by GuestfromEU » April 9, 2018, 9:44 am
Major services - special surveys (drydockings), re-powerings, modifications, etc. are all planned out well in advance. Class approval is required before any components are ordered, and scope of work outlines are composed by naval architecture and/or marine engineering firms. This scope of work could be relatively brief, or it could be very in-depth. I have prepared SOWs for major structural renewal of tanker hulls in a package less than 25 pages. I've prepared SOWs for addition of shelving in a store room on a ship which exceeded 100 pages. It is all about how detailed the owner prefers to be. Sometimes it can be a generic outline, other times it can be so detailed as to specify the grade, length, and torque spec of individual nuts and bolts.
Once a complete scope of work package is assembled, requests for bids will be sent to any capable facility. It is up to those facilities whether they wish to reply or not. The shipping company, if publicly controlled, is also obligated to work with the most effective solution, notably the most cost effective, but logistics and other factors can influence projects as well.
Many factors can combine to a decision in using a certain facility. If Bay Shipbuilding offers a better package overall, it may offset the towing costs to move the vessel there from the Upper Lakes. Sometimes it is simply a matter of the shipping company having more confidence in working with a certain vendor. No doubt Fraser could perform a re-powering job, as recent history exhibits. Perhaps they did not bid, or the litigation concerning asbestos is still a factor. If I recall, Fraser outsourced some of the major steps in the job on the Jackson. 3rd Party vendors working as sub-contractors with the shipyard are quite common, but not without their own headaches. Not likely in this case, but I have seen an outside worker performing maintenance (removing a main engine turbocharger), but he was not allowed to operate the chain blocks...a shipyard rigger had to pull the chains. Of course, they weren't standing by, ready to assist (they were upset at the outsourcing of their jobs). Not very cost effective for anyone. Again, likely not a possibility as Fraser is a union shop, and outside vendors work with them regularly, but it's an example of "lessons learned" that other companies pay attention.
If only drydocking is required, the company may have secured attractive rates by committing to sending X number of vessels to the specified yard.
Many factors are at play in seemingly no-brainer decisions. I can assure you that any shipping company does not base their outlook on slighting a workforce out of spite.
Although not a direct comparison, a relevant story is that I import steel from Korea to the USA regularly. Used in ship repairs, the finished steel is brought in from overseas vendors due to lack of manufacturers in the USA. Many people outside the business tell me "Can't we get someone to make it here?" or "Why does it have to be this certain grade of steel?" Suffice to say, metric sizing is not readily available in the USA, and tooling to make this domestically would be prohibitively expensive. Why can't we use an "equivalent" grade which is produced domestically? Because ABS will not permit this (in many cases, depending on use of course). Alloys of steels are approved for shipbuilding, and they must be matched to compatible materials for their metallurgy to be effective. So, while the layman thinks John's Steel Supply, with their warehouse just outside a shipyard, would be the best vendor, sometimes it is not so simple.
Major services - special surveys (drydockings), re-powerings, modifications, etc. are all planned out well in advance. Class approval is required before any components are ordered, and scope of work outlines are composed by naval architecture and/or marine engineering firms. This scope of work could be relatively brief, or it could be very in-depth. I have prepared SOWs for major structural renewal of tanker hulls in a package less than 25 pages. I've prepared SOWs for addition of shelving in a store room on a ship which exceeded 100 pages. It is all about how detailed the owner prefers to be. Sometimes it can be a generic outline, other times it can be so detailed as to specify the grade, length, and torque spec of individual nuts and bolts.
Once a complete scope of work package is assembled, requests for bids will be sent to any capable facility. It is up to those facilities whether they wish to reply or not. The shipping company, if publicly controlled, is also obligated to work with the most effective solution, notably the most cost effective, but logistics and other factors can influence projects as well.
Many factors can combine to a decision in using a certain facility. If Bay Shipbuilding offers a better package overall, it may offset the towing costs to move the vessel there from the Upper Lakes. Sometimes it is simply a matter of the shipping company having more confidence in working with a certain vendor. No doubt Fraser could perform a re-powering job, as recent history exhibits. Perhaps they did not bid, or the litigation concerning asbestos is still a factor. If I recall, Fraser outsourced some of the major steps in the job on the Jackson. 3rd Party vendors working as sub-contractors with the shipyard are quite common, but not without their own headaches. Not likely in this case, but I have seen an outside worker performing maintenance (removing a main engine turbocharger), but he was not allowed to operate the chain blocks...a shipyard rigger had to pull the chains. Of course, they weren't standing by, ready to assist (they were upset at the outsourcing of their jobs). Not very cost effective for anyone. Again, likely not a possibility as Fraser is a union shop, and outside vendors work with them regularly, but it's an example of "lessons learned" that other companies pay attention.
If only drydocking is required, the company may have secured attractive rates by committing to sending X number of vessels to the specified yard.
Many factors are at play in seemingly no-brainer decisions. I can assure you that any shipping company does not base their outlook on slighting a workforce out of spite.
Although not a direct comparison, a relevant story is that I import steel from Korea to the USA regularly. Used in ship repairs, the finished steel is brought in from overseas vendors due to lack of manufacturers in the USA. Many people outside the business tell me "Can't we get someone to make it here?" or "Why does it have to be this certain grade of steel?" Suffice to say, metric sizing is not readily available in the USA, and tooling to make this domestically would be prohibitively expensive. Why can't we use an "equivalent" grade which is produced domestically? Because ABS will not permit this (in many cases, depending on use of course). Alloys of steels are approved for shipbuilding, and they must be matched to compatible materials for their metallurgy to be effective. So, while the layman thinks John's Steel Supply, with their warehouse just outside a shipyard, would be the best vendor, sometimes it is not so simple.