CV-XX (003 carrier) Thread I ... News & Discussions


Anlsvrthng

Senior Member
Registered Member
Thanks for the explanation. Why not a full diesel electric power system where propeller is only powered by electric motors? This would eliminate need for gear boxes used by the gas turbine. You can put the generators in the center of the ship, and route power to the motors near the propellers. No need for long shaft, which increases both space efficiency and power efficiency.
Too heavy . Diesel/turbine electric used only if the power is small, or if the weight is not an issue.
 

boytoy

New Member
Registered Member
Congrats, you just inented IEPS :)

Just googled this. So since people are showing pictures of combined gas turbine and diesel electric system. Does this mean 003 is not using a IEPS design? Is there advantages of this over IEPS designs? Or are the tech for IEPS not mature enough yet
 

Tetrach

Junior Member
Registered Member
At some point we will see the first aircraft carrier with pods for propulsion. At the moment, the developers do not dare to design this way.

you already have pods for the (french) Mistral class but it seems it is not that much liked.
 

nlalyst

Junior Member
Registered Member
Thanks for the explanation. Why not a full diesel electric power system where propeller is only powered by electric motors? This would eliminate need for gear boxes used by the gas turbine. You can put the generators in the center of the ship, and route power to the motors near the propellers. No need for long shaft, which increases both space efficiency and power efficiency.
Good question. USS Langley, the first aircraft carrier the US built and commissioned had electric drive. This was a conversion from a 1910s electric drive collier. At that time reduction gear drives were not yet mature enough and the USN experimented both with electric and geared drives. Simultaneously, in the 1910s, the US built 6 battleships with electric drives (turbo-electric propulsion). The USN seemed rather satisfied with the arrangement, and proceeded to build 2 fleet carriers (45,000t) with electric drive. It had plans to build six largest ever battleships at the time (48,000t) in 1920, also with turbo-electric propulsion. However, the Washington Naval Treaty smashed those plans.

The main argument against turbo-electric propulsion that I could find cited is excessive weight. Nonetheless, the US launched roughly 120 destroyers with turbo-electric propulsion in just 2 years (1943-1944).

Congrats, you just inented IEPS :)
No, such arrangement doesn't have to be IEPS.
 

Anlsvrthng

Senior Member
Registered Member
Good question. USS Langley, the first aircraft carrier the US built and commissioned had electric drive. This was a conversion from a 1910s electric drive collier. At that time reduction gear drives were not yet mature enough and the USN experimented both with electric and geared drives. Simultaneously, in the 1910s, the US built 6 battleships with electric drives (turbo-electric propulsion). The USN seemed rather satisfied with the arrangement, and proceeded to build 2 fleet carriers (45,000t) with electric drive. It had plans to build six largest ever battleships at the time (48,000t) in 1920, also with turbo-electric propulsion. However, the Washington Naval Treaty smashed those plans.

The main argument against turbo-electric propulsion that I could find cited is excessive weight. Nonetheless, the US launched roughly 120 destroyers with turbo-electric propulsion in just 2 years (1943-1944).


No, such arrangement doesn't have to be IEPS.
The problem of long shafts bit overblown.

They are not that heavy ,they need to be only hollow tubes.

Issue is simple, the ship has a cost ,weight limit, and a desired maximum speed, and the electric propulsion usually has inferior characteristic if all three considered compared to direct geared drive.
 

Top