$7.5 billion Zumwalt Destroyer needs new engine despite only a few months of use

[endicom]

Next Big Future
Brian Wang
July 11, 2018

One of two operating Zumwalt Destroyer will need to have a main turbine engine replaced.

They completed acceptance trials in February, and the Navy accepted partial delivery of the ship in April.

It is taking over six months to replace the engine because a special rail system is needed to remove the engine and put in a new one. The system to enable engine replacement had not been designed when the Navy realized it needed one. Engineers had to finish the design and then install the system.

More... https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2018/07/7-5-billion-zumwalt-destroyer-needs-new-engine-despite-only-a-few-months-of-use/

[Sighlass]

Next Big Future
Brian Wang
July 11, 2018

One of two operating Zumwalt Destroyer will need to have a main turbine engine replaced.

They completed acceptance trials in February, and the Navy accepted partial delivery of the ship in April.

It is taking over six months to replace the engine because a special rail system is needed to remove the engine and put in a new one. The system to enable engine replacement had not been designed when the Navy realized it needed one. Engineers had to finish the design and then install the system.

More... https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2018/07/7-5-billion-zumwalt-destroyer-needs-new-engine-despite-only-a-few-months-of-use/

I have an old mopar engine that needs a new home.

[endicom]

I have an old mopar engine that needs a new home.

And parts for it are probably available.

[rangerrebew]

No need for those parts.  I assume the ship has the standard 5 years or 500,000 miles warranty.

[endicom]

No need for those parts.  I assume the ship has the standard 5 years or 500,000 miles warranty.

Nautical miles which are...uhh...different.

[thackney]

https://news.usni.org/2018/07/11/second-zumwalt-destroyer-needs-new-engine-turbine-blades-damaged-sea-trials

...Galinis told USNI News that the MT30 marine gas turbine showed no signs of malfunctioning during the sea trials, but the damage was found in a post-trials inspection.

“The problem we had coming off of acceptance trials was actually the turbine blades – so think of a jet engine on the side of an airplane, the blades that you see – we actually had some dings, some damage to those turbine blades,” he said.
“We found that after the sea trial through what we call a borescope inspection, where we actually put a visual and optical device inside the turbine to kind of look at this. And we determined that it was best to change that turbine out before we actually transited the ship to San Diego.”

Monsoor completed acceptance trials in February, and the Navy accepted partial delivery of the ship in April. According to Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA), the damage was discovered in February during a post-cleaning inspection of the engine....

...In the U.S., the $20-million Rolls-Royce MT30 is installed on not only the Zumwalt-class but also on the Navy’s Freedom-variant of Littoral Combat Ships. Internationally, the gas turbine –derived from Rolls’ Trent 800 aviation engine – is in use on the U.K. Royal Navy’s Queen Elizabeth-class carriers, the under-construction Royal Navy Type 26 frigate, the planned Daegu-class frigate for South Korea and the Italian Navy’s new Trieste amphibious warship....

[Fishrrman]

Pic of the engine is at the URL in the original article. The image was too large to post here.

This is beyond ridiculous -- why put such an expensive, complicated, high-maintenance prime mover in a warship?

Seems to me simplicity and ruggedness would be more worthwhile.
There are plenty of conventional diesel engines that could get the job done just as well, at far more reasonable cost, and more easily maintained.

The Zumwalt (and its sister ship) should be removed from service and sent to the scrapyard.

Bring back REAL "destroyers" -- not ships with engines that "destroy" themselves!

[thackney]

Pic of the engine is at the URL in the original article. The image was too large to post here.

This is beyond ridiculous -- why put such an expensive, complicated, high-maintenance prime mover in a warship?

Seems to me simplicity and ruggedness would be more worthwhile.
There are plenty of conventional diesel engines that could get the job done just as well, at far more reasonable cost, and more easily maintained.

The Zumwalt (and its sister ship) should be removed from service and sent to the scrapyard.

Bring back REAL "destroyers" -- not ships with engines that "destroy" themselves!

Jet type engines are used both for size and power to weight ratio.  These turbines have been used on ships for many decades.

http://www.dieselduck.info/machine/01%20prime%20movers/gas_turbine/gas_turbine.htm

[ img width=640][/img] delete the leading space to reduce the display size of the pictures like below.