Large Surface Drives

So does anyone make a ship size surface drive?...something that could be refit to those freedom class ships of the navy in place of the problem jet drives?
Fred

 

It looks like it's a transmission problem, more than a jet drive problem. The combining gears that allow either diesel power, or gas turbine power seem to be an unreliable design.

 

I understand the machinery has issues as well but i have also listened to a couple three vids and the jet drives appear to have issues as well just like the BC ferry's they built always sucking in trash....and a surface drive is almost a bolt in swap and open the jet drive tube at the bottom for a tunnel hull effect. and then look junking the combining gear and do 2 test boats 1 rip out the gas tubine's and 2 rip out the diesel's and go for lng hydrogen mix fuel either way. 3 more crew space,a crying need for this in the design 4 more fuel and or cargo space,ditch the hele pad for more covered cargo deck that's what i would do with the hulls anyway and make them fast cargo/troop boats.

 

What do you mena by "a tunnel hull effect"? If you are using surfacing piercing propellers, installing them in a tunnel is the exact opposite of the requirements. They are supposed to operate with the hub slightly above the waterline in the least possible turbulent flow. A tunnel will generate turbulence. Since you are planing on buying two ships to experiment, your budget is in the many millions. Do yourself a favor and hire a Naval Architect and an engineer to start with. Watching a couple of youtube videos as a background for a multimillion dollar investment is foolish. A preliminary study can't cost more than $50k, which is a tiny percentage of what you are planning on spending.

 

I am sorry, always run ideas thru a naval architect, like of course just because I run off an idea seeking input does not mean be Cap'n Stupid ok. I do not know everything there is to know; what i do know is they hulls are unusable in their current form and could be had for a pittance since they're being decommissioned already.
And yes after some more reading removing the jets altogether as a unit might be the better option in refit. With something like a super size blackhawk final.
and thing like air induction downtubes to prevent loading issues, which I've read about.

 

Actually, just scrap all the LCSs and Re-engine the GEARING class. A cheaper, faster, and more capable vessel.

 

Gearing class, as improved Allen M Sumner class which were improved Johnson class DD's? I love those guys.

 

Hmmm... "Re-engine", interesting challenge. Swap 4 (?) boilers and a set of steam turbines for what, and what happens with stability after that? How many are still "alive" in the US, is it two out of nearly 100? But I can agree that they seem to have served well over a long time. Buy some back from Turkey, and Iran perhaps......

 

The Allen M Sumner class was an improved Fletcher; replacing five single 5"/38 mounts with three twin 5"/38 mounts and improved maneuvering and fire control. Gearing class was the last major class before post WWII destroyers grew to cruiser proportions, and cost. There was a reason for this, but realistically with todays electronics and GTs, you can put much more in an all steel Gearing hull form than you can in the almost identical length and tonnage of an LCS-1 class. That whole 'module" idea was a huge waste.

 

I wouldn't suggest taking an original hull, but re-arranging inside the hullform to take GTs and new weapon systems would be easy. LCS-1 and Gearing are almost identically the same size (only major dimensional difference is LCS-1 is 10 feet more in beam). LCS-1 is slightly faster in flat seas, but has 20% more power with a 70% lower sustained sea speed and only ~70% of the range. LCS-2 is significantly larger on the same displacement but similar performance. The big difference is the materials, especially in the waterjets, the 2 LCS classes are OOC in 15 years, the steel Gearings mostly lasted 30+ years

 

Of course!: Fletcher, not Johnson.

Those would be some big surface drives. The disk loading at such power levels would pose a challenge.

 

well my goal was to get something like this, Abdiel-class minelayer - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdiel-class_minelayer out of it..as a fast transport and not so much guns or weapons which it is just not fit for it seems.
perhaps some standard super size single or duo prop out drives?
perhaps it is not so fit for 30+ knots and just get whatever high cruise rate out of it and fit it out for for fast tanker or cargo and get some kind of use out of them even ditching the helo pad and everything for more cargo/tank space..cargo boat not so much crew needed...perhaps some increase in cabin space so some few military people can be shuffled about to stations as well and can get into places the deepwater hulls can not.

now if you want to talk about the real DD of all time the Fletcher Class heh 5 modern single 5 inch guns 2 agm 166 turrets with 5 boxes of losat missiles per for 30 per turret in place of the quint torp launchers on a ball mount base so they can be angled up for more glide range, replace the 40mm bofers mounts with 5 bae 57mm singles and the 7 20mm for 7 25mm mk 38 mounts with coax belt fed 40mm grenade guns..keep the depth charges and kguns and for the weight saved in modern stuff a couple of those anti sub hedge hog rocket dispensers either side of the bridge, and some chaff and flare launchers.
and some flare to the bow forward.
the Improved Fletcher!