Re: Steam Turbines - Cruise power
- From: fairwater@xxxxxxxxx (Derek Lyons)
- Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2011 15:23:45 GMT
Eugene Griessel <eugene@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mon, 24 Oct 2011 12:37:17 +0100, "Keith W"
<keithnospoofsplease@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I guess that depends on how you define best but turbines
were definitely more efficient.
I define it in context of the original question asked here. There is
no real "best" for everything - just the best for the task at hand.
The best _available_ for the task at hand _within the schedule and
budget_. It's been alluded to upthread, but availability of machinery
and hands of the appropriate skill level factor (to name just of the
many) into the equation as well. Determining what is 'best' can be a
complex and uncertain task indeed.
D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.
http://derekl1963.livejournal.com/
-Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings.
Oct 5th, 2004 JDL
.
- References:
- Steam Turbines - Cruise power
- From: MarchHareMFP@xxxxxxxxxxx
- Re: Steam Turbines - Cruise power
- From: Keith W
- Re: Steam Turbines - Cruise power
- From: Eugene Griessel
- Re: Steam Turbines - Cruise power
- From: Peter Skelton
- Re: Steam Turbines - Cruise power
- From: Eugene Griessel
- Re: Steam Turbines - Cruise power
- From: Keith W
- Re: Steam Turbines - Cruise power
- From: Eugene Griessel
- Re: Steam Turbines - Cruise power
- From: Keith W
- Re: Steam Turbines - Cruise power
- From: Eugene Griessel
- Steam Turbines - Cruise power
- Prev by Date: Re: A Tory MP's proposal in 1951 - build new 12-inch gun monitors
- Next by Date: Re: There are times...
- Previous by thread: Re: Steam Turbines - Cruise power
- Next by thread: Re: Steam Turbines - Cruise power
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|