Propulsion Damage on the Anthem !!

[chengkp75]

You would lose your bet. The Celebrity S class ships all weigh more than the latest Navy carriers. The carriers are also a bit shorter than the S class ships. But the carriers hulls are about 10 deeper in the water.

 

And again, you are wrong. Celebrity Solstice has a displacement of only 61,000 tons, or only 60% of either a Nimitz or Ford class aircraft carrier. Please google "gross tonnage" and "displacement" to see where your error is coming from.

[Clarea]

And again, you are wrong. Celebrity Solstice has a displacement of only 61,000 tons, or only 60% of either a Nimitz or Ford class aircraft carrier. Please google "gross tonnage" and "displacement" to see where your error is coming from.

Chief, where do you find the specs? Publicly available?

Edited February 13, 2016 by clarea

[A&L_Ont]

I agree. Anthem aside. I think it's crazy that some ships are allowed to sail for weeks. With mechanical issue.

 

If I remember Allure was down a pod for a few months until they rigged up a way to dry dock her in the Bahamas. It was quite the technique that they did as the dock physically was not big enough. RC did have a video for it somewhere, but that must have been back in 2014.

 

Found it. Here is link to the video of it. Rather interesting viewing.

 

[LMaxwell]

What about the aircraft carrier in Final Countdown?

 

As to actual weight (displacement) I'll bet an aircraft carrier outweighs all cruise ship with the possible exception of the three Oasis class ships.

That is my favorite movie ever. All I want is a remake with modern graphics and the next generation of Douglas and Sheen.

[chengkp75]

Chief, where do you find the specs? Publicly available?

 

Displacement is hard to find, as most commercial ships don't care about displacement. I'm using the USCG PSCIX (Port State Control Information Exchange, google it) and you can search for any foreign ship that the USCG has visited over the last few years. They have most data on some ships, but while I found Anthem's and Solstice's displacement there, Oasis class wasn't, so I had to do a google search and found some "ask how" things about ships floating and displacement, and Oasis was of course an example.

 

Pretty much, naval vessels care about displacement, commercial ships care about gross tonnage and deadweight.

[AtleeH]

From what I've read, the Oasis class ships are nearly double the tonnage of the Navy's latest carriers. Oasis = 225,000 to 227,000 ton, while the USS Ronald Regan weighs in at only 101,400 Long Tons or 113,600 Short Tons. The Oasis ships have 31 ft drafts while the Nimitz class ships have 37 ft operational draft and 41 ft max draft.

 

Actually, the Oasis class has a displacement of 100,000 tons, so it is a rough tie with the Nimitz.

[Cuizer2]

Actually, the Oasis class has a displacement of 100,000 tons, so it is a rough tie with the Nimitz.

 

As I said, the Oasis class ships were a possible exception.

[chengkp75]

People would be even more amazed when deadweight is compared. Deadweight is the amount of fuel, water, and cargo that a ship is designed to carry.

 

Anthem, with a gross tonnage of 168,000 tons, has a deadweight of 11,000 tons.

 

Can't find the deadweight for the Nimitz.

 

Emma Maersk, one of the largest container ships in the world, has a gross tonnage of 158,000 (so smaller than Anthem), but has a deadweight of a whopping 299,000 tons.

 

And finally, the Vale Brasil, a bulk carrier, has 200,000 gross tons, but can lift 402,000 deadweight tons, or two Oasis class cruise ships.

[Cuizer2]

You would lose your bet. The Celebrity S class ships all weigh more than the latest Navy carriers. The carriers are also a bit shorter than the S class ships. But the carriers hulls are about 10 deeper in the water.

 

The Celebrity S class ships do not outweigh the US aircraft carriers. I would estimate that the S class ships weight (displace) about 2/3 of what the US aircraft carriers weigh (displace).

[Clarea]

Displacement is hard to find, as most commercial ships don't care about displacement. I'm using the USCG PSCIX (Port State Control Information Exchange, google it) and you can search for any foreign ship that the USCG has visited over the last few years. They have most data on some ships, but while I found Anthem's and Solstice's displacement there, Oasis class wasn't, so I had to do a google search and found some "ask how" things about ships floating and displacement, and Oasis was of course an example.

 

Pretty much, naval vessels care about displacement, commercial ships care about gross tonnage and deadweight.

Thanks, found the website.

 

When that website lists "Breadth", would that be the measurement at the waterline?

[Cuizer2]

Chief, where do you find the specs? Publicly available?

 

Some of the commercial ports have scales, like the truck scales on the highway. They just pull the ship up, drain out the water, check the reading on the scale, pump back in the water and repeat for the next ship. :)

[chengkp75]

From what I've read, the Oasis class ships are nearly double the tonnage of the Navy's latest carriers. Oasis = 225,000 to 227,000 ton, while the USS Ronald Regan weighs in at only 101,400 Long Tons or 113,600 Short Tons. The Oasis ships have 31 ft drafts while the Nimitz class ships have 37 ft operational draft and 41 ft max draft.

 

For the third time, you are comparing gross tons to displacement tons.

 

If you are using Wikipedia, note that the figure you quote for Oasis is called "tonnage" and is followed by the letters "GT".

 

Here is the definition of Gross Tons, also from Wikipedia:

 

"Gross tonnage (often abbreviated as GT, G.T. or gt) is a unitless index related to a ship's overall internal volume. Gross tonnage is different from gross register tonnage.[1] Neither gross tonnage nor gross register tonnage is a measure of the ship's displacement (mass) and should not be confused with terms such as deadweight tonnage or displacement.

 

Emphasis mine.

 

Now, when you look up the Ronald Reagan the figure is called "displacement". Here is a definition of displacement, also from Wiki:

 

"Displacement or displacement tonnage is the weight of water that a ship displaces when it is floating, which in turn is the weight of a ship (and its contents). It is usually applied to naval vessels rather than commercial ones, and is measured when the ship's fuel tanks are full and all stores are aboard."

 

Emphasis mine.

 

While I always treat Wiki with caution, these definitions are correct, and I'm using them in case you want to confirm.

Edited February 13, 2016 by chengkp75

[Cuizer2]

From what I've read, the Oasis class ships are nearly double the tonnage of the Navy's latest carriers. Oasis = 225,000 to 227,000 ton, while the USS Ronald Regan weighs in at only 101,400 Long Tons or 113,600 Short Tons. The Oasis ships have 31 ft drafts while the Nimitz class ships have 37 ft operational draft and 41 ft max draft.

 

The Oasis does not weigh 225,000 tons. That is a measure of its interior volume. One GRT = 100 cubic feet. So the interior volume of the Oasis OTS is 22,500,000 cubic feet.

[chengkp75]

The Oasis does not weigh 225,000 tons. That is a measure of its interior volume. One GRT = 100 cubic feet. So the interior volume of the Oasis OTS is 22,500,000 cubic feet.

 

Your definition of GRT is correct, but GRT is no longer used. Oasis' figure of 225,000 GT is gross tons, which is somewhat different from GRT by mathematical formulas.

[Cuizer2]

Your definition of GRT is correct, but GRT is no longer used. Oasis' figure of 225,000 GT is gross tons, which is somewhat different from GRT by mathematical formulas.

 

Thank you. Well at least I will not have to type the "R" so much.

[garnetpalmetto]

And again, you are wrong. Celebrity Solstice has a displacement of only 61,000 tons, or only 60% of either a Nimitz or Ford class aircraft carrier. Please google "gross tonnage" and "displacement" to see where your error is coming from.

 

He's actually doubly wrong, Chief. He alleges that the Solstice class is also longer than a CVN. A Solstice class ship has a length overall of 1,040.68 ft. A Nimitz class CVN has a length overall of 1,092 ft. For the Gerald R. Ford class CVNs it will be 1,106 ft overall.

[DrD]

Chief -

 

I always am in awe of your explanations. I found this link to a pdf that describes the XO Azipods: (for tech geeks)

 

https://library.e.abb.com/public/6c1b0250efd18e73c1257a530040dcf2/XO2100_XO2300_Product_Intro_lowres.pdf

 

It's a very impressive system. The power requirment for normal autopilot mode steering is 50-108 kilowatts!

 

Aloha,

 

John

 

ps: The Anthem has XO2300 pods rated at 21.5MW

 

You may like to know that the original concept was invented for submarines by John Holland.

 

for all subs through WW2, props were connected to electrical motors. When on the surface , they ran diesel engines connected to generators to power motors. Underwater, they ran off batteries. Back to surface, some engines could power motors, others charge batteries.

 

They discovered another advantage. Since electric from diesel generators was evenly distributed to all electric motors, any engine could be taken out of service without affecting overall propulsion except to limit top speed (but still drive both motors.) Also, engines run most efficiently at about 80-90% throttle, so when they wanted to go slow, instead of running all 4 engines at low throttle, (inefficiently), they could run 1 or 2 at full throttle and keep others off, or charging batteries (US WW2 Gato class had 4 Diesel engines/generators.) In fact they referred to speed not as slow, 1/3, full, etc but 1 engines, 2 engines, etc. Finally, the engines, which are bigger and more complicated, could be located remote from the propeller shafts, since they only had to connect to the relatively small and simple electric motors by cable. Thus they can place engines wherever.

 

Anyway, this design is so efficient and practical, that it was adapted for surface ships, minus batteries of course. In a cruise ship, they usually have 4-6 diesel/generators. Each can power azipods for propulsion, power ship's electric, or be shut off undergoing maintenance or just resting. Running engines are throttled up to full efficiency always. I think for normal speed you need 3 engines/generators sending power to pods, and 2 engine powering house, and 1 can be off/ in reserve. Engines are usually located amidships for best balance, even though propellers obviously are aft.

 

so thanks John Holland for this neat system.

[eddeb]

As previously mentioned, the ship (Aka now dubbed the U-turn Ship of the future)

 

had azipods that had clutches fail? They limped back to port a slow speed,

 

then replaced the clutches in both of their only engines at Sea.

 

No ship with azipods has to have tug boat assistance to get back to Port.

 

I used to hang out with George Steinbrenner and know about tugs and azipods,

 

we miss you George... I was his photographer for 15 years.

 

We have video showing the ship was going 1 to 4 knots during the storm...

 

I know there are "experts" on these threads with Tons per gallon, ballast, etc...

 

One expert had friends on the El Faro, how are those physics working out for them these

 

days? Big ship & Big storm = Trouble

 

But this is really simple, the ship was in dire straights, period.

 

Just ask the guests and the crew...

 

Azipods have a history of failing and are not designed to run at 100% in high seas.

 

Visit events at sea to see how many azipods have failed over the years...

 

If they lost their power, which has happened on many other vessels, well

 

that would make a few new movies in the future I'm sure.

 

Good Luck with the Investigation Captain, I am sure you need a little time off as you

 

said to your guests this was your worst day at Sea...

 

May Your Seas be Flat,

 

and your tummies be fat....

 

And remember to TIP Tip, and tip!

 

That is what makes your crew happy, and you too!

 

We are the Moore's

Tampa Bay :)

[Rinderoo]

Cheng is the acronym for Chief Engineer, KP stands for Kings Point, the US Merchant Marine Academy, and 75 is my year of graduation.

 

This has been a fascinating read. I know far more about cruise ship propulsion than I ever thought possible, thanks to ChengKP75.

 

Thank you!

[pspercy]

As previously mentioned, the ship (Aka now dubbed the U-turn Ship of the future)

 

had azipods that had clutches fail? They limped back to port a slow speed,

 

then replaced the clutches in both of their only engines at Sea.

 

No ship with azipods has to have tug boat assistance to get back to Port.

 

I used to hang out with George Steinbrenner and know about tugs and azipods,

 

we miss you George... I was his photographer for 15 years.

 

We have video showing the ship was going 1 to 4 knots during the storm...

 

I know there are "experts" on these threads with Tons per gallon, ballast, etc...

 

One expert had friends on the El Faro, how are those physics working out for them these

 

days? Big ship & Big storm = Trouble

 

But this is really simple, the ship was in dire straights, period.

 

Just ask the guests and the crew...

 

Azipods have a history of failing and are not designed to run at 100% in high seas.

 

Visit events at sea to see how many azipods have failed over the years...

 

If they lost their power, which has happened on many other vessels, well

 

that would make a few new movies in the future I'm sure.

 

Good Luck with the Investigation Captain, I am sure you need a little time off as you

 

said to your guests this was your worst day at Sea...

 

May Your Seas be Flat,

 

and your tummies be fat....

 

And remember to TIP Tip, and tip!

 

That is what makes your crew happy, and you too!

 

We are the Moore's

Tampa Bay :)

 

Well bless your heart.

[sjn911]

People would be even more amazed when deadweight is compared. Deadweight is the amount of fuel, water, and cargo that a ship is designed to carry.

 

Anthem, with a gross tonnage of 168,000 tons, has a deadweight of 11,000 tons.

 

Can't find the deadweight for the Nimitz.

 

Emma Maersk, one of the largest container ships in the world, has a gross tonnage of 158,000 (so smaller than Anthem), but has a deadweight of a whopping 299,000 tons.

 

And finally, the Vale Brasil, a bulk carrier, has 200,000 gross tons, but can lift 402,000 deadweight tons, or two Oasis class cruise ships.

 

Wow....so can I assume are we somewhat "fluffy passengers and projected big bags" included in that 11,000 ton figure..or is that another figure..(lol..bad dream: wt loss needed before boarding of all passengers before this cruise can go..your records given are over the limit..you all have 3 months..LOL) thanks...very interesting.

[CPT Trips]

And I agree 100% with you, but unfortunately 2 larger pods or airplane engines cost less than 3 comparably smaller ones, and money talks. Early 747s had 4 engines and carried fewer passengers less distance at higher fuel burn than current 2 engine 777s; I don't have hard numbers in front of me, but I'd be pretty sure that 777 reliability is also better than early 747s. Nothing is ever perfect, but I'd think that azimuth thruster reliability is continuously improving (but not a lot of good if you are the one person in 10,000 stuck with the failed one:rolleyes:).

 

Amazing what the more than 25 year technology gap between the early 747 and the early 777 meant in terms of efficiency.

 

Me too because for now, I'm thinking Anthem is a stick shift. ;)

 

Nah, with all those clutches, it must be a wicked quick paddle shifter. :p

[robtulipe]

Me too because for now, I'm thinking Anthem is a stick shift. ;)

 

Paul, since you've been on enough cruise to likely have done one or more bridge tours you should have known this before. Here's a shot of the master's seat on Anthem taken during our bridge tour on our recent cruise on this ship.

As you can clearly see it's a right hand shift. :p

 

Edited February 13, 2016 by robtulipe

[3CatsInMA]

sorry, lou, gotta keep my identity a secret. :d just think of how many toilets i'd be asked to fix if someone knew who i was. :p

 

lol!

[AtleeH]

Now that I have been sufficiently chastised, I have a question for you. Why is it Displacement Tons are mainly applied to Naval ships and not commercial ships? Obviously, it must be important to the military. Why is it not important to commercial interests?

 

For the third time, you are comparing gross tons to displacement tons.

 

If you are using Wikipedia, note that the figure you quote for Oasis is called "tonnage" and is followed by the letters "GT".

 

Here is the definition of Gross Tons, also from Wikipedia:

 

"Gross tonnage (often abbreviated as GT, G.T. or gt) is a unitless index related to a ship's overall internal volume. Gross tonnage is different from gross register tonnage.[1] Neither gross tonnage nor gross register tonnage is a measure of the ship's displacement (mass) and should not be confused with terms such as deadweight tonnage or displacement.

 

Emphasis mine.

 

Now, when you look up the Ronald Reagan the figure is called "displacement". Here is a definition of displacement, also from Wiki:

 

"Displacement or displacement tonnage is the weight of water that a ship displaces when it is floating, which in turn is the weight of a ship (and its contents). It is usually applied to naval vessels rather than commercial ones, and is measured when the ship's fuel tanks are full and all stores are aboard."

 

Emphasis mine.

 

While I always treat Wiki with caution, these definitions are correct, and I'm using them in case you want to confirm.