Register here

Author Topic: Ohio Replacement Submarine  (Read 22619 times)

Online sferrin

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 11246
Re: Ohio Replacement Submarine
« Reply #30 on: February 05, 2015, 12:07:35 pm »
The electric drive is the single largest contributor to the extra size, but there are lots of things contributing to it. For example ORP will have a big upgrade in living conditions, with particular attention to accommodating mixed-gender crews, and that requires space.
interesting.

I thought that electric drive (in the context of nuclear boats) would be more compact since it's what's used in small nuclear subs which cannot fit a steam plant, e.g. Losharik, NR-1...

Compare the (nuclear, turbo-electric) Glenard P. Lipscomb SSN to it's nearest peer, the Sturgeon class.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Glenard_P._Lipscomb_(SSN-685)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sturgeon-class_submarine
« Last Edit: July 29, 2016, 10:36:49 am by sferrin »
"DARPA Hard"  It ain't what it use to be.

Offline Moose

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 914
Re: Ohio Replacement Submarine
« Reply #31 on: February 05, 2015, 04:39:37 pm »
Interesting.

I thought that electric drive (in the context of nuclear boats) would be more compact since it's what's used in small nuclear subs which cannot fit a steam plant, e.g. Losharik, NR-1...
My reply got eaten by the above or by Comcast, sorry.


NR-1 was nuclear-electric because Rickover wanted her to be super-quiet and because it made it easier to power things like the maneuvering thrusters, floodlights, etc.


A Nuclear Electric submarine still has the steam plant, since direct conversion of fission heat to electricity on this scale is not practical at present. The essential difference between a Nuke and a Nuclear electric is that the mechanical drivetrain is replaced by an electrical one. The steam plant turns a big generator, and the propulsor is turned by a big electric motor. The generator and motor alone are quite large given the application, plus you have the various controllers, power cables, driveshafts, etc which all take up space. On top of all that you have the SUBSAFE culture within the Silent Service which tends to overbuild in order to minimize risk of things going wrong hundreds of feet underwater. A shaftless nuclear electric boat could shave off a chunk off that extra size+weight, but the Navy isn't ready to go there yet.

Offline Triton

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 9704
  • Donald McKelvy
    • Deep Blue to Wild Blue
Re: Ohio Replacement Submarine
« Reply #32 on: July 29, 2016, 10:27:12 am »
Time to rename this topic to "Columbia-class SSBN"?

"Navy Ohio Replacement Sub Class to Be Named for D.C."
By: Sam LaGrone
July 28, 2016 8:30 PM • Updated: July 29, 2016 7:34 AM

Quote
The Navy’s new planned class of ballistic missile submarines will be named in honor of the District of Columbia, two Navy officials confirmed to USNI News on Thursday.

According to a notification memo to Congress obtained by USNI News, the first ship in the next planned class of Navy nuclear ballistic missile submarines (SSBN(X))– also known as the Ohio replacement program — will be named USS Columbia.

Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus’ office is not releasing further information until the naming announcement, one Navy official told USNI News.

While the name Columbia for a U.S. ships and aircraft is not new – at least eight U.S. ships, a Space Shuttle and the Apollo 11 command module have all shared the name – it will be the first time the name has been used to commemorate the U.S. capital, the sources told USNI News.

The fleet’s current USS Columbia (SSN-771) – a Los Angeles attack submarine – is named in honor of Columbia, S.C., Columbia, Ill and Columbia, Mo. The submarine is expected to decommission before the first SSBN(X) enters service.

Other ships in the fleet were named after the romantic female personification of the Americas – Columbia.

The Columbia-class is set to replace the current crop of 14 Ohio-class boomers starting with the first acquisition of Columbia in Fiscal Year 2021.

“The Navy’s proposed FY2017 budget requests $773.1 million in advance procurement (AP) funding and $1,091.1 million in research and development funding for the Ohio replacement program,” according to a May Congressional Research Service report.

The new boomers will feature a new life-of-boat reactor, an electric drive and field 16 Trident II D5 ballistic nuclear missiles as one leg of the U.S. strategic nuclear deterrent triad.

According to early estimates, the 12 boat class will cost the Navy about $100 billion and is the service’s number one acquisition priority, a claim Navy leadership has repeated often.

Offline Triton

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 9704
  • Donald McKelvy
    • Deep Blue to Wild Blue
Re: Ohio Replacement Submarine
« Reply #33 on: July 29, 2016, 10:33:49 am »
U.S.S. Columbia (SSBN-822)? The next available number after Block VII of the Virginia-class is 822. With 48 Virginia-class submarines planned, will all members of the Columbia-class be named for United States territories?
« Last Edit: July 29, 2016, 11:08:10 am by Triton »

Offline Moose

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 914
Re: Ohio Replacement Submarine
« Reply #34 on: July 29, 2016, 10:34:54 pm »
Technically the Navy can go a couple routes with the hull numbers, so we just have to wait and see there. As for naming, it's highly unlikely the entire class would be named for territories. For one, there are only 16 territories, only 5 with permanent population. It seems very unlikely that the Navy would name SSBNs after uninhabited territory, for a number of reasons.

For two, Guam and Puerto Rico already have Sealift ships named for them. While not impossible to rename ships or declare a name will be reused while it's still currently in use, it's somewhat unusual.

l'll also point out that DC is not a territory, it's the Federal District. Whether this is a nod to the DC statehood movement or just a nod to the citizens who live and work in DC, I couldn't say. But it's a fine name, to my eyes.
« Last Edit: July 30, 2016, 02:22:09 pm by Moose »

Offline RLBH

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 177
Re: Ohio Replacement Submarine
« Reply #35 on: August 01, 2016, 03:56:28 am »
Looking outside the park here, you could use COLUMBIA as a jumping-off point for a class named after American virtues and symbols. CONGRESS and PRESIDENT have precedence, maybe slip a REPUBLIC in there. If they weren't already taken, CONSTITUTION, FREEDOM, LIBERTY, and INDEPENDENCE would fit in perfectly.

The scheme gives good names, avoids the political game playing that's bound to result in the USS JAMES BUCHANAN one of these days, and should be completely uncontroversial. I fail to see the downside....

Offline phil gollin

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 197
Re: Ohio Replacement Submarine
« Reply #36 on: August 01, 2016, 04:16:36 am »
.

Well  ::)  why not get corporations to "sponsor" them ?

Columbia, could be sponsor by Columbia Records.

OBVIOUSLY, we could have USS Walmark, USS ExxonMobile, USS Apple, USS Microsoft, USS Google, USS Amazon, etc.......

Offline Grey Havoc

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 8106
  • The path not taken.
The sole imperative of a government, once instituted, is to survive.

Offline bobbymike

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 8522
Books are the quietest and most constant of friends; they are the most accessible and wisest of counselors, and the most patient of teachers.

Charles W. Eliot

Offline Grey Havoc

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 8106
  • The path not taken.
The sole imperative of a government, once instituted, is to survive.

Offline fightingirish

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 2087
« Last Edit: December 14, 2016, 02:44:02 pm by flateric »
Slán,
fightingirish

Slán ist an Irish Gaelic word for Goodbye.  :)

Avatar:
McDonnell Douglas Model 225 painting by "The Artist" Michael Burke (Tavush) 2018, found at deviantart.com and at Secret Projects Forum » Research Topics » User Artwork » McDonnell Douglas Model 225 Painting

Offline Steven

  • CLEARANCE: Confidential
  • *
  • Posts: 82
    • AIAA at UCLA
Re: Ohio Replacement Submarine
« Reply #41 on: December 14, 2016, 10:59:07 pm »
That rendering appears to show 16 missile tubes. Does the life-of-ship reactor that this new boat class sports contribute to the increased size?

As for naming, why not restart the convention of naming attack submarines after underwater creatures? State names for boomers seem fine, and frankly I'm getting quite tired of seeing vessels named after politicians.
« Last Edit: December 14, 2016, 11:07:31 pm by Steven »
Do not go gentle into that good night.
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Offline Moose

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 914
Re: Ohio Replacement Submarine
« Reply #42 on: December 15, 2016, 07:22:59 am »
That rendering appears to show 16 missile tubes. Does the life-of-ship reactor that this new boat class sports contribute to the increased size?

As for naming, why not restart the convention of naming attack submarines after underwater creatures? State names for boomers seem fine, and frankly I'm getting quite tired of seeing vessels named after politicians.
The reactor and the electric drive contribute a lot of mass and volume, plus there's the regular generational growth contributed by improvements in the crew accommodations and quieting.

Offline marauder2048

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 2162
  • "I should really just relax"
Re: Ohio Replacement Submarine
« Reply #43 on: December 15, 2016, 03:41:26 pm »
That rendering appears to show 16 missile tubes. Does the life-of-ship reactor that this new boat class sports contribute to the increased size?

As for naming, why not restart the convention of naming attack submarines after underwater creatures? State names for boomers seem fine, and frankly I'm getting quite tired of seeing vessels named after politicians.
The reactor and the electric drive contribute a lot of mass and volume, plus there's the regular generational growth contributed by improvements in the crew accommodations and quieting.

My impression was that by going to a larger beam (43 ft. vs. 42. ft) they could potentially accommodate a longer
SLBM in the future e.g. they could replace the through-deck third stage motor with a longer first or second stage
motor.

Offline NeilChapman

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 864
  • Interested 3rd party
Re: Ohio Replacement Submarine
« Reply #44 on: January 07, 2017, 02:06:46 pm »
That rendering appears to show 16 missile tubes. Does the life-of-ship reactor that this new boat class sports contribute to the increased size?

As for naming, why not restart the convention of naming attack submarines after underwater creatures? State names for boomers seem fine, and frankly I'm getting quite tired of seeing vessels named after politicians.
The reactor and the electric drive contribute a lot of mass and volume, plus there's the regular generational growth contributed by improvements in the crew accommodations and quieting.

Well, the Ford-Class reactors are reportedly smaller, weigh less and require 2/3 the maintenance than Nimitz-Class while electrical power generation is 3x larger.  Expect the Columbia-Class reactor to have many efficiencies over predecessor besides service - to include size.  Recall Virginia-Class reactors are life-of-the-boat @ 33 yrs.   

Interesting article.  Indicates drive is actually smaller...

http://www.public.navy.mil/subfor/underseawarfaremagazine/Issues/Archives/issue_09/power_system.html

"As I mentioned earlier, with mechanical drive 75-80 percent of the useful power produced by the reactor is available exclusively for propulsion. An integrated electric power system, on the other hand, puts power on a common electrical bus and gives the commanding officer operational flexibility in how this energy is distributed to suit the range of payloads, sensors, and propulsion needs for a given tactical situation. An integrated electric power system will allow tomorrow's submarines to make greater use of rechargeable off-hull vehicles, payloads, and sensors to extend the submarines' tactical reach and safeguard operations in high risk and restricted areas."

Emphasis above mine.  What might be integrated into all that space.  All I can find are references to "performance - survivability and acoustics". 

http://nationalinterest.org/feature/beyond-the-ohio-class-inside-americas-next-generation-16270?page=show

"While there have been rumors  that the ORP is larger than its Ohio predecessors because of the size of the electric drive and its permanent magnet motor—despite carrying eight fewer missiles—Lennon said that is not true. The ORP will be larger than the Ohio-class because of the enhanced survivability measures integrated onboard the submarines—the new boats will displace more than 20,800-tons. Indeed, the Navy could have opted to build the boat with twenty or twenty-four missile tubes, but chose not to in order to make sure the United States dispersed its nuclear deterrence. “If you look at the overall length of the ship, the length of the missile compartment is smaller,” Lennon said. “But it’s distributed pretty much equally—the increase—forward and aft. Very little of that has to do with electric drive. It’s really to do with the other capabilities we’ve had to put into the ship in order to meet the mission needs.”

While he could not go into detail, Lennon said those mission needs include performance—including survivability and acoustics. “We’ve had to designate larger volumes in order to put certain features and capabilities into the ship,” he said."

On another note...

UK Dreadnought is also larger then its predecessor and it too has less tubes.  Interesting to note that US/UK shared reactor tech but US reactor has 42 year life and UK is 30 years.