Have you checked out Magic's butt lift?

[Capt_BJ]

Magic's new hiney

 

 

exiting Port Canaveral .. 6:30 pm 10/23

Edited October 23, 2013 by Capt_BJ

[NameThatFunnel]

Magic's new hiney

 

 

exiting Port Canaveral .. 6:30 pm 10/23

 

 

I like big butts and I can not lie :-)

[jessicaelostz]

I love this ship .. We had a magical time.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums mobile app

[Host Mick]

Makes her look like she's melting.

Edited October 23, 2013 by Host Mick

[Irene7]

i like big butts and i can not lie :-)

 

lmao!!!

[Scrapnana]

Anyone have a picture of her old bum?

[bear3412]

It looks much better live, than in the renderings IMO.

 

I like it. It looks cool. Better than many other ship's duck tails.

 

I think DCL and the engineers did a great job with the delicate task of added a tail, yet maintaining the visual lines.

 

It could have been much worse.

 

I'm happy. Isn't everyone else ? Especially if she's more stable.

Or is it all about about speed and fuel conservation. It makes you wonder at times....

if stabilty had anything to do with it. lol. :D

 

Happy stable cruising to all the new Magic pax. :)

Edited October 24, 2013 by bear3412

[Capt_BJ]

Ducktail: "An extension to ship’s stern. On older ships the diminished stability can be regained by adding a ducktail. Ducktail is also used on

newbuildings; there the primary purpose is often to reduce the power

consumption for propulsion."

 

The ducktail is the newer attempt, like the bulbous bow before it, to alter the water flow around the hull in a way that reduces resistance and thereby reduces fuel consumption. In some cases modest increase of speed is also realized.

[Ex techie]

Anyone have a picture of her old bum?

 

I don't like it.

Side By side comparison (and although the light in the after picture is worse than the before.....) Urghhh!

 

 

ex techie

Edited October 24, 2013 by Ex techie

[Capt_BJ]

engineering is often in conflict with ascetics

 

from an engineering perspective, as I under stand it, the 'duck tail' brings the ship hull form in to 'harmony' with the wave length generated by the hull going thu the water ... which impacts fuel consumption.....

[Ex techie]

engineering is often in conflict with ascetics

 

from an engineering perspective, as I under stand it, the 'duck tail' brings the ship hull form in to 'harmony' with the wave length generated by the hull going thu the water ... which impacts fuel consumption.....

 

That I fully understand and I know in these times of austerity and protecting the environment it is necessary..... BUT that is bloody ugly compared to how she used to look from the rear ;)

 

Capt_BJ, you or Truck1 might be able to answer this question!

Were the Dream and Fantasy also built with the same shaped hull as the Magic class and thus have to have this added or was this aqua-dynamic hull design built in already?

 

ex techie

[Capt_BJ]

from anything I've SEEN, NO THIS IS not THE design of the D and F and I would go so far to say that this is a very $$ experiment on the behalf of DCL.

 

The organization I worked for also experimented with similar 'modifications' to ships and measured the savings. I can't think of one that was applied fleet wide.

 

In other words I believe corp' thought the many $ to test this was OK ... but is it already on the plans for the next dry-dock of the other 3 ships? I doubt it . . . time will tell.

[Irene7]

from anything I've SEEN, NO THIS IS not THE design of the D and F and I would go so far to say that this is a very $$ experiment on the behalf of DCL.

 

The organization I worked for also experimented with similar 'modifications' to ships and measured the savings. I can't think of one that was applied fleet wide.

 

In other words I believe corp' thought the many $ to test this was OK ... but is it already on the plans for the next dry-dock of the other 3 ships? I doubt it . . . time will tell.

 

Capt: Will the duck tail also make the ship more stable and help it not to rock so much? I know that it had been mentioned by some passengers, that the ship was constantly rocking, even in calm seas. Something to do with balance. I guess this is the answer. Also, don't some of the RCI ships have duck tails as well? When I was on the Disney Dream, I only felt motion if the sea was choppy. Other than that, it was smooth sailing.

[Irene7]

That I fully understand and I know in these times of austerity and protecting the environment it is necessary..... BUT that is bloody ugly compared to how she used to look from the rear ;)

 

Capt_BJ, you or Truck1 might be able to answer this question!

Were the Dream and Fantasy also built with the same shaped hull as the Magic class and thus have to have this added or was this aqua-dynamic hull design built in already?

 

ex techie

 

When I first saw the duck tail I thought it look pretty cool, but when I see it side by side with a photo of her without it, I don't like it so much.

[Ex techie]

When I first saw the duck tail I thought it look pretty cool, but when I see it side by side with a photo of her without it, I don't like it so much.

 

I totally agree.

 

I just wish DCL had spent the $ to extend the rest of the stern above water (even in fibreglass like most of the deck 10 structures) to keep her swooping curve and at least try to hide the addition.

 

from anything I've SEEN, NO THIS IS not THE design of the D and F and I would go so far to say that this is a very $$ experiment on the behalf of DCL.

 

The organization I worked for also experimented with similar 'modifications' to ships and measured the savings. I can't think of one that was applied fleet wide.

 

In other words I believe corp' thought the many $ to test this was OK ... but is it already on the plans for the next dry-dock of the other 3 ships? I doubt it . . . time will tell.

 

I thought I had read that most 15+ year old cruise ships were being retro-fitted with the duck tail to increase the aqua-dynamics and hence fuel efficiency, not some sort of DCL experiment?

 

 

http://www.marinelink.com/article/ship-electronics/system-dubbed-technical-breakthrough-642

 

http://blogs.mirror.co.uk/captain-greybeard/2011/11/how-cruise-ship-splendour-is-d.html

 

 

 

ex techie

[Talex831]

Makes her look like she's melting.

 

Perfect description!

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[Ex techie]

I totally agree.

 

I just wish DCL had spent the $ to extend the rest of the stern above water (even in fibreglass like most of the deck 10 structures) to keep her swooping curve and at least try to hide the addition.

 

ex techie

 

In hindsight, my comment about fibreglass replacement is ridiculous.

It would have to have been in steel as the deck 2 AFT mooring deck would have been prominent in any change to extend the stern.

 

Sorry.

 

ex techie

[Tonka's Skipper]

The *duck tail* has been around for over 20 years in one form or another.

 

The latest design is primarily, as Capt. BJ pointed out , to provide better water flow under and around the hull, reduce fuel usage and increase speed.

 

It will to a minor degree help with stability and reduce rolling.

 

There was some changes in IMO and Salas rules, which I cannot seem to find online, regarding these tails, but there doesn't seem to be any *requirement for them as I was first told.

 

There are other vessels and cruise liners that are having the same/similar tails added.

 

The Magic and Wonder are very well riding vessels and do NOT roll more then would be excepted. The untrained eye, viewing the seas from the upper decks is no way to judge sea conditions that would cause rolling.

 

AKK

Edited October 25, 2013 by Tonka's Skipper

[Host Mick]

I heard it explained in one of the dry dock videos that like many people, ships gain weight as they age. The duck tail recovers the lost stability.

[Ex techie]

from anything I've SEEN, NO THIS IS not THE design of the D and F and I would go so far to say that this is a very $$ experiment on the behalf of DCL.

 

In other words I believe corp' thought the many $ to test this was OK ... but is it already on the plans for the next dry-dock of the other 3 ships? I doubt it . . . time will tell.

 

The *duck tail* has been around for over 20 years in one form or another.

 

The latest design is primarily' date=' as Capt. BJ pointed out , to provide better water flow under and around the hull, reduce fuel usage and increase speed.

 

 

AKK[/quote']

 

Sorry to multi-quote, but if you are saying the "ducktail" has been around for 20 years, why is Capt_BJ saying it is an expensive experiment for DCL?

Surely they have had models of the Magic's hull in those wave tanks and looked at the aqua-dynamic impact (at 10's of thousands of dollars) it has before spending millions of dollars on it?!?

 

ex techie

[Tonka's Skipper]

Sorry to multi-quote, but if you are saying the "ducktail" has been around for 20 years, why is Capt_BJ saying it is an expensive experiment for DCL?

Surely they have had models of the Magic's hull in those wave tanks and looked at the aqua-dynamic impact (at 10's of thousands of dollars) it has before spending millions of dollars on it?!?

 

ex techie

 

Now techie, I said 20 years in one *form or another*, not necessarily the butt we have come to call the *Duck tail*.

 

Capt. BJ is right, every ship will require a custom designed Duck tail and that costs a fair amount of design money and when you add in actual construction costs its getting pretty expensive.

 

Any addition like this seeking to increase speed and save fuel would still be called a experiment until they run her for a while and see if they get the results they are looking for.

 

AKK

[seawise]

All cruise ships that have had more steelwork added in the form of accommodation or enhanced features have had ducktails fitted which can then be ballasted to counteract additional "top weight" and return the ship to its original metacentric height (centre of Gravity). This can also increase the ships fuel efficiency and reduce drag.

 

Most cruise lines are reducing their cruising speed to save fuel and if the duck tail can give fuel reduction this is of benifit to the cruise line.

 

Seawise

 

On cruise ships with ducktails fitted it has shown upwards of a 4% fuel saving.

[Ex techie]

Now techie' date=' I said 20 years in one *form or another*, not necessarily the butt we have come to call the *Duck tail*.

 

Capt. BJ is right, every ship will require a custom designed Duck tail and that costs a fair amount of design money and when you add in actual construction costs its getting pretty expensive.

 

Any addition like this seeking to increase speed and save fuel would still be called a experiment until they run her for a while and see if they get the results they are looking for.

 

AKK[/quote']

 

Ah OK? Just try it and see then?

 

ex techie

[Capt_BJ]

yes, what I was saying is that my organization also tried many of the 'sure to improve fuel consumption AND increase speed' improvements. We'd do the modification and then measure the results on one ship of the class. IME in the vast majority of cases the cost of the modification did not win out over actual fuel savings.

 

So I suspect - no proof, just my opinion - that DCL has done an 'experiment' on Magic and will run it for a time and see if there ARE savings.

 

I'll reference again the bulbous bow ... when a ship is designed with it from the get go, it is a winner. Retro fits ... not so much and not EVERY ship hull form benefits . . . ever seen a destroyer with a bulbous bow?

 

here's a brain teaser: Almost every new sizable ship IS built with a bulbous bow - they improve fuel consumption and ride. If the ducktail provides similar savings, why are ships still built without them?

 

Ship design is not an EXACT science IMO . . . there are still MANY mistakes made. (If you want a horrible example research what the USCG spent to stretch 110' patrol boats to 123' to accommodate extra equipment. Some engineers said it would work while others said no it won't. The work was done to 6(?) hulls and they cracked; re-enforcements were added to the hulls, and they cracked again. The boats the work was done do are now JUNK ... waiting to be artificial reefs)

[Ex techie]

yes, what I was saying is that my organization also tried many of the 'sure to improve fuel consumption AND increase speed' improvements. We'd do the modification and then measure the results on one ship of the class. IME in the vast majority of cases the cost of the modification did not win out over actual fuel savings.

 

So I suspect - no proof, just my opinion - that DCL has done an 'experiment' on Magic and will run it for a time and see if there ARE savings.

 

I'll reference again the bulbous bow ... when a ship is designed with it from the get go, it is a winner. Retro fits ... not so much and not EVERY ship hull form benefits . . . ever seen a destroyer with a bulbous bow?

 

here's a brain teaser: Almost every new sizable ship IS built with a bulbous bow - they improve fuel consumption and ride. If the ducktail provides similar savings, why are ships still built without them?

 

Ship design is not an EXACT science IMO . . . there are still MANY mistakes made. (If you want a horrible example research what the USCG spent to stretch 110' patrol boats to 123' to accommodate extra equipment. Some engineers said it would work while others said no it won't. The work was done to 6(?) hulls and they cracked; re-enforcements were added to the hulls, and they cracked again. The boats the work was done do are now JUNK ... waiting to be artificial reefs)

 

Huh?

 

"The US Navy is recognized as the leader in the development of hydrodynamic technologies for improved ship power and fuel savings.

 

Two of its technologies put into use have been the Stern flap and bulbous bow, both demonstrating large cost and fuel savings. The application of the stern flap to naval destroyers is a recent innovation. The stern flap originated from stern, or transom, wedge research conducted in the 1980s. Stern wedges or flaps have been installed on naval destroyers to create a vertical lift at the transom and to modify the distribution of pressure on the after portion of the hull. The Navy reports better fuel efficiency, higher top speed, and reduced emissions. The cost of implementation, $170,000, can be recouped within approximately one to two years. The Navy also found that refitting a bulbous bow on a DDG-51 Class Destroyer results in tremendous fuel savings from reduced ship resistance. Although the original funding for this project was $3.4 million, savings for 50 ships in the DDG-51 Class are estimated at $200 million. The bulbous bow concept has been well received, and as a result of the great potential for cost savings, bow designs for future ships are being reexamined. The success of the bulbous bow retrofit has resulted in the Navy aggressively pursuing spin-off technologies with the potential for similar fuel savings."

 

http://www.cleanmpg.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-43235.html

 

ex techie