Talk:Crane vessel

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Sapura 3000[edit]

This crane has not 3000mT but 3000sT (=2722mT) capacity. http://www.huismanequipment.com/documenten/products/pipelay/leaflet_sapura3000_a.pdf — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.209.196.241 (talk) 23:43, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Largest Crane Vessels[edit]

Is the table of largest vessels complete? What about Rambiz (3,300 tonnes) and Asian Hercules II (3,200 tonnes)?

Davagh (talk) 08:27, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Okay. I went ahead and added above. Note, Asian Hercules II is technically a sheerlegs, although this would still be classed as crane vessel? Correct if wrong. I suggest adding a section on offshore renewables, (where there quite a bit of demand for construction vessels happening right now).

Davagh (talk) 12:44, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Distinction between floating cranes and crane ships/vessels[edit]

As a reaction to my category edits (merging category:floating cranes into category:crane vessels), I got a revert and message on my discussion page stating that floating cranes are not crane vessels.

As the article currently treats them together, I'm asking: Is there a clearly defined difference which can be used as a criterion for correct categorization? --Tetris L (talk) 06:02, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Floating cranes float (and don't require much more than this), crane vessels are vessels and , like other vessels, are capable of making independent headway. A crane vessel and more obviously a crane ship has some pretence of being a boat or ship that can function as such. Floating cranes are generally no more than rafts or pontoons.
There is also a historical difference. The heyday of the floating crane was in the first half of the 20th century, when they provided a mobile crane heavy lift service that was used around ports and harbours, for civil engineering projects as much as for shipbuilding. At this time there were no comparable land-based mobile cranes. The few mobile cranes available were lower capacity and limited to working on firm surfaces (i.e. not for construction sites).
I would support the merging of a descriptive article for both classes (the classes are distinct, but their history is best told through an overall article), but the category structure should be kept separate, so as to appropriately describe articles on individual cranes (many individual floating cranes were large enough to acquire individually notable histories). This is particularly relevant to Commons. Andy Dingley (talk) 12:05, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

PieterSchelte[edit]

I suppose that the Pieter Schelte will be added to the list once her topside fitout is complete?. signed:Donan Raven (talk) 16:31, 20 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Crane vessel. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 21:57, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Crane vessel. 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:

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

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:51, 14 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Crane vessel. 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:

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

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:05, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Pioneering Spirit[edit]

@Mliu92: The Pioneering Spirit in this article is a bit odd. It is not yet a crane vessel, and once it is, the crane capacity will be 5000 ton. The lifting capacity of the vessel itself is much higher, but that is not by crane, but by float over. Comparing lifting records with crane vessels is comparing apples and pears. Other float overs have taken place in the past with higher weights. Boskalis recently performed the Aasta Hansteen float over of 24,300 ton.[1] Technip has performed float overs up to 18,000 ton.[2] Wheatstone was a 36,000 ton float over, while Arkutun Dagi was 42,380 ton, both with the H-851.[3][4] Therefore I plan on removing the sections on what are actually float overs. BoH (talk) 14:59, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted to bring up the Topsides Lift System (TLS). It's quite a unique system with a notable lifting capacity of 48,000 tons, different from the conventional crane vessels and float-over systems.
Although the TLS isn't a crane in the traditional sense, its ability to lift entire topsides in a single operation aligns it with the core purpose of heavy lifting. I believe this makes it relevant for the topic. It's an example of how heavy lifting technology is evolving, offering new solutions and pushing the boundaries of what we typically consider in this category.
Thought it might be worth mentioning in the article as it adds another dimension to our understanding of heavy lifting capabilities in marine engineering. Lucanator1 (talk) 16:06, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ [1]
  2. ^ [2]
  3. ^ [3]
  4. ^ [4]

Commons files used on this page have been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page have been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 20:06, 2 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Crane_vessel&oldid=1213094397"