Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Flexible Warships in Foreign Navies: Applications for Future U. S

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Flexible Warships in Foreign Navies: Applications for Future U. S"— Presentation transcript:

1 Flexible Warships in Foreign Navies: Applications for Future U. S
Flexible Warships in Foreign Navies: Applications for Future U.S. Navy Surface Combatants ASNE DAY 2015 March 5, 2015 Authors: Nicholas Abbott, Darren Leap, Tony Jang, Alexander B. Schaps

2 Agenda Introduction to “Flexibility” Foreign Navy Flexible Warships:
Germany, Denmark, United Kingdom, The Netherlands, Italy and France Summary of Flexibility Enablers on Foreign Warships Positive Impacts of Flexibility Enablers on Foreign Warships Flexibility Enablers Applied Over the Life Cycle US Flexible Warships: History, Applications for the US Navy - Future Flexible Warships Observations & Analysis Recommendations We wanted to take a look at what’s happening with “Flexibility” in the foreign navies of some of our NATO allies and how can this apply to the US Navy. Our Introduction to Flexibility will define how we characterized the ship programs we reviewed. We will review flexibility for early innovators (Germany and Denmark) and follow with developments in the Netherlands, the United Kingdom , Italy and France. Discuss impacts and look at how these relate to a ships life cycle. Finally we will present a brief overview of the history of Flexible warships in the US Navy and provide some analysis and recommendations for Future Flexible Warships.

3 Flexibility Definition
Flexibility is defined as: “The ability of a ship to adapt to universal or alternate solutions with the benefit of increased capability, reduced cost or both.” Flexibility can have multiple definitions. We wanted to use a definition that would provide a more comprehensive view of foreign naval ship programs. [Read the definition]

4 Key Attributes of Flexibility NAVSEA Flexible Ships Roadmap 2014
Description Adaptability Ships built with the ability to accept systems/equipment that can be removed and replaced according to specified time/cost objectives to adapt a ship’s capabilities to a given mission. Modularity Ships built with standardized interfaces and modular components that reduce the complexity of producing/integrating systems and modernizing capabilities. Scalability The ability of hardware/software combinations to be increased/decreased to match capability requirements of different sized ship platforms without sacrificing performance. Payload Commonality Payload systems developed independently of ship platforms using standardized design specifications allowing the same systems to be applied across multiple platforms. The Flexible Ships Roadmap was completed in May 2014 by PEO Ships to identify opportunities to insert flexible technologies and characteristics in Navy surface ship and mission systems programs over the next several decades. This Roadmap identified the four key attributes that define flexible ships: Adaptability, Modularity, Scalability and Payload Commonality. We wanted to ensure that our analysis of foreign flexible warships would align with this roadmap.

5 Flexibility Enablers (1 of 2)
Production Modularity – The use of production processes that use standardized design elements as the building blocks to produce customized ships. This includes the use of modularized equipment to facilitate streamlining of outfitting and furnishing. SWAP-C – Growth Margins for Size, Weight, Power and Cooling. Flexible Design Provisions – The incorporation of considerations that support technology insertion or mission reconfiguration at reduced cost. This includes design benefits that aren’t included in other categories (e.g. access routes). Modular Payloads/Stations – Modular Stations - ship spaces that are designed with standard module interfaces. Modular Payloads are the packaging of equipment or systems that can easily be integrated into a ship space or module station. During the assessment of foreign warship programs, we looked at what “flexibility enablers” are present in these ships that meet the our definition of “flexibility”. All of these enables can be found on at least one ship program.

6 Flexibility Enablers (2 of 2)
Flexible Mission Spaces (Mission Bay) - Ship spaces that support reconfiguration for multiple missions using multiple module stations. Open Infrastructure – The built-in ability of a ship platform to easily accommodate change. This includes the use of a common computing, data, communications infrastructure. Open Standards – The use of requirements that are not customized for a ship or a payload module. Commonality - The use of items that are shared with other subsystems or naval platforms.

7 Flexibility Enablers to Flexible Ship Roadmap
Key Attributes of Flexible Ships Adaptability Modularity Scalability Payload Commonality Production Modularity X* X Flexible Design Provisions Modular Payloads / Stations Flexible Mission Spaces (Mission Bay) Open Infrastructure *Production modularity that uses modularized equipment. Flexibility enablers were mapped to the FSR. The following enablers could not be directly mapped but are included since they meet our definition of “flexibility” and they can provide significant cost reduction benefits.

8 Image Source: Blohm + Voss
Germany F125 Class MEKO Concept MKS 180 Image Source: Blohm + Voss

9 Denmark StanFlex 300 Ship Source: RDN Large Displacement Classes
StanFlex Container Source: RDN

10 Danish Frigate F363 Modularity Features
StanFlex Modular VLS Station & Payload Straight Run Service Piping and Cabling Optional Bolt-on Lightweight Armor Midship Container Storage Area Modular Gun on ISO Container Mounts Extra-Large Cabling Tray and Penetrations Photos taken by AOC on F363 tour on

11 British Cellularity Concept
Type 26 GCS Cellularity Concept circa. 1985 Type 26 GCS Mission Bay Concept. Image Source: Navy Matters.

12 Image Source: Damen Schelde Naval Shipbuilding
The Netherlands Combat System Auxiliary Systems Propulsion Accommodation Support Spaces Image Source: Damen Schelde Naval Shipbuilding CROSSOVER

13 Italian FREMM and PPA Modular Frigate Concepts
Surface Combatants Building new 7000-ton Bergamini-class FREMM frigates Developing new units (e.g. PPA multi-role patrol vessel) Bergamini class FREMM GP Image source: Modular PPA Concept Amphibious Support PPA Concept Humanitarian Relief PPA Concept Source: Italian Navy

14 French Flexible Warships

15 Flexibility Enablers Summary
per Ship Class (1 of 2)

16 Flexibility Enablers Summary
per Ship Class (2 of 2)

17 Flexibility Enablers over the Life Cycle

18 Naval Flexibility History
Documents Programs Ships Influenced MEKO 1975 1980 CG52 1985 1990 LPD17 LCC SC21 1995 CVN DD21 2000 CG(X) 2005 FREMM 2010 Future Flexible Warships 2015 DOD 5000 Series MOSA Guidelines NOA 2003-current SEAMOD SSES ATC AIMS TOSA MISSIT 2003-Current DDG51 LCS STANFLEX DDG 1000

19 Observations and Analysis
What can we learn from foreign flexible warships? - Foreign Navies made decisions in favor of building flexible warships for near term savings. These include: Improved construction process and MEKO demonstrated savings in in construction time, labor hours and ship construction costs. Mission Reconfiguration Capability in a Single Hull (The Danish Navy was able to replace 20 Patrol Boats with 16 Patrol Boats that could be tailored to the mission.) Use of a common hull (platform) for multi-national use (The FREMM project supports both Italian and French navies, sharing shares common systems and NRE costs. Flexibility benefits are proven and are driving decisions for wider adoption by these navies. Blohm + Voss demonstrated 25% savings in construction time, 40% savings in labor hours, 17% savings in ship construction costs including combat systems installation

20 Recommendations for Future U.S. Warship Development
Top Priorities for Implementation of Flexibility: Shipyards for the next Surface Combatant should use modular payloads for streamlining the construction process. Cost estimators need to develop a process based cost model that will more accurately calculate construction costs of flexible warships. Equipment suppliers need to learn “what’s in it for them” by documenting the benefits already obtained by equipment suppliers to the various foreign flexible warships. The U.S. Navy needs to realize that building a “common hull (platform)” with flexibility enablers is low risk because it has already been done. By building flexible surface combatants that can affordably/quickly modify or upgrade its payload, the Navy will save money, improve each ship’s AO, and therefore provide more “bang for the buck” to rest of the fleet. The concept of a Flexible Warship can help the Navy achieve both cost and capability goals for its ships. It is hoped that the information presented in this paper will assist in the efforts to develop a true “Flexible Warship” for future Navy surface combatants. 1. Shipyards need to understand how to optimize construction processes to take advantage of decoupled modular payloads.

21 Questions? Thank You

22 Backup

23 Military Worth of a Flexible Warship

Download ppt "Flexible Warships in Foreign Navies: Applications for Future U. S"

Similar presentations

Ads by Google