检索结果-内蒙古大学图书馆

EDITOR'S CLIPBOARD: RELIABILITY, MAINTAINABILITY, AVAILABILITY ‐ THE REAL QUESTION

Naval Engineers Journal 1983年第5期95卷 76-82页

作者： Richardson, James C. Berman, Paul I. Capt. James C. Richardson Jr. a surface warfare officer was graduated from the U.S. Naval Academy U.S. Naval Postgraduate School and the American University. With proven subspecialities in Material Management and Computer Systems Technology he has served as Commanding Officer USS Hepburn (FF-IOSS) Program Manager of the Mk 86 Gun Fire Control System at the Naval Sea Systems Command and is currently Commanding Officer of the Navy Regional Data Automation Center Washington D. C. Paul Berman is manager of Product Support Engineering for Lockheed Electronics Company Plain field New Jersey. His department is responsible for logistics planning and analysk supply support field engineering training and technical documentation in support of the division as products. His 30 years of experience in product support include preparation of logistics plans engineering data technical publications and training materials. He is also an adjunct instructor at Rutgers University. Mr. Berman received a BA from Queens College in 1951 and an MA from Hunter College in 1957. He attended the U.S. Army Signal Corps radar school and was a field radio and radar repairman during the Korean War. He is currently a member of the Society of Logistics Engineers and the National Management Association.

来源：评论

学校读者我要写书评

暂无评论

THE APPLICATION OF A PLANNING CONTRACT CONCEPT TO A COMPLEX NAVY SURFACE SHIP OVERHAUL

引用

NAVAL ENGINEERS JOURNAL 1983年第2期95卷 51-65页

作者： NODELL, WR SIAS, PM William R. Nodell USCG (Ret.):graduated from the U. S. COAST GUARD Academy in 1950 receiving a B.S. degree and earned his Master of Sciences and Naval Engineer degrees from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 1957. He has served in various line and engineering capacities on board COAST GUARD Cutters in Atlantic Pacific and Alaskan waters. He served in the production department of the COAST GUARD Yard in Curtis Bay Maryland and later was Chief of the Naval Engineering Branches of the 13th COAST GUARD District in Seattle Washington and the 3rd COAST GUARD District New York New York. After retirement he held a position as Manager of the Marine Engineering Department at Atlantic Research Corporation Costa Mesa California and joined Lockheed Shipbuilding and Construction Company in 1973. He was Project Engineer for the Polar Class Icebreakers the AS-41 and the LSD-41 in various stages. He has contributed technical papers to several professional societies. He is currently a member of the Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers the American Society of Naval Engineers where he served as a past chairman of the Puget Sound Chapter and the National Management Association where he served as a Past President of the local chapter. He is a senior systems engineer at Lockheed. Peter M. Sias:received his B.S. degree in Marine Engineering from Maine Maritime Academy in 1950. Subsequently he completed a NAVY sponsored program in Naval Architecture at the University of California and Department of Defense courses in program management and contract administration at the Air Force Institute of Technology. He served on active duty with the United States Navy during the Korean emergency with assignments as Engineering Officer for a minesweeper and collateral staff duty assignments with the Commander Mineforce U.S. Pacific Fleet for reserve ship activation. Upon release from active duty in 1952 he joined United States Steel Corporation as an Industrial Engineer. In 1955 he accepted a position in the Eng

Early in 1979, the Commander in Chief, United States Pacific Fleet requested that alternate procedures be explored for overhaul of the USS Sacramento (AOE-1). Of particular concern was the availability of the ship to accomplish alterations and repair planning prior to the start of the overhaul and the history of AOE Class ships not being completed in the private sector within the scheduled availability time. The planning type contract concept wherein pre-overhaul tests and inspections, preparation of drawings, procurement of long lead time material and detailed overhauling planning and scheduling would be accomplished by the successful Contractor was one approach requested for major consideration. In July 1979, the decision was made to proceed with the planning contract concept for overhaul of the USS Sacramento. The Request for Proposals (RFP's) were issued to industry in November 1979 with contract award to Lockheed Ship building and Construction Company (LSCC) on 4 February 1980. In September 1980, the overhaul for USS Sacramento was classified by the Navy as “complex”, confirming specific management action and attention to be given during the planning and overhaul phases. This technical paper describes the application of the planning contract concept to the planning and overhaul of USS Sacramento. Actual experiences including issue of the negotiated Request for Proposals (RFP's), performing pre-overhaul test and inspections (POT & I) procedures, accomplishing ship check and drawing preparation, and scheduling, including proper phasing of all elements and critical path analysis, will be reviewed in detail. Comparisons to conventional procedures will be made, along with concepts for modifying the methods employed to custom fit the characteristics of future overhauls. The closure will include a summary of “lessons learned” to date with specific recommendations for application of procedures to future overhauls.

关键词：

来源：评论

学校读者我要写书评

暂无评论

U.S. AND FOREIGN HULL FORM, MACHINERY AND STRUCTURAL DESIGN PRACTICES

引用

Naval Engineers Journal 1983年第6期95卷 36-53页

作者： KEHOE, JAMES W. BROWER, KENNETH S. MEIER, HERBERT A. RUNNERSTROM, CDR. ERIC James W. Kehoe Jr. is well known for his work in conducting comparative naval architecture studies of U.S. and foreign warship design practices for which he received the ASNE Gold Medal for 1981 and the Legion of Merit. He is currently a partner in Spectrum Associates Incorporated Arlington Virginia where he is engaged in the feasibility and concept design of naval ships and in continuing his comparative engineering analyses of U.S. and foreign warships. Prior to his retirement from the U.S. Navy as a Captain in 1982 his naval career involved sea duty aboard three destroyers and three aircraft carriers including command of the USS John R. Pierce (DD-753) and engineer officer of the USS Wasp (CVS-18). Ashore he had duty at the Naval Sea Systems Command where he directed the Comparative Naval Architecture Program as an instructor in project management in the Polaris missile project and as a nuclear weapons officer. He holds a B.S. in mathematics from Stonehill College Massachusetts (1952) and an MA in education from San Diego State College (1959). A frequent contributor to the Naval Engineers Journal U.S. Naval Institute Proceedings and the International Defense Review he has published a number of articles on U.S. Soviet and other foreign warship design practices and the effects of design practices on ship size and cost. Kenneth S. Brower is a partner in Spectrum Associates Incorporated Arlington Virginia which he founded in June 1978. He graduated from the University of Michigan in 1965 with a Bachelor's Degree in Naval Architecture. Mr. Brower has contributed to the design and construction of numerous merchant ships and warships the latter of which include the CG-47 project Arapaho the FDL and DX projects the new NATO Frigates Replacement for the ‘90's DDGX and FFX projects as well as several frigate developed for Foreign Military Sales. Since 1972 he has actively supported the Naval Sea Systems Command's Comparative Naval Architecture Program. During this period Mr. Brower has contribute

There are two principal benefits to conducting comparative engineering analyses of U.S. and foreign ship design practices and criteria: 1) they offer an opportunity to identify clever ideas from which the U.S. can benefit, and 2) they cause us to assess U.S. design practices critically that we may have been taking for granted or may have been accepting as inviolable. The results of a comparative analysis of U.S. and foreign hull form, machinery, and structural design practices are reported in this paper. Numerous studies of U.S. and foreign warships have shown that the hull form, machinery, and structural design practices of various navies differ considerably. Although most large navies operate their ships in generally similar environments, each country has developed its own unique style of hull form. Based on an assessment of foreign hull form design practices, the U.S. Navy has recently developed a style of hull form that offers improved stability and seakeeping performance and which facilitates the arrangement of internal functions. Foreign ships generally have a tighter machinery arrangement than comparable U.S. ships. However, this is not necessarily achieved by accepting less subsystem performance or by sacrificing redundancy. The tightness of foreign machinery plants seems to be achieved by tighter management control over the ship design and acquisition process. In addition, foreign navies appear to be more flexible in adjusting to a new technology such as that which occurred during the change from steam to gas turbine propulsion. U.S. ships appear to be constructed to more rigorous structural detail design standards than foreign ships. The structural configuration of foreign ships, including the integration of web frames, longitudinal girders, and stanchions also differs from U.S. practice. The configuration of ship structure and the value of rigorous U.S. structural design practices are worthy of additional research. The results of the study reported in thi

关键词：

来源：评论

学校读者我要写书评

暂无评论

SEAKEEPING AND COMBAT SYSTEM PERFORMANCE - THE OPERATORS ASSESSMENT

引用

NAVAL ENGINEERS JOURNAL 1983年第3期95卷 256-266页

作者： KEHOE, JW BROWER, KS COMSTOCK, EN Capt. James W. Kehoe Jr. USN (Ret.):is well known for his work in conducting comparative naval architecture studies of U.S. and foreign warship design practices for which he received the ASNE GoldMedalfor 1981 and the Legion ofMerit. He is currently a partner in Spectrum Associates Incorporated Arlington Virginia where he is engaged in the feasibility and concept design of naval ships and in continuing his comparative engineering analyses of U.S. and foreign warships. Prior to his retirement from theU.S. Navyas a Captain in 1982 his naval career involved sea duty aboard three destroyers and three aircraft carriers including command of theUSS John R. Pierce (DD-753)and engineer officer of theUSS Wasp (CVS-18). Ashore he had duty at the Naval Sea Systems Command where he directed the Comparative Naval Architecture Program as an instructor in project management in the Polaris missile project and as a nuclear weapons officer. He holds a B.S. in mathematics from Stonehill College Massachusetts (1952) and an MA in education from San Diego State College (1959). A frequent contributor to theNaval Engineers Journal U.S. Naval Institute Proceedings and theInternational Defense Review he has published a number of articles on U.S. Soviet and other foreign warship design practices and the effects of design practices on ship size and cost. Mr. Kenneth S. Brower:is a partner in Spectrum Associates Incorporated Arlington Virginia which he founded in June 1978. He graduated from the University of Michigan in 1965 with a Bachelor's Degree in Naval Architecture. Mr. Brower has contributed to the design and construction of numerous merchant ships and warships the latter of which include theCG-47 projectArapaho theFDLand DX projects the new NATO Frigate Replacement for the 90's DDGX and FFX projects as well as several frigates developed for Foreign Military Sales. Since 1972 he has actively supported the Naval Sea Systems Command's Comparative Naval Architecture Proram. During this period Mr. Brower has cont

In a recent effort to improve our assessment of the Comparative seakeeping performance of existing U.S. N avy ships, a seakeeping questionnaire was distributed to the Commanding Officers of U.S. N avy frigates, destroyers, and cruisers. The objectives were to determine, (1) the operational availability of existing weapons and sensors in relation to a ship's seakeeping performance, (2) the availability of ships to make full speed and to conduct sonar, helicopter, and replenishment-at-sea operations, (3) effects of a ship's seakeeping limitations on task force and convoy operation, and (4) realistic seakeeping design crteria for use in the design of new ships. The responses to the questionnaire indicated that frigates are severely limited in their availability to conduct ASW task force and convoy operations in the North Atlantic during the winter season because of seakeeping limitations on speed, hull sonar performance, and helicopter operations. The findings suggest that in the design of future ships we need to place emphasis on improving the seakeeping performance of ships in rough water, instead of just their speed and range in calm water. They indicate that the ASW capability of U.S. ships in high sea states would be enhanced by a towed acoustic sensor; an extended range ASW missile; active fin roll stabilizers; and a helicopter recovery assistance, securing and traverse (RAST) system. They also suggest that the question of the interaction of a ship's size and seakeeping characteristics with the choice of weapons and sensors requires careful attention in the design of future U.S. N avy ships.

关键词：

来源：评论

学校读者我要写书评

暂无评论

LETS DESIGN OUT EMI - EMI TRILOGY .1.

引用

NAVAL ENGINEERS JOURNAL 1982年第1期94卷 37-40页

作者： GARRETT, JF HARDIE, RL ROGERS, PA Mr. James F. Garrett:is a staff engineer in the Systems Electromagnetic Division of the Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA 61X4). He is Program Manager for the Shipboard Electromagnetic Compatability Improvement Program (SEMCIP) and for the Waterfront Corrective Action Program (WCAP). Mr. Garrett received his BS degree in Electrical Engineering from North Carolina A&T State University and his Masters of Business and Public Administration from Southeastern University. He is the originator and program manager of the NAVSEA EMI Control Program for Design and Acquisition. Mr. Robert L. Hardie Jr.:is a Project Manager with Scientific Management Associates Riverdale Maryland where he is presently managing and providing direct support to the Navy's EMI Control Program. He is also SMA's Deputy Project Manager supporting the Battleship Reactivation and Modernization Program. Mr. Hardie has been involved in Electromagnetic Environmental Effects for the last four years and Ship Acquisition Modernization and Conversion for the last fifteen years. He received his BS degree from Hampton Institute then served as Chief Electrical Engineering in the U.S. Army for two years. Mr. Paul A. Rogers:is a Program Manager with Scientific Management Associates and presently he is managing SMA's Management Support for a variety of programs including CG-47 High Performance Ships AALC LCAC Command Control Communications/Intelligence DDG-X and the Battleship Program. He has been involved in various aspects of Systems Acquisition for the past nineteen years.

As technical innovations in electronics have increased, piecemeal approaches to improving Electromagnetic Compatability (EMC) have resulted in overly complex and often ineffective designs. This paper addresses the current institutionalized approach to the reduction of management, planning and control deficiencies in the area of EMC. The paper begins with a discussion of the problems caused by EMI followed by a discussion of the traditional approach to reducing EMI. Then NAVSEA 61×4's role as the Electromagnetic Environmental Effects point of contact and as Electromagnetic programs Coordination office is identified in the context of EMI Control. The EMI/EMC management benchmarks are also reviewed along with their appropriate management controls which ensure that all EMC planning for design, acquisition, modernization and conversion efforts are coordinated by the cognizant activities and program managers.

关键词：

来源：评论

学校读者我要写书评

暂无评论

Coordinated control and its implementation

引用

Process Safety Progress 1982年第2期1卷 85-90页

作者： C. S. Lin T. H. Tsai J. W. Lane Tenneco Inc. Houston Texas 77001 Cheng S. Lin:was born in Taiwan and received a BS in Mechanical Engineering at Cheng Kung University. He came to the Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute in 1959 where he received a MME in Mechanical Engineering in 1962 and a PhD in Mechanical Engineering in 1966 He spent three years at West Virginia Pulp and Paper Co. in Process Control Research three years at TRW Inc. Systems Group on the Apollo program and nine years at Bonner and Moore Assoc. installing process control systems worldwide. He joined the Operations Technologies Department of Tenneco Inc. as a Consulting Engineer in June 1980. He is a US citizen and a member of IEEE. Thomas H. Tsai:is a Managing Engineer of the Operations Technologies Department of Tenneco Inc. He is a Registered Professional Engineer in the State of Calif. and is a Member of AIChE and a Senior Member of ISA. He received a BS degree in Chemical Engineering at Tunghan University of Taiwan and attended graduate school at Oklahoma State University. James W. Lane:received a BE and MS in Chemical Engineering from the University of Southern California. He is a Registered Professional Engineer in the States of Tex and Calif. and is a Member of the AIChE Senior Member of the IEEE and Senior Member of the SME. For the last seven years he has been Director of the Operations Technologies Department of Tenneco Inc. a cooperate engineering group providing expertise in advanced control technology for process control energy management and environmental monitoring systems.

来源：评论

学校读者我要写书评

暂无评论

THE DESIGN OF VARIABLE PAYLOAD SHIPS

引用

NAVAL ENGINEERS JOURNAL 1982年第2期94卷 147-178页

作者： BROOME, GW NELSON, DW TOOTLE, WD Granville W. Broome Jr.:received his BS degree in Civil Engineering from the North Carolina State University in 1967 and MS degree in Naval Architecture from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 1970. He started his career at the former Naval Ship Engineering Center working on preliminary structural designs for FFG-7 CVAN-71 and PHM. Subsequently he participated in design integration of FFG-7 DG (AEGIS) CSGN and CG-47 Class ships. Later he served as the Lead Naval Architect for feasibility studies of LSD-41 T-AGOS and T-AO and feasibility studies as well as concept design of ARS-50. Mr. Broome is currently the Head of the Surface Combatant Section (SEA 33112) in the Advanced Design Division of the Naval Sea Systems Command. He is also serving as the Assistant Program Manager for Ship Design Concepts on the Ship Systems Engineering Standards (SSES) Program. In this capacity he is responsible for feasibility studies of the Variable Payload Ships. Mr. Broome is a member of ASNE and ASE. David W. Nelson:graduated from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill with a BA degree in History prior to joining the Navy in 1963. He served inUSS Conyngham (DDG-17)and at the Naval Communication Station Greece. Upon release from active duty he entered North Carolina State University where he earned a BS degree in Civil Engineering. He joined the Naval Ship Engineering Center Hyattsville Maryland in 1973. He was the General Arrangements Task Leader for the DD-993 Contract Design the CG-26 Modernization and the DDG-2 Class Conversion. He is currently the Manager for Destroyer Design in the Ship Arrangements (SEA 3211) Group of the Naval Sea Systems Command where his primary responsibility is the general arrangements of DDG-51. He is also the Assistant Program Manager for Ship Design on the Ship Systems Engineering Standards Program. Mr. Nelson is a member of ASNE ASE and SNAME. William D. Tootle:received his BSEE degree from the North Carolina A&T State University in 1960. Between 1960 and 1964 h

This paper presents the issues involved and the approach taken in the design of Variable Payload Ships. The objectives in Variable Payload Ship design are: first, to permit concurrent design and development of the ship and its initial combat system; and second, to simplify the testing, installation, and upgrading of the combat system over a ship's life cycle. In order to accomplish these objectives, Ship systems engineering Standards and Design Criteria are being developed for the VPS platform and payload. Based on the Mid-Size Combatant design conducted so far, indications are that the abovementioned objectives can be met — giving the Navy maximum flexibility to choose the latest and most appropriate combat suite for each of its surface combatants during both initial acquisition and entire life cycle.

关键词：

来源：评论

学校读者我要写书评

暂无评论

LUNCHEON ADDRESS - UNITED-STATES NAVY PRESENT AND FUTURE - AN engineering PERSPECTIVE

引用

NAVAL ENGINEERS JOURNAL 1982年第3期94卷 47-50页

作者： FOWLER, EB COMMANDER NAVAL SEA SYSTEMS COMMAND Vice Admiral Earl B. Fowler Jr. USN:was born in Jacksonville Fla. on 29 September 1925. After attending Landon High School in Jacksonville he enlisted in the Navy's V-12 Program on 18 May 1943 and entered the Georgia School of Technology from which he graduated in February 1946 receiving his Bachelor of Mechanical Engineering degree and his commission as Ensign in the U.S. Naval Reserve. Following graduation he was ordered to duties inUSS Columbia (CL-56)andUSS Ranger (CV-4)until November 1946 when he was assigned to the Pre-commissioning Detail and later served in theUSS Wright (CVL-49). In July 1947 he entered Massachusetts Institute of Technology graduating therefrom in January 1949 and receiving his B.S. degree in Electrical Engineering. He next served in theUSS Leary (DDR-879)for two years and the Naval Shipyard Charleston from 1951 until 1953 when he became Force Electronics Officer Staff of Commander Mine Force U.S. Atlantic Fleet also at Charleston until 1956. Subsequently he served at the Navy Radiological Defense Laboratory (1956–57) at Hunter's Point Naval Shipyard (1957–60) with the Military Assistance Advisory Group Republic of China as Material and Engineering Advisor (1960–62) on the Staff of Commander Service Force U.S. Pacific Fleet (1962–65) and as Head Ship Engineering Division Pacific Missile Range Pt. Mugu Calif. where he worked on the design of ships for the APOLLO Program and National Range Support (1965–67). Admiral Fowler came to the Naval Material Command in July 1967 as Project Manager Instrumentation Ships Project Office (PM-5) and served in that capacity until February 1968 when the project was transferred as a Ship Acquisition Project to the Naval Ship Systems Command and he became the Project Manager for the Oceanographic Mine Patrol and Special Purpose Ship Acquisition Project. He then attended the Harvard University Advanced Management Program in 1971 subsequently reporting to the Naval Electronic Systems Command in Janu

来源：评论

学校读者我要写书评

暂无评论

THE CONSTRUCTION OF VARIABLE PAYLOAD SHIPS

引用

NAVAL ENGINEERS JOURNAL 1982年第2期94卷 179-199页

作者： THOMPSON, DH THORELL, LM Daniel H. Thompson Jr.:is a native of Louisville Kentucky. He graduated from Webb Institute of Naval Architecture in 1957. He was an Engineering Duty Officer in theUNITED STATES NAVYprimarily in the Far East responsible for ship repair and overhaul. He joined Sparkman & Stephens Inc. New York City as Assistant to the Chief Engineer in 1963 and worked on commercial military and private contracts. He has worked for Bath Iron Works since 1967. Between 1967 and 1971 he served first as Project Engineer on the DLG-16 Class Ship Modernization Program which involved eight ships and later as the Assistant to the Production Manager when he assumed the responsibilities for production management administration and sea trial coordination. He organized and directed cost reduction programs and led the development of a comprehensive management administration information system. Between 1971 and 1972 Mr. Thompson served as the Facilities Project Manager responsible for the execution of a nine million dollar shipyard facilities improvement program. In 1972 Mr. Thompson was appointed as the Producibility Assurance Manager for the FFG-7 Program. In this capacity he reviewed the detail design work and coordinated the early activities of the subcontractor responsible for detail design. He was also responsible for the development of the FFG-7 Class Producibility Assurance Manual which provided guidance to the detail designers on production/design integration. During the DG-47 (now CG-47) studies at BIW Mr. Thompson served as the Deputy Program Manager for DG-47 Technical Characterization in 1977. At present Mr. Thompson is working as a Project Engineer in the Technical Department. He is responsible for coordinating the engineering work on new DDGX and Variable Payload Ship projects. On special assignment he is also supporting the Cost Reduction Program at BIW as Chairman of the Technical Committee. Mr. Thompson is a member of SNAME and ASNE and is a licensed professional engineer in New York and Maine. Len Thorell:is a

The decoupling of combat systems from the platform makes it possible for shipyards and combat system suppliers to work in parallel without schedule or technological conflict. Great benefit is derived from building one, standard platform able to accommodate a variety of combat systems. The capability to build and test the payload modules independently, in a well equipped shore-based facility, means higher production efficiency and improved quality control. The standardization of payload-platform interfaces means that the detail design and construction of foundations and distributive systems need not be delayed if some of the combat system components are being upgraded at the time when the ship is in construction. Additionally, shipyards recognize the value of the variable payload ship concept for major combat systems and weapons upgrades. Analysis shows that combat system changes will not lie on the critical path from a scheduling point of view if the payload items are modularized and conform to the Ship systems engineering Standards. The shipyards intend to participate actively in the conservation of tenth-scale models and full-scale mock-ups. These mock-ups should prove valuable in the definition of interface requirements which must be incorporated in the Ship System engineering Standards. The module installation procedures and clearance requirements for both weapons modules and pelletized electronics can be checked in this effective way. Variable payload ship platform construction poses no technical problems as far as new facility requirements are concerned. Shipyards interested in assembling, testing, and installing payload modules would, however, have to use appropriate buildings, equipment, and cranes. These capital requirements are significant but reasonable for those yards that are likely to be interested in building frigates, destroyers, or cruisers. Furthermore, these yards generally plan for production improvements through better facilities, many of which

关键词：

来源：评论

学校读者我要写书评

暂无评论

THE FFG 7 CLASS DESIGN IMPACT BY INSURV TRIALS

引用

NAVAL ENGINEERS JOURNAL 1982年第2期94卷 87-100页

作者： WOODRUFF, RB The authorgraduated from the U.S. Naval Academy with distinction in 1964. He served initially in theUSS Davis (DD-937)as Main Propulsion Assistant attended the Naval Destroyer School and then was a member of the Pre-Commissioning Crew and Engineer Officer in theUSS Julius A. Furer (DEG-6).Selected as an Engineering Duty Officer (ED) in 1968 he had a tour in the Maintenance Department Staff of Commander Cruisr-Destroyer Force U.S. Atlantic Fleet at Newport R.I. after which he attended Massachusetts Institute of Technology for graduate studies which culminated in his receiving his M.S. degree in Mechanical Engineering and his degree of Ocean Engineer in 1972. Following graduation he was assigned to the Boston Naval Shipyard followed by two years in theUSS Puget Sound (AD-38)as Repair Officer after which he was ordered to the Norfolk Naval Shipyard as the Production Engineering Officer. Currently he is on duty in the Naval Sea Systems Command (PMS 399) where he is the Trials Officer and Hull Technical Director for theOliver Hazard Perry (FFG-7)Class Acquisition Program. Cdr. Woodruff is a qualified Surface Warfare Officer and among his military decorations holds the Naval Achievement Medal and the Vietnamese Meritorious Unit Citation Gallantry Cross. In addition to ASNE which he joined in 1967 he is a member of the U.S. Naval Institute. Two previous papers on Naval Shipyard Production presented at ASNE Day 1978 and 1979 were published in the Naval Engineers Journal Vol. 90 No. 2 (April 1978) and Vol. 91 No. 2 (April 1979). A paper on the Management of Surface Ship Maintenance was published in theNaval Engineers JournalDecember 1980.

This paper describes the impact made on the OLIVER HAZARD PERRY (FFG 7) Class design after numerous trials by the President, Board of Inspection and Survey and his Staff. In the early 1970s, faced with a Fleet of World War II Destroyers, the Navy embarked on a program to build large numbers of Frigates to perform an Ocean Escort role. This ship had three major design constraints placed on it by Chief of Naval Operations (CNO): fixed meaning, fixed displacement, and fixed cost or “designed to cost.” The purpose of this paper is to pass on some “lessons learned.” The acid test of any ship design is how well it does with the Fleet in regard to performance and reliability. How well has the “design-constrained” FFG-7 fared with 20 plus ship trials under its belt? Very well in some areas; not so well in others. Examples of the good aspects of this ship design (LM 2500 and main propulsion train, Standard Option Equipment, et cetera) as well as those which must be considered poor will be addressed. Some examples of the latter are the “breezeway” cargo doors, ship's service diesel generators, MK 92 Combat systems, decontamination stations, and topside corrosion control. In many cases INSURV caused design changes to be made that were sorely needed; in other cases, changes were made (or not made) over issues that had little or no impact on making this ship more ready for war. A brief examination of the Naval Sea systems Command (NAVSEA) surface ship design policies is made from the point of view of the Trials Officer (the Author) who rode most of the trials with PRESINSURV. Some of the issues addressed: •Improved NAVSEA corporate memory between ship designs. •Longer Acceptance Trial for Lead Ship. •Early deployment of Lead Ship without TECHREPS. •Improved NAVSEA/INSURV/CNO communication on Trial/Technical Issues and insertion of INSURV early into the design process. •Need for NAVSEA to stand up and say “no” to costly design changes that do little to make for a better warship.

关键词：

来源：评论

学校读者我要写书评

暂无评论

建议与咨询留下您的常用邮箱和电话号码，以便我们向您反馈解决方案和替代方法

时间限定

文献类型

馆藏选择

核心期刊

语言

文献类型

帮助

文字说明：

检索规则说明：

检索范例：

分类表

所选分类

限定检索结果

文献类型

馆藏范围

日期分布

学科分类号

主题

机构

作者

语言

请选择保存的检索档案：

请选择收藏分类：

通借通还

建议与咨询 留下您的常用邮箱和电话号码，以便我们向您反馈解决方案和替代方法

时间限定

文献类型

馆藏选择

核心期刊

语言

文献类型

帮助

文字说明：

检索规则说明：

检索范例：

分类表

所选分类

限定检索结果

文献类型

馆藏范围

日期分布

学科分类号

主题

机构

作者

语言

请选择保存的检索档案： 新增检索档案 确定 取消

请选择收藏分类： 新增自定义分类 确定 取消

通借通还

建议与咨询留下您的常用邮箱和电话号码，以便我们向您反馈解决方案和替代方法

请选择保存的检索档案：

请选择收藏分类：