Wikipedia

Talk:MSC Napoli

Latest comment: 6 years ago by InternetArchiveBot in topic External links modified
Learn more about this page

MSC Napoli was NOT first post-Panamax containership

edit
Latest comment: 17 years ago6 comments3 people in discussion

That honor goes to the APL President Truman, built in 1988, four years before the MSC Napoli. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 155.14.7.49 (talk) 18:50, 9 April 2007 (UTC).Reply

Humm - Information on the President Truman can be found here and looking at Panamax suggests that the Truman would not fit through. It would be nice to have a source that says "ship X was the first" though. For now I have stuck on a fact tag. Andreww 19:34, 9 April 2007 (UTC)Reply
Actually - there is a reference in the article but chasing it up we find "This ship was the first post panamax container vessel many years ago and MSC was the first shipping line who employed a post panamax ship to the NE -> MED services." Which is not quite the same as saying that this was the first panmax container ship (actually, it does not say that at all). I would guess that NE = Northern Europe and MED = Mediterranean but that rally is a guess. Anyway, fact it is. Andreww 19:40, 9 April 2007 (UTC)Reply
Well, that source does say "This ship was the first post panamax container vessel many years ago" which to me would be the same as saying that it was the first post panamax container ship; the following "and" would start a new sentence fragment to say that MSC were the first to use a vessel of this size on the Northern Europe/Med service. Either way, it looks as if we need to find some neutral source to corroborate these (For example, has APL President Truman been extended since launch?). Probably worth noting that the IP address stating that honour goes to a rival shipping line is assigned to the rival line [1].
Personally, I think that http://www.containershipping.nl/ is suitably neutral, but whether it is suitably reliable, I would not like to say until we can find some further sources. -- Ratarsed 12:40, 10 April 2007 (UTC)Reply
It's sad. I remember the time when we did not need to do whois lookups on comments from IPs, and how on earth did a shipping company get a whole /16 anyway? Thanks for spotting this. I completely agree that we could do with a decent neutral source. I'll see what I can find. Andreww 17:05, 11 April 2007 (UTC)Reply
this says:
In 1988 three ships were delivered for the US American President Lines. The capacity was 4340 TEU's, length 275 m and the sensational breadth of 39 meter! An unwritten law of maritime construction says, a ship must be able to pass the locks of the Panama Channel and thus have a breadth of no more than 33 meters. But APL developed a new transportation net without using the Panama channel. This marked the creation of the new 'Post-Panmax' type.
and this suggests that the "first post-panmax container ship" was built by HDW (not very neutral though).
Even less helpfully this says:
APL developed a new transportation net without using the Panama channel. This marked the creation of the new 'Post-Panmax' type. In 1996 the Regina Mærsk exceeded this limit, with an official capacity of 6,400 teu, and started a new development in the container ship market. Since 1996, the maximum size of container ships has rapidly increased from 6,600 teu in 1997 to 7,200 teu in 1998, and up to 8,700 teu in ships delivered in 1999. The vessels delivered or on order with a capacity of approx. 9,000 teu have exceeded the Panamax beam by approx. 10 m. The development of the post-panamax fleet has been dramatic; today 30% of the world's fleet, by capacity, is post-panamax.
and that's all I can find. I guess this is one for a longish footnote. What we really need is a authoritative book. Andreww 17:23, 11 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

Past tense?

edit
Latest comment: 17 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Now that she's been broken up and the bow towed away, shouldn't we start referring to this ship in the past tense? --Eamonnca1 22:37, 9 August 2007 (UTC)Reply

This article is chock-full of errors

edit
Latest comment: 16 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

I am a marine surveyor who was been working on the cargo salvage aspect of the casualty since day one.

Metvale Limited are the legal owners of the vessel but this is a British Virgin Islands registered company and nothing whatever to do with the UK plc, TG21.

The hull was actually cracked on both sides

the vessel could not have been accommodated in Falmouth, the harbour and its approaches have insufficient draught for a vessel of that length and the act of turning the vessel for Falmouth would have broken her hull.

It is far from certain that the stern section will be refloated at all, let alone taken to Belfast. It is more likely that this part will be dismantled in situ. Fordrj 11:00, 20 August 2007 (UTC)Reply

The captions at right says "laid down 2007" and immediately afterwards launched in 1991. To lay down a ship means to lay the keel, so presumably it must be pre-1991. Correct please!!! Everybody got to be somewhere! (talk) 23:29, 4 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

Are you aware that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia that anyone can edit? So, please, correct the article yourself! Thanks - Adrian Pingstone (talk) 09:15, 5 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

cargo

edit
Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Has there been an estimate on the cargo lost? Any lawsuit against the shipping company etc? --Kvasir (talk) 21:25, 3 April 2008 (UTC)Reply

MAIB Report released

edit
Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The MAIB report has been released. I can't access it as it's a PDF document which will cause my computer to freeze if I try to open it. Mjroots (talk) 08:06, 30 April 2008 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on MSC Napoli. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:32, 22 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on MSC Napoli. 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.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 00:39, 29 May 2017 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on MSC Napoli. 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.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 19:59, 10 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:MSC_Napoli&oldid=1213139603"