Re: Cubic comparisons

From: Jeff Birch
Location: Algoma, WI
email:
Remote Name: 24.183.15.18
Date: 10.29.07
Time: 04:44:38 PM

Comments

I'm no expert, but here are some answers: Many straight-deckers built as primarily ore carriers have relatively large ballast tanks since they would usually see half of their service empty, and would require the extra draft for better stability when light. This made sense, since iron ore is very heavy, and not a lot of cubic capacity was needed, relatively speaking. For straight-deckers that were converted to self-unloaders, several (but not all) had the hoppers placed in bottom of the existing holds, further reducing cubic capacity. Also for self-unloaders, the construction of the system provided can have impact on the cubic capacity. For example, more recent straight-decker conversions to self-unloader used additional cubic capacity for the loop belts and other equipment. In some cases, this is partially compensated for with an extended trunk deck, as can be seen on the AAAs. Finally, some have multiple belts in the bottom of the hold which I believe contributes to additional cubic capacity.