That doesn’t look practical at all. The point of cargo ships is to move containers, so they put them out in the open for rapid loading and unloading… Plus this “aerodynamic” design makes no sense. Most of the drag comes from what’s under the water at low speeds and if it’s a sailboat the wind will be behind them. At the scale of cargo ships some are 400m long, meaning these sails could be 200 m or more high… the small flexible blades on a wind turbine are 80 m at most.
On-deck cargo ships are not as common as you think they are. I mean sure, they’re everwhere, but they’re also VASTLY outnumbered by the amount of roll on/roll off ships. While they are for utterly massive ones, those massive ships are forced to dock at massive ports that have the infrastructure pre-built. Most of the world doesn’t have those massive ports or they have smaller ports that are closer. There are a massive amount of cargo ships that are instead a ‘roll on/roll off’ type, similar to a ferry. That’s what this ship is. The minimalistic design is odd but likely has far less to do with aerodynamics as it does with structural integrity and the fact that it’s a cargo ship. It’s also a concept image so any visual design could be left until the final stages, provided it doesn’t impact hull integrity. It doesn’t need a bunch of random designs on the outside. All other cargo ships are done in a streamlined fashion. The length of this cargo ship is actually 200m and the length of the sails are 40 meters. They’re also sails and not wind turbine blades, are retractable, turn 360 degrees, tilt and designed to be retroactively attached to multiple other ships.
Seems pretty practical to me. It’s almost like the people who designed it knew what they were doing.
This trend of looking at something, making wild assumptions based off of no data, and then judging based off of those assumptions without ever even attempting to verify them? This really needs to stop.
You’re kinda right. The person you were replying to was talking about container ships that operate on liner services, and indeed rotor (or other, there are more than one kind) sails would be impractical.
However, the vast majority of ships are not RoRos. In fact, they make up a tiny percentage of the global fleet. These kinds are sails are designed for bulk carriers and tankers which, along with container ships, make up the majority of the global fleet. If you want I can post the actual numbers (I am in the shipping and oil industry and have access to the proprietary sources that track this stuff).
The EU is making a massive push, mostly through ETS, to curb ship emissions by a signifiant amount, 40% less starting next year, and going to 50% then 70% the following two years. So sails in various forms are finally becoming a viable commercial (partial) solution.
Sailboats are fastest when sailing across the wind, called a “Beam Reach”
Like the other person said this is a roll-on-roll-off cargo boat meaning it transports automobiles and cargo trailers. But I believe this specific one only does new cars.
As far as being aerodynamic, on a normal boat having things like biminis up can make docking difficult but with sail boats in general, a draggy top can hurt upwind performance. Meaning if you have some sleek aero superstructure then you might be able to sail 30° from the wind, but a bunch of biminis, a big square pilot house, etc might push you to 45° from the wind.
As an example, this boat might do 45° from the wind and exposed containers might push it to 55°, but that’s still better than a lot of old ships which had terrible up wind performance.
There is a different one that’s a retrofitted container ship with smaller sails. They do take up the space of a few containers but not many as far as I remember.
This looks like it might be a roll-on/roll-off cargo ship, which have covers like that. But at the speeds a ship travels aerodynamic drag is minimal so you’re right about that.
And those sails will make going under bridges pretty hairy unless they can be stowed somehow.
The sails in the render look segmented into 4 separate parts that are nested in one another, so I imagine they can retract into themselves from the looks of it.
That doesn’t look practical at all. The point of cargo ships is to move containers, so they put them out in the open for rapid loading and unloading… Plus this “aerodynamic” design makes no sense. Most of the drag comes from what’s under the water at low speeds and if it’s a sailboat the wind will be behind them. At the scale of cargo ships some are 400m long, meaning these sails could be 200 m or more high… the small flexible blades on a wind turbine are 80 m at most.
On-deck cargo ships are not as common as you think they are. I mean sure, they’re everwhere, but they’re also VASTLY outnumbered by the amount of roll on/roll off ships. While they are for utterly massive ones, those massive ships are forced to dock at massive ports that have the infrastructure pre-built. Most of the world doesn’t have those massive ports or they have smaller ports that are closer. There are a massive amount of cargo ships that are instead a ‘roll on/roll off’ type, similar to a ferry. That’s what this ship is. The minimalistic design is odd but likely has far less to do with aerodynamics as it does with structural integrity and the fact that it’s a cargo ship. It’s also a concept image so any visual design could be left until the final stages, provided it doesn’t impact hull integrity. It doesn’t need a bunch of random designs on the outside. All other cargo ships are done in a streamlined fashion. The length of this cargo ship is actually 200m and the length of the sails are 40 meters. They’re also sails and not wind turbine blades, are retractable, turn 360 degrees, tilt and designed to be retroactively attached to multiple other ships.
Source.
Seems pretty practical to me. It’s almost like the people who designed it knew what they were doing.
This trend of looking at something, making wild assumptions based off of no data, and then judging based off of those assumptions without ever even attempting to verify them? This really needs to stop.
You’re kinda right. The person you were replying to was talking about container ships that operate on liner services, and indeed rotor (or other, there are more than one kind) sails would be impractical.
However, the vast majority of ships are not RoRos. In fact, they make up a tiny percentage of the global fleet. These kinds are sails are designed for bulk carriers and tankers which, along with container ships, make up the majority of the global fleet. If you want I can post the actual numbers (I am in the shipping and oil industry and have access to the proprietary sources that track this stuff).
The EU is making a massive push, mostly through ETS, to curb ship emissions by a signifiant amount, 40% less starting next year, and going to 50% then 70% the following two years. So sails in various forms are finally becoming a viable commercial (partial) solution.
Please don’t post proprietary data to internet without prior approvals, it might get expensive to you.
No.
Sailboats are fastest when sailing across the wind, called a “Beam Reach”
Like the other person said this is a roll-on-roll-off cargo boat meaning it transports automobiles and cargo trailers. But I believe this specific one only does new cars.
As far as being aerodynamic, on a normal boat having things like biminis up can make docking difficult but with sail boats in general, a draggy top can hurt upwind performance. Meaning if you have some sleek aero superstructure then you might be able to sail 30° from the wind, but a bunch of biminis, a big square pilot house, etc might push you to 45° from the wind.
As an example, this boat might do 45° from the wind and exposed containers might push it to 55°, but that’s still better than a lot of old ships which had terrible up wind performance.
There is a different one that’s a retrofitted container ship with smaller sails. They do take up the space of a few containers but not many as far as I remember.
Edit: also every spec in this is just an example.
This looks like it might be a roll-on/roll-off cargo ship, which have covers like that. But at the speeds a ship travels aerodynamic drag is minimal so you’re right about that.
And those sails will make going under bridges pretty hairy unless they can be stowed somehow.
They’re telescoping so they can retract them for bridges or inclement weather.
The sails in the render look segmented into 4 separate parts that are nested in one another, so I imagine they can retract into themselves from the looks of it.
Edit: Yep
Ah, okay. Like an upside down daggerboard.
Looking at their website, it looks like the wings fold in half and then lay down.