I hear it takes an entire month to turn and two weeks to stop, from full cruise speed........

 

I though ship builders limited the size of container ships so they would fit in the locks of canals.

 

No they don't do that to fit the existing locks and its not the length its the beam that is the main constraint to the existing locks take a look at the west coast of the USA ports are full of ships that won't fit the current canal the shippers offload here and ship by truck and rail to the mid western states its cheaper than going around the horn and they have been doing it or a long time that way.

 

I bet its controlled by a joystick as is as maneuverable as 40 foot sail boat.

 

So when do these buyers realize that several smaller ships with more efficient screws are more capable to move cargo... or better stated more flexible to go elsewhere in pinch?

probably about the time fuel costs go up again.

Can someone answer for me why they build these massive direct-drive engines, instead of taking the freight train approach of hybrid drives (diesel engines driving generators for power, then electric motors driving the locomotive)... Or is it just inefficient to have multiple "screws," better to have 1 large one than several small ones?

 

Can someone answer for me why they build these massive direct-drive engines, instead of taking the freight train approach of hybrid drives (diesel engines driving generators for power, then electric motors driving the locomotive)... Or is it just inefficient to have multiple "screws," better to have 1 large one than several small ones?

I always wondered why cars aren't done that way either. A small diesel generator powering and electric car....

 

It has been a long time but are not the Panama locks 1000' long? Wonder how much extra fuel and time to go around?

 

That's what I was thinking. Maybe this one is for a dedicated route that doesn't go through the Panama canal.

 

panama is expanding...

 

panama is expanding...
Panama Canal expansion project - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

China is planning a Nicaragua canal. It is likely being designed to handle larger ships.

 

So they build this ship under the assumption the canal will be upgraded? Sounds expensive and a bit risky. But I suppose that's why those smart guys get paid the big bucks.

 

Well, yeah, they do build "New Panamax" ships ahead of time so they'll be ready for the new Panama locks, now scheduled to open in early 2016, a little over a year late, but it's definitely going to happen.

"max" as a suffix is a shipping/charter term for the largest ship that can fit a given canal, port, or design formula, with ("old") "Panamax" being the most commonly heard, they measure it in tonnage but about 800 feet and definitely not over 106' in beam.

Look now how many "maxes" there are:

Ship Sizes | Maritime-Connector.com

These are really big girls but even so, Colregs rule 18 still gives the lowly sailboat stand-on status, subject to the Narrow channel rule (9), Traffic Separation Scheme rule (10), and the Restricted Maneuverability Rule which is 18(a)(ii) if you look it up as I just did. And in fog/restricted visibility neither vessel has right of way.

But taking two miles to stop and five minutes to turn right does not constitute "restricted in ability to maneuver" if that's the ship's normal capability, so sail is still privileged. But as Capta mentions, I personally would abandon all hope of trying to "get missed" by that "give-way" Triple-E huge containership unless I had a blood-oath agreement with her captain that he would and could. Otherwise I'm "right, but dead right" as my old man used to say when we were out in a small sailboat. ;-)

 

It is 56.8m (186ft) wide ... 'm giving these guys a WIDE birth, period.

It's not very wide: 57 meters. Hmmm. Quick little arithmetic in my head ... At 3 knots I can sail out of her way in about 45 seconds. Just. Out at sea there is not much of a danger. Really narrow harbor entrances are about 400 feet wide. Again plenty of room to pass, if you see them coming.

The largest bulk carriers are the same length ... so there is some length limit somewhere in the world ... or at the shipyard.

Can someone answer for me why they build these massive direct-drive engines, instead of taking the freight train approach of hybrid drives...

You are joking, yes?

 

Here are the specifics on canal limits and the main limit seems to be draft at 39 ft 6 in

A.
Maximum Transit Draft: 12.04 meters (39 feet, 6 inches) Tropical Fresh Water.
B.
Maximum Beam: 32.31 meters (106 feet).
C.
Maximum Overall Length: 294.13 meters (965 feet) for passenger and container vessels.
D.
Maximum Airdraft: 57.91 meters (190 feet) at any tide, 62.48 meters (205 feet) at low tide with special approval from the ACP authorities.

 

The megaships are usually designed very particularly for a particular area of operations. They reduce expenses because the crew size is basically "one crew, one ship" without regard for ship size. In theory, a bigger ship could mean a faster ship could mean better able to outrun weather and repel pirates, so those factors could be involved.

Propulsion systems? I'm sure they've done sharp cost accounting including construction, procurement, maintenance, life cycle, reliability.

Panama Canal? Not all runs need to cross the Americas, there is the rest of the world, i.e the Suez as well. If this is for China trade to the EU? Panama Canal would not be a consideration. And with the Chinese and Nicaraguans breaking ground for a new canal that is supposed to obsolete the Panamanian one...or with the Northwest Passage being projected to become viable so shortly...Could be built for Chinese exports via the NW Passage to Russia, for all we know.

When you can afford to pay the yard bill for something that big, odds are you've invested a great deal in determining how to build it. And then you either get rich because you're so smart, or you go bust because you gambled wrong. Happens all the time.

 

What is the draft of that beast? I think that would be a lot of boat to run aground.

 

maximum draught (m): 15,00
9695121_CSCL GLOBE

 

generating electricity is only about 65 to 70% efficient. Trains (and engine starter-motors, for that matter) use "series wound" electric motors which produce exceptionally high torque characteristics which is just what you want for starting something massive and heavy moving. If I was a navy designer I'd be keen on this ability on a warship, but not for a vessel that needs the utmost economy of operation.

As an aside, I was reading an article on boat design recently and the author demonstrated how big is better works for power boats, but not for sail boats and how that was one of the reasons for the decline in commercial sailing cargo vessels. It goes along the lines of some factors increasing to the square versus others increasing to the cube as size increases. This favours power, but disadvantages sail.

 

the USCG uses Diesel Electrics for their ice breakers and buoy tenders. They never gave up on the tech.

 

Icebreakers routinely break ice, and come to dead stops as they climb onto ice, break it with their weight, and then back off and repeat. All that constant shifting from forward to reverse means they need FULL TORQUE from zero rpms, way more than any freighter would.

IIRC only steam and electric motors have full torque at any rpm. Diesels don't.

So what you want on an icebreaker...isn't what you want on a container ship.

Diesels are also best optimized for constant speed, constant load operation. Very much the routine plodding that a containership would be doing.

 

"The world's biggest ship - for 53 days
The world's largest container ship, the Globe, is docking in Britain for the first time as it continues its maiden voyage. But how vast and powerful is it and how long until it's superseded?
The Globe is more than 400m (1,312ft) long, the equivalent of eight Olympic-size swimming pools. It is 56.8m (186ft) wide and 73m (240ft) high, its gross tonnage is 186,000 - the equivalent of 14,500 London buses, according to the Port of Felixstowe, where it arrived on Wednesday." BBC News - The world's biggest ship - for 53 days

I don't care what the Colregs say, I'm giving these guys a WIDE birth, period.

At 186,000 tonnes they definitely have the right of weight.

 

a WIDE birth...

Heh, ya, that would be a wide, and painful, birth.

 

Our definition of big is any ship whose length on the AIS is given in decimal nautical miles because the display only goes to 999 feet. We found it pretty routine that these ships would alter course to avoid us because they could see that we were under sail. There are a lot of ships out there that cannot go through Panama and Suez. The route between South Africa and Singapore is like an interstate for them.

 

Those big ships paint a nice picture on the radar too...

A tanker we see around Singapore...1000 feet long and 22.49 meter draft.

http://www.vesselfinder.com/vessels/MARAN-CARINA-IMO-9240512-MMSI-237951000