Boatnerd Discussion Forum

GLF has always been slow at making modernizations to the fleet. There has been "Talk" about repowering some of the steamers. Starting with the biggest gas hog and the doing one or two of the triples

Aarcr wrote:What sort of steam engine are these? turbines or something else?

All of the remaining steamers in service on the Lakes are steam turbines except for the St. Mary's Challenger, James Norris, and the carferry Badger, which have uniflow engines.

What sort of steam engine are these? turbines or something else?

CN is very happy with the GLF and they have been making significant investments and improvements in the fleet since acquiring it. Alot of automation and upgrade work has been done to the steamers in their fleet so they don't currently feel the need to dieselize, though I'm sure at some point it will be considered.

One possible explanation (I'm just speculating here) for why those steamers remain steam powered is when Canadian National got the former USS Fleet, it was because they were forced to take the Great Lakes Fleet. It was a property they didn't want but had to take in order to get the Great Lakes Transportation rail lines they wanted (Such as the Bessemer & Lake Erie Railroad). This was widely reported at the time so I don't think it's a false statement.

As such, they've quite possibly never really had any particular interest in the fleet and their subsidiary that operates them (Key Lakes I believe to get around the Jones Act). Their long term vision quite possibly doesn't include owning a fleet and I would not be surprised to see it eventually sold off to another company if a significant investment is needed for future operation (Such as a repowering program for the steamers). They got the fleet to get properties they wanted and are possibly not here for the long haul when a attractive proposition comes along to sell the fleet, which could explain the seeming lack of investment into it's future compared to what fleets like Interlake are doing.

That line of thought revolves around speculation about their initial intentions that is now several years old. Canadian National has now owned the fleet since 2004 (Well over half a decade now and through boom years like 2007 and most of 2008) and they're currently investing a lot of money into repowering the Gott. To me, that suggest that they're pleased with the property despite not wanting to take it on initially. If so, that to me means that they must think this fleet has a future with them (If not, why willingly repower the Gott?) and must just be satisfied with the operating cost of the steamers, the improvements done to them such as with computerized controls for increased efficiency, and the reliability of their steamers and are in no rush to invest in diesels until it's mandated for continued operation.

I imagine they will get diesels when the government forces it upon them and not before.

Bill, I see what you're saying. Whether the Ryerson had a diesel, it still seems doubtful that it would be sailing. The Ryerson's cargo hold was designed small for strictly hauling dense iron ore and taconite, so it does not yield high cubic capacity for lighter loads such as coal or grain. As for the companies that retain their steamers and the ones that are repowering, it just seems to be the preference of the respective companies. A few years back USS had talked of repowering their steamers, but since then has kept upgrading what they can on the boilers. It would be interesting to see what is the latest in boiler technology and change out just the boilers instead of the whole engines and all.

Leo, I know the reasons for the Ryerson being at the wall due to
her lack of cargoes and her lack of self-unloading gear and also
making her less versatile then the Sykes & Block. All I was trying
to say was if she was a diesel instead of a steamer would she be
out running inspite of a lack of cargoes and no self-unloader.
Also, I don't get why USS hasn't dieseled their steamers when
Interlake and Lower Lakes Towing have started with theirs also.

ASC hasn't done it with their steamers because they're currently excess capacity. When and if the cargos are there, you'll see them return to service as steamers and likely see them make investments in them to keep them going into the future if the economy and the industries ASC serves remain healthy.

The Ryerson's powerplant isn't why she's sitting idle. Her propulsion unit is in excellent condition and hasn't seen use during a good 20% or more of her lifespan. She's at the wall because of the lack of cargos and a her lack of self unloading gear making her less versatile then the Sykes and Block, not because she's a steamer. If she ever gets converted to a self unloader and gets the expensive reconfiguration work of her holds needed along with it, I'm sure you could expect her to get a diesel eventually since her hull has a great many years of useful life remaining.

Interlake Steamship and Lower Lakes has repowered most of their
steamers in the past. So, why doesn't ASC do the same with their
steamers along with USS/GLF? If ASC was to ever repower their
steamers, would there be any chance they would sail again?
Also, what about the Ryerson maybe someday getting diesels at
least then maybe she would be back out running instead of sitting.