Topic Actions

Topic Search

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

Coal & Ironclads

This fascinating series is a combination of historical seafaring, swashbuckling adventure, and high technological science-fiction. Join us in a discussion!
Re: Coal & Ironclads
Post by dan92677   » Sun Jan 29, 2017 8:59 pm

dan92677
Commander

Posts: 218
Joined: Thu Apr 18, 2013 10:33 pm
Location: Southern California

According to what I've read, on many of the "posed" runbys, the firemen almost always 'made smoke' for the photographers..., and even moreso nowadays with restored locomotives.
Top
Re: Coal & Ironclads
Post by chrisd   » Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:55 am

chrisd
Captain (Junior Grade)

Posts: 341
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 10:38 am
Location: North-East England (70%) and also Thailand (30%)

dan92677 wrote:According to what I've read, on many of the "posed" runbys, the firemen almost always 'made smoke' for the photographers..., and even moreso nowadays with restored locomotives.


Certainly there is frequently a request from the photographic fraternity for "molto fumo negro", and this is often accommodated, usually by overfiring and closing the dampers
(Alternatively, a "clag bomb" can be used but the thermal shock can strain the firebox plates).
Once past the "gricers", get the dampers open and clear the smoke.

We had one bad occasion with 60532 at Bradford Forster Square station where the fireman had "prepped" everything with a good charge of coal ready for the "off" and then we were given a 10 minute delay with less than a minute to go.
Blower off, all dampers shut just as the coal warmed through: well, with no draught there was smoke everywhere, it just seemed to ooze out of the chimneys (Double Kylchaps) and crawl down the sides of the smokebox then spread like a carpet all round the loco. Once we got the "right away" the clag cleared within 100 yards once the crew got some oxygen to the fire again.
Last edited by chrisd on Sun Mar 05, 2017 12:18 am, edited 1 time in total.
Top
Re: Coal & Ironclads
Post by robert132   » Wed Feb 08, 2017 1:20 pm

robert132
Captain of the List

Posts: 496
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2011 8:20 pm

chrisd wrote:
Most of the WW1 photographs are of ships "at speed" where heavy firing would be required (Or in some capital ships "Oil Sprayers in use)

The White "smoke" from locomotives is condensed water vapour and shows that the fire is burning cleanly and smoke is not discolouring the exhaust; it generally re-evaporates quickly


With almost any propulsion system, steam or diesel or even gas turbine there are a number of factors which could result in a "cloud" of exhaust smoke. Often those factors are a result of a malfunction, a bit of grit in a steam plant oil spray head (happened several times in my last ship in the 1990s), insufficient or excessive air intake on a steam or diesel plant (diesel turbocharger failure) or (my favorite) something REALLY fubar on a gas turbine engine just before the engine self destructs (saw a Soviet cruiser suffer one of these.)

Even a "clean running" plant at sea produces exhaust plumes that can sometimes be seen at over the horizon distances, though often not unless you are looking for it with a seaman's eye and have a suspicion there is something there beforehand.
****

Just my opinion of course and probably not worth the paper it's not written on.
Top
Re: Coal & Ironclads
Post by chrisd   » Thu Feb 09, 2017 10:07 am

chrisd
Captain (Junior Grade)

Posts: 341
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 10:38 am
Location: North-East England (70%) and also Thailand (30%)

robert132 wrote:" . . . . or (my favorite) something REALLY fubar on a gas turbine engine just before the engine self destructs (saw a Soviet cruiser suffer one of these.)



Did you see the news reports of the "Admiral Kusnetsov" on its way through the Channel on its way to Syria recently?
No improvement by the time it came back, either.

I do wonder how it is the the Chinese have kept its sister ship, the former "Variag" as seaworthy as the seem to have done; it certainly seems to perform better than the "Admiral Kusnetsov"
Top
Re: Coal & Ironclads
Post by Silverwall   » Thu Feb 09, 2017 3:01 pm

Silverwall
Captain (Junior Grade)

Posts: 280
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2011 12:53 am

chrisd wrote:
robert132 wrote:" . . . . or (my favorite) something REALLY fubar on a gas turbine engine just before the engine self destructs (saw a Soviet cruiser suffer one of these.)



Did you see the news reports of the "Admiral Kusnetsov" on its way through the Channel on its way to Syria recently?
No improvement by the time it came back, either.

I do wonder how it is the the Chinese have kept its sister ship, the former "Variag" as seaworthy as the seem to have done; it certainly seems to perform better than the "Admiral Kusnetsov"


Thats easy, they actually spend money on maintinance, spares and training the technicians to run it. The Chinese military is well funded unlike the perpetually cash starved Russian navy.
Top

Return to Safehold