Are there commercial technologies in mercantile operation that navies could adopt to reduce costs and increase effectiveness?
I have been mulling the purported advantages of the Ulstein X bow design (see http://www.ulsteingroup.com). Ulstein say the design delivers stability and economy in bad weather and protects the midships/stern cargo area.
It seems to me that, plug-ugly though the x-bow certainly is, navies could take advantage of these features. The obvious area of application is in auxiliaries although it might benefit small (non flat top) LSDs and helicopter carriers. But would it work on an escort frigate, carrying a VLS block midships to handle (say) ASROC and SAMs, a hanger and flightdeck aft, and a CIWS? Only problem would be mounting a gun forward, but why bother? I suppose you could mount a 76mm gun mounted as on the Oliver Hazard Perry class.
Is this completely unrealistic?
By: Distiller - 7th November 2008 at 18:50
That bow looks like from some pre-Dreadnought. Guess it’s a good option for smaller ships, or if you recon you’ll jump around all the time with the bow out of the water. Doubt it’s better than a SWATH, though.
By: sealordlawrence - 7th November 2008 at 16:18
By all means carry on along this line (because it’s just as interesting as my point) but please note that I raised the issue of incorporating commercial technologies, not necessarily of building vessels to commercial standards. The two don’t have to go together. 🙂
I think you will find that there are few commercial technologies that have not found their way into navies that could have a use.;)
By: Springheel - 7th November 2008 at 15:56
By all means carry on along this line (because it’s just as interesting as my point) but please note that I raised the issue of incorporating commercial technologies, not necessarily of building vessels to commercial standards. The two don’t have to go together. 🙂
By: sealordlawrence - 7th November 2008 at 14:45
In general terms mercantile standards have been gradually creeping their way into naval use for a long time now.
The issue I have with this concept is that the benefits in cost and maintenance are outweighed by the fact that you are sacrificing damage control and the safety of your valuable crews by potentially putting them in harms way in a craft that does not have adequate ability to protect them from unecessary risk.
The flip side is that you may not be able to recruit that crew in the first place, personnel are not just expensive but also hard to come by, more automisation, less crew.
On the issue of mercantile standards, remember that this has only really started to happen since the end of th cold war, ie when there is no threat of a ship being put into actual combat. Most modern naval vessels are just platforms fro troops or weapons and will never be fired upon except by the occasional small boat.
By: bgnewf - 7th November 2008 at 14:29
In general terms mercantile standards have been gradually creeping their way into naval use for a long time now.
The issue I have with this concept is that the benefits in cost and maintenance are outweighed by the fact that you are sacrificing damage control and the safety of your valuable crews by potentially putting them in harms way in a craft that does not have adequate ability to protect them from unecessary risk.
By: Fedaykin - 7th November 2008 at 14:07
Well a variant of Ulsteins SX series would make an excellent replacement for RFA Diligence (arguable one of the hardest worked vessels in the UK fleet).
Sign In
November 7, 2008 at 1:39 pm