FYI, the main innovations of these kite sails compared to traditional sailing ships are that it doesn’t need masts that get in the way of cargo handling and that it requires fewer crew. In other words, it’s not faster or anything; it’s just cheaper.
You also need vastly less sail area and the things are more reliable because wind gets quite a bit stronger and reliable at 100-300 metres up. The system actually isn’t new. AFAIU main reason for it not getting wide-spread adoption is that shipping lines, not ship owners, pay for fuel.
Modern cargo ships are so huge traditional sails wouldn’t provide enough force to push them around. Neither will these kites, mind you. But, supplemental energy will still be a bonus, and a kite can reach higher and sit in faster, more stable winds.
Modern cargo ships are so huge traditional sails wouldn’t provide enough force to push them around.
Believe it or not, “proportionality” is a thing. You make the ship bigger, you make the sails bigger to match. Simple! Granted, previously, making sails bigger was limited by the weight of the things when hoisted by men operating manual winches, but now we’ve got motors now to solve that, and higher strength-to-weight ratio materials, too.
Point is: I maintain that, in principle, you could make a post-Panamax sailing ship – even a traditional fully-rigged one – if you really wanted to, and it would be capable of sailing at hull speed on wind power alone. It’s just that they don’t want to for reasons unrelated to technical feasibility.
A bigger challenge would be sourcing enough shantymen to be feasible. I’m not sure that the world has sufficient production capacity to provide the necessary rum for more than a handful of ships.
It would be really interesting to see a fully rigged ship with dozens of sails where the rigging was pulled by motors and controlled by computers rather than humans. It would also be interesting to see what they could do with modern materials. Nylon sails, carbon fibre masts, steel lines, etc.
Having said that, I would bet that a real modern cargo ship would probably use fancy solid wing-style sails.
You underestimate the force of wetted surface area resistance. The sail area needed to move a modern cargo ship at the snail’s pace of old sailing ships would be unmanageably large. You simply couldn’t hold enough sail area to get them near their current speeds. These hybrid sail concepts are nice, but all they do is save some fuel.
The longer the ship, the more masts you can add, so the length doesn’t really matter. What would matter is the width, but I don’t see why the sail surface area couldn’t scale with the ship’s surface area. Sure, it would be a huge amount of sail, but it’s a huge amount of steel.
The resistance from the wetted surface area scales up a lot more quickly than the wind force does. You’d have to completely redesign the hull shape to try to compensate, significantly reducing internal cargo volume and still not getting the ship above a few knots of speed…
Digging up my old naval architecture notes I’m reminded that I was a bit wrong in pointing out the real problem. It’s the speed that causes an exponential increase in required effective horsepower, not the displacement. And it’s exponential by a cube factor, so doubling the speed typically requires about 8x the power.
So, you can make a giant ship move under wind power, but you can only ever get so much power from the wind, limited by how big you can effectively make your sails and all the wind turbulence issues that arise from that. Sailing ships never went very fast, so that speed is never going to get much above 4-10 knots, as horsepower requirements above that just start to skyrocket. And there are few merchants who will accept that kind of speed when the competition will get their goods to market 2-3x faster using engines. Even goods that can survive a longer voyage will lose out on profit to those that get to the best market the quickest.
The really neat thing about this is that the largest factor in creating this drag at higher speeds is actually the waves created by moving. You end up trying to sail upstream, essentially, as you outpace your wake. There’s a certain point where, if you’re going fast enough, the resistance goes back down a bit as you ride your own wake, but beyond that it’s a vertical line. There are some real clever things you can do to get around this with lighter sailboats, but anything hauling cargo is just too bogged down to try it.
It’s the speed that causes an exponential increase in required effective horsepower, not the displacement
Is any of this dependent on the size of the ship?
limited by how big you can effectively make your sails and all the wind turbulence issues that arise from that
Is this a bigger problem with big sails? I can imagine with a really big airfoil sail it might be hard to get the ideal angle / shape. But, if it’s a square-rigged ship it seems like it would be less sensitive to turbulence because it’s not an airfoil?
Sailing ships never went very fast, so that speed is never going to get much above 4-10 knots
And a modern cargo ship goes about 20 knots, right? But, does that mean that you could get maybe 16 knots out of the engine and 4 from the wind? Or is it that the wind can supply 1 MW of power, which is enough to move at 4 knots, but if you want to move at 20 knots you need 30 MW of power, so the wind would only supply about 3% of what you need, so it might not be worth it for all the added complexity?
Even goods that can survive a longer voyage will lose out on profit to those that get to the best market the quickest.
And, because petroleum-based fuel is very cheap because you don’t have to pay for the impact it causes, you can get an incredibly powerful engine that doesn’t cost an absurd amount to run. So, the additional cost to ship things at 30 knots using vast amounts of very dirty diesel is low enough that it’s still worth it?
You end up trying to sail upstream, essentially, as you outpace your wake
Yeah, I read about that, and how at one speed your bow and stern are both at wave peaks so it’s very efficient, but if you go faster your bow is a peak and your stern is a trough and that’s the worst situation.
If you wanted to go post-apocalypse mode though, is there any size-scaling thing related to ships that means that big ships are impossible to scale as sailing ships? Or if you can scale the sails up with the size of the ship, could you have an enormous post-Panamax sailing ship with absurd sized sails and a ridiculous sized keel that would cruise around at the same speed as the cargo sailing ships of old? Imagine seeing one of the biggest of the big cargo ships of today but rigged for sail power only. Either with a crew of 5000 post-apocalyptic refugees-turned-sailors handling the absurdly complex sails, or, with a computer in charge with hundreds of different motors all making continuous tiny adjustments to keep dozens of sails all set up perfectly.
So, I got that information from a different Lemmy comment, and on the spur of your contradiction I went looking myself. My search results are flooded with mostly useless news articles (they went to tell stories, not relay technical information). Regardless, the most ambitious claim I’ve seen is to reduce emissions by up to 90% for a ship design that can’t handle shipping containers and is about 1/4 the size of the largest ships being produced today.
Don’t get me wrong, I want this to happen. In fact, I would ban carbon-fuel shipping today, if I could make it happen. That being said, I don’t think we’ll ever get back to 100% wind power.
The sail kite project has had claims of up to 10% fuel savings for about 20 years, now.
It’s all moot when we should just be focusing on figuring out practical nuclear shipping. It’s the only way to meet or exceed our current standard and be carbon-free. The NS Savannah proved it could be profitable ages ago, and that without any economy of scale to reduce costs.
Hmm i feel like there it was a case of working against the ocean whereas here I think it is working with the wind so it shouldn’t be THAT bad… but who knows…
Why can I only think of that journey to the center of the earth movie with the kite sail and had the one dude browsing google with the PSP. Why can I only remember two things from that movie?
FYI, the main innovations of these kite sails compared to traditional sailing ships are that it doesn’t need masts that get in the way of cargo handling and that it requires fewer crew. In other words, it’s not faster or anything; it’s just cheaper.
You also need vastly less sail area and the things are more reliable because wind gets quite a bit stronger and reliable at 100-300 metres up. The system actually isn’t new. AFAIU main reason for it not getting wide-spread adoption is that shipping lines, not ship owners, pay for fuel.
Modern cargo ships are so huge traditional sails wouldn’t provide enough force to push them around. Neither will these kites, mind you. But, supplemental energy will still be a bonus, and a kite can reach higher and sit in faster, more stable winds.
Believe it or not, “proportionality” is a thing. You make the ship bigger, you make the sails bigger to match. Simple! Granted, previously, making sails bigger was limited by the weight of the things when hoisted by men operating manual winches, but now we’ve got motors now to solve that, and higher strength-to-weight ratio materials, too.
Point is: I maintain that, in principle, you could make a post-Panamax sailing ship – even a traditional fully-rigged one – if you really wanted to, and it would be capable of sailing at hull speed on wind power alone. It’s just that they don’t want to for reasons unrelated to technical feasibility.
You’re assuming everything scales linearly, which is not necessarily accurate. The square-cube law rains on many people’s parades.
I can see how you’d think that, but I’m really just asserting that these specific things scale well enough to still work at post-Panamax size.
A bigger challenge would be sourcing enough shantymen to be feasible. I’m not sure that the world has sufficient production capacity to provide the necessary rum for more than a handful of ships.
I have it on good authority that the Wellerman will handle this issue, along with any concerns with tea and sugar supply
deleted by creator
Not really. Drag grows with area and so does force from a sail. The larger ships will be faster per unit volume if anything.
Sailing cargo ship is a thing. There’s a record breaker recently in fact.
It would be really interesting to see a fully rigged ship with dozens of sails where the rigging was pulled by motors and controlled by computers rather than humans. It would also be interesting to see what they could do with modern materials. Nylon sails, carbon fibre masts, steel lines, etc.
Having said that, I would bet that a real modern cargo ship would probably use fancy solid wing-style sails.
You underestimate the power of wind, stranger.
You underestimate the force of wetted surface area resistance. The sail area needed to move a modern cargo ship at the snail’s pace of old sailing ships would be unmanageably large. You simply couldn’t hold enough sail area to get them near their current speeds. These hybrid sail concepts are nice, but all they do is save some fuel.
The longer the ship, the more masts you can add, so the length doesn’t really matter. What would matter is the width, but I don’t see why the sail surface area couldn’t scale with the ship’s surface area. Sure, it would be a huge amount of sail, but it’s a huge amount of steel.
The resistance from the wetted surface area scales up a lot more quickly than the wind force does. You’d have to completely redesign the hull shape to try to compensate, significantly reducing internal cargo volume and still not getting the ship above a few knots of speed…
Really? Can you explain why?
Digging up my old naval architecture notes I’m reminded that I was a bit wrong in pointing out the real problem. It’s the speed that causes an exponential increase in required effective horsepower, not the displacement. And it’s exponential by a cube factor, so doubling the speed typically requires about 8x the power.
So, you can make a giant ship move under wind power, but you can only ever get so much power from the wind, limited by how big you can effectively make your sails and all the wind turbulence issues that arise from that. Sailing ships never went very fast, so that speed is never going to get much above 4-10 knots, as horsepower requirements above that just start to skyrocket. And there are few merchants who will accept that kind of speed when the competition will get their goods to market 2-3x faster using engines. Even goods that can survive a longer voyage will lose out on profit to those that get to the best market the quickest.
The really neat thing about this is that the largest factor in creating this drag at higher speeds is actually the waves created by moving. You end up trying to sail upstream, essentially, as you outpace your wake. There’s a certain point where, if you’re going fast enough, the resistance goes back down a bit as you ride your own wake, but beyond that it’s a vertical line. There are some real clever things you can do to get around this with lighter sailboats, but anything hauling cargo is just too bogged down to try it.
Nice, thanks for going to the trouble.
Is any of this dependent on the size of the ship?
Is this a bigger problem with big sails? I can imagine with a really big airfoil sail it might be hard to get the ideal angle / shape. But, if it’s a square-rigged ship it seems like it would be less sensitive to turbulence because it’s not an airfoil?
And a modern cargo ship goes about 20 knots, right? But, does that mean that you could get maybe 16 knots out of the engine and 4 from the wind? Or is it that the wind can supply 1 MW of power, which is enough to move at 4 knots, but if you want to move at 20 knots you need 30 MW of power, so the wind would only supply about 3% of what you need, so it might not be worth it for all the added complexity?
And, because petroleum-based fuel is very cheap because you don’t have to pay for the impact it causes, you can get an incredibly powerful engine that doesn’t cost an absurd amount to run. So, the additional cost to ship things at 30 knots using vast amounts of very dirty diesel is low enough that it’s still worth it?
Yeah, I read about that, and how at one speed your bow and stern are both at wave peaks so it’s very efficient, but if you go faster your bow is a peak and your stern is a trough and that’s the worst situation.
If you wanted to go post-apocalypse mode though, is there any size-scaling thing related to ships that means that big ships are impossible to scale as sailing ships? Or if you can scale the sails up with the size of the ship, could you have an enormous post-Panamax sailing ship with absurd sized sails and a ridiculous sized keel that would cruise around at the same speed as the cargo sailing ships of old? Imagine seeing one of the biggest of the big cargo ships of today but rigged for sail power only. Either with a crew of 5000 post-apocalyptic refugees-turned-sailors handling the absurdly complex sails, or, with a computer in charge with hundreds of different motors all making continuous tiny adjustments to keep dozens of sails all set up perfectly.
So, I got that information from a different Lemmy comment, and on the spur of your contradiction I went looking myself. My search results are flooded with mostly useless news articles (they went to tell stories, not relay technical information). Regardless, the most ambitious claim I’ve seen is to reduce emissions by up to 90% for a ship design that can’t handle shipping containers and is about 1/4 the size of the largest ships being produced today.
Don’t get me wrong, I want this to happen. In fact, I would ban carbon-fuel shipping today, if I could make it happen. That being said, I don’t think we’ll ever get back to 100% wind power.
The sail kite project has had claims of up to 10% fuel savings for about 20 years, now.
It’s all moot when we should just be focusing on figuring out practical nuclear shipping. It’s the only way to meet or exceed our current standard and be carbon-free. The NS Savannah proved it could be profitable ages ago, and that without any economy of scale to reduce costs.
They found out rhe hard way with the Ever Given
Hmm i feel like there it was a case of working against the ocean whereas here I think it is working with the wind so it shouldn’t be THAT bad… but who knows…
It was more a comment on the power of wind on a modern container ship.
Why can I only think of that journey to the center of the earth movie with the kite sail and had the one dude browsing google with the PSP. Why can I only remember two things from that movie?
deleted by creator