BIW-built stealth destroyer needs $20 million engine replaced

[jpak]

https://www.pressherald.com/2018/07/12/report-second-biw-stealth-destroyer-needs-engine-replaced/

Bath Iron Works’ second Zumwalt-class stealth destroyer, the $7.5 billion USS Michael Monsoor, needs a $20 million engine replaced because inspectors found damage after the ship’s naval acceptance trials.

The Monsoor must have a main turbine engine replaced before the ship can sail to San Diego for its combat system activation, according to a U.S. Naval Sea Systems Command spokeswoman. The engine was made by Rolls-Royce and installed at BIW in Bath, where the ship is currently docked.

“In February 2018, a post-cleaning inspection of one of the DDG 1001’s two main turbine generators revealed damage to the rotor blades of the generator’s MT30 engine,” Navy spokeswoman Colleen O’Rourke said in a statement. “After the damage was identified, and out of an abundance of caution, the Navy decided to remove the engine in its entirety to ensure a successful and safe transit of the ship to her San Diego homeport.”

The Navy is preparing to remove and replace the engine with a spare, she said. Upon removal, the engine will be inspected to determine the root cause of the damage, and then it will be refurbished.

<more>

[exboyfil]

1. $7.5B for a destroyer

We are out of our minds.

[GeorgeGist]

5. Yep, have been for awhile now.

[FBaggins]

15. That wasn't really the pricetag.

They were supposed to be more like 3-4Billion per ship IIRC (still a large number of course)... but the program was canceled at three ships... so the entire cost of the program ($10+ Billion) is now spread among only three units.

To make matters worse... the original purpose of the class was to provide long-range artillery support (potentially out to 100 miles), using a new (LRLAP) 6" round. Here's the kicker: Those munitions were canceled as well. So what was to be the main armament of those three destroyers are really just pretty paperweights sitting on deck.

IOW - the entire plan was an incredibly expensive disaster.

[haele]

2. The spare being an engine already assigned to a ship that has just begun new construction.

Shades of the LHA program. The equipment that the poor ship that was the "last to be built" ended up with by the time she was commissioned consisted of around 50% refurbished equipment from all the other ships after they had completed their shakedown and found the major problems.
That's a reason why "last of the class" or "last of the flight" ships and planes are often considered cursed.

Haele

[donco]

3. NO Warrenty?

[Lee-Lee]

7. Since this was under trials it almost certainly will be a contractor paid repair

But until they get the engine out and determine the reason for the failure exactly who pays is not known yet.

If it was a problem with the manufacturing of the engine, the engine maker will pay.

If it was a problem with how it was installed, the shipbuilder will pay.

Only way the Navy is on the hook is if it was a case of someone in the Navy abusing it during the trials and causing the damage.

[exboyfil]

11. Fourth option

What, if under mission defined performance, the engine is not able to handle the load? Then we would be truly screwed.

[Lee-Lee]

13. I was reading another article that noted those engines are used in a lot of other ships

So they have a pretty good idea what it’s capable of, and since it’s entirely for powering an electrical generator they had it designed with the load in mind.

I’ll bet it’s defective parts, or a failure by the shipbuilder to properly clear debris from the air intake that caused FOD to be drawn into the turbine and damage the blades.

[hack89]

10. The engine has been in service for a while

It was originally installed on another ship. I suspect the original manufacturers warranty has expired.

[Lee-Lee]

14. No it's a new engine

What that article says is that engine CLASS isn’t new and those style engines have been in use on other ships.

That engine is either new or was rebuilt by the manufacturer, either case it will have a warranty.

[dalton99a]

4. "The bigger issue is the fact that the ships don't have a clearly defined purpose."

What a fucking waste of money

[jpak]

6. They cannot even use the guns - ammo is too expensive.

It's going to take a lot of money to get these things combat ready.

[dalton99a]

9. What a joke. They should call it a jobs program instead of defense

[Ilsa]

8. Ugly boat, to boot, if it is the one I'm thinking of. nt

[malthaussen]

12. No kidding.

I understand the reasons, but they don't make 'em like they used to.

-- Mal

[jmowreader]

16. It's the one that looks like an upside-down sailboat