NCL Wins Lawsuit Against ABB for their "AZIPODS" - Now What?

[EvanBedar]

Last month, Norwegian Cruise Line's lawsuit partners, Holland & Knight won a $159M judgment against ABB for misrepresenting the safety and reliability of their Azipod propulsion system.

Great.   So now what?   Is NCL still using these systems, if they now have such little faith in them that they have successfully charged ABB with being fraudulant about their misrepresentations?

If they're not safe, have they swapped them out already?

Anyone know?

https://www.hklaw.com/en/news/pressreleases/2022/10/hk-wins-159-million-judgement-for-norwegian-cruise-line

Edited November 1, 2022 by EvanBedar

[hallux]

24 minutes ago, EvanBedar said:

If they're not safe, have they swapped them out already?

Is there a comparable competitor on the market?  Swapping them would be quite a challenge.

[EvanBedar]

Just now, hallux said:

Is there a comparable competitor on the market?  Swapping them would be quite a challenge.

I mean, perhaps so.  But they can't win a court case proving the propulsion system is neither safe nor reliable, and then not face their customers and tell us what they intend to do about whatever ships are currently using them.

[shof515]

i wonder if other cruise lines will do the same thing. I know both carnival and royal had issues with the azipods in the past

[PATRLR]

3 hours ago, EvanBedar said:

I mean, perhaps so.  But they can't win a court case proving the propulsion system is neither safe nor reliable, and then not face their customers and tell us what they intend to do about whatever ships are currently using them.

Did the suit really prove "the propulsion system is neither safe nor reliable"?  Or is it possible the suit decided that the propulsion system isn't as safe nor as reliable as ABB promoted it to be?

[EvanBedar]

14 minutes ago, PATRLR said:

Did the suit really prove "the propulsion system is neither safe nor reliable"?  Or is it possible the suit decided that the propulsion system isn't as safe nor as reliable as ABB promoted it to be?

The link to the judgment summary is what we all now know.   If there’s something in it you want clarification on, that would require conjecture, and I’m fresh out of it at this time.   
 

I was just hoping someone may have come across other news about revamping of any of the ships’ propulsion systems and so far it doesn’t look like it. 
 

 

Edited November 1, 2022 by EvanBedar

[Two Wheels Only]

chengkp75 would be a better source for info but from what I've read, the main culprit was the VO2300 model of Azipods which seem to be the older versions. More current NCL ships seem to use XO versions...whatever that means. 

[JGmf]

5 hours ago, EvanBedar said:

Great.   So now what?   Is NCL still using these systems, if they now have such little faith in them that they have successfully charged ABB with being fraudulant about their misrepresentations?

If they're not safe, have they swapped them out already?

 

We're all reasonably assuming that NCL wouldn't continue operating a ship if there was indeed, foreseen risks to health and safety of anyone.

 

From my time working with built, engineered systems, what usually is the case is that the manufacturer fails to live-up to its specifications for performance and/or required maintenance, driving the owner (NCL in this case) to spend extra time and money to ensure that something works properly (enough).

 

[bonvoyagie]

Here is another article on the issue Jury Awards Norwegian $159M in Damages From Azipod Dispute with ABB (maritime-executive.com). I appears that the older pods are still installed on some of NCLs fleet while newer ships have newer designed pods.

[MoCruiseFan]

12 hours ago, EvanBedar said:

I mean, perhaps so.  But they can't win a court case proving the propulsion system is neither safe nor reliable, and then not face their customers and tell us what they intend to do about whatever ships are currently using them.

 

That is not what the law suit said.  It said the manufacturer misrepresented the safety and reliability.  That means that what they stated was not accurate.  They overstated it to some degree is what was adjudicated.  It could be that the manufacturer stated they were 100% reliable when in reality they were only 80% reliable for example.  Does not mean they are unreliable or unsafe.  It also does not mean that steps cannot be taken to use them in a safe and reliable manner.

[dexddd]

18 hours ago, EvanBedar said:

Last month, Norwegian Cruise Line's lawsuit partners, Holland & Knight won a $159M judgment against ABB for misrepresenting the safety and reliability of their Azipod propulsion system.

Great.   So now what?   Is NCL still using these systems, if they now have such little faith in them that they have successfully charged ABB with being fraudulant about their misrepresentations?

If they're not safe, have they swapped them out already?

Anyone know?

https://www.hklaw.com/en/news/pressreleases/2022/10/hk-wins-159-million-judgement-for-norwegian-cruise-line

Welcome to CC.

[chengkp75]

I'll answer a few questions about this:

 

1.  The lawsuit was about the representation of the reliability of the azipods.  ABB relied on safety and reliability data from smaller installations to project reliability figures for the much larger cruise ship models they produced.  

2.  ABB has an almost complete monopoly on "podded propulsion systems" for cruise ships.  The only other manufacturer of note is Rolls Royce/Kongsberg, but they have had their own reliability issues from day one, and have a miniscule market share.

3.  The main issue comes from the "thrust bearing" in the azipod.  This bearing takes all of the thrust that the propeller makes in the water, and transfers it to the ship's hull to propel the hull through the water.  Due to the design of the azipod, the size of these bearings is limited, and so the loading (force per square inch) goes up, and apparently the bearing design and metallurgy did not upsize as easily as the rest of the pod when sizing up to cruise ship sized pods.  This lead to "premature" bearing failure.  This means that ABB claimed that in normal use, the bearing would last a minimum of 5 years of service (requiring renewal every dry docking), or longer.  This did not prove to be true.

4.  As noted, the problems primarily exist with the older VO model pods, where the thrust bearing cannot be changed out without a dry docking, so a premature failure requires an emergency dry docking, and associated increase on operating cost.  In the newer XO model pods, the bearing can be changed out without dry docking.

5.  While many think that azipods are "tried and true" technology, but in the maritime field, they are actually still (after 20 years or so of use) considered "cutting edge".  There are about 700 azipod units (of all sizes) out there, with less than a 20 year average "historical lifespan" to provide data.  Shafted propeller drives (where the thrust bearing is inside the hull of the ship, and therefore has no real size limitations), have been around for 160 years, and there are over 50,000 ships out there currently using this technology.  So, you can see that azipods have a very small data base for service life of components.  But, the bearing failures of the past with azipods are leading to not only the XO models, but continually testing new designs and metallurgy for the bearings to increase reliability.

6.  Whether or not NCL will upgrade all the older VO model pods to the XO pods will remain to be seen, this cash will be used to weather the current financial crisis, with no thought to upgrades.  ABB has produced "historical service life" curves, and the cruise lines are now using these to plan maintenance intervals that fall within the 90% reliability range, to preclude (though nothing can prevent) premature failure.  As the VO pods are older, the ships with them are older, and will require shorter dry dock intervals (2.5 years instead of 5, regardless of whether they have pods or not), so it may simply be a case of increased maintenance cost to overhaul the pods at 2.5 years instead of 5.

[EvanBedar]

No further questions here.   Thank you sir.  

[steamboats]

Royal Caribbean had a lot of problems with the Allure of the Seas´ azipods and the bearings.

 

So it´s definitely not just NCL.

 

steamboats

[hallux]

30 minutes ago, steamboats said:

Royal Caribbean had a lot of problems with the Allure of the Seas´ azipods and the bearings.

 

So it´s definitely not just NCL.

 

steamboats

Oasis as well.  It was the Oasis that was in the Grand Bahamas Shipyard, partially out of the water (there isn't currently a dock there big enough to fully lift those ships) for service on at least one of the pods when 2 cranes collapsed, damaging the ship and drydock.  It was a neat solution they designed to be able to do that, but there were apparently some limitations.

[shof515]

37 minutes ago, hallux said:

Oasis as well.  It was the Oasis that was in the Grand Bahamas Shipyard, partially out of the water (there isn't currently a dock there big enough to fully lift those ships) for service on at least one of the pods when 2 cranes collapsed, damaging the ship and drydock.  It was a neat solution they designed to be able to do that, but there were apparently some limitations.

Carnival Cruise Lines had issues with the Carnival Vista pods and they had to use to a floating dry dock. very interesting stuff

[Yesimapirate]

17 hours ago, Two Wheels Only said:

chengkp75 would be a better source for info but from what I've read, the main culprit was the VO2300 model of Azipods which seem to be the older versions. More current NCL ships seem to use XO versions...whatever that means. 

It means they hug the shoreline and occasionally the ship will kiss a sandbar or iceberg. 

[hallux]

1 hour ago, shof515 said:

Carnival Cruise Lines had issues with the Carnival Vista pods and they had to use to a floating dry dock. very interesting stuff

Most or all of the "out of water" work done in that yard has been in floating docks.  I don't see a 'graving dock' there, which is a dock dug out of the shoreline.  See Cadiz for an example of one.

[chengkp75]

1 hour ago, hallux said:

Most or all of the "out of water" work done in that yard has been in floating docks.  I don't see a 'graving dock' there, which is a dock dug out of the shoreline.  See Cadiz for an example of one.

What was meant was that a "heavy lift ship" was used as there was no floating dry dock of suitable size.  Vista was lifted while outside the port of Freeport, as the heavy lift needs more depth to submerge than a drydock.

[EvanBedar]

3 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

What was meant was that a "heavy lift ship" was used as there was no floating dry dock of suitable size.  Vista was lifted while outside the port of Freeport, as the heavy lift needs more depth to submerge than a drydock.

At this point you could tell me that ships are made out of ground pork and I will believe whatever you say.

 

[chengkp75]

2 hours ago, Yesimapirate said:

It means they hug the shoreline and occasionally the ship will kiss a sandbar or iceberg. 

Neither of which was caused by azipod issues.

[PATRLR]

NCL won $159 million.  Anyone know what an azipod costs?

[chengkp75]

7 hours ago, PATRLR said:

NCL won $159 million.  Anyone know what an azipod costs?

About $15 million.

[CarnivalShips480]

Carnival Vista, Carnival Horizon, Carnival Panorama - entire Vista class has had propulsion issues, wonder if Carnival could do a similar lawsuit

[chengkp75]

16 hours ago, CarnivalShips480 said:

Carnival Vista, Carnival Horizon, Carnival Panorama - entire Vista class has had propulsion issues, wonder if Carnival could do a similar lawsuit

If they prove fault by ABB.  These ships all have the newer XO pods, so not sure that this is the problem these ships are experiencing.  Not sure that Carnival is following manufacturer's planned maintenance.  Not sure, even if they are all azipod related.