Earliest gas turbine

I think realistically the 60s at the earliest - probably the Marine RR Olympus get deployed and tested some years earlier and Britian builds a CVA-01 in the late 60s and early 70s
 
At work.

Turbine for carrier aircraft?

Heck, get better funding for Whittle and straighten out the manufacturing/production/design of things and you get a turbine in an airframe in the early to mid 40's.

Another five to ten years working things out/through and you possibly the get carrier machines in the early 50's.

With a war on? Shave things down some more if given the changes above.

Remember, Whittle first put forward his idea in the 30's. With others proposing kind'a similar ideas earlier than that.
 

SsgtC

Banned
At work.

Turbine for carrier aircraft?

Heck, get better funding for Whittle and straighten out the manufacturing/production/design of things and you get a turbine in an airframe in the early to mid 40's.

Another five to ten years working things out/through and you possibly the get carrier machines in the early 50's.

With a war on? Shave things down some more if given the changes above.

Remember, Whittle first put forward his idea in the 30's. With others proposing kind'a similar ideas earlier than that.
No, turbine engines proved more difficult to scale up than people originally thought they would. They weren't used for major warships until until 1972 (at least in the USN). Early to mid 60s is really the absolute earliest IMO
 
The is a possibility of getting Olympus up and running in a German ship before the Finish Navys Turunmaa Gun boat in the mid/late 60s

This german vessel was abandoned in 1962 while land based testing was going on resulting in further testing being delayed till 1966 - this might have been enough for a CVA-01 type carrier laid down in the late 60s/early 70s

Perhaps increased earlier use of Gas Turbines - particularly on longer range train line in the UK (where its more efficient operating costs make sense outside of the stop start shorter train services) results in increased earlier marine use.

Mad brain fart but maybe the Chieftain tank benefits from a Gas turbine power plant instead of the Leyland L60 due to increased land use?

But anyway whatever POD allows for a decent carrier or 3 to be built at this period - would I expect be looking to replace the Eagle, Ark Royal and Victorious (and light fleets) during the 70s and an 8 x Olympus driving 4 shaft affair would offer about 180,000 - 200,000 SHP
 
The Whittle X1, the very first model with the single combustiin chamber, could have conceivably been running in 1930 rather than 1940. However IOTL with the 1940 start date it took 15 years before the Tribal class frigates were deigned with a single 6500hp GT, 17-18 years for the Counties to have 4 × 7500hp GTs and 25 years for the Type 82 to have 2 x 22,000hp Olympus GTs.

If jets were in production in Britain from 1940, and allowing for an accelerated development due to WW2 you still likely won't get GTs powerful enough to put in a carrier until about 1960.
 
You could go with combined cycle. Exhaust from turbine heats water to generate steam. Steam used on its own turbine. They are pretty efficient.

Yep each Olympus TM3 generates 19,000 KWs - you could even have a smaller turbine fitted forward specifically for Steam generation!
 
If you want a big gas turbine suitable for naval operations, I'd start off with the de Havilland Gyron. It was first run in 1953 and made 18,000 lb thrust in dry condition by 1955 during flight testing.
 

trurle

Banned
No, turbine engines proved more difficult to scale up than people originally thought they would. They weren't used for major warships until until 1972 (at least in the USN). Early to mid 60s is really the absolute earliest IMO
The main problem for naval gas turbine design were low-corrosion, low-creep blade alloys with longevity good enough to be competitive to steam turbines. May be even single-crystal blade manufacturing was necessary to reduce creep, although i am not sure. IOTL, these alloys were developed concurrently for American and Soviet space program combustion chambers around 1965, therefore earlier date for naval gas turbine is not practical.
Aircraft jet turbines are useful in design, but cannot be directly scaled for naval propulsion. Turboprop engines like Rolls-Royce Dart are more useful template.
 
Last edited:
You could go with combined cycle. Exhaust from turbine heats water to generate steam. Steam used on its own turbine. They are pretty efficient.

Yes, combined cycle power plants are common in modern ships, although they might not be appropriate for warships let alone 50s warships. Certainly GTs generate enough heat from their exhaust to boil water, and unlike steam the faster the ship goesthe more steam will be available.
 
The timeline seems to have gone:
  • Motor Gun Boat MGB 2009 is converted to use a Metropolitan-Vickers G1 Gatric, a modified F2/3, in 1947
  • Steam Gun Boat Grey Goose is converted to use Rolls-Royce RM60 gas turbines in 1952
  • Bold-class Fast Patrol Boats Bold Pioneer and Bold Pathfinder are built and fitted with Metropolitan-Vickers G2, evolved from the Beryl, gas turbines in 1953
  • The Tribal-class were the first major ships built to use gas turbines with HSM Ashanti commissioning in 1961
With MGB 2009 and Grey Goose they were very much experimental vessels, even with the two Bold-class they had Diesel engines for normal propulsion and only used the gas turbines for shorter high speed stretches. The Tribal-class weren't trusted solely to gas turbines with their having steam engines as well.

The Royal Navy were in the forefront of investigating marine gas turbines and as SsgtC noted they ended up being more difficult to scale up to larger outputs so I'm not sure you can shave off massive amounts of time. Unless I've overlooked others the first class of ships that relied on just gas turbines were the Type 21 frigates with the lead ship HMS Amazon being ordered in 1969 and commissioned in 1974. The first Invincible-class carrier was ordered in 1973 so with design times it looks as though the Admiralty trusted gas turbines by the later 1960s, even if you push things a bit I dont think you can get gas turbines powers carriers before the late 1970s.
 
Last edited:
With aircraft and torpedo boat engines--especially aircraft--the benefit of high performance justifies frequent major overhauls or replacement. Carriers, cruisers, and the like need much more durable engines.
 
The Royal Navy were in the forefront of investigating marine gas turbines and as SsgtC noted they ended up being more difficult to scale up to larger outputs so I'm not sure you can shave off massive amounts of time. Unless I've overlooked others the first class of ships that relied on just gas turbines were the Type 21 frigates with the lead ship HMS Amazon being ordered in 1969 and commissioned in 1974. The first Invincible-class carrier was ordered in 1973 so with design times it looks as though the Admiralty trusted gas turbines by the later 1960s, even if you push things a bit I dont think you can get gas turbines powers carriers before the late 1970s.

I'd say this is pretty much on the money but I'd give a special mention to HMS Bristol. Her GTs were more powerful than her steam plant and a boiler mishap neant she ran on her GTs alone from 1974 to 1976.
 
You could go with combined cycle. Exhaust from turbine heats water to generate steam. Steam used on its own turbine. They are pretty efficient.
A CVA-01 type carrier laid down in the late 60s/early 70s an 8 x Olympus driving 4 shaft affair would offer about 180,000 - 200,000 SHP
4 shaft Olympus with exhaust steam turbines - would that not defeat the whole objective reducing space/weight and crew numbers?
 
4 shaft Olympus with exhaust steam turbines - would that not defeat the whole objective reducing space/weight and crew numbers?

Probably cheaper than a legacy Steam turbine equivilent and far more econmical in terms of weight and fuel use etc - ton for ton GTs are far more powerful than Steam turbines

Once Marine Gas Turbines were introduced and were mature there is no going back to steam turbines or deisels - not fro a front line warship
 
One consideration is necessity, the issue of fuel economy before 1973 is rather lower priority, the "need" for a gas turbine seems to be the reduced time to get a ship moving, a steam plant requires hours to warm up, but a gas turbine is far faster, and that speed was I conjecture more pressing once the prospect of a ballistic missile or fast bomber strike came into focus. So the 1950s is when a Navy begins to ponder getting to sea before they are struck in port, thus we get gas turbines pushed for by and after the 1960s, coinciding nicely with economy concerns, both personnel and fuel, dovetailing with the ability to let ships sit in port rather than be kept at sea, spooling up and getting deployed on short notice. Now the later might spur the RN to demand just such a technology for its former reliance on a mobilizing reserve fleet. It is my understanding that steam plants require a lot more to mothball and reactivate than would the gas turbine, giving the RN a surge capability quite fitting for the 1940s/50s era. That might give us the necessity to midwife invention.
 

Zen9

Banned
I think a GT setup for large warships like carriers is asking a lot of the 50's and early 60's.
And yes the Gyron is a strong solution. Possibly betterthan the Olympus.
Beyond that I do wonder about the mighty G.4 that certainly is the right scale for big ships.
 
Top