2. Team Members
Brian Weber
Ocean Engineering
Florida Atlantic University
Reid Richardson
Ocean Engineering
Florida Atlantic University
Preston Jones
High School Student
Pensacola High School
23-24 July 2013 2
2013 Summer NREIP Final
Presentation
3. Presentation Outline
• Background
• Concept of Operations
• MCMV Vehicles
• Launch & Recovery Systems
• Naval Architecture
• Operational Profile
• Acknowledgements & Conclusion
23-24 July 2013 3
2013 Summer NREIP Final
Presentation
4. Background
• The MCM Mission Package
allows U.S. Navy ships to
remain outside the minefield
through the use of unmanned
vehicles (UVs)
• Several amphibious ships
have the potential capacity to
employ the MCM package
currently in development for
the LCS
Image Source: usni.org
23-24 July 2013 4
2013 Summer NREIP Final
Presentation
5. Task
Integrate a selection of unmanned vehicles onto
a self-sufficient Mine Countermeasures Vessel
capable of being deployed from an amphibious
ship to survey and sweep a minefield
23-24 July 2013 5
2013 Summer NREIP Final
Presentation
6. Benefits
• Expansion of mission capability for MCM Mission
• Operate in shallow waters
• Reduced vehicle transit time
• Expanded on-station time
• Modular with other vessels of opportunity
• Manned Navy ships can be kept further from mine hazard
• Amphibious ships to perform other missions
• LCS can be utilized for a combatant mission
23-24 July 2013 6
2013 Summer NREIP Final
Presentation
9. •MCMV utilizes space more
efficiently than current LCU
•Well deck size was the driving
factor of the hull characteristics
and size of the MCMV
LPD-17 Well Deck
Top View of LPD-17 Well Deck
23-24 July 2013 9
2013 Summer NREIP Final
Presentation
Image Source
10. MCMV Modifications
Characteristic LCU 1600 Class MCMV
Length Overall (LOA) 134 ft 180 ft
Beam Overall (BOA) 30 ft 46 ft
Depth 8 ft 10.5 ft
Height 18 ft 27 ft
Deck Area 3,390 ft2 7,290 ft2
Hull Volume 22,427 ft3 64,975 ft3
Displacement (Light) 375 LT 437 LT
Crew Capacity 14 22
Image Source: http://wjm1981.egloos.com/5309873
23-24 July 2013 10
2013 Summer NREIP Final
Presentation
11. Sea-Painter Boom
•Assists in all launch and recovery
•Relieves longitudinal tension
•Telescopic and slewing
23-24 July 2013 11
2013 Summer NREIP Final
Presentation
12. USV & RMV Launch & Recovery Systems
•Two arm luffing davit
•Telescopic to clear railing
and deck
•Storage cradle
•Hydraulic articulating davit
•Rotates on base to store RMV
on cradle
23-24 July 2013 12
2013 Summer NREIP Final
Presentation
13. •Telescopic articulating
crane
•Retrieves BPAUV from
enclosure
•BPAUVs stored on
carousel
•Single arm slewing davit
23-24 July 2013 13
2013 Summer NREIP Final
Presentation
BPAUV & RIB Launch & Recovery Systems
14. Storage & Maintenance
•Retractable enclosure
•Access to ISO from enclosure
•RMV pre/post dive checks
require protection from the
environment
•Metal retractable doors allow
access from top and back side
•Houses BPAUV storage carousel
•Protects sensitive electronics
from elements
23-24 July 2013 14
2013 Summer NREIP Final
Presentation
15. Manning of MCMV
• Original Crew of LCU: 12
peacetime/ 14 wartime
• Additional 10 Navy crew members
will be needed for launch and
recovery systems (LARS)
• Maintainer and operator for each
of the 3 types of UVs
• Four can be used from the original
crew for LARS
• Total Crew: 22
– Plus 10% margin (two crew)
0
5
10
15
20
25
Ship
Operation
8
Launch
and
Recovery
10
Shared
4
NumberofCrew
Crew Distribution
23-24 July 2013 15
2013 Summer NREIP Final
Presentation
16. General Arrangements of MCMV
Lower Deck Arrangements
23-24 July 2013 16
2013 Summer NREIP Final
Presentation
17. General Arrangements of MCMV
Upper Deck Arrangements
23-24 July 2013 17
2013 Summer NREIP Final
Presentation
Boom
18. Ship Space Classification System
(SSCS)
Group # Space Type Area (ft2) Volume (ft3)
Group 1 Military Mission 844 6,415
Group 2 Human Support 1,984 14,322
Group 3 Ship Support 2,631 14,163
Group 4 Ship Machinery 1,409 9,634
Total + 10% Margin 7,555 48,987
Total Available 12,251 64,975 (Hull Volume)
23-24 July 2013 18
2013 Summer NREIP Final
Presentation
20. Stability & Hydrostatics
Hydrostatic
Characteristic
Value Unit
Mean Draft 4.7 ft
Trim 0.2 ft
List Angle 0.2 deg
GM Transverse 38.0 ft
•Low trim and list angle
•High GM will result in a
stable ship
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
RightingArm(ft)
Heel Angle (°)
GZ Curve
(23°, 8.8 ft)
•
•
(77°, 0 ft)
23-24 July 2013 20
2013 Summer NREIP Final
Presentation
21. Resistance & Powering
Original Bow
Spoon Bow
TMB Bow
Comparison between three LCU (A)
ship shape bows
Results include:
•15% of frictional resistance for
appendages
•Model to full scale correlation allowance
•Still air drag estimation
•8% design margin
MCMV Parameters
LWL (ft) 180
Draft (ft) 4.7
Displacement (LT) 613
23-24 July 2013 21
2013 Summer NREIP Final
Presentation
22. Resistance and Powering
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
5 7 9 11 13 15
BrakeHorsepower(HP)
Speed (knots)
Speed vs. Power - Ship Shape Bow LCU (A)
TMB Bow
Original
Bow
Spoon Bow
Vobjective
V = 8 knots
BHP = 580 HP
23-24 July 2013 22
2013 Summer NREIP Final
Presentation
50% reduction
compared to
current LCU
24. Machinery Selection
Endurance Requirements
•2 to 10 days
•50 nm radius from LPD-17
Desired Characteristics
•Fuel efficient
•High torque output
•Reliable
Diesel-Electric
23-24 July 2013 24
2013 Summer NREIP Final
Presentation
Diesel-Electric Characteristics
•Fuel consumption and
propulsion electronically
controlled
•Increased payload
•High reliability
•Flexibility in location
25. Propulsion Selection
Rim Drive Characteristics
•All-electric power plant
•360° rotation for steering
•100% thrust produced in any
direction
Desired Characteristics
•Maneuverability at slow speeds
•Utilize electrical power supply
efficiently
•Size limitation due to launch and
recovering from LPD-17’s well
deck
23-24 July 2013 25
2013 Summer NREIP Final
Presentation
26. Operation Profile
•Preliminary estimation of the effectiveness of the MCMV
•Search and sweep rates evaluated over a 2 day and 10 day
period
•Unmanned vehicle’s operation time
•Fuel supply for MCMV operations
23-24 July 2013 26
2013 Summer NREIP Final
Presentation
27. 27
Operation Profile
2 Days
Search:
Sweep:
`
40 nm2
19 nm2
10 Days
Search:
Sweep:
200 nm2
93 nm2
Search Sweep
MCMVLCS
MCMV Compared to LCS
Search
84%
Sweep
35%23-24 July 2013 27
2013 Summer NREIP Final
Presentation
28. Operation Profile
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
Gallons
2 Day MCMV Fuel Usage
Fuel
Remaining
Fuel Used
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
Gallons
10 Day MCMV Fuel Usage
Fuel
Remaining
Fuel Used
Propulsion
MCMV, LARS
& UV Fuel
Propulsion
MCMV, LARS
& UV Fuel
23-24 July 2013 28
2013 Summer NREIP Final
Presentation
29. Conclusion
• As an alternative to LCS, the MCMV was
deemed feasible for conducting MCM
operations
– MCMV can host all off-board vehicles and LARS
required for effective MCM
– It can be carried in the well deck of LPD-17
– Leaves LCS free for other operations
– Low impact integration to amphibious ship
– Available for training MCM personnel
29
2013 Summer NREIP Final
Presentation
23-24 July 2013
30. David Ruley
Colen Kennel
Ryan Mortimer
Jovan Brown
Julie Banner
Heather Tomaszek
Charles Dorger
Lt. Kevin Ray
Lt. John Arazny
2012 MCM Team
Acknowledgements
2013 Summer NREIP Final
Presentation
3023-24 July 2013
34. Machinery Selection
Diesel-Electric
•Fuel efficient
•Run on high loads with high efficiency
•High torque
•Multiple engine redundancy
•Increased payload
•Direct control over electrical system
•Flexibility of location
Fuel Cell
•Costs are lower than diesel
•Low maintenance
•High reliability
•Noise reduction
•Natural gas not as accessible as diesel fuel
•Not a proven technology in marine
systems
Gas Turbine
•High power-to-weight ratio
•Smaller than conventional engines
•Better for larger ships due to high
power output
•Use more fuel when not under a load
34
2013 Summer NREIP Final
Presentation
23-24 July 2013
35. Propulsion Selection
Screw Propeller
•Well developed and proven method
•Good efficiency at high rotational
speed
•Relative insensitivity to ship motion
•Maneuverability is restricted at slow
speeds
•Requires extra appendages
Podded Propulsor
•Excellent maneuverability
•Good speed control over complete range
•Use of non-reversing machinery
•Complicated Z-drive mechanism
•Possibility of interference between
podded propeller strut and hull
Water Jet
•No appendages
•Improved maneuverability
•Higher static thrust can be obtain
allowing fast acceleration
•Less noise and vibration
•Occupies a lot of space
•Less efficient than propeller
Rim Drive
•Reduced space requirements
•High dynamic performance
•100% thrust in both directions
•Propeller design reduces cavitation
risk
•Need multiple drives to meet power
requirements
35
2013 Summer NREIP Final
Presentation
23-24 July 2013
36. Operation Profile
36
2013 Summer NREIP Final
Presentation
23-24 July 2013
Propulsion Load Information
Speed (kts) Power (kW) 2 Day Time (hr) 10 Day Time (hr)
2 110 30 210
8 430 18 30
2 Day Operation
Unmanned
Vehicle
Launch
(hr)
Recover
(hr)
Times
Ops.
Time (hr)
Ops.
Speed
(kts)
Fuel
(gal/hr)
Fuel (gal)
# of
Vehicles
USV 1 1 2 7.5 25 20 300 1
BPAUV 1 1 3 10 3 n/a 3
RMV 1 1 2 10 12 15 300 1
RHIB 1 1 1 1 1
10 Day Operation
Unmanned
Vehicle
Launch
(hr)
Recover
(hr)
Times
Ops.
Time (hr)
Ops.
Speed
(kts)
Fuel
(gal/hr)
Fuel (gal)
# of
Vehicles
USV 1 1 10 7.5 25 20 1500 1
BPAUV 1 1 15 10 3 n/a 3
RMV 1 1 10 10 12 15 1500 1
RHIB 1 1 5 1 1
