I'd be fine with a truck route.
West coast port issues update
I do believe it is time to bring back the ultimate transport solution...Zeppelin airship , no more ports and canal fees...Just the import tax... No need for huge bulky shipping containers...Streamlining the air operation with keeping a steady supply to hungry Ewoks everywhere...
I was gonna bring up Crimson Skies if you didn't. One of my favorite fictions.
Far-fetched air piracy aside, ever since that game came out, I've wondered why Zeppelins couldn't revolutionize the shipping industry. I know they come with a host of logistical challenges, but it doesn't seem that any are insurmountable.
As I understand it, it's an aerodynamic issue (caveat: I am not an aeronautical engineer, and it's been years since I talked to one about blimps and zeppelins). Basically, a structurally feasible envelope for whatever lighter-than-air gas you're using adds mass and creates drag, which means that in comparison to fixed-wing aircraft it takes more thrust to accelerate the same cargo, which means higher fuel costs.
But that's not necessarily the case. Like I said, there are challenges to overcome, but have a look at this:
http://rt.com/news/aeroscraft-revolutionary-airship-cargo-187/
I do believe it is time to bring back the ultimate transport solution...Zeppelin airship , no more ports and canal fees...Just the import tax... No need for huge bulky shipping containers...Streamlining the air operation with keeping a steady supply to hungry Ewoks everywhere...
I was gonna bring up Crimson Skies if you didn't. One of my favorite fictions.
Far-fetched air piracy aside, ever since that game came out, I've wondered why Zeppelins couldn't revolutionize the shipping industry. I know they come with a host of logistical challenges, but it doesn't seem that any are insurmountable.
As I understand it, it's an aerodynamic issue (caveat: I am not an aeronautical engineer, and it's been years since I talked to one about blimps and zeppelins). Basically, a structurally feasible envelope for whatever lighter-than-air gas you're using adds mass and creates drag, which means that in comparison to fixed-wing aircraft it takes more thrust to accelerate the same cargo, which means higher fuel costs.
Also they tend to be inflammable.
Yeah, no. They don't.
Was able to copy. Here is Managements Press release:
PMA Makes “All-in” Offer to ILWU as Contract Talks Lag
ILWU’s Choice: Continued Slowdowns or Gold-Standard Wages & Benefits
SAN FRANCISCO, Calif. (February 4, 2015) – Seeking to break the deadlock in stalled West Coast
longshore negotiations, the Pacific Maritime Association has made an “all-in” contract offer that would
significantly increase compensation to members of the International Longshore and Warehouse Union.
Full-time ILWU workers already earn an average of $147,000 per year, and would see their wages rise
roughly 3 percent per year, along with fully paid health care that costs employers $35,000 per worker
per year. The maximum ILWU pension would rise to $88,800 per year as part of the proposed five-year
PMA’s offer is designed to bring contract negotiations to a close after nearly nine months, and follows
three months of severe ILWU slowdowns that have crippled productivity at major West Coast ports.
“Our members have shown tremendous restraint in the face of ILWU slowdowns that have cut
productivity by as much as 30, 40, even 50 percent,” said PMA President Jim McKenna. “This offer puts
us all-in as we seek to wrap up these contract talks and return our ports to normal operations.”
PMA’s offer also meets the ILWU’s two biggest demands: maintenance of their Cadillac health benefits –
which feature no worker premiums, no co-pays and no deductibles for in-network benefits – as well as
jurisdiction over maintenance and repair of truck chassis. Those two issues consumed months of
contract talks, and in both cases PMA has offered significant concessions to the ILWU.
The resulting contract offer calls for a cost increase of roughly five percent each year over the life of the
five-year contract.
ILWU slowdowns – which are prohibited by contract – are now in their 14
operations at major West Coast ports including Tacoma, Seattle, Oakland, Los Angeles and Long Beach.
PMA has requested a contract extension, which would prohibit slowdowns, but the ILWU has refused.
Despite four weeks of participation by a federal mediator, the parties have not yet been able to bridge
the considerable gaps between them. The Union has recently made significant new demands, and is also
insisting on changes to the decades-long process for selecting arbitrators – trying to change the rules on
the waterfront in their favor, giving them the ability to unilaterally remove arbitrators who rule against
“The deteriorating situation on the docks is in nobody’s long-term interest,” McKenna said. “I hope the
ILWU leadership will give very serious consideration to this contract offer, which I believe respects their
members and gives us a clear path to conclude these talks. We owe it to workers and businesses across
the nation to resolve our differences and get our ports moving again.”
A fact sheet on the PMA offer is attached, and a video of McKenna offering details of the offer is
available on the PMA website: www.pmanet.org.
Here is the Unions...sorry I couldnt get the actual PDFs up. If anyone is interested PM me and I can email them to you...
ILWU tells employers: finish negotiations, don’t
close ports over only a few remaining issues
SAN FRANCISCO, CA – The ILWU is trying to keep dock employers at the negotiating table to finish an
agreement that is “extremely close.”
“We’re this close,” said ILWU President Robert McEllrath, who held up two fingers in a gesture indicating
how close the parties are to reaching an agreement.
“We’ve dropped almost all of our remaining issues to help get this settled - and the few issues that remain
can be easily resolved.”
The ILWU pledged to keep the ports open and keep cargo flowing, despite the massive, employer-caused
congestion crisis that has delayed shipping for most of 2014.
This is the second time in recent memory that the employers have threatened to close ports at the final
stages of negotiations. The union has not engaged in a port strike over the coast longshore contract since
1971, 44 years ago.
“Closing the ports at this point would be reckless and irresponsible,” said McEllrath. The ILWU urged the
Federal Mediator to keep both parties at the talks until the nearly-finished agreement is concluded.
If the PMA closes the ports, “the public will suffer and corporate greed will prevail,” said McEllrath, who
noted that the major powers on the employer side are multi-national corporations who are foreign-owned.
“These foreign-owned companies make billions of dollars and pay their executives millions to do their
bidding.”
The ILWU Longshore Division represents 20,000 dockworkers at 29 west coast ports.
As I understand it, it's an aerodynamic issue (caveat: I am not an aeronautical engineer, and it's been years since I talked to one about blimps and zeppelins). Basically, a structurally feasible envelope for whatever lighter-than-air gas you're using adds mass and creates drag, which means that in comparison to fixed-wing aircraft it takes more thrust to accelerate the same cargo, which means higher fuel costs.I do believe it is time to bring back the ultimate transport solution...Zeppelin airship , no more ports and canal fees...Just the import tax... No need for huge bulky shipping containers...Streamlining the air operation with keeping a steady supply to hungry Ewoks everywhere...
I was gonna bring up Crimson Skies if you didn't. One of my favorite fictions.
Far-fetched air piracy aside, ever since that game came out, I've wondered why Zeppelins couldn't revolutionize the shipping industry. I know they come with a host of logistical challenges, but it doesn't seem that any are insurmountable.
Also they tend to be inflammable.
Yeah, no. They don't.
in·flam·ma·ble
inˈflaməb(ə)l/
adjective
easily set on fire.
Edited by GroggyGolemWhich is why modern airships are not inflammable. Being filled with helium, dirigibles are considerable less combustible than an airplane. In fact, even historically it was only the German airships that were filled with hydrogen, and there is significant evidence that it wasn't even the hydrogen that caused the Hindenburg fire, it was the aluminum coating on the skin. Historic dirigibles were much more likey to just crash than to catch fire, and modern ones would be even less prone to accidents. The Hindenburg was just a particularly spectacular (and filmed) outlier.
Edited by ForgottenloreThere are more options than west coast ports. Transit time from Houston to Shanghai is just a whopping 6-8 weeks. The west coast stuff has been going on for a while. My shipper stopped going through LA late last year. I would imagine ffg has done the same
What we need to do is build a system of tubes ala Mario world so you can just go from a to b, contact Nintendo and licence their technology!
I do believe it is time to bring back the ultimate transport solution...Zeppelin airship , no more ports and canal fees...Just the import tax... No need for huge bulky shipping containers...Streamlining the air operation with keeping a steady supply to hungry Ewoks everywhere...
I was gonna bring up Crimson Skies if you didn't. One of my favorite fictions.
Far-fetched air piracy aside, ever since that game came out, I've wondered why Zeppelins couldn't revolutionize the shipping industry. I know they come with a host of logistical challenges, but it doesn't seem that any are insurmountable.
As I understand it, it's an aerodynamic issue (caveat: I am not an aeronautical engineer, and it's been years since I talked to one about blimps and zeppelins). Basically, a structurally feasible envelope for whatever lighter-than-air gas you're using adds mass and creates drag, which means that in comparison to fixed-wing aircraft it takes more thrust to accelerate the same cargo, which means higher fuel costs.
But that's not necessarily the case. Like I said, there are challenges to overcome, but have a look at this:
http://rt.com/news/aeroscraft-revolutionary-airship-cargo-187/
Dude, that's Thunderbird 2, it's not real!
Do we know how this will effect shipments to the rest of the world? Do they ship to North America and thence to Europe, South America and Africa, or will those loads be on different boats? If the latter, might this mean a break from the norm where we see releases everywhere at once? It could be quite expensive for FFG storing all that stock while they wait for the American shipments.
I presume the whole shipment goes to merica then Europe gets their share shipped via plane as there would be a bigger gap if it was shipped a second time.
So. Back to the OP.
What's the status?
See link post 111. Not good.
Waiting to see how long it takes for them to piss of geeks who aren't getting their shinys before we march on the ports and show them how ugly gamer rage is
Waiting to see how long it takes for them to piss of geeks who aren't getting their shinys before we march on the ports and show them how ugly gamer rage is
Yes I'm sure the larping community will strike fear into the hearts of people who work heavy machinery every day.
I bet the B.C. ports are working overtime to deal with overflow...
I wonder if X-wing fans all chipped in a dollar could they hire a cargo helicopter or something to take the first load to shore?
Also, does anyone else get surprised that dock workers make almost $150k/year?
Waiting to see how long it takes for them to piss of geeks who aren't getting their shinys before we march on the ports and show them how ugly gamer rage is
Alas, I think we all know how ugly gamer rage is 
So. Back to the OP.
What's the status?
I posted a copy paste version of the press releases previously...looks like this was just for the weekend. Not at work yet but I'll see if there is anything new in my mailbox. As for the comment above that it might be expensive to store? Not really...outside of delayed sales. The product is either sitting on the ship unloaded...incurring no further fee on ffg...it's not their fault it's not getting unloaded. Or it's sitting on a dock waiting to be recieved...neither of these things typically incur further fees...especially when there are labor confrontations going on.
I was asking about storing it IF there was a separate boatload in Europe (as opposed to Europe's supply being part of the American supply, flown over from America). If that's not how it works then yeah, nothing for them to store.
That said, I assume shipping is just charged by the weight and volume, not by time taken (like a metered taxi journey)?
I was asking about storing it IF there was a separate boatload in Europe (as opposed to Europe's supply being part of the American supply, flown over from America). If that's not how it works then yeah, nothing for them to store.
That said, I assume shipping is just charged by the weight and volume, not by time taken (like a metered taxi journey)?
Correct but it really only weight, unless the product is so oddly shaped that it would cause an issue. Everything is loaded into shipping containers so as long as the items fit in there you are good. Time taken is a hard to control variable...especially when we are talking about seaborne transportation.
I was asking about storing it IF there was a separate boatload in Europe (as opposed to Europe's supply being part of the American supply, flown over from America). If that's not how it works then yeah, nothing for them to store.
That said, I assume shipping is just charged by the weight and volume, not by time taken (like a metered taxi journey)?
Correct but it really only weight, unless the product is so oddly shaped that it would cause an issue. Everything is loaded into shipping containers so as long as the items fit in there you are good. Time taken is a hard to control variable...especially when we are talking about seaborne transportation.
Surely they also pay by number of containers? Otherwise someone could ship loads of really light stuff and the profit for your journey is decimated.