Slashdot Mirror
Navy Spends $33 Million For Hybrid of the High Sea
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."
-- Charles P. Pierce, from "Idiot America: How Stupidity Became a Virtue in the Land of the Free"
Pity the poor "real Americans," because they sure feel sorry for themselves. Self-pity appears to be the latest national craze. Not that we haven't got real troubles, but everywhere you look and listen these days, some big crybaby's blubbering about how people like him or her get no respect from (take your pick) "Ivy League elitists," the "scientific establishment," "so-called sophisticates," the "mainstream media" and so on.
But hey, Americans don't come any realer than me. I learned that recently from MSNBC news-chat personality Mika Brzezinski. Discussing Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's supporters on "Morning Joe," Brzezinski allowed as how us country folks (I live in a rural county with a lot more cows than people) constitute the nation's moral backbone. "God, I hate to say it," Brzezinski allowed, "but in the cities where there are a little bit more liberal elite populations, you are not going to find what is representative of America."
Sigh. We already tried that. It brought us George W. Bush, a synthetic cowboy who dropped the "rancher" pose the minute he left the White House. Back in 2001, metropolitan pundits -- seemingly unfamiliar with the oeuvre of Hank Williams and Garth Brooks -- kept telling us about the superior moral instincts of us "red state" voters.
Brzezinski's the daughter of former Carter administration national security advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski, and attended several fancy private schools. So I'm guessing she doesn't know a lot of drinkin' and cheatin' songs either.
The occasion of the MSNBC pundit's comments was Palin's poor-pitiful-me resignation speech, the one that sounded like an audition for the Lucille Ball part in an "I Love Lucy" revival.
"Life is too short to compromise time and resources," Palin said. "It may be tempting and more comfortable to just keep your head down, plod along and appease those who demand: 'Sit down and shut up,' but that's the worthless, easy path; that's a quitter's way out. And a problem in our country today is apathy. It would be apathetic to just hunker down and 'go with the flow.' Nah, only dead fish 'go with the flow.'"
No dead-fish quitter she, Palin quit.
Having spent much of her tenure as Alaska's governor scheming to fire her ex-brother-in-law from the state police and having her press secretary issue statements contradicting her daughter's 18-year-old former boyfriend, Palin evidently mistook national politics for one long Miss Congeniality contest.
That is, until she started picking fights with TV comics and whining that nobody before her had been so victimized by "the politics of personal destruction" -- a phrase Bill Clinton coined after Republican operatives accused him and his wife of murder.
Chances are Palin doesn't know that, as she appears to know precious little else. Even many conservatives who supported Bush almost to the end fear that the Republicans have finally touched bottom.
"In television interviews," Peggy Noonan wrote in the Wall Street Journal, "she was out of her depth in a shallow pool. She was limited in her ability to explain and defend her positions, and sometimes in knowing them. She couldn't say what she read because she didn't read anything. She was utterly unconcerned by all this and seemed in fact rather proud of it: It was evidence of her authenticity."
Palin's authentic, all right: An authentic product of what author Charles P. Pierce calls the "Three Great Premises" of America's decayed TV celebrity culture. First, "Any theory is valid if it moves units," i..e. sells advertising. Second, "Anything can be true if someone says it loudly enough." Third, "Fact is that which enough people believe. Truth is measured by how fervently they believe it."
The cultural left is sometimes as prone to dimwit populism as the right. Witness the Rev. Al Sharpton moving an audience to tears by assuring Michael Jackson's children that he wasn't "strange," but his crit
Now the US navy can bring death upon the infidels in a clean and environmentally safe way.
If 30 tons of Lithium batteries burst open on the high seas? After,say, a torpedo strike?
I bet it would be spectacular.
12000 barrels per year at $100 per barrel, 1,200,000. Cost to save 12000 barrels per year with hybrid drive, 8.8 million (plus 17.1 million initial cost). Can someone explain the economic benefit of this move?
http://www.nypost.com/seven/07162009/news/regionalnews/dem_health_rx_a_poion_pill_in_ny_179525.htm
My favorite line from the article:
"New York would become the third-most-hostile place for top earners to live under the proposed new surtaxes supported by House Democrats and championed by Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY)."
LOL, your own Congressman goes up to Capitol Hill and stabs you in the back! Why on earth do you keep voting for that pathetic, ashy-faced nigger who slaps you with job-crushing taxes and then turns around and "forgets" to pay taxes on foreign rental properties that he owns? Do your research, you lazy slobs! It's no wonder you're getting taxed until your eyes are popping out, since you always seem to pull the lever for the same guy regardless of what a pile of shit he is.
Ships have had multiple methods of propulsion for a long time; early ocean going steamships also had masts and rigging for sail in emergencies, German U-Boats in in WWII had dual diesel/electric engines. Frankly, I'm surprised that this research hadn't already been started, albeit to reduce dependence of foreign oil rather than out of any concern for the environment given the stance of the Bush Presidency on such matters. Still, it'll be interesting to see what they can come up with. Maybe something like the Kinetic Energy Recovery System (KERS) that was used in some Formula One cars this year; use the motion of water past the hull and in the wake to generate electricity while the vessel is underway.
UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
I would have thought that the Navy would have led hybrid engine research with everything that was done in WWI and WWII for submarines. Essentially those were hybrid engines, with the diesel's powering the boat on the surface and recharging the batteries, and then using the batteries when the ship was submerged.
That has all been supplanted by nuclear submarines, but you have to wonder where battery technology would be today if the Navy had kept using that system.
Introducing Microsoft Vacuum 1.0 The first Microsoft product that doesn't suck.
could someone put that into perspective, how many barrels would a ship normally expect to get through.
never a better time for robbIE to turn off his patentdead PostBlock censorship devise, as opposed to cranking it up to include subjects that he personally disagrees with/has no concept of, &/or scares him.
there's nothing new under the fake 'atmosphere'/enlarging sun. also never a better time to consult with your creators. the lights are coming up all over now & again.
Only $33 million? For a military contract? Really? Not to be a smartass, but that seems insanely cheap for what they're asking for.
Is there anything being built in America these days,that does not destroy something??
Can it pull up next to a nuclear sub or aircraft carrier and recharge? 33 million... how much does a small reactor cost in comparison?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turbo-electric
Turbo-electric drives are common and the USN has a few according to the above linked wiki article.
What appears to be new here (according to tfa) is that the turbines can be mechanically coupled thru a gearbox to the propellers for high speed maneuvers. That isn't so common, usually the only thing connected to the propellers (for ships) or wheels (for locomotives) is the electric motor. I guess that is what makes the ship similar to a Prius although I don't suppose the ship has batteries.
Penis. That's what I get for skimming the summaries. I figured they'd found another one of these:
http://www.metro.co.uk/weird/article.html?Giant_ice_penis_-_is_climate_change_to_blame?&in_article_id=304450&in_page_id=2
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
It is also an important strategic advantage to have a ship that is more fuel efficient as it can stay in the arena for longer before it needs to be refuelled.
This is likely a main driver for this research.
Dude, if you saw what the Navy dumps off the side of the boats when they're a sufficient distance off shore you'd crap yourself.
If it doesn't float it goes. hybrid motors is laughable given that they'll stil be dumping anything and everything over the side of the boat regardless of how clean the engine runs.
...I used to play this submarine game. It presented dials and knobs and switches and levers. There were notifications and warnings and other messages. There was a periscope. But one thing that I recall in the game was running electric when submerged and diesel when surfaced and the diesel charged the batteries. Makes me wonder a bit how "new" this naval technology is.
http://www.informationdissemination.net/2009/07/good-reason-for-flight-iii-burkes.html and the reasons for this work.
A defence Industry view
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/327M-to-General-Atomics-for-DDG-51-Propulsion-System-Prototype-05598/#more-5598
A general Atomics view
http://www.ga.com/news.php?read=1&id=262
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?
How is this system any different than the diesel-electric systems that have been used on locomotives for decades?
I understand that batteries will be used- The old diesel-electric submarines used that system before WWII.
-b
No offense, but I've stopped responding to AC's.
Why don't they just use the energy from the waves to generate electricity? it would be just like a bycicle with a dynamo and an electric motor!
How does regenerative braking work in the high seas?
What the Navy means by 'hybrid' is not exactly what you'd expect. TFA is light on details, but I suspect the idea is to use the electrical generators on the ship for low-speed propulsion, instead of having to run the main gas turbine engines at 10% load, at which they're very inefficient. There'll be no batteries involved, and no regenerative braking.
Many warships already have two plants capable of driving the propellers. Not so much the USN, but European navies often use gas turbines to provide high speeds (30+ knots), plus a set of diesels for lower speeds (up to 20 kt).
For new ships, electrical propulsion is being looked into for the same reason: you can switch generators on and off so you always have them running at their most efficient power setting.
The cruise ship industry has been doing this for years!!!! What proof of concept is necessary? This is an industry best practice and this $33M is wasted money.
(Posted as AC because at work)
I was on a DDG. A full fuel load is somewhere between 400,000 and 450,000 of DFM (Diesel Fuel Marine) I believe the Nato term is F-76 of F-45 for this type of fuel but don't quote me on that, the memory is slipping. On a full power run, all 4 gas turbines engines online and the throttles set to full forward, we burn about 100,000 gallons an hour. This is extremely rare as it is wasteful. Only done for periodic testing of the ships systems, and when the ship really has to haul ass (imminent combat or other special circumstance require full speed with full reliabilty.) Normally the ship "steams" on one or two engines, and consumption if I remember can go down to something like 500 gallons per hour. Steaming across the sea at 20 knots with two engines running we burned something like 6k an hour but again I dont remember exactly. Saving 12,000 barrels in one year, which is 500,000 gallons according to Wikianswers, does not seem significant to me. But I guess it is something. Oh, but then the costs have to be counterbalanced with the cost of retrofitting the propulsion systems with an electrive drive, and the maintenance and repair costs on the said electric drive, and the additional training of ships crew to work with the new equipment. And also I would say the additional people onboard because of the extra equipment but, haha, im laughing inside, the Navy wouldn't do something like that, they would just pile more work onto already overworked engineers.
Also on a side note the generators providing electricity for the ship run on the same fuel. I guess the savings is allowed to happen because the generators are more efficient at generating electricity, sending it through the ships electrical distribution system, and powering an electric drive at certain shaft speeds, than the engines themselves are at those same speeds.
Honest, its for a new propulsion system we are trying not to meet the power requirements for the super rail gun we are putting on our ships in case we need to shoot Decepticons from the top of a pyramid.
While I do joke, I do think this could be used as a test bed of some sort. Rail guns have been talked about before, and certainly laser technology has advanced. Just a thought.
I read some years ago about self-contained nuclear batteries that could be set up in communities without direct connections to the broader electrical grid. Don't we have the ability to leverage similar technologies on our ships? I'm talking about preconfigured reactors with constant power output and finite life (based on fuel rods encapsulated inside the power generation unit). Why not nuclear?
I use irony whenever I can, but my shirts are still wrinkled...
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!
arrrrr me blundering fuck-buckets, behold ye "hybrid of the high sea" arrr ye pirates be unstoppable see, 33 million arrr
Well played, sir. (Doffs hat)
Some might call it an enormous floating Prius
That read that as "enormous floating Penis" ?
...can it fire torpedoes while cloaked?
I can say [REDACTED] anytime I want!
When you slow down, you let the friction of the water turn the blades and capture that energy.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Ok, w/o the guns and missiles. Rats.
Seriously, Detroit could have mass-produced an automotive turbine-electric 40 years ago. Dr. Porsche was designing them at least by the '20s.
Next, while there are still tertiary wastewater treatment plants which just burn off the methane they produce, we will read about some 15 yo whiz kid getting kudos, grants and carbon credits for his "why has no one thought of that?" biomass digester for producing fuel gasses Oh, wait...
Now get off my lawn.
... a direct drive gas turbine propulsion system with a motor-generator on the shaft. In one mode, the ship's auxiliary power can be diverted to assist the turbines. Or, at slow speeds, the turbines can be shut down and the ship driven by the auxiliary power system. Although I didn't see it mentioned in the article (but others have speculated about it), if the electrical system is bi-directional, one could tap the turbine power for a short time to power large electrical loads like a rail gun or laser.
Its about time our navy catches up with the sharks.
Have gnu, will travel.
warriors/ship-driver-wannabes here:
http://blog.marport.com/2009/06/
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/navy/docs/swos/eng/64b7-205.html
(read the Bleed Air section and the Prairie Air section beneath it...)
good views are in:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ship/systems/prairie.htm
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/navy/docs/swos/eng/index.html
To add to the good comments that prop is the noise introducer from other components in the shaftline, readers (who read, that is) might be interested to see this:
http://www.gibbscox.com/nsv.htm
Shock mounting in the hull helps absorb certain frequencies of noise that otherwise would be emitted.
This one has nice pretty colors for those who are visually-oriented.
http://metocph.nmci.navy.mil/KBay/backgroundnoise.htm
Now, for those wanting to know what a ship looks like under the stresses of the sea, and you think it's a huge honkin' piece of unbending steel, look at page 13 in:
http://www.mscsoftware.com/support/library/conf/wuc94/p01994.pdf
But, for all of you having wet dreams about the 16% fuel savings, keep in mind it is "UP TO", it's by NO means guaranteed. Considering volatility in fuel prices and potentially unstable regimes providing oil, some circles see smaller lightweight nuc plants as a viable alternative.
(From above: http://blog.marport.com/2009/06/ )
Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
This might also be informative to those interested in ship energy transformation:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/7801101/High-All-Electric-Ship-Concept
Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
Sail technology is being re-adapted with complex technology to reduce fuel consumption on very high inertia vessels. Look up 'sky sail'.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=sky+sail&aq=f&oq=&aqi=g10
Cheers.
Yet Socrates himself is particularly missed.
A lovely little thinker but a bugger when he's pissed.
Average fuel oil price today is $2.35 per gallon at retail (heating oil, delivered). That's with $65 crude.
Government price will be cheaper for obvious reasons but fuel oil will still cost substantially more then crude.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
... wind powered ships. Maybe we could plant a huge wind turbine on the ship's deck and use the electricity thus generated to power the motors. I mean... there's lots of wind over the oceans. Somebody should definitely look at using wind to propel the ships.
Does it shoot organic missiles while sipping wine and complaining about SUV drivers?
One of the real reasons behind this is that the gear train to connect a gas turbine to a propeller is a huge pain. Turbine shaft speeds are around 20,000 RPM, and this has to be stepped down to 200 RPM or so for the propeller. There's a clutch and reversing gear, too. Often the gearbox is bigger than the engine.
Reverse with a turbine is a headache. Some marine diesels are built so they can run in either direction, but that's not an option with a turbine. So there's either a really big gearshift, or a second powerplant for reverse operation.
Thus, there's ongoing interest in going to electric transmission, like a locomotive. It's not a new idea; an electric transmission was tried on a ship before WWII. But it works much better with modern power semiconductors. Locomotives do this now. Modern locomotives use AC to DC to variable frequency polyphase AC conversion to drive the motors. This takes large switching power supplies, using very large semiconductors. It's a solved problem; GE locomotives have been doing this for ten years now, and their competitors now have comparable technology. Moving the technology to ships is an obvious move at this point.
There's also a Navy effort to develop a permanent magnet motor (!) big enough for shipboard propulsion. This gets rid of the field coils and increases efficiency. I'm not sure how that's coming along.
This is routine progress being made in heavy machinery. The combination of electronics and really big gears and motors can do things neither can do alone.