Military Review

Fighting sea giants. Container carriers - first in their class

100

It seems to be a little strange to talk on the pages of "Voennoye Obozreniye" about even non-military vessels of commercial fleet... However, not so long ago there appeared an article about passenger steamers, where it was very appropriate to mention that cruise liners not only entertained tourists, but on occasion could transport an entire division across the ocean.


Honestly, this inspired me to talk about an unusual ship that brought to life a whole subclass of its own kind.

In addition, you can remember that there is such a term as the transport security of the state. There is even such a law, and transport ships are one of the constituent parts of this very security. It is not for nothing that our overseas partners apply the term merchant navy to this fleet - that is, although it is a commercial one, it is still navy.

Today our heroes will be:

- Danish company AP Moller-Maersk Group, which is known in the shipping world under the simplified name Maersk. In fact, Maersk is the world's largest container ship operator. Every sailor knows of steamers of a characteristic blue color with the Maersk Line inscription on board. In 2020, the company owned and operated more than 700 vessels with a total capacity of 4 TEU (I will explain a little later what this is);

- a container ship named Emma Maersk, which laid (in my opinion) the beginning of such a phenomenon as the Ultra Large Container Ship.

A bit of theory and history


Now a little theory and stories.

Container ships emerged as specialized cargo ships in the 1950s and proved to be a very convenient means of transporting goods on a door-to-door basis.

The containers themselves did not have a common standard at first, and for twenty years they had a variety of sizes until this became a problem.

And if there is a problem, then it must be solved - and the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) rallied with strength and introduced standards. Containers for sea shipping began to have a standard design, and container ships began to be built to these dimensions.

Something like this:


The picture was taken at the entrance to the Panama Canal.

The steamer barely moves, almost not disturbing the sea surface. It is he who is waiting for me, they are taking me to him by boat. Now we will go around it, there will be a ladder hanging from the starboard side, I will rise, and the next 4 months of life will pass there.

The capacity of this instance is 5 TEU.

It’s about these TEUs and about the race for them, and will be discussed.

To begin with, what is this TEU and why should you chase after it?

This term just arose as a result of standardization and it means twenty-foot equivalent unit. One TEU, shall we say, hints at the capacity of a standard shipping container 20 feet long, 8,5 feet high and 8 feet wide. It is for such dimensions that container ships are designed, and their capacity is precisely measured in TEU.

True, 20-foot containers soon became too small, and extended versions of 40 and 45 feet were launched into use. Their height has also increased slightly, but the width remains the same. And the term TEU remained. Accordingly, one 40-foot container is equal to two TEU.

Why are you trying to increase the container capacity?

And the reason is very simple.

The more containers you carry, the cheaper the transportation of one container is, which is very attractive for cargo owners.

And if so, then all decent shipowners began to try to get hold of large container ships in their fleet. The shipbuilders, of course, readily responded to the requests of the ship owners and began to build larger and larger container ships.

By 2005, the size approached 10 TEU.

And here the race stopped.

Up to this point, the increase in container capacity went along a very simple path - the length and breadth of the vessel grew, as well as the number of containers that could be taken on deck. It was not uncommon to see container ships with 7 tiers of containers, because of which the wheelhouse protruded only slightly.

Further increase in size required significant changes in the design of the vessel.

Development was carried out, but opinions differed on exactly how to build.

Some shipbuilders believed that the ULCS (Ultra Large Container Ship, as such monsters were called in advance) could no longer be built according to the traditional scheme - that is, with the superstructure slightly shifted aft from the middle of the ship and with the engine room located directly below it.

There was also debate on the composition of the power plant of such a ship: it was assumed that it should consist of two engines with a capacity of 50–55 thousand liters. With. each, otherwise there is no way to reach the required speed of 25 knots.

At that time, it was believed that a self-respecting container ship of this size must navigate the seas at exactly that speed, otherwise everyone would look at it as a misunderstanding.

Who could have guessed that several years would pass and the mood in the shipping world would radically change?

Accordingly, it was proposed to shift the superstructure of such a vessel to the bow, and the engine room to the stern. At the same time, this improved the view from the bridge and reduced the length of the propeller shaft, which was also important, because it was supposed to transfer enormous power to the propeller.

Well, in passing, as something insignificant, it was mentioned that the crews would be in more comfortable conditions, since the source of noise and vibration would be removed from the living quarters by almost 200 meters.

Others stated that the traditional architecture had not yet exhausted itself and that they even had ready-made projects, but only there were no orders.

And then thunder struck.

Rumors began to circulate that Maersk was building something big at its own shipyard in Odense. And later, photographs appeared, and it became clear that the rumors were true.


While the controversy was going on, the designers of Maersk spit on everyone and went the traditional way.

"Emma"


In the end, this is what happened:

Fighting sea giants. Container carriers - first in their class

The vessel was launched with great fanfare.

Yes, it is understandable, not every day and not even every decade such an event happens.

It is also understandable that Maersk Line wants to talk about "Emma" only in enthusiastic tones. Everything that concerns her, they had the prefix "most-most". The longest ship, the most powerful engine, the heaviest anchor, the largest propeller ...

The new giant entered service in September 2006.

Isn't it beautiful and somewhere even elegant?

Dimensions of a newborn: length - 397 m, width - 56 m, draft in full load - 16 m. Capacity ...

Here is a little more about this, since there is some intrigue here.

With regard to capacity, the world shipping and ship-owning community has been enthusiastically building assumptions on this topic for several years.

Maersk has officially announced that it is 11 TEU.

The public allowed itself not to believe - the size of the vessel assumed that 14 containers would easily enter it - an unprecedented figure at that time. And it is quite possible that more!

The Maersk's container capacity determination system gave room for thought and calculation.

When calculating, they proceed from the fact that all containers loaded on board will be evenly and equally loaded, and the weight of the cargo in each will be exactly 14 tons.

In general, this is standard maritime practice.

And if you look at the characteristics of container ships for interest, you will see a double figure: maximum TEU capacity and container capacity at 14 t. The first is usually 35–40% larger than the second.

The container ship on which I am currently working has the following figures: maximum TEU capacity = 8 250 and container capacity at 14 t = 6 805. This is due to the fact that in real life a variety of containers are loaded onto the ship, both empty and loaded , and even overloaded, and it is rather difficult to take into account all this.

Maximum capacity rather characterizes the volume of cargo space measured in containers: if all of them are empty, then 8 can be crammed, and if they all weigh 250 tons, then only 14, since the maximum carrying capacity will be chosen.

At the moment we are carrying 6 270 TEU, but the carrying capacity has already been selected at 95%.

And Maersk stubbornly continues to assume that all containers on his the ships will weigh a standard 14 tons. Well, they have such a tradition, what can you do.

In general, all and sundry began to divide and multiply, and it turned out that the real maximum TEU capacity should be close to 15 TEU. It was very impressive.

By the way, later Maersk admitted that the calculations were close to the truth - the real figure is 15 512 containers.

Engine


Further from the "most-most" - the most powerful (so far) in the world main engine SULZER 14RT-96C-flex, made in Korea at the Doosan plant under license from Sulzer.

It stands for simple: 14 cylinders with a diameter of 96 cm, and the flex prefix means that the common rail system is used here. Such an engine does not have a camshaft and individual high-pressure fuel pumps, and is stuffed with electronics cleaner than a spacecraft.

At the same time, it is much more economical in comparison with the 96C series and reacts more flexibly to work with reduced power - this property later turned out to be very useful. Its power is 80 kW, and he and his seven brothers for a long time, and most likely forever, will remain the most powerful power plant of a sea vessel, consisting of one engine.

Here it is still at a factory in Korea, assembled and ready for battle:


But that's not all.

Calculations have shown that the required speed of 25 knots at full load will still not be achieved, despite the enormous power.

Apparently, the hull lines were shaped to maximize the carrying capacity - but the streamlining suffered at the same time. Therefore, two Siemens electric motors of 9 kW each were built into the propeller shaft line.

This also makes the "Emma" a unique vessel, which is certainly not the case anywhere else. Rather, shaft generators of just such a design are quite common, but so that electric motors are built into the propeller shaft for the specific purpose of increasing the power transmitted to the propeller - I have never heard this before.

Look at the 120 meter long line of the propeller shaft. And somewhere in the distance one of these electric motors is slightly visible:


Here it is closer.


Where to get electricity from?

Power


There is a power plant on board, consisting of 5 diesel generators of 4 kW each with a voltage of 100 kV and a turbine generator with a capacity of 6,6 kW.

Let's dwell on the turbine generator in more detail.

Although an electronically controlled main engine is more economical than a conventional engine, the law of large numbers must not be forgotten. It is economical in terms of specific fuel consumption - the value of “grams per horsepower per hour” is 5–8% less than that of a conventional engine of a traditional design. However, if we multiply grams by kilowatts and by hours, then we get not a small daily consumption - about 330 tons per day at full speed.

Now let's multiply tons by dollars. Let's say the cost of a ton of heavy fuel in Singapore is now $ 620 ... Wow, almost 200 thousand dollar bills fly into the pipe a day!

And hot gases from the combustion of those same tons of fuel are emitted into the pipe. And hot gas flying at high speed is energy.

Those who build and design such engines have known for a long time that the efficiency of such a colossus can be obtained a little more than 50%, and this is just wonderful, designers and technologists have been moving towards this figure for more than 100 years! And in the next 50 years, it is unlikely that much more will be achieved. There is a struggle for every percentage.

Naturally, the idea arose long ago - why not use the energy of the burnt gases?

The idea came to life in the form of the so-called. "Waste boiler" - a boiler in which the energy of the exhaust gases of the main engine is used to produce steam.

It was believed that if the main engine had a power of more than 10 kW, then such a boiler would be able to get enough steam to turn the turbine generator. Thus, on the move, the ship could be supplied with electricity without wasting excess fuel, and diesel generators could be started only in the port.

On container ships, however, such a system did not become widespread, since they had very large electricity needs. After all, they began to transport not only ordinary containers, but also refrigerated ones, and each such refinery pulls up to 7 kW from the ship's network.

But time passed, the design idea continued to work, new ideas, materials and technologies appeared.

So Sulzer came up with the WHS - Waste Heat Recovery system, which they claimed would recycle up to 12% of the energy contained in the combustible fuel.

Maersk got interested in the case and tested the idea.

In 2005, the same shipyard in Odense launched the 10 TEU Gudrun Maersk. There was a 500RT-12C-flex engine, similar to the one that was supposed to be installed on the Emma, ​​only in a 96-cylinder version.

Its capacity was 68 kW, and the WHS system supplied steam to a 000 kW turbine generator.

Tests have shown that the system works as promised by Sulzer.

This is how it looks in hardware:


Great power can be obtained due to the fact that the generator is turned and turned by two turbines at once: steam and gas. The steam turbine is supplied with steam from a specially designed recovery boiler with a high steam capacity, and the gas turbine is supplied with energy from the exhaust gases of the main engine.

The same system was installed on Emma.

At the same time, this gave the owners the opportunity to assert that the "Emma" is almost the most environmentally friendly ship in the world, since the exhaust gases are emitted into the chimney for a reason, but do useful work along the way.

However, by that time it had already become fashionable to fight for the environment, so let's leave this statement without comment ...

However, Maersk sometimes replays in its advertising.

Crew


For example, Maersk claims that Emma's crew is only 13 people.

Well, here I will allow myself to doubt.

The number of "13 people" is most likely indicated in the so-called Minimum Safe Manning - a document issued by the maritime administration of the state whose flag the ship is carrying. And this only means that the Danish Maritime Authority believes and admits that 13 people can ensure the safe operation, navigation and other life of the vessel.

In 2009, I arrived on a steamer, which had been at anchor in the Philippine bay for almost a year, in the company of the same poor fellows.

The flag was there for Liberia, and according to Liberian rules, only 7 people were enough to bring the ship to the nearest port.

Well, yes, we reached Manila in every possible way, where another 15 people settled in.

So let's leave this statement (or misconception) on their conscience, and let's estimate.

Captain. Even if he is on watch on the bridge, it means that two more assistants (senior and 2nd) are needed to ensure a normal round-the-clock watch "4 through 8".

The requirements of SOLAS (Safety of Life at Sea) cannot be bypassed in any way, which means that at least 4 more sailors are needed to provide the lookout watch.

A cook is needed - the crew will not cook their own food!

And you need a steward - he not only sets the table and washes the dishes, but also performs all sorts of "household chores", for example, washing clothes.

And now we get 9 people.

This means that there are only four left for the entire machine team, of which at least two people are the senior mechanic and the 2nd mechanic.

There are two minders left. I highly doubt they can handle servicing whatever is fancy there.

True, Maersk claims that their navigators have double-acting diplomas, navigator / mechanic, which means they can perform work in the MCO.

Well, let's imagine that the chief mate was keeping watch on the bridge from 4 to 8 o'clock. After breakfast, he goes to do his immediate business on the deck - for example, checks the fastening of containers, which he is obliged to do every day. It will take him some time, at least until lunchtime. After dinner, he can go to turn the nuts in the engine room with renewed vigor. After that, he will just have time to go to the shower, and there will be another watch on the bridge from 16 to 20.

Something hard to believe.

Although one can guess, here are the footage from the video for Discovery Channel - Mighty Ships, which shows the flight of "Emma" from Singapore to Europe.

The crew gathered for lunch.

Eight people are sitting at one table, but at least two more did not get into the frame - you see, there are plates on the edge of the table, and one of them is full?


There are 11 people at the second table, with the cook and the steward remaining behind the scenes - they are shown in the film.

And someone else must be on watch on the bridge, because the action takes place in the ocean.

In total, we get at least 23 people - this is no longer the truth.


And in general, not everything was so rosy.

Troubles


The troubles began during the construction process.

The unfinished Emma was badly damaged by fire. Due to careless welding work, the entire superstructure burned out:




As a result of the fire and subsequent firefighting, all the equipment that they managed to install was destroyed.

After that, the superstructure was simply cut off and a new one was ordered, and the crumpled one was scrapped. The delay in leaving the factory was 6 weeks.

During her first year of service, Emma (like her subsequent three sisters) experienced problems with propeller shaft bearings.

It was apparently not so easy to transfer 109 thousand horses along a shaft 120 meters long, which, moreover, is subject to vibration and bending.

I personally saw her in Hong Kong, fully unloaded at the pier. The pilot let slip that, due to problems with bearings, it was temporarily removed from the line, and a team of factory specialists is now working there.

True, when a week later we went to Hong Kong again, she was gone, and on the second series of ships (a total of 8 ships were built) the problem had already been resolved.

And the biggest blow to "Emma", or rather to the concept of the giant ship from which she was born, was dealt by the world economy.

Namely: the economic crisis of 2008 and the sharp jump in fuel prices that followed.

In 2006, the year Emma was launched, the maximum price of IFO380 marine fuel was 360 dl per ton, and in July 2008 it was already 760 dollars! The jump is more than doubled.

According to the established rules, fuel is paid by the charterer of the vessel, not the owner, and many cannot afford it. Container ships, with their powerful propulsion systems designed for high speeds, were the first victims.

Shipowners were often forced to take ships out of service and put them in the so-called. lay-up for an indefinite period. Countries such as Indonesia, Singapore, Malaysia, the Philippines have even begun to develop an unusual type of business - to offer convenient anchorages for such ships. It was considered good luck to charter the ship simply at cost.

I myself worked on such a steamer in 2008, it earned $ 5000 per day and spent exactly the same amount. We were told to forget about supply bids. They only sent things without which it was impossible to go on the flight.

Since then, prices have fallen, but not much, and have not returned to their previous figures.

Fuel was already the biggest expense item, and now it has become completely unbearable for many.

And then shipowners and charterers jointly came up with the concept of slow steaming - the operation of ships at a reduced speed.

Thanks to the tricky dependence "speed is proportional to the power in the third degree", it becomes possible to reduce the power of the main by half, while the speed will drop only by 20%. The engines, however, do not feel very well in this load range, so the manufacturers - Sulzer, MAN and others - had to meet halfway and develop a number of measures.

I will not dwell on this in detail, this is a very broad topic ...

So "Emma" and her sisters had to moderate their appetites.

In the timetable, which is now available on the Maersk website, you can see that from the port of Jebel Ali (Emirates) to the port of Ningbo (China) "Emma" should reach in 15 days. At 5 miles, this gives us an average speed of 547 knots, which means these giants are now walking at about 15% of their maximum speed.

Thanks to the above relationship, it can be seen that Emma now uses 35% of her 108 thousand horsepower.

This is good for the environment and for saving, but the question arises - how, with such a low power, does its exhaust gas energy recovery plant work?

After all, the ship's owners advertised it as reducing fuel consumption and significantly (several times!) Reducing the emission of harmful gases into the atmosphere.

Fuel consumption has indeed dropped, but for a completely different reason.

These same gases have also declined, and it is possible that they are no longer sufficient to operate the WHS system that Maersk was so proud of. This means that money invested in additional equipment is not returned ... Well, okay, this is not our money.

And in February 2013, "Emma" underwent a new test.

Probably everyone remembers the clogging of the Suez Canal, and what kind of commotion it caused?

But for sure no one (well, almost no one) knows that in 2013, "Emma" nearly sank at the entrance to the Suez Canal from the Mediterranean Sea.

This could have caused a similar incident, with much worse consequences.

It's hard to believe what happened: the propeller blade of one of the thrusters came off, which made such a hole in the hull that water flowed in at a speed of 1,5 m3 / sec. The accident developed extremely quickly. The timeline can be seen from a picture taken from the Maersk campaign magazine:


At 21:33, an alarm was triggered about the flow of water into the engine room, at 22:40 the main engine stopped, and at 23:45 the ship was left without electricity.

By this time, "Emma" with the help of tugs almost got to the berth of the container terminal.

Digression. A bow thruster is, simply put, a sealed tube across the ship's hull that houses a variable pitch propeller driven by an electric motor. The propeller sucks water from one side of the vessel and pushes it out from the other side, creating a powerful lateral moment, which is very helpful when maneuvering, and changing the propeller pitch allows you to adjust the force and direction of the stop. There are four such devices on the Emma: two in the bow and two in the stern.

Already at the "Emma" pier they sat down safely, and the water level in the MCO was equal to the water level overboard. The result is 16 meters.

While "Emma" was at the pier, all the cargo was removed from her and the hole was temporarily welded, as a result, she surfaced. Then in tow, she went to Palermo.

Moreover, the water from the engine room has not yet been pumped out, otherwise, when combined with oxygen, all structures and mechanisms would quickly begin to rust. The pumping out of water and the simultaneous processing of the mechanisms took more than a month.

The Emma returned to service in mid-July, which should be considered a very good result.

As expected, Maersk Line used this extraordinary event to their advantage - like these are the heroic people we work with.

Of course, we must pay tribute to the crew and especially to the captain, who managed to remove the wounded ship from the caravan route and moor it when it was practically out of control.

However, questions arise.

The propeller shaft compartment, where the thrusters pass, must be separated from the engine room by a watertight bulkhead, and therefore it is not entirely clear how the water flooded not only this compartment, but also the engine room.

Was the hole really that big?

Or, at the time of the accident, the watertight door was not closed, and then this is a mistake of the crew?

Or a watertight bulkhead is even permeable, and then it is a mistake of designers and builders.

And who are the designers?

Fairplay Solution Magazine says the ship was designed by Maersk Line in partnership with Maersk Ship Design and Odense Steel Shipyard, all of which are divisions of AP Moller.

I have a report on this incident, but now we are talking about something completely different.

The arrival of the Emma worked like a pistol shot for shipowners and shipbuilders, and the ULCS container ships tumbled from the shipyards one by one.

The statistics classify container ships in this class with a capacity of more than 10 TEU, although there are no official criteria.

If you delve into the network, you can find that at the beginning of 2019 there were about 600 such ships. True, they do not look so elegant at all.

The design of "Emma" remained unique, and no one else in the world dared to repeat its design.

The centrally located superstructure and engine room did not inspire anyone else, and a typical representative of the new generation of container ships looks like this:


The length of this particular specimen, on which I also managed to work, is 366 meters, width - 52 meters and capacity - 13 800 TEU.

It still has a powerful engine and is rated for a top speed of 27 knots. However, like absolutely all container ships at this time, they operate at reduced power, saving fuel.

I think its owners had time to regret many times that they did not find their bearings in time and did not order a weaker engine. But what can you do ... It is not yet possible to look into the future.

The dimensions will allow him to take advantage of the new, expanded version of the Panama Canal, which was dug by the restless Panamanians.

But "Emma" cannot use the channel, but this does not bother its owners.

It is very likely that at least one consequence of the appearance of "Emma" had a devastating effect.

By the time it appeared, rumors had been circulating for several years that the well-known engine-building company MAN-B & W was close to producing a marine engine with a cylinder diameter of 108 cm.

It is quite possible that they were hoping to get the order from AP Moller, as the 12-cylinder version of their new engine would more than cover Emma's power needs.

However, it did not work out ...

Now shipowners are trying to surprise not with the power and speed of their new vessels, but with their efficiency and environmental friendliness. Large powers have become unpopular, and we will most likely never see such engines again.

The construction of the E-class series, as it was called (all sisterships had names beginning with E), turned out to be a swan song for the shipyard in Odense as well. It ceased to exist, repeating the fate of almost all European shipyards, which lost economic competition to the Koreans and Chinese.

And then the inevitable happened - "Emma" lost the title of the largest container ship in the world.

New most-most


Maersk, however, built new ships, which for some time allowed him to return the title of self-most.

Meet Maersk McKinney Moller on sea trials in June 2013.


He was followed by no less than 19 brothers of the same size. Their cost, perhaps, was also "very-very": almost 200 million American bills each.

The construction of the new giants was entrusted to the Korean company Daewoo. Its length is exactly 400 m, its width is 59 m, and its draft is 15,5 m.

This time Maersk decided not to fool the public with their clever system of calculating container capacity and announced in advance that it would be 18 TEU.

Interestingly, Maersk stubbornly continues to ignore the possibility of its new vessels passing the new Panama Canal.

Even the new, extended version of the canal, which is planned to be launched in 2014, has locks only 55 meters wide.

As you can see, this time Maersk decided not to be smart and chose the hull architecture that became the standard for ULCS: the superstructure is shifted to the bow, and the engine room is located in the stern.

However, the zest in the new project is still present.

Maersk called the new concept of their ships Tripple-E, which, according to their idea, should mean Economy of scale, Energy efficient and Environmentally improved.

In the spirit of this concept, a new design was developed.

Effiency of scale: the shape of the body is more like a box shape, as stated in the ad, and therefore more containers were crammed in there.

Energy efficient: The energy efficiency of the combustible fuel has received a lot of attention.

Since the design speed of the vessel was modest 22 knots (moderation and economy is the motto of the present days), the required power of the main engine for such a speed was somewhere in the region of 65-70 thousand kW. Motors of this size are well established in the industry and finding the right size is not difficult.

However, Maersk again went his own way, different from the others.

The power plant was chosen, consisting of two engines and two propellers! Each with a capacity of 43 not even kilowatts, but horsepower!

This time MAN-B & W was chosen as the main engine manufacturer, they just entered the market with a new model of the G-type engine. Engines of this type are incredibly slow at full power - only 68 rpm (for comparison, the engine "Emma" is spinning at 122 rpm). This significantly increases the efficiency of the propeller, and therefore saves fuel.

Such a power plant, according to Maersk Line, is still the best.

They are the most economical and slowest, and two large-diameter propellers, combined with low revs, will save an additional 4% of power, which means that less nasty exhaust gases will be emitted into the atmosphere.

The specific consumption of the G-type engines is 168 g-kW / h, in other words, about 250 tons of fuel will burn at full speed per day - much less than that of Emma.

Overall, Maersk estimates that the new container ships will emit 20% less CO50 than Emma and XNUMX% less than conventional container ships currently operating on the Asia-Europe line.

The cost of transporting one container, even compared to the newly built ULCS, will be 35% less.

However, as far as ecology is concerned, any possible tricks to reduce harmful emissions for a long time, if not forever, were surpassed by the French CMA CGM, having built the CMA CGM Jacques Saadé container ship with a capacity of 23 TEU. Its main engine, type 000X12DF, manufactured by the Swiss company WinGD, runs on liquefied gas.

Gas is stored in tanks at a temperature of -163 ° C, and a full refuel lasts for 23 miles. It is planned to build 000 such vessels.

Well, the largest container ship, at the moment, is Ever Ace, built for the Taiwanese company Evergreen, it can take on board 23 standard containers. A series of 992 such vessels is being built at factories in China and Korea.

I think it will not be long, and very soon someone will surpass this size.

These are the passions in the shipping business, and it is a pity that we are strangers at this holiday.

If we ask the question of the Global merchant fleet to Yandex, Google and others, we get the following picture:


We are not even close here.

No Zvezda factories will help catch up with Korea, let alone China.

Of course, one is asking to compare the present times with the times of the USSR and cry about the fact that now everything is bad with us not only with the military fleet, but also with the merchant ...

But I don’t want to. Moreover, the USSR also received almost the entire merchant fleet from friends in the camp, so in this sense, nothing particularly had to be broken. So we will live with what we have.
Author:
100 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, daily additional materials that do not get on the site: https://t.me/topwar_ru

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. AlexVas44
    AlexVas44 12 January 2022 11: 30
    +19
    Very interesting about these designs. Thanks to the author. I would also like to receive information about the need to have similar ones in the Russian Federation. What and where to carry. Well, and then lament, or rejoice that the Russian Federation does not build similar ones.
    1. antiaircrafter
      antiaircrafter 12 January 2022 12: 01
      +14
      Quote: AlexVas44
      What and where to carry.

      Even if you do not carry your own and not yourself, you can provide transportation services and make money on it.
      1. carpenter
        carpenter 12 January 2022 13: 17
        +5
        Quote: antiaircrafter
        Even if you do not carry your own and not yourself, you can provide transportation services and make money on it.

        So now they carry "not their own and not to themselves", now there is nothing "in common and mine", everything belongs to some kind of capitalist, Russian, Chinese or European.
        1. Civil
          Civil 12 January 2022 15: 36
          +14
          An incredibly interesting article! The author is waiting for the continuation. good
        2. Sergej1972
          Sergej1972 13 January 2022 10: 17
          +1
          In fact, there are very few large companies now that are owned by one person or controlled by one person. Large property is often joint-stock, semi-anonymous. Shareholders of one legal entity are often other legal entities.
    2. Doccor18
      Doccor18 12 January 2022 13: 07
      +10
      Quote: AlexVas44
      I would also like to receive information about the need to have similar ones in the Russian Federation. What and where to carry.

      To carry something somewhere, you need to produce something at home, and someone should really want to buy it. While with this sadness, therefore, Emma is not needed ...
      1. bayard
        bayard 13 January 2022 05: 00
        +5
        Quote: Doccor18
        To carry something somewhere, you need to produce something at home, and someone should really want to buy it. While with this sadness, therefore, Emma is not needed ...

        If the NSR develops, and the depths will allow such colossus to be driven along it, then the need for something similar will appear with us, but in a reinforced ice class. And cargo for transportation will be found in China, Japan, South Korea, etc. SEA.
        Moreover, it will be possible (after a while) to order such ships at the "Star" of Bolshoi Kamen.
        And it seems that this is where it all goes.
        But first - tankers, gas carriers, dry cargo ships.
        1. Doccor18
          Doccor18 13 January 2022 08: 06
          +4
          Good morning hi
          The NSR is very important, but rather important for Russia. Its commercial component just rests on the "ice class". The route is twice as short, but ice-class ships are more expensive to build. In the near future, the star is ready to build such ships, but questions of cost and timing arise. Bolshoi Kamen is far from a resort, not Nikolaev or Kerch ... It is significant that there is not a single large metallurgical complex nearby. Everything will have to be transported from afar or ... to collect "Lego" from large sections of R. Korea. But how profitable is all this from a commercial point of view? That's the question.
          The NSR has no alternative for Russia, it is an axiom. But it is still very difficult to talk about the commercial success of this route.
          1. bayard
            bayard 13 January 2022 08: 28
            +4
            Quote: Doccor18
            It is significant that there is not a single large metallurgical complex nearby.

            Haven't you heard that a project is already being prepared and a place has been chosen for such a metallurgical complex. Moreover, its performance will be 4-5 times higher than the planned requests of Zvezda. And he will be quite close by - across the creek. From there, yes, metal will go on barges.
            Eo everything Rosneft is trying - building a production cluster with an eye on the full cycle. In the meantime, yes, Lego is in half with the Koreans ... Yes, and the SAS CVD has not yet been completed.
            And in general, while the shareholders of this CVD, Rosneft and NOVATEK, are building for themselves there. So the high cost is still internal corporate expenses ... in exchange for gaining competencies.
            Quote: Doccor18
            The NSR has no alternative for Russia, it is an axiom. But it is still very difficult to talk about the commercial success of this route.

            When the infrastructure of the NSR is ready, and the icebreakers are built, then there will be a commercial return. And in the case of the construction of ice-class ships (yes, more expensive) for commercial transportation, then even without icebreakers they will go without any problems.
            But I after all wrote about the future . About perspective.
            And it’s not a fact that such bulks will be able to walk there - with such a draft. In many places it is quite shallow.
    3. g1v2
      g1v2 12 January 2022 16: 42
      +6
      Well, we don't need so many and such huge ones - we simply do not have such sea trade, but we still buy container ships from South Korea. How did we buy gas carriers or large tankers? The USSR, like the USA, at one time gave all the powerful civil shipbuilding to the allies in blocks and therefore neither we nor they built a lot. Now we have, in fact, the first fully modern shipyard, capable of building ships of any size and comparable to the shipyards of China, Japan and South Korea. True, it is being built in stages and will be fully completed by 27-28, but this is the only such shipyard in our country. It is clear that now it is loaded with gas carriers, tankers and supply ships, but it can also build container ships. In a few years, we can start building them.
      But in general, sea trade and sea trade routes have always brought huge profits to countries. Tch here it is necessary to climb and develop and maritime trade and shipbuilding.
  2. A. Privalov
    A. Privalov 12 January 2022 11: 31
    +15
    A very informative article. Thanks to the author for the work done.
    By the way, Maersk walked along the NSR in 2018. Something has not been heard about the projects of special arctic container ships. True, with the width of the project 22220 icebreakers of the "Arktika" type of 34 meters, it is impossible to accelerate especially with modern container ships.
    Has the case stalled, or have I missed something, somewhere?
    1. carpenter
      carpenter 12 January 2022 13: 21
      +7
      Quote: A. Privalov
      True, with the width of the project 22220 icebreakers of the "Arctic" type of 34 meters, especially with modern container ships it is impossible to accelerate.

      The SMP and container ships are not very compatible, such hulls are broken like plywood, and the CPP screws or bronze screws, not at all times you can slip through the SMP. Although I am a small connoisseur of the seas, I had to work in the north as the head of the RTS and a radio navigator.
      1. skipper83
        skipper83 13 January 2022 04: 33
        +3
        The CPP is just the norms for ice, if you hit the edge, you can put the load at a minimum. The propeller will thresh all the time, and in ice it is important that the propeller does not stop.
        1. carpenter
          carpenter 13 January 2022 11: 40
          +1
          Quote: shkiper83
          The CPP is just the norms for ice, if you hit the edge, you can put the load at a minimum. The propeller will thresh all the time, and in ice it is important that the propeller does not stop.

          And the VRSh propeller is made of bronze, and when you back up, you will break the blades. When we were "dragging" the caravan, the master shouted all the time "don't work backwards, you'll ruin the propeller!"
          1. skipper83
            skipper83 13 January 2022 14: 33
            +1
            It may be steel, it is not connected specifically with the CPP.
            1. carpenter
              carpenter 13 January 2022 15: 24
              +1
              Quote: shkiper83
              It may be steel, it is not connected specifically with the CPP.

              When working in the north, fixed-pitch screws are "changed" to a steel one (a spare screw is always made of steel).
              1. skipper83
                skipper83 13 January 2022 15: 58
                +1
                On the Afromax series, Pavel Chernysh VRS was originally made of steel. It was built for a reinforced ice class.
                1. carpenter
                  carpenter 13 January 2022 16: 50
                  +1
                  Quote: shkiper83
                  It was built for a reinforced ice class.

                  Well, you yourself answered.
          2. Motorist
            Motorist 14 January 2022 20: 27
            +2
            Quote: carpenter
            "don't work backwards, you'll ruin the propeller!"

            For a VFS, working backwards is dangerous due to the bending of the blades due to the profile - the "backward" edge is much thinner and will stick into the ice. I myself somehow participated in this disgrace - here is my screw ... recourse Ice class up to 0,8 m.



            The CPP, on the other hand, always spins in one direction, and the risk of damage to the blades is small when working backwards. Here is another screw of mine for clarity.



            In any case, you should not ride in reverse on the "virgin lands". hi
            1. carpenter
              carpenter 15 January 2022 11: 10
              +1
              Quote: Motorist
              In any case, you should not ride in reverse on the "virgin lands".

              It's right. But work in the north is always the most difficult, and everything is unpredictable there. The biggest danger for ships with high-speed engines.
              1. Motorist
                Motorist 15 January 2022 16: 01
                +1
                Quote: carpenter
                The biggest danger for ships with high-speed engines.

                Because they are with VRSh, this screw has a more complex design, and damage threatens to lose speed. If you damage the VFS (as in my top photo), then the consequences will be visible only on clean water, the loss of speed is excluded. But the probability of damage to the VRSh is still lower.
    2. Pane Kohanku
      Pane Kohanku 12 January 2022 15: 05
      +1
      A very informative article. Thanks to the author for the work done.

      I will join with kind words to the author of the article, Igor. Keep it up!
      Alexander, and a wish for you - to please us more often too!
  3. mark1
    mark1 12 January 2022 11: 31
    +13
    Moreover, the USSR also received almost the entire merchant fleet from friends in the camp,

    Well, this is not true, let's remember "Butoma", "Horiton Greku", "Crimea", "Alexei Kosygin", "Captain Smirnov" (these are all episodes!). I will not enter the discussion, who wants to ask yourself.
    As for the diesel engine, as I understand it, it is slow-moving, the specific parameters (kg / hp) should be like that of a steam engine (i.e. very, very heavy). We (in the USSR - not for me if that ...) on the "Captain Smirnov" (the same 25 nodes) used a gas turbine.
    But the review is interesting, I never thought that a low-speed diesel is profitable at such a speed (25-27 knots)
    1. Coward
      Coward 12 January 2022 13: 26
      +4
      You probably mean low speed? Diesel engines are divided into low-speed, medium-speed and high-hull, and these are low-speed and high-speed vessels.
      1. mark1
        mark1 12 January 2022 13: 44
        +1
        "You probably meant low speed"
        Yes, of course - these are slow-speed turbines ... Inventory ... damn it ...)))
    2. Motorist
      Motorist 12 January 2022 23: 23
      +1
      Quote: mark1
      As for the diesel engine, as I understand it, it is slow-moving, the specific parameters (kg / hp) should be like that of a steam engine (i.e. very, very heavy).

      I don't know for sure, but a small low-speed one (size 46) - about 23 kg / kW. The steam engine must have many times more due to the low parameters of the process.

      Quote: mark1
      I never thought that a low-speed diesel is profitable at such a speed (25-27 knots)

      The speed depends on the pitch of the propeller and the CV (minus the slip, of course). The screw does not care what turns it there. A low-speed two-stroke machine is beneficial wherever there is a place to put it.
  4. Mavrikiy
    Mavrikiy 12 January 2022 11: 32
    +1
    These are the passions in the shipping business, and it is a pity that we are strangers at this holiday.
    belay Are you delusional? Container ships are vitally important for traders and islanders who live on imported products in million tons, China, USA, Korea, Taiwan, Naglia, who have a transport business, Holland, for example. And we just needed an ice class for the NSR and we are just starting with a clean slate. Everything is ahead, beautiful marquise! wink
    1. Kisa
      Kisa 12 January 2022 15: 00
      +2
      demand from supply. Americans are now completely shopping online on Amazon ebee-demand for containers. we have it in Chinese Ali. but right to export raw materials by tankers and sevmor route priority ...
      cool article ... sleeve 96 cm - we both went up and down in it on the piston and measured it)). that he started as a cadet 160 gkWh what is now what is now in 30 years
      1. Motorist
        Motorist 12 January 2022 21: 45
        +5
        Quote: kitty
        that he started as a cadet 160 gkWh what is now what is now in 30 years

        Kisa, hi ... No, there is 160 g / kWh, not even 168 ... I measured it myself on the undercarriage (described in the MAN G-type article). They muddle with the calibration of hydraulic brakes on bench tests. Catch by the hand! ..
  5. NDR-791
    NDR-791 12 January 2022 11: 34
    +13
    Very interesting, informative so. Nowhere about sea laborers have they talked like that, and even with personal experience.
    Here is a five-story diesel that really "killed" me. Why can we "Moscow-City", but such (and even less) apparatus we can not?
    And also:
    After that, the superstructure was simply cut off and a new one was ordered, and the crumpled one was scrapped. The delay in leaving the factory was 6 weeks.

    And how much will we move after the recently burnt out superstructure?
    1. Elturisto
      Elturisto 12 January 2022 14: 20
      +12
      They could well have been in the USSR
  6. Rurikovich
    Rurikovich 12 January 2022 11: 38
    +5
    Super good I read it in one go!
  7. Galleon
    Galleon 12 January 2022 11: 39
    +9
    Thanks for the interesting article. But what about the new EVERGREEN mastodon container ship - EVER ACE with a capacity of 24000 TEU? It is quite fresh - last July.
    1. Elturisto
      Elturisto 12 January 2022 14: 20
      +3
      horseradish ...
  8. Daniil Konovalenko
    Daniil Konovalenko 12 January 2022 11: 48
    +3
    Moreover, the USSR also received almost the entire merchant fleet from friends in the camp, so in this sense, nothing particularly had to be broken. So we will live with what we have.
    Such is the "selyavi", as they say.
  9. Fitter65
    Fitter65 12 January 2022 11: 58
    +6
    Even the new, expanded version of the channel, which is planned to be launched in 2014, has
    So we already have 2022 ...
    1. carpenter
      carpenter 12 January 2022 13: 36
      +2
      Quote: Fitter65
      Even the new, expanded version of the channel, which is planned to be launched in 2014, has
      So we already have 2022 ...

      Well, yes, the second channel was opened on August 6, 2015.
  10. antiaircrafter
    antiaircrafter 12 January 2022 11: 59
    +2
    It's time to quit with nuclear icebreakers and start building nuclear container ships.
    Let's go and handle it.
    1. Coward
      Coward 12 January 2022 13: 49
      +13
      There are very few ports in which ships with a nuclear power plant are allowed to enter.
      1. antiaircrafter
        antiaircrafter 12 January 2022 19: 05
        +1
        This is also worth working on.
        1. faiver
          faiver 12 January 2022 21: 41
          +1
          in the sense of and on nuclear container ships we will put calibers with artillery? laughing
          1. antiaircrafter
            antiaircrafter 12 January 2022 22: 17
            +2
            And the Poseidons to cling to the bottom.
  11. tralflot1832
    tralflot1832 12 January 2022 12: 04
    +13
    A very informative article. The tyrnet is full of videos of how they work on the bending of the hull of such steamers. It resembles a railway train on the tracks. What kind of steel that can withstand so many bending cycles. Once I felt like our fisherman in Tikhiy, in a typhoon, went to a break (length then only 120 meters) an extremely unpleasant feeling, I will remember for a lifetime. Thank you for the review, now they really write that container companies have wild profits due to disruption of logistics due to covid, container rental exceeded $ 10. We have only two niches left, river sea (we build excellent ships, every year the English register gives a star to some kind of project) and the NSR, to which the government finally turned its face, with the product carriers the issue has been resolved, Now we need to deal with ships that carry other cargo.
    1. carpenter
      carpenter 12 January 2022 13: 52
      +8
      Quote: tralflot1832
      Now we need to deal with ships that carry other cargo.

      During the Soviet era, it was necessary to build large shipyards.
      Today, three Asian countries - the Republic of Korea, China and Japan - are the leaders of the world shipbuilding industry. And they started in 1972.
      Korea is currently the most competitive shipbuilding country in the world, followed by Japan and China. The Republic of Korea is seven years ahead of its closest competitors in the construction of tankers for transporting natural gas and almost eight and a half years in the construction of offshore platforms. In 1993, Korea came out on top in terms of the number of orders for the construction of ships, and in 1999 it finally became the leader of the world market.
      Two dry docks and high production capacities made it possible to build ships with a displacement of up to 700 thousand tons. Who can do that?
      1. tralflot1832
        tralflot1832 12 January 2022 13: 56
        +1
        Sometimes the military dictatorship bears fruit, as with Y.K. I remember this Chon Doo Hwan.
        1. carpenter
          carpenter 12 January 2022 14: 14
          +7
          Quote: tralflot1832
          As far as I remember, Yu.K was simply driven into development by the military, by the most severe military discipline.

          Koreans discipline even the Chinese in the belt. Shipbuilding is a private business, not a military one on a state basis: here again, Hyundai holds the leading position.
          In 2013, new vessels left the docks of Hyundai Heavy Industries almost every day. At that time, almost half of all ships in the world were built in Korea, 20% of them at the docks of Hyundai Heavy Industries. At the same time, the company occupied almost 45% of the world market of marine engines (this is how the Koreans mastered it at the moment: and this is a breakthrough in shipbuilding). In 1983, she became a leader in this field and still holds the palm.
          1. tralflot1832
            tralflot1832 12 January 2022 14: 21
            +6
            Those who received it were repaired in Yu.K., China and Japan note their strictest discipline in both work and adherence to technological processes, and not how it will work out for us, although once encountered this at the Norwegian shipyard.
        2. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA 13 January 2022 10: 52
          +3
          Quote: tralflot1832
          Sometimes the military dictatorship bears fruit, as with Y.K. I remember this Chon Doo Hwan.

          In the South Caucasus, everything began even earlier - during the presidency of Army General Park Chung-hee, one of the creators of the "South Korean" version of Juche - Jucheson.
      2. skipper83
        skipper83 13 January 2022 04: 45
        0
        Isn't China the leader? I have never seen so many ships under construction in China. It remains only to improve the quality.
    2. Motorist
      Motorist 13 January 2022 00: 04
      +2
      Quote: tralflot1832
      What a steel that can withstand so many bending cycles.

      Did you see how Arvin's Volgobalt broke a year ago? A terrible sight ... 40 years, it seems - both wear and tear and fatigue.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tBVIopxDiy4
  12. Elturisto
    Elturisto 12 January 2022 12: 06
    +12
    Thanks to the author for an interesting material.
    Once again I was convinced that mankind has gone crazy, - I have to invent - to plant on the propeller shaft "to increase the power" a pair of electric motors rotated by gas and steam turbines powered by exhaust and a utilization boiler on the same exhaust. The efficiency of these turbines is negligible since the temperature of the gases is insufficient, to obtain a coolant of a sufficient temperature, and an increase in resistance in gas ducts will bring additional losses. As a result, we have an increase in specific fuel consumption, complication and rise in the cost of the control system. as part of an organized group and causing severe bodily harm.
    True, Maersk then changed her mind and installed 2 conventional diesel engines.
    By the way, the production of marine low-speed diesel engines, licensed by the Danish Burmeister og Vine (B&W), existed in Bryansk (BMZ) and was destroyed when it got up from its knees. GE. Is it any wonder that the production of the 33D2006 diesel was discontinued in 10?
    1. bnm.99
      bnm.99 12 January 2022 13: 25
      -2
      10D100 like the entire D100 series is a wretched Kharkiv hack, such as revenge of the ugly Ukrainians to the damned Muscovites. Kolomenskie will be much better
      1. Elturisto
        Elturisto 12 January 2022 14: 23
        +2
        So let's go without this patriotism ...
        1. bnm.99
          bnm.99 12 January 2022 15: 30
          +2
          What kind of patriotism? Diesels D49 surpass D100 in all respects and do not depend on Western sanctions and the wishes of your Ukrainian friends. The Dutch registration of Transmashholding does not prevent the use of diesel engines 10D49 on frigates 22350, corvettes 20380 and others and others. And they also make diesels for "Varshavyanka", yes, what a sadness, and that's not counting diesels for diesel locomotives. What a sadness for a Ukrainian patriot !!!
          1. Elturisto
            Elturisto 12 January 2022 16: 39
            -2
            Everything is clear, - a patient from the city of Olgino, from st. Prigogine, until we meet again ...
  13. Proton
    Proton 12 January 2022 12: 29
    +2
    Thanks a lot to the author!
    Interesting article.
    I just didn't understand a little - why in the article 2014 is in the future tense. Was the article written long ago?
    This paragraph
    "Even the new, extended version of the canal, which is scheduled to launch in 2014, has locks only 55 meters wide."
  14. Bekasov Artem Andreevich
    Bekasov Artem Andreevich 12 January 2022 13: 24
    +19
    Igor, thanks for the article, as a whole it has learned quite descriptively. On my own I will add some additional information and criticism.
    Is it necessary to catch up with South Korea and China? And Japan at the same time. They have invested gigantic finances in this industry and, against the background of the growth of international trade, have become among the leaders. For three, they hold more than 2/3 of the world's civil shipbuilding and maritime transport, where even Europe and the United States have not been nearby for the last 30 years. Among the 30 largest ports in the world, the overwhelming majority is in Southeast Asia. The Europeans could not withstand the competition with the Asians and went into separate niches (special ships, sea ferries and cruise liners), while practically all other large maritime countries (USA, Great Britain, France, Germany, Italy) left their military shipbuilding afloat. Container shipping companies for 2020 are presented below:

    We are not among the 50 largest container companies! There are several reasons and they are very different:
    1) We are located far from the main sea trade routes for the transportation of containers, alas, the geography is as follows
    [/ Center]
    2) Our ports are shallow and most of them are not designed to receive large ships, including container ships. It is easier for us to get to many places by rail than by sea. And from us you will have to carry through the narrows - the Danish and Turkish straits, which increases the delivery time and risks.
    3) Our port infrastructure does not meet the requirements of working with large vessels, including container ships (there are practically no or few berths with a length of more than 300 meters and a depth of more than 16 m. world standards., there are no or too small container terminals-platforms for working with large cargo flows, there is no high-speed interface with Russian Railways and other modes of transport).
    2) And most importantly, we do not have an adequate strategy and work plan for working with large international container carriers (we just gave them our port facilities at their disposal), just as there is no plan for the development of our own merchant marine fleet - we transport less than 4 % of cargo !!! And the construction of ships in Russia is carried out by a Department of several dozen people in the Ministry of Industry and Trade, against the background of the powerful Ministry of the Shipbuilding Industry and the Ministry of Maritime Transport in the USSR. In the entire history of the USSR, we have never built sea container ships of large displacement, specializing in other types of ships (tankers, bulk carriers, oil carriers, etc.).
    By the way, like ours, in the United States, since the end of the Second World War, there has never been a developed civil shipbuilding, and in the absence of post-war demand for transport ships of the "Liberty" type, American shipyards supplied under Lend-Lease quickly closed (in the United States from 1945 to 1965, the number of sea ​​transport ships fell by half, and then completely disappeared and now the largest American sea carriers are not included in the number of large international ones). In our country, on the contrary, the massive construction of sea-going ships began in the 60-80s, after the construction of Ukrainian shipyards (in the USSR, during the same period, the number of sea transport ships increased threefold). And in the best years, we provided ourselves with a merchant fleet by 50%, buying the rest abroad (mainly in socialist countries), while our civil ships of the best projects of the USSR times were in demand abroad - we made sea transport vessels to order! In the 80s, our fleet provided 90% of its own sea cargo transportation, worked part-time on international cargo lines, earning the necessary currency for the USSR and was among the 7-10 largest merchant fleets in the world (17 shipping companies). I suspect that this is precisely what the United States was afraid of and since then has been trying with all its might to tear Ukraine, Georgia and the Baltic states away from us.
    Our geography and climate do not allow us to be competitive in the global shipbuilding and container shipping. But, this does not mean that you need to let everything go by itself. We need our own large sea merchant fleet, we must transport our goods ourselves and build sea merchant ships for ourselves. And turn our little obsolete military shipbuilding into a powerful modern and versatile, capable of producing any type of civil and military ships and ships. Even in cooperation with other countries.
    1. soul
      soul 12 January 2022 19: 12
      +8
      Artem, your comment is no less informative than Igor's article good
    2. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 13 January 2022 11: 09
      +5
      Quote: Bekasov Artem Andreevich
      By the way, like ours, the United States has never had a developed civil shipbuilding industry since the end of the Second World War, and in the absence of post-war demand for Liberty-type transport ships, American shipyards supplied under Lend-Lease quickly closed (in the United States from 1945 to 1965, the number sea ​​transport vessels fell by half, and then completely disappeared, and now the largest American sea carriers are not among the major international ones) .

      So in the United States, even before the war, civilian shipbuilding did not develop much. Market decided © - American-built ships were too expensive.
      As a result, the country's leadership had to act by purely non-market methods: the Merchant Marine Act of 1936 was adopted, according to which the state subsidized the construction and operation of American-built ships, provided that their crews were 90% US citizens, they worked only under the US flag and the possibility of mobilizing the vessel in event of a war. Also under this Act, the United States Maritime Commission was created, whose task was to develop a program to "get up from your knees" of the American merchant fleet. As part of this program, a project was developed for a typical merchant ship of a new generation, which was to be built at public expense and then leased to private companies (free market, yes ... smile ). Plans for the pre-war period were ambitious - 900 ships in 10 years.
      It was the preparation of the industry for the implementation of this program that allowed the US ship industry to quickly move on to the mass construction of "ships of freedom" - the Liberty and Victory.
    3. kig
      16 January 2022 07: 36
      +1
      Quote: Bekasov Artem Andreevich
      Is it necessary to catch up with South Korea and China?
      - of course, it is not necessary to catch up, but it is necessary to have normal shipbuilding, as an industry. Korea and China, and earlier Japan, apparently set themselves the task of building merchant ships at their factories both for themselves and for everyone. We apparently do not have such a goal.
  15. The leader of the Redskins
    The leader of the Redskins 12 January 2022 14: 16
    +12
    Great article! I haven’t read it for a long time! If I watched the Discovery Channel!
    Thank you author!
  16. Alien From
    Alien From 12 January 2022 14: 37
    +3
    Informative and interesting! Thanks to the author for the article hi
  17. 203-K
    203-K 12 January 2022 16: 45
    +2
    The article is very interesting and informative, many will read it with interest. There is a question for the author - how the holds are used on such ships. Are they also loaded with containers, or are they only placed on the upper deck?
    1. Stas
      Stas 13 January 2022 00: 31
      +4
      Can I share my personal experience too? If you don't mind. Containers are placed both in the hold and on the deck. Thanks to the presence of electric fans and refrigerated sockets, even a refrigerated container can be safely loaded into the hold. The hold or part of the hold is unloaded after the end of unloading from the deck and after removing the cover of the hold. I will not upload photos, if you are interested, you will find them on the Internet.
  18. 911sx
    911sx 12 January 2022 20: 19
    +1
    Thank you, informative. I have a question. All containers on the upper deck are located or there is still some in the hold. In theory, there should be a lot of them in the hold, but here's how to unload?
    1. seacap
      seacap 13 January 2022 13: 22
      +4
      and in the hold, too, it's like an iceberg, otherwise there would be no talk of stability, no ballast would help.
  19. Bekasov Artem Andreevich
    Bekasov Artem Andreevich 12 January 2022 21: 27
    +4
    Quote: alma
    your comment is no less informative than Igor's article

    Thanks Alexey!
    This topic has long been demanding disclosure, and we are writing more and more about aircraft carriers)))
    Read my articles about the Zvezda factories in the Far East and about the reasons for the collapse of the Ukrainian shipbuilding and the Soviet merchant fleet, there are also many interesting things.
    Soon there will be new ones about the Kerch "Zaliv" and proposals for the construction of a dry dock in St. Petersburg.
  20. Motorist
    Motorist 12 January 2022 21: 56
    +2
    Good afternoon kig. Interesting article, thanks. Below is a screenshot - this is very much like an intermediate bearing (excuse me). Please check back. hi

    1. seacap
      seacap 13 January 2022 13: 19
      +2
      this is he, the oil outlets are visible, and the wires are only from thermocouples and dd
    2. kig
      16 January 2022 04: 25
      +2
      Quote: Motorist
      intermediate bearing

      it's really a bearing, and the ED is in the far dark corner. By "closer" I meant that the photo is slightly larger than the previous one.
      1. Motorist
        Motorist 16 January 2022 15: 34
        0
        Quote: kig
        ED in a far dark corner

        Thanks, it's clear now. I tried to find a photo or a drawing of this electric motor on the Internet, but it doesn’t work out of the blue - you have to look for special literature. hi
        1. kig
          17 January 2022 02: 59
          +1
          Quote: Motorist
          Tried to find

          unlikely to find. All that is known: Siemens, 9000 kW 6300V. Judging by the fact that the rotor had to be built into the shaft line, this is not a serial product.
  21. Ilya22558
    Ilya22558 13 January 2022 11: 34
    +2
    I read it with great pleasure! Author, thank you!
  22. seacap
    seacap 13 January 2022 13: 18
    +2
    Shipbuilding itself, and so on. full cycle, a huge driver of almost the entire industry of mechanical engineering, metallurgy, microelectronics, etc., the entire complex of fundamental and industrial science. Even releasing competitive components, navigation and other equipment, it gives huge profits, every sailor knows them and can list on his fingers the companies and countries capable of designing and manufacturing ship engines, automated control systems, crane and rigging equipment, safets, etc., but ours are not there ...
    It would be nice for the author to touch upon the topic of the virtuoso and total "ripping off" of seamen during certification, obtaining certificates, retraining, etc., when a seaman is viewed as a source of income for an innumerable number of officials and port services, he has to constantly pay for every piece of paper and signature, working on "galleys "for the sake of papers, and every 5 years is a significant waste, and crewing, especially in the south and the Far East, is a separate story. Yes, and only our wild airlines do not care about international laws and "sea" air tickets.
    1. Motorist
      Motorist 13 January 2022 23: 03
      +1
      Quote: seacap
      It would be nice for the author to touch upon the topic of the virtuosic and total "ripping off" of sailors during certification, obtaining certificates, retraining, etc., when a sailor is considered as a source of income for an innumerable number of officials and port services

      Do not terrify the members of the forum if you are not talking about Ukraine (there it costs 6-7 thousand euros to renew a captain's diploma). Last year, when renewing for everything - about everything, I kept within 45 thousand rubles. hi
    2. kig
      16 January 2022 04: 16
      +2
      Quote: seacap
      It would be nice for the author to also touch on the topic of virtuoso and total "rip off" of sailors

      alas, I do not know this topic. I paid extra for the renewal of documents only once, somewhere in the 90s, when this case was a complete mess. And then everything happened officially. There were (and still are) bypass roads, for those who are in a hurry or do not want to go to courses, but no one extorted anything.
      1. seacap
        seacap 16 January 2022 12: 00
        0
        Not at all bypass, very official, everything through the cash desk, there are very few crewing companies that take on at least part of the costs.
  23. Zaurbek
    Zaurbek 13 January 2022 16: 10
    0
    Further from the "most-most" - the most powerful (so far) in the world main engine SULZER 14RT-96C-flex, made in Korea at the Doosan plant under license from Sulzer.

    Here, with such dimensions, you can put a turbine from a power plant ... and an electric motor
    1. kig
      16 January 2022 07: 19
      +1
      Quote: Zaurbek
      You can also supply a turbine from a power plant.

      turbines have not been installed on merchant ships for a long time - they are uneconomical compared to diesel engines. The last ones who used them were gas carriers, since in the boilers it was possible to burn the gas evaporating during transportation without any problems. Now this niche has disappeared - high-power dual-fuel diesel engines have appeared.
      1. 203-K
        203-K 16 January 2022 14: 24
        0
        The last ones who used them were gas carriers, since in the boilers it was possible to burn the gas evaporating during transportation without any problems. Now this niche has disappeared - high-power dual-fuel diesel engines have appeared ..
        Tell us in more detail what this situation is connected with, because it was behind the gas turbine that they saw the future of large-capacity ships. Has the concept changed?
        1. kig
          16 January 2022 15: 26
          +1
          Quote: 203-K
          it was behind the gas turbine that they saw the future of large-capacity ships
          - it's all about the money. A merchant ship must be profitable, and P = M - R. Increase D, decrease P, and you get a larger P. One of the costs, and a very big one, is fuel. Modern 2-stroke low-speed diesel engines have proven to be the most economical. The gas turbine in comparison with it has only one advantage - significantly smaller dimensions and weight with the same power as a diesel engine. Assurances that, due to smaller dimensions, more cargo can be taken, did not work. It still gets more expensive. But it is used with pleasure by the Navy, where they are in their place.
          1. Zaurbek
            Zaurbek 17 January 2022 09: 40
            0
            But what about power plants? Why are turbines more economical there?
            1. kig
              17 January 2022 11: 00
              0
              Quote: Zaurbek
              Why are turbines more economical?

              I can't say for sure, but I think it's because:
              - tradition and to some extent inertia. Thermal power plants were created, one might say, in ancient times, they have grown to a capacity of 1 million kW - and now try to replace them painlessly.
              - CHP is not only electrical energy, but also thermal. Everything complements each other
              - economical ... why do you think the prices per kWh and ggcal are constantly growing?
              1. Zaurbek
                Zaurbek 17 January 2022 11: 08
                0
                Most likely, like in airplanes .... the power of the internal combustion engine is finite, but there is no weight ...... and for turbines at high powers, there is an increase in power and a small increase in mass.
            2. Motorist
              Motorist 18 January 2022 22: 51
              0
              Quote: Zaurbek
              But what about power plants? Why are turbines more economical there?

              Turbines are not more economical, it's just harder to shove coal into a diesel engine than into a boiler. Moreover, it is also ТEC, and heat from a diesel engine - like from a goat's milk.
  24. Borz
    Borz 14 January 2022 03: 21
    +1
    Met Emma at the entrance to the Gulf of Aden in 2011. I was very impressed with the size. Despite the fact that we, too, were not on the "kid"
    1. seacap
      seacap 16 January 2022 12: 15
      +2
      Well, yes, he passed us on the roadstead, his nose appeared in the lume for breakfast, feed for lunch.
    2. kig
      17 January 2022 03: 17
      +1
      Quote: Borz
      Met Emma at the entrance to the Gulf of Aden, in 2011

      And here she is in the Channel, in the Bitter Lake
      1. Borz
        Borz 17 January 2022 07: 26
        0
        Yes, she is the best. That was a long time ago...
  25. kytx
    kytx 14 January 2022 07: 54
    0
    "normal round-the-clock watch "4 through 8". "

    It's not normal, it's a Swedish watch!
    hi
    More precisely 8-4-4-8
    1. seacap
      seacap 16 January 2022 12: 06
      0
      The "car" and "deck" are usually on the "working day" with or without overtime, only in antiquity, the car is on watch. Navigators on many ships 4+ through 8
      1. kytx
        kytx 16 January 2022 14: 22
        0
        I'm not good at transportation. I know how the fishermen. Either 12-12, or the Swedish watch, sometimes it's 16-8 but it's tough. I stood somehow 18-6.
        1. seacap
          seacap 16 January 2022 15: 05
          0
          I also have some experience with fishermen, and I started with them. Depending on which, again, the workshop and production are clear 8x8, on the "large" bridge and the car, the "normal" watch 4x8 + sub-watch 4 if necessary, + in case of repair or for the necessary provision of production, navigation safety - machine, special. this management is an irregular working day (no one canceled the watch either).
    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. kig
      17 January 2022 08: 13
      0
      Quote: kytx
      this is swedish watch

      Well I do not know. I didn’t work under the Swedish flag, but in the rest, where I had to, that’s exactly how it was.
      1. kytx
        kytx 17 January 2022 08: 19
        0
        Swedish watch is just a name. Not necessarily the Swedes.
  26. restless
    restless 14 January 2022 08: 11
    +2
    The largest merchant fleet was in the USSR, but then since 1991 crooks came to power and after privatization all the ships were cut and it was the biggest sabotage and no one answered for it, this continues to this day, but now they have reached fellow citizens who are being deceived and thrown in all spheres of life ...
  27. Grossvater
    Grossvater 14 January 2022 11: 18
    +1
    For ship machinery, I strongly recommend: Gavrilov S.V. "Ship power plants. History of development". The book is on the website of the Kamchatka Regional Library.
    Extremely interesting and informative. There is also about heat recovery systems. Written easily and, I would even say, fascinating.
  28. Bekasov Artem Andreevich
    Bekasov Artem Andreevich 14 January 2022 13: 59
    +1
    Quote: Alexey RA
    So in the United States, even before the war, civilian shipbuilding did not develop much. The market decided © - American-built ships were too expensive.
    As a result, the country's leadership had to act by purely non-market methods: the Merchant Marine Act of 1936 was adopted, according to which the state subsidized the construction and operation of American-built ships, provided that their crews were 90% US citizens, they worked only under the US flag and the possibility of mobilizing the vessel in event of a war. Also under this Act, the United States Maritime Commission was created, whose task was to develop a program to "get up from your knees" of the American merchant fleet. As part of this program, a project was developed for a typical merchant ship of a new generation, which was to be built at public expense and then leased to private companies (free market, yes ...). Plans for the pre-war period were ambitious - 900 ships in 10 years.
    It was the preparation of the industry for the implementation of this program that allowed the US ship industry to quickly move on to the mass construction of "ships of freedom" -.


    Well, not quite right away. This was already preparations for the Second World War and the planned new redistribution of sales markets in the context of preparations for war in Europe. Moreover, the US already had experience.
    Let's remember the Jones Act of 1920 (on the Merchant Marine), the Shipping Act of 1916 and the Passenger Ship Act of 1886 - this is how American protectionism in maritime trade and shipping began. And in addition to them, I think you will be interested in how the Emergency Fleet Corporation (Corporation of emergency fleet) was created and operated in 1917. Which instantly requisitioned all American shipyards and 431 ships under construction on them with a displacement of more than 2500 tons for the needs of military transportation of the US government, and also interned most of the ships of hostile countries in their ports. She also invested gigantic sums in the expansion of existing and construction of new shipyards, it was about tens of billions of US dollars at the current rate.
    The same corporation carried out strict unification at all shipyards, both in the production of engines and components, and in the mass construction of ships of the same type. Which, by the way, were even more modern than ships like "Liberty" and "Victory" from WWII! And these were the years 1917-1922.


    From all this, post-war US leadership at sea was born:
    U.S. Navy and Carrier Fleet Construction Program
    Lend-Lease Program to Help the Allies
    Coast Guard Shipbuilding Program and others
    The volume of construction was colossal!
    1. seacap
      seacap 16 January 2022 12: 12
      0
      One Liberty program was worth what, simple and cheap, does not mean that it is bad. One of the last Liberty-type steamships on the move, the Canadian one seems to have seen himself in the late 80s, is not at all a small steamship.
  29. fa2998
    fa2998 15 January 2022 08: 56
    +1
    Quote: bayard
    something similar will appear with us, but in a reinforced ice class. And there are goods for transportation in China, Japan, South Korea, etc. Southeast Asia.

    You know how in a public transport, there are profitable routes, there are unprofitable ones. If a similar steamer goes from Japan, there is China, all of Southeast Asia, India, the Bl. East and around Europe. They load something, unload something and EVERYONE PAYS. the population of the earth.
    And at the NSR from Murmansk to Chukotka-TISHINA. Will we supply polar bears? The NSR is needed mainly ONLY RUSSIA. It is far from commercial success. hi