Academic literature on the topic 'Arleigh Burke Class'
Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles
Consult the lists of relevant articles, books, theses, conference reports, and other scholarly sources on the topic 'Arleigh Burke Class.'
Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.
You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.
Journal articles on the topic "Arleigh Burke Class"
FOLEY, J. KEVIN. "The Testing of a New Ship Class-The USS Arleigh Burke." Naval Engineers Journal 105, no. 6 (November 1993): 30–38. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-3584.1993.tb02773.x.
Full textSchmidt, William R., James R. Vander Schaaf, and Richard V. Shields. "Modeling and Transfer of Product Model Digital Data for DDG 51 Class Destroyer Program." Journal of Ship Production 7, no. 04 (November 1, 1991): 205–19. http://dx.doi.org/10.5957/jsp.1991.7.4.205.
Full textKarafiath, Gabor. "Stern End Bulb for Energy Enhancement and Speed Improvement." Journal of Ship Production and Design 28, no. 04 (November 1, 2012): 172–81. http://dx.doi.org/10.5957/jspd.2012.28.4.172.
Full textDissertations / Theses on the topic "Arleigh Burke Class"
Anderson, Travis J. (Travis John). "Operational profiling and statistical analysis of Arleigh Burke-class destroyers." Thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2013. http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/81582.
Full text"June 2013." Cataloged from PDF version of thesis.
Includes bibliographical references (p. 60-62).
Ship operational profiles are a valuable tool for ship designers and engineers when analyzing potential designs and ship system selections. The most common is the speed-time profile, normally depicted as a histogram showing the percent of time spent at each speed. Many shortcomings exist in the current Arleigh Burke (DDG 51)-class operational profiles. The current speed-time profile is out of date, based on another ship class, and does not depict the profile in one-knot increments. Additional profile data, such as how the engineering plant is operated and a mission profile, do not exist. A thorough analysis of recent DDG 51 operations was conducted and new and improved profiles were developed. These profiles indicate the ships tend to operate at slower speeds than was previously predicted with 46% of the time spent at 8 knots and below as compared to the previous profile with 28% for the same speeds. Additionally, profiles were developed to show the amount of time spent in each engineering plant line-up (69% trail shaft, 24% split plant, 7% full power) and the time spent in different mission types (69% operations, 27% transit, 4% restricted maneuvering doctrine). A detailed statistical analysis was then conducted to better understand the data used in profile development and to create a region of likely speed-time profiles rather than just a point solution that is presented in the composite speed-time profile. This was accomplished through studying the underlying distributions of the data as well as the variance.
by Travis J. Anderson.
Nav.E.and S.M.
Fahner, Matthew J., and Charles N. Cuddy. "Generation of the Arleigh Burke Destroyer class shipboard phased replacement program list." Monterey, California. Naval Postgraduate School, 2010. http://hdl.handle.net/10945/10487.
Full textThis project is designed to provide a class-wide list of items for inclusion in the Phased Replacement Program (PRP) for each ship in the DDG 51 Arleigh Burke Class of Guided Missile Destroyers (DDGs). Current business practice involves the Supply Officer on each ship generating and maintaining an independent ship-specific list. This practice reduces the efficiency in the supply chain for these items by not maximizing the demand and ordering structure. The intention of the generation of a class-wide list is to improve the ordering periodicity and provide visibility for replenishment of these parts at the unit level for further consolidation at the class-wide level for oversight, management, and guidance. Research was conducted using PRP lists gathered during ship visits, review of Naval Surface Forces' online financial management Continuous Monitoring Program, and cross referencing the data with Defense Logistics Agency's inventory management databases to validate the PRP items selected for inclusion in the class-wide list for items that should be tracked, stored, and managed on all DDGs. The resulting PRP list is meant to provide a baseline for ship Supply Departments to use and does not include every PRP item that ships must have.
Weekes, Godfrey D. "Cost benefit analysis of adjustable speed drives aboard Arleigh Burke class destroyers." Thesis, Monterey, Calif. : Springfield, Va. : Naval Postgraduate School ; Available from National Technical Information Service, 2003. http://hdl.handle.net/10945/6253.
Full textThesis advisor(s): Robert W. Ashton, John Ciezki, Andrew A. Parker. Includes bibliographical references (p. 69-71). Also available online.
Kimbley, Robert, and LeRoy Bates. "SHIPBORNE TELEMETRY RECEIVING/RECORDING SYSTEM FOR ARLEIGH BURKE DDG 51 AEGIS CLASS DESTROYERS." International Foundation for Telemetering, 1991. http://hdl.handle.net/10150/612178.
Full textPortable Telemetry Data Receive/Record Sets (TDRRS) are temporarily installed in Navy ships to record and display data from tactical surface-to-air and surface-to-surface missiles (e.g., STANDARD, HARPOON, TOMAHAWK and SEA SPARROW). The Arleigh Burke DDG 51 AEGIS class Destroyer is the fleet’s newest Man-of-War. The first ship of this class, the USS Arleigh Burke (DDG 51), was recently commissioned on 4 July 1991. Permanent telemetry data RF and control transmission cabling systems will be installed in these Destroyers. The purpose of the dedicated cabling system is to deliver high quality telemetry data to the portable TDRRS. A dedicated quality interface guarantees reliable communications with the STANDARD Missile (SM) 2 during the pre-exit and initial airborne stages during missile launched from the ship’s Vertical Launch System (VLS). Previous ship classes depended on portable cables and equipment to provide for this function. Cables were brought through hatchways and bulkheads to the telemetry receiving and recording equipments. The DDG 51 AEGIS Class Destroyer uses a Collective Protection System (CPS) that provides for differential inside air pressure that is greater than the outside air pressure. This is intended to prevent chemical, biological, and nuclear contamination from entering the ship. To preserve CPS integrity, telemetry cabling is routed through airtight bulkhead connectors. This paper introduces the new integrated shipboard telemetry cable interface and the recently developed fleet telemetry receive and record system. Discussions will be provided on the SM 2 Vertical Launch System telemetry data transfer and the latest state-of-the-art receive and record equipment installed on the Arleigh Burke DDG 51 AEGIS Class Destroyers.
Taylor, Michael Eric. "System identification and control of an Arleigh Burke Class Destroyer using an extended Kalman Filter." Thesis, Springfield, Va. : Available from National Technical Information Service, 2000. http://handle.dtic.mil/100.2/ADA379628.
Full textKulow, Keith S. "Modeling the progressive flooding characteristics of the Arleigh Burke Class Destroyer using SIMSMART and Excel." Thesis, Monterey, Calif. : Springfield, Va. : Naval Postgraduate School ; Available from National Technical Information Service, 2000. http://handle.dtic.mil/100.2/ADA380747.
Full textThesis advisor(s): Calvano, Charles ; Papoulias, Fotis. "June 2000." Includes bibliographical references (p. 141). Also available online.
Taylor, Michael Eric 1970. "System identification and control of an Arleigh Burke Class Destroyer using an extended Kalman filter." Thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2000. http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/91716.
Full textIncludes bibliographical references (leaves 88-92).
by Michael Eric Taylor.
Nav.E.
S.M.
Quezada, Ojeda Rene E. (Rene Eduardo) 1965. "Robust control design and simulation of the maneuvering dynamics of an Arleigh Burke Class destroyer." Thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1999. http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/88861.
Full textIncludes bibliographical references (leaf 116).
by Rene E. Quezada Ojeda.
S.M.in Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering
S.M.in Ocean Systems Management
Anderson, Travis J. "Operational profiling and statistical analysis of Arleigh Burke-class destroyers." Thesis, 2013. http://hdl.handle.net/10945/40211.
Full textShip operational profiles are a valuable tool for ship designers and engineers when analyzing potential designs and ship system selections. The most common is the speed-time profile, normally depicted as a histogram showing the percent of time spent at each speed. Many shortcomings exist in the current Arleigh Burke (DDG 51)-class operational profiles. The current speed-time profile is out of date, based on another ship class, and does not depict the profile in one-knot increments. Additional profile data, such as how the engineering plant is operated and a mission profile, do not exist. A thorough analysis of recent DDG-51 operations was conducted and new and improved profiles were developed. These profiles indicate the ships tend to operate at slower speeds than was previously predicted with 46% of the time spent at 8 knots and below as compared to the previous profiles with 28% at the same speeds. Additionally, profiles were developed to show the amount of time spent in each engineering plant line-up (69% train shaft, 24% split plant, 7% full power) and the time spent in different mission types (69% operations, 27% transit, 4% restricted maneuvering doctrine). A detailed statistical analysis was then conducted to better understand the data used in profile development and to create a region of likely speed-time profiles rather than just a point solution that is presented in the composite speed-time profile. This was accomplished through studying the underlying distributions of the data as well as the variance.
Goldsmith, Sam. "China’s Anti-Access & Area-Denial operational concept and the dilemmas for Japan." Master's thesis, 2012. http://hdl.handle.net/1885/9721.
Full textBooks on the topic "Arleigh Burke Class"
Gourley, John. Arleigh Burke-class guided missile destroyers. Carrollton, TX: Squadron/Signal Publications, 2007.
Find full textTaylor, Michael Eric. System identification and control of an Arleigh Burke Class Destroyer using an extended Kalman Filter. Springfield, Va: Available from National Technical Information Service, 2000.
Find full textHaag, Jeremiah N. Navy Destroyers: Arleigh Burke and Zumwalt Class Programs. Nova Science Publishers, Incorporated, 2013.
Find full textMichael, Green, and Gladys Green. Destroyers: The Arleigh Burke Class (Edge Books, War Machines). Edge Books, 2004.
Find full textCost Benefit Analysis of Adjustable Speed Drives Aboard Arleigh Burke Class Destroyers. Storming Media, 2003.
Find full textModeling the Progressive Flooding Characteristics of the Arleigh Burke Class Destroyer Using SIMSMART and Excel. Storming Media, 2000.
Find full textConference papers on the topic "Arleigh Burke Class"
Russom, Dennis, Jeffrey Patterson, and Ivan Pineiro. "Analysis of U.S. Navy Rolls Royce 501-K34 Turbine Engine Removals 2008 to 2018." In ASME Turbo Expo 2019: Turbomachinery Technical Conference and Exposition. American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 2019. http://dx.doi.org/10.1115/gt2019-91535.
Full textWalters, Robert, Vinodhini Comandur, and Karen Feigh. "3D Conformal Pilot Cueing for Rotorcraft Shipboard Landings: A Time Horizon Parametric Study." In Vertical Flight Society 77th Annual Forum & Technology Display. The Vertical Flight Society, 2021. http://dx.doi.org/10.4050/f-0077-2021-16750.
Full textCairns, John A. "DDG51 Class Land Based Engineering Site (LBES): The Vision and the Value." In ASME Turbo Expo 2012: Turbine Technical Conference and Exposition. American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 2012. http://dx.doi.org/10.1115/gt2012-70155.
Full textPreisel, John H. "Testing at the US Navy’s Gas Turbine Systems Engineering Complex." In ASME 1990 International Gas Turbine and Aeroengine Congress and Exposition. American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1990. http://dx.doi.org/10.1115/90-gt-296.
Full textSocoloski, Paul, Michael Maier, and Michael Lamberto. "Life-Cycle Engineering Support From the US Navy Gas Turbine Ship Complex." In ASME 1996 International Gas Turbine and Aeroengine Congress and Exhibition. American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1996. http://dx.doi.org/10.1115/96-gt-496.
Full textKozuhowski, Helen J., Matthew G. Hoffman, C. David Mako, Leonard L. Overton, and William E. Masincup. "Integrated Testing of the Full Authority Digital Control and Redundant Independent Mechanical Start System for the U.S. Navy’s DDG-51 Ship Service Gas Turbine Generator Sets." In ASME 1998 International Gas Turbine and Aeroengine Congress and Exhibition. American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1998. http://dx.doi.org/10.1115/98-gt-273.
Full textOuillette, Joanne J. "Designing the Future DDG 51 Class Computer Aided Design." In ASME 1993 International Computers in Engineering Conference and Exposition. American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1993. http://dx.doi.org/10.1115/edm1993-0105.
Full textHalpin, Richard, and Frank Sapienza. "Integrating a Hybrid Electric Drive Propulsion System With the Existing DDG 51 Class Machinery Control System." In ASME 2011 Turbo Expo: Turbine Technical Conference and Exposition. ASMEDC, 2011. http://dx.doi.org/10.1115/gt2011-45902.
Full textHendry, Morgan L., and Nicholas Bellamy. "Hidden Advantages and Strategic Leaps for CODAG, CODELAG, CODELOG and Hybrid Propulsion Systems." In ASME Turbo Expo 2020: Turbomachinery Technical Conference and Exposition. American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 2020. http://dx.doi.org/10.1115/gt2020-15543.
Full textReports on the topic "Arleigh Burke Class"
Vandroff, Mark R. DDG 51 Arleigh Burke Class Guided Missile Destroyer (DDG 51). Fort Belvoir, VA: Defense Technical Information Center, December 2013. http://dx.doi.org/10.21236/ada613364.
Full textVandroff, Mark R. DDG 51 Arleigh Burke Class Guided Missile Destroyer (DDG 51). Fort Belvoir, VA: Defense Technical Information Center, November 2015. http://dx.doi.org/10.21236/ad1019141.
Full textFahner, Matthew J., and Charles N. Cuddy. Generation of the Arleigh Burke Destroyer Class Shipboard Phased Replacement Program List. Fort Belvoir, VA: Defense Technical Information Center, December 2010. http://dx.doi.org/10.21236/ada536327.
Full text