|
|
Post by User Unavailable on Dec 19, 2013 4:32:12 GMT
The energy used for washing wouldn't just include using the machines, but also in filtering/treating the water* to get rid of the salt and heating it. You might also end up expending more energy further treating the soiled water - unless you just dump it, which could have environmental problems (something the US Navy is interested in, if only for PR reasons**). Plus you probably end up having to use even more energy drying clothing - you can't exactly hang it out to dry in a force 10 gale. I wasn't implying that normal washing would not be needed. I somehow doubt that personal would like the idea of their dress uniforms being shredded - and I'd suspect that ship-manufactured cloth would be of fairly low quality anyway. Or at least not suitable for the best uniforms. Rather that it might allow for jumpsuits and work clothing to be made on board as needed, this might save space and also reduce the amount of cleaning solutions needed. It would also be idea for situations where you are suddenly trying to support a larger than normal number of people at short notice. If nothing else it would remove the number of supplies you have to carry on the off chance you might suddenly be asked to transport an army or special forces unit in addition to the normal crew complement. It also, as I noted, would allow a ship to provide clothing, blankets, some types of medical supplies and shelter to disaster areas as soon as it can get into range and without having to worry about resupplying first. Thinking logically here, but if a ship has machinery capable of creating prefabricated structures then, as long as that equipment is working, it should be capable of making items that can be used to repair the ship well enough to get it back to port under its own power. Consider that if you can make a wall, you could use the same equipment to make a panel to cover a hole in the hull. Heck, you could probably create an emergency rudder and maybe even a propeller if you had to. This wouldn't fully repair a ship, but could well allow it to get back to a repair facility without having to dispatch additional units to help out. Or buy enough time for better solutions and repairs to be made. If nothing else it gives the crew more options as to how to deal with a lot of problems, and probably save a lot of money overall. (*Thinking on this. If the equipment is capable of using organic matter for its construction materials then it is possible that a ship at sea might be able to filter and use algae and plankton to replenish its supplies to some degree.) (**Not that I'm implying that is the only reason the Navy is interested in environmental issues - in many cases, such as dumping fuel from carrier aircraft as they come into land, it also makes economical sense.) I understand what you're saying, though don't agree. For redundancy sake, ships would be required to carry not only what they are carrying now, but also the raw materials to feed the printers. Even if you gather resources from the sea, you're going to have to carry the needed resources, should the gathering equipment fail and you're going to have to have materials on hand to function effectively should the printing system system fail. The replacing of a ships propellor sounds nice, but today's ships are not single propellor vessels and the likely hood of all the props being knocked out of commission is slim, short of a complete power plant failure, at which point the number of props doesn't matter and you're getting towed. Besides, ships don't have the cranes and derricks needed to remove and replace props. For example the props on the John C Stennis weigh 61,000 pounds (30.5 tons) each, that's not something a few men in scuba gear change out, while at sea.  |
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Dec 22, 2013 10:50:05 GMT
Just to note, I was asked to transport a ships propeller.
BIG Bronze thing heavily protected with wooden transport protectors on each leading edge....
It was "STGO", as in, over-weight for a normal 44ton gross heavy goods.
However...
The move now is into "Pods".
The ships propeller is replaced by several pods that can steer themselves to give thrust in any direction....
Saves on Tug boats at ports, although, it does kinda require deep water ports, as these things stick out a bit underneath.
Although on that, they are looking at retractable ones, on the idea of something like the landing gear on aircraft being retracted in flight, the pods retract in port to be replaced by low power thrusters?...
I have seen one of the pods close up in transport....
Looks like the business end of a wind farm generator without the blades.
|
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Dec 23, 2013 1:19:40 GMT
Just to note, I was asked to transport a ships propeller. BIG Bronze thing heavily protected with wooden transport protectors on each leading edge.... It was "STGO", as in, over-weight for a normal 44ton gross heavy goods. However... The move now is into "Pods". The ships propeller is replaced by several pods that can steer themselves to give thrust in any direction.... Saves on Tug boats at ports, although, it does kinda require deep water ports, as these things stick out a bit underneath. Although on that, they are looking at retractable ones, on the idea of something like the landing gear on aircraft being retracted in flight, the pods retract in port to be replaced by low power thrusters?... I have seen one of the pods close up in transport.... Looks like the business end of a wind farm generator without the blades. here, our newer tugs have hypoid drives. kind of a cross between an eggbeater and a paddle wheel. it's a complicated mechanism, but the result is it can deliver 100% thrust in any direction and change directions almost instantly - and doesn't stick down as far as a propeller. |
|
|
|
Post by wvengineer on Jan 22, 2014 23:55:37 GMT
Looks like the Navy is experimenting with the 3d concrete printing idea. I It will be interesting to see how it turns out.
|
|
|
|
Post by ponytail61 on Apr 4, 2014 0:54:44 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Apr 4, 2014 1:07:55 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by chriso on Apr 6, 2014 8:27:56 GMT
I was just about to chime in on the use of 3D printing on mars, when I saw the lightworks beat me to it.
I don't know if it's the idea that guy was pitching, but the version I heard used mirrors for heat. Basically, you launch a very rugged and long lasting 3D printing device, then forget about it for 10 years. It uses mirrors and some sort of movement system to slowly fuse rock dust together into glass. Power for control, mirror tracking, and movement would be provided by a small solar array. With the right program, this could slowly create an airtight room. The reason to consider it is price: your raw material is already there, and you only have to launch a mission twice.
|
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Apr 7, 2014 1:32:45 GMT
I was just about to chime in on the use of 3D printing on mars, when I saw the lightworks beat me to it. I don't know if it's the idea that guy was pitching, but the version I heard used mirrors for heat. Basically, you launch a very rugged and long lasting 3D printing device, then forget about it for 10 years. It uses mirrors and some sort of movement system to slowly fuse rock dust together into glass. Power for control, mirror tracking, and movement would be provided by a small solar array. With the right program, this could slowly create an airtight room. The reason to consider it is price: your raw material is already there, and you only have to launch a mission twice. I doubt two people got a similar idea that close together. |
|
|
|
Post by ponytail61 on Jun 8, 2014 2:16:37 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Jun 15, 2014 11:11:31 GMT
From Top of Page....
User unavailable?...
Oh, that answers that then.
|
|
