Return to Great Lakes & Seaway Shipping Great Lakes & Seaway Shipping Online
Discussion Boards
Please click to visit our sponsor
It is currently October 22, 2021, 4:21 am

FAQ | Instructions | Help
Search for:



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 64 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: GLF update?
Unread postPosted: September 14, 2021, 5:32 pm 

Joined: July 2, 2010, 1:36 pm
Posts: 756
ML wrote:
Did CN lose hauling contracts with US Steel to ASC? Seems like the last few years ASC's footers haul to Gary and Conneaut and am wondering if that has any play in CN layups and the Blough's fate..


It probably does have something to do with it - word on the waterfront seems to be that AIP/Rand is running the ASC footers with notably small crews. If that's so, it likely allows them to charge lower freight rates in the short term, even if it means ASC vessels might end up with shortened life spans in the long term from the deferred maintenance and increased wear and tear that a very small crew might lead to.

In the short term this might mean that ASC is able to charge lower freight rates than GLF. Given how some of GLF's ships were built and how they've been maintained, some of those GLF ships are likely to last much longer than most ASC ships, however.

The big looming variable is what happens with new shipping industry-wide fuel efficiency standards coming from c. 2023 onward, which might make for some unpredictable outcomes in the business of Lakes shipping which a lot of us in 2021 might think of as very unlikely.


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: GLF update?
Unread postPosted: September 14, 2021, 2:08 pm 
Did CN lose hauling contracts with US Steel to ASC? Seems like the last few years ASC's footers haul to Gary and Conneaut and am wondering if that has any play in CN layups and the Blough's fate..


Report this post
Top
  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: GLF update?
Unread postPosted: September 14, 2021, 1:27 pm 
I'm probably the least qualified to comment, but if they have excess capacity it would make sense to let the Blough go and focus investment on their other Lakers. Footers aside, they have Munson, Anderson, Callaway, and Clarke...my understanding is that these ships are very similar and/or sister ships...this provides economies of scale and operational capability to easily dispatch interchangeably. And for the biggie loads, they have the footers. Was the Blough serving a need that couldn't be met with the smaller/bigger ships?

I'm not in the industry so perhaps I'm missing some nuance.. hopefully I'm all wrong..


Report this post
Top
  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: GLF update?
Unread postPosted: September 14, 2021, 1:05 pm 
guest wrote:
with 2 105 ft wide vessels done for, is that new lock at the soo justified?


Yes, the new lock is justified. The ships with a 78-foot beam also need to use the Poe Lock and the new lock when it's completed. If the Poe Lock is out of service for any length of time, it means that ships with a beam of 78 feet or wider, and a length greater than 767 feet can't use the MacArthur Lock. That's a vast majority of the American lake fleet, and a number of newer Canadian vessels laidup.

As for the Blough, I'm still waiting on the NTSB investigation report to be available.


Report this post
Top
  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: GLF update?
Unread postPosted: September 14, 2021, 7:36 am 
Based on the fact that GLF has essentially been running a fleet of 6 this season without any real issues, and keeping the Clarke at the wall, seems to indicate that they're not in a position where they see themselves needing that tonnage anytime soon. Frankly, they could take the money and put it into the Callaway and Clarke, since the stone trade has been very good the last several years.

One has to wonder if CN is considering slowly divesting their maritime operations if the Callaway and Blough never get back on the lakes. Time will tell, I guess. The loss of the Blough would be crushing for boatwatchers, but with that St. Clair-esque size, it really is too big to haul stone and too small for the footer-size loads.


Report this post
Top
  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: GLF update?
Unread postPosted: September 14, 2021, 6:34 am 
When it comes to being in the know regarding office decisions, crew are Very low on the totem pole.


Report this post
Top
  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: GLF update?
Unread postPosted: September 14, 2021, 12:37 am 
So now what do they do with the blough if she’s done send her to scrap?


Report this post
Top
  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: GLF update?
Unread postPosted: September 13, 2021, 10:28 pm 
with 2 105 ft wide vessels done for, is that new lock at the soo justified?


Report this post
Top
  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: GLF update?
Unread postPosted: September 13, 2021, 10:17 pm 
My friend is definitely not low on the totem pole. Well respected long time GLF mariner. He says Blough is finished I believe him. Said damage is real extensive. Too expensive too repair considering market outlook n limited flexibility.


Report this post
Top
  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: GLF update?
Unread postPosted: September 13, 2021, 1:25 pm 

Joined: December 6, 2014, 4:51 pm
Posts: 630
Guest wrote:
For all of you speculating about the BLOUGH. Spoke with long time GLF officer in my home town on Saturday while he’s off his ship on vacation. He says the BLOUGH is finished. Won’t be repaired.


Heard the same thing several months ago with a few of the shipyard workers who told me she was done. However NO decision has been made public and the information provided to me was by low men on the totem pole.


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: GLF update?
Unread postPosted: September 13, 2021, 11:37 am 

Joined: July 28, 2009, 10:30 pm
Posts: 695
Spoke with someone currently working with GLF and nothing offical has been decided but it's not looking good


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: GLF update?
Unread postPosted: September 13, 2021, 9:35 am 
For all of you speculating about the BLOUGH. Spoke with long time GLF officer in my home town on Saturday while he’s off his ship on vacation. He says the BLOUGH is finished. Won’t be repaired.


Report this post
Top
  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: GLF update?
Unread postPosted: September 13, 2021, 8:29 am 
What year was the Hugh?

hugh3 wrote:
I remember on the USS boats that I sailed on.


Report this post
Top
  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: GLF update?
Unread postPosted: September 13, 2021, 8:15 am 
I remember on the USS boats that I sailed on there being a notice on the pilot house bulkhead about insurance. As I remember it stated that USS would cover the first 50% of any cost and Lloyds of London would cover the second 50%. It had to do with a fund that USS maintained instead of paying 100% of premiums..


Report this post
Top
  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: GLF update?
Unread postPosted: September 12, 2021, 10:37 am 

Joined: December 7, 2014, 10:33 am
Posts: 325
All GLF vessels have P&I coverage with North of England, as I can see from online P&I Club database search. H&M search is not as easy. Key Lakes is the member holding coverage for all GLF vessels.

Full P&I and H&M cover may be a requirement of financial institutions if any lending instruments are in place for any vessels in the fleet. Being self-insured during the winter navigation experiment makes sense, as it is possible H&M clubs may have denied coverage due to high potential for claims. Since GLF has changed hands several times and is now managed by a true shipping company, it seems likely they would have true H&M coverage.

Quick clarification, P&I (Protection & Indemnity) coverage is for claims related to damages caused by the vessel. Damage to docks, oil spills, damage to other ships, and the like. It could be compared to comprehensive coverage for your auto. H&M (Hull & Machinery) is for damage to a ship. Hull repairs after grounding, machinery faults which are high value to repair, and others. It is not a fixed line, though. Many claims can be assessed to both P&I and H&M depending on the situation. P&I is a general term taken to include both, as P&I clubs also offer H&M coverage. It is common for shipowners to have one club for P&I and a different club for H&M.

Also, P&I clubs technically are self-insured. A good analogy would be to a "farmer's co-op". Members are the shipowners and money (premiums) are paid in to a collective fund and disbursed as claims are filed. The clubs all work together and will share claims as well.

Some further information can be found here https://www.igpandi.org/about

My apologies for taking away from the original discussion.


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 64 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Return to Great Lakes & Seaway Shipping  
Copyright Boatnerd.com All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Use of this site is based on the Terms of Use
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group