Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

BYD just launched the largest car carrier to charge up its global EV ambitions

electrek.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 70 posts

Re: BYD just launched the largest car carrier to charge up its global EV ambitions

#51

Post by defrost »

feverzsj wrote: post #48
defrost wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which factory? Shenzhen, Changsha, Huizhou, Shanxi, Shanghai (in China), the one in Thailand, in Hungary or Uzbekistan? (etc.) I ask as Reuters reported the Shenzhen and other plants as having standard eight hour shifts less than two years past: https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/byd-re... Do you have a source for claim?

Can't you just google a little bit more? [0] https://www.scmp.com/economy/global-economy/article/3293923/... [1] https://carnewschina.com/2024/05/20/strike-at-byd-factory-in... [2] https://clb.org.hk/en/content/auto-workers-bear-brunt-compet...

> Can't you just google a little bit more?

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

[1] is extremely vague wrt hard details, in summary it's a dispute between Brazilian standard conditions and Chinese standard with hints of "slave like conditions" but nothing concrete.

[2] is about Chinese workers striking to demand longer hours:

  According to reports, the main reason for the employees’ discontent was the implementation of a four-shift system and a five-day, eight-hour work schedule. This would result in the loss of overtime pay, leading to a significant reduction in their income.
The pay scale can be debated but it doesn't support your claim above that the company forces long hours upon the workers.

[3] references workers striking for better pay, safer conditions, et al but doesn't mention slave like conditons etc. that you claimed

Re: BYD just launched the largest car carrier to charge up its global EV ambitions

#52

Post by philwelch »

numpad0 wrote: post #49
philwelch wrote: post #21

This ship might not be for peacefully exporting electric cars. China is making unmistakable preparations to invade Taiwan in the near future and RORO carrier vessels have clear military applications in such a scenario. Consider this analysis of the invasion barges they’re preparing: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Klkpk_hO4FQ

Car shipping RORO vessels aren't LSTs... They can't beach and land tanks. Amphibian tanks can roll on and off amphibious assault ships, but this isn't it.

You probably wouldn’t use a ship like this in an initial landing, but once you’d secured a beachhead you could easily use it to deliver reinforcements and supplies. A major part of the value of a RORO ship is that you need little to no port infrastructure to unload it. Once you’ve secured a beachhead and built some minimal infrastructure on it you could land tanks and other armored vehicles, or you could also land trucks filled with fuel, ammunition, supplies, infantry, and so forth. This is, in practice, most of the work that LST’s did as well.

And it’s very common to requisition merchant RORO ships for amphibious operations. The British did so during the Falklands War (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/SS_Atlantic_Conveyor).

Re: BYD just launched the largest car carrier to charge up its global EV ambitions

#53

Post by richardw »

creer wrote: post #27
Incipient wrote: post #7

Vertically integrating. Not as subtle as I'd have expected, but still sensible.

That's pushing vertical integration to extremes. Is there any precedent to car carriers dedicated to one manufacturer? Wikipedia mentions a "Toyota Maru No. 10" which was NOT owned by Toyota - although I don't know if it was dedicated to them.

Not exclusively cars but Hyundai got into the game early, buying pure car carriers in the 80’s:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMM_(company)

Re: BYD just launched the largest car carrier to charge up its global EV ambitions

#54

Post by sho_hn »

richardw wrote: post #53
creer wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's pushing vertical integration to extremes. Is there any precedent to car carriers dedicated to one manufacturer? Wikipedia mentions a "Toyota Maru No. 10" which was NOT owned by Toyota - although I don't know if it was dedicated to them.

Not exclusively cars but Hyundai got into the game early, buying pure car carriers in the 80’s: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMM_(company)

Sorta makes sense -- the first time Germany noticed Korea in the 80s is when their shipyards started outbidding the German ones.

Re: BYD just launched the largest car carrier to charge up its global EV ambitions

#55

Post by maxglute »

philwelch wrote: post #21

This ship might not be for peacefully exporting electric cars. China is making unmistakable preparations to invade Taiwan in the near future and RORO carrier vessels have clear military applications in such a scenario. Consider this analysis of the invasion barges they’re preparing: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Klkpk_hO4FQ

Why not both like Merchant Marines.

Dual use sealift is just common sense. Too many years of stupid western analysis that PRC would waste $$$ to build dedicated TW amphib fleet, and point the absence of one as PRC not ready to invade TW. Reality is every $$$ PLAN spends on sealift is one not spent on weapons shooting back at US+co.

PRC RO/ROs (and a lot of other commercial shipping) are indeed build to military standards for TW scenario. Used for shipping cars like they're suppose to during peacetime to let that capex work, and armor vehicles during war.

Comparable RO/ROs have been actively involved in invasion TW training/exercises. PRC RO/RO numbers a couple years ago was enough to land 7 full PLA group armies (300k + equipment) on TW in about 10 days, or every US Army Brigade Combat team in 5 days. They'll probably have enough RO/RO sealift to cut that down to 2-3 days in a few more years.

Re: BYD just launched the largest car carrier to charge up its global EV ambitions

#56

Post by senti_sentient »

paulryanrogers wrote: post #50
senti_sentient wrote: post #33

Living in Australia, I chose a BYD over a Tesla. After previously owning a Nissan Leaf, I can clearly see why BYD is leading the EV market.

Why?

Price to build quality/package ratio. For AUD 36ks you can get a BYD Dolphin Premium with blade LFP battery, which will give you around 450 to 500ks of range.Why would you buy a Tesla?

Re: BYD just launched the largest car carrier to charge up its global EV ambitions

#57

Post by philwelch »

maxglute wrote: post #55
philwelch wrote: post #21

This ship might not be for peacefully exporting electric cars. China is making unmistakable preparations to invade Taiwan in the near future and RORO carrier vessels have clear military applications in such a scenario. Consider this analysis of the invasion barges they’re preparing: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Klkpk_hO4FQ

Why not both like Merchant Marines. Dual use sealift is just common sense. Too many years of stupid western analysis that PRC would waste $$$ to build dedicated TW amphib fleet, and point the absence of one as PRC not ready to invade TW. Reality is every $$$ PLAN spends on sealift is one not spent on weapons shooting back at US+co. PRC RO/ROs (and a lot of other commercial shipping) are indeed build to military stand…

China still has an amphib fleet, and there are reasons to use amphibs for at least the initial forced entry operation, but once you have a beachhead the dual use ROROs are a good way to sustain and reinforce the landing force without needing to capture or build a port facility.

And it’s not like the amphibs are only useful for Taiwan; there are plenty of disputed islands in the South China Sea worth fighting over.

Re: BYD just launched the largest car carrier to charge up its global EV ambitions

#58

Post by maxglute »

philwelch wrote: post #57
maxglute wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not both like Merchant Marines. Dual use sealift is just common sense. Too many years of stupid western analysis that PRC would waste $$$ to build dedicated TW amphib fleet, and point the absence of one as PRC not ready to invade TW. Reality is every $$$ PLAN spends on sealift is one not spent on weapons shooting back at US+co. PRC RO/ROs (and a lot of other commercial shipping) are indeed build to military stand…

China still has an amphib fleet, and there are reasons to use amphibs for at least the initial forced entry operation, but once you have a beachhead the dual use ROROs are a good way to sustain and reinforce the landing force without needing to capture or build a port facility. And it’s not like the amphibs are only useful for Taiwan; there are plenty of disputed islands in the South China Sea worth fighting over.

Specialized pieces of amphib equipment for initial landing, but bulk of sealift is going to be done via commercial ships / RO/ROs. Likely down to 100,000s of fishing boats / commercial vessels to distribute survivability for a reverse dunkirk. Point is PLAN never had intention to build out enough gray hulls to ferry 100,000s men + equipment, so analysts/arguments fixating on PRC _military_ sealift readiness needs to recalibrate on what % of sealift work will actually be done by military procured hulls. My guess is... very minor %, and a shockingly many of commercial ships will get drafted / voluntold to assist with sealift.

SCS islands are too small to need amphib. Like even largest Taiping island is basically just a 1km long airstrip. LHD + paratroopers is enough. Maybe for Ryukyus if things get really spicy.

Re: BYD just launched the largest car carrier to charge up its global EV ambitions

#59

Post by senti_sentient »

paulryanrogers wrote: post #50
senti_sentient wrote: post #33

Living in Australia, I chose a BYD over a Tesla. After previously owning a Nissan Leaf, I can clearly see why BYD is leading the EV market.

Why?

Not to mention that it doesn’t have the battery degradation that my leaf suffered from. Nissan engineers messed up big time by leaving proper battery thermal management, giving edge to newcomers like BYD.
Post reply on HN