Talk:Emma Mærsk

Wartsila
A little remark from a Wartsila employee: Wartsila doesn't use the Sulzer brand anymore, so this engine should be called only Wärtsilä 14RTFLEX96-C —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.38.72.43 (talk) 12:09, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

I have amended this page to show that the Emma Maersk is the largest ship in existence and the largest container ship ever builit. Although there are two other larger ships, one has been scrapped and one has been converted into a floating oil storage facility, and so is no longer a ship - see wikipedia page for worlds largest ship  01/09/06 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lukeski (talk • contribs) 20:00, 1 September 2006

Anyone got information about the crew, size etc.

According to the ship's official site, it's heavily automated and can be operated by a minimum Ŕcrew of 13, but it says nothing about the usual crew complement. 80.47.195.192 14:27, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Estelle Maersk, second ship of this design, has a crew of 25 as per a conversation with shore-side staff.

If I remember correctly, 13 is the minimum crew needed to comply with USCG and international regulations. According to a former merchant marine officer, most ships run with 20 or so.Littlerubberfeet 22:52, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Possible Satelite imagery?
Is the ship in this photo the Emma Maersk?

That graving dock measures 415 x 90 metres, so it could be the Emma, but my rough count of holds indicates a total of 6 Forty foot equivalent racks aft of the superstructure, whereas the Emma has 10 (http://gcaptain.com/maritime/blog/wp-content/uploads/2007/05/_mg_4903.JPG). I could very well be mistaken. Littlerubberfeet 22:52, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Huh? The imaged ship has 10 racks aft of the superstructure. Thue | talk 12:00, 23 February 2008 (UTC)


 * The bow section looks too pointy. Or is that what they're like below the waterline? --RenniePet (talk) 12:53, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Could the ship that's there now be the Emma? Megatronacepticon (talk) 09:05, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I used the scale on that map to measure the imaged ship, and calculated it to 397m. That happens to be exactly the length of Emma Mærsk. So yes, it is probably her. Thue | talk 11:57, 23 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Well, one of her sister ships, presumably. Neat pictures. --RenniePet (talk) 12:53, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Exceeds Suezmax?
Does the Emma Mærsk exceed Suezmax?

No - The route goes through Suez: Emma is in the Asia-to-Europe service route with a round trip of 63 days, calling on ports in China, Japan, England, Denmark and the Netherlands, among other countries. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Special:Contributions/ (talk)

Air Draft
The artile shows what the keel to deck distance what is the deck to top of radar mast or the total of keel to highest structure? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.116.129.23 (talk) 20:17, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

TEU capacity surpassed by MSC Daniela
http://gcaptain.com/maritime/blog/interesting-ship-msc-daniela/

"At an overall length of 366 meters, she is just slightly under the 397 meter Emma Maersk but able to carry more cargo due to technological advancements in ship design" (emphasis added).

There's a page on here about the MSC Daniela as well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 158.143.163.87 (talk) 12:45, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Autochthony writes. The 'E' class have a GT of about 170,000; the MSC Daniela class about 135,000. The Maersk ships are some thirty metres - say a hundred feet - longer, several metres more in the beam, and have a (slightly) greater load draft. A personal guess at their capacity (given the 14,000 for the Daniela) is some [LxBxD] 10%x9%x2,5% = more then 20% bigger; so over 16,000 teu. Approaching Malaccamax.

So.

Plainly the 'E' class are large ships. Autochthony wrote at 2035z, 2009.09.17: 86.158.246.151 (talk) 20:36, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Autochthony adds: The 'E' class have finer lines than the MSC Daniela class, so the difference in capacity is diminished from my earlier estimate (by a factor related to the difference in their Block Coefficients: perhaps the Maersk 'E' class are merely 14500-15000 teu (on a non-Maersk measure).  Autochthony added, 1945z 19 May 2010.  81.156.52.159 (talk) 19:47, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Nothing on the fire?
It cought on fire you know. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gG0vcDGmCf4 Daniel Christensen (talk) 04:00, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Daniel, please see History, first paragraph. It's been there for some time. 86.158.246.151 (talk) 18:39, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Coordinates
What's with the coordinates (55°28′11″N 10°31′56″E﻿)? Google Maps shows a ship there, but this seems a quaint use for the Coord template. Surely it is meant for non-moving objects (unless, perhaps, it is continuously updated to show the current location). --Jmk (talk) 13:42, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Redundancy with sister articles
Perhaps common content among Emma and her sisters could be moved to Mærsk E-class, and let each ship article retain individual content (Emma was first, Ebba has record, Eugen was last and so on). TGCP (talk) 21:24, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

The Previous "Emma Maersk"
I was a petroleum inspector involved in the maiden voyage of the tanker "Emma Maersk" back in the mid-eighties. She made a delivery of Jet A Fuel into Port Everglades. I will attempt to put up a photo I have of her sitting at berth, as well as retrieve the actual dates. I just now found the current "Emma Maersk" containership here at Wikipedia and was quite surprised.

Dmmoninger (talk) 17:09, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Bunker Fuel
As far as I know all container ships use bunker fuel. So perhaps the section with criticism should be moved to the article about container ships —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.104.135.136 (talk) 14:12, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
 * The ref specifically names Emma as one of the polluters, so the section should stay, but also be copied to container ships. However, Emmas pollution control should be expanded in the article. TGCP (talk) 15:36, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree that it is ridiculous to single out this ship when every single ship in international traffic worldwide, whether container, tanker, offshore, fishing, even research ships, run on bunker fuel. Every ship that can run it will run because of the price advantage. Perhaps a more educated reference, criticizing bunker fuel more generally and accurately instead of singling out a ship just because it's famous on Discovery Channel. --Joffeloff (talk) 14:08, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

New Mærsk ships in early planning?
http://www.gizmag.com/triple-e-maersk-worlds-largest-ship/17938/

http://www.marinelog.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=532:2011feb0002100&catid=1:latest-news&Itemid=107

http://www.maerskline.com/link/?page=news&path=/news/story_page/11/Triple_E

--Lakkasuo (talk) 17:56, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Dubious numbers on deceleration
Hi, The article currently says: At full speed and normal load, it takes 10 minutes and 8 km to stop the ship. Which is an average of 25.9kts. Those kinematics doesn't look right to me given that service speed is 25.5kts or thereabouts. A hypothetical ship which decelerated perfectly evenly from 25.5kts over a 10 minute period would cover about 3.9km, no? bobrayner (talk) 12:35, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Correct; removed. TGCP (talk) 12:49, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
 * 👍 bobrayner (talk) 13:04, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

place for 15,212 TEU in volume
According to loading plan http://www.alphaliner.com/liner2/research_files/liner_studies/misc/EMMA_MAERSK_capa_estimate.pdf - Nevertheless the ship can load only about 11,000 TEU with 14 tons gross weight each which gives 154,000 tons corresponding (about) to dwt deadweight 152,800 is listed in http://www.container-transportation.com/container-ships.html --Helium4 (talk) 14:00, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

18,000+ TEU
Wow, Maersk has just odered 10 new super post Panamax ships from a korean shipbuilder with an EIGHTEEN THOUSAND TEU capacity, significantly larger than the Emma/Maersk E-Class. Daniel Christensen (talk) 05:07, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
 * oh I see it's already well known, the triple e class. Daniel Christensen (talk) 05:59, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
 * oh I see it's already well known, the triple e class. Daniel Christensen (talk) 05:59, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Fuel consumption
At the given power of 81MW i calculate the following:

Power density heave fuel oil: 40,4 GJ / ton Power: 81MW * 3600 seconds = 291,6 GJ Energy conversion efficiency: ~50% (according to the linked article, might be slightly above but not much since the carnot limit of that factor) Fuel needed: 291,6GJ/0,50 = 583,2GJ / 40,4GJ/ton = 14,43 tons =~ 14500 liter =~ 3800 gallons

I think it should be corrected. Proof might also be, that a similar sized ship the QMS2 needs aprox. 12 tons at her cruising speed of 25 knots. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.119.188.164 (talk) 16:52, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
 * You are probably right, but the ref says 1660 gallons per hour. If that number is wrong, other refs should be found and the dissimilarity should be investigated using your calculation. The 3800 is a result of WP:original research and thus discouraged. Also, verifiability, not truth applies here. TGCP (talk) 17:56, 20 November 2011 (UTC)


 * I will add a link to the engine's manufacturer's technical specifications that is also to be found in the article for the engine. At full load it states a consumption of 172g/kWh. Partial load with most effiency would be 163.7g/kWh at 65% load. Another point is the power which is more 80MW than 81MW (80,080kW). Consumption would be approximately 172g/kWh*80080kW=13.77tons/h (~3600 US gallons) or at partial load of 65%: 163.7g/kWh*(80080kW*0,65)=8.52tons/h (~2200 US gallons). I left unconsidered here, that there is a system to retreive energy from the exhaustion gases. Ideally it can deliver about 10MW at the engine's rated power, which would lower the specific fuel consumption to some 155g/kWh. Fuel consumption is the same, but there are additional 10MW power. --77.190.223.138 (talk) 10:39, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page
Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request its removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:


 * http://www.ship-technology.com/projects/emmamaerskcontainers/
 * Triggered by  on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.— cyberbot II NotifyOnline 11:24, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

✅ This issue has been resolved, and I have therefore removed the tag, if not already done. No further action is necessary.— cyberbot II NotifyOnline 20:57, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Does the engine turn the propeller?
Is the propeller turned solely by the two electrical motors, or does the diesel engine also directly drive the propeller? AxelBoldt (talk) 22:07, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I've marked this part "dubious" and will remove it if no one can provide an explanation. The statement "Two 9 MW electric motors power the main propeller shaft" has two source citations. One is 404, and the other is about shaft generators and has nothing to do with electric motors. That big diesel obviously has to be doing something. Kendall-K1 (talk) 16:24, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 one external links on Emma Mærsk. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.discoveryhd.ca/shows/showdetails.aspx?sid=9955
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110310083959/http://www.allbusiness.com:80/manufacturing/machinery-manufacturing-general/4004678-1.html to http://www.allbusiness.com/manufacturing/machinery-manufacturing-general/4004678-1.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 21:51, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Emma Mærsk. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20130426185242/http://www.maerskline.com/link/?page=brochure&path=/news_room/photo_archive/vessels to http://www.maerskline.com/link/?page=brochure&path=/news_room/photo_archive/vessels

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 17:28, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Emma Mærsk. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131016065643/http://www.nationalbanken.dk/DNUK/NotesAndCoins.nsf/side/Emma_Maersk!OpenDocument to http://www.nationalbanken.dk/DNUK/NotesAndCoins.nsf/side/Emma_Maersk!OpenDocument
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070713100229/http://media.maersk.com/en/pressreleases/2006/namegiving+l203.htm to http://media.maersk.com/en/PressReleases/2006/namegiving+L203.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090327001747/http://www1.axsliner.com/WWW/research_files/EMMA_MAERSK_capa_estimate.pdf to http://www.axsliner.com/WWW/research_files/EMMA_MAERSK_capa_estimate.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 03:30, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Emma Mærsk. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070629030509/http://sailingschedules2.maerskline.com/MaerskSailingSchedulesCustomerWeb/CustomerWebServlet?ssaction=com.saf.ss.cust.action.search.SearchSchedulesByVesselAction to http://sailingschedules2.maerskline.com/MaerskSailingSchedulesCustomerWeb/CustomerWebServlet?ssaction=com.saf.ss.cust.action.search.SearchSchedulesByVesselAction&liveworking=LIVE&pageAction=search&isWildcardSearch=true&searchVessel=EMMA+MAERSK&searchVoyageNumber=&searchFromDate=01-Mar-2005&searchToDate=14-Jan-2010
 * Added tag to http://www.dmaib.dk/Ulykkesrapporter/EMMA%20M%C3%86RSK%20-%20Flooding%20of%20engine%20room%20on%201%20February%202013.pdf
 * Added archive https://archive.is/20130121151622/http://www.dnv.com/industry/maritime/publicationsanddownloads/publications/dnvcontainershipupdate/2008/2-2008/thelogisticsof.asp to http://www.dnv.com/industry/maritime/publicationsanddownloads/publications/dnvcontainershipupdate/2008/2-2008/thelogisticsof.asp
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.maerskline.com/link/?page=brochure&path=%2Fnews_room%2Fphoto_archive%2Fvessels
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110708120543/http://www.cargo-in-china.com/shsc/shscde/876233__S00311_S00614_S00001___S00614.html to http://www.cargo-in-china.com/shsc/shscde/876233__S00311_S00614_S00001___S00614.html
 * Added archive http://arquivo.pt/wayback/20141223211746/http://www.imo.org/OurWork/Environment/PollutionPrevention/AirPollution/Pages/Sulphur-oxides-%28SOx%29-%e2%80%93-Regulation-14.aspx to http://www.imo.org/ourwork/environment/pollutionprevention/airpollution/pages/sulphur-oxides-%28sox%29-%E2%80%93-regulation-14.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 13:12, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

wartsila
The boat itself managed to make 107,000 horsepower and around 5.1 million lb ft of torque. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.188.135.242 (talk) 15:55, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

Marco Polo comparison Blueprints and how to improve articles
Marco polos listed as a competitive ship out of deowoo South Korea 209.171.85.18 (talk) 06:01, 4 July 2023 (UTC)