I am curious why you think Hanwha is investing $5b into Philly Shipyard?
I’m not convinced they are. As they admitted in a GAO report last year, big investments can only be justified by having a large orderbook. And right now, I don’t think that exists. https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-25-107304.pdf
1 Like
To put some numbers to this - If my math is right -
for an aframax tanker if the fee is 1 cent that is $350,000 per port call, at 25 cents it is like 8.7Million.
Can’t see how that makes any sense at all ( pun not intended)
It’s logical the discussion evolved to the topic of which old ships will the supposed new ships replace. Well here’s another good article from gCaptain letting us know MARAD has something in the works to recruit new blood into out anemic industry. Maybe the plan isn’t to rebuild to maintain the status quo but to somehow build new to grow? If so, I’m for it.
Years ago she was the ship Pasha kept laid up in reserve and broke out occasionally for runs here and there. I believe she was kept active/in regular service while the Reliance was being repowered, but the word on the street always was that she was slated to become razor blades herself— following the Enterprise and Pacific. Maybe plans changed for her?
All I can think when I see Pasha’s new builds and the repowered Reliance is what a waste of cargo space that whole rig is.
Last I knew, she was still laid up at San Diego as Pasha’s reserve. She was slated to be converted as was Reliance, but that may have changed. On Google Earth she can still be seen near the Pasha Group building, with “Horizon Pacific” breasted in alongside her.
Thanks for the response. Looks like MARAD released an updated vessel in/out list yesterday that shows the Horizon Spirit still in the fleet and its status as “laid Up- converting to LNG power” https://www.maritime.dot.gov/sites/marad.dot.gov/files/2026-02/Consolidated_In_Out_List_DEC25.pdf
So between that and last year’s USCG determination letter, seems like a sure thing that the vessel is currently in Nantong getting a new engine. Which means it is going to stay in service long past age 50. Have to imagine this desire to avoid new construction in US yards at least partly reflects Pasha’s miserable experiences with AmFELS and VT Halter.
That must be an old image, I’ve seen shots of the Pacific in Brownsville partially scrapped.
1 Like
Surprised I didn’t catch that news. I enjoyed my time in her, and the other Pasha ships.
1 Like
It was posted to Facebook apparently, dated March 3, 2024. Sad picture. I believe the Enterprise has already been cut up as well.
1 Like
Thanks, that “Ship Breaking” image was one of the first that came up when I researched it after your response. She was very clean topside my final gig in her.
I just dont see this working.
How can you compete equally with China, Taiwan, Vietnam, etc.?
The only way is to re-design ship construction for conveyor/ automated assembly with robots.
This needs even higher investment.
Design too needs an overhaul. Sadly ABS is long behind the curve in modern technology. American Jones Act ships look WW2 vintage ??
Design needs a thorough overhaul to make ships easier and cheaper to operate and maintain over lifespan. All small fittings on deck to be of stainless. Hatches and breaks on deck to be integrated into structure to simplify assembly and operation.
Are we building simple low tech slow-speed diesel vessels, or more complicated waste-heat recovery propulsion.
Lifespan to be considered. Bahamas Flag do not flag vessels older than 25 years.
With rare exception, todays manual workers are not going to put up with Shipyard conditions - dirt, grime, rust, rain and freezing winds.
Ships instead have to be built indoors with quality US steel, welded by computer controlled robots, supervised by experts.
That is the ONLY way economic commercial US Shipbuilding will work, and probably ONLY for the US Jones Act domestic market.
2 Likes
Class rules, whether ABS, DNV, LR, etc are all strikingly similar. Companies and/or shipyards bring their proposed designs for class approval.
Slow-speed diesels being constructed today are hardly low tech these days. The days of the Sulzer type RND engines have been over for quite some time.
Lifespan is always considered. That said I believe you are in error with regards to Bahama Flag vessel age mandates.
2 Likes
But there is no Jones Act domestic market.
For that reason, i have to agree that the plan won’t work. And if the government’s award for the Arctic Security Cutters is any indication, even the military is recognizing that if you need a good ship built in any reasonable length of time, you need to have them built overseas.
2 Likes
I’m still waiting for concrete action from the Administration and Congress. It’s been a mixed bag, so far, and the few bright spots are overwhelmed by yet more outsourcing of the industry overseas.
If we want to revitalize the commercial shipbuilding industry in the US, the easiest and fastest way to do so would be to put out immediate RFPs to replace the Algol Fast Sealift Ships (8 hulls), the ACS crane ships (6-10 hulls), and the two classes of LMSRs (19-20 hulls). That’s a substantial orderbook to jumpstart the industry.
Look to create a primary and secondary construction contract for each class. Yard A gets the DD&C contract for fast sealift ship replacement with 4-5 hulls and is required to turn over the TDP for a second yard to build the other 3-4 ships in the class.
Start a program to produce Container, ConRo, and tanker vessels with militarily useful features–subsidize the construction, then put them in a rotating pool where the various US flag shippers are subsidized to operate them for a number of years (5 seems to be a good number), then they go into the reserve fleet for an equal period before being pulled out and returned to service. More new ships in service–running inefficiently via overcapacity by design–creates more jobs at sea, increasing opportunity and, hopefully, an influx of mariners.
Start looking at disused sites (Mare Island, Avondale, Ingleside, Charleston, etc) where capacity can be added and green/brownfield sites where new modern shipyards could be constructed from scratch, as well as small shipyards that could expand to increase capacity.
Put investments (subsidies) in place to add capacity to make the steel, the forgings and castings, the equipment (engines, winches, generators, etc.), and the controls. Require repairs to be done in US repair yards, at least some significant portion.
There’s lots of words in the Maritime Action Plan, but there needs to be concrete action and a sustained plan–which means Congress needs to do some legislation.
Doug
1 Like
Start small. The initial intent should not to be to go head-to-head against China, Japan, and South Korea. That may be a long-term goal, but the short term should be focused on increasing capability on an incremental basis.
We have a recent history of building shuttle tankers, moderately sized container and ConRO vessels, and the occasional large crude carrier. We also currently build heavy-lift vessels (ESB), auxiliary tankers (T-AO), and LNG bunker barges. Expand on that, first.
We don’t need to jump into making 24,000 TEU containerships or ultralarge LNG carriers, right off the bat. But we can certainly look at the orders over the last decade and start by buying more of the same, then evolving from there.
Don’t worry about the 90% market share, let’s focus on moving from 0.04% share to 0.1%, then to 1%.
Doug
1 Like