| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the LaMont boiler article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
History updated
editI have used the material I could find in the last weeks regarding the history and advantages and disadvantages of the article. However I could only update the history section today with the proper references. Other users and experts comments are welcome . Ghorpaapi (talk) 10:37, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
Issues
editMark Benson lived until 1950s, so he could't had an idea in 1856. "Lamont was a Navy Lieutenant Commander and an engineer in the US marines as well as a patriot" doesn't matter for an encyclopedia.--Power Plant Fan (talk) 16:32, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
Bismarck?!
editHello,
there is no historical evidence, that La Mont-Boilers were used on the Bismarck - it's a myth. This battleship used 12 Wagner-Highpressure boilers.
Cheers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HieronAlexandria (talk • contribs) 14:38, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
- OK, thanks for raising that.
- Do you have good sourcing for what the Bismarck did have? That's obviously better than simply removing the source that was here, even though it's not the most convincing source.
- Can you explain what a Wagner boiler was? The only Wagner I know is Wagner the railway locomotive engineer, who was noted for his opposition to high pressure boilers, at least on railways. Is a Wagner a forced circulation boiler, and so could the "Bismarck used LaMont boilers" claim be a confusion over two similar types? Andy Dingley (talk) 15:57, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
My source is the B.I.O.S. Final Report 1264,"Wagner Natural Circulation Boilers" which was puiblished by the British Intelligence Objectives Sub-committee in 1945 after investigating the "Wagner-Hochdruck-Dampfturbinen-KG" in Hamburg. Furthermore you can take a look on the B.I.O.S. Final Report 382,"La Mont Boilers in Germany (for Naval and Mercantile use)" where all ships are mentioned, which were steamed by a La Mont boiler - and not suprisingly, there is no a single word about the use of a La Mont boiler on the Bismarck.
The difference between La Mont and Wagner is that the La Mont-System is a forced circulation system while the Wagne-System is a natural circulation.
To reference to "THE FORGOTTEN LAMONT BOILER" by George Nutz is totally useless. Nutz Article on La Mont Boiler does not mention any relialbe source for his claim that the Bismarck used La Mont boilers.
And finally - the correct spelling of LaMont Boiler is La Mont Boiler (like the spelling in the B.I.O.S. Final Report 382)
Cheers!
I hope that this ar — Preceding unsigned comment added by HieronAlexandria (talk • contribs) 09:07, 15 August 2018 (UTC)