Marine Engineers and Naval Architects

We found no cases of AI fully writing reports or deciding budgets by itself. Those tasks still need a person’s judgment and context. In fact, professionals stress that the core science of ship design hasn’t changed – it’s just that “the tools… are allowing us to analyse the same thing in a different way” ^[1].

One expert noted AI systems “cannot yet” replace the human naval architect or just spit out a complete design on command ^[1]. In short, AI and automation today mostly augment the work (doing repetitive analyses and simulations), while humans still do the creative thinking, checking, and final decisions.

On the other hand, adoption will likely be gradual. Ship design is complex, safety-critical work, so companies are careful about new tech choices. Building a reliable AI tool requires time, specialized data, and testing – an expensive upfront investment.

Experts say firms are currently “breaking down” the design process into pieces and applying AI only to routine parts. One firm noted they focus on automating repetitive tasks so engineers can use that time for higher-level decisions ^[1], but they aren’t “expecting to have a large language model… where we can just type in ‘build us a new tanker’” ^[1]. In short, the industry sees real economic benefits, but also understands the risks: design errors are costly and must meet strict rules.

As one thought leader put it, AI adds a powerful new “tool set” for analysis, but the fundamental physics and human judgement remain essential ^[1]. This means AI will help marine engineers and naval architects do their jobs more easily, but it won’t replace the need for skilled people doing the final, critical choices.