Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by LaminatorX on Monday October 20 2014, @09:33PM   Printer-friendly [Skip to comment(s)]
from the not-the-local-bulk-cruisers-mind-you dept.

Alastair Philip Wiper writes that at at 194 feet wide and 1,312 feet long, the Matz Maersk Triple E is the largest ship ever built capable of carrying 18,000 20-foot containers. Its propellers weigh 70 tons apiece and it is too big for the Panama Canal, though it can shimmy through the Suez. A U-shaped hull design allows more room below deck, providing capacity for 18,000 shipping containers arranged in 23 rows – enough space to transport 864 million bananas. The Triple-E is constructed from 425 pre-fabricated segments, making up 21 giant “megablock” cross sections. Most of the 955,250 litres of paint used on each ship is in the form of an anti- corrosive epoxy, pre-applied to each block. Finally, a polyurethane topcoat of the proprietary Maersk brand colour, “Hardtop AS-Blue 504”, is sprayed on.

Twenty Triple-E class container ships have been commissioned by Danish shipping company Maersk Lines for delivery by 2015. The ships are being built at the Daewoo Shipbuilding and Marine Engineering factory in the South Korean port of Opko. The shipyard, about an hour from Busan in the south of the country, employs about 46,000 people, and "could reasonably be described as the worlds biggest Legoland," writes Wiper. "Smiling workers cycle around the huge shipyard as massive, abstractly over proportioned chunks of ships are craned around and set into place." The Triple E is just one small part of the output of the shipyard, as around 100 other vessels including oil rigs are in various stages of completion at the any time.” The vessels will serve ports along the northern-Europe-to-Asia route, many of which have had to expand to cope with the ships’ size. “You don’t feel like you’re inside a boat, it’s more like a cathedral,” Wiper says. “Imagine this space being full of consumer goods, and think about how many there are on just one ship. Then think about how many are sailing round the world every day. It’s like trying to think about infinity.”

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by VLM on Monday October 20 2014, @09:44PM

    by VLM (445) on Monday October 20 2014, @09:44PM (#107991)

    There was a big discussion pre-world trade that building a world class skyscraper was proof there would be an economic collapse in a couple years.

    Similar discussion about building giant ships in the world trade era. "Imagine this space being full of consumer goods" LOL not for long!

    The shame of it is a mostly empty skyscraper can creep along for decades, but you stop maint on a ship that big, the suckers going down in weeks/months. Beach it somewhere and wait for better economic conditions? Then all its systems will be out of date if its a decade. Its an environmental disaster because its all going to be wasted soon, a total loss on the environmental costs of making it, when its soon no longer needed.

    Maybe people can live in it, like the float cities so popular in some sci fi. As the book said, "Maybe they'll listen to REASON". That book would make a decent movie. (Thinks about the recent Star Trek reboot). On second thought don't go ruining my memories, skip the movie.

    • (Score: 1) by tftp on Monday October 20 2014, @10:29PM

      by tftp (806) on Monday October 20 2014, @10:29PM (#108004) Homepage

      Maybe people can live in it, like the float cities so popular in some sci fi.

      Owners of Jules Verne's Propeller Island did not need to worry about the economy. They could buy the best and not worry about where the money would come from. However in the real world a floating city would have to worry very much about the economy, as they have to buy food from earth-based farms. Perhaps fishing jobs would be available, or marine research, or some purely intellectual pursuits. But not much else - not with today's technology. People on a ship like that would have nothing to do. Even programmers would have hard time working there, due to slow, expensive and unreliable (in bad weather) satellite Internet. The best way to use one of such ships for living is by parking it at some pier forever.

      • (Score: 2) by tibman on Monday October 20 2014, @10:48PM

        by tibman (134) Subscriber Badge on Monday October 20 2014, @10:48PM (#108009)

        If you wanted, you could float your little city down to a better pier. That's a nice bonus.

        --
        SN won't survive on lurkers alone. Write comments.
    • (Score: 2) by frojack on Monday October 20 2014, @10:36PM

      by frojack (1554) Subscriber Badge on Monday October 20 2014, @10:36PM (#108005) Journal

      Lets assume the the predictions of a collapse upon which you base your post-apocalyptic musing were in fact imminent:

      Shipping is drastically reduced. Which ships will be the cheapest to continue to run, those with the biggest payload and the best fuel economy and a small crew, or many may much smaller vessels with small payloads, poor fuel economy, and just about the same size crew?

       

      --
      No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
      • (Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Monday October 20 2014, @10:52PM

        by hemocyanin (186) on Monday October 20 2014, @10:52PM (#108011) Journal

        It depends on where you go and how much you need to carry.

        So for example, a bus provides better fuel economy on a per person basis IF it exceeds a certain rider level. If the bus is carrying one passenger however, a full size pickup with a single occupant will more efficient. So with the shipping -- if you can fill the ship and arrange destinations efficiently, the big ship is better. If you can't, the small ship is.

    • (Score: 2) by zafiro17 on Tuesday October 21 2014, @02:32PM

      by zafiro17 (234) on Tuesday October 21 2014, @02:32PM (#108246) Homepage

      The shipping business operates on razor-thin margins these days, and companies like Maersk have been in economic downturn over the past decade, squeezed by the cheaper options of sketchy Asian companies who ship for less by skimping on safety etc. So if they've decided to invest in this kind of ship you can rest assured their lawyers, accountants, planners, and managers have studied the costs and benefits and decided it makes sense. There is enormous amount of trade going on between Asia and America, all of which docks on the USA's Pacific Coast. These are ships that are too large to go through the Panama Canal because they're intended to ever need to. Companies like Maersk can't afford to make a mistake. If they're ready to invest in this kind of ship then there must be a calculated advantage to doing so.

      As for measuring the ship's volume in bananas, WTF? Can I have that in Libraries of Congress or swimming pools, please?

      --
      Dad always thought laughter was the best medicine, which I guess is why several of us died of tuberculosis - Jack Handey
      • (Score: 2) by VLM on Tuesday October 21 2014, @03:23PM

        by VLM (445) on Tuesday October 21 2014, @03:23PM (#108263)

        Yeah you're right, we should always form opinions based on deference to authority because those in positions of authority can do no wrong and never have. What could possibly go wrong?

      • (Score: 2) by TK on Tuesday October 21 2014, @03:42PM

        by TK (2760) on Tuesday October 21 2014, @03:42PM (#108270)

        It would be much simpler to say that the new ship can transport 43 Olympic swimming pools full of bananas across 12,000 football fields and over 266 million Sydney Harbor's worth of ocean.

        --
        The fleas have smaller fleas, upon their backs to bite them, and those fleas have lesser fleas, and so ad infinitum
  • (Score: 4, Informative) by frojack on Monday October 20 2014, @10:26PM

    by frojack (1554) Subscriber Badge on Monday October 20 2014, @10:26PM (#108002) Journal

    Bigger ships have been built. The Seawise Giant [wikipedia.org], at 458.46 m (1,504.1 ft) long 564,650 DWT was substantially bigger than the planned 400 meter, 165,000t being built. The net tonnage capacity of the Seawise would hold and entire Tripple E ship with room to spare.

    These triple E can only claim bragging rights because the Seawise was scrapped in 2010. It had previously been sunk by the Iraqi Airforce (while full of Iranian oil). In fact there were 6 or 7 ships [wikipedia.org] built that were bigger than the Triple E's.

    You can get an idea of the size of these things on Google Maps [goo.gl] in satellite view. The tricky bit is finding something in the image to judge by. Zoom around in the image and you will see some white pickup trucks parked between the monsters.

    --
    No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
    • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 21 2014, @02:13AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 21 2014, @02:13AM (#108052)

      They can only claim bragging rights as the largest container ships. Aside from Knock Nevis/Seawise Giant, all of the ULCC/T1 class supertankers are larger. The triple-E's cargo capacity is only 165k tons, where normal VLCC class supertankers carry 280k tons. And the Prelude FLNG barge [wikipedia.org], at 488 m, is more than 20% longer.

      Also, the first of the triple-E's was delivered almost a year ago.

    • (Score: 2) by mhajicek on Tuesday October 21 2014, @03:15AM

      by mhajicek (51) on Tuesday October 21 2014, @03:15AM (#108069)

      I could build a ship bigger than that. (in Space Engineers...)

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 21 2014, @12:02AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 21 2014, @12:02AM (#108023)

    First, that's A LOT of bananas.
    Next, I would have put this in the outsourced dept.

    Finally, are U-shaped hulls that uncommon?
    I know that some icebreakers have those.
    What are the disadvantages that it hasn't always been done that way?

    -- gewg_

    • (Score: 1) by lentilla on Tuesday October 21 2014, @12:14AM

      by lentilla (1770) on Tuesday October 21 2014, @12:14AM (#108029)

      First, that's A LOT of bananas.

      I wonder if that would qualify as radioactive cargo?

      • (Score: 3, Interesting) by Popeidol on Tuesday October 21 2014, @04:13AM

        by Popeidol (35) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday October 21 2014, @04:13AM (#108092) Journal

        If wikipedia can be trusted, A lethal dose of radiation is approximately 80,000,000 Bananas [wikipedia.org]. So the ship can carry enough bananas to kill eight and three-quarter people via radiation poisoning.

        While obviously we will all find that figure terrifying, the attempt to eat eighty million bananas will probably kill you before the radiation does.

    • (Score: 2) by Adamsjas on Tuesday October 21 2014, @12:43AM

      by Adamsjas (4507) on Tuesday October 21 2014, @12:43AM (#108039)

      Canals.
      Get the hull flare significantly above the water line and you can fit through canals you couldn't otherwise use.
      You can also dock closer. But it makes loading tricky.

  • (Score: 2) by kaszz on Tuesday October 21 2014, @12:32AM

    by kaszz (4211) on Tuesday October 21 2014, @12:32AM (#108034) Journal

    Alastair Philip Wiper writes that at at 59.1 meters wide and 399.9 meters long, the Matz Maersk Triple E is the largest ship ever built capable of carrying 18 000 6.1-meter containers [alastairphilipwiper.com]. Its propellers weigh 70 tons apiece and it is too big for the Panama Canal, though it can shimmy through the Suez [wired.com]. A U-shaped hull design allows more room below deck, providing capacity for 18 000 shipping containers arranged in 23 rows – enough space to transport 864 million bananas. The Triple-E is constructed from 425 pre-fabricated segments, making up 21 giant “megablock” cross sections. Most of the 955.250 m³ of paint used on each ship is in the form of an anti- corrosive epoxy, pre-applied to each block. Finally, a polyurethane topcoat of the proprietary Maersk brand colour, “Hardtop AS-Blue 504”, is sprayed on.

    Twenty Triple-E class container ships have been commissioned [maersktechnology.com] by Danish shipping company Maersk Lines for delivery by 2015. The ships are being built at the Daewoo Shipbuilding and Marine Engineering factory [ship-technology.com] in the South Korean port of Opko. The shipyard, about an hour from Busan in the south of the country, employs about 46 000 people, and "could reasonably be described as the worlds biggest Legoland," writes Wiper. "Smiling workers cycle around the huge shipyard as massive, abstractly over proportioned chunks of ships are craned around and set into place." The Triple E is just one small part of the output of the shipyard, as around 100 other vessels including oil rigs are in various stages of completion at the any time.” The vessels will serve ports along the northern-Europe-to-Asia route, many of which have had to expand to cope with the ships’ size. “You don’t feel like you’re inside a boat, it’s more like a cathedral,” Wiper says. “Imagine this space being full of consumer goods, and think about how many there are on just one ship. Then think about how many are sailing round the world every day. It’s like trying to think about infinity.”

    (We are going metric inch by inch..)

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 21 2014, @01:21AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 21 2014, @01:21AM (#108047)

      "Tons" was close enough?

      -- gewg_

      • (Score: 2) by kaszz on Tuesday October 21 2014, @02:38AM

        by kaszz (4211) on Tuesday October 21 2014, @02:38AM (#108058) Journal

        "70 tons" = 7 * 10^4 kg unless it's one of those cases where people redefine ton into some abomination.

  • (Score: 2, Interesting) by cngn on Tuesday October 21 2014, @01:19AM

    by cngn (1609) on Tuesday October 21 2014, @01:19AM (#108045)

    Frickin inches and feet drive me up the wall, much prefer Metric, especially I've grown up using Metric, with Feet I have absolutely no idea, what approximate size I'm imagining.

    • (Score: 2) by kaszz on Tuesday October 21 2014, @02:42AM

      by kaszz (4211) on Tuesday October 21 2014, @02:42AM (#108060) Journal

      Feet is approximately precisely whatever the thought reading of the text author shows ;-)

    • (Score: 2) by Tork on Tuesday October 21 2014, @02:51AM

      by Tork (3914) on Tuesday October 21 2014, @02:51AM (#108062)
      Really? I'm a thick-headed American who works in feet and inches and I have no trouble reading meters or even Celcius.
      --
      Slashdolt Logic: "24 year old jokes about sharks and lasers are +5, Funny." 💩
      • (Score: 2) by mhajicek on Tuesday October 21 2014, @03:13AM

        by mhajicek (51) on Tuesday October 21 2014, @03:13AM (#108067)

        I'm a machinist. Drill bits come in fractions of an inch, number sizes, letter sizes, and metric sizes. And there's still not always the size you need to drill undersize for a reamed hole.

        • (Score: 2) by Tork on Tuesday October 21 2014, @03:20AM

          by Tork (3914) on Tuesday October 21 2014, @03:20AM (#108071)
          I'm not sure what that has to do with imagining how big something is...?
          --
          Slashdolt Logic: "24 year old jokes about sharks and lasers are +5, Funny." 💩
          • (Score: 2) by mhajicek on Tuesday October 21 2014, @11:08AM

            by mhajicek (51) on Tuesday October 21 2014, @11:08AM (#108182)

            Being familiar with four unit systems.

  • (Score: 2) by mendax on Tuesday October 21 2014, @03:05AM

    by mendax (2840) on Tuesday October 21 2014, @03:05AM (#108064)

    I predict the North Koreans will now try to build a ship larger than this. The basis for this prediction is the existence of the Ryugyong Hotel [wikipedia.org] in Pyongyang. The Wikipedia article on the hotels says:

    The plan for a large hotel was reportedly a Cold War response to the completion of the world's tallest hotel, the Westin Stamford Hotel in Singapore, in 1986 by [a] South Korean company....

    However, the real reason why it was built was because the hotel in Singapore was built by a South Korean company and the North Koreans were not going to be shown up by their enemy to the south. With a South Korean company building a huge ship, the North will not be far behind... if they really want to waste money on such a foolish thing. But the North Koreans have priorities that don't look rational to those on the outside.

    --
    It's really quite a simple choice: Life, Death, or Los Angeles.