Back to our 'big ship' discussion
Bruce Johnson
(21 Oct 2014 00:05 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Back to our 'big ship' discussion
Greg Caires
(21 Oct 2014 02:05 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Back to our 'big ship' discussion
Craig Berry
(21 Oct 2014 02:37 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Back to our 'big ship' discussion
Evyn MacDude
(21 Oct 2014 03:18 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Back to our 'big ship' discussion Phil Pugliese (21 Oct 2014 08:55 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Back to our 'big ship' discussion
Grimmund
(21 Oct 2014 12:40 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Back to our 'big ship' discussion
Phil Pugliese
(21 Oct 2014 15:15 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Back to our 'big ship' discussion Phil Pugliese 21 Oct 2014 08:55 UTC
-------------------------------------------- On Mon, 10/20/14, Evyn MacDude <xxxxxx@gmail.com> wrote: Subject: Re: [TML] Back to our 'big ship' discussion To: xxxxxx@simplelists.com Date: Monday, October 20, 2014, 8:18 PM On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 5:05 PM, Bruce Johnson <xxxxxx@pharmacy.arizona.edu> wrote: > Some real-world news, Maesk has commissioned 20 'biggest ships in the world' capable of carrying 18,000 standard 20-foot containers each <http://tech.slashdot.org/story/14/10/20/010252/the-largest-ship-in-the-world-is-being-built-in-korea> > > That's 42KdT of cargo alone ... Remember they will be on J3+ routes only, as there are only a few ports in the world that can support Triple E's (18 all told half in asia the other half in Europe) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- So they can't come to North America at all! ======================================================