Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#11
posted to alt.binaries.pictures.tall-ships
|
|||
|
|||
NL - Friesland _ Prinsenhof _ tacking a skutsje - file 4 of 5 DSC_8043_bewerkt.jpg
"HEMI - Powered" schreef in bericht ... OTOH, this configuration is very wasteful of power and cannot get very much speed over the water before friction caused by a gigantic bow wave overwhelms the power of the engines. Thus, in the case of true "tall ships" such as the fast clippers of the 19th century, speed was more valued than cargo tonnage and draft. Today, however, the pendulum has swung back to cargo capacity especially for container ships and tankers as power plants have advanced tremendously in the last 20 or so years while costs have skyrocketed. Clippers were sailing in deep water. In the early year the ships were nice and had class. Nowadays they think what the cargo is and and build something around it that floats and call it a ship;-( I understand the purpose of the clippers and the fact that because of both their hull design and the configuration of their sails they were unsuited for smaller bodies of water and totally unsuited for rivers and canals. However, I used the clippers as an example of the difference in hull designs for speed vs. cargo capacity. I understand. One could draw a similar comparison in modern nautical terms between a huge lake ore carrier or super tanker vs. greyhounds of the fleet such as destroyers, fast carriers, or even the once proud passenger liners such as the SS United States or the first Queen Elizabeth. In fact, had Capt. Smith of the Titanic not been so concerned with setting a new speed record for a transatlantic crossing on a ship's maiden voyage, he would have both slowed down and move 100 miles or so south when warned about the many sightings of icebergs in his path, but he decided to take the risk because being more conservative but decreasing his risk would have cost him nearly a day's steaming time, a decision that he learned to his sorrow was fatal for many hundreds of passengers, crew, and himself. They are still investigating on that disaster. I just read an article (no not on Whacopediagrin) that they were buildin to many large ships like Titanic and they had not enough good iron for the rivets and used bad iron rivets for the bow of the Titanic, one of the reasons the ship sunk so fast. If I'll find that site I will post it, but I know there are a lot of rumours about the Titanic. Now, undoubtedly I've made a number of errors in the above but as I said, my background is much more mechanical engineering from an education point-of-view and specifically car body engineering from a practical point-of-view so corrections to my factual errors would be much appreciated. It was not that bad Jerry;-) Thank you, Bouler, I appreciate the critique. It is better not to lead with one's chin when venturing into areas where one does not have a lot of knowledge and/or is unsure of one's facts, don't you think? Very wise spoken Jerry. -- Greetings Bouler (The Netherlands) |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
NL - Friesland _ Prinsenhof _ tacking a skutsje - file 2 of 5 DSC_8041_bewerkt.jpg | Tall Ship Photos | |||
NL - Friesland _ Prinsenhof _ tacking a skutsje - file 3 of 5 DSC_8042_bewerkt.jpg | Tall Ship Photos | |||
NL - Friesland _ Prinsenhof _ tacking a skutsje - file 1 of 5 DSC_8040_bewerkt.jpg | Tall Ship Photos | |||
NL [Friesland] various pictures - file 13 of 14 Friesland-13.jpg | Tall Ship Photos | |||
NL [Friesland] various pictures - file 12 of 14 Friesland-12.jpg | Tall Ship Photos |