Hval
I suspect that most of the load balancing / shock effects will actually be contained "downstream" of the Prime Power Interface. I'm not a sparky and don't wear pink ovies, but I believe that the "shock" elements you refer to will be no different to those on a CVN and should therefore be catered for within the existing EMALS design.
Where there will be a difference will be re-jigging the ships IPMS software to recognise and accommodate the load demanded by the PPI to energise the flywheel. However, that load demanded should build up relatively smoothly to a defined level, before decaying as the storage device (flywheel) reaches full capacity, again, downstream of the PPI. In my simple mind, all that requires is that the ships distribution grid (IPMS) software recognises the load characteristics of that particular consumer and does not trip. All the energy feedbck/harmonics and clever bits should be isolated on the EMALS side of the PPI.
I'm sure there will be more complexities to it than that - I don't for one minute underestimate the demands of this type of engineering, that's why it's called electrickery. However, I would be very surprised if any "redesign" required extensive hardware changes, particularly when the EMALS / AAG system should have been designed from the off to be standalone systems acting merely as loads on the grid.
Your point on EMI however, is well made, although again, I should have thought that the location of the EMALS system ought to minimise the effect on the ships systems.
Last edited by Not_a_boffin; 26th Mar 2012 at 18:47.