No Signals Posted February 1, 2009 Share Posted February 1, 2009 What and where? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gritineye Posted February 1, 2009 Share Posted February 1, 2009 A Pinnacle? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
antarmike Posted February 1, 2009 Share Posted February 1, 2009 Turbinia? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
antarmike Posted February 1, 2009 Share Posted February 1, 2009 (edited) If it is it's at the Newcastle Discovery Museum. From the very cleverly chosen camera angle it is difficult to see if it has the radical, backward canted stembar., so I may be wrong. Edited February 1, 2009 by antarmike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
antarmike Posted February 1, 2009 Share Posted February 1, 2009 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
antarmike Posted February 1, 2009 Share Posted February 1, 2009 A Pinnacle? Did you mean Pinnace? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No Signals Posted February 1, 2009 Author Share Posted February 1, 2009 Some of you are just too well educated! Yes it is indeed the Turbinia, the brainchild of Charles Parsons and scourge of the navy at the Spithead review in 1897. I must confess that until I came across it I thought it had been scrapped years ago. So pleased to see it intact, if not afloat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gritineye Posted February 1, 2009 Share Posted February 1, 2009 Did you mean Pinnace? Of course I did, it was a possibly humorous link to another post (no smiley for fat fingers/half comatose, mods please note) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abn deuce Posted February 1, 2009 Share Posted February 1, 2009 What was the thinking about using multiple small propellors and not fewer larger ones ? example using three instead of 9, was this do to rpm of the shafts and vibration? .And why have the stern most shaft so long would seem it would fowl the rudder ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No Signals Posted February 1, 2009 Author Share Posted February 1, 2009 What was the thinking about using multiple small propellors and not fewer larger ones ? example using three instead of 9, was this do to rpm of the shafts and vibration? .And why have the stern most shaft so long would seem it would fowl the rudder ? I really am no expert on this and if you do a Google search I'm sure you will find some articles on the Turbinia that explain it much more accurately than I can. It is something to do with the speed at which the turbine is capable of spinning and if the props go too fast then they waste a lot of their energy making bubbles rather than pushing the craft forward. I think the multiple smaller props were a method of reducing this problem. But I accept I could be completely wrong on that. You need to understand that this was the worlds first successful steam turbine vessel and for a lot of things there was 'no book' at the time. It was all pioneering work and tackling lots of different elements all at the same time. All said Mr Parsons did it quite well! I dont know about whether the long central shaft would interfere with the rudder. From the way it ran rings around everything that was sent out to chase it at Spithead I reckon it wasnt an immediate problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abn deuce Posted February 1, 2009 Share Posted February 1, 2009 Understood , I will have to do a google at some point and get educated. thanks for the information . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest catweazle (Banned Member) Posted February 1, 2009 Share Posted February 1, 2009 Some of you are just too well educated! Yes it is indeed the Turbinia, the brainchild of Charles Parsons and scourge of the navy at the Spithead review in 1897. I must confess that until I came across it I thought it had been scrapped years ago. So pleased to see it intact, if not afloat. I didnt know it had survived,would be nice to see in the water,boats dont fare well in musuems,cutting edge for its time,really peed of the navy as you say.I expect the prop blade area calculated would of been to huge,so this was the answer,we use Duo props today. PS Black smoke :cool2: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
antarmike Posted February 1, 2009 Share Posted February 1, 2009 It spent a while as two halves, the museum who had it not having enough room to display her, but front met back some years ago.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlienFTM Posted February 2, 2009 Share Posted February 2, 2009 It IS the Discovery Museum? I thought it was. Been upstairs to visit A Soldier's Life? Exhibition of bits of 15/19H and LD memorabilia. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlienFTM Posted February 2, 2009 Share Posted February 2, 2009 It is something to do with the speed at which the turbine is capable of spinning and if the props go too fast then they waste a lot of their energy making bubbles rather than pushing the craft forward. Cavitation. Also makes a racket on sonar and draws anti-submarine craft to submarines like flies to a cowpat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony B Posted February 2, 2009 Share Posted February 2, 2009 Cavitation. Also makes a racket on sonar and draws anti-submarine craft to submarines like flies to a cowpat. Hence the reason one of the most secret things on a submarine? The design of the prop. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest catweazle (Banned Member) Posted February 2, 2009 Share Posted February 2, 2009 Did you know the prop is hardly more efficient today than Brunells original design. He wasnt a PC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
antarmike Posted February 2, 2009 Share Posted February 2, 2009 And during the cold war, hydrophones were used to listen for Russian Subs, and we knew each individual Russian sub, because each propellor due to manufacturing tolerances, wear etc, made a slightly different sound. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
antarmike Posted February 2, 2009 Share Posted February 2, 2009 Designed by Charles Parsons in 1894, TURBINIA was an experimental craft intended to demonstrate the potential of the successful steam turbines already being produced by his company to drive generators for ship propulsion. TURBINIA had a long narrow hull form (100ft x 9ft) and, powered by a single 1000hp steam turbine, was expected to achieve 30 knots or more. TURBINIA was launched on 2 August 1894 and her trials started on 14 November 1894. Initial results were very disappointing as she could only reach 19.75 knots. The problem was traced to the propeller which was not capable of performing efficiently at 2000 rpm. Two years intensive work followed, during which the effects of cavitation on high speed propellers were discovered and eventually overcome. Rebuilt and now fitted with three steam turbines, each one driving a shaft fitted with three propellers, TURBINIA achieved 29.6 knots in December 1896 and further improvements gave 32.76 knots in April 1897. She was then the fastest vessel in the world. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
antarmike Posted February 2, 2009 Share Posted February 2, 2009 On 11 January 1907, TURBINIA was badly damaged when she was hit by a ship being launched from the other bank of the Tyne. She was repaired and her last powered run was made on the Tyne later in 1907 when it was hoped she could accompany the MAURITANIA on her maiden voyage down river, unfortunately a mechanical fault stopped her completing the trip. Taken out of the water and placed on a cradle she slowly deteriorated. In 1926 TURBINIA was offered to the Science Museum but, due to lack of space, the museum could only accept the stern section containing the turbines and propeller shafts. She was cut in half and the forward section remained in Newcastle. In 1959 both sections were reunited in Newcastle and the whole craft was restored and put on public display. TURBINIA was taken off display in 1983 for further extensive renovation, which has restored her to her appearance in 1897 and she is now on display at the Newcastle Discovery Museum. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest catweazle (Banned Member) Posted February 2, 2009 Share Posted February 2, 2009 :tup::Thanks for imfo mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abn deuce Posted February 3, 2009 Share Posted February 3, 2009 Yes :tup:: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.