Issuu on Google+

SPECIAL REPORT

Advances in Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering Ensuring Successful Naval Projects from Design to In-Service Operation Naval and Marine Capabilities are Critical to 21st Century Geopolitics How Modern Combat Operations Impact on Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering Systems in Action The Future Trends in Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering

Sponsored by

Published by Global Business Media


People Who Know How

To Assure Ship Safety

Tel: +44 (0) 8700 100 942 Email: Maritime@QinetiQ.com To find out more please visit

QinetiQ.com/Maritime


SPECIAL REPORT: ADVANCES IN NAVAL ARCHITECTURE AND MARINE ENGINEERING

SPECIAL REPORT

Advances in Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering Ensuring Successful Naval Projects from Design to In-Service Operation

Contents

Naval and Marine Capabilities are Critical to 21st Century Geopolitics How Modern Combat Operations Impact on Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering Systems in Action The Future Trends in Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering

Foreword

2

Mary Dub, Editor

Ensuring Successful Naval Projects from Design to In-Service Operation

3

Iain Kennedy, QinetiQ Ltd

Sponsored by

Published by Global Business Media

Published by Global Business Media Global Business Media Limited 62 The Street Ashtead Surrey KT21 1AT United Kingdom Switchboard: +44 (0)1737 850 939 Fax: +44 (0)1737 851 952 Email: info@globalbusinessmedia.org Website: www.globalbusinessmedia.org Publisher Kevin Bell Business Development Director Marie-Anne Brooks Editor John Hancock Senior Project Manager Steve Banks Advertising Executives Michael McCarthy Abigail Coombes Production Manager Paul Davies For further information visit: www.globalbusinessmedia.org The opinions and views expressed in the editorial content in this publication are those of the authors alone and do not necessarily represent the views of any organisation with which they may be associated. Material in advertisements and promotional features may be considered to represent the views of the advertisers and promoters. The views and opinions expressed in this publication do not necessarily express the views of the Publishers or the Editor. While every care has been taken in the preparation of this publication, neither the Publishers nor the Editor are responsible for such opinions and views or for any inaccuracies in the articles. © 2014. The entire contents of this publication are protected by copyright. Full details are available from the Publishers. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the copyright owner.

Supporting Technical Assurance Decisions Building Confidence Through Experiment and Analysis De-risking Naval System Design Advantages of Using “Next Generation” Test and Evaluation in Modern Military Operations Tuning and Troubleshooting Naval Systems in Acceptance and In-Service Operations Future Outlook

Naval and Marine Capabilities are Critical to 21st Century Geopolitics 7 Mary Dub, Editor

Why Geopolitics is Important for Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering Re-learning the Value of a Systems Approach to Naval Acquisition The Lost Memory of These Lessons in the Congressional Debate on Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) Program

How Modern Combat Operations Impact on Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering

9

Don McBarnet, Staff Writer

The Littoral Combat Ship Victim of Cuts? Survivability? The Government Accountability Office (U.S. GAO) Multi Criteria Decision-Making Based on Too Many Uncertainties

Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering Systems in Action

11

Mary Dub, Editor

China Leads Global Shipbuilding The Importance of Global Alliances Dutch Design, UAE (United Arab Emirates Commission), Chinese Build Scandinavian Collaboration with Japanese Shipbuilders for Bulk and Liquefied Gas Carriers

The Future Trends in Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering

13

Don McBarnet, Staff Writer

The Free Electron Laser The Integrated Topside INP DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency) Innovative Projects with Transformative Potential Autonomous Undersea Submarine Tracking

References 15

WWW.DEFENCEINDUSTRYREPORTS.COM | 1


SPECIAL REPORT: ADVANCES IN NAVAL ARCHITECTURE AND MARINE ENGINEERING

Foreword R

EDUCING THE risk involved in the design, realisation and testing of the enormously expensive process of producing naval and mercantile vessels is the theme of this edition of Defence Industry Reports. The Report opens with an article that examines the role played in the procurement of naval ships, submarines and autonomous systems by independent test evaluation partners of project design teams. Their function is to provide advice to support technical assurance throughout design assessment, design demonstration, acceptance into service and in-service operation. The partner and associated technical services are part of the of the cost of the naval project and need to be able to deliver a tangible return on investment, including mitigation of risks and cost savings throughout the lifecycle of a naval system. The second piece reflects the renewed interest placed on national naval capabilities. It is written in the context of the sudden heightened level of world attention directed towards Russia’s need to sustain control over the Ukrainian city of Sevastopol, in Crimea, their traditional warm and deep-water port. The 21century trend towards greater emphasis on global naval capabilities reflects the economic growth and consolidation in power of Asian economies and their domination of the world shipbuilding capabilities.

Power projection has always been assumed to be one of the key strategic values of a blue water navy. However, the growth in global sea-based trade links and the long littoral shorelines of many of the leading oil rich trading nations, are drivers for new naval capabilities. So from Asia, Africa and the Middle East there are new and changing demands for innovative thinking on ship capabilities. Some companies are seizing the re-centering of shipbuilding capabilities in China, South Korea and Japan as an opportunity for international collaborative working. The penultimate piece looks at examples of how some European marine architecture and design companies are making this work. The final article in this Report takes a look over the horizon and addresses the implications of new potentially disruptive naval and marine technologies. It is of the very nature of disruptive technologies that the full transformative impact of their implementation is hard to predict. However, it is clear from research and development taking place in the United States and elsewhere that autonomous surface and subsea vessels are under development. Their adaptation and construction will perhaps be new work for naval architects – their impact on the world’s navies and mercantile activity can only be guessed.

Mary Dub Editor

Mary Dub is the editor of this Special Report. She has covered the defence field in the United States and the UK as a television broadcaster, journalist and conference manager.

2 | WWW.DEFENCEINDUSTRYREPORTS.COM


SPECIAL REPORT: ADVANCES IN NAVAL ARCHITECTURE AND MARINE ENGINEERING

Ensuring Successful Naval Projects from Design to In-Service Operation Iain Kennedy, QinetiQ Ltd

The value of independent test, evaluation, assessment and technical advice in reducing risk, time and cost to complete

T

HE PROCUREMENT of naval ships, submarines and autonomous systems from concept design through to in-service operation is a challenging endeavour. Naval platforms are complex engineering systems required to conduct war fighting missions in extreme environments. As such, broad and deep technical knowledge is required to ensure that safety, security, performance, acquisition and operational cost considerations meet the needs of navies and their procurement agencies. A single project design team cannot normally provide all the niche skills required and so a technical services provider who has access to specialist skills and facilities can be a useful partner in ensuring successful project delivery.

Supporting Technical Assurance Decisions Technical assurance decisions range from early stage validation that the design will meet the requirements, that the supporting evidence is complete and verifiable and to ensure build quality will deliver the expected performance through life. To provide this level of assurance, an independent test and evaluation partner with the requisite skills, knowledge, experience and facilities is required to provide the technical evidence, advice and support needed to make optimal procurement and operational decisions cost effectively and with confidence and free from commercial bias. At the concept stage of design it is also beneficial to clearly define acceptance criteria for the whole platform, equipment, systems and systems of systems. Agreeing what is essential, achievable and desirable in terms of acceptance strategies and planning is as important as agreeing the acceptance criteria.

The test and evaluation partner must be able to provide valuable advice to support technical assurance throughout design assessment, design demonstration, acceptance into service and in-service operation. The partner must be able to draw upon the experience and toolsets of a range of Naval Architecture, Marine Engineering, Combat System and similar technical service capabilities at the earliest stages in the procurement cycle to help to evaluate the range of concept design options available and gain an understanding of the cost-performance trade-offs, design drivers, sensitivities and risks before down selecting to a preferred specification and then design. A range of Naval Architecture software tools such as ParamarineTM help clients select cost effective designs by performing rapid analyses and modelling of aspects such as stability, structures, manoeuvring, powering and endurance. The susceptibility and vulnerability of a complex naval system design against a multitude of threat weapon damage scenarios can also be assessed in the early design phase utilising software tools such as SURVIVETM. The partner and associated technical services are part of the cost of a naval project. There is a need therefore to deliver a tangible return on investment (value for money case) which includes the mitigation of technical risks and reduction of costs through the lifecycle of a naval system.

Building Confidence Through Experiment and Analysis The application of numerical simulation and system stimulation as part of the test and evaluation toolset is now widespread in many technical disciplines. This provides the ability to assess the theoretical performance of an individual aspect of a platform or system through a range of scenarios. WWW.DEFENCEINDUSTRYREPORTS.COM | 3


SPECIAL REPORT: ADVANCES IN NAVAL ARCHITECTURE AND MARINE ENGINEERING

Mitigating many of the performance risks at the earliest possible stage before committing to detailed design specification and solutions reduces time

SURFACE SHIP MODELS UNDERGOING HYDRODYNAMIC TESTING

and potential project cost escalation

The potential benefit of numerical simulation in naval test and evaluation is to improve the understanding of a system’s behaviour up to and out with design boundaries. This increases confidence in the design and allows for many simulation experiments to be conducted at a reduced time and cost compared to physical model or full-scale test and evaluation. Mitigating many of the performance risks at the earliest possible stage before committing to detailed design specification and solutions reduces time and potential project cost escalation. For organisations procuring services described above, a key consideration must be the ability to trust the results, conclusions and recommendations made. If the advice provided is based purely on simulation and modelling then the assumptions, dependencies and exclusions and their influence on the results needs to be clearly described to enable a customer to make a more informed decision. The service provider must be in a position to explain how the simulation and modelling has been experimentally validated and verified. Technical service providers must be able to demonstrate how they will harness in-depth analysis and simulation capabilities which will have been underpinned by thorough experimental testing and validation. Areas such as structural strength, fatigue, shock, noise and vibration, magnetics, materials, hull form resistance, sea keeping, manoeuvrability, propeller design and cavitation needs to be considered as well as aspects such as submarine escape and rescue (SMERAS), submarine atmospheres, diving and hyperbaric medicine, sensors, weapons,

4 | WWW.DEFENCEINDUSTRYREPORTS.COM

communications, data links and command and control systems. These are all areas where a provider can be expected to supply authoritative technical advice.

De-risking Naval System Design In all cases it is necessary to validate the performance and behaviour of equipment, systems or whole platforms as part of the design de-risking process. Selecting the most appropriate test conditions to represent inservice operations is an important aspect of test and evaluation. Optimising the number of tests to achieve sufficient confidence whilst minimising evaluation time and cost is essential to support the customer’s need to make decisions and achieve their goals. A test and evaluation partner needs to possess a broad experience in test and evaluation of naval equipment, structures, hull forms, combat systems, sensors, communications and personnel. The value of access to large scale experimental facilities cannot be underestimated. A provider possessing the capability to not only test against current engineering standards but who is also in a position to develop and define new standards in the light of changing technology, applications and/or legislation, enables project progress to be made more rapidly. Due to the complexity and often bespoke nature of naval systems, their design and integration requires a true systems-of-systems approach to understand the interaction between each design parameter, operational conditions and the external environment. Technical service providers must be able to draw on both experience and their breadth and depth technical knowledge to


SPECIAL REPORT: ADVANCES IN NAVAL ARCHITECTURE AND MARINE ENGINEERING

TYPE 45 DESTROYER TRANSITING A SEA RANGE

address design and operational performance shortfalls. By working collaboratively with equipment suppliers, operators and customers, a provider will apply their expertise and often multi-disciplinary approach to develop innovative solutions where functional and/or capability performance is being compromised.

Advantages of Using “Next Generation” Test and Evaluation in Modern Military Operations Traditionally, naval concepts of operation (CONOPS) inform user and system performance requirements of conventional naval systems. Independent test, evaluation and acceptance plans can then be constructed for each defence line of development. However, for emerging, transformational and disruptive system technologies such as autonomous systems, their capability may enable novel concepts of military operation. One of the roles of test and evaluation of autonomous systems will be to help explore the art of the possible in mission capability. The exploitation of these technologies may have consequential impacts on aspects such as system architectures and marine engineering aspects (e.g. power distribution, launch and recovery). A test and evaluation partner needs to be in a position to evaluate such systems’ safety, suitability and performance, as well as human interactions in order to predict system behaviour and decision processing capability. With the rapid development and integration of new technologies, a test and evaluation provider will enable the navies and their agencies with the vital objective evidence needed to support procurement and operational decisions.

Using a blend of experimental trials facilities, training, simulation and visualisation technology, maritime autonomous systems’ functional performance and capability can be evaluated. As the level of autonomy increases, test and evaluation needs to transition away from the execution of specifically planned scenarios to a new test paradigm that must be established to understand and validate autonomous system decision making and behavioural aspects in a dynamic environment.

Tuning and Troubleshooting Naval Systems in Acceptance and In-Service Operations Once a naval system has been designed, manufactured and integrated into a larger whole, the fundamental questions that need to be answered are: 1. Does it work (meet the requirement)? 2. Is it safe? 3. Are the operators trained? 4. Is the system supported? 5. Is the infrastructure in place? 6. Is it interoperable? and 7. Is it legal? 8. Overall: Is it fit for purpose? An independent test and evaluation partner who has been involved in evaluating and de-risking constituent elements of the system’s performance will be valuable in measuring the whole system’s performance and will know how to optimise components and sub-systems to deliver the required capability and improve operational efficiency. Equally, the knowledge and experience gained in supporting in-service naval systems enables WWW.DEFENCEINDUSTRYREPORTS.COM | 5


SPECIAL REPORT: ADVANCES IN NAVAL ARCHITECTURE AND MARINE ENGINEERING

An independent test and evaluation partner who has been involved in evaluating and derisking constituent elements of the system’s performance will be valuable in measuring the whole system’s performance and will know how to

DIVERS WITH UNDERWATER AUTONOMOUS SYSTEM

optimise components and sub-systems to deliver the required capability and improve operational efficiency

an independent test and evaluation partner to provide valuable insights into the design and integration of future equipment, platforms and systems. This “closed loop” test and evaluation approach delivers tangible benefits in reducing naval programme risk, time and cost to complete.

Future Outlook The global procurement of warships, naval vessels and associated systems continues to grow with many nations expanding both surface and sub-surface fleets. Naval platforms are complex engineering systems and their design and operation inevitably carries with it technical risks which can negatively impact safety, security, war fighting ability and cost. At QinetiQ we work with industry, governments and navies around the world as an independent test and evaluation partner providing the breadth and depth of technical knowledge and experience needed to reduce programme risk and achieve safe, functional and capable naval platforms and systems.

6 | WWW.DEFENCEINDUSTRYREPORTS.COM

Contact QinetiQ Haslar Marine Technology Park Gosport Hampshire PO12 2AG United Kingdom Tel: +44 (0)2392 335717 Fax: +44 (0)2392 334099 Email: maritime@qinetiq.com www.qinetiq.com


SPECIAL REPORT: ADVANCES IN NAVAL ARCHITECTURE AND MARINE ENGINEERING

Naval and Marine Capabilities are Critical to 21st Century Geopolitics Mary Dub, Editor

2

014 HAS been marked by an intense world focus on the importance of blue water navies based in ice-free ports. The recent crisis in Crimea underlines the supreme importance attached to the navy as a symbol of state power and hard power projection. The Russian naval base in the Ukrainian city of Sevastopol in the Crimea acts as a key strategic resource for Russia with a deep, defensible harbour for a naval force with immediate readiness. The potential threat to that power base caused by a change of leadership in the Ukraine has caused high levels of international tension. Similarly, China’s development of a blue water navy, PLAN, the People’s Liberation Army Navy, based in Hainan in the South China Sea represents China’s recent development of a blue water navy with ambitions to operate beyond “the first island chain”. The first island chain refers to a perimeter that stretches the length of the Western Pacific from Japan in the northeast, through Taiwan to the Philippines in the south. The era of globalised trade and long shipping routes has made the control of the seas the key strategic asset for a global power. The architecture and survivability of the vessels that have to defend these routes is a source of renewed interest and complexity.

Why Geopolitics is Important for Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering The appropriateness of naval architecture software for marine engineering depends on the optimization of a complex range of calculations of a range of uncertainties and probabilities. In a thesis for the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, John Hootman offers a review of the literature analysing the military effectiveness analysis and decision making framework for naval ship design and acquisition. For a generalist reader he summarises a range of factors that make decision-making for naval architecture so challenging. He describes how combatant ship design is a series of trade-offs, often made with

little knowledge of the impact of the decisions, except on ship size or displacement. However, many other considerations, such as combat effectiveness, survivability, and initial cost may be equally important in the design process1. Measures and targets that drive these studies are dependent on the subjective opinion of the customer i.e. the requirements. These requirements are often ambiguous and typically change over time. Therefore, understanding the simultaneous impact of requirements, product design variables, and emerging technologies during the concept formulation and development stages is critically important, and until now elusive. Further, to design a modern, highly complex engineering system, the designer must understand what external factors are most important to the design, the interaction of these multiple, competing design factors, how the system relates to its environment, and frameworks that decision makers use to evaluate the system2. The complexity of the thinking a naval architect puts into his design is not straightforward.

Re-learning the Value of a Systems Approach to Naval Acquisition Hootman, in his review, highlights the lessons learned in using a systems approach to the design of vessels. This requires a wider focus on the fleet rather than specifically on the specifications for a vessel itself. During the first half of the Cold War, “ship level requirements, rather than the ship’s contribution to the performance of the task force, drove the design process” [Rains, 1999]. The International Council on Systems Engineering (INCOSE) recognizes a general problem associated with this approach: organizations focused on the optimization of their products often lost sight of the overall system. Each organization perceived that their part must be optimal, using their own disciplinary criteria, and failed to recognize that all parts of a system do not have to be optimal for the system to perform optimally.3 WWW.DEFENCEINDUSTRYREPORTS.COM | 7


SPECIAL REPORT: ADVANCES IN NAVAL ARCHITECTURE AND MARINE ENGINEERING

The LCS program has become controversial due to past cost growth, design and construction issues with the lead ships built to each design, concerns over the ships’ ability to

CALIBRATION OF TRIALS EQUIPMENT

withstand battle damage, and concerns over whether the ships are sufficiently armed and would be able to perform their stated missions effectively

The Lost Memory of These Lessons in the Congressional Debate on Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) Program In February 2014 the US Congress has become embroiled in renewed debate about the capabilities of the Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) and changes to its specifications impacting its costs. Ronald O’Rourke, Specialist in Naval Affairs for the American Congress, summarises the issues. The LCS program has become controversial due to past cost growth, design and construction issues with the lead ships built to each design, concerns over the ships’ ability to withstand battle damage, and

8 | WWW.DEFENCEINDUSTRYREPORTS.COM

concerns over whether the ships are sufficiently armed and would be able to perform their stated missions effectively. Some observers, citing one or more of these issues, have proposed truncating the LCS program to either 24 ships (i.e., stopping procurement after procuring all the ships covered under the two block buy contracts) or to some other number well short of 52. Other observers have proposed down selecting to a single LCS design (i.e., continuing production of only one of the two designs) after the 24th ship4 – a naval architecture challenge of not inconsiderable complexity, that reprises many of the issues highlighted by Hootman in his review of the literature.


SPECIAL REPORT: ADVANCES IN NAVAL ARCHITECTURE AND MARINE ENGINEERING

How Modern Combat Operations Impact on Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering Don McBarnet, Staff Writer

F

ROM AN American perspective, the greatest impact on naval architecture and marine engineering has come from Congressional pressure to sequestrate funds from the Defense budget. The overall impact of the cuts in 2014 has been to make decision-making on new platforms controversial and to attack one of the key features of American naval supremacy – the level of training and readiness of its crew. Frank Kendall, Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics, described the impact of the cloud of fiscal uncertainty at the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics SciTech. “I lived the readiness crisis of the ’70s,” he said. “I know exactly what it’s like to have a hollow force because of readiness. But that’s not the only way we can have a hollow force. Failing to invest in science and technology to stay ahead in the world is another route to a hollow force, as is relying on aging equipment that’s hard to maintain. “So there’s a number of ways you can have a hollow force, readiness is just one of them.” Kendall said Pentagon officials are trying to avoid that. “But frankly, if we stay on the path that we’re on, I think that we will, at least in the short term, until we can get back into balance, have a hollow force because of this.”5

The Littoral Combat Ship Victim of Cuts? The Littoral Combat Ship is a good example of how a vessel can become a political scapegoat. Originally envisioned as capable of operating on the high seas and along shallow coastlines (the “littorals”), the fast, manoeuvrable ship is central to President Obama’s strategy of projecting American power in the Pacific and the Persian Gulf. The LCS adds a relatively small and technologically advanced ship to America’s

traditional blue-water Navy of aircraft carriers and destroyers. As the New York Times’ Elizabeth Bumiller describes, it is planned to have a niche role: it is designed to battle Iranian attack boats, clear mines from the Strait of Hormuz, chase down Somali pirates and keep watch on China’s warships.6 However, the politics of its acquisition has made it open to cuts.

Survivability? The vessel has also been vulnerable to a host of specification changes and cost overruns, but some of the most hard-hitting criticism of the design has been addressed to its supposed survivability in a combat environment. The New York Times reports that some say missiles could more easily penetrate its hull and do more damage than to a larger, more powerful ship. It also has fewer and far less sophisticated defenses.7 Still, the Navy argues that it will be heavily armed with guns and missiles and will operate in hostile waters, like the Persian Gulf, only with larger ships nearby.8 It is a clear example of what Hootman in his MIT thesis describes as the need for a system perspective: organizations focused on the optimization of their products often lost sight of the overall system. Each organization perceived that their part must be optimal, using their own disciplinary criteria, and failed to recognize that all parts of a system do not have to be optimal for the system to perform optimally.9

The Government Accountability Office (U.S. GAO) The Government Accountability Office (U.S. GAO) has a trenchant and astute appraisal of the misfortunes of the LCS. And it is clear that political interference is a strong factor in bedevilling the work of the naval architects and marine engineers. The Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) sea frame program continues to face challenges WWW.DEFENCEINDUSTRYREPORTS.COM | 9


SPECIAL REPORT: ADVANCES IN NAVAL ARCHITECTURE AND MARINE ENGINEERING

The Navy is currently studying potentially significant design changes, such as increasing the commonality of systems between the two ship

PHYSICAL MODEL TESTING AT QINETIQ’S OCEAN BASIN FACILITY

variants and changing ship capabilities

stemming from concurrent design, production, and testing activities. The Navy has taken steps to resolve problems with the lead ships, and the shipyards are beginning to realize benefits from facility improvements and experience. However, testing remains to be completed and the Navy is currently studying potentially significant design changes, such as increasing the commonality of systems between the two ship variants and changing ship capabilities. Changes at this point can compromise the positive impacts of shipyard learning, increase costs, and prolong schedules. The mission module program also has concurrency issues, and testing to date has shown considerable limitations in capabilities. The Navy is pursuing an incremental approach to fielding mission packages, but it has yet to finalize the requirements for each increment and does not plan to achieve the minimum performance requirements for the mine countermeasures and surface warfare packages until the final

10 | WWW.DEFENCEINDUSTRYREPORTS.COM

increments are fielded in 2017 and 2019, respectively.10 What a tale of unending woe for the naval architects!

Multi Criteria DecisionMaking Based on Too Many Uncertainties Unfortunately, this is not a new situation and the process of clarifying the decision-making process involved in the final product is encapsulated adroitly by Hootman at MIT. Today’s ship is composed of many systems: propulsion, electrical, weapons, mechanical, and environmental to name a few. Many of these systems are complicated in their own right, but their interactions can be even more so. Further, due to these interactions, it is entirely possible that the integration of optimized subsystems into a ship design will not create an optimized ship system. Therefore, it is clear that a ship design is a multi-criteria decision problem by its very nature, composed of multiple, competing objectives.11


SPECIAL REPORT: ADVANCES IN NAVAL ARCHITECTURE AND MARINE ENGINEERING

Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering Systems in Action Mary Dub, Editor

W

HILE THE future size and shape of the US navy is in discussion in Washington DC, the navies of China, (PLAN) and the countries of the Middle East are beginning to reflect their economic and therefore naval strength. However, it is in the field of commercial shipping and shipbuilding that the greatest change in the balance of global power is most extant. In Barry Rogliano Salles’ (BRS) 2013 report, the Paris based shipbrokers note the changes in the world market trends. In 2013 their latest annual review, they see a market depressed by the world economic crisis and by a slowdown in Chinese growth, but the shipyards delivered more than 2,000 ships and 150m dwt. Indeed, they say, the world fleet increased by 35% over the last four years!12 They go on to note, only 49m dwt (or about 852 ships) were ordered in 2012 compared to 89m dwt (or about 1,375 ships) in 2011. This volume is higher than the record low of 34m dwt reached in 2009 but in line with levels seen in 1993–2003 when the volume of orders fluctuated between 40 and 60m dwt per year.

China Leads Global Shipbuilding BRS also look at who is leading the way in shipbuilding. The answer is the Chinese, closely followed by the South Koreans. China, with a 45% market share, is in first position ahead of the other shipbuilders with an order book of 111m dwt (67m gt) at the end of 2012. This compares with 154m dwt (90m gt) at the end of 2011. South Korea holds second place with a 29% market share and an order book of 70m dwt (53m gt) compared to 109m dwt (53m gt) a year earlier. European shipbuilders had an order book of 3m dwt (4.5m gt) compared to 4.6m dwt (5.5m gt) in 2011, representing no more than 1% of the market. The once proud European shipbuilding tradition is now miniscule faced with Asian size and might. It is relevant to note that due to the global economic crisis there is considerable overcapacity in shipbuilding.

The Importance of Global Alliances While Asian countries dominate the shipbuilding market, European marine architects and designers have learnt to collaborate with the Asian shipbuilders and use their skills in Asia. In a recent company announcement, French and Dutch companies are working together to market their products globally. Leading international classification society Bureau Veritas has entered into a technical and commercial cooperation agreement with French hydrodynamic specialist HydrOcean. Under the agreement, HydrOcean will provide advanced Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) services to BV’s shipping and offshore clients, and Bureau Veritas will market HydrOcean’s specialist services worldwide. As with other design systems the economic driver is reduction in energy consumption to reduce costs. Jean-Francois Segretain, Technical Director, Bureau Veritas, said, “HydrOcean’s CFD (Computational Fluid Dynamics) services save massive amounts of time for ship, offshore structure and marine energy systems designers. For example, hull forms can be optimised by evaluating hundreds of designs over a wide range of load conditions in only a few weeks, and produce ship fuel consumption savings up to 10 or 15 per cent.13”

Dutch Design, UAE (United Arab Emirates Commission), Chinese Build Petrofac’s commission of a new vessel is an example of the intricacy of international shipbuilding and design. Sharjah based Petrofac is to build the Petrofac JSD 6000 deepwater derrick lay vessel, a customized Ulstein SOC 5000 developed by Dutch design company Ulstein Sea of Solutions. The vessel will be constructed at the ZPMC yard in China and be available for construction and installation activities in early 2017. Petrofac’s JSD 6000 is a unique, innovative design featuring J-Lay, S-Lay and heavy lift capabilities, allowing WWW.DEFENCEINDUSTRYREPORTS.COM | 11


SPECIAL REPORT: ADVANCES IN NAVAL ARCHITECTURE AND MARINE ENGINEERING

While the future size and shape of the US navy is in discussion in Washington DC, the navies of China, (PLAN) and the countries of the Middle East are beginning to reflect their

TRIALS SUPPORT VESSELS ON AN ACOUSTIC RANGE

economic and therefore naval strength

it to serve deepwater and SURF markets as well as shallow water EPCI projects. The design features an NOV (National Oilwell Varco) revolving main crane with 5,000mt lifting capacity. But what makes this vessel truly unique is the combination of a 600mt Remacut S-lay system via a center firing line below main deck and a 2,000mt IHC EB J-lay system via a moon pool. ’We are very pleased that Petrofac selected us for designing their first offshore construction vessel,’ says Edwin van Leeuwen, managing director at Ulstein Sea of Solutions.14

Scandinavian Collaboration with Japanese Shipbuilders for Bulk and Liquefied Gas Carriers Danish designers, Odense Maritime Technology A/S (OMT) have put together a deal with Mitsubishi Heavy Industries (MHI). By combining the two companies’ track records

12 | WWW.DEFENCEINDUSTRYREPORTS.COM

in shipbuilding business, MHI and OMT have targeted development of diverse ship types in a quest to expand their licensing business. Under the collaborative arrangement, MHI will primarily take charge of developing propulsion performance aspects, including hull form design, model testing, and development of energy-saving devices and propellers. OMT will be responsible largely for the conceptual and basic designs based on MHI’s hull form designs. In addition to container ships, plans call for collaborative development of bulk carriers and small and medium size liquefied gas carriers. OMT already enjoys a solid reputation within the Chinese market for its bulk carrier designs. Using recently designed hulls, energy-saving devices and propellers developed by MHI, the two partners want to create designs offering improved performance.15


SPECIAL REPORT: ADVANCES IN NAVAL ARCHITECTURE AND MARINE ENGINEERING

The Future Trends in Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering By Don McBarnet, Staff Writer

P

EERING INTO the future as a generalist journalist writing about a specialist area can create hostages to fortune. The future is not always a trend forward from the past. Disruptive technologies can and do do what they are described as doing and disrupt hitherto familiar patterns. To look at what may be over the horizon in the naval field, Rear Admiral Matthew Klunder, United States Navy Chief of Naval Research, is a sound source of ideas. In his testimony to the House Armed Services committee 2013 Budget request he offered an informed appraisal of what the United States Navy had in planning. Klunder describes Innovative Naval Prototypes (INP) as discontinuous, disruptive, radical departures from established requirements and operational concepts.16 He describes Persistent Littoral Undersea Surveillance (PLUS) INP (to develop an autonomous over-the-horizon Anti-Submarine Warfare system) and Sea Base Enablers INP (to evaluate Transformation Craft concepts) completed last year and elements of both transitioning to the Fleet/Force.17

The Free Electron Laser Klunder notes the Free Electron Laser (FEL) INP is hoped to develop the critical technologies needed for a Megawatt class laser system. The FEL is designed to be tunable to atmosphere penetrating wavelengths for use in maritime environments. Focusing on the critical components will allow the US Navy to assess the potential of fielding a Megawatt class laser on a surface ship, which will permit additional shipboard sensors and defense that includes tracking, discrimination, countermeasures, and scalable direct fire at the speed of light. Because of its potential to reach Megawatt power levels, the FEL is designed to defend against current and future surface and air threats, anti-ship cruise missiles, small boat swarms, and other asymmetric threats.

The Integrated Topside INP The Integrated Topside INP may enable the US Navy to dominate the electromagnetic spectrum through development of multisimultaneous function wide-band apertures and Radio Frequency (RF) equipment for all ship classes. And, of course, there are naval unmanned autonomous systems, like the Large Displacement Unmanned Undersea Vehicle (LDUUV) INP. This is a potentially reliable, long endurance UUV capable of extended operation in cluttered littoral environments. The program will develop the needed energy, autonomy and core UUV systems to operate in a complex ocean environment near harbours, shore, and high surface traffic locations.

DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency) Innovative Projects with Transformative Potential Continuing in the search for autonomous systems that deliver beyond the capability of manned systems, DARPA is working on the Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW) Continuous Trail Unmanned Vessel (ACTUV). This is being developed as an unmanned vessel optimized to robustly track quiet diesel electric submarines. DARPA says the program is structured around three primary goals, to explore the performance potential of a surface platform conceived from concept to field demonstration under the premise that a human is never intended to step aboard at any point in its operating cycle. As a result, a new design paradigm emerges with reduced constraints on conventional naval architecture elements such as layout, accessibility, crew support systems, reserve buoyancy and dynamic stability. The objective is to generate a vessel design that exceeds state-of-the art platform performance to provide complete propulsive overmatch against diesel electric submarines at a fraction of their size and cost. Advanced unmanned WWW.DEFENCEINDUSTRYREPORTS.COM | 13


SPECIAL REPORT: ADVANCES IN NAVAL ARCHITECTURE AND MARINE ENGINEERING

The objective is to generate a vessel design that exceeds state-of-the art platform performance to provide complete propulsive overmatch against diesel electric submarines at a fraction of their size and cost

COMPUTATIONAL FLUID DYNAMIC MODELLING OF FLOW

maritime system autonomy is in theory enabled to independently deploy systems capable of missions spanning thousands of kilometers of range and months of endurance under a sparse remote supervisory control model. This includes compliance with maritime laws and conventions for safe navigation, autonomous system management for operational reliability, and autonomous interactions with an intelligent adversary.

Autonomous Undersea Submarine Tracking DARPA wants to demonstrate the capability of the ACTUV system to use its unique characteristics to employ non-conventional sensor technologies that achieve robust continuous track of the quietest submarine targets over their entire operating envelope. While the ACTUV program is focused on demonstrating the ASW tracking capability in

14 | WWW.DEFENCEINDUSTRYREPORTS.COM

this configuration, the core platform and autonomy technologies are broadly extendable to underpin a wide range of missions and configurations for future unmanned naval vessels.18 Viewed with 20th century vision a 21st century world where world navies use or merely supplement their blue water navies with autonomous marine and subsea vessels appears a dystopian vision. However, if it relieves the submariner of 6 month tours of duty under the sea or further reduces manning on long ocean voyages it is perhaps an advance that favours the wellbeing of sailors, naval officers and workers in the merchant navy. Naval architecture and marine engineering has to face huge challenges in a rapidly changing global market, now dominated by Asia. However, the ideas and design algorithms of American and European engineers will continue to have a value well into the future.


SPECIAL REPORT: ADVANCES IN NAVAL ARCHITECTURE AND MARINE ENGINEERING

References: 1

 A Military Effectiveness Analysis and Decision Making Framework for Naval Ship Design and Acquisition John C. Hootman

B.S. Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering Webb Institute of Naval Architecture, 2001 Submitted to the Department of Ocean Engineering in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degrees of Master of Science in Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering and Master of Science in Ocean Systems Management at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology June 2003 2

Hootman ibid

2

Hootman ibid

4

Navy Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) Program: Background and Issues for Congress Ronald O’Rourke

5

Specialist in Naval Affairs February 5, 2014 Controversy and Proposals to Truncate the Program Overview

6

http://www.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=121487 Budget Uncertainty Challenges Readiness, Official Says By Army Sgt. 1st Class Tyrone C. Marshall Jr.
American Forces Press Service WASHINGTON, Jan. 15, 2014

Smaller Navy Ship Has a Rocky Past and Key Support By ELISABETH BUMILLER Published: April 5, 2012

7

BUMILLER Published: April 5, 2012

8

BUMILLER Published: April 5, 2012

9

Hootman ibid

10

http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-13-530 NAVY SHIPBUILDING:

Significant Investments in the Littoral Combat Ship Continue Amid Substantial Unknowns about Capabilities, Use, and Cost

GAO-13-530: Published: Jul 22, 2013. Publicly Released: Jul 25, 2013.

11

Hootman ibid

12

BARRY ROGLIANO SALLES, 11 boulevard Jean Mermoz, 92200 Neuilly sur Seine, France, BRS.com 2013, ANNUAL REVIEW, SHIPPING AND SHIPBUILDING MARKETS

13

In action Hydro Ocean http://www.maritime-executive.com/pressrelease/BV-Cuts-Energy-Saving-Design-Time-with-HydrOcean-2014-02-05/ February 05, 2014 BV Cuts Energy Saving Design Time with HydrOcean BY MAREX

14

January 20, 2014 Petrofac Chooses Ulstein Pipelay Design BY MAREX European design Dutch and Chinese building

15

European Asian collaboration February 05, 2014 MHI Partners with European Ship Designer BY MAREX

16

KLUNDER TESTIMONY TO CONGRESS STATEMENT OF REAR ADMIRAL MATTHEW L. KLUNDER, UNITED STATES NAVY, CHIEF OF NAVAL RESEARCH BEFORE THE EMERGING THREATS AND CAPABILITIES SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE HOUSE ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE ON THE FISCAL YEAR 2013 BUDGET REQUEST FEBRUARY 29, 2012 Leap Ahead Innovations (Innovative Naval Prototypes)

17

KLUNDER ibid

18

DARPA

http://www.darpa.mil/Our_Work/TTO/Programs/Anti-Submarine_Warfare_(ASW)_Continuous_Trail_Unmanned_Vessel_(ACTUV).aspx

ANTI-SUBMARINE WARFARE (ASW) CONTINUOUS TRAIL UNMANNED VESSEL (ACTUV)

WWW.DEFENCEINDUSTRYREPORTS.COM | 15


Defence Industry Reports… the Defence Industry Reports….the leading specialist combined leading specialist online research andcombined networking online research and networking resource for senior military and resource for senior military and defence industry professionals. defence industry professionals.

• Up minute Industry News other content available • to Upthe to the minute Industryand and Technology Technology News andand other content available to to allallsite users on a free of charge, open access basis. site users on a free of charge, open access basis. • Qualified signed upupmembers abletoto access premium content • Qualified signed members are are able access premium content SpecialSpecial Reports andand interact with usinga variety a variety of advanced Reports interact withtheir their peers peers using of advanced onlineonline networking tools. networking tools. • Designed to help usersidentify identify new solutions, understand the the • Designed to help users newtechnical technical solutions, understand implications of differenttechnical technical choices select the the bestbest solutions implications of different choicesand and select solutions available. available. • Thought Leadership Advice and from internationally recognised • Thought Leadership – -Advice andguidance guidance from internationally recognised defence industry key opinion leaders. leaders defence industry key opinion • Peer Input - Contributions from senior military personnel and defence industry • Peer Input – Contributions from senior military personnel and defence professionals industry professionals. •

Independent Editorial Content - Expert and authoritative analysis from award

Unbiased Supplier Provided Content

Designed to facilitate debate

• Independent Editorial Content – Expert and authoritative analysis from winning journalists and leading industry commentators award winning journalists and leading industry commentators. •

Unbiased Supplier Provided Content.

Designed debate. • Writtento tofacilitate the highest professional standards

Written to the highest professional standards.

Visit: www.defenceindustryreports.com


Special Report – Advances in Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering Qinetiq