WesWorld

Hello Wesworld,

Back again. This time i want to pose a question for the ocean liner fans out there. Here's a spin on the conventional Blue Riband liners you thought you knew. Here is the scenario. Thinking way back to early 1900-1903, the HAPAG liner SS Deutschland took the Blue Riband from her rival German liners of Nordeutscher Lloyd (NDL), keeping it for herself until the arrival of Lusitania and Mauretania in 1907. Say that in the meantime (say around 1902-1904 time frame) some Canadian shipbuilders decided to build some speedsters of their own? What sort of tech might the Canadian builders use to combine maximum power and speed and least vibration for passengers and crew? I read that the Deutschland had terrible vibration problems at 22-23 knots. I want to avoid that

Here is my question: How would you guys approach designing a Blue Riband winner on Springsharp? One that could take the Blue Riband away from Deustchland? How would the Canadian builders approach this objective and pull it off (just keep in mind that this was before Lusitania and Mauretania came on the scene)

Thanks guys, RMSCANADA

Quoted

Originally posted by RMSCANADA
What sort of tech might the Canadian builders use to combine maximum power and speed and least vibration for passengers and crew?

Forgive the question, but in this time period did Canada have a shipyard large enough to build an ocean liner capable of a Blue Riband run?

I was thinking hypothetically, say if Canada DID have a shipyard big enough and interest was enough for Canada to initiate construction of a Blue Riband liner.

I'm no expert, but could it be a matter of Deutschland's 2 engines/screws vs Lusitania's 4?

Hey guys,

I just wanted to say that I have just completed a new Springsharp design for a new liner that can take away the Blue Riband from the SS United States permanently ... also the ship will be fast enough to recover the eastbound record as well. I am calling her RMS Terra Nova

She will be the first Blue Riband liner built since the SS United States in 1952. She is also the first ship since the Queen Mary to combine size and speed into one ship.

Here is RMS Terra Nova for you guys to look at...

Gross Tonnage: 84,516 gross tons

Displacement: 49,083 t light; 50,373 t standard; 64,500 t normal; 75,802 t full load

Dimensions: Length (overall / waterline) x beam x draught (normal/deep)
(1,028.00 ft / 1,000.00 ft) x 114.00 ft x (36.00 ft / 40.78 ft)
(313.34 m / 304.80 m) x 34.75 m x (10.97 m / 12.43 m)

Machinery:
• 4 x Wärtsilä-Sulzer RTA96-C Diesel Engines driving 4 propeller shafts (109,000 BHP each)
• Total Power: 436,000 BHP = 39 knots
• Cruising Power: 284,099 BHP = 35 knots
• Range 6,000 nautical miles @ 35.00 kts
• Bunker at normal / max displacement = 14,127 tons / 25,429 tons (diesel oil)


Complement: 1,011

Cost: £24.848 million / $99.391 million

Distribution of weights at normal displacement:
• Machinery: 10,431 tons, 16.2 %
• Hull, Fittings & Equipment: 22,252 tons, 34.5 %
• Fuel & Stores: 15,417 tons, 23.9 %
• Miscellaneous Weights: 16,400 tons, 25.4 %
o Hull below water: 5,800 tons
o Hull void weights: 2,500 tons
o Hull above water: 3,900 tons
o On freeboard deck: 3,200 tons
o Above deck: 1,000 tons

Survivability and Seakeeping Ability:
• Survivability (Non-critical penetrating hits needed to sink ship):
o 14,026.2 lbs / 6,362.2 kg = 129.87 x 6 " / 152 mm shells or 0.61 torpedoes
• Stability (unstable if below 1.00): 1.28
• Metacentric Height 9.4 ft / 2.9 m
• Roll Period: 15.6 seconds
• Steadiness (average = 50 %): 96 %
• Seaboat Quality (average = 1.00): 2.00

Hull Form Characteristics:
• Hull has a flush deck, a normal bow and large transom stern
• Block Coefficient (normal/deep): 0.550 / 0.571
• Length to Beam Ratio: 8.77 : 1
• 'Natural speed' for length: 36.26 kts
• Power going to wave formation at top speed: 57 %
• Trim (Max stability = 0, Max steadiness = 100): 48
• Bow Angle (Positive = bow angles forward): 8.75 degrees
• Stern Overhang: 20.00 ft / 6.10 m
• Freeboard Breakdown
- Forecastle: 20.00 %, 52.00 ft / 15.85 m, 48.00 ft / 14.63 m
- Forward deck: 30.00 %, 48.00 ft / 14.63 m, 46.00 ft / 14.02 m
- Aft deck: 35.00 %, 46.00 ft / 14.02 m, 44.00 ft / 13.41 m
- Quarter deck: 15.00 %, 44.00 ft / 13.41 m, 44.00 ft / 13.41 m
- Average Freeboard: 46.37 ft / 14.13 m

Ship Space, Strength and Comments:
• Space - Hull below water (magazines/engines, low = better): 69.7 %
- Above water (accommodation/working, high = better): 358.3 %
• Waterplane Area: 82,834 square feet or 7,696 square meters
• Displacement Factor (displacement / loading): 173 %
• Structure weight / hull surface area: 156 lbs/sq ft or 761 kg/sq meter
• Hull Strength (Relative):
- Cross-sectional: 0.91
- Longitudinal: 2.51
- Overall: 1.00
• She has excellent machinery, storage, compartmentation space
• She has excellent accommodation and workspace room
• She has a slow, easy roll period; she is a good steady ocean liner
• She is an excellent seaboat, comfortable; she rides out heavy weather easily

Quoted

Originally posted by RMSCANADA
Wärtsilä-Sulzer RTA96-C Diesel Engines driving 4 propeller shafts

Those are 1990s diesel engines, if I'm not mistaken. Wärtsilä didn't acquire the Sulzer brand until sometime in the 1990s.

I choose those engines because they are modern and my ocean liner Terra Nova will be built in modern times, not back in the 1950s.

-Sigh- Not trying to be mean here, but it seems to me that every design i put up is assumed to be built back in the 1950s or something. I will say this to make it clear...all my designs i have made thus far are to be built in the 21st century, not back in the 50's. So, coming back to the Terra Nova , I choose the engines becuase they are available and the most powerful ones you can get today.

Quoted

Originally posted by RMSCANADA
-Sigh- Not trying to be mean here, but it seems to me that every design i put up is assumed to be built back in the 1950s or something.

Since this is a sim currently set in 1941, and you're using Springsharp to sim ocean liners, we naturally presume these designs are made for the 1950s, as that was really the last time ocean liners were effective means of transportation.

Quoted

Originally posted by RMSCANADA
I choose those engines because they are modern and my ocean liner Terra Nova will be built in modern times, not back in the 1950s.

-Sigh- Not trying to be mean here, but it seems to me that every design i put up is assumed to be built back in the 1950s or something. I will say this to make it clear...all my designs i have made thus far are to be built in the 21st century, not back in the 50's. So, coming back to the Terra Nova , I choose the engines becuase they are available and the most powerful ones you can get today.

Springsharp is a tool that is limited to pre-1950 designs, pretty much. It cannot take into account various new technologies common in modern shipbuilding (Bulbous bows, Azipods, Gas Turbines, etc). Furthermore, you keep discussing ships to replace or compete with ships from the liner era; 1900-50, more or less.

There's also reasons why no liners have really been built since the United States; Air travel is far more effecient, with transatlantic crossings only being done as ship repositoning measures, and a single niche line that focuses on the upscale market, with several world-cruises to supplement the transatlantic crossings (Cunard's Queen Mary 2)

And I don't see any specific date attached to this project, to be honest.

Are you pursuing these projects from a purely technical standpoint? Because other considerations make them impractical on several levels.