Launch HN: OutSail (YC W23) – Wingsails to reduce cargo ship fuel consumption

527 points by jmoorebeek ↗ HN
Hi HN! I’m Joseph, and along with Arpan and Bailey we are the founders of OutSail Shipping (https://outsailshipping.com/). We’re building a sail the size of a 747 that rolls up into a shipping container. When deployed, it will generate thrust from the wind to reduce the fuel consumption of a cargo ship. An array of these devices will reduce fuel consumption on ships by up to 20%. These sails are easily stowed and removed to cause no interference with cargo operations. Here’s a short video showing our prototype: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VUpVqzpym54.

Sails powered ships for millennia; but then the convenience of energy-dense fuels displaced sails. As ship speeds eventually exceeded wind speeds, the consensus became that sails had no place in shipping and were relegated to hobbyists and sport. Fast forward a century and a half, and maritime shipping, like all other industries, is facing a reckoning to mitigate the greenhouse gasses produced by their activities.

The International Maritime Organization (IMO) has introduced new regulations which use a vessel’s Carbon Intensity Indicator (CII) to grade ships. This grading scale becomes more aggressive over time, and any ship with a poor grade must take corrective action. The corrective actions can be as non-invasive as reducing speed (aka: slow steaming) or as extreme as a retrofit to use a different, cleaner fuel source. This costs millions and takes a ship out of commission for months, and it’s difficult to ensure your (now more expensive) fuel is available at every port of call. Ship owners are hedging their bets that slow steaming will dominate their future, with ship order books full to reflect the increased capacity needed when containers take 20% longer to cross the ocean.

Or option three. There is sufficient wind on the ocean to power the entire shipping industry, if you’re willing to grab it. Wind Assisted Ship Propulsion (WASP) devices can be used as a corrective action to improve a vessel’s CII rating, without reducing ship speed or changing the route. In other words, a return of sails.

We are hardware engineers with over two decades of experience between us, working at Tesla, SpaceX, JPL, Relativity, and some startups. The idea for OutSail came from Arpan and Joseph getting coffee after work one day. When we asked each other “What would you do if you weren’t building satellites?” maritime cargo came up from both sides; Arpan from having studied the industry for opportunities to reduce emissions, and Joseph from a love of hydrodynamics and maybe too many sea-shanties. Bailey and Arpan, meanwhile, had been looking at working on bicycling infrastructure. What brought the three of us together was actually a Dungeons & Dragons game where we realized we made a good team! We settled on OutSail as a good fit for our hardware hacking mentality, trading in our druids staffs for spanners.

Aerodynamically, sails are simply vertical wings. Wind blowing across the vessel causes the sail to generate lift and drag, and the resultant vector has some forward component to pull the ship through the water. However, if the wind comes from an angle too close to the direction of travel, there is no thrust. As an added complication, the sail only sees the relative wind. If the ship travels faster, the wind will appear to come from closer and closer to the direction of travel, even if the true wind is coming from perpendicular to your course! Despite this, standard sails can still produce forward thrust as long as the wind is at least 20 degrees off from directly in front of the vessel. This is how our sails can still save power, even on a fast moving vessel.

There are many sail technologies out there. A common question we get asked is “Are you going to use flettner rotors/suction airfoils?”. Both of these technologies use power supplied by the ship to increase the lift ...

279 comments

[ 21.7 ms ] story [ 6274 ms ] thread
did you put your prototype on a small boat and test it out in the water?
Not yet. Our first prototype is a bench model without the necessary structure to handle full loads. We're working on the detailed design to get on the water now.
To calculate roll effects of your equipment while under pressure, I would try to make the bench model a digital twin in a stability software like NAPA.
Great idea! The world needs this - if it works.

Just like some strong pressure will bend a tape measure - will a strong wind gust damage your sails?

Of course, there will be limits on the wind speed the structure can handle. Flexing of the structure will be designed in, similar to how a 787 wing flexes by design under load. For stronger gusts, aside from design margin, we are also looking at technologies that can help us see gusts coming, for instance LIDAR systems which are already used on ships which can detect windspeeds for kilometers around the vessel. We can then reef or feather the sails when we see a gust coming and remain within structural limits.
Thanks @jmoorebeek. I wish you tremendous success.
This is neat, but I wonder about applying thrust through the container?

I also was kind of expecting a kite TBH. I wonder if the extra work of a kite is a good trade off, I feel like the tying off the thrust issue is easier with a kite than a mast.

Edit: I see wingsail in the title and I think it’s slightly ambiguous. I want to say this is “mast” based? Not a tech issue but

From our first analysis, applying the thrust through the container seems doable; the containers are secured to each-other and the ship via mechanical "twistlocks", which are designed to handle not just ship loads, but also trucking loads (such as a 2g hard braking from a semi). The roll loads are actually the more difficult design challenge.

Regarding kites, we looked at those quite a bit. The challenge with those is that kites tend to be best for when the wind is coming from behind you or crosswind. For a container ship traveling at high speed, the kites would act more as a parachute and slow you down (even if you were extracting energy from them).

Master Mariner here with bridge experience from sail assisted vessels both conventional and through magnus effect equipment. Also a lifelong sailing competitor.

Have you considered the effect your design has on the drift and drift angle of a vessel yet? Looks like your aiming to benefit from conventional sail assisted lift but there is a thin line between lift and drift. The negative effect of drift induces increased consumption so some kind of trimming needs to be done quite fast to maintain lift effect. To maintain an optimal angle of attack to get the maximum lift requires quite fast adjustments which on sailboats can be done in two ways, either by trimming sails or adjusting course. Adjusting course on large cargo vessels takes quite a while so i don't see that as an option unless the sail is hooked up to a fast acting autopilot.

Do you have plans for how to get the effect of the sail into the loading computer? Would be surprised if any of the current software is capable of handling a dynamic input like that. Seems like an interesting problem, but tough.
Kite systems for cargo ships already exist

https://www.airseas.com/seawing

And they seem to make more sense than sails.

SkySails which is the company knew tried kites seems to have given up ships and changed focus to land-based power:

> SkySails is the pioneer of wind-assisted ship propulsion systems based on kites. The technology was successfully proven on board of sea-going vessels between 2004 and 2012. However, in order to make the biggest possible impact on the ongoing energy transition, SkySails decided to focus on the dynamic energy sector with its SkySails airborne wind energy systems for power production for the time being.

> The SkySails propulsion system for vessels is therefore currently not marketed anymore.

https://skysails-marine.com/ | https://skysails-power.com

Back in the days they even had some commercial orders: https://www.surfertoday.com/kiteboarding/norwegian-ship-orde...

Not sure I buy their reasoning of discontinuing the shipping angle. Seems likely it was a hard sell.

I always though it seems like a cool idea, given that the automatic controls were robust enough. Hope airseas have more luck.

Yeah, I'd say that kites would be far more practical considering that automatic piloting should be easily solved (trivial compared to e.g. driving cars or landing rockets) and structural changes to the ship would be so much smaller.

But https://skysails.com have completely given up on ships (full focus on stationary electricity generation), and they had already been at the point of operating an installation on a real life freighter. But at least it's not clear that their goodbye to ships was due to technological challenges: it might be because of unrelated business events, e.g. the shipping company they partnered with was already on the course to failure (chances are from their perspective the kite project has been a desperate hail mary from the start), and are some point the not-electricity part had mostly pivoted to shopping management software and that part was eventually completely separated from anything kite related.

Masts have rigging for a reason. You can't just fold one up in a box; the physics doesn't work, mast will be torn off by the first big gust.
Sails can be deployed without conventional rigging. I have experience of these so called free standing rigs myself. Dynaspar rigs is one real life example.
There are many designs of unstayed masts throughout history including modern designs with aluminum and carbon fiber: https://www.google.com/?q=unstayed+mast&tbm=isch

America’s Cup AC55 yachts come to mind with an unstayed carbon fiber wing. As do friendship sloop two masters.

Freestanding rigs do exist, but as you're likely aware, they transfer all their loading and stresses through their mast step - most often being stepped through the deck so you essentially have the full hull height worth of support. Not sure which AC class you're referring to either - all the wing based boats absolutely have standing rigging, they just don't have spreaders since they're rotating masts.

Even if this proposed mast is stepped through the entire container, the forces on it will be plenty to cause issues since the containers are only held down by neighbouring containers and the 4 anchoring twistlocks. This proposed design will 100% require standing rigging to support it - the claim that the rig will only experience 10s of kn of loading is almost certainly incorrect as well - 30ft racing sailboats will experience loads exceeding that at the chainplates regularly. The moments about a mast are huge, even on relatively small rigs.

It was the AC50 and I see you’re right; it does have standing rigging.
How are they powered?
I would assume the same way reefer containers are, hooked up to the ships onboard power distribution. Electrically rigged sail of this magnitude does not impose any significant loads on the grid onboard
We actually plan to go a step further, and power these containers from an internal battery pack. We can then recharge the pack passively when deployed (small wind turbine or solar). Of course we can optionally hook up to ship power if it's available, but we're planning for the case where it is not. As you say, the power to operate these devices should not impose a large electrical load.
Sounds like step further indeed. Considering all the equipment and ideas raised so far, would be amazing to have a look at how you would arrange all this inside the oversized container. Must be quite an intricate puzzle inside.
Feel free to reach out to us via our website, I'd be more than happy to keep this conversation going!
I know zero about how containers are tied down but the gust forces on the sails that I saw in the video are going to be enormous. Have there been some simple checks on the righting moments on the container and how it transmitted to the containers below and finally to the deck? One benefit of the design is that you can "reef" in bad conditions (hopefully really, really quickly) and perhaps still get some benefit.

Have you done any weather routing calcs to see what the angle of attack for the big ship lanes? Perhaps an integrated trip cost-benefit?

Also, you might not want to use the WASP acronym and stick with just "wind-assisted propulsion". The wind industry will immediately think of the WAsP software [0].

[0] https://www.wasp.dk/

I agree, the roll moments are a huge design challenge! We're looking at multiple avenues to bring those loads down to the deck: - The double wide container already has a longer lever arm to provide righting moment - We plan to incorporate load spreaders (similar to a crane) which can further extend the footprint to the adjacent container stacks - We are designing in tethers which automatically drop down to the deck level and get lashed down by a deckhand during installation, which provide additional tension support.

Bailey has written a routing software which we use to send virtual ships on crossings (for instance Trans Pacific), incorporating historical weather data. Even with no change in route or vessel speed, we can see benefits.

(comment deleted)
> The double wide container

Yikes. Containers are stacked as high as they can be to not crush the containers below. Applying additional downward force is going to cause cascading failures.

You've also just limited your deployment to routes that have double-stack container cranes, which AFAIK aren't that widely deployed.

Have you guys actually talked to anyone in the shipping industry or visited a cargo shipyard yet?

Stability of the container stack is a much bigger issue than the pure weight of the containers. On board a container ship, everything must be lashed down tightly anyways.

Also, sails apply lift, so upwards pull. I know nothing about sail physics, but this claim is in the OP.

Since port stays are very costly, you won't deploy this for anything shorter than a transatlantic voyage anyways. So the double-wide setup seems less of an issue.

Why do you think containers are lashed down? They just sit there and in bad weather some of them fall off, this happens all the time.

Their sail might provide some lift, true, but they also apply rotation and shearing forces around the (double) container like a lever.

There are at least a few that are lashed on some ships.
Containers don't just sit there- they are secured, with a combination of lashing rods and twistlocks that connect the bottom of the container to the deck or the container it is resting on. In fact, there are computer programs which tell the crew exactly how this needs to be done. They do sometimes fall off in bad weather, this is due to failure of the lashings.

See here [0]: "The MAIB’s preliminary assessment found that [the ship]’s violent pitching and ploughing into the heavy seas resulted in a rapid loss of speed and heading control, which exposed the deck cargo to green sea forces capable of overwhelming the maximum loading of the container securing arrangements... corrosion to the vessel’s deck cargo securing arrangements may have contributed to the scale of the loss."

Or here [1]: "At 0800, the ship sailed from Xiamen with 6,466 containers on board... At about 1000, the bosun and four deck crew mustered at the forward end of the weather deck and began a post-departure inspection of the deck cargo securing arrangements... they checked that the manual twistlocks, connecting the first tier of containers to the hatch covers, were locked, and ensured that the container lashing rods were correctly tensioned. With over 12,000 twistlocks and 3000 lashings to inspect, the checks continued all day"

[0]:https://www.gov.uk/maib-reports/loss-of-34-containers-overbo...

[1]: https://www.gov.uk/maib-reports/loss-of-cargo-containers-ove...

I was under the impression that their double wide container rig would be at deck level and lashed down to the vessel; not stacked on top of other containers. This is the only way they could control the vertical height of the retracted sail for going under bridges, etc.

Love how this idea has energized HN.

When sails provide lift, that is forward motion, not vertical.
Yes, this is what I thought too. It feels very back of a napkin without much industry experience. I'd love it to work obviously but the thought that installation will be drop a double container onboard and it can be lashed onto most ships and still provide the amount of force needed seems fanciful. It certainly cannot go on top of other containers if that is what they are thinking!
(comment deleted)
Appreciate the acronym check! That's a great point.

Our design evolved out of a routing/performance analysis software that we run on historical weather data. Angle of attack and trip cost-benefit varies per lane. In general transpacific and transatlantic have amazing winds, with other routes performing well but not at well.

We've done the excel-level analyses on container loads and wing buckling forces. It all checks out. There is a combined-load case at 15deg of roll with heavy containers and heavy winds that's zero-margin, but as you said we can reef when required. Reefing will likely be single-digit minutes, but we can also feather (0 angle of attack) much more quickly.

Though it may not matter much, "WASZP" is also the naming of a popular foiling dinghy sailboat.
Can you reef while the sail is feathered (?) or does the sail have to be aligned with the boat/container to be rolled up?
If you go with WAP you can hire Cardi B as your celebrity spokesperson!
questions:

1) what size container ship are you targeting?

2) how many container sails are needed in an array to achieve 20% fuel cost reduction?

3) what scale of retrofitting is required to install this onto existing fleets?

4) what sort of training is required for existing staff to properly trim the sails / will this impact headcount requirements per ship?

1.We are talking to ship owners with Panamax vessels (3000 – 4500 TEU). Therefore, many of our estimates are based on a vessel of that size. Nevertheless, our product will work with any sized container ship.

2.We will need 15 sails to save 20% fuel on a 4000 TEU vessel travelling transpacific or transatlantic.

3.We will install an override panel on the bridge of the ship, a lidar system to sense wind gusts and some extra lashings will be tied from the sail’s container to the containers below it – that’s it! None of those additions will require permanent changes to the ship.

4.No extra staff will be needed, our sails will be controlled autonomously. However, the captain will be given controls in the bridge if they ever want to force the sails to retract.

Awesome to see this on Hacker News, I love whenever we get sailors on here. I have tons of questions.

Why steel? Durability I assume? Have you modeled using a textile?

Do you have load sensors throughout the wing? Anemometors?

How active is the trimming? Is it just a single axis of rotation or do you have the ability to adjust the leech and luff shape? If so do you have the ability to adjust both the leeward and windward skins? Or just the windward? 2mm steel seems like it has a decent amount of play at that scale? Have you built any bigger scale models with steel? Feels to me like iteration time would take a significant hit playing with steel instead of cloth?

As consistent as these ships are with their speed under motor, the apparent wind will be all over the place. Could see apparent from 50+ on the nose to 5 knots from dead astern. Do you intend to have a fixed set of optimal wind velocities and trim settings? Or want to make something that is usable and automatic in anything but the most violent of breezes?

How much of the bill-of-materials is custom and how much is off-the-shelf type components and structural bits? Any custom composite parts or fairly off the shelf steel tubing, bar, and such?

Also are you hiring?

We're looking at steel partly for durability, but also if we're going to be rolling up the sails a lot then fatigue limits become a lot more important. Cost is key too - I'd love to make this from CF, but price goes way up.

For load sensors, we're thinking strain gauges and pressure sensors to measure wing surface pressure and use that for live feedback. Anemometers might be mounted on the top of the wing, but more likely we'll use a master anemometer at the bridge to send info to the entire array.

For the wing shape, we're currently looking at a symmetric airfoil with fixed ribs inside for strength, so not able to actively change the camber, but we are looking at the ability to do wing warping to change the overall shape of the wing. We are still working to get our first data from on the water, so no good answers on the trim other than we want to make this as automatic and turnkey for the ship master as possible. We're quite early in the design still, though, so don't yet know where the limits of the technology are. Likewise, no answers on BOM and sourcing for you. However, we do plan to start hiring after our seed raise, so feel free to contact us through our website!

+1 to seeing sailing on here :)

I'd imagine the last 1-2 generations of America's Cup boats would have a lot to glean in terms of wing sail camber changes and how they operate. Pretty neat to watch how they use flaps vertically, but there's a lot of hydraulics and carbon at play there as well.

Maybe the competition is these guys? (Inflatable sails) https://www.michelin.com/en/press-releases/michelin-continue...

And something a bit more conventional off the bow when winds are favorable? https://skysails-marine.com/

Skysails seems like it would just be too much for boats to manage. I can't imagine the amount of time you can run that is a large percentage of the trip.
Don't like the potential of the kite going under the boat and getting wrapped up / destroyed in the prop.
Why can’t you ? Kites and sail usually can operate on the same wind angles, the only limitation I can think for kites are bridges which are not encountered in the large percentage of the trip.

On top of that, higher altitudes wind Jane more power potential than the ones used by sails, ask kytesurfers !

The most recent completed America's Cup uses a boomless dual skinned mainsail held up by a fairly traditional mast. The Cats and Tris between the IACC and the AC75 (2010, 2013, 2017) are more something to take inspiration from I'd think with their more complex internal construction. SailGP's wings, have proven to be quite versatile and durable, albeit with significant maintenance. I'd assume a cargo wingsail would be a bit beefier than a foiling raceboat's.

Despite the switch from wings back to "normal sails" In my view, this latest generation of America's Cup is especially awesome from a follower's perspective for two distinct reasons.

1. The rule is similar to last gen, a foiling 75 foot monohull. A number of the initial engineering work and sorta figuring out how to design and build the various systems has already been done, a team wanting to join in on the fun doesn't have to reinvent the wheel with everything unless they believe they can have an edge by doing so. There are old boats for sale as well as a 40-foot model for training the athletes on their controls.

2. There's a centralized repository for reconnaissance. Meaning, every team, and some of the media have access to sailing, launching, and training footage of every team. What has for over a century required each team employ their own multi-national team of spies to surveil each competitor. It was unnecessarily costly and the fans get the added benefit of being to watch much more of each team's boats as their systems morph throughout the design process. I have a friend on the recon team and as well have been exposed through a yt channel, "Mozzy Sails"[1], who does a great assessment on the various teams systems developments.

If you're a fan of F1 for the engineering bits, you'll likely feel right at home following some of the America's Cup coverage. Even the technical documents like the Class Rule and super interesting to me. [2]

[1] https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCK0h2Yj6jcyeXGeITonYnOA [2] https://www.americascup.com/files/m5498_AC75-Class-Rule-v20....

Small world! I head up the IT systems at Alinghi Red Bull Racing. Agree with your final paragraph that it is extremely close to F1 in terms of engineering bits. Good fun!
Always wanted to say hi.
Didn't Newey get his America Cup fix as part of his contract at Red Bull ?
Unreal, Alinghi's got the claim for the last cup win with an American Skipper and the last win in a "true" monohull. Win it back and get Ed into the IACC again! I know he's itching for it, he still matches J/70s in Tampa Bay and Dragonforce Model Yachts in his backyard.

Hope you the best and any if there's chance you need a hand in Barcelona, I'd drop everything for a shot to work on a campaign.

Look at basalt fiber, similar properties to carbon fiber but much cheaper.
> We're looking at steel partly for durability

...

> For load sensors, we're thinking strain gauges and pressure sensors

"We're looking"? "We're thinking"? Considering your demo video was a guy showing off folded printer paper secured with duct tape, and a gauzy fabric built around an off-the-shelf tape measure....

How far along are you? Sounds like you're nowhere even near a prototype, let alone a beta design. I know every company has gone through a design phase and a (sometimes lengthy) build up... but you don't usually see them start the PR hype train before they've even got a CGI demo or a model that isn't made out of scrap. What is it that makes you a real company, and not just some guy who got real excited about an idea he had last week?

I'd guess that YC advised them to launch now, maybe to get the idea in front of any people (employees, advisers, customers, etc) who could accelerate the concept.

And YC would be betting that their experience counts for something beyond just a random person with a weekly idea:

"We are hardware engineers with over two decades of experience between us, working at Tesla, SpaceX, JPL, Relativity, and some startups."

Personally, and I know that is outside the SV bubble of experience, I would have expected at least one founder with a solid background as a naval architect and another one with an equally solid background in container shipping.

The experience you listed read more like name-dropping PR to sell this whole thing to other investors down the line.

Or maybe some sailing experience. It didn’t sound to me that they are active sailors.

Will there be a keel or any other foils to help create lift to not just get blown sideways?

To me this seems like solar roofs on electric cars. An obviously good idea that doesn’t really have a meaningful benefit.

And it is not even the first time someone tried.
Container ships don't have keels or other foils like real sailboats do. That wouldn't really be possible due to limited hull space and draft. But the hulls are somewhat resistant to leeway on their own.

The various supplemental sail technologies being tried to improve merchant shipping fuel efficiency are mostly only effective going downwind. They have to make serious design compromises compared to a dedicated sailing rig in order to meet cost and space constraints. But with the cost of fossil fuels expected to continue increasing (eventually including perhaps some sort of carbon tax or emissions cap) even a minor increase in efficiency is worth pursuing.

My guess is that some sort of deployable kite sail will eventually win out instead of this wingsail concept. We'll probably start to see that integrated into new ship designs as the cost is pretty low and the equipment occupies a fairly small volume at the bow.

And when those sails are integrated, which is far from certain, I somehow have my doubts the supplier will be some scrappy start up.
They obviously have nothing except the idea. However, you are being wholly unfair to them expecting a prototype. Even with the entire YC funding they won't be able to build more than a scale model, no chance for a working prototype.

This is a very cool, very hard idea to execute - i shudder to think at the kind of testing, reliability and certification you need to ensure a foldable ten-storey building is safe around human crew in gale force winds. It's a moon shot, and sometimes these take you on the Moon.

This is an awesome idea! Whilst I know nothing about containers, I find myself wondering if the connections between containers would be able to support the massive moments of force from these sails. Also, would you have to ensure that all the wings are based at the same height on deck for stability or can that be effectively managed through extending and contracting individual wings? Finally, suppose you need the sail containers to be as close to the deck as possible (anticipating one response to my previous thoughts), how much shipping volume would be sacrificed by being unable to place any containers directly above?
Neat! I love seeing this type of technology, offloading/optimizing using a fairly simple idea; though I doubt it's realization was easy!

Nitpick: you seem to have a typo under "Safe": it says "safely and secularly" which I'm fairly sure should be "securely".

Godspeed!

Hahaha, thank you - just fixed! Our website was drafted up quickly to show off our marketing video - can you tell?!
I like wingsail. I learnt a lot about it when i do some digging about catamaran few years back. There's some of them equipped with combination of wingsail and solar-battery which is neat. Really hope it becomes big in shipping industry. Have smooth journey you guys!
how is this better than the computer guided kite?
Kites are incredible for sailing downwind; however, they don’t produce sufficient thrust when sailing upwind. The vast majority of container ships travel faster than 15 knots causing most of the wind they experience to be upwind.
Questions for the maritime folks in the group: What would it take to re-start the shipbuilding industry in the U.S.? In a world of potentially more contested waters, is there a need for smaller more nimble cargo ships or will the unit economics of large ones always outcompete them? Any innovations you're surprised don't exist in the industry yet?

Yes, I am fishing for ideas!

Probably not the idea you were fishing for but

https://www.realclearscience.com/quick_and_clear_science/201...

Still awesome, I've thought about this actually, especially for transporting high value goods inland from difficult environments to ports (I'm thinking deep in the DRC or in West Africa during the rainy season when the roads are basically unusable) but hadn't considered the overall replacement of cargo ships with them.

I thought this was a fun article: https://www.elidourado.com/p/cargo-airships

A practical collapsible container still has not been made. If you could stack 3 collapsed containers in one slot, that could be a game changer for repositioning.
> A practical collapsible container still has not been made.

That's yet another idea that people often think of when people wonder about improvements for container shipping. The container shipping company I worked for studied it every few years. There's various reason why it hasn't been done. It's not just the container or the container vessel. It would be good to reach out to the right people and see what the problems were that prevented this from being used. It wasn't about making a container collapsible, it was stuff surrounding that.

There are sometimes some really nice cost saving projects that were pretty innovative. Plus maybe also easy if someone thought of it. But often it required a bit more knowledge to think of than "add sails" or "collapsible container".

One fun thing what a few shipping companies many years ago is to take existing vessels and make them bigger. So really cutting various parts of the steel and adding more (e.g. height). An random Google example (use retrofit as search term): https://gcaptain.com/upgrades-to-famous-maersk-e-class-to-bo...

The ship building industry is alive and well here in the PNW. I think the biggest threat is the work force. Many people are retiring and we're not doing enough to back fill what we're losing. Add that the Jones Act keeps international companies from being part of the process and we're going to run into a wall very soon.

Innovation is coming, but the labor unions are apprehensive. We have literally heard them say that they don't fear automation and innovation, but "put a steering wheel on it." That's such a short sided perspective and if it doesn't change soon, we're going to see a very crippled industry being outsourced by international companies.

Interesting, definitely hear a lot about the Jones Act and I've heard horror stories RE labor unions (including on the port side of things with a lot of hesitation to bring in new tech that could streamline/automate processes)
My feeling is that would need to get rid of the Jones Act. The protection of shipbuilding and shipping industry have captured both of them and turned them into shadows. Without protection, they would have to compete. They might be destroyed or might survive, but better than limbo.

For example, there is market for shipping containers along the West Coast. Most of the inter-US shipping goes by rail but sea would make sense for some of it. Small container ships would be perfect and locally built would make sense.

A large Great Lakes cargo vessel was recently completed by Fincantieri Bay Shipbuilding (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MV_Mark_W._Barker). Great Lakes vessels need to be built in the US due to the Jones Act, but they also tend to last a very long time in the fresh water in which they operate, so this is the first lake freighter built in many decades.

Ships for the US Navy (including the Military Sealift Command) are also built in the US. So, shipbuilding hasn't stopped, but the US's comparative advantage is not really in shipbuilding.

Cool! Fair enough RE competitive advantages but it does seem like having the manufacturing base to rapidly build a huge amount of shipping capacity (whether for trade or military use) could be critical for the U.S. in case of something like a conflict with China. But maybe that just means that we end up needing a 'Chips Act' for shipbuilding or something to incentivize local development.
This is awesome because everyone needs to read about how cargo and cruise ships burn disgusting, super nasty "bunker fuel" and make the world even more toxic.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel_oil#Health_impacts

https://www.cruiselawnews.com/2010/05/articles/pollution/rea...

How are the Mirage containers powered and controlled? You have a very interesting product and I wish y'all the best of luck!

Also, there's something about the animations in your demo video that reminds me of a Dahir Insaat video.

The Mirage will be controlled autonomously and the Captain will have an override panel in the bridge. It will be powered with batteries, which will be recharged with solar panels or a wind turbine.

Also, hahaha, just looked up Dahir Insaat, thank you I guess?!

Why is a retracting mast preferable to a freestanding rig with, e.g. a roller furling main or a nonsuch style wishbone boom? Is there a physics reason or is this a pragmatic trade-off to fit under bridges and stay out of the way during loading?
Retraction is pragmatic: Air draft and loading/unloading concerns. Wings because they perform much better than traditional sails when installed on ships that are already powering forward at speed.
Typically attempts to fit sails on moderns ships (like the rotor sails that have been installed on some ships in recent years) are targeted at ferries or tankers, exactly because of the loading/unloading topic. Putting large structures on a container ship will interfere with the cranes. And the SC Connector launched in 2021 can tilt the rotor to fit under bridges, with sails half as high as what OutSail tries to do [1]

1: https://www.rivieramm.com/news-content-hub/sea-cargo-ro-ro-w...

This is neat, have lots of questions about how sturdy the connections are between TEUs. Also How difficult is it for the captains and crew to pilot a ship like this? How much cargo capacity has to be forsaken for these to be installed? 20 TEUs?

This feels like something that the govt should be subsidizing through grants.

Does this have any impact on the stability of the ship in rolling seas? Is this an issue that is countered with ballasts or would there need to be thought into a more traditional sailing keel?

Also, what is the maintenance like on these? When I was in the Navy we had huge crews to conduct routine maintenance but on cargo ships, there tend to be small numbers.

Love this - what a cool idea!

From our early investigations, many cargo ships already maintain sufficient moveable ballast (ie: water tanks) in order to handle dock operations, that they can also handle the roll moment from the sails. Maintenance is on our mind too. The possibility with a containerized solution is as easy as "ship it back to the manufacturer by putting a shipping label on it" for maintenance, and we can make sure to have spares dockside for our customers while their main device is being serviced.
Using ballast in port operations is significantly different then using ballast while sailing especially for offsetting a non static moment.

Container vessels are designed to sail at a very specific draught. The bulbous bows on most container vessels are fine tuned hydrodynamic shapes that impact ths wave patterns that ships generate. Sailing at a different draught because you're adding ballast will greatly decrease fuel efficiency. Additionally any added draught also increases the amount of water you have to displace, so again decreasing fuel efficiency.

Further more, I highly doubt regulations would permiss this. I'd have to dive in IMO statues to verify, but imagine because of any event the rolling moment from the sails decreases in a short amount of time. Now the vessel has the same instability that you initially tried to offset, just caused by your own ballast.

I'd be interested to hear what your thoughts are on these issues. Non the less, very interesting ideas

I would be cautious about the twisting loads on containers. The side forces will be huge, especially in a swell. Then add mechanical parts that must work in an incredibly hostile environment, and lastly, add on the north Atlantic in the winter, and you are in for a bad time. Ships losing containers due to stacks collapsing happens very frequently, without any extra forces.

https://alsum.co/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Perdida-de-conte...

Look at a purpose-built sailship from the age of sail in a north Atlantic storm. It is a rough ride.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y7RABaByP_8

Another attempt in a similar fashion is the Oceanbird concept by Wallenius Wilhelmsen, but that means building the vessel from the ground to handle the forces and that over-head loading and unloading is not possible, thus the aim at RO-RO ships.

https://www.theoceanbird.com/

With one vessel already ordered:

https://www.walleniuswilhelmsen.com/news-and-insights/highli...

Personally, as a commercial sailor and software engineer, this container approach screams of VCs throwing money at commercial shipping without understanding the industry. Profit margins are non-existent and are already hugely optimized with possibilities for specialized solutions. This wing sail will have to compete with synthetic fuels without increasing the cost due to crewing requirements.

Agreed on all counts. "Mirage" is the perfect name for this product.
I'm sure it's implied the container itself will be fixed to the hull to meet those requirements
Yep, supporting the moment from the wing via containers is the biggest structural concern. The containers are strong enough in most sea states, with reefing/feathering required in heavier winds and seas. We will stow the sail long before it encounters conditions like the ones shown in your video.

Oceanbird is awesome! The trouble is that overhauling the entire industry with new-built ships would take too long to make a meaningful climate impact, and be extremely expensive (not to mention that their approach only works for ro-ros).

Synthetic fuels will compete with aviation for the green hydrogen supply (needed to make methanol/ammonia/green hydrocarbons) and are expected to cost 2-3x what current fuels cost. This net makes our fuel cost savings case even stronger.

Industry insiders generally already know that there's really no good cost-saving decarbonization solution, and that decarbonizing fast is a hair-on-fire problem for owner/operators. The barriers standing in the way of most wind-assist devices are: poor ROI, shipyard availability for retrofits, risk to shipwoner (capital upfront), and that they don't package on containerships. We solve all these problems by using a large, efficient wing and depending on the container load path. There are technical problems to solve, but the fundamental physics works.

What is the order of magnitude of the wind load generated on one single wing?
10s of Kn . It's <10% the wingloading of a 747.
Every "I'm going to start with a shipping container" solution eventually runs into the same problem: shipping containers are effectively empty soda cans. They are only strong when loaded exactly as expected.

Have you actually talked to anyone in the cargo ship industry about your idea?

(comment deleted)
Ultimately they don't need to use an actual standard shipping container but just a container that's the same shape on the outside.
It's not their container that's the issue. It's the containers below it.
Is the sail-container sufficiently heavy to stay in place, or does it need pull on something that's holding it down?

If the sail is pulling, the container below would see a remaining uneven load from above. Is there a limit to this? Loading/unloading an unbalaned container sounds like a problem, but is it, while sitting on the ship?

To me the problem is transmitting the force generated by the sails to the body of the vessel

A small to medium vessel fully loaded is like 150.000 tons. 10% of that is 15000 tons, imagine the force that needs to be transferred to the structure of the ship in a place where it was not designed to handle that force.

Mass of the ship would matter if it was supposed to hover. Trying to google for engine thrust I found numbers that might be in the order of magnitude of 500kN (hp translated to pounds at certain speed). 10% of that through the kite 500kN. That would be enough to lift 50t, which is at the order of magnitude of the maximum mass of a shipping container. Looks like it might work.
The mass is actually 50.000 tons, I typed wrong. My point is not the force to move the mass of the ship, but transmitting that force to the structure of the vessel in order to move it forward. It’s a lot of force, the structure is not made for that
> Have you actually talked to anyone in the cargo ship industry about your idea?

I worked in the container shipping industry. It doesn't sound like this person ever talked to anyone in the industry. It's not like "add a sail" hasn't been thought off loads of times before. I've seen a few times where people spend 6 months to run a project where they never talked to a person with experience. Then that project would eventually fail. Circumstances and restrictions sometimes change over time, so trying to solve the same thing every few years is a good thing. But "sail in a container", ehh..

"soda cans" is very pessimistic. The structural integrity of containers is very high. Specially the end walls.

The typical problem with containers is non-standard or unsecured cargo pressing against the side walls, which are indeed very weak.

Nonsense. Drinks cans are strong when filled because they are pressurised. Containers aren't pressurised. Their contents have no effect on their strength.
That is why I explicitly said an empty soda can.
>> Oceanbird is awesome! The trouble is that overhauling the entire industry with new-built ships would take too long to make a meaningful climate impact, and be extremely expensive (not to mention that their approach only works for ro-ros).

Shipping is responsible for like 2% of emissions. A 5-10-20% reduction on a small number of vessels for a small number of voyages is not gonna make a dent.

This is clearly intended to supplement, not replace, the ship's existing power source.

You would fold these down rather than trying to ride out a swell with them up. They go out of they way to clarify how easily these can be furled and unfurled.

Im no engineer but this is what i thought too. Just automatically fold the sails when gusts reach above a certain threshold. Shouldn't be too hard, right?
This may be more challenging than you think; depending on how you 'fold' the sails, you may end up with enough 'windage' 'aloft' to over-stress the connections anyway. They'll likely be forced to bring the wing down completely, which will either make the wings small or expensive.
I believe the design is to roll them up like a measuring tape.
(comment deleted)
Well, you don't have to run it in those conditions.
Most of the popular shipping lanes traverse hostile conditions for at least one season of the year.
Everyone's forgetting that this is just like a jetliner wing. Huge forces, harsh environments, long lifespan... this is how commercial airplanes are designed, and one of the founders is a professional aerospace engineer who worked at Tesla.
> professional aerospace engineer who worked at Tesla.

Being fair, this is really broad and doesn't mean much at all.

> Everyone's forgetting that this is just like a jetliner wing.

Just like a jetliner wing that can be folded up. On the plus side, jetliners regularly hit speeds relative to the air that are ten times as fast

It's never gonna work for a multitude of reasons like you said. Usually I'm not pessimistic but this really seems like: we have an idea, make a video, post it on a site, ask questions later.
It probably won't succeed, because most startups don't succeed.
It won't succeed because of physics/math.

They claim a save of 400kW per sail, with a boat cruising at 22kts. Let's do some math:

- 400kW is 400e6 J/s, or 400e6 N.m/s

- 22kts is 11.31m/s

So the forward force must be 400e6/11.31 = 3.5e7N, so around 3500 metric tons of force for a single sail. And with a relative wind coming from the front usually, this means the side force will be much bigger than that.

I am calling this BS

Exactly my point. Not to mention transferring that load to the body of the vessel, which has a structure made to withstand loads in specific points. A container stacked on top of other containers for sure isn’t able to sustain such forces lol not even if it’s well latched. It’s just too much force. Also the ship is hollow, there are like 5 rows of containers below deck, so the deck itself is not very strong except for some points that have the mechanism for the ropes.
This seems really awesome. Just out of curiosity, why not take advantage of the stacking nature of containers to make the wing sheath 1xN? It seems like having a deeper sheath you could get more flexibility in wing construction just by virtue of more room. Also, to echo @roter: how does the stack below the sail container handle the extra force from the sail? Are there extra stays from the bottom of the sail container to the deck/gunwales to keep it from toppling the stack?
I like the deeper sheath idea, but we moved away from that early on for a few reasons. A major one is cargo-handling, because you rapidly hit limits on how high the cranes can lift containers away from the deck. They can't start moving sideways until the entire container is free and clear, and if your container is too tall you may not even clear the stack before the crane reaches its upper limit. From a load management perspective, if you have the choice to go taller or wider, it's generally better to go wider. This also plays into the idea of using tape-spring rollers to store the sail material - it lends itself to being wider, rather than narrower. You can look in a few of our other comments below for more of a description, but yes, we plan to have load spreaders to reduce the compression load on any one stack, and tethers deployed to the main deck to provide additional tension restraints.
Awesome idea. Would the potential savings in fuel not warrant this as part of a more permanent fixture onboard rather than from shipping containers?

(Assuming a fuel price of $550 per metric ton, the cost of fuel for a trip from China to USA would be around $1,485,000 (2,700 metric tons * $550))

We agree that a permanent installation would be awesome, but we came across some difficulties with that idea in customer conversations. First is the number of containers you permanently displace might mean you never recover your investment. Having a removable solution allows you to access the containers under the sail without any difficulty at the port. A permanent solution also requires time in a shipyard to install the foundations and mechanisms. There are thousands of ships out there which will need retrofits, and shipyards are already struggling with capacity, so a solution which you can build inland, then ship to and rapidly install at a dock makes sense to us.
(comment deleted)
With the relative wind angle mostly being dead ahead because of the engines, this means that the vessel will effectively be sailing a close hauled course. When sails are trimmed for this heading, most of the force generated by the sail is perpendicular to the direction of the vessel. In normal sailing vessels this perpendicular force is converted into forward velocity with a keel. Without a keel your sailing ship will just drift sideways when attempting to sail a close hauled course. I'm assuming that giant shipping container ships don't have a keel, so how will these sails generate effective forward velocity for the ship and not just drag the ship horizontally off course?
While a container ship doesn't have a keel per-se, it does have about 200m of flat plate length sticking into the water. At small angles, that flat plate can actually have a decent lift to drag ratio. Historic sailing vessels also made do without a modern wing-keel, so our current plan is that the container ship can crab into the wind by less than a degree to produce all of the side force required to maintain a steady course.
Yeah a classic keel is not needed for bigger vessels as long as GM is low enough. One big difference between sail ships and modern ones is the increased air draft which effects the lift to drag ratio. Looking at your answers so far, I assume you've considered this already.
Yes, I can't say that we have absolutely everything figured out so far, but we have a decently complete model. Windage, changes to draught, and GM are already factored into our models at the root level, and while we may need to still tweak things we aren't waiting to be surprised by their effects.
This is super cool. I hope it pans out this time. I've seen a number of attempts to add sails to cargo ships in the past, and generally they have not been a success because it involves adding a skilled person to the crew to manage the sails and cargo companies are allergic to paying extra salaries, even if they manage to make more than their salary back in fuel costs.
This is definitely a place where we think we can leverage modern automation processes. No need to add additional crew to manage the rigging, and the system should be able to manage itself safely.