatures (cont)
RCS
Freq: 1 GHz
Elev: 5 deg
Polar graph
Signatures (cont)
Temperature
Prediction
(Environmental)
Signatures (cont)
IR Signature
(10 Km,
staring
sensor)
Radiance
Summary
• Threats
• Scenarios
• Trade off
• Mission Packages
• Signatures
Hull Design
Introduction
Conclusions
Manning
Requirements
& Alternatives
Damage
Control
Combat
Systems
Next Speaker:
LTJG Zafer
Elcin
Electrical
Hull
Modularity
Propulsion
Initial Hull Design Philosophy
Deck Area
1
Maneuverability 2
Draft
3
Length
4
Beam
5
Hull Design
Power
6
Displacement
7
Philosophy Priorities
2.5 %
10 %
12.5 %
15 %
(%) Weight of each priority
17.5%
20%
Hull Form Candidates
Initial Hull Design Analysis
Priority
Monohull Catamaran
Trimaran
SES
Deck Area
0.2
0.6
0.8
0.4
Maneuverability
0.8
0.4
0.2
0.6
Draft
0.2
0.6
0.8
0.4
Length
0.5
0.375
0.125
0.25
Beam
0.5
0.25
0.125
0.125
Power
0.075
0.15
0.3
0.225
Displacement
0.15
0.075
0.3
0.225
Total
2.425
2.45
2.65
2.25
*Sum of the product of each priority weight and ranking
Ranking of FOUR for top thru ONE for bottom
Initial Hull Design Analysis
Hull Design Analysis
3
Displacement
2.5
Power
Beam
2
Length
1.5
Draft
Maneuverability
1
Deck Area
0.5
0
Monohull
Catamaran
Trimaran
SES
Hull Design Processes
Advantages
• Resistance
• Seakeeping and Motions
• Maneuverability
• General Arrangement
• Survivability
• Signature Reduction
Side Hull Positioning –
Resistance and Powering
SPEED vs. EHP
80000
70000
EHP (hp)
60000
50000
40000
30000
20000
10000
0
13
23
33
43
SPEED (kts)
Xout=0.15625, Yout=0.1
Xout=0.15625,Yout=0.15
Xout=0.2,Yout=0.1
Xout=0.2, Yout=0.15
53
Side Hull Positioning –
Seakeeping
Heave RAO for Head Seas (Fn=0.2)
Heave RAO for Head Seas (Fn=0.4)
35
12
30
10
25
8
20
X=0.15625
15
X=0.20
X=0.15625
6
X=0.20
4
10
2
5
0
0
0
1
2
3
4
5
0
6
1
Heave RAO for Head Seas (Fn=0.6)
2
3
4
5
6
Heave RAO for Head Seas (Fn=0.8)
3
3.5
3
2.5
2.5
2
X=0.15625
1.5
X=0.20
1
2
X=0.15625
1.5
X=0.20
1
0.5
0.5
0
0
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
Side Hull Positioning
Side Hull Positioning
Characteristics of SEA SWAT
Characteristic
Main Hull
Side Hull
Length (LBP)
400 ft
125 ft
Beam (B)
30.8 ft
7.5 ft
Total Beam for
Yout / L pp  0.1
89.5 ft
Draft (T)
12 ft
10 ft
L/B
13.0
16.7
L / 1/ 3
9.39
7.54
Block Coefficient (CB)
0.53
0.50
Midship Coefficient (CM)
0.84
0.68
Waterplane Coefficient (CW)
0.81
0.79
Volume
77226 ft3
4558ft3
Displacement
2206 LT
130 LT
Total Volume
86343 ft3
Total Displacement
2466 LT
Body Plan of SEA SWAT
Main Hull
Body Plan of the Main Hull
0
-5
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
-1
-2
-3
-4
-5
1
2
3
4
5
Body Plan of SEA SWAT Side
Hull
Side Hull Body Plan
0
-5
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
-1
-2
-3
-4
1
2
3
4
5
Body Plan of SEA SWAT
Maneuverability
General Arrangement
General Arrangement
General Arrangement
Survivability
Signature Reduction
Modularity Design
Introduction
Conclusions
Manning
Requirements
& Alternatives
Damage
Control
Combat
Systems
Next Speaker:
LT Scott Lunt
Electrical
Hull
Modularity
Propulsion
Modularity
• Definition
• Application to SEA SWAT
Modularity
• Mission Packages
• AW
• USW/MIW
• Core Systems
Modularity
VLS/Torpedo Handling
Modularity
VLS/Torpedo Handling
Modularity
SEARAM
SEARAM
Nixie
Towed Sonar
Propulsion Design
Introduction
Conclusions
Manning
Requirements
& Alternatives
Damage
Control
Combat
Systems
Next Speaker:
LTJG Alper
Kurultay
Electrical
Hull
Modularity
Propulsion
Approach
• Resistance Calculations and Power Requirements
• Selections
• Propulsion Plant
• Prime Mover
• Propulsor
• Propeller
• Trade-Offs
• MT 30 vs. LM 2500(+)
• LM 1600 vs. LM 2500(+) for Endurance Speed
Calculations
• Fuel Consumption and Endurance Speed Calculations
• Layout Plan
Resistance Calculations
• Wave Resistance
• Ship Wave Analysis Code
• Frictional Resistance
• Based on ITTC57 Formula
• Form Resistance
• Percent of the Frictional Resistance
Power Requirements
Speed vs Power
80000
SHP
60000
40000
20000
0
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Spe e d (k nots )
24 Hour Ship Electric Load = 5 000 Hp (~3.7 MW)
45
Alternatives for Propulsion Plants
• Conventional Steam Plant
• Nuclear Steam Plant
• Fuel Cells
• Diesels
• Gas Turbines
Prime Mover Selection
• ICR WR21
• LM 1600
• LM 2500
• LM 2500+
• MT 30 Trent
Comparison of Gas Turbines
Weights of Gas Turbines
120000
100000
80000
lb
60000
40000
20000
0
MT 30
ICR LM 1600 LM 2500 LM LM 6000
WR21
2500+
Trade Off Study Between
MT30 and LM2500(+)
LM2500+ vs MT30 Comparison Chart
Fuel Consumption (LT/hr)
1
7
0.9
6
0.8
5
0.7
4
0.6
MT30
total score 0.5
3
LM2500+
0.4
2
0.3
1
0.2
0
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
0.1
0
Speed (knots)
volume
LM 2500+
MT 30
weight
sfc
power/weight
total
Final Decision
• 1 LM2500+
• 1 LM1600
• 1 Allison AG9140
(Harbor Duty)
Fuel Consumption Calculations
600
Required Fuel (LT)
500
400
300
200
100
0
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Speed (knots)
LM1600
LM2500+
Endurance Fuel Estimation for 2500 NM
600
500
Fuel (LT)
400
300
200
100
0
0
5
10
15
20
25
Speed (kts)
30
35
40
45
50
Propulsor Choices
• Podded Propulsors
• Water jets and hydro drive
• Conventional Propeller
Propeller Selection
Retractable Rudder Propellers
Propulsion Motor Selection
• Conventional motors
• HTS AC synchronous motors
• DC Super Conducting Homopolar motors
Engine Rooms Layout
Engine Rooms Layout
Electrical Distribution
Introduction
Conclusions
Manning
Requirements
& Alternatives
Damage
Control
Combat
Systems
Next Speaker:
LT Freddy
Santos
Electrical
Hull
Modularity
Propulsion
Electrical Distribution
Electrical Distribution
Electrical Distribution
Electrical Distribution
Electrical Distribution
Electrical Distribution
Damage Control
Introduction
Conclusions
Manning
Requirements
& Alternatives
Damage
Control
Combat
Systems
Next Speaker:
LT Jake
Didoszak
Electrical
Hull
Modularity
Propulsion
Damage Control Philosophy
PREVENT
COMBAT
RESTORE
Prevent Casualties
• Shipboard Virtual Reality DC Training
• Integrated Zonal Compartmentalization
• Electrical
• Mechanical
• Remote Sensing Systems
• Embedded Damage Sensing System
• Space CCTV/Video Monitoring
• Point Detection System (CBR)
Evolving Technologies
• Fiber Optic Embedded Wing Shape Sensing (FOEWS)
• EmberNet Wireless-Networking System
• Embedded Temperature Sensing
• Infra-Red Flame Detection Sensors
Damage Sensor Matrix
Compartment
CIC
Bridge
Offices
Berthing
Galley & Messing
Passageways
Electronics rooms
Pump rooms
AC&R rooms
Paint lockers
Engine enclosures
Machinery spaces
Magazines
Hangar
Flight deck
Infrared
Flame
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
CCTV/
Video
Liquid
Level
Fiber Opt/
Embedded
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Combat Casualties (FIRE)
• Automated First Response
•
•
•
•
Water Mist System
FM-200 (Fire Suppression)
CO2 Flooding
AFFF
• Human System Interface
• Personnel tracking system
• Shipboard Wide Area Network
• SEED for all watchstanders
Automated Response Matrix
Compartment
CIC
Bridge
Offices
Berthing
Galley & Messing
Passageways
Electronics rooms
Pump rooms
AC&R rooms
Paint lockers
Engine enclosures
Machinery spaces
Magazines
Hangar
Flight deck
FM 200
X
X
X
CO2
Water Mist
AFFF
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Combat Casualties (FIRE)
• Automated First Response
•
•
•
•
Water Mist System
FM-200 (Fire Suppression)
CO2 Flooding
AFFF
• Human System Interface
• Personnel tracking system
• SEED for all watchstanders
• Shipboard Wide Area Network
Firemain and AFFF Systems
Combat Casualties
• Damage Control Parties
• Two Repair Lockers
• Video/sensor investigation
• Secondary line of response
• Utilityman cross-training
• Reduced overall manning
Restore from Casualties
• Zonal systems
• Damage Control (FM, AFFF, CPS)
• Mechanical (CW, VENT, compartment isolation)
• Electrical (integrated distributed power grid)
• Self-healing systems
• Buoyancy foam filler
• Quickset patches
• Kevlar cladding
• Installed smoke ejectors
• Installed drainage and eductors
CBR – Layered Defense
CMWDS
Damage Control Summary
• Increased use of Automatic response systems
• Real-time situational awareness through SWAN
• More unmanned machinery/electrical spaces
• Model & Simulate to predict damage progression
• Use of COTS Damage Control systems
• Greater survivability through better
compartment/zonal segregation
Reduced Manning
Introduction
Conclusions
Manning
Requirements
& Alternatives
Damage
Control
Combat
Systems
Next Speaker:
LT Constance
Fernandez
Electrical
Hull
Modularity
Propulsion
Reduced Manning
• Manning levels determined based on
• Watch Stations
• Maintenance
• Logistics Operations requirements
• Focused on Reduced Manning
• Low maintenance design
• Increased skill level of crew
Reduced Manning
Condition I Watch Bill
STATION LOCATION
AAW USW
PILOT HOUSE/SIGNAL BRIDGE
3
3
CO/XO
2
2
COMBAT
9
9
AAW
3
USW
4
WEAPONS/SUPPORT
11
11
CCS/DC
4
4
ENGINEERING
7
7
REPAIR 1
21
21
REPAIR 2
21
21
FLIGHT DECK
5
5
HELO FIRE FIGHTING
11
11
HELO DETACH
CORPSMEN
6
6
MESSING
4
4
SUPPLY
4
4
TOTAL
111
112
AAW USW
Without Repair Parties
54
55
2 Section Rotation
108 110
Repair Parties
57
57
Required Manning
165
167
Required Berthing
(Helo Detachment of
10 persons)
175
182
SHIP
LENGTH (FT) CREW
FFG -7
445
300
DDG-51
505
320
TRIDENT
560
175
Reduced Manning
• MAINTENANCE:
• Condition Based Maintenance
• COMBAT SYSTEMS:
• Multi-function Radar - two maintenance men, no
operators
• Software for system is “self-diagnostic” and “self
healing”
• ENGINEERING:
• Integrated Electric Drive
• Electrical Distribution System (fully automatic)
Reduced Manning
• DAMAGE CONTROL:
• SWAN(Shipboard Wide Area Network)
• Automated Identification Technology
• Information Systems
• Sensors
• Virtual Training
• Automated Response
• Systems that are “self-diagnostic” and “self
healing”
Reduced Manning
• Summary of Reduced Manning
• Low maintenance/operator design
• Use of more Sensors
• Use of self diagnostic systems
• Increasing skill level of ship crew
Space Allocation
Space Allocation
Conclusions
Introduction
Conclusions
Manning
Requirements
& Alternatives
Damage
Control
Combat
Systems
Electrical
Hull
Modularity
Propulsion
Closing Remarks
•
•
•
•
All Requirements Met
Trade-off Analyses Conducted
Design Spiral Completed at least once
Ship Loaded with Combat Systems
Closing Remarks
• Weight Estimations
• Cost ~$655 M
• Hydrostatics
• Environmental Concerns
• Further Pursuits
• http://www.nps.navy.mil/tsse
Conference Room
3rd Deck of MAE Building
1330
Go Navy
Beat Army!