HS 0318-WZ

Schiffstechnik | Ship Technology
One of two remaining
major shipyards for ocean
going vessels: Philly Shipyard
Photo: Philly Shipyard
The two faces of U.S. shipbuilding
Shipbuilding in the U.S. presents a dichotomy. Yards building large ocean going vessels
struggle with the vicissitudes of the Jones Act. On the other hand, yards for smaller vessels
see consistently brighter prospects, writes Barry Parker
It is well known that large ocean going
Jones Act qualified vessels might cost
three or four times the price for a comparable
vessel built in a reputable Asian
yard. At the same time, facilities building
competitively priced smaller vessels
for harbors and the vast inland waterway/
river system have remained busy as the
U.S. economy expands, ferries are seeing
a surge in popularity, and increased oil
exploration is in the wind.
All in all, in the States, shipbuilding
continues to be vibrant. In particular,
with offshore drilling likely to be expanded
under the present Administration and
with automobile gridlock giving rise to
more ferry activity, the outlook is rosy for
the shipbuilding business.
Deepsea – only two yards
The marketplace for large deepsea ships
is limited to tankers with 45–50,000dwt
vessels for the refined product trades predominating
and containerships for the
Puerto Rico, Alaska or Hawaii trades. The
containership side of the business illustrates
the serendipitous nature of this arena.
In mid 2017, Tote Maritime had been
strongly hinting that a four vessel order
(2 firm, 2 options) with Philly Shipyard
(PSI) for 3,700 TEU bottoms to be deployed
on the U.S. West Coast to Hawaii
routes would be forthcoming. However,
in January, Tote pulled the plug on the
project, at least temporarily, citing difficulties
in efforts to negotiate arrangements
for land-side terminals in Hawaii.
PSI, a one time yard for the U.S. Navy
(which became Kvaerner Shipyard, and
then Aker Shipyard, predecessors of the
current company), had already started
work on the two firm vessels. The project
may be revived; the yard said: »PSI intends
to resume this project when there is
more clarity regarding the new order situation
and related capital requirements.«
The business of building large commercial
ships has been erratic over the
past decades, with Oslo-listed Philly and
NASSCO in San Diego being the last two
yards standing. Since the late 1990s, PSI
has delivered 28 vessels, including four
2,600 TEU vessels for Matson, in the
Jones Act containership trade, delivered
in 2003–2006. The yard presently has two
3,600 TEU vessels under construction for
the same owner.
In addition, the yard has been very successful
in building tankers for the Jones
Act, most notably product tankers, drawing
heavily on designs from Hyundai
Mipo, for Overseas Shipholding Group
(OSG), American Petroleum Tankers
(APT, a division of Kinder Morgan) and
Crowley Maritime. The APT and Crowley
vessels are described as »LNG-ready«.
The ten 46,000 dwt vessels built for OSG
are »owned« by American Shipping
Company, a financial owner which then
places them on long term leases to the
U.S. owner. Two additional vessels built
at the yard – and fitted with bow loaders
for Gulf of Mexico shuttle work at the Detyens
Yard, in Charleston, S.C. – are also
operated by OSG.
Nassco in San Diego, a division of
behemoth contractor General Dynamics,
builds both commercial and military
ships. On the business side, its vessels
have included 50,000 dwt product
tankers – incorporating designs originating
with Korean Daewoo group –
for U.S. Shipping Partners (USS) with
the vessels subsequently going to APC,
for APC directly, and also for U.S. owner
Seacor. On the container front, Nassco
is the builder of two LNG fueled
container ships, each 3,100 TEU, utilized
by Tote in the Puerto Rico trades,
that entered the run in early 2016. Nassco
states: »The ships were designed
by DSEC, a subsidiary of Daewoo
Shipbuilding & Marine Engineering
(DSME), located in Busan, South Korea,
and will include DSME’s patented
48 HANSA International Maritime Journal – 155. Jahrgang – 2018 – Nr. 3