The Bill Rider To Kill 35-Year Old Ships

Maybe they are golfing buddies but one thing sure is both of them are in the Cabinet of President Rodrigo Duterte. And maybe Secretary Arthur Tugade offered to carry the cudgels (or golf bags) for Secretary Alfonso Cusi for the latter’s new ships cannot win over the competition in a level playing field because it has no definite technical advantage unlike the FastCats which definitely have low fuel consumption relative to their rolling cargo capacity. The new Starlite ferries might be new and are thrifty compared to the old ferries but they still have to amortize their ships whereas their competitors’ ships are already basically paid for already and that really matters a lot.

22178492131_c37acf4851_z(1)

A very good ferry that is 35 years old

There was a bill to give President Rodrigo Duterte new Starlite ferries to solve our traffic problems. And it seems a rider was inserted that will cull ferries that are already 35 years old which meant ferries built in 1982 or earlier. There was even a rumor that new ferries will be given exclusive routes. This is what I was saying in another article of mine that there seems to be moves to target and retire old ship via legislative or administrative fiat. It seems that without that kind of assistance the new Starlite ferries or the new SWM ferry would have a hard time competing. Knowing short-distance ferries have fixed schedules and two-hour gaps are in the rules then that just simply negates the advantage of new ferries as passengers, drivers and car owners normally take the next available RORO. And besides they don’t perceive the old ferries have a definitely disadvantage in safety.

The fact is in many routes no steel-hulled ferry has ever sunk and that includes many heavily-traveled routes like the Matnog-Allen/San Isidro route, the routes from Tabaco to Catanduanes, the Pilar-Masbate route, the routes from Bogo to Cawayan, Cataingan and Palompon, the routes connecting Leyte and Bohol, the Roxas-Caticlan route, the routes from Lucena to Marinduque, the Bacolod-Dumangas route, the Iloilo-Bacolod route, the routes from southwest Cebu to southeastern Negros Oriental, the Dumaguete-Siquijor routes, the Dumaguete-Dapitan route, the Ozamis-Mukas route, the routes from Balingoan to Camiguin, the Zamboanga-Basilan routes and many, many other routes too numerous to list. And old ferries basically plied these routes.

In a conference called by MARINA earlier this year (2017), they admitted that they have no study that says old age is the cause of the loss of ships (well, they can’t even if they make a study because actually one big cause of the mishaps is navigational errors and some ships were lost while not sailing like a force majeure caused by a typhoon and accidents in shipyards or while doing afloat ship repair or ASR). Now after a stalemate where MARINA can’t force its way it seems they simply passed the (golf )ball to Secretary Tugade’s club who I suspect can be influenced but does not know shipping. I don’t think he is even aware that culling 35-year old ship will mean cutting up approximately half of our short-distance and overnight ferry-RORO fleets which are very essential in bridging our islands by moving cargo, people and vehicles. These sectors are actually more important than the liners and the container ships as they connect ports that are beyond the reach of their Manila-based counterparts.

If half of our RORO fleet outside the liners and container ship is suddenly discarded there would definitely be a shipping crisis of major proportion. Some shipping firms like George & Peter Lines, VG Shipping, J&N Shipping, Southern Pacific Transport, Denica Lines, JVS Shipping, Aurelio Shipping, CSGA Ferry, Millennium Shipping, Milagrosa J Shipping and the Camiguin ferry companies will suddenly end up defunct for they will lose all their ferries. And some shipping companies will only retain one ferry out of a former fleet. Actually ferry companies in Cebu province will lose more than half of their ferries and there is no need to emphasize the importance and weight of Cebu shipping to the country. The would be like that of 1986 (or even worse) when we severely lacked ferries because so many shipping companies collapsed in the crisis spawned by the Aquino assassination and the former “FS” ships also gave out because of old age (but unlike now the old ships are not expiring yet because of advances in metallurgy and technology and the availability of replacement engines). I thought the current administration is seeking growth. Is killing ships the way to do that? Replacing nearly 200 ferries is never easy. Can anybody guess how much will that cost?

I have always wondered why in our government the decision-makers in transport are the ones who do not ride them. Like in shipping I wonder if Secretary Tugade ever rode a scheduled ferry for I know he is a certified landlubber from Cagayan province. That is also true in buses and jeeps; the decision-makers also don’t ride those. These decision-makers do not really know their fields inside-out and yet they decide its fates and maybe it is only the whispers to their ears that count. I thought when I was still studying that it should be the experts that should decide and not the political hacks. It has been a long time already when our Cabinet was dominated by technocrats or those who really studied their fields. In the US most of the men in Cabinet are there because of political connections. But at least they know when to bring in and to consult the experts. Not here because for a long time already those who feel and act like they are the “experts” are the politicians, the media people and the bishops when actually they practically know nothing and true experts are just used as decoration.

We only have just over 300 ferry-ROROs (there are also a few cruisers and true motor launches but our liners is just over a dozen). So that means we are practically just talking about overnight ferries and short-distance ferries in this issue. Add to that a little over 40 HSCs (High Speed Crafts) too. The others are Moro boats, motor boats and motor bancas which are too numerous to count (they are much more than in numbers than our steel-hulled crafts) and should not be included here (anyway practically none of them are over 35 years old, amazingly). In the ROROs, the LCTs are included.

If 35-year old ferries are to lose licenses the following will have to be sent to the breakers (or be converted into cargo ships if cargo ships over 35 years old will not be culled but the freighter Fortuner breaking into two recently after loading with steel bars will not help their case):

Montenegro Lines/Marina Ferries: Maria Angela, Maria Beatriz, Maria Diana, Maria Erlinda, Maria Gloria, Maria Helena, Maria Isabel, Maria Josefa, Marie Kristina, Maria Matilde, Maria Rebecca, Maria Sofia, Marie Teresa, Maria Xenia, Maria Yasmina, Maria Zenaida, City of Sorsogon, City of Masbate, City of Tabaco, City of Calapan, Maria Timotea, Reina del Rosario, Reina Genoveva, Reina Hosanna, Reina Neptuna and Reina Quelita. A total of 26 ferries and fastcrafts. The four whose names start with “City” are fastcrafts. Hernan Montenegro will cry a bucket of tears and expect Gloria Macapagal Arroyo to fight like hell against the bill in Congress.

Asian Marine Transport Corporation (AMTC): Super Shuttle Ferry 1, Super Shuttle Ferry 2, Super Shuttle Ferry 3, Super Shuttle Ferry 5, Super Shuttle Ferry 6, Super Shuttle Ferry 9, Super Shuttle Ferry 15 and Super Shuttle Ferry 23. A total of 8 ferries.

Trans-Asia Shipping Lines Inc. (TASLI): The new Trans-Asia that is not yet finished, Trans-Asia 2, Trans-Asia 9, Trans-Asia 10 and Asia Philippines. A total of 5 ferries.

Cokaliong Shipping Lines Inc. (CSLI): Filipinas Iligan, Filipinas Butuan, Filipinas Iloilo, Filipinas Maasin, Filipinas Dapitan, Filipinas Dinagat and Filipinas Dumaguete. A total of 7 ferries.

Roble Shipping: Wonderful Stars, Joyful Stars, Theresian Stars, Beautiful Stars and Ormoc Star. A total of 5 ferries. Add to this the Asian Star and Asian Star II which were the former Blessed Star and Sacred Stars sent to Theresian Stars shipping company.

Lite Ferries: Lite Ferry 1, Lite Ferry 2, Lite Ferry 3, Lite Ferry 6, Lite Ferry 7, Lite Ferry 8, Lite Ferry 15, Lite Ferry 20 and Lite Ferry 21. A total of 9 ferries.

Island Shipping: Island RORO I, Super Island Express I, Super Island Express II, Super Island Express III, Island Express II, Island Express III and Island Express V. A total of 7 ferries although I doubt the existence of some now.

Medallion Transport: Lady of Love, Lady of All Nations, Lady of Miraculous Medal, Lady of Sacred Heart, Lady of Charity, Lady of Guadalupe-Cebu and Lady of Angels. A total of 7 ferries and I am not even sure the Lady of Good Voyage will survive.

Aznar Shipping: Melrivic 1, Melrivic Two, Melrivic Three, Melrivic Seven, Melrivic Nine and their fastcrafts.

George & Peter Lines: GP Ferry-2, Zamboanga Ferry and Georich

Gabisan Shipping: Gloria Two, Gloria Three, Gloria V

Jomalia Shipping: Mika Mari, Mika Mari III, Mika Mari V, Mika Mari VI

Maayo Shipping: LCT Giok Chong, LCT Martin, LCT Wilcox

Cuadro Alas Navigation: Santander Express, Santander Express II, Santander Express IV

GL Shipping: GL Express and probably GL Express 2

J&N Shipping: J&N Carrier and J&N Ferry. Ubay will suddenly lose its connection to Cebu.

Southern Pacific Transport: South Pacific and Fiji-II

VG Shipping: VG RORO II and VG 1.

Rose Shipping: Yellow Rose

Maypalad Shipping: Samar Star

Lapu-lapu Shipping: Lapu-lapu Ferry 1

Golden Star: Anluis

Metro Ferry: Princesa (but not Carmen Uno)

PAR Transport: Leonor 3 and probably Leonor 5

R&D: Lady Star (this is laid up)

Orlines Sea-Land Transport: Siquijor Island 1

Sta. Clara Shipping/Penafrancia Shipping: Hansel Jobett, Mac Bryan, Nathan Matthew, Don Benito Ambrosio II, Don Herculano and Eugene Elson. A total of 6 ferries.

Regina Shipping Lines: Regina Calixta IV

168 Shipping: Star Ferry-II

Denica Lines: Marina Express and Odyssey

Province of Camarines Sur: Princess Elaine (a fastcraft)

Kalayaan Shipping: Kalayaan VII

Rolly Fruelda: Elreen 2

Tour-cruise ships of Manila: Pacific Explorer, Eco Explorer, Discovery Palawan, 7017 Islands, Oceana Maria Scuba

Atienza Shipping Lines: April Rose

JVS Shipping: D’ASEAN Journey, D’Sea Journey

Aurelio Shipping: San Carlo Uno

Quincela Shipping: Q-Carrelyn VII

Starlite Shipping: Starlite Annapolis, Starlite Ferry, Starlite Navigator and Starlite Polaris. A total of 5 ferries.

Besta Shipping Lines: Baleno VII

Navios Shipping Lines: Grand Unity and Grand Venture 1

CSGA Ferry: Princess Annavell

Tri-Star Megalink: LCT Tabuelan Navistar

Millennium Shipping: Lakbayan Uno and Millennium Uno

Milagrosa J Shipping: Milagrosa J-3 and Milagrosa J-5

Aleson Shipping: Estrella del Mar, Stephanie Marie, Neveen, Danica Joy, Ciara Joie, Ciara Joie 2. A total of 6 ships.

Ever Lines: Ever Queen of Asia, Ever Queen Emilia, Ever Transport, Ever Sweet, Ever Queen of Pacific. A total of 5 ships.

Magnolia Shipping: Magnolia, Magnolia Grandiflora, Magnolia Fragrance

Evenesser Shipping/Ibnerizam Shipping/Sing Shipping: Bounty Cruiser, Jadestar Legacy, KC Beatrice

Province of Tawi-tawi: Tawi-tawi Pearl 1, LCT Tanah Tawi-tawi

ZDS-ATOM FSA: LCT Mabuhay

Sarangani Transport: Song of Dolly-3

Mae Wess/CW Cole: The Venue, LCT Nicole II Starferry

KSJ Shipping: Fortune Angels

Philstone Shipping: Yuhum, Kalinaw, Royal Princess

Davemyr Shipping: Dona Pepita

Hijos de Juan Corrales: Hijos-1

Daima Shipping: Swallow I and Swallow II

Ocean Fast Ferries: Oceanjet 7

A total of about 187 steel-hulled ferries to be culled including a few fastcrafts. Again, Moro boats (whose number is about 130 plus), motor boats, motor launches (like most of the crafts of Metro Ferry) and passenger-cargo motor bancas, big and small are not included. Anyway almost all of them will survive as the local-built, wooden-hulled crafts are generally below 35 years old in age (few wooden-hulled crafts reach 35 years of age).

In my database about 250 steel-hulled ferries will survive including over a dozen liners and more than 3 dozen HSC plus a sprinkling of Medium Speed Crafts (MSCs) like the two Anika Gayle ships (this count does not include the FastCats). If liners, HSCs and MSCs are not included (but the FastCats are included) so the comparison will be basically ferry-ROROs (that are not liners) then about 180 will be culled and about a little less 200 will survive (very few of the 180 and 200 are cruisers like the Georich and Yellow Rose). So that means killing nearly half of our ROPAXes.

If the plan to cull 35-year old ships is immediately implemented one sure response will the be multiplying of LCTs from China (not the local LCTs as basically those are not people carriers although some can and will be converted and the bulk of them are less than 35 years old). Will they call the transition from ferry-ROROs to passenger-cargo LCTs as “progress”?

If ships that are not ferries will not be culled then many of the ferries that will be culled might be converted into Cargo RORO ships that will not carry passengers like what happened to Trans-Asia 5 (but she is too beautiful as a comparison). People then will have to find alternate means of transport. Maybe the intermodal buses will mushroom. Or probably the Camotes motor boats like the Junmar ships will multiply. Otherwise there is our trusty motor banca to take. But I thought they want to phase that out too including the motor boats? Again, will they call that as “progress”?

I imagine for the remaining ferries, passenger loads of 100% will be a daily common occurrence, peak season or not. Maybe the ticket scalpers will return too to make a living. And it will matter a lot if one knows a crewman of a ship. Or better yet one of the owners. But if I talk of shipping of the 1980’s, will Secretary Tugade understand? I am sure he has no understanding of the shipping difficulties of that period.

Do MARINA and Secretary Tugade think that passengers are that important to the shipping companies? Those in the know knows that is not so and shipping companies can live by cargo and rolling cargo alone and that is the reason why the Cargo RORO LCTs are thriving. If the bill is passed I imagine the likes of Roble Shipping will just be doing cargo and rolling cargo basically plus maybe two ROPAXes to Ormoc and Hilongos, their prized ports and that will also include their freighters and Cargo RORO LCTs. I don’t think Secretary Tugade knows that the bulk of the sailing ships of Roble Shipping is not into passengers (and that includes their freighters). So in the end it will be the passengers that will really suffer. 

I wonder if Secretary Tugade knows some of the ships he wants to cull are actually re-engined now and some do not have any history of trouble and are still very good condition like the sister ships Filipinas Iligan and Filipinas Butuan. In other countries they base renewal of ship papers on technical inspection and not in some kind of arbitrary cut-off in age. As pointed out by the ship owners and PSSS (Philippine Ship Spotters Society), there is no mandatory retirement of ships in other countries and the IMO (International Maritime Organization) has no protocol on that (gusto yata mas magaling pa tayo sa kanila; mahilig din naman ang Philippine bureaucrats sa hambog). For the haters of old ships to say there is such a thing is just a bald lie and they resort to that because they have their own vested interest. Now what they want is a legislative fiat which is clearly anti-competition.

Give exclusive routes to the new ships? To where? To Sabah and Indonesia? Does Secretary Tugade think he can simply dissolve the franchises held by the shipping companies? It seems that Secretary Tugade is also applying into the Impunity Club a.k.a “What Are We In Power For” Club. It can smash a ship owner’s head like a golf ball.

8407189223_d160a902b0_z

A very good ship that is over 35 years old (Photo by Jonathan Bordon)

The current dispensation is saying that former Secretaries Roxas and Abaya left a lot of mess in transport. Do they want their own mess too?

Advertisements

The Start and Impact of Containerization on Local Shipping

Containerization or the use of container vans to transport goods began in the Philippines in 1976, a decade after containerization began to take hold internationally. The new method was started by Aboitiz Shipping Corporation when they converted their 1,992-gross ton general cargo ship “P. Aboitiz” into a container carrier. This was followed by the conversion of their general cargo ship “Sipalay” in 1978. These first two container ships had limited capacity in terms of TEU (Twenty Foot Equivalent Unit) which is the common measure of container capacity that can be carried by container ships but it more than showed the direction of cargo loading in the future. And it also showed that general cargo ships can be converted container carriers.

By 1978 and 1979, containerization was already in full swing in the Philippines when major competitor shipping companies William Lines Inc., Sulpicio Lines Inc. and Lorenzo Shipping Company also embraced the new paradigm and competed. This new wave was also joined at the same time by two other small and new shipping companies, the Sea Transport Company and Solid Shipping Lines. Except for these two, our pioneers in container shipping were passenger liner (which means there are fixed schedules and routes) shipping companies.

The leading liner shipping company then which was Compania Maritima declined to follow suit into containerization along with Gothong Lines while the others like Sweet Lines, Negros Navigation and Hijos de F. Escano followed a little later in the early 1980’s. Gothong Lines, however, was into small ROROs early and these can also load container vans. Sweet Lines later founded a separate cargo-container company, the Central Shipping Company.

Like Compania Maritima, Madrigal Shipping, another old shipping company also did not follow into containerization. The smaller passenger liner companies also did not or were not capable into going to containerization. Among them were Galaxy Lines, N & S Lines, Northern Lines, Bisayan Land Transport, Newport Shipping, Cardinal Shipping, Dacema Lines, Rodrigueza Shipping, etc. Soon all of them were gone from Philippine waters and one reason was that they failed to adapt to the new paradigm and shippers were already demanding for container vans.

Before the advent of container vans, dry cargo were handled bulk or break-bulk. Bulk is when the whole ship is loaded with grains or copra. But bulk shipment is not possible in the passenger-cargo ships then as major parts of the ship is devoted to passengers and its requirements. Along with passengers, the passenger-cargo ships then carried various merchandise as in finished goods from the city like canned goods, “sin” products and construction materials. On the return trip, it would carry farm products like copra, abaca, rice, corn or dried fish. Since it was mixed, it was called break-bulk. It was mainly handled by cargo booms and porters and stowed in the ships’ cargo holds. Since it was mixed and has no containers aside from boxes the handling was long and tedious and it was vulnerable to pilferage and damage by handling and by the weather.

With the coming of container vans the weaknesses of the old way of loading that led to damage and pilferage were minimized by a big degree. Actually, the arranging of the goods was even passed on to the shipper or trader and all the container shipping company had to do was haul aboard the container. The new system needed much less labor (who can be balky at times and disputes with them can lead to delays or intentional damage) than before and the loading is faster because containers can simply be stacked one atop the other. This was difficult with breakbulk because of possible contamination and because the cargo had no containers it was difficulty to simply stack them and this even led to lost cargo spaces.

One initial result of containerization was the need for dedicated container ships as the passenger-cargo ships of that era, the cruisers were not meant for the loading of container vans (although they can carry a few and loaded LOLO). Since our local volume was low, our shipping companies preferred not to order purpose-built container ships. Instead, the discovered path was just to convert general cargo ships into container ships. The needed conversion was actually minimal and since these ships were already equipped with cargo booms then it was easier for everything. Only, the booms needed to be more stout as in it has to have more lifting capacity because of the added weight of the steel of the container van. Container vans were handled LOLO or Lift-On, Lift Off.

With the coming of ROROs with its ramps and car decks starting in 1980, cargo handling became easier. Break-bulk cargo especially the heavier ones can now be handled by the forklifts and transferred to the car decks (which then became cargo decks also but not as cargo holds). Shipping companies have used forklifts before but mainly just in the ports. Now, the first ROROs also carried forklifts in the car decks and the stowing of container vans in the car decks of the ROROs began. These were mainly XEUs (Ten-Foot container vans) which can easily be handled by medium-sized forklifts. Still many of cargoes in the first ROROs were break-bulk.

Some liners of the 1980’s had cargo booms at the front of the ship while having RORO ramps at the stern like the “Zamboanga City” and the “Dona Virginia” of William Lines. It carried container vans at the front of the ship and those were handled LOLO while at the stern they loaded container vans. Actually, some big cruiser liners of the late 1970’s can carry container vans on their upper decks at the stern like the “Don Enrique” and “Don Eusebio” of Sulpicio Lines, the “Cagayan de Oro City” of William Lines and the “Don Claudio” of Negros Navigation”. It was handled LOLO by the cargo booms of those ships.

At the tail end of the 1970’s and at the start of the 1980’s what was prominent was the race of the leading liner shipping companies to acquire general cargo ships and convert it to container ships. Aboitiz Shipping Company was the early leader and they fielded thirteen container ships between 1976 and 1989. Their series was called the “Aboitiz Concarrier” and latter additions were called the “Aboitiz Superconcarrier” and “Aboitiz Megaconcarrier”. William Lines rolled out in the same period eight container ship plus two Cargo RORO ships which can also carry passengers. They named their series as the “Wilcon”. Sulpicio Lines was not to be outdone and they fielded fourteen and these were dubbed as “Sulpicio Container” or “Sulcon”.

In the same period, Lorenzo Shipping, a former major, also rolled out eleven container ship in a series called “Lorenzo Container” or “Lorcon”. Some of these were former general cargo ships of theirs. Sea Transport Company were also able to field eight with place name of their ports of call followed by “Transport” like “Davao Transport”. None of the other liner shipping companies which followed into containerization like Sweet Lines and Negros Navigation had half a dozen container ships. Instead, they began relying on their new RORO ship acquisitions but that was also done by Sulpicio Lines, William Lines, Aboitiz Shipping and Gothong Lines.

The main effect of the rush to acquire container ships was the slowing down of the acquisition of passenger ships. Actually, this might even had an effect on their purchase of RORO passenger OR ROPAX ships. With the collapse of many shipping companies in the crisis decade of the 1980’s, this resulted in a lack of passenger ships at the end of that decade. But there were many container ships as in about sixty and that fleet pushed many shipping companies in the cargo trade out of business in the 1980’s. Two main factors pushed them into the precipice – the economic crisis which made it hard to acquire ships and the loss of patronage because the paradigm in cargo handling had changed. Break-bulk was now already marginalized and frowned upon. Shippers and traders have had enough of pilferage and goods damaged in transit.

With marginalization, the other cargo liner companies had more difficulty filling up their cargo holds. Voyages became fewer and sailing times ballooned. They became dead duck for the container vans loaded into the fast RORO liners which had fixed schedules. Soon they were on the way out or they had to move to tramper shipping where there are no fixed routes and schedules. During this period cargo liners were even included in the schedule boards of the passenger liners. Their only deficit compared to passenger liners was as cargo ships they had less speed. And since cargo is handled LOLO they also spent more time in the ports.

Now, long-distance break-bulk shipping is almost gone. It is only lively now in the regional routes like the routes originating from Cebu and Zamboanga. In many cases, places and routes they have already evolved into intermodal shipping – the use of trucks which are loaded into short-distance ROROs. In this mode the trucks are the new “containers” or “vessels”. Since that is in competition with container shipping, it is now container shipping which is beginning to be marginalized by the intermodal truck especially if it is supported by the cheap Cargo RORO LCT.

Things change. Always.