Boats With 105 Ft. Beam

[GuestfromEU]

Ah, I remember the individual pumps now on the ONCO. I wonder if the idea came from the deepwell ballast pumps on the Cort? I never worked on the latter, but I have heard stories of pumping out all tanks dry in three hours.

Just curious, are Ballast Water Treatment Systems being required now? I know some systems have been installed on the new Canadian ships, but I have not read anything on refits to existing ships. I'm trying to imagine where there is room to install that equipment on the Bay Ship footers. The Engine Rooms were already very tight.

[Ex Bethlehem]

It would have been in the late 80's before we went over to Columbia. It really was not a stripping system per se. In tanks 1 thru 6 port and stbd it was sort of a sump pump on steroids. In the 80's we were the most hated boats at the ore docks. We would be 18-24 hours loading as the QMED's had a devil of a time getting the water out. Finally in 95 at Columbia we got a first mate who went down and asked the QMED'S what they needed. They told him give us a 6 inch rake and we will dry the boat out for you, if the dock had the ore he would get us out in 4 hours quite a change from the early years.

[GuestfromEU]

Easy one to answer on Tac Harbor. Bethlehem cut the hatches down on the Foy and Burns to get under the belts, then they raised the belts on the dock. Great plan eh? We would go in at Code 1 ballast almost a flat boat 25-26 foot draft and the QMED'S would pop one two and three tank's forward then the mate would start loading in the aft hatches and gradually work his way forward. We only loaded in the even hatches and had to keep the landing boom swung in to clear the forward belts. Great fun in the early years as the Foy did not have a stripping system for the ballast tanks.

When did Bethlehem add the stripping system to the Foy? I may be confused between the Foy and Columbia Star, as I was on both over the years. I recall one had a dedicated stripping system, the other had two valves - main and stripping - but used the same pump? This was quite some time ago, so I could be confusing this altogether.

[Woodtick]

I had a dockworker in Marquette tell me that the 1000' had to turn around to load the other side of the holds

[rburdick27]

Footer load time in Marquette ≈ 20 - 22 hours

[garbear]

George A. Stinson under the gravity chutes, LS&I, Marquette, Summer 1993
105' beamed James R. Barker, Mesabi Miner and Presque Isle have also loaded ore.

rod-Do you remember how long it took to load in Marquette?
Thanks for the info.

[rburdick27]

George A. Stinson under the gravity chutes, LS&I, Marquette, Summer 1993
105' beamed James R. Barker, Mesabi Miner and Presque Isle have also loaded ore.

[garbear]

Yes, as I have a video many years ago taken by Patrick Lapinski and it clearly shows the Indiana Harbor loading a cargo once at Taconite Harbor for delivery to Ashtabula, Ohio. The video is called Inland Mariners if anyone has seen or heard of it and has a copy of it. It is basically still photos though but there is also a narration as well. A very good video though I may add if anyone has not seen it. I also want to say that I believe the American Century formerly the Columbia Star may have also loaded at Taconite Harbor in her days when she was with Oglebay Norton along with the American Integrity which was once the Oglebay Norton itself. Fairly certain that both of these Bay Ship Footers along with the Indiana Harbor all loaded from Taconite Harbor at one time or another. This was also remember during the days when they would load at Tac Harbor and then carry the pellet loads to Lorain for the Lorain Pellet Terminal. Granted and Yes in those days the Barker and the Miner both with Interlake and Am Ship 1,000 footers, would carry lots of those Taconite Harbor loads to Lorain but I do know that the former Oglebay footers and the Indiana Harbor would often load up there at Taconite Harbor for Lorain as well with some loads going to Indiana Harbor I think as well? Hope that all of my information here has helped out on this.

Lots of ore carried from there to Indiana Harbor. The Youngstown Sheet & Tube/Pickands Mather days. Think in those days they were all one group, including Erie Mining.

[Guest]

could see with the Miner, Spirit, PRT, it would be possible, but no way with the Speer and Gott. It would be hard pressed for the chutes to even reach their hatches. They were built specifically to load at belt docks. A lot smaller hatches and a lot farther inboard than those on the the other Bay built 1000 footers and the other AmShip builds. Not arguing with you, but I've had other people say the Speer and Gott could. I say "No". Thanks for your input.

I sailed on the Gott and I fully agree, there is no way the Gott, Speer, or the Cort could load at the chutes. I didn't mention them because I thought we'd all agreed they they were out of the question already.

[Ex Bethlehem]

Easy one to answer on Tac Harbor. Bethlehem cut the hatches down on the Foy and Burns to get under the belts, then they raised the belts on the dock. Great plan eh? We would go in at Code 1 ballast almost a flat boat 25-26 foot draft and the QMED'S would pop one two and three tank's forward then the mate would start loading in the aft hatches and gradually work his way forward. We only loaded in the even hatches and had to keep the landing boom swung in to clear the forward belts. Great fun in the early years as the Foy did not have a stripping system for the ballast tanks.

[hausen]

I believe the American Integrity (ex-Oglebay Norton, ex-Lewis Wilson Foy) was built with lower hatch coaming heights than other Bay Shipbuilding ships, likely to accommodate the original purpose of the Taconite Harbor dock shuttles. I recall a special ballast for Taconite Harbor...essentially ballasted down to a much as the hull stresses would allow.

Have other Bay Shipbuilding ships loaded in Taconite Harbor? I know American Shipbuilding boats have.

Fairly certain Columbia Star and Indiana Harbor loaded there regularly during the 1990s.

[Denny]

Yes, as I have a video many years ago taken by Patrick Lapinski and it clearly shows the Indiana Harbor loading a cargo once at Taconite Harbor for delivery to Ashtabula, Ohio. The video is called Inland Mariners if anyone has seen or heard of it and has a copy of it. It is basically still photos though but there is also a narration as well. A very good video though I may add if anyone has not seen it. I also want to say that I believe the American Century formerly the Columbia Star may have also loaded at Taconite Harbor in her days when she was with Oglebay Norton along with the American Integrity which was once the Oglebay Norton itself. Fairly certain that both of these Bay Ship Footers along with the Indiana Harbor all loaded from Taconite Harbor at one time or another. This was also remember during the days when they would load at Tac Harbor and then carry the pellet loads to Lorain for the Lorain Pellet Terminal. Granted and Yes in those days the Barker and the Miner both with Interlake and Am Ship 1,000 footers, would carry lots of those Taconite Harbor loads to Lorain but I do know that the former Oglebay footers and the Indiana Harbor would often load up there at Taconite Harbor for Lorain as well with some loads going to Indiana Harbor I think as well? Hope that all of my information here has helped out on this.

[Guest]

I believe the American Integrity (ex-Oglebay Norton, ex-Lewis Wilson Foy) was built with lower hatch coaming heights than other Bay Shipbuilding ships, likely to accommodate the original purpose of the Taconite Harbor dock shuttles. I recall a special ballast for Taconite Harbor...essentially ballasted down to a much as the hull stresses would allow.

Have other Bay Shipbuilding ships loaded in Taconite Harbor? I know American Shipbuilding boats have.

Taconite Harbor has been closed for many yrs., so hard one to answer.

[GuestfromEU]

I believe the American Integrity (ex-Oglebay Norton, ex-Lewis Wilson Foy) was built with lower hatch coaming heights than other Bay Shipbuilding ships, likely to accommodate the original purpose of the Taconite Harbor dock shuttles. I recall a special ballast for Taconite Harbor...essentially ballasted down to a much as the hull stresses would allow.

Have other Bay Shipbuilding ships loaded in Taconite Harbor? I know American Shipbuilding boats have.

[garbear]

could see with the Miner, Spirit, PRT, it would be possible, but no way with the Speer and Gott. It would be hard pressed for the chutes to even reach their hatches. They were built specifically to load at belt docks. A lot smaller hatches and a lot farther inboard than those on the the other Bay built 1000 footers and the other AmShip builds. Not arguing with you, but I've had other people say the Speer and Gott could. I say "No". Thanks for your input.

[Duluth Guest]

Theoretically, it's likely possible but probably very impractical. The angle that the gravity chutes would create when they came to rest against the hatch coaming of the vessel would be far from aligned with opening of the pocket in the dock. I would think you'd get a massive amount of spillage. The shallower vessels, Miner, Barker, Tregurtha and Spirit, I don't think have an issue with clearance beneath the chutes but rather how far the chutes are from the edge of the hull; the gravity chutes may not reach when they begin to settle low in the water. The Presque Isle and Blough both have huge hatches on deck to account for this. At any rate, the amount of time it would take to shuffle them between docks, wait for the trains to reload the dock ( since there isn't much forward and aft room to shuffle at the chutes) then clean up the mess afterwards, is probably longer than waiting and loading at the ship-loader. You can be the judge by the photos below. There is a video link at the very end that illustrates how the 50 ft vessels fit beneath the chutes as well.











https://youtu.be/G7rdneh7fGI

[garbear]

Thanks for the replies. When I sailed for USS/GLF about the only option was the gravity docks and I knew the Blough and Presque Isle shifted between North of #2 and South of #1. They could because of the big hatches. With the hatches on the Speer and Gott it would be pretty much impossible to use the chutes. Thanks again!

[Chris M]

The James R Barker has loaded at the LS&I dock in Marquette. It's a royal pain though, they have to shift from one side of the dock to the other to get a level load

[Guest]

Was once told they tried to load the Stinson from Allouez Dock One once. Was told all the did was make a hell of a mess on the deck. They couldn't get the chutes down low enough.

[garbear]

[quote="ML"]Freeboard, beam and too short chutes.. IMO, don't think so.[/quote

Not even beam because Blough and Presque Isle are both 105 ft. More the freeboard and the hatch size, plus the chutes. Easy to load on a 70 ft. beam boat like when I was on the Clarke.
Here's an example of the hatches on 2 105 ft. beam boat.

http://www.boatnerd.com/pictures/fleet/ ... 080906.jpg