DOCSLIB.ORG

The Tukan: Product Range

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Tukan: Product Range TUKAN 750 / 1500 / 3000 PRODUCT RANGE TUKAN THE TUKAN: PRODUCT RANGE. PRODUCT RANGE Cranes of the TUKAN series are multi- Hook 4-rope multi- 2-blade motor- purpose cranes suitable for handling beam blade grab driven grab bulk goods with all types of grabs, for general cargo handling using load hooks and special load attachment equipment such as e.g. coil or slab tongs, magnets Load magnet Telescopic Rotator and for container handling by means of spreader spreaders. Typical of the Tukan crane design is the large-diameter tubular column and the large roller bearing used for the slewing ring. O Load attachment equipment (examples) O The Tukan from Ardelt in the port of Isdemir/Turkey Page 2 TUKAN THE TUKAN: PRODUCT RANGE. Tukan 750 The Tukan 750 is designed chiefly for the handling of goods in inland ports. With an outreach of 27 m, and with the normal gantry gauge of 10 m and a distance of approx. 2.5 m between waterside rail and fender, it is capable of loading and unloading without problem all ships that operate on inland waterways. It is also possible to serve sea-going vessels up to Handymax size in an efficient manner. As standard, the Tukan 750 is equipped with a container stage allowing container ships of the 1st generation with up to 8 rows (19.2 m) to be served. Tukan 1500 The Tukan 1500 is a crane built for sea ports. It is optionally equipped with jib systems that allow a max. outreach of 32, 35, 40 or 45 m to be attained. Its application range extends from Handymax ships (32 m outreach) up to ships of Capesize class (45 m out- reach). In the case of container handling, ships up to the 3rd generation (13 rows) can be managed. Grande Tukan 3000 The Grande Tukan 3000, which represents the largest version of the series, is offered with jib systems that provide max. outreaches of 50 or 63 m. With an assumed nominal gantry gauge of 15 m, this provides effective outreaches over fender of 39.5 and 52.5 m. In bulk goods operation, this allows ships up to Capesize class to be served, including also Japanmax special ships with 36.3 m hatch width. In container operation, the loading and unloading of ships up to the 4th generation (Post-Panamamax with up to 18 rows of containers) is possible. Cranes of the type Grande Tukan 3000 are also frequently used as shipyard cranes, with their design parameters specially tailored to suit the relevant operating location. In bulk goods operation, ship-to-ship handling is also possible. All cranes of the Tukan series are distinguished by their environmentally-friendly concept and very low operating costs. Seite 3 TUKAN LIFTING CAPACITIES: TUKAN 750 WITH 27 M OUTREACH. WORKING SPEEDS Q Lifting with full grab: 64 m/min Q Lifting with empty grab: 90 m/min Q Luffing: 40 m/min and 60 m/min Q Slewing: 1.0 rpm to 1.6 rpm Q Crane travel speed: 20 m/min and 40 m/min 27000 Heavy-lift stage 2 Heavy-lift stage 1 45 40,5 30 General cargo handling 20 Bulk goods handling 16 10 10000 Lifting capacity (t) 27 25 22 17 12 8 Outreach (m) Bulk goods handling Container handling 8 rows = 19.2 m Ship width = 24 m Page 4 TUKAN LIFTING CAPACITIES: TUKAN 1500 WITH 32 M OUTREACH. WORKING SPEEDS Q Lifting with full grab: 64 m/min Q Lifting with empty grab: 90 m/min Q Luffing: 40 m/min and 60 m/min Q Slewing: 1.0 rpm to 1.6 rpm 32000 Q Crane travel speed: 20 m/min and 40 m/min Heavy-lift stage 1 63 60 General cargo handling 2 50 General cargo handling 1 40 30 Bulk goods handling 20 Lifting capacity (t) 10 10000 32 30 26 22 20 15 10 8 Outreach (m) Bulk goods handling Container handling 10 rows = 24 m Ship width = 30 m Page 5 TUKAN LIFTING CAPACITIES: TUKAN 1500 WITH 35 M OUTREACH. WORKING SPEEDS Q Lifting with full grab: 64 m/min 35000 Q Lifting with empty grab: 90 m/min Q Luffing: 40 m/min and 60 m/min Q Slewing: 1.0 rpm to 1.6 rpm Q Crane travel speed: 20 m/min and 40 m/min Heavy-lift stage 1 63 60 General cargo handling 2 50 General cargo handling 1 40 32 Bulk goods handling 20 Lifting capacity (t) 10 12000 35 30 26 23 20 15 10 Outreach (m) Bulk goods handling Container handling 10 rows = 24 m Ship width = 32.3 m Page 6 TUKAN LIFTING CAPACITIES: TUKAN 1500 WITH 40 M OUTREACH. WORKING SPEEDS 40000 Q Lifting with full grab: 64 m/min Q Lifting with empty grab: 90 m/min Q Luffing: 40 m/min and 60 m/min Q Slewing: 1.0 rpm to 1.6 rpm Q Crane travel speed: 20 m/min and 40 m/min Heavy-lift stage 2 80 70 Heavy-lift stage 1 63 60 General cargo handling 2 50 General cargo handling 1 40 32 Bulk goods handling 25 Lifting capacity (t) 20 10 12000 40 36 33 28 24 20 15 10 Outreach (m) Bulk goods handling Container handling 13 rows = 31.2 m Ship width = 38 m Page 7 TUKAN LIFTING CAPACITIES: TUKAN 1500 WITH 45 M OUTREACH. WORKING SPEEDS 45000 Q Lifting with full grab: 64 m/min Q Lifting with empty grab: 90 m/min Q Luffing: 40 m/min and 60 m/min Q Slewing: 1.0 rpm to 1.6 rpm Q Crane travel speed: 20 m/min and 40 m/min Heavy-lift stage 2 80 70 Heavy-lift stage 1 63 60 General cargo handling 50 40 Bulk goods handling 32 25 Lifting capacity (t) 20 10 12000 4536282420151040 32 Outreach (m) Bulk goods handling Container handling 15 rows = 36 m Ship width = 38 m Page 8 TUKAN LIFTING CAPACITIES: GRANDE TUKAN 3000 WITH 50 M OUTREACH. WORKING SPEEDS Q Lifting with full grab: 64 m/min Q Lifting with empty grab: 90 m/min Q Luffing: 40 m/min and 60 m/min Q Slewing: 1.0 rpm to 1.6 rpm Q Crane travel speed: 20 m/min and 40 m/min Heavy-lift stage 2 100 90 Heavy-lift stage 1 80 70 63 General cargo handling 2 60 General cargo handling 1 50 40 Bulk goods handling Lifting capacity (t) 30 20 10 15000 50 45 40 34 28 23 15 10 Outreach (m) 50000 Bulk goods handling Container handling 16 rows = 38.4 m Ship width = 50 m Page 9 TUKAN LIFTING CAPACITIES: GRANDE TUKAN 3000 WITH 63 M OUTREACH. WORKING SPEEDS Q Lifting with full grab: 64 m/min Q Lifting with empty grab: 90 m/min Q Luffing: 40 m/min and 60 m/min Q Slewing: 1.0 rpm to 1.6 rpm Q Crane travel speed: 20 m/min and 40 m/min Heavy-lift stage 2 120 110 100 90 Heavy-lift stage 1 80 70 General cargo handling 2 60 General cargo handling 1 50 Lifting capacity (t) 40 Bulk goods handling 30 20 10 15000 63 60 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 Outreach (m) 63000 Bulk goods handling Container handling 20 rows = 48 m Ship width = 50 m Page 10 TUKAN OUTREACH / EFFECTIVE WORKING RANGE: RELATIVE TO GANTRY GAUGE AND FENDER DISTANCE. During the development of the Tukan series we based our designs on the most commonly used ship sizes. For determination of the effective working range we have assumed the following ship sizes: Q CRANE TYPE Q MAX. Q NOMINAL Q MIN. DISTANCE Q MIN. DISTANCE Q MAX. OUTREACH TUKAN / OUTREACH GANTRY RAIL - FENDER CENTRE - FENDER OVER FENDER GRANDE TUKAN (a) GAUGE (s) (f) (x) = s/2 + f (y) m m m m m 750 - 27 27 10 2.5 7.5 19.5 1500 - 32 32 10 2.5 7.5 24.5 1500 - 35 35 12 2.5 8.5 26.5 1500 - 40 40 12 3.0 9.0 31.0 1500 - 45 45 12 3.0 9.0 36.0 3000 - 50 50 15 3.0 10.5 39.5 3000 - 63 63 15 3.0 10.5 52.5 O Outreach/effective working range Page 11 TUKAN BULK GOODS HANDLING: SHIP SIZES AND CRANE TYPES. CORRESPONDENCE TO THE BULK CARRIERS Q SHIP SIZES Q SHIP Q HATCH WIDTH Q REQUIRED Q CRANE TYPE WIDTH (APPROX. 0,45 OUTREACH OVER TUKAN / (b) X WIDTH) (L) FENDER (y1) GRANDE TUKAN Saimax 2,000 - 4,000 12.6 5.7 9.1 750 - 27 Handysize 15,000 - 35,000 27.0 12.1 195 750 - 27 Seawaymax 40,000 - 50,000 24.0 10.8 17.4 750 - 27 Handymax 50,000 - 60,000 30.0 13.5 21.8 1500 - 32 Panamax 60,000 - 75,000 32.3 14.5 23.4 1500 - 35 Post-Panamax 75,000 - 85,000 38.0 17.1 27.6 1500 - 40 Post-Panamax 75,000 - 85,000 38.0 17.1 27.6 1500 - 45 Capesize 140,000 - 160,000 47.0 21.2 34.1 1500 - 45 Japanmax 80,000 - 85,000 50.0 22.5 36.3 3000 - 50 O Bulk goods handling Page 12 TUKAN CONTAINER HANDLING: SHIP SIZES AND CRANE TYPES. CORRESPONDENCE TO THE CONTAINER SHIPS Q NO. OF ROWS Q CONTAINER WIDTH Q STACK WIDTH Q CRANE TYPE (sb) TUKAN / GRANDE TUKAN 1st Generation 6 2.4 14.4 750 - 27 1st Generation 8 2.4 19.2 750 - 27 2nd Generation 10 2.4 24.0 1500 - 32 2nd Generation 10 2.4 24.0 1500 - 35 3rd Generation (Panamax) 13 2.4 31.2 1500 - 40 3rd Generation (Panamax) 15 2.4 36 1500 - 45 4th Generation (Post-Panamax) 16 2.4 38.4 3000 - 50 4th Generation (Post-Panamax) 18 2.4 43.2 3000 - 63 O Container handling Page 13 TUKAN DRIVES OF THE TUKAN SERIES: HOISTING GEAR.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • In This Issue …
    In This Issue … INLAND SEAS®VOLUME 72 WINTER 2016 NUMBER 4 MAUMEE VALLEY COMES HOME . 290 by Christopher H. Gillcrist KEEPING IT IN TRIM: BALLAST AND GREAT LAKES SHIPPING . 292 by Matthew Daley, Grand Valley State University Jeffrey L. Ram, Wayne State University RUNNING OUT OF STEAM, NOTES AND OBSERVATIONS FROM THE SS HERBERT C. JACKSON . 319 by Patrick D. Lapinski NATIONAL RECREATION AREAS AND THE CREATION OF PICTURED ROCKS NATIONAL LAKESHORE . 344 by Kathy S. Mason BOOKS . 354 GREAT LAKES NEWS . 356 by Greg Rudnick MUSEUM COLUMN . 374 by Carrie Sowden 289 KEEPING IT IN TRIM: BALLAST AND GREAT LAKES SHIPPING by Matthew Daley, Grand Valley State University Jeffrey L. Ram, Wayne State University n the morning of July 24, 1915, hundreds of employees of the West- Oern Electric Company and their families boarded the passenger steamship Eastland for a day trip to Michigan City, Indiana. Built in 1903, this twin screw, steel hulled steamship was considered a fast boat on her regular run. Yet throughout her service life, her design revealed a series of problems with stability. Additionally, changes such as more lifeboats in the aftermath of the Titanic disaster, repositioning of engines, and alterations to her upper cabins, made these built-in issues far worse. These failings would come to a disastrous head at the dock on the Chicago River. With over 2,500 passengers aboard, the ship heeled back and forth as the chief engineer struggled to control the ship’s stability and failed. At 7:30 a.m., the Eastland heeled to port, coming to rest on the river bottom, trapping pas- sengers inside the hull and throwing many more into the river.
    [Show full text]
  • ANNUAL REPORT 2016 Corporate Profile
    ANNUAL REPORT 2016 Corporate Profile Diana Shipping Inc. (NYSE: DSX) is a global provider of shipping transportation services. We specialize in the ownership of dry bulk vessels. As of April 28, 2017 our fleet consists of 48 dry bulk vessels (4 Newcastlemax, 14 Capesize, 3 Post-Panamax, 4 Kamsarmax and 23 Panamax). The Company also expects to take delivery of one Post-Panamax dry bulk vessel by the middle of May 2017, one Post-Panamax dry bulk vessel by the middle of June 2017 as well as one Kamsarmax dry bulk vessel by the middle of June 2017. As of the same date, the combined carrying capacity of our fleet, excluding the three vessels not yet delivered, is approximately 5.7 million dwt with a weighted average age of 7.91 years. Our fleet is managed by our wholly-owned subsidiary Diana Shipping Services S.A. and our established 50/50 joint venture with Wilhelmsen Ship Management named Diana Wilhelmsen Management Limited in Cyprus. Diana Shipping Inc. also owns approximately 25.7% of the issued and outstanding shares of Diana Containerships Inc. (NASDAQ: DCIX), a global provider of shipping transportation services through its ownership of containerships, that currently owns and operates twelve container vessels (6 Post-Panamax and 6 Panamax). Among the distinguishing strengths that we believe provide us with a competitive advantage in the dry bulk shipping industry are the following: > We own a modern, high quality fleet of dry bulk carriers. > Our fleet includes groups of sister ships, providing operational and scheduling flexibility, as well as cost efficiencies.
    [Show full text]
  • Assessment of Vessel Requirements for the U.S. Offshore Wind Sector
    Assessment of Vessel Requirements for the U.S. Offshore Wind Sector Prepared for the Department of Energy as subtopic 5.2 of the U.S. Offshore Wind: Removing Market Barriers Grant Opportunity 24th September 2013 Disclaimer This Report is being disseminated by the Department of Energy. As such, the document was prepared in compliance with Section 515 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (Public Law 106-554) and information quality guidelines issued by the Department of Energy. Though this Report does not constitute “influential” information, as that term is defined in DOE’s information quality guidelines or the Office of Management and Budget's Information Quality Bulletin for Peer Review (Bulletin), the study was reviewed both internally and externally prior to publication. For purposes of external review, the study and this final Report benefited from the advice and comments of offshore wind industry stakeholders. A series of project-specific workshops at which study findings were presented for critical review included qualified representatives from private corporations, national laboratories, and universities. Acknowledgements Preparing a report of this scope represented a year-long effort with the assistance of many people from government, the consulting sector, the offshore wind industry and our own consortium members. We would like to thank our friends and colleagues at Navigant and Garrad Hassan for their collaboration and input into our thinking and modeling. We would especially like to thank the team at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) who prepared many of the detailed, technical analyses which underpinned much of our own subsequent modeling.
    [Show full text]
  • Ship Types & Sizes
    The Source for Maritime Information and Insight Chris Pålsson, Director, IHS Fairplay Copyright © 2011 IHS Inc. All Rights Reserved. 1 Size matters Copyright © 2011 IHS Inc. All Rights Reserved. 2 Endorsed by the IMSF 2011 Copyright © 2011 IHS Inc. All Rights Reserved. 4 Basis for size categories • Dimensional limitations – Passages, straits, canals, bridges, locks….. • Operational – Rate setting mechanisms – Cargo batch sizes – Type of service – Range of service – ….. Copyright © 2011 IHS Inc. All Rights Reserved. 5 Lingo • Handysize, small/large • VLCC • Handymax, large • ULCC • Supramax • VLGC • Panamax, sub/post/new • Feeder • Kamsarmax • ULCS • Capesize, mini • Seawaymax • VLOC • Chinamax • MR, small/large • Q-max • Aframax • Säfflemax • Suezmax • …. Copyright © 2011 IHS Inc. All Rights Reserved. 6 Dimensional limitations Copyright © 2011 IHS Inc. All Rights Reserved. 7 Panama Canal Panamax – L 294.1 m – B 32.3 m – D 12.04 m – H 61.3 New Panamax – L 366 m – B 49 m – D 15.2 m Copyright © 2011 IHS Inc. All Rights Reserved. – H 61.3 8 Suez Canal Suez Canal Bridge Shohada 25 January Bridge Egyptian-Japanese Friendship Bridge Max draft: 20.1 m, Max height: 68 m Copyright © 2011 IHS Inc. All Rights Reserved. 9 The Strait of Malacca Depth 25 m. Max draft 21 m. Copyright © 2011 IHS Inc. All Rights Reserved. 10 St Lawrence Seaway • L 225.6 m (740 feet) • B 23.8 m (78 feet) • D 7.9 m (26 feet) • H 35.5 m (116 feet) Copyright © 2011 IHS Inc. All Rights Reserved. 11 Qatar: Q-max • L 345 m (1,132 ft) • B 53.8 m (177 ft) • H 34.7 m (114 ft) Copyright © 2011 IHS Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • Liquid Bulk / Quantity Measurements and Other Challenges
    Liquid Bulk / Quantity Measurements and other challenges Prepared by Jorge Pecci, SafeWaters UM Disclaimer: AIMU is committed to advancing the educational, governmental, regulatory and technical interests of the ocean marine insurance industry. One of the services AIMU provides for its members is the provision of education and publishing of information for use by underwriters, loss control and claims specialists, and other interested parties. Volunteer members of a committee and/or staff of AIMU have produced this information. Committee members abide by antitrust restrictions and all other applicable laws and regulations while compiling information. It is generally not possible to treat any one subject in an exhaustive manner, nor is it AIMU’s intent to do so. No representations or warranties are made regarding the thoroughness or accuracy of the information. Introduction: Quantity of crude oil or petroleum product(s) loaded, assessed by measurements done ashore at the terminal and afterwards shippers enter these figures in the bill of lading. On the other hand ship’s figures ascertained on board by way of measurement of ship’s tanks and concomitant calculations done by especially appointed surveyor together with responsible for cargo operations ship’s officer, normally Chief Mate. These figures obtained ashore and on board of tanker, as a rule, differ from each other. There are many factors contributing to these discrepancies such as superseded tables used by the terminal in the calculation of Bill of Lading quantities, inaccurate vessel experience factor, Cargo Custody transfer practices and the competency of Cargo Inspectors and crew. These discrepancies product of errors in calculation eventually evolve in what is normally called in insurance “paper loss”.
    [Show full text]
  • DRAFT: 2018/2019 Update to Inventory for Ocean-Going Vessels: Methodology and Results
    Update to Inventory for Ocean-Going Vessels DRAFT: 2018/2019 Update to Inventory for Ocean-Going Vessels: Methodology and Results January 15, 2019 AIR RESOURCES BOARD 1 Update to Inventory for Ocean-Going Vessels Contents 1. Summary and Background...................................................................................... 5 2. Ocean-Going Vessel Background and Description ................................................. 6 2.1. Ocean-Going Vessel Marine Engines and Operations ................................ 9 2.2. Geographical Areas..................................................................................... 9 3. General Emissions Inventory Methodology and Sources...................................... 12 3.1. Base Year Vessel Visits and Time At Berth............................................... 13 3.2. Vessel Visit Length .................................................................................... 15 3.3. Effective Power (EP) ................................................................................. 19 3.4. Emission Factors (EF) ............................................................................... 22 4. Future Year Forecasts........................................................................................... 22 4.1. Freight Analysis Framework ...................................................................... 23 4.2. Mercator Forecast for Ports of LA/LB ........................................................ 27 4.3. Engine Tier Availability and Introduction...................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Alternatives for Replacing Enbridge's Dual Line 5 Pipelines Crossing The
    Report to the State of Michigan Alternatives for replacing Enbridge’s dual Line 5 pipelines crossing the Straits of Mackinac June 15, 2018 Table of Contents Executive Summary 1 The Purpose of This Report 1 Summary of Key Conclusions 1 Summary Comparison of the Two Feasible Alternatives 5 Reporting Parameters and Process 6 How Enbridge Defines Feasibility in the Context of This Report 6 How Enbridge Prepared This Report 6 Consultants for the Three Alternatives Feasibility Assessments 7 Enbridge’s Line 5 in Michigan 8 Alternative: Tunnel 10 Highlights of the Tunnel Alternative 10 Overview of Underwater Tunnels 11 Tunnel planning and design 11 Tunnel construction 12 Tunnel lining 13 Pipe installation 13 Tunnel access 14 Summary of Feasibility Study for a Line 5 Tunnel under the Straits 16 Tunnel consultants 16 Tunnel feasibility 16 Tunnel configuration options 17 Straits tunnel specifications 18 Geological considerations 19 Tunnel depth 20 Tunnel diameter and lining 21 Placing other utilities in the tunnel 22 TBM type 22 Approximate construction sequence 23 TBM launch and reception 23 Spoil handling and disposal 24 Pipeline installation 24 Independent Assessment of Hatch’s Tunnel Feasibility Study 25 Construction Cost Estimate 25 Project Execution Schedule 25 Tunnel Permits and Approvals 25 Tunnel Risk Assessment 26 Geologic hazards 26 Report to the State of Michigan—Alternatives for replacing Enbridge’s dual Line 5 pipelines crossing the Straits of Mackinac Alternative: Open Cut With Secondary Containment 28 Highlights of the ‘Open Cut with
    [Show full text]
  • New Trends in Maritime Transportation and Port Activity
    V.E. Chapapría, Int. J. Transp. Dev. Integr., Vol. 1, No. 4 (2017) 624–632 NEW TRENDS IN MARITIME TRANSPORTATION AND PORT ACTIVITY VICENT ESTEBAN CHAPAPRÍA Ports and Coastal Engineering, Universidad Politécnica de Valencia, Valencia, Spain ABSTRACT The role of ports has changed and has become more complex. Ports play a relevant role in global economy. They connect modes of transport and usually they are the leaders in the logistics chain. New works in Suez Canal were in progress until August 2015. The expansion of the Panama Canal will finish this year. These new operational conditions allow for an improvement of international maritime transportation. The Suez Canal Corridor Area Project is a mega project in Egypt that was officially launched in August 2014. The project’s aim is to increase the role of the Suez Canal region in international trading and to develop the three canal cities: Suez, Ismaïlia and Port Said. The importance of these actions changes in the new port cities and new trends and conditions in maritime transportation are discussed. Keywords: maritime transportation, Panama Canal expansion project, ports, port cities, Suez Canal. 1 INTRODUCTION The role of ports has changed and has become much more complex over time. Today, ports must be analysed on the basis of their role in the logistics or supply chains of which they form a part. The port must offer connectivity between the modes of transport in an environmen- tally integrated and respectful way (co-modality). Ports must provide infrastructure, facilities and handling equipment. Moreover, they must bridge the gap between modes of transport in terms of frequency, capacity and time.
    [Show full text]
  • Glossary of Shipping Terms
    SHIPPING TERMS glossary glossary of shipping terms A term from Latin meaning, “according to AD VALOREM value.” Import duty applied as a percentage of a the cargo’s dutiable value. A contract term requiring that the vessel not rest ALWAYS AFLOAT A representative of a government commission on the ground. In some ports the ship is aground (AA) ADMINISTRATIVE LAW when approaching or at berth. or agency vested with power to administer oaths, examine witnesses, take testimony, and conduct hearings of cases submitted to, or A proceeding wherein a shipper/consignee ABANDON initiated by, that agency. Also called Hearing seeks authority to abandon all or parts of their Examiner. cargo. To move cargo up line to a vessel leaving ADVANCE A discount allowed for damage or overcharge ABATEMENT sooner than the one booked. See also Roll. in the payment of a bill. Transportation charge advanced by one carrier ADVANCE CHARGE Referring to cargo being put, or laden, onto a ABROAD to another to be collected by the later carrier means of conveyance. from the consignor or consignee. Any vessel entering United States waters from a Carrier assumes the charges of another without ABSORPTION ADVANCED NOTICE OF any increase in charges to the shipper. foreign port is required to give a 96–hour ANOV. ARRIVAL (ANOA) Any vessel of 300 gross registered tonnage and greater is required to give the ANOA to the Charges that are applied to the base tariff rate ACCESSORIAL CHARGES U.S. Coast Guard’s National Vessel Movement or base contract rate, e.g., bunkers, container, Center.
    [Show full text]
  • Europe's Southeastern Gateway
    EUROPE’S SOUTHEASTERN GATEWAY: RESPONDING TO RAPIDLY CHANGING PATTERNS OF WORLD SHIPPING. Abstract World trade and transportation are changing THE UNIVERSITY’S ROLE dramatically. Energy prices and transport sustainability concerns are reinvigorating ocean freighter shipping. An ever-increasing portion of trade is in containers, and container ships are Roger E. HAMLIN getting larger quickly. Many ports, nations and continents are not keeping up with ship size Dan T. LAZĂR increases putting them at a trade disadvantage. Major canals and seaways must also upgrade or be rendered obsolete, causing a change in the Roger E. HAMLIN pattern of world trade. Ports have to do more than expand vessel size Professor, Urban and Regional Planning Faculty, School of limits. Port regions must also invest in infrastructure Planning, Design and Construction, Michigan State University, that improves multi-modal access to the port and East Lansing, MI, United States of America augments hand-off of containers to smaller seaway Tel.: 001-517-353.8743 ships, trains and trucks. With heightened security E-mail: [email protected] and evolving emphasis on flexible and efficient logistics, ports must become high-tech logistics Dan T. LAZĂR hubs with improved real-time data about port Associate Professor, Public Administration Department, Faculty throughput. of Political, Administrative and Communication Sciences, Constanţa, Romania provides an example of Babeş-Bolyai University, Cluj-Napoca, Romania an attempt to respond to this rapid change. Near Tel.: 0040-264-431.505 the Danube Delta, on the Black Sea, Constanţa offers a potential southeastern gateway to Europe E-mail: [email protected] for the Black Sea, the Eastern Mediterranean and beyond.
    [Show full text]
  • Oshima Shipbuilding Company
    CENTER ON JAPANESE ECONOMY AND BUSINESS Occasional Paper Series January 2015, No. 69 Oshima Shipbuilding Company Hugh Patrick This paper is available online at www.gsb.columbia.edu/cjeb/research COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK January 7, 2015 Oshima Shipbuilding Company Hugh Patrick Center on Japanese Economy and Business Columbia Business School Abstract Oshima Shipbuilding is one of many mid‐size Japanese companies that are major global players in niche markets. This essay tells the Oshima story in the context of the global shipbuilding industry’s cycles, changing competitors, and evolving technologies. The industry is subject to wide, rapid swings in demand and pricing, primarily for exogenous reasons. Oshima, a builder of mid‐size bulk carriers, has survived, and even prospered, through productivity growth, technological innovation, and earning a reputation for quality. Oshima Shipbuilding Company Hugh Patrick Many mid‐size Japanese companies are major global players in niche markets. This essay is about one such firm. It is a company whose plans have routinely been overwhelmed by events, at times tossing it about like a ship in a major storm. Yet it has not just survived, it has come to prosper – though always precariously in an industry as turbulent as the seas its products sail. The Oshima Shipbuilding Company, Ltd, describes itself as “a small‐scale but world‐class shipbuilder.” It builds bulk carriers, which are ships that carry loose, usually homogeneous cargo that is often loaded with the help of gravity. There are many types, some highly specialized, transporting coal, ore, grain, caustic soda, and the like, as well as rolls of paper and steel pipes.
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. Great Lakes Seaway Ports Enjoying Magic Grain Season
    FALL 2010 U.S. Great Lakes Seaway Ports Enjoying Magic Grain Season Freight Rates Luring Salties to Seaway U.S. grain tonnage shipped through the St. Lawrence Seaway this year by both Seawaymax ocean-going vessels and Canadian lakers has S increased by more than 36 percent over 2009 navigation season num - ADMINISTRATOR ’S bers with almost 1.3 million metric tons shipped through September 30. COLUMN Part of the reason for the big bump up in tonnage can be attributed to e Nature’s generosity in providing excellent weather during the growing season. Farmers deserve kudos for having had the foresight to increase grain acreage planted. a U . Collister S . Johnson, Jr. Seed, sunshine, rain, labo r— all are vita l— but are not enough reasons D e w for a exceptional year for grain on the southern side of the Great Lakes. p a r t The price of grain, especially wheat, has been substantially higher since m e late July than most analysts projected two brief months earlier. n t o f a T Record rainfall in a huge swathe of the Canadian Prairie provinces r The Future is Bright a n spelled trouble in June. In a few days, a major chunk of the season s p There is no doubt that we are was lost. Meanwhile intense heat baked fields in Russia, Ukraine and o r y t witnessing good things happen - a Kazakhstan laying waste wheat crops that had been slated to be export - t i o ing in the Great Lakes Seaway n ed to global markets.
    [Show full text]