Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Drydocking?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • "Irish" ferries in name only lately. Got rid of the irish crews to replace them with lower paid foreign workers.

    Comment


    • But at any level of govt, are you aware of anyone who is supporting this kind of joined-up forward thinking? What about the industry?
      "He is an enemy officer taken in battle and entitled to fair treatment."
      "No, sir. He's a sergeant, and they don't deserve no respect at all, sir. I should know. They're cunning and artful, if they're any good. I wouldn't mind if he was an officer, sir. But sergeants are clever."

      Comment


      • Originally posted by morpheus View Post
        But at any level of govt, are you aware of anyone who is supporting this kind of joined-up forward thinking? What about the industry?
        Industries in general look to the bottom line and will diversify employment and conditions to improve profits and neutralise trade union interference or meddling. As far as joined up thinking goes out of 90000 jobs created some 40,000 went to New Migrant labour , at labour rates of 1.60 to 3.60 Euro per hour. The latter rate was paid then to Latvian crew in Irish Ferries. The Irish Government havn't ratified the EU conventions on Seafarers Rights or similar rights for EU migrant workers. Statistics will laud job creation but who got jobs and at how much is not revealed.
        The States bottom line must be to create maritime infrastructure to meet growing capacity needs and provide for normal and emergency repair of ships. We need quay walls with afloat berths and we badly need 3 drydocks, at 150 M + ( Cork ) at 225 M (New ) and at 300 M ( New ).

        Comment


        • Originally posted by ancientmariner View Post
          The State may have to takeover Cork Dockyard.
          I can't see the EU allowing that to happen.

          Comment


          • I can't see DSG allowing that happen either.
            Things have changed in this post-thatcherite society. The state manages very little in the way of infastructure. Everything is operated by semi-state or private enterprise. (Roads, Rail, Airports) Seeing as it let the last state owned shipping company fade away in the 80s, I do not see it sees any importance in maintaining any ship repair facility.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by 25 pounder View Post
              I can't see the EU allowing that to happen.
              Exigencies could dictate otherwise and history proves that the State, under Lemass did it before. In 1941 on the foundation of Irish Shipping Ltd, that company took over Cork Dockyard and brought it up to full use, and continued to do so until the arrival of Verholme in Cork. Major infrastructure such as Docking and repair of ships is critical to the well being of a state, leaving capabilities to the whims of expediency and bean counters, leads to amputation and "crippling" results.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by ancientmariner View Post
                Exigencies could dictate otherwise and history proves that the State, under Lemass did it before. In 1941 on the foundation of Irish Shipping Ltd, that company took over Cork Dockyard and brought it up to full use, and continued to do so until the arrival of Verholme in Cork. Major infrastructure such as Docking and repair of ships is critical to the well being of a state, leaving capabilities to the whims of expediency and bean counters, leads to amputation and "crippling" results.
                Different times. Very different times. You'll be hard pressed to find any state operated ship repair facility anywhere in the world any more, except perhaps maybe in Communist China.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by na grohmití View Post
                  Different times. Very different times. You'll be hard pressed to find any state operated ship repair facility anywhere in the world any more, except perhaps maybe in Communist China.
                  Shipbuilding and repair facilities in both the USA and Great Britain depend on State demands/needs and all have umbilical connections back to the State. Even Appledore have connections back to Devonport Dockyards and remain committed to naval shipbuilding whole or in part.

                  Comment


                  • Best hope, I'd guess, of something along those lines happening would be Cork being viewed as a strategic asset in EU Defence planning.

                    Of course while NATO remains the real mutual defence organisation and our neighbours know that we'll cherry pick what we're involved in, they may be, eh, hesitant.

                    Comment


                    • Depend on.
                      A large term for two relatively small words. One would suggest that the US Navy exists purely to keep work in US owned shipyards, with their inbuilt state supported protectionism and inefficient work practices. They could not survive in a free market economy, so the US government gives them plenty of work to do, building overpriced ships that face no real threat.
                      Equally the UK has decided to create an unnecessary class of OPV, disposing of the ship it will replace prematurely, purely to keep sipyards open until the RN knows what its future frigate will look like. Appledore has almost closed many times since Niamh was built there. It is only the charity being offerred by HM government that keep it open. Again it cannot compete in the open market and is kept open purely for political reasons, i.e vote winning. They get work to support the industry, without the government work they would have nothing. They are not there to support shipping, more like shipping, in the form of government contracts, are there to support shipbuilding.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by na grohmití View Post
                        Depend on.
                        A large term for two relatively small words. One would suggest that the US Navy exists purely to keep work in US owned shipyards, with their inbuilt state supported protectionism and inefficient work practices. They could not survive in a free market economy, so the US government gives them plenty of work to do, building overpriced ships that face no real threat.
                        Equally the UK has decided to create an unnecessary class of OPV, disposing of the ship it will replace prematurely, purely to keep sipyards open until the RN knows what its future frigate will look like. Appledore has almost closed many times since Niamh was built there. It is only the charity being offerred by HM government that keep it open. Again it cannot compete in the open market and is kept open purely for political reasons, i.e vote winning. They get work to support the industry, without the government work they would have nothing. They are not there to support shipping, more like shipping, in the form of government contracts, are there to support shipbuilding.
                        There's that, I mean when you look at it, the UK went to South Korea for their RFA hulls since the UK yards didn't/couldn't offer a price that equaled them. The history of BAe's yards is so bad that the new ship building strategy is actively trying to get the 31 built somewhere else. When you compare it to some of the European yards that do much higher volume of business. The reality is a) there's no shortage of yard space in the EU or partners that could mean Cork could compete, b) we'd never have enough orders to keep a modern yard in business (and all the supply chains/training/certification etc).

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by ancientmariner View Post
                          Exigencies could dictate otherwise and history proves that the State, under Lemass did it before. In 1941 on the foundation of Irish Shipping Ltd, that company took over Cork Dockyard and brought it up to full use, and continued to do so until the arrival of Verholme in Cork. Major infrastructure such as Docking and repair of ships is critical to the well being of a state, leaving capabilities to the whims of expediency and bean counters, leads to amputation and "crippling" results.
                          Is the Register of Shipping available on line I don’t see it on the MSO website?

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by DeV View Post
                            Is the Register of Shipping available on line I don’t see it on the MSO website?
                            THE REGISTER OF SHIPS is published by LLyod's Register of Ships on a biennial basis ie. 1987-1988 etc. Assuming a ship's notional life might be 15 years to 20 years, if you built up a library of a set for every twenty years then you have a good chance of having every Merchant ship that floats in your library. They need to be about fifteen years old when you buy as the set cost will be at least £100 plus postage or new about £ 450. The Register can be researched on Line.
                            Getting back to the anguishing need to maintain ships within the state you must start with the Solas requirement that all ships should be drydocked twice every five years that means we should plan to drydock 18 times every 5 years for 9 ships. Since all ships interface at sea there is a need to conform.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by EUFighter View Post
                              If true, then it is in the LPD range in terms of displacement and cost but it also matches HMNZS Canterbury; that is something we should not follow. Better a purposed design vessel from bottom up such as the Damen Enforcer family than something based upon an Isle of Man ferry. If Far East ship builders are excluded then in Europe at the moment that leave Damen & Navantia with smaller versions of the Enforces class or Fincantieri with the Improved San Giusto class.
                              I think any of the Enforcer designs are wider than the Cobh Graving Dock though?

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Sparky42 View Post
                                I think any of the Enforcer designs are wider than the Cobh Graving Dock though?
                                The smaller Enforces have a beam of 24.8m, even the Canterbury has a beam of 23.4m so vessels of this size will not fit in any Graving dock in the state at present. But is this a real issue? If so then that is something the state would have to provide as there is no commercial justification at present. While good for a navy to have such a facility at its main base we are small and so must determine if this for us makes sense or we use a dock outside the state?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X