Print Page | Close Window

Columbia Class attributes

Printed From: Rontini Submarine BBS
Category: General
Forum Name: U.S. Submarine Related
Forum Description: Submarine Related Topics
URL: http://RontiniSubmarineBBS.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=4614
Printed Date: 24 Apr 2024 at 12:43pm
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.04 - http://www.webwizforums.com


Topic: Columbia Class attributes
Posted By: Rontini599
Subject: Columbia Class attributes
Date Posted: 30 May 2018 at 3:28pm
1. Electric Propulsion-no reduction gears-much quieter
2. X shape stern control surfaces with stern planes inside the housing of the propulsor (water jet) drive system. (No prop)
3. Maneuvering Room area is 3 levels.  Top level is Advanced Seal Delivery System.
4. Retractable bow (sail planes)
5. 6 mast sail vs Ohio's 10.
6. Bow Dome is composite material to better pass signals through
7. Same length as Ohio but 1 foot wider
8. HY100 Stainless hull coated with rubber material
9. New reactor control rod surfaces for better reactor control.
10. 42 year life
11. 2027 should see the first one in the water.  12 to replace current 16 Ohios.  Because of increased reactor core life, less overhauls, thus balancing out the 12/16 ratio. 
12. D-5 Trident II missiles
13. First cost is $6.2 billion then down to $4.2 billion


-------------
My heroes wear dog tags, not shoulder pads



Replies:
Posted By: SaltiDawg
Date Posted: 30 May 2018 at 6:49pm
Ron,

The Columbia Class will have a ducted propulsor (Prop.).

We examined moving the aft control surfaces inboard  on ducted  propulsors years ago.


Posted By: Sewer Pipe Snipe
Date Posted: 31 May 2018 at 8:37am
Sounds like Red October!

-------------
Walt,
Had I done everything right throughout my life, the World wouldn't have noticed.


Posted By: Curt
Date Posted: 31 May 2018 at 9:44am
Are you sure about:

 1 Maneuvering Room area is 3 levels?
 
2 Retractable bow (sail planes)?
 
 


-------------
Thanks,
Curt


Posted By: Rontini599
Date Posted: 01 Jun 2018 at 10:38pm
Just reported what I read.  I don't make this stuff up.  Above Maneuvering was the Advanced Seal Delivery sytem and below is what looked like a pump room. 

https://patents.google.com/patent/US20070126297A1/en" rel="nofollow - US20070126297A1 - patents.google.com/patent/US20070126297

A shaftless propeller may be made to ... A shaftless electrically driven propulsion propeller for use in an ... Ship pod-mounted hydrojet unit .

..

Shaftless Propulsion Technology for Next-Generation Nuclear ...
www.defencetalk.com/shaftless-propulsion...
DRS Technologies, Inc, PARSIPPANY: DRS Technologies, Inc. announced today that it was awarded a new $30 million contract, including options, to develop advanced shaftless propulsion technology for a next-generation U.S. Navy nuclear-powered submarine design study under the Tango Bravo program. Tango




-------------
My heroes wear dog tags, not shoulder pads


Posted By: SaltiDawg
Date Posted: 02 Jun 2018 at 9:11pm
Respectfully, my post above stands, does it not?


Posted By: gerry
Date Posted: 03 Jun 2018 at 12:48am
I'm guessing whoever wrote the article that Ron read confused "Maneuvering" with "Engine Room". Info I have seen on Colombia class had a large 3 level engine room, and there is indeed a SEAL staging/lockout facility in ERUL.

re: Bow planes vs sail planes - again, probably a non-submariner writing the article. Retractable... I can see foldable like the old fleet boats. Retractable though... seems like it would waste a lot of space and be a potential maintenance problem. *shrug*

Shaftless propeller (again, terminology... wouldnt we call it a screw?) - now that's voodoo. I mean, if you're turning a screw there has to be SOME sort of a shaft from the motor producing the motive force to the screw. Isnt a "propulsor" a different thing than a "propeller"? Aren't "propulsors" similar to a jet pump?


-------------
MT2/SS
USS Simon Bolivar - SSBN 641 (B)
USS Henry M. Jackson - SSBN 730 (B)
USSVI - Wyoming Base


Posted By: Flapper
Date Posted: 03 Jun 2018 at 2:08pm
Bow planes are retractable to avoid damage while berthed and during close quarters surfaced maneuvering, and for blue-nose ops when surfacing through ice.



-------------
ET1ss Nuke; 1962 - 1973. SSN-588, CVA-63, SSBN-629 BLUE, SSN-669 PLANKOWNER, FICPAC


Posted By: Flapper
Date Posted: 03 Jun 2018 at 5:15pm
From the patent link Ron provided: 
Each blade is attached to the inside of an annular ring, tips in toward common axis of rotation. Permanent magnets are mounted on outer rim of ring. 

That 'shaftless' design improves flow efficiency a lot, and it reduces cavitation significantly. The unit is 'spun up by big electromagnet coils contained in the outer housing of the propulsor assembly.

The shaftless direct electric drive allows elimination of the noisy reduction gears in current use.



-------------
ET1ss Nuke; 1962 - 1973. SSN-588, CVA-63, SSBN-629 BLUE, SSN-669 PLANKOWNER, FICPAC


Posted By: SaltiDawg
Date Posted: 04 Jun 2018 at 7:56pm
No disrespect, but that Google Pattern has nothing to do with the SSBN(X).

it is for a motorized propulsor in size  up to 24Kw.




Posted By: Dr. Stan
Date Posted: 05 Jun 2018 at 11:04am
Is the ducted propulsor you refer to similar to the ones in the below graphics?








-------------
It has been my experience that folks who have no vices have very few virtues.~Abe Lincoln
SS-393, SSBN-610(B), SSBN-624(G), SSN-591
USSVI Life Member; Holland Club; Plank Owner, Smoky Mtn. Base


Posted By: SaltiDawg
Date Posted: 05 Jun 2018 at 3:20pm
Precisely.  Note the control surfaces are forward of the duct or shroud...

The UK has worked closely with the US for over forty years in the area of Submarine Propulsors and they have sent many variants to sea.

Dr. Jerry


Posted By: Dr. Stan
Date Posted: 05 Jun 2018 at 8:40pm
Now, I know very little about this as it very far outside my area of expertise, but I did study fluid flow in nuke school 56 years ago from which I remember 2 things:  laminar flow and turbulent flow.  At any rate, it seems to me that what you are saying is that having control surfaces forward of the duct or shroud which could distort the inflow causing it to affect the control surface action is not a good thing because it could increase noise and reduce efficiency.  And that having the control surfaces aft and outside the flow stream is better since it would not do that.  So, Dr. Jerry, am I misinterpreting this?



-------------
It has been my experience that folks who have no vices have very few virtues.~Abe Lincoln
SS-393, SSBN-610(B), SSBN-624(G), SSN-591
USSVI Life Member; Holland Club; Plank Owner, Smoky Mtn. Base



Print Page | Close Window

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.04 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Copyright ©2001-2015 Web Wiz Ltd. - http://www.webwiz.co.uk