Tesla boat

[Lewie]

24 minutes ago, Dientus said:

As to OPs original question, it really depends heavily on what it is they want a boat for. It'd be leisurely travel around the lake, or long endeavors across the ocean, there are currently pluses and minuses to both.

Really just a pleasure craft for lakes

Boats really do suck gas (when you start pulling skiers+tubes) so an electric boat (with widespread use) could really save fuel

[StrandedonEarth]

46 minutes ago, tater said:

USS Wahoo)

Sorry, but that name is just tickles my funny bone 

[tater]

6 minutes ago, StrandedonEarth said:

Sorry, but that name is just tickles my funny bone 

WW2 era USN submarines were named after fish.

^^^ A Wahoo

[SpaceFace545]

52 minutes ago, tater said:

WW2 era USN submarines were named after fish.

^^^ A Wahoo

^^^ A great eating fish!!!

[tater]

4 minutes ago, SpaceFace545 said:

^^^ A great eating fish!!!

Never had it. Will seek it out next time I'm in the sort of place where that might be possible.

[mikegarrison]

1 hour ago, tater said:

WW2 era USN submarines were named after fish.

Yes. But under the Reagan administration they changed that policy to name them after states and cities. This is because, as Hyman Rickover supposedly said, "Fish don't vote."

Edited August 3, 2021 by mikegarrison

[SpaceFace545]

37 minutes ago, tater said:

Never had it. Will seek it out next time I'm in the sort of place where that might be possible.

Basically they are just found in the tropics like the Caribbean and Florida

Also one part of the fun with boats, especially speed boats is all the noise that twin V8s make. The only noise that electric motors make is that sickening whine.

[Dientus]

2 hours ago, Lewie said:

Really just a pleasure craft for lakes

Boats really do suck gas (when you start pulling skiers+tubes) so an electric boat (with widespread use) could really save fuel

Just an opinion mind you. Yes boats use a lot of fuel. Electric boats can use a lot of electricity. The thing about the batteries is they really have to stay between a 20% and 80% charge or they go bad very quickly. So it would have to stay up twith some kind of smart charger that would maintain that for you while it is not in use usually year round.

 

Initial investment in electric boats is much more than gas or diesel and they are not cheap. More so than you would expect. But once done you would get approximately 5 years worth of good use out of the battery. Time will vary depending upon how new the battery is and of course what type which I'm not sure if there's any thing left now but lithium ion new, but used you better make sure you know what kind you're getting. There are still acid core batteries around, and though they may not be common as far as a main storage for electric boats go, they do exist. 

 

After the battery is dead, it is extremely expensive to replace depending upon how the hull is built around it. The battery itself can be anywhere between $3,000 to $10,000 USD plus labor. And of course there is no way to cheaply dispose of the batteries as of yet so there is no telling what a shop May charge for storing a bad battery. Contrary to popular beliefs most old batteries are currently not recycled.

 

There is a safety Factor. Corrosion is a very serious issue with any battery and can get worse when in a constant wet situation, especially if it's salt water. Remember your regular maintenance, of course that's not anything that you wouldn't have to do to a gas or diesel boat as well. Consider fuel tanks storage of fuel emptying carburetors, injectors and so on. In my opinion the safety Factor balances out as long as you use common sense and know the equipment you have.

 

Does this mean electric is not for you? Of course not, because if you consider how much oil and maintenance you would spend on a gas or diesel burner in the same period of time you could easily spend more by far than the cost of the battery. The difference is it's usually not all at once.

 

TLDR; So my final opinion is if you have quite a bit of disposable income up front, and don't plan on Long excursions, an electric boat may actually be just what you need. Always shop around and ask other boaters for their opinions because after all most other boaters have already done it. Their experience can guide you to a happy boating life.

Edited August 3, 2021 by Dientus
correct ion

[HvP]

Please forgive the embedded video, but I thought this was not only relevant, but charming as well. YMMV

 

[kerbiloid]

Listing the electric ships, especially submarines, we should not forget the proven classics.

Spoiler

 

[tauntyyy]

Many don't know it but electrical boats have actually been used for over 120 years. In fact, they were actually very popular between 1880 and 1920. The first electric boat was developed by German inventor Moritz von Jacobi in 1839 in St Petersburg. It was a 7.3 meter (24-foot) long boat that could carry up to 14 passengers at speed of 4.8 km/h (3 miles per hour).

Here is a picture of how an early electric boat looked like

Here is how a modern electric boat (the Eelex 8000 from X Shore) looks like today, so safe to say it's definitely possible to make one :D

[DDE]

18 hours ago, magnemoe said:

Fuel cost at an remote base in southern Afghanistan is high

so much there's now an official project for portable nuclear reactors.

[kerbiloid]

If there is a powerplant at the water, they may just drop the electric cables into water and power the boat from it.

[TheSaint]

15 hours ago, mikegarrison said:

Yes. But under the Reagan administration they changed that policy to name them after states and cities. This is because, as Hyman Rickover supposedly said, "Fish don't vote."

Actually, the Los Angeles, SSN688, was laid down in 1972, under the Nixon administration.

And, funny you should mention it, they're going back to naming them after fish.

Coincidentally, I just got an email from one of the alumni mailing lists I'm on reminding me that my old boat was decommissioned four years ago today. Time flies.

Edited August 3, 2021 by TheSaint

[wumpus]

17 hours ago, tater said:

Indeed, here's a fave of mine:

(USS Wahoo)

Not sure why, but subs are classified as "boats" in the US Navy.

18 hours ago, mikegarrison said:

Hybrid electric drive ships are pretty common.

That's odd.  They can't get a gearing to match the engine speed to the propeller,  or the engine simply refuses to run at the right speed to enter/navigate harbors?

[kerbiloid]

7 minutes ago, wumpus said:

Not sure why, but subs are classified as "boats

Traditions.

Spoiler

 

Edited August 3, 2021 by kerbiloid

[tater]

8 minutes ago, wumpus said:

Not sure why, but subs are classified as "boats" in the US Navy.

That's odd.  They can't get a gearing to match the engine speed to the propeller,  or the engine simply refuses to run at the right speed to enter/navigate harbors?

In the case of submarines, the diesel (locomotive engines, repurposed, actually) generates electricity that charges the batteries or supplies power directly to the electric motor that drives the screw. I believe diesel trains have done the same for a long time.

U-boats (at least the most common varieties during the war) directly drove the screw with the diesel, and had a secondary electric motor for use while submerged.

Edited August 3, 2021 by tater

[TheSaint]

7 minutes ago, wumpus said:

Not sure why, but subs are classified as "boats" in the US Navy.

It's a nickname. Back in the early days of the submarine service the surface sailors would refer to the subs as "boats" rather than "ships", intending for it to be derogatory. The submarine sailors adopted it as a point of pride, and it stuck. They've been referred to, informally, as boats ever since.

12 minutes ago, wumpus said:

That's odd.  They can't get a gearing to match the engine speed to the propeller,  or the engine simply refuses to run at the right speed to enter/navigate harbors?

On nuclear ships, in general, that's exactly what they do. They have large reduction gears that reduce the steam turbine speed to the shaft speed. But there have been several (experimental, and generally unsuccessful) exceptions to that:  USS Tullibee, USS Narwhal, and USS Glenard P. Lipscomb all come to mind. Rumor mill is that they are looking at turbo-electric drive again for the Ohio-class replacement SSBNs. Apparently they've learned something new, or they're just gluttons for punishment.

[mikegarrison]

1 hour ago, wumpus said:

That's odd.  They can't get a gearing to match the engine speed to the propeller,  or the engine simply refuses to run at the right speed to enter/navigate harbors?

I'm not a marine drive expert, but I know some ships do use such drive systems. For instance, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queen_Mary_2#Power_plant_and_propulsion_system

[DDE]

1 hour ago, wumpus said:

That's odd.  They can't get a gearing to match the engine speed to the propeller,  or the engine simply refuses to run at the right speed to enter/navigate harbors?

That's usually the case. Definitely the case for turbines, they have rubbish efficiency unless ran at RPMs well above what screws can tolerate.

[monophonic]

14 hours ago, wumpus said:

That's odd.  They can't get a gearing to match the engine speed to the propeller,  or the engine simply refuses to run at the right speed to enter/navigate harbors?

Maintenance costs mostly, I should think, especially with podded propulsors. The complex angle gearings required for mechanical ones can be quite hard to get to for servicing. I have also seen lesser space requirements mentioned, as there is no need for big shafts running from the engines to the gearboxes and propellers.

Oh, and electric transmission completely decouples number of screws from the number of engines. Power splitting and combining gearboxes are very specialized things and can be hard to maintain or even get right in the first place. (See Freedom-class combining gearbox issues.)

14 hours ago, TheSaint said:

Rumor mill is that they are looking at turbo-electric drive again for the Ohio-class replacement SSBNs. Apparently they've learned something new, or they're just gluttons for punishment.

The technology has advanced by several magnitudes since the eighties, don't even mention the sixties experimental SSNs let alone the battleship era systems. As mentioned complete electronic propulsion systems from engine to propeller/wheel are now commercially available off the self and with both wide and long service history. Very high power semiconductors appear to have been the key to efficient and reliable electric propulsion.

In the submarine context there is also another consideration. Without mechanical links between the turbine and the propulsor the designers gain extra freedom in designing the frequency characteristics of each end. Not to mention reduced vibrating mass means less radiated noise overall, and the space gains leave room for additional quieting measures. Very very very important for an SSBN.

[DDE]

34 minutes ago, monophonic said:

Oh, and electric transmission completely decouples number of screws from the number of engines.

 

34 minutes ago, monophonic said:

In the submarine context there is also another consideration.

Spoiler

Based on USN circa 2002:

http://www.hisutton.com/images/FutureSubConcept_hangar2.jpg

Naval Group:

http://www.hisutton.com/images/Fr_SMX-31_cutaway.jpg

Neither of those are going with the Soviet habit of having two reactors.

(integration of images is derped SMH)