Talk:Container ship: Difference between revisions
Felgerkarb (talk | contribs) copyright violations box |
Felgerkarb (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 108: | Line 108: | ||
The sentences reading "Multimodal Transport will be dealt with in Topic V Unit 6. We shall also be dealing with Just in Time manufacturing" in the "History" section look like they were copy-pasted straight out of some textbook to me. That casts doubt on the rest of the paragraph too I expect. [[Special:Contributions/82.6.108.62|82.6.108.62]] ([[User talk:82.6.108.62|talk]]) 21:59, 23 November 2010 (UTC) |
The sentences reading "Multimodal Transport will be dealt with in Topic V Unit 6. We shall also be dealing with Just in Time manufacturing" in the "History" section look like they were copy-pasted straight out of some textbook to me. That casts doubt on the rest of the paragraph too I expect. [[Special:Contributions/82.6.108.62|82.6.108.62]] ([[User talk:82.6.108.62|talk]]) 21:59, 23 November 2010 (UTC) |
||
::I agree. Adding a copyright problems box. [[User:Felgerkarb|Felgerkarb]] ([[User talk:Felgerkarb|talk]]) 22:18, 23 November 2010 (UTC) |
::I agree. Adding a copyright problems box. [[User:Felgerkarb|Felgerkarb]] ([[User talk:Felgerkarb|talk]]) 22:18, 23 November 2010 (UTC) |
||
:: Quick googling has found this text <i>verbatim</i> on several other sites. Some look like they are scraping Wikipedia, so I am not sure if they are the original source or not. None of them have any internal reference to a 'Topic V Unit 6' to make me think they are the original source. [[User:Felgerkarb|Felgerkarb]] ([[User talk:Felgerkarb|talk]]) 22:23, 23 November 2010 (UTC) |
Revision as of 22:23, 23 November 2010
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Container ship article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Template:WikiProject Maritime Trades Template:WikiProject Ports |
North Atlantic route
How long does it take for a container ship to go form the USA (take New York) accros the Atlantic to Europe (for example to London) ? --Laurenttas 13 November 2004
- New York-Newark to Southampton or Felixstowe/UK route was 6 days to cross the atlantic. --217.9.49.2 21 June 2005
helding the stack
Does anyone know how the stacked containers are held to the ship above the deckline? I know there are little twist-lock things for stacking on railroad cars, but it can't be the same mechanism, it'd be much too tedious. --Benandorsqueaks 18:13, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
- Above deck containers are secured with twistlocks at each of the four corners. For vessels, these are now required to be either of the semi-automatic variety or are the newer fully-automatic twistlocks. The semi-automatic twistlocks ratchet to release when a short wire is pulled by a longshoreman with a pole from the deck. The newer fully-automatic twistlocks are designed to ratchet automatically when the gantry crane lifts the container. Additionally the lower few tiers of containers are normally lashed to the deck with rods and turnbuckles for additional securing during transit. --68.208.147.168 16 February 2006
Hatch
What are the different types of hatchcovers being used in containerships in breakbulks there is a bontoon hatch --61.17.27.53 15 July 2006
- "bontoon hatch" is wrong terminology. The hatch is the opening into the ship's hold which is created by the removal of the hatch cover. On breakbulk ships this cover is made of steel and it has a hollow core. This type of hatch cover is called a "pontoon". Container ships have a much heavier and more substantially built hatch cover. The hatch cover of a container ship may weigh 40 long tons.--69.143.150.67 04:06, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
decimal / thousands
Someone is using the . for both a decimal point and a thousands separator. I will fix it now.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.102.186.234 (talk • contribs) 27 September 2006
PLS NOTE THAT THE BIGGEST SHIPS IS NOT UPDATED. I MEAN CMA CGM VESSELS THERE ARE THE LATEST CMA CGM CHRISTOPHE COLOMB AND CMA CGM AMERIGO VESPUCCI (LENGTH 365.5M AND 13344 TEUS) - KINDLY UPDATE :)
This table has many defects:
- no references
- too long
- many sisterships could be summed in one class
- inline presentation
I should at least move it to a separate article, if not removing it for being an eternal source of inaccuracies. --Marc Lacoste 22:09, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
I would second this comment. In addition, what is/are the 'GT' tabulated in the column bearing this title (I think I know, but this abbreviation occurs nowhere else in the text)? What is their relevance? Similarly, the expression 'DWT' is used in the text but not defined. Shouldn't there be a link to Wikipedia article on Tonnage here? --Paulredfern1 12:13, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
- I propose to replace the table by the table of the German Wikipedia, but also in the table of German Wikipedia the column BRZ should be removed. The reason is, that the interesting number for a container ship is the TDW. This number defines how many filled container with normal weight can be loaded.
- Example: The Eamma Maersk carries 11000 container with 14t each. The sum is 154000t. The TDW is 157000. There 3000t for fuel and so on.
- The values GT and BRZ are volume values. They are not important and very often there is a confusion also in the source documents - and than the values are wrong --Roland Schmid 22:01, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
For most I agree with you Roland. From commercial (charterers) aspect the amount of homogeneously loaded 14tons (8'6" high 20ft long) containers that the vessel can carry is the most important value/particular. For this count the vertical centre of gravity is normally taken at 45% of the containers height as well. Since this value is a selling argument it is often given in the descriptions of the vessel. I feel these values should be mentioned in any table about container vessels. For the same reason I do not agree with the notes that are listed underneath the table. So it is probably best to delete the table anyway and only mentione the largest container vessel sailing today.beapeet 10:28, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
The list was made with the information provided here. http://www.containership-info.net.tc --Pcpirate16 April 28 2007
PLS NOTE THAT THE BIGGEST SHIPS IS NOT UPDATED. I MEAN CMA CGM VESSELS THERE ARE THE LATEST CMA CGM CHRISTOPHE COLOMB AND CMA CGM AMERIGO VESPUCCI (LENGTH 365.5M AND 13344 TEUS) - KINDLY UPDATE :)
mpg
what is the mpg [or km/litre].. or, gallons per mile even, of these things (typical, obviously)
when it comes to this size you measure fuel in kilograms per hour/tons per hour usually. the ship i worked in for an example consumed 14 tons of heavy fuel oil every 24 hours at standard speed, she was a mid sized to small ship though. and as type of cargo and hull size also plays in much it's impossible to say what a typical ship would have. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.133.2.95 (talk) 18:42, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
hello check the largest container ship list again...
msc daniela, msc danit are much high in teu intake capacity vs emma maersk —Preceding unsigned comment added by Azeez66613 (talk • contribs) 07:06, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
PLS NOTE THAT THE BIGGEST SHIPS IS NOT UPDATED. I MEAN CMA CGM VESSELS THERE ARE THE LATEST CMA CGM CHRISTOPHE COLOMB AND CMA CGM AMERIGO VESPUCCI (LENGTH 365.5M AND 13344 TEUS) - KINDLY UPDATE :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.133.125.109 (talk) 11:50, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
Contradiction?
This page: "The first container ship was the Ideal-X, a converted T-2 tanker, owned by Malcom McLean, which carried 58 metal containers between Newark, New Jersey and Houston, Texas on its first voyage, in April 1956."
Another Wikipedia page - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Containerization: "The first vessels purpose-built to carry containers began operation in Denmark in 1951. Ships began carrying containers between Seattle and Alaska in 1951."
207.189.233.158 02:41, 29 January 2007 (UTC)Gord
- Dean & Kemp's Oxford Companion to Ships & the Sea says Fairland was the first. Trekphiler 04:21, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
- This article also referred to the 1955 Clifford J Rogers voyage, despite saying theIdeal-X was first in 1956. Given the Rogers is better sourced, and noting the Fairland reference above, I've copyedited the section to include the Denmark startup and Rogers voyage and note the Ideal-X only as the first purpose-built US container ship.
- This issue was raised a year ago without any changes being made so I assume this is not a matter of much controversy. However, opposing views or comments are welcome. Euryalus (talk) 00:54, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
Costs
Does anyone have any information about indusrty building/shipping costs and the cost effectiveness of container ship versus other kinds of shipping? 140.180.166.176 00:01, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
Risk
I've deleted the following self-contradictory text from the Risk section. If the pirates only rob the crew, then the high value of the cargo is not what makes container ships a target for pirates. And the difficulty of getting the cargo off a container ship would imply that piracy is not a significant risk. If piracy is a risk, please sort out the text and give a citation.
The great value of merchandise on these vessels makes them a target for hijackers. Well-organized piracy remains a threat in places such as Indonesia. Although pirates usually limit themselves to robbing the crew; mainly due to the difficulty of finding a suitable anchorage where a container ship can be unloaded without being noticed. Even changing the name of the vessel would be difficult as ships are quite distinctive in appearance.
I have also deleted the reference to MSC Napoli in
It has been estimated that container ships lose over 10,000 containers at sea each year. Most go overboard during a storm, but there are some examples of whole ships being lost, as in the MSC Napoli.
It is true that the Napoli was lost. However, the containers that were lost went overboard in a storm; the ship survived the storm in almost one piece but it was later decided to be beyond economic repair. The rest of the containers were unloaded from the ship in the salvage. However, using it as an example of a "whole ship" lost in a storm suggests that the ship and the cargo were lost. Dricherby (talk) 00:47, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
TEU
I find the use of the abbreviation TEU not specific and totally confusing.
The TEU is defined as a 20-ft container equivalent.
Then a ship is defined as 14000 TEU's. Does this mean that the ship can carry 1400 20-ft containers? Such a ship would be some 1200 m long!
If is some equivalent volume then is it cm or cf?
14000 TEU's should mean 14000 20-ft containers, and not include some nebulous undefined coversion factor 65.5.207.221 (talk) 15:30, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
please see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twenty-foot_equivalent_unit —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.133.2.95 (talk) 18:46, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
Plagiarism?
The sentences reading "Multimodal Transport will be dealt with in Topic V Unit 6. We shall also be dealing with Just in Time manufacturing" in the "History" section look like they were copy-pasted straight out of some textbook to me. That casts doubt on the rest of the paragraph too I expect. 82.6.108.62 (talk) 21:59, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
- I agree. Adding a copyright problems box. Felgerkarb (talk) 22:18, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
- Quick googling has found this text verbatim on several other sites. Some look like they are scraping Wikipedia, so I am not sure if they are the original source or not. None of them have any internal reference to a 'Topic V Unit 6' to make me think they are the original source. Felgerkarb (talk) 22:23, 23 November 2010 (UTC)