On 19/03/2024 11:22, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 19/03/2024 10:34, Colin Bignell wrote:
>> On 19/03/2024 10:00, brian wrote:
>>> In message <uta014$3k1q0$1@dont-email.me>, Jethro_uk
>>> <jethro_uk@hotmailbin.com> writes
>>>> I have always wondered why wind power isn't used in moving sea cargo
>>>> around since I was a lad ...
>>>>
>>>> https://www.independent.co.uk/tech/cargo-ship-sails-wind-windwings-
>>>> b2514396.html
>>>>
>>> Well shiver me timbers.
>>>
>>> Https://gcaptain.com/chemship-launches-worlds-first-wind.../
>>>
>>>   "which is amplified by smart vacuum technology"   Wonder what that
>>> is. Mr Google is unhelpful here.
>>>
>>> Maybe it's sucked along by a gigantic Dyson.
>>
>> At a guess, it could be something similar to trials done with a Miles
>> Magister, many decades ago. The wings were covered with perforated
>> sheets, which, using a separate engine, drew air through the tiny
>> holes. This prevented the surface layer breaking away and creating
>> turbulence, resulting true laminar airflow. However, for an aircraft,
>> the benefit was not enough to justify the additional weight and
>> complexity.
>>
>>
> Probably. Blown flaps and slats were (and still are) far easier ways to
> achieve more low speed lift.
>
> An interesting experiment was done with formula one with fans sucking
> the car to the ground. It is still the way to achieve maximum
> acceleration and grip at slow speeds, but they banned it.

There was a concern that a failure of the system could result in a car
flying off the track and, possibly, into the spectators.

>
> Anyway, as the saying guess. Nothing sucks like an Electrolux, except a
> Dyson
>
>

--
Colin Bignell

On Tue, 19 Mar 2024 10:34:40 +0000, Colin Bignell wrote:

> On 19/03/2024 10:00, brian wrote:
>> In message <uta014$3k1q0$1@dont-email.me>, Jethro_uk
>> <jethro_uk@hotmailbin.com> writes
>>> I have always wondered why wind power isn't used in moving sea cargo
>>> around since I was a lad ...
>>>
>>> https://www.independent.co.uk/tech/cargo-ship-sails-wind-windwings-
>>> b2514396.html
>>>
>> Well shiver me timbers.
>>
>> Https://gcaptain.com/chemship-launches-worlds-first-wind.../
>>
>>  "which is amplified by smart vacuum technology"   Wonder what that
>>  is.
>> Mr Google is unhelpful here.
>>
>> Maybe it's sucked along by a gigantic Dyson.
>
> At a guess, it could be something similar to trials done with a Miles
> Magister, many decades ago. The wings were covered with perforated
> sheets, which, using a separate engine, drew air through the tiny holes.
> This prevented the surface layer breaking away and creating turbulence,
> resulting true laminar airflow. However, for an aircraft, the benefit
> was not enough to justify the additional weight and complexity.

Aren't they building planes like that now ?

On Wed, 20 Mar 2024 18:28:25 +1100, Jethro_uk <jethro_uk@hotmailbin.com>
wrote:

> On Tue, 19 Mar 2024 10:34:40 +0000, Colin Bignell wrote:
>
>> On 19/03/2024 10:00, brian wrote:
>>> In message <uta014$3k1q0$1@dont-email.me>, Jethro_uk
>>> <jethro_uk@hotmailbin.com> writes
>>>> I have always wondered why wind power isn't used in moving sea cargo
>>>> around since I was a lad ...
>>>>
>>>> https://www.independent.co.uk/tech/cargo-ship-sails-wind-windwings-
>>>> b2514396.html
>>>>
>>> Well shiver me timbers.
>>>
>>> Https://gcaptain.com/chemship-launches-worlds-first-wind.../
>>>
>>> "which is amplified by smart vacuum technology" Wonder what that
>>> is.
>>> Mr Google is unhelpful here.
>>>
>>> Maybe it's sucked along by a gigantic Dyson.
>>
>> At a guess, it could be something similar to trials done with a Miles
>> Magister, many decades ago. The wings were covered with perforated
>> sheets, which, using a separate engine, drew air through the tiny holes.
>> This prevented the surface layer breaking away and creating turbulence,
>> resulting true laminar airflow. However, for an aircraft, the benefit
>> was not enough to justify the additional weight and complexity.
>
> Aren't they building planes like that now ?

Nope.

On 19/03/2024 11:22, Andrew wrote:
> On 19/03/2024 09:10, Soup wrote:
>> On 18/03/2024 20:28, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>> On 18/03/2024 18:09, Jethro_uk wrote:
>>>> I have always wondered why wind power isn't used in moving sea cargo
>>>> around since I was a lad ...
>>
>>> Because it is shit.
>>
>> How so ?
>>
>
> Docking with engines is so much safer and easier

Well use engines for that.
Less rugged engines are required as (say) 70% of the running will be
wind powered whilst the rest (docking adverse winds etc) can be engine
powered.

On 19/03/2024 18:33, Rod Speed wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Mar 2024 20:10:24 +1100, Soup <cheez2011@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 18/03/2024 20:28, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>> On 18/03/2024 18:09, Jethro_uk wrote:
>>>> I have always wondered why wind power isn't used in moving sea cargo
>>>> around since I was a lad ...
>>
>>> Because it is shit.
>>
>> How so ?
>
> Wind is intermittent.

Well when wind drops to zero or an againsterly, fold down whatever
passes for the mast system and use engines

On 20/03/2024 07:28, Jethro_uk wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Mar 2024 10:34:40 +0000, Colin Bignell wrote:
>
>> On 19/03/2024 10:00, brian wrote:
>>> In message <uta014$3k1q0$1@dont-email.me>, Jethro_uk
>>> <jethro_uk@hotmailbin.com> writes
>>>> I have always wondered why wind power isn't used in moving sea cargo
>>>> around since I was a lad ...
>>>>
>>>> https://www.independent.co.uk/tech/cargo-ship-sails-wind-windwings-
>>>> b2514396.html
>>>>
>>> Well shiver me timbers.
>>>
>>> Https://gcaptain.com/chemship-launches-worlds-first-wind.../
>>>
>>>  "which is amplified by smart vacuum technology"   Wonder what that
>>>  is.
>>> Mr Google is unhelpful here.
>>>
>>> Maybe it's sucked along by a gigantic Dyson.
>>
>> At a guess, it could be something similar to trials done with a Miles
>> Magister, many decades ago. The wings were covered with perforated
>> sheets, which, using a separate engine, drew air through the tiny holes.
>> This prevented the surface layer breaking away and creating turbulence,
>> resulting true laminar airflow. However, for an aircraft, the benefit
>> was not enough to justify the additional weight and complexity.
>
> Aren't they building planes like that now ?

No. They use slats and fowler flaps

--
"The great thing about Glasgow is that if there's a nuclear attack it'll
look exactly the same afterwards."

Billy Connolly

On 20/03/2024 08:01, Soup wrote:
> On 19/03/2024 11:22, Andrew wrote:
>> On 19/03/2024 09:10, Soup wrote:
>>> On 18/03/2024 20:28, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>> On 18/03/2024 18:09, Jethro_uk wrote:
>>>>> I have always wondered why wind power isn't used in moving sea cargo
>>>>> around since I was a lad ...
>>>
>>>> Because it is shit.
>>>
>>> How so ?
>>>
>>
>> Docking with engines is so much safer and easier
>
> Well use engines for that.
> Less rugged engines are required as (say) 70% of the running will be
> wind powered whilst the rest (docking adverse winds etc) can be engine
> powered.
>

70%? - even the hype doesn't claim anywhere near that in fuel saving.
These are not ships that can sail by wind alone - they are wind "assisted".

A much greater fuel saving can be made by slowing down a ship by 20%.

--
mailto : news {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

On 20/03/2024 07:28, Jethro_uk wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Mar 2024 10:34:40 +0000, Colin Bignell wrote:
>
>> On 19/03/2024 10:00, brian wrote:
>>> In message <uta014$3k1q0$1@dont-email.me>, Jethro_uk
>>> <jethro_uk@hotmailbin.com> writes
>>>> I have always wondered why wind power isn't used in moving sea cargo
>>>> around since I was a lad ...
>>>>
>>>> https://www.independent.co.uk/tech/cargo-ship-sails-wind-windwings-
>>>> b2514396.html
>>>>
>>> Well shiver me timbers.
>>>
>>> Https://gcaptain.com/chemship-launches-worlds-first-wind.../
>>>
>>>  "which is amplified by smart vacuum technology"   Wonder what that
>>>  is.
>>> Mr Google is unhelpful here.
>>>
>>> Maybe it's sucked along by a gigantic Dyson.
>>
>> At a guess, it could be something similar to trials done with a Miles
>> Magister, many decades ago. The wings were covered with perforated
>> sheets, which, using a separate engine, drew air through the tiny holes.
>> This prevented the surface layer breaking away and creating turbulence,
>> resulting true laminar airflow. However, for an aircraft, the benefit
>> was not enough to justify the additional weight and complexity.
>
> Aren't they building planes like that now ?

Not that I am aware of. There are easier ways to delay boundary layer
separation. If you look out of the window of many airliners, you will
see a row of small metal tabs along the top. Those are vortex
generators, which are, small, light, with no moving parts and they delay
boundary layer separation.

The only use of perforated wing surface I can think of is along the
leading edge on some aircraft, where it is used to dispense anti-icing
fluid.

--
Colin Bignell

On 20/03/2024 09:19, Colin Bignell wrote:
> On 20/03/2024 07:28, Jethro_uk wrote:
>> On Tue, 19 Mar 2024 10:34:40 +0000, Colin Bignell wrote:
>>
>>> On 19/03/2024 10:00, brian wrote:
>>>> In message <uta014$3k1q0$1@dont-email.me>, Jethro_uk
>>>> <jethro_uk@hotmailbin.com> writes
>>>>> I have always wondered why wind power isn't used in moving sea cargo
>>>>> around since I was a lad ...
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.independent.co.uk/tech/cargo-ship-sails-wind-windwings-
>>>>> b2514396.html
>>>>>
>>>> Well shiver me timbers.
>>>>
>>>> Https://gcaptain.com/chemship-launches-worlds-first-wind.../
>>>>
>>>>    "which is amplified by smart vacuum technology"   Wonder what that
>>>>    is.
>>>> Mr Google is unhelpful here.
>>>>
>>>> Maybe it's sucked along by a gigantic Dyson.
>>>
>>> At a guess, it could be something similar to trials done with a Miles
>>> Magister, many decades ago. The wings were covered with perforated
>>> sheets, which, using a separate engine, drew air through the tiny holes.
>>> This prevented the surface layer breaking away and creating turbulence,
>>> resulting true laminar airflow. However, for an aircraft, the benefit
>>> was not enough to justify the additional weight and complexity.
>>
>> Aren't they building planes like that now ?
>
> Not that I am aware of. There are easier ways to delay boundary layer
> separation. If you look out of the window of many airliners, you will
> see a row of small metal tabs along the top. Those are vortex
> generators, which are, small, light, with no moving parts and they delay
> boundary layer separation.
>
> The only use of perforated wing surface I can think of is along the
> leading edge on some aircraft, where it is used to dispense anti-icing
> fluid.
>
Well in WWII they had machine gun ports as well. :-)

The fact is that what aircraft designers are after is a controllable
high lift low speed performance for landing, and for some cases,
takeoff. High drag is not a problem, and in fact it is advantage, in
getting speeds down to landing speed..

So *controlled* boundary layer separation is the goal.

--
"Corbyn talks about equality, justice, opportunity, health care, peace,
community, compassion, investment, security, housing...."
"What kind of person is not interested in those things?"

"Jeremy Corbyn?"

In article <gV-dnc-MlIS3N2f4nZ2dnZeNn_udnZ2d@giganews.com>, Colin Bignell
<cpb@bignellREMOVETHIS.me.uk> wrote:
> On 20/03/2024 07:28, Jethro_uk wrote:
> > On Tue, 19 Mar 2024 10:34:40 +0000, Colin Bignell wrote:
> >
> >> On 19/03/2024 10:00, brian wrote:
> >>> In message <uta014$3k1q0$1@dont-email.me>, Jethro_uk
> >>> <jethro_uk@hotmailbin.com> writes
> >>>> I have always wondered why wind power isn't used in moving sea cargo
> >>>> around since I was a lad ...
> >>>>
> >>>> https://www.independent.co.uk/tech/cargo-ship-sails-wind-windwings-
> >>>> b2514396.html
> >>>>
> >>> Well shiver me timbers.
> >>>
> >>> Https://gcaptain.com/chemship-launches-worlds-first-wind.../
> >>>
> >>> "which is amplified by smart vacuum technology" Wonder what that
> >>> is. Mr Google is unhelpful here.
> >>>
> >>> Maybe it's sucked along by a gigantic Dyson.
> >>
> >> At a guess, it could be something similar to trials done with a Miles
> >> Magister, many decades ago. The wings were covered with perforated
> >> sheets, which, using a separate engine, drew air through the tiny
> >> holes. This prevented the surface layer breaking away and creating
> >> turbulence, resulting true laminar airflow. However, for an aircraft,
> >> the benefit was not enough to justify the additional weight and
> >> complexity.
> >
> > Aren't they building planes like that now ?

> Not that I am aware of. There are easier ways to delay boundary layer
> separation. If you look out of the window of many airliners, you will
> see a row of small metal tabs along the top. Those are vortex
> generators, which are, small, light, with no moving parts and they delay
> boundary layer separation.

> The only use of perforated wing surface I can think of is along the
> leading edge on some aircraft, where it is used to dispense anti-icing
> fluid.

The suction boundary layer experiments were over 60 years ago. Ideas have
changed.

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England - sent from my RISC OS 4té²
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle

On 20/03/2024 11:00, charles wrote:

>
>> The only use of perforated wing surface I can think of is along the
>> leading edge on some aircraft, where it is used to dispense anti-icing
>> fluid.
>
> The suction boundary layer experiments were over 60 years ago. Ideas have
> changed.

And aircraft technology has kept pace with new ideas over those 60
years, especially when it comes to using less fuel.

--
mailto : news {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

On 20/03/2024 09:28, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 20/03/2024 09:19, Colin Bignell wrote:
>> On 20/03/2024 07:28, Jethro_uk wrote:
>>> On Tue, 19 Mar 2024 10:34:40 +0000, Colin Bignell wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 19/03/2024 10:00, brian wrote:
>>>>> In message <uta014$3k1q0$1@dont-email.me>, Jethro_uk
>>>>> <jethro_uk@hotmailbin.com> writes
>>>>>> I have always wondered why wind power isn't used in moving sea cargo
>>>>>> around since I was a lad ...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://www.independent.co.uk/tech/cargo-ship-sails-wind-windwings-
>>>>>> b2514396.html
>>>>>>
>>>>> Well shiver me timbers.
>>>>>
>>>>> Https://gcaptain.com/chemship-launches-worlds-first-wind.../
>>>>>
>>>>>    "which is amplified by smart vacuum technology"   Wonder what that
>>>>>    is.
>>>>> Mr Google is unhelpful here.
>>>>>
>>>>> Maybe it's sucked along by a gigantic Dyson.
>>>>
>>>> At a guess, it could be something similar to trials done with a Miles
>>>> Magister, many decades ago. The wings were covered with perforated
>>>> sheets, which, using a separate engine, drew air through the tiny
>>>> holes.
>>>> This prevented the surface layer breaking away and creating turbulence,
>>>> resulting true laminar airflow. However, for an aircraft, the benefit
>>>> was not enough to justify the additional weight and complexity.
>>>
>>> Aren't they building planes like that now ?
>>
>> Not that I am aware of. There are easier ways to delay boundary layer
>> separation. If you look out of the window of many airliners, you will
>> see a row of small metal tabs along the top. Those are vortex
>> generators, which are, small, light, with no moving parts and they
>> delay boundary layer separation.
>>
>> The only use of perforated wing surface I can think of is along the
>> leading edge on some aircraft, where it is used to dispense anti-icing
>> fluid.
>>
> Well in WWII they had machine gun ports as well. :-)

If you are counting holes that big, they also had balloon cable cutters
fitted to bombers.
> The fact is that what aircraft designers are after is a controllable
> high lift low speed performance for landing, and for some cases,
> takeoff. High drag is not a problem, and in fact it is advantage, in
> getting speeds down to landing speed..
>
> So *controlled* boundary layer separation is the goal.

The Miles Magister trials were about finding ways to increase fighter
speeds at a time when engine powers were fairly low. However, weight is
not quite as much of a problem on a ship.

--
Colin Bignell

On 20/03/2024 11:00, charles wrote:
> In article <gV-dnc-MlIS3N2f4nZ2dnZeNn_udnZ2d@giganews.com>, Colin Bignell
> <cpb@bignellREMOVETHIS.me.uk> wrote:
>> On 20/03/2024 07:28, Jethro_uk wrote:
>>> On Tue, 19 Mar 2024 10:34:40 +0000, Colin Bignell wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 19/03/2024 10:00, brian wrote:
>>>>> In message <uta014$3k1q0$1@dont-email.me>, Jethro_uk
>>>>> <jethro_uk@hotmailbin.com> writes
>>>>>> I have always wondered why wind power isn't used in moving sea cargo
>>>>>> around since I was a lad ...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://www.independent.co.uk/tech/cargo-ship-sails-wind-windwings-
>>>>>> b2514396.html
>>>>>>
>>>>> Well shiver me timbers.
>>>>>
>>>>> Https://gcaptain.com/chemship-launches-worlds-first-wind.../
>>>>>
>>>>> "which is amplified by smart vacuum technology" Wonder what that
>>>>> is. Mr Google is unhelpful here.
>>>>>
>>>>> Maybe it's sucked along by a gigantic Dyson.
>>>>
>>>> At a guess, it could be something similar to trials done with a Miles
>>>> Magister, many decades ago. The wings were covered with perforated
>>>> sheets, which, using a separate engine, drew air through the tiny
>>>> holes. This prevented the surface layer breaking away and creating
>>>> turbulence, resulting true laminar airflow. However, for an aircraft,
>>>> the benefit was not enough to justify the additional weight and
>>>> complexity.
>>>
>>> Aren't they building planes like that now ?
>
>> Not that I am aware of. There are easier ways to delay boundary layer
>> separation. If you look out of the window of many airliners, you will
>> see a row of small metal tabs along the top. Those are vortex
>> generators, which are, small, light, with no moving parts and they delay
>> boundary layer separation.
>
>> The only use of perforated wing surface I can think of is along the
>> leading edge on some aircraft, where it is used to dispense anti-icing
>> fluid.
>
> The suction boundary layer experiments were over 60 years ago. Ideas have
> changed.
>
I don't think ideas have changed, its simply that the cost-benefit
advantage of sucked or blown wings was very poor.

I have noticed that non engineers (and some engineers) think in terms of
*possibility*, but neither practicability, nor cost effectiveness.

(Which is of course why people think renewable energy is cool).

THIS is how you decrease landing and takeoff distances!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hPakbghLe38
Slats and massive flaps. And a bit of a headwind.

--
“Puritanism: The haunting fear that someone, somewhere, may be happy.”

H.L. Mencken, A Mencken Chrestomathy

On 20/03/2024 08:47, alan_m wrote:
> On 20/03/2024 08:01, Soup wrote:
>> On 19/03/2024 11:22, Andrew wrote:
>>> On 19/03/2024 09:10, Soup wrote:
>>>> On 18/03/2024 20:28, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>> On 18/03/2024 18:09, Jethro_uk wrote:
>>>>>> I have always wondered why wind power isn't used in moving sea cargo
>>>>>> around since I was a lad ...
>>>>
>>>>> Because it is shit.
>>>>
>>>> How so ?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Docking with engines is so much safer and easier
>>
>> Well use engines for that.
>> Less rugged engines are required as (say) 70% of the running will be
>> wind powered whilst the rest (docking adverse winds etc) can be engine
>> powered.
>>
>
>
> 70%? - even the hype doesn't claim anywhere near that in fuel saving.

For (say) read numbers picked out of my nefr.

On 19/03/2024 11:06, SteveW wrote:
> On 19/03/2024 09:40, alan_m wrote:
>> On 19/03/2024 09:10, Soup wrote:
>>> On 18/03/2024 20:28, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>> On 18/03/2024 18:09, Jethro_uk wrote:
>>>>> I have always wondered why wind power isn't used in moving sea cargo
>>>>> around since I was a lad ...
>>>
>>>> Because it is shit.
>>>
>>> How so ?
>>>
>>
>> There was a very good reason why large sailing ships became mainly
>> obsolete 150+ years ago.  Even the hybrid vessels of that time (full
>> sail plus steam engine) were soon abandoned as a design.
>
> The reason sail disappeared was the unreliability of the wind

Hence the term 'The doldrums'

On 20/03/2024 17:14, Andrew wrote:
> On 19/03/2024 11:06, SteveW wrote:
>> On 19/03/2024 09:40, alan_m wrote:

>>> There was a very good reason why large sailing ships became mainly
>>> obsolete 150+ years ago.  Even the hybrid vessels of that time (full
>>> sail plus steam engine) were soon abandoned as a design.
>>
>> The reason sail disappeared was the unreliability of the wind
>
> Hence the term 'The doldrums'

True, but for every "Doldrums" there is a "Roaring forties".

On 19/03/2024 09:40, alan_m wrote:

> There was a very good reason why large sailing ships became mainly
> obsolete 150+ years ago.  Even the hybrid vessels of that time (full
> sail plus steam engine) were soon abandoned as a design.

Yeah but early steam engines were 'pants' (shit has been used too often,
to my mind, in this thread already).
But even rubbishy steam engines were 'better' than pure sailing ships
which is why, as far as I am concerned, dual drive systems will come to
the fore . Engines when docking, in "The Doldrums" or facing a wind.
sail (or rather a suitable variation) wence running with the wind .

On 20/03/2024 17:52, Soup wrote:
> On 20/03/2024 17:14, Andrew wrote:
>> On 19/03/2024 11:06, SteveW wrote:
>>> On 19/03/2024 09:40, alan_m wrote:
>
>>>> There was a very good reason why large sailing ships became mainly
>>>> obsolete 150+ years ago.  Even the hybrid vessels of that time (full
>>>> sail plus steam engine) were soon abandoned as a design.
>>>
>>> The reason sail disappeared was the unreliability of the wind
>>
>> Hence the term 'The doldrums'
>
> True, but for every "Doldrums" there is a "Roaring forties".

Indeed. Long distance racing yachts use weather routing, going out of
their way and increasing the distance they have to travel, in exchange
for more speed and so arriving sooner.

Wed, 20 Mar 2024 19:11:28 +1100, Soup <cheez2011@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 19/03/2024 18:33, Rod Speed wrote:
>> On Tue, 19 Mar 2024 20:10:24 +1100, Soup <cheez2011@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 18/03/2024 20:28, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>> On 18/03/2024 18:09, Jethro_uk wrote:
>>>>> I have always wondered why wind power isn't used in moving sea cargo
>>>>> around since I was a lad ...
>>>
>>>> Because it is shit.
>>>
>>> How so ?
>> Wind is intermittent.
>
> Well when wind drops to zero or an againsterly, fold down whatever
> passes for the mast system and use engines

Nowhere to fold them down to with a container ship and
nowhere to have the masts when the wind is useful either.

Even that cruise ship that does have extra sails doesnt in
fact use them much at all because the sails arent useful
very often. There is a doco on it in the ship doco series.

On Thu, 21 Mar 2024 04:52:22 +1100, Soup <cheez2011@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 20/03/2024 17:14, Andrew wrote:
>> On 19/03/2024 11:06, SteveW wrote:
>>> On 19/03/2024 09:40, alan_m wrote:
>
>>>> There was a very good reason why large sailing ships became mainly
>>>> obsolete 150+ years ago. Even the hybrid vessels of that time (full
>>>> sail plus steam engine) were soon abandoned as a design.
>>>
>>> The reason sail disappeared was the unreliability of the wind
>> Hence the term 'The doldrums'
>
> True, but for every "Doldrums" there is a "Roaring forties".

The trouble is that the roaring fourtys arent on the trade routes anymore.

On Thu, 21 Mar 2024 05:00:46 +1100, Soup <cheez2011@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 19/03/2024 09:40, alan_m wrote:
>
>> There was a very good reason why large sailing ships became mainly
>> obsolete 150+ years ago. Even the hybrid vessels of that time (full
>> sail plus steam engine) were soon abandoned as a design.
>
> Yeah but early steam engines were 'pants' (shit has been used too often,
> to my mind, in this thread already).
> But even rubbishy steam engines were 'better' than pure sailing ships
> which is why, as far as I am concerned, dual drive systems will come to
> the fore .

Not a chance now that the vast bulk of freight moves in containers
now and sail just wont work on a container vessel.

> Engines when docking, in "The Doldrums" or facing a wind. sail (or
> rather a suitable variation) wence running with the wind .

Too slow to be useful now.

On Thu, 21 Mar 2024 07:08:55 +1100, SteveW <steve@walker-family.me.uk>
wrote:

> On 20/03/2024 17:52, Soup wrote:
>> On 20/03/2024 17:14, Andrew wrote:
>>> On 19/03/2024 11:06, SteveW wrote:
>>>> On 19/03/2024 09:40, alan_m wrote:
>>
>>>>> There was a very good reason why large sailing ships became mainly
>>>>> obsolete 150+ years ago. Even the hybrid vessels of that time (full
>>>>> sail plus steam engine) were soon abandoned as a design.
>>>>
>>>> The reason sail disappeared was the unreliability of the wind
>>>
>>> Hence the term 'The doldrums'
>> True, but for every "Doldrums" there is a "Roaring forties".
>
> Indeed. Long distance racing yachts use weather routing, going out of
> their way and increasing the distance they have to travel, in exchange
> for more speed and so arriving sooner.

Just not feasible for container ships and tankers. The roaring fourtys
are much too far away from the trade routes now due to the modern
canals and even when the suez is too risky to use, its fucking long
way with fuck all wind in the right direction even when Good Hope
has to be used.

On 20/03/2024 21:08, Rod Speed wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Mar 2024 04:52:22 +1100, Soup <cheez2011@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 20/03/2024 17:14, Andrew wrote:
>>> On 19/03/2024 11:06, SteveW wrote:
>>>> On 19/03/2024 09:40, alan_m wrote:
>>
>>>>> There was a very good reason why large sailing ships became mainly
>>>>> obsolete 150+ years ago.  Even the hybrid vessels of that time
>>>>> (full sail plus steam engine) were soon abandoned as a design.
>>>>
>>>> The reason sail disappeared was the unreliability of the wind
>>>  Hence the term 'The doldrums'
>>
>> True, but for every "Doldrums" there is a "Roaring forties".
>
> The trouble is that the roaring fourtys arent on the trade routes anymore.

A necessity when they had no other means of propulsion but best avoided
for calmer waters when there is an alternative.

--
mailto : news {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

On 20/03/2024 20:51, Rod Speed wrote:

> Even that cruise ship that does have extra sails doesnt in
> fact use them much at all because the sails arent useful
> very often. There is a doco on it in the ship doco series.

It's more of a marketing gimmick on a cruise ship with sails.

--
mailto : news {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

On 20/03/2024 18:00, Soup wrote:
> On 19/03/2024 09:40, alan_m wrote:
>
>> There was a very good reason why large sailing ships became mainly
>> obsolete 150+ years ago.  Even the hybrid vessels of that time (full
>> sail plus steam engine) were soon abandoned as a design.
>
> Yeah but early steam engines were 'pants' (shit has been used too often,
> to my mind, in this thread already).
>   But even rubbishy steam engines were 'better' than pure sailing ships
> which is why, as far as I am concerned, dual drive systems will come to
> the fore .  Engines when docking, in "The Doldrums" or facing a wind.
> sail (or rather a suitable variation) wence running with the wind .
>

So ships with early rubbish engines were better (for trade) than the
sailing ships that they made obsolete so why would sailing ships now
replace the modern cargo ship with much better engines? Hybrid ships of
150 years ago with both sails and (rubbish) engines also disappeared and
this wouldn't have happened if there was some major benefit in keeping
the sails.

--
mailto : news {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk