Slashdot Mirror


World's Largest Ship Floated For the First Time

Zothecula writes "A ship with a hull longer than the Empire State Building is tall has been floated out of dry dock in Geoje, South Korea. Measuring 488 m (1,601 ft) long and 74 m (243 ft) wide, the hull belongs to Shell's Prelude floating liquefied natural gas (FLNG) facility, which upon completion will be the largest floating facility ever built."

16 of 166 comments (clear)

  1. Technically it is not a ship... by Stolpskott · · Score: 5, Interesting

    As it has no motive power of its own (it has to be towed into position), it is not really a ship. But it is still a really cool feat of engineering, designed to ride out the typhoon season off the Australian coast and keep LNG production going for 25 years or so...
    However, Shell are apparently building an even bigger one as well. Maybe they are trying to have a ship that is longer than the Burj Khalifa? ;)

    1. Re:Technically it is not a ship... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      RTFA: "three 6,700-hp thrusters at the rear of the Prelude"

      Just because they're not intended for transportation doesn't mean they're not there.

    2. Re:Technically it is not a ship... by Stoopiduk · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Prelude has three 6,700 horsepower thrusters for weathervaning. Mightn't be the best way of getting it around, but if they can pivot the bugger about the mooring turret, I'm sure they could move it around in some dreadfully slow and awkward fashion.

    3. Re:Technically it is not a ship... by jcr · · Score: 5, Informative

      Technically, it's a barge.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    4. Re: Technically it is not a ship... by Joce640k · · Score: 4, Informative

      Barges can also have their own propulsion, for example the river homes that people pilot around the canals here in the UK are barges.

      Those things were pulled by horses when they started out, hence "barges".

      Adding a motor made them into "boats".

      --
      No sig today...
    5. Re:Technically it is not a ship... by phrostie · · Score: 5, Funny

      to me it looks like a cross between the titanic and the Hindenburg.

      stand back.

    6. Re:Technically it is not a ship... by RivenAleem · · Score: 4, Funny

      I'm sure Archer could provide some choice words to this effect.

    7. Re:Technically it is not a ship... by Snotnose · · Score: 4, Funny

      RTFA: "three 6,700-hp thrusters at the rear of the Prelude"

      That Honda must go hella fast, unless it has to haul your mom around.

  2. Whatever.... by meglon · · Score: 5, Funny

    ....floats your boat.

    --
    Fascism: An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization. See also: NAZI's
  3. And they used to say... by Notabadguy · · Score: 4, Funny

    It's not the size of the ship, it's the motion in the ocean....

    Apparently, it *is* all about the size of the ship!

  4. Worlds biggest shipyards by antsbull · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I saw a documentary on them a couple of nights ago, and this shipyard is averaging a super-tanker every 3.5 days if you divide the number of super-tankers they will build this year. Absolutely stunning the technology, skills, planning and productivity that they are managing there. This wouldn't be achievable in a western country thanks to unions and the terrible productivity and project overruns that come with western societies.

    1. Re:Worlds biggest shipyards by AmiMoJo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      SK has unions. Also French and Japanese companies seem to be able to build things on time and on budget. Ditto the Germans, who are also unionised.

      It's a cultural thing, nothing to do with unions.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    2. Re:Worlds biggest shipyards by ickleberry · · Score: 3, Informative

      Apparently at the Samsung shipyard this thing was built in, it's a good month if nobody dies in an accident that month. At least that's how it was in 2006 when they had almost made it a month without anyone getting killed, then 2 lads decided to fall to their deathsfrom a crane.

  5. Re:Taunt the seasteaders. by SuricouRaven · · Score: 3, Informative

    It's a movement that aims to escape the reach of existing governments by setting up semi-autonomous permanent settlements at sea. A mixture of libertarian idealists ('A place free from overgrown government, where the right of individuals to live free is valued!') and free market enterprise idealists ('A place where we can locate our call centers and offices free from taxation, minimum wage, health and safety and working hours regulations.').

    The only group with a halfway-viable business plan are Blueseed, who hope to use their ship as a legal workaround for US immigration law - station it just in international water, allowing people 'visiting' the country on a tourist visa to commute by ferry and technically not be illegally working in the US. It's not attracted enough investment, because it's a high-risk venture: Even if the ship works and is financially viable, it's likely the government would act quickly to change the law and close this 'loophole.'

  6. Re:amazing indeed by WWJohnBrowningDo · · Score: 5, Informative

    Do you even know how offshore natural gas is processed?

    Natural gas is pressurized at the offshore platform and pumped all the way to the shore using a long pipeline. Then an onshore LNG processing plant cleans and liquefies it and pump it back out to LNG tankers.

    This thing is designed to replace the long undersea pipeline and the onshore LNG processing plant and its associated dock. One of the reasons why this monstrosity is being built is precisely because it's more environmentally friendly than the alternative. A single offshore facility can replace multiple onshore facilities since the offshore facility is mobile.

  7. Re:Taunt the seasteaders. by SuricouRaven · · Score: 3, Interesting

    There are easier ways. The UK had a very similar situation once - pirate radio ships in the 60s. Stations were broadcasting from international water. This created a problem for the government: They were causing interference to commercial stations, blatantly infringing copyright, and had a tendency to say very offensive things that would get 'legitimate' stations in trouble. Yet they were legally untouchable. The government's solution was simple: Siege. They made it a crime for anyone to provide any service to these boats, including transportation or sale of goods. Thus the pirates couldn't come ashore (They'd be arrested), and their supporters couldn't deliver supplies (they'd be arrested upon return), and eventually the ships would run out of food for the crew and fuel for the transmitter.

    The same approach would work against a hypothetical Blueseed-like ship: Simply make it illegal to travel outside the US to work while in the US on a visitor or student visa. The workers can still go out to work, but they can't come back without being arrested. If they start doing anything illegal enough to really upset the powers that be (Counterfeit goods manufacture, drug production, unlicensed radio station operation, etc) then they can be shut down by the siege approach.