New shipspotting.com site almost ready

[Bob Scott]

The programmer has used the word 'weight' in reference, I think, to gross tonnage. Now you are all talking about deadweight.
Relatively few members of this site ever refer to deadweight in their photo captions so I don't think it would be wise to start now: especially at the expense of reference to the ship's gross tonnage which, as most of us know, has nothing to do with weight.
A personal view here but I don't often make telephone of radio calls to ships. So I wonder why we are bothering about MMSI numbers and call-signs?
In fact, I don't quite understand one thing: are members going to be asked to fill in a details 'form', with MMSI, call-sign "weight" etc, with every photo they post?
Given the present reluctance of members to put ANY info with their photos, I would be interested to see the reaction to that!
Other than the above reservations and observations, I think the new site looks OK!

[Phil English]

Good point Bob. Include MMSI or call sign if you like, but I hope it won't be compulsory. Given he is not a ship buff, the programmer might not realise that MMSI and call sign are largely irrelevant for ship identification, unlike in aviation. where a call sign / aircraft registration is the primary identifier.

Brgds
Phil

[Bob Scott]

Ken:
In the examples the programmer has given and used the word

[Bob Scott]

Okay I won't keep on, except to point out that, in the shipping industry, knowing the deadweight capacity of ANY type of cargo-carrying ship - not just tankers -   is arguably more important than knowing its gross because if you load a vessel over its deadweight capacity - it will probably sink!
However for the shipspotter, gross tonnage is better for for comparing the SIZES of ships. As I said, forget about deadweight! I won't mention it again, if you don't!

[Bjarne Pettersen]

Hi
Just to to toss in another variable. None of the above are used on naval vessels. What is interesting there is displacement.

Best regards
Bjarne Pettersen

[Andre Brandao]

Thanks for all your input. What is important here is what we've said from day one, this site is made by enthusiasts for enthusiasts: keep the suggestion coming and we will implement them. It is possible that the programmer made some mistakes (Weight vs DWT is one of them). I've already asked him to change this as well as the country->flag field.

So and in resume: keep your suggestions coming.

[Allan RO]

Hi all

Personally I believe deadweight is of importance for tankers and bulkers, but perhaps little else.  In my postings I always gave both, and as both are now available via Equasis, I suggest both be given where appropriate.    As stated earlier, the dwt of a cruise ship is of no use to anyone !!

Regarding call sign, I think this is perhaps a little more relevant than the MMSI, as it is a good check that the flag being given is correct.  This becomes more important with chartered box boats that quite often change flag with a change of charterer.

Allan

[Bob Scott]

Although I get irritated with members who do not bother to put any info on their photos apart from where, when and the IMO number, I realise that these people predominate on the site and I therefore am of the opinion that members should not be forced to include much other, extra  info, such as MMSI, call-sign, deadweight tonnages, etc. That is not to say, though, that they should not be encouraged to provide more.
If there is to be some sort of mandatory level of info required, or encouragement to provide more, I would suggest the following order of priorities.
1: Vessel name; 2: IMO no; 3: where and when photographed; 4: gross tonnage; 5: flag; 6: operator details; 7: deadweight tonnage or TEU capacity for containerships. 7: build date and builders; 8 machinery details/ship

[Tony des Landes]

I think Call Signs aren't very useful because ships call signs can change, usually when ships change their country of registry. IMO numbers remain with a vessel throughout it's life.

Regarding tonnages, why not just have the option for all three - Gross, Deadweight and Displacement, and members can fill out those that are relevant.

Tony d

[Joy Loughnan]

I'm one of those guilty of putting up minimum information (IMO, date and place, year built and sometimes cargo), there are plenty of sites with extra details for those who want more.

Joy

[Pieter_Inpijn]

I also think that for uploading of pic's the only necessary info should be: ship name, IMO, date and place. Indeed there are many other sites that give other info. In the present website the IMO can be lookup, is this done on an external (linked) website? In that case in the new version other data maybe can be retrieved as well from that site.

I would like to mention my concern about the new presentation of the categories. On the old site all categories are mentioned in one screen and in a certain order (mostly alphabetical). On the new site they are mentioned at random and I am missing sub-categories. I myself never look for all new photo's but only for new photo's in certain categories (such as passengerships and its sub-category ferries). How can that be done on the new site in an easy way?

[E. Vroom]

Hi all,

Bob i'd like to comment on what you say about MMSI and Call sign.
You are right about members not filling in all details. The ones that do,
help making the search options larger. So if one doesn't know the name of a ship or IMO number but do know MMSI or call sign, More info about the ship can be found using those.
I still feel the advanced search is to limited in options. But while developing I think in time (together with members putting in more effort in filling in the blanks) we will have a database with an enhanced search other websites will be jealous of.
One of my proposals has been to have a field for inland vessels ENI number their equivalent for IMO number. Adre Brandao (AIRNAV) understands the importance of it, because inland vessels are increasingly outfitted with AIS transponders and show up on the AIS screen.

[Robert Smith]

Generally, I add the ship's name, IMO nr., GRT, DWT, when she was built and flag. On top I insert where and when the picture was made and some extra details which may be of interest. I regularly check "my photos" to add later details like sale of the vessel, previous names and/or scrapping details. Mind you: Equasis' scope is also limited. Therefore I regularly consult the Llloyd's register which I'm receiving free of charge under the previous Shipspotting arrangement. (At least till 01-10-10) Another useful site, although it's not free of charge, is the Miramar Shipping Index. This one is especially useful for scrapped vessels. But the crux is that the information is always linked to the IMO nr.  allowing anybody to find any ship at any time in any site.

Brgds,
Robert

[E. Vroom]

Hi All,


pm_inpyn is concerned:
"On the new site they are mentioned at random and I am missing sub-category."

I know the programmers changes are instantly seen on the Beta Site.

When it was first launched, the categories looked slightly different.
I suppose he's working at this section of the site right now.

The changes I see since, is that some categories are double but not complete and that now, when you search in a main category that contains sub-categories you get results. Before you got none.

All of this because of members commented on this. This shows that our comments are taken seriously, but it just takes time to implement all of it.

To all I say: I think we need to be patient. Where "the FLY-boys" go wrong in ignorance, just explain to them what's what, don't judge them that leads nowhere.

[Cornelia Klier]

I have viewed the Beta version now, and I think, there needs alot of work to be done, some members have given constructive critic already.

Regarding data of ships, I think it should be compulsory to give IMO-Nr. and name of the ship, and date when the photo was taken and the place.

All other, is possible to find by IMO-Nr. on other sites !!!! As well I would not bother about things like flag and operator. These things do change too !! And it is better, not to have these dates wrong on the site, but leaving them away, and if one really wants to know it, use IMO-nr. go to www.equasis.org and check info - and THIS site has always updated info, whereas our photos will always stay with the old info.

One thing has disturbed me on the new site:
On the front page you do see the categories in a very fuzzy way. Also letters are of different font and size. It is not neccessary to make the categories look cluttered by such feature.
I think, it is best if it clear, and practicable to see !!

In general, this is my big plea to the programmers: I know it is possible to do all kinds of fancy, posh things in programming and I bet it is alot of fun !!

But I would highlight to you, that what is nice, and fancy, is not always user-friendly, practicable and easy on the eye. So, please do always take user-friendliness in mind as well !!!
Please keep in mind, that many folks here although using a computer, are not as deep in the subject as you, and therefore, it would be good to also make navigating around easy.

As well, please take your time, good thing takes time here, better wait a bit longer and have a well-tested, well functioning website on, than doing it hurryhurry and have a only partly functioning thing  :-D

Oh, and - don't forget to rely on some of the design elements of this site here. It would be a shame if we wouldn't have the members search function anymore, the top-posters list and the who's online list !

With regards,

Cornelia