Table Of Content1
NPS-ME-94-004 MO:
SCHOOL
NAVALPOSTGRADUATE
Monterey, California
LARGECAPACITYMISSILE CARRIER(CMX)
by
C.N.ptlvano
J.M. Berner
J.M.Bradley
K.A. Torsiello
D.T. Hooker
C.F.Merrill
December 1993
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited
Prepared for: Naval Sea Systems Command
Ship Design & System Engineering Group
Hwy
2351 Jeff Davis
Arlington, VA 20362-5101
FedDocs
D 208. 1U/2
NPS-ME-94-004
-44-OXf
NAVAL POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL
MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA
USN
Rear Admiral T. A. Mercer, Harrison Shull
Superintendent Provost
The report was prepared as an integral part ofthe Total Ship Systems Engineering
program educational process. Externally provided funds were not used. Reproduction of all
or part of this report is authorized.
This report was prepared by:
IRITY CLASSIFICATION OF THiS PAGE PUPLP' KNOX LIDRAT1Y
REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE NAVALPl OSTGRADUATE SCHOO
REPORT SECURITY CLASSIFICATION lb RESTRICTIVE MARKINGS MUNTERFf CA 93S40- 1 1
UNCLASSIFIED
.ECURITY CLASSIFICATION AUTHORITY 3 DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY OF REPORT
Approved for Public Release;
DECLASSIFICATION/DOWNGRADING SCHEDULE distribution unlimited
iRFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER(S) 5 MONITORING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER(S)
NPS-ME-94-004
MAME OF PERFORMING ORGANIZATION 6b OFFICE SYMBOL 7a NAME OF MONITORING ORGANIZATION
NAVAL POSTGRADUATE (If applicable) SHIP DESIGN & SYS. ENG. GROUP (03D)
SCHOOL ME NAVAL SEA SYSTEMS COMMAND
ADDRESS (City, State, and ZIPCode) 7b. ADDRESS(City. State, and ZIPCode)
2351 JEFF DAVIS JWY
MONTEREY, CA 93943-5000
ARLINGTON, VA 20362-5101
(NAME OF FUNDING/SPONSORING 8b OFFICE SYMBOL 9 PROCUREMENT INSTRUMENT IDENTIFICATION NUMBER
ORGANIZATION (if applicable)
ADDRESS(City. State, and ZIPCode) 10 SOURCE OF FUNDING NUMBERS
PROGRAM PROJECT TASK WORK UNIT
ELEMENT NO NO NO ACCESSION NO
TITLE (Include Security Classification)
LARGE CAPACITY MISSILE CARRIER (CMX)
PERSONAL AUTHOR(S) C.F.
.N. CALVANO, J.M. BERNER, J.M. BRADLEY, K.A. TORSIELLO, D.T. HOOKER. MERRILL
TYPE OF REPORT 13b TIME COVERED 14 DATE OF REPORT (Year, Month, Day) 15 PAGE COUNT
TECHNICAL erom 7/93 to 12/93 12/20/93 328
SUPPLEMENTARY NOTATION
COSATI CODES 18 SUBJECT TERMS (Continue on reverse if necessary and identify by block number)
FIELD GROUP SUB-GROUP SHIP DESIGN, SURVIVABILITY, WARSHIP, COOPERATIVE
ENGAGEMENT, STRIKE WARFARE
ABSTRACT (Continue on reverse if necessary and identify by block number)
A systems engineering approach to the development of a radically different kind of surface
combatant ship is presented, followed by a preliminary design of the ship shown by the
analysis to be most effective. The requirement for the project was the development of a
ship which would provide a major increase in the missile firepower of a battlegroup. The
study conducts an analysis of four warfare scenarios and evaluates the effectivenes of
replacing some Aegis ships with the missile carrier (CMX) and examines the relative utility
of varying missile loads for the CMX. An alternative is chosen for further development and
is designed to the preliminary design level. Data and drawings are included.
DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY OF ABSTRACT 21. ABSTRACT SECURITY CLASSIFICATION
D
UNCLASSIFIED/UNLIMITED SAME AS RPT DTlC USERS
a NAME OF RESPONSIBLE INDIVIDUAL 22b TELEPHONE (Include AreaCode) nc OFFICE SYMBOL
CHARLES N. CALVANO, CODE ME/Ca (408) 656-2364 ME/Ca
)FORM 1473, 84mar 83 APRedition may be used untilexhausted SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE
Allother editions are obsolete «U.S. Govtmminl prlntlnjOfflet: IttC—COC-24.
CMX
The Large Capacity Missile Carrier,
This report documents a systems engineering and design capstone project undertaken
by students in the Total Ship Systems Engineering program at the Naval Postgraduate School.
The project was under the direction of Prof. C.N. Calvano. (The officer students who
comprised the design team were: CDR J. M. Berner; LCDR J.M. Bradley; LT K. A.
Torsiello, LT D. T. Hooker, LT C. F. Merrill, all USN.)
ABSTRACT
A tentative operational requirement is given to the development team, calling for analysis and
design of a ship (CMX) which acts as the launch platform for large numbers of anti-aircraft
and/or cruise missiles, but which does not carry the sophisticated systems required to
accurately direct those missiles. The envisioned requirement would have the subject ship
serve as a large magazine augmentation for other ships, permitting them to make use of the
CMX's missiles. The intent is to increase a battle group's overall effectiveness by increasing
its firepower, while decreasing its cost by reducing the number of sophisticated and expensive
Aegis control systems.
The report examines four warfare scenarios: land strike; amphibious assault (including theater
ballistic missile defense); an engagement against small surface combatants in littoral waters;
and a blue water AAW engagement. For each, the degree to which the substitution of CMXs
for Aegis ships would improve the effectiveness of a battle group is examined. It is included
CMX
that the benefits of the large number of additional missiles provided by the more than
offsets the lost capability of the reduced number of Aegis systems in the battle group. For
each of the first three scenarios, the report concludes that overall battle group effectiveness is
AAW
increased. For the blue water engagement, effectiveness is decreased if incoming raids
are of high density, but increased otherwise.
CMX
Upon completion of the scenario analysis, a combat system suite and architecture for the
is selected, including a self-defense (but not area defense) capability. Feasibility studies, based
on this "payload" proceed, examining propulsion plant options, features for survivability
enhancement and general naval architectural considerations. A hull geometry; stability,
flooding, structural and weight analysis is provided; ship arrangements are defined; a manning
analysis is presented and a cost analysis provided. Numerous examples of calculations,
summaries of data and drawings are included.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
INTRODUCTION
I 1
REQUIREMENTS PHASE
II 3
A TENTATIVE OPERATIONAL REQUIREMENT 4
1. Background Political/Military World View 4
2 Large Capacity Missile Carrier (CMX 2010) 5
B SCENARIO STUDY 7
Land Strike 9
1
2 Amphibious Assault 20
3. Blue Water Engagement 27
4. Small Surface Action Group Engagement 38
5. Summary 41
C OPERATIONAL REQUIREMENTS DOCUMENT (ORD) FOR LARGE
CAPACITY MISSILE CARRIER (CMX) 2010 43
1. General Description ofOperational Capability 43
2. Cooperative Engagement Capability (CEC)/Offboard Command Launch (OCL) 44
3. Threat 46
4. Shortcomings ofExisting Systems 46
5. Range ofCapabilities Desired 47
6. General Affordability Limits 48
7. Integrated Logistics Support 48
8. Infrastructure Support and Interoperability 49
.
Page
9. Force Structure 49
10. Other Considerations 49
D. REQUIRED OPERATIONAL CAPABILITIES (ROC) 50
1. Primary ROCs 50
2. Secondary ROCs 50
3. Primary Design Requirements 51
4. Secondary Design Requirements 51
III DESIGN PHILOSOPHY 55
A PRIORITY OF DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS 55
B JUSTIFICATION 56
1 High Priorities 56
2. "Next" Priorities 57
3. "Also" Priorities 58
IV. COMBAT SYSTEM DEFINITION 60
A COMBAT SYSTEM DESIGN PHILOSOPHY
61
B. TRADEOFF METHODOLOGY AND ELEMENT SELECTION 63
1. Detection Elements 65
2. Command, Control and Communications (C3) Elements 75
3. CEC/OCL Weapons Systems/Engagement Elements 79
Page
4. Self-Defense Weapons Systems/Engagement Elements 80
5. Aviation Assets 86
C. EVALUATION OF SELF-DEFENSE COMBAT SYSTEM 87
1. Threat Parameters 87
CMX
2. Combat System Parameters 89
3. Assumptions and Definitions 91
4. Threat Engagement Profiles 92
5. Threat Engagement Summary 96
D COMBAT SYSTEM DEFINITION SUMMARY 98
V. FEASIBILITY STUDIES 102
A DESIGN CONCEPTS CONSIDERED 104
1. Hull 104
2. Main Propulsion 105
3. Electrical Distribution 107
4. Auxiliaries 108
5. Materials 109
6. Steaming Requirements 109
B. ASSET MODELS 111
1. Models 112
2. Parameter Variations 115
in
Page
3. Model Outputs 116
C. TRADEOFF STUDY 120
1. Model Selection 120
2. Parameter Variations 124
D FINAL DESIGN CONCEPT 128
VI PRELIMINARY DESIGN 129
A GENERAL COMBAT SYSTEM ARCHITECTURE
131
1. Combat System Integration and Management 131
2. Combat System Diagrams 141
3 Functional Flow Diagrams 145
B HULL, MECHANICAL AND ELECTRICAL 158
1. Engineering System Integration and Management 158
2 Hull 159
3. Main Propulsion 160
4. Electrical Distribution System 164
5. Auxiliary Systems 168
6. Damage Control Systems 170
C SHIP SYSTEM INTEGRATION AND MANAGEMENT 171
D NAVAL ARCHITECTURE 174
1. Hull Geometry and Coefficients 174
IV
