"Potential DDG-51 Flight III Growth Alarms"
http://www.aviationweek.c...%20III%20Growth%20Alarms"Potential DDG-51 Flight III Growth Alarms""As the possible requirements and expectations continue to grow for the proposed DDG-51 Arleigh...
View ArticleRe: "Potential DDG-51 Flight III Growth Alarms"
In Electronic Greyhound, there was an alternate design using a Spruance Hull but a Burke type superstructure
View ArticleRe: "Potential DDG-51 Flight III Growth Alarms"
I know what one you are talking about, that was an early Ingalls proposal and was rejected fairly early on.
View ArticleRe: "Potential DDG-51 Flight III Growth Alarms"
There is a picture of it in Freidman's design series It looks like the canceled Aegis/Virginia stuck on to the Spruance hull.
View ArticleRe: "Potential DDG-51 Flight III Growth Alarms"
It is not the same design if I remember correctly In honesty, I think a "Spruance Hull" Burke did have some advantages. It would have probably had better range, been more fuel efficient, and would...
View ArticleRe: "Potential DDG-51 Flight III Growth Alarms"
IIRC, the Burkes turned out to be too damned fat and thus with too much drag for the 25k SHP GTMs. IIRC, that precipitated a push toward 30+k LM-2500s. I don't know if there was any threat that...
View ArticleRe: "Potential DDG-51 Flight III Growth Alarms"
The WR-21 appears to be a pretty new engine so likely was not available in 1980s / 1990s. If the US Navy went to it, they have to go "whole hog" and all new classes would need to mount it. We have no...
View ArticleRe: "Potential DDG-51 Flight III Growth Alarms"
It certainly would require some mods to the existing uptakes arrangement and the air intakes unless they are by chance able to use the same path the existing engines use. In the FFG-7, the take-up...
View ArticleRe: "Potential DDG-51 Flight III Growth Alarms"
The LM2500 was one of the first aeroderivitive gas turbines that could provide the needed power for frigates, and destroyers/cruisers.Here are some stats on various models of GE gas turbine:LM1600 --...
View ArticleRe: "Potential DDG-51 Flight III Growth Alarms"
Unless you are planning to add a couple of cruising engines, most likely diesels, relying on a single gas turbine for fuel effiency is a loser. Runing at slow speed and low power does not reduce gas...
View ArticleRe: "Potential DDG-51 Flight III Growth Alarms"
The other solution is to follow the route the UK took and run everything including the propulsion off electricity. One gas turbine running at its most efficient power setting to power everything,...
View ArticleRe: "Potential DDG-51 Flight III Growth Alarms"
BINGOREkA! YREkgo! I found part of and more than what I was trying to share regarding the M-7 Propulsion Plant: Launch of sixth Project 11356 Talwar Class frigate for Indian Navy....
View ArticleRe: "Potential DDG-51 Flight III Growth Alarms"
daetaku wrote:IIRC, the Burkes turned out to be too damned fat and thus with too much drag for the 25k SHP GTMs.Recall reading someplace that the up-rated 2500s were selected for the Burkes because of...
View ArticleRe: "Potential DDG-51 Flight III Growth Alarms"
Did the Cole being fresh out of the drydock after repairs mean she had some at-the-time newer or more advanced anti-fouling coating, or just a whole new cleaning with typical coating and some other...
View ArticleRe: "Potential DDG-51 Flight III Growth Alarms"
Probably a sensor of some kind, the modules are run with the lights out normally. I would assume the Cole had every turbine on-board changed out for shore-side overhaul, for potential shock/flooding...
View ArticleRe: "Potential DDG-51 Flight III Growth Alarms"
As for re-connecting to an ealier comment about the USN seeking connecting both shafts to a single engine, here: http://eng.zmturbines.com...ucts&srub=1245353811 is another plan view of cruise and...
View ArticleRe: "Potential DDG-51 Flight III Growth Alarms"
daetaku wrote:IIRC, the Burkes turned out to be too damned fat and thus with too much drag for the 25k SHP GTMs. IIRC, that precipitated a push toward 30+k LM-2500s. I don't know if there was any...
View ArticleRe: "Potential DDG-51 Flight III Growth Alarms"
AegisFC wrote:daetaku wrote:IIRC, the Burkes turned out to be too damned fat and thus with too much drag for the 25k SHP GTMs. IIRC, that precipitated a push toward 30+k LM-2500s. I don't know if...
View ArticleRe: "Potential DDG-51 Flight III Growth Alarms"
I've been on two Burkes and a Tico. The Tico was horrible (coming off the Phil Sea for a port visit to Rosy Roads was the only time I've ever been "land sick") but the Burkes it was hard to tell we...
View ArticleRe: "Potential DDG-51 Flight III Growth Alarms"
daetaku wrote:Here is a wikipedia page showing a pair of LM-2500s being lowered into the USS Bunker Hill. I hadn't known they were installed this way. I thought they modular construction of the ships...
View Article
