The company recently developed the Tandem™ Quattro, which is due to enter service at APM Terminals' capacity-restricted facility at Algeciras, in Spain, in April this year. The advantage of this latest spreader is that it can lift either two or four 20-foot containers at a time, or perform in a twin-40 or twin-45 role.

“We view the role of Tandem spreaders as less 'either/or' and more 'both/and',” says Mr Fredin. “However, Tandem spreaders are not going to replace separating twin-lift spreaders. Terminals will choose the product solutions that best fit their operating context, which encompass such things as their mix of containers, the number of available cranes, the ability of the dock to support dual-hoist cranes and so on.

“In some cases, they will use single-hoist cranes with conventional spreaders. In other cases, they will choose dual-hoist cranes with conventional spreaders. Or, they might also choose single-hoist cranes equipped with Tandem spreaders. We also see a clear market for the Tandem on existing cranes.”

Crucially, Mr Fredin does not see the choice of spreader as presenting the operator with the biggest headache, since those produced today by reputable manufacturers are extremely reliable.

“With equipment performing as it should, the biggest challenge faced by operators is in organising ship-to-shore and yard operations so that containers flowing inbound from the vessel at a high rate do not cause the yard operation to 'back up' in terms of productivity,” he says.

Quizzed as to whether there are any clear technical constraints on the development of spreaders in the future, Mr Fredin says that the overall weight of these devices could prove a problem. Not all manufacturers have addressed this as they perhaps should have, since Bromma's Tandem spreader is some 7 tons lighter than the nearest competing split-headblock Tandem model.

“A second technical constraint is that, with a Tandem operation, a terminal has more communications information headed up to the crane, all of which has to be processed easily.” Bromma believes that its new SCS3 control and communications technology has propelled it into the leading position in the market in this respect.

As to whether such innovations do, indeed, impose a price premium on operators is difficult to assess, since manufacturers are typically shy when quizzed in this area. However, getting a return on investment on such equipment is often a function of quayside efficiency and if multi-lift spreaders can push more containers through the system in a shorter time then any additional cost of the hardware is probably more than justified.

That terminals are justifying the cost of multi-lift is evident, since Mr Fredin insists that Tandem is operating at smaller terminals as well as at larger ones. Nor is multi-lift confined to empty containers, he stresses. “Everything depends on the capacity of the crane. A crane with lower capacity will likely be using Tandem spreaders for handling empties. A crane with higher capacity can also use Tandem to handle fully loaded containers,” he says.

Reports have also reached Port Strategy of spreaders routinely malfunctioning in wet weather. Mr Fredin says, as far as Bromma is concerned, this is a non-issue. He claims it is the result of some manufacturers using off-the-shelf equipment for spreader communications and control. Bromma's SCS3 control equipment can operate under all environmental conditions to be found in ports worldwide.

“Electronics have to be designed, specified and built for the difficult physical environments that ports experience, be they rain, high humidity, blowing sand, high heat, or whatever.”

As for the future development of spreaders, three crucial points have to be continually addressed: fewer spreader-related downtime events; shorter duration of downtime events; and reduced spreader maintenance time through the elimination of service points.