Anyone going to see the Russian flotilla sail past Dover?

Sorry no - I'm busy digging my new bunker system

Must fly
TD

 

Just off to buy a tin hat, not that it will do any good

 

Notice that the aircraft carrier had a bad stack emission....looked like a diesel engine in bad shape although the main propulsion,I would have thought will be gas turbine powered.

 

From news reports it is the only carrier that Russia has and carries 50 planes.

Regards
Tom

 

What a mess:

Propulsion:

• Steam turbines, 8 turbo-pressurised boilers, 4 shafts, 200,000 hp (150 MW)
• 2 × 50,000 hp (37 MW) turbines
• 9 × 2,011 hp (1,500 kW) turbogenerators
• 6 × 2,011 hp (1,500 kW) diesel generators

 

Thanks for posting Dave.

I would have thought that the carrier had gas turbine propulsion....seems old hat in technology...how old is the carrier?....I think the decommisioned RN carriers were all steam propelled.

Looking at the installed plant.it looks like:

2 Steam turbines rated at 37 mws connected to two propulsion units,ie,two 100% units which is the norm to have main and standby units.

Steam turbines...four shafts say HP,IP and two LPs exhausting to a condenser....there might be some steam services supplied by bled steam from the the HP or IP cylinders.....steam pressure and temperature which is very important in steam turbine design not mentioned.....unusual to have a steam turbine with four shafts at this relatively low capacity.

Steam supplied from 8 turbo pressurised oil fired boilers which means each boiler is supplied with forced draught air only with their pressurised combustion chambers exhausting to the stack.

I think the 150mws quoted is the total heat input expressed in mws

The 9 x 1500kw turbogenerators would supply auxiliary and operational services for the carrier....supplied by steam from the oil fired boilers.

The 6 x diesel generators would act as emergency standby to the 1500kw turbogenerators and for periods when the carrier was in port....economical practice avoiding the firing of the oil fired boilers and running the 1500kw turbogenerators.

Would be interesting to see the full engineering specification......probably NATO will have the intelligence.

 

Gosh Harry! I'm impressed. Incidentally, as a more general comment, I never cease to be amazed at the in-depth knowledge of members of this forum.

 

A lifetime in the "hiss and piss" business,ie,steam and its use in power generation.

Looking at the Soviet carriers they seem to have experienced bad times and hence poor availability since their commissioning......I remember one uncompleted carrier was sold to China.

But the carrier in question is also from the same stable as is the Baku which became the Admiral Gorshkov and was sold to India.It looks as if the carrier type design stems from before 1985.

A look at its power units,it appears that the carrier in question has the same 8 pressurised boilers supplying 4 turbines (not 2) x 37 mws, connected to four shafts giving a total shaft output to the screws of 200000 HP,ie 149.2 mws,say 150 mws.TAhe four shafts would give greater flexibility..... what the duty ratings for maximum speed are is not disclosed.

I could not see where 2 x 37 mw steam turbines could deliver 200000 shaft hp to the screws,hence my assumption that it was the total heat to the boilers.

So the 8 oil fired boiler output is capable of supplying150 mws plus (9 x 1.5 mw).ie 13.5 mw of auxiliary turbogenerator capacity.

The main steam turbines would not have four shafts as interpreted but most likely be simple designs having 2 shafts,ie an HP and LP cylinder.

I would add that the USN carriers are propelled by steam but this is derived from nuclear reactors and not by fuel oil fired boilers.France's CGD carrier is also nuclear powered.

 

Hmmmmmmm

Need to think about this and absorb all this info some how


TD

 

choo choo

 

The Cloths of Heaven



Had I the heaven's embroidered cloths,
Enwrought with golden and silver light,
The blue and the dim and the dark cloths
Of night and light and the half-light;
I would spread the cloths under your feet:
But I, being poor, have only my dreams;
I have spread my dreams under your feet;
Tread softly because you tread on my dreams.

W. B. Yeats

 

I don't know if the frames of the carrier are snapshots but the oil fired boiler emissions remind me of the B52 Smokey Joes......something adrift in combustion control perhaps or could be the establishing/changing over of a boiler.

The Choo Choo photograph does not show the MIG 29s on board as seen in other coverage.

 

That was my first thought too, I hope they paid their congestion charge.

 

Almost as smoky as a Vulcan.

 

I thought that the 2 × 50,000 hp (37 MW) turbines line in the wiki entry meant that she had 2 x 50,000 HP gas turbines (jet engines) in addition to the 200,000 HP steam turbines but I can't seem to find any more info on the power plant.

A lot of newer warships have diesel engine and gas turbine combinations but I hadn't heard of any steam turbine / gas turbines before.

 

Dave,

The 50000 hp quoted is the rough equivalent to 37 mws from the actual conversion giving
49597 hp ......conversion...... one hp equals 746 watts

Large steam turbine and large gas turbines are an option for propulsion.....as you say would not expect to find the two selected together for propulsion...

 

It really is a non-story. However with planes invading air space and this bunch of junk blocking the Channel why are we not calling Putin's bluff by downing a few planes and sinking a few ships, someone needs to get on the front foot and be proactive rather than all this reactive nonsense. Then maybe we could justify a few column inches in the daily press. Brian

 

Bunch of 'junk'? The Chinese Navy was there too?