Fitz Conversion

[Guest]

The fuel tank arrangement would've had no bearing on whether a self-unloader was stern or bow for the Fitzgerald. For example, the Ernest T. Weir (later Courtney Burton), was orginally coal-fired and her self-unloader conversion entailed relocating the fuel tanks to either side of the conveyor trunk for her stern-mounted self-unloader.

I have a drawing from 1982, that Marine Designers and Consultants did for Interlake Steamship of a proposed stern-mounted self-unloader installation for the John Sherwin. As in the Ernest T. Weir, the fuel tanks in the former coal bunker would be relocated on either side of the stern-mounted conveyor trunk. It was in the early 1990s that the plan was revised to a forward-mounted self-unloader installation.

I didn't say that the fuel tank arrangement/location had any bearing on whether the boat received a stern or bow mounted self unloading system. Please re-read the last three sentences of the first paragraph and you'll better understand the hinderance of a fuel tank that is mounted within a coal bunker.

It is true though; the Courtney Burton was indeed converted in this manner after she had the fuel tanks installed within the coal bunkers like the Sherwin and Fitzgerald. It wasn't a terribly efficient design, and contributed greatly to the relatively short career of the Burton as a self unloader (only about 20 seasons worth of work). She spent much of her career with Olgebay Norton as well as American Steamship in layup and when trade conditions dipped, she was the first vessel to be idled. The saddle tanks that were used in her conversion were too small and she requried frequent stops to refuel. She'd refuel in Duluth and need to refuel again in Sarnia on the way back up. These are some of the factors that would have come up when the conversion design was being considered so the tank location, and cost associated with tank volume and relocation of them, would most certainly been something that fleet management would have been looking at. The bow vs. stern unloading gear location is primarily affected by the ports that the vessel will be serving.

[Guest]

The fuel tank arrangement would've had no bearing on whether a self-unloader was stern or bow for the Fitzgerald. For example, the Ernest T. Weir (later Courtney Burton), was orginally coal-fired and her self-unloader conversion entailed relocating the fuel tanks to either side of the conveyor trunk for her stern-mounted self-unloader.

I have a drawing from 1982, that Marine Designers and Consultants did for Interlake Steamship of a proposed stern-mounted self-unloader installation for the John Sherwin. As in the Ernest T. Weir, the fuel tanks in the former coal bunker would be relocated on either side of the stern-mounted conveyor trunk. It was in the early 1990s that the plan was revised to a forward-mounted self-unloader installation.

Just curious if you have ever seen any drawings of the proposal to move the stern of the Elton Hoyt 2nd onto the John Sherwin? John O. Greenwood, who was a vice president at Interlake at the time, told about this engineering proposal during a presentation he gave in the mid-1980s. He commented that one of the issues was the 5 foot difference in beam between the two hulls, but that this would not be an overriding issue in whether or not the project moved forward. Obviously, it did not. Interlake did have some experience of reworking hull sections with different widths such as the grafting of the Gulfport stern onto its Charles M. Schwab in 1961.

[Guest]

The fuel tank arrangement would've had no bearing on whether a self-unloader was stern or bow for the Fitzgerald. For example, the Ernest T. Weir (later Courtney Burton), was orginally coal-fired and her self-unloader conversion entailed relocating the fuel tanks to either side of the conveyor trunk for her stern-mounted self-unloader.

I have a drawing from 1982, that Marine Designers and Consultants did for Interlake Steamship of a proposed stern-mounted self-unloader installation for the John Sherwin. As in the Ernest T. Weir, the fuel tanks in the former coal bunker would be relocated on either side of the stern-mounted conveyor trunk. It was in the early 1990s that the plan was revised to a forward-mounted self-unloader installation.

[badger]

did the fitz or any other ON vessels ever transit the welland canal and/or the seaway after it opened in 1959? i think the demise of ON was when they purchased the quarry in rogers city.

[Duluth Guest]

Something else to consider, regarding the conversion of the Fitzgerald to an SU vessel, is how some of the previous work on her was done. For example, let's look at the John Sherwin and Shenango II, (AKA Charles M. Beeghly & Ret. Honorable James L. Oberstar). The two vessels are sisters, or nearly so, except that the Sherwin was launched as a coal burner whereas the Beeghly was launched as an oil burner. They were part of the same fleet, P&M ( AKA Interlake Steamship). As was common practice, the coal bunker for the Sherwin was placed directly in front of the stack. In the attached image, note the deck length differences in front of the after deckhouses ( Oberstar on the left, Sherwin on the right). Both of these vessels were also lengthened to 786 ft. in the early 1970s. Both vessels were oil-fired by the time self unloader conversions were being considered by Interlake. In the end, the Beeghly was chosen to be converted, in 1980, and the Sherwin went to the wall ( and remains there today). The largest reason for this was how the oil conversion was done to the Sherwin. The fuel oil tanks were placed within the coal bunker so these tanks would need to be relocated to another space when the conversion took place. This adds cost obviously. The Beeghly, was built with the fuel oil tanks in a more optimal location already so the conversion was easier and more practical.

The Fitzgerald was also built as a coal-burner ( coal bunker was in the same location; in front of the stack) and recevied a similar oil-fired conversion at Fraser Shipyards ( same shipyard that converted the Sherwin). The same addtional fuel tank relocation would have been required making SU rather unlikely for the Fitzgerald.

What about a bow-mounted self unloader design? This was, afterall, the plan for the Sherwin in 2008. The Fitzgerald was in a tough situation there as well but for a different reason than her design; Olgebay Norton already had a few bow mounted self unloaders that were serving the smaller ports and cargoe volumes. In 1974, they had the J. Burton Ayers and Crispin Olgebay converted to a bow mounted self unloaders They also operated the Robert C. Norton, Sylvania, G.A. Tomlinson, Joseph H. Frantz, and Buckeye through the 1970s. The smaller "river class" boats, Wolverine and Paul Thayer, which were stern mounted inclined belt type self unloaders, also joined the fleet in the 1970s. So Olgebay Norton was pretty flush with self unloading vessels through the 1970s; they really didn't need any others. Their "big hulls" through the 1970s ( Armco, Middletown, Reserve, Fitzgerald was the largest of them) were busy hauling taconite. Once the footers came out in the early 1980s ( Columbia Star and Olgebay Norton) those "big hulls" were relegated to the trade routes handled by older self unloaders that were subsequently retired by ON ( Crispin Olgebay, J. Burton Ayers, Robert C. Norton). it's quite likely that the Fitzgerald would have followed a similar fate as her near sister, Arthur B. Homer, and ended her days as excess tonnage in the early 1980s.

The Ernest T. Weir didn't join the fleet until 1978 and being a smaller hull, was purchased to replace some of the elderly self unloaders and bulk carriers ( Sylvania, Buckeye, G.A. Tomlinson, Ashland, Thomas Wilson and others) rather than replace the tonnage lost by the Fitzgerald sinking. The MIddletown replaced the Fitzgerald on the Toledo - Silver Bay run beginning in 1976 and the Armco took over flagship duties from the Fitzgerald that same year.

[Guest]

Yes the iron ore demand in 1981/1982 was so down that Oglebay’s newly delivered footer COLUMBIA STAR in 81, was tied up half the 1982 season.

Weren't the hullets removed when Torco developed their new ore dock at Toledo? I believe the dock was renovated to handle only self-unloading vessels in 1981. If this is the case, as one of the Fitzgeralds usual destinations along with the arrival of the Columbia Star, as noted in this post, it is very likely that these circumstances would have had some effect, likely negative considering the economics of the time, on the Fitzgerald's future if it had in fact survived the 1975 storm.

The Armco and Middletown's self-unloader conversions were completed in June of 1982, and both did a few shakedown trips, before laying up for the season. Columbia Star started the 1982 navigation in late June.

Reserve was towed from Toledo to Sturgeon Bay on June 14, 1982 for the start of her conversion. Work on her self-unloader installation wasn't completed until the Fall of 1983, when she made several trips.

The Edmund Fitzgerald unloaded at two different ore docks in Toledo. First was the C&O ore dock and the other was the Lakefront ore dock. If I recall correctly, the later ore dock was closed in 1976 after the formation of Conrail, and the start of retirement of the older, outdated ore docks. But the Fitzgerald also unloaded at other docks on occasion. In 1975 she made two trips to Conneaut, two trips to Ashtabula, a couple of trips to Cleveland, two trips to Indiana Harbor - one for the Mark Plant (Youngtown Sheet and Tube) and the other to Inland Steel. And of course she made several trips to Zug Island for National Steel. While we will never know if the Fitzgerald would have been converted to a self-unloader, when we look at Oglebay Norton's self-unloader plans for their 1950s-built vessels in the late-1970s, she may have been a candidate for such work.

[Guest]

Yes the iron ore demand in 1981/1982 was so down that Oglebay’s newly delivered footer COLUMBIA STAR in 81, was tied up half the 1982 season.

Weren't the hullets removed when Torco developed their new ore dock at Toledo? I believe the dock was renovated to handle only self-unloading vessels in 1981. If this is the case, as one of the Fitzgeralds usual destinations along with the arrival of the Columbia Star, as noted in this post, it is very likely that these circumstances would have had some effect, likely negative considering the economics of the time, on the Fitzgerald's future if it had in fact survived the 1975 storm.

[FWE]

Yes the iron ore demand in 1981/1982 was so down that Oglebay’s newly delivered footer COLUMBIA STAR in 81, was tied up half the 1982 season.

[Guest]

It's a possibility that the Edmund Fitzgerald would have been converted to a self-unloader, had she not sank in November 1975.

Oglebay-Norton began planning the self-unloader conversions for the Armco, Reserve, Middletown and Ernest T. Weir around 1978, when there was a strong demand for iron ore, stone and coal. They wanted to retire their older self-unloaders due to their operating and maintenance costs. When these self-unloader conversions were planned, no one had any inkling that demand for iron ore would drop so suddenly and so steeply in 1982 when three of the conversions were completed and one was yet to be started.

Oglebay-Norton was approached in 1974 by R.A. Stearn (a marine design and consultantancy company in Sturgeon Bay) who proposed the lengthening of the Fitzgerald by 96 feet, as they had just completed design and contract plans for her near-sister, the Arthur B. Homer. And though the Edmund Fitzgerald was chartered from Northwestern Mutual, she was still upgraded over the years (bow thruster in 1969 and conversion to oil-firing in 1972). So I think her owner was open to the idea of further upgrades to the Fitzgerald.

Another poster mentioned the Ernest T. Weir's purchase by Oglebay Norton in March 1978, and how some have wondered if she was purchased as replacement tonnage for the Fitzgerald. I myself have never heard any confirmation, one way or the other. But it's important to note that the Edmund Fitzgerald did make a number of trips for National Steel in 1974 and 1975 for National Steel. In fact, during January 1975, she made two trips to the C and P ore dock in Cleveland and two trips to Zug Island, all for National Steel. And in 1975 she made several trips to Zug Island, and of course she was enroute to Zug Island when she sank. So there may be a grain of truth to the rumour.

[Denny]

Difficult to say with the recession in the 1980s and the fact that many lakers were sent to scrap some scrapped very young in their careers. I guess we will never fully No that one!

[Guest]

Most likely tied up with the economic collapse in early 80s n gone to the scrapper like the homer. Lots of good boats died early as demand lessened and costs rose. Economically not viable. But who knows? All hindsight speculation

[Guest]

Difficult to say with her being leased and operated on charter. Had she been owned outright there's little doubt that Oglebay Norton would've done so. But unless they bought her, they'd of been unlikely to make such an expensive investment towards upgrading someone else's asset.

But perhaps if the terms of the charter were long-term enough and they weren't risking investing in an asset that could soon end up in a competitor's fleet, perhaps?

[Guest]

This is a question that has come up from time to time that can be looked at as something that could have or might not have happened. Considering the Fitzgerald was not owned by Oglebay Norton but rather chartered from Northwestern Mutual with an agreement scheduled to end in 1983, at the height of the downturn of the steel industry during the 1980s, it is doubtful it would have been converted to a self-unloader. Now if for some reason, Oglebay Norton had purchased the ship at some point prior to or perhaps even at the end of the charter it is equally likely that it could have been converted as the company converted the Courtney Burton, Middletown, Armco, and Reserve to self-unloaders between 1981 and 1983. However, there is, in my opinion, some reason to doubt the Courtney Burton (the former Ernest T. Weir) was acquired by Oglebay Norton in 1978 to replace the lost capacity represented by the loss of the Fitzgerald sinking in 1975. Despite it being widely regarded as such within the Great Lakes shipping enthusiast's hobby, I have never seen any proof of the Weir actually being acquired as a replacement for the Fitzgerald in the form of any statements indicating as such being issued by Oglebay Norton in 1978. Therefore, I have some doubt as to the actual truth of this belief within the hobby. Now if the Weir had not become a member of Oglebay Norton's Columbia Transportation fleet, there is a stronger likelihood that the Fitzgerald could have been included in the company's program of self-unloading conversions during the early 1980s. In the end, it is probably more likely that it would have been scrapped at some time during the 1980s like so many others of its age. Although many would like to draw a parallel to the scrapping of the Fitzgerald's near sister Arthur B. Homer, it must be remembered that these two ships, while much alike, were subject to the operations of two different fleets with the Homer being part of a vertical integration business model that had just placed 3 thousand foot ships into service within the past 10 years and with a prime focus of moving raw materials for Bethlehem Steel's production requirements with little to no emphasis on outside cargoes. To sum it up, this is all conjecture, and despite the assertions from some to the contrary, no one can really say what would have happened had the Fitzgerald survived the November 10, 1975 storm.

[Scott]

I think I've seen this topic before somewhere. As a hypothetical, had the Fitzgerald survived is there a good chance that she would have been converted to a self unloader or simply retired?