The same way Lockheed sold the F-35. Maybe build one less of those flying pork barrels each year and make American shipbuilding and the merchant marine “great again.” Somehow I see exactly the opposite happening.
American shipyards cannot compete against countries where there is no OSHA and workers make $5 a day. Where workers are expendable and worker injuries or death only cost the shipyard $200.
American shipyards are strangled by environmental rules and a daisy chain of environmental liabilities than go on forever. Of course they cannot compete with companies where there are no enforced rules.
All American companies have huge health and benefit costs. All other industrialized countries subsidize their industries with free national health care.
We only subsidize billionaires.
I have also found Indian Officers technically competent with a very good standard of spoken and written English. Some lack practical skills.
Which country and which century are you referring to?
This kind of fairy tales may be nice to swap across the mess table with like minded crews, but it doesn’t exactly help to understand why American shipyards and merchant marine has declined to insignificance during the last 3-4 decades.
If you want to compete on even footing with other shipbuilding countries you have to get rid of the attitude that it is all them foreigner’s fault and start looking at what is wrong with the way things are done now.
Not only being driven on US roads, they are built in the US.
BTW; BMW is the biggest exporter of US made cars.
Before you get started, Norway can’t compete with the low prices foreign labor. That’s why most Norwegian ships are built in Romania and other cheap countries then assembled in Norway and called “Norwegian built”.
During World War II, more than four million people who installed insulation in ships were heavily exposed to asbestos.
How true this is. The asbestos tragedy during WWII was downplayed as a ‘dust’ problem and reports stating otherwise were hidden. The industry never really accepted responsibility. Working as a American ship builder was almost as deadly as fighting as a front line soldier. They were the victims of a cover-up that rivals that of Big Tobacco. The Navy knew but accepted the risk and thus kept silent.
so airlines and traffic rights are negotiated gov to gov, IATA keeps the running sheet.
You first get to fly over a country
then you can land
then you might be able to drop in 2 places
then maybe pickup in 2 places
but never get domestic rights of pickup and drop without international leg unless you become a local airline.
You bet the Chinese are getting faa approval for their new plane, helps with insurance and landing rights.
killed Steve McQeen
Norwegian Shipyards use different methods to stay competitive;
Some (Vard and Fiskerstrand) buy or set up their own yards in countries were simple steel work can be done cheaper, to build the hulls for the ships to be outfitted at their Norwegian yards.
Others (Ulstein, Havyard etc.) contract the building of hulls to yards in other countries, while Kleven gets sections built in Poland for assembly and outfitting in Norway.
Some smaller and more specialised builders, like those building service vessels for the aquaculture and wind farm industries and Br. Aa that build fast crafts in composite material for export all over the world, build their crafts from scratch.
The designs and most of the machinery and equipment that goes into the ships are made in Norway and the finished product becomes Norwegian.
This is not too different from cars and air crafts “built” in the US with a large % of the components imported from abroad.
What about the other way around; The IPhone is assembled in China from parts made in a dozen or more countries, but branded as “American”.
Of course it is much better to subsidise an inefficient and dying US shipbuilding industry then to force them to modernise, or die.
One of the reason ECO is succeeding where other US companies are failing may be because they are not hung up in using American designs and equipment. Just look at what they have built lately.
BTW; TDW has eventually learnt that too, but probably too late.
Apparently, you were too busy making money in Singapore during the 1990’s to notice that US environmental liability claims under C.E.R.C.L.A. ( the Comprehensive Environmental Recovery and Clean Up Liability Act) passed in 1980, better know as the SUPERFUND law, caused the bankruptcy of thousands (yes, thousands) of investors and “names” in Lloyd’s of London. It nearly resulted in the complete collapse of Lloyd’s insurance market itself.
No shipyard, and/or it’s owners and operators, anywhere else in world has to fear the unlimited liability with potential corporate and personal bankruptcy under the SUPERFUND law that US shipyard owners and operators face. Shipyards and their owners and operators are responsible for the cost of potential future clean up of environmental damage caused not only by themselves, but also by previous owners decades ago.This makes existing or former US shipyards very difficult to sell, finance, and insure.
Ever wonder why there are so many abandoned and unused “Brownfields” sites along what should be productive high value waterfront in US cities? Now you know.
This is an enormous competitive disadvantage for US shipyards, and all other manufacturing in the US.
What other country exposes shipyards, investors, insurers, and banks to this kind of risk and expense?
Surprising that many foreign shipyards acquire US yards when they are exposed to such draconian laws. Why do they think it is good business??
Could it be because of lucrative US Government contracts and a captive market?
Likewise for foreign shipping companies setting up US subsidiaries and registering ships under US flag?
If you are thinking of KIR’s acquisition of the Philadephia Navy Yard, it was probably because the yard was government owned, the government was required under US law to clean it up before they could sell it, and the government probably also agreed to hold harmless, indemnify, and defend the new owners against all claims arising from pollution that occurred before the date of purchase.
Back the 1990’s, a small private Seattle shipyard in bankruptcy could not find any buyer until a very creative attorney came up with the idea of negotiating a settlement of all claims for past pollution (which included some clean up) with the government and getting the settlement approved by the court. Even then, no one would buy the shipyard until a lawsuit was filed, the time passed for third parties to intervene, and the settlement agreement was adopted as a final judgement by the court.
Not only Philly, although that may be the largest on foreign hands?
AMSFELS and VT Halter is owned by Singapore Government affiliated companies.(Keppel and ST Engineering)
BEA and Austral is probably there for the lucrative Naval contracts, not so much interested in commercial activities.
I am not very knowledgeable about those companies or yards. The BAE yards were “too big to fail” because the Navy is dependent on them. Probably the same fo Austral. No idea about V T Halter, But you can be sure that they were bought at a very deep discount and only after a reliable mechanism for protecting the new owners from past pollution liability was in place.
On Feb. 28, BAE Systems ceased ship repair operations at its Mobile, Alabama, shipyard. The other 4 locations are still open.
Good riddance. Easily the worst yard experience I’ve ever had. The writing was on the wall
I believe they quit servicing civilian vessels because of the slump in offshore activity in the GoM.
Probably found it was more profitable to concentrate on work for the navy. Easier to suck up taxpayers money there then to try to squeeze a few extra $$ from the Bayou boys.
Pretty sure their yard in San Francisco is shuttered now, too. . . .