07/29/2010 (4:48 am)
Record holder for number of moving parts? Best answer on the web
For full credit, I'll need the name of the device, how many parts it has, at least one reference or link supporting the information, and a reasonable train of thought that suggests that the answer is correct.
I can think of two candidates for the current record holder: one is the space shuttle, the other would be the Digital Light Processor produced by Texas Instruments (a MEMS micromirror array).
I fully understand how specific you were with your question, but unfortunately it just isn’t possible to entirely answer every question that can possibly be asked in life with absolute figures, though certainly if one were to spend a lifetime auditing the parts of an aircraft carrier piece by piece one would eventually come to a firm conclusion. However, this isn’t possible, even for someone who did have access to every moving part (classified and non-classified) on the ship. I’d venture to guess that such an answer might not even be obtained from the engineers who designed the vessel.
I direct you to a comment by Lt. Gen. John D. Hopper Jr., Vice commander, Air Education and Training Command, who said, “Believe me when I say that our current advantage was not earned easily or without great cost, and it must be guarded very carefully, because losing air and space dominance would be very costly to our nation in blood and treasure in the future. You see, we've held the "high ground" for so long that we must be careful not to take it for granted. When viewed through the lens of a television camera, it is difficult to appreciate just how complex and perishable our air and space capabilities really are … it is difficult to see the thousands of moving parts that come together to achieve an objective. I think you are getting an excellent, albeit rapid, look at some of those moving parts on this orientation. You're seeing what the camera lens doesn't see … the young airmen who turn the wrenches and load the bombs, the crew chiefs who launch the aircraft.”
AETC SPEECHES http://www.aetc.randolph.af.mil/pa/Library/speeches/cv02-02.htm
As you can see, even this three star general in command cannot (or will not) answer such a question.
Since you have left the decision up to me, I’d have to say that I am absolutely confident in the answer I have provided. I does sadden me that I am not able to provide you with the exact number of moving parts as you have requested, and as such I have not fulfilled you full expectations of this forum. But just as we cannot definitively answer questions relating to unproven theories, some answers, like this one, will remain elusive to even the best researchers. If the decision were mine, I’d have to say that my answer, such as it is, stands as the most accurate and complete answer that can possibly be provided. But ultimately it is you who must determine whether or not to finally accept it, rate it, or reject it. I hope that you will consider the logic and accuracy of the content that I "was" able to provide in making your decision.
Regards;
Tutuzdad-ga
I am sorry, but I was pretty up-front in what the requirements were when I posted the question. Bottom line is that with only 2 of 4 parts answered, I can't justify more than 2.5 stars out of 5. If you want the money and are satisfied with that rating, I'll submit the rating. If you want to withdraw your answer, that's okay too. It's up to you.
Thank you for allowing me an opportunity to answer your interesting question.
Your question will undoubtedly be answered by logic and by narrowing it down to the largest mobile mechanism built in modern times (“modern”, meaning high technology). While the space shuttle is certainly an example of modern technology at its largest, it is, after all, quite empty inside in terms of equipment. Most of the vehicle is designed to act as a storage bay, and that is closely monitored for excess weight before and during flight. A heavy ship cannot fly, so ideally, the fewer items stored in this bay the better. In addition, the large fuel tanks on either side of the vessel which make up the bulk of the ship before takeoff (and which also happen to get jettisoned before leaving the atmosphere) are technically not even part of the vehicle itself. Even so, they are relatively devoid of moving parts on the inside as they mostly contain fuel.
My guess is that the mechanism with the most moving parts can only be one of these United States Navy Nimitz Class Aircraft Carriers:
FORRESTAL (CVA 59)
SARATOGA (CVA 60)
RANGER (CVA 61)
INDEPENDENCE (CVA 62)
KITTY HAWK (CVA 63)
CONSTELLATION (CVA 64)
ENTERPRISE (CVN 65)
AMERICA (CVA 66)
JOHN F. KENNEDY (CVA 67)
NIMITZ (CVN 68)
DWIGHT D. EISENHOWER (CVN 69)
CARL VINSON (CVN 70)
THEODORE ROOSEVELT (CVN 71)
ABRAHAM LINCOLN (CVN 72)
GEORGE WASHINGTON (CVN 73)
JOHN C. STENNIS (CVN 74)
HARRY S. TRUMAN (CVN 75)
RONALD REAGAN (CVN 76)
GEORGE H.W. BUSH (CVN 77)
Logically, it would seem that the USS Enterprise is probably the winner here; enormously dwarfing the Space Shuttle (or any other vessel for that matter) by comparison. Taking a quick look at the vessel (based on what the military will let us know for certain) we can clearly see that this thing is a behemoth. It possesses eight – count them, eight – onboard reactors, a huge array of tracking devices, computerized equipment and armament (which is certainly quite technical nowadays as opposed to the old guns used on the old ships). In addition, this machine has the functionality of a small city providing living quarters, cooking/dining facilities, entertainment facilities (theaters, gyms, etc), training facilities, meeting rooms, auditoriums, water purification plant, sewer plant/plumbing system, research facilities and medical facilities (to some degree) for up to 5382 full time crewmembers (passengers/residents). This of course is not to mention the enormous storage capacity that can hold tons of sophisticated equipment, vehicles, guided missile systems and of course many fighter jets (after all, it is an aircraft carrier). The electrical system’s wires alone undoubtedly weigh more than that of every man and woman aboard combined. Since all of the onboard systems are electronic or nuclear, it goes without saying that it takes hundreds of not thousands of pieces to put together devices for even the most minor functions on this ship. Whereas the old ships might have employed a crank or a handle device to open or close a door, this modern ship may devote miles of wire, computer hardware/software and a vast array of technology for the same purpose. I’m sure you can imagine what it must take to run this sea-based city.
USS ENTERPRISE (CVAN-65)
(later CVN-65)
CLASS - ENTERPRISE
Displacement 75,700 Tons, Dimensions, 1101' 2" (oa) x 133' x 37' 1" (Max) Armament None as built, fitted with Sea Sparrow in 1967.
Armor, Unknown.
Machinery, 280,000 SHP; 8 Westinghouse (A2W) Reactors driving geared turbines, 4 screws Speed, 35+ Knots, Crew 5382.
The USS Nimitiz, on the other hand, displaces significantly more weight than the Enterprise, so in terms of volume it might be considered even larger. It’s not quite as long and doesn’t have near as many reactors but it can hold about 300 more people (and probably more aircraft, but no one is saying):
USS NIMITZ (CVAN-68)
(later CVN-68)
CLASS - NIMITZ
Displacement 91,300 Tons, Dimensions, 1088' (oa) x 134' x 37' 8" (Max) Armament 3 Sea Sparrow-SAM, Starting with CVAN-70 4 20mm CIWS, 90 Aircraft. Armor, Unknown.
Machinery, 260,000 SHP; 2 Westinghouse (A4W) Reactors Driving Geared Turbines, 4 screws Speed, 35+ Knots, Crew 5617.
Though my answer does not specifically state how many moving parts are on onboard this machine (presently there is somewhat of a blackout on information pertaining to military equipment), it certainly fits the criteria you’ve set forth. I came to this conclusion as a matter of common sense, which clearly dictates that this, being the largest, most technologically advanced, mobile piece of equipment ever produced my man, is in all probability, the correct answer.
Below you will find that I have carefully defined my search strategy for you in the event that you need to search for more information. By following the same type of searches that I did you may be able to enhance the research I have provided even further. I hope you find that that my research exceeds your expectations. If you have any questions about my research please post a clarification request prior to rating the answer. Otherwise, I welcome your rating and your final comments and I look forward to working with you again in the near future. Thank you for bringing your question to us.
Best regards;
Tutuzdad-ga
* INFORMATION SOURCES *
USS NIMITZ (CVAN-68)
http://www.navsource.org/archives/02/68.htm
USS ENTERPRISE (CVAN-65)
http://www.navsource.org/archives/02/65.htm
NAVSOURCE ONLINE
http://www.navsource.org/archives/02idx.htm
SPACE SHUTTLE DRAWINGS AND TECHNICAL DIAGRAMS
http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/diagrams/shuttle/shuttle.htm
* SEARCH STRATEGY *
Google ://www.google.com
SEARCH TERMS USED:
LARGEST AIRCRAFT CARRIER
ARICRAFT CARRIER DIMENSIONS
LARGEST NAVAL VESSEL
Your questions are indeed challenging ones, and I fear that there is no public reference from which I can take (assume, estimate, etc.) a plausible answer. For obvious reasons the military does not divulge ALL the equipment onboard these vessels, but one must assume that the world's finest, latest and most advanced technology is there. By virtue of this alone the number of moving parts aboard an aircraft carrier are not only impossible to determine, the number is also impossible to estimate and believe that we are reasobly close.
If you'd like me to retract my answer, I'd certainly be willing to allow someone else to give it a shot. However, as I mentioned earlier, since this is the largest mobile mechanism, it is quite likley that future answers will also return to this same subject again. Please let me know how we shall proceed from here.
Regards;
tutuzdad-ga
#If you have any other info about this subject , Please add it free.# |