Container and CT combinations

From UG

Revision as of 15:14, 12 August 2009 (edit) Alex (Talk | contribs) (Created page with 'Category:Concepts') ← Older edit		Current revision as of 22:20, 16 November 2009 (edit) (undo) Alex (Talk | contribs)
Line 1:		Line 1:
	[[Category:Concepts]]		[[Category:Concepts]]
		+
		+	=== In Transit Logic for "FCL" is an "approximation of life" ===
		+
		+	Assume:
		+	* CT1 and CT2 are part of Master M
		+	* CT1 is in Container A
		+	* CT2 is in Container B
		+	* Container A has Actual Delivered Date not empty (in life all CT1 goods have been delivered and it is not really in transit)
		+	* Container B has Actual Delivered Date empty (in life all CT2 goods have NOT YET delivered and it is in transit)
		+
		+	In this case CT1 would not be on In Transit report. It has to wait for CT2 to be delivered. Basically our in transit logic is "per master", not "per CT"

---

Current revision as of 22:20, 16 November 2009

[edit] In Transit Logic for "FCL" is an "approximation of life"

Assume:

• CT1 and CT2 are part of Master M
• CT1 is in Container A
• CT2 is in Container B
• Container A has Actual Delivered Date not empty (in life all CT1 goods have been delivered and it is not really in transit)
• Container B has Actual Delivered Date empty (in life all CT2 goods have NOT YET delivered and it is in transit)

In this case CT1 would not be on In Transit report. It has to wait for CT2 to be delivered. Basically our in transit logic is "per master", not "per CT"