Bloughs Final Salute

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

Re: Bloughs Final Salute

Unread post by Guest »

Guest wrote:
Guest wrote:Is there any legal proceedings underway that could affect this timeframe?
The findings of the NTSB investigation have yet to be released, but I’m not sure if that would have any effect.
NTSB investigation probable cause findings are not admissible in court proceedings when it comes to aviation-related litigation so I assume that there are similar procedural guidelines when it comes to maritime cases. These reports are not intended to serve or substitute for a fact-finding investigation for civil litigation. Factual information gathered from these reports, however, can be admissible. As such, I would tend to believe that the insurer has already conducted its own investigation of the incident along with any of the other parties involved.
Guest

Re: Bloughs Final Salute

Unread post by Guest »

Guest wrote:Is there any legal proceedings underway that could affect this timeframe?
The findings of the NTSB investigation have yet to be released, but I’m not sure if that would have any effect.
Guest

Re: Bloughs Final Salute

Unread post by Guest »

As another poster has indicated the possibility of the Blough having been either already or will soon be surrendered to the insurance company, I have a question about how long CN would have to make that decision. Wouldn't there be a window as to when such a decision would have to be made? It seems that if CN has yet to surrender the vessel to an insurer that window would likely be closed a year after the incident. Is there any legal proceedings underway that could affect this timeframe?
Guest

Re: Bloughs Final Salute

Unread post by Guest »

Yes, Speer never got a boom because they don't or didn't own the boat.
Guest

Re: Bloughs Final Salute

Unread post by Guest »

The Gott was converted in just this way. However, its a much more complicated thing with the Blough given her unique belt arrangement.
Denny

Re: Bloughs Final Salute

Unread post by Denny »

Regarding a possible conversion to a long deck mounted unloading boom on the Speer possibly someday and the fact that the Gott received one in the mid-1990s, it has been talked and mentioned here before as far as why they did it to the Gott and not the Speer then. I did not know this back then but, it was mentioned here that the Gott is or was owned by them while the Speer is owned by Connecticut Bank & Trust if I'm right? That's why I think they chose to do the boom conversion on the Gott back then and not the Speer. I did not know the whole details of that until I read it here a while back.
Bulldog

Re: Bloughs Final Salute

Unread post by Bulldog »

A little off subject here but with the sale of the Great Lakes/keylakes fleet the blough would not be the only ship limited to 2 or 3 ports to unload as the speer is also in same predicament as the blough as to which ports it can unload at also. The talk earlier in this post about the blough and changing its unloading system to a deck mounted unloading boom this is also something that whoever buys the fleet would have to consider doing to the speer. As of right now those 2 ships can only unload at Gary,conneaut or burns harbor. I’m sure it wouldn’t be a problem to convert the speer over as they did the same thing with the gott only the cost would be much greater than when they converted the gott in 1995. Food for thought!
Jared
Posts: 798
Joined: December 6, 2014, 4:51 pm

Re: Bloughs Final Salute

Unread post by Jared »

Guest wrote:
Bulldog wrote:It will be a very sad day when they tow the blough to scrap. It’s been one of my all time favorite ships. I know eventually the ship would be scrapped but just seems way ahead of her time. The unfortunate circumstances of things that have happened to her over her career is sending her to the scrap yard early I know. Too bad they couldn’t make a museum out of her.
With the Blough being one of my all-time favorites as well, I wholeheartedly share your sentiments. This one is tough because the writing wasn't on the wall like it was/is for other classic lakers (that is, until her 2021 fire, of course). Perhaps naively, I am holding out hope due to how the Blough's engines were oiled and wrapped, as has been discussed previously on this thread. If this is true, someone with knowledge and control of the whole situation is at least giving her a chance. A potential sale of CN could always change things as well - heck, even a long-term layup would be good news at this point!

With talk of the Blough being sent to dock at CN's Escanaba facility, this got me wondering: What would be the benefit of scrapping her now rather than holding on to her and seeing what the future brings? Is it likely all just a matter of scrap prices? With the Jones Act making new construction expensive, it has always been my impression that keeping U.S. ships at the wall as contingency vessels would be a prudent decision. I understand that there are a number of American boats already in that position as demand falls, but if increased tonnage were ever needed, one would imagine a major investment in a younger ship like the Blough would be better long-term than some of the other options. Thoughts? I'm obviously not an expert, but thought this might be an interesting topic for discussion.
The Jones act is dying a death of a thousand cuts. Anytime that an emergency happens (which should be the reason for a "reserve") the act is suspended temporarily by executive orders or congress. And this is just talking boats. How quickly can mining be activated? How quickly can blast furnaces or factories come on line? Is the iron ore reserve quality and quantity enough for the emergency or period? The Blough is not a younger ship, she's 50 years old and has seen a ton of use.

However, I think long term layup is the idea right now. It's not expensive to wrap and oil engines, and it's not expensive keeping her at a dock that is owned by the owners of the vessel. A decision can be made tomorrow to begin rehabbing and restoration, and then 3 months later work halted and sent to the scrapper I.E. the Sherwin.

I am very pessimistic about the future of Great Lakes shipping as a domestic industry. I think deep down, we all know this and the industry itself knows this.
Guest

Re: Bloughs Final Salute

Unread post by Guest »

Bulldog wrote:It will be a very sad day when they tow the blough to scrap. It’s been one of my all time favorite ships. I know eventually the ship would be scrapped but just seems way ahead of her time. The unfortunate circumstances of things that have happened to her over her career is sending her to the scrap yard early I know. Too bad they couldn’t make a museum out of her.
With the Blough being one of my all-time favorites as well, I wholeheartedly share your sentiments. This one is tough because the writing wasn't on the wall like it was/is for other classic lakers (that is, until her 2021 fire, of course). Perhaps naively, I am holding out hope due to how the Blough's engines were oiled and wrapped, as has been discussed previously on this thread. If this is true, someone with knowledge and control of the whole situation is at least giving her a chance. A potential sale of CN could always change things as well - heck, even a long-term layup would be good news at this point!

With talk of the Blough being sent to dock at CN's Escanaba facility, this got me wondering: What would be the benefit of scrapping her now rather than holding on to her and seeing what the future brings? Is it likely all just a matter of scrap prices? With the Jones Act making new construction expensive, it has always been my impression that keeping U.S. ships at the wall as contingency vessels would be a prudent decision. I understand that there are a number of American boats already in that position as demand falls, but if increased tonnage were ever needed, one would imagine a major investment in a younger ship like the Blough would be better long-term than some of the other options. Thoughts? I'm obviously not an expert, but thought this might be an interesting topic for discussion.
Bulldog

Re: Bloughs Final Salute

Unread post by Bulldog »

It will be a very sad day when they tow the blough to scrap. It’s been one of my all time favorite ships. I know eventually the ship would be scrapped but just seems way ahead of her time. The unfortunate circumstances of things that have happened to her over her career is sending her to the scrap yard early I know. Too bad they couldn’t make a museum out of her.
Guest

Re: Bloughs Final Salute

Unread post by Guest »

The Roger Blough is most likely finished and will eventually follow the St. Clair and Manistee to the scrapyard in Port Colborne. I don't see why anyone in this current economic market would would want the Roger Blough for rebuilding and reactivation. It just doesn't make sense to me.

So many had seen the HBI plant in Toledo as a potential salvation for the industry, but that is unlikely as there is competition in the form of scrap metal. The HBI briquettes are just another feedstock for an EAF, and usage of such will depend on cost more than anything else. If scrap metal is too costly, then an EAF operator can switch to HBI, conversely, if HBI is too expensive, then scrap metal is used.

What we are witnessing in the integrated steel industry is what's happened in the Pacific Northwest in the lumber industry. Whereas up until the late 1980s, fallen tress were processed at sawmills in the US, they are now seen as a resource that's shipped overseas for processing into lumber and other products, then sent back into US markets. US Steel has been doing something similar over the past 20 years or so where iron ore pellets are being brought to Lake Erie, and transshipped down the Seaway for steel mills in China and Europe.

Ironically, the lumber industry is strongest in the Southern US, just like the majority of EAF capacity.
guest

Re: Bloughs Final Salute

Unread post by guest »

did no[ the steamer e.b. barber have a raised or trucnk deck which added to its carrying capacity when it was converted from a straight decker to a self unloader?
ARandomGuest

Re: Bloughs Final Salute

Unread post by ARandomGuest »

As someone with a technical background who is involved in the Great Lakes maritime industry, I'll add the following:

1. I do not work for CN/Great Lakes Fleet, but am involved in the maritime industry and have reasonable reliable sources of information. From what I have heard, the Blough already has (or will soon be) surrendered to the insurance company for likely auction or scrapping.

2. In my relatively well-informed opinion, it simply isn't economically viable to return her to service. It isn't as simple as replacing her engines and slapping a boom on her. She is an awkward size, where her economy of scale is not as great as a footer but not small enough to compete with the versatility of River-class boats. Lengthening her is not easy, as someone already mentioned length/depth ratios. Even if a company were to spend the tens of millions to convert her with an unloading boom, she simply cannot fit into many of the ports smaller boats do. The weight savings of a truss boom vs. shuttle boom would be minimal in the grand scheme of cargo capacity.

3. Just because it may be cheaper to re-use an existing cause may not mean that's the best course of action. Case-in-point, the John Sherwin.

I hate to sound negative, I love the old boats like everyone else hear. But I also believe we need to be realistic with balancing industry and company economics with our passion.
Denny

Re: Bloughs Final Salute

Unread post by Denny »

While I do agree with Shipwatcher1 and his comments, while I don't know IF this would have made any difference or not as far as comparing the Blough and St. Clair fires I would just like to say is all that as far as the Blough fire goes it was put out in one day and took about maybe I'd say 12-14 hours something like that? As for the St. Clair, its fire burned for about 2 days or so. So I guess what I'm trying to say and ask here is "Since the St. Clair fire burned longer than the Blough, could that have made any differences as far as the extent of damage done to St. Clair?" In other words, had the fire not burned as long and had been discovered immediately, who knows then what the St. Clair's future would have been or if it could've been repaired or not? Sorry if I'm not making any sense with any of this to you all. Just my thoughts only on the two ship fires!
Shipwatcher1
Posts: 489
Joined: April 19, 2011, 4:01 pm

Re: Bloughs Final Salute

Unread post by Shipwatcher1 »

Andrew wrote:Took a while for the decision to be made on the St. Clair, and the Blough is well within that timeline.

Again, I doubt CN would send her to the heap now, but will wait to see who buys the fleet. Often, even if the buyer plans to scrap, the vessel will come as part of the package deal. Look at the 4 ASC ships sold to Algoma. Algoma had no use for the 2 steamers but they came as part of the deal. I imagine CN would treat the Blough and Callaway the same. Whether they sail again will be up to the buyer, and CN will make more money off selling them as potential assets than by scrapping them outright. The only way the 2 meet their fate under CN is if nobody buys the fleet outright and the ships get parsed out to different fleets. That seems the most unlikely situation, but it can't be ruled out. CN can also afford to wait for a few years, especially considering they have dock space to park them at for no extra cost.
I don't feel the St Clair fire can be compared to the Blough fire. The St Clair fire burned out the entire unloading tunnel as well as completely destroying the aft superstructure. From what I have heard about the Blough, the fire was largely contained to the engine room spaces and unloading machinery. If the cargo carrying section was undamaged, now is the prime time to seriously look at giving her a more versatile unloading boom and maybe new engines as well.
Guest

Re: Bloughs Final Salute

Unread post by Guest »

Andrew wrote: I doubt the boatwatchers of the 80s thought the early 2000s would be as good as they were either.
As someone who witnessed the 1980s firsthand, I can tell you that the current outlook for the future of Great Lakes shipping is far worse than it was back then. Yes, some companies are/or have modernized their fleets but the fleet will continue to become progressively smaller in the face of declining tonnages and growing obsolescence. Despite the various modernizations, much of the US fleet dates back to the 1950s and as these vessels reach 80 years old there will come a time that they require replacement. Furthermore, several of the ships built during the 1970s are either now or likely will be sailing under the Canadian flag. I don't see any possibility of a major shipbuilding program to replace these ships in the next 20 years. The early 2000s are nearly 20 years ago and that resurgence turned out to be a short-lived event that may or may not ever be repeated. Remember, ships do not create business themselves but rather serve the transportation demands of their owner's customers. The near-extinction of coal movements on the lakes will have a drastic impact on the US fleet in much the same way it affected the Canadian fleet. Ironically, a good part of the potential growth area for US flagged operations may be in the export markets for coal and ore through the Seaway. This would reverse the long-held practice of US operators building or enlarging ships to a point they could not operate in the Seaway since the 1970s.
I do agree with Jared in that I would also predict the first of the 1000 footers going to scrap before this decade is out.
Andrew

Re: Bloughs Final Salute

Unread post by Andrew »

I disagree, Jared. Fleets are investing in their ships. VTB and Interlake are building, which they wouldn't do if they didn't see a future in Great Lakes shipping. Granted, a ship will not last forever, but many of the ships you listed, Ojibway, Mississagi, Manistee, have not been treated well by their owner and when you haul salt and work locks for 20 years, nothing is going to last long. Canadian ships reliably serve for about 30 years, after that, you never know. The ships you named above served 20 years after spending 50 years under prior ownership.

Interlake just finished major repowering jobs on many of their ships. The Wilfred Sykes had her boilers rebuilt. The John G. Munson was recently repowered, and the Arthur M. Anderson just had an extensive cargo hold project done. I don't see fleets doing this stuff if the next 20 years will bring about inevitable decline and end.

While I doubt that we are in the "golden age" of Great Lakes shipping, I doubt the boatwatchers of the 80s thought the early 2000s would be as good as they were either.
Jared
Posts: 798
Joined: December 6, 2014, 4:51 pm

Re: Bloughs Final Salute

Unread post by Jared »

As I mentioned in another thread, the Blough had her engines oiled up and covered in plastic which should rule out immediate disposal, but in terms of her usefulness and capacity I have doubts that she will be needed anytime in the future.

Remember that with exception to the new Barker and the Algoma boats that the lakers in service now are beyond their lifespans and are in their sixth or seventh decade of service. A lot of these boats (Maumee, Ojibway, Missagi, Burton, etc) have been rode hard and put away wet. We know that eventually these boats will and must meet their end. As stated before on several threads now, the ideas of the repowering, lengthening, rebuilding, barging, and whatever else has been mentioned is all moot if the hull is no good. Intense fires change the makeup of the steel which is a deal breaker, the changing of the economic situation, and the lack of cargos will put an end to the Blough.

There is no economical way to convert her to carry "packaged" goods like windmill blades or towers. She can't carry LNG or oil, she isn't designed for grain, stone, or salt. She can carry ore down and coal up. Cargoes that are in danger of being irrelevant in this economy and new world. We will see the first footers go to scrap before this decade is done. We will see the classics gone with two decades. The Sherwin, Ryerson, Valor, and McKee Sons (along with the Spencer) have sat at the wall during a period of remarkable economic growth and a upsurge in cargo demand. That is not a good sign of the times ahead for the lakes.
Andrew

Re: Bloughs Final Salute

Unread post by Andrew »

Took a while for the decision to be made on the St. Clair, and the Blough is well within that timeline.

Again, I doubt CN would send her to the heap now, but will wait to see who buys the fleet. Often, even if the buyer plans to scrap, the vessel will come as part of the package deal. Look at the 4 ASC ships sold to Algoma. Algoma had no use for the 2 steamers but they came as part of the deal. I imagine CN would treat the Blough and Callaway the same. Whether they sail again will be up to the buyer, and CN will make more money off selling them as potential assets than by scrapping them outright. The only way the 2 meet their fate under CN is if nobody buys the fleet outright and the ships get parsed out to different fleets. That seems the most unlikely situation, but it can't be ruled out. CN can also afford to wait for a few years, especially considering they have dock space to park them at for no extra cost.
Guest

Re: Bloughs Final Salute

Unread post by Guest »

A key factor in the Blough having some pontential future is the fact that it has not yet been sold off for scrap. Apparently the damage was not bad enough for the owners to abandon the ship to the underwriters as I believe that would have likely come about by now if that was indeed the case. One question is that if the fleet is sold in whole to another entity, would any insurance settlement that could be used to at least partially fund repairs pass to the new owners or stay with the former as they suffered the loss? Or would this be a factor in negotiating the terms of the sale?
Post Reply