|
Author |
Topic Options
|
Posted: Mon Aug 04, 2014 2:09 pm
Winnipegger Winnipegger: And I know how to relieve metal fatigue. Yes, my father was a welder, the best welder at the heavy equipment shop of the CN railroad until he retired. As a hobby I've studied blacksmithing, and for part of my bids for NASA contracts I studied metallurgy. I could tell you how to anneal a hull, but Gunnair probably wouldn't understand. In fact, if you were willing to anneal an entire hull in place in dry dock, the hull would last indefinitely. Then it's just a matter of updating equipment. Annealing is a very big job, but so is building a whole ship. I'll accept the 60 year life span without annealing. To make it that long, the ship has to be refit periodically. And refit is a very big job. From the way Gunnair is talking, I doubt he knows what's involved. So far he's the only one citing sources. I'll take verifiable facts over "my dad is better than your dad" semantics just about every time. I don't want to dispute what you say about metallurgy, but I want to see sources before I'll believe it.
|
Posts: 11907
Posted: Mon Aug 04, 2014 2:14 pm
Winnipegger Winnipegger: And I know how to relieve metal fatigue. Yes, my father was a welder, the best welder at the heavy equipment shop of the CN railroad until he retired. As a hobby I've studied blacksmithing, and for part of my bids for NASA contracts I studied metallurgy. I could tell you how to anneal a hull, but Gunnair probably wouldn't understand. In fact, if you were willing to anneal an entire hull in place in dry dock, the hull would last indefinitely. Then it's just a matter of updating equipment. Annealing is a very big job, but so is building a whole ship. I'll accept the 60 year life span without annealing. To make it that long, the ship has to be refit periodically. And refit is a very big job. From the way Gunnair is talking, I doubt he knows what's involved. Unlike a pompous asshole who claims he knows more about naval ships than the guy who has been in the navy for over 20+ years.
|
Posts: 35257
Posted: Mon Aug 04, 2014 2:18 pm
The technology is a bit old-fashion but at least it's dirt cheap.
Last edited by raydan on Mon Aug 04, 2014 2:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
|
Posts: 13404
Posted: Mon Aug 04, 2014 2:33 pm
In fact, if you were willing to anneal an entire hull in place in dry dock, the hull would last indefinitely.
That, I believe is what they do to submarine pressure vessels (that and they use really unusual alloys.) The catch is those multi-billion dollar hulls ....
|
Posts: 1804
Posted: Mon Aug 04, 2014 3:19 pm
2Cdo 2Cdo: Unlike a pompous asshole who claims he knows more about naval ships than the guy who has been in the navy for over 20+ years. I see the problem. We're butting heads. You claim you know more about government budgets than me. The reason is you served in the navy. What was your position?
|
Posts: 13404
Posted: Mon Aug 04, 2014 3:22 pm
What was your position?
[... bites down hard on tongue ...]
|
Posts: 12398
Posted: Mon Aug 04, 2014 3:32 pm
Winnipegger Winnipegger: And I know how to relieve metal fatigue. Yes, my father was a welder, the best welder at the heavy equipment shop of the CN railroad until he retired. As a hobby I've studied blacksmithing, and for part of my bids for NASA contracts I studied metallurgy. I could tell you how to anneal a hull, but Gunnair probably wouldn't understand. In fact, if you were willing to anneal an entire hull in place in dry dock, the hull would last indefinitely. Then it's just a matter of updating equipment. Annealing is a very big job, but so is building a whole ship. I'll accept the 60 year life span without annealing. To make it that long, the ship has to be refit periodically. And refit is a very big job. From the way Gunnair is talking, I doubt he knows what's involved. To anneal (stress relieve) a hull it would have to be heated to about 600C and then slowly cooled. The whole hull including all support beams would have to be heated simultaneously, same for the slow cool down. Due to expansion, the stresses involved would probably buckle the weaker sections rendering the hull unusable. This would be a major undertaking and IMO not feasible.
|
Posts: 23565
Posted: Mon Aug 04, 2014 4:23 pm
Winnipegger Winnipegger: And I know how to relieve metal fatigue. Yes, my father was a welder, the best welder at the heavy equipment shop of the CN railroad until he retired. As a hobby I've studied blacksmithing, and for part of my bids for NASA contracts I studied metallurgy. I could tell you how to anneal a hull, but Gunnair probably wouldn't understand. In fact, if you were willing to anneal an entire hull in place in dry dock, the hull would last indefinitely. Then it's just a matter of updating equipment. Annealing is a very big job, but so is building a whole ship. I'll accept the 60 year life span without annealing. To make it that long, the ship has to be refit periodically. And refit is a very big job. From the way Gunnair is talking, I doubt he knows what's involved. Interesting. It's a curious thing that DND doesn't consult you on extending the FFGs to 60 years. Every source I've cited says between 25 - 40, but that's only because DND hasn't sought out some CKA forum Eureka clone that's all that and a bag of chips. As I've said, I cited sources. Even with that, Winnipegger definitely didn't understand.
|
Posts: 23565
Posted: Mon Aug 04, 2014 4:24 pm
PluggyRug PluggyRug: Winnipegger Winnipegger: And I know how to relieve metal fatigue. Yes, my father was a welder, the best welder at the heavy equipment shop of the CN railroad until he retired. As a hobby I've studied blacksmithing, and for part of my bids for NASA contracts I studied metallurgy. I could tell you how to anneal a hull, but Gunnair probably wouldn't understand. In fact, if you were willing to anneal an entire hull in place in dry dock, the hull would last indefinitely. Then it's just a matter of updating equipment. Annealing is a very big job, but so is building a whole ship. I'll accept the 60 year life span without annealing. To make it that long, the ship has to be refit periodically. And refit is a very big job. From the way Gunnair is talking, I doubt he knows what's involved. To anneal (stress relieve) a hull it would have to be heated to about 600C and then slowly cooled. The whole hull including all support beams would have to be heated simultaneously, same for the slow cool down. Due to expansion, the stresses involved would probably buckle the weaker sections rendering the hull unusable. This would be a major undertaking and IMO not feasible. But...but... it looks good on paper.
|
Posts: 23565
Posted: Mon Aug 04, 2014 4:29 pm
Winnipegger Winnipegger: 2Cdo 2Cdo: Unlike a pompous asshole who claims he knows more about naval ships than the guy who has been in the navy for over 20+ years. I see the problem. We're butting heads. You claim you know more about government budgets than me. The reason is you served in the navy. What was your position? No, you claim you know more about ship building than the multiple and credible sources cited while at the same time, refuse to cite your own. That has zero, zilch, sweet fuck all to do with your alleged experience in government budgets. All you can do is rally round your fall back position of internet boasting about what you're supposedly qualified to do. We've seen that before. It certainly doesn't qualify you to read government sources that say your claims are full of shit, nor are you qualified it seems, to exchange sources to justify your position.
|
Posts: 1804
Posted: Mon Aug 04, 2014 4:51 pm
Gunnair Gunnair: But...but... it looks good on paper. I know several people who have done what others claim is impossible. Several welders faced a problem where others said heating would buckle, leave stressed. But the steel workers knew what they were doing, and got it done. I've faced computer repairs that others said couldn't be done. Often did the repair while they were watching and chin-waging. And this is about government budget. The Conservatives have proposed scrapping a multi-billion dollar asset acquired during the most recent Liberal administration. Then replace it with something exactly the same. Halifax class frigates were not laid down during World War 2, they were commissioned during the Chrétien administration. The Conservatives do not proposed any radical new design; they propose replacing steel mono-hull vessels with steel mono-hull vessels. And there aren't newer weapon systems. These aren't catamaran ships, or carbon fibre composite, or stealth. And high power lasers to shoot down anti-ship missiles don't exist yet. The ships proposed are exactly the same. You complained when Trudeau scrapped the Bonaventure; a ship laid down during World War 2. Laid down in 1943, decommissioned in 1970. So why would you argue to scrap ships commissioned 1992-1996? You also pointed out the Bonaventure had just completed a multi-million dollar refit when Trudeau scrapped it. But our frigates are in the process of a $3.1 billion refit. So why scrap them now?
|
Posts: 23565
Posted: Mon Aug 04, 2014 4:53 pm
Winnipegger Winnipegger: Gunnair Gunnair: But...but... it looks good on paper. I know several people who have done what others claim is impossible. Several welders faced a problem where others said heating would buckle, leave stressed. But the steel workers knew what they were doing, and got it done. I've faced computer repairs that others said couldn't be done. Often did the repair while they were watching and chin-waging. And this is about government budget. The Conservatives have proposed scrapping a multi-billion dollar asset acquired during the most recent Liberal administration. Then replace it with something exactly the same. Halifax class frigates were not laid down during World War 2, they were commissioned during the Chrétien administration. The Conservatives do not proposed any radical new design; they propose replacing steel mono-hull vessels with steel mono-hull vessels. And there aren't newer weapon systems. These aren't catamaran ships, or carbon fibre composite, or stealth. And high power lasers to shoot down anti-ship missiles don't exist yet. The ships proposed are exactly the same. You complained when Trudeau scrapped the Bonaventure; a ship laid down during World War 2. Laid down in 1943, decommissioned in 1970. So why would you argue to scrap ships commissioned 1992-1996? You also pointed out the Bonaventure had just completed a multi-million dollar refit when Trudeau scrapped it. But our frigates are in the process of a $3.1 billion refit. So why scrap them now? I've asked you before and I'll ask you again. Post the link that the CPC is planning to scrap the Halifax class. Post...the fucking...link.
|
Posts: 11907
Posted: Mon Aug 04, 2014 4:59 pm
Winnipegger Winnipegger: 2Cdo 2Cdo: Unlike a pompous asshole who claims he knows more about naval ships than the guy who has been in the navy for over 20+ years. I see the problem. We're butting heads. You claim you know more about government budgets than me. The reason is you served in the navy. What was your position? Thanks for confirming you know nothing about the military in Canada.
|
Posts: 11907
Posted: Mon Aug 04, 2014 5:03 pm
Winnipeggers resume: A blacksmith, metallurgy expert and a superman who can repair computers that computer experts cannot. Also does budget planning for the future Liberal government in his spare time.
|
Posts: 23565
Posted: Mon Aug 04, 2014 5:07 pm
2Cdo 2Cdo: Winnipeggers resume: A blacksmith, metallurgy expert and a superman who can repair computers that computer experts cannot. Also does budget planning for the future Liberal government in his spare time.
|
|
Page 5 of 6
|
[ 88 posts ] |
Who is online |
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 23 guests |
|
|