Maxima

Discussion board focusing on Great Lakes Shipping Question & Answer. From beginner to expert all posts are welcome.
Guest_SB

Re: Maxima

Unread post by Guest_SB »

Yes, that is the Maxima in question.

She appears to be a freighter with a modern design. Basically not much different to the forward pilothouse lakers.

Modern styling, large hatch covers, etc. I don't know that there's anything revolutionary here.

The hull shape is conventional. Not much you can do with a parallel midbody. The stern is similar to the aft pilothouse freighters. The bow is a bit more vertical with modern styling.

The Ports Report is not correct. The Maxima does not have an X-Bow - that is an Ulstein design, a bit different to this (google: ulstein x-bow). The Maxima also does not have a Damen Axe Bow (google: damen axe bow), but it is a plumb bow similar to the axe bow in profile.

The Maxima, to me, looks good. In reality the design isn't much different to the Sykes, Callaway, Kaye Barker, or others. The Maxima just has a "modern" look. In 2093, when she's the same age as the Wilfred Sykes is today, will she look as modern? Probably not.

Is the US fleet going to modernize to look anything like this? Probably not.
JMarx

Re: Maxima

Unread post by JMarx »

Just to confirm, it's the Maxima in this photo correct? ...the picture certainly shows the difference in style between the ships... (understanding the Maxima is an ocean vessel vs a laker optimized for the lakes)

https://boatnerd.com/wp-content/uploads ... 36x864.jpg
Darryl

Re: Maxima

Unread post by Darryl »

Saturday Morning 0920, anchored or staging about 1500 meters off the Duluth Piers out of the channel. Maybe waiting for a pilot? Until I got the binoculars out I thought it was the LAT. Might have to go down to Canal Park and get a closer look when they come in.
Custom500

Re: Maxima

Unread post by Custom500 »

Crew of 10! With todays technology i have been wondering why all those people were needed in the engine room anyway. Trains run without attendants in each locomotive.
Guest

Re: Maxima

Unread post by Guest »

Beautiful design, also runs with a total crew of only 10! Very efficient ships.
Guest

Re: Maxima

Unread post by Guest »

Guest wrote: July 23, 2022, 11:35 am The design rationale for the accomodations forward along with the particulars of the Maxima, and the first ship of the EasyMax design, Egbert Wagenborg, can be found at this link.

https://www.niesternsander.com/project/ ... wagenborg/
Thanks for the link! Very interesting information. Would be nice to see some of these concepts make their way into Great Lakes freighter design with the necessary differences for functionality. I like the comment about the unobstructed line of sight offered by the forward positioning of the bridge that is not obstructed by the hull or project deck cargo. This seems to have become much less of a concern recently with the forward mounted booms on ships with an all cabins aft design.
Guest

Re: Maxima

Unread post by Guest »

The design rationale for the accomodations forward along with the particulars of the Maxima, and the first ship of the EasyMax design, Egbert Wagenborg, can be found at this link.

https://www.niesternsander.com/project/ ... wagenborg/
Custom500

Re: Maxima

Unread post by Custom500 »

Are modern ships run right from the bridge? I.e. no telegraph and a guy in the engine room?
Guest

Re: Maxima

Unread post by Guest »

This ship looks something like a modern version of the fore and aft cabin layout of classic Great Lakes freighter design. Does anyone know what the rationale was behind the use of this particular configuration when the Maxima was built? Was it influenced by a major customer or a particular trade route in mind? Looks almost like it belongs on the lakes!
FWE
Posts: 76
Joined: November 7, 2019, 7:14 am

Re: Maxima

Unread post by FWE »

In 1972 the first 1000 footer to ply our Great Lakes had all accomodaions up forward,
JMarx

Re: Maxima

Unread post by JMarx »

Agree it's a good looking boat... As a practical question, I once asked about the forward pilothouse/rear cabin design on this forum and was told that it became obsolete given the inefficiency of two (forward/aft) structures that require items like potable water vs the now more commonly built stern-ender. Assuming the Maxima engine room is still in the rear of this vessel, are they somehow getting around this inefficiency? Or perhaps having no accomodations aft and only the engine room they can manage without too much overhead in design?
CSLFAN

Re: Maxima

Unread post by CSLFAN »

Glad to see I'm not the only one who has no use for the U.S. tug barge fleet....You know what they say..."If you ain't Dutch, you ain't much"....
Custom500

Maxima

Unread post by Custom500 »

What's with the Dutch? How come they can build the Maxima, a proper looking ship, but we have to settle for a barge with a chicken coop on one end. Well now i see that it CAN be done.
Post Reply