Steam engines was Re: COLONIAL WEAPONS

Reciprocating steam engines haven't been used commercially or industrially for
decades. Turbines were just so much better (efficiency, reliability,
simplicity) that there was no reason to use a reciprocating engine. IIRC one
of the last ships built with a reciprocating steam engine was the Titanic (it
was also the largest reciprocating engine ever built).

I remember from a History Channel show that the inventor of the steam turbine
pitched it to the Royal Navy and was turned away. So he built a ship and
showed up at a military regatta or review (I don't remember exactly) and
demonstrated the superiority of the turbine by proceeding to run away from any
ship that tried to catch him. The Royal Navy (after they calmed down) took
notice and started converting their ships to turbine engines.

Bill

                    KH.Ranitzsch@t-online.de

(K.H.Ranitzsch) To:
<gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>
Sent by: cc:

                    owner-gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Be       Subject:     Re:
COLONIAL WEAPONS rkeley.EDU

                    01/31/02 01:34 AM

                    Please respond to gzg-l

[quoted original message omitted]

> bbrush@unlnotes.unl.edu wrote:

> Reciprocating steam engines haven't been used commercially or
IIRC
> one of the last ships built with a reciprocating steam engine was the

In all fairness, the disadvantage of Parsons' steam turbine was that a
reciprocating steam engine was a lot easier to match to a propellor. I think
that at the time,