Hey! The hell with them! Maine Maritime oughtta be in the market for a new training ship about now, right? Out with the TSPOS and in with the SSUS!
[QUOTE=Topsail;125398]You don’t have to be ashamed of anything because look what is left of the magnificent FRANCE …
… the Noze !
[/QUOTE]
You know the France was later the Norway, and was used as a cruise ship for NCL until she suffered a boiler explosion that killed eight men (the reporter says 4 but more died later- lungs badly burned).
She was repaired and remained in service for some time after that, but later scrapped in India. The bow piece in your photo was removed at the Indian scrapyard along with other parts that went on the auction block.
Here’s the youtube video of the boiler incident.
[QUOTE=PaddyWest2012;125417]Hey! The hell with them! Maine Maritime oughtta be in the market for a new training ship about now, right? Out with the TSPOS and in with the SSUS![/QUOTE]
I think MarAd is trying to avoid buying another expensive museum piece to rehab (i.e. NS Savannah). 
[QUOTE=catherder;125424]You know the France was later the Norway, and was used as a cruise ship for NCL until she suffered a boiler explosion that killed eight men (the reporter says 4 but more died later- lungs badly burned).
She was repaired and remained in service for some time after that, but later scrapped in India. The bow piece in your photo was removed at the Indian scrapyard along with other parts that went on the auction block.
Here’s the youtube video of the boiler incident.
//youtu.be/AWSy-cLAQWM
[/QUOTE]
The France/Norway’s story was one that I followed closely from the time that they announced her retirement to the time that they finished scrapping her. She was a one of the last truly beautiful ocean-going commercial ships and she always has been and always will be one of my absolute favorites. To tell the truth though, I never got the inside scoop on just what caused her mechanical malfunction. Anybody on here have that story? I think we can safely assume that no one on here worked on the ship at the time but somebody must have heard the technical details on the incident. Was someone just not watching the pressure gauge on the boiler and let it scoot right past critical? What the heck happened?
No clue on what happened. I know we took a 6200hp tractor tug down from charleston to escort it out to sea. 3hrs worth of work.
[QUOTE=PaddyWest2012;125429] Was someone just not watching the pressure gauge on the boiler and let it scoot right past critical? What the heck happened?[/QUOTE]
Poor steammanship.
Yep. Bad chemistry control, poorly executed repairs to header, and rapid cycle startup- shutdown. All spell doom for a boiler.
Normandie was not so bad as well …
Another of the French Liner’s greatest triumphs also turned out to be one of her greatest flaws: her decor. Normandie’s slick and modern art deco interiors proved to be somewhat intimidating for the first class passengers and uncomfortable others, since the majority of her passenger space was devoted solely to first class.
The designers of the new French superliner intended to construct their new ship similar to French Line ships of the past but then they were approached by Vladimir Yourkevitch, a former ship architect for the Imperial Russian Navy. His ideas included a slanting clipper-like bow and a [U]bulbous forefoot [/U]beneath the waterline, in combination with a slim hydrodynamic hull so that hardly a wave was created off the bulbous bow.
In addition to a novel hull which let her attain speed of 32.125 knots at far less power than other big liners, Normandie was filled with technical feats. She had turbo-electric transmission, with turbo generators and electric propulsion motors built by Alsthom of Belfort. CGT chose turbo-electric transmission for the ability to use full power in reverse and performed a crash stop from that speed in 5,577 ft, was quieter and more easily controlled and maintained. The engine installation allowed all propellers to operate even if one engine was not running.
Refurbish the SSUS would cost too much and towing her to Chittagong Ship Breaking Yard would be a great failure. So cutting her into pieces from her load lines and rebuild the shell on a concrete platform that would recreate deep sea conditions, perfectly painted, reinstall lights in every port hole, passage ways, decks and funnels, dummy lifeboats, show flags, building part of a lookalike passenger terminal nearby displaying a museum, observation tower, 3D videos, souvenirs, would be a good compromise to start with.
[QUOTE=Topsail;125442]Normandie was not so bad as well …
Another of the French Liner’s greatest triumphs also turned out to be one of her greatest flaws: her decor. Normandie’s slick and modern art deco interiors proved to be somewhat intimidating for the first class passengers and uncomfortable others, since the majority of her passenger space was devoted solely to first class.
The designers of the new French superliner intended to construct their new ship similar to French Line ships of the past but then they were approached by Vladimir Yourkevitch, a former ship architect for the Imperial Russian Navy. His ideas included a slanting clipper-like bow and a [U]bulbous forefoot [/U]beneath the waterline, in combination with a slim hydrodynamic hull so that hardly a wave was created off the bulbous bow.
In addition to a novel hull which let her attain speed of 32.125 knots at far less power than other big liners, Normandie was filled with technical feats. She had turbo-electric transmission, with turbo generators and electric propulsion motors built by Alsthom of Belfort. CGT chose turbo-electric transmission for the ability to use full power in reverse and performed a crash stop from that speed in 5,577 ft, was quieter and more easily controlled and maintained. The engine installation allowed all propellers to operate even if one engine was not running.[/QUOTE]
If memory serves me correctly, NORMANDIE always had vibration problems.
[QUOTE=c.captain;125445]If memory serves me correctly, NORMANDIE always had vibration problems.[/QUOTE]
Normandie did have her problems. Even though new propellers were put in place, they had obviously not cured vibration toward the stern. She suffered from terrible vibrations and according to Maxtone-Graham’s account of a traveler in First Class: ‘‘When we reached cruising speed, vibration took over, the likes of which I had never experienced. This was not just vibration, it was a good, sound shaking and accompanied by a tumult of noise—everything rattled, jounced and banged.’’
Queen Mary was not without her problems either. “She vibrated badly, despite the claims from Cunard-White Star that she’d been built from the start as a ‘vibration-free’ ship.” She also had a “rolling” problem in rough waters, her hull design was not stable enough to prevent her from rocking back and forth and being tossed about in the sea. Her designers, who apparently never envisaged such a possibility, hadn’t installed handrails on her splendid broad alleyways. As a result, her passengers, screaming in terror, careened around the ship like bowling pins… These troubles caused quite a stir in the British press.
http://www.fordham.edu/normandie/ship/MW3%20A%20Tale%20of%20Two%20Ships.html
In May of 1952, with the SS United States more than 90% complete, initial sea trials were conducted. These trials proved without a doubt that the liner SS United States would capture the Blue Ribbon and complete the fastest transatlantic crossing in history. The ship was noticeably free of vibration.
In June of 1952, a second more rigorous set of sea trials were conducted on America’s superliner. 1,700 invited guests, reporters, and crew were onboard to witness the trials. William Francis and his brother Frederic Gibbs were onboard, along with 150 United States Lines personnel who were guests. The trials were conducted by the shipbuilder as the SS United States had not yet been turned over to United States Lines. The SS United States raced up and down the Virginia Capes. The ship was put through the rigors of crash stops, full rudder tests, and stability tests. Mechanical tests were also performed. The ship even traveled in reverse at a phenomenal speed of 20 knots, nearing the top forward speed of the ill-fated Titanic. The ship is reported to have reached an astonishing top speed of 43 knots for a brief period of time, outpacing a speeding Navy Destroyer! The SS United States performed beautifully in gale force winds and moderately rough seas. Roll and vibration was minimal, and the ship remained very stable at high speed. The ship met or exceeded all performance specifications, and even exceeded the expectations of William Francis Gibbs himself.
The SS United States is shown here going 20 knots in reverse during sea trials.
http://www.ss-united-states.net/SSUnitedStatesWebpageFiles/WebPages/PagesSeaTrials.htm
Nothing is lost, nothing is created, everything is transformed …
missed this earlier and quite perplexed
Aboard the ship, Basile said it’s in better shape than it appears, and a level in the navigation bridge shows that it’s not hewing either way. “It’s benefited from being over-engineered,” he said.
I’m sorry but WTF does this clown mean when he says “hewing”?
[QUOTE=c.captain;125463]missed this earlier and quite perplexed
I’m sorry but WTF does this clown mean when he says “hewing”?[/QUOTE]
Sounds like drunken yachtie lingo.
[QUOTE=catherder;125465]Sounds like drunken yachtie lingo.[/QUOTE]
soon I may be “heaving” rather than “hewing”…
Geez, it was a typo or another auto correct fail. No need to fillet him. Or is it Philly?
[QUOTE=salt’n steel;125472]Geez, it was a typo or another auto correct fail. No need to fillet him. Or is it Philly?[/QUOTE]
I can’t think of any other word with spelling close to hewing that he might have meant? Especially a word connected to an observation made at the bridge level? Hogging or sagging would not be observable from a bridge, only list would be visible and that has nothing to do with condition of the hull. Since the superstructure was aluminum I might expect a high degree of corrosion in it and have heard reports of same. The hull obviously has significant surface rust but I don’t know about internal wastage in tanks or other closed spaces? There has to be some but then again, it is likely the steel was dimetkoted when new so I would expect the hull to still be strong. No idea of electrolysis wastage over all these years sitting but there must be.
But what on earth is “HEWING”?
.
Since the author is talking about a level I guess I took that to mean that the SSUS isn’t listing in her berth. That’s not a great way to describe it but the author’s never been to sea so I usually just let the land-luberry-ness slide. You are correct that lost doesn’t have much to do with the condition of the hull but surely it denotes to the average reader that she is not taking on too much water over time. Of course the case may be that she’s just sitting on the bottom but the average reader wouldn’t understand that.