Re: First World War questions
- From: Peter Skelton <skeltonp@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2005 06:04:10 -0400
On 31 Aug 2005 08:31:31 +0100, azb@xxxxxxxxxx (Andrew Robert
Breen) wrote:
<good stuff gone>
>Re-supply of fuel at sea was still fairly rare. Generally warships
>coaled or oiled at shore bases. The facilities could be very
>elaborate, as witness the automated coaling wharves at Portland.
>More often they consisted of the crew carrying the stuff aboard.
>
Perhaps somewhat rare but re-oiling destroyers from battleships
was routine in the Grand Fleet by 1915.
>>Here is my summary of the engine types of the era (not distinguishing
>>between light and heavy oil, or the various types of turbines, just
>>looking at major distinctions):
>>I. A. Coal-fired reciprocating steam
>> B. Coal-fired turbine
>>II. A. Oil-fired reciprocating steam
>> B. Oil-fired turbine
>> C. Oil-fired piston (i.e. diesel)
>>III. Gasoline/petrol piston
>>Did I leave out anything major?
>>
>>Why would a ship carry both coal and fuel oil? It looks like a lot of
>>capital ships did so, at least according to Jane's.
>
>1. Spraying oil on the fires would produce a short-term power boost
>for a coal burner.
At the cost of glassing the clinker.
>2. Oiling facilities wern't available over much of the world. A blue
>-water warship would have to use coal for cruising, switching to
>her oil-burning main boilers when speed was required.
3. A boiler could be started much faster on oil than coal. It
could then be switched over.
Peter Skelton
.
- References:
- First World War questions
- From: FHPDX
- Re: First World War questions
- From: Andrew Robert Breen
- First World War questions
- Prev by Date: Re: First World War questions
- Next by Date: Post-Katrina rescue efforts
- Previous by thread: Re: First World War questions
- Next by thread: Post-Katrina rescue efforts
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
