Thread: Littoral Combat Ship Analysis

Came across a intresting read from the Naval Institute up in Monterey. With a complete breakdown in Littoral Combat Ship man power requirments and augmented modules as well as Cost Analysis and legacy comparison.

Link - http://www.nps.edu/Research/HCS/Docs...ong_thesis.pdf

Abstract

-------------------------------------------
The Littoral Combat Ship’s (LCS) minimally manned core crew goal is 15 to 50 manpower requirements and the threshold, for both core and mission-package crews, is 75 to 110. This dramatically smaller crew size will require more than current technologies and past lessons learned from reduced manning initiatives. Its feasibility depends upon changes in policy and operations, leveraging of future technologies and increased Workload Transfer from sea to shore along with an increased acceptance of risk.

A manpower requirements analysis yielded a large baseline (~200) requirement to support a notional LCS configuration. Combining the common systems from the General Dynamics and Lockheed Martin designs with other assumed equipments (i.e. the combined diesel and gas turbine (CODAG) engineering plant) produce the notional LCS configuration used as the manpower requirements basis. The baseline requirement was reduced through
the compounded effect of manpower savings from Smart Ship and OME and suggested paradigm shifts. A Battle Bill was then created to support the notional LCS during Conditions of
Readiness I and III.

An efficient force deployment regime was adopted to reduce the overall LCS class manpower requirement. The efficiency gained enables the LCS force to “flex” and satisfy deployment requirements with 25% to 30% fewer manpower requirements over the “one-forone” crewing concept. An annual manpower savings of $80M to $110M if each requirement costs $60K.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION ............................................1
II. BACKGROUND ..............................................5
III. PROBLEM AND OBJECTIVE ..................................13
A. PROBLEM ...........................................13
B. OBJECTIVE .........................................13
IV. ASSUMPTIONS ............................................15
A. NOTIONAL LCS SEAFRAME .............................15
B. BATTLE BILL .......................................19
1. Ship Control .................................25
2. Operations Control ...........................26
3. Communication Control ........................27
4. Combat Systems/Electronics Casualty Control ..28
5. Weapons Control ..............................28
6. Engineering Control ..........................29
7. Damage Control ...............................30
8. Support Control ..............................32
C. AVIATION DETACHMENT ...............................32
D. FOCUSED MISSION PACKAGES ..........................34
E. MAINTENANCE .......................................37
V. SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS ..................................39
VI. METHODOLOGY ............................................41
VII. FORMULATION AND DATA ...................................45
A. FORMULATION .......................................45
1. Indices ......................................45
2. Parameters ...................................45
3. Decision Variable ............................45
4. Objective Function ...........................46
5. Constraints ..................................47
B. DATA ..............................................47
VIII. ANALYSIS ..............................................49
A. “BUSINESS AS USUAL” ANALYSIS ......................49
B. REDUCED MANNING INITIATIVES .......................52
1. Smart Ship ...................................53
2. Fleet Optimal Manning Experiment (OME) .......54
C. PARADIGM SHIFTS ...................................56
1. Composite Sailor .............................57
2. Technology Leverage ..........................58
3. Workload Transfer (Ship to Shore) ............58
D. CORE CREW ANALYSIS ................................59
E. MISSION PACKAGE CREW ANALYSIS .....................61
v iii
F. LCS MODULE FORCE ANALYSIS .........................65
IX. SUMMARY .................................................7 1
X. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ..........................75
A. CONCLUSIONS .......................................75
B. RECOMMENDATIONS ...................................75
XI. FUTURE STUDY ...........................................81
A. FATIGUE STUDY ON LCS FLIGHT “0” ...................81
B. TASK ANALYSIS ON LCS FLIGHT “0” ...................84
C. LCS MANPOWER COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS ................85
APPENDIX A. NOTIONAL PROJECTED OPERATIONAL ENVIRONMENT ......87
APPENDIX B. NOTIONAL REQUIRED OPERATIONAL CAPABILITY ........89
APPENDIX C. LCS DESIGNS ....................................137
APPENDIX D. FORMULATION INDICES ............................139
APPENDIX E. LEGACY SHIP MANPOWER REQUIREMENTS ..............141
APPENDIX F. LEGACY CONDITION I CONTROL STATION SUMMARY .....143
APPENDIX G. LEGACY CONDITION III CONTROL STATION SUMMARY ...145
APPENDIX H. CG (NS) BATTLE BILL REQUIREMENTS ...............147
APPENDIX I. CG (SS) BATTLE BILL REQUIREMENTS ...............149
APPENDIX J. DDG BATTLE BILL REQUIREMENTS ...................151
APPENDIX K. DDG (OME) BATTLE BILL REQUIREMENTS .............153
APPENDIX L. FFG BATTLE BILL REQUIREMENTS ...................155
APPENDIX M. MCM BATTLE BILL REQUIREMENTS ...................157
APPENDIX N. MHC BATTLE BILL REQUIREMENTS ...................159
APPENDIX O. NAVY ENLISTED RATE DESCRIPTION .................161
APPENDIX P. SEAFRAME BASELINE BATTLE BILL ..................167
APPENDIX Q. SEAFRAME BASELINE RQMTS ........................169
APPENDIX R. SEAFRAME RQMTS ANALYSIS ........................171
APPENDIX S. SEAFRAME REDUCED RQMTS .........................175
APPENDIX T. SEAFRAME REDUCED BATTLE BILL ...................177
APPENDIX U. MODULE PRE-PACKAGED RQMTS ......................179
APPENDIX V. MODULE FLEXED RQMTS COMPUTATION ................181
APPENDIX W. ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS .....................183
LIST OF REFERENCES .........................................187
INITIAL DISTRIBUTION LIST ..................................191

Manpower requirments are mainly determined by - Operational Capacity; Mission Enviroment and Requriments; Work Load Analysis; And Specified Readiness, IE. underway replenishment, logistical operations).

Figure 1 - Shows legacy manning by various augmented modules. Without significant change to current manning concepts. (see - Ship Manning Document (SMD) Note that the core crew is 120, with various module packages from 70-80. Greatly exceeding the thershold of 75-110 manpower goal.

Based on pervious legacy ships, and functions, the LCS seaframe would be organized into 5 departments - Executive, Operations, Combat Systems, Engineering, and Supply. Breakdown shown in Figure-2 (Table 11. PG.52)

Figure 3 - Smart Ship and Fleet Optimal Manning Experiment (OME) reduced manning concepts.

Figure 4 - Is even more radical and reduces manning requirments through various initiatives such as workload transfer (outsourching shorebased), "composite sailor' (multiple jobs), and further by technology means.


A. PROBLEM

The seaframe and module manpower requirements (RQMTS) for LCS are highly constrained by the crew accommodation threshold. The LCS critical design parameter for manning is of particular interest. In the preliminary requirements
document, the combined (seaframe plus mission module) RQMTS is limited by the threshold of 75 [Ref 2]. Since the release of the critical design document
(CDD) in May 2004, the crew accommodation threshold has been increased to 110, reflecting the difficulty of the manning problem. This increase added 35 additional bunks, and has eased the constraint for the combined manpower
requirements considerably. However, this relaxed threshold remains much lower than legacy RQMTS, and is still a significant challenge. Addressing this challenge is the problem at hand.

B. OBJECTIVE

This study has two objectives. The first objective is to determine the aggressiveness of the different approaches to achieve the specified manning levels. The baseline, or “business as usual”, estimates were derived using a methodology similar to the NMRS used to determine new construction RQMTS. This approach is not as aggressive in looking for ways to reduce the RQMTS or to efficiently manage the personnel. Because of this, we looked carefully at reduced manning initiatives, as well as to evaluate some “paradigm shifts” that would cause the Navy to significantly change its manning practices.

B. BATTLE BILL
The most demanding manpower requirements are during Conditions I and III for 24-hours and 60 days respectively. The Operational Manning is the requirement driver for supporting these conditions of readiness. The battle bill delineates the watch stations required to support the different control stations to satisfy the requirements of the Required Operational Capabilities and Projected Operational Environment (ROC/POE) documents. There are eight control stations common to all legacy ships:

1. ship control,
2. communication control,
3. operations control,
4. combat system casualty control,
5. weapons control,
6. engineering control,
7. damage control, and
8. support control.

The composition concept was also used frequently to change the watch standing philosophies during the reduced manning experiments. For example, the DDG had two RQMTS for a NIXIE Operator and a NIXIE Repairman before the experiment. After OME, the DDG required only one NIXIE operator/Repairman. The concept assumes that the workload for both the NIXIE Operator and Repairman was able to be reduced by 50%. Table 4 lists some of the legacy compositions from the DDG OME. The LCS composition
concept, based upon the DDG NIXIE RQMTS, will also assume the workload of two RQMTS can be reduced by 50%. For example, the LCS EN who has been trained to do the GSM function will be required to support only 50% of both the EN and GSM workload. Furthermore, the composition of the operator and
repairman has enabled greater flexibility of operational personnel. The operator has the skills required to adjust the system to operational requirements without minimal outside assistance. However, the system operator will be the system maintainer while the operator is not standing
watch. The further necessitates the requirement to reduce the administrative workload for the operator/repairman or offload any additional responsibilities.



The Composite Sailor concept is both a policy and operational change item. This concept not only allows the combination of watch stations, it also allows the combination of the rates and functions. For example, a diesel mechanic (engineman or EN rate) who is assigned to the LCS will also be trained to work on gas turbine engines similar to the gas turbine mechanical (GSM) rate. Rates with similar job descriptions onboard the LCS were considered for composition. These rates include, but are not limited to these ratings: BM, CTT, DC, EN, ET, GS, HT, MM, MR, OS, QM, STG and TM. See Appendix O for rate descriptions and Table 5 below for proposed rate combinations.



The LCS Boatswain’s Mate (BM) rate will consist of KSAs from the Engineman (EN), Machinist’s Mate (MM) and Quartermaster (QM) rates. Small boat coxswains have traditionally been the BMs. When a small boat is deployed,
it is required to have an EN rate onboard. Since BMs are capable of maintaining deck machinery, it is assumed that BMs can also maintain the small boat engines of which they are the coxswain. Similarly, the EN rate should also be able to perform duties as the small boat coxswain. On the
bridge, BMs have traditionally stood the watch as the Boatswain’s Mate of the watch (BMOW). Today, they are standing watch as the Officer of the Deck (OOD) and Junior Officer of the Deck (JOOD) during Condition III operations. It is assumed that they are now capable of carrying out the
duties as the navigator as well when on the bridge, thus removing the requirement for the QM.
---------------------------------------------------------------------


Cotrol Stations

1. Ship Control - With respect to ship control, it is assumed that the
Smart Ship Integrated Bridge System (IBS) and Voyage Management System (VMS) will have matured enough to reduce the LCS piloting control stations to just the OOD and JOOD watches. Both the IBS and VMS systems would be integrated into the notional Integrated Command Centers (ICC). Furthermore, it is also assumed that the chart coverage provided by the VMS and electronic Chart Display Information System (ECDIS) will be sufficient to require only minimal paper charts onboard the LCS. If not, the Operations Specialist (OS) is assumed to be capable of preparing and managing the paper charts without the Quartermasters (QM). Operations Specialists (OS) have consistently been the secondary navigation team supporting the Quartermasters (QM). These skills combined with the VMS and IBS can be used to conduct all the LCS seaframe’s voyage planning requirements. The LCS bridge watchstanders will be the primary watchstanders responsible for the safe navigation of the ship. Using the IBS, VMS and ECDIS systems, the Officerof-the-Deck (OOD) and Junior OOD will be able to receive real-time ship’s position and other pertinent navigation data to support their decision-making abilities. It is assumed that the LCS pilot house will give the
bridge watchstanders the ability to see all around the ship. On the bridge with a 360-degree viewing capability, the LCS OOD and JOOD are able to safely navigate and handle the ship without additional lookouts. These Ship Control assumptions will allow the bridge watch stations to be reduced to just two. The Officer of the Deck (OOD) and the Junior Officer of the Deck (JOOD) is
assumed capable of safe ship operations with the IBS, VMS and an all-around viewing capability.

2. Operations Control - It is assumed that the LCS seaframe Combat Information Center (CIC) will incorporate the use of multi-modal consoles (MMC) along with an integrated Weapons Control Console (WCC). The MMC is an emerging system that, in the interim, may require the use of legacy sensor and weapon consoles. It is also assumed that the MMC will make available all the sensor inputs (e.g., Search RADAR, EO/IR, SLQ-32, etc.) to the watchstanders. Decoy controls are assume to be integrated into either the WCC or IBS console. CIC watchstanders will have primary decoy (air, surface and underwater) controls with the secondary controls located in the pilot house’s IBS. Traditional CIC watches required watchstanders to operate stations predominantly dedicated to a single sensor or weapon system. These Operations Control assumptions will consolidate most of the sensor inputs and weapon controls into a few consoles. This will greatly reduce the number of watchstanders down to perhaps only two or threewatchstanders using the MMC and WCC.

3. Communication Control - It is assumed that the LCS Battle Bill Communication Control stations are similar to legacy Communication Control stations. These watchstanders will maintain communication, tactical and LAN systems. The communication systems of legacy ships involved the use of many different circuits. Most of these circuits had dedicated handsets which resulted in some difficulty in differentiation. Onboard the LCS, it is assumed that these different circuits are patched into a common system where the executives and watchstanders will be able to access the different circuits with a visual aid to identify the status of the different circuits. Moreover, the LCS will leverage remote monitoring and sensing systems to reduce the manpower requirements for monitors. The systems are assumed to replace legacy monitoring personnel (i.e., missile launcher monitors) thus allowing the system operators and casualty control personnel the ability to remote monitor all systems and respond as they are needed. Communications systems are greatly improved through advances in computing technology and commercial off the shelf (COTS) systems. These improvements combined with the Smart Ship fiber optics LAN system, have greatly reduced the need for human monitors to check system performance and security. With the ability to remotely monitor machinery and conditions, a dedicated monitor will not be required. Thus communication systems have the potential to be unmanned.

4. Combat Systems/Electronics Casualty Control - It is assumed that the LCS Battle Bill Combat Systems/Electronics Casualty Control stations are similar to legacy Combat Systems/Electronics Casualty Control stations where the RQMTS respond to combat system casualties as well as electronic system casualties. However, the assumed LCS will have personnel capable of operating and maintaining their systems. This will greatly reduce the requirement for a separate operator and maintainer. For example, the NIXIE system demonstrated that the requirements for a NIXIE Operator and NIXIE
Repairman can be consolidated into a single NIXIE Operator/Maintainer.

5. Weapons Control - The 57MM, RAM, CIWS and decoy controls are assumed integrated into a single Weapons Control Console (WCC) console located in CIC with several back-up consoles located nearby. Additionally, each weapon system will have the local control capability (i.e., CIWS will have an operator at the Local Control Panel). During Condition I, .50-caliber machine guns on the port and starboard sides will be manned and ready. Each
mount will require one operator and one ammo loader. These personnel will also act as decoy loaders in support of the CIC watchstanders who are controlling the decoy launchers. The other two mounts will be augmented by standing down other watchstanders, and the ammo loader will support both
mounts on their respective sides. These assumptions will reduce the requirement for dedicated watch stations and systems. By integrating more than one system into a console, the potential exists to reduce the watch-stander requirements. The seaframe crew is responsible for the safe
launching and recovery of unmanned surface and underwater vehicles. The assumed launch and recovery system is based upon an enlarged variant of the Swedish Visby corvette’s UV launch and recovery system. The current U.S. Navy boat launching and recovery systems like the gravity davits found on legacy ships are manpower intensive. The system proposed for LCS is the overhead rail system assisted with electrical winches and controls that spot the UVs to the launch/recovery station and then back its storage station.
This system requires only one winch operator assisted by the personnel responsible for the UVs as tenders and assistants. Thus, the boat launching and recovery apparatus onboard LCS may require only one operator. UAVs will be the responsibility of the aviation detachment personnel. Aviation detachment personnel are responsible for the UAVs spot to the flight deck and then back to the hangar. The seaframe crew will be responsible
for the launch and recovery flight operations.

6. Engineering Control - The engineering plant is assumed to be of the combined diesel and gas turbine (CODAG) configuration. The fuel efficiency of the diesel engine at slow speed and the power of the gas turbine engine at high speed make this propulsion system ideal for the LCS. The engineers assigned onboard LCS will not be watchstanders. Their primary function is the maintenance and safe operation of the engineering plant and associated machinery. Engineers will assist the bridge watchstanders in the start-up and shut-down of engineering systems. Bridge and CIC watchstanders will have the ability to remote start the main engines as well as auxiliary equipment from the bridge or CIC through the Machinery Control System accessible on
the fiber optics LAN system. This will allow the bridge and CIC watchstanders to control vital engineering equipments required to safely operate and fight the ship without degradation. During Condition III steaming, watchstanders are not required in the engineering spaces. All engineers are maintainers during Condition III. The EOOW and their assistant will be the watchstanders during Condition I with a monitor in the main engineroom. This could reduce the LCS engineering watchstanders by 25% to 50% over the legacy engineering watches. The position of the JP5 Pump Room Operator is not
required if it is able to be remotely operated from Central Control Station (CCS). JP5 nozzleman will also have the redundant ability, from CCS, to start and stop the pumps from the flight deck area.

7. Damage Control - It is assumed that primary Damage Control Central
(DCC) will be located in the Central Control Station (CCS), and secondary DCC will be remotely located on the bridge. The damage control function relies on the extensive use of the Smart Ship Damage Control System (DCS) and installed shipboard firefighting technology that is available today. For example, the installed AFFF and CO2 systems inside critical spaces such as the main engineering and ordnance spaces. The Damage Control Officer (DCO) and Damage Control Assistant (DCA) will monitor and control damages from CCS while coordinating damage control efforts with the Engineering Officer of the Watch (EOOW). To facilitate ease of communication and efficiency, the DCO, DCA and the damage control party will be co-located in the same pace.
The damage control party will be reduced commensurate with the acceptable risk level and technology leverage. In general, the damage control party will consist of a scene leader, investigators, nozzleman and hoseman. These will
be the positions on the Rapid Response Team (RRT). The damage control philosophy is to engage the RRT to the scene immediately after the casualty. The RRT will estimate the damage and augmentation required. If the damage is beyond their capability, then the decision must be made whether or not to use the automation and installed firefighting system to isolate the damage. This is important especially if the affected space is a critical space. If the damage is too large for the RRT and the decision is made not to use the installed firefighting system, then additional personnel will be required by
standing down watch stations that are deemed non essential to the operation at hand. If the damage is excessively large for the augmented damage control party, then the decision must be made to either continue the operation until it is time to abandon or disengage from the operation. By changing the Damage Control philosophy, the legacy Damage Controls of 80 personnel can be reduced by 50% to 75%.

8. Support Control - LCS seaframe Support Control is assumed to be the same in all respects as the legacy Support Control stations and their functions. The assumed LCS Supply Department is assumed to use advanced inventory systems like the scanners and commercial inventory management programs. These technologies can reduce the amount of personnel required to locate and issue as well as the time required. Another assumption is that
the self-service food line function is capable of reducing the CS requirement by about 25% to 50%.

Appendix O

Cryptologic Technician, Technical (CTTs) are “advanced [Electronic Technicians (ETs)] who do wiring, circuit testing and repair. They determine performance levels of electronic equipment, install new components, modify
existing equipment and test, adjust and repair equipment cooling systems [Ref 6]”. Under the assumption that ETs are able to perform these advanced functions, the ETs will replace the CTT RQMTS. The engineering rates of Damage Controlman (DC), Hull Maintenance Technician (HT) and Machinery Repairman (MR) are very similar. Thus, the LCS DC rate will possess the KSAs from the HT and MR rate. The DC knowledge of damage control can be greatly advanced with the skills of the HT and MR.

In general, The Operations Specialist (OS) rate is responsible for managing secondary charts and performing radar navigation in support of the QM who performs the visual navigation. These two rates are similar, using GPS data to update their positions. The voyage management system (VMS) is capable of updating positions as well as voyage planning using GPS and radar inputs and steering the ship along the planned tracks. Thus, it is assumed the QM rating can be replaced by the VMS and watchstanders in the piloting control stations and supported by the OS in CIC. This also assumes digital charts and permanent electronic recording of ship’s movement are acceptable in lieu of hardcopy charts, and the VMS along with the ECDIS are authorized for unrestricted use.

The LCS SONAR Technician (Surface) (STG) rate will possess the KSAs of both the STG and the Torpedoman’s Mate (TM). For LCS, the TMs are equired for torpedo countermeasures. By extending the ordnance capability to the STG rate, the torpedo countermeasures can be covered by
the STG.


Boatswain’s Mate (BMs) train and supervise personnel in all activities relating to marlinspike, deck and boat seamanship, and the maintenance of the ship’s external structure and deck equipment. They act as petty officers in charge of small craft and may perform duties as master-atarms, serve in or take charge of gun crews and damage control parties.

Cryptologic Technicians Technical (CTTs) control the flow of messages and information. Their work depends on technical communications by means other than Morse code and electronic countermeasures.

Electronics Warfare Technician (EWs) operate and maintain electronic equipment used in navigation, target detection and location and for preventing electronic spying by enemies. They interpret incoming electronic signals to determine their source. EWs are advanced electronic technicians who do wiring, circuit testing and repair. They
determine performance levels of electronic equipment, install new components, modify existing equipment and test, adjust and repair equipment cooling systems. The CTT and EW rates have been combined into the CTT
rate.

Damage Controlmen (DCs) perform the work necessary for damage control, ship stability, fire-fighting and chemical, biological and radiological (CBR) warfare defense. They instruct personnel in damage control and CBR defense and repair damage-control equipment and systems.

Electrician’s Mates (EMs) operate and repair the ship’s or station’s electrical power plant and electrical equipment. They also maintain and repair power and lighting circuits, distribution switchboards, generators, motors and other electrical equipment.

Enginemen (ENs) keep internal combustion engines, diesel or gasoline in good order. They also maintain refrigeration, air-conditioning, distilling-plant engines and compressors.

Electronics Technicians (ETs) are responsible for electronic equipment used to send and receive messages, detect enemy planes and ships, and determine target distances. They must maintain, repair, calibrate, tune and adjust all electronic equipment used for communications, detection and tracking, recognition and identification, navigation and electronic countermeasures.

Fire Controlmen (FCs) maintain the control mechanism used in weapons systems on combat ships. Complex electronic, electrical and hydraulic equipment is required to ensure the accuracy of Navy guided missile and surface gunfire-control systems. FCs are responsible for the operation, routine care and repair of this equipment, which includes radars, computers, weapons direction equipment, target designation systems, gyroscopes and range finders. It is in the advanced electronics field and requires a sixyear
enlistment.

Navy Gunner’s Mates (GMs) operate, maintain and repair all gunnery equipment, guided-missile launching systems, rocket launchers, guns, gun mounts, turrets, projectors and associated equipment. They make detailed casualty analyses and repairs of electrical, electronic, hydraulic and mechanical systems. They also test and inspect ammunition, missiles and their ordnance components. GMs train and supervise personnel in the handling and stowage of ammunition, missiles and assigned ordnance equipment.
Gas Turbine System Technicians (GSs) operate, repair and maintain gas turbine engines; main propulsion machinery, including gears; shafting and controllable pitch propellers; assigned auxiliary equipment propulsion control
systems; electrical and electronic circuitry up to the printed circuit module; and alarm and warning circuitry. They also perform administrative tasks related to gas turbine propulsion system operation and maintenance, (GSE:
Electrical) (GSM: Mechanical)

Hull Maintenance Technicians (HTs) are responsible for maintaining ships’ hulls, fittings, piping systems and machinery. They install and maintain shipboard and shore based plumbing and piping systems. They also look after a vessel’s safety and survival equipment and perform many tasks related to damage control.

Interior Communications Electricians (ICs) operate and repair electronic devices used in the ship’s interior communications systems, SITE TV systems, public address systems, electronic megaphones and other announcing equipment. They are also responsible for the gyrocompass systems.
Machinist’s Mates (MMs) are responsible for the continuous operation of the many engines, compressors and gears, refrigeration, air-conditioning, gas-operated equipment and other types of machinery afloat and ashore. They are also responsible for the ship’s steam propulsion and auxiliary equipment and the outside (deck) machinery. MMs also may perform duties involving some industrial gases.

Minemen (MNs) test, maintain, repair and overhaul mines and their components. They are responsible for assembling, testing, handling, issuing and delivering mines to the planting agent and for maintaining mine-handling and mine-laying equipment.

Machinery Repairmen (MRs) are skilled machine tool operators. They make replacement parts and repair or overhaul a ship’s engine auxiliary equipment, such as evaporators, air compressors and pumps. They repair deck equipment, including winches and hoists, condensers and heat exchange devices. Shipboard MRs frequently operate main propulsion machinery, besides performing machine shop and repair duties.

Operations Specialists (OS) operate radar, navigation and communications equipment in shipboard combat information centers (CICs) or bridges. They detect and track ships, planes and missiles. They also operate and maintain identification friend or foe (IFF) systems, electronic countermeasures (ECM) equipment and radiotelephones.

Quartermasters (QMs) assist the navigator and officer of the deck (OOD), steer the ship, take radar bearings and ranges, make depth soundings and celestial observations, plot courses and command small craft. Additionally, they maintain charts, navigational aids and oceanographic publications and records for the ship’s log.

Signalmen (SMs) send and receive various visual messages, handle and route message traffic, operate voice radio and repair visual signaling devices. They also render honors to ships and boats and serve as navigators. The QM and SM rates have been combined to be called bridge specialists. No acronyms exist to represent this consolidation. The QM rate is still in effect and will be
used to fill bridge specialist requirements. Torpedoman’s Mates (TMs) maintain underwater explosive missiles, such as torpedoes and rockets, which are launched from surface ships, submarines and aircraft. They also maintain launching systems for underwater explosives, and are responsible for shipping and storage of torpedoes and rockets.