Tasman
Junior Member
The MV-22's seem to take up a lot of deck space. Can they be struck down in the hangar of an LHD or do they have to be stowed on deck?
Tas
Aircraft Carriers II (Closed to posting)
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
- Status
The MV-22's seem to take up a lot of deck space. Can they be struck down in the hangar of an LHD or do they have to be stowed on deck?
Tas
Pointblank
Senior Member
The wings and propellers can be folded (the wings rotate around 90 degrees so that they point front and back, and the propellers are folded), like so:
The aircraft is designed to fit in the space that a CH-46 Sea Knight used to take. Folding it all up takes around 90 seconds to do, and can be halted to do maintenance or anything else.
Tasman
Junior Member
Thanks for the detailed and well illustrated answer.
Like Popeye I'm pleased to see the MV-22 program moving forward with an actual deployment.Tas
harryRIEDL
New Member
this is very intersting
Navy wants under 1,000 sailors on new carriers
By Andrew Scutro - Staff writer
Posted : Friday Oct 19, 2007 18:32:11 EDT
The Navy wants to figure out a way to put an aircraft carrier to sea with a crew of fewer than 1,000 sailors.
Huh? Or better, how?
In an era when manpower costs devour 60 percent of annual Navy budgets, the service has been hard pressed not only to reduce its end strength so it can afford the ships and aircraft it wants, but to pare down crew sizes while making the most of each sailor.
The manning goals for future Navy warships are far below that of current surface combatants, with just 75 sailors expected to be aboard the Littoral Combat Ship and fewer than 150 crew members aboard the Zumwalt-class destroyers. Future submarine crews also are being optimized.
But when it comes to the next-generation aircraft carrier, the cuts may be more dramatic.
Nimitz-class carriers now sail with more than 5,700 personnel aboard — ship’s company and air wing. The goal for the Gerald R. Ford-class carriers — to be delivered in 2015 — has been to bring that number down to 4,600. It’s unclear how much of that number is ship personnel vs. air wing.
Now the Navy wants to cut that even further, for a ship’s company total of fewer than 1,000 sailors, a number that does not include the air wing.
“How do you optimize manpower from a 5,000 crew to 1,000? It’s very difficult. Can it be done? Maybe,” said William “Kip” Krebs, program officer for human systems integration at the Office of Naval Research.
His office recently called on the nation’s research community to find out how much a sailor can be expected to perform on an ergonomically designed ship and what shipboard functions can be replaced by automation. Krebs, a former active-duty aerospace experimental psychologist, said it’s one thing to build a piece of machinery — the proverbial “black box” — but it’s another to design it with a human operator in mind, the definition of human-systems integration.
“It’s easy to quantify and build a black box. They are usually predictable. You’ve got certain assumptions, you’ve got certain restraints, and it’s fairly easy to build that black box,” he said. “When you are dealing with humans, it’s nonlinear, it’s unpredictable. So it’s very difficult to quantify a human and human performance. I’m not saying it can’t be done, it’s just a harder problem because it’s not as straightforward.”
Factoring in fatigue, stress
Through computer modeling and experimentation, ONR hopes to determine how much to expect from a sailor performing at 100 percent without an overload of stress or fatigue while maintaining situational awareness.
“When you say I want this sailor to be performing at 100 percent, what does that mean, because your 100 percent is different from my 100 percent,” he said. “You don’t need a Ph.D. to understand what fatigue is or workload or stress or stressors.”
Krebs said the key is to go through the ship and identify and isolate each task by the knowledge, skills and abilities required to perform it.
“Then you can start looking at redundancies and say, ‘What type of automation tools can be created to reduce work load on that individual?’” he said. “If you look historically, for instance, at the airplane, when the airplane came about, it was a stick and rudder and a couple of dials. Now you’ve got autopilot, and some airplanes can take off from gate to gate all by itself — all computer-driven. It’s fully automated, and the pilot has very little interaction.”
Another potential shift from traditional crewing will be the need for extensive training so that a smaller number of sailors can operate an increasingly complex machine.
“You can design a very efficient ship, but then you’ve got to put someone in it who fully understands it,” Krebs said. “You are not going to get the recruit out of A-school because they don’t have the knowledge.”
For naval analyst Norman Polmar, all that crew training spells a drain of the existing pool of manpower.
“It’s more front-end training, but the more you train a sailor, the less he’s available to operate on the ship,” he said. “The more complex the ship with fewer people, the more you’re training them and the less useful time you’re getting from them.”
For example, on the Ford-class carriers, steam catapults have been replaced by electric catapults. That may seem more efficient, but Polmar said it’s a case where technology steals from manpower, especially if there are still Nimitz-class carriers with steam technology.
“You need a new school system for those guys, so you’re eating up people in instructors and support,” he said.
Polmar points out that on Nimitz-class carriers, there are nearly 1,000 sailors assigned to the engineering department alone. He said a few hundred might be reduced from the crew, but the sheer size of an aircraft carrier requires lots of sailors.
“We should save on people, but it’s not a case of cutting a certain number because the engineering department needs people, you need plane-pushers and lots of them, you need a certain number of boatswain’s mates because the ship’s a certain size, and you need ship’s security.”
So, an aircraft carrier with fewer than 1,000 sailors aboard?
“Impossible,” Polmar concludes bluntly. “It’s not going to happen.”
Proposals for the research work are now being reviewed; Krebs said a decision on who will try to figure this out is expected in weeks.
well Popey you have the most exprience on a USN CV and CVN could it be done and be as effective as the presnent carriers
Navy wants under 1,000 sailors on new carriers
By Andrew Scutro - Staff writer
Posted : Friday Oct 19, 2007 18:32:11 EDT
The Navy wants to figure out a way to put an aircraft carrier to sea with a crew of fewer than 1,000 sailors.
Huh? Or better, how?
In an era when manpower costs devour 60 percent of annual Navy budgets, the service has been hard pressed not only to reduce its end strength so it can afford the ships and aircraft it wants, but to pare down crew sizes while making the most of each sailor.
The manning goals for future Navy warships are far below that of current surface combatants, with just 75 sailors expected to be aboard the Littoral Combat Ship and fewer than 150 crew members aboard the Zumwalt-class destroyers. Future submarine crews also are being optimized.
But when it comes to the next-generation aircraft carrier, the cuts may be more dramatic.
Nimitz-class carriers now sail with more than 5,700 personnel aboard — ship’s company and air wing. The goal for the Gerald R. Ford-class carriers — to be delivered in 2015 — has been to bring that number down to 4,600. It’s unclear how much of that number is ship personnel vs. air wing.
Now the Navy wants to cut that even further, for a ship’s company total of fewer than 1,000 sailors, a number that does not include the air wing.
“How do you optimize manpower from a 5,000 crew to 1,000? It’s very difficult. Can it be done? Maybe,” said William “Kip” Krebs, program officer for human systems integration at the Office of Naval Research.
His office recently called on the nation’s research community to find out how much a sailor can be expected to perform on an ergonomically designed ship and what shipboard functions can be replaced by automation. Krebs, a former active-duty aerospace experimental psychologist, said it’s one thing to build a piece of machinery — the proverbial “black box” — but it’s another to design it with a human operator in mind, the definition of human-systems integration.
“It’s easy to quantify and build a black box. They are usually predictable. You’ve got certain assumptions, you’ve got certain restraints, and it’s fairly easy to build that black box,” he said. “When you are dealing with humans, it’s nonlinear, it’s unpredictable. So it’s very difficult to quantify a human and human performance. I’m not saying it can’t be done, it’s just a harder problem because it’s not as straightforward.”
Factoring in fatigue, stress
Through computer modeling and experimentation, ONR hopes to determine how much to expect from a sailor performing at 100 percent without an overload of stress or fatigue while maintaining situational awareness.
“When you say I want this sailor to be performing at 100 percent, what does that mean, because your 100 percent is different from my 100 percent,” he said. “You don’t need a Ph.D. to understand what fatigue is or workload or stress or stressors.”
Krebs said the key is to go through the ship and identify and isolate each task by the knowledge, skills and abilities required to perform it.
“Then you can start looking at redundancies and say, ‘What type of automation tools can be created to reduce work load on that individual?’” he said. “If you look historically, for instance, at the airplane, when the airplane came about, it was a stick and rudder and a couple of dials. Now you’ve got autopilot, and some airplanes can take off from gate to gate all by itself — all computer-driven. It’s fully automated, and the pilot has very little interaction.”
Another potential shift from traditional crewing will be the need for extensive training so that a smaller number of sailors can operate an increasingly complex machine.
“You can design a very efficient ship, but then you’ve got to put someone in it who fully understands it,” Krebs said. “You are not going to get the recruit out of A-school because they don’t have the knowledge.”
For naval analyst Norman Polmar, all that crew training spells a drain of the existing pool of manpower.
“It’s more front-end training, but the more you train a sailor, the less he’s available to operate on the ship,” he said. “The more complex the ship with fewer people, the more you’re training them and the less useful time you’re getting from them.”
For example, on the Ford-class carriers, steam catapults have been replaced by electric catapults. That may seem more efficient, but Polmar said it’s a case where technology steals from manpower, especially if there are still Nimitz-class carriers with steam technology.
“You need a new school system for those guys, so you’re eating up people in instructors and support,” he said.
Polmar points out that on Nimitz-class carriers, there are nearly 1,000 sailors assigned to the engineering department alone. He said a few hundred might be reduced from the crew, but the sheer size of an aircraft carrier requires lots of sailors.
“We should save on people, but it’s not a case of cutting a certain number because the engineering department needs people, you need plane-pushers and lots of them, you need a certain number of boatswain’s mates because the ship’s a certain size, and you need ship’s security.”
So, an aircraft carrier with fewer than 1,000 sailors aboard?
“Impossible,” Polmar concludes bluntly. “It’s not going to happen.”
Proposals for the research work are now being reviewed; Krebs said a decision on who will try to figure this out is expected in weeks.
well Popey you have the most exprience on a USN CV and CVN could it be done and be as effective as the presnent carriers
Some fool must have thought this up...This sums up my thoughts exactly
Whomever thought this up must be planning on robots, UAV's and a lot of automation. The 1,000 person crew will probaly be all techs mainating the equipment. Perhaps this can be achieved about 40-50 years in the future. But in the near future and maintain the same tempo of operations? No way..
There are so many jobs that are labor intensive on a ship I just don't see how it will work.
- Status