Military value of extra-quick ship of my design


Military value of extra-quick ship of my design
Author: David Judbarovski, systems engineering, principle inventor, retired
judbarovski@gmail.com 

Abstract
Being compared with typical destroyer (Type 055, Japan) = USD 60,000,000,00; 13,000 dwt; 112,000 kW; 56 km/h, and with Boeing 787-9 airliner = USD 30,000,000,00; 55 ton payload;  80,000 kW; 900 km/h, my ship is better than the said destroyer in 30 times by CAPEX and 9 times by OPEX, and can substitute 8 destroyers. Correspondingly, with the airliner, 200 times by CAPEX and 80 times by OPEX, substituting 100 them by one ship  

Very shorty,
Two key elements of my ship are
(1) Slightly lower than sea level, the ship’s nose is tilted back and like a wedge it bends the upstream water upward in the air, and it substitutes the big water resistance by the air resistance being in three orders of magnitude less one  Such energy effect is inherent for very big velocity.. It is new kind of sea ship, breaking all stereotypes.
(2) to add a thin pressed air cocoon created around a hull of the ship. It reduces the power loses by the water viscosity practically to zero.  

Power consideration for my ship
W = Q * H = ( l * B * H / T ) * H = B * H^2  * V = S * H * V (km/h) / 3.6,
Here: W (kW) – power; Q (m3/s}- water rate; H (m) – ship’s draft = nose height submerged; B (m) – ship’s nose beam submerged; S (m2) = B * H; l (m)  nose length submerged; V (m/s) – velocity = V (km/h) / 3.6; T = l / V (m/s) 
So
So W = 0.28 * S * H * V (km/h), hence a power is proportional to a speed !!!.
While for conventional ships it is W = a * S * V^3 / 2

Let a ship of my design be
H = 6 m, B = 10 m, 6500 dwt; and V = 900 km/h 
Let abovementioned air cocoon be consuming 10,000 kW

So for the said ship of my design :
W = 0.28 * 10 * 36 * 900 = 90,700 kW + ~10,000 kW (for the cocoon)
So W ~= 100,000 kW totally

If compared with the said destroyer:
(6500 /13,000) * (900/56) = 8. My one instead of the eight by total payload,
and by cost ( 8 * 60 millions) /15 millions =  32 times by CAPEX,
while 8 * 112,000 /100,000 = 9 times by OPEX   

If compared with the said airliner
(5,000/50) * (30,000,000 / 15,000,000) = 200 times cheaper CAPEX, 
and (5,000 /50) * 80,000 /100,000) = 80 times less OPEX  

So my sea transport can be out of competition for military quick response.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Progressive city-car realization and powering-Updated,#1

Progressive city-car realization and powering-Updated, #1 Author: David Judbarovski, principle inventor, retired engineer, Israel judbarovski@gmail.com   Short CV: https://www.linkedin.com/in/david-judbarovski-1390944a/ Archive since 2017 yr: http://judbarovski.blogspot.be Archive since 2006 yr.: http://judbarovski.livejournal.com [3791]-3/11/2017,   My three levels’ conception of progressive transportation was disclosed in http://www.judbarovski.blogspot.co.il/2017/05/progressive-transportation-manifesto.html  (Progressive transportation manifesto, May 02. 2017). Its first level is a city-car.   Special designed city-car is a car moved electrically and equipped by very small battery as a city-grid element, and it isn’t big news now. Such cars are to be much cheaper and simpler than conventional cars and save a lot of energy. But I can suppose strictly to reject all sorts of powering them from underground, because it is energy ineffective and creates additional
Read more

Equipment for Short Take-off and Landing (E-STOL)

Equipment for Short Take-off and Landing (E-STOL) Author: David Judbarovski, systems engineering, principle inventor judbarovski@gmail.com , Linkedin Abstract My E-STOL comprises a aerodynamic resistance of quite small area (SAR), being rigid and turnable, and a water jet device (WJD), comprising high pressure water jets in corners of quadrangular frame. The SAR can be very quickly erected or downed to turn it into additional wing-kite for short gliding in the sky. The WJD provides stabilization below stall speed and serves as start support, while landing or take-off. It is very attractive for Navy aviation, because allows high cruise speed, extremely short runway, and better reliability vs. helicopter, and we can repeat approach, if taking a portion of ambient sea water, in flight by simple pails.     The water is thrust out through the jets by gases at high pressure after ignition of “liquid vigorous combustible” (LVC), e.g. stoichiometric composition of amm
Read more

Breakthrough new fuel is better than oil

Breakthrough new fuel is better than oil David Judbarovski, systems engineering, principle inventor judbarovski@gmail.com Abstract Lithium hydride being reformed by water vapor in hydrogen then by fuel cell can create 5.25 kWh electricity/ kg. LiH, vs. 3.75 kWh per kg gasoline, while that LiH needs for its recycling 10.3 kWh renewable electricity , so system energy efficiency is 50% without any harmful exhaust. For the oil, analogous technology or by burning the both are followed by the oil recycling, they are 25% energy efficient with a lot of harmful exhaust.. Really For Lithium hydride, it was evaluated by me in the article : “Breakthrough kind of electric vehicle” in https://judbarovski.blogspot.com /2022/11 , posted at Nov. 05, 2022 For the oil, it is recycled from atmospheric CO2 and hydrogen produced by the water splitting.
Read more