Webinar recap: Where fleet owners are focusing technology investment for 2027

As fleet owners plan their technology investments for 2027, experience with the tools already on board is shaping the next round of decisions. Which investments have delivered enough value to expand? Where has adoption stalled? And what would operators do differently next time?

Those questions guided Orca AI’s webinar, “From Promises to Proof: AI & Technology in Fleet Operations in 2027,” featuring Stavros Gyftakis, CFO of Seanergy Maritime Holdings and CFO & Director of United Maritime Corporation; Simon Smakowski, Senior Director at Oldendorff Carriers; and Dor Raviv, CTO & Co-Founder of Orca AI, moderated by Edwin Lampert of Riviera Maritime Media.

A clearer test for the next investment

For Seanergy Maritime Holdings, the starting point for 2027 is data quality and fleet visibility. Reliable information from vessels gives the company a foundation for investing in safety, navigation, and performance. Stavros Gyftakis described a more practical discussion at board level: what problem will the technology solve, will people use it, and what happens if it fails?

At Oldendorff Carriers, that scrutiny includes how a new tool fits the equipment and software already in place. Simon Smakowski shared an example that explains why: high-frequency machinery data produced detailed graphs, but some superintendents weren’t using them. The capability had developed faster than demand among the people expected to act on it.

That experience sat alongside a more readily measurable investment: hull coatings, where reduced fuel consumption and fouling helped confirm the benefit. Both examples inform the next purchasing decision. Owners need to understand how an investment will improve operations and how the people using it will recognize that improvement.

For Dor Raviv, the growing number of AI tools makes the vendor’s ability to support implementation an increasingly important part of the buying decision. Shipping companies need dependable support across vessels with different connectivity conditions, alongside maintenance and coordination with their shore teams. Those capabilities deserve scrutiny during vendor selection.

Proving value when the benefit is an avoided problem

Asked how confidently he could prove the return on technology already in the fleet, Stavros Gyftakis put himself at 6 or 7 out of 10. A higher score, he joked, would invite a request for a spreadsheet he couldn’t provide.

Fuel savings are relatively easy to quantify. Earlier identification of a technical problem or reduced navigational risk is harder to isolate financially. Yet avoiding an off-hire event has economic value, even when it’s difficult to attribute that outcome to a single tool.

That makes the cost of leaving a problem unresolved part of the investment case.

For navigation, Dor Raviv described agreeing on measures such as close encounters, assessed with operational context and normalized by distance sailed. Fleet teams can then follow changes over time, review unusual results, and question the evidence with the vendor.

The work continues after installation. Reliable data, regular reviews, and someone ashore responsible for following the results help turn an expected benefit into evidence the company can use.

Fitting into the vessel’s day

A new tool arrives into a working vessel. Watches continue, maintenance needs attention, and port operations compete with reporting and inspections.

From the office, an extra screen or report can look like a small request. On board, its value depends on what it helps the crew accomplish within that existing workload.

Stavros Gyftakis used Orca AI to explain why fitting into existing workflows matters for adoption:

“You don’t need to create new workflows. You don’t need to create new processes. […] You are removing friction out of an existing process. And that’s actually what makes technology being adopted very naturally and very easily without resistance from the ship.”

The same test applies ashore. Before approving a purchase, someone needs to own the problem, define success, and understand how the tool will be used. Otherwise, a company can train people to solve one problem and discover they’re using it for something else entirely.

As Stavros Gyftakis put it: “The investment risk now is the implementation risk.”

Dor Raviv connected that risk to a gap between office and vessel life. Shore teams often have tools designed around their working day, while crews manage growing operational demands through equipment and processes that put much of the burden on the user.

Closing that gap requires vendors to stay involved after installation, working through crew feedback, IT requirements, and data quality with the operator. A successful demonstration is the beginning of that relationship.

A benefit an experienced officer can see

An audience question made the adoption challenge personal: how do you convince an officer who has spent 30 years at sea and doesn’t want new technology on the bridge?

Simon Smakowski’s answer was to demonstrate a capability that helps that officer do the job. He used Orca AI’s thermal imaging as an example:

“The capability to have a thermal camera which sees objects which nobody else would see in a normal environment.”

That was something he could make a case for even with very experienced seafarers, because it brought a capability they hadn’t previously had on board.

Officers bring years of experience to assessing whether a tool is useful. Showing them what they can now see gives them something concrete to judge.

And their judgment affects the investment. Dor Raviv described crew acceptance as a condition for expansion across a fleet. The navigation team and master need to find the technology helpful in their work. Without that acceptance, a pilot can remain a pilot.

For the next budget, that means allowing for the work of adoption alongside the purchase itself, including crew feedback and support after installation.

Invest for the vessels you have

For an actively traded fleet, the payback period also has to fit the ownership horizon. Simon Smakowski explained that longer returns bring more exposure to changes in deployment and the possibility of selling a vessel.

That favors a selective approach, particularly for older vessels. An audience member asked where to begin without committing to a full retrofit. The advice was to identify the operational problem that matters most and make a targeted investment.

Better data collection or performance monitoring can support decisions on an existing vessel. Simon Smakowski also cited variable frequency drives as an example of an investment Oldendorff Carriers was making to reduce onboard consumption without a major retrofit.

The same discipline applies when looking at competitors’ budgets. Knowing how much another owner spends on AI says little about whether the same allocation would work for a different fleet. Understanding which problem they solved, and how, is more useful.

Key takeaways

• Let operational needs guide the 2027 budget. Assess each investment against a specific fleet problem, the existing setup, and who will use it.
• Define how you’ll measure progress. Fuel savings are easier to quantify; safety improvements need consistent indicators and review over time.
• Make adoption part of the investment case. Tools earn a lasting place when they fit existing workflows and give crews a benefit they can recognize. Assess the vendor’s capacity to support that process after installation.
• Match spending to the vessel’s remaining time in your fleet. Targeted improvements can deliver value on older vessels, with payback periods that fit the ownership plan.