Is the US Navy building ships that can't weather rough seas?

The Navy’s newest class of transport ships is currently undergoing maintenance to make the vessels seaworthy, after it was found that design compromises led to weakened hulls susceptible to damage by waves.

|
Austal USA Mobile/File
The USNS Spearhead (JHSV-1) on builder trials in 2012 in the Gulf of Mexico.

The United States Navy will have to shoulder the repair costs for a new class of its ships after discovering that their bows can’t withstand heavy ocean waves, according to Bloomberg.

The Navy’s new Expeditionary Fast Transports (EPF) fleet will have to undergo maintenance to repair damages sustained by some of their structures and to reinforce the vessels’ bows. Four of five currently operational ships have been mended so far, while the other five remain under construction in an Alabama shipyard.

“The Navy accepted compromises in the bow structure, presumable to save weight, during the building of these ships,” said J. Michael Gilmore, director of the Department of Defense Operational Test & Evaluation, in a September report.

“Multiple ships of the class have suffered damage to the bow structure, and repairs/reinforcements are in progress class-wide,” he wrote.

The aluminum EPF ships, developed for a total cost of $2.1 billion by Australian shipbuilder Austal Ltd., all share the same structural flaw after Austal’s design recommendation to the Navy weakened the ships’ bows. So far, $2.4 million has been spent on strengthening the bows and more than $4 million on repairs. Even with the additional support, though, the Navy is still unsure if the repairs will be enough to keep the ships’ frameworks intact.

“Since the repairs are still in progress, there has been no heavy weather testing yet to verify if the fixes are sufficient,” Marine Corps Maj. Adrian Rankine-Galloway told Bloomberg.

Despite the setbacks, the ordering of an 11th fleet vessel was approved for the Navy through the 2016 Consolidated Appropriations Act at a cost of $225 million.

The Navy is currently charting its course for another ship model with potential design problems, the Zumwalt-class destroyer. Construction of more than 30 of the advanced Zumwalt class were originally planned, but it is likely that after years of research and ballooning costs only three will ever be completed. The reason: the spiraling costs, and concern that the ships would not be stable in heavy ocean waves.

“On the DDG-1000 [The first completed Zumwalt-class ship], with the waves coming at you from behind, when a ship pitches down, it can lose transverse stability as the stern comes out of the water – and basically roll over,” civilian architect Ken Brower in 2007, told Wired.

While the Navy hopes to improve the EPF fleet’s integrity, the construction adds nearly one ton of weight to each ship causing the displacement of around 250 gallons of fuel. Gilmore said the change should not affect the ships’ travel ranges, but said in his report that their routes and speeds may still have to be altered to avoid damage.

“Operating the ship outside of the SOE (Safe Operating Envelope) or encountering a rogue wave that is outside of the current sea state can result in sea slam events that cause structural damage to the bow structure of the ship,” Gilmore wrote. “The operational restriction of the SOE is a major limitation of the ship class that must be factored into all missions.”

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Is the US Navy building ships that can't weather rough seas?
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Military/2016/0114/Is-the-US-Navy-building-ships-that-can-t-weather-rough-seas
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe