Recent Topics
Washing coolant down a storm drain?
by jharrison - 02/22/20 12:57 AM
storm door installation question
by FirstNissan - 02/22/20 12:13 AM
Kirkland VS M1
by A_Spruce - 02/21/20 11:24 PM
Ryan Newman bar
by P10crew - 02/21/20 10:16 PM
Good aftermarket shocks and struts?
by Micahmcmeen - 02/21/20 09:49 PM
Oil Marketing
by Mathew_Boss - 02/21/20 09:45 PM
run to your walmart NOW!
by willow - 02/21/20 09:39 PM
When redundancy goes out the window
by Exhaustgases - 02/21/20 08:34 PM
Please help me decide....
by ecureed - 02/21/20 08:03 PM
Flywheel pic
by Chris142 - 02/21/20 07:49 PM
Rislone Hyper Fuel
by rrretiree7 - 02/21/20 07:40 PM
Bosch Brakes
by ChiTDI - 02/21/20 07:16 PM
Which 15W40 for an Onan generator?
by atikovi - 02/21/20 06:39 PM
Valvoline Advanced 5W40 MST
by BurntMusic - 02/21/20 06:04 PM
2014 F250, 6.7L 13,000 OCI Amsoil AME 15w40
by claluja - 02/21/20 05:43 PM
What Are These On My Caliper Pistons?
by Fitz98 - 02/21/20 05:37 PM
Gun carry insurance
by Colt - 02/21/20 05:25 PM
drywall crack. how do i fix it?
by WhyMe - 02/21/20 02:55 PM
Yokohama AVID Ascend GT
by Bottom_Feeder - 02/21/20 02:53 PM
Getting my Chevy 4.3 to 300k
by CharlotteB - 02/21/20 02:16 PM
Newest Members
Hubbs1982, AW4BYT, YOUSSEF, b3e3, Bogdon
70775 Registered Users
Who's Online Now
35 registered members (Blkstanger, carlprop, 2013ecof150, BlakeB, Bailes1992, c502cid, 2 invisible), 1,268 guests, and 18 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Statistics
Forums67
Topics301,769
Posts5,202,393
Members70,775
Most Online4,538
Jan 20th, 2020
Donate to BITOG
Print Thread
Hop To
Page 2 of 2 1 2
Re: Gonna need more oil! [Re: ctechbob] #5305193 12/27/19 04:48 AM
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 43,495
S
Shannow Online Content
Online Content
S
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 43,495
Originally Posted by ctechbob
Originally Posted by fozzdesy2001
Lifetime fill?



I wonder. Dry sump with centrifuge filtration and super low speed and probably hundreds of gallons of lube oil. Be interesting if they actually change it or somehow inject additives as needed


They have different sumpt for the crankshaft lubes (SAE30) and the piston lube, which is some ridiculouslyhigh TBN thing...with realtime UOA.

Asto the idea that theseships could run on batteries...LOL...they have to carry cargo...


If it's the truth....it can handle the pressure !!!
Re: Gonna need more oil! [Re: Mad_Hatter] #5305206 12/27/19 05:16 AM
Joined: Dec 2017
Posts: 5,853
S
Snagglefoot Offline
Offline
S
Joined: Dec 2017
Posts: 5,853
Check and fill. Never needs changing. laugh


If you want the job done right......do it yourself.
Re: Gonna need more oil! [Re: Snagglefoot] #5305221 12/27/19 05:59 AM
Joined: Oct 2012
Posts: 517
E
Egg_Head Offline
Offline
E
Joined: Oct 2012
Posts: 517
Think of the rebate cheques! smirk


1979 Garelli Rally Sport
2009 Cub Cadet LT1042
2002 BMW 540 M Sport (totaled)
2011 MB E350 4Matic wagon
1979 CJ-7
1978 K-5 Blazer 400ci
Re: Gonna need more oil! [Re: Mad_Hatter] #5305226 12/27/19 06:05 AM
Joined: May 2019
Posts: 3,866
M
Mad_Hatter Offline OP
OP Offline
M
Joined: May 2019
Posts: 3,866
Originally Posted by Shannow

They have different sumpt for the crankshaft lubes (SAE30) and the piston lube, which is some ridiculouslyhigh TBN thing...with realtime UOA.

I was wondering if it used something like a monograde.. yeah, the TBN on some of the lubes are in the triple digits!!

Originally Posted by 97prizm
I'd go nuclear with a ship that size. Yeah you'd need a nuclear engineer but 20 years between fill ups beats nasty bunker fuel and hours to take on fuel.

Maybe the diesel design delivers better torque? Plus there are regulatory issues pulling into port with nuclear. Some countries prohibit it. Being a very expensive shipping vessel, I would think that you wouldn't want to limit what ports you can visit??

Originally Posted by GMguy84
I'm sure a Fram XG can handle that thing

πŸ˜‚πŸ˜‚πŸ˜‚..my guess is that the filter's the size of a Mini!

Re: Gonna need more oil! [Re: Mad_Hatter] #5305240 12/27/19 06:36 AM
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 43,495
S
Shannow Online Content
Online Content
S
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 43,495
If the world was rational...these ships would be nuke...but if it was rational....we wouldn't need the ships delivering trinkets.


If it's the truth....it can handle the pressure !!!
Re: Gonna need more oil! [Re: Triple_Se7en] #5305313 12/27/19 08:25 AM
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 3,651
W
WyrTwister Offline
Offline
W
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 3,651
Originally Posted by Triple_Se7en
Originally Posted by fozzdesy2001
Lifetime fill?

Not oil for the batteries someday. But I would say never anything oil-lubricating lifetime for gas-only vehicles, which will be basically gone from new dealer lots in another 15-20 years. Alternative energy, electric, solar.....who knows what else..... is coming rapidly, due to significant climate change that's threatening the skies, water and land, quicker than expected.

Consumers will be squeezed to buy these alternatives too. We are going to see the gas prices double in coming years. That's the only way to get consumers to buy these new alternative vehicles coming out next decade.



You related to Al Gore ?


Wyr
God bless
Re: Gonna need more oil! [Re: Mad_Hatter] #5305391 12/27/19 09:55 AM
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 41,571
O
OVERKILL Offline
Offline
O
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 41,571
Originally Posted by Mad_Hatter

Maybe the diesel design delivers better torque? Plus there are regulatory issues pulling into port with nuclear. Some countries prohibit it. Being a very expensive shipping vessel, I would think that you wouldn't want to limit what ports you can visit??


There is a significant lack of civilian nuclear propulsion systems available, that's the issue. The only country that runs a nuclear freighter is Russia. Torque isn't an issue, look at the aircraft carriers the US runs with nukes, it's all regulation and an industry that is historically military-focused. That may be changing though.


2019 RAM 1500 Sport - Mobil 1 EP 0w-20, FRAM Ultra
2020 Grand Cherokee SRT - Ravenol SSL 0w-40, FRAM Ultra
Re: Gonna need more oil! [Re: Shannow] #5305394 12/27/19 09:56 AM
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 41,571
O
OVERKILL Offline
Offline
O
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 41,571
Originally Posted by Shannow
If the world was rational...these ships would be nuke...but if it was rational....we wouldn't need the ships delivering trinkets.


Nailed it.


2019 RAM 1500 Sport - Mobil 1 EP 0w-20, FRAM Ultra
2020 Grand Cherokee SRT - Ravenol SSL 0w-40, FRAM Ultra
Re: Gonna need more oil! [Re: Mad_Hatter] #5305444 12/27/19 10:35 AM
Joined: May 2019
Posts: 3,866
M
Mad_Hatter Offline OP
OP Offline
M
Joined: May 2019
Posts: 3,866
Originally Posted by OVERKILL

There is a significant lack of civilian nuclear propulsion systems available, that's the issue. The only country that runs a nuclear freighter is Russia. Torque isn't an issue, look at the aircraft carriers the US runs with nukes, it's all regulation and an industry that is historically military-focused. That may be changing though.

A Russian freighter, never heard of her.πŸ˜‚

Fair point on the torque though, I forgot about our nuclear powered carriers. But there is more than one issue preventing proliferation of nuclear powered vessels.

Google "nuclear free zones". Countries like Italy and Japan and New Zealand and parts of Australia I believe, prohibit the docking of nuclear powered vessels. Many port cities in Canada, like Vancouver BC, are nuclear free.. parts of the UK like London are nuclear free zones. Everywhere you parked a nuclear powered commercial vessel requiring massive security cuzz you'd likely be swarmed with protestors and creating a big headache for local authorities, that I suspect before too long they'd tell you you're no longer welcomed.πŸ˜‰ And that's just the beginning of your problems.. just wait till Somali pirates hijack your pretty nuclear powered liner (you're a floating nuclear liability) and are now selling it on the black market to dirty bomb makers in the middle East. You'd be going out of business yesterday... Lloyd's of London ain't gonna insure your cargo even using somebody else's money.πŸ˜‚

No way no how will nuclear powered commercial vessels become a thing anytime soon, certainly not in my lifetime anyhow.

(fwiw I'm no tree hugging anti nuclear protestor. Quite the contrary, I think we should be investing more in nuclear power technologies)

Last edited by Mad_Hatter; 12/27/19 10:49 AM.
Re: Gonna need more oil! [Re: Mad_Hatter] #5306213 12/28/19 11:13 AM
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 41,571
O
OVERKILL Offline
Offline
O
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 41,571
Originally Posted by Mad_Hatter
Originally Posted by OVERKILL

There is a significant lack of civilian nuclear propulsion systems available, that's the issue. The only country that runs a nuclear freighter is Russia. Torque isn't an issue, look at the aircraft carriers the US runs with nukes, it's all regulation and an industry that is historically military-focused. That may be changing though.

A Russian freighter, never heard of her.πŸ˜‚

Fair point on the torque though, I forgot about our nuclear powered carriers. But there is more than one issue preventing proliferation of nuclear powered vessels.

Google "nuclear free zones". Countries like Italy and Japan and New Zealand and parts of Australia I believe, prohibit the docking of nuclear powered vessels. Many port cities in Canada, like Vancouver BC, are nuclear free.. parts of the UK like London are nuclear free zones. Everywhere you parked a nuclear powered commercial vessel requiring massive security cuzz you'd likely be swarmed with protestors and creating a big headache for local authorities, that I suspect before too long they'd tell you you're no longer welcomed.πŸ˜‰ And that's just the beginning of your problems.. just wait till Somali pirates hijack your pretty nuclear powered liner (you're a floating nuclear liability) and are now selling it on the black market to dirty bomb makers in the middle East. You'd be going out of business yesterday... Lloyd's of London ain't gonna insure your cargo even using somebody else's money.πŸ˜‚

No way no how will nuclear powered commercial vessels become a thing anytime soon, certainly not in my lifetime anyhow.

(fwiw I'm no tree hugging anti nuclear protestor. Quite the contrary, I think we should be investing more in nuclear power technologies)


I don't think we'll see it in the cruise ship industry, at least not anytime soon, but I do for freight transport, with the necessary precautions. While I can't imagine Somali pirates having the wherewithal to extract anything of value, they'd probably just kill themselves with radiation, I can see that being a liability issue, though I'd expect sufficient armament would be more than paid for both the lack of fuelling costs.

The port issue is definitely something that'd need to change.

The US operated a nuclear freighter back in the day too, but the only country with one currently in operation is Russia, and its usage has generated some interesting headlines (concerned Norway in this trip):
https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2019...ed-with-seafood-approaches-norway-a67218

This is a good read:https://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/non-power-nuclear-applications/transport/nuclear-powered-ships.aspx

Important excerpts:
Quote
In 2018 the International Maritime Organization (IMO) adopted the aim of reducing greenhouse gas emissions from shipping by 50% by 2050, compared with 2008. In 2017 global bunkering totalled 8.9 EJ, with 82% being heavy fuel oil and the balance marine gas oil and diesel. In 2018 the global shipping fleet had a capacity of 2 Gt and it transported 8.9 Gt of freight. Russia’s 61,900 tonne Sevmorput is the only nuclear-powered freighter in service. The head of the large Chinese shipping company Cosco suggested in December 2009 that container ships should be powered by nuclear reactors in order to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from shipping. He said that Cosco was in talks with China's nuclear authority to develop nuclear powered freight vessels. However, in 2011 Cosco aborted the study after three years, following the Fukushima accident.


Quote
In November 2010 the British maritime classification society Lloyd's Register embarked upon a two-year study with US-based Hyperion Power Generation (now Gen4 Energy), British vessel designer BMT Group, and Greek ship operator Enterprises Shipping and Trading SA "to investigate the practical maritime applications for small modular reactors." The research was to produce a concept tanker-ship design, based on a 70 MWt reactor such as Hyperion's. Hyperion (Gen4 Energy) had a three-year contract with the other parties in the consortium, which planned to have the tanker design certified in as many countries as possible. The project included research on a comprehensive regulatory framework led by the International Maritime Organisation (IMO), and supported by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and regulators in countries involved.In response to its members' interest in nuclear propulsion, Lloyd's Register has rewritten its 'rules' for nuclear ships, which concern the integration of a reactor certified by a land-based regulator with the rest of the ship. The overall rationale of the rule-making process assumes that in contrast to the current marine industry practice where the designer/builder typically demonstrates compliance with regulatory requirements, in the future the nuclear regulators will wish to ensure that it is the operator of the nuclear plant that demonstrates safety in operation, in addition to the safety through design and construction. Nuclear ships are currently the responsibility of their own countries, but none are involved in international trade. Lloyd's Register said it expected to "see nuclear ships on specific trade routes sooner than many people currently anticipate."


2019 RAM 1500 Sport - Mobil 1 EP 0w-20, FRAM Ultra
2020 Grand Cherokee SRT - Ravenol SSL 0w-40, FRAM Ultra
Page 2 of 2 1 2
Previous Thread
Index
Next Thread

BOB IS THE OIL GUY® Powered by UBB.threads™