BSC moves to buy 8 more ships with Chinese funds

[Ideas_R_Bulletproof]

Answers to your questions (note hyperlinks):

1. Short answer is yes.
2. Correct.
3. Partially yes, with some reservations.

Right now it takes a special type of low-draft (about 8m fully loaded) container ship to berth at Chittagong port given its low draft jetties (around 10m draft). These are known in the trade as 'Chittagong Max' vessels or also known as the popular Zhejiang 2700 design (for 2700 TEU capacity and about...). Maersk and other shipping line order these vessels for most Bay of Bengal ports like CTG and Yangon (Sittwe) because draft is low around these ports. Here is Maersk ship 'MCC Chittagong', a vessel of this class. This one carries containers back and forth between Singapore/Port Klang and Chittagong, sort of doing semi-lighterage duties.

http://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais...i:477636300/imo:9761023/vessel:MCC_CHITTAGONG

These are roughly 37157 DWT displacement ships.

However large container-carrier vessels with normal draft requirements routinely exceed 10m draft call at transshipment ports like Singapore and Colombo. They cannot come to Chittagong so garments and other exporters have to incur extra shipping charge.

Supramax is the largest of the vessels with a size of around 50,000 to 60,000 DWT and can be as long as 200 meters or 656 feet. These are high draft vessels so about 20+meters draft. These have to anchor in outer anchorage or Kutubdia island south of CTG port. If we build the deep-water port at Sonadia or Kutubdia, those ports will be able to accommodate these classes of ships.

Handymax vessels are slightly smaller and have a displacement of 40,000 to 50,000 DWT. These ships are usually at least 150 meters or 492 feet. These are the bulker vessels that are being discussed in this thread and won't normally be able to berth directly in CTG if they are of normal high-draft design (draft about 12 to 15m). However these new builds in China will probably be built to low-draft design (under 8m) and will be able to berth in Chittagong.

Handysize are even smaller-sized ships with a capacity ranging between 15,000 and 35,000 DWT. These vessels are ideal for small as well as large ports, and so make up the majority of ocean cargo vessels in the world. These are OK to berth in Chittagong port jetties directly if they are under 20,000 DWT (around 8~9m draft).

See images below for guidelines for drafts for various TEU classes.

In the neighborhood, Chennai and Visakhapatnam ports have natural deep-draft ports and harbors so they can accommodate much larger container vessels, thereby lowering shipping costs for their users.

http://www.maritimegateway.com/news/dp-world-chennai-hosts-14-8-metres-deep-draft-vessel/

http://www.maritimegateway.com/news/cma-cgms-cimex-2e-iex-service-makes-maiden-call-visakhapatnam/

thanks for the detailed answer..... but probably I was unable to explain my questions to you.... let me explain a bit further....

1. if we get a deep-sea port, would that mean that most of the ships that come to Bangladesh would directly download on a jetty? - I was referring to "ships", not just "container ships".... would this mean that big ships would download their cargo on a jetty and then we would re-load the cargo on another smaller "lighter" ship to carry the cargo to the rest of the country? or do we load the cargo on a truck rather than a "lighter" ship?.....we're talking about a minimum of 70 million tons of goods....
2. we would no longer require to send ships to Colombo or Klang or Singapore to fetch our containers left there by bigger ships? - so we scrap our own ships, or do we start our own container shipping lines to challenge Maersk and others globally?
3. so, we can rely more on our own ships to ship our goods rather than spending $6bn+ on shipping per year, thereby putting huge pressure on foreign reserves? - related to the second question.... so, our ships take only our containers to Europe?...... how big are we thinking this ship to be?..... the same ships would go to China to bring imported goods containers?..... how many container ships do we require?.... do we let international shipping lines to still operate from our ports or do we buy or build an international container shipping line that would challenge Maersk and others?

 

[Bilal9]

thanks for the detailed answer..... but probably I was unable to explain my questions to you.... let me explain a bit further....

1. if we get a deep-sea port, would that mean that most of the ships that come to Bangladesh would directly download on a jetty? - I was referring to "ships", not just "container ships".... would this mean that big ships would download their cargo on a jetty and then we would re-load the cargo on another smaller "lighter" ship to carry the cargo to the rest of the country? or do we load the cargo on a truck rather than a "lighter" ship?.....we're talking about a minimum of 70 million tons of goods....

Yes - if we had a natural deep sea port like Visakhapatnam (like we are planning at Sonadia) big ships (upto 60,000 tons or so) could download all their cargo on a jetty very quickly and then smaller "lighter" ships could re-load the cargo to carry the cargo to the rest of the country (such as Dhaka Inland Container Terminal which exists for this purpose). The low draft 176 TEU container carriers are already being built by private yards and have been completed. By truck would be more expensive and far slower.

2. we would no longer require to send ships to Colombo or Klang or Singapore to fetch our containers left there by bigger ships? - so we scrap our own ships, or do we start our own container shipping lines to challenge Maersk and others globally?

Yes - this would enable us to save money. Storing containers at Colombo or Port Klang or Singapore is not cheap. But let's not get beyond ourselves here. Challenging Maersk etc. is a long shot with our volume of containers. They have certain operating economy of scale that can be tough to match - these companies have been at it for a while. But yes we can have our own container shipping lines to Europe or other continents. Some transshipment at local Asian ports like Singapore or HK would still be needed.

3. so, we can rely more on our own ships to ship our goods rather than spending $6bn+ on shipping per year, thereby putting huge pressure on foreign reserves? - related to the second question.... so, our ships take only our containers to Europe?...... how big are we thinking this ship to be?..... the same ships would go to China to bring imported goods containers?..... how many container ships do we require?.... do we let international shipping lines to still operate from our ports or do we buy or build an international container shipping line that would challenge Maersk and others?

Having our own container shipping lines does not automatically mean we can save a huge amount. There are other factors. But yes - not having at the mercy of the larger shipping lines (which act like an oligopoly by fixing shipping rates) means we have definitely better negotiating leverage and we can save much more money by having our own carriers - which will have to operate at a profit as well.

Most 'Handymax' size container ships that will be able to dock at Sonadia or Kutubdia (say 50,000 to 60,000 DWT or about 4000 TEUs) can of course make a trip to China. Number of ships would depend on (being calculated by) size of ships and volumes of containers they carry travelling back and forth between Chinese and other destination ports at any given time.

Once we have a deepwater port - then having larger (upto 'Handymax' size) container ships and having some shipping lines to successfully operate these becomes a possibility.

 

[Ideas_R_Bulletproof]

Yes - if we had a natural deep sea port like Visakhapatnam (like we are planning at Sonadia) big ships (upto 60,000 tons or so) could download all their cargo on a jetty very quickly and then smaller "lighter" ships could re-load the cargo to carry the cargo to the rest of the country (such as Dhaka Inland Container Terminal which exists for this purpose). The low draft 176 TEU container carriers are already being built by private yards and have been completed. By truck would be more expensive and far slower.

again, brother..... I was talking about "any ship", not just "container ship"..... you're ignoring the biggest volume products that are handled by Chittagong Port - cement clinker, stone, coal, wheat, iron scrap, gypsum, limestone, crude oil, diesel, palm oil, salt, raw sugar, etc.... these are millions of tons.... nowhere near what you are talking about.... you can't have a strategic discussion by ignoring the most important strategic supplies that your port handles....

Yes - this would enable us to save money. Storing containers at Colombo or Port Klang or Singapore is not cheap. But let's not get beyond ourselves here. Challenging Maersk etc. is a long shot with our volume of containers. They have certain operating economy of scale that can be tough to match - these companies have been at it for a while. But yes we can have our own container shipping lines to Europe or other continents. Some transshipment at local Asian ports like Singapore or HK would still be needed.

Having our own container shipping lines does not automatically mean we can save a huge amount. There are other factors. But yes - not having at the mercy of the larger shipping lines (which act like an oligopoly by fixing shipping rates) means we have definitely better negotiating leverage and we can save much more money by having our own carriers - which will have to operate at a profit as well.

Most 'Handymax' size container ships that will be able to dock at Sonadia or Kutubdia (say 50,000 to 60,000 DWT or about 4000 TEUs) can of course make a trip to China. Number of ships would depend on (being calculated by) size of ships and volumes of containers they carry travelling back and forth between Chinese and other destination ports at any given time.

having no container ship of our own is a strategic weakness that we can't afford.... this would mean that we would need to hire others' ships to even import our most sensitive items during the most trying of times.... or worse, no shipping line may even agree to carry our goods!!..... such strategic need is not negotiable, and its not worth any amount....

Once we have a deepwater port - then having larger (upto 'Handymax' size) container ships and having some shipping lines to successfully operate these becomes a possibility.

you're trying to design your port to abide by the designs of the ships of Maersk and others?..... think again brother..... you design ports to ships' needs??.... you destroy your environment to conform to multinational ship designs??..... what do you do, when ships' designs change again?..... you change your port again??..... please think again.... I know, you're a rational person....

 

[Bilal9]

again, brother..... I was talking about "any ship", not just "container ship"..... you're ignoring the biggest volume products that are handled by Chittagong Port - cement clinker, stone, coal, wheat, iron scrap, gypsum, limestone, crude oil, diesel, palm oil, salt, raw sugar, etc.... these are millions of tons.... nowhere near what you are talking about.... you can't have a strategic discussion by ignoring the most important strategic supplies that your port handles....

I was mentioning container ships as examples of 'a ship'. Please don't see differences between container ships and bulkers as far as draft. They simply carry different payloads and have different arrangements to on-load and offload their cargo.

So we have two situations:

Container-handling is critical for exporting manufactured products that have to be protected such as garments or shoes.

Bulk products handling (cement clinker, stone, coal, wheat, iron scrap, gypsum, limestone, crude oil, diesel, palm oil, salt, raw sugar, etc.) are critical for imports.

For now:
Handling bulk is easier technically and can use existing process (anchoring high draft super-carriers somewhere in outer anchorage near Kutubdia/Sonadia) and then using on-board bulk transfer chutes and conveyors (or one ton poly-bags or clamshell buckets) to transfer dry bulk goods onto low-draft open cargo-hold marine barges or bulk carriers of anywhere from 800 to 2500 tons which can navigate our rivers.

For later:
For even more efficient bulk product handling you need a bulk dry goods port which needs draft of at least fifteen meters and for which Kutubdia and Sonadia may be appropriate. This below is Amsterdam. Note the relatively smaller bulk barges which are waiting to take bulk goods up the river. Bulk goods are also being transferred to rail carrier cars. We need this type of infrastructure at some point to make things more efficient.

having no container ship of our own is a strategic weakness that we can't afford.... this would mean that we would need to hire others' ships to even import our most sensitive items during the most trying of times.... or worse, no shipping line may even agree to carry our goods!!..... such strategic need is not negotiable, and its not worth any amount....

Well the sooner our leaders understand this the better. We need our own fleet and not to be at the mercy of the Maersk's of the world.

you're trying to design your port to abide by the designs of the ships of Maersk and others?..... think again brother..... you design ports to ships' needs??.... you destroy your environment to conform to multinational ship designs??..... what do you do, when ships' designs change again?..... you change your port again??..... please think again.... I know, you're a rational person....

No one single country dictates ship designs for low-draft ports, it is an international problem faced by many countries and solved in unison by involvement of all nations. These technical challenges if resolved can help a country like ours. Ship designs adapt to accommodate the environment. In this case the new low-draft 39,000 ton Maersk container ship was designed to _not_ necessitate expensive dredging at this time at Chittagong port jetties.

I hope our BSC-ordered bulkers will also conform to the same low-draft design as MCC Chittagong, which is the second ship from Maersk to be built to the new “Zhejiang 2700” design. Popularly called “Chittagong Max”, these ships are specially designed to fit Chittagong port’s unique requirements which is draft of 9.5m.

https://www.mcc.com.sg/news/2016/12/15/welcome-the-largest-ship-to-call-chittagong

However I doubt you can find a person involved in any environmental movement who will say dredging is environmentally harmful especially in the case of Chittagong or Mongla. All ports require dredging and periodic deepening of marine thoroughfares near jetties.

Yes - you can argue that point with shipbuilders and shipping policy-makers, but you'd be arguing only for arguments' sake. Which is pointless.

 

[Ideas_R_Bulletproof]

For later:
For even more efficient bulk product handling you need a bulk dry goods port which needs draft of at least fifteen meters and for which Kutubdia and Sonadia may be appropriate. This below is Amsterdam. Note the relatively smaller bulk barges which are waiting to take bulk goods up the river. Bulk goods are also being transferred to rail carrier cars. We need this type of infrastructure at some point to make things more efficient.

again, nice detailed post....

can we compare our ports with Rotterdam?.... the English Channel weather is rough enough to force the Netherlands to close off the entrance of Rotterdam with massive gates.... and Rotterdam handles goods for Germany mostly.... and it had to compete with Antwerp to become the biggest port in Europe.... massive expensive infrastructure are the results of weather and regional competition...

their problems won't match with ours.... we have to get used to our conditions.... not just get lessons from others' conditions to impose those on us.... we should devise our own ways.... just like what the Dutch did for their sea wall.... they didn't look at anyone else to find an example before they build things... if they think they need something, they just do it...

However I doubt you can find a person involved in any environmental movement who will say dredging is environmentally harmful especially in the case of Chittagong or Mongla. All ports require dredging and periodic deepening of marine thoroughfares near jetties.

Yes - you can argue that point with shipbuilders and shipping policy-makers, but you'd be arguing only for arguments' sake. Which is pointless.

yes, ports and waterways require dredging.... but not down to 20-24 feet or something like that!!.... clearing channels of silt is one thing, and redesigning rivers is another....
bending natural rules have their consequences.... take the lesson from Farakka Barrage....

 

[Bilal9]

again, nice detailed post....

can we compare our ports with Rotterdam?.... the English Channel weather is rough enough to force the Netherlands to close off the entrance of Rotterdam with massive gates.... and Rotterdam handles goods for Germany mostly.... and it had to compete with Antwerp to become the biggest port in Europe.... massive expensive infrastructure are the results of weather and regional competition...

their problems won't match with ours.... we have to get used to our conditions.... not just get lessons from others' conditions to impose those on us.... we should devise our own ways.... just like what the Dutch did for their sea wall.... they didn't look at anyone else to find an example before they build things... if they think they need something, they just do it...

yes, ports and waterways require dredging.... but not down to 20-24 feet or something like that!!.... clearing channels of silt is one thing, and redesigning rivers is another....
bending natural rules have their consequences.... take the lesson from Farakka Barrage....

You make some interesting points - all valid of course.

By the way - the primary consultants for our river training and sea barriers (cyclone-proofing project) are all Dutch companies. Netherlands and Bangladesh terrain have remarkable similarity.

We can come up with our own ideas, but nothing wrong with taking lessons and adapting some ideas for our own use IF (Big IF) they apply to our specific scenario. I know I sound like I am harping on a bunch of obvious lessons, but adaptation and customization of existing Western ideas is what got Japan, Taiwan, Korea and China this far. The Japanese are experts at it.

They used to send delegations overseas (to Europe and US in the 50's) on how to design everything, including street-lamps, traffic lights etc.

Tons of pictures were taken, analyzed by committee for the best choice, then adapted for use in Japanese scenario.

So far - only Korea and Taiwan has emulated these ideas.

Yes, blatant copying does take place, but adaptation examples are more successful.

 

[Bilal9]

@Ideas_R_Bulletproof Bhai - you remember I was mentioning that there were innovative solutions to float out high draft naval or freighter/tanker builds in low draft areas? Like building large 8000 ton destroyers in Chittagong yards that couldn't navigate the river?

Well here's a picture of the Bergamini class FREMM heavy frigate built at the Trieste yard of Fincantieri in Italy. This build displaces about 6000 tons. Heavy Frigate is accurate.

The seas here are very shallow (like Chittagong port outer banks). So they can't launch on the shore.

They build a submersible marine barge and float this whole thing out to sea and slowly submerge it until the frigate floats free...then they pump air into the barge and float it back up.

 

[Bilal9]

Since the subject of Trans-shipment came up in the posts above, here are a couple more videos showing the process (by a company called Oldendorff) for double-banking (transshipment that is needed for Bangladesh if using HandyMax carriers of say 40,000 to 50,000 DWT).

a) Older style mechanized but non-automated Bauxite transshipment using cranes and huge one ton grabs in Guyana (very similar to our Mongla and other narrow riverine situations in Bangladesh)

b) Newer style iron ore transshipment using automated bucket disks and large trans-shipper platform in Abu Dhabi (on a bay having draft of only seven meters)

 

[Ideas_R_Bulletproof]

[IMG]https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-XuYRCZbMU2c/WNl8g6x4PAI/AAAAAAAAJPY/ZzjiysMJNSw0hdiWr71UbsZJ7zjDQqRNQCLcB/s1600/federico.jpg[/IMG]

really like this, brother....

we should surely think in this way..... it can greatly reduce the trouble while building deep-draft warships....

 

[Arthur]

খবর > চট্টগ্রাম
জুলাইয়ে বিএসসির বহরে যুক্ত হচ্ছে নতুন জাহাজ
চট্টগ্রাম ব্যুরো বিডিনিউজ টোয়েন্টিফোর ডটকম
Published: 2018-03-13 19:06:05.0 BdST Updated: 2018-03-13 19:29:22.0 BdST

• 

দীর্ঘ ২৭ বছর পর বাংলাদেশ শিপিং করপোরেশনের (বিএসসি) বহরে যুক্ত হতে যাচ্ছে নতুন জাহাজ।

মঙ্গলবার বিএসসি কার্যালয়ে এক মতবিনিময় সভায় এর ব্যবস্থাপনা পরিচালক (এমডি) কমডোর ইয়াহইয়া সৈয়দ বলেন, “চীন সরকারের আর্থিক সহযোগিতায় নির্মাণাধীন ছয়টি জাহাজের মধ্যে প্রথমটি ‘বাংলার জয়যাত্রা’ জুলাই মাসে আমাদের কাছে হস্তান্তর করা হবে।

“বাকি জাহাজগুলো পর্যায়ক্রমে আগামী ফেব্রুয়ারির মধ্যে বহরে যুক্ত হবে। বর্তমানে জাহাজগুলোর ‘মেসিভ ব্লক রেইজিং’ ও ব্লকগুলো জোড়া লাগানোর কাজ চলছে।”

চায়না ন্যাশনাল ইমপোর্ট অ্যান্ড এক্সপোর্ট মেশিনারিজ করপোরেশন থেকে এক হাজার ৮৪৩ কোটি টাকা ব্যয়ে এই ছয়টি জাহাজ কেনা হচ্ছে। এর মধ্যে তিনটি অয়েল ট্যাংকার ও বাকিগুলো বাল্ক ক্যারিয়ার। এতে চীন সরকার দিচ্ছে এক হাজার ৪৪৮ কোটি টাকা এবং বিএসসির নিজস্ব তহবিল থেকে দেওয়া হচ্ছে ৩৯৫ কোটি টাকা।

‘বাংলার জয়যাত্রা’ জাহাজটি বাল্ক ক্যারিয়ার বলে মতবিনিময়ে জানানো হয়। আগামী ১৫ মার্চ অনুষ্ঠিত বিএসসির বার্ষিক সাধারণ সভা উপলক্ষ্যে সংবাদকর্মীদের সঙ্গে এ মতবিনিময় সভার আয়োজন করা হয়।

সভায় বিএসসির এমডি বলেন, দেশের বর্তমান চাহিদা বিবেচনায় বিভিন্ন ধরন ও আকারের কমপক্ষে ৪০-৫০টি জাহাজ থাকা বাঞ্চনীয়।
“বিভিন্ন প্রতিকূলতার কারণে প্রয়োজনীয় অর্থের সংস্থান করতে না পারায় বিগত ২৭ বছরে বিএসসির বহরে নতুন কোনো জাহাজ সংযোজিত হয়নি।”

১৯৭২ সালের ৫ ফেব্রুয়ারি প্রতিষ্ঠিত বিএসসির বহরে ১৯৯১ সাল পর্যন্ত বিভিন্ন সময়ে যুক্ত হয় মোট ৩৮টি জাহাজ। পুরনো ও বাণিজ্যিকভাবে অলাভজনক হওয়ায় ধাপে ধাপে ৩৬টি জাহাজ বিক্রি করে দেওয়া হয়। বর্তমানে এই প্রতিষ্ঠানের হাতে থাকা দুটি লাইটার ট্যাংকারের গড় বয়স ৩০ বছর।

ইয়াহইয়া সৈয়দ বলেন, “আমাদের মেরিটাইম সেক্টর যেন আবার জেগে ওঠে সে লক্ষ্যে আমরা কাজ করছি।
“জাহাজ ভাড়া হ্রাস এবং পরিচালনা ব্যয় অনেক বৃদ্ধির পরও ২০১৬-১৭ অর্থবছরে আট কোটি ৬৫ লাখ টাকা মুনাফা হয়েছে। নতুন ছয়টি জাহাজ বহরে যুক্ত হলে মুনাফার পরিমাণ শত কোটি টাকায় পৌঁছাবে।”

সভায় জানানো হয়, ২০১৬-১৭ অর্থবছরে পরিচালনা খাতে ৮২ কোটি ১৫ লাখ টাকা এবং অপরিচালন ও অন্যান্য খাতে ৩৫ কোটি ৮৪ লাখ টাকা আয় করে। বিপরীতে পরিচালনা ব্যয় ছিল ৫৪ কোটি ৫০ লাখ এবং প্রশাসনিক ও রক্ষণাবেক্ষণ ব্যয় হয় ৫৪ কোটি ৮৫ লাখ টাকা।

সভায় বিএসসির পক্ষ থেকে কয়লা পরিবহনের জন্য ছয়টি মাদার বাল্ক ক্যারিয়ার ও ১০টি লাইটার বাল্ক ক্যারিয়ার, এলএনজি পরিবহনের জন্য দুটি এলএনজি ভেসেল, ক্রুড অয়েল পরিবহনের জন্য দুটি মাদার ট্যাংকার, জ্বালানি তেল পরিবহনের জন্য দুটি মাদার প্রোডাক্ট অয়েল ট্যাংকার এবং ফিডার সার্ভিস চালুর জন্য চারটি সেলুলার কন্টেইনার জাহাজ কেনার পরিকল্পনার কথা জানানো হয়।

https://bangla.bdnews24.com/ctg/article1470595.bdnews

English link- https://www.jagonews24.com/en/national/news/37832
-----------------------
One Bulk carrier will be delivered in July, second one around August. Rest will be delivered by February of 2019.
Two LNG carrier and Two Container ships coming too.

@Bilal9 @BDforever @Homo Sapiens @Mage @UKBengali @Species

 

[Arthur]

Hunday shipping Corporation started a new direct shipping route between South Korea, China & Chittagong. This new route will cut down shipping te by 15-20 days. Thats a great news for RMG and steel manufacturing sector. Since much of the raw materials are sourced from this two countries.

I hope this new route will also contribute & help our exports in Chinese market.

@Bilal9 @Homo Sapiens @Species @Ashik Mahmud @BDforever @Centaur @Mage & others

 

[Species]

Hunday shipping Corporation started a new direct shipping route between South Korea, China & Chittagong. This new route will cut down shipping te by 15-20 days. Thos a great news for RMG and steel manufacturing sector. Since much of the raw materials are sourced from this two countries.

I hope this new route will contribute & help our exports in Chinese market.

@Bilal9 @Homo Sapiens @Species @Ashik Mahmud @BDforever @Centaur @Mage & others

This is a huge development, trade with East Asia is growing rapidly. I just hope other shipping corporations will follow suit.

 

[Bilal9]

Hunday shipping Corporation started a new direct shipping route between South Korea, China & Chittagong. This new route will cut down shipping te by 15-20 days. Thos a great news for RMG and steel manufacturing sector. Since much of the raw materials are sourced from this two countries.

I hope this new route will contribute & help our exports in Chinese market.

@Bilal9 @Homo Sapiens @Species @Ashik Mahmud @BDforever @Centaur @Mage & others

Most people don't realize this but the Koreans and Chinese themselves arranged this to help their own industries in Bangladesh.

Side benefit will be to local Bangladeshi exporters because it is crucial to get back raw materials for value addition ASAP after opening back-to-back Letter of Credit.

Shaving 20 days off of inbound transshipment of raw materials in Singapore will obviously get us (and Koreans/Chinese) more orders in the SEZ's.

The other boost (leap/milestone) will come when we can export using our own shallow draft ships directly to European ports of Rotterdam, Antwerp, Hamburg and Amsterdam instead of going through outbound transshipment in Singapore.