Spares for preserved diesels

[jjb1970]

I used to get annoyed on the big slow speed engines that even the licensee made a difference. We had a number of MSE (Mitsui) built B&W engines in the fleet and certain spares had to be ordered from MSE as B&W supplied spares with the same part number didn't fit. I don't want to be overly critical of MSE as in my experience MSE built B&W slow speed engines were a gold standard of big engines and the best B&W engines I sailed with (and they were a pleasure to work with when I did design approval with them at LR) but the spares issue really annoyed me. The drawings are all approved by class and are still owned by B&W as the licensor so how do they end up different? It was something class were terrified of addressing as strictly speaking if the builder deviated from the approved drawings it invalidated approvals but the problem was so endemic there was a tacit agreement between class, licensor and licensee to not kick sleeping dogs.

[MarkC]

1 hour ago, jjb1970 said:

 

I think by that point they had got the message I was only agreeing to let them make their proposal as a courtesy. Things were that bad that the head of the UK operation of a major multinational company said that not only would he make sure that they would never buy anything from said company again on his watch but that if it was down to him they'd never buy gas diesels again and go for small gas turbines instead.

Ouch! I bet that went down like the Hindenberg...

[New Haven Neil]

3 hours ago, jjb1970 said:

I used to get annoyed on the big slow speed engines that even the licensee made a difference. 

snip<

 

 

Hmm yes, 'Barclay-Curle' Sulzer RND90 - disaster area.  Mitsubishi, Chantiers Dunkerque and another Japanese builder that escapes me - no problems.  Personal experience.  

[MarkC]

3 hours ago, jjb1970 said:

I used to get annoyed on the big slow speed engines that even the licensee made a difference. We had a number of MSE (Mitsui) built B&W engines in the fleet and certain spares had to be ordered from MSE as B&W supplied spares with the same part number didn't fit. I don't want to be overly critical of MSE as in my experience MSE built B&W slow speed engines were a gold standard of big engines and the best B&W engines I sailed with (and they were a pleasure to work with when I did design approval with them at LR) but the spares issue really annoyed me. The drawings are all approved by class and are still owned by B&W as the licensor so how do they end up different? It was something class were terrified of addressing as strictly speaking if the builder deviated from the approved drawings it invalidated approvals but the problem was so endemic there was a tacit agreement between class, licensor and licensee to not kick sleeping dogs.

I sailed on a French-built LPG tanker (3 ways of doing a job - the right way, the wrong way and the French way...) with a Mitsui B&W main engine. It was OK, but the manuals were in 'Jinglish', which made life interesting at times... I don't recall any issues with spares, tbh. Perhaps we were lucky.

 

We are digressing - but on the other hand perhaps not really, as it all illustrates the problems that can exist when obtaining parts for even fairly recent large diesel engines.

 

Electronics - oh boy. I don't care what promises the makers come out with about reliability etc - on many modern engines, if the electronics fail, you can't go back to first principles to keep it running.

 

Good luck to those trying to keep the old diesel locos going - and stock up on spares whilst you can.

[MarkC]

25 minutes ago, New Haven Neil said:

snip<

 

 

Hmm yes, 'Barclay-Curle' Sulzer RND90 - disaster area.  Mitsubishi, Chantiers Dunkerque and another Japanese builder that escapes me - no problems.  Personal experience.  

I offer you the Tyne-built Sulzer 5RTA56 on the "Traquair" - well, we thought it was a RLA until I needed a new Cylinder Head. Turned out that it had been fitted with RLB heads when built - we only found out when we put the new head in place & discovered that it was a couple of CM higher, & none of the connections would line up...

 

It was the last Sulzer built by Clarks, back in 1981 - they obviously used what was to hand...

[jjb1970]

Mitsubishi built Sulzer RND engines were excellent, the OCL Liverpool Bay class were re-engined from twin screw steam turbine to twin screw Sulzer 8RND90M diesels and the engines were pretty much bomb proof. 

The worst engines for spare parts in my experience was Caterpillar, but not because the spares weren't available. The spares books for Cat were like telephone books in size and number of pages (literally) as every single configuration and variant of an engine platform was included. Which meant that identifying part numbers and completing an order with the required part codes for a specific engine could be a nightmare.

[MarkC]

5 minutes ago, jjb1970 said:

Mitsubishi built Sulzer RND engines were excellent, the OCL Liverpool Bay class were re-engined from twin screw steam turbine to twin screw Sulzer 8RND90M diesels and the engines were pretty much bomb proof. 

The worst engines for spare parts in my experience was Caterpillar, but not because the spares weren't available. The spares books for Cat were like telephone books in size and number of pages (literally) as every single configuration and variant of an engine platform was included. Which meant that identifying part numbers and completing an order with the required part codes for a specific engine could be a nightmare.

Cats can be bad for ordering, certainly - but Destroyed - sorry, Detroit Diesels are/were horrendous - both for spares ordering and the engines themselves...

[jjb1970]

Detroit's were horrible things, a lot of power from a small engine but thirsty, noisy, maintenance intensive, oil drinking, expensive to operate garbage. In a way they were like the exact opposite of the Mirlees K-Major engine, the K-Major was enormous for the meagre power it provided but the ones I worked with were rock solid engines that just kept going and going (maybe because they were so conservatively rated for the size....). 

[The Evil Bus Driver]

On 02/08/2022 at 09:54, Bucoops said:

Anything can be re-made - after all someone did it once for the original. The trick (as seen with the pistons mentioned above) is to keep the cost affordable.

To me the pistons will always be a problem in any engine. I had an Essex V6 for a Capri and it was something like £70 per piston but I could pick up a replacement engine for £400. But they are expensive engines to rebuild anyway. I'd imagine a Sulzer rebuild would hit similar problems as stated above  among others.

 

At least if you did have to buy 50 pistons you'd have spares plus some to sell. Not sure who'd buy at 50k each though.

[jjb1970]

Some of the US engine builders especially have a sales model in which they almost give the engines away in return for service contracts in which operators pay $$$$$$$$$s for spares and support. In a way the effect is similar to the choice of buying an asset or leasing it, higher up front costs or higher total life costs.

[Bucoops]

7 hours ago, The Evil Bus Driver said:

To me the pistons will always be a problem in any engine. I had an Essex V6 for a Capri and it was something like £70 per piston but I could pick up a replacement engine for £400. But they are expensive engines to rebuild anyway. I'd imagine a Sulzer rebuild would hit similar problems as stated above  among others.

 

At least if you did have to buy 50 pistons you'd have spares plus some to sell. Not sure who'd buy at 50k each though.

 

Same with some Saab engines and gearboxes. I've "futureproofed" myself I hope, including getting some parts manufactured. 

[The Evil Bus Driver]

17 hours ago, Bucoops said:

 

Same with some Saab engines and gearboxes. I've "futureproofed" myself I hope, including getting some parts manufactured. 

I had a Reliant Svimitar SE5A which needed an engine rebuild. I told the buyer it'd be cheaper to get a new engine. He then said he'd found one for about £350 and I said that wouldn't even buy the parts new hehe. Good find though. Ex boat engines are a good way to find them. 

[roythebus1]

Similar problem to the billybusnuts who love Routemasters with the AEC AV590. Iv've stripped down and rebuilt a few of them but the last couple were only fit for scrap. Cranshafts ground to 60 thou undersize, wet liners won't seat properly due to corrosion of the lower cylinder block, top faces ground down to minimum.. The best replacement for them is the Cummins C series, and you can still get the parts for them. No doubt the railcar boys are finding the same problem with their BUT/AEC 11.3 engines?

 

[New Haven Neil]

On 04/08/2022 at 20:15, MarkC said:

I offer you the Tyne-built Sulzer 5RTA56 on the "Traquair" - well, we thought it was a RLA until I needed a new Cylinder Head. Turned out that it had been fitted with RLB heads when built - we only found out when we put the new head in place & discovered that it was a couple of CM higher, & none of the connections would line up...

 

It was the last Sulzer built by Clarks, back in 1981 - they obviously used what was to hand...

 

The Barclay-Curle Sulzer was in a Tyne built vessel, the Yorkshire - a 113,000 dwt floating disaster area.  It was an 8RND90 I don't know if Clarke's couldn't build it?  Whatever, it was rough and unreliable, the build quality was awful, as was the rest of the ship.  Man, was I glad to see the back of that one.

 

This looks like her leaving the Tyne, preparing for her first breakdown....

 

[62613]

When someone like H & W or Kincaids built B & W engines under licence, didn't they use BSW/BSF, rather than metric, fastenings, certainly up to about 1967?  I seem to recall one British - built ship I was on had a 9-98VT2BF, with 2" or 2 1/2" BSF head bolts

Edited August 9, 2022 by 62613

[New Haven Neil]

On 04/08/2022 at 20:10, MarkC said:

I sailed on a French-built LPG tanker (3 ways of doing a job - the right way, the wrong way and the French way...)

Snip<

 

We had three Chantiers Dunkerque built LPG tankers, two, the Hampshire and Devonshire were 'identical' (ish!) and had rather muddled engineroom layouts to this then young engineer, the third, the Staffordshire was 50% larger but similar, and had an absolutely gorgeous and logical layout that was a pleasure to work in with a nice hassle free 7RND90M. The starter switches on the control room panel for motors though, defied logic.

 

Unfortunately it also had Crepelle DA engines, aptly dubbed Crapelle later in her life.  They had an appetite for cylinder heads such that they were later chucked out entirely, after my time in Bibbys.