Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
Large engine, no gearbox: 660 "output".
This update is a steaming joke.
That's 1 large firebox, 4 boilers and 20 turbines, ~105 generator output per turbine.
4 Large diesel engines barely reach 1400 generator output.
While it might not be much for the mass the steam turbines add, it's definitely viable if you consider runtime and want to keep costs down.
In the shown example the firebox will use 1 coal every 91-92 seconds, I'll leave the math to you to figure out the runtime at 250 coal from a large coal duct.
They definitely could increase power output a bit, something around 50-75% more would be a decent enough change to make them viable in more applications.
What kind of ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ creation would even have that?
What does one turbine cost and weigh and how much space does it occupy?
Where would you even put it aside from these horrible, empty "dead inside" ships without any interior which are garbage to begin with?
It's like you're missing the point on purpose or something.
How can people defend this nonsense, or even not just criticize it and instead just shrug their shoulders and make a BS creation with 20 turbines unironically talking about being "viable".
Go look up some steam ship plans.
Go count the turbines on them, or compare the size with what we have.
How would we ever create, say, a steam powered harbor tug with what we have?
It's total nonsense!
Turbines need to be roughly 10 times as effective as they are now to be viable, especially considering its size and that it still needs a furnace, a boiler and a condenser which take up even more space.
Count the turbines, my friend:
https://images.maritimeprofessional.com/images/maritime/steam-turbine-manufacture-photo-credit-11999.jpg
That's not even very big, as far as impulse turbine stacks go.
Even then "it don't be real" would never be the argument. We all know no part of the game is following real world physics or even an analogue. The bridge from making something functional to making something good is iteration and testing, never assume.
I'm reaching 34 knots on a 30k mass steam tug with that very same setup. Seems a bit fast for a replica ship, no?
You are referring to the turbine blades, no one is talking about them.
Are the big cylindric-shaped things we have steam turbines or turbine blades?
No, they represent a steam turbine, the whole thing. No damn ship has 20 steam turbines.
Some have/had two, most had one.
Look at ships of the past, like turbine tankers. One turbine.
Any cargo vessel. One turbine.
Make it two on a great day... my point remains. Someone kicking the door in pretending a 20 turbine ship is "viable" is either high or insane.
It is my argument and simply saying it isn't one, is not an argument.
Obviously Stormworks tries to be somewhat realistic.
However, having steam turbines with the power output of a lawn mower motor is a joke too far. Are you saying steam turbines are fine as they are?
Expecting a steam turbine of acertain size in a game to perform at least remotely to a real life counter part is not "a mistake", it is natural, logical and makes perfect sense.
You are basically saying it is silly to expect a ship to swim in a game because it also does in real life.
No one is talking about 1:1 simulations, we all know Stormworks is way too far away from that. But it is hardly outlandish to expect a single turbine to be able to power a ship when the ship and turbine comparable in size in real life would function as well.
The game is full of evidence to support this. Most other parts work as expected. We can expect a small motor being unable to drive a large vessel and we can expect a large engine to be able to drive a large vessel.
So how can I not expect a "medium sized steam turbine" to perform better than a lawn mower?
Tl;dr: You are making ♥♥♥♥ up.
Put it on the workshop.
Also, your understating how usable these things are. We don't have room for 11 turbines! They would need to be much smaller, not even a block thick! small ships, sometimes not even bigger ships, can afford that!.
Lol. As confused as ever.
This is a turbine blade:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f9/Turbinenschaufel_RB199.jpg
This is a turbine:
https://www.howden.com/Howden/media/Howden/img/products/steamturbines/steamturbine-AFA-700x400.jpg?ext=.jpg
This is several turbines mounted on one shaft, 17 by a quick and rough count:
https://blog.technavio.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/gas-turbine-manufacturers.jpg
In Stormworks the connecting shaft is the pipe that the power goes through.
Yeah I figured the sole reason of your post was some semantics BS again, too bad you stumble over your own BS once again.
What you call a turbine, is a turbine ROTOR which holds the turbine blades. My mistake for being so lazy to skip over this and having the audacity to refer to it as blades, oh the humanity!
Go on and pretend the thing we have in Stormworks represents a single damn rotor, blade, orcallitwhatever when everyone is completely aware that it represents the whole damn thing: A steam turbine.
"No one has 20 turbines, but when provided with overwhelming proof to the opposite i cry semantics!!!"
Oh my.
Did you also ignore the part where 2 people mentioned Stormworks doesn't, has never, and will never emulate real life regardless of the point that many steam turbine assemblies are composed of more than a dozen turbines?
By the way, just to put your misnomers to rest, this is a turbine rotor shaft:
https://www.wamag.cz/image/963/6/demagnetizace_turbina_realizace.jpg
You know... the thing we'd normally call a driveshaft, but it's so stonking huge we call it something else. The entire thing is called a rotor assembly when it has the turbines slapped onto it.
My point - the one you ignored - about old ships which used coal fired steam turbines all just having ONE (or perhaps, in biggest cases, 2) steam turbines still stands.
Let's look at a T-2 tanker for example. Large for it's time, quite fast. One steam turbine.
"Oh my."
Yeah mine like i say is a steady 107 just using pumps and pushing the boiler to a steadyish 9 pressure
Haven't tried adding electric motors see if that does anything cus like im trying not to go many turbine cus they do take quite a lot of space might try a multi boiler to one turbine since they smaller.
A nuclear power station round 1600