A Giant Engine Wrapped In a Tank: Icebreaker Propulsion

Рет қаралды 2,606

DMS | Marine Consultant

Күн бұрын

Пікірлер: 27

@ilyaluv6186 11 ай бұрын

Nick, would be great to hear your opinion on ice breaking cargo ship combos in terms of moving further into the topic.

@JinKee 11 ай бұрын

Ah the northwest passage, the battleground of the 21st century

@johngillespie9459 10 ай бұрын

Gawd! As an obsessive cat care taker, you got me. I’m subscribed now.

@Sbiper 11 ай бұрын

Re the Mackinaw - the USN had experience with Turbo-Electric drive some of its Battleships and The Lexington class Aircraft carriers - and with 2 classes of mass built Destroyer-Escorts during WW2 (1 Diesel Electric and 1 Turbo Electric).

@kurtwagner350 11 ай бұрын

4:42 did that ship have an asymmetrical bow to help make this maneuver more efficient or am I hallucinating?

@FernandoLXIX 11 ай бұрын

You are indeed hallucinating. The weird-shaped thing at the bow is a helipad and is far above the waterline.

@FernandoLXIX 11 ай бұрын

Though the stern is asymetrical to help the maneuver.

@kurtwagner350 11 ай бұрын

@@FernandoLXIX that’s what I was talking about, I clearly was mistaken about the bow and stern

@DatawaveMarineSolutions 11 ай бұрын

You are not hallucinating. It's subtle and not easily visible from the top. But yes, that ship is not symmetrical. It starts with a normal bow, and then the port side flares out more than the starboard. She made quite the stir in naval architecture magazines when she first came out.

@kurtwagner350 11 ай бұрын

@@DatawaveMarineSolutions cool

@samuelzackrisson8865 11 ай бұрын

the isbreakers in the baltic sea are about 16000kw to 22000kw i think

@hermitoldguy6312 11 ай бұрын

If you have the name of a ship, you can look it up online.

@samuelzackrisson8865 11 ай бұрын

@@hermitoldguy6312 you have the atle class icbreakers at around 16mw, oden is about 18mw and polaris is about 19mw so that max was a misstake from me sorry

@dwightlooi 11 ай бұрын

Nuclear is actually lower in power density than gas turbine propulsion. A GE9000 gas turbine generator will make 73.5 MW (98,564shp) in a volume smaller than a 40 ft shipping container. Nuclear wouldn't fit in even thrice that volume. In the same space that the Nimitz Class carrier's nuclear reactors, turbines and condensers occupy, you can stuff in eight of those for a total of almost 800,000 shp. The fuel consumption of course will be prodigious and 200,000 shp would be unprecedented.

@mozismobile 11 ай бұрын

OTOH engine + fuel for a year... nuclear is the same size, the fossil fuel version is now an oil tank with a little motor hidden inside it.

@dwightlooi 11 ай бұрын

@mozismobile True. But in the case of the carrier, the majority of the bunkerage is aviation fuel and needs to be there anyway. Also, most ships do not need or want to carry fuel for a year; even trans oceanic vessels typically carry fuel for maybe 12,000 nm at deepload with endurance between resupplying in port limited by crew, crew consumables and mission incidentals.

@N330AA 6 ай бұрын

Power is still loosely related to RPM on an electric motor, difference is it has maximum torque at low/zero RPM as you mention, whereas ICE's typically don't.

@frfr9537 10 ай бұрын

I'm planning on studying maritime engineering. My question watching this videos: Will eletrical motors replace diesel engines in the near future?

@DatawaveMarineSolutions 10 ай бұрын

Not a complete replacement, no. Electric motors have their advantages, and there are ships where we use them. But considering the scale of ships, where we spend megawatts of power, an efficiency difference of only a few percent means enough to completely alter a design. And there are ships where conventional diesel engines are slightly more efficient than electric motors. So not a complete replacement. What we see is that both electric motors and diesel engines have their own specialty application, depending on the ship use. From the perspective of marine engineering, I can say that you will find BOTH diesel engines and electric motors in 99% of all commercial ships. Even in a diesel ship, there are many electric motors for auxiliary purposes, and they aren't small. (Think motors for the crane.) And even on an all electric ship, we normally have a diesel engine as emergency power. You may specialize in electric or mechanical side. But it's best to cultivate a working knowledge of both.

@35manning 11 ай бұрын

*Request for video on boat design software* As complex as it is, with all the different elements that go into overall boat design, I would really love a quality video (or series of videos) that detail the types of software along with specific products that can be used. I plan (dream) to build my own sailboat, suited to my specific needs. Which also means a custom design, where I can place the berths where I want etc. And whilst I have a rough 2D floorplan in my head, boats unlike houses don't work well with 2D floorplans. I'd love to use some easier software to try out a hull shape, build in my 2D floor plan, visualise the space available for storage etc. I also love if it can give a basic assessment of handling and stability. Ultimately I won't build a boat that I designed directly, but I want to be able to walk into a naval architects office with more than a hand sketch of a floor plan and a list of requirements, like blue water capabilities. We will then have a good starting point to refine and I can trust the final design as something that will both suit my needs and also not kill me five minutes after launching it. Again, I know it's a complex subject and I likely won't be able to fully understand or afford the top tier software used by professionals, but I would appreciate your efforts in making this topic more accessible for the wider public.

@DatawaveMarineSolutions 11 ай бұрын

I have a whole website that reviews common boat design software: www.dmsonline.us/ship-science-blog/software/

@robertkb64 8 ай бұрын

Amusing that everything I know about civil naval architecture is from you, while I have first hand experience with all modern US nuclear powered naval vessels (and know a lot about battleship architecture, but that’s just for fun). The amusing part about this video is scaling: you implied that 10,000 shaft power is a lot for the 1940’s and are talking about diesel, while real power from that era was steam turbine, which necessarily decouples the generator (boiler) from the motor (turbine), with the Iowa class battleships being illustrative - 8 engine rooms and 210,000 shaft horsepower, while the A2W reactors we put in CVN-65 (USS Enterprise) gave it 210MW capacity for 280,000 shp for propulsion….. compared to the 60MW on the Russian icebreaker or the 700MW thermal power from each of the A1Bs in the USS Ford (plus ~300,000 shp - the real numbers are all still classified and depends on application, but the difference in scale is the neat part).