Re: [FT] Naval Manpower

Donogh McCarthy wrote:
> 
> Interesting article on Northrops new naval designs
> 
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A5236-2002Apr29.html
> 
> In relation to the new Destroyer Class design it states:
> 
> "Under the plan, sailors' standard of living also would be drastically
> improved. For example, three-tier bunk beds would be replaced with
> staterooms shared by as many as three sailors and outfitted with
computers
> and Internet connections. Crew sizes would drop from 300 to 125, then
> eventually to 95. "It allows the Navy to free up a lot of resources,"
> [defense analyst Jay] Korman said.
> 
> Questions arising from this:
> 
> 1. What kind of % of total personnel is there is each area of
operations on
> board a military naval vessel?

I have more knowledge of submarine operation and crews than for carrier
or other surface forces.  Submarine crews operate in six hour shifts.
One shift on duty, two shifts off duty.  So the figure of three times
the crew for each position is accurate.

Percentages will vary greatly depending on the platform.  You have
bridge
crew, weapons, engineering, and support crew.  Air crew and flight
support
crew are a major percentage on a carrier.

> 2. Presumably there as some tasks manpower is always needed for, that
can't
> be automated. What kind of tasks would these be, and what plausible
sci-fi
> elements could lead to these being done by automation?

The new Virginia class SSN is highly automated and computerized.  It
requires
a crew of about 110.  The older Los Angeles class requires a crew of
about 125.
It also means that some of the crew won't have to "hot bunk."
 
Don't count on automating too much of a ship's operation, especially
with 
multiple shifts.

> 4. Would crew comfort, health etc. be a bigger concern in space, and
would
> this lead to larger vessels or smaller crews; or shorter deployment
times?

Good question.	A ship's volume will be the determining factor.

Jon