Algoma New Builds

[algowest]

Hatches appear to be one piece with a clamp latchdown system. Still have hatch cover crane to remove/replace covers.
-Andy

[ben55]

i think the only way the gordon c leitch will not be resold by a scrapper to a competitor is if uls sends her to a overseas yard like inda an by the time they wanted to buy her she would prob be 3/4 way gone look at how fast they cut up the canyon

[Guest]

smt isnt going to sell to the competition they learned from the algocen affair

SMT won't sell Directly to the competition. They will probably sell the Gordon C. Leitch to a scrapper and specify that the scrapper is not to resell. However, those "Do Not Resell" clauses have historically Not been held as binding by the Courts. So the scrapper may resell to an outfit like Voyageur or Vanguard (at a sizable mark-up in price). So the Leitch may see continued use Despite the intentions of SMT.

[Guest]

http://www.seawaymarinetransport-new.co ... inox_Class

See the New SMT ships that are being built in China.

[lyle]

smt isnt going to sell to the competition they learned from the algocen affair

[Guest]

What are the odds of someone buying the Leitch? Like Voyageur or Vanguard shipping? The brought back the algocen and she seemed pretty beat up.

[DavidFrank]

Any idea on the hatch clamping system to be used on the new vessels? There must be a better way than putting on 1500 individual clamps like those on the older U.S. boats.

[J Kerwin]

While on the subject of the 640' vessels, I see the Algoway is having very little work done to her in Sarnia this season. I would think this can be taken as a sign that she is not going to be in service much longer. They (Agawa Canyon, Algorail, Algoway) had a very unique design to them that is quickly becoming extinct.

[Guest]

Also they exclude the Canadian Ranger. Does that mean she's done too?

[TWilush]

Also noticeably absent are Gordon C. Leitch, Algontario, Algonorth, Canadian Ranger and Canadian Miner.

[CA Mike]

I notice that SMT's new website has the Algosteel listed as a member of the fleet but omits the Algorail. That's interesting.

[Guest]

SMT has changed their website and added a ton of details, graphics and design information on the upcoming "Equinox" class of Great Lakes bulkers & self-unloaders. Interesting mix of design features - cylindrical bow for more cargo, single vessel-length cargo belt, number of engine room efficiencies mentionned. Note the stern-mounted boom is now fully-enclosed. Ships do resemble the Polsteam "Miedwie" superstructure on a CSL "Seawaymax" hull.
Looks like these are Great Lakes service only, so Algobay and Canadian Mariner will be the only "coastal" class S-U for now (in CDN flag that is) Perhaps the Ambassador & Pioneer will have forebodies rebuilt at some point.

[Leo]

That previous post should've said "when the ships are finally built".

Sorry for the typos.

[Leo]

That was all the way in April. So it could easily end up being significantly changed when the ship was finally bet (Just like the switch from a forward cabin to having everything at the stern on the James R. Barker by the time it was built).

And who knows, those might be simply a mockup for that release.

[cacw302]

There is a rough diagram available on page 33 of this Algoma Central presentation.
http://www.algonet.com/news/news_releas ... 430PPT.pdf

[J Kerwin]

I'd be surprised if Algoma changed their bulker and s-u designs from their 3d plans released in April 30 Annual Mtg Powerpoint. These 3d renditions show stern mounted boom, single belt, 5-hold configurations. Bulker shows 5-hold config also.

Are these renditions available on the web. I am curious what they look like.

[algowest]

I'd be surprised if Algoma changed their bulker and s-u designs from their 3d plans released in April 30 Annual Mtg Powerpoint. These 3d renditions show stern mounted boom, single belt, 5-hold configurations. Bulker shows 5-hold config also.

[Randy M]

Wasn't this decided by coin toss? Isn't that how ULS ended up with the Gordon Leitch?

[Monkeysfist]

I am sure that ULS will be building new ships in the near future as well. It is SMT (which is pretty much Algoma anyway) that is scraping all of the ships, not by choice of ULS. Not so sure it was a very good agreement to have between ULS and Algoma. Why would someone team up with the competiton and ruin themselves? But then again maybe ULS which is a private company holds a bunch of Algoma shares?

[Guest]

I wonder what this means for ULS, they seem to have dithered again on their shipbuilding, with Algoma continuing to add to the SMT fleet and ULS loosing more and more ships to scrap, one must wonder if this will be the end of SMT & ULS and will be just Algoma ?

Back in the late 1990s I spoke to a gentlemen who worked in the marine industry, and there were rumblings about this very same thing. His rationale was that of the many bulkers acquired from GLBC in the mid 1990s, the ones in worse shape went mainly to ULS, while the better ones went to Algoma. He said that at the time there were rumors that when all was said and done, by 2020 or so ULS and Algoma would probably have merged under the Algoma banner. I didn't think much of it until I read this post, but the fact that ULS is currently building the Canadian Mariner in China is a good sign for the company. It all will depend, I guess, on what ULS does as vessels such as the Progress and Olympic age. Will they be replaced or will ULS simply write them off once they lose the Ontario Hyrdo coal runs for good and cede some of the remaining cargos to Algoma via the SMT partnership?