Prop Shaft Motors

[Mark Sarsfield]

I was wondering if any of you museum boats that have at least one running engine, if you a) have ever tried to running electricity to the control cubicle and b) ever tried to run power to one or more prop motors?  Some boats have props.  Some don't.  Just curious as to how far people are taking some restoration projects.

[Tom Bowser]

OK I just have to throw my 2 cents in here, maybe even a quarter.
They only boats that in their wildest dreams that could even think about turning over a prop motor are those on land. If you are in the water do you have any idea if the shafts are locked or secured out side the hull? If you spin the shaft have you got new packing because it will leak like hell when you spin it. Have you traced all of the wiring to and from the cubicle and found all disconnected and cut wires. Have you pulled every contact in the cubicle and inspected or repaired. Do you have an excellent fire suppression system on board, there were lots of cubicle fires when these boats were operating.

Periscopes
Are you going to be opening you conning towers to visitors, if not why spend the time and money.

Air systems
all of our air systems are 65-70 years old, are the pipes absolutely clean, what is the condition of your air banks, I bet I am the only one that can answer that question.

Come guys- ever boat on here is complaining they don't have the money to paint or do other things.
Tom

[Mark Sarsfield]

I already know the answer to the first question.  Batfish will never run power through the boat via the diesel engines.  I don't think we'll ever get an engine running, for that matter.  So, I wasn't asking the question from a "maybe we can do it, too" standpoint.  I was just curious if anyone tried it and how loud the transmission was when it was running.  Supposedly, the loudest thing on the boat next to the engines was the reduction transmission (for the boats that used high-speed motors).

Rick would like to run special hard hat tours through the CT.  It would be nice to have working scopes, but it's not critical.

I have no desire to restore the air system.  As you said, it's ancient plumbing and it would be a safety hazard to run thousands of pounds of air into something that won't be maintained very well.

Our next project on the Batfish is actually trying to correct the port-side list.  Supposedly, Muskogee Public Works will donate men and machinery to help us dig out the stern and also a trench along the starboard side to help it right itself - we hope.  Dig day is supposed to be in two weeks.

[Tom Bowser]

Mark
My post was not meant to single out you/batfish but for all on here, these boats are extremely dangerous and every one really needs to be careful.
Tom

[Mark Sarsfield]

Agreed.  We just don't turn power back on and cross our fingers.  We have enough issues with lighting.

[Darrin]

Tom,

You have brought up some good points that needed to be addressed and I can only speak for myself and I do know part of the condition of the air banks on Torsk and as they have been brought back online slowly and surely to help the capacity of the large home style air compressor. When we worked on our air banks we did find that they were preserved and once the blanking plates were removed and the valves rebuilt they hold air quite well and they will never see true high pressure air once more they do hold 150# quite well.

As far as I know all waterborne submarines have their shafts locked using straps and or metal bars and on Torsk I also believe that the MG brushes have been lifted and tied away so that they cannot make contact and generate power once more, then both of the shafts are locked in place and honestly I wouldn't try to rotate them without replacing the packing.

just my .02 worth

Darrin

[Mark Sarsfield]

Interesting.  I wasn't aware of everything that the Navy went through to de-mil a submarine.

[pekelney]

Some thoughts on all the notes above:

- There is no consistency on what the Navy did nor did not do before turning the boats over.
- Most of the Navy contracts include provisions that disallow reactivation of propulsion.  Turning a shaft would constitute reactivation.
- On Pampanito we have not restored the cubicle.  However, we have restored all the other services, 120 VDC, 120 VAC, 250 VDC on the aux bus.  For example, the lighting is on DC.  To do this we have 480 three phase that comes over the brow, through a removed salvage valve in the head, down into after battery where we have transformers and rectifiers.
- Once or twice we ran the auxilliary engine, generated electricity, matched voltages with the rectifier, shut down the rectifier and ran the house load on the aux.  
- We never generated electricity on any of the main engines.  This would require the cubicle to be restored, and more important a load.  We have no intention of spinning the motors.
- I agree that it would be foolish to try to turn a shaft even if it were allowed.  It would require drydocking to pull the shafts, repack, check lignum vitae bearings, and the money reserved for an emergency drydocking if it started to leak.  This would be after all the work it would take to safely turn the motors.

- We have hydrostatic tested 1/2 of #1 air bank and some of the relief valves.  We have a shore side compressor.  In the past we had one of the Hardie Tynes working, but it has be down for repairs for several years.  There are crew slowly working on #1 high pac.

- We have restored the inside of the conning tower (although there is more to be done.)  The restoration is for preservation in addition to interpretation.


rich

[Mark Sarsfield]

Yeah, our CT is in need of a major clean-up.