Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: fcooke
In the game I would never put troops on something that slow......

quote:

JFBs routinely put troop on xAKLs when ferrying to the small islands nearby. Ship availability and ability to dock at very small ports are more important than speed

quote:

ORIGINAL: fcooke

Interesting find! I've only briefly looked at it but was surprised to find a 9 knot ship in the mix and quite a few around 11. In the game I would never put troops on something that slow......

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dili

Yeah if you read some the text it tells some were modified with turbines to be able to be faster, i remember reading one that 11kt when upgraded speed increased to 17kt.

quote:

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

Looks like the particularly slow ones were only used on milk runs to and from Alaska and Hawaii.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dili

There were quite a bit of new merchants ships build in 30's and there were a big incentive for them: diesel engines were starting to be viable.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dili

Since i am on a roll on merchant stuff you can get ONI 208 here, it has nationality and year date in the document list. https://archive.org/details/MerchShipRecogManual

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ian R

I remember reading somewhere (possibly on here) that when building of merchant hulls was expanded during WW1, they went for the tried and tested reciprocating engines instead of then the then new-fangled turbines. The manufacturers just weren't tooled up for the new technology stuff.

Eventually the EFC set up Hog Islander production, with the new design featuring oil fired turbines - too late for WW1.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ian R

I remember reading somewhere (possibly on here) that when building of merchant hulls was expanded during WW1, they went for the tried and tested reciprocating engines instead of then the then new-fangled turbines. The manufacturers just weren't tooled up for the new technology stuff.

Eventually the EFC set up Hog Islander production, with the new design featuring oil fired turbines - too late for WW1.

Britain used oil-fired turbines in the Queen Elizabeth class BBs, but reverted to standard coal fired reciprocating engines for the R class BBs because the government felt the shipyards/engine manufacturer had overcharged for the turbine engines and Britain did not have easy access to oil fuel. I wouldn't be surprised if heat resistant metals like tungsten and titanium were also in short supply for making turbine blades. Nascent technology always has its growing pains and starts out expensive.

I thought I read somewhere that Germany had a lock on diesel technology during the interwar period because they patented it. So I could see them licensing Italian shipyards for it but limiting how much Britain could use it until at least the mid-1930s.

quote:

The Oil Burning or Coal Burning steamships had interesting quadruple expansion engines and were built expressly for Weirs with interchangeable fuel burned in their boilers. Coal or oil was purchased when required in either format dependent upon price and availability, the ship's engineers being required to make the boiler burner alterations to suit. Generally, however, the engineers preferred the cleaner oil over the dirty and heavy work of coal.

quote:

ORIGINAL: pontiouspilot

interesting.....I always wondered why the Germans didn't put diesels in their tanks (AFVs). Diesel is much easier and cheaper to produce and a hell of a lot less flammable.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorch

Someone will probably correct me on this, but I thought the R class BBs used turbines from launch; it's just that they were coal-fired in most boilers.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ian R

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorch

Someone will probably correct me on this, but I thought the R class BBs used turbines from launch; it's just that they were coal-fired in most boilers.

I had a look at that in Conways. The "Revenge" class (as described in the Admiralty papers for the 1913 building programme) were designed as cheaper versions of the 'cutting edge' QEs.

The original design, when the first three keels were laid in 1913, and the 4th and 5th in 1914, was 'multi-fuel' with both coal and oil, and 4 shaft Parson's turbines, for 21.5kts.

Renee Greger in his book (page 87) says the lower speed, compared to the QEs, was acceptable because the ships were specifically designed for North Sea duty, and the German High Seas Fleet was limited to not more than 21kts anyway.

RN concerns about fuel oil supplies where alleviated when Sir Winston Churchill arranged for the strategic purchase of shares in the Anglo-Iranian oil company, and in January 1915 the design was altered (even though two had been launched) to pure oil firing, with a consequent increase from 31,000 to 40,000 SHP, and speed increased to 23 knots (not that they ever achieved that) - I.E. making them a more austere version of the "second generation" QE fast battleship. For example, they only had one rudder (plus a smaller hand operated rudder centreline ahead of it, which proved useless and was later removed).

This in one sense compares favourably with the QEs, whose turbines produced 56,000 SHP on a similar displacement, and also rated at 23kts. However, the power limitations, and other aspects of "accepting the lowest bidder" procurement, made them less amenable to later modernisation. Also, on trials with torpedo protection bulges added, the speed dropped by 0.5kts, albeit they became more stable gun platforms.

In August 1914 the 6th and 7th units were suspended and later re-ordered as the BCs Renown and Repulse, and the 8th unit (Resistance) was canned.

Only one of the five ships received an extensive rebuild in the 1930s - the Royal Oak, which was ironically sunk at anchor by a U-boat. The other four were retired to reserve during the war after performing useful convoy escort and bombardment duties.

Winston Churchill, writing after 1945, said the Admiralty spent most of the war keeping the R class BBs "as far away from the enemy as possible".