I have been reading that Undersecnav Work wants to use this as the basis for the platform but is that even possible? the ships interior sections would be vastly differnet and by new enviro regulations it would have to be doubled hulled. I could see some savings reusing the the propulsion plant, superstructure and over aft portion of the ship but the bow and midship sections would have to be a totally new design right.
Like I can see a command ship, hospital ship, and tender built on the overall same hull but a tanker i have my doubts about
Could I get some opinions from the experts.
By: ronaldorx - 6th June 2011 at 04:32
This is auxiliary support ship, this ships can be deliver more than 10,000 tons of food, fuel and other provisions to combat ships at sea, this ship is made by Lewis and Clark, there are so many different and useful work is done by this ship.
By: Wanshan - 7th May 2011 at 18:57
I actually started that one :p
Thought so :;)
Interestingly, this DRY cargo ship comes with a port and starboard refuelling station (liquid cargo volume 3729 m3, located mostly in the forward/bow sections). 8,391 tons dry cargo + 18,000 barrels fuel
http://www.hazegray.org/worldnav/usa/aux_flt.htm
Conversely, the Henry J Kaiser ships (T-AO-187) have a small capacity to carry and transfer fresh and frozen foods as well as other materials, and have two dry cargo transfer rigs.
The T-AO fuel capacity is 26,166 tons (178,000 bbls). The T-AKE cargo fuel capacity is 2,646 tons (18,000 bbls).
http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA401770&Location=U2…
So, the question is: would a set of ‘hybrid’ ships work better than two more specialized classes…..? (assuming T-AKE is not already to be considered a hybrid)
Federal Contracts : 2011-01-10 : (Custom Search)
19–Request for Information (RFI) – Fleet Replenishment Oiler (T-AO 187 Class) Recapitalization
Solicitation Number: N0002411R2204Agency: Department of the Navy
Office: Naval Sea Systems Command
Location: NAVSEA HQ
Recapitalization of the T-AO 187 Fleet Replenishment Oiler Class is part of the U.S.
Navy’s long-range shipbuilding plan. On September 17, 2010, the Navy announced that its Fiscal Year 2012 budget submission would include acceleration of the double-hulled fleet oiler T-AO(X) production from 2017 to 2014. Emphasis will be placed on compliance with environmental protection regulations, and on lowering total ownership costs (TOC) in the design and operation of the new oilers, including the use of mature, commercial technologies, and component commonality with other ships in the U.S. Navy fleet.
The Navy is preparing to conduct an Analysis of Alternatives (AoA) to refine the key attributes of the T-AO(X). The AoA will conduct various tradeoff analyses to determine the optimal solution in terms of cost, cargo capacity, speed and overall number of T-AO(X)s required to meet Fleet requirements.
Alternatives will examine various quantities of bulk petroleum products (JP-5 and DFM); dry stores/packaged cargo, fleet freight, mail, personnel and other miscellaneous cargo to determine the optimum cargo capacities. A range of dry cargo capacities at least 20% greater than the T-AO 187 Class should be considered.
http://www.implu.com/federal_contracts/listing/N0002411R2204
By: Arabella-Cox - 7th May 2011 at 17:37
I actually started that one :p
By: Wanshan - 7th May 2011 at 14:13
@blark18/philbob
It certainly would seem a good match in terms of required size.
current T-AKE
• Length: 689 feet
• Beam: 105.6 feet
• Draft: 29.9 feet
• Displacement: 41,000 tons
• Speed: 20 knots
• Civilian: 124 civil service mariners
• Military: 11
• Government-Owned/
Chartered: Government
current T-AO
• Length: 677.5 feet
• Beam: 97.5 feet
• Draft: 35 feet
• Displacement: 41,225 long tons
• Speed: 20.0 knots
• Civilian: 89 civil service mariners
• Military: 3
• Government-Owned/
Chartered: Government-owned
Similar discussion on practical issue is here: http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/topic/16528/T-AKE-as-the-basis-for-T-AO-X
Sign In
May 7, 2011 at 5:44 am