[QUOTE=KrustySalt;157471]I guess in the end I feel like we the sailors are getting the biggest screw. American shipyards are expensive and the quality doesn’t match the price. So no one is building ships with better hulls and machinery, which would drop operating costs, they’re just calling to end the Jones Act and send all the work over seas. I just wish we could do something to make American shipyards step their game up and bring the prices down so we can get more ships.[/QUOTE]
We’ll never win that domestic battle. Shipyards are rather stationary in some Congressman’s district and two Senators’ state, so the shipyard workers and dependent businesses are all represented in Washington.
We seamen live scattered all over the nation and the world… and you can’t hardly get an anonymous forum of a few dozen of us together without us going at each others’ throats.
Looking for foils on catamarans I came across an article about how some yards (and obviously owners)get around the Jones Act, or at least manage to import modern designs, technology and equipment to the US ship/boat building industry, yet deliver Jones Act compliant vessels. (Maybe nothing new exactly?)
A small yard in Belfast, Main has entered into a joint venture with Brodrene AA in Norway: http://www.braa.no/about-brdrene-aa/
They intend to build High Speed Crafts from composite material and sandwich construction, rather than traditional steel, aluminum or fiberglass construction. The entire construction will take place at the yard in the US: http://bangordailynews.com/2015/12/21/business/norwegian-deal-could-mean-more-jobs-at-belfast-shipyard/
The weight saving and hull design is enough to obtain abt. 40% fuel saving, apparently
The same Norwegian firm also deliver hulls built in Norway to an American Yacht builder for outfitting in the US: http://www.braa.no/pj-48m-supersport
This is how Norwegian yards manage to stay competitive, but to export hulls from Norway is something unheard of for other types of vessels. It shouldn’t have anything to do with the Jones Act, since it is private yachts, not commercial vessels, I believe.
Whether this it is to circumvent some other US laws, rules or restrictions, I do not know?
Then why bother posting crap like that and imply it violates the Jones Act when everyone (except you apparently) knows if its built in the US then it can get a coastwise trade endorsement. Look it up.
Whether this it is to circumvent some other US laws, rules or restrictions, I do not know?
Reread the first 7 words of my response above. Then look up the rules before trying to stir up shit again.
[QUOTE=Steamer;184647]Then why bother posting crap like that and imply it violates the Jones Act when everyone (except you apparently) knows if its built in the US then it can get a coastwise trade endorsement. Look it up.
Reread the first 7 words of my response above. Then look up the rules before trying to stir up shit again.[/QUOTE]
Did you read anything between the first bit of the first sentence and the last sentence?
[QUOTE=ombugge;184659]Did you read anything between the first bit of the first sentence and the last sentence?[/QUOTE]
I believe his point was if it is following the letter of the law then it isn’t “getting around” anything and the implication of your statement is that it violates the Jones Act, which it doesn’t.
[QUOTE=Capt. Phoenix;184669]I believe his point was if it is following the letter of the law then it isn’t “getting around” anything and the implication of your statement is that it violates the Jones Act, which it doesn’t.[/QUOTE]
No, what I implied was that the boats could probably have been built at their yard in Norway and transported to the US cheaper. By building them in the US they “get around” the Jones Act restrictions on foreign built boats in the US, yet are able to offer their modern and highly efficient HSC designs in the US market.
At the same time US Owners can get more efficient boats while complying to the Jones Act.
Saving 40% on fuel + reduced maintenance costs are no small matter in tough competition with other operators.
[QUOTE=ombugge;184674]No, what I implied was that the boats could probably have been built at their yard in Norway and transported to the US cheaper. By building them in the US they “get around” the Jones Act restrictions on foreign built boats in the US, yet are able to offer their modern and highly efficient HSC designs in the US market.
At the same time US Owners can get more efficient boats while complying to the Jones Act.
Saving 40% on fuel + reduced maintenance costs are no small matter in tough competition with other operators.[/QUOTE]
Maybe it’s the language barrier but it isn’t “getting around” the restrictions on foreign built boats, it’s complying with the requirement to build in the US. There’s nothing wrong with using designs that originated in another country, just like how many European countries use Robert Allen designed tugs. A good design is a good design and they can sell or license their intellectual property to anyone they want worldwide.
[QUOTE=Capt. Phoenix;184701]Maybe it’s the language barrier but it isn’t “getting around” the restrictions on foreign built boats, it’s complying with the requirement to build in the US. There’s nothing wrong with using designs that originated in another country, just like how many European countries use Robert Allen designed tugs. A good design is a good design and they can sell or license their intellectual property to anyone they want worldwide.[/QUOTE]
Refr. Cambridge Dictionary: http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/get-around-something
I.e. If a US Owner bought a HSC built in Norway he would have a problem using it in the US. If the same boat is built in the US he “gets around” that problem.
Maybe a difference between UK and US form of English is the problem? We can get around that by accepting that there are differences.
One form can be as right as the other.