A tip o' the hat to Solomon for putting up this video clip of a new small craft suspension system.
It turns out that Nauti-Craft is an Australian company, with ambitions to apply their suspension to all sorts of smaller craft. Being a former military man, I was interested to read their perspective on its military use: "Provides significant reduction in Whole Body Vibration (WBV) and stabilised platform for increased operational capability for military personnel. Provides a competitive technical advantage where operational success is critical."
This is of even greater interest when one learns, from their Web site, that Nauti-Craft has partnered with Metal Shark in the USA. Metal Shark has won two significant US Navy contracts, one for the PB(X) 40-foot-class patrol boat (supplying up to 50 vessels), the other for the Near Coastal Patrol Vessel (NCPV), an 85-foot vessel to be built for US partner nations. Up to 13 may be constructed, in terms of the initial contract. You can see Metal Shark's publicity page for the PB(X) here, and for the 85-foot Defiant class NCPV here.
Both vessels would appear to be suitable candidates for further development into a multi-hull version using Nauti-Craft's suspension system, which that company says is suitable for "up to 100 foot commercial workboats". That would make them a great deal more comfortable for their crews during extended missions, and possibly make them more stable weapons platforms if it should come to that. I'm intrigued by the possibilities. There's also the small craft used by US Navy SEAL teams - for example, the Mark V, the Combatant Craft Medium, the Combatant Craft Heavy and the M80 Stiletto (although not all may be in service - not very much is reported about them in the public domain). Could some of them be augmented or replaced by a boat with a suspension system, for greater flexibility?
There's also the question of civilian work boats. One of the biggest problems in transferring people between a smaller and a larger vessel is the rise and fall of both in relation to each other, or between a small craft and a fixed station like a quay or the leg of an oil rig. If Nauti-Craft's technology can help to keep the boat's deck more or less stable in relation to the transfer point (as demonstrated in the video clip above), it'll be a big step forward (literally and figuratively). I reckon that'll only be possible in milder sea states, but I'm sure they're working to improve that already. Having fallen into the sea on more than one occasion while transferring between vessels in rough weather, additional stability while doing so is something I can certainly appreciate!
The big question is, how reliable will Nauti-Craft's suspension system prove in long-term service? It'll take a pounding in continuous use, particularly if the boats using it have to put to sea in any and all sea states and weather conditions. Will it stand up to that? If so, I think it has a very bright future. If it doesn't, then it'll be at best a short-lived flash in the pan. I guess we'll wait and see.
Peter
4 comments:
Hmm, fallen into the sea.
And I thought all your service was on land.
@Ray: It didn't happen during military service (although some of that was at sea), but as a volunteer with a sea rescue service in South Africa. Crossing between the rescue craft and a small vessel in trouble got . . . interesting . . . from time to time. (Life-vests, safety harness and ropes were mandatory, for obvious reasons.)
It works.
New.
How well all that contraption and thingamajigerry will work after six months of salt water exposure is...questionable, at the most charitable guess.
Deploy one to the North Sea oil rigs for a year, and tell me how many days out of 365 it's functional. Then get back to us. That will be the final grade, by the way, and 90% is passing. One catastrophic fail underway is an automatic fail. The ocean is funny like that.
All they've done is apply suspension to a hull, like to a dune buggy tire.
Go whole hog:
Try it to multiple segmented underhulls, like a tank suspension, and include the center hull as well, so the entire lot are reactive.
It should be great.
But then we're back to the salt-water reliability and longevity problem, as before, which is why boats traditionally just have one (hopefully) impermeable hull.
Sales brochures are like mutual fund prospectii:
Past performance does not guarantee future behavior.
Thanks Peter!
I was thinking the incident in Cabinda...
Post a Comment