WinGD (Winterthur Gas & Diesel): Corporate History

What WinGD is

Winterthur Gas & Diesel Ltd. (WinGD) designs slow-speed two-stroke marine engines from Winterthur, Switzerland, & licenses them to builders in China, Korea, & Japan. It is one of only three two-stroke design houses left in the world. The other two are MAN Energy Solutions, which carries the MAN B&W lineage, & Mitsubishi UE / J-ENG of Japan. Between them these three firms set the design of every large two-stroke engine on the world’s deep-sea fleet.

WinGD as a corporate name dates only to 19 January 2015. Its engineering lineage is far older. The company is the direct heir to the two-stroke business of Sulzer Brothers of Winterthur, a line that began with a sea-going two-stroke in 1912 & ran through the RD, RND, RTA, & RT-flex families. The 2015 to 2017 ownership changes moved that engineering team & its design rights from Wartsila of Finland to China State Shipbuilding Corporation (CSSC), so the Sulzer two-stroke line is now Chinese-owned but still designed in Switzerland.

This article covers the Sulzer roots, the Wartsila years, the CSSC takeover, the present X-engine & X-DF portfolio, & the licensing model. For the propulsion-side engineering you can also work through the slow-speed two-stroke system calculator.

The Sulzer roots

Sulzer Brothers (Gebruder Sulzer) was founded in Winterthur in 1834 as a foundry & machine works. The firm built its first diesel engine in 1898, working under license arrangements tied to Rudolf Diesel’s patents, & put a two-stroke marine diesel to sea on the motor ship Monte Penedo in 1912. From that point Sulzer & its German rival Burmeister & Wain set much of the direction for large marine two-stroke design.

Sulzer’s mid-century engines used loop scavenging, where intake & exhaust ports sit in the cylinder liner & the incoming charge sweeps up one side & down the other. The RD series of 1957 & the RND series of 1968 were loop-scavenged. Loop scavenging avoided the exhaust valve in the cylinder head, which simplified the head, but it left more residual gas in the cylinder & limited the bore-to-stroke ratio that designers could run.

The break came with the RTA series in 1983. The RTA moved Sulzer to uniflow scavenging: air enters through liner ports at the bottom & exhaust leaves through a single large hydraulically-actuated valve in the head. Uniflow scans the cylinder from one end to the other, clears residual gas better, & allows the long stroke that suits a slow-turning, high-torque propulsion engine. The RTA established the architecture that WinGD still builds on today, & it is the reason a modern X-engine can run a stroke roughly four times its bore. The mechanics of that gas exchange are covered in two-stroke marine engine fundamentals.

Why the long stroke matters is a propeller question. A large ship’s propeller is most efficient turning slowly with a big diameter, on the order of 60 to 100 revolutions per minute at full power. A two-stroke that fires once per revolution can drive that propeller directly, with no reduction gearbox, if it turns at the same low speed. To make useful power at low rpm an engine needs a large swept volume per cylinder, & a long stroke gives that volume without growing the bore beyond what the cylinder cooling & the piston can handle. Uniflow scavenging was the enabler: a poppet exhaust valve at the top of a long cylinder clears the burnt gas cleanly over a stroke that loop scavenging could not have served, because loop scavenging needs the exhaust ports near the bottom of the liner, which caps the stroke-to-bore ratio. The RTA’s stroke-to-bore ratio climbed across its life as Sulzer pushed this logic, & the X-engines that followed run the longest strokes of any production diesel.

The RTA also fixed the heavy-fuel-oil case that defines the deep-sea two-stroke. These engines burn residual fuel oil, the bottom of the refinery barrel, at high viscosity & with contaminants that a high-speed engine could not tolerate. The slow turning speed gives the long, late combustion that heavy fuel needs, & the large heavy-walled components survive the abrasive ash & the acidic combustion products. The RTA’s uniflow head, its cylinder lubrication system, & its piston-ring pack were all shaped by the requirement to run for tens of thousands of hours on the cheapest fuel afloat. WinGD inherited that whole discipline, & it is the reason the X-engine bottom end can be adapted to gas, methanol, or ammonia without redesigning the running gear.

Common rail: the RT-flex step

The next change was the move off mechanical fuel injection. A conventional two-stroke uses a camshaft to drive a jerk pump per cylinder; injection timing & quantity are fixed by the cam profile & can be trimmed only within narrow limits. Sulzer’s answer was common rail. A high-pressure rail holds fuel at roughly 1,000 bar, & solenoid or servo valves meter each injection under electronic control, so timing & quantity become free variables the engine management system can set per cylinder & per cycle.

Sulzer ran the first commercial common-rail two-stroke, the RT-flex58T-D, on the bulk carrier Gypsum Centennial, which entered service in 2001. The “flex” in the name marks the flexibility that electronic injection brought: smokeless slow steaming, fuel-quantity balancing across cylinders, & injection profiles tuned to load. Common rail also removed the camshaft & its drive train, which cut a long, heavy, maintenance-heavy part out of the engine. The principle is set out in common-rail fuel injection on two-stroke engines, & the per-cylinder rating of that founding engine is here:

RT-flex was the technical bridge between the Sulzer of the 20th century & the WinGD of today. Every X-engine inherits its electronic injection from the RT-flex work, & the X-DF dual-fuel engines depend on that injection control to manage a diesel pilot dose measured in single-digit percentages of full-load fuel.

The practical gains from common rail were the selling points. A camshaft engine has to keep injection above a minimum speed to make a clean spray, which forces visible smoke at the low loads used for slow steaming. RT-flex broke that link: the rail holds full injection pressure regardless of engine speed, so the engine can run smokeless down to very low load, & a slow-steaming ship saves fuel without sooting up its exhaust. Per-cylinder fuel balancing was the second gain. On a jerk-pump engine each cylinder’s fuel quantity drifts as pumps & cams wear, which spreads the cylinder exhaust temperatures & the loads; common rail meters each cylinder from the same electronically-set value, so the engine can hold the cylinders in balance over a maintenance interval. The third gain was the freedom to shape the injection itself, with pre-injection or split injection events that a fixed cam profile cannot produce, which the dual-fuel engines later used to control the pilot dose.

The Wartsila years

Sulzer reorganized its diesel business as a standalone subsidiary, New Sulzer Diesel Ltd. (NSD), in November 1990. The parent group was moving away from heavy engineering toward pumps, surface technology, & textile machinery, & a separate diesel company made the unit easier to manage or sell.

The sale came in 1997. Wartsila Diesel Oy of Finland & New Sulzer Diesel merged in April 1997 to form Wartsila NSD Corporation. That transaction is where the Sulzer two-stroke business effectively passed to Wartsila. The Finnish firm already had a strong four-stroke medium-speed business; adding the Sulzer two-stroke line gave it a full range from auxiliary gensets to the largest propulsion engines. The wider arc of the buyer is set out in Wartsila’s corporate history.

Wartsila kept the Sulzer engineering team in Winterthur & folded it into a Swiss subsidiary, named Wartsila Switzerland Ltd. from 2006. Under Wartsila the team launched the X-series. The first X-engines reached the market from 2011 onward, replacing the RT-flex names while keeping the common-rail core.

The X-series was more than a rename. The new engines tightened the firing pressures & raised the stroke-to-bore ratio again, which improved fuel consumption against the RT-flex they replaced, & they brought a cleaner control architecture for the electronic injection & valve actuation. The naming also changed in a way that stuck: the bore in millimeters became the number, so an operator could read the cylinder size straight off the name, where the old RTA & RT-flex numbers had encoded the size differently. Wartsila also began the dual-fuel work in this period, adapting the low-pressure gas concept it knew from its four-stroke engines to the two-stroke, which became the X-DF line.

By the early 2010s, though, Wartsila’s strategy had shifted toward services, integrated systems, & medium-speed engines, & the capital-heavy two-stroke design business no longer fit the center of that plan. A two-stroke design house carries a large fixed engineering cost & sells into a cyclical newbuild market, while Wartsila wanted to weight its business toward the steadier service & solutions revenue. Selling a majority of the unit to a partner that controlled a large slice of the world’s shipyards let Wartsila release capital & keep a supply relationship at the same time. That set up the CSSC deal.

The CSSC takeover

Wartsila & China State Shipbuilding Corporation announced a two-stroke joint venture in July 2014. The venture began operations on 19 January 2015 under the name Winterthur Gas & Diesel Ltd. CSSC held 70% & Wartsila held 30% at the start. The logic was direct on both sides. CSSC controls the largest Chinese shipyards & wanted ownership of the design technology that its yards were building under license. Wartsila wanted to release the value of the two-stroke business while keeping a minority position & a supply relationship.

The minority position did not last. On 20 June 2016 Wartsila announced it would sell its remaining 30% stake to CSSC & recognize write-downs of about EUR 21 million tied to the divestment in its second-quarter results. The sale completed in 2016. From that point WinGD has been wholly owned by CSSC, while the engineering & headquarters stayed in Winterthur.

CSSC itself was restructured in 2019. China’s State-owned Assets Supervision & Administration Commission approved a merger of CSSC with China Shipbuilding Industry Corporation (CSIC), & the combined group kept the CSSC name. WinGD stayed a subsidiary through that merger. The shape of the parent group & its engine-building arms is set out in CSSC marine engine subsidiaries.

Corporate lineage timeline

Corporate structure today

WinGD runs as a stand-alone company inside the CSSC group. Its headquarters & most of its research stay at the historical Sulzer site in Winterthur. It keeps subsidiary offices in China, South Korea, & Japan to support the licensees who build its engines & the owners who run them. The engineering team is substantially the one Wartsila kept after 1997, & it links to ETH Zurich & to Chinese research institutes on combustion, materials, & alternative-fuel work.

WinGD does not publish a separate headcount or revenue figure. CSSC reports WinGD results inside a broader marine-power segment rather than as a named line, so external figures for the unit alone are not available from the parent’s filings. What is on the public record is the engine portfolio, the running-hour totals WinGD itself reports, & the licensee network.

The X-engine portfolio

The X-series is WinGD’s mainstream two-stroke line. The number in each name is the cylinder bore in millimeters, so the family runs from the small X35 at 350 mm bore to the X92 at 920 mm bore. Each base size sells as a diesel engine & as an X-DF dual-fuel engine, & each is offered in a range of cylinder counts, typically five to twelve, so an engine builder can match a single bore size to a wide power band.

The diesel X-engines, X35 through X92, cover the standard fuel-oil market: bulk carriers, tankers, & the smaller-to-mid container & gas ships. They keep the common-rail injection from the RT-flex work, with electronically set timing & per-cylinder fuel balancing. The X92 is the largest, & in its biggest cylinder counts it reaches into the high tens of thousands of kilowatts, the power band that drives the largest container ships.

The bore sizes are not arbitrary. Each fills a power band that matches a ship class & a propeller speed. The small X35 & X40 suit feeder ships, handysize bulkers, & small tankers, where the propeller turns faster & the power demand is modest. The X52 & X62 sit in the supramax-to-panamax bulker & medium-tanker range. The X72 & X82 cover larger tankers, capesize bulkers, & mid-size container ships. The X92 is the big-container-ship engine, the only size that reaches the power a 14,000-plus TEU ship needs at the slow propeller speed that ship runs. Within each bore an owner picks the cylinder count to land on the exact rated power, since output scales almost linearly with the number of cylinders. The per-cylinder ratings of two representative diesel sizes are here:

A two-stroke engine’s rated output scales with the number of cylinders, so an owner sizing a propulsion plant works from a per-cylinder maximum continuous rating (MCR) & multiplies by cylinder count, then checks the result against the propeller demand & the efficiency rules. The fuel economy of the resulting plant is read through specific fuel oil consumption (SFOC), in grams of fuel per kilowatt-hour, & SFOC converts directly to brake thermal efficiency:

X-DF dual-fuel

The X-DF family is WinGD’s dual-fuel line for liquefied natural gas. It is the part of the portfolio where WinGD leads the market, & it is built on a different combustion idea from its main rival.

WinGD’s X-DF burns gas on the Otto cycle at low pressure. Gas is admitted to the cylinder at a few bar through liner-mounted valves, mixes with the scavenge air, & is compressed as a lean premixed charge. A small diesel pilot, injected near top dead center, ignites the mixture. Because the gas is premixed & lean, peak combustion temperatures stay low enough to meet IMO Tier III NOx limits in gas mode without exhaust aftertreatment. The low admission pressure also means the gas supply system runs at a few bar rather than the several-hundred-bar plant a high-pressure design needs.

MAN’s competing ME-GI engine takes the opposite route. It injects gas at high pressure, on the order of 300 bar, late in the cycle, & burns it on the diesel cycle by direct ignition. High-pressure direct injection avoids the lean-premixed combustion that lets unburned gas escape, so it has very low methane slip, but it needs a high-pressure gas compression plant on board. Low pressure versus high pressure, Otto versus diesel, is the central architectural split between the two designers in the gas-fueled market, & it is covered in detail in the X-DF dual-fuel architecture article.

The first commercial X-DF vessel was the LNG carrier SK Audace, which entered service in 2017. From there X-DF took a large share of LNG-carrier newbuild propulsion, the segment where a ship already carries its own fuel as cargo & the low-pressure gas system suits the ship’s layout. WinGD reports more than 400 X-DF engines in service or on order, with the in-service fleet having logged several million running hours, which is the running-hour base that supports the design’s commercial maturity claim. Per-cylinder ratings for two of the dual-fuel sizes:

Methane slip & the case for iCER

The weak point of any low-pressure Otto-cycle gas engine is methane slip: a fraction of the gas escapes the cylinder unburned, partly from the lean charge near the cool cylinder walls & partly from gas trapped in the scavenge-port region during the open-valve overlap. Methane is a strong greenhouse gas over a 20-year horizon, so even a small percentage of slipped gas erodes the well-to-wake carbon benefit of running on LNG. You can size that trade-off with the LNG well-to-wake calculator & the methane-slip calculator.

WinGD’s answer was the X-DF2.0 generation, introduced in 2020, with iCER. iCER stands for Intelligent Control by Exhaust Recirculation. It routes part of the exhaust gas back into the scavenge air, after cooling & water separation, which lowers the oxygen fraction & the combustion temperature in the cylinder & changes the in-cylinder mixture so that more of the gas burns. WinGD reports that iCER cuts methane slip on the order of 50% against the first-generation X-DF & also trims gas-mode fuel consumption.

The exhaust-recirculation idea is related to the broader EGR work on two-stroke engines, although iCER is tuned for the methane-slip problem rather than for NOx alone. There is a useful distinction between the two. Conventional EGR on a diesel two-stroke recirculates exhaust mainly to cut nitrogen-oxide formation, by diluting the charge & dropping the peak flame temperature so less NOx forms. iCER does dilute the charge, but its target is the unburned methane: the cooler, lower-oxygen, recirculated charge slows the flame & gives the lean premixed gas more time & a more favorable mixture to burn out, & the water-separation step keeps the recirculated stream dry enough not to upset the lubrication. The same hardware also lets the engine run gas mode at higher load with better knock margin, which is why iCER improves gas-mode fuel consumption rather than only trading fuel for emissions.

The methane question is also a fuel-economics question, not only an environmental one. Slipped methane is fuel the owner paid for & did not burn, so a slip figure is both a greenhouse-gas penalty & a direct efficiency loss. That is why WinGD presents the iCER gain as a combined methane-slip & fuel-consumption improvement rather than as an emissions number alone, & why an owner comparing X-DF generations weighs the slip reduction against the cost of the recirculation plant. The X92DF-2.1, the largest dual-fuel size in this generation, is rated here:

The reason methane slip & fuel burn matter together is the carbon-intensity math. An engine’s carbon dioxide output per unit of work follows directly from its fuel consumption & the carbon factor of the fuel, & for a gas engine the unburned-methane term has to be added in carbon-dioxide-equivalent form to get an honest figure:

Those figures feed straight into the ship-level efficiency indices: the design-stage EEDI for new ships & the EEXI for existing ships, both set under IMO MARPOL Annex VI. A dual-fuel engine with controlled methane slip helps a ship meet those index limits where a heavy-fuel engine of the same power would not. The Tier III NOx side is covered in Tier III compliant two-stroke engines, & the diesel-pilot mechanism that ignites the gas charge is set out in pilot injection in dual-fuel engines.

Methanol & ammonia: X-DF-M and X-DF-A

WinGD is extending the X-DF architecture to two more fuels, because LNG is a low-carbon step rather than a zero-carbon one, & owners ordering ships now want a path to fuels that can be made from renewable energy.

The methanol engine is the X-DF-M. It keeps the X-engine bottom end but adds a methanol injection system, again with a diesel or distillate pilot for ignition. Methanol is a liquid at ambient conditions, which makes the fuel-handling system simpler than a cryogenic gas plant, & it can be made as e-methanol or bio-methanol. WinGD reported that the X-DF-M completed its first full-load running on methanol in December 2024, with the first commercial installations aimed at large container ships. The fuel chemistry & the safety case for methanol as a marine fuel are covered in methanol marine engines overview.

The ammonia engine is the X-DF-A. Ammonia carries no carbon at all, so an ammonia engine emits no carbon dioxide from the fuel itself, although it does need careful control of nitrogen-oxide & nitrous-oxide emissions & of the toxicity & slip of ammonia. WinGD is developing the X-DF-A with its Korean & Chinese licensees & with gas-carrier owners, since LPG & ammonia carriers are an early market that already handles the fuel as cargo. The wider fuel case, including the energy density penalty & the safety handling, is in ammonia marine engines overview, & the slip-related emissions you have to track are in the ammonia NOx & slip calculator.

Both new fuels reuse the same hard-won pieces: the uniflow cylinder from the RTA, the common-rail injection from the RT-flex, & the dual-fuel control logic from the X-DF. That re-use is the point of a single architecture. WinGD does not have to design a new engine for each fuel; it adapts the fuel-admission & combustion control on a common base.

The licensing model

WinGD does not build engines. Like MAN B&W before it, it designs the engine, sets the specification & the tolerances, & licenses the design to engine builders who manufacture under that license. This is the standard model for large two-stroke marine engines, because the engines are too large & too few in number per year to support a single central factory near every shipyard.

The licensee network reflects where large ships are built, which is almost entirely Northeast Asia:

• CSSC engine-building subsidiaries in China, including Hudong Heavy Machinery & associated CSSC works, which have a natural position given CSSC’s ownership of WinGD
• Korean builders, including the Hyundai engine arm (HD Hyundai Engine, the former HHI-EMD) & Hanwha Engine, the former HSD / Doosan Engine
• Japanese builders, including Japan Engine Corporation (J-ENG) & the Mitsui engine business

The split of WinGD production across those three countries tracks shipbuilding capacity, with Korea & China taking the larger shares & Japan a smaller one. The licensee performs the casting, machining, assembly, & shop test; WinGD supplies the design, the control software, the build approval, & ongoing technical support. The same licensees often build for more than one designer, so a Korean engine works may assemble both WinGD & MAN B&W engines in the same shop.

The license model shapes how a new engine reaches the market. When WinGD develops a fuel variant such as the X-DF-M or X-DF-A, the first physical engine is built by a licensee, & the shop test, the type approval test (TAT), & the factory acceptance test (FAT) happen on that licensee’s bed. So the milestones in WinGD’s development program are tied to specific licensee shops & specific owners’ newbuilds rather than to a WinGD-owned factory. The first ammonia & methanol engines came out of Korean & Chinese licensee shops working with the owners taking those ships, which is the normal route for any first-of-class two-stroke under this model.

The model also means WinGD’s commercial reach depends on the licensees keeping current with its design generations. A licensee has to tool up for each new bore size & each fuel variant, train its shop on the control system, & hold the build approval. CSSC’s ownership gives the Chinese licensees a clear path to that tooling, which is part of why Chinese-built WinGD output has grown, while the Korean & Japanese licensees stay in the network because the owners ordering ships from those yards specify WinGD engines.

Where WinGD sits in the market

The two-stroke design market is a duopoly with a third small player. MAN Energy Solutions, carrying the MAN B&W line, holds the larger share of total two-stroke newbuild orders across all ship types. WinGD holds a smaller overall share but leads decisively in LNG-carrier propulsion, the segment its low-pressure X-DF design suits best. J-ENG, with the Mitsubishi UE line, is the smallest of the three & is concentrated in the Japanese domestic market. The broader map of who makes marine engines is set out in marine engine makers.

WinGD’s particular strengths are the CSSC ownership, which ties it to the largest single shipbuilding market, the continuity of the Sulzer engineering team, & the established X-DF lead in gas-fueled propulsion. Its constraint is scale. It runs at roughly half the annual order volume of MAN B&W, which limits the engineering budget it can spread across a wide fuel-transition program at a time when owners are asking all three designers to deliver methanol & ammonia engines on short timelines.

The LNG-carrier lead is worth reading carefully, because it is both real & narrow. An LNG carrier burns its own boil-off gas, so a low-pressure gas engine that takes the gas at the pressure the cargo system already supplies fits the ship without a separate high-pressure compression plant. That is the structural reason X-DF dominates this one segment. It does not carry over to container ships or tankers, where the ship has to install a dedicated fuel-gas plant either way, & where MAN’s high-pressure ME-GI competes hard on its lower methane slip. So WinGD’s share is segment-shaped: strong where the ship’s own cargo & layout favor the low-pressure design, balanced or trailing elsewhere.

The 2019 CSSC and CSIC merger also matters to WinGD’s position. The combined group owns shipyards & engine works on a scale no other single owner of a two-stroke designer can match, which gives WinGD a captive build base in China. The same ownership is a commercial sensitivity in some markets, where buyers weigh the state-owned-parent question into a procurement that will tie them to the engine for the ship’s twenty-five-year life. Both effects flow from the same fact of who owns the company.

The competition between WinGD & MAN has largely moved to the fuel question. For LNG it is the low-pressure Otto X-DF against the high-pressure diesel ME-GI. For methanol & ammonia both firms are racing similar architectures to market. An owner now chooses an engine on the fuel pathway it wants, the methane-slip & emissions profile, & the capital & operating cost of the gas or liquid-fuel supply system, rather than on the bare two-stroke output alone.

Engineering continuity from Sulzer to WinGD

The thread that runs through this whole history is one engineering team & one design line, under three owners. The Winterthur engineers who designed the RTA in the early 1980s, the RT-flex common-rail engine in the late 1990s, & the X-series under Wartsila are substantially the same organization that now develops the X-DF, X-DF-M, & X-DF-A under CSSC. The corporate name on the building changed three times; the design discipline did not.

That continuity shows in the products. The uniflow cylinder head, the long stroke, & the heavy-fuel running gear come straight from the RTA work. The electronic common-rail injection & the per-cylinder control come from the RT-flex. The dual-fuel logic that meters a small pilot dose to ignite a lean gas charge sits on top of that injection control. When WinGD adapts the engine to methanol or ammonia, it changes the fuel-admission valves & the combustion control, not the bottom end, which is why a new-fuel variant can reach the market on the timescale of a control & injection development rather than a clean-sheet engine. The re-use is deliberate, & it is the commercial value of holding a mature two-stroke design line.

The research base sits in Winterthur, with the ETH Zurich link on combustion & materials & a set of Chinese research-institute collaborations that came with CSSC ownership. WinGD also sits on the IMO & class-society working groups that write the rules its engines have to meet, which is where the methane-slip & alternative-fuel test methods are agreed. That position lets the design team shape & track the regulatory test conditions its engines are certified against.

How the rules drive the portfolio

WinGD’s product direction follows MARPOL Annex VI & the IMO greenhouse-gas measures. The Tier III nitrogen-oxide limit, which applies in designated emission control areas, is the reason the X-DF can sell into those waters without aftertreatment: lean premixed gas combustion keeps NOx below the Tier III line in gas mode, where a heavy-fuel diesel of the same power would need exhaust-gas recirculation or a selective-catalytic-reduction unit to comply. The relevant resolutions sit in the IMO MEPC index for MARPOL Annex VI.

The carbon side is the EEDI for new ships & the EEXI for the existing fleet. Both set a maximum grams-of-carbon-dioxide-per-transport-work figure, & both reward a lower-carbon fuel & a more efficient engine. A dual-fuel engine running on LNG, with methane slip held down by iCER, can clear an EEDI or EEXI limit that a heavy-fuel engine of the same shaft power would miss, which is the regulatory case for the whole X-DF line. The methanol & ammonia variants extend that case toward the deep-cut carbon targets that LNG alone cannot reach, since LNG still emits carbon dioxide from the fuel carbon while a renewable methanol or an ammonia fuel can approach a near-zero well-to-wake figure. The portfolio reads, in that sense, as a direct response to the regulatory schedule: LNG & iCER for the present limits, methanol & ammonia for the targets ahead.

Limitations

This article reports WinGD’s corporate history & published engine portfolio. It is not an engine-selection guide & does not replace the engine maker’s project guides, the licensee’s shop-test data, or a class society’s approval documents. Several points need a practitioner’s caution.

Order & running-hour totals are point-in-time figures that WinGD updates in its own releases; treat any single number as current to its source date, not to the moment you read it. CSSC does not publish WinGD’s revenue or headcount separately, so financial statements about the unit alone cannot be sourced to the parent’s filings. The methane-slip reductions attributed to iCER are the manufacturer’s reported figures under defined test conditions; in-service slip depends on load profile, ambient conditions, & maintenance state, & should be measured rather than assumed. The per-cylinder ratings in the formula cards are nominal maximum continuous ratings for engine sizing; a specific project’s contracted rating, derating, & layout point are set in the engine order, & the propeller match & operating envelope have to be checked against that contract & against the EEDI or EEXI limit for the ship.

Related calculators

• Slow-speed two-stroke main engine system calculator
• LNG well-to-wake calculator: Otto MS / Otto SS / Diesel
• Methane slip calculator for LNG engines
• Ammonia NOx & slip calculator
• BMEP calculator
• SFOC to thermal efficiency calculator

See also

• Sulzer marine diesel engines: history
• Wartsila corporate history
• CSSC marine engine subsidiaries
• WinGD X-DF dual-fuel engine architecture
• MAN Energy Solutions corporate history
• Mitsubishi UE two-stroke engines
• Two-stroke marine diesel engine fundamentals
• Common-rail fuel injection on two-stroke engines
• Methanol marine engines overview
• Ammonia marine engines overview
• EGR retrofit on two-stroke engines
• Tier III compliant two-stroke engines
• What is EEXI
• What is EEDI
• Marine engine makers