RN nuclear-powered surface ships?

[GeorgeC]

Snipet from Janes -

'BMT Defence Services Ltd is exploring possible alternative fuels for future UK /Royal Navy (RN) surface ships amid concerns over the rising cost and long-term availability of conventional fossil fuels.

According to Roy Quilliam, BMT Defence Services' technical director, the company's study work is aimed at informing the RN's projected Future Surface Combatant programme, which plans for a new class of frigate to enter service in the post-2018 timeframe.

"Given that this new class of ships will remain in service beyond 2050," he said, "we need to understand what alternatives are available in the event that NATO-standard F76 diesel [the RN's current fuel] is either unobtainable or unaffordable. We have looked at both nuclear and bio-fuels. However, at this stage we are not in a position to say any more."

He elaborated on the issues BMT had been coming up against, however. "The ideal of adapting [nuclear fuel] to put it into a surface fleet isn't hard, but it's difficult to fit it into a typical UK size surface combatant.

"The ships have to be bigger than typical destroyers or [other] ships of 10, 000 tonnes." '

Nuclear-powered Type 45 anyone? Certainly would make the British naval reactor programme more viable than for the occasional SSN and, perhaps, SSBN.  

[Phnx28]

YES! Finally the RN is looking at the option of investing in a nuclear plant for more than just carriers and subs. When I read about how the US decommissioned and scrapped its CGNs in the mid-90s, I was not happy to say the least. Granted such propulsion capability is expensive, especially given the Virginias' lack of Aegis, but it provides the closest analog to the old cruiser (and Frigate, interestingly enough ) mission profiles that modern naval tactics will allow. If quiet enough, such vessels can operate offensively and independently agaisnt nuke subs and air threats rather than just protecting the task force in question.

[GeorgeC]

Oh and the other options were bio-gas and hydrogen - HMS Hindenburg?

[jcf]

Oh and the other options were bio-gas and hydrogen - HMS Hindenburg?

Naah...HMS Methane, lovingly referred to as the "Cow-fart" by her crew.

Cheers, Jon

[RLBH]

Won't happen.

You can't get a nuclear-powered rubber dingy. The soldier/sailor/airman that is the entire armed forces objects when he starts glowing in the dark.

[Mossie]

Hydrogen actually makes sense.  Although it is highly explosive, you wouldn't need any more protection for the tanks than with current fuels.  The fuel would take up less space, being a gas it can be compressed.  Hydrogen fuel cells have no moving parts, so the fuel system itself is silent & maintenance is very low.  The only by product is water, so this is simply dispensed into the sea with no chance of tracing any emissions.  They are very efficient so you could spend very long periods at sea without re-fueling.

The main problem at the moment is cost.  The catalysts required are very expensive (they currently use platinum), although the cost of this is expected to decline rapidly once fuel cells come into the mainstream.

The German U212 Sub already uses them in tandem with it's diesel engines, & is able to stay submerged for long stretches & is considered to be the most technically advanced Sub in the world.  Italy & Greece should be running them soon too.  Revell do a 1/144 kit.

[Hobbes]

Um, no. Hydrogen takes up more space than gasoline, even when it's compressed or cooled enough to liquefy. Both methods have drawbacks (high-pressure tanks or -200 degree storage). Hydrogen isn't that much more efficient than gasoline, either.  

[P1127]

Can't see an RN surface unit with a nuclear powerplant - the CVFs will be diesel powered.

Now biofuel - corn diesel anyone...?

[BillSlim]

I think the world's oil reserves will long outlast any frigates that enter service in 2018, unless they plan to keep them in service for more than 100 years.

CVF is GT/electric powered btw.

[kitnut617]

Woudn't all you need is a hydrogen converter,  ships float on all the fuel they want, just needs converting and then the exhaust goes back to water        

[Hobbes]

uhuh. And the hydrogen converter is powered by, what?  :dum:  

[P1127]

CVF is GT/electric powered btw.

And what powers the turbines?

[GeorgeC]

CVF is GT/electric powered btw.

And what powers the turbines?

Nothing because they are STILL on paper     Current plans are to use 4 Marine Trent turbines - see:

Link

Of course, the ambitious 60,000t CVF programme might well be sent for 'further review' rather than approved at Main Gate, and turn into 2 large 25,000t Ocean- type LPHs.  If you are an optimist you might think these ships could still carry about 12 F35B - or the UK buy might turn into the less F35A model and be turned over entirely to RAF sqns (cf 1968) , or it might just whither away as Batch 3 Typhoons re-equip Tornado and Harrier sqns.

No doubt a reasonable purchase of destroyers, say 4, would be necessary (cf Type42) to sustain the shipbuilding industry (you didn't think any of this was to do with military capability did you?).  A stretched Type 45 could meet this

   Half way down this page

You could even stick some Tomahawk or UAVs on it as well as the ASTER and claim it was doing the same job as a carrier.  It might even be big enough to justify a nuclear power plant. (Just made it back on topic!)  Then for good measure call them London, Cardiff, Edinburgh and Belfast and any new Prime Ministers who happen along can smile in the House as these wonderful symbols of 'Britishness' are discussed.

[DamienB]

Can't see an RN surface unit with a nuclear powerplant

Neither can I, on environmental grounds alone. Imagine if all the ships lost in the Falklands had included a nuclear reactor on board each one...

[kitnut617]

uhuh. And the hydrogen converter is powered by, what?  :dum:

Well, once it's started it powers itself, right     Not really a perpetual motor but close.

You'd only have to get it going when it's in dock.  Once the process is started, any excess produced is just discharged overboard and returns to water.

Also the exhaust could be piped to discharge into the water too, as it's just water. No stack protruding up in the way and the space used for other equipment.