NAVAL POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL Monterey, California TECHNICAL REPORT “Sea Force” A Sea Basing Platform By Faculty Members Charles Calvano Robert Harney Fotis Papoulias Robert Ashton Student Members LT Dwight Warnock, USN LT Seth Miller, USN LT Lynn Fodrea, USN LT Matt Steeno, USN LT Luis Alvarez, USN LT Brian Higgins, USCG LTJG Murat Korkut, Turkish Navy LTJG Jihed Boulares, Tunisian Navy LTJG Mehmet Savur, Turkish Navy Maj Chong-ann Teh, Singapore Navy Maj Keng Shin Chong, Singapore Navy Distribution statement A - Unlimited Distribution THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Form Approved OMB No. REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE 0704-0188 Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instruction, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302, and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (0704-0188) Washington DC 20503. 1. AGENCY USE ONLY (Leave 2. REPORT DATE 3. REPORT TYPE AND DATES COVERED blank) January 2003 Technical Report 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE “Sea Force” 5. FUNDING NUMBERS A Sea Basing Platform 6. AUTHOR (S) Faculty Members: Charles Calvano, Robert Harney, Fotis Papulius, Robert Ashton, Student Members: Dwight Warnock, Seth Miller, Lynn Fodrea, Matt Steeno, Luis Alvarez, Brian Higgins, Murat Korkut, Jihed Boulares, Mehmet Savur, Chong-ann Teh, Keng Shin Chong, 7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION Naval Postgraduate School REPORT NUMBER Monterey, CA 93943-5000 9. SPONSORING / MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSORING/MONITORING NA AGENCY REPORT NUMBER 11. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES The views expressed in this thesis are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of the U.S. Department of Defense or the U.S. Government. 12a. DISTRIBUTION / AVAILABILITY STATEMENT 12b. DISTRIBUTION CODE Approved for public release, distribution unlimited 13. ABSTRACT (maximum 200 words) The need for effective operation from the sea while conducting amphibious operations ashore has never been more evident than in today’s modern conflicts. As important as this task is it has not been significantly changed since World War I. Sea Force is an attempt to show how that sea basing, as discussed by the CNO in Sea Power 21, can be accomplished by the year 2020 with reasonable advances in technology. The Total Ship Systems Engineering Program, under the tasking of CNO (N7) through the Wayne E. Meyer Institute of Systems Engineer, undertook the task of designing a system of ships that could be brought together to enable the sea basing of one Marine Expeditionary Brigade (MEB) for an indefinite period of time. The Sea Force design completely supports all of the operational requirements of Ship to Objective Maneuver (STOM), in addition to providing a path for re-supply and method for reconstitution of forces ashore. Sea Force is also designed to be reconfigurable from a warship to a supply ship during a shipyard availability period with minimal effort through modularity. 14. SUBJECT TERMS sea basing, free electron laser, rail gun, 15. NUMBER OF trimaran hull, integrated power systems, unmanned flight deck, PAGES shipboard automation, reduced manning 16. PRICE CODE 17. SECURITY 18. SECURITY 19. SECURITY 20. LIMITATION CLASSIFICATION CLASSIFICATION OF THIS CLASSIFICATION OF OF ABSTRACT OF REPORT PAGE ABSTRACT Unclassified Unclassified Unclassified UL NSN 7540-01-280-5500 Standard Form 298 (Rev. 2-89) Prescribed by ANSI Std. 239-18 i THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK ii ABSTRACT The need for effective operation from the sea while conducting amphibious operations ashore has never been more evident than in today’s modern conflicts. As important as this task is it has not been significantly changed since World War I. “Sea Force” is an attempt to show how that sea basing, as discussed by the CNO in Sea Power 21, can be accomplished by the year 2020 with reasonable advances in technology. The Total Ship Systems Engineering Program, under the tasking of CNO (N7) through the Wayne E. Meyer Institute of Systems Engineer, undertook the task of designing a system of ships that could be brought together to enable the sea basing of one Marine Expeditionary Brigade (MEB) for an indefinite period of time. The “Sea Force” design completely supports all of the operational requirements of Ship to Objective Maneuver (STOM), in addition to providing a path for re-supply and method for reconstitution of forces ashore. Sea Force is also designed to be reconfigurable from a warship to a supply ship during a shipyard availability period with minimal effort through the use of modularity. iii THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK iv TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION ..............................................1 II. DEVELOPING THE REQUIREMENTS .............................3 A. INTRODUCTION .......................................3 B. SEA INITIAL REQUIREMENTS DOCUMENT (IRD) ANALISYS ...4 1. The Marine Expeditionary Brigade (MEB) ........5 2. Defining the MEB ..............................7 3. Sustainment ...................................9 4. The Sea Base .................................11 C. BOTTOM-UP ANALYSIS ................................11 D. DESIGN OPTIONS ....................................13 1. Number of Ships ..............................13 2. Types of Ships ...............................14 D. KEY TECHNOLOGY AREAS ..............................15 E. CONCLUSION ........................................16 III. ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES ..............................18 A. SINGLE SHIP DESIGN ................................18 B. LMSR/MPF WITH LHA DESIGN (ALTERNATIVE B) ..........21 C. LHA/MPF WITH LMSR DESIGN (ALTERNATIVE C) ..........23 D. EVALUATION CRITERIA AND CONCLUSIONS ...............27 IV. DESIGN PROCESS ..........................................31 A. DESIGN PHILOSOPHY .................................31 B. DESIGN OBJECTIVES .................................36 C. DESIGN CONSTRAINTS ................................37 D. TECHNOLOGY ENABLERS ...............................38 1. Flight Deck ..................................38 1. General Description .......................38 2. Transponders ..............................39 1. Fueling Systems ...........................41 2. Fire Fighting Systems .....................43 3. Towing and Tie Down Systems ...............44 2. At-Sea-Transfer and Logistics Automation .....45 1. Hybrid Linear Actuator ....................46 2. Linear Electric Drive Technology ..........47 3. Omni Directional Vehicle ..................49 4. Advanced Weapons Elevator .................50 5. Automated Magazine ........................51 6. Automated Stowage and Retrieval System ....52 7. Motion Compensated Crane ..................53 3. Propulsion ...................................54 1. Propulsion Plant Trade off Studies ........54 v 2. Gas Turbine Comparisons ...................57 3. Propulsors ................................64 4. Propulsor Motor Selection .................66 4. Combat Systems ...............................70 V. SHIP’S DESCRIPTORS .......................................75 A. NAVAL ARCHITECTURE CURVES .........................76 1. Hull Type Selection ............................76 2. Hull Design ....................................81 3. Outrigger Hull Design ..........................83 4. Stability ......................................85 5. Structural Concerns ............................87 6. Floodable Length ...............................89 7. Conclusions ....................................90 B. FLIGHT DECK LAYOUT ................................91 1. Aircraft .......................................92 2. Dimensions .....................................92 3. Aircraft Spots and Runway ......................93 4. Flight Deck Monitoring System ..................94 5. Spot Signal Beacons ............................96 6. Aircraft Elevators .............................98 7. Ordnance Elevators .............................99 C. INTERNAL VOLUME LAYOUT ............................99 1. Well Deck .....................................101 2. Hangar Bay ....................................103 3. Vehicle Decks .................................105 4. Warehouse .....................................110 5. Medical/Hospital ..............................112 6. AIMD ..........................................113 7. Berthing ......................................113 8. C4ISR .........................................114 9. Intermediate Maintenance Activity .............115 11. Tankage ......................................116 12. Ammunition ...................................118 13. Engineering spaces ...........................119 D. COMBAT SYSTEMS ...................................119 1. Overall Architecture ..........................121 2. C4ISR .........................................122 3. Air Warfare ...................................124 a. Sensors ..................................124 b. Weapons ..................................126 4. Mine Interdiction Warfare .....................128 5. Surface Warfare ...............................130 a. Sensors ..................................130