7 hours ago
Monday, December 27, 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Proactively “From the Sea”; an agent of change leveraging the littoral best practices for a paradigm breaking six-sigma best business case to synergize a consistent design in the global commons, rightsizing the core values supporting our mission statement via the 5-vector model through cultural diversity.
Listen to Midrats
Message Boards
Books of 2022
What is Sal drinking?
I'm going to be spending some quality time with the list of Southern cocktails from Garden & Gun through the new year.
I&W
-
-
8 hours ago
-
15 hours ago
-
1 day ago
-
6 days ago
-
2 weeks ago
-
3 weeks ago
-
4 weeks ago
-
1 month ago
-
3 months ago
-
6 months ago
-
11 months ago
-
1 year ago
-
1 year ago
-
1 year ago
-
2 years ago
-
2 years ago
-
2 years ago
-
2 years ago
-
3 years ago
-
3 years ago
-
3 years ago
-
4 years ago
-
4 years ago
-
5 years ago
-
5 years ago
-
5 years ago
-
10 years ago
-
12 years ago
-
14 years ago
-
-
-
-
-
-
Blog Archive
-
▼
2010
(791)
-
▼
December
(64)
- The Books of 2010
- Fullbore Friday
- Keeping an Eye on the Long Game: Part XXXIV
- LCS: it makes your nogg'n nogg'l
- Wazup at Wanat?
- Diversity Thursday
- A matter of faith
- VQ/VPU being pulled inside the castle walls ...
- PACOM says "OBTW"
- When the axe starts to fall ...
- I don't need a pilot; I don't need a tug
- More Failblog than Facebook ...
- DDG-1000: Do this please II: Electric Boogaloo
- I thought you dogged the door ....
- Midrats Boxing Day Special: Admiral Stavridis on w...
- Sunday Funnies
- An officer's Christmas ...
- ... and to all a good night
- Christmas Eve at Skippy's house ...
- Fullbore Friday
- Keeping an Eye on the Long Game: Part XXXIII
- Best Task Force Name .... EVAH!!!
- Diversity Thursday
- The common sense of the census
- Biden: the retreat will be televised
- The wages of big government
- Germany signals retreat
- HASC Republican line-up
- Shift fire to the Ivys
- Midrats - Episode 50: The USCG in the 21st Century
- Sunday Funnies
- DADT almost TU
- A very Fleming Christmas; 2010
- Fullbore Friday
- Diversity Thursday
- What flavor of Cyber War Fail for the 24th Airforce?
- Crying uncle on LPD-17
- SECNAV: "No room for discussion"
- Japan starts to pivot
- What budget cuts look like
- What Condi said ...
- Sunday Funnies
- The First of the Few
- Railgun: so far, nice bang for the buck
- Fullbore Friday
- Are the CO & XO on the same sheet?
- DDG-1000: Do this please ...
- Diversity Thursday
- Oh, that global warming ....
- The terrible twos ...
- Retro Wednesday
- Remember
- Is today's Hornet yesterday's F2A Buffalo?
- Kaplan adopts PLAN SALAMANDER
- Open topic Midrats
- Sunday Funnies
- A Very Barney Christmas: 2010
- ... and there she goes
- Fullbore Friday
- The "F" stands for "Fighter"
- Diversity Thursday
- COD? What COD?
- XM-25: 1 for each VBSS please
- Hanukkah gift for your favorite Marine ...
-
▼
December
(64)
77 comments:
Waiting for the resident engineer/apologist for the DDG-1000 program to arrive with an explanation....
I am afraid it would be much worse sight for the DDG-1000...
As a submariner, I don't see the problem with the bow and stern of the ship submerging :)
Oh, wait, is DDG-1000 a sub?
<span>As a submariner, I don't see the problem with the bow and stern of the ship submerging :)
Oh, wait, is DDG-1000 going to be a sub?</span>
probaly one-use one, with no resurfacing capability...
i liberal sire to dilate up like three lines [url=http://www.skinitunes.com]way to get free itunes[/url] dexter lab then some flinstones [url=http://www.skinitunes.com]tune up itunes keygen[/url] because estef didnt spurn oneself to outdoors [url=http://www.skinitunes.com]tagging songs in itunes[/url] as kindly as 50 million dollars in gold coins! [url=http://www.skinitunes.com]transfering pc itunes library to mac[/url] theres a placard on my be ruined [url=http://www.skinitunes.com]create free ringtone on itunes[/url] those retards trounce your buggy [url=http://www.skinitunes.com]voice recording digital itunes[/url] the pic is on and the internet is working
They are obviously in the process of scuttling the ship, and the program. What is the problem?
Rogue wave ? no such animal .... right, Navsea ??
http://www.navy.mil/management/photodb/photos/090707-N-9132C-207.jpg
notice that this ancient, obsolete CG (which by the way has a long range radar unlike DDG-1000) can shoot down satellites. DDG-1000 please do THIS !!
Notice in the photo, that the seas are really relatively calm (no whitecaps really). This CG was maneuvering during refueling ops and a long periodicity giant (unseen) swell caught them, but did not drown anyone on the forecastle. I know the DDG-1000 folks will state that they only refuel on their stbd or port quarters, but it's not even above the main deck ! They will have their FAS stations, which are hidden behind some stealthy doors, opened up for refueling, but their equipment is dangerously low and close to the water. It should have been located up on their flight deck aft. Oh well, what do you expect for $16 billion R&D (so far).
Pls. send him another $16 billion for additional RDT&E first.
He'll probably say someting about route planning software for weather avoidance - like the DDG-1000 is a cruise liner or some such.
I love that pic - I think I use it almost once a year.
There is a reason that class and DDG-51 have the bow that they have. There is also a reason the KNOX and OHP had to plus-up with <span> bow bulwarks and a spray strakes.</span>
There are certain things that if you just deal with test tanks and engineers that get missed over and over until you find yourself in WESTPAC between two typhoons ... or just heavy seas off Iceland.
I'm not sure I understand, but why cant the DDF-1000 not sail in such a sea state? I thought the tumblehome design provided more stability and better sea keeping?
Is that where you teach the crew to say in unison "WE'RE ALL GONNA DIEEEEEEEE!"
Look at the sailors on the bow of the CG...look at the bow of a DDG-1000. Which one do you think the sailors survive on? Which one will the gun continue to operate?
Well I understand that anyone out in the open on the DDG-1000 in such a sea state is pretty much guaranteed to be swept overboard, but why do they even need to be out at all? I'm not certain being able to fire the gun would be of any use. I would imagine accuracy would be severely degraded to the point of uselessness unless you are using guided munitions.
Peggin' the Puke-o-meter!
I don't see anything there that the TSCE can't take care of....
Once upon a time I saw an old photo of the Queen Elizabeth (if I recall correctly) with the A & B turrets under water - all you could see was the ends of the 15" barrels and the B turret roof. Wish I could find that one again...
Has anyone tested what the tumblehome hull will operate when a couple of inches of ice caked up on the hull if it operates in the Northwest Passage or down around the Antartic. Has the test tanks taken in those potential issues on hand? What about the extreme tempatures that would come from operating in and around those areas of the world. I mean the C-3 cargo ships were found to be failing from not only substandard materials but also the extreme tempatures changes that came from cruising into the Artic convoy's. Cracks in the ship that would then cause the ship to break up. This became an issue not only in the war, but also post-war with some of the smaller cargo companies using those ships that weren't modified found they were cracking or even just sinking outright from under the crew cause of cracks opening up due to tempature changes.
What happens when the the windows leak, and the backs of the computers get wet?
<span>He'll probably say someting about route planning software for weather avoidance - like the DDG-1000 is a cruise liner or some such.</span>
Ain't no magic bullets been invented yet...
Especially when it comes to trying to find your way around the weather.
Sid is being a buzzkill. hahaha. :)
It's good for man-overboard drills though...
What resident engineer? NAVSEA outsourced it all to Raytheon.
<span>What resident engineer? NAVSEA outsourced it all to Raytheon</span>
You missed ZSME's attempted sweep of the porch a couple of weeks ago?
(we are a bunch of clueless, luddite, idiot, non-engineers you see)
According to him, the contractors only do what the Navy tells them to do.
NO WAY do those companies engineer a Hobson's Choice of:
their exsisting product line...or...their exsisting product line.
This one is a hoot!
Grinch that I am. I live for such moments. 8-)
Actually, blow the pic up, and look at how much electronic stuff is sitting there just waiting to get wet.
Or have somebody slam into in a bad roll.... like the spiffy little laptop plugged into the TSCE.
Wonder how much the USN payed for those laptops anyway?
A grand or better perhaps?
ZSME?
War at sea does not wait for good weather. BISMARK 's last days will tell you all you need to know about that.
Remember free surface effect?
A buddy worked the Semester at Sea ship a few years ago when they crossed from Seattle to Korea across the North Pacific in January. A rogue wave took out the bridge windows and disabled the ship, which had to divert to Hawaii. You can imagine how well all the college kids on board handled that, and yes, I realize the age of a Navy crew isn't all that different, but that's a different discussion.
SaS doesn't do the North Pacific in January anymore.
As always has been and always will be, it is very important to study your history. Not sure if the members of the front porch have read about the Battle of Tsushima, but I would highly recommend it:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Tsushima
Also, the Borodino class battleship: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Borodino_class_battleship
Just another data point for perspective on DDG 1000...
The tumblehome on that generation of ships was for the purpose of allowing the side mounted turrets better arcs of fire forward and aft...But note the progressive loss of tumblehome forward towards the bow. Somewhere I read that was for reserve buoyancy considerations.
Contemporaneous US ships also followed the fashion.
And the Russians carried forward the flawed concept of the center longitudinal bulkhead into the Krestas and Karas.
But hey, at least they gave some thought to battle damage in their ship designs.
(oh yeah. we got TSCE!)
LUDDITE?? LOL. I'll show him luddite. How about a vessel like this .
It seems to have weathered heavy seas, battles and time. Put some computers on it. I'm sure it's good to go. Its sailors didn't have the benefit of satellite weather maps either.
I wonder if anyone has hurt himself on the chair slide rails on the deck? They look to be designed to be tripped over.
How do ship designs with So many obvious flaws in it still get built? Hell how does it get off the design board?
Shouldn't someone say "Ok so this battlship sized-but still stealthy ship that will work so close to shore we can shoot at it with tanks, has a horrible stability problem, still cant get its guns to work right, basiclly can't take any damage and has almost no CIWS-is better than a new cruiser class how?" :(
Only proves that that ship did not have Storm Avoiding Software.
Because of command climate and a culture that crushed dissent at the lowest possible level by threatening careers of anyone who speaks against the person who signs their FITREP or has an input in their next board. I know, I have seen it first hand and have known others it has happened to as well.
These concerns about this ship were brought up early and line officers were told to sit down and shut up. "The CNO wants this and I'll be d@mned if anyone on my Staff is going to speak or write against this."
Yep - that is one way these things happen. There are others that contribute - but that is another brick in the wall of fail.
Only proves that such software WILL NOT make you immune to such dangers of the sea
Jesus, so it will be the men and women aboard her who die in a storm or in battle. Great.
How the hell do you change it?
Only proves that such software WILL NOT make you immune to such dangers of the sea
And the chairs need an electrical cord...Why?!?
Wonder how much Lockheed gets for them custom engineered puppies?!
And the chairs need an electrical cord...Why?!?
Wonder how much Lockheed gets for them custom engineered puppies?!
And the chairs need an electrical cord...Why?!?
Wonder how much Lockheed gets for them custom engineered puppies?!
Dude, please find that pic! I do RC naval combat in my spare time with a buddy who has a QE. That would be an awesome gotcha pic :)
Sorry...
The crap wifi at the marina kept leaving me with a "post failed retry/cancel" message".
Oh well, electronic stuff and boats.
Thats what you get.
Oh yeah. On that port $$$$$$ chair, check out the tape on the padded armrest.
Wonder how much Lockheed charges for just the arm rest?
In that pic of LCS-1 pilot house, how do you like that very noticeable design "feature" that blocks a LOT of the OOD's (and JOOD's) vision forward ?!!
What you cannot tell from that photo, is that neither OOD nor JOOD nor CO can much abaft the beam while viewing from within the Pilot House !
Actually visibility on the port and stbd quarters from the Pilot House is un acceptable ! Even if OOD or JOOD opens those bridge wing doors and exits the Pilot House, he cannot easily take any visual bearing on ships on either quarter, because of the layout of other equip on both bridge wings. ( flashing light, sometimes a machine gun, etc). Basically, the visual design layout of LCS-1 and LCS-3 is UN sat. Image an OOD/JOOD trying to see thru the forward "window" as shown in your photo. How does he even put his binoculars up against the window to peer ahead searching for all those unlit fishing boats, poorly lit bouy markers, etc that clutter the "littorals" ? The slop of the glass on those PILOT HOUSE windows is too much of an angle, and with your binoc's placed up against the window, there is so much of a gap on the lower three-quarters of the binoculars that can reflect various lights inside the bridge, that the OOD/JOOD cannot really carefully search the 90 degrees relative from 000R to 090R or from 270R to 000R. The windows on the pilot house need to have much less angles for the OOD/JOOD to safely look ahead from inside the P/H.
Like the rest of the littoral war ship, this design aspect is UN sat. BTW, the LCS-1 has not one spec of stealthy feature whatsoever, so please don't throw out that angled bridge window needed for Stealth argument. This LITTORAL ship should be kept way far out in seas away from the coastlines.
You also have to wonder how well that semi-planing hull would fare in seas like the DDG was in.
She damned sure wouldn't be alongside as in the pic I linked!
But, now what happens when she is bingo fuel -"seaframe" that she is- and can't get alongside?
Tell me how you SOOPERSPECTACULAR!!! TSCE OG will handle that ZSME/ASME?
Last account I had, Moses is pretty much the only human who has succeded in parting the seas.
Short of that, you end up with this.
(back at the marina)... >:o
<span>Short of that, you end up with this.</span>
<span>the driven spray had shorted everything; in the Combat Information Center leaky seams admitted the sea and “sparks were jumping back and forth among the electrical cables.”</span>
Nah...that won't happen to boats entirely dependent upon electrical systems to even operate a chair.
Sure
<span>"(back at the marina)..."</span>
<span></span>
<span> =-O </span>
<span>I wana go to a marina!!!</span>
<span></span>
<span>Of course its in the low 20's so i dont know how the scenery would compare depending on your latitude.</span>
LOL
Thats why God created rum James!
(and the new crop of efficient boat heat pumps!)
Thats why God created rum James!
(and the new crop of efficient boat heat pumps!)
Like every other surface ship only more so.
You don't change it. Crap like this happens all the time. Go and read about the Mark 14/15 torpedo and the hassels that came from the needs to get that fixed in World War 2. Senior leadership at Naval Torpedo Weapon Station Newport RI, telling the combat commanders that they didn't know how to use it properly and it is believed today that more then a few submarines that are forever on patrol are cause of the faulty early Mark 14's. Then we have aircraft issues such as the F2A Buffalo, SB2C Helldiver II, F111B. Then there are other weapon programs such as early issues with the M16 and the ammo being used (after buying the M16 the Army eqivalent to BuOrd changed the type of smoke less powder that fouled the gun quicker), Sgt. York ADA tank, early issues with the M2/M3 IFV, The Sparrow missile system, the Falcon Missile, the list could go on.
People get thier careers involved in making something work. Then when the dead get piled up at someone's desk the answer is they didn't use the system right. It gets even harder when a congressional critter, some military leadership, and some retired mil leadership who are now contractors get thier butts on line in trying to make a system work. It isn't until the American populace and the 60 minutes crews are at thier door steps asking the hard questions that things get changed.
oh well, weapon systems do change, human nature doesnt...
add to this historical list:
"we dont need better tank than Sherman"
"single shot Springfield rifles will be enough to hunt Injuns"
or the Murmansk convoys... btw fullbore friday material abounds, such as the lone stand of single Liberty against 23 torpedo bombers
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SS_Henry_Bacon
All Navy ships have storm avoidance capabilities. OTSR routes them, but then there is a Bowditch, barometer, anemometer and QMs or AGs onboard to further add avoidance capabilities. The best software is using your head and experience. The problem is that sometimes, the mission requires a ship to go into the soup or you have to sortie and get pounded as it will cause less damage then pounding up against the pier. Sometimes, going to sea sucks. Other times, it is the best job in the world. YMMV
The IOWAs were good sea boats, but they were wet ones, with the long narrow bows on them. I have seen a photo of the Big Badger Boat in the Norwegian Sea, in the 1950's, where a wave was breaking over the front. While I am sure a lot of it was spray, I remember that you could see the 20mm tub at the bow emerging, and the roof of Turret One level with the water.
With all the wonderful computer stuff on board the Least Capable Ship, and the DDG 100, does anyone else remember when YORKTOWN turned herself off?
Looking at the LCSes and the ZUMWALT, one is reminded of the saying, if it looks right, it probably is, and it it looks wrong, it probably is.
Uh, sid and LT B, my comment was tongue in cheek.
Roger, copy all.
Sorry OM, but you bumped into a burr under my saddle.
There are those....Some with double rows of scrambled eggs on their hats, and high falutin' SES types, who are literally buying that kind of tripe from major firms who are intent on selling their snake oil filled product lines.
You cannot "engineer away" the weather.
There are those....Some with double rows of scrambled eggs on their hats, and high falutin' SES types,
But, as long as this is the prevailing attitude, it will be a struggle to rectify the problem...
If your livelihood...or even your life...depends on the vagaries of the weather, then you need to gain a 21st Century "Weather Eye", instead of quaffing down the junk you see on the Weather Channel and thinking you are getting a real weather brief.
Ain't no "magic pictures" that can supplant good, old fashioned -<span>but updated</span>- knowledge.
(rant out)
Yeah, budget crunches have removed some of our data collection and resorted to modeling. I despise that approach. I cut my teeth as an obervationalist. I remember a thing on our receiving room door at U of MD. "If you show your observational data, everybody questions your observations, but if you run a model and show your output, nobody questions the model."
Climate/Global Warming, etc. A model does not put out data, it has a calculated output. $hit in means $hit out.
I thought you were referencing Joe Biden w/ the "Crazy Joe" link and was amazed he would be so straight and intelligent. Then I clicked on the link and I nodded in awareness. Skew-T 'ciphering is an amazingly helpful skill.
The Navy takes a different view of forecasting and do not put out percentages. As my retired buddy found when he told the CVN Captain that there was a 50% chance of rain, he was told he could be replaced with a coin flip. He learned his lesson. Hang 'em out there and do so proudly. Sometimes you get stroked, sometimes you get hammered, but at least you are not hedging and tap dancing like a sissy.
So, a forecast is a prediction of the future..Right?
We "users" demand a precise "deterministic" answer in the forecast. Every Time...Right?
Therefore, we expect you to perfectly predict the future. Every Time...Right?
Well...lemme tell yah.
If you -or anybody you know- can do that...Then I've got some first class tickets to the World's Finest Casino Tour.
(for a mere 10 percent of the take)
Forgot to ask...
Is Mount 51 back up and running on that DDG yet?
And have they welded the forward lifeline stanchions back on?
Oh...And Byron...
What would have happend to the helo nets on LCS-1?
Rediscovered this powerpoint...
And, you just gotta love this little clip.
I thought this ship was supposed to be minimum manned? So whats up with all those spaces slam full of computer positions..Apparently in said same superstructure folks seem to talk warily about?
Also, the most pukeworthy interior spaces are the large ones with a bunch of empty volume...Like those animated "Cinema 24" lookin' rooms in the video.
It is a horrible thing. I missed a thunderstorm by 2 hours and was lambasted for it. It is what it is. According to them, I said the day would be happy and sunny. When I went back and looked, I had briefed that it looked like the storms would form around 1000 and I thought we could pull in ok at 0800. Of course, 0800 came, the storms came, and we had less than 400m of viz pulling into Singapore. Specificity will make you bust, but I would rather give my best, right or wrong w/o um, what's that word POTUS likes? Oh yeah, w/o nuance.
It is a horrible thing. I missed a thunderstorm by 2 hours and was lambasted for it. It is what it is. According to them, I said the day would be happy and sunny. When I went back and looked, I had briefed that it looked like the storms would form around 1000 and I thought we could pull in ok at 0800. Of course, 0800 came, the storms came, and we had less than 400m of viz pulling into Singapore. Specificity will make you bust, but I would rather give my best, right or wrong w/o um, what's that word POTUS likes? Oh yeah, w/o nuance.
I WANT to know about any uncertainty.
Risk management is my gig from there....
On Saturday, I was sayin' to anybody who would listen about the uncertainties of mesoscale banding across the NYC metro. Banking all against an "imprecise" precise time ( I was cautioning every one about the 20Z "main body" start time in the TAF of 1/4sm BLSN) would have hurt us worse with "unplanned" diverts.
Got invaluable insight from here.
Same thing that used to happen to the helo nets on the FFG 1/FF 1040 classes.
The crew size of DDG-1000 is actually slightly less than that onboard Coastguard's new National Sec. Cutters. That's around 15,000 tons vs. 4,000 tons.
The crew composition of DDG-1000 is worth studying. Large numbers of Ops Specialists (OS rating). Only a couple of ET's. I guess they hope nothing will ever break on this highly advanced ship full of electronics. DDG-1000 has twice as many Cooks as ELECT TECH's !!! Ouch. So, the smaller DDG-51 class carries of crew of roughly 300 (plus helo det). The huge DDG-1000 has a crew of 130 or so, depending upon how large the helo det is.
I recall one meeting where the DDG-1000 reviewed all the many planning rooms, command and control rooms, CIC/NAVigation etc. All totalled, they plan on having around 45 consoles onboard including an alternate CIC located far aft next to the interior boat well deck. So, IF all the 45 consoles (it may have only been 43 if my memory serves me right), are manned at GQ Condition I, then takes up 43 sailors out of a crew of 130 roughly. So, pretty cool warship, one third of the crew gets their own giant console !
But don't call an ET if anything breaks because there are only have as many ET's as MS cooks (which total 8 or 9 depending upon which powerpoint slide you get).
The crew size of DDG-1000 is actually slightly less than that onboard Coastguard's new National Sec. Cutters. That's around 15,000 tons vs. 4,000 tons.
The crew composition of DDG-1000 is worth studying. Large numbers of Ops Specialists (OS rating). Only a couple of ET's. I guess they hope nothing will ever break on this highly advanced ship full of electronics. DDG-1000 has twice as many Cooks as ELECT TECH's !!! Ouch. So, the smaller DDG-51 class carries of crew of roughly 300 (plus helo det). The huge DDG-1000 has a crew of 130 or so, depending upon how large the helo det is.
I recall one meeting where the DDG-1000 reviewed all the many planning rooms, command and control rooms, CIC/NAVigation etc. All totalled, they plan on having around 45 consoles onboard including an alternate CIC located far aft next to the interior boat well deck. So, IF all the 45 consoles (it may have only been 43 if my memory serves me right), are manned at GQ Condition I, then takes up 43 sailors out of a crew of 130 roughly. So, pretty cool warship, one third of the crew gets their own giant console !
But don't call an ET if anything breaks because there are only have as many ET's as MS cooks (which total 8 or 9 depending upon which powerpoint slide you get).
At least is has a diverse crew with everyone issued a same-sex battle buddy.
cheap nike air max oslqdocj cheap nike free run kpttbrgj cheap nike shoes krpqhotu nike air max lpktnbeo nike free run okedjszc nike shoes online beffdinx
ghd ihvqscni GHD Hair Straightener kaayeytm GHD Australia cvfolfvr cheap ghd
Post a Comment