<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="https://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Transport Research International Documentation (TRID)</title>
    <link>https://trid.trb.org/</link>
    <atom:link href="https://trid.trb.org/Record/RSS?s=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" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <description></description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <copyright>Copyright © 2026. National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.</copyright>
    <docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
    <managingEditor>tris-trb@nas.edu (Bill McLeod)</managingEditor>
    <webMaster>tris-trb@nas.edu (Bill McLeod)</webMaster>
    
    <item>
      <title>COST AND ENGINEERING CONSIDERATIONS IN PLANNING FOR OFFSHORE FACILITIES</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/19091</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Ship loading and unloading terminals built in the open sea have greatly contributed to the development of new sources of raw materials and to the increased utilization of large vessels.  Offshore berths of various types for loading and unloading solid and liquid bulk cargoes are reviewed. Discussions are based on offshore terminals and artificial islands engineered by Soros Associates around the world. The terminals described are located up to 15 kilometers from shore.  Some installations require the moving of the vessel during loading and unloading, others are designed to maintain the ship in one position.  The vessel may be pulled up against breasting structures or may be positioned away from the dock face with the help of mooring systems.  Some terminals allow more than one orientation, enabling the ship to head into the wind and waves under a variety of conditions.  Criteria for locating and designing offshore terminals is discussed with such factors as berth availability, handling rates and ship sizes evaluated in terms of their influence on the transport system's cost.  It is the conclusion of the author that the construction of offshore terminals is technologically feasible and in many instances offers important economic and ecological advantages.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 07 May 1974 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/19091</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>A FLOATING ROLL AND HEAVE STABILIZED MANEUVERABLE DEEP WATER TERMINAL FOR SUPER TANKERS</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/19092</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The capital equipment intensive society of the United States requires improved economic access to energy if it is to retain a competitive position in world markets.  Increased productivity in transport of crude oil is one aspect of "improved economic access to energy".  A deep water terminal would afford the United States this "improved economic access to energy" by availing it of the increased transport productivity of super tankers, a productivity increment presently exploited by our trading partners but denied us by our lack of deep channel harbors.  This paper describes a 340-ft diameter, 500,000-ton capacity, floating, roll and heave stabilized, maneuverable, spherical-hulled, storage/transfer facility for transshipment of crude oil from super tankers to onshore storage or refineries. Emphasis is placed on how this deep water terminal uniquely responds to and satisfies design requirements for a super tanker facility; included is an environment impact rationale supportive of the "floating in deep water" siting concept.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 07 May 1974 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/19092</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>IMPORTATION OF BULK RAW MATERIALS TO COASTAL RIVER SITES</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/19093</link>
      <description><![CDATA[With recent and continuing major increase in size of bulk-carrying vessels, the depth of the rivers has become generally inadequate.  This is a problem also felt by the coastal ports, but the rivers are typically shallower than the harbors through which they pass into the sea. Cost-of-transportation calculations are made for the shipment of a hypothetical bulk import, in such a way that the cost penalties inflicted by draft limitations are shown. Often, the distance from the sea to a point of receipt may seemingly be a factor, since it obviously increases the length of voyage from the foreign loading point.  The same calculations are used to show the effect of river distance, it being assumed that river passage can be accomplished at 10 knots.  It is shown that a length handicap is likely to be minor compared to a draft handicap taken independently, when typical instances of each are noted.  However, if both are taken together, a draft handicap imposes a multiplying effect on a length handicap.  Dredging as a cure for draft handicaps will be more costly for an up-river destination than for a coastal one, simply because of the added distance.  An alternative to dredging is the offshore deepwater transfer port, such as proposed for lower Delaware Bay.  Calculations are made to show that this would benefit a coastal harbor and a river point in about equal measure.  On the other hand, if one looks at a particular site on a river that is too shallow by modern standards, it is seen that the draft handicap is greatly reduced by the availability of a deep-transfer port.  This is shown by example of a river, the James of Virginia, where increase in channel depth from 25 feet to 35 feet has recently been denied on the grounds of low benefit/cost ratio.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 07 May 1974 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/19093</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>THE COMPENSATED CUTTER HEAD DREDGE--A SOLUTION TO BEACH RESTORATION</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/19094</link>
      <description><![CDATA[America's beaches are eroding significantly and in some localities are severely damaged or destroyed.  The Army Corps of Engineers' Report on the National Shoreline Study states that 2700 miles of shoreline is in critical condition and 1.8 billion dollars should be spent to protect this great natural resource.  While various methods of shore protection may be used, "artificial fill with periodic nourishment to restore and preserve a beach is the preferred method."  To this date, the only viable hydraulic dredge to operate offshore is the hopper dredge, expensive to operate and procure.  The more economic and efficient cutter head dredge can be adapted to the offshore conditions by providing compensation equipment to offset the motion of the sea.  Design requirements of such an offshore cutter head dredge design are presented as well as first costs and operating cost information.  More formidable than the technical equipment problems are the contractual problems involving the federal, state, county and municipal bureaucracies.  This problem is analyzed and a recommendation is presented for the ultimate solution to the restoration and preservation of our great natural resource--the Nation's shoreline.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 07 May 1974 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/19094</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>A SHIPOWNER'S PERSPECTIVE OF SUPER SHIPS AND OFF-SHORE TERMINALS</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/19095</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This paper discusses an ocean transportation scheme which does not encourage the major carrier to use conventional berths.  There are more than six hundred vessels of 100,000 DWT and over in existence and of these 73% are tankers, 18% are combined carriers and 9% are bulk carriers.  There are three hundred tankers and combined carriers in the over 200,000 DWT range, so that the major preoccupation with off-shore terminals lies for the present with the oil companies and the operators of oil-carrying ships.  For obvious reasons, growth in dry bulk ship size has lagged behind tankers and the off-shore terminal for dry cargoes has a somewhat different connotation.  Unless the shipowner is to face even greater congestion in the approaches to the main oil terminals and if the cost of oil to the ultimate consumer is to be minimized, the development of VLCC's in excess of 500,000 DWT is inevitable.  From a shipowner's viewpoint, the establishment of off-shore terminals offers certain clear-cut advantages.  Notable among these is the probability of reduced turn-around time, with considerable reduction in cost of operation of large vessels.  The economic case can be made.  Another favourable feature to the owner is the reduced danger of accident or grounding through not having to manoeuvre in congested, restricted and shallow waters.  He will still need his improved navigational aids, maximum manouevrability, braking devices and the like to compensate for ship size, but his margins of safety will be increased.  He may even anticipate some relief in insurance rates on hull and cargo.  One of the major disadvantages of off-shore terminals to the shipowner may be a socio-economic one.  The days when young men could be persuaded to join the merchant navy on the basis of "seeing the world" are disappearing, particularly in the tanker trades.  The complement of a tanker operating between an offshore terminal in the Persian Gulf and another 40 miles off the U.S. East Coast have little if any opportunity to go ashore.  Hence the need to provide increasingly attractive conditions of service in the way of accommodations, leave and other forms of compensation.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 07 May 1974 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/19095</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>