concept of a post-disaster rescue ship

problem

 

Thank you for the thoughtful comments GW. Yes, we are getting what advice we can locally from experienced marine architects, more than one actually. You might be amazed to hear that opinions on what we are doing vary considerably, even amongst the professionals! Go figure. But in general, within the limits of what we are trying to do, mostly very positive.

Concerning the organizations plan, we do have a strong Board of Directors, one of whom has spent a lot of time offshore with Greenpeace and the Sea Shepherds, very relevant experience.

There are areas where I have been casting the net wider though, in this forum as an example; the other topic of our implementation of the diesel-electric drive system is one where it appears most marine architects have no experience and I've had very little consistent advice across the board. My feeling is that we will be into some sea trial time getting the formula right before going operational.

 

I haven't asked for help on this. I think the information I've already given is detailed enough for this discussion.

Forgive us if we only manage to feed 2,500 people for a week, however initially we are targeting smaller coastal communities. Have to start somewhere. Not sure I understand your numbers though, we will be able to do considerably better than that. And when possible we expect to be mobile enough in coordination with other agencies to get more supplies.

Our diesel-electric hybrid drive system has 50kW of generating power if needed, and we will have a very large lead-acid battery bank to make charging times as efficient as possible. I hear your incredulity about our intention to be a green organization (though don't understand the mocking tone), but think it quite reasonable to consume some fuel in order to produce water in emergencies to save lives.

 

Oh puleeze.

Gonzo, do you not see how ridiculously negative and scoffing you sound?

 

Ray firstly I must compliment you on your project, it is a noble and worthy cause, we need a lot more of it.

The fact that you got the empty hull is a problem
I have modelled it myself just to have a look (quick drawing)
50 ton displacement yes ok
but with electric drives and and and = very little cargo

the project is great
the hull is lousy
anything above 5 knots will double the fuel consumption
this is polishing the turd

all that weight at the back is bad and big windage

WHEN EMPTY THIS BOAT IS DANGEROUS

the sailplan is lousy - CE is way too far forward of LCR
she wont sail, she will just be blown around by the wind
as a "Green boat" nowhere near enough "design" has gone into it.

As I said - you are doing a great job, keep it up.
If I were in your shoes I would downplay this piece of junk and seriously start with competent designers to design your GREEN DREAM that will funtion as a CARGO life saving vessel.
It can be done, most definately, just not on this foundation.

and as a reminder

WHEN EMPTY THIS BOAT IS DANGEROUS

 

Manie's post is pretty good. Those electric drives are probably worth a lot more than this hull/design. Is it possible to keep those and keep shopping for a hull? Might save you a lot of money in the long run.

 

The “numbers” come from studies in Cambodia of various poverty stricken villages through the dry season to the wet season over a period of 10 years. They averaged 0.5kg per day, that’s all they had to eat to survive.

So 0.5kg into 9.0tonne = 2500 people for 1 week.

Ah..”some fuel”…so how much? How much does your 50kW genny system consume while producing 24A/h per gallon of water?. So work out how many gallons of fuel you’ll need to run this baby to produce even a modicum of water for those in need. Not forgetting to add the fuel you'll need for 'general servcies'. Then how much of that fuel shall take away from your cargo capacity, or payload. See, it isn’t rocket science, just logic.

Except of course if you wish to ignore it and as Gonzo said, resent anyone not patting you on the back. The comments from most on here are based upon your claims of what you are saying you can do, not your altruism. The two are totally separate yet you are confusing and blurring the issues searching for praise.

PS...so, i'll ask again. Where will the boat be based?

 

Hello Ray- Great ideal and effort.

One of my sisters spent many years with Mercy Ships whose vessels are in continuous rotation in poverty areas.
The goals are similar by stint of providing relief, medical treatment and supplies to out of the way places.

The typical vessel is a converted ferry and of some size:

http://www.mercyships.org/index.php/pages/about-fleet

The vessels manage response to stricken areas from their bases on occasion in addition to the scheduled cruises.
It may be that a consultation would yield some valuable input as they have been in this effort for many years.
I join with others in part by questioning the deployment challenge.
Globe trotting from a base of operations to a randomly hit disaster area is a considerable challenge to my mind for a vessel of this size. I also join in believing that the power requirements should be in keeping with known demands for utility.

I did spend some time with one of their smallest vessels which was based in Chile.
At 63' this well powered and designed motor sailor was found to be too small for anything more than token relief efforts to a very small region & would never have been moved across oceans to lend support to stricken areas.

 

As I've already mentioned a number of times (though you're new to this thread so you may not have seen it), this vessel will be deployed in a limited zone, we have a base already planned off Thailand.

 

Thanks Ray

 

Yes, I have roughly the same figures, serious wave-making at 6 knots upward, I'm good with 100+ miles per day. Resistance calcs show increasing from 6 to 7 knots multiplies fuel consumption considerably up to the max 50kW, I'm well aware of it.

The boat won't be cruised empty of course. FYI fuel tanks alone are over 2,000 gallons. (Ad Hoc, please don't hit this forum with yet another sniggering post about our attempting to be a green operation and having that kind of fuel aboard, we already get your opinion).

I am anticipating ballast of course. I don't expect the rig to let this boat sail into the wind, anything from the beam and aft will be acceptable in this application.

We don't have the option to start with a clean slate and get another boat - our funding is extremely low with a small dedicated group. After the organization's proved itself and our funding increases, we'll build to purpose.

 

This thread has not been started by you and it is a “general thread” oh, and it is a public forum, not your own personnel one!

If you cannot support your claims, then don’t post them. It isn’t rocket science.

If you state the following is “your opinion” then that is fine. But when you state claims of what you will do, but upon inspection provide no supporting evidence and what is provided doesn’t add up and then you get shirty with those questioning your MO…then the only conclusion that can be drawn is your ego is wounded.

Bntii’s link of the mercy ships are a prime example. Professional, excellent, well thought out and catering for the “what if” scenarios for others and themselves; can’t help others if one is in a pickle from inadequate preparations. Yet you refuse to accept reality. If you want endless adulation and pats on the back, go to a social forum that provides support groups.

As you once, correctly, identified, this is a technical forum. The comments from most are technical in nature, but your inability to recognize that is and answer them is no one’s problem other than your own.

Engineering requires facts, not emotions.

Dreams especially personal ones, are highly subjective and emotive.

The two, and their objectives, are at variance with each other.

This has best been summed up here:

 

No pats on the back requested, desired or required.

Plenty of advice has come my way, some amateur, some highly professional, some from this group and some locally. Some paid for (at dear cost), some volunteered. Much of it conflicting. I can tell you're very upset that I'm not taking your advice, but frankly I have 13 messages from people informing me that you and Gonzo are hapless trolls who never stop ruining discussions, and that most of your advice is useless, so this is the last time I reply to either of you. As it seems both of you have nothing better to do than spend all day proving what you don't know, your track records show that you'll probably escalate from this point, just the way trolls do.

I'm sure Steve Jobs and Bill Gates had lots of people saying their ideas were never going to work, they took it upon themselves to prove the naysayers wrong. As I will.

I don't see myself as either a Steve Jobs or Bill Gates, but I have had my business successes in the past and founded and sold companies internationally, which requires some degree of imagination, determination, sweat and dedication. In my small way, I've proved myself in the past, and similarly will make this work. And save lives.

Despite your skepticism.

 

So, rather than answer questions based upon your claims, you resort to ad hominem. Great stuff

Good luck with your dream...

 

Can you name any of your businesses or is that not to be divulged either? Personal attacks do not provide support to your claims, solid engineering and data do. If you plan to be within a short distance of the affected area, you are likely to become another casualty. How is that you deny that and claim I am picking on you? Can you explain how do you avoid damage while being in a tsunami or hurricane zone?