Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Navy Spends $33 Million For Hybrid of the High Sea

Posted by samzenpus on from the batteries-not-included dept.

coondoggie writes "Some might call it an enormous floating Prius, but others will call it a step in the right direction: A new hybrid electric engine for US Navy ships that promises to save up to 12,000 barrels of oil a year per ship. The folks who brought you the Predator unmanned flying aircraft, General Atomics, this week got $32.7 million to develop a proof-of-concept Hybrid Electric Drive (HED) system for a full-scale demonstration on board the Navy's DDG 51 Class destroyers. DDG 51 destroyers are powered by General Electric gas turbines capable of moving the ships along at over 30 knots or about 35 mph. The General Atomics system would meld into this system and let the ship use electric power for slow-speed maneuvers. The engines would provide more power as the ship needed to go faster."

6 of 210 comments (clear)

  1. Re:What would happen... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    we ca ask the electrical/diesel submarines .... not new tech at all

  2. Re:What would happen... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The same thing that happens when 30 tons of oil bursts open on the high seas?

  3. Re:So that's where our tax dollars go. by mrvan · · Score: 3, Insightful

    $100 per barrel= costs at the refinery.

    The ships are generally in nasty, remote locations. Factor in the cost of building a supply ship and fueling that ship to get the fuel to the destroyer, PLUS escort, PLUS lost mission time and extra miles to go to refueling, and you will probably break even in the first year.

    And then the ship has 30 more years to go.

    I guess your tax dollars didn't go to elementary math & common sense education, aka high school :-)

  4. Too bad we don't have this already by marsdominion · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Oh, wait. We do. Why are we even talking about building hybrids when the Navy already has more than 80 electrics in the form of nuclear powered vessels? With more than 5500 reactor years without an accident, haven't we proved that it is safe?

  5. Re:So that's where our tax dollars go. by Migraineman · · Score: 4, Insightful

    And to further expand on your point, any military should be concerned with fuel efficiency, because a machine that can stay on-station or can hang in a firefight longer has a distinct tactical advantage. Granted, that is but one variable that must be balanced against many others, but it's really just as important as offensive and defensive capabilities.

  6. The REAL reason for electric boats by wisebabo · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Can you say "Rail Gun" or "LASER"?

    These new weapons technologies (needed for interception of ballistic or hypersonic projectiles) will require a colossal amount of electric power. If the ship is already geared up to be capable of storing a lot of power in its batteries, a major hurdle in the deployment of these weapons are overcome.

    Maybe they could even use the tremendous kinetic energy of the ship moving at high speed to generate electricity from the motors. Probably only useful in an emergency because it makes your ship a sitting duck!