Commercial Sailing Ship Design

Comments?

http://www.gizmag.com/next-gen-ship...aign=86c8085466-UA-2235360-4&utm_medium=email

 

Sooner or later its back to sails and those will change, thats my opinion, whats yours?

 

They look from the photo like they are big enough and 'conventional' enough to work as real fuel-savers.
The real problem is not the ocean but the land, bridges, port loading facilities etc.
If used on tankers that get their load through a hose often from a buoy miles at sea, this makes sense.
For general or bulk freighters with big hatches working up long rivers to load at cranes or obsolete bulk facilities that often hang over the ship, I see problems....
Container ships, I don't see how either.
Anyone else?

 

One of the pictures on the link to the article shows the sails and masts telescoping down for harbor use and bad weather (and going upwind I guess) - the spacing on the masts is shown wide enough for container cranes to reach in - but still not as good of access as now on some vessels.

Also the bridge on some of the new cargo ships is 130 feet off the water - so there is a question in my mind on how high is high for the masts -

The design is way above my pay-grade - - but I say dream and design on - build some detailed computer models for the righting moments and sea states and such - not making any more dead dinosaurs so might as well look at different ways to get from here to there.

Good luck to them

 

I think Sail Assist will pay for itself only in smaller sized ships.

The fuel per ton mile on a super container ship is miniscule. I heard of one the boasted a 1,000 ton/miles.

Smaller ships, IHO, are another matter.

Here is a doodle of a 240 ft container ship for more off the beaten path locations, such as islands.

The un stayed masts are all off to one side of this vessel, and the booms and boomlets can be guyed out over the side, for loading and unloading operations.

The container lifting device would be an overhead crane which extendeds over the berth. The 16, 40 ft long containers would be removed one at a time, on the island end, an operation that would take hours, but would allow reasonable cost unloading equipment.

 

I think that kites have a better potential for assisting the ship propulsion. They can develop more power and occupy less space on deck.
http://www.gizmag.com/cargill-ship-will-be-largest-ever-to-utilize-kite-power/18005/
The only thing I don't get in that illustration is that they have shown it attached in the bow area. It should be, imo, attached close to the CLR, or else the yawing moment from the kite would be huge. Unless, of course, the intention is to use the kite only for downwind sailing.

 

Bingo!

 

The idea has been around at least since the Dyna Ship was originally proposed by Dr. Wilhelm Prolss in the late 1960's, roughly 40 years........

Examine the challenges currently facing the shipping industry and you will quickly see why these proposals never go far. Freight rates are down, ships are operating at a loss or are anchored. These folks propose adding $22.5 million dollars to the cost of a ship.....which "May be returned in 5-10 years" Ha! it's surely a joke?

If folks really want to save fuel, don't ship stuff.

But this is not about saving fuel, it's about making money for the principals involved.

 

The square rig Gerard Dijkstra designed for the maltese falcon might shave a few millions off
I always was intriged with striking masts but dont think these telescoops are that feaseble yet

 

I still think traction kites make more sence, easier to install, cheaper, less fixed equipment, and easily scalable in size..

See sky sail

 

THAT is going to the point

 

Nice to hear from you Luc, hope things are well.

Yes, folks don't usually want to hear uncomfortable stuff. I've been asked to advise on protesting tanker traffic locally. I replied that "I protest tankers every day by not driving my truck, not using the (diesel powered) ferry, and not flying in jet planes."