Jump to content

Talk:Triple E-class container ship

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:Maersk Triple E class)
Former good article nomineeTriple E-class container ship was a Engineering and technology good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
October 5, 2011Good article nomineeNot listed
Did You Know
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on February 28, 2011.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that Maersk Line's Triple E Class are expected to be the largest ships in the world when they enter service?

Naming sources

[edit]

The current use of CiteWeb does not name the source in the reference list - this should be done as per Help:Citing_sources#Webpages, probably by using the publisher-field in Template:Cite web. TGCP (talk) 17:13, 25 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's on my to-do list, along with some other cleanup of refs. Probably tomorrow.
(I don't want to own the article; if anybody else wants to take on such boring chores, go right ahead ) bobrayner (talk) 17:24, 25 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Engine

[edit]

There are some details on the ultra-long stroke engine type here: http://www.shippipedia.com/man-announces-ultra-long-stroke-engine/ While not specifically about the TripleE-engine, the principles should be the same. TGCP (talk) 23:51, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Maersk Triple E class/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Sp33dyphil "Ad astra" 03:16, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • "Asian builders are now considered more competitive." how are they competitive? Price wise?
     Done The relative merits of different builders were outlined in the following sentence - it's largely about price. I've tweaked the wording to make this clearer.
  • "Chinese (for technology reasons)" could you please elaborate?
    I was wary of digressing on this one. Chinese shipyards have massively increased output but have less experience with really advanced, high-tech, complex projects such as this one. There may also be concerns about technology transfer / IP theft but this is not said explicitly in sources. Do you want a bit of expansion on this point?
  • "helped Maersk win a the 'Sustainable Ship Operator of the Year" a implies there are the same awards from other institutions.
     Done
  • "The engines have waste heat recovery (WHR) systems,, known as WHR; heat recovery which is also used in 20 other Mærsk vessels including the eight E-class ships.
     Done
  • "Economy of scale, Energy efficient and Environmentally improved" I suggest only italicise the letter E.
     Done
  • "Seawise Giant was the largest of all." I don't think it's needed.
    Personally, I would disagree. Since the extreme size of the ships is the basis of their notability, and most readers are likely to be here for that reason rather than because of personal passion for Maersk, I feel it may be better to have a few extra words on this point. How about a compromise - remove the explicit mention of Seawise Giant, but add a link to the list of longest ships - does that sound fair?
  • "The hull is more 'boxy'" compared to what?
    "The hull is more 'boxy' with a U-shape compared to the V-shape of Maersk's E-class". It would be nice to wikilink "boxy" but we don't have a good target yet, as articles on naval architecture are slightly hit and miss - there's no article on block coefficient yet (it's on my to-do list).
  • " Panama canal" capitalise "C"
     Done
  • "In 2008, The late-2000s recession in many countries" the recession didn't only happened in 2008.
    The decline in demand in container transport happened in 2008. I've rearranged the sentence to make this relationship clearer - does that help?

Comments from Haus

[edit]

Hi. It would be a conflict of interest for me to review this article, however there are a number of items that I think could use some attention before this article passes GA. I'll excuse myself and leave the decisions up to the reviewer.

  • "In February 2011, Maersk announced orders... with an emphasis on lower fuel..." Can an order have an emphasis?
  • This parenthetical conversion seems to be adrift: "(2 trillion Korean Won).[3]"
  • Consistency: "ordered for $1.9bn" where "billion" and "trillion" have been used above.
  • "Payment of the ship" doesn't make sense to me.
  • Consistency: "containership" is used in some places, "container ship" in others.
  • Capitalization: "design: It"
  • This sentence has at least two problems: "Usually a single engine is more efficient,[9] but using two propellers allows a better distribution of pressure, increasing propeller efficiency more than the disadvantage of using two engines."
  • "The twin-skeg principle also means..." Can a principle mean anything?
  • "of the desired route" to "along projected routes"?
  • "A slower speed of 19 knots is targeted as the optimum,[according to whom?]"
  • "These will be the most efficient containerships in the world, per TEU." Needs a citation.
  • "Seawise Giant was the largest of all." This needs a citation. Arguments down the road could be sidestepped by qualifying this with "in terms of deadweight tonnage."
  • Item 1a of WP:WIAGA requires that "Embedded lists should be used only when appropriate; sometimes the information in a list is better presented as prose paragraphs." I'm not convinced that the embedded list in the "Specifications" section complies.
Best wishes. HausTalk 21:42, 25 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Article should be failed at this time as concerns remain unaddressed. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 17:06, 5 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Largest Ships?

[edit]

Triple E won´t be the largest ships in service; it seems people make confusion between length, and Gross Tonnage. Not for being the longest ships means that they are the largest, as the measurement of size for merchant ships is the total volume (Gross Tonnage). Triple E Class will be around 200,000 GT-more or less-. The largest ships currently in service are the TI Class supertankers, at 234,000 GT. The second largest ships are Royal Caribbean's Oasis Class, at 225,000 GT. Also, a big mistake consists of thinking that the Seawise Giant (mentioned here) was the largest of the ships. Well, another urban legend; she had the greatest deadweight, and was the longest ship ever built with 458.45 meters, but her total volume was 260,941 GT. The largest ships ever built were the 275,268 GT Batillus Class supertankers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.37.55.153 (talk) 18:10, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You have a point, see also List of world's largest ships by gross tonnage. I have added a reference about longest.
However, volume and length are just two of the measures ships are judged by; some of the other parameters are deadweight tonnage and displacement. No ship is the "biggest" by all parameters, so an amalgamation has to be used. Such an amalgamation is a kind of WP:original research and must be performed by WP:Reliable sources outside Wikipedia, as the Economist reference shows. The Seawise Giant came close to topping all parameters, and I have tried to reference the claim.
The vast empty space of MS Oasis of the Seas' Central Park is a considerable part of the gross tonnage (volume), and may even be considered as a kind of payload as it adds value to the ship. However, container ships get no credit from the considerable amount of "empty space" above deck for the thousands of containers that are direct payload. As such, volume is not the only way to size a ship, and may not even be the best way. Oasis has about 100,000 tons of deadweight; less than Triple-E's 165,000. TGCP (talk) 22:43, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't know that the empty space on Oasis class is considered part of their gross tonnage; it was a doubt i had, and i tried to look for information on the net about it, because it is not really an enclosed space, as it isn't covered by a roof, opposite to the Freedom class interior promenade that is a true enclosed space. Anyway, when you see a big ship or a big building, you see the three dimensions-lenght, width and height-so it is correct to consider the gross tonnage to compare one ship to other, load appart, as the specification says "size of a ship", not "load capacity" or "displacement". Those are different things. I know some times it's important for commercial reasons talking about the load capacity of a ship, but i was talking about the volume, it means size. Seawise Giant was longer and wider than Batillus class, but Batillus class were much more deeper; all measurements together made them bigger than Seawise Giant — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.37.55.153 (talk) 14:22, 8 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Use of "rows"?

[edit]

The word "row" is not defined in the context of this article, and the usage seems to contradict the definition in the linked article on container ships. It would appear that a "row" runs from one side of the ship to the other, and row number increases from bow to stern. The width of the ship would control the number of "slots", not rows. Clarification needed?

NitPicker769 (talk) 20:46, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ports

[edit]

I believe the ships can also be handled in Wilhelmshaven.--Oneiros (talk) 22:35, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. bobrayner (talk) 23:06, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Done--Oneiros (talk) 13:59, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Several ports may handle these ships, but not when they're loaded to max. The route from Asia first enters a deep port like Rotterdam when alot of the load is unloaded and the ship then continues to other ports. 82.182.77.220 (talk) 20:07, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest digging up the max draught of the late ports and compare them with the ship max draught. TGCP (talk) 07:07, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment in article moved here : TGCP (talk) 20:06, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Correction?: A source at the Port of Long Beach actually said that the sailing draft of the EEE Class Maersk ship is ~16m which is in the same ballpark as 14,000 TEU ships, which the POLB can handle. The problem is the crane dimensions which cannot reach over the stack due to height, and cannot reach far enough due to width. Source is the Senior Port Planner at the Port of Long Beach, Matt Plezia.

Incorrect Fact or Misunderstanding?

[edit]

In the section "Dimensions and Layout" the article reads:

"The container port handling speed can be 29 moves per hour."

I assumed "container port handling speed" referred to the number of containers that could be moved on and off ship per hour. If so, "29 moves per hour" is not correct. Something closer to "29 moves per minute" is of the right order.

Is the number incorrect, or does the statement need further clarification in the text? I was unable to access the article where this fact is referenced.

Andtomorrow (talk) 17:32, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Probably incorrect fact, or a measure we just don't understand. I have added an archive, where it clearly states "29 moves per hour", and we must go by source. An expansion of the concept is appreciated, if anyone can find such. Containerization improves productivity, and "moves per hour" seems relevant in that context. TGCP (talk) 19:44, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
An elaborating calculation example, not related to Triple-E. The metric is used as a measure of productivity, showing the number of containers moved by one crane, per hour. Per berth seems to be per ship, when a number of cranes work simultaneously on one ship. It's about getting the ship underway as quickly as possible. TGCP (talk) 20:07, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I think the problem here is that the measurement applies to the port, not the ship. While I can't access the source regarding Tanger-Med, the Rotterdam source is clear that the record is about port productivity and the record just happened to be made with Triple-E. The current wording in the article gives the impression that the ship itself somehow enables greater productivity here and I don't believe that's the case. I'm inclined to remove it unless a more significant connection can be made. Regards, Orange Suede Sofa (talk) 21:09, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
If anything, the larger ship decreases productivity per crane as the container has to travel a longer distance on the crane. A longer ship may increase productivity per berth as it allows more cranes. The archive should be easily accessible, and the simple wording did not allow for other ways of conveying that statement. If you search the web with "moves per hour", you should encounter better references. Anyway, we now have a debate about "moves per hour", which is a good thing. The concept may be copied to the Container and Container ship articles also. TGCP (talk) 21:33, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Cyberbot II has detected links on Maersk Triple E class which have been added to the blacklist, either globally or locally. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed or are highly inappropriate for Wikipedia. The addition will be logged at one of these locations: local or global If you believe the specific link should be exempt from the blacklist, you may request that it is white-listed. Alternatively, you may request that the link is removed from or altered on the blacklist locally or globally. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. Please do not remove the tag until the issue is resolved. You may set the invisible parameter to "true" whilst requests to white-list are being processed. Should you require any help with this process, please ask at the help desk.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

  • http://www.searates.com/reference/portdistance/?fcity1=33126&fcity2=6438&speed=19&ccode=8363
    Triggered by \bsearates\.com\b on the local blacklist
  • http://www.searates.com/reference/portdistance/?fcity1=33126&fcity2=6438&speed=25&ccode=6222
    Triggered by \bsearates\.com\b on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 16:52, 11 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Cyberbot II has detected links on Maersk Triple E class which have been added to the blacklist, either globally or locally. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed or are highly inappropriate for Wikipedia. The addition will be logged at one of these locations: local or global If you believe the specific link should be exempt from the blacklist, you may request that it is white-listed. Alternatively, you may request that the link is removed from or altered on the blacklist locally or globally. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. Please do not remove the tag until the issue is resolved. You may set the invisible parameter to "true" whilst requests to white-list are being processed. Should you require any help with this process, please ask at the help desk.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

  • http://www.searates.com/reference/portdistance/?fcity1=33126&fcity2=6438&speed=19&ccode=8363
    Triggered by \bsearates\.com\b on the local blacklist
  • http://www.searates.com/reference/portdistance/?fcity1=33126&fcity2=6438&speed=25&ccode=6222
    Triggered by \bsearates\.com\b on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 00:49, 14 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Maersk Triple E class. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:18, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 external links on Maersk Triple E-class container ship. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:09, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Total effect of engine?

[edit]

"dual 29.68-megawatt (39,800 hp) ultra-long stroke two-stroke diesel engines" - does it mean that it has a total of 59.36MW ? Afro~svwiki (talk) 10:53, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 13:22, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Triple_E-class_container_ship&oldid=1213623034"