Interesting article on Northrops new naval designs
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A5236-2002Apr29.html
In relation to the new Destroyer Class design it states:
"Under the plan, sailors' standard of living also would be drastically
improved. For example, three-tier bunk beds would be replaced with
staterooms shared by as many as three sailors and outfitted with computers and
Internet connections. Crew sizes would drop from 300 to 125, then eventually
to 95. "It allows the Navy to free up a lot of resources,"
[defense analyst Jay] Korman said.
Questions arising from this:
1. What kind of% of total personnel is there is each area of operations on
board a military naval vessel?
2. Presumably there as some tasks manpower is always needed for, that can't be
automated. What kind of tasks would these be, and what plausible
sci-fi
elements could lead to these being done by automation?
3. Also presumably you need 2-3 times the number of people needed to do
all the jobs. Does anyone see this aspect of crew requirments as ever being
able to change?
4. Would crew comfort, health etc. be a bigger concern in space, and would
this lead to larger vessels or smaller crews; or shorter deployment times?
Any thoughts?
> On Tue, 30 Apr 2002, Donogh McCarthy wrote:
> Interesting article on Northrops new naval designs
And #4:
How do they plan to deal with damage control with only a fraction of the
original crew size? AFAIK, damage control capability is still a big factor in
crew sizes. However, it's not an area I'm very familiar with, perhaps someone
knowledgeable could comment?
Cheers,
> Questions arising from this:
I don't know enough to touch this one...
> 2. Presumably there as some tasks manpower is always needed for, that
The biggest problem is damage control. Articles have been flying back and
forth in the U.S. Naval Institute Proceedings over manpower requirements for
damage control. Automated systems are great as long as you have electric
power. Men have the advantage of being able to move to the part of the ship
where they are needed. Automated systems can't. Note that this assumes that an
effective comm. system is still functioning. In Star Wars, you have astromech
droids, which combine the best of both worlds. Their an automated damage
control system that has its own power, and can go where it is needed.
Go R2-D2...
> 3. Also presumably you need 2-3 times the number of people needed to
Actually, you need more depending on damage control requirements and damage
control automation. I don't see it changing unless your sci-fi universe
includes genitically enhanced humans who can function effictively for extend
periods of time with much less sleep then our current models. Or if you have
fully automated ships and the humans are just along for the ride.
> 4. Would crew comfort, health etc. be a bigger concern in space, and
Well, space ops. are far more like sub ops. If a naval ships loses all power,
the crew can survive for as long as they have food and water (assuming the
ship isn't taking on water, and there not too far north or south). In a sub,
you have to wory about too little oxygen, too much CO2, and freezing to death
as the temperature drops inside the hull (if you are not in shallow warm
waters). In space, you have all the problems of the sub, plus the problem of
broiling if you are too close to a star. Note, Earth's orbit is too close.
Health concerns are related to how fast FTL travel is, and how fast FTL
communications are. Basically, it is how fast can the nearest base
and/or
fleet be notified and how fast can they respond. The slower they are when
compared to exist with now on earth, the more important health concerns will
be.
The Swedish Navy has the most experience of slim manning reqiurements, but
they operate small ships. Does anyone out there know how how the Swede's plan
on dealing with damage control.
> Donogh McCarthy wrote:
I have more knowledge of submarine operation and crews than for carrier or
other surface forces. Submarine crews operate in six hour shifts. One shift on
duty, two shifts off duty. So the figure of three times the crew for each
position is accurate.
Percentages will vary greatly depending on the platform. You have bridge crew,
weapons, engineering, and support crew. Air crew and flight support crew are a
major percentage on a carrier.
> 2. Presumably there as some tasks manpower is always needed for, that
The new Virginia class SSN is highly automated and computerized. It requires a
crew of about 110. The older Los Angeles class requires a crew of about 125.
It also means that some of the crew won't have to "hot bunk."
Don't count on automating too much of a ship's operation, especially with
multiple shifts.
> 4. Would crew comfort, health etc. be a bigger concern in space, and
Good question. A ship's volume will be the determining factor.