Posted on 09/21/2012 3:15:50 AM PDT by ryan71
On September 18th Russia told India that delivery of the refurbished Russian carrier Admiral Gorshkov (since renamed the INS Vikramaditya) would be delayed ten months. The problem is that seven of eight steam boilers in the carrier power plant failed during recent high-speed trials. The Russians blame India for this, as the Indians refused to allow the Russians to use asbestos to insulate the steam boilers. Instead the Russians had to use firebrick which, as some engineers suspected, was not adequate. Now extensive work has to be done on the engines to rectify the problem. India is not happy with yet another delay. The Gorshkov served in the Russian Navy from 1987 to 1995, but was then withdrawn from service because the navy could not afford to keep the carrier operational. Gorshkov was put up for sale and in 2005 India agreed to buy a refurbished Gorshkov.
(Excerpt) Read more at strategypage.com ...
LOL!
"The lack of screws makes this fine ship much more streamlined through the water, don't you think comrade?"
Claims made by the plaintiff bar often bear little resemblance to facts.
You better have a written warranty and mechanism for enforcement. What, you gonna send Crazy Squaw Liz Warren to sue ‘em?
having served on board the Kennedy and one other carrier, I couldn’t agree more.
Not that I’m a naval systems mechanic but the Nimitz is a nuke boat why would she need Asbestos to protect the interior of her reactors?They operate on a totally different principle.
Can you imagine the disaster that will befall a nation when WWIII begins and they have to abide by environmental and green regulations in building a war machine?
Indians refused to allow the Russians to use asbestos to insulate the steam boilers. Instead the Russians had to use vodka in their workers.
You can argue the safety of asbestos till the cows come home and that doesn’t change the fact that not only did the Navy drop its use but it obviously replaced it with something suitable that isn’t causing any problems with overheating the boilers. I’m just surprised that India and Russia didn’t use whatever the U.S. is using. Unless, of course, the Russian excuse is all BS and the engineering failure is due to sloppy workmanship or poor design. And I’m not willing to discard that possibility either.
They still use boilers. The difference between nuclear carriers and conventionally powered carriers is that nukes use the reactor to create the heat to generate steam in the boilers and conventional carriers use oil.
I agree, but the decision to abandon asbestos it was *not* based on engineering or safety concerns. It’s an old story by now, but the World Trade Center used asbestos up to the 66th story, at which time “safety” (read fear of the plaintiff bar) made them switch to a less effective alternative. This at least contributed to and hastened the structural failure of the upper stories.
The reactors are used to make superheated steam just like the oil powered ships.
How did you think the reactors turned the propellers?
I know that the reactors are used to boil water to create steam to turn the screws and power the catapult system.But that’s still different than a regular oil fired boiler system that requires insulation on the inside to keep it from melting.
The steam is created indirectly by the reactors so the temperature of the water is not great enough to melt the steam system even when it is pressurized.
What does India need with an aircraft carrier?
I guess India will feed its starving people with it....
It appears, however, that your second "f" did.
LOL!
Maybe I should forward the post card to the Indian Navy. Maybe they cover engine boiler repairs on a cobbled up ex Russian ship?
A nuclear reactor is just another kind of boiler, with admittedly a few extra quirks of its own. It generates steam for turbines too, although there is no place in a nuke that gets as hot as an open flame (except for Chernobyl, that is).
So it’s still important to insulate a reactor and its steam lines, especially one used in a confined space like a ship or a sub.
I’m not sure if that’s totally correct. I don’t know whether or not they stopped sing asbestos above the 66th floor, as you say, but the engineering studies done about the collapse of the Towers suggest it wouldn’t have made a difference. The insulation, of whatever material, is sprayed on the beams. The violence of the explosions when the planes hit literally blew the insulation off the steel..they were bare, and that’s what caused the building to collapse.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.