ShipSpotting.com
Login: Lost Password? SIGN UP
Ship Photo Search
Advanced Search
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: CSCL / COSCON 22,000 teu ships  (Read 2695 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Patalavaca
Top Poster
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 814

Saludos


View Profile
« on: April 14, 2017, 08:45:30 pm »

Spoke to the master of CSCL GLobe today, 14 April 2017; he stated that the Shanghai Waigaoqiao Shipbuilding yard will begin to deliver the first of six, 420 metre long, 22,000 teu vessels from the end of this year to CSCL/COSCON.

If the info is accurate, they will be the first megabox carriers to exceed 400 metres & will be enaged on the Far East - NW Europe service.

Regards, Rick
Report to moderator   Logged

Regards, Rick
Captain Ted
Top Poster
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8,954



View Profile WWW
« Reply #1 on: April 14, 2017, 09:03:51 pm »

Hi Rick,, and there the caroussel keeps going. Looking fwd when the next big one goes down the drain.
Report to moderator   Logged

NOW!!!,,,if we could get rid of the sailors,,how safe shipping would be !!!!!!!!
MO Roy
Just can't stay away
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 88


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: April 15, 2017, 02:51:21 am »

Hi Rick,

If this is true, than it is done in an old Maersk style fashion. Secretly updating the capacity and only make it public upon delivery. Of course now the Chinese can do it with there Chinese yards.

But then maybe it's only in the mind of this master, because I haven't heart anything about container ships in the pipeline that are bigger then 400 meters.

CSCL has indeed 6 ships on order from Waigaoqiao but they were ordered as "normal" 20000teu vessels i.e. 400 meter long.

I guess we have to wait and see.

Cheers,
Roy
Report to moderator   Logged
Patalavaca
Top Poster
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 814

Saludos


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: April 15, 2017, 06:33:35 am »

Guten Morgen Ted, wherever you are  Cool
My primary interest is in the latest and greatest floating engineering marvels, but on the other hand I, like most other observers, am deeply concerned about the consequences of a major collision or stranding of such ships on the crew and the environment.

When I asked the Master about taking a ship of this 'new' size up the Elbe to Hamburg he instantly replied that they would *not* be calling there, but Bremerhaven or Wilhelmshaven instead.

Who will build the first MalaccaMax, I wonder?!

Tschuss, Rick




Hi Rick,, and there the caroussel keeps going. Looking fwd when the next big one goes down the drain.
Report to moderator   Logged

Regards, Rick
Patalavaca
Top Poster
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 814

Saludos


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: April 15, 2017, 06:40:35 am »

Good morning Roy, indeed & this is why I posted the info.
I have been told by various masters and engineers that there are some major constructional barriers in designing vessels exceeding 400 metres in length. (I wish I knew exactly what they are though!)
Clearly, these barriers are not insurmountable, but will the Chinese be the pioneers? I'd like to think so.
As for the master's quite specific words? Time will tell.

Regards, Rick




Hi Rick,

If this is true, than it is done in an old Maersk style fashion. Secretly updating the capacity and only make it public upon delivery. Of course now the Chinese can do it with there Chinese yards.

But then maybe it's only in the mind of this master, because I haven't heart anything about container ships in the pipeline that are bigger then 400 meters.

CSCL has indeed 6 ships on order from Waigaoqiao but they were ordered as "normal" 20000teu vessels i.e. 400 meter long.

I guess we have to wait and see.

Cheers,
Roy
Report to moderator   Logged

Regards, Rick
Allan RO
Top Poster
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,585


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: April 15, 2017, 11:17:19 am »

Sometime ago before the CSCL merger the COSCO web-site announced the first 3 from SWS whould be called COSCO Creation, Wisdom and Explorer.  I wonder if they will retain these names.  Certainly a 420m. box boat would be some creation but I am concerned about the wisdom of this venture...

Allan
Report to moderator   Logged
Captain Ted
Top Poster
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8,954



View Profile WWW
« Reply #6 on: April 15, 2017, 04:56:05 pm »

In shipping generally is not much wisdom,, more like reaction to the failure to foresee. Once this is done, it is usually overshot to the extreme until it makes boom somewhere.
Same with the mega passenger vessels, all good and nice. But just imagine a situation a collision, the passegner vessel sinks with 5000 plus peoples aboard. Does really anyone think that they can be taken off from such a ship in time !! ??
I predict, that when that really one day happens,,the sinking of such a ship, that all those who were involved in the desgin/construction/approval and operation will say : we do not understand,, ,,,,,,
Report to moderator   Logged

NOW!!!,,,if we could get rid of the sailors,,how safe shipping would be !!!!!!!!
Neil D
Just popping in

Offline Offline

Posts: 13


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: April 18, 2017, 10:16:21 am »

I'd be very surprised if the 400 metre long barrier is broken. All of the very big container ships on order fall within the 400m long x 59m beam limits. Ports and terminals have invested and adapted on the basis of 400m max vessel lengths and going beyond this will cause significant issues for many places.

What is happening is that designers are finding ways to squeeze greater teu intakes into the 400m x 59m shape. For example a 12th layer of boxes on deck (empties only) adds about 1,000 teu.

The 6 vessels that Cosco China Shipping has on order from the Waigaoqiao yard have a stated capacity of just under 21,000 teu.
Report to moderator   Logged
Patalavaca
Top Poster
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 814

Saludos


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: April 18, 2017, 07:01:54 pm »

We'll *all* be very surprised if the Chinese break the 400 metre barrier Neil!
I hope they do, but expect they won't.
But then Trump will never be President & Brexit will never happen - said the pundits  Tongue
All the best, Rick


I'd be very surprised if the 400 metre long barrier is broken. All of the very big container ships on order fall within the 400m long x 59m beam limits. Ports and terminals have invested and adapted on the basis of 400m max vessel lengths and going beyond this will cause significant issues for many places.

What is happening is that designers are finding ways to squeeze greater teu intakes into the 400m x 59m shape. For example a 12th layer of boxes on deck (empties only) adds about 1,000 teu.

The 6 vessels that Cosco China Shipping has on order from the Waigaoqiao yard have a stated capacity of just under 21,000 teu.
Report to moderator   Logged

Regards, Rick
chrisg46
Top Poster
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 514


View Profile WWW
« Reply #9 on: April 18, 2017, 09:52:58 pm »

Back in around 2008, STX Shipyards gained a considerable flush of publicity when they announced what they said was a fully developed plan for a 460 metre 22,000 TEU container ship, 60m beam.

They didn't find a customer to build the ship for, however, and bearing mind traffic difficulties, it might not have been a bad thing that it didn't happen!
Report to moderator   Logged

Chris
I'm a working shipping journo, and run a website called ShippingTV . . .
http://www.shippingtv.co.uk
Andrew McAlpine
Top Poster
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,570



View Profile
« Reply #10 on: April 19, 2017, 06:55:42 am »

thanks for sharing this with us Rick as I find this very interesting,

Back in 2008 when STX first came up with the concept for a 22,000TEU ship it was envisaged that it would have to be 460m in length with a beam of 60m.
As always the ships designers have found ways to add ever more capacity into the standard 400 x 58m profile. When the first series of Triple E vessels were launched in 2013 I was told by a very reliable source that the second batch 10 vessels from Mayview onward had slightly more capacity due to slight design changes, which perhaps explains why their quoted capacity changed from the initial 18,270 to 18,340TEU.

If this is indeed correct and setting aside any issues that extra length or container height would give the master, planners, ports etc, these ships would not need to be 460m in length. With the arrival of MOL Triumph we now have ships that can load 12 tiers under deck.

The designers would have to weigh up the pros and cons of either loading a 12th tier on deck behind the bridge or increasing the overall length by adding an additional 40' bay both of which would easily increase capacity to just beyond 22,000TEU.

As we have already seen with container ship design perhaps itís not 'if' but 'when' we see it..............

regards
Andrew  
              
« Last Edit: April 20, 2017, 07:10:21 am by Andrew McAlpine » Report to moderator   Logged
Neil D
Just popping in

Offline Offline

Posts: 13


View Profile
« Reply #11 on: April 20, 2017, 01:23:20 pm »

The Maersk Triple E vessels are a good example of optimising what's possible within the 400m x 59m footprint. The first batch were 18,340 teu but the second batch are 20,568 teu. The second batch has 12 tiers under deck rather than 11 (deeper hull) and the bridge moved further forwards (reducing deck load line of sight restrictions). There's also more lashing framework on deck to allow higher deck stacks. 20-21,000 teu seems to be the absolute maximum you can squeeze into the 400m x 59m footprint.

There are a lot of strong reasons why it's unlikely that we'll see ships significantly bigger than 21,000 teu. My company (Drewry) did some detailed modelling and found that after about 18,000 teu, while the ship costs decline a bit more with bigger ships, the port costs go up, so the overall system cost increases.

Also, a key question is how would shipping lines fill even bigger ships? They already have to work together in just three big alliances to fill the ships they have today. Plus even bigger ships would likely mean even lower service frequency (and it's already declined markedly over the last few years). Shippers would be even less happy than they are today!
Report to moderator   Logged
Captain Ted
Top Poster
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8,954



View Profile WWW
« Reply #12 on: April 20, 2017, 01:28:38 pm »

@ Neil D,,, thanks for your post, a side/info which one does not hear, as most only go over how big and more big and such matters and other criterias often just brushed of or neglected.
Report to moderator   Logged

NOW!!!,,,if we could get rid of the sailors,,how safe shipping would be !!!!!!!!
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  


Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC
Page created in 0.06 seconds with 20 queries.
Copyright © 2010 All rights reserved