Solar Voyager Trip Ends

Canada has a Navy?

they do have 2 oceans and the North Pole

3...

Indian too? jk

Of course we do!!

Good grief, the things some people think. Look, you can see it in the second picture beside the SV and the big boat- and its got both front and rear admirals, not to mention midshipman!

I know you Cannuks would have a statistical overload of REAR Admirals.

It is a stealth Navy. The stole it from the Brits. (or borrowed).

Well it didn't really fail by breaking, just hamstrung by pollution...unless of course it was captured in some fishing vessels net...then we might say a communication failure....

You don't suppose they could have cut out the fouled line/net and set the little gal back on her way again?

So they didn't manage to sink anything or to dent the finances of some European fisherman by snagging their nets, they just dented the finances of some unsuspecting American or Canadian fishing folk. If the country hicks think that two tiny spots of yellow constitute a high visibility paint job I have to disagree. I still can't see where the 360° visibility light is???

On a serious note. Because this artificial log, bobbing around at the mercy of wind and tide, did not do any serious damage this time it does set a dangerous precedent for the future. If the hicks are going to try again, PLEASE encourage them to do it in a way where neurotic Brits can't find so many legitimate faults. I do have a problem with unmanned ships and supertankers where one man is left on the bridge watch for several hours at a time. I don't have a problem with genuine pioneers doing something daring and different. Provided they do it in a way that causes no harm or damage (to people or fishing nets)

PS If the Canadian Navy bills them for their time and effort the hicks won't have any money left for another attempt. Navy ships cost a heap of money to run.

So as for the whale tangled in fishing nets - it should be killed for damage to the fishing industry?

I guess they figured it was a really big ocean and the chances of someone running into it was remote (pun intended). What it did prove is we do have a problem with "lost" fishing gear out there in the big blue if such a small vessel should find some so quickly and easily.

I am surprised it did not end up swirling the drain in the mid-Atlantic toilet bowl where all the plastic goes.

Canadian navy confiscates unmanned vessel in the hope of gaining additional intellectual property. Admiral was heard to say "The intelligence gained from this could move our defense efforts forward by decades."

Oops, not "Caption this", Sorry!!

Unmanned and bobbing in the ocean - - - salvage rights????

The mono-hull keel looks close to un-foulable, so maybe tweaking the hull design to make this righting and lateral plane feature more un-foulable and doing some flow design on where to put intake ports for a jet-ski internal prop variant (near laminar flow positive displacement pump), may be the ticket when combined with split discharge ports for directional control. Another possibility would be to combine a sheer mounted scull blade, the action of which could be both propulsion and navigation; the device would shed gear, sargassum, etc., and with some fancy-schmancy drive control algorithms may be even more efficient than a low speed mostly laminar-flow pump prop system.

Hey, Senegal has a navy and would welcome the opportunity to escort the little boat that could beyond the reach of coastal pirates. Much less loose gear in the tropical Atlantic. But there is always the possibility it could get seriously off course and end up in the Falklands, which would definitely raise the hackles of Her Majesty's Navy.

This bit of kit is designed to stop prop injuries to skiers towed behind power boats!!!! You will note that there is no mesh on the intake side of the prop so the prop wash will pull flotsam into the basket and foul much quicker than a conventional setup. To work the vessel would have to be running backwards. Ha, don't I remember a few days back posting that your vessel was going backwards. My apologies, maybe this thing would work for your artificial log.

This whole project has the potential to be far more than a high-tech tinker-toy stunt. Solving the navigational security (safe shipping) and propulsion problems can produce a near-autonomous sea-surface roaming vessel that is more than a scientific data collection platform. Unfortunately, it will take DARPA figuring out how to mount laser weapons and cruise missiles on the big brother before the real humanity-benefiting direct applications to transport, mariculture, sea-water mineral refining, etc. may be realized.

We already have near autonomous sea surface vessels. The Yara Viking the worlds largest oil tanker displacing ½million tons and 500m long has a crew of 40. That is very high for a tanker, as a crew of 20 is typical. The Exxon Valdez only had a crew of 20 and crew fatigue was one of the contributing factors according to the findings of the enquiry. The Mærsk Trpple E container ships, ten of which are in commission or on the stocks, have a crew of 19, but the company claims that the ship can be operated with a crew of 13. They want to cut the amortized crew wage costs for the average value $120,000 of goods in one of the 18,000 20ft containers on the 17 day trip from Shanghi to LA from $36.10c to $25.30c (2014 costings taken from a Mærsk Shipping internal memo) Even multiplied by 18,000 containers the saving are equivalent to a couple of hours fuel costs. Given that the insurance loss value is over $2billion plus the value of the ship, I would quadruple the insurance premiums for any vessel that could not put 4 men on bridge watch for a maximum of 2 three hour shifts in any 24 hours. I would ban the writing of any insurance for unmanned vessels. Maybe that would help keep the seas safe from accidents and pollution. The whole problem with this project is that it does have the potential to be more than a high tech tinker toy stunt, it sets a dangerous precedent.