Files
Abstract
Tomorrow’s warships must break free from the handcuffs of yesterday’s technology. In a world where the lifecycles of combat and mission systems are dramatically shorter than those of the ships that deploy them, a fundamental design challenge exists for ship designers. That is, to design a ship that can adapt and evolve alongside whatever the next generations of emergent technology might throw at it. When one fails to comprehend or address this challenge from the outset of design, they resign themselves to a static capability that will be rapidly surpassed and render its crew ill-equipped for the fight of the future. What may once have been a prized asset at delivery quickly becomes a costly liability for inefficient upgrade or disposal taking considerable sunken costs with it to the grave.
So how can the design of a warship mitigate the risks of future technology integration and increase the likelihood of successful capability upgrades throughout its life? This paper explores the effectiveness of conventional methods such as growth margins, modular systems and controlled sub-system interfaces in the context of past programs and experiences. Issues of spatial allocation and the trade-offs associated with compartment and deck arrangements for a generic next-generation surface combatant from a previous paper by the authors is summarised. Its second-order impacts and inter-dependencies with several design features including topside design, survivability, and ship performance are expanded upon. Lastly, a set of guiding principles are offered as an aid for requirements development in the early stages of naval ship acquisition programs in order to ensure a sensible balance of adaptability is specified and achieved.