Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
2 hours ago, blacklab said:

In some places they produce steam that is piped around the city for heat.

Steam->Heat is more efficient than steam->turbine->electricity->wire->heater

The US Navy seems to like doing this on bases as well.

My complex uses boilers to heat water for the entire place. You can melt your skin off with the tap water.

Posted
6 hours ago, Gatorubet said:

Konstantin says that he spoke with a Russian acquaintance who owns a freight company who confirmed that they are not shipping anything right now - - because his trucks can’t buy enough fuel to ship the contracted goods - - and even if they have enough gas to go on a delivery, they may not be able to buy gas to get back.

Is that good? Because that doesn’t seem like it’s a good thing. 

I think that totally depends on how much vodka you have left

Posted
1 hour ago, Chad Fuck said:

Doesn't this seem like a lot of inside information really quickly?  Does that strike anyone else as odd?  

Why would they want to drag their balls across Russia's face with this, unless all this was compromised already?  

 

It does seem odd. I chalked it up to a Ukranian engineer that was employed there, at one time, that was high up enough to know the complete inner workings of the plant. Hell, it might have been a Ukranian contractor that built it. As for the air defense, they have dealt with it for four years, and probably know the timing from watching Russian reaction times to have a good idea of how to defeat it.

CHIEF

Posted
16 minutes ago, choripan said:

Steam systems are common in the States, too, at least in cities in which I've lived. 

 

I steamed a rug yesterday (and cooked a nice seafood dinner) so this hits close to home. 

Posted
1 hour ago, Chad Fuck said:

Doesn't this seem like a lot of inside information really quickly?  Does that strike anyone else as odd?  

Why would they want to drag their balls across Russia's face with this, unless all this was compromised already?  

14 minutes ago, CHIEF said:

It does seem odd. I chalked it up to a Ukranian engineer that was employed there, at one time, that was high up enough to know the complete inner workings of the plant. Hell, it might have been a Ukranian contractor that built it. As for the air defense, they have dealt with it for four years, and probably know the timing from watching Russian reaction times to have a good idea of how to defeat it.

CHIEF

Or it could be they have a very good grasp of Russia's defenses and its shortcomings and putting that info out there is daring the Russians to move assets around or bring forces back into Russia proper from the occupied territories. There's even been some strikes where I've wondered if they are trying to get the Russians to move AA around - it's easier to spot when it's on the move. 

Then again, the more they strike, the more outlandish stuff they pull off (such as the huge drone strike launched from within Russia against aircraft), the more paranoid Putin/Russian leadership is, the more AA and other troops/assets are moved in closer to Moscow and St. Petersburg, the more exposed other places are (whether Russian O&G facilities or Russian military sites).

We may also be reaching a point of culmination for Russian air defenses anywhere outside of Moscow or St. Petersburg.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
10 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

Then again, the more they strike, the more outlandish stuff they pull off (such as the huge drone strike launched from within Russia against aircraft), the more paranoid Putin/Russian leadership is, the more AA and other troops/assets are moved in closer to Moscow and St. Petersburg, the more exposed other places are (whether Russian O&G facilities or Russian military sites).

We may also be reaching a point of culmination for Russian air defenses anywhere outside of Moscow or St. Petersburg.

This seems like a decent bet at the strategy.

Russia has only so many AA defenses.  They have to deploy them among the following competing interests: (1) protecting Russian military operations in and near Ukraine, (2) protecting Russian industrial/refining sites inside Russia, and (3) protecting the key strategic sites of Moscow and St. Petersburg.  It seems certain that they do not have the AA resources to fully protect all three.  And any attack you launch on any one of those three is an incentive to devote more AA resources to the target (kinda like how the Doolittle Raid caused at least some Japanese forces to be devoted to defending the home islands -- those resources couldn't be used elsewhere).

I'm curious about Russia's rate of AA replenishment as well.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted (edited)
29 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

I'm curious about Russia's rate of AA replenishment as well.

I'm guessing not very high.  Even prior to 2022, it would not have been high enough to handle the volume they've seen over even just the past year - the amount of aerial attacks is absolutely insane - up to hundreds every day, ranging from ballistic missiles down to off-the-shelf stuff dropping off-the-shelf mortar shells.  And the same could probably be said for the US, although we would focus more on destroying the threats on the ground as well as the factories and jamming the command and control. 

Evidence of this being that Ukraine has been able to repeatedly hit the same sites, even within just weeks of the first strikes, as well as the fact that it's been clear for weeks that Ukraine is going to continue to hammer O&G, and Russia has been mostly impotent to stop it.  To put it another way: If somebody in Ukraine is drawing up a list of critical sites and is following that list, somebody in Russia would be just as aware of what that list looks like.

So they are clearly short on AA replenishment.

Edited by atomheartbevo
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
27 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

I'm curious about Russia's rate of AA replenishment as well.

I saw an interesting video about the strike on the refinery that was north of Moscow.    Part of the genius of that attack was using flocks of super cheap drones carrying no munitions to confuse air defenses and make them spend resources to stop the large numbers of what were essentially completely useless and non-threatening drones.  

if sending up hundred dollar drones will result in expensive AA Resources being wasted by Russia, they should be doing this every night until it’s time to use the real drones or missiles. 

  • Hook 'Em 4
Posted
3 hours ago, blacklab said:

In some places they produce steam that is piped around the city for heat.

Steam->Heat is more efficient than steam->turbine->electricity->wire->heater

The US Navy seems to like doing this on bases as well.

3 hours ago, InkaUtexas said:

Yes, and smaller microgrids to augment specific sections of bases. Army is doing it as well. 

Thanks guys. I forgot I already knew this.

One of earliest memories as a toddler/youngling was touching a radiator in an Air Force hospital. Only happened once.

3 hours ago, Gatorubet said:

Does anyone know what facility(s) process Ivan’s aviation fuel?  

I imagine every refinery has a distillation column similar to this.  Additional columns may include operating at a vacuum to enhance separation, or use a catalyst or extreme heat to "crack" the long chain heavy hydrocarbons into lighter, short chain hydrocarbons. 

A refinery will make 100+ gallons of products from 100 gallons of crude oil.

In simple terms, jet fuel is a combination of gasoline and kerosine and other substances.

Refining 101 - Distillation

image.thumb.png.96d90e913d24b5dd619dc22f1621c247.png

"Much like a simple still, in a distillation column, liquid is heated to a vapor and lifted upward to be distilled again into separate substances. This is the beginning of the refining process. Distilling exploits the characteristic of the chemicals in crude oil to boil at different temperatures.

Unlike a still, a distilling column contains a set of trays that allow heated vapors to rise and collect at different levels, separating out the various liquids derived from crude oil. The top of the column is cooler than the bottom, so as liquids vaporize and rise, they condense again, collecting onto their respective trays.  

Butane and other light products rise to the top of the column, while straight-run gasoline, naphtha, kerosene, diesel, and heavy gas oil gather on the trays, leaving straight run residue at the base of the column. Liquids are considered “heavy” or “light” based on their specific gravity, which is determined based on its weight and density compared to that of water. "

The bottom of the barrel really is the bottom of the barrel.

2 hours ago, Chad Fuck said:

Doesn't this seem like a lot of inside information really quickly?  Does that strike anyone else as odd?  

Why would they want to drag their balls across Russia's face with this, unless all this was compromised already?  

 

FIFY

Like anything you read, there is some fiction based on fact. You decide how much of which is which.

Using an orbiting satellite to identify a specific weld  in a large processing plant "for weakness" is Bruce Willis level kind of fiction. (99.9% of welds in a process plant are stronger than the pipes that are welded together, because they are thicker than the pipes.)

Now Russian steel might include melted fenders and hood ornaments, so ... 

59 minutes ago, choripan said:

Steam systems are common in the States, too, at least in cities in which I've lived. For example, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_City_steam_system and https://detroitthermal.com/.

 

In a large power plant or smaller gas plants & NGL fractionation plants that make steam, you will probably have and/or use different levels of steam;

~1,800 PSI (#) steam - to drive a very large turbine-generator sets (~ 10,000+ HP?)

600 # steam - to drive smaller pumps and equipment

80 # steam -  the heat medium for heating the process towers

Low level steam  - auxiliary heating for buildings, etc.

The resulting low level steam that is not used in all of the above (condensate) is condensed from steam back to water by using cooling water and/or cooling towers.  The less you have to do this, the higher the plant efficiency. That is why nuclear and other large power plants are near oceans, rivers and lakes.

As a young District Engineer in the 80's, I got one of my plants licensed as a FERC certified co-generation plant, that had a 90+ % thermal efficiency (~ 93% ?).

The water used to make steam is cleaner and purer than distilled water.

It is normal for smaller steam turbines to go 10+ years without having to open the case to inspect it. The large turbines are inspected on a more frequent basis as a precautionary measure.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...