3 ms·

The article missed out on the details I was keen to hear. A) power source? Electric motors so I'm assuming a mix of solar and wind? Or diesel? I'm guessing not

The article missed out on the details I was keen to hear. A) power source? Electric motors so I'm assuming a mix of solar and wind? Or diesel? I'm guessing not nuclear. B) docking. Can something this large (width more than length) actually be docked? From the shape I'm guessing "mostly no". So provisioning, embarking and so on is done via ferry? In open water? That might be fun. So actually visiting various places (getting off) might be very constrained. C) dry-docking. I'm going to assume it can only be dry docked in the place it was built. That's fine for planned maintainence, but perhaps a problem if she became unseaworthy far from home. D) is this a holiday cruise ship? Is it supposed to be permanent residence? If holiday seems like a poor alternative to an actual cruise ship (no / Minimal port docking?). If a permanent residence then it also seems like a poor choice. Limited access to everything (no overnight amazon delivery for you), very limited job opportunities, not sure what it's "exporting" to pay for the fuel. So I'm guessing not self-sustaining, so basically reliant on land for food/fuel? And cash. So permanent if you start mega-rich and don't need money. But if you're mega-rich why go on this thing? Why not just get your own yacht? Sooo many questions... But ultimately I wonder; A) who wants this thing? B) can they afford it?

preisschild 4y ago
Hydrogen might be a solution to powering marine shipping too. Can be produced en masse and co2-free by big fission reactors & renewables. Although having SMRs directly power ships would be cool too.
PaulHoule 4y ago
Please let it use https://www.seaborg.com/ https://www.seaborg.com/
wiml 4y ago
A) Many large ships run with electric motors and diesel generators anyway, so it would be unsurprising if this ship did the same. B) I'm sure they can carry fairly large swanky launches / tenders / whatever C) This is interesting to me also. I suppose you could build a coffer dam around it anywhere you have a large enough shallow harbor. But even conventional large ships spend a lot of their time far away from any shipyard big enough to repair them, maybe it's just an accepted difficulty. D) The $8-billion question, yes? The page doesn't seem to address this at all. It seems to be one designer's idle fantasy and a bunch of renders.
harywilke 4y ago
Embarking is answered in this video the project put out. looks like a combination of 'drone pods' that land on the helicopter pads on the back legs. ( the pads seem to be partly tucked under the overhang of the upper stage? that doesn't seem safe for anybody ) and a tunnel through the side that enters the docking area in the center of the ship that looks like it would be fun to pilot through. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XT_3YmlXvOI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XT_3YmlXvOI
davedx 4y ago
Yeah if this thing ran on bunker fuel it would be utterly awful for the climate, in terms of per passenger emissions.
- dzhiurgis 4y ago
  Yes if you count per km travelled, maybe. But if it aimlessly floats for years and you count tons of co2 per year per person... Maybe it's not that bad. General consensus is to shit on cruise ships, but I feel they are actually quite efficient. Fitting 5000people, basically entire town on a few hundred square meters is an amazing feat.
  - dsr_ 4y ago
    If you can do it on the water, you can do it cheaper on dry land.
    - mauvehaus 4y ago
      On the open ocean, the containment that keeps the 5000 people from driving everywhere is free and perceived as idyllic. On land, attempts to contain 5000 people and prevent them from driving would be costly and considered dystopian.

preisschild 4y ago

Hydrogen might be a solution to powering marine shipping too. Can be produced en masse and co2-free by big fission reactors & renewables. Although having SMRs directly power ships would be cool too.

PaulHoule 4y ago

Please let it use https://www.seaborg.com/ https://www.seaborg.com/

wiml 4y ago

A) Many large ships run with electric motors and diesel generators anyway, so it would be unsurprising if this ship did the same. B) I'm sure they can carry fairly large swanky launches / tenders / whatever C) This is interesting to me also. I suppose you could build a coffer dam around it anywhere you have a large enough shallow harbor. But even conventional large ships spend a lot of their time far away from any shipyard big enough to repair them, maybe it's just an accepted difficulty. D) The $8-billion question, yes? The page doesn't seem to address this at all. It seems to be one designer's idle fantasy and a bunch of renders.

harywilke 4y ago

Embarking is answered in this video the project put out. looks like a combination of 'drone pods' that land on the helicopter pads on the back legs. ( the pads seem to be partly tucked under the overhang of the upper stage? that doesn't seem safe for anybody ) and a tunnel through the side that enters the docking area in the center of the ship that looks like it would be fun to pilot through. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XT_3YmlXvOI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XT_3YmlXvOI

davedx 4y ago

Yeah if this thing ran on bunker fuel it would be utterly awful for the climate, in terms of per passenger emissions.

dzhiurgis 4y ago
Yes if you count per km travelled, maybe. But if it aimlessly floats for years and you count tons of co2 per year per person... Maybe it's not that bad. General consensus is to shit on cruise ships, but I feel they are actually quite efficient. Fitting 5000people, basically entire town on a few hundred square meters is an amazing feat.
- dsr_ 4y ago
  If you can do it on the water, you can do it cheaper on dry land.
  - mauvehaus 4y ago
    On the open ocean, the containment that keeps the 5000 people from driving everywhere is free and perceived as idyllic. On land, attempts to contain 5000 people and prevent them from driving would be costly and considered dystopian.