Sheer line

sydney heads
17th September 2012, 12:11
My curiosity leads me to ask, why indeed do today's designers not consider incorporating the sheerline hull design in modern practise?

Perusing these and other forums, I note and agree with the sadness felt by those of us who remember with warm nostalgia, the fast disappearing classic liner/cruise ships of old.
While they varied in hull colours, funnel placement, deck numbers, and the placement of their tender craft, the one common link to all was was the sheerline.
Nowadays of course they are replaced by the current generation of sheerless blocks of aluminium apartments on straitline hulls.

Is it just money saving to keep ships lines straight?
With todays tools of technology, surely it wouldn't be do difficult to design or construct.

Curious as to what our fellow members thoughts are, or those with first hand knowledge of the subject think?

Cisco
17th September 2012, 12:39
I have a copy of 'Origins, Orient and Oriana' written by Charles F Morris who was Orient Line's naval architect for many years. Worth a read re the probs involved in building a big ship with sheer... its some time since I read it but I think the later Orient liners had no sheer through the entire centre section.

Amazing stuff... building a big ship with sheer and camber on sloping ways....

A.D.FROST
17th September 2012, 13:23
The "Sheer" was to give the bow & stern extra bouyancy,this was found un-neccessary when bulbous bows became more popular on Liners

sydney heads
20th September 2012, 10:45
Many thanks Cisco, I shall see if I can come across that book- would be very enlightening I guess.

Thanks A.D. I never connected the bulbous bow to the overall modern design. I am guessing ship's stabilisers also come into consideration.
Cheers John

japottinger
16th February 2013, 16:41
Cheapness, cheapness

Stephen J. Card
16th February 2013, 17:00
Stephen Payne, former Carnival Chief Naval Architect said that to build a ship with sheer today would add roughly 25 to 30% to the cost of a newbuild.

In the past there were plenty of ships built without sheer and look none the worse for it. QE2 had flat sheer.... flat midships with bow and stern given a flat sheer. NORMANDIE had no sheer.

What is missing today is the lack of 'fairing' of ship's lines. The use of flat plate is taken to the extreme.

Tanks, bulkers and box boats have more fairing in their plates than ANY passenger ship built today. The designers of these ships are not 'artists'. They not nothing about what makes a ship look good. Oddly the auto intdustry takes style to the extreme and we have some damn beautiful motor designs.

Cruise line owners seem to see nothing but a big box, sharp on one end, as shallow draught as is possible and build them as high as they can. Paint everything white. Give them a name that really does lack in imagination and preferably have the corporate name before or make it sound more royal than Buckingham Palace. Instead of a funnel they should built a giant tit on the upper deck. Would make it more easier to milk the bit/ch for all she is worth!!!

Jeff Taylor
16th February 2013, 17:03
I suspect a noticeable shear line would also be very disruptive to the pre-fab cabins used in todays cruise ships which depend on identical boxes which slide in during fit out.

Stephen J. Card
16th February 2013, 17:38
I suspect a noticeable shear line would also be very disruptive to the pre-fab cabins used in todays cruise ships which depend on identical boxes which slide in during fit out.

As Mr Payne said, this is what the 25 to 30% increase in construction costs include.