Fate of the Ryerson

Discussion board focusing on Great Lakes Shipping Question & Answer. From beginner to expert all posts are welcome.
Guest

Re: Fate of the Ryerson

Unread post by Guest »

Guest wrote:Consider it an educated guess. No one, including the owners have ever given up hope, nor stopped trying to find a niche for her.

I truly believe her Leslies will be singing their way around the lakes next year.
What's her niche? Probably that market has been there since 2009. Nothing has changed.
Guest

Re: Fate of the Ryerson

Unread post by Guest »

Consider it an educated guess. No one, including the owners have ever given up hope, nor stopped trying to find a niche for her.

I truly believe her Leslies will be singing their way around the lakes next year.
Guest

Re: Fate of the Ryerson

Unread post by Guest »

Guest wrote:I don't see the Ryerson with a Boom, But I'll bet she sails within the year.
What makes you think she'll sail in a year when she hasn't sailed since 2009? To me this would have been the year with all the Minnesota pellets going down the Seaway.
Guest

Re: Fate of the Ryerson

Unread post by Guest »

I don't see the Ryerson with a Boom, But I'll bet she sails within the year.
A J

Re: Fate of the Ryerson

Unread post by A J »

If/when the Ryerson ever gets a self-unloader, hope the boom is mounted behind the wheelhouse like the Munson. Not only more functional as opposed to mounted aft, but also keep the nice lines of the aft deckhouse. The conveyor housing could be low profile like the Munson as well.
Tom

Re: Fate of the Ryerson

Unread post by Tom »

You are right Ray, he said that day it was safe right in the spot it is parked and he was saving it for future use. He also said it would be hard to convert to self un loader because of some center ballast tanks.
Paul A
Posts: 428
Joined: June 28, 2010, 12:30 pm

Re: Fate of the Ryerson

Unread post by Paul A »

Duluthian wrote:
Paul A wrote:Only my opinion, I think they're waiting to see what arc furnace ready products will be furnished in the near future. They will be dense cubic cargos that can be unloaded with magnets. Again, just my thoughts formed from what's been reported over the last few years.

Paul, forgive my naivete, but what do you mean by cubic cargoes?

I thought that the material that would be transported from Minnesota to the new HBI plant in Toledo was going to be Direct Reduced Pellets, like those already produced at Northshore Mining. See the following article: http://www.wdio.com/TWIM/dri-cliffs-min ... o/4514241/

Thus, to take advantage of the new DR pellet cargoes moving to Ohio, the Reyerson would probably still need to be converted to a self-unloader.
I was thinking of a cubically dense cargo like the steel nuggets from the iron range that have been discussed in the news for the past few years.
Duluthian

Re: Fate of the Ryerson

Unread post by Duluthian »

Paul A wrote:Only my opinion, I think they're waiting to see what arc furnace ready products will be furnished in the near future. They will be dense cubic cargos that can be unloaded with magnets. Again, just my thoughts formed from what's been reported over the last few years.

Paul, forgive my naivete, but what do you mean by cubic cargoes?

I thought that the material that would be transported from Minnesota to the new HBI plant in Toledo was going to be Direct Reduced Pellets, like those already produced at Northshore Mining. See the following article: http://www.wdio.com/TWIM/dri-cliffs-min ... o/4514241/

Thus, to take advantage of the new DR pellet cargoes moving to Ohio, the Reyerson would probably still need to be converted to a self-unloader.
Guest

Re: Fate of the Ryerson

Unread post by Guest »

Guest wrote:One factor I have not seen mentioned here yet is the possibility of using this ship if there is future growth in the export ore market. A vast majority of U.S. flagged capacity on the lakes is represented by ships too large to transit the Welland Canal and Seaway locks and as such the Ryerson is optimized for such a trade. Over longer voyages, the lack of self-unloading gear is less of a detriment than it is in the Lake Superior to lower lakes trading patterns. The changing coal trade will also likely result in American shipping companies taking a more aggressive approach to Seaway trading in the future.

In addition, by all accounts the Ryerson is in excellent mechanical condition with far less use on its structural components in comparison to other ships in the U.S. fleet. Several years ago, the St. Marys Challenger was the focus of much attention when it reached 100 years of service. I would not be surprised to see many of the ships built during the postwar shipbuilding boom from 1949 to 1960 currently in existence to also achieve that milestone.
It looks like to me that Algoma and CSL both have a good handle on the export ore trade. I don't see it growing to the point where they can't handle the tonnage. Especially with Algoma having new boats arriving soon. 3 boats, 1 Algoma and 2 CSL, left the Twin Ports and Two Harbors yesterday bound for Quebec with ore.
Guest

Re: Fate of the Ryerson

Unread post by Guest »

One factor I have not seen mentioned here yet is the possibility of using this ship if there is future growth in the export ore market. A vast majority of U.S. flagged capacity on the lakes is represented by ships too large to transit the Welland Canal and Seaway locks and as such the Ryerson is optimized for such a trade. Over longer voyages, the lack of self-unloading gear is less of a detriment than it is in the Lake Superior to lower lakes trading patterns. The changing coal trade will also likely result in American shipping companies taking a more aggressive approach to Seaway trading in the future.

In addition, by all accounts the Ryerson is in excellent mechanical condition with far less use on its structural components in comparison to other ships in the U.S. fleet. Several years ago, the St. Marys Challenger was the focus of much attention when it reached 100 years of service. I would not be surprised to see many of the ships built during the postwar shipbuilding boom from 1949 to 1960 currently in existence to also achieve that milestone.
Ray
Posts: 221
Joined: December 7, 2014, 9:33 am

Re: Fate of the Ryerson

Unread post by Ray »

I doubt that I was the only one on Boatnerd at Gales of November last Fall when the president of CML was a speaker. The question of the Ryerson's fate was asked, his response was along the lines of the Ryerson is safe in secure long term storage awaiting the development of future cargos and market opportunities. Not that the information in a public presentation is binding, but he made it very clear that the Ryerson is not in any immediate danger of a scrap tow.

Maybe someone else who was there has the exact wording of his answer.
Guest

Re: Fate of the Ryerson

Unread post by Guest »

At least two times Inland and later CML were close to converting the ELR to a self-unloader. The reason they did not, had nothing to do with the configuration of the cargo holds. But first with the down sizing of the fleet, and second with a collapse at the time of the steel industry. This was information from the company.
Sometimes in the past it has been posted the people that were part owners of the former Little Steel company did not want to change the profile of the the boat; or that the holds weren't big enough. That talk was never substantiate when I worked there.
The hull and machinery is in good shape. Three reason have been noted why it is still around. As a boat to use when needed, as a replacement for the Sykes and/or a method to haul new steel/iron product. Who knows.
Paul A
Posts: 428
Joined: June 28, 2010, 12:30 pm

Re: Fate of the Ryerson

Unread post by Paul A »

Only my opinion, I think they're waiting to see what arc furnace ready products will be furnished in the near future. They will be dense cubic cargos that can be unloaded with magnets. Again, just my thoughts formed from what's been reported over the last few years.
Guest

Re: Fate of the Ryerson

Unread post by Guest »

If it's feasible why hasn't it happened? If everyone is waiting for the right time, I think the right time has come and gone several times. I don't see it getting any better than this year with all the pellets being moved down the Seaway.
BigRiver
Posts: 1090
Joined: April 28, 2010, 6:37 pm

Re: Fate of the Ryerson

Unread post by BigRiver »

Plans were drawn up at one time, so it is mechanically feasible. This drawing is from the Boatnerd gallery on the Ryerson but I remember seeing something similar hanging in the Chief's room on the boat during tours in Sturgeon Bay.
Attachments
ryersonboom3.jpg
Guest

Re: Fate of the Ryerson

Unread post by Guest »

As far as Ryerson's cargo hold configuration is concerned I believe the only real obstacle is the added expense involved for a conventional hopper style self-unloading conversion. I don't believe I have ever heard of its being structurally impossible but I have seen it presented that their was at one time to lengthen the vessel if it was to receive a self-unloading reconstruction. Why could the ship not be fitted with a reclaimer type unloader as that installed in the CSL Assiniboine and I believe in some of the ULS self-unloaders built during the late 1960s and early 1970s? From a quick, uniformed, glance such a system would appear to present a possible solution to the Ryerson's cargo hold configuration especially if its primary cargo remained taconite.

https://www.ems-tech.net/projects/self- ... siniboine/
Guest

Re: Fate of the Ryerson

Unread post by Guest »

I would think Ryerson has a lot better chance of seeing service than the Sherwin, simply her smaller size may serve her better out the seaway.
Guest

Re: Fate of the Ryerson

Unread post by Guest »

Anything can be converted just a matter of how much, she's Jones act compliant so thats a plus as new build US ship must be built in country so that would be very expensive, Im sure they could do new tanks like the Dool Lietch and others have had done.
Guest

Re: Fate of the Ryerson

Unread post by Guest »

What trade routes could the Ryerson and Sherwin serve? Detroit Edison within the next 20-25 yrs. plans to phase out most if not all of their coal fired power plants. So there goes a lot of lost cargoes hauled by Interlake, plus other companies. The former Inland Steel Mill(ArcelorMittal) hasn't received a cargo on a gearless bulker in yrs. Her bridge unloaders have been inactive for yrs. So where does the Ryerson haul to. Hamilton?The Seaway? Looks like to me Algoma has those runs taken care of, plus Algoma has several more efficient self-unloaders coming out. I know the Ryerson had hauled into Lorain, but that market has dried up. I know this site has been posted before, but just the basic work that would have to be done on the Sherwin would run into the millions. I for one would like to see them run again, but I don't see it.

http://www.nailhed.com/2014/09/drummond ... y-own.html
Guest

Re: Fate of the Ryerson

Unread post by Guest »

Guest wrote:Im sure the Ryerson would be looked at as an asset and only if the company was loosing lots of money and needed cash would then scrap it. Also guessing that down the line its probably thought of as a replacement for the Sykes.
Ryerson can't be converted to a self-unloader because of her cargo hold configuration, so there goes the idea of replacing the Sykes.
Post Reply