Autonomous Mayflower to attempt Atlantic crossing, again

The Mayflower Autonomous Ship (MAS) is attempting to sail across the Atlantic Ocean with no humans on board again, after it failed three days into its first trip last year. Named after the 17th century vessel that carried over 100 passengers from England to what is now Massachusetts, the MAS was initially designed to retrace …

[Pascal Monett]

Not the ultimate goal ?

So what is it you actually want this for, taking pics of penguins ?

Honestly, an unmanned ship is good for what if it is not transporting cargo ? It's not like you can task it with conducting scientific surveys on land.

Sure, you could tell it to go to a given "remote point", and then what ? It takes some samples of seawater and a video of the shore ? And ?

The only reason for automating a ship is to make cargo ships that don't need personnel on board. Anything else is just pie-in-the-sky wishful thinking.

[Screepy]

Re: Not the ultimate goal ?

There are probably some good uses.

A good example would be searching for wreckage on the ocean floor.

When the Air Malaysia flight disappeared off Western Australia a few years ago, ships spent days/weeks scanning the ocean floor.

If you could get a fleet of these automated ones to head out, scan an area and report back, I be think that would be pretty useful.

Ideally they'd run off solar/wind and not rely on fossil fuel (removing the need to return for refuel).

The fact that they're still trying to just get the ship to sail in a straight line between two points suggests we may be still quite a way off my example though - baby steps ;)

[Stevie]

Re: Ideally they'd run off solar/wind

Because side scan sonar is so economic with the electricity.

Considering the actual business involved in doing a deep water undersea wreck search rather than simply lading and unlading cargo containers this idea simply does not stack up agains the cargo boat idea.

[A Non e-mouse]

Re: Not the ultimate goal ?

Honestly, an unmanned ship is good for what if it is not transporting cargo ? It's not like you can task it with conducting scientific surveys on land.

I suggest you go and speak to NASA...

[stiine]

Re: Not the ultimate goal ?

And I suggest you ask them that question from Mars.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Not the ultimate goal ?

So what is it you actually want this for, taking pics of penguins?

It's a proof-of-concept. The eventual aim is to sell the technology to P&O Ferries who then won't have to pay anything to their ships' crews...

[imanidiot]

Re: Not the ultimate goal ?

the only personnel you might be able to eliminate on a cargo vessel is the captain and maybe two or three people directly below him like the helmsman and first mate. The rest of a ships crew are (as the article already indicated) always busy with maintenance tasks to keep the vessel in good condition. Doing that while underway means far less time spent in port (which costs money) and far more time underway (which means less time between payouts). And even the captain isn't "useless".

out of the many classes of ship, the big cargo ships are the LEAST likely to get automated any time soon imho.

[Stevie]

Re: Not the ultimate goal ?

"the rest of a ships crew are (as the article already indicated) always busy with maintenance tasks"

That would be just as true with the crashed aircraft finding sonar drone ship though.

Once the ship is shown to be capable of making the atlantic crossing those maintenance jobs become redefined, possibly as in-port jobs.

Not that I disagree that this idea is nuts. Saltwater and electronics do not mix well.

[imanidiot]

Re: Not the ultimate goal ?

A ship is not earning money birthed in port. There is no way regular maintenance will ever be getting done in port if it can be done underway. And there is no way to do all regular maintenance during loading/unloading operations as that's just too little time. Container ships are often only alongside the berth for about 8 hours, in which time all other operations would also have to be completed. That's just not happening as large parts of the ship are simply unsafe to be in during (un)loading operations.

[Prst. V.Jeltz]

Re: Not the ultimate goal ?

The only reason for automating a ship is to make cargo ships that don't need personnel on board

I'm sure there are some itinerate South American farmers who have already mastered this. They just keep quiet about it.

[Gene Cash]

Re: Not the ultimate goal ?

At a demo of the principle of the electric generator, an audience member asked Mr. Faraday, the behavior of the magnet and the coil of wire was interesting, but of what possible use can it be?

Faraday answered Sir, of what use is a newborn baby?

[Roger Kynaston]

Fair winds

I hope it makes it this time though the idea of a 300000 tonne oil tanker with no humans is a scary prospect .

Icon because - Arrh Jim me lad!

[DS999]

Re: Fair winds

Perhaps that's not as bad as you are thinking. Tugboats manage those big ships around ports, so the "self driving" option would only be in open ocean. Even then, a ship keeping lookout via radar, lidar and sonar is probably going to do a better job seeing some tiny craft half hidden by waves than a bored and possibly tired and/or drunk captain.

Much much less to hit in the ocean than on any road other than maybe those in the Outback.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Fair winds

It's not the risk of collision to worry about, more the opportunities for piracy. That 300000 tonnes of oil could fetch quite a tidy sum!

(or more likely, just a few tonnes of it at a time - helps with both the logistics and the risk of being caught)

[A Non e-mouse]

Re: Fair winds

The theory is that pointing a gun at an onboard computer to persuade it to change its course is a bit futile.

(Yes, we all know about IT security, etc, but you get the point)

[ThatOne]

Re: Fair winds

You just switch the computer off and take over manually.

Or load a software update which makes it obey your orders.

Or spoof its owner's orders ("Change of plan, go drop anchor in that remote bay and wait").

My point is the possibilities are only limited by your imagination and the effort you want to put into this.

[Prst. V.Jeltz]

Re: Fair winds

The phrase "They did that in Superman 3" is usually reserved for the' money transaction rounding off' scam when its brought up .

They also did this oil tanker thang too!

I wonder what else from that movie will come true?

runaway traffic signals?

overly generous ATM machines?

The leaning tower of pizza being straightened?

The rogue underground AI supercomputer?

[parperback parper]

Re: Fair winds

Your opponent in the game Carrier Command 2 is an AI controlled ship.

There are some amusing ways to win.

[stiine]

Re: Fair winds

Define 'win'....

[DS999]

Re: Fair winds

You have to get to the computer first, it could be pretty well protected with bank vault like security, ditto the engine room and any hatches that let you get at the oil.

You could electrify the deck plating if cameras detect someone boarding it during transit. Or heck just flood that hallway up to the ceiling with oil and drown the pirates, since you'll have plenty of that handy. Lots of ways to handle it, and few pesky laws in international waters stopping you from killing would-be pirates in some pretty gruesome ways without the worry of collateral damage to a crew.

[John Brown (no body)]

Re: Fair winds

You'll still need a way to dispose of the bodies. Some countries might have odd idea about ships coming into port with various and miscellaneous dead bodies decomposing on board. Importation of hazardous waste, at the very least!

[stiine]

Re: Fair winds

Just toss them overboard, its not that hard.

[DS999]

Re: Fair winds

Oil is just decomposed dinosaur bodies, or so a very reliable source on the internet said. So wait long enough and those bodies will make more oil. Win win!

[ThatOne]

Re: Fair winds

> It's not the risk of collision to worry about, more the opportunities for piracy.

I fail to see the difference. It's not like the crew would take up arms to defend your oil against pirates armed with assault rifles and RPGs. SOP is they will try to prevent the pirates from boarding (something the computer can do just as well), but once the ship is boarded they will immediately surrender.

Not that I think big ships will become autonomous anytime soon: As others already stated, the crew is mostly there to keep the ship in working condition, and that is something no computer will ever be able to do.

[Yet Another Anonymous coward]

Re: Fair winds

Also easier to make an unmanned ship pirate proof - no doors or windows for a start

If the "bridge" is a single server locked in a box inside a locked metal room

[John Brown (no body)]

Re: Fair winds

with a sign extorting the values of being wary of the leopard?

[Filippo]

> The MAS relies mostly on its solar-powered engines for propulsion, but has a backup diesel generator just in case. [...] With only solar power, the ship started slowing down and would eventually have run out of energy.

That doesn't sound like what "just in case" means.

[ThatOne]

> With only solar power, the ship started slowing down and would eventually have run out of energy.

I think they stumbled upon the known problem that almost half of a day is night, and solar power doesn't work during those hours. I'm just guessing, but it seems logic; It's a ship, she can't just park and wait for the sun to rise again, that's probably why they needed that generator, to bring her through the dark hours. Once the generator was out, the batteries took a nasty hit, as they were never supposed to run all night on a day's (more or less efficient) solar panel charge.

As I said I'm just guessing.

[pavel.petrman]

I'm surprised

With all those Intel chips and IBM software on board, how come it's the diesel engine that goes wrong?

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't think "sailboat" means what you think it means.

[Anonymous Coward]

its a schooner!

[ThatOne]

It's more of a later...

[Ken Shabby]

A Schooner

Here in New South Wales, that is 3/4 of this ------>

[ThatOne]

Re: A Schooner

Sorry if I'm overstepping, but why on earth do you have a 3/4 of a pint serving???

[Alan Bourke]

So anyway

tell me again how cars are going to be able to drive themselves around central Madrid or somewhere when this thing can't even go from A to B in the vast emptiness of the ocean.

[Yet Another Anonymous coward]

Re: So anyway

>how cars are going to be able to drive themselves around central Madrid

Tracks, amour, no sensors but a compass and a complete disregard for other traffic or buildings

So exactly like regular drivers, except for the compass, tracks and armour

[ThatOne]

Re: So anyway

> how cars are going to be able to drive themselves around central Madrid or somewhere when this thing can't even go from A to B in the vast emptiness of the ocean

Apparently you missed that the problem was her engine breaking down. Which obviously would be less of a problem in central Madrid than in the middle of the Atlantic. Nothing to do with finding one's way.

[SImon Hobson]

Hmm, anyone else thinking about the SS Madame de Pompadour

All they needed was a few robotic engineers, what could possibly go wrong.

[Stevie]

Bah!

"sailboat"?????

[-v(o.o)v-]

Sailboat??

Sailboats primarily use sails for propulsion, not motors.

[Anonymous Coward]

I know that feeling of overconfidence. I get it every time I've written a new piece of software and try to run it for the first time. There is always that hope that it will work right the first time, but that rarely happens. How many times I have to try is almost entirely random it seems.

The question is whether they can afford to do with their "research vessels" what I do in real life -- keep on trying until I win. They're potentially losing a lot of coin every time they try and fail...