I dont need to, they are all in the posts above for everybody to see, not to mention this is a Russian navy thread that you now seem bent on trashing.

No, you can’t because you didn’t.

And according to you not relevant to the discussion about the Russian navy is e.g the remark by Snake65 on CDF: “This sounds more like problems with boilers not the steam turbine and it sounds very familiar with problems of SU Navie’s Sovremennys during the years of decline (after 1990) when boilers were ruined mainly due to inadequate preparation of water and poor maintenance. At least the repaired Sovs in RuNavy (4 of them IMHO) have not reported boiler problems anymore.”

No, as mentioned, I asked about whether the Chinese had had similar issues with their Sovr’s. Your reply:

I assume that the reason you are not reading what I type is that you are a Troll? Steam propulsion is inherently more unreliable and in a navy with a history of maintenance concerns that is a key factor. Interestingly the Chinese ships also rarely make it far from Chinese waters. With reduced maintenance funding and poor quality personnel the maintenance issues will only get worse.

You are saying this is not about the PLAN Sovr’s then?

Related comments on CDF: http://www.china-defense.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=176&st=777#

That is exactly what the discussion was about: However you deliberately tried to warp it in order to start some sort of flame war.

Sure, whatever. As usual, it has nothing to do with you and everything with me.

Repeat after me: Steam propulsion is less reliable and efficient than gas turbines.

Repeat after me: this is not my personal board. Really, stop trying to misrepresent me by suggesting I am somehow glorifying steam propulsion, or that I somehow don’t know the comparative pro’s and con’s of various propulsion plants.

It is a valid question to ask whether there are differences in experience with the Sovremenny’s in Russian and in Chinese service and, if any, what they are and why they exist. Particularly since the Chinese have 2 refurbed ones and to new built ones. Both sets have done rather well, also in comparison with the newbuilts 052B/C, which have had their share of problemsn with their propulsion plant (and let’s not forget about the engine problems the 054s have had either). As it turns out (thx Snake65), Russia has refurbed several as well (and has had no problems with them after that > which you conveniently ignore). The cause of the problems was poor water treatment, which messed up boilers. This is a people not a technology problem ( > which you also conveniently ignore). In short, the world is not as simple and straightforward as you might like to portray it and, personally, I like those nuances. Now, get out of my hair.

INS Shivalik
Credit: Col Ajai Shukla

Ah, thank you, I’ve been looking forward to new imagery of these. Any more pics? Link?

You clearly have not properly read what I typed, I never said that there was a specific problem with the Sovremennys, simply that their propulsion systems, combined with the long and continuing period of underfunding and poor personnel levels will be more unreliable than the gas turbine powered vessels. This is borne out by the fact that of the destroyer and frigate forces it is the gas turbine powered ships that are taking on the bulk of the long endurance work.:rolleyes:

I read you just fine. You said: “That this is another Udaloy and that we rarely if ever see Sovremenny’s far from home suggests that the latter are not held in high esteem by the Russian navy. I would suggest that their steam propulsion plant is the primary reason and that it causes maintenance concerns.” Which is not: “their propulsion systems, combined with the long and continuing period of underfunding and poor personnel levels will be more unreliable than the gas turbine powered vessels”. And you’re trying to avoid answering my question.
AFAIK there is no difference in propulsion system between the russian and the chinese Sovs, except perhaps that 2 chinese ships are much newer. If they don’t have similar trouble, then the problem is not the steam propulsion system per se but rather the funding and maintenance and crew training.

Different question: if you subject a Sovrmenny and a Udaloy to the same poorly trained personnel, lack of maintenance and low funding, will power plant performance /rliability deteriorate to the same extent? If not, which plant is more vulnerable?

Steam boilers/turbines are inherently harder to maintain and more unreliable than gas turbines, when one is operating on a limited budget with personnel of questionable quality as the Russians are the preference will also be for gas turbines.

Speaking of GTU powered vessels, how are the remaining Krivak’s (3?) doing in this respect?