If Denis commented, that means he either likes the ship, or the photo, or both, or finds interesting whatever he sees at this or that page. In any way, it's automatically a compliment to author of the photo. :D

Regards,
me

Everything's OK and in good order Manuel, thank you !
Actually, I only felt free to compliment your photo in the name of all of us below commentators.
I can be utterly sure that all of us, and always, likes a nice photo of a ship.
Once again ... remaining with best regards,
Jadran

Jadran, I fully understand that the fans of this website, are not only photos, but also boats and technical issues. I know that Denis liked the photo, thanks for your comments. Best regards,
Manuel

@ Denis & Captain Ted
There was a topic on the Forum regarding the issue that you are mentioning.
Shipspotters all over the world>>Shipping News and information>>Question
Topic: Question
This topic was opened on February 12, 2013
Kindly take some spare time and have a look.
Brgds (J)


PS
I trust that all of us have a need to also say:
A very nice photo of a cute g.c. ship;
Thanks for posting Manuel !
Brgds

Ted, you're talking about that resulting in to low freeboard/maindeck on initial designs of these freighters, right? Should be, because all such typical ones had extremely low maindeck first & that didn't provide them enough of bouyancy in rough waters. Since early 2000s I notice newbuilts of these series are havng either the freeboard like on the above ship or just a hump. Current freighters of such size have higher freeboard than the ship above. Hartman's M2 Runner Oceanic has freeboard as high as the upper deck, but narrow wing tanks width... I'd like to have some enlightenment on this situation (once again).
Delete

Hi Denis
Yes/No,If I remember it correct it was initially a "trick" to lower the overall GT of a ship and therefore the port costs. Then regulation, (not sure if it is still today the same) said somehow along the line , lowest open deck is baseline for calculations of
the GT of a ship and this therefore lowers the GT considerably. You can see some feeder container ships with extreme low freeboards, even some with a flush deck , all made to lower the GT number and therefore cost. This plays then also into the Panama /Suez Canal GT calcualtions, because they did not except it, because they get much more if they calculate from the top deck. I am not mistaken in international GT calculation is for example the funnel not calculated in the GT in the Canal,s calculations it is as far as I know it. hoever who knows better/more,,please correct me if so,, thx

As I would understand by now, the raised freeboard after the forecastle is to have enough of buoyancy, compared to very low one on the main deck level in initial design of these freighters.