In the Hamburg Le Havre range the figure of port calls will be limited for the newbuilds due to dimensions of the vass, max three or two ports will be in the coastal agenda for Europe, can you cipher the call size for your port following info are available.Port Aa.

Market portion in the scope 36 % with 3 ports and 58 % with 2 portsB. Vessel size 14,000 and 18,000 TEUc. Vessel use 85 %What will be the call size for your port with 3 ports in the scope and a 14,000 vas or with 2 ports in the scope and a 18,000 vasANSWER 2Using Formula:Note: 2 = & gt ; discharge & A ; burdenTo cipher the call size, you besides need the TEU ratio. Since this is non given, we assume the TEU ratio is 1.6.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!

order now

This is due to the fact the TEU ratio in Europe now is between 1.5 and 1.65 on norm. A TEU ratio of 1.6 agencies that there are somewhat more 40 TEU containers used than 20 TEU. The o,85 in the expression is the capacity use of the vas. The 0,36 and 0,58 are the market portion of the port. We multiply by two in the expression, because containers are loaded and unloaded.

The call size in instance of 14000 TEU vas with 3 port calls and a TEU ratio of 1.6:Name Size = 14000/1.6 ) * 0,85 * 0,36 * 2 = 5355The call size in instance of 14000 TEU vas with 2 port calls and a TEU ratio of 1.6:Name Size = 14000/1.6 ) * 0,85 * 0,58 * 2 = 8627,5The call size in instance of 18000 TEU vas with 3 port calls and a TEU ratio of 1.6:Name Size = 18000/1.6 ) * 0,85 * 0,36 * 2 = 6885The call size in instance of 18000 TEU vas with 2 port calls and a TEU ratio of 1.

6:Name Size = 18000/1.6 ) * 0,85 * 0,58 * 2 = 11093Question 3A bearer programs to upgrade her Asia Europe vass by upgrading from: 14,000 teu to 18,000 and like to market low emanation ( Green ) by cut downing velocity on the sea ocean trip, nevertheless the reduced velocity leads to 2 excess seafaring yearss. The figure of port calls in Europe will travel back from 3 to 2 ports.If a terminus can increase productiveness and so cut down efficaciously on port stay clip the difference is made versus competition.

What will be the needed Crane productiveness for the two terminuss to manage the 18.000 TEU vas witha Crane split of 4,6?ANSWER 3For replying inquiry three, we used the capacity use given at inquiry 2, which is 85 % and we assumed a TEU ratio of 1.6. As explained at inquiry 2, the TEU ratio in Europe lies between 1.5 and 1.

65, hence we take a TEU ratio in between of 1.6. In the following expression, we multiply by two, because containers are loaded and unloaded.A 14000 TEU vas with a TEU ratio of 1.

6 and a capacity use of 85 % Handles: 14000/1.6*0.85*2 = 14875 containers.A Crane split of 4.2 with 25 container moves per hr leads to 105 moves per hr in entire.14875/105 = 141,6667 handling hours in instance of a 14000 TEU vas.Due to the lessening in port calls from 3 to 2, you save 24 hours of port stay and 36 seafaring hours. This means 60 hours in entire.

Due to the slow steaming, you spend two more yearss at sea, which is 48 hours. The difference is 12 hours in favour of the 18000 TEU vas. Therefore, the handling clip may be the handling clip of the 14000 TEU vas + 12 hours, the hours gained by cut downing the figure of port calls. This means the entire sum of handling hours for the 18000 TEU vas may be 141,6667 + 12 is 153,6667.The sum of containers handled due to the 18000 TEU vas is once more with a TEU ratio of 1.6 and a capacity use of 85 % : 18000/1.6*0.85*2 = 19125 containers.

19125 divided by the entire figure of container handlings per hours leads to the maximal sum of handling hours which as calculated is 153,6667. So 19125/153.6667 leads to the entire necessary sum of container handlings per hr.

Which is 124,46. If we divide 124,46 by the Crane split of 4,6, we get the needed Crane productiveness of 124,46/4,6 = 27,06, which means the needed Crane productiveness for the two terminuss is at least 27 with a Crane split of 4,6.Question 4What is the value economic/commercial value of the increased terminus productiveness?What are the excess costs that the terminus will confront to heighten her productivenessANSWER 4DEFINING PORT PRODUCTIVITYTerminal Productivity particularly at container terminus is defined by some factors. Terminal operation is divided by two operations, i.e. waterside operation and landside operation.

Waterside operation productiveness is determined by some factors such as berth handiness and berth productiveness. In add-on, operation determination act uponing berth productiveness, viz. crane productiveness, Crane split and yard public presentation. On the other manus, Landside operation is determined by factors such as backwoods handiness and dependability. Good waterside operation has to be supported with good landside operation, otherwise it would take to congestion.

There are three chief factors finding Container Terminal Productivity, i.e. labour, equipment and land ( Esmer, 2008 ) . Therefore efficiency of these resources is of import for Container Terminal Operation. Berkovnik ( 2008 ) on his reseach construct a theoretical account of terminal productiveness with specifying act uponing factors and operation elemen.

In order to fufil increasing tendency of international trade, terminal is required to do subtansial investing, betterment in physical capacity and efficiency of operation. Therefore betterment lead to heighten terminal productiveness ( Le-Griffin, 2006 ) . Harmonizing to this papaer, terminal productiveness is determine by five elements, which is Crane, position, yard, gate and pack. However, different port has different manner to mensurate terminal productiveness, depend on bussiness procedure rhythm, market, lading handled and geographical status.ECONOMICS AND COMMERCIAL VALUE OF PORT PRODUCTIVITYOne of the effects of terminal productiveness is call size.

Improvement of terminal productiveness leads to increasing in call size. Assuming the same market portion, by bettering port productiveness would increase name size and diminish ship clip at port ( larboard stay ) every bit good. This would be affect marketing power of port. Port with best terminal productiveness gives advantage to both shipper and bearer as port client. Port with really close competition, for illustration port at Hamburg and Le Havre scope are providing about indistinguishable market. Competition between port within HLH scope are purely strong. Nowaday, client which is transporting lines are comparatively non loyal to port.

Port has become cardinal success point for shipper and bearer, hence, port productiveness is one of attraction. Having benefit from high terminal public presentation lead to marker power. Furthermore, lifting of port selling power leads to increasing of market portion.In a different position, port non merely every bit facilitate to function international trade between states.

Market used to be determine port capacity, nevertheless, late, port is taking active portion to pull market. Port with high productiveness and dependable to manage assorted type of ship, particularly big type of vas. High productiveness port would pull market even though, lading non directed to port part state but could be used as hub and spoke port. It would convey a batch of chance to port, foremost port located strategically at international trade path. For illustration what is Singapore has win to accomplish nowaday.

Cost TO IMPROVE TERMINAL PRODUCTIVITYBettering terminal productiveness could be done by several ways. The betterment program has to see every component in terminal because each elemen is related each other. Terminal operation consist with three system that is berth, container pace and bringing zone ( Beskovnik, 2008 ) . Furthermore, each system equipped with constituents and from here cost of operation occurs, including initial cost ( investing ) , operational cost and care cost.

Direct cost that terminus operator or port have to cover with are cost of investing new installations or infrastucture to increase capacity of terminus. With new tendency that vas are acquiring bigger and bigger to carry through market growing particularly for containerized lading and to accomplish economie of scale enforce port to better her capacity and productiveness of lading managing rate. All terminus installations has to adjusted with vessel demand. Thus, farther investing of land and equipment are of import demands that can non avoided. Terminal desain and layout is substansial facet to accommodate, for illustration bill of exchange, container pace capacity and position construction. Bigger vas such as 18.000 TEU required deeper bill of exchange, increased pace capacity and stronger position construction to prolong more lading handling.Furthermore, progress engineering development is one of necessity.

In order to derive efficiency and productiveness, using new engineering contribute to better terminal public presentation. Furthermore, labour is cardinal point every bit good. High accomplishment labour needed to set about sophisticated equipment, hence, labour competence is outstanding factor to be adjusted with beforehand terminal operation system.Furthermore, bettering in terminal country has to supported by availablity and dependability of backwoods.

Railroad, truck lane, terminal ( depriving and stuffing country ) and even dry port is built-in portion that affect port fight. Therefore, terminal operator or port it self has to playing active function to develop backwoods. Eventough backwoods is non to the full controlable for port, nevertheless, port need to construct good cooperation with backwoods supplier i.

e. local authorities, other province goverment and private sector. Construct reciprocally understanding with backwoods suppliers can better port fight and it is possible to derive market portion from another port nearby because win to hold a better nexus with market.


Le-Griffin, H.

D. 2006. Container Terminal Productivity: Experiences at the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach. Department of Civil Engineering, University of Southern California. Paper [ online ] Available at: hypertext transfer protocol: // [ Accesssed 16 February 2011 ]Beskovnik, B.

2008. Measuring and Increasing the Productivity Model on Maritime Container Terminal. Journal. [ on-line ] Available at: hypertext transfer protocol: //hrcak.srce.

hr/index.php? show=clanak & A ; id _clanak_jezik=49118 & A ; lang=en [ Accessed 16 February 2011 ]Esmer, S. 2008. Performance Measurement of Container Teminal Operation. Journal [ online ] Available at: hypertext transfer protocol: // % C4 % B11/10.1 % 20esmer.pdf [ Accessed 16 February 2011 ]