It’s great when manufacturers are keen to share their order books. Obviously it helps us in the press out and offers a handy overview of the market, but more importantly it’s a sign that business is good. Unfortunately, that’s not something we’ve been able to take for granted for a while now, even with the largest companies.

As you’ll note from the tables placed around this article, gantry cranes is one of those pleasing markets in which manufacturers are all too happy to tell us about their sales – from Japan’s Mitsui Engineering & Shipbuilding Co, Ltd (MES) to ZPMC[TN1] , Konecranes and Cargotec. Rail-mounted gantry cranes (RMGs) and rubber tyred gantry cranes (RTGs) are a continuing source of good news stories in terms of contracts and developments.

KEEP IT GREEN

Unsurprisingly, the focus of product development in this market hasn’t shifted much in recent years from the familiar synergy between ecology and economy. Manufacturers are still striving to reduce the environmental impact of their products to not just meet regulations, but also lessen operational costs for their clients. The challenge, of course, is doing so without compromising on productivity. Cargotec has taken an innovative approach to tackling this issue with the latest addition to its RTG portfolio and range of Kalmar E-One2 RTGs, the SmartPower. This specialist machine differs from traditional diesel engine RTG designs in that it is optimised to proficiently carry out the cranes’ most common operations, rather than every possible operation.

Cargotec identified that RTGs are usually designed to be suitable for “the rare occasion” when a full load needs to be hoisted with full acceleration and speed. By creating the E-One2 SmartPower with a smaller diesel engine and an intelligent power management system, the manufacturer states that it can deliver significant savings for typical RTG operations that involve handling between 9 and 18 containers per hour.

So while the engine is less powerful than those of some of its market counterparts, at 9 litres per hour it offers what Cargotec calls the lowest fuel consumption of any diesel-electric RTG on the market. By eschewing the ‘one-size-fits-all’ principle, the manufacturer argues that it can deliver a more bespoke solution to deliver both optimal performance and economy. That, it states, is where the “smart” bit of the name comes from. Reducing running costs is also a key aspect of Liebherr’s ongoing development of its RTG technology. The manufacturer states that it is currently working on a new engine and drive algorithm with a view to further reducing running costs. It has noted an increased importance of all-electric models in its RTG business, having delivered a zero-emission crane to the Port of Cork, Ireland, earlier this year. Dual-power all-electric and diesel RTGs delivered to Sharjah Port in the United Arab Emirates have also been among recent orders. Additionally, Liebherr points to its ability to equip RTGs with DGPS, auto steering and other technologies that enhance productivity as a way of saving costs.

FUEL FOR THOUGHT

Konecranes offers the optional Diesel Fuel Saver system on its RTGs, which reduces fuel consumption by eliminating high-speed idling and also minimises noise emissions. This system provides power on-demand, only supplying the RPMs required for the work the crane is performing, so no energy is wasted. The manufacturer states that this can result in savings of tens of thousands of Euros a year per RTG, without compromising on productivity. A further modular option for Konecranes’ RTGs is the Hybrid Power Pack, which turns a diesel RTG into a diesel-electric hybrid RTG, thus dramatically reducing fuel consumption. Much like a hybrid car, this takes energy generated during braking and converts it into electricity to recharge the energy store, from which the crane then derives its power whenever possible.

Mitsui Engineering & Shipbuilding Co, Ltd (MES) has been delivering Paceco Transtainer RTGs, fitted with a large lithium ion storage battery since May 2010. Again, the hybrid system works by storing and reusing energy during as a container is lowered. The MES original Engine Variable Speed Control (EVSC) fitted on these machines controls engine speed by optimally synchronising with the loading condition. The hybrid Transtainer has since undergone further enhancements, increasing its capacity and in turn improving the energy storage potential so the engine size could be reduced along with emissions. MES states that it is dedicated to continuously contributing to the conservation of the environment by offering state-of-the-art, environmentally friendly equipment.

A QUIET EVOLUTION

This ongoing dedication to further developing RTG technology is common among all the companies to which World Port Development spoke for this article. With fuel prices and environmental regulations evolving as they are, the manufacturers really have no other choice. Of course, those regulations also stretch beyond merely fuel emissions; the increasingly tight requirements regarding noise reduction have resulted in Cargotec placing the matter high on its agenda for RTGs. The manufacturer boasts that, in removing the diesel engine, its all-electric E-One2 Zero Emission RTG is “the most quiet solution available.” It has also worked to reduce noise in the diesel-electric SmartPower version, with that aforementioned smaller engine housed in a specially designed, noise-limiting compartment. Cargotec adds that, even when regulations do not demand noise reductions, the increasingly congested urban areas in which terminals operate may lead to this becoming a greater concern. Additionally, the E-One2 range aims to minimise overall costs by maximising maintenance intervals. All of the RTGs in the line have a 1,000-hour maintenance window, with equipment and support services on offer 24 hours a day. It also describes its 9+1 RTG as being “unique” in its width, offering an alternative to RMGs. “Where commonly RMGs were desired for large rail operations as several tracks can be covered simultaneously,” the company details, “this can be achieved with the RTG as well – with the RTG requiring less infrastructure (no rail) and hence [providing] a greater amount of flexibility. The Kalmar RTG crane range varies from a 4+1 to 9+1 block size, with 1 over 3 or 1 over 6-high stacking.”

Recent orders for E-One2 RTGs include the first two eight-wheel units of this class ever supplied to an Ecuadorian client. These were ordered in early November by cargo handling firm INARPI S.A for a new inland yard operation on Trinitaria Island, Guayaquil – the largest city in the country. The cranes are scheduled for delivery in July 2013 and will join existing Kalmar equipment in the INARPI S.A fleet, including six DRF450-65 reachstackers and five Ottawa C50 terminal tractors. Further to this, in October Cargotec announced that it had received an order for four E-One2 Zero Emission RTGs from International Transportation and Trading Joint Stock Company (ITC Corp). This was for the company’s new port at Phu Huu Ward Dist 9, Ho Chi Minh City. These machines are scheduled for delivery in the first quarter of 2013. They will service the first phase of the port development, which is set to open in the following quarter. This will comprise a 41-hectare area with 900 meters of quay that will handle 2,000-TEU container ships and 36,000 DWT vessels. Cargotec states that important factors behind ICT’s investment in the Kalmar RTGs include their environmental friendliness, related savings offered by a more than 30% reduction in fuel consumption, and long maintenance intervals.

LASTING SERVICE AND RELATIONSHIPS

Maintenance savings are also a central feature of 10 eight-wheel RTGs that Konecranes delivered to Indonesia’s Belawan International Container Terminal (BICT) in June. These machines’ wheels rotate while turning, thus reducing wear on the rubber tyres and the container yard in comparison to traditional so
lutions, and extending the crane’s length of service. The BICT contract was the result of a longstanding relationship, with the 10 new units bringing the total number of Konecranes RTGs at the terminal to 15. Such long-term connections with clients have been a cornerstone of much of Konecranes’ recent activity. This was notably the case in an order it received in August from the Bolloré Group in West Africa, for nine RTGs to MPS Container Terminal in Tema, Ghana, and Benin Container Terminal in Cotonou, Benin. Bolloré Group, the leading private concessions operator in Africa, now has a fleet of 67 Konecranes RTGs across West Africa. Features of the latest cranes include Auto Steering and Variable Speed Engine and Fuel Saver technology. Similarly, an October delivery of three Konecranes 16-wheel RTGs to Luka Koper in Slovenia was based on a decade-long relationship. Ordered in January, these are the first 16-wheel RTGs at the port, featuring active load technology, the Fuel Saver system, and the Autosteering and Autostop features. In the same month, the manufacturer received an order from another long-term client, the Port of Houston Authority (PHA) in the US. This was for eight 16-wheel RTGs for the Barbours Cut Terminal, increasing its fleet of 16-wheel Konecranes RTGs to 30. PHA already has 49 of the manufacturer’s RTGs operating across all of its terminals, and this is the authority’s second order for fuel-saving models from Konecranes. The manufacturer delivered its first RTGs to the port – which, as a handler of almost 230 million tons of cargo per year is the largest in the US in terms of foreign waterborne tonnage – in 2003.

ORDER, ORDER!

Liebherr has also notched considerable success over the past year, with a notable glut of orders across Europe and Africa. This includes deliveries to DCT Gdansk (Ukraine), DP World Sokhna (Egypt), the Port of Cork (Ireland) and OJSC Petrolesport at St Petersburg, Russia. Again, many of these are rooted in existing client relationships; the deliveries to Gdansk bring the terminal’s fleet of Liebherr RTGs to a total of 14, complementing five ship-to-shore cranes supplied by the manufacturer. The Egyptian delivery of six 1 over 5 RTGs increased the DP World Sokhna site’s fleet to 11. The St Petersburg contract involves two deliveries; the first was for six 1 over 5 RTGs that can stack 6 containers wide, the second for a further five that stack 7 wide.

In 2011, Liebherr delivered more than 30 RTGs – a total it will better this year and is projected to trump once again in 2013. Liebherr’s year began with a delivery of three 16-wheel RTGs to Termont Montreal, Canada, and the manufacturer recently installed two RMGs for the Freightliner Ltd Southampton Maritime Rail Terminal, UK. Both of these cranes were launched in a ceremony on 15 October, with the names Freightliner Fortis 15-10-2012 and Freightliner Agilitas 15-10-2012. Freightliner, the UK’s largest rail freight operator with an 81% market share of all deepsea maritime containers that enter the UK, had previously invested in Liebherr cranes for its Birmingham and Manchester terminals in 2009 and 2008 respectively. The manufacturer’s RMG order books for 2013 are already looking healthy, with nine deliveries scheduled for next year.

It boasts that such strong demand for its gantry cranes – particularly RTGs – is driven by a range of factors that differentiate Liebherr from its competitors. For RTGs, Liebherr highlights the perks of its eight-rope reeving anti-sway system, which is supplied as standard on all its stacking cranes. This, coupled with the simultaneous operation of the gantry, hoist and travel motors allows for “superior positioning of the spreader and eliminates the need for a headblock.” The simplified hoist configuration optimises drive power for maximum energy-efficient operation, Liebherr states. The manufacturer adds that it can offer “an increase in productivity of between 30 and 40%” when compared with alternative designs. Paceco España, a licensee of the global manufacturer Paceco and subsidiary of the Mitsui Group, is currently in the process of delivering five RTGs to the Port of Bilbao. These eight-wheel Transtainer models, which were ordered back in May, are being delivered in two stages. The first shipment, which is being completed at the time of going to press, involves the delivery of two units. The remaining cranes will be shipped in January.

SUCCESS BREEDS CONFIDENCE

Such widespread news of large gantry crane deliveries and orders, combined with projections for 2013, is heartening. This staple technology of port operations may date back to an archetypal principle that’s more than 150 years old, but the manor in which it continues to evolve around the modern world’s requirements still allows plenty of scope for manufacturers to innovate. So while nothing should ever be taken for granted, we can at least retain confidence that the RTG and RMG market should continue to be a source of good news and – hopefully – success for both operators and manufacturers.

[TN1]Assuming you are using the ZPMC spreadsheet – they’re not mentioned elsewhere as they didn’t provide additional info.

The Italian port of Venice has a long tradition in international sea trade and has over the past centuries exploited its strategic geographic position enabling trade between Europe and the East. To maintain the economic growth of the region and expand to new markets, the existing maritime infrastructure needs to be expanded and navigation channels widened and deepened to allow access by larger ships. The unique nature of Venice Lagoon and the old city (which is a UNESCO World Heritage site) means that further industrial expansion and in particular dredging of the navigation channels is constrained by the regulations which are intended to protect the environment of the lagoon and surrounding areas from the potential adverse impact of such activities. To address this and also to maximise opportunities for wider expansion of economic activities and future growth in the region, Venice Port Authority has proposed development of an offshore island port to be located outside the lagoon and cargo to be trans-shipped to inland ports and terminals. This paper outlines the concept for the offshore port with particular focus on the novel approach for

transferring containers between the offshore and inland terminals.

Venice lagoon and its ports

Venice lagoon is located in the north end of the Adriatic Sea and has three main inlets which are used for navigation. (See Figure 1) The Lido inlet, in the north, is mainly used by passenger cruise liners calling at the historic city of Venice. The other two inlets, Malamocco

in the middle and Chioggia in the south, are used mainly for commercial and industrial traffic, serving the main industrial ports inside the lagoon and the inland waterways and canal network. Porto Marghera is the main industrial port of Venice, which is the focus of redevelopment for container and logistics activities. The water depth at the main navigation channel to Porto Marghera is 12m. This is the maximum depth to which the channel can be dredged under the environmental regulations. With increasing draught for commercial shipping this water depth limits the expansion of the port and the container terminals. The likely maximum beam that can call at Porto Marghera is 32.3m limiting the vessel size. Further there are sections in the approach to the terminal where traffic is limited to one-way operation only with vessels forming conveys and designated waiting areas.

Venice Port Authority strategic development plan

With the expected rebalancing of economies and the shift from west to east and to emerging

economies, exchanges with Asian nations are likely to increase across the entire European economy. Most goods travelling between Asia and Europe are expected to continue to enter the Mediterranean through the Suez Canal. Today, most of this traffic crosses the Suez Canal and heads for Gibraltar to reach European markets through the North Sea and Baltic ports. A port in the Upper Adriatic has the potential to offer an alternative and possibly faster and more economical transit route for cargo. However, other Mediterranean ports, Upper Adriatic and Upper Tyrrhenian ports alike may take advantage of this rebalancing of trade.

Venice is ideally located within the Trans European land transport corridor. It is directly on East-West Corridor 5, which links Kiev in Ukrain to Lisbone in Portugal; and it is close to North-South Corridor 1, which links Berlin in Germany to Palermo in southern Italy (see Figure 2). Venice is therefore strategically placed to link to the Eastern markets and facilitate intermodal services across Europe. Furthermore, with the changing nature of the industries

previously located in Venice’s Porto Marghera, more land is becoming available for the development of transport and logistics hubs. Venice Port Authority’s strategic goal is to capitalise on Venice’s location and proposed improvements to hinterland connectivity to make the Port of Venice an alternative Gateway to Europe.

Proposal for an offshore port

For this vision to be realised and to protect the fragile environment of the lagoon and the old city, Venice Port Authority proposed the creation of an island port approximately 15km offshore of the Malamacco inlet in 20m water depth, enabling the berthing of large ocean-going ships. The offshore port is to serve the onshore terminals accessible from within the lagoon and other regional terminals and inland destinations (Figures 3 and 4). The offshore container terminal is proposed to have a capacity of 3.0 million TEU per annum as well as an oil terminal to replace the existing oil import jetties located inside the lagoon and reduce the

environmental impact on the lagoon. Fundamental to the success of the offshore port is the seamless transfer of cargo from the offshore terminal to the various inshore terminals and vice versa, requiring a high degree of planning, reliability and cooperation and therefore a unique, integrated system is required.

Options for linking offshore port to land

Various options to connect the offshore terminal to the mainland were considered. These included fixed links such as a tunnel, bridge or causeway as well as a flexible waterway link.

The analysis concluded that a flexible waterway link from the offshore terminal is likely to be the best option considering key stated customer requirements:

staged investment cost,

various inland terminal destinations of cargoes,

reduced environmental impact

flexibility

operational considerations

To meet the above requirements various waterway transfer mechanisms and terminal layouts were investigated. In the development of the waterway transfer mechanism, particular attention was given to the operators and client’s expectation as these would be fundamental to the ports success.

Expectation of service levels and challenges

Typical key service level expectations of operators and customers that the terminal would need to be able to fulfill include but are not limited to:

No terminal imposed delays to mainline container vessels

No terminal imposed delays on the landside interface

Approximately 15% of cargo should be available for pick up 24hrs after discharge is complete

Drop off times of up to 12-24hrs before departure from mainland must be allowed for a percentage of cargo

The majority of export cargo is likely to be dropped off at the terminal in the period of 7 days to 1 day before expected ship arrival

In addition to these requirements, any proposed system needs to provide the ability to cope with unexpected events and constraints that are outside the operators control such as:

Unreliable estimated time of arrival for mainline or feeder vessels,

Various combinations of vessel size/ container exchange/ discharge only/ load only / optional loading calls

Various specific hold/ slot positions for containers

A variety of receiving and redelivery times

Late planning information

Further challenges lie in the inherent nature of the offshore-onshore container terminal concept. In comparison with conventional terminals there is the need to handle containers multiple times. In addition, effort is required to transfer containers between the offshore and onshore terminals across the open sea and through the restricted lagoon channel. Finally, all the personnel working on the offshore terminal have to travel significant distances over sea to get to their place of work, affecting potential shift patterns in relation to EU working time regulations. All of these factors have time, cost and operational implications for any future operator and need to be optimised as far as possible.

Proposed container handling system

Following detailed feasibility studies, a novel approach for handling of containers and their transfer between offshore and inland terminals was proposed. The proposed container handling system holistically considers the entire transport chain from offshore mainline ves
sels to onshore transport node (rail/ road) and vice versa and comprises of a special

waterway transfer element and a unique terminal container layout to optimise the overall productivity and flexibility of the system.The mainline vessel interface chosen comprises of ship to shore gantry cranes (SSGC) with an outreach of at least 24 containers as these have proven high productivity and reliability. The offshore terminal is expected to utilise automated straddle carriers operating in the backreach of the SSGC to decouple the crane operations from the terminal operations with low manning requirements. This means that small delays in one equipment operations do not result in immediate bunching up of traffic and delays in

another operation, increasing overall productivity. Further, the area between the crane legs is sufficient for all operations where the presence of workers is required enabling full separation of human and automated traffic and increasing safety. An automated or semi-automated bridge crane is proposed to transfer containers to both the buffer stack and barges for the waterway transfer mechanism. Automated bridge cranes have been developed and implemented previously, but have not been used widely due to the relatively expensive overhead structure. However, in this application, the cost of the overhead structure may be compensated by the reduced need for equipment, increased productivity and increased ability to automate.

Figure 5 – Schematic representation of the proposed container terminal handling system

6

The buffer stacks are designed to store containers parallel to the quay (i.e. same alignment as the barges) to ensure high barge crane productivity and therefore minimised barge numbers. This also avoids the need to have rotating bridge crane spreaders which would add cost and complication. Further, the bridge crane tracks extend to the barge width over the quay to enable the discharge and loading of barges in a single move directly to the buffer stack location. At the point of load or discharge to/from ship to shore crane, the same bridge crane can perform a single move from buffer stack to transfer area ready for the mini straddle carrier and vice versa (in both single and dual cycling mode). For the waterway transfer it is proposed to use a small number of specially designed lighter (LASH) vessels, in combination with a large number of low cost unpowered dumb barges with container slots (see Figure 6). The lighter vessels are highly manoeuvrable and seaworthy and rapidly with dumb barges using an on-board float-on float-off ballasting system. The dumb barges are specifically designed to suit the dimensions of the bridge crane as well as the lighter vessel. Overall, this novel transfer method reduces the amount of staff required to operate vessels, provides sea worthiness without extensive lashing, enables manoeuvering in the restricted channel and lagoon, provides flexibility of serving other destinations and other barge sizes and increases the turnaround speeds in the loading process.The inshore terminals have similar layout and stack design to the offshore terminal. However, due to increased storage requirements the stacks are longer and a second rotating bridge crane spreader is

proposed to ensure a semi-automated safe loading and unloading of road trucks.

Conclusion

The regulatory and environmental constraints on the development of navigation channels within Venice Lagoon, together with availability of land for development and the unique location of Venice in Northern Adriatic created an opportunity for the development of a new container hub and logistics centre and a potential alternative gateway to Europe. Venice Port Authority’s proposed offshore container terminal incorporated a novel approach to trans-shipment of containers which could provide the opportunity for large oceangoing containerships call at Venice and for the fast and efficient distribution of containers to

inland terminals. Discussion on the economic aspects of the proposed scheme is beyond the scope of this paper but it can be said that detailed studies have been carried out to investigate the scheme’s attractiveness and its economic viability and that interested parties can enquire with Venice Port Authority for more information.

In a box?

The feasibility studies for this project were carried out by Halcrow Group Ltd, with support from Idroesse Infrastruttre and BMT Titron, and in close collaboration with Venice Port Authority. The authors wish to express their thanks to Mr Antonio Revedin, Director of Strategic Planning at Venice Port Authority, and his colleagues for all their support and guidance.

Current terminal expansion plans and new-build projects around the globe have generated a surge of orders for spreader manufacturers. Some of the specific projects that prompted orders include the DP World London Gateway terminal and the Maasvlakte II project where operators have ordered their container handling equipment and are now placing their orders for spreaders. On the other side of the pond in California, USA, the Long Beach Container Terminal, a wholly owned subsidiary of Orient Overseas Container Line Ltd in Los Angeles has been driven by environmental decisions resulting in orders for large numbers of electric spreaders.

In addition to the rush of orders, and to satisfy the appetite for new spreader technology, manufacturers have not been sitting on their laurels waiting for the customers to come along. Instead, they have been very active in developing some new and interesting products.

In the September issue we highlighted the new activities of spreader manufacturer VDL containersystemen based in the Netherlands. The company entered the Automated Guided Vehicle (AGV) market – a market currently dominated by Gottwald Port Technology (now Terex Gottwald) with a new AGV model. According to Pieter Verdonschot, Sales Manager spreaders, the company developed the AGV together with terminal operator ECT Rotterdam within one year and are currently finalising an order to supply 21 AGVs to the terminal.

But the good news doesn’t stop there for VDL. Verdonschot also reports on continued success for their electric spreader with rotation and gravity adjustment – one such model was delivered to a container terminal in the Netherlands at the beginning of this year. “We have received several orders for such a spreader and will supply 2 more of these spreaders to different customers this year,” said Verdonschot. In addition, VDL also developed a special piggyback spreader for an intermodal terminal in Germany. The spreader has a capacity of 48 tonnes and is able to lift trailers with a height up to 4m. According to VDL the spreader is conforming to the “Deutsche Bahn” specifications. The first two units of this spreader will be supplied to Rostock in Germany in 2013.

RAM Spreaders

Perhaps the biggest technology news comes from UK-based RAM Spreaders, part of the NSL Engineering Group based in Singapore. The intensive development by RAM engineers of the RAM SingFlex head-block system has enabled the company to secure a number of major contracts during the last 12 months. RAM SingFlex enables a ship-to-shore container crane fitted with a single hoist system to handle two telescopic spreaders simultaneously thereby improving productivity without the high expense of a full dual hoist crane. The system is particularly adaptable enabling it to be fitted to existing cranes not originally intended for tandem spreader operation. The unique design ensures that just as new spreaders have to work with the existing crane head-blocks in a terminal so RAM SingFlex as a new head-block system must work with the existing spreaders and utilise their quick release system(s). This is particularly important as terminals worldwide use many different variations of twist-lock and pin connections. As the changeover from single spreader to dual spreader operation must be achieved quickly to avoid delays, again the unique design of RAM SingFlex ensures that the usual five minutes allowed for this operation is easily achieved. This is due to the use of a docking station and the fact that during the changeover the master and slave head-blocks are always contained by the docking station thus ensuring consistent changeover timings. The use of the docking station has a second important feature and that is to ensure correct alignment between the component parts of the head-block. Since it is the head-blocks that are supported by the docking station spreaders of different types and makes within a terminal can be utilised thereby ensuring flexibility of operation. The only change to the spreaders is if the operational staff request side and end gather guides rather than the usual corner gather guides. RAM believe that the extensive work carried out by its R&D engineers over the last ten years for dual head-block systems suitable for both single and dual hoist cranes has resulted in RAM SingFlex and its sister system RAM DualFlex. This intensive programme of development has resulted in a full range of electric spreaders for all applications within a terminal including single lift spreaders for STS cranes (3400 series), single lift spreaders for RTG and RMG cranes (3500 series), twin-lift spreaders (fixed twins) for STS, RTG and RMG cranes (3600 series), centre-spread twin-lift spreaders (separating twins) for STS, RTG and RMG cranes (3900 series). The wide product range has resulted in many contracts with spreaders being delivered worldwide to all Continents, from the tropics to the intense cold of Siberian Russia. Additional features are available such as electric rotation with centre of gravity adjustment. Major benefits to a terminal are quiet operation that minimises background noise and lower operating costs due to reduced power consumption and less maintenance.

Bromma

For Bromma the two main areas that generated huge sales over the last couple of months have been California in the USA and Rotterdam in the Netherlands. In June 2012 the company had its second best month in its entire history with 150+ crane spreaders ordered during those 4 weeks. It is also reporting to achieve in-roads with its spreader fleet maintenance programme Green Zone – a programme that observes spreader functions and maintenance on the spreader. Bromma’s largest single order for ship-to-shore (STS) all-electric spreaders, an order for 18 STS45E all-electric spreaders, came from Long Beach Container Terminal (LBCT), and was part of a larger order from LBCT for a total of 50 all-electric spreaders. LBCT also ordered Green Zone on their new spreaders. In Rotterdam, Bromma received its largest single order for multi-lift Tandem spreaders, an order for 9 Tandem units to the new APM Terminals facility at Maasvlakte II. The order is part of a larger order for 31 high-capacity STS spreaders. APM Terminals specified Green Zone on 31 new spreaders. Bromma has also developed and added ‘Work Order’ to the Green Zone product family.  Work Order creates living service plans that adapt in real time to specific changes in a spreader’s operational characteristics. It delivers pre-warning alarms that tell terminal maintenance managers when it is time to replace certain components, and it creates maintenance reminders based on both spreader cycles and service events. Work Order adapts to the unexpected and unplanned service warning by altering daily action schedules to address unanticipated issues. It is seamlessly integrated with the other modules in the Green Zone product family – Roadmap and Fleet Doctor. In the container yard, Bromma saw more and more [automated] terminals switching to all-electric spreaders and recently received a new automated terminal order for 22 Greenline yard spreaders from Global Terminals in New York. Other major automated terminal orders recently won by Bromma include 34YSX45E all-electric spreaders for Khalifa, Abu Dhabi, 40YSX45E all-electric spreaders for Barcelona, Spain, 10YSX45E all-electric spreaders for TraPac in Los Angeles and 20YSX45E all-electric spreaders for the London Gateway, UK. The company also received a record order of 56 crane spreaders to Colombo International Container in Sri Lanka, including 44 all-electric spreaders, plus 12 STS45 ship-to-shore spreaders. In the last couple of weeks Bromma was awarded a contract for 15 STS45 ship-to-shore crane spreaders for HHLA in Hamburg, Germany.