TheMaritime.net
Dry Bulk Freight Index2,490 -1.3%Capesize3,538 -2.8%Panamax2,124 +0.7%Dirty Tanker Index1,935 +1.1%Supramax1,668 -0.1%Clean Tanker Index1,280 -1.4%Handysize947 +0.2%Dry Bulk Freight Index2,490 -1.3%Capesize3,538 -2.8%Panamax2,124 +0.7%Dirty Tanker Index1,935 +1.1%Supramax1,668 -0.1%Clean Tanker Index1,280 -1.4%Handysize947 +0.2%Dry Bulk Freight Index2,490 -1.3%Capesize3,538 -2.8%Panamax2,124 +0.7%Dirty Tanker Index1,935 +1.1%Supramax1,668 -0.1%Clean Tanker Index1,280 -1.4%Handysize947 +0.2%Dry Bulk Freight Index2,490 -1.3%Capesize3,538 -2.8%Panamax2,124 +0.7%Dirty Tanker Index1,935 +1.1%Supramax1,668 -0.1%Clean Tanker Index1,280 -1.4%Handysize947 +0.2%Dry Bulk Freight Index2,490 -1.3%Capesize3,538 -2.8%Panamax2,124 +0.7%Dirty Tanker Index1,935 +1.1%Supramax1,668 -0.1%Clean Tanker Index1,280 -1.4%Handysize947 +0.2%Dry Bulk Freight Index2,490 -1.3%Capesize3,538 -2.8%Panamax2,124 +0.7%Dirty Tanker Index1,935 +1.1%Supramax1,668 -0.1%Clean Tanker Index1,280 -1.4%Handysize947 +0.2%
Container Ship🇵🇦 PanamaActive

MSC TAMARA

IMO
9351579
MMSI
354745000
Call Sign
3EOC

Technical Specifications

Key Figures

Gross Tonnage
41,225GT
Deadweight
53,335DWT
Length Overall
264.96m
Beam
32.35m
Draught
11.2m
Year Built
2008

Intelligence

Risk & Sustainability

Estimated market value
$46.1Mrange $31.5M$50.8M
$865/dwt · 53,335 dwt · built 2008
high confidence · 15 comps
Comparable sales
GENOA EXPRESS 2014 · $45MDETROIT EXPRESS 2014 · $45MBARCELONA EXPRESS 2014 · $45MLIVORNO EXPRESS 2014 · $45MSPIRIT OF HONG KONG 2010 · $30.1MBALTIC WEST 2009 · $36M

Estimate from $/dwt of similar-size, similar-age ships sold in the last 24 months. Indicative, not a certified valuation.

Risk scoreMedium
77/ 100
Safety68
Compliance95
Environment68
Carbon intensity · 2024C
33,703t CO₂
AER (CO₂/capacity·nm)
10.9
Fuel burned
10,813 t
Technical
EEXI (10.38 gCO₂/t·nm)

Verified reported figure. Band is peer-relative, not official IMO CII.

Compliance

Safety Record

Marine casualties1
  • TOTAL FAILURE OF ANY MACHINERY OR TECHNICAL SYSTEMMinor
    Sep 5, 2018Trois-Rivières, QC, QUEBEC (QC)

    On 05 September 2018, the container ship "MSC TAMARA" reported an engine failure 0.25 nautical miles SE of Trois-Rivières, QC. The vessel anchored and the crew carried out repairs on the main engine.

Recorded marine occurrences naming this vessel.

Composite Risk

Risk Score

61/100
Elevated riskLow confidence40% component coverage

Multiple adverse factors, or a hard ship-specific signal, lift this hull above the fleet norm.

PSC detentionsno data
Sanctions exposureno data
Dark-fleet signalno data
Hull age52
Flag register75

A coverage-weighted blend of the 2 components we could read for this hull — the weights renormalise over only the components present, so a thin read is never inflated and a hull is never credited a “safe 0” for a signal it has no row for. This headline is flagged low-confidence (a thin or structural-only read) and should not be treated as a verdict. Higher means riskier. Derived in-house from government-open port-State-control, flag, sanctions and our own vessel data; weight it by the coverage above.

Estimated

Capacity & Classification

Cargo capacity at draughtHigh confidence
~53,335t at summer draught

Container · summer draught 11.2 m · 73.7 t per cm immersion

Estimated intake by draught
7.84 m~28,576 t
8.4 m~32,703 t
8.96 m~36,829 t
9.52 m~40,956 t
10.08 m~45,082 t
10.64 m~49,209 t
11.2 m~53,335 t

Estimate only — modelled from deadweight (hull geometry) using a first-principles hydrostatic model, not measured hydrostatic tables. The design draught it is anchored to is unreliable across the fleet.

Type classification
Declared
Container
Inferred from size
Container

density DWT/GT=1.29 is consistent with declared container

DWT/GT 1.29Beam/LOA 0.122Declared type: Container Ship

Declared type is consistent with the class implied by the vessel’s size signals. Inferred via our shared size-based classifier.

Commercial

Voyage Estimate

From 53,335 DWT · ~30 t/day · bunker @ live VLSFO.

Explore More

Similar Vessels

Community

Vessel Comments