Several deficiencies relating to connection and photographs

Comments

8 comments

  • Official comment
    Avatar
    Aline Ribeiro

    Hello Pieter,

    Thank you for your detailed post here in our community. We really appreciate you took the time to share what you have experienced and how you feel about it.

    We really value your feedback, and I would like to learn more about what you have shared with us, as to take the required actions towards helping you get value from our services, and also improving our services in general.

    Regarding #1, would you be kind enough to share the IMO of the latest vessel you have searched in Google and got the above result?

    With regards to #2, may I ask you to share a screenshot illustrating what you mention or as many details as possible as for me to reproduce it?

    Last but not least, about #3, could you also provide me with an example, please? Please mention the name you used for the search and if the current name shown in MarineTraffic is out of up to date.

    The above information will be very helpful.

    Any additional information you may provide us with will also be most appreciated.

    Thank you in advance for your reply and thank you for your collaboration so far. I look forward to hearing from you.

    Best,

    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Pieter Melissen

    Hi Aline,

     

    Thanks for your prompt reply.

     

    I have been checking many IMO numbers off recent, so I cannot recall which ones gave the problems as I decribed under point 1 and 2. 

    With regards to point three, I was looking at IMO number 8309610. This is an ex- Iranian bulker which was scrapped in 2013 as Asher.

    This was the result

    https://www.marinetraffic.com/nl/photos/of/ships/shipid:8905/#forward

    As you can see the ship name given to the picture is Asher, but the name on the bow clearly reads Aquarian, her previous name. I do not know whether the photographer is to blame here, but it is obviously wrong. This is a rather frequent mistake I would say.

    I am still checking IMO numbers so as soon as I come across results that correspond to what I said in the first two points, I will post them to you.

     

    Thank you

     

    Pieter

     

     

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Pieter Melissen

    https://www.marinetraffic.com/de/ais/details/ships/-7941124

     

    Dear Aline,

     

    This is a link that produces my point number 1.

     

    Cheers

     

    Pieter

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Marc Servranckx

    Pieter,

    Als dit kan helpen 

    IMO 7941124

    https://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/details/ships/shipid:914353/vessel:EKUELLE

    Groetjes uit België

    Marc

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Pieter Melissen

    Thanks Marc,

     

    Apparently there is a possibility to avoid the "oops" message, but it is very frustrating to receive it in the first place. I also note that my link has /de/ in it, while yours has /en/ in that position. Now we can blame Google for finding the wrong link, but that link should work in the same way as the one you provided. I only searched the number to find out whether MT has a picture of that particular ship, and with "my" link that was not possible. 

    Pieter

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Aline Ribeiro

    Hi Pieter, 

    Thank you for your comments. They are very helpful.

    After further analysis internally, I noticed that some details may be constantly changed in google when redirect users to the respective url pages within our website. As such, in order to avoid such gaps when being redirected to specific pages in our website (e.g. vessel records or photos), I would suggest you firstly enter www.marinetraffic.com then perform the search using the IMO or MMSI of the vessel. This way, the values will be redirect you to the respective records.

    Regarding when you find names of vessels that might not be updated, like the vessel ASHER, which should be named as AQUARIAN (IMO: 8309610), although our algorithm is set to automatically update such changes when we receive AIS signals with the new name, the change may not occur in some chases. In such cases, our competent team will manually review the name and perform the required changes. In fact, I have already escalated this specific case to our technical team for further analysis. It will be addressed as soon as possible, and, once I have any updates, I will surely let you know.

    We always welcome questions and suggestions, so please don't hesitate to contact us whenever you detect similar cases. We will be glad to review them accordingly.

    Always at your disposal.

    Best,

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Aline Ribeiro

    Hello again Pieter,

    I am glad to inform that the vessel's name (AQARIAN) has been successfully updated:

    https://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/details/ships/shipid:8905/mmsi:-8309610/vessel:8309610

    We always welcome any suggestions, so thank you once more for your kind contribution.

    At your disposal,

    0
    Comment actions Permalink

Please sign in to leave a comment.