Problems for the QM2 in Oslo

[FjordViking]

I had planned to watch the QM2 departure from Oslo last night, but the departure was delayed until sometime during the night. The ship left early this morning.

 

The reason for this was that one of the General Electric LM2500 turbines (that generate electricity for the pods) had to be replaced.

 

When I arrived Oslo Cruise Terminal, there was a big crane (taller then the ship) and two turbines laying beside the ship.

 

Some pictures:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[elaine61]

That doesn't look good does it??????

 

Elaine

[FjordViking]

Well, they managed to fix it and the ship was only a few hrs delayed. Everything is ok now as far as i understand.

Let`s hope there will be no more problems for the QM2 for a while:

I am booked on the 14th october crossing Southampton-NYC :)

[guernseyguy]

Well, they managed to fix it and the ship was only a few hrs delayed. Everything is ok now as far as i understand. Let`s hope there will be no more problems for the QM2 for a while: I am booked on the 14th october crossing Southampton-NYC :)

 

FjordViking,

 

As you say, they had a problem & they fixed it - and thanks for posting the photographs. I assume this was one of the turbines that is based in the Funnel Housing - hence the huge crane to lift it up? Perhaps someone onboard may enlighten us. If so, these turbines are used to provide extra power to run the fixed azipods when the QM2 needs extra speed - for example on a crossing. I was surprised how small they look - I guess we are all used to big fan jets nowadays & forget the humble earlier examples like the JT8D. The GE Turbines on the QM2 are based on their CF6-50, which started on the DC10 and is used widely.

(see here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Electric_CF6-50)

 

Peter

[stephen@stoneyard.co.uk]

> these turbines are used to provide extra power to run the fixed azipods when the QM2 needs extra speed - for example on a crossing. I was surprised how small they look - I guess we are all used to big fan jets nowadays

 

I believe the high bypass ration turbofan engines used today have big fans to propel the plane through the air. Only a small amount of air is forced into the jet engine and used for combustion. On QM2 these engines do not propel the ship through the air. The only air required will be for combustion in the jet engine. On QM2 these engine drive an electricity generator by a mechanical linkage. Consequently a big fan would serve no purpose and waste power.

 

I am not an expert so could be totally incorrect.

 

Best wishes, Stephen.

[dougnewmanatsea]

I was surprised how small they look - I guess we are all used to big fan jets nowadays & forget the humble earlier examples like the JT8D.

The LM2500 is actually based off a high-bypass engine, albiet a smallish one.

 

Incidentally, the LM2500 is not based off the CF6. It is based off the military TF39 (the world's first high-bypass ratio turbofan), which was a predecessor of the CF6. So the LM2500 is closely related to the CF6 but it is not a marinized CF6 as some have suggested.

 

I believe the turbines on QM2 are the newer LM2500+ variants, though I'm not sure.

 

More information here from GE Aero Engines.

[mufi]

Fjord Viking - Great pictures. Where else can we get such instant information. Thans for them.

 

David.

[guernseyguy]

Incidentally, the LM2500 is not based off the CF6. It is based off the military TF39 (the world's first high-bypass ratio turbofan

 

Yikes! Even older technology than we thought....introduced in 1964...compared to R-R Trent introduced in 1995......

 

Peter

[dougnewmanatsea]

introduced in 1964...compared to R-R Trent introduced in 1995......

The Trent is a derivative of the RB.211 introduced in 1972.

[Minne Wonka Girl]

Fjord Viking,

I am emailing you wirelessly from my laptop in our cabin to confirm that you are correct regarding the late departure out of Oslo.When we saw the crane upon arrival on board after a two hour Oslo fjord tour we knew there were engine problems up on top. Your photos accurately depict the situation. We were astounded by the number of people lined up along the quay to send us off as well as the piper.

Caroline

[PRINSENDAM]

Re the gas turbines....

 

I sailed with these things more than thirty years ago on the world's first gas-turbine container ship, the EUROLINER. We used to change our engines , once every two months. The eowrk was done on arrival New York. The engine woudl be lifted out of the ship by special gantry and replaced with a reconditioned one. Usually took twelve hours. It would be done by a team of specialists engineers from Pratt & Whitney.

 

In the early 70'3 these engines suffered from corrosion due to salt air wheich necessitated the overhaul and reconditioning every two months. There were four ships and lots of spare engines to be exchanged between them.

 

Anyhow, over the years the air filtering systems have been much improved and it is no longer necessary to change engines so often. that saild they do require maintainace than cannot be done on board. This may or may not be the first time the engines on QM2 have been changed.

 

As for size... in the photo you are only seeing a small part opf the engine. This is the part that requires replacement/overhaul. It is the 'gas generator'.

 

Firstly air is drawn into the system through large intakes... the large square holes on the side of the funnel house on QM2. From there it flows into the circular intake... very much the same shape of a jumbo jet engine. The air is drawn in by the very large fans... actually 'compressor blades'. the high colume of air is compressed and hlows into the gas generator where it combines with fuel, is ignited and burns generating thrust. The hot air 'thrust gasses' then flow through a turbine and then up the funnel. The turbine has an extended shaft that turns inside and electrical generator. The power generated in then delivered to the main bus bar and into the ships power system. From the bus bar the electrical power, along with power from teh diesel genetating sets go to the electriv azipod drives... not by 440 Volt flex I might add!

 

So, what you see being replaced on the Mary is not a gas turbine, just a 'gas generator'. They sit in heavily soundproofed boxes. Were they not to be sound proofed the noise would be deafening all over the ship. On EUROLINER I went into one of the boxes while the ship was under way... at 28 knots. Very tight space, only 8'6" x 8'6" x 20'....wire and whatnot all over the place. Once inside the engineer turned the lights off. There, not a foot from my nose is a beast generating the power 30,000 horses... and glowing cherry red! Scared the S*** out of me!!!!! I was never so glad to get back up to the bridge!!!!!

 

I showed Doug some photographs of EUROLINER the other day. Fine and handsome looking container ship. Beautiful fine lines... makes the QM2 hull look like a Rhine barge!!!!

 

Stephen

[PRINSENDAM]

A bit more on the 'gas generators'...

 

Each time we changed engines in New York... 12 times a year... four ships, the cost was $1 million EACH!!!!

 

Our fuel bill was astronomical. Todays gas turbines are are burnig diesel fuel I believe. Our were burning aviation spirit.... 270 tones per day.

 

The owners, Seatrain Lines, made lots of money on the four ships. Eleven ports on a 28 day rotation. One deparure every Saturday from Greenock. New York, Baltimore, Wilmington NC, Charleston SC, back to Ny, then Le Havre, Zeebrugge, Rotterdam, Hamburg, Bremerhaven and back to Greenock.

 

We carried 1000, 40' boxes. Fifteen officers and ten crew!!!! Very hard working ships and very little time in port... or time to get ashore. Beautiful ship but I hated the North Atlantic run... there was no pleasure in at all. I switched after five months.. did a sting on large tankers then got myself onto banana boats where life was hardworking but rather pleasant! One shipmanager in the office wanted me back on his box boats but I wouldn't take the bait!

[guernseyguy]

The Trent is a derivative of the RB.211 introduced in 1972.

 

Doug,

 

Repeat after me, GE technology is old while Rolls-Royce technology has pedigree - just like the ships of Princess and Cunard!;)

 

Stephen, thanks for the very informative posts. I remember when the QE2 was launched my father pointing out that the VC10's engines were more powerful....and now (and for some time) that technology too goes to sea! Must save a lot of space overall - and if you put them up top like the QM2's two, all those shafts. Brilliance of the Seas (all gas turbine iirc) was very smooth.

 

Peter

[mufi]

Could this be a case of planned maintenance timed in advance to be carried out on a cruise rather than on the much tighter schedule crossing.

 

David.

[guernseyguy]

Could this be a case of planned maintenance timed in advance to be carried out on a cruise rather than on the much tighter schedule crossing.

David.

 

Good thought David, from what I recall, it would be challengng to get such a crane outside the QEII terminal in Southampton - and as you imply, speeds on cruises are typically quite a bit slower (~20-22 knots) than on crossings (~24 - 29, depending on track/weather) so leaving much more room for catching up any delay.

 

Peter

[FjordViking]

From Seatrade Insider:

 

"QM2 gas turbine replaced

 

27/7/2005

 

Queen Mary 2 is under way again after having one of its gas turbine engines replaced yesterday in Oslo, Seatrade Insider has learned.

A Cunard spokeswoman said the pre-planned operation was carried out in Oslo due to the available cranage and wharf area required to perform the work. The gas turbine that was replaced was fully operational when the ship arrived in Oslo, she added.

 

 

Queen Mary 2's departure from the Norwegian capital was delayed from 11 p.m. Tuesday to 4 a.m. today for operational reasons as the ship is restricted to a daylight transit of the narrows at the entrance to the Oslo Fjord. The extended stay also assisted in the smooth changing of the gas turbine engine, the spokeswoman said. The operation will have no effect on the ship’s onward itinerary, including the scheduled arrival of QM2 into Bergen on Friday morning, according to the spokeswoman. "

[PRINSENDAM]

Doug,

 

Repeat after me, GE technology is old while Rolls-Royce technology has pedigree - just like the ships of Princess and Cunard!;)

 

Stephen, thanks for the very informative posts. I remember when the QE2 was launched my father pointing out that the VC10's engines were more powerful....and now (and for some time) that technology too goes to sea! Must save a lot of space overall - and if you put them up top like the QM2's two, all those shafts. Brilliance of the Seas (all gas turbine iirc) was very smooth.

 

Peter

 

My old ship EUROLINER came into service in '71 and I joined her a year later. Sailing from port was an experience for sure. We gave no thought to lengthly preparation time for leaving port. Once all cargo work was complete the paperwork could begin in earnest. The officer on watch would go around with the cadet ensuring that all the lashings had been set up, twist locks in place etc etc. Our crew were not permitted to touch any lashings. A two minute job tightening a turnbuckle could cost the company 1 hour's overtime! Once sailing time was announce and the pilot ready to board the OOW woudl go to the bridge to carry out the safety checks and prepare the bridge equipment. This meant testing steering gears, rdars, echo sounders, radios, whistle, compass and gyro checks etc etc. Ten minute before sailing the crew woudl be called to stations for and aft. The OOW would then call ECR (Engine Contril Room) and the start up proceedure would begin. The engineers would start fuel pumps, cooling water systems etc etc. When ready to start the OOW would insert the keys into the bridge starting control. One teh keys were switched to on the ECR could start the motor turning the compressor fans. When the revs were up and all for go they would fire the gas generator. Power would the go onto the main turbines and would build up until the engines were running at about 40% power and the shafts turning at around 120 RPM. These turbines turned the main shafts, not electric drive.

All systems running we could depart within a few minutes. Going out of port the revs would be kept to 120 and the power at 40%. this was sufficient for around 20 knots. Dead Slow was around 10 knots! If less speed was required then one propeller would be put to zero pitch hich would still give us around 6 knots. Once the pilot was away and we were ready to run up to full speed the bridge controlls woudl be slowly pushed up into the power range... from 40% power up to say 80%. On a ship of just 30,000 GRT on an 800 foot long hull we had a total of 60,000 HP. You could almost feel the ship take off.

 

While serving in EUROLINER were berthed in Baltimore nearby another ship from our company, the CLUNEPARK, a traditional 10,000 grt tween-deck, 6 hatch cargo ship about 14 years older than EUROLINER. We went over for a look. CLUNEPARK was loading grain... covered in fine dust. Three of us went aboard wearing out best winter blues, from our fast racing machine. First thing I noticed in CLINEPARK was the very dim lighting in the accommodation alleyways... old DC low voltage. Every ten feet or so... an oil lamp in a gymbal. Not in use but they were there! The wheelhouse was tiny! Wheel, telegraph, single radar, gyro compass and little more. The officers bar on EUROLINER was a plush place with modern furniture and smart carpets, draught beer (easy on regular run to the UK), large television with VIDEO etc etc. CLUNEPARK had a tired old room with a dark wooden bar, old and worn chintsy covered furniture. We spent a few hours on board... had a few too many beers ;) and if I had been offered a transfer from the big container ship to the old rust bucket I would have jumped at it! The old CLUNEPARK was a very happy ship.

 

Stephen

[Transatlantic Tom]

Stephen:

 

This has nothing to do with QM2, GE turbines or Cunard but...

 

As you've been so kind to share memories of sailing on the Atlantic some 35-40 years ago with all of us, I'm curious - did you ever have a chance to cross paths with the famous N.S. Savannah ???

 

Tom

[PRINSENDAM]

Stephen:

 

This has nothing to do with QM2, GE turbines or Cunard but...

 

As you've been so kind to share memories of sailing on the Atlantic some 35-40 years ago with all of us, I'm curious - did you ever have a chance to cross paths with the famous N.S. Savannah ???

 

Tom

 

 

 

Tom:

 

Heavens! Don't day "40 years ago".. I ain't THAT old! :) My first crossing on the Atlantic was in 1967... on the old QUEEN ELIZABETH at age 15.

 

 

N.S. SAVANNAH. Now there was a ship! She entered service in '62 and was laid up ten years later. I never saw her during those years.

 

I did see her about 2 years ago in Savannah while cruising in SAGAFJORD down the US East Coast. She was open to the public and I certainly didn't need any prompting to take a visit to the ship. She is was certainly beutiful. The accommodation areas were sealed but I could look through the windows .

She was definitely a 'WOW' ship!

 

Do you remember the feature stories in National Geographic?

 

Stephen

[Transatlantic Tom]

Stephen:

 

I too am a "young kid", Stephen, 45. Sorry I had you already with white hair, in a wheelchair, using an ear trumpet !!

 

Yes, I do remember seeing that article on Savannah in a back issue of National Geographic, as well as an article in an early 1960's edition featuring the then brand-new US Navy nuclear trio of USS Enterprise, USS Long Beach and USS Bainbridge.

 

There seemed to be an optimistic forward-looking feeling in the air back in those days.

 

I still love to come across old copies of the Geographic and scan the pages for advertisements promoting steamship companies such as American President Lines and Mooore-McCormick Lines ("Sail aboard the Brazil or Argentina to South America !") It's enough to make you want to cry !!!

 

Tom

[PRINSENDAM]

Stephen:

 

I too am a "young kid", Stephen, 45. Sorry I had you already with white hair, in a wheelchair, using an ear trumpet !!

 

Yes, I do remember seeing that article on Savannah in a back issue of National Geographic, as well as an article in an early 1960's edition featuring the then brand-new US Navy nuclear trio of USS Enterprise, USS Long Beach and USS Bainbridge.

 

There seemed to be an optimistic forward-looking feeling in the air back in those days.

 

I still love to come across old copies of the Geographic and scan the pages for advertisements promoting steamship companies such as American President Lines and Mooore-McCormick Lines ("Sail aboard the Brazil or Argentina to South America !") It's enough to make you want to cry !!!

 

Tom

 

 

Tom,

 

No white hair, no trumpet, no wheelchair... YET!

 

Matson used to run some great adds as well... French Line too.

 

I think that today's advertising people have kind of missed the boat. For all their glossy brochues and hype they don't seem to be able to get across the real attraction of ocean travel.

 

Stephen

[Transatlantic Tom]

Tom,

 

No white hair, no trumpet, no wheelchair... YET!

 

Matson used to run some great adds as well... French Line too.

 

I think that today's advertising people have kind of missed the boat. For all their glossy brochues and hype they don't seem to be able to get across the real attraction of ocean travel.

 

Stephen

 

Stephen:

 

As a lucky boy and young man, I sailed aboard the ships of Matson Line - so when you you refer to those wonderful old Matson ads it brings a tear of wonderful nostalgia to my eye.

 

Yes, in general the ads for the various lines were IMHO so much better, and - dare I say- romantic back in the "old days". I still think one of the most clever bits was the French Line's saying (and I apologize for the loose paraphrasing) "...once you walk across the gangway in New York, and board your French Line ship, you are practically in France itself...".

 

Tom