Larger than life

Ships of more than 22 rows of stowed containers are becoming a reality, but few ports have the quays to accommodate them and crane manufacturers are still waiting for orders to build the necessary handling equipment.

Paceco España sales engineer José Bandrés says his company has only ever bid for one super post-panamax crane capable of reaching 23 rows for the port of Rotterdam. Virtually all of Paceco España's recent deliveries have been for super post-panamax cranes, but Mr Bandrés defines these as units capable of handling between 18 and 22 rows of stowed containers.

“Although we have never built a crane capable of reaching 23 rows, in my opinion, it is only a matter of time, because vessels are getting bigger.” However, he concedes that there doesn't yet seem to be a policy among the big terminal operating groups of committing to 23+ row cranes.

The new Felixstowe South development at the UK's biggest container port is one of the few taking the plunge, having placed orders for the world's three largest quayside gantry cranes. These can span containers stowed 24-wide on deck, while the safe working load under the spreader is 70 tonnes, although they have a heavy-lift function allowing 100 tonnes to be lifted under the headblock.
“Working larger vessels, with generally larger stows per hatch, allows better productivity as proportionately less time is spent repositioning the crane or undertaking hatch moves,” says Felixstowe's head of corporate affairs Paul Davey, adding that each crane will also have twin-lift capability.

Although built by ZPMC, Felixstowe operator HPH has eschewed the all-Chinese option, preferring instead to specify Siemens electrical systems and Dutch Merford cabs.

Operational Berths 8 and 9 have already been dredged, initially to a depth of 16 metres, but they have been designed to be deepened to 18 metres as and when required. The terminal will therefore be able to handle any size of vessel currently in operation or on order. The new Maersk Triple-E class vessels, for example, will have containers stowed 23-wide on deck, which is less than these cranes are designed to handle. Significantly, Felixstowe is currently the only UK port capable of handling these vessels.

“The E-class vessels, the largest in the world currently, have been regular callers at Felixstowe, and there are over 150 ships of 10,000+ TEU currently on order, most of which will be deployed on the Asia-Europe service,” says Mr Davey. “Felixstowe is also the nearest UK port to the main European container ports and offers these mega-ships minimum deviation and no lengthy river passage; both essential criteria for the largest vessels.”

He adds that ports also need to be suitably located in respect of their hinterland, with Felixstowe being well placed to serve the whole UK, possessing both good road links and rail connections. Ports designed to service particular UK regions, he suggests, will not attract the type of vessels which need these cranes.

For Paceco España, there are no real design or technical issues associated with 23+ row units. These would have to be a bit bigger and a bit taller, but that would not be considered a complex operation. Indeed, theoretically, says Mr Bandrés, the company could build a crane as big as the client wanted.

And the price of a 23 row crane would not be significantly higher than for a 22 row crane, he says, estimating a 5% price hike. However, crane prices, he notes, have fallen of late, as many of the remaining European manufacturers have opened production plants in China.

“Some of our competitors have therefore been able to cut costs, making the market extremely competitive,” Mr Bandrés says.

“It is hard for us, because we still manufacture everything in Europe. All our components are sourced in Europe, which means our cranes have to be slightly more expensive. However, we survive because some operators are still prepared to pay a bit more for a 100% European crane,” he says, noting that some customers don't want Euro-Chinese hybrid cranes either, even though the price would be cheaper.

He notes that, on bigger cranes, the electronics can be more sophisticated. Paceco España therefore buys in a complete electronics package, usually from Siemens, but also occasionally from ABB. Indeed, 85% of the company's customers opt for Siemens drives, which Mr Bandrés notes are not cheap.

“The Chinese have their own control system, but if a customer specifies a Siemens drive they then have to integrate this into their electronics. This can prove quite expensive. At Paceco España, we have never received a request for a Chinese-built drive, which feedback suggests are inferior. The result is we can produce a more reliable crane,” he says.

One other operational point to consider is the crane rail spacing on existing terminals, which may not be wide enough to accommodate larger cranes. In Felixstowe, the new quay where the cranes will operate was specifically designed for these cranes in mind, with the crane rails being 35 metres apart as opposed to 30 metres at the port's existing Trinity Terminal. Available power will also be sufficient for these larger units, since bigger cranes draw proportionately more.

“We cannot comment on other ports, but the requirements of cranes of this size will inevitably mean there will be ports where either the quay loadings, or crane rails, will be unsuitable,” Mr Davey says, adding that this also applies to power consumption.

For Paceco España, forward contracts have picked up and the company is currently working on three major contracts, meaning that lead time is averaging 13 months, which Mr Bandrés says is towards the upper end. In 2009 and 2010, which he characterises as “horrible years”, cranes could have been turned round in 11 months.

“Business is pretty good at the moment. The industry seems to be in recovery after the recession.”