Talk:Gross tonnage

Skip to table of contents

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Gross tonnage article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Ships

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ships, a project to improve all Ship-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other articles, please join the project, or contribute to the project discussion. All interested editors are welcome. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.ShipsWikipedia:WikiProject ShipsTemplate:WikiProject ShipsShips

Transport: Maritime

	Transport portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Transport, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TransportWikipedia:WikiProject TransportTemplate:WikiProject TransportTransport
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Maritime task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Capitalization

Is it "Gross Tonnage" or "Gross tonnage"; or even "gross tonnage"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hamiltondaniel (talk • contribs) 14:19, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Historical basis and rationale

This article could do with something about the rationale and historical basis of the calculation.

The Moorsom System article is very good for this because it shows that the current tonnage system is descended via a series of fudges from an actual volume measurement. This also gives the lie, at least in part, to the claim that gross tonnage "does not have a unit"; it's the descendant of systems which attempted to estimate the actual volume and hence deadweight capacity of a vessel.

We could also do with some new text about the reasons for the IMO decision.

The article Tonnage is good too. Some rationalisation/reorganisation will make this subject a lot clearer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.13.197.229 (talk) 11:37, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes please. As a layman, when I read this, all I can think is "what kind of perverse madness is this?!?". Some kind of explanation seems badly needed. 84.215.46.150 (talk) 13:30, 23 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the articles need improving. You will find some information regarding the history and development of ITC-69 here. Feel free to include it to this and the other relevant articles. Tupsumato (talk) 14:55, 23 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

How is Volume V calculated from the dimensions in the diagram

How is Volume V calculated from the dimensions in the diagram ? eg. Does it include the volume of the funnel and the superstructure ? and is this significantly different than the older gross register tonnage ? - Rod57 (talk) 16:42, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]