Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Cracks plague Ticonderoga-class cruisers (all 22 of them)

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
unhappycamper Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 08:07 AM
Original message
Cracks plague Ticonderoga-class cruisers (all 22 of them)
unhappycamper note: Since the ‘Pentagon’ (DoD? Gannett?) has ‘requested’ that I only post one paragraph from articles on Army Times, and Airforce Times, To keep in that same (new) tradition, I will also do the same for for articles on Navy Times, Marine Corps Times, stripes.com and military.com.
To read the article in the military's own words, you will need to click the link.

Read all about Fair Use here. It sure is beginning to smell like fascism.

unhappycamper summary of this article: :(





The Navy cruiser Port Royal being refloated at Pearl Harbor in September 2009 after repairs from a grounding. The ship is back in the shipyard because of a new series of cracks in its superstructure.


Cracks plague Ticonderoga-class cruisers
By Christopher P. Cavas - Staff writer
Posted : Thursday Dec 9, 2010 21:44:09 EST

Barely a year after the Navy spent $40 million to fix the cruiser Port Royal after an embarrassing grounding, the ship is again out of action, back in a shipyard at Pearl Harbor, Hawaii. But this time it’s not a damaged hull that’s the problem. Rather, it’s an issue that is plaguing all 22 cruisers in service: cracks in the aluminum superstructure.
Refresh | +8 Recommendations Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
xor Donating Member (180 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 08:15 AM
Response to Original message
1. I read that as the drug at first... Not sure which would be worse..
Anyway, the companies who designed and built these ships should be held liable for this... Instead, I'm sure they'll get some nice contracts to fix their poor design. No doubt shit happens, but when shit happens, the people who caused the shit should be the ones o clean it up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Ichingcarpenter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 08:50 AM
Response to Reply #1
4. Just like any Automotive Recall
is handled.

It should cost the contractors not the taxpayers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Angleae Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 06:17 PM
Response to Reply #4
13. Just how many 16 year old cars are recalled by the manufacturer?
That's how old the newest Ticonderoga is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Ichingcarpenter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 04:20 PM
Response to Reply #13
15. 16 new ships the welding doesn't work
You are now my friend.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
xchrom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 08:26 AM
Response to Original message
2. The Incompetent Age. Nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DainBramaged Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 08:42 AM
Response to Original message
3. Were the plates outsourced????
Great quality control. Where did they get the ingots from, 'pure' recycled Pepsi cans?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 09:00 AM
Response to Reply #3
6. US shipyards have to us US-produced materials
for DoD shipbuilding contracts. They may have been "outsourced" in the sense that a US contractor fabricated the plates rather than the shipyard itself.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
madrchsod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 08:52 AM
Response to Original message
5. no problem! just buy a few drums of....


this will fix the problem in no time at all!


did anyone tell the navy you can`t weld aluminum and that it is prone to cracking?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 09:06 AM
Response to Reply #5
7. Loctite has a naval adhesive
That stuff will bond to anything, including a bosuns mate's hand...
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
hootinholler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 09:15 AM
Response to Reply #5
8. Actually you can weld aluminum
It's just very tricky and involves flooding the weld with gasses while hot. An yes, it can be prone to fatigue cracking under vibration.

J-B has some great products though :thumbsup: I like JB-80 "twice as good as 40" lol.

-Hoot
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
madrchsod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 04:01 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. what the hell was i thinking!
i worked right next to a aluminum tanker assembly line and put sub assemblies on them. dam i`m getting old!
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Kaleva Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 04:07 PM
Response to Original message
10. Nothing unusual. Same problem with the OHP class FFG. Navy years ago went back to steel .
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Bigmack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 04:13 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. The only thing I heard about the steel..
replacement superstructures make them heavier topside. With the lighter, stronger powerplants installed, that weight topside is dangerous.

What do you know specifically about that problem?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Kaleva Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 04:25 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. Well, you can't replace an aluminum superstructure with a steel one.
One reason you mentioned and the other is that the cost would be so great, might as well build a new ship. This will be an on going problem with the Ticos and OHPs until they are retired. The newer Burke class DDG has a steel superstructure.

On the USS Clifton Sprague FFG-16, I well remember the cracks in the bulkheads of the Stir Equipment Room whic contained part of the MK 92 FCS that I worked on was located. The shipyard had to weld reinforcing plates over the crack.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
haele Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-10-10 07:24 PM
Response to Original message
14. It's the superstructure design that does this.
Since 1990, cracks in the superstructure at the module welds has always been a problem. The Aegis cruisers ended up top-heavy due to support the implanted design of the radars, far more so than the average Naval ship. Thus, a lot of aluminum in the ship to keep the weight down to a manageable tonnage for the ship's size. Large constructs of aluminum closer to the waterline or set in the lower area of the superstructures (helo deck, launcher decks, etc) that would normally be steel in ships of that size will weather, turn brittle, and crack much quicker than steel does, and is far less forgiving when it comes to repairing it.
A crack in a steel deck will weld repair to the same strength and wear-ability as the original build, no matter what age or condition the surrounding steel is. Aluminum - well, in my experience with dealing in external foundations, most times if you're repairing a section, you have to take out a whole section and figure out where to weld to the old aluminum and hope to hell that the older section hasn't weathered it's way out of the original grade and the newer plate is an exact grade match to the older plate was - no matter what the yard told you the grade of the plate was, there's always a risk of contaminated or mis-graded aluminum. It's not so bad when you're dealing with lots that are only five years apart or so, but a ten - twelve year difference?
And you also hope that your marine welder knows his/her stuff and the inspector knows what they are doing with the test equipment.
Aluminum sucks to work with when you're dealing with an older vessel. Our crew ended up waiting out three different re-build efforts to replace an interior aluminum water-tight door/hatch frame after a firemain break flooded out an electronics space we were doing an installation in. The 20 year old aluminum just wouldn't support the new welds, and they ended up replacing 25 ft of bulkhead and all the fittings to ensure that the normal flexing of the ship at sea wouldn't crack either the hatch or the bulkhead.

Doesn't surprise me one bit. Aluminum weathers, crystallizes and cracks.

Haele

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
L0oniX Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 04:32 PM
Response to Original message
16. Since they started drug testing everything has gone to hell.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Jan 03rd 2025, 04:41 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC