NationStates Jolt Archive

The Whilan Lama seeks to purchase an assortment of new or used merchant vessels. At least 100 ships (5 million gross weight tonnage) sought. Prefer already constructed ships.

(Please do NOT post full stats/pics. A total package of 100 or so ships and a price only woukld be greatly appreciated.)

GIAI and several other Western Asian companies have developed alternates to Naval cargo transportation that can achieve similar transfer rates in less time with greater flexability.

These two systems provide longer ranges in shorter times and have been used extensively by Western Asian companies to deliver shipments of goods over a wide variety of types and sizes.

The first such system is the PelicanULTRA, a massive airplane which uses the Wing-in-Ground effect to greatly boost its ability to carry massive payloads. Like its namesake, the PelicanULTRA soars (relatively) close to the water but this Pelican is really a land bird and can land at almost any international airport.

The second system is based on Western Asia's ULAs (Ultra Large Airlifters). ULAs are offered for foreign sale in a variety of sizes and can be tremendously versatile as they require basically no infrastructure to land and off-load the cargo (the systems of the vessels mean that a ULA can land on any relatively open and flat area on its own, even water, and can then anchor itself for the unloading of gear.

While these systems are both much slower than conventional cargo aircraft, their load capacity and versatility have allowed for a reduced demand upon Western Asia's civilian naval freighter business (although the need still exists for some types of gear and naval cargo vessels are still sometimes used for super-high capacity voyages without time constraints).

To learn more about both these systems, I will direct you to a series of posts describing their functions, statistics, and which provides a large amount of additional information for the discerning buyer.

Link to the Future of Cargo Transportation (http://www.nationstates.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1568750#1568750)

While we don't offer any ships to you we do offer advice.

Ships offer the best per unit transport cost. While they arn't the fastest means of transport they are much cheaper than any other option. If you plan on shipping large amounts of good but don't worry too much about them getting then overnight a ship is the best and cheapest option.

Planes are faster but they can't carry nearly as much as a ship and they most alot more money and I mean ALOT. If you need to ship things fast a plane will do it.

Also the more a single transport can carry the cheaper it will be per load. Although with larger transports the total cost will be higher they can carry more thus getting larger revenue so the larger the cheaper.



If the builder of these ships needs steel for the production of them contact Kravoli and we can talk about selling you most grades of steel.

We would kindly dispute the claim that shipment by sea freight is cheaper than our ULAs, as the larger models have proven operating costs/ton/distance below even those of ships...but with a much greater speed.

Even the PelicanULTRA, which is definitively more expensive, breaks the old balance of shipment methods by providing a large, decently-fast air transport capability...but with the added benefit that port facilities are not required.

We would kindly dispute the claim that shipment by sea freight is cheaper than our ULAs, as the larger models have proven operating costs/ton/distance below even those of ships...but with a much greater speed.

Over a short distance maybe, but over long distances Ships are much much cheaper. Over a short distance planes can match ships becuase they can be filled to the brim with cargo and still have a range large enough to get to the destination but over a large distance the plane needs to be filled less to make the distance while the ship losses much much less cargo.

Adding more fuel to the planes adds cost so having massive fuel tanks can be a bad thing for profit and Aviation fuel is much more expensive than Diesel.

Over a short distance maybe a plane could match a ship but over large distances a ship will always win(Ever notice how basically only mail is sent by plane around the world?)

Even the PelicanULTRA, which is definitively more expensive, breaks the old balance of shipment methods by providing a large, decently-fast air transport capability...but with the added benefit that port facilities are not required.

Not needing a port isn't really an advantage unless the company that ordered the shipment has it's own airport or the country has no ports. No matter if the shipment is at the port or airport it still needs to be transported to the people that order it and generally ports have much better cargo handling facilities than airports.

We would kindly dispute the claim that shipment by sea freight is cheaper than our ULAs, as the larger models have proven operating costs/ton/distance below even those of ships...but with a much greater speed.

Over a short distance maybe, but over long distances Ships are much much cheaper. Over a short distance planes can match ships becuase they can be filled to the brim with cargo and still have a range large enough to get to the destination but over a large distance the plane needs to be filled less to make the distance while the ship losses much much less cargo.

Adding more fuel to the planes adds cost so having massive fuel tanks can be a bad thing for profit and Aviation fuel is much more expensive than Diesel.

Over a short distance maybe a plane could match a ship but over large distances a ship will always win(Ever notice how basically only mail is sent by plane around the world?)

Here you're assuming that the ULAs are airplanes...they're not. They're dirigibles that run on simple fuels. They run at a top speed of about 100mph but the largest model can bear 1000 tonnes and costs much less than a cargo ship...not to mention basement-low maintenance costs.

The largest ULA actually has one of the lowest operating costs around and yet has enough cargo capacity to transport significant loads across the world within a short time period.

The ULAs have none of those problems but so many more benefits. Simple integrated systems allow the ULAs to unload anywhere. For most modern aircraft your argument is true...but neither the ULAs nor the PelicanULTRA are in the same league as modern aircraft.

Those exact issues were taken into account when I first determined that WA, to RP decently, needed a cheap but efficient means of transporting large volumes of cargo in a decent amount of time.

Even the PelicanULTRA, which is definitively more expensive, breaks the old balance of shipment methods by providing a large, decently-fast air transport capability...but with the added benefit that port facilities are not required.

Not needing a port isn't really an advantage unless the company that ordered the shipment has it's own airport or the country has no ports. No matter if the shipment is at the port or airport it still needs to be transported to the people that order it and generally ports have much better cargo handling facilities than airports.

Ports tend to have better cargo handling facilities for the cargo that comes through ports. Commercial airlifted equipment (and 747-400ER cargo planes are used extensively to transport items other than mail) is best treated by its own facilities, but the PelicanULTRA doesn't need the same off-loading facilities of a ship. It can off-load cargo containers directly to local depots (near airports) instead of depending upon a number of intermediate steps in the process.

Most private shipment companies can (and do) receive air shipments at international and regional airports...they don't need their own airports any more than every importing company needs its own port. Allow me to also remind you that some countries don't have significant or proper access to the sea that would allow for the construction of port facilities (and it's cheaper to pave one large runway than to build a large port).

As it stands, ports have to offload containers into massive storage yards, the containers are inspected(well, some are anyways) and then moved onto trucks or trains. These trucks and trains still have to move the cargo to local depots for additional storage and further redistribution.

The PelicanULTRA and ULAs are not the be-all and end-all of cargo transportation, they simply offer new capabilities to fill the clear and common gaps that commercial naval transportation cannot fill (many companies that depend upon slow ships to bring in new goods from foreign factories would rush to get at a faster shipment method (since it keeps down overhead and allows vendors to sell 'hot' items before the particular fad dies)...If a ULA can move dozens of cars without the same risks that a ship faces (such as the ship loaded with BMWs that sank recently in the english channel, bearing down millions in credit and goods) then the manufacturers can cut out the expensive insurance and financing that accompanies the slower naval shipments (at least for certain goods).

If that airship can infact handle that much load it must be huge and take a massive amount of gas and gas costs money and is lost on trips. So you need both petrol and gas to run this thing adding cost. And with size come drag making the need for bigger engines and more petrol to push it along.

Airships are very unsafe in even the lightest of storms.

Boths means of transports have pros and cons but there is a reason ships are still around and airships arn't.

[self deleted]

Please not that these vessels are not for our own needs. We are replacing the merchant fleet of a friend in need.

If that airship can infact handle that much load it must be huge and take a massive amount of gas and gas costs money and is lost on trips. So you need both petrol and gas to run this thing adding cost. And with size come drag making the need for bigger engines and more petrol to push it along.

Airships are very unsafe in even the lightest of storms.

Boths means of transports have pros and cons but there is a reason ships are still around and airships arn't.

Please read the linked descriptions before going further. I've addressed these issues and you can even see what these airships look like.

The airships are fairly large, but not beyond reason.

As these are airlifters (derive lift from both gasses and a lift-generating form), they are easy to run and not at all dangerous. As things go, Helium is an inert gas and poses no danger to the operators. The materials used greatly limit any loss to the environment and the gasses are enclosed in isolated sections within the body. These systems ensure that the loss of gas is minimized enough that serious maintenance is only needed every several months.

As for petrol, ships need a LOT more fuel than these airships do, and they travel at a much slower pace (more fuel/hour X many more hours=huge expense).

These are not simple airships (as I've tried to explain) and they do not bear the problems that airships did (since most were built with older-style materials and were dependant upon explosive hydrogen (and flammable materials)). Airships aren't around because the advances in shipping have previously out-done the increase in demand...but this is no longer the case.

IRL, the UN has endorsed the idea of these airlifters as a means for reaching areas affected by disasters quickly and safely.

The speed of the vessels allows units endangered by storms to seek calmer skies (and the vessels themselves are sturdy enough to withstand most storms).

Please not that these vessels are not for our own needs. We are replacing the merchant fleet of a friend in need.

We hope that our offerings can be considered.

We would prefer ships not airships, thank you.

bump