1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186 
container commentary
Page 135
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
by Norman M. Douglas A monthly intelligence report on container topics Few containers at Earls Court—but plenty to see abroad
CONTAINERS are conspicuous by their absence, or near-absence, at this week's Commercial Motor Show. The handful that are there are mainly being used as "window dressing" for the skeletals that support them. Some visitors may find this surprising, bearing in mind that until now containers have been well to the fore at trade vehicle exhibitions, and still are at the Amsterdam, Geneva and Turin shows.
The reason for this has been mentioned, briefly, in CM earlier this year. However, because of the many questions haulier visitors are asking about the lack of containers, perhaps I may be excused for restressing the SMMT decision, made apparently at the request of container manufacturers, to hold a giant exhibition every other year devoted solely to containers and container equipment, to be held on alternate years to the Commercial Motor Shows.
Next year's exhibition—Interfreight—is well ahead in the planning stage and most of the well-known names in the industry have undertaken to be there, Container exhibitions and shows in Britain appear to have been somewhat in the doldrums of late—the last one held in the spring at Olympia, for instance, was a big disappointment to unsuspecting visitors who were unaware of the SMMT's ban.
The picture is different abroad, and Export 70, the 3rd International Shipping and Containerisation Exposition and Congress in New York, starts on Monday. With no less than 14 leading trade, professional and governmental organizations affiliated as co-operating associations, this show is expected to be quite a container bonanza. The accent will be on the packing of containers, or "stuffing", as the Americans prefer to call, it; there will be on-site demonstrations of this important function. The Exposition ends on October 1.
Following close on its heels, on October 21, is one of the Continent's most important shows of the year—Containerization 70, at Munich. To be staged at the Fair Grounds, which have extensive outdoor and indoor facilities, the exhibition is by no means limited to container traffic and equipment, but will deal with all the intermodal systems currently available. The Containerization 70 exhibits are divided into seven sections: containers and "exchangeable superstructures"; vehicles for container carriage and exchangeable superstructures; transfer equipment; loading and unloading equipment; accessories for containers; pallets and packing, and container loading services.
In common with container exhibition practice, a congress or conference is to be held during each of the above-mentioned exhibitions.
At Munich, of course, German manufacturers such as IWT MAFI and Demag will be in attendance and it will be interesting to see whether there has been any improvement in the new container delivery situation which most manufacturers, when questioned at the Hamburg exhibition earlier this year, were quoting as "two years at least".
Rise in insurance premiums due?
RECENT statements that perhaps the time is ripe for a rethink on container insurance have been attributed to the giant Australia-Europe consortia, OCL and ACT. They tried, incidentally, to introduce a uniform system of container insurance a year or so ago but were forced to drop the idea because of the attitude of shippers. However, a rethink could ultimately mean increased insurance premiums if suggestions voiced recently in the States are followed here.
Since the American marine insurance industry made public its contention that container shipments require higher rates "because of the inherent hazards", the American journal Container News in particular has been waging a campaign designed, it would appear, to put pressure on the US Congress to intervene. The journal has been urging the insurance industry to publicize the data on which it based its contention which, after all, goes against the oft-quoted benefits of containerization.
In support of its case for containerization, the journal has cited figures issued by the American Institute of Merchant Shipping which show a casualty incidence of 55 per 330,693 containers carried over a one-year period, which works out at a loss ratio of one container per 11,430 moved. A good record by any standards, one would think. But the insurers counter this by pointing out that, apart from the fact that the industry considers that three-year statistics are regarded as an absolute minimum for meaningful study, 38 of the 55 incidents quoted involved more than one container. The insurers say that they know of the loss of 30 or even more containers at one time, and they feel it would be reasonable to assume the total numbers of containers affected by the 55 incidents could easily be as high as 500 or even more.
No wonder, then, that American underwriters are asking for higher rates to offset six consecutive years of unprofitable underwriting!
In this they would appear to be backed by leading underwriters in the London market, and by German insurers who point out that the moment the merchandise is not shipped entirely from door to door, containerization loses considerably in economic effectiveness; and from the point of view of insurance "one must then really speak in terms of increased risk".
A big snag about container insurance is that to a large extent, while pilfering is minimal on door-to-door movements, more container hijacks occur these days. After all, when mounted on a chassis, a container is so convenient to hitch up to a tractive unit and take away.
So serious is the hijacking situation in America that the Seatrain Line has adopted a "shoot-on-sight" policy at its New Jersey depot! According to the Line's UK vice-president, Stuart Danoff, the offices and administration buildings have been constructed on stilts, the vehicles and containers entering at a lower level beneath the buildings. Anyone seen walking around the area would be shot, he said.
With a reported hijacking of 14 containers from the warehouse of a Brooklyn forwarders on one night, one can understand the company's attitude.
From LASH to HASH
WITH the arrival, recently, of the second LASH (Lighter Aboard Ship) vessel in the Medway off Sheerness, bringing Central Gulf's Mississippi-UK-Holland service to a fortnightly schedule; comes news of the possible development of an idea to substitute hovercraft barges for the conventional non-engined type now in use. Thus, instead of LASH the method will become known as the HASH system!