# Ro-Ro's Quarter Ramps....



## non descript (Nov 18, 2005)

Survey Chile has added an excellent shot of a Ro-Ro *here* and it makes me ponder on one aspect of these ships....

Almost without exception they have the access ramp place on the Starboard Quarter (and not Port) – it has become in its way almost an industry standard. Does anyone have a logical explanation for this positioning, or is it one of those things hidden in the mists of times, along with why do Ship Designers always place the fire main on the Port Side…..(EEK)


----------



## SHM 078 (Feb 11, 2007)

That looks to me like the ramp is in fact moveable, ie can be positioned on either the port or starboard side?? maybe wrong but it looks that way ?

As for why they have them predominantly on the stbd side i really dont know?

Marc


----------



## Steve Woodward (Sep 4, 2006)

Good thought Mark, I dont have the foggiest - I only park them 
heres one that I parked earlier, although the door at the back is angled the ramp is not - these structures seem to be fixed and not moveable
Click here


----------



## non descript (Nov 18, 2005)

SHM 078 said:


> That looks to me like the ramp is in fact moveable, ie can be positioned on either the port or starboard side?? maybe wrong but it looks that way ?
> 
> As for why they have them predominantly on the stbd side i really dont know?
> 
> Marc


Marc, you are right, it could well do that and I chose a rather poor example of the concept; I would have been wiser to show this one *here* which supports the theory in a more dramatic way.


----------



## makko (Jul 20, 2006)

All,

Whilst I have no idea, I would like to suggest that it possibly has to do with rotation of the propellor. RoRos have constant draft (so as not to bend the ramp!) which may also have a bearing. Then again, maybe it has to do with the position of the steering wheel in vehicles - a LH drive would have more visibility negotiating a RH bend and vice-versa.

Until Tonga's observation, I had never thought about it, I just took it for granted! If you look at the Wilhelmsen/BF RoRos, you can also see the dedicated (open) bunker station on the port side. There was a bunker station on the stb'd, accessed by a watertight hatch/door.

Looking forward to a "solution"!
Rgds.
Dave


----------



## non descript (Nov 18, 2005)

Curiously, had the *Cougar Ace* *not* had a starboard ramp, she would almost certainly have gone to the bottom....


----------



## Dave Edge (May 18, 2005)

The only exceptions that spring to mind are the Unions Rotorua and Rotoiti which had port quarter ramps. Perhaps they had the plans upside down - after all, they were built down under.


----------



## John Crossland (May 11, 2007)

Just beat me to it. (Thumb)


----------



## makko (Jul 20, 2006)

Dave Edge said:


> The only exceptions that spring to mind are the Unions Rotorua and Rotoiti which had port quarter ramps. Perhaps they had the plans upside down - after all, they were built down under.


Yes Dave, with RH drive! The drive side came to mind because I found out that RH drive trucks are very popular in Italy for Transalps trucks (they can see the drop) and I found that 150 tonne tipper trucks at mines are also RH drive for the same reason!

I'm still waiting for a naval architects input!!

Rgds.
Dave


----------



## Tony Breach (Jun 15, 2005)

This is analagous to reefers. Originally they had shell doors on both sides as many banana load ports were anchorages. In the 1980s vessels began to have the doors on on one side only - normally starboard. I always felt this was a little strange for in many banana ports there are no available tugs & it is much easier to go alongside port side to. (In Geest we berthed port side to at all berthing ports where fruit was loaded as no Windward Island ports had tugs). Nowadays reefers do not have shell doors.

The Avon & Laurentian Forests had fore & aft quarter ramps on the starboard side but they also had twin screws & bowthrusters. 

Tony


----------



## captainchris (Oct 29, 2006)

I must admit that I never thought about this before, but at Dartford the Cobelfret ferries go either port side or starboard to, depending on either lower or upper berth, also at Purfleet the same applies, as is Fords. Some of the ferries do have a small ramp on the port side, but the main big ramp always seems to be on the starboard side. Perhaps they are moveable??
Even abroad all the boats seem to have the ramp starboard side, although ferries seem to have one straight down at the back.

Best regards,
Chris


----------



## MikeK (Jul 3, 2007)

Getting a bit confused here. Original ro-ro's had stern doors across the stern (doh) The pictures show quarter doors which were invented to do away with the need for dedicated ro-ro berths ie ramps. Quarter door ships tied up to conventional berths. As to port or starboard I would think it was a matter of design choice in most cases - you have a choice of two sides, heads or tails !!

Mike


----------



## Gulpers (Sep 8, 2005)

MikeK said:


> ...... The pictures show quarter doors which were invented to do away with the need for dedicated ro-ro berths ie ramps. Quarter door ships tied up to conventional berths. As to port or starboard I would think it was a matter of design choice in most cases - you have a choice of two sides, heads or tails !!
> 
> Mike


I reckon that Mike has probably solved the problem. Often the simplest solutions are staring you in the face and are easily dismissed! (Thumb)


----------



## Cisco (Jan 29, 2007)

Starboard is the norm on all car carriers but while it may have been a 'heads or tails' at the start there must have been a reason that all went that way. Maybe the big Japanese operators went for it for some reason.. layout at the big car plants?.. and all others followed.

Mind you the very first dedicated car carrier I remember seeing was a small Japanese one in about 1970... she had a port side angled stern ramp.


----------



## exsailor (Dec 18, 2005)

Wasn't only us Kiwis who got it wrong.
www.shipsnostalgia.com/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/94099

Dennis.


----------



## ROBERT HENDERSON (Apr 11, 2008)

Maybe the designers were all right handed.

Robert


----------



## MikeK (Jul 3, 2007)

ROBERT HENDERSON said:


> Maybe the designers were all right handed.
> 
> Robert


My thoughts exactly Robert, the majority of people are right handed and probably that is the top & bottom of it 

Mike


----------



## non descript (Nov 18, 2005)

Having started the thread out of curiosity, I am heartened to find that my query was not as daft as might first appear, and am more than grateful for the quality replies. It is interesting to see that my caution in saying _“Almost without exception they have the access ramp place on the Starboard Quarter…” _was maybe well placed, for there is indeed, as so often in life, the 1pct that swims against the tide.(EEK) 

So we seem to have arrived at an Industry Standard of Starboard-Side To, but without a solid reason for it, other than chance; although to a certain extent, given an equal chance, wouldn’t we all prefer to berth a ship Port-Side To ? Which if true make it doubly confusing…(Jester)
(Thumb) 
Mark


----------



## ROBERT HENDERSON (Apr 11, 2008)

Mark
I certainly preferred to park port side alongside purely because my cabin was invariably on the starboard side and most of the ships I was on the gangway was situated on the deck above.

Regards Robert


----------



## makko (Jul 20, 2006)

The Wilhelmsen/BF Mk1 RoRos had a 6.7m dia. right hand prop. In this case, the ramp would act as an anti roll bar.

Dave


----------



## uisdean mor (Sep 4, 2008)

*Quarter Ramps*

Not sure what the question is really - why stb or why qtr ?

Reason for qtr ramps was in the days prior to major link span improvements it was much easier to berth at any dock as long as enough room to manouever the cargo.Also during loading the deck could be set for the access to the "tween" decks which were sometimes used for car carrage i.e. if tall cargo then tweens raised and internal ramps lifted - some vessels had lifts . If low height cargo being loaded then tweens lowered and ramp set to same angle as qtr thus saving a lot of main deck space.
Larger vessels and much improved link spans have more or less made these ramps obsolete.
Rgds Uisdean


----------



## non descript (Nov 18, 2005)

uisdean mor said:


> Not sure what the question is really - why stb or why qtr ?


Well I guess we all see things in a different way, but with the best will in the world the original question was very clearly not about why have a ramp, and it was only about why are they (almost exclusively today) placed on the Starboard Quarter – The text in *# 1* was: *Almost without exception they have the access ramp place on the Starboard Quarter (and not Port) – it has become in its way almost an industry standard. Does anyone have a logical explanation for this positioning? *

It is interesting to see from *this one*, that the emphasis on saying "today" is fairly wise, as way back in 1985 it was not so certain it would be located on the Starboard quarter.


----------



## Cisco (Jan 29, 2007)

uisdean mor said:


> Larger vessels and much improved link spans have more or less made these ramps obsolete.
> Rgds Uisdean


Well, in my experience bog standard stern ramps were the norm on early dedicated ro-ro ferries as they still are today ...quarter ramps were only later fitted mainly on car carriers and large ro-ro running international.

Quarter ramps are still the norm on all PCCs and are invariably on the starboard side.

Yet another exception to the rule are the Hurtigruten ships which have their ( pallet Loading etc) doors on the port side


----------

