Oasis vs Titanic

[DShock]

Probably been posted before but for those about to sail on Oasis this is interesting.

 

[HMH G]

Wow! Neat to see the size comparisons.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

[jcross2]

Thanks for the link, DShock!

 

I found it interesting as well.

 

Jan

[CruisinCons]

I too sailed the Norway, and still find her to be amazing. I love that she carried her tenders with her everywhere she went. :D

[css5]

I don't know. I think it's kind of cool.

 

But then I love looking at aviation history museums and seeing how equipment that changed the world evolved from when the Boeing 314 opened up the globe to when the 707 ushered in the jet age to the Concorde and 747 changing air travel forever.

 

So maybe these things are only interesting to some people, but they can still be interesting.

 

Please don't misunderstand - I love all types of museums, and learning as much as I can about many different topics. But a youtube video comparing "Oasis vs. Titanic", just seemed silly to me.

[sprint180]

Well I thought it was neat. My kids were just talking about the titanic. They were wondering what the size difference was. Now I have something to show them. (We are going on the Allure in November). Thanks for posting!

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Forums

[chengkp75]

Please don't misunderstand - I love all types of museums, and learning as much as I can about many different topics. But a youtube video comparing "Oasis vs. Titanic", just seemed silly to me.

 

Especially when they get the facts wrong, listing the "displacement" of Oasis as 225,000 tons and Titanic as 46,000 tons. This is the GT figure for Oasis, and the GRT figure for Titanic, which are two totally separate and different measurements, and only somewhat comparable. For instance, Oasis has a GT of 225,000 tons, and a displacement of 100,000 tons (not precise, but the accepted figure), while Titanic had a GRT of 46,000 tons and a displacement of 52,000 tons.

[Biker19]

^ now that, is much more interesting.

[DirtyDawg]

Especially when they get the facts wrong, listing the "displacement" of Oasis as 225,000 tons and Titanic as 46,000 tons. This is the GT figure for Oasis, and the GRT figure for Titanic, which are two totally separate and different measurements, and only somewhat comparable. For instance, Oasis has a GT of 225,000 tons, and a displacement of 100,000 tons (not precise, but the accepted figure), while Titanic had a GRT of 46,000 tons and a displacement of 52,000 tons.

 

OK, let's move on to the power plant. The model T had a 4 cylinder, 20HP, 2 speed unit, with rear wheel drive while the Explorer Sport has 6 cylinder, 365 HP, 6 speed unit that is all wheel drive. What's the difference between the Titanic and the Oasis?

[chengkp75]

OK, let's move on to the power plant. The model T had a 4 cylinder, 20HP, 2 speed unit, with rear wheel drive while the Explorer Sport has 6 cylinder, 365 HP, 6 speed unit that is all wheel drive. What's the difference between the Titanic and the Oasis?

 

Titanic had 2 triple expansion steam engines and one LP steam turbine fed by 29 boilers, for a total propulsion power of 46,000 hp. Oasis has 6 diesel generator sets (3 x 18,590 hp, 3 x 24,780 hp) feeding 3 x 27,000 hp azipods, for a total propulsion power of 81,000 hp). So, Oasis propels nearly twice the displacement (weight) with less than twice the power. More telling is fuel consumption. Titanic's proposed consumption is about 650-700 tons/day of coal, with a calorific value of about 11,000 Btu/lb, or 15.7 billion Btu/day. This equates to about 14,000 Btu/hp-hr. Oasis burns (going full speed) about 350 mt/day of IFO380 residual fuel oil, with a calorific value of 18,000 Btu/lb, or 13.8 billion Btu/day. This equates to about 7000 Btu/hp-hr. So, Oasis burns half as much fuel to produce one horsepower of propulsion as Titanic, and pushes more weight per horsepower as well. And a far larger share of the fuel consumption goes to "hotel load" on Oasis than on Titanic, so the numbers are even more skewed in Oasis' favor.

 

I know your post was probably humorous, but this was a fun exercise.

[DirtyDawg]

Titanic had 2 triple expansion steam engines and one LP steam turbine fed by 29 boilers, for a total propulsion power of 46,000 hp. Oasis has 6 diesel generator sets (3 x 18,590 hp, 3 x 24,780 hp) feeding 3 x 27,000 hp azipods, for a total propulsion power of 81,000 hp). So, Oasis propels nearly twice the displacement (weight) with less than twice the power. More telling is fuel consumption. Titanic's proposed consumption is about 650-700 tons/day of coal, with a calorific value of about 11,000 Btu/lb, or 15.7 billion Btu/day. This equates to about 14,000 Btu/hp-hr. Oasis burns (going full speed) about 350 mt/day of IFO380 residual fuel oil, with a calorific value of 18,000 Btu/lb, or 13.8 billion Btu/day. This equates to about 7000 Btu/hp-hr. So, Oasis burns half as much fuel to produce one horsepower of propulsion as Titanic, and pushes more weight per horsepower as well. And a far larger share of the fuel consumption goes to "hotel load" on Oasis than on Titanic, so the numbers are even more skewed in Oasis' favor.

 

I know your post was probably humorous, but this was a fun exercise.

 

Thanks, I usually put in a :D for the humourous stuff.

 

Now, did they enforce the dress code in the MDR on the Titanic vs Oasis? :D ;)

[rafinmd]

Thanks, I usually put in a :D for the humourous stuff.

 

Now, did they enforce the dress code in the MDR on the Titanic vs Oasis? :D ;)

 

MDR on Titanic??? My guess they did in the First Class dining room but it was anything goes in the Steerage cafe.

 

 

Is the Coastal Kitchen dress different than in the MDR?

 

Roy

[Paulxyz2004]

Thanks, I usually put in a :D for the humourous stuff.

 

Now, did they enforce the dress code in the MDR on the Titanic vs Oasis? :D ;)

 

 

They had no dress code on the Titanic for steerage, which equates the MDR on Oasis and there is a somewhat enforced or not dress suggestion on Oasis.

 

 

Dress Code for suite category on Titanic was adhered to without enforcement, dress code for CK on Oasis is hardly existant and enforced.:D;)

[Clarea]

... Is the Coastal Kitchen dress different than in the MDR?

 

Roy

Same variety of attire.

[Redrobo]

Titanic had 2 triple expansion steam engines and one LP steam turbine fed by 29 boilers, for a total propulsion power of 46,000 hp. Oasis has 6 diesel generator sets (3 x 18,590 hp, 3 x 24,780 hp) feeding 3 x 27,000 hp azipods, for a total propulsion power of 81,000 hp). So, Oasis propels nearly twice the displacement (weight) with less than twice the power. More telling is fuel consumption. Titanic's proposed consumption is about 650-700 tons/day of coal, with a calorific value of about 11,000 Btu/lb, or 15.7 billion Btu/day. This equates to about 14,000 Btu/hp-hr. Oasis burns (going full speed) about 350 mt/day of IFO380 residual fuel oil, with a calorific value of 18,000 Btu/lb, or 13.8 billion Btu/day. This equates to about 7000 Btu/hp-hr. So, Oasis burns half as much fuel to produce one horsepower of propulsion as Titanic, and pushes more weight per horsepower as well. And a far larger share of the fuel consumption goes to "hotel load" on Oasis than on Titanic, so the numbers are even more skewed in Oasis' favor.

 

I know your post was probably humorous, but this was a fun exercise.

 

Interesting the coal consumption, given the recent and not so recent alternative ideas of how the ship sank. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/rms-titanic-evidence-fire-senan-molony-belfast-new-york-southampton-sink-april-1912-a7504236.html

[chengkp75]

Interesting the coal consumption, given the recent and not so recent alternative ideas of how the ship sank. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/rms-titanic-evidence-fire-senan-molony-belfast-new-york-southampton-sink-april-1912-a7504236.html

 

The fire in the coal bunkers has been known for quite some time, and was a fairly common occurrence with wet coal in the days of coal fired boilers. Whether or not it was as severe as this article states, or whether or not it was covered up is a matter for conjecture.

[DirtyDawg]

And getting back to the Titanic vs Oasis, here are some more fun facts.

 

Cost to Build: Titanic 1.5M pounds ($7.5M USD), Oasis: $1.4 Billion USD

Cost in 2017 USD: Titanic $155M (using UK inflation rates and current exchange rate), Oasis: $1.47B

Capacity: Titanic 3,547 (including crew), Oasis 7,794

Cost to build per passenger and crew (2017 USD): Titanic $43,761, Oasis: $188,962

Edited August 14, 2017 by DirtyDawg
Originally used U.S. inflation for Oasis but should have used Finnish inflation and Euro exchange rates

[brevardcruiser]

69 days til I travel on oasis

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums