Live data from Hacker News

Top navy admiral wants rust-free ships

gcaptain.com

11–20 of 206 posts

Re: Top navy admiral wants rust-free ships

#11

The Navy builds its ships with steel, and the grades of steel used in the construction can experience rust. Solutions: Switch to 100% stainless steel. Stainless steel is an alloy and contains a minimum of 11% chromium. This allows the formation of a protective film of chromium oxide which acts as a shield against rust. The protective film will re-form if damaged. Corrosion resistance can be further enhanced with the…

That's a good idea. Everyone knows chromium does not contain any Rust.

Joking aside: There are many ways to prevent rust, though I think environmental concerns are also an issue. Galvanising might leak heavy metals into the sea? And chrome is also a pollutant. Iron is not.

Re: Top navy admiral wants rust-free ships

#12

The Navy builds its ships with steel, and the grades of steel used in the construction can experience rust. Solutions: Switch to 100% stainless steel. Stainless steel is an alloy and contains a minimum of 11% chromium. This allows the formation of a protective film of chromium oxide which acts as a shield against rust. The protective film will re-form if damaged. Corrosion resistance can be further enhanced with the…

Stainless steel is pretty expensive, but I suppose it would be no big deal for the US Navy. I thought they used sacrificial anodes to stop rust.

Re: Top navy admiral wants rust-free ships

#13

> "An AKE like the Shepard should have 129 crewmembers in perfect conditions but they are now running at roughly 80% because of manning problems,” said another MSC officer. “About 20 in the deck department can be assigned to rust prevent duty. However, that crew is also assigned to Underway Replenishment duties. Three Unreps could easily eat away an entire day. When we return to port can we OSPHO? No. Can I send a cr…

Manning problems have existed for a decade, if not more. The Navy holds the sad record of being the worst managed branch of service. Steep budget cuts in the 1990s and again during sequestration have had severe effects that the Navy hasn't yet recovered from. But I don't know whether that's the cause of the problem. The Navy is an especially unique branch given that it's the only service that revolves around a relatively small number of very large, very expensive assets. The Army doesn't revolve around its tanks, and the Air Force, while it revolves around planes, there are a lot more planes in the Air Force than ships in the Navy. Congress is not without blame for the Navy's problems either, apart from the budget cuts. Congress has the last word on all programs and procurement. The Littoral Combat Ships should never have seen the light of day for instance, but Congress pushed the program through, and now the ships are useless (and still being built!)

But there is hope on the horizon. The submarine construction programs (Virginia SSNs and Columbia SSBNs) are proceeding smoothly, as are the Flight III destroyers. DDG(X), the future replacement of the Arleigh-Burke class destroyers and Ticonderoga-class cruisers, is in development, and the first Constellation-class frigates will soon be laid down.

Re: Top navy admiral wants rust-free ships

#15

The Navy builds its ships with steel, and the grades of steel used in the construction can experience rust. Solutions: Switch to 100% stainless steel. Stainless steel is an alloy and contains a minimum of 11% chromium. This allows the formation of a protective film of chromium oxide which acts as a shield against rust. The protective film will re-form if damaged. Corrosion resistance can be further enhanced with the…

Stainless steel is pretty expensive, but I suppose it would be no big deal for the US Navy. I thought they used sacrificial anodes to stop rust.

I don't think those anodes are 100% effective though? I've seen many ships that have them and still have signs of rusting.

Re: Top navy admiral wants rust-free ships

#17
This looks like the same phenomenon as the crisis in staffing nurses that was discussed here the other day. Careerist, indifferent management giving the people on the front line inadequate resources and then blaming them when things start to look shabby, or when someone dies. Scapegoating the people who were in the wrong place at the wrong time, who are tired, inadequately trained, and inured to a climate of normalized deviance. Many organizations don't suffer from these problems to nearly such an extent. I've worked in reasonably functional organizations, and ones that are disfunctional in different ways. Why does this malady strike the U.S. Navy and healthcare so severely? Am I viewing this from too great a distance? Are these actually separate forms of institutional dysfunction?

Re: Top navy admiral wants rust-free ships

#18

I think this is a good lesson that can be applied to offices and data centres. If you run your teams and equipment beyond the threshold, your equipment and team will suffer and degrade your abilities. This is a failure of leadership, and it was avoidable!

I also like the part of looking sharp, this is also a non-zero factor in any field, including IT. Between two professionals, if one looks sharp, clean and fit, while the other one does not, it is hard not to conclude one has also more self discipline.

Re: Top navy admiral wants rust-free ships

#19

The Navy builds its ships with steel, and the grades of steel used in the construction can experience rust. Solutions: Switch to 100% stainless steel. Stainless steel is an alloy and contains a minimum of 11% chromium. This allows the formation of a protective film of chromium oxide which acts as a shield against rust. The protective film will re-form if damaged. Corrosion resistance can be further enhanced with the…

I don't know if there's a name for this phenomenon, but it's sort of like an invisible Chesterton's fence. "Just make them out of a different steel" feels like a idea that is elegant, but even as someone that's never built a ship, I have to imagine there's some good reason why they're built out the materials they are, and why a simple material change is unlikely to be a solution. Maybe I'm wrong (it's not like organizations haven't done dumb things before despite a having a good simple solution), but it really feels like that's probably not the case here.
Post reply on HN