| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Invernahaille
|
 Posted -
26/06/2006
:
04:02
|
Edited by - Invernahaille on 10 April 2007 04:41:19
|
|
| Replies |
| Author |
|
|
thomo
Barlick Born Old Salt
2021 Posts
|
|
Posted - 26/11/2009 : 18:35
They also power generator sets, the system as designed gives the most efficient energy for propulsion under variable conditions whilst remaining as environmentally friendly as is possible. Ships do not carry surplus equipment, but by carefull management of available power sources can be run as economically as is practical during ever changing conditions at sea. Does that help? Rolls Royce has always been at the forefront of propulsion technology and does not always get it right up front, but rest assured, they will. The English Electric Generator sets are very efficient, we used a portable one whilst the the ship was closed down in harbour in Hong Kong, standing next to it, you hardly knew it was running, essential on a passenger ship.
Edited by - thomo on 26/11/2009 6:37:12 PM
thomo  |
jgb7573
New Member
44 Posts
|
|
Posted - 27/11/2009 : 10:31
Thanks for that Thomo, it certainly answers my question. Like you I have a lot of faith in Rolls Royce's ability to get new techniology right. I've no doubt they also included provision for some tuning at sea in their budgets.
JohnB,
Found that horn - gorn! |
Invernahaille
|
Posted - 25/07/2010 : 14:45
|
Invernahaille
|
Posted - 19/08/2010 : 22:54
City of Eastbourne.
City of Canterbury.
City of Lichfield.
City of Ottowa.
City of Oxford. J.R.Es favourite ship.
City of Winnipeg. (Later City Of Delhi)
My first ship. The City of Worcester.
Very fond memories.
Edited by - Invernahaille on 20/08/2010 12:00:38 AM
|
Stanley
Local Historian & Old Fart
36804 Posts
|
|
Posted - 20/08/2010 : 04:41
There was a TV programme on Rotterdam last night. Usual overblown commentary but some big ships. One of them was a bulk carrier, the Berge Stahl, I think they said 700,000 tons deadweight. It had 1 metre under the keel. Impressive ship! But I still like the pics of the older boats. Thanks for them Robert.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MS_Berge_Stahl
Stanley Challenger Graham
Barlick View
stanley at barnoldswick.freeserve.co.uk |
Invernahaille
|
Posted - 21/08/2010 : 22:07
Stanley,
Its a pleasure to share the photographs. The recent photos I posted bring back many good memories, though some were tainted by bad trips.
Usually a bad trip means that some member of the crew lost someone at home, Mums Dads and children.
Live goes on.
Ronnie passed away whilst I was on my first trip, three weeks from home, just after leaving South Africa on the home run.
A sailors life was not always an easy one.
|
Invernahaille
|
Posted - 25/11/2010 : 17:19
I remember once whilst I was in a shipbuilding yard in Glasgow, that two shipbuilders were taling to eachother about the demise of one of their colleagues due to an accident in the yard. I quote "Poor John, spent fifty years in the shipyards, building ships that sailed the globe, and he never travelled further than Wemyss bay, or Largs"
Poignant story. Now we dont have the skills left to build ships. Let alone sail them.
Whatever happened to British Shipping owners and the British Merchant Navy?
Edited by - Invernahaille on 25/11/2010 5:20:40 PM
Edited by - Invernahaille on 25/11/2010 5:22:41 PM
|
Tizer
|
Posted - 25/11/2010 : 19:40
At least we still build some trawlers....
http://www.trawlerphotos.co.uk/gallery/showgallery.php?cat=745
http://www.macduffshipyards.co.uk/
|
Invernahaille
|
Posted - 26/11/2010 : 00:45
There are still some shipbuilders in the UK, but nothing on the scale that it used to be. I understand the economics of the market place, and all that it entails.
Appledore in Devon springs to mind as one, upper clyde shipbuilders and whats left of Vickers shipbuilding and engineering, in Barrow in Furness.
There are of course a few ship repairing companies around, like George Priors etc.
Its just a shame.
|
Stanley
Local Historian & Old Fart
36804 Posts
|
|
Posted - 26/11/2010 : 08:20
Robert, I agree and so stupid! I always thought that it was the height of political stupidity to neglect ship-building after WW1 when there was such a tremendous demand for new ships. The trick was of course that the governments who subsidised their ship builders laid a foundation of resource and skills that is paying dividends decades later. Same with other basic manufacturing industries of course.
Stanley Challenger Graham
Barlick View
stanley at barnoldswick.freeserve.co.uk |
thomo
Barlick Born Old Salt
2021 Posts
|
|
Posted - 26/11/2010 : 15:33
Nothing to do with the unions then???
thomo |
Invernahaille
|
Posted - 26/11/2010 : 15:54
Thomo,
I was trying to keep away from the union issues. I agree that the unions did create unfavourable limitations on the British Shipbilders, but there was also the issue with the shipowners and builders. I think the truth lies somewhere in the middle. Its all immaterial now though.
|
Invernahaille
|
Posted - 26/11/2010 : 16:09
Talking about the unions.
I was a member of the National Union of Seamen, back in the 1970s, when it was a condition of employment that you had to be a member of the union (closed shop agreements).
The NUS called a strike in 1971, whilst I was at sea, we were told to heave to, after a few days, we had to start jetison some of the frozen cargo overboard because we didnt have enough fuel to keep the generators going.
The officers and crew where a bit upset to say the least, we had been away at sea for the best part of nine months and only three days from home
The upshot was that we ended up with a pay freeze, and a reduction in benefits from the shipowners.
The leader of the union at that time became deputy prime minister 30 years later.
Yes you guessed it, it was John Prescott
|
Stanley
Local Historian & Old Fart
36804 Posts
|
|
Posted - 27/11/2010 : 07:49
I always remember my old firebeater at Bancroft, John Plummer, a good man. Stoker on drifters up round Bear Island and later on Fyffe's banana boats. He said that when they were steaming home they had to fire like hell to power the refrigeration units and occasionally, if the price fell on the UK markets, they would heave to in the Bay of Biscay, unpack all the bananas and jettison them overboard. Then they turned round and went back for another load. Cheaper than carrying on to UK. He said it seemed such a waste.
Thomo, unions were often at fault but also right on occasions. Look at the Clyde Shipbuilders work-in. They saved the yard but in the end the major factor was lack of government support.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upper_Clyde_Shipbuilders
Stanley Challenger Graham
Barlick View
stanley at barnoldswick.freeserve.co.uk |
Stanley
Local Historian & Old Fart
36804 Posts
|
|
Posted - 27/11/2010 : 08:46
Robert, I was thinking about your comment that the ship-owners weren't always whiter than white. I seem to remember that during the war if a merchant seaman had his ship sunk under him his wage stopped with the sinking. Have I got this right? Does it still apply today?
Stanley Challenger Graham
Barlick View
stanley at barnoldswick.freeserve.co.uk |
Marine Engineers
