How Did They Widen A Ship? - Page 2 - Ships Nostalgia
08:38

Welcome
Welcome!Welcome to Ships Nostalgia, the world's greatest online community for people worldwide with an interest in ships and shipping. Whether you are crew, ex-crew, ship enthusiasts or cruisers, this is the forum for you. And what's more, it's completely FREE.

Click here to go to the forums home page and find out more.
Click here to join.
Log in
User Name Password

How Did They Widen A Ship?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #26  
Old 19th February 2012, 21:02
Ian6's Avatar
Ian6 Ian6 is offline  
Senior Member
Organisation: Merchant Navy
Department: Navigation
Active: 1954 - 1965
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
My location
Posts: 598
I sailed in several T2's, all turbo-electric. There were specific production issues as Cisco mentioned in the previous post (possibly related to General Electric getting the contract) but turbo-electic had some genuine advantages over straight steam turbine propulsion.

Steam turbines could not be reversed any more than a windmill can go backwards. The only options were to either fit expensive gearboxes or more usually a separate reverse turbine. This was much less powerful than the (usually) three stage forward turbine so an emergency stop didn't happen plus you didn't use reverse much but carried its weight around all the time. Turbo electric was also generally quieter and less prone to vibration, P&O fitted turbo electric drive to two of the 'Strath's prewar and the Canberra in 1960.

Any engineers reading this please excuse the layman's language I was only a navigator after all.

Ian
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 19th February 2012, 21:20
Super Moderator
Organisation: Merchant Navy
Department: Engineering
Active: 1962 - 2005
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
My location
Posts: 6,714
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cisco View Post
Bob, all but a very small number of T2s were turbo-electric. I read once that this was chosen for them as the US didn't have sufficient gear cutting capacity for all the ships they were building in WW2 so naval ships , victorys, etc got the standard steam turbine kit. One company that liked turbo-electric was Union Steamship Coy of NZ. They used it on a number of their express passo boats.
They made handy power staions... T2's being used in Norway about 1960ish to supplement hydro power due to a drought and a few were also used in Vietnam during the war. At least one of the USS coy ships was also used in that matter after retirement.
I was on a Diesel Electric drill ship once, Glomar Grand Isle. When drilling the electricity went to the drill floor, when shifting ship someone threw a big switch somewhere and off we went. The 'telegraphs' were Baldwin locomotive controllers.......
Sailed the Glomar 2or perhaps 3 as 1St Engineer ( 2nd in UK terms ) from Aberdeen to North Shields in 72/73 ? Diesel electric DC . Generators used to drive the drill rig ; also when shifting the power was used for propulsion . She would not make any speed under her own power but when in tow the propulsion was used to assist which allowed a high speed tow .
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 19th February 2012, 23:13
Stephen J. Card's Avatar
Stephen J. Card Stephen J. Card is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,359
Quote:
Originally Posted by Derek Roger View Post
I have seen that done John ; a complete new hull onto an exsisting Engine room . What seems to being put forward here were convertions that would have had a new section to increase the lenght and some widening of the remainder of the hull to fair into the new section which was of 7 feet more in beam than the original vessel .
I can see how it could be done but would imagine that it would not be cost effective .


In the case of BANGKOK and SIAM... to take the afterpart of a 30,000 dwt tanker and attach it to a new forepart to increase capacity to 60,000 I would think that would be very cost effective. ie double the capacity but no new machinery.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 19th February 2012, 23:38
Super Moderator
Organisation: Merchant Navy
Department: Engineering
Active: 1962 - 2005
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
My location
Posts: 6,714
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen J. Card View Post
In the case of BANGKOK and SIAM... to take the afterpart of a 30,000 dwt tanker and attach it to a new forepart to increase capacity to 60,000 I would think that would be very cost effective. ie double the capacity but no new machinery.
I agree with that Stephen ; I believe that is what I said .. But to lenghten and widen an existing vessel does not to make sense re cost . I think that is what has been proposed and is being debated . Perhaps I have missed the reason for the post.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 20th February 2012, 12:58
Stephen J. Card's Avatar
Stephen J. Card Stephen J. Card is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,359
Quote:
Originally Posted by Derek Roger View Post
I agree with that Stephen ; I believe that is what I said .. But to lenghten and widen an existing vessel does not to make sense re cost . I think that is what has been proposed and is being debated . Perhaps I have missed the reason for the post.

OK, let's talk a simple tank vessel. 1 centreline tank and sidetanks port and starboard. Dock the vessel, cut away PART of the sidetank which would include the vertical side plating, the bilge keel and the sheertrake. From what is left, extend the framing etc out to the new beam max and then plate up the sides, sheertrake and bilge keel. Cost probably not too bad and you might get another 10 to 20% capacity. No? Lengthening... that would be the easy way.
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 20th February 2012, 13:20
chadburn chadburn is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 7,734
Pre WW2 I think with GB shipowner's it was a matter of "the Devil you know" when it came to type's of propulsion. Crosswaites Tugs had a D/E tug built by Hall Russell in 1933 (the first in GB), the initial build cost was higher than the normal propulsion method's and she was certainly still with Crosswaites in the 1950's when I was at Smiths. Very much the American style of Tug she was the only one built for the Company.
__________________
Geordie Chief

From Grey Funnel to any Funnel, just show him/ me the money Mabel
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 22nd February 2012, 01:59
allanc's Avatar
allanc allanc is online now   SN Supporter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
My location
Posts: 676
A bit off topic, but as I recall, Normandy was turbo-electric.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 11th March 2012, 20:52
Bjorne Bjorne is offline  
Member
Organisation: Merchant Navy
Department: Engineering
Active: 1956 - 1978
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
My location
Posts: 78
T2-tankers

during the winter 1061-61 there where 4 T-2 tankers in Sweden to supply electrical power. I was down in the engineroom of one of them ( Greek Owned laying just ooutside Stockholm) and it was spotles.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Was "slave ship" used to describe a barge/ship being towed? JMB Ship Research 1 30th June 2010 10:57
Scapa Flow ship to ship transfers rushie News and Views from the Shipping World 0 9th February 2007 08:33
Anti whaling ship labelled a pirate ship rushie News and Views from the Shipping World 7 11th January 2007 09:54



Search the net with ask.com
Support SN
Ask.com and get


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.