Comparison tool

Compare LNG vessels and containment systems

Pick up to 4 entries, or start from a preset. Entries are compared on described characteristics only — no scores or rankings are applied.

Educational data

Preset comparisons

Select entries (1/4)

Side-by-side comparison of selected LNG vessel entries
Attribute	FLNG Production, liquefaction, storage, and offloading on one hull.
Operational role	FLNG
Containment system	GTT Mark III Membrane · SPB / Self-Supporting Prismatic Type B
Capacity class	Large conventional (indicative: approximately 180,000–210,000 m³)
Indicative capacity	180K–220K m³
Tank geometry	Motion-tolerant membrane or independent prismatic tanks
Typical application	Monetising offshore or stranded gas without onshore infrastructure
Hull-space efficiency	Hull volume shared between storage and liquefaction topsides
Infrastructure requirements	Field mooring, subsea tie-backs and weather windows for offloading
Propulsion options	Non-propelled or towed
BOG management	BOG as fuel · Reliquefaction
Advantages	Monetises remote and stranded gas without onshore infrastructure — Lower environmental footprint on land and no pipeline landfall — Topsides can be relocated at end of field life
Limitations	Very high capital cost and complex topside integration — Offloading depends on weather windows at the field
Typical routes	Offshore field mooring with side-by-side offloading

Production, liquefaction, storage, and offloading on one hull.

Operational role: FLNG
Containment system: GTT Mark III Membrane · SPB / Self-Supporting Prismatic Type B
Capacity class: Large conventional (indicative: approximately 180,000–210,000 m³)
Indicative capacity: 180K–220K m³
Tank geometry: Motion-tolerant membrane or independent prismatic tanks
Typical application: Monetising offshore or stranded gas without onshore infrastructure
Hull-space efficiency: Hull volume shared between storage and liquefaction topsides
Infrastructure requirements: Field mooring, subsea tie-backs and weather windows for offloading
Propulsion options: Non-propelled or towed
BOG management: BOG as fuel · Reliquefaction
Advantages: Monetises remote and stranded gas without onshore infrastructure — Lower environmental footprint on land and no pipeline landfall — Topsides can be relocated at end of field life
Limitations: Very high capital cost and complex topside integration — Offloading depends on weather windows at the field
Typical routes: Offshore field mooring with side-by-side offloading

Technical information

Technical parameters are indicative and may vary by vessel design, generation, shipyard, operator and intended service.