273
Mr. Glen Sturtevant
I am going to try to convince Rear Admiral Joe Carnevale that
this program executive office is not a barrier to getting new ideas to
the fleet. I will begin by spending a few minutes describing some of
Mr. Glen Sturtevant is the Director for Science and Technology assigned
to the United States Navy Department’s Program Executive Office for
Ships. He graduated from College du Leman in Geneva, Switzerland,
earned a B.S. degree in civil engineering from the University of Delaware,
and earned an M.S. degree in public management from Indiana
University. He has completed Program Management and Engineering
programs of study at National Defense University, Webb Institute of
Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering, and the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology. Mr. Sturtevant began his career with the
Department of the Navy in 1978 as a Project Engineer at Philadelphia
Naval Shipyard. In 1983 he was assigned to the Surface Ships Directorate
at Naval Sea Systems Command Headquarters in Arlington, Virginia,
where he was a Project Manager. In 1987 he was assigned to the Aegis
Shipbuilding Program (PMS 400) where he held several managerial
positions, and from 1998 to 2004, he was Program Manager for the
Navy’s Smartship Program. His current duties include Senior Advisor for
Energy to the Program Executive Office (PEO) and Naval Sea Systems
Command Deputy Commander for Surface Warfare, Project Manager
for the DDG 51 Hybrid Electric Drive Proof of Concept Project, and
the PEO’s Small Business Innovative Research Program. He is a member of the American Society of Naval Engineers, the World Scientific
Engineering Academy and Society, the Surface Navy Association, the
American Management Association, and the Navy League of the United
States and has served on the Association of Scientists and Engineers
Professional Development Committee and as Chairman of the Science
and Education Committee. Mr. Sturtevant has received the Association
of Scientists and Engineers Professional Achievement Award, the Office
of the Secretary of Defense’s Aegis Cruiser Reduced Total Ownership
Cost Award, and the individual Aegis Excellence Award.
274
Climate and Energy Proceedings 2011
the operational testing we are doing to reduce the risk associated
with the follow-on acquisition of some important technologies.
In my view, there are three key things to think about. I believe
that the energy imperative is now driving innovation, but I submit
to you that the real innovation is in the application of that technology. Secondly, I think we all need to adapt faster. We should not
be forcing the adaptation on the back of the operators in the fleet;
the Office of the Chief of Naval Operations staff resources requirements, the Office of Naval Research, scientific research, technology development, the shipbuilders, the program executive offices,
and the systems commands need to adapt faster if we are going to
get ahead of the power curve with respect to energy. And lastly,
if you think you understand all of the consequences of your decisions today, then I submit you are wrong.
We adapted this idea from commercial shipping. We start easy.
Basically, we are going to go out and survey our ships. It is all
about collecting the data, making improvements, and then validating those improvements. It is basic stuff. We design ships—the
best ships in the world. But I will tell you, we really do not know
where the energy goes today. We know how we design our ships
and where the electricity and fuel goes for those designs, but many
of our existing ships are 10, 15, 20, or 25 years old, and we really
do not know where the energy goes. So we are going to find out.
We are going to measure it. We originally called it an audit, but the
crews did not like the word “audit,” so we are calling it an energy
survey. We are starting simple to make sure we are chasing the
sweet spot and not some red herrings and to make sure we are not
investing in the wrong areas for improvement.
I am going to talk about four technologies. As you will see, we
have adapted a lot of things from commercial shipping, from the
airline industry, and from government and industry labs. I am going
to talk about a handful of these and what we are doing today, how
we trying to get operational feedback, and how we plan to reduce
risks for the follow-on acquisition programs. So here is the list.
As you can see (Figure 1), we have categorized these technologies according to their expected availability—be it 2012, 2016, or
Chapter 8 Adapting Ship Operations to Energy Challenges
275
farther in the future. By 2012 we will have the Green Strike Group,
and by 2016, we will have the Great Green Fleet. I have highlighted four of these technologies; in what follows, I will describe
how we are taking these to sea and how we think we are going to
make a difference.
Figure 1. Energy Efficiency Enabling Technologies
Let us start with hybrid electric drive, which you have already
heard something about. In Figure 2, we show the drive system for
a DDG-51-class destroyer. We have three gas turbine generators
over to the left. They generate electricity and make up half the
system. The propulsion plant is on the right. We actually have four
LM-2500 gas turbine engines on USS Truxton, the proof-of-concept ship. Next January, we will be taking a subscale system out to
the ship. As shown in the center of Figure 2, it includes the basic
electric motor on the main reduction gear, along with a converter
and switchboard. Ultimately, we will be powering the electric
motor through the gas turbine generators that have been moved to
a more efficient location aboard ship, the way they were originally
designed. When you do not need all the power that the gas turbines provide, you can turn them off and run the ship through the
water at low rates of speed using electricity.
276
Climate and Energy Proceedings 2011
Figure 2. DDG-52 Hybrid Electric Drive
That is the idea. Initially, it is all about fuel efficiency. But once
you field the hybrid electric drive, you are likely to find that the
operators will say “well, geez that kind of changes everything.”
Now they will have a new quiet speed that can be used by DDG51s conducting antisubmarine warfare operations. Or, it could
prove beneficial for destroyers conducting ballistic missile defense
missions in the Mediterranean. Maybe it changes the transit speed
when the ship crosses the Atlantic. Perhaps 16 knots is not the best
speed for that evolution. So, once we make that innovative design
change, we are likely to find that it is followed by innovative application changes.
We stole the idea for the Smart Voyage Planning Decision Aid
(Figure 3) from the commercial airline industry. When you fly from
here to Los Angeles, it is all about altitude and heading. It turns out
that Maersk, the largest American commercial shipping line, has
adapted the idea to ship routing. They have come up with a pretty
sophisticated tool that directs the ship where to go in order to save
gas. By adapting that approach for the Navy, we are projecting
that perhaps as much as 8% fuel savings could result from using
the most fuel-economic route. Airplanes take advantage of the jet
stream, why can’t we take advantage of the Gulf Stream?
Chapter 8 Adapting Ship Operations to Energy Challenges
277
Figure 3. Smart Voyage Planning Decision Aid
For years we have done optimum track ship routing to avoid
bad weather that bangs up the ship and injures the crew. If we
can lay the toolset for the ship router, or something that has local
weather conditions, into the Voyage Planning Decision Aid, then
perhaps we can route our ships based on weather and get better
gas mileage, recognizing of course that mission comes first. So, we
are going to start doing that. We intend to roll out this system in
time to support Pacific Fleet’s participation in Exercise Rim of the
Pacific (RIMPAC) 2012 next year.
Figure 4 illustrates our test plan for surface ship alternate fuels.
Starting with the upper-left-hand corner, you see the rigid hull
inflatable boat (RHIB). We tested a 50/50 blend in a RHIB down
in Little Creek back in July 2010. In October, we tested a Riverine
Control Boat experimental craft (RCB-X). We are going to test alternate fuel on a yard patrol (YP) craft at the Naval Academy this
spring and on an LCAC down in Panama City this summer. Next
year, we are going to test use of alternate fuel on an FFG coming
out of commission or on the Navy’s self-defense test ship (SDTS)
in Port Hueneme, California. In June 2012, we will test alternate
fuels with the Green Strike Group (GSG) during RIMPAC 2012. Our
basic approach is to “build a little, test a little.” We are also doing
component testing ashore.
278
Climate and Energy Proceedings 2011
Figure 4. Alternate Fuel Test Plan
The important point is that using the alternate fuel will have
no impact whatsoever on the operator. We are designing drop-in
fuels. The operators will not know the difference. That is the model
we are following now for a lot of our technologies. We are not putting the burden on the back of the warfighters. They already have
enough to worry about.
My final example is what Rear Admiral Philip Cullom called
“the box on the bridge.” We have labeled it the “energy dashboard.” Commercial shipping uses this extensively. It is a way to
try to influence the actions of the operators. If you know exactly
where your fuel is going, where your electricity is going, then perhaps you can take actions to use that fuel or energy more efficiently. The large arrow in Figure 5 is my way of showing that you
may want to send that data off the ship, which is what commercial
shipping does. They have found that by pitting one ship against
another, they can significantly change the energy consumption
behavior of their ship masters.
Chapter 8 Adapting Ship Operations to Energy Challenges
279
Figure 5. Energy Dashboard
One of the real powers of this energy tool is that you can overlay the material condition of the ship onto the display. You will
know that the sea grass on the hull is increasing your drag. You will
know that you have a bad generator that you did not know about
before. You can also lay the maintenance of the material piece
into the energy dashboard. We are going to field this in one of our
destroyers—the USS Chafee—later this year. We will get it out to
other ships as we move forward.