- Author
- Letter Writer
- Subjects
- Letter to the Editor
- Tags
-
- RAN Ships
- HMAS Brisbane II
- Publication
- September 1998 edition of the Naval Historical Review (all rights reserved)
I refer to your request on page 3 of the June 1998 issue of the Naval Historical Review for information about the nature of the oil carried by HMAS Brisbane.
A check of the Hull Specification for Brisbane confirms that the ship carried 260 tons of heavy liquid fuel in double bottom tanks and was fitted with arrangements to supply fuel to destroyers and to receive fuel from lighters. I don’t have details of the ship’s boilers but it would seem that, like those in many coal-fired contemporaries, they were fitted to burn both coal and oil.
It is interesting to read the Admiralty Steam Manual of 1910 on this subject. It says:
“In ships fitted for burning coal and oil fuel, oil fuel may be used for instructional purposes both at sea and in harbour. In harbour it may be expended at the rate of three tons per week. At sea it may be used for an average of about 24 hours per month for three months at the beginning, and for an average of about 24 hours per month for the remainder of the commission. The oil fuel is to be burnt in one boiler room at a time in conjunction with coal, and its use is to be discontinued when a sufficient number of officers and ratings are trained in the fleet or squadron to which the ship is attached. The proportion of oil fuel to coal consumed at sea may be varied as found convenient. At the maximum rate at which it is burnt in any boiler the quantity of oil per hour is not to exceed 30 per cent of the combined fuel required per hour when developing the authorised power for that boiler. Obviously liquid gold!
John Jeremy