Slashdot Mirror


Rolls Royce Developing Drone Cargo Ships

kc123 writes in with news that Rolls Royce is designing unmanned cargo ships."Rolls-Royce's Blue Ocean development team has set up a virtual-reality prototype at its office in Alesund, Norway, that simulates 360-degree views from a vessel's bridge. Eventually, the London-based manufacturer of engines and turbines says, captains on dry land will use similar control centers to command hundreds of crewless ships. Drone ships would be safer, cheaper and less polluting for the $375 billion shipping industry that carries 90 percent of world trade, Rolls-Royce says."

19 of 216 comments (clear)

  1. Worst. Idea. Ever. by n1ywb · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I don't even know where to begin. The ocean is a harsh environment and ships work hard and maintenance and upkeep is a constant chore day in and day out both in port and while underway. The engineering crew is basically the travelling maintenance department. If the ship doesn't carry a crew, it will have to come out of service for maintenance and repairs, which means not only is it not making money, it's tying up an expensive berth in port. If it does break down while underway, how is anybody going to get to it? It could take days.

    --
    -73, de n1ywb
    www.n1ywb.com
  2. What do the humans actually do on a ship? by steveha · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The article is mainly about using telepresence and computers to pilot a ship. But other than piloting, what else do humans do, and how automatable is it?

    For example, how often do people have to repair ships while under way? During a storm, do people ever have to run around fixing chains that are working loose, or fix a leaking seal and set up pumps to pump out a flooded compartment?

    I don't know the answers to the above questions, by the way. I don't know much about cargo ships.

    Even if we still need humans for some tasks on a cargo ship, perhaps not too far in the future, we might have telepresence robots that can do the tasks.

    --
    lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely
    1. Re:What do the humans actually do on a ship? by n1ywb · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Pretty much constantly. Entropy is a bitch and the sea generates a lof of it.

      --
      -73, de n1ywb
      www.n1ywb.com
    2. Re:What do the humans actually do on a ship? by Firethorn · · Score: 3, Informative

      very few airplanes need in-air service.

      I remember reading about a plane where there was a crawspace so you could do maintenance on engines while in flight. But I'll point out that cargo ships are often out of dock for 30+ days at a time, while planes are hardly ever up for more than half a day, after which they go through large amounts of maintenance.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    3. Re:What do the humans actually do on a ship? by angularbanjo · · Score: 5, Funny

      I remember reading about a plane where there was a crawspace so you could do maintenance

      No, that's where they put the snakes.

    4. Re:What do the humans actually do on a ship? by floobedy · · Score: 4, Informative

      But other than piloting, what else do humans do, and how automatable is it?

      Generally the employees on a ship are divided into officers and crew. The officers include the captain, first mate, and second mate. Also the officers include the engineering department, with a chief engineer, second engineer, and third engineer. Among the crew, there are a bunch of seamen (perhaps 5 or more of them). There is also a steward and a cook.

      All of these people are divided into shifts. At any given time, there are 5 or so people working: one deck officer (such as the captain), one engineer (who is maintaining the large engine), and a couple of able seaman, one of whom is on lookout at the front of the ship.

      I doubt they could do away with the engineering positions. These ships have large engines which require continuous maintenance. It won't be done by robots any time soon.

      Perhaps they could automate the captain/lookout positions. Doing so would reduce the people on a shift from 5 or so, to 3. Perhaps there could be one captain for a convoy of ships, and a single lookout for the forward-most ship in the convoy. Also they could reduce the steward/cook to one person (instead of two) per ship in that case.

    5. Re:What do the humans actually do on a ship? by viperidaenz · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This idea is being proposed by an engine manufacture. I'm sure they thought about engine maintenance.

  3. Re:until someone hacks it by Cryacin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Hmmm, let's see. Several tens if not hundreds of millions of dollars of floating kit, carrying possibly just as much value in cargo, int he middle of nowhere, with no-one in sight, just a video camera. Hmmm.

    Will the pirates at least wave and say thank you to the crew when they take manual control of the ship? How about just looting a few cargo containers as it's travelling along?

    --
    Science advances one funeral at a time- Max Planck
  4. Laws would have to be changed by the_Bionic_lemming · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If someone boards an unmanned drone ship, wouldn't they be able to claim the ship as salvage and sell the contents?

    --
    _ _ _ Go for the eyes Boo! GO FOR THE EYES!
    1. Re:Laws would have to be changed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Absolutely!

      Also, international law requires that every ship continuously maintains a "proper" watch by all possible means while at underway. Further, all ships are required to render assistance to any ship or crew in distress. An unmanned ship would by its very nature be unable to maintain a watch 24/7 or pull an injured crew from a liferaft.

  5. Re:Bandwidth by the_Bionic_lemming · · Score: 4, Funny

    It's awesome to know that nothing will ever go wrong in five minutes.

    Altho, it's amazing that all captains who had at least five minutes to respond to everything ever lost a ship.

    It's going to be awesome to have the best new captains who can respond to everything with five minute breaks during their shift! Thank you for your insight! You are exactly what I expect from anon cowards! I bow to your creativity!

    --
    _ _ _ Go for the eyes Boo! GO FOR THE EYES!
  6. Very little benefit by floobedy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Drone ships would have very little benefit compared to ships of today, and would save very little labor. That's because crew sizes are already negligible on modern ships. Ships require very little labor for their operation. For example, a massive containership like the Maersk Triple-E might carry 15,000 containers (equivalent to about 7,000 tractor-trailer truckloads) while having a crew of 15, in three shifts. At any one time, there are 5 people transporting 7,000 tractor-trailer truckloads of cargo. If we reduced those jobs, it would make very little difference to costs or anything else.

    Bear in mind that three of the 15 positions are the engineering staff who are frequently performing physical operations on a massive engine. Those jobs will not go away by having a single captain for multiple ships.

    The number of jobs on a ship is decreasing every year anyway, as ships gradually grow larger. Larger ships generally do not have larger crews, so the amount of labor per unit of cargo keeps dropping anyway. Large containerships today carry more than twice the cargo of ships from 20 years ago, while crew sizes have not grown, so the amount of labor per unit of cargo has dropped by half and continues dropping.

    Labor costs are already an extremely small fraction of the costs of operating a ship. It would make little difference to reduce labor costs further.

    1. Re:Very little benefit by floobedy · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I should also point out that the statistics mentioned in the article are incorrect. From the article:

      Crew costs of $3,299 a day account for about 44 percent of total operating expenses for a large container ship, according to Moore Stephens LLP, an industry accountant and consultant.

      A modern containership can cost $200 million, and can consume 300 tons of bunker fuel per day. Thus, the fuel costs are over $100,000 per day, and the costs of the purchase of the ship are over $50,000 per day.

      Thus, crew costs are more like 2% of all costs, and not 44% as the quotation indicates.

      The only way to arrive at the 44% figure is if you break down containership costs into capital costs (the cost of the ship), bunker costs (fuel), and operating costs (not including fuel). This kind of breakdown is commonly done. If you break things down in this way, "operating costs" are generally about 10% of the total cost of running the ship, and labor costs would be 44% of that ~10%. Thus, labor costs altogether are a few percent of the cost of running a ship.

      The article does not spell this out, and gives a mistaken impression.

  7. Re:until someone hacks it by tlhIngan · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Hmmm, let's see. Several tens if not hundreds of millions of dollars of floating kit, carrying possibly just as much value in cargo, int he middle of nowhere, with no-one in sight, just a video camera. Hmmm.

    Will the pirates at least wave and say thank you to the crew when they take manual control of the ship? How about just looting a few cargo containers as it's travelling along?

    And yet, the outcome is still better than it is now, where they hijack the ship and hold the crew ransom. Here, they hijack the ship, and.. that's it. There's no crew to hold for ransom, no one to talk to for instant quick payment, etc. You save human lives.

    The only way to make money is for the pirates to go and sell the contents of the containers, which requires a lot more time, effort and money and takes a lot of time. Holding a crew hostage could easily get $10M+ in a week. Making money selling what's in the containers takes far longer.

  8. Re:I'm sure pirates will like them. by davester666 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    in containers that aren't labelled, stacked 5 high and 10 wide [or more], where you would have to move most containers to be able to actually open them to see inside, nevermind the whole "in the middle of the ocean without a road in sight" thing.

    and while it could be fairly easy to disable remote control of the ship [by physically destroying/disconnecting the antenae/satellite dish], and they can kill the engine, it may not be that easy to get control of the ship to get it to shore in a reasonable [for the pirate] way.

    maybe it will become a 'give us money or we'll sink it' thing?

    --
    Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
  9. Re: and what about the welfare for the people auto by pitchpipe · · Score: 4, Interesting

    You really hate washing machines and tractors too? How much human work is lost because of machines?

    Some ... for now. What happens when all of the ~4,000,000 truck drivers in the US are out of a job due to automation. Oh, they'll go to work fixing robots.Mmm hmm. As someone who has been doing controls systems engineering for the last 10 years, I can tell you that these systems are getting better all of the time. I used to get calls at night and on weekends a lot. Now, very few calls. The hardware and software tools and upgrades make it so that the system is very robust. Now, very few calls.

    And those truck drivers? Well, I can tell you that the electrical technician's (we have about the same amount as we did 10 years ago) workload has also decreased. Motor brushes are going away. Bearings are becoming sealed, or automated grease systems installed. Breakers: now know when they are able to trip the load, they can isolate the load to the least affected area, and they can minimize the damage because they are so fast. Things last longer because of materials engineering and computer modelling. These guys just don't have that much to do anymore (Kaizen boards, and PRTs notwithstanding, that shit is just make-work).

    And really, have you met many truck drivers? Some are very intelligent, but the vast majority have a boring mindless job for a reason.

    Take automated cars for instance: Taxicab drivers out of a job. But not only that. Maybe I and my neighbors sign up for a service where a self driving car is called up and arrives where you are in a matter of minutes. I'm not going to buy another car, that's just a waste of money. Also, less cars on the road because they are operating all of the time. Think about how much time your car just sits there. (There's a job at Ford that I've contemplated applying for, but this gives me pause.) And then, less accidents. Bye bye insurance middleman. Bye bye auto body repair guy.Oh yeah, don't forget to apply for a job fixing robots. Bye bye garages. I'm sure our houses will just become bigger.

    I could keep typing along these lines, but maybe you could put your mind to this line of reasoning and come up with many more examples. Seriously, the near term future is vastly different than what we've been experiencing. But in the long term, that's a good thing. And the long term future is radically different.

    --
    Look where all this talking got us, baby.
  10. Re:until someone hacks it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    And no control over the contents that specific ship may have, or whether they can find a market for the booty...I don't buy it either.

    I was under the impression that the whole point of the piracy was the payoff on the hostages, and really had nothing to do with the ship's cargo. (generalization, not 100% accurate)

    And no control over the ship either. The remote crew could just sail it to the nearest friendly warship.

  11. Re:until someone hacks it by DrXym · · Score: 4, Interesting
    With no "good guys" to care about, there are all kinds of novel things the ship could do. It could be remotely or automatically steered to the nearest warship or safe harbour. Parts of the ship could made impassable with bars or shutters. Other parts could flooded with tear gas, frictionless liquids, strong adhesives, permanent marker dye etc. On the outside nets or grapples could be thrown out to foul the pirates boats or propellers. Stun grenades could be fired etc. Cargo could be protected with electrified fences, barbed wire etc.

    The ultimate failsafe if remote control was impossible and communication was disabled would be to trip a few circuits deep in the ship, jam the rudder and drop anchors. Good luck towing that. Basically it could be made really unpleasant and futile to hijack these ships. But it could make for some amusing news headlines.

  12. Re:until someone hacks it by Electricity+Likes+Me · · Score: 5, Insightful

    And no control over the contents that specific ship may have, or whether they can find a market for the booty...I don't buy it either.

    I was under the impression that the whole point of the piracy was the payoff on the hostages, and really had nothing to do with the ship's cargo. (generalization, not 100% accurate)

    And no control over the ship either. The remote crew could just sail it to the nearest friendly warship.

    Also no need for the ship to look like a regular ship to start with. No need for fixed railings or entrance ways at sea-level - good luck grappling to that.