maumee

Discussion board focusing on Great Lakes Shipping Question & Answer. From beginner to expert all posts are welcome.
MilwBob
Posts: 379
Joined: May 9, 2010, 7:20 pm

Re: maumee

Unread post by MilwBob »

Ron wrote:Concerning the possible work needed for the CTC#1, it is true equipment has been stripped out of the boat but most of this would have had to be replaced any how as it was outdated. This is specially true of the electronics and controls, both on the bridge and in the engine room. this question of stripped out equipment, I consider a moot point as it would half to be done despite any decision concerning reactivation of the vessel.
One thing to remember it's not just electronics & engines that need replacing, but a lot of infrustructure too. (wiring, plumbing, etc) I imagine sitting since 1980 her water pipes are pretty rusted up, that just won't flush out of the pipes. And who knows what kind of shape the wiring is in (assuming it hasn't been stripped already?)
Ron

Re: maumee

Unread post by Ron »

Concerning the possible work needed for the CTC#1, it is true equipment has been stripped out of the boat but most of this would have had to be replaced any how as it was outdated. This is specially true of the electronics and controls, both on the bridge and in the engine room. this question of stripped out equipment, I consider a moot point as it would half to be done despite any decision concerning reactivation of the vessel.
Guest

Re: maumee

Unread post by Guest »

It appears to be laid up for the season. She has been tied off at one of the ArcelorMittal docks on the east bank of the Cuyahoga in Cleveland for at least 2 weeks now.
Guest

Re: maumee

Unread post by Guest »

Has Maumee laid up yet or has she not been added to the layup list because of the holiday? Will be interesting to see what the scuttlebutt will be once her crew is ashore for the winter.
Jon Paul

Re: maumee

Unread post by Jon Paul »

Great point Chris. It is all speculation and sometimes it's fun to guess what I would do in their situation and spending their money. LLT/Rand have done very good for themselves so far and have made very good decisions. I appreciate that they have given new life to ships that would otherwise be but memories.
For fans of LLT/Grand River Nav I can highly recommend Skip Gillhams new book;
The Grey Ghosts, The Ships of LLT and Grand River Nav.
Chris M
Posts: 704
Joined: July 28, 2009, 10:30 pm

Re: maumee

Unread post by Chris M »

We can speculate all we want, we should just be patient and hope for the best for the Maumee and CTC 1
Guest

Re: maumee

Unread post by Guest »

I find it very difficult to believe that it would be cheaper to convert the CTC#1 than the Maritime Trader. The CTC#1 has sat in the caustic Calumet River for decades with virtually no movement. The forward cabins including everything in the Pilothouse is stripped bare. All the deck equipment; winches, windlass.etc. would have to be replaced. The MT is a fully functioning laker, seaway hull or not. The Fairbanks Morse diesels in her are known to have very long service life and are some of the easiest to rebuild. The engine room and everything else is already diesel compliant, the CTC is not. Time is an issue too. The MT could be converted and ready in 6 months, the CTC will take a year or more. As for the re-flagging issue, the MT could not be under American registry no matter what due to Jones Act restrictions but if flagged Canadian this would allow for say the Cuyahoga for example to go back under the American flag. I agree though, they still would be one boat short still on the Canadian grain runs, not sure how that would work out.
Leo

Re: maumee

Unread post by Leo »

Jon Paul wrote:Their is one vessel that would certainly fit the size requirements needed by LLT and she's a diesel too. The Maritime Trader. She would be a lot easier to convert than the CTC.1 and a lot newer. I realize that Maritime Trader is basically a dedicated grain boat but Rand Logistics has an option to purchase the Maritime Trader and may need a utility self-unloader more than a small grain boat. They would have to flag her Canadian but they could take the Cuyahoga and re-flag it American.
My original message didn't get through earlier, but I'm not so sure that would work out too well. With the retirements of her Canadian fleetmates of the same vintage having been ongoing for years due to age and salwater, and her old Fairbanks Morse engine plant, I suspect a conversion would cost more with her than the CTC #1

I suspect the CTC #1's hull is in better overall shape and the Trader's powerplant would probably also be replaced if any such project was undertaken to her.

Not to mention they'd still need to find a hull to replace her lost capacity for their Canadian customers if they did all that work to her and could get her reflagged American.
Jon Paul

Re: maumee

Unread post by Jon Paul »

SideshowBob wrote:What about the Kathryn Spirit? She's been in lay-up for almost a year now, and she has a carrying capacity comperable to the Maritime Trader.
The Kathryn Spirit has a 66' beam which would not work in some of the narrower confines that the Maumee can access. Also she can carry 12,100 tons but only at full draft whereas the Maritime Trader can carry over 19,000. Many of the ports that the Maumee services only can handle a 20-22ft draft, at that level the KS would be at about 10,000 tons and the MT would still be able to carry over 15,000 tons.
Jon Paul

Re: maumee

Unread post by Jon Paul »

Good point Hugh, a cargo hold will have to be modified for self-unloading gear no matter what and the Ryersons could be too. I think beam is the issue though in replacing the Maumee. The Ryerson is too wide to access some of the ports that the Maumee services. Bridges and narrow channels restrict what vessel can be used. Of course a bigger vessel could be brought into the fleet freeing up one of the Maritime boats for the smaller ports.
hayhugh

Re: maumee

Unread post by hayhugh »

The Alpena is a cut down super (Leon Fraser) so large capacity cargo in not a must. Ryerson has hatches and a cargo hold. Hatches would be modified and cargo capacity could be controlled by length of boat. All things done to convert Fraser.
Ed S

Re: maumee

Unread post by Ed S »

Brent wrote:From what I hear from a guy who sailed her for years JAW's needs a lot of plate work, especially the bottom. Maybe a better bet would be the Townsend, though small she is already a diesel. it would seem that the cost would be more having to convert a cement boat, as they would have to take out all the cement unloading eqp to do the conversion. There is always the Ryerson!
The Ryerson is Built strictly for the iron ore trade only.
ML

Re: maumee

Unread post by ML »

My question is: Why would they clean out Maumee's holds if they were going to scrap her? She looks pretty tired for sure and we've heard about a crack, but.
Guest

Re: maumee

Unread post by Guest »

It's been a dock for over 20 years.
TWilush
Posts: 788
Joined: April 28, 2010, 3:48 pm

Re: maumee

Unread post by TWilush »

She's a dock face at Algoma Steel in the Soo.
Pww2407

Re: maumee

Unread post by Pww2407 »

Where is the Sewell Avery located? She is still around?
Brent

Re: maumee

Unread post by Brent »

There is always the Sewell Avery!
SideshowBob

Re: maumee

Unread post by SideshowBob »

What about the Kathryn Spirit? She's been in lay-up for almost a year now, and she has a carrying capacity comperable to the Maritime Trader.
Jon Paul

Re: maumee

Unread post by Jon Paul »

Their is one vessel that would certainly fit the size requirements needed by LLT and she's a diesel too. The Maritime Trader. She would be a lot easier to convert than the CTC.1 and a lot newer. I realize that Maritime Trader is basically a dedicated grain boat but Rand Logistics has an option to purchase the Maritime Trader and may need a utility self-unloader more than a small grain boat. They would have to flag her Canadian but they could take the Cuyahoga and re-flag it American.
Leo

Re: maumee

Unread post by Leo »

The overall dimensions for the Sarah Spencer and the Jane Ann IV are 729' 03".

I don't think what is basically a maximum sized Seaway vessel is suited for the trades that a replacement for the Maumee would have to undertake.

If they do ever have any interest in the Spencer, I imagine it would be to expand their business and would remain flagged Canadian like their larger vessels. I doubt it would be suited at all to replace the 604' Maumee that services smaller American customers in locations unsuited for significantly larger freighters.

With the passing of ships like the Robert C. Norton, Joseph Frantz, the Willowglen, Calumet, Nicolet, L.E. Block, Kinsman Enterprise and so on over the past 15 years or so, the CTC #1 is the only American built hull in this size category that is surplus and available. Seems like a wise move to buy her and hang on to her for the future. The Maritimers in their fleet appear to have several decades left in their lifes and adding one that only has seen 35 years or so of service could have many decades of usefulness left in her after being refurbished, modernized, and converted to a self unloader.
Post Reply