Mark Barker Construction

[Jared]

5 thousand footers seems like an awful lot for a declining steel industry. I was reading a book about the Vietnam era unrest, and the author claims that the steel and auto industry knew the writing on the wall as early as 1968.

On an off note, I wonder how many footers were imagined or planned? I'd be surprised if the number surpassed 15.

No, in fact steel demand was growing at 2% a year in the late 1960s, traffic studies by the American Iron and Steel Institute (AISI) and the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) forecast that demand for iron ore would reach 140 million tons by the year 2000. The USACE even did another study on maximum ship size needed for the US fleets in 1977 and projected anywhere from 30 to 40 thousand-footers and 1,100 foot vessels needed to replace older, smaller tonnage by 2010!

US Steel was planning a new greenfield steel mill near Conneaut, Ohio (where the David M. Roderick nature preserve is now located) in the late 1970s.

I'm sure they inflated those numbers by quite a bit. This is when they started to rely on taconite as their main iron cargo as the Minnesota and UP ranges ran dry.

[Guest]

It just seems funny that the reason for her size was because they thought she would have trouble at Johnsons point which ended not being a problem and since they were lengthening other ships in the fleet I would have thought the Blough would have also.

[Guest]

The Roger Blough's designer, C. E. Tripp of Marine Consultants and Designers stated in a technical paper from the early '70s stated that the Roger Blough was designed to be lengthened. (I assume that deck strapping, strapping on the underside of the hull and strapping along her sheer strake would have been required to increase her section modulus.)

It had been generally accepted within the industry that the Johnson Point area of Neebish Island would be the problem area, but the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) commenced a Bend Widening Program in the Spring of 1971 in the St. Marys river to dredge six bends in the river that would be a problem for thousand-footers. The Bend Widening Program took three years to complete.

I believe the Johnson Point area was dredged in 1971, the same year that Roger Blough was originally set to enter service, but the devastating fire in June 1971 delayed her entry into service until the following June.

When Stewart J. Cort entered service in May 1972, Johnson Point was already dredged and wouldn't have presented a problem for her.

[Guest]

Any reason why USS didn't lengthen the Blough?

[Guest]

5 thousand footers seems like an awful lot for a declining steel industry. I was reading a book about the Vietnam era unrest, and the author claims that the steel and auto industry knew the writing on the wall as early as 1968.

On an off note, I wonder how many footers were imagined or planned? I'd be surprised if the number surpassed 15.

No, in fact steel demand was growing at 2% a year in the late 1960s, traffic studies by the American Iron and Steel Institute (AISI) and the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) forecast that demand for iron ore would reach 140 million tons by the year 2000. The USACE even did another study on maximum ship size needed for the US fleets in 1977 and projected anywhere from 30 to 40 thousand-footers and 1,100 foot vessels needed to replace older, smaller tonnage by 2010!

US Steel was planning a new greenfield steel mill near Conneaut, Ohio (where the David M. Roderick nature preserve is now located) in the late 1970s.

[FWE]

It was long rumored that USS execs hid at Johnson Pt to observe the upbound SJC. There was some fear a “footer” would have great difficulty with that turn in the St Mary’s. They left dismayed with their heads down, as a month later, their “compact “ BLOUGH would be by.

[Jared]

5 thousand footers seems like an awful lot for a declining steel industry. I was reading a book about the Vietnam era unrest, and the author claims that the steel and auto industry knew the writing on the wall as early as 1968.

On an off note, I wonder how many footers were imagined or planned? I'd be surprised if the number surpassed 15.

[GuestfromEU]

The first mid-body module for the Stewart J. Cort was completed in June 1969, with the stern-bow section, "Hull 1173" arriving at Erie in June 1970 and float-off of the attached bow and stern sections to the mid-body occurring in January 1971. Sea trials commenced in the Summer of 1971, but technical issues delayed the entry into service of the Stewart J. Cort to May 1972.

The bow-stern sections name was "Hull 1173". They transited to the Great Lakes from the Gulf under a carpenters certificate, so that initial registration of the vessel could occur after completion of the vessel.

By May 1972, Bethlehem Steel was upset at the length it took to build the Cort that they basically told Erie Marine and Litton Industries that they would never order another ship from them again. They then did a complete 180 and in late 1973 ordered three sisters to the Stewart J. Cort, which Erie Marine declined to build - the disagreement went all the way to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court where Bethlehem Steel lost the case in 1983.

Very interesting about the legal history. I have not heard of this before. If interested, here is the case summary.

https://law.justia.com/cases/pennsylvan ... -88-1.html

Few legal disputes involving the shipping or shipbuilding industry are settled in short order. Most legal disputes are settled by arbitration court in London, where it can be several years before a case is initially heard, with judgement rendered years later.

[Guest]

The first mid-body module for the Stewart J. Cort was completed in June 1969, with the stern-bow section, "Hull 1173" arriving at Erie in June 1970 and float-off of the attached bow and stern sections to the mid-body occurring in January 1971. Sea trials commenced in the Summer of 1971, but technical issues delayed the entry into service of the Stewart J. Cort to May 1972.

The bow-stern sections name was "Hull 1173". They transited to the Great Lakes from the Gulf under a carpenters certificate, so that initial registration of the vessel could occur after completion of the vessel.

By May 1972, Bethlehem Steel was upset at the length it took to build the Cort that they basically told Erie Marine and Litton Industries that they would never order another ship from them again. They then did a complete 180 and in late 1973 ordered three sisters to the Stewart J. Cort, which Erie Marine declined to build - the disagreement went all the way to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court where Bethlehem Steel lost the case in 1983.

[Guest]

Yes that is correct Guest. My error as my typing didn’t make any type of correction on that one. The Cort’s bow and stern was indeed named and called “Stubby” when it was first constructed and built in 1971. Thanks.

Stubby was launched in December of 1970, so construction would have been started in early to mid 1970. She would have taken about 2 years to build and put into service.

https://greatlakesships.wordpress.com/stewart-j-cort/

[Denny]

Yes that is correct Guest. My error as my typing didn’t make any type of correction on that one. The Cort’s bow and stern was indeed named and called “Stubby” when it was first constructed and built in 1971. Thanks.

[Guest]

You could also say too that the Edmund Fitzgerald also took over a year to build and complete! The keel for her hull was laid down in 1957 I believe it was? She was then launched in June 1958 and it entered service in September 1958. Another that comes to mind is the Stewart J. Cort. If I am correct, I believe that "Subby" as the bow and stern were once called was built and launched in 1971 and then finally what is today's Stewart J. Cort if you will was finished and completed in 1972 and entered service at that point and time.

That would be "Stubby".

[Denny]

You could also say too that the Edmund Fitzgerald also took over a year to build and complete! The keel for her hull was laid down in 1957 I believe it was? She was then launched in June 1958 and it entered service in September 1958. Another that comes to mind is the Stewart J. Cort. If I am correct, I believe that "Subby" as the bow and stern were once called was built and launched in 1971 and then finally what is today's Stewart J. Cort if you will was finished and completed in 1972 and entered service at that point and time.

[Guest]

A couple of particulars for similar sized river class ships built during the 1970s at Sturgeon Bay, Wisconsin:

Buffalo
Keel Laid - 5-12-1977
Launched - 3-16-1978
Entered Service - 9-23-1978

Fred R. White Jr.
Keel Laid - 4-4-1978
Launched - 11-16-1978
Entered Service - 5-26-1979

Looks like these constructions took 13-16 months.

[Guest]

From the renderings, this ship looks like it will resemble the Manitoulin.

[Guest]

Super carriers never have been built that quickly. Take the Kitty Hawk for an example. Keel was laid on December 27th 1956, she was float launched on May 21st 1960, and she was commissioned on April 29th 1961.

[geysir]

Will a new construction like the Mark Barker have the unloading gates operated from on deck or does a "gateman" still need to be in the hold to open/close gates.
What about ballasting? Is that still done from the engine room?
Crewing certainly differs form the 70s when you had a gateman, tunnelman, 3 deckhands, 3 deckwatches, bosun, 3 watchmen, and 3 wheelsmen.

[Rob]

And the Pere Marquette 18(II) took something like 90 days to completion in South Chicago.

[Guest]

I was just saying to my father what are they building an aircraft carrier its taking so long, in the sixties and seventies it took around a yr to build.

[garbear]

This was the James R. Barker.

Her keel was laid on October 14, 1974, float launched May 29, 1976, her sea trials took place on July 31st and Christened August 7, 1976 . She was built at a cost of more than $43 million under Title XI of the Merchant Marine Act of 1970.