A Notional Global Fleet Station Ship Concept Design

8/11/2019 A Notional Global Fleet Station Ship Concept Design

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/a-notional-global-fleet-station-ship-concept-design 1/12

ASNE DAY 2009: GLOBAL FLEET STATION: CHARACTERISTICS OF A DEDICATED CONCEPT SHIP DESIGN

1

GLOBAL FLEET STATION: CHARACTERISTICS OF A DEDICATED CONCEPT SHIP

DESIGN

C A Dicks and S M Howard, Ministry of Defence, UK, and C G Kennell, Naval Surface Warfare Center, USA

SUMMARY

The Global Fleet Station (GFS) mission has emerging importance within United States Navy future planning. Themission fosters positive relationships with partner nations by providing operational training, support and humanitarian

aid. This paper presents a Naval Surface Warfare Center Carderock Division - Center for Innovation in Ship Design

concept for a notional GFS station ship. The concept study was used to investigate notional operational requirements.

Important insights into the feasibility of the notional requirements were gained. More importantly, the design i mpacts

of the notional requirements were revealed.

The 6405 tonne design has a modular, re-configurable loading plan based around ISO TEUs, a well deck and a hangar.

This flexible configuration provides one ship which is capable of completing the variety of missions associated with

GFS. The monohull is designed to merchant standards and uses COTS equipment.

NOMENCLATURE

CISD Center for Innovation in Ship Design

COTS Commercial off the Shelf (equipment)

GFS Global Fleet StationHMMWV High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicle (“HUMVEE”)

ISO International Standards Organization

MEG Military Effective ness Grou p

NSWC CD Naval Surface Warfare Center, Carderock Division

NAVSEA Naval Sea Systems Command

SOLAS Safety of Life at Sea (Convention)

SSCS Ship Space Classification System

SWBS Ship Weight Breakdown Structure

TEU Twenty Foot Equivalent Unit ISO Container

USCG Unite d State s Coastguard

USN United States Navy

INTRODUCTION

This paper introduces a conceptual design for a specifically designed Global Fleet Station “Station Ship”. While nocurrent US Navy plans call for the construction of dedicated vessels to undertake the GFS mission, a mission specific

concept design was developed to allow the Military Effectiveness Group of NSWC CD to further develop the proposed

operational requirements. It is intended to be used in future development of the GFS operational concept and not as an

indication of any future naval construction program.

Global Fleet Station “…is a highly visible , positively engaged, persistent sea base of operations from which to interact

with partner nation military and civilian populations and the global maritime community" (Ref. 1). The concept can be

broken down into two primary mission profiles; training / support and humanitarian aid.




2

While GFS deployments are high priorities within the US Navy, GFS is one of many operational concepts competing

for resources in the wider US Navy program. A fundamental tenet of all work detailed in this paper is that resources for

GFS will only be available if it is not to the detriment of the US Navy’s other programs. Hence all design work detailed

here seeks to minimize cost, as well as ensuring cost effectiveness. The Station Ship is intended to be sufficiently low

cost and numerous to provide a dedicated GFS capability, freeing other, more capable, vessels to fulfill roles with

greater military risk. As such, the design is intended to use commercial construction approaches and is designed to meet

merchant ship rules. As the design will not operate in high threat environments, it does not require shock resistance,

signature reduction or other specific survivability design features.The design reported here is based on a hybrid container ship / landing ship dock. The design displaces 6,405 tonnes

with a shallow draft allowing operations close to shore and within austere harbors. The design includes a well deck,

helicopter landing pad, hangar and two large flexible holds which are serviced by two onboard cranes. The cargo

capability is flexible and based on multiples of ISO TEU containers. While the vessel has a full range of safety related

command and control features, the overall command and control facilities are at the low end to reduce cost. This isconsistent with the premise that the GFS ship will usually be operating independently and will not have a need for much

command / control coordination with other Navy ships..

THE GLOBAL FLEET STATION CONCEPT

AN INTRODUCTION TO GLOBAL FLEET STATION

GFS missions are undertaken throughout the developing world in areas where partner nations of the USA are facing

instability and deprivation, for example, the Gulf of Guinea. The intention is to support the development and security of the partner nation, thus indirectly supporting US foreign and defense policy. The two main GFS missions are training /

support, and humanitarian aid.

The training / support mission aims to provide assistance to a partner nation’s maritime force in the operation and

support of small naval craft. A key benefit of this is the ability to enable the partner’s maritime force to adequately

maintain its own equipment and be operationally effective, thus allowing the unique capabilities of the wider

USN/USCG to concentrate on major operations requiring the most capable ships.

In many cases, the training and support will be in Riverine, Green Water or Littoral operations undertaken by the

partner nation in patrol craft and ships. As a result, it is considered that the correct method of achieving this is to f ocus

extensively on training and development of the partner’s military forces ability to operate its own forces. In addition the

USN/USCG help partner maritime forces to more effectively accomplish their missions. Putting that training into

practice could lead to several types of operation including internal defense, anti-pirac y, protection of offshore economic

assets and peacekeeping.

When considering how to improve the operation and support skills of a partner nation, several options are feasible, butexperience has shown that a combination of practical training in a joint operating context with both the partner nation’s

craft and USN craft works best. Although some classroom based elements are necessary there is general agreement that

“on the job training” works better than strictly classroom training. Onboard training using mixed crews of US and

partner nation personnel is considered very effective.

The GFS Humanitarian Aid mission is based on the concept of aiding civilians in partner nations: government t o

government, people-to- people. It is the traditional “hearts & minds” approach with the provision of medical,

infrastructure and educational benefits to a local populace by the US Navy, other government agencies and non-

governmental organizations; for example by running vaccination clinics, digging wells, and building schools. The GFS

Humanitarian Aid mission is primarily for sustained humanitarian support including provision of medical facilities,

supply logistics, training of partner nation personnel, organizational headquarters facilities, transportation and

consequence management facilities.

The complementary “Disaster Relief” element (for example the response to the 2004 Indian Ocean Tsunami) is not

considered here as a fundamental part of the GFS mission due to the implications it has on the speed of response of theship, the number of ships required to provide effective response across the globe, and the impact of these on size,

complexity and total program cost. It is considered that provision of Disaster Relief will remain a pan-Navy task

undertaken by the diversion of the most capable ship in the right region at the right time to support disaster relief.

While the specifics of the GFS missions differ, there are several common elements between the Training/Support and

Humanitarian missions that imply that a single, flexible ship could undertake both roles. The first of these is persistent

presence. When considering the Training / Support mission, experience has shown that long stays permit relationship

building which leads to trust and, in turn, to more effective training and mentoring. In addition, these long-term

relationships lead to increased cooperation and effectiveness.




3

“[M.A.Thomas] observed a direct correlation between the number of U.S. visits to Thailand and the quality of

interaction between U.S. and Thai military personnel” (Ref 2).

Humanitarian Assistance benefits from extended duration stays, measured in weeks and months, to avoid superficial

improvements to deep rooted problems.

“We have not been in one place long enough and our pediatrician has had to turn down cases” (Ref. 3)

Taken as a whole, these suggest that persistence is the key to building relationships and trust and that a persistent

presence is a key requirement of platforms used to support GFS. Trust is also i ncreased by close c o-operation on boarda ship.

GFS missions can be undertaken by many of the operational ships within the US Navy. These ships are not GFS

specific designs. While having the significant advantage of being both available and capable of meeting many of the

GFS requirements, they have been designed primarily for different roles and possess characteristics that may make

them impractical, unavailable or not cost effective for routine use as GFS ships. Some of the characteristics that are

present in these ships are unnecessary or not beneficial, or add significantly to the cost of undertaking the GFS

operation are shown below:

Large size, especially draft, preventing access to austere ports or shallow water and introducing complex logistics

arrangements for ship to shore transport.

Higher operating cost.

Larger ship’s complement, adding to operating cost.

Higher maximum speed impacting logistics requirements and cost.

Military mission capability (Complex, sensitive, but irrelevant to the GFS mission) Readiness profiles, training requirements, and primary tasking that prevent repeated deployment for long periods

on a GFS mission.

Partial provision of GFS mission requirements; for example, provision of Humanitarian Aid, but without a Training

/Support capability.

As a result, MEG / CISD have developed a dedicated “Station Ship” meeting notional GFS requirements to operate in

conjunction with US and partner nation green and brown water craft. The Station Ship will be detailed in the

subsequent sections of this paper.

AN INITIAL SET OF “STATION SHIP” REQUIREMENTS

To develop the Station Ship concept, all the requirements that, to date, have been partially or fully met by using non-

dedicated ships were reconsidered. This section summarizes the derived requirements for the Station Ship. The

overarching principle was that a dedicated “GFS Station Ship” must efficiently support GFS tasks including a myriad of

subsidiary tasks without impacting wider US Navy acquisition programs. The key objective was that the ship must berendered affordable and adaptable. This was accomplished by excluding design features solely required for high

intensity military operations and focusing on features required to support a partner nation of limited means. The key

characteristics of the Station Ship are noted (Table 1) with additional requirements for each of the two main operationalroles (Table 2). The requirement for the GFS station ship to complete the missions resulted in the development of a

unified set of requirements for the ship design (Table 3).

Table 1 Key Characteristics of a GFS Station Ship

Key Requirement Design Implication

Inexpensive Many naval standards and features are not affordable, to allow the provision of

sufficient hulls throughout the 4-5 likely GFS locations.

Ship Speed and Range Ship speed is limited to reduce cost. Ship endurance to be sufficient to allow

persistent presence requirements to be met.

Multi-Mission Capability /

Flexibility

The ship will have to perform in several roles, switching between

training/support and humanitarian roles quickly and easily.

Transport and service other

watercraft

Provide mother ship capabilities for both US and partner nation’s small boats.

Provide engineering support and training capabilities for the boats and their

crews.

Combat System, Command and

Control System

Systems should be limited to safe operation / self defense / force protection

measures only.




4

To address the high level of versatility required in the GFS requirements, a modular cargo system is used in this design.

This permits a basic ship to be loaded with mission specific packages the size of one or more TEUs. The basic ISO

TEU container can be designed for a wide variety of configurations and provide many different capabilities. For

example, there are COTS accommodation blocks and a variety of medical facilities based on multiples of TEUs. The

addition of mission specific TEUs allows the basic ship to be transformed into a ship capable of performing multiple

missions. .

Training / Support Humanitarian Aid

Classroom facilities and equipment training spaces

for equipment maintenance and operation

Ship must be capable of operating in varying roles carrying

various types/amounts of cargo (e.g. construction equipment,

hospital modules).

Ship characteristics should permit operations by

small boats.

Ship dimensions and maneuverability should allow access to

austere ports and shallow water.

Provide facilities for stowage, operations and

maintenance of Partner and US owned small boats

A sufficiently large quantity and variety of stores and

equipment for different humanitarian aid scenarios.

Accommodation for ship’s crew, training

detachment and Partner Nation trainees.

Accommodation for ship's crew and additional specialist

personnel.

Command and control a flotilla of small boats

during training and operations.

Command and control for humanitarian aid operations.

Capability for safe management of small arms and

force protection weapons.

Generation, stowage and provision of humanitarian aid

supplies (e.g. fresh water supply, shore side electricity).

Table 2 Mission Specific GFS Station Ship Key Requirements

Particular Requirements Particular Requirements

Beam (m) < 32 Permanent Crew 60 persons

Loaded Draft (m) < 4.5 Mission Crew 35 persons +1 VIP

Cruising Speed

(knots) 15 Segregation

Separate accommodation areas

for mission and permanent crew

Max Speed (knots) 18 Accommodations

Standard US Navy

Range @ 15 Knots

(nm) 6,000 Water Generation 43 tonnes per day

Supply Endurance

(days) 30+

Water Storage (tonnes)

(for humanitarian aid) 207

Cargo (TEUs) 50 Power Offload (MW)

(for shore supply) 3

Vehicles Specified wheeled

military vehicles Guns 360 degree force protection

Cranage Lift (tonnes) 25 Aviation 1 x SH-60 or 2 x UAVs

Boats 2 Spec Ops Mk V or

smaller Classificati on Merchant Ship

Table 3 - Table of Notional Design Requirements for a GFS Station Ship

EVOLUTION OF THE SHIP CONCEPT

Four different ship types were identified, each exhibiting some, but not all, of the features required from the Station

Ship. The four ship types were: US Coast Guard Cutter, Handymax sized container ship, Heavy Lift Ship and Landing

Platform Dock. Elements of all four types were included in three initial concept designs that were considered further.

The ship was designed using an iterative weight and volume balancing synthesis spreadsheet. Simultaneously a CAD

model of the architectural arrangements of the vessel was generated to integrate the architectural synthesis of the design

with the development of gross characteristics. Key architectural features of the design such as the cargo hold

arrangements, weather deck arrangements, dock and helo deck played a substantial role in sizing the gross dimensions

of the ship. The graphic evolution of the design through the iterations is shown below. The first concept (Concept 1a,




5

Figure 1) featured a traditional well deck with cargo bays and helo deck amidships. Concept 1b (Figure 2) featured a

significantly more radical arrangement with a submersible deck f or boat operations and two cargo sections. This

concept also included a bow helo deck. The bow helo deck was introduced to minimize vessel length given that

volume, beam and draught were being driven by other requirements, notably the requirement for the boat facilities and

the need for shallow water operations. Concept 1c (Figure 3) maintained this feature while investigating a vessel

concept without a well deck and using davits for boat operations. The most promising features of these three concept

designs were integrated and developed further into the final Station Ship concept design.

Figure 1 Concept Design 1a Figure 2 Concept Design 1b Figure 3 Concept Design 1c

A GLOBAL FLEET STATION “STATION SHIP” CONCEPT

DESIGN OVERVIEW

The final ship concept is a hybrid container ship / landing ship design, classified under Merchant Ship Class rules with

a few naval enhancements. The ship has a small well deck, helicopter landing pad and hangar. In addition, it has twolarge flexible container or vehicle holds with removable hatches. These are serviced by two cranes located on the port

side of the ship. Additional TEUs or other cargo can be carried on the removable hatches. The cargo capacity is flexible

and capable of carrying a wide range of solid cargo limited only by overall size and weight.

Particular Value

Le ngth B etween Perpendicu lars (m) 1 40

Beam (m) 17.38

Draft (m) 4.5

Hull Depth (m) 11.9

Loaded Displacement (tonnes) 6,405

Li gh ts hip Disp lacement (tonnes ) 4,797

Design Speed (knots) 15

Max Speed (knots) 18

Range @ 15 knots (nm) 6,000

Engine Type (Diesels) 2 x 12V26 Wartsila Diesels

(3,900 kW)

Azimuth Pods 4 x ABB compact pods, size 3

Aircraft 1 x H-60 Helicopter +

2 x Fire Scout UAVs

Well Deck Dimensions (m) 14.7 X 25

Armament 5 x Stabilized Gun Mounts

Ship Crew 60

Mission Complement 35 + 1 VIP

Transient Austere Complement 83

Table 4 - Principal Particulars for GFS Station ShipThe selection of standards for the vessel was deemed important to avoid mission creep from the simple and inexpensive

vessel originally envisaged to a more capable Landing Platform Dock. Key weight scaling algorithms were derived

from merchant ship based sources, although the vast majority of weight and scaling algorithms are based on LPD-17

derived data for function such as outfit and auxiliaries.

The ship will not be required to operate in high threat environments and hence does not require shock or signature

reduction features. Armament is limited to 5 small caliber stabilized gun mounts for force protection in addition to the

equipment carried by the organic boats and the embarked military force. A two compartment merchant ship stability

standard is intended. Equipment fitted to the vessel is to be from commercial off the shelf sources, without recourse to

development programs.




6

A full electric propulsion system was selected because it provides flexibility to generate power for propulsion use, hotel

services or for shore supply. A fully electric ship also allows flexibility in the placement of main propulsion machinery.

This allowed the placement of the engines forward in the ship without a large shaft weight penalty and precluding

possible architectural conflicts between the propulsion arrangements, cargo spaces and well deck.

Four compact pods were selected as representative equipment fits and fitted in two contra-rotating pairs of pods, with

steerable aft pods. Small rudders were also placed aft of the propeller to provide the ability to make small alterations to

the heading while underway without rotating the pods. The selection of podded propulsors was driven primarily by the

draft requirement and the power needed to propel the ship. The pod height from blade tip to hull was constrained to lessthan 4m. Two 12V26 Wartsila diesel generators with a combined power of 7.8MW were selected as the prime movers.

The propulsion required is 5 MW (18 kts). The ship service power was estimated at 1.5MW. The maximum trial speed

is predicted to be 19 knots.

Figure 4 - GFS Station Ship Concept

WEIGHT & SPACE ESTIMATES

The weight and space estimates were developed using the US Navy’s SWBS and SSCS systems. The largest weight andspace elements were calculated from first principles or algorithms derived from previous ship data, notably the LPD-17

class. One digit weight summaries for the GFS Station Ship are detailed in Table 5, with an area summary at Table 6.

380 tonnes of margins (7.8 % of lightship) have been distributed among lightship groups, with the margin for each

lightship weight group varying between 5 and 10% depending on the level of confidence in the individual estimates.

MISSION SYSTEMS, EQUIPMENT AND CAPABILITIES

A well deck and associated ballast system was added to the design to allow for the recovery and stowage of a variety of

US and partner nation patrol craft and landing craft. The largest ships that can be accommodated are a pair of Special

Operations Craft Mk V boats. For humanitarian operations, landing craft (based on the LCM 6 footprint) can be carried

to provide logistics delivery capability to the shore. Access to the well deck from the aft internal cargo hold allows

wheeled vehicles or cargo to be stowed and shipped to shore.

Helicopter operations for this ship are not intended to be undertaken in significant seas with forward speed. The final

design shows a deck arrangement with a forward helicopter deck. This arrangement was selected to minimize length by

avoiding spatial conflicts with the open well deck, hatches and container stowage cranes at the stern. During the






8

Humanitarian Aid Mission

(Medical Support sub-variant)

Training and Support Mission

(Boat Operations and Auxiliary Troop Lift sub-variants)

Vehicles N/A N/A 10 x Truck

15 x HMMWV

Accessible TEUs 60 36 5

Inaccessible TEUs 0 8 40Helicopters 1 x SH - 60

2 x Fire Scout UAV

1 x SH - 60

2 x Fire Scout UAV

1 x SH - 60

2 x Fire Scout UAV

Boats 2 x LCM 6 sized landing craft 4 x Spec Ops Mk 5 1 x Spec Ops Mk 51 x LCM 6 sized landing craft

Other Aircraft N/A N/A 1 x Seaplane

Mission Personnel 60 x Ships Crew, 108 x Patients

93 x Medical Staff or NonGovernmental Staff

60 x Ships Crew, 35 x Training

Staff, 83 x Trainees

60 x Ships Crew, 35 x Full

83 x Austere, 32 x TEU basedAccommodation

Table 7 – Representative Humanitarian Aid and Training / Support Mission Payloads

Particular Value

Number of container holds 2

Internal capacity of Hold 1 40 ISO TEU Containers

Internal capacity of Hold 2 40 ISO TEU Containers or 5 x 24.3m vehicle lanes

Above Hold 1 deck capacity (Hatches 1, 2) 40 ISO TEU Containers or 5 x 24.3 vehicle lanes

Above Hold 2 deck capacity (Hatches 3,4) 20 ISO TEU Containers or 5 x 24.3m vehicle lanes

Max total mass of all cargo (tonnes) 728

Table 8 - Cargo Hold Dimensions and Capacities

OPERATIONAL LOADING

The assumed loading configurations for the two principle GFS missions, Training / Support (with Boat Operations and

Auxiliary Troop lift sub-variants) and Humanitarian Aid are shown in Table 7. The flexible loading arrangement is

based primarily on ISO TEUs but can carry solid cargo within weight and space limits. The cargo area and maximum

cargo weight restrictions are shown in Table 8. The cargo holds have a combined area of 766m2

and the cargo hatches

have a combined area of 674m2. The cargo hold and hatches can be loaded with combinations of vehicles, containers or

solid stores. Only the aft cargo hold can organically offload vehicles at sea. There are two types of container stowage

location, accessible and inaccessible. Accessible TEUs contain cargo or equipment that can be fully accessed and usedat sea. Inaccessible TEUs contain cargo which is purely for transportation to a port for offload. The arrangements of the

vessel with an indicative load of cargo, boats and vehicles are presented at Figure 6 and Figure 7.

HUMANITARIAN AID OPERATIONS LOADING

A medical treatment ship was selected as the representative Humanitarian Aid mission. The loading arrangement was

scaled from the hospital ship arrangement of Reference. 4. The GFS Station Ship has 60 accessible container locations

and these were assigned to roles to give a capability of dealing with 108 patients. The Emergency and Intensive Care

Units were placed on the weatherdeck as short a distance from the helicopter deck as possible. The wards were placed

in the holds to give greater environmental protection.

TRAINING / SUPPORT OPERATIONS LOADINGS

Profile views of two different Training/Support missions are shown in Figure 9 and Figure 10. Figure 9 shows the ship

equipped to support boat operations while Figure 10 illustrates its potential to deploy troops. It is envisaged that the

mission would require an increased number of patrol boats. In addition to the two patrol boats berthed in the well deck,

two additional patrol boats are stowed on the weather deck. This loading condition limits the mass of the patrol boats tothe maximum lifting capacity of the cranes which, at half span, is 50 tonnes. 36 accessible ISO containers are used to

store engineering supplies, and provide workshop and support capabilities.

In the Auxiliary Troop Lift sub mission the ship is capable of accommodating a light infantry company consisting of

150 men and associated equipment. To berth a company, 32 troops would be accommodated in TEU accommodation

modules in addition to the 83 troops in the internal austere accommodation and 35 in the multi purpose space. The

vehicle requirement for a company can vary, but a representative loading of ten 7 ton trucks and 15 HMMWVs was

assumed. With this payload, the remaining TEU bays have been designated for operational equipment and supplies

stowage.




9

Figure 6 GFS Station Ship General Arrangement (Upper Decks & Superstructure)




10

Figure 7 GFS Station Ship General Arrangement (Lower Decks)




11

Figure 8 - Humanitarian Aid Ship Layout

Figure 9 - Training/Support Layout (Boat Operations Sub Variant)

Figure 10 - Training/Support Layout (Auxiliary Troop Lift Sub Variant)

CONCLUSIONS

The GFS mission has developed into an important part of the US Navy’s plans to foster goodwill and support partner

nations. The GFS concept currently uses US Navy ships in a role they were not designed for. A dedicated GFS Station

Ship design was developed to give insight into the requirements and characteristics of a dedicated GFS vessel, to aid the

development of the operational requirement.

The Station Ship developed and detailed in this paper is a 6,405 tonne ship with a 140m length. It has a shallow draft

for austere port access. The ship has a well deck and cargo decks capable of carrying many different combinations of

small boats, vehicles and cargo. The cargo is predominantly in the form of ISO container sized modules used to supply

facilities for hospitals, workshops, maintenance and training as well as general cargo stowage. The ship also has multi-

mission spaces that can provide generic office, accommodation and training spaces for several different mission

profiles.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSAll views expressed in this paper are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the UK Ministry of Defence or

the US Department of the Navy. CISD is jointly sponsored by ONR and Naval Sea Systems Command and this support

is gratefully acknowledged.

The authors wish to acknowledge the support of the leaders of the NAVSEA 05D-sponsored study that led to this

project (Mark A. Campbell and John H. Krempasky) and the exchange program funding provided by the UK MOD’s

Director Equipment Capability (Expeditionary Logistics & Support) and the Defense Engineering & Science Group.




12

REFERENCES

1. “Global Fleet Station Concept of Operations”, US Fleet Forces Command, 10 March 2008.

2. “Enlisting Madison Avenue The Marketing Approach to Earning Popular Support in Theaters of Operation”, T. C.

Helmus, C. P. Russell, W. Glenn RAND Corporation, 2007.

3. Quote from Dr. N. Norris, aboard USNS Comfort, Financial Times, 8 July 2007.

AUTHORS BIOGRAPHY

Dr Chris Dicks is the UK Ministry of Defence exchange Naval Architect at the Center for Innovation in Ship Design,

Naval Surface Warfare Center Carderock Division, Carderock, Maryland, USA. He supports US Navy research, design

and development activities in the areas of high speed sealift and seabasing. Prior to this he was Head of Naval

Architecture for the Royal Navy’s current Aircraft Carriers, Amphibious Assault Ships and Destroyers.

Mr Simon “Matt” Howard was a Graduate Naval Architect on the Ministry of Defence’s Defence Engineering and

Science Group training scheme. Between August 2007 and February 2008 he undertook a training placement at CISD

and focused on the development of the GFS “Station Ship” concept. In December 2008, Matt graduated from the

training scheme and is currently a Naval Architect in MOD’s Afloat Support project team.

Dr Colen Kennell is a Naval Architect at the Center for Innovation in Ship Design, Naval Surface Warfare Center

Carderock Division. He supports development of advanced ship and seabasing concepts.

Documents

A Notional Global Fleet Station Ship Concept Design