Not that “the neighbor's cottage burned down - a trifle, but nice,” but a fact. If the newest American destroyer "Michael Monsour" had not made everyone happy with a breakdown, maybe news would have flown by. And so - sorry.
A breakdown of this level (one of the two main turbine engines) - this, of course, will be cool to start. The DDG-1001 "Michael Monsour" is the second destroyer of the three. All ships of this type use Rolls-Royce Marine Trent-30 gas turbines. British turbines were considered to be one of the most powerful in their class, but nobody said anything about reliability.
The royal Navy of Great Britain, the warships of Italy and the Republic of Korea are equipped with exactly the same turbines. And here ... Oddities further.
However, for the Zamvolt class destroyers, this technical fault is far from the first. And, as it becomes clear - not the last.
“Monsura” was dragged to the port of Bath in the state of Maine, where they tried to decide its future fate in terms of the complexity of the repairs and the timing. I remind you that tests of the ship are underway, and the next stage was to be the check of all combat systems.
Experts using a borescope found damage to the blades of the turbine and generally sentenced her to replace.
The US military decided to change the turbine completely, without bothering to repair. As I understand it, the failure of the blades is so serious that there is nowhere else.
Meanwhile, replacing half the propulsion system (this is still unknown, by the way, in which state the second half is there) is not a quick and expensive thing.
In San Diego, on the basis of the US Navy, where the next test phase was supposed to begin, Monsura is not expected until autumn. October November. And "just something" 20 million dollars. That is the cost of the work of engineers at General Dynamics Bath Iron Works, responsible for building the ship, and specialists at Rolls-Royce.
What does this mean first? As well as the complete absence in the Western press of screams on the subject of “a, Krivorukovy!”, All this suggests that the repair is NOT WARRANTY.
There is an opinion, and it is not only mine, that the crew put their hands on the damage to the turbine.
However, what really little things! If for Zamvoltov in general, and for Michael Monsur in particular, breakdowns were something epically rare ...
Let us recall how last December the Montsuru had to interrupt the tests and return to the port just a day after departure. The filter system protecting the ship’s electrical equipment failed (completely failed). As a result, the destroyer lost the ability to use the electrical network at elevated loads and stood up for repairs.
And the situation is quite funny. For almost a year, Monsur has been on probation, but they don’t see the end-edge.
Of course, for a new ship, a malfunction is normal. For this and need, in fact, the test.
However, not only Michael Monsour faced problems, but also his predecessor from the Zamvolt series, DDG-1000.
Everyone remembers the case that caused us "a feeling of deep satisfaction" when Zamvolt crashed into the wall of the Panama Canal due to engine failure?
The reason for the failure of the main power plant was sea water, which in some incomprehensible way penetrated two of the four bearings connecting the engines of the ship with its drive shafts. It is clear that the bearings are jammed, and the shafts could not perform their functions. "Zamvolt" cracked lightly, the damage was purely cosmetic, but according to prestige it hit not weakly.
Here, some readers may immediately recall "Admiral Kuznetsov." Let's put it this way: a frankly old cruiser is one thing, another is the newest destroyer. One thing, the power plant, which smokes, but still moves the ship where he needs, and the power plant, which cannot do this at all, is quite another thing.
There is a difference.
It is clear that navy US leadership is clearly disappointed with the "successes" of Zamvoltov. Who is pleased to get a dull dish instead of a fancy newest ship that costs more to repair than it does business?
This is still the third "Zamvolt" not launched. So we still have to watch how the life of this ship.
The third ship of the Zamvolt series - the DDG 1002 “Lyndon B. Johnson” will be the third and last ship of the series. On it, the production of destroyers of this type will be discontinued.
It is clear that a rather pragmatic approach to expensive ships played a role. After the start of work on the construction of ships in the United States were going to 2030-s to produce 30 such destroyers. But the current policy of Trump put on a fat cross. And the number of ships reduced exactly 10 times.
Although I'm sure, folding the arms in the US will not sit down. It is just that an urgent (or not so) project will be invented that will allow the appropriate branch of the military-industrial complex to exist normally. Well, you can not just throw on the streets of thousands of good American guys, just because the "Zamvolt" did not justify the hopes placed on it, right?
And just a couple of words on the topic of the day.
The Americans have the latest destroyers constantly breaking down. That, of course, is good. And the fact that they refuse to build new ones will also sadden anyone, but not us.
But the conclusion is somewhat sad in the end.
Destroyers of the USA break, but they are. Or break down because they exist.
We have something?
And we have ONE squadron destroyer of the “Sarych” type on the water with the 1991 of the year, “Persistent”. He is the flagship of DCBF, which, however, permanently for the last five years, if not more, has been under repair.
On the Black Sea, we have no such ships at all.
6 (six) is listed in the Northern Fleet. BOD (Large anti-submarine ships of the project 1155), in principle, the same destroyers. Candid veterans "Vice Admiral Kulakov" (in the ranks from 1981 of the year), "Severomorsk" (in the ranks from 1987 of the year), "Admiral Levchenko" (in the ranks of from 1988 of the year), "Admiral Chabanenko" (in the ranks of from 1999 of the year) . And one surviving destroyer of the project 956 "Sarych", "Admiral Ushakov" (in line with 1993 year).
BOD "Admiral Chabanenko"
And the ships of the project 1155 really scary only to submarines. Only Admiral Chabanenko and Admiral Ushakov have anti-ship weapons.
In the Pacific, it is still sadder. Of the three "Sarychey" in the ranks (from 1989 year) only "Quick", "Fearless" and "Stormy" in reserve. We know what it is, right?
Veterans of the 1155 project, too. Conditional destroyers "Admiral Panteleyev", "Admiral Tributs", "Admiral Vinogradov". And "Marshal Shaposhnikov" in repair.
You can, of course, gossip at the American sailors who hit the turbine on the Zamvolta, but somehow the fuse disappears when you look at the fact that the Americans still have 65 (sixty-five) destroyers Arly Burke. The oldest of which is in service since 1991, and can carry "Tomahawks".
EM "Arly Burke"
So Americans can afford in such a situation and expensive, and long-term repairs. Unfortunately for us, there is something to envy.