George M. Humphrey wreck

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: George M. Humphrey wreck

Re: George M. Humphrey wreck

by Guest » November 23, 2011, 5:59 pm

From research on the ending of the Kinsman fleet, the chartered Frantz was the last boat in there colors and crewed by the fleet. At the end of 2004 it went for scrap, and Kinsman had contracts to fill from General Mills, so Kinsman let these contracts to Oglebay Norton, and they used to fill these obligations with the Courtney Burton. The Burton was not crewed or operated by Kinsman, so the Burton was not "chartered" as was the Frantz. The contracts for grain for General Mills went through the 2005 and 2006 seasons. The younger Steinbrenner's did not want to continue, so the business began to shut down. The door was locked on there office officially on January 31, 2007, ending 106 years since Henry Steinbrenner started with his first ship in 1901.
Actually the business goes back further, when Henry Steinbrenner's father-in-law, Philip Minch began with his first vessel in 1841. So, one could add more years to this "Kinsman Enterprise!"
Dick Wicklund

Re: George M. Humphrey wreck

by Rob » November 23, 2011, 5:51 pm

Thanks Craig! Nice talking to you as well.

Re: George M. Humphrey wreck

by ashland69 » November 23, 2011, 3:53 pm

Rob:

Regarding George Steinbrenner, I didn't ever meet him; however, those who did know him say he was "different". Smart business head on his shoulders, but "different" in his dealings with people. John Eckert knew him quite well. It was more than a business relationship. As I understand it, they apparently grew up in the same neighbor and their families somehow knew one another. At the end, those long-time connections somehow didn't mean all that much! Quite a shame. John was a nice man. Ever hear what happened to him after Kinsman? I've lost complete track of him.

About the Frantz/Burton option, my preference was to go for the Burton versus the Frantz. Even though the Burton would have cost more money, it was newer and bigger and we knew it would have no trouble negotiating the river at Buffalo.

Back to the KI, you mentioned someone must have used our idea about a vacuum system to unload grain. Yes, they did. The folks at McKeil. Shortly after the flop at Kinsman, we were talking with people at McKeil and we talked about the vacuum system on the KI in considerable detail. Well, a version of it is now being used on the very boat we had originally planned to use it on in the first place! Talk about coming full circle.

You mentioned that the KI was the first boat you got to see up close. The first boat I got aboard was, I think, Hochelaga. Talk about impressive. I climbed up the ladder and went aboard. The sensation and the view was indescribable. It truely left a lasting impression that hasn't faded to this day and that was 47 years ago!

Nice chit chat. Thanks for the comments and questions.

-Craig

Re: George M. Humphrey wreck

by Rob » November 23, 2011, 12:45 pm

Craig,

Great insiders look of Kinsman's last days. Being from Buffalo it was a familar sight to see the Kinsman Independent at General Mills. When they installed the self unloader hopper, I was hoping she would be spared. Its good to see her still going!

I find the Joseph H Frantz/Courtney Burton information quite interesting. The Frantz obviously took over the KI run, and I wondered why she only did it for a year only to be scrapped. Was that George just cutting the rope Why didn't a company like lower lakes buy her? Also I find it interesting that the Courtney Burton took over where the Frantz left off. So someone must have used your logic after the demise of the fleet, as the Courtney Burton/American Fortitude held on to the route for quite sometime.

It has been a strange progression of boats on this run since the KI. The GM loads went from the Kinsman Independent to the smaller Joesph H. Frantz, followed by the larger Courtney Burton/American Fortitude. Then the Adam E Cornelius came onboard, only to be replaced by the 730ft American Mariner. Quite the progression since 2004!

In the end I have to thank Kinsman Lines, as the Kinsman Independent was the first laker to draw my interest great lakes shipping. I went to see her docked at the old Ford Plant in the spring of 04'. Thats all it took and i was hooked!

Thanks,
Rob

Re: George M. Humphrey wreck

by ashland69 » November 21, 2011, 1:34 pm

Guest wrote:Skip Gillham and I just put out a book, "The Kinsman Line." In this research I found nothing in this regard, but even so I would not rule it out entirely that the Collins and Shiras were sold to Kinsman as a "payment" for the loss of the Humphrey.
However, keep in mind the Pittsburgh fleet took delivery of the five "Super Class" ships in 1942, and three Maritime Class ships in 1943, so they had replacement tonnage for the two that went to Kinsman.
Also, the Collins and the Shiras were part of the Hawgood (Acme Transit) purchase in 1916, of six 400 foot ships which were very much alike, and vintage. The Pentecost Mitchell and the Herman C. Strom were traded for the Maritime Class vessels in 1943, but used until the end of the War, then scrapped. The R.R. Richardson was sold to another fleet and continued service in 1940. The John H. McLean was trasfered to U. S. Steel's American Steel & Wire Division in 1943 and converted to a crane ship, named the Clifford F. Hood. Then the Shiras and Collins went to Kinsman in 1944. One could assume from this that Pittsburgh was disposing of its 400 footers during World War II, and using only their 600 footers. Thus the Collins and Shiras went to Kinsman as expendable, rather than as a payment for the Humphrey. I might add that the Hood as a crane ship was the last 400 footer in the U. S. Steel fleets, until she went to scrap in 1974.
Also, the Collins and the Shiras fit well into the Kinsman fleet since their other vessels were of similier size and age. Add to this that Kinsman was consentrating on grain cargos, and 400 footers were better suited for this trade at this time, and afterwards.
So although possibly profitable, the Collins and Shiras were part of a pattern and expendable to the expanding Pittsburgh fleet, and as such we can't say they were sold only, if at all, to pay for the lost Humphrey.
Dick Wicklund
An interesting sideline to the history of Kinsman is that, at the end, John Eckert and I were quietly "working" together to find ways to extend the life of the company. One thing John and I were looking at was installing a relatively inexpensive and portable vacuum system aboard the Kinsman Independent (currently Ojibway) to make her a faster unload and enable her to do other other grain runs during the summer slowdown. A second thing we were seriously looking at was aggressively going after the bulk cement trade up to the Lakehead so the KI would not have to layup during the summer because of the annual downturn in grain into Buffalo. A third thing was we were looking at was buying either the Courtney Burton or Joseph H. Frantz and get Kinsman back into the self-unloader trade and diversify the fleet a bit. If we were successful at getting either one, it was going to be renamed Kinsman Conveyor. Finally, John had connections at National Steel and, I think, he had begun talks with them about eventually taking over the ore run into Zug Island and run the George A. Stinson as Philip Minch. Unfortunately, George got a little upset that I, an unpaid employee at the time, was able to do something that his existing office staff could've and should've been doing themselves! And, for other reason(s), sent John packing and shut down the fleet!! A darn shame. So unnecessary. But that was George, as I understand it. Shoot first and ask questions later. Kinsman had a long and colorful history. All the way back to 1842 when old Philip Mich built his first boat on Lake Erie, near Vermilion, I think. But alas, the corporate brain only looks at the bottom line!

-Craig Gammon

Re: George M. Humphrey wreck

by Guest » November 20, 2011, 10:01 pm

Skip Gillham and I just put out a book, "The Kinsman Line." In this research I found nothing in this regard, but even so I would not rule it out entirely that the Collins and Shiras were sold to Kinsman as a "payment" for the loss of the Humphrey.
However, keep in mind the Pittsburgh fleet took delivery of the five "Super Class" ships in 1942, and three Maritime Class ships in 1943, so they had replacement tonnage for the two that went to Kinsman.
Also, the Collins and the Shiras were part of the Hawgood (Acme Transit) purchase in 1916, of six 400 foot ships which were very much alike, and vintage. The Pentecost Mitchell and the Herman C. Strom were traded for the Maritime Class vessels in 1943, but used until the end of the War, then scrapped. The R.R. Richardson was sold to another fleet and continued service in 1940. The John H. McLean was trasfered to U. S. Steel's American Steel & Wire Division in 1943 and converted to a crane ship, named the Clifford F. Hood. Then the Shiras and Collins went to Kinsman in 1944. One could assume from this that Pittsburgh was disposing of its 400 footers during World War II, and using only their 600 footers. Thus the Collins and Shiras went to Kinsman as expendable, rather than as a payment for the Humphrey. I might add that the Hood as a crane ship was the last 400 footer in the U. S. Steel fleets, until she went to scrap in 1974.
Also, the Collins and the Shiras fit well into the Kinsman fleet since their other vessels were of similier size and age. Add to this that Kinsman was consentrating on grain cargos, and 400 footers were better suited for this trade at this time, and afterwards.
So although possibly profitable, the Collins and Shiras were part of a pattern and expendable to the expanding Pittsburgh fleet, and as such we can't say they were sold only, if at all, to pay for the lost Humphrey.
Dick Wicklund

George M. Humphrey wreck

by sh71382 » November 20, 2011, 7:57 pm

Back in 1943 when the George M. Humphrey was struck and sunk by the DM Clemson in June 1943. It was told to us that after it was determined that the Clemson was more at fault than the Humphrey, which I have been able to confirm. Though I have not been able to directly link to the incident is the story that the Pittsburgh Steamship Company ended up selling the EC Collins, and MacGilvray Shiras to Kinsman to replace the lost tonnage caused by abandoning the Humphrey to the underwriters. I have found a document as well as a newspaper article telling that Kinsman won a court case to recover costs from the loss, originally they sought out $1,600,000 However the court placed the Humphrey's value at $1,088,000, and then thusly awarded them an amount of $495,000. But also then later that year Kinsman acquired the EC Collins and MacGilvray Shiras from Pittsburgh. Based on what we were told, the two ships were part of the package, they were sold to Kinsman to replace the lost tonnage from the lost Humphrey, ontop of the cash award.

However diving deeper into research and history we cant seem to find any specific information to refute this claim, but we cant prove it either. Does anyone have any information on the reasonings behind Pittsburgh selling two profitable carriers to a competitor Kinsman, in the height of WWII wartime production? Has anyone else heard or found proof of this transaction being linked to the Humphrey incident? Thanks.

Top