Jump to content

Talk:Net tonnage

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the current revision of this page, as edited by BattyBot (talk | contribs) at 03:30, 14 March 2024 (top: Fixed/removed unknown WikiProject parameter(s) and general fixes per WP:Talk page layout). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.

(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Net Register Tons vs. Short Tons

[edit]

in Freight specifically, does NT (Net Ton) not *also* mean Short Ton? I.e., Net Ton could be the Register Ton of 100 cubic feet, as described here, but sometimes refers to Short Ton of 2000 Lbs... I don't know the correct answer to this, but think that a reference to Short Tons should be appended. Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.86.160.62 (talk) 15:33, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Net tonnage

[edit]

Modern net tonnage is an unitless index (see gross tonnage)) and thus there is no such thing as "net ton". The difference between NT and NRT should be more clearly stated. Tupsumato (talk) 15:35, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Explain briefly on net tonnage. 45.215.253.165 (talk) 09:09, 19 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

How can NT be greater than GT?

[edit]

I realize these are unitless numbers that don't directly correspond to anything physical, but I'm having trouble understanding how NT can be greater than GT. Maybe this could be explained briefly in the article? GA-RT-22 (talk) 15:00, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I was wondering the same thing, and the direct reason seems to be that passenger count contributes towards NT but not GT. For Icon of the Seas additional contribution from passenger count is (1.25 * (248663 + 10000)) / 10000 * 7600 = 245730 “net tons” that is added to a number that is a fraction of the gross tonnage. The figure calculated this way is meaningless, and I would be willing to delete it from Icon of the Seas article. The figure might have some relevance when calculating harbour charges, if the charges are really based on NT. IlkkaP (talk) 20:53, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn't remove the number from any article if it's well sourced, but I do think we should explain it here, because it's contradictory to the usual use of the terms "gross" and "net". GA-RT-22 (talk) 21:02, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It seems that Oasis class ships have NT and DWT specified too, but the number is meaningless. If explained here, it should be something along the lines “As NT is based on GT, draught, depth and passenger count of the vessel, and passenger count of the vessel can increase NT more than the draught and depth of the vessel decrease it, NT can exceed GT.” IlkkaP (talk) 21:20, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
While it's a meaningless number just like length between perpendiculars, it's such a customary metric together with GT and DWT that I would strongly oppose deleting it from any article. Tupsumato (talk) 11:03, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]