LR2s have coated tanks, Aframax may or may not..

Allan

Bob, interesting DNV link: I think this is worth a quote:

"The Green Dolphin 575 is a 190m long Common Structural Rules (CSR) compliant handymax bulk carrier with five cargo holds. It is available in single hull standard or double-hull (open hatch) configurations"

So we have the same ship (a bulk carrier) in normal and open hatch configuration. According to what we do here now, one is a bulkcarrier, the other is a general cargo ship.

(About as similar as the difference between an Aframax and an LR2, but both these ships come at least under the tanker category).

A basic definition of a bulk cargo is unpackaged, and fluid (i.e. free flowing). So yes some forest product such as woodchips are classed as bulk, but timber, lumber, logs etc are not.

Pieter, we don't consider them as bulk cargoes when chartering, operating, and stowing.

Bob, I asked for a definition of "General Cargo", not for one of bulk carriers...and the open hatch (single deck too) ships as you decribe them are much better defined as bulk/container ships as forest products are also counted as a minor bulk commodity. (A woodchip carrier is a bulk carrier and not a general cargo ship). Do you really think that the "less informed enthusiast" will check with for instance a Star bulk ship, whether it has topside tanks or hopper shaped holds?

An illustration of the main constructional difference between a conventional bulk carrier and an open-hatch type can be seen at: https://gcaptain.com/introducing-new-green-dolphin-575-bulk-carrier-concept-design-photos/

A definition of bulk carriers is given in SOLAS Chapter IX; that is, “Bulk Carrier means a ship which is constructed generally with single deck, topside tanks and hopper side tanks in cargo spaces, and is intended primarily to carry dry cargo in bulk, and includes such types as ore carriers and combination carriers. “
The classification societies generally classify dry cargo vessels built to other than the above specifications as general cargo ships. Multi-purpose, open-hatch dry cargo ships, with their box-shaped holds, full-width hatches and double-skinned sides, can also carry bulk cargoes, as well as packaged timber and containers.
In the industry they are often known as open-hatch bulkers, and smaller, box-hold coasters are referred to as mini-bulkers. But the classification societies’ definitions are what appear in the information sources that are most used by enthusiasts so, in my opinion, it is most appropriate that these categories are used by this site, where many users are not experts in naval architecture or shipping trades

Paul, many of the commodities you mention are considered as (minor) bulk cargoes

https://www.opensea.pro/blog/minor-dry-bulk-commodities

Still plenty of cargo's for general cargo ships out there. Just looking at my local ports there are general cargo vessels loading / or discharging steel, timber, packaged waste, bagged fertilizer, wind-turbine blades, outsized project cargo, bricks, and bagged cement.

Bob: Give me one good definition of General Cargo. It used to be the stuff for which those fantastic multideck linerships were designed. Those ships are almost gone now, to the chagrin of many. Today al dry cargo (95%?) goes as unitary load. The five major bulk and the many minor bulks all go in bulkcarriers, the remainder in containerships.

I don't think we need any mmore categories or sub-categories on this site. All the usual references that enthusiasts use list open-hatchers as general cargo ships. Why make things more complicated for the non-technical ship photographer?

I think it is about time to consider open-hatch bulkers as a subcategory to bulkcarrier, rather than hide them under "general cargo ships"

It is a single-deck, box-shaped-hold, open-hatcher and was reclassified by the classification society when they made the differentiation between those and normal bulk carriers. In LR 1985, it was classed as a bulk carrier.

Miramar has the vessel as a cargo ship, and as Miramar is one of the recommended sources for classifying vessels on Shipspotting, I guess that could be the reason. It's unlikey that many members would have access to a Clarkson's Bulk register.

This ship was once included in the Clarkson's Bulk Register. (Ships over 10,000 DWT) I am sure Phil E. will remeber. Why is it here classified under general cargo?