Arriving on her maiden voyage at Felixstowe in sea mist this morning, 06/04/2009.
Built 2009 by Samsung, Koje Island (1709).
L X B X D = 336m X 46m X 16m.
151,599 g.t., 165,300 dwt and 13,800 teu. Regards, Rick
Tmac, there could be a nucleus of truth in what Tonga says - we have Sizewell A and B power stations round the corner and heavy water could be discharged via their reactor cooling water sluice valves...
(Haven't we flogged those damned valves to oblivion yet ?) (POP)
Certainly they'll probably lose space for a few dozen boxes on deck, however that's in exchange for the extra few hundred/thousand spaces they'll gain from moving the accommodation forward, thereby allowing the stacks behind to be higher.
Surprising nobody thought of it sooner to be honest.
cryan and Jim, you are both correct and especially with regard to the higher deck stows allowed forward (and for an extended length aft of the accomodation). Looks like 7 high now forward, but maybe 8 or 9 high is permissible too.
There's also another factor involved as to why the accomodation and engine room are seperated and that is new IMO regulations which require protectively located bunker tanks and prohibit ( from 2010) the use of double bottom / double hull / wing tanks etc. for bunker storage. Obviously to minimise spillage in stranding or collision.
Briefly covered here :- http://www.imo.org/home.asp?topic_id=1114
Large containerships pose a specific challenge to relocate fuel storage given the very large quantity of fuel oil that must be carried to maintain their high service speeds. On this MSC class, the bunker tanks have been positioned inboard and are underneath the accomodation. I can but assume that for safety's sake the designers preferred to put the crew above the bunkers rather than cargo. It's nothing new when you think about what was underneath older tankers midships accomodation!