Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 36 to 63 of 63

Thread: Two billion tons, deadweight.

  1. #36
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Northeast
    Posts
    16,539

    Default Re: Two billion tons, deadweight.

    Quote Originally Posted by Favorite View Post
    Why would I give any credence to a stupid thread here when

    1) Neighbor across the dock is an actual airline pilot

    2) I have read other sources that know what they are talking about

    Also, as they say, proof is in the pudding. Show me a crash in a first world country with first world pilots. Asiana taught some of us a lesson.
    Why? Because many of the individuals on the thread are commercial pilots. There is also an airline maintenance mechanic and other skilled professionals from the industry. Because the “save” of the Lion Air flight the day before the crash was by a “Third World Pilot”. Lastly, because the implied arrogance and superiority really have no place here.

    Apologies to ACB for the thread drift.
    "The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it to change; the realist adjusts the sails."
    -William A. Ward



  2. #37
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Woodbridge, Suffolk, UK
    Posts
    24,100

    Default Re: Two billion tons, deadweight.

    Quote Originally Posted by Canoez View Post
    Why? Because many of the individuals on the thread are commercial pilots. There is also an airline maintenance mechanic and other skilled professionals from the industry. Because the “save” of the Lion Air flight the day before the crash was by a “Third World Pilot”. Lastly, because the implied arrogance and superiority really have no place here.

    Apologies to ACB for the thread drift.
    You are very welcome.

    Now, that doubling in tonnage in 13 years is half made up of bulk carriers, with smaller proportions for tankers and for container ships. It's fair to say that bulkers have slowed down a bit since 2008 but only from about 14 knots to about 11 knots.
    Last edited by Andrew Craig-Bennett; 05-22-2019 at 06:20 AM.
    IMAGINES VEL NON FUERINT

  3. #38
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Southern Maine
    Posts
    20,678

    Default Re: Two billion tons, deadweight.

    ...
    Last edited by Hwyl; 05-22-2019 at 07:01 AM.

  4. #39
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Woodbridge, Suffolk, UK
    Posts
    24,100

    Default Re: Two billion tons, deadweight.

    Quote Originally Posted by Reynard38 View Post
    Why? Not arguing your point as I don’t know enough about the subject. Just curious why you think so.
    The impact of merchant shipping on the oceans was once quite modest. This changed first with the arrival of tankers which dumped their tank washings overboard. That was stopped, and so in due course were almost all other overboard discharges of oil, such as engine room bilge water. Even stern tube seals are not allowed to leak traces of oil.

    Then we discovered that if you painted the bottom of your ship with an eroding paint containing tr-butyl tin, molluscs did not grow on it. Too late we discovered that tributyl tin is persistent and will devastate most other molluscs even at tiny, tiny, concentrations. So a few years ago we banned that.

    Now we are finding that out use of refinery residues as fuel in our wonderfully efficient diesel engines is turning the world's oceans acid...

    And our fleet has doubled in size every fifteen years since 1949...
    IMAGINES VEL NON FUERINT

  5. #40
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Huntsville, AL
    Posts
    5,901

    Default Re: Two billion tons, deadweight.

    And now there's work on using sail power on cargo ships to reduce fuel consumption.

    https://www.popularmechanics.com/tec...magnus-effect/
    Will

  6. #41
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Pleasant Valley NS Canada
    Posts
    18,092

    Default Re: Two billion tons, deadweight.

    There has been work - some very serious, some wing-nuttery - on sail-assisted cargo ships for a very long time. One of my classmates did his final-year design project on a bulker with hydraulically-controlled semi-rigid square sails (the rig looked surprisingly like that of the superyacht Maltese Falcon) way back in 1983. IIRC, he considered Flettner rotors, but ceased that line of investigation when it became apparent that he couldn't overcome stability issues in worst-case scenario due to excessive topsides weight combined with a shifted cargo. This was before carbon fibre was in current usage, so there were few options for reducing the aloft weight.
    Hope for the best, but plan for the worst.

  7. #42
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Woodbridge, Suffolk, UK
    Posts
    24,100

    Default Re: Two billion tons, deadweight.

    There is a sailing cruise ship with a rig based closely on the F Laeitz' "Preussen" which is successful enough to have encouraged her owners to order a larger sister.

    Sailing tankers are fine, except that most of the places where the oil comes from don't have very useful wind systems. But the Big Idea is not to use oil anyway.

    When we come to dry cargo, be that dry bulk, commodities, or finished and part finished goods, we have the horrid problem that modern cargo handling systems use all the deck space.
    IMAGINES VEL NON FUERINT

  8. #43
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    MD
    Posts
    52,864

    Default Re: Two billion tons, deadweight.

    Andrew, when do you think a peak in ship traffic will occur?

  9. #44
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Northeast
    Posts
    16,539

    Default Re: Two billion tons, deadweight.

    Quote Originally Posted by Andrew Craig-Bennett View Post
    There is a sailing cruise ship with a rig based closely on the F Laeitz' "Preussen" which is successful enough to have encouraged her owners to order a larger sister.

    Sailing tankers are fine, except that most of the places where the oil comes from don't have very useful wind systems. But the Big Idea is not to use oil anyway.

    When we come to dry cargo, be that dry bulk, commodities, or finished and part finished goods, we have the horrid problem that modern cargo handling systems use all the deck space.
    What other "green" propulsion opportunities make sense for such a large craft as these? Are there any that are useful?
    "The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it to change; the realist adjusts the sails."
    -William A. Ward



  10. #45
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Woodbridge, Suffolk, UK
    Posts
    24,100

    Default Re: Two billion tons, deadweight.

    Quote Originally Posted by Canoez View Post
    What other "green" propulsion opportunities make sense for such a large craft as these? Are there any that are useful?
    Nice question... I can bore for Britain on this, but trying to keep myself under control:

    1. Methane. Lousy choice. with present systems about 8% passes through or leaks un-burned and it's a worse greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide while it has about half the calorific value per ton of heavy fuel oil. But people are going for it.

    2. Nuclear: Good choice for big, high powered, ships (container ships and tankers) but merchant ships can't use the highly enriched stuff that submarines use so refuelling will be needed (takes months!). Simple steam power plant, well understood, with an operational lifetime about twice that of the hull, so you build a new hull round it.

    3. Hydrogen from electrolysis of water, used in fuel cells: Awkward to stow; needs very heavy pressure tanks, and leaks easily, but...

    4. Ammonia (NH3) is a convenient way to store and carry hydrogen.

    5. Solar cells - need too much area

    6. Batteries - too heavy.

    A first step is a proposal for everyone to slow down, enforceable by port state control, which is going before the IMO shortly. I had a hand in starting that ball rolling.
    Last edited by Andrew Craig-Bennett; 05-22-2019 at 06:03 PM.
    IMAGINES VEL NON FUERINT

  11. #46
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Huntsville, AL
    Posts
    5,901

    Default Re: Two billion tons, deadweight.

    Ships are required to slow down in some parts where there are whales.

    https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/insig...vessel-strikes

    If the cargo is not needed yesterday then the ship can move more slowly to save fuel. But then more ships are needed to transport a given amount of cargo in a year. I'm sure the costs of this balance have been completely studied and worked into optimizing the operating plan.
    Will

  12. #47
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Nashville TN
    Posts
    28,699

    Default Re: Two billion tons, deadweight.

    Quote Originally Posted by CK 17 View Post
    I’m impressed. Tell me more.
    The irony of this is not lost on us.
    One of the most enduring qualities of an old wooden boat is the smell it imparts to your clothing.

  13. #48
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Woodbridge, Suffolk, UK
    Posts
    24,100

    Default Re: Two billion tons, deadweight.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lew Barrett View Post
    The irony of this is not lost on us.
    It might have been lost on « Favourite ». He hasn’t apologised.
    IMAGINES VEL NON FUERINT

  14. #49
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Hell
    Posts
    97,361

    Default Re: Two billion tons, deadweight.

    Quote Originally Posted by Andrew Craig-Bennett View Post
    Favourite .
    jaft
    Simpler is better, except when complicated looks really cool.

  15. #50
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    UK. Cornwall, Suffolk.
    Posts
    5,724

    Default Re: Two billion tons, deadweight.

    Quote Originally Posted by Andrew Craig-Bennett View Post
    .... but merchant ships can't use the highly enriched stuff that submarines use...
    Why? What are the issues? Terrorism / security?

  16. #51
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Location
    lagunitas, ca, usa
    Posts
    633

    Default Re: Two billion tons, deadweight.

    Quote Originally Posted by Andrew Craig-Bennett View Post
    If you read the thread, you would know that several of the contributions come from « actual airline pilots » and others are from an actual airline maintenance manager.
    Sorry but, guy across the dock is an instructor with, at one time, the most hours in the US in 737's. To quote - "It's a runaway stabilizer situation. You reach down (hands moving), flip off the stab switches, trim manually. If you just pull back on the wheel, as soon as you let go it does it again. Then you run out of time and hit the ground."

    Pretty clear.

    He does fault Boeing for giving the impression that the planes are magic and you don't need skill anymore. But that's the Modern Thing everywhere. Look at Apple computers. And being a pilot and instructor, of course he is always going to stand up for skills.

    But sorry, 737 is not "fatally flawed." That's b.s., like calling my boat "fatally flawed" because it pulls to port when you hit reverse. The driver is supposed to know how to drive.

  17. #52
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    UK. Cornwall, Suffolk.
    Posts
    5,724

    Default Re: Two billion tons, deadweight.

    Take it to the 737 Max thread?

  18. #53
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Barrie, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    5,420

    Default Re: Two billion tons, deadweight.

    Nobody keeps stuff on shelves anymore. It's all on vehicles -- "We don't have that in stock at the moment, but can have it for you in 2 days."

  19. #54
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Huntsville, AL
    Posts
    5,901

    Default Re: Two billion tons, deadweight.

    Yep. You just about speak of Amazon.
    Will

  20. #55
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    MD
    Posts
    52,864

    Default Re: Two billion tons, deadweight.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dave Hadfield View Post
    Nobody keeps stuff on shelves anymore. It's all on vehicles -- "We don't have that in stock at the moment, but can have it for you in 2 days."
    “I’d like to support a local business, can you match Amazon?” After spending 30 min with customer helping him find the product that did what he was looking for. Some people are natural idiots.

  21. #56
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    Gulf Islands B.C.
    Posts
    848

    Default Re: Two billion tons, deadweight.

    Quote Originally Posted by LeeG View Post
    “I’d like to support a local business, can you match Amazon?” After spending 30 min with customer helping him find the product that did what he was looking for. Some people are natural idiots.
    As a construction contractor, I will give general information for free, but if a customer wishes me to spend time and energy to solve their problems for them, they need to pay. It's almost getting to the point where retailers need to charge for advice.

  22. #57
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Pleasant Valley NS Canada
    Posts
    18,092

    Default Re: Two billion tons, deadweight.

    Echoing Decourcy, my usual policy is that talk is cheap - free, in fact - but if I have to research, draw, or calculate, the clock starts ticking.
    Hope for the best, but plan for the worst.

  23. #58
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Location
    lagunitas, ca, usa
    Posts
    633

    Default Re: Two billion tons, deadweight.

    Quote Originally Posted by mmd View Post
    Echoing Decourcy, my usual policy is that talk is cheap - free, in fact - but if I have to research, draw, or calculate, the clock starts ticking.
    I gave somene twenty bucks to go away once, just to see the look on their face Plus it saved me from wasting $50 worth of time ....

  24. #59
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Shubenacadie NS
    Posts
    4,683

    Default Re: Two billion tons, deadweight.

    Andrew, I'm working on a master's in Maritime Management (MMM) from memorial University in Newfoundland. I've had quite a lot of discussion with classmates about tonnage available, the shipping markets etc. Could you point me toward the source that says we're at 2 billion tons deadweight? I've been trying to figure out about how many merchant ships we have. At one point, I figured about 50 000 ships worldwide but I am beginning to think over 100 000 ships worldwide. I'd be curious to share that figure with my class but not if I can't back it up.
    Cheers,
    Daniel
    If one advances confidently in the direction of his dreams, and endeavors to live the life which he has imagined, he will meet with a success unexpected in common hours.
    -Henry David Thoreau-

  25. #60
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Location
    lagunitas, ca, usa
    Posts
    633

    Default Re: Two billion tons, deadweight.

    Quote Originally Posted by Andrew Craig-Bennett View Post
    It might have been lost on « Favourite ». He hasn’t apologised.
    There is no need to apologize for telling the truth.

  26. #61
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Woodbridge, Suffolk, UK
    Posts
    24,100

    Default Re: Two billion tons, deadweight.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sailor View Post
    Andrew, I'm working on a master's in Maritime Management (MMM) from memorial University in Newfoundland. I've had quite a lot of discussion with classmates about tonnage available, the shipping markets etc. Could you point me toward the source that says we're at 2 billion tons deadweight? I've been trying to figure out about how many merchant ships we have. At one point, I figured about 50 000 ships worldwide but I am beginning to think over 100 000 ships worldwide. I'd be curious to share that figure with my class but not if I can't back it up.
    Cheers,
    Daniel
    Clarksons.

    see here:

    https://splash247.com/global-merchan...he-first-time/

    If if you are working on a degree in Maritime Management you should be reading Clarksons’ Weekly
    IMAGINES VEL NON FUERINT

  27. #62
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Shubenacadie NS
    Posts
    4,683

    Default Re: Two billion tons, deadweight.

    Great, Thanks. I'll have a look in there.
    If one advances confidently in the direction of his dreams, and endeavors to live the life which he has imagined, he will meet with a success unexpected in common hours.
    -Henry David Thoreau-

  28. #63
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Woodbridge, Suffolk, UK
    Posts
    24,100

    Default Re: Two billion tons, deadweight.

    Daniel - remember that nobody really counts non-Convention ships; numbers for these are just educated guesswork. Once we come to Convention ships the situation is very much better.
    IMAGINES VEL NON FUERINT

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •