billy backstay 1,007 Posted September 27, 2019 Share Posted September 27, 2019 Apologies if there is already a thread on this, but I searched for and found none. From G-Captain, the guy in the video makes some very bold unbelievable claims!! https://gcaptain.com/video-hydrofoil-containerships-are-now-a-thing-maybe/ Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MisterMoon 307 Posted September 27, 2019 Share Posted September 27, 2019 Forget that, I want a foiling Party Barge! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
billy backstay 1,007 Posted September 27, 2019 Author Share Posted September 27, 2019 35 minutes ago, MisterMoon said: Forget that, I want a foiling Party Barge! Did you watch the video? He makes some outrageous claims, don't you think? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Rasputin22 2,714 Posted September 27, 2019 Share Posted September 27, 2019 Well that contraption deserves the name of the MULE... These boys are pretty full of themselves calling that a 'working ship'! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
A guy in the Chesapeake 1,674 Posted September 27, 2019 Share Posted September 27, 2019 I saw a bit of the video, and then the screen swapped out to some "walmart gift card" scam. Conceptually? it's interesting. My knowledge of naval architecture isn't sufficient to understand whether it could scale from pontoon boat dimensions to cargo ship dimensions, but, I'm skeptical. I'm also very skeptical of the claim of making an trans-pacific crossing in ~~ 5 days. Quick back of the napkin calculations are that it's ~6500 miles from LA to Shanghai, the vessel would need to make 1295.8 miles/day to make the crossing in 5 days. That would require an average speed of 54MPH, discounting pilot time in/out of the harbor. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
SloopJonB 8,583 Posted September 27, 2019 Share Posted September 27, 2019 The time comparison is bullshit - across the Pacific in the same time as a jet? Fuel costs? As the racers say: Speed costs money, how fast do you want to go? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
mikewof 1,004 Posted September 28, 2019 Share Posted September 28, 2019 6 hours ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said: I saw a bit of the video, and then the screen swapped out to some "walmart gift card" scam. Conceptually? it's interesting. My knowledge of naval architecture isn't sufficient to understand whether it could scale from pontoon boat dimensions to cargo ship dimensions, but, I'm skeptical. I'm also very skeptical of the claim of making an trans-pacific crossing in ~~ 5 days. Quick back of the napkin calculations are that it's ~6500 miles from LA to Shanghai, the vessel would need to make 1295.8 miles/day to make the crossing in 5 days. That would require an average speed of 54MPH, discounting pilot time in/out of the harbor. The 50% plane speed of that boat is probably used to determine that speed. It's realistic in a hydrodynamic sense, but likely not realistic in an economic sense. The economics of cargo shipping determine the length of the regular displacement hull, cargo shipping is more about cheap and reliable than fast. Nearly every aspect of a contemporary cargo ship from the hatchless design to the shape of the hull is to minimize loading costs, fuel use and wasted volume. Can a foiling design find its own niche for cargo that is time sensitive rather than price sensitive? A sweet spot between displacement hull ships and cargo planes? Maybe, but what cargo is that? That niche would have to be large enough to support some 15 years of R&D and optimization. So what would that be? Jackfruit, durian and mangoes? What else has that mix of time sensitivity and relative lack of economy? And no matter what they tell you, any hull that rides over the water rather than at or below hull speed in the linear wave system, is going to suck up fuel. Billy's suspicion is well founded, it's a solution in search of a problem. Yeah, we have to embrace the future, but fast cargo shipping relies on globalization, and how much steam is left in globalization when China's and India's economies are growing so fast? Eventually, when the market demands it, it becomes cheaper to make, grow and mine stuff nearby. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Mrleft8 2,420 Posted September 28, 2019 Share Posted September 28, 2019 I can see that as a viable local cargo operation, but even Miami to Georgetown, Guyana would be brutal.... East coast USA to Bahamas, sure..... Puerto Rico..... Sure, But after that, even island hoping, the wind and currents would make a heavy cat very unhappy. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
weightless 497 Posted September 28, 2019 Share Posted September 28, 2019 It wasn't clear to me exactly what they were comparing. Their proposed ~50 knot ship is not going to cross the Pacific in the same time as a ~500 knot airplane. I think it's fair to assume they realize that. Were they saying it takes air freight 3-7 days? I wonder: Would the fuel / cargo be better for the ship than an airplane? Would there be any payload available on the ship after the fuel load? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Windward 405 Posted September 28, 2019 Share Posted September 28, 2019 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
tommays 28 Posted September 28, 2019 Share Posted September 28, 2019 From my POV of buying expensive machines manufacturing machines in the USA ,FRANCE ,SPAIN and other places all the projects our long term and long lead time and 99% of the time our going by ship as it’s such a tiny amount of time Quote Link to post Share on other sites
floating dutchman 40 Posted September 28, 2019 Share Posted September 28, 2019 13 hours ago, billy backstay said: Apologies if there is already a thread on this, but I searched for and found none. From G-Captain, the guy in the video makes some very bold unbelievable claims!! https://gcaptain.com/video-hydrofoil-containerships-are-now-a-thing-maybe/ He's not building a ship, he is applying for funding. If you are gullible to believe these ships will work then you are stupid enough to part with your money. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Caca Cabeza 130 Posted September 28, 2019 Share Posted September 28, 2019 12 hours ago, tommays said: From my POV of buying expensive machines manufacturing machines in the USA ,FRANCE ,SPAIN and other places all the projects our long term and long lead time and 99% of the time our going by ship as it’s such a tiny amount of time I think they have it figured out. Just look, they are standing on the wall with no difficulty. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Windward 405 Posted September 28, 2019 Share Posted September 28, 2019 3 hours ago, Caca Cabeza said: I think they have it figured out. Just look, they are standing on the wall with no difficulty. Ha! Well done. With gravity defying skills like this, the simple matter of cargo transport will be a snap. Heck, they built the Deathstar. That thing was monumentally huge and complex. And that was before Lego was even invented! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Laker 260 Posted September 28, 2019 Share Posted September 28, 2019 I have had a bit of exposure to large? hydrofoils with the Bras D'Or military hydrofoil and was aware of it's sensitivity to amount of weight and its placement.. Just thinking it may be an issue. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
random 160 Posted September 29, 2019 Share Posted September 29, 2019 Good luck with keeping the foils clean. Disposable nappies and garbage bags would make short work of that fucker. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MisterMoon 307 Posted September 29, 2019 Share Posted September 29, 2019 What about the effect of hitting large sea life? Hit a whale, damage a foil and there goes your expedited shipping. Not to mention the public outcry when the slaughter comes to their attention. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
mikewof 1,004 Posted September 30, 2019 Share Posted September 30, 2019 That was what kind of stalled the commercial development of Ekranoplanes/wing-in-ground-effect planes back about 25 years ago. A foil is essentially an aircraft due to the speeds. But those WiGs promised all kinds of delivery efficiencies (possibly less expensive per unit weight than a hydrofoil due to the much lower drag) and Russia had a ready-to-go industry to build the fuggers. But the chance of some kind of devastating marine strike (boat, whale, buoy, debris) was non-negligible, and the shipping and aircraft industry wasn't ready to open a can of worms with a whole new risk paradigm. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Boink 672 Posted September 30, 2019 Share Posted September 30, 2019 The vendee globe fleet and ultimes have a hard enough time going down the Portugese coast and not getting involved with unlit fishing boats - so this type of activity will have a field day. Surely with the trend shown by aviation towards better fuel efficiency rather than outright speed or size of craft - as demonstrated by the decline in A380 use and a still less than convincing case for supersonic types to revive the Concorde Luxury model - then marine shipping will more likely focus on reducing its fuel burn and carbon foot print. Kite assistance would seem the obvious low hanging fruit to seize..... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
luminary 34 Posted September 30, 2019 Share Posted September 30, 2019 The other problem with ground effect is sea state. It only works if you clear the tops when you are in the environment. But, there's a chance in a million that there's a wave out there. If you need to be sure that you'll not clip some and auger in, you build a plane. Ocean going WIG = planes. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.