Talk:List of the world's longest ships

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Length is a pretty bad measurement of how large something is. I think ranking by mass would be more appropriate.

Gross tonnage seems to be the "industry standard", but media often list ships by longest, so it satisfies the curiosity of some. --Dhartung | Talk 03:33, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Still, shouldn't this article be called "List of the world's longest ships"? It could be complemented by a "List of the world's largest ships" where we measure by gross tonnage and link to the longest ships for people who want to see it that way. TomTheHand 14:17, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Incomplete

I removed this self-reference, which belongs here on Talk:

It appears to be erroneous, as there are a number of freighters on the Great Lakes that are 1,000' long; length is an imperfect measure of a ship's size, regardless.

So obviously there are ships out there that should be here, let's find 'em! --Dhartung | Talk 03:33, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Largest Ship?

Ok should it be based on gross tonnage rather than length?

As this page measures largeness only by length it should be relabeled as sugested above. To measure largeness by gross tonnage may make sense for commercial vessels, but displacement is how naval vessels are measured. And it is not easy to find displacement figures for passenger ships, and gross tonnage figures for warships may be virtually impossible to come by (at least enough of them sufficient to compile a meaningful comparative list). Kablammo 19:15, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Aircraft carriers

There may be some confusion among the aircraft carriers - over whether to use overall length or waterline length. Not all articles supply both numbers and the ones that don't do not specify which figure they are giving. Rmhermen 20:15, 11 July 2006 (UTC)