Fate of the Ryerson

Post a reply


BBCode is ON
[img] is ON
[url] is ON
Smilies are OFF

Topic review
   

If you wish to attach one or more files enter the details below.

Maximum filesize per attachment: 3 MiB.

Expand view Topic review: Fate of the Ryerson

Re: Fate of the Ryerson

by Zeek 92 » August 28, 2018, 10:43 pm

Passengers enjoy a trip on brand new Ryerson at the Soo Locks.
Attachments
picasabackground-161.jpg

Re: Fate of the Ryerson

by Guest » August 28, 2018, 7:39 pm

Cleveland-Cliffs Northshore mining plant at Silver Bay is modifying one production line for the DRI they'll be making for the HBI plant in Toledo. There will be no increase in the amount of iron ore hauled, at least for Northshore Mining.

I don't see how the Ryerson comes back out as Electric-Arc Furnaces make up nearly 70% of US raw steel production now. The severe recession in 2008-2009 caused blast furnaces at Sparrows Point (not Great Lakes served), Steubenville, Warren, Fairfield, Lorain and Ashland to either be dismantled or idled.

But, she is kept around so Mittal must see her as a strategic-asset, just like Interlake Steamship does with the John Sherwin.

Re: Fate of the Ryerson

by Darryl » August 28, 2018, 4:37 pm

Follow-up to Jerry: The Ryerson's 2nd deck on her forecastle (or passenger deck) has four staterooms that can hold up to eight passengers. The quarters are like Hilton Hotel rooms, or at least Hilton Hotel rooms thirty years ago. Beautiful curtains, phones, thick carpeting. The passenger's lounge, that's the floor to ceiling glass enclosed area under the Captain's quarters that faces aft, has beautiful furnishings and a small kitchen / bar where a porter assigned just to the passengers waited on them hand and foot. Halfway down the main deck, was their shuffleboard court. And on the stern's cabin second deck on the starboard side facing forward is the passenger's diningroom. It has a big round table like you'd see in a fancy restaurant. Besides royalty from Norway having traveled on the Ryerson, other guests included major automotive executives and people who would buy steel by the 100,000s of tons.

Re: Fate of the Ryerson

by Jerry at Duluth » August 28, 2018, 9:14 am

You are right, The tanks were vented into the cargo hold. Inland designed the boat to be like a yacht or passenger liner as much as possible. They used all of the boats in the fleet as a sales tool. Every trip from Memorial Day to Labor Day, the passenger quarters were filled with their largest customers and usually, there was a sales rep on board. They wanted the Ryersons spar deck to be clear and clean as possible both for safety and appearance. I don't know of another ship that was built that way.

Re: Fate of the Ryerson

by Guest » August 27, 2018, 10:01 pm

Darryl wrote:Also, her tank vents are inside the holds.
This was an old posting from Darryl - but curious why they would put the tank vents inside the holds. Less clutter on the deck? One less thing that can leak in heavy weather? Were other ships in dedicated ore service built with the vents inside the hold, or was this a one of a kind experiment with the Ryerson?

Re: Fate of the Ryerson

by Guest » February 17, 2018, 11:44 am

Guest wrote:
Guest wrote: What's her niche? Probably that market has been there since 2009. Nothing has changed.
The Niche will be similar to the niche that was created for her in Lorain. Previously unconsidered out of the box thinking that was unproven, yet feasible.

The Old girl is tenacious if nothing. Don't underestimate the love for her, and the desire to make her work..
Wait for it!

Re: Fate of the Ryerson

by Guest » July 28, 2017, 1:48 am

The Ryerson is over 50 years old and is fully depreciated. That they're hanging on to her indicates that they view her as a strategic asset.

Re: Fate of the Ryerson

by Guest2 » July 27, 2017, 7:45 pm

I Don't think that she will sail again, Also I think that see is safe from the cutting torches for the foreseeable future, Here is my reasoning:

Mital is a global steel company the lakers are a very small part of their business that they use to move raw material cheaper than they could hire it done, if it's cheaper to hire it done thats want they will do.

Putting the Ryerson back in service would cost too much money and have to little return, the money could be spent better elsewhere.

Since Mital is a publicly traded company their decision process looks at what will happen to stock price and earnings per a share.

The average Mutual Fund manager does not care about the Ryerson one way or another they only care about the stock price, this is who the decisions are made for.

Thats way she won't run again

But I think that the same reasons keep her from being scrapped.

I would guess that her book value far exceeds what she would bring at the scrap yard so to scrap her they would have to take a large loss which would effect their earnings and stock price.

As she sits there not doing any thing she depreciates which also helps Mital sheld profits fro taxes. So the Ryerson's greatest value may be as a tax shelter.

Re: Fate of the Ryerson

by BigRiver » July 27, 2017, 1:03 pm

I looked up the archived stories about the conversion on Boatnerd news. No $$ amount was ever specified... Can this really have been 9 years already?

Conversion, repowering of John Sherwin delayed due to economy

11/12/08 - Cleveland - The repowering and conversion of a Great Lakes freighter taken out of long-term storage this summer and towed to Sturgeon Bay has been put on hold as its owners wait to see what happens with the economy.

Interlake Steamship Co. President Mark Barker said Monday that work on the 806-foot John Sherwin has been put on hold. "Right now, the demand for steel has dropped considerably globally and steel companies are shutting down capacity to deal with that," he said. "That's got everyone pausing a little bit to see if this is a short-term realigning of inventory or if this is the global economy coming to a stop."

Barker said work on the ship - plans of which called for adding new engines and converting the 50-year-old ship to a self-unloader - had been under way, though not a lot of that work had been planned for this winter. "We're going to put the work on hold and see what the economy does," he said.

While numbers aren’t known, Boilermakers Local 449 President Mark Heimbecher said the hold on work is expected to have an impact on employment levels at the yard. He said Bay Shipbuilding is actively looking for additional work to fill the void left by the hold on the Sherwin. "It did change the work outlook at the shipyard because that was a fairly sizable job, and it's going to impact some members," Heimbecher said.

Pat O'Hern, vice president and general manager of Bay Shipbuilding Co., said they are working on securing additional projects for the yard and expect winter lay-up to be early this year as shipments on lake slow down due with the economy. "While we're going to lose the Sherwin for the last six weeks of work, we're going to gain some work from the fleet coming in earlier and we hope to replace the Sherwin with another lay-up boat that has a rather large amount of steel work on it," he said. O'Hern said they expect to be hiring people for winter work.

Bay Shipbuilding is also adding new engines to another of Interlake's vessels, the Charles M. Beeghly. That work is expected to go forward, Barker said.

He expects the Sherwin to remain in, or around, Sturgeon Bay. The Sherwin had been in lay-up since 1981 until an Interlake customer told the company they were looking for additional capacity. Bay Shipbuilding had about 700 employees at the yard earlier this fall.

"We're just taking some time to evaluate this with the diligence it needs," Barker said. "I don't think anyone knows what's going on with the economy right now."

From the Green Bay Press-Gazette

Editor's Note: The vessel was towed to Sturgeon Bay in late August and work on the conversion began shortly thereafter. The Sherwin was built in 1958 at the American Ship Building Co., Lorain, Ohio. She was lengthened in 1973. The vessel has been laid up as surplus tonnage since 1981, but saw some use as a grain storage hull near Chicago recently.

Re: Fate of the Ryerson

by Guest » July 27, 2017, 12:53 pm

garbear wrote:I've been reading with interest the posts on the Ryerson. I've got a couple questions possibly someone could answer. Does anyone have a reasonable guess how much it would cost to convert her to diesel/self-unloader? I know I'd read years ago the boom, at that time, would be around $30.000.000. The other question is how much would be the cost of an ATB like the Clyde S. VanEnkevort/Erie Trader? Thanks for any ballpark guesses anyone would have.
I think that the JOHN SHERWIN's diesel/self-unloader conversion was to cost about $50 million.

Re: Fate of the Ryerson

by Ohio Bob » July 27, 2017, 12:26 pm

Cargo capacity for other materials and unloading capability always seem to be the issues cited. Adding an unloader cuts further into cargo capacity. Could she be lengthened either with a new mid section, or deepened (is that the right word) by adding depth/freeboard?

Re: Fate of the Ryerson

by garbear » July 27, 2017, 11:26 am

I've been reading with interest the posts on the Ryerson. I've got a couple questions possibly someone could answer. Does anyone have a reasonable guess how much it would cost to convert her to diesel/self-unloader? I know I'd read years ago the boom, at that time, would be around $30.000.000. The other question is how much would be the cost of an ATB like the Clyde S. VanEnkevort/Erie Trader? Thanks for any ballpark guesses anyone would have.

Re: Fate of the Ryerson

by Guest » July 27, 2017, 12:06 am

GuestAgain wrote:Putting a boom on her or re-powering her with diesel engines really aren't crazy ideas. Expensive yes, crazy no. She will not legally be able to operate her current steam plant past 2025 without re-powering or other significant investment such as scrubbers (which I'm not even sure are compatible with steam turbines). She is severely limited in what she can carry in her current configuration, and to justify having to re-commission her, inspect her in drydock, insure her, and pay crew, my guess is that it would take an annually re-occurring cargo that runs for more than a few months a year. If there was truly a good profit margin existing for her, I doubt her owners would keep her tied up. That's not to say she isn't worth keeping for the future, and I'd hate to see her scrapped, but we have to be realistic.
Ok! I take back crazy. Permit me a little dramatic license?

Re: Fate of the Ryerson

by MilwBob » July 26, 2017, 10:08 pm

Guest wrote:I was always curious why they never tried the Ryerson in the grain trade. Steinbrenner did it for years and the Canadians still run straight deckers for grain. That would give her maybe 3-4 months of the year employment and usually once these things are running they find other spot loads for them here and there. Plus she has an MSD plant so she's not restricted to having to go to Indiana Harbor every week or two because her sewage holding tank needs to be pumped and they don't want to pay a sucker truck to haul it away!! :)
It's been noted time and again that due to her hold configuration grain cargoes aren't doable.

Re: Fate of the Ryerson

by MilwBob » July 26, 2017, 10:05 pm

[quote="

Seems like a lot of "ifs" to me. I've talked to people in the "know" and they say she'll never run again.[/quote]


Through the years of reading these posts I have found that people "in the know" often don't "know" as much as they think they do.

Re: Fate of the Ryerson

by Ray » July 26, 2017, 1:22 pm

Guest wrote:
Jerry at Duluth wrote:I have watched with interest, the many opinions about the Ryerson over the past weeks. I can assure you all that if and when their is a cargo for this boat, she will come back out. If there is long term business for her, they will repower her and if necessary they will put a boom on her. She was scheduled to get a boom the year after the Sykes but that was cancelled and the Beeghly took her place. The hull is in great condition and even though the repower and boom would cost tens of millions of dollars, that is small in comparison to the cost of a new ship of the same size. Be patient, the Ryerson still has much work to do. I have a rendering of the Ryerson with a stern mounted boom. If I can find it, I will post it for all to see.

Jerry
Seems like a lot of "ifs" to me. I've talked to people in the "know" and they say she'll never run again.
Not sure who your "in the know' people are, "guest", but as I stated earlier the guy who ACTUALLY OWNS THE BOAT publicly disagreed with your position last November.

Re: Fate of the Ryerson

by Guest » July 26, 2017, 10:07 am

Jerry at Duluth wrote:I have watched with interest, the many opinions about the Ryerson over the past weeks. I can assure you all that if and when their is a cargo for this boat, she will come back out. If there is long term business for her, they will repower her and if necessary they will put a boom on her. She was scheduled to get a boom the year after the Sykes but that was cancelled and the Beeghly took her place. The hull is in great condition and even though the repower and boom would cost tens of millions of dollars, that is small in comparison to the cost of a new ship of the same size. Be patient, the Ryerson still has much work to do. I have a rendering of the Ryerson with a stern mounted boom. If I can find it, I will post it for all to see.

Jerry
Seems like a lot of "ifs" to me. I've talked to people in the "know" and they say she'll never run again.

Re: Fate of the Ryerson

by badger » July 26, 2017, 9:23 am

scrubbers are for the boiler exhaust they have nothing to do with the boilers

Re: Fate of the Ryerson

by Jerry at Duluth » July 26, 2017, 9:17 am

I have watched with interest, the many opinions about the Ryerson over the past weeks. I can assure you all that if and when their is a cargo for this boat, she will come back out. If there is long term business for her, they will repower her and if necessary they will put a boom on her. She was scheduled to get a boom the year after the Sykes but that was cancelled and the Beeghly took her place. The hull is in great condition and even though the repower and boom would cost tens of millions of dollars, that is small in comparison to the cost of a new ship of the same size. Be patient, the Ryerson still has much work to do. I have a rendering of the Ryerson with a stern mounted boom. If I can find it, I will post it for all to see.

Jerry

Re: Fate of the Ryerson

by GuestAgain » July 26, 2017, 8:00 am

Putting a boom on her or re-powering her with diesel engines really aren't crazy ideas. Expensive yes, crazy no. She will not legally be able to operate her current steam plant past 2025 without re-powering or other significant investment such as scrubbers (which I'm not even sure are compatible with steam turbines). She is severely limited in what she can carry in her current configuration, and to justify having to re-commission her, inspect her in drydock, insure her, and pay crew, my guess is that it would take an annually re-occurring cargo that runs for more than a few months a year. If there was truly a good profit margin existing for her, I doubt her owners would keep her tied up. That's not to say she isn't worth keeping for the future, and I'd hate to see her scrapped, but we have to be realistic.

Top