Complexity vs mission-worthiness and reliability

[Gilhooley]

Greetings..

After 10 years, I’m in the process of selling my Nordic Tug 42 and doing that 100% myself for reasons that would not be interesting in a power forum. You have to, at a minimum message a product you’re intending to sell and for me that is easy... the clear value of a low-complexity/purely mechanically controlled diesel. My 6CT and the resulting mission-worthiness is the leading point of emphasis and I selected a boat I considered best in class across it’s product evolution. Minimum viable complexity is a no-prisoners requirement in any machine I’ll own.. a top of mind consideration in anything I’m making/integrating... and the prime suspect on any system design I’m reviewing (“rescue consults”). People simply can’t help themselves on this point.

I’m reasonably educated and experienced in systems, design and electronics and have experienced significant exposure to why systems/machines fail (131 “rescue consults”) and why designers might go off the rails, how to approach design (think) to optimize for the system’s mission, and how to find the faults in system design prototypes. That perspective is how I ended up with Clock Work, and it is something maybe 20% of interested parties I’ve spoken with “get” from the start... The remaining 80% universally ends up nodding in agreement as we speak, though retention/bleed-off can be imperfect. I’m using a new method of generating leads and this new method will likely be (already is) expanding my need to have this conversation, so I decided what I hoped would be a simple cheat sheet for a certain potentially interested person who is not that “mechanical”... a person looking out at what’s available for a second-gen Nordic Tug 42 in the price range where you can actually find engine choice in the inventory, and what they might gain or lose stochastically from pushing their decision one way or the other. That is... it’s for a decider pre-choice.. not post (i.e. already has their boat). Posted here if anyone’s interested. Thanks.

Diesel Engine Complexity vs Reliability/Mission-Worthiness – Silicon vs Cast Iron

Take care,
G

 

[psneeld]

Not sure about other TFers... I know some will read your post with interest.

I struggled.... not sure what you were getting at. Something like because you have a mechanical diesel you think that is a selling point?

I hope you get what you want... just skimmed over the post the first time and lost interest...read it a second time to actually try to understand it. Think I did.... everyone is different... but if all you are trying to do is convince people that a mechanical diesel is the way to go...you might try simplifying the post.

Many here are pretty smart... they either think mechanical diesels are the way to go or not really. Probably why I started wandering even in the first paragraph. Many buyers really don't get that detailed in powerplant selection.

 

[Comodave]

I too struggled with the meaning of the post. But I certainly do like my 6CTA…

 

[RT Firefly]

Greetings,
Mr. G. Agreed although I think it is more redefining representation and plurality of application in an intersectional framework.

 

[DDW]

An interesting hypothetical to contemplate (it will never happen) is what would an engine designer at Cummins do, today, if there were no regulations on emissions? Completely mechanical engine? I doubt it, there are too many advantages of some electronic controls. Those electronic controls could be much simpler, since a large percentage of the complexity is in the emission control part of it.

If we look at gas engines, the best of them today is as reliable - actually much more reliable - than fully mechanical ones from the 50's and 60's. There is tremendous complexity in the electronics, but the electronics are also phenomenally reliable. Also, make diagnostics very easy, at least for the tech that has all the requires software - the restrictions on access to those is a business, not an engineering problem.

 

[sean9c]

Bit of a head scratcher and I don't much understand the post. But I did notice that your mechanical 6CTA is controlled by electronic Glendenning controls. And that your bow and stern thrusters appear to be connected by an electronic interface. So if the intent is minimal complexity as stated in your post, that didn't appear to work, a choice was made to add complexity when it wasn't necessary. Just sayin'.

 

[guy with a boat]

You might be underweighting the possibility that the people you discuss this with just have different priorities, so they nod and move on. Electronic diesels have some significant benefits that outweigh any theoretical reduction in reliability they may give us relative to mechanicals.

I own and operate both and prefer the cleaner running, less stinky, more efficient electronic Deere. We are only about 15,000miles into this one so too early to judge the reliability, but good so far.

I don’t mean to reopen the overworked debate about mechanical v electronic. I’m just suggesting that a prospective buyer may not share your engine preference even after being enlightened, because their priorities are different than yours.

 

[Nick F]

Greetings,
Mr. G. Agreed although I think it is more redefining representation and plurality of application in an intersectional framework.

Perfect, RTF !

 

[ranger58sb]

You might be underweighting the possibility that the people you discuss this with just have different priorities, so they nod and move on. Electronic diesels have some significant benefits that outweigh any theoretical reduction in reliability they may give us relative to mechanicals.

I don’t mean to reopen the overworked debate about mechanical v electronic. I’m just suggesting that a prospective buyer may not share your engine preference even after being enlightened, because their priorities are different than yours.

Agree.

FWIW, we had 6CTAs. Liked 'em. Now have electronically- controlled diesels. Like 'em (although I'd prefer an in-line 6 vs V8). I mostly prefer the advantages of the newer engines.

None of my preference needs Taylor Swift, Bono, Clooney (etc.) approval.

-Chris

 

[O C Diver]

I to got lost in the weeds of the original post.

However, I had a thought as a result of this thread, that I'd not had before. The Achilles heel of electronic engines is the electronics (brilliant, I know). Years ago, I flew ultralight aircraft. Failure of spark generation at the spark plug was enough of a risk that most of the aircraft that I flew, had redundant systems. Why not duplicate the injection system (or atleast the electronics) on a diesel. Have two independent systems that either fire together at half the rate, or alternate periodically. Obviously have an override in case one system fails.

In my own tier 2 John Deere diesel, having 2 independent ECMs to control the solenoid pulsing the injector pump would have been priceless. Maybe with tier 4 you would need two independent systems including the injectors, but independent redundancy would certainly reduce the risk of single engine boat failures, IMO.

Ted

 

[Retriever]

I don’t think most Nordic Tug buyers care about your perception of the advantages of a mechanical diesel.

I’d wager most actually view the electronic engine as an advantage, since it’s more sociable (less smoke, easier starts, etc), should run better at very low loads it’s likely to see in a NT, and provides more diagnostic information to the operator.

To most buyers, the mechanical diesel just seems older and dirtier.

Do you have any data that shows electronic diesels are less reliable than mechanical diesels?

 

[Jeff F]

I chose the boat I have in part because it had a modern(ish) electronically controlled motor. Despite having had serious issues with those electronics I don't feel like it was a mistake.

Given that mechanical diesels are now well into mid-age it's hard for me to imagine a compelling case for choosing them over modern replacements from an overall reliability/service point of view. And the modern ones are quieter, better behaved and produce significantly less noxious exhaust.

 

[mvweebles]

Do you have any data that shows electronic diesels are less reliable than mechanical diesels?

My assumption is electronically controlled diesels are very reliable. I don't see many OTR trucks broke down with their engine bay open. But for a shade tree mechanic like myself, I believe I have a decent shot of receiving an old ailing diesel. Plus it sorta fits the genre of an old Willard - old technology for old technology. But there is much to recommend a modern diesel. They're quieter, lighter, more compact, smoother, cleaner, and more fuel efficient.

Peter

 

[Delta Riverat]

I wouldn't think so either.

Same as todays gas engines also computer controlled. If the engine shuts off, you call AAA -

 

[Jeff F]

Like Ted, I've thought lots about reducing the vulnerability of computer failure.

I'd lean more towards periodic preventative replacement of ECM and wiring harness. Say every ten years if you're super conservative. Keep the previous components for spare.

That's maybe 3k for parts on our small motors. Not an outrageous proposition.