5 ms·

I don’t see the article specifically mention slow steaming... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slow_steaming https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slow_steaming Using sa

I don’t see the article specifically mention slow steaming... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slow_steaming https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slow_steaming Using sails to increase fuel economy seems like a no brainer, but now I’m wondering if cargo ships were ever using sails to increase their maximum safe cruising speed. Does anyone know?

ghaff 6y ago
Before steam they did :-) Sail died off pretty quickly once steam came in. [EDIT: Apparently in some applications much faster than others.] In the case of modern examples, I'm pretty sure it's been exclusively for fuel economy. And, until recently, the overhead associated with using sails was generally more trouble than they were worth.
- nabla9 6y ago
  Steam ships used to have sails for a long time. Gradually the amount of sails deceased. Last ocean liners with sail assist were build in 1884. The most famous clipper (fast sail ship) Cutty Sark (later Ferreira) operated between 1870 - 1922 (17.5 kn max speed).
  - Retric 6y ago
    Yea, the original limitation was the manpower cost of manning the sails which is why they where eventually dropped. With modern systems they are almost completely automated, which makes them far more viable.
    - nabla9 6y ago
      It was not the manpower cost that was the limit. Steam ships had huge crews managing the engines. Titanic had 25 engineers, 170 firemen, 73 coal trimmers and 33 greasers. It was the size. Sail ships had practical upper limit for their size and weight. Size of the mast and sails could not just grow. Square–cube law: (drag) surface area is proportional to the square while the volume is proportional to the cube. Bigger the ship, more efficient it becomes.
      - deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
      - Retric 6y ago
        It’s important to realize that 300 man engine crew was needed in large part do to the Titanic’s fast 21 knots cruse. A slower vessel of the same size and weight needs dramatically less power. By comparison the last commercial bulk cargo sailing ship Palmer which sank in 1957 needed an 85+ man crew, only had an 8-9 knots cruse, and was vastly smaller. For the titanic to add an extra 200+ crew to possibly save less than 10% on fuel costs was simply not tenable. Where combined steam and sail ships really benefited wasn’t fuel, it was consistent power. Early steam engines where unreliable as was sail, but they rarely failed at the same time. However with more reliable steam it was just a question of economics.
      - svieira 6y ago
        > 33 greasers There's a Liberty Ship that sails out of Baltimore at times [1] and if you go down into the engine room you can meet (or could 3 years ago) a greaser who sailed with these ships during WW II. They were the last mass-produced steam ships in the world [2]. [1]: https://www.ssjohnwbrown.org/ https://www.ssjohnwbrown.org/ [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberty_ship#Propulsion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberty_ship#Propulsion
        deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
  - ghaff 6y ago
    Ocean liners (and certain types of cargo) makes sense. An increase in speed can work economically even though it's not efficient. From what I was reading, sail went out in most military ships fairly quickly but that's a different set of constraints and priorities.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
  - walrus01 6y ago
    the economics of fast sail clippers such as the cutty sark were limited to high value, low weight products such as specialty teas. the actual cargo volume in such a sail clipper was fairly low. an analogy for today would be air cargo freight in 747s of fresh flowers or something.

ghaff 6y ago

Before steam they did :-) Sail died off pretty quickly once steam came in. [EDIT: Apparently in some applications much faster than others.] In the case of modern examples, I'm pretty sure it's been exclusively for fuel economy. And, until recently, the overhead associated with using sails was generally more trouble than they were worth.

nabla9 6y ago
Steam ships used to have sails for a long time. Gradually the amount of sails deceased. Last ocean liners with sail assist were build in 1884. The most famous clipper (fast sail ship) Cutty Sark (later Ferreira) operated between 1870 - 1922 (17.5 kn max speed).
- Retric 6y ago
  Yea, the original limitation was the manpower cost of manning the sails which is why they where eventually dropped. With modern systems they are almost completely automated, which makes them far more viable.
  - nabla9 6y ago
    It was not the manpower cost that was the limit. Steam ships had huge crews managing the engines. Titanic had 25 engineers, 170 firemen, 73 coal trimmers and 33 greasers. It was the size. Sail ships had practical upper limit for their size and weight. Size of the mast and sails could not just grow. Square–cube law: (drag) surface area is proportional to the square while the volume is proportional to the cube. Bigger the ship, more efficient it becomes.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
    - Retric 6y ago
      It’s important to realize that 300 man engine crew was needed in large part do to the Titanic’s fast 21 knots cruse. A slower vessel of the same size and weight needs dramatically less power. By comparison the last commercial bulk cargo sailing ship Palmer which sank in 1957 needed an 85+ man crew, only had an 8-9 knots cruse, and was vastly smaller. For the titanic to add an extra 200+ crew to possibly save less than 10% on fuel costs was simply not tenable. Where combined steam and sail ships really benefited wasn’t fuel, it was consistent power. Early steam engines where unreliable as was sail, but they rarely failed at the same time. However with more reliable steam it was just a question of economics.
    - svieira 6y ago
      > 33 greasers There's a Liberty Ship that sails out of Baltimore at times [1] and if you go down into the engine room you can meet (or could 3 years ago) a greaser who sailed with these ships during WW II. They were the last mass-produced steam ships in the world [2]. [1]: https://www.ssjohnwbrown.org/ https://www.ssjohnwbrown.org/ [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberty_ship#Propulsion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberty_ship#Propulsion
      - deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
- ghaff 6y ago
  Ocean liners (and certain types of cargo) makes sense. An increase in speed can work economically even though it's not efficient. From what I was reading, sail went out in most military ships fairly quickly but that's a different set of constraints and priorities.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
- walrus01 6y ago
  the economics of fast sail clippers such as the cutty sark were limited to high value, low weight products such as specialty teas. the actual cargo volume in such a sail clipper was fairly low. an analogy for today would be air cargo freight in 747s of fresh flowers or something.