Most seaworthy type of ship?

Most seaworthy type of ship?

Author
Discussion

wolfracesonic

Original Poster:

7,011 posts

128 months

Saturday 4th October 2014
quotequote all
Ok, so you find yourself in the middle of an ocean in sea conditions that make the 'perfect storm' look like a millpond. What type of ship would best be able to cope/would you feel safest on? Would bigger be better e.g Nimitz carrier, Iowa class battleship (I know they don't venture out now) or something like an ocean going tug or even one of the self righting life boats the RNLI use?

knight

5,207 posts

280 months

Saturday 4th October 2014
quotequote all
Submarine.

anonymous-user

55 months

Saturday 4th October 2014
quotequote all
wolfracesonic said:
What type of ship would best be able to cope/would you feel safest on?
Spaceship.

Simpo Two

85,495 posts

266 months

Saturday 4th October 2014
quotequote all
If not a submarine, then maybe one of those rigs with big feet under the surface. Or maybe just a spherical pod with a long pole underneath with a big weight on the end. That would keep you the right way up and dampen the vertical movement.

MBBlat

1,634 posts

150 months

Saturday 4th October 2014
quotequote all
The one with the worse stability.

It may seem counter intuitive but the more stability a ship has the more it rolls (both amplitude and acceleration increase).
Thus the best solution to poor seakeeping is to put weight up high.

A submerged submarine is even better since below about 4x wavelength there is no impact from a storm. just don't get caught on the surface.

dudleybloke

19,846 posts

187 months

Saturday 4th October 2014
quotequote all
Rnli offshore lifeboats seem pretty unsinkable.

Efbe

9,251 posts

167 months

Saturday 4th October 2014
quotequote all
Harland and Wolff Olympic-class are unsinkable tbh

jimboe39540i

31 posts

157 months

Saturday 4th October 2014
quotequote all
You don't want to be on the surface in a submarine during a storm. Not a nice experience.

RobDickinson

31,343 posts

255 months

Saturday 4th October 2014
quotequote all
MBBlat said:
The one with the worse stability.

It may seem counter intuitive but the more stability a ship has the more it rolls (both amplitude and acceleration increase).
Thus the best solution to poor seakeeping is to put weight up high.

A submerged submarine is even better since below about 4x wavelength there is no impact from a storm. just don't get caught on the surface.
Sorry that sounds insane and against physics. top heavy will mean more movement until its upside down.

jimreed

120 posts

124 months

Saturday 4th October 2014
quotequote all
Simpo Two said:
If not a submarine, then maybe one of those rigs with big feet under the surface. Or maybe just a spherical pod with a long pole underneath with a big weight on the end. That would keep you the right way up and dampen the vertical movement.
A good friend of my father was on board this rig when it capsized:[[ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ocean_Ranger ]]

Silent1

19,761 posts

236 months

Saturday 4th October 2014
quotequote all
A SWATH type ship would be a good bet shirley?

wolfracesonic

Original Poster:

7,011 posts

128 months

Sunday 5th October 2014
quotequote all
I was thinking of surface ships, anyway submarines are boats aren't they?;) The idea of being in a top heavy, unstable ship seems insane to me as well, I think I'd choose the lifeboat.

matchmaker

8,495 posts

201 months

Sunday 5th October 2014
quotequote all
Having been an RNLI lifeboatman, I'd feel pretty safe in any modern all-weather lifeboat!

MBBlat

1,634 posts

150 months

Sunday 5th October 2014
quotequote all
RobDickinson said:
Sorry that sounds insane and against physics. top heavy will mean more movement until its upside down.
Its not against physics - its all about the ships response to the sea, which in a storm is anything but flat.

A very stable ship will tend to stay perpendicular to the local sea surface, which means that on the side of the wave it can be at quite an angle to the vertical. A less stable ship (note not unstable) will not follow the sea quite so closely, thus have lower accelerations.. Add a bit of damping such as bilge keels to the equation and you can quite quickly reduce the amplitude as well.

If you still think that's counter-intuitive don't look up anti-roll tanks, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antiroll_Tanks as this uses the movement of water from side to side to counteract roll.

One example I worked on a while back, unmodified in beam seas the model tests (and reports from the full sized ship in question) showed roll amplitudes of 45degrees. Lowering the GM (ie reducing stability), increasing the size of the bilge tanks and putting in some anti-roll tanks and in the same beam seas the ship was just bobbing up and down with no roll.

Vipers

32,894 posts

229 months

Sunday 5th October 2014
quotequote all
USS Enterprise.




smile

the_lone_wolf

2,622 posts

187 months

Sunday 5th October 2014
quotequote all
I reckon some kind of freefall lifeboat would have to be pretty sturdy and stable...

Vipers

32,894 posts

229 months

Sunday 5th October 2014
quotequote all
jimreed said:
Simpo Two said:
If not a submarine, then maybe one of those rigs with big feet under the surface. Or maybe just a spherical pod with a long pole underneath with a big weight on the end. That would keep you the right way up and dampen the vertical movement.
A good friend of my father was on board this rig when it capsized:[[ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ocean_Ranger ]]
That was a Semi Submersible, a floating structure with anchors out, those with feet mentioned are called "Jack Ups", just claryfing between the rig and those with big feet.

Having worked offshore, I wouldnt like to be on either.




smile

wolfracesonic

Original Poster:

7,011 posts

128 months

Sunday 5th October 2014
quotequote all
MBBlat said:
Its not against physics - its all about the ships response to the sea, which in a storm is anything but flat.

A very stable ship will tend to stay perpendicular to the local sea surface, which means that on the side of the wave it can be at quite an angle to the vertical. A less stable ship (note not unstable) will not follow the sea quite so closely, thus have lower accelerations.. Add a bit of damping such as bilge keels to the equation and you can quite quickly reduce the amplitude as well.

If you still think that's counter-intuitive don't look up anti-roll tanks, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antiroll_Tanks as this uses the movement of water from side to side to counteract roll.

One example I worked on a while back, unmodified in beam seas the model tests (and reports from the full sized ship in question) showed roll amplitudes of 45degrees. Lowering the GM (ie reducing stability), increasing the size of the bilge tanks and putting in some anti-roll tanks and in the same beam seas the ship was just bobbing up and down with no roll.
That's me and RobDickinson put in our place then!

DJFish

5,922 posts

264 months

Sunday 5th October 2014
quotequote all
^wot they used to call 'stiff' & 'tender' ships if I remember correctly.

Kenty

5,052 posts

176 months

Monday 6th October 2014
quotequote all
A fully laden ULCC