Talk:Viking Wind Farm
|WikiProject Scottish Islands||(Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)|
|WikiProject Energy||(Rated Start-class, Low-importance)|
Hub height; rotor diameter and total capacity
Just to answer questions:
1) The source provides hub height (90m) and turbine total height (145m). That means that the rotor diameter is 2*(145-90)=110m 2) 370 or 371 depends how you rounding it. The exact figure for 103 turbines is 103*3.6 = 370.8. Most of media sources have rounded it to 370, but more precise is 371 as used e.g. by ReCharge. If you prefer to have 370.8MW, I have nothing against it
I don't understand why this the information about turbines was removed from the infobox. Reducing the number of turbines does not change the turbines specification; it may change only cost, area or construction time. Therefore I will restore the information in the infobox. Beagel (talk) 13:29, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
- Siemens doesn't make a 110m turbine.. That's why we shouldn't use synthesis. The figures may be approximations.
Also blade length = (rotor diameter - blade hub diamater)/2 ..(garbled irrelvevant)
- The turbines could be a 107m blade length machine Siemens.com SWT 103 3.6 (speculation), which siemens do make. Or not. Specifactions change -this would be speculation.
- Also 3.6 x 103 - 370.8 - this is synthesis based simple multiplication. The figure of 3.6 MW is given to two significant figures, thus any multiple of it should also be given to 2 sig figs. I think the 370.8MW figure reported by ReCharge is based on this mutliplication, and is poor technical reporting.
- I have not objection to stating that the maximum tip height is 145m as that is verifyable from reliable sources.Oranjblud (talk) 13:42, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
- Recharge says 371 which is more precise as 370. Actually, this is simple arithmetics as the total capacity of the wind farm is a sum of turbines' capacities. As different sources report that the turbine capacity of 3.6, this is indeed simple multiplication but has nothing to do with synthesis. Beagel (talk) 13:57, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
- Is there any reason why we can't wait for official facts about the built wind farm to be published?
- Stromsta, Karl-Erik (4 Apr 2012), "Scotland says yes to 371MW Viking wind farm on Shetland", ReCharge, NHST Media Group (subscription required)
The link is dead and doesn't show up on archive.org. I couldn't find another reference to the contract - which is very odd.. Could this have been a mistake on the website ?
No mention on the official website - almost certainly wrong - by the time the wind farm is developed (if) the Siemens 3.6MW may not even be available.
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Viking Wind Farm. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131016092624/http://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/opinions/2013CSOH158.html to http://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/opinions/2013CSOH158.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
You may set the
|checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting
|needhelp= to your help request.
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
If you are unable to use these tools, you may set
|needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.