Talk:MSC Napoli

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the MSC Napoli article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

WikiProject Ships (Rated Start-Class) This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ships, a project to improve all Ship-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other Ship-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome. Start rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale Mid rated as Mid-importance on the assessment scale WikiProject Shipwrecks     (Rated Start-Class) This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Shipwrecks, an attempt to improve coverage of shipwreck-related topics. See also the parent WikiProject, WikiProject Disaster Management. If you plan to work on this article for an extended period of time, please indicate what you are doing on the Project's talk page. NB: Assessment ratings and other indicators given below are used by the Project in prioritising and managing its workload. Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the Project's quality scale. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the Project's importance scale. Shipwreck-related priority open tasks: To Do Shipwrecks Clean up typos Improve grammar Add any additions if needed Discuss desired additions Cattewater Wreck Needs expansion Done Shipwrecks Re-wrote the first paragraph Cleaned up Types of Shipwrecks it felt a bit jumbled Cattewater Wreck Started the article WikiProject Devon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Devon, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics connected with Devon. If you would like to participate, you can visit the WikiProject Devon project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. ??? This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the importance scale.

Contents 1 MSC Napoli was NOT first post-Panamax containership 2 Past tense? 3 This article is chock-full of errors 4 cargo 5 MAIB Report released

[edit] MSC Napoli was NOT first post-Panamax containership

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).

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

[edit] Past tense?

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)

[edit] This article is chock-full of errors

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)

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)

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)

[edit] cargo

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

[edit] MAIB Report released

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)