Jumbo Maritime is a shipping company active in the heavy lifting market. Jumbo uses stabilisers to enlarge the stability of the ship during lifting. By using stabilisers Jumbo can perform heavy lifts with a relative small ship, this is one of the major advantages. Downside of using stabilisers is that the installation and de-installation is a time-consuming process. Besides that the usage also causes safety issues, more and more port authorities no longer approve the usage of stabilisers. Research is done in finding alternatives for the use of stabilisers, focusing on alternatives for new ships that need to be build. Looking at Jumbo’s position in the market shows the following unique selling points, for the J-type: • Limited draft compared to its competitors • Length < 150 meters On the one hand the usage of smart stabiliser to speed up the installation and de-installation of stabilisers is looked at. Because smart stabilisers are still stabilisers, also alternatives are analysed that do not require a stabiliser at all. By widening the ship, the ship can be stable enough to perform lifts without extra support from stabilisers. A model is created to be able to determine the required width for each concept. This model is generated based on the input and requirements set by literature, market analysis and Jumbo’s specifications. Some of these requirements are: limited dimensions, minimum required stability, anti heeling and deadweight. The four concepts that are created as input for the model are: • Base concept, concept 1..., Concept 2... Concept 3...Concept 4...: A case study is performed to be able to compare the concepts. Three cases are created, which are actual relevant cases for JumboMaritime: For each concept the costs are determined to sail the certain case. Because the heavy lift market consists of somany single jobs that differ a lot on weight, complexity and distance it is difficult to map the revenues. The costs are determined per job, to be able to compare the different concepts. Costs consists of the capital costs, fuel costs and operational related costs. Besides cost per job, also cost per ton/mile is calculated to determine the economical speed. For case 1 the economical speed is 14 knots, which is similar to the required design speed. This means that the ships sails most cost efficient at this speed. The time that is saved by eliminating the stabiliser is used to reduce the sailing speed. In this way the same amount of jobs can done in the same time. This research shows that the saved fuel consumption as a result of slower sailing can compensate the longer sailing time and increased resistance for a wider hull concept. Comparing the concepts in the different cases shows that concepts 3 and 4 are more beneficial in case the stabiliser usages goes up. It can be concluded that awider hull shape can operate at 2-5%lower costs. The fuel consumption of the V-shape decreases more significantly at lower drafts. It is an advantage at ballast sailing or during sailing light cargoes. Besides the lower costs, the increase of deck space for the wider concepts is added value in the heavy lift market. An other important advantage of the wider ship concepts is the elimination of safety issues because the usage of stabilisers is not needed any more to lift heavy cargoes safely.