General rule for ships, at least heavily loaded ships, is to retire after some 60 or so years. There’s no exact number but it exists for each type of ship. Reason is material stress. Even though ship might look okay, they have a lot of stress when transporting cargo or in general dealing with waves. In time, these stresses cause material stress and eventually fracture.
This is the reason behind those videos on YouTube where ship splits in half in high waves. It’s not that ship can’t handle high waves, it’s simply that ship owner wanted to squeeze more money out of the vessel and didn’t want to retire it, even though he was most likely advised to do so.
It needs to be cost effective (which might include profotabilit6), be feasible to implement, sustainable, and a bunch of other stuff too.
Aircraft carriers and subs being the only transportationethod using nuclear is a good sign that it isn’t practical for shipping. That is likely a combination of nuclear requiring highly trained staff that are not just out in the work force, the ability to procure a reactor and maintenance parts, the ability to obtain fissible material, the ability to dry dock a ship with a nuclear reactor, and a bunch of other stuff that could even be affordable without being practical for reasons beyond costs.
Best depends on many factors beyond things like efficiency, weight, or durability. Lateen sails are easy to implement with a single mast, are easy to store and maintain, and everyone that has sailed has experience with them. Other sails might do a better job of catching the wind, but with tradeoffs on maintenance and usability.
Practicality is often complex and leans towards easier maintenance and established knowledge.
I wonder how practical it would be to recommission old nuclear aircraft carriers as cargo ships
General rule for ships, at least heavily loaded ships, is to retire after some 60 or so years. There’s no exact number but it exists for each type of ship. Reason is material stress. Even though ship might look okay, they have a lot of stress when transporting cargo or in general dealing with waves. In time, these stresses cause material stress and eventually fracture.
This is the reason behind those videos on YouTube where ship splits in half in high waves. It’s not that ship can’t handle high waves, it’s simply that ship owner wanted to squeeze more money out of the vessel and didn’t want to retire it, even though he was most likely advised to do so.
They’d be in repair most of the time like right now
If it was practical they would be doing it already.
You misspelled profitable
It is far more than that.
It needs to be cost effective (which might include profotabilit6), be feasible to implement, sustainable, and a bunch of other stuff too.
Aircraft carriers and subs being the only transportationethod using nuclear is a good sign that it isn’t practical for shipping. That is likely a combination of nuclear requiring highly trained staff that are not just out in the work force, the ability to procure a reactor and maintenance parts, the ability to obtain fissible material, the ability to dry dock a ship with a nuclear reactor, and a bunch of other stuff that could even be affordable without being practical for reasons beyond costs.
Profit is what’s left after all that shit. My point stands lol
We don’t always do the most practical thing though.
For instance lateen sails are not the best sail design but is used by every sail manufacturer currently.
Best depends on many factors beyond things like efficiency, weight, or durability. Lateen sails are easy to implement with a single mast, are easy to store and maintain, and everyone that has sailed has experience with them. Other sails might do a better job of catching the wind, but with tradeoffs on maintenance and usability.
Practicality is often complex and leans towards easier maintenance and established knowledge.