Talk:LaMont boiler

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.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Articles for creation

	This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
	This article was accepted on 18 April 2013 by reviewer Joe Decker (talk · contribs).

Engineering

	Engineering portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Engineering, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of engineering on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EngineeringWikipedia:WikiProject EngineeringTemplate:WikiProject EngineeringEngineering articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

History updated[edit]

I 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)[reply]

Issues[edit]

Mark 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)[reply]

Bismarck?![edit]

Hello,

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]