≡ Menu

Daewoo wins contract to build tankers for Royal Navy

Daewoo Shipbuilding and Marine Engineering has landed a £452million contract to build four supply tankers for the Royal Navy.

It appears not everyone in the UK is happy about it, though.

About the author: Just the administrator of this humble blog.

  • PeterDownUnder

    You gotta compare between the economic benefits of buying from home to the cost savings from buying abroad.

  • silver surfer

    What with this and the decision to let uni tuition fees go through the roof, I have to ask are they sell-outs with zero regard for national self-interest? Or are there still true believers in the old market-knows-best ideology left in the post-bailout world?

  • silver surfer

    Meanwhile the SNP is asking with leadership like this can Scotland afford *not* to have independence – and I don’t blame them.

  • http://rjkoehler.com Robert Koehler
  • YangachiBastardo

    like the UK build anything anymore

  • yuna

    They build creme eggs.

  • cm

    Why didn’t UK ship builders put in their own bids? Only Korea and Italy did.

    Korean media says it’s because of superior technology that they won the bid. The Daily Mirror article above says it’s because of cheap labor that UK couldn’t compete with. I love the discrepancy. Is there that much significant gap anymore, in wages between EU and Korea?

  • http://rjkoehler.com Robert Koehler

    Is there that much significant gap anymore, in wages between EU and Korea?

    Even if there is, Korea makes some damn good ships.

  • http://dok.do/4aVK41 Year of the Dragon

    40 years ago Europe LAUGHED at Mr. Asan (Chung Ju-yung) when he asked for a loan to create Hyundai Ship-Building company.

    They laughed because they thought Korea couldn’t build boats.

    He took a 500 won note out of his pocket, pointed to the pic of the turtle-boat and told Europe Koreans KNEW how to build good boats.

    He got the loan and started his mega-Empire.

    Good on Hyundai and Daewoo! Britain went to the dogs years ago.

    http://tiny.cc/7o07f

  • redwhitedude

    #9,
    he must have done something else to convince europeans since building turtle boats and modern steel ships are two completely different things. What do they build in England anyways. All their car brands are foreign owned. They don’t really build ships. The only ships I hear europeans build are cruise ships way up in finland. It’s the only segment of the shipbuilding where europeans still have an edge over the asians.

  • http://askakorean.blogspot.com thekorean

    Even if there is, Korea makes some damn good ships.

    People do not realize how much of a shipbuilding superpower Korea is. Korea alone builds more ships than entire Europe combined. And Korea’s labor used for building ships is NOT cheap at all — Ulsan has the highest average income in all of Korea.

  • YangachiBastardo

    The Daily Mirror article above says it’s because of cheap labor that UK couldn’t compete with. I love the discrepancy. Is there that much significant gap anymore, in wages between EU and Korea?

    The answer is…yes and no. Koreans on average earn net salaries that are, on a PPP basis, much higher than Belgium, France, Italy, Denmark etc. etc. The visual impact of the country is striking. Koreans appear much better dressed, they drive bigger cars, and buy more of ‘em per capita than say Brits or Italians, they also live in more modern buildings etc.

    For an average Korean middle-class family the visual appeal of Europe is probably reminiscent of the former iron curtain bloc.

    Said so in terms of overall cost of labour Korea is still around 1/3 cheaper than the Euro average. In fact Korean workers are burdened with a much lower tax wedge and Korean employers as well have to pay much less social benefits. So Europeans have less in terms of private consumption choices and much more in terms public goods.

    Bascially we eat like shit, drive shit tuna fish cans , live in run down buildings but hey it’s great to get that basket weaving degree for free and go on take a civil service job, that will pay a retirement check when you turn 55. Alternatively if you really don’t feel like “working” if you’re a 17 years old girl with 3 kids from 3 diferent fathers you’re pretty much set for life

  • YangachiBastardo

    That’s why i think a Progressives vvictory would be detrimental to Korea :)
    I don’t think they’ll hand over the country to the Norks, i’m just scared they’re seriously intentioned to go down the Euro whacko road.

    Patience Korea is strong enough to survive a few years of mismanagement

    Ulsan has the highest average income in all of Korea. </blockquote

    Ulsan has a GDP per capita on par with Switzerland and higher than the US

  • PeterDownUnder

    Theres no way South Korea will become a welfare state.

    They can see whats happening with the Euro and EU right now. And even with all the populist shenanigans by the politicians South Korea still has a competent civil service.

    Check out http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/biz/2012/02/123_105278.html

    Koreas ministry of finance points out that the welfare pledges made by both major parties IF implemented as they say would cost over 300 billion dollars. Over 1/3 of Koreas annual GDP.

    Personally though I believe South Korea could get a healthier balance check and funding to implement more public investments and welfare by implementing some ‘sin taxes’.

    Increase tax on alcohol, tobacco and maybe even legalize prostitution by allocating brothel licenses for hefty annual fees and taxation, in return for providing police protection and health checkups and etc.

    Over here in Australia, whenever the government needs more money, more red light cameras and speed cameras along with road patrol takes place. Just today I got fined 300$ for making a right turn on a road that I’ve made right turns on for the past 10 years due to a ‘no right turn’ sign being put 1 month ago apparently…

    Legalising prostitution in Korea although would be big step and a very liberal and progressive idea for many Koreans to take in, doubling the price of Soju and tobacco would increase government revenue IMMENSELY! and still would be many times cheaper than other countries in the world.

    20$ for a pack of durries here is just ridiculous…and it continues to go up every year.

  • cm

    “The visual impact of the country is striking. Koreans appear much better dressed, they drive bigger cars, and buy more of ‘em per capita than say Brits or Italians, they also live in more modern buildings etc.”

    I’ve never been to Europe. But still, this is just too hard to believe. Is Europe that bad ?

  • YangachiBastardo
  • YangachiBastardo
  • cm

    YangachiBastardo you can find pictures of same poverty and grunge in Korea as well, that doesn’t mean anything.

    I do agree with you however, that Socialism coupled with living off of the wealth and reputation earned by their parents, has ruined Europe. A pattern unfortunately much admired by many Koreans who are aspiring hard to be in the same shoes as Europe.

  • http://vmphotography.com.au hoju_saram

    You pain a pretty grim picture, Yangachi, but I’m not sure Koreans are ahead on living standards just yet. I think they will be soon. There are plenty of slum-dwellers in the ROK and I think the average taxi wage is about $700 a month. Mechanics and other workers get a pittance too, and while I agree that the social system is the Euro zone (hell, in Australia too) is far too generous, I’d hate to suddenly be out of work in Korea. Don’t even get my started on elderly poverty.

    Also, the images you’ve linked are all from poor areas of major cities. Maybe things have changed since I went through Europe. I do recall being underwhelmed by the cities; I thought they were drab and a little sketchy in some cases, but I really thought lots of small towns were beautiful (much more so than most ROK towns, which are mostly poverty-stricken). I thought Switzerland and Austria and Northern Italy were stunning. Then again I was passing through drinking chiantis and camping next to lakes etc, so maybe I had my rose-coloured glasses on.

    Also, as far as living standards are concerned, I think Northern Europe does pretty well, at least. Everyone I saw in Finland and Sweden seemed very well-to-do, although I don’t envy them their winters.

  • http://vmphotography.com.au hoju_saram

    One area I think Korea is way ahead of Europe on is crime and the transport system. I remember getting on the metro to Inchon and marvelling at how clean, efficient and affordable it was. In the Gwangju subway they had potted plants and framed pictures on the walls. Shit like that would last 20 minutes here in Australia (and Europe, I’m guessing) before some dirt-bag kid smashed it.

    Then I get off in Sydney, pay three times the price for a train with torn seats and graffiti all over the walls. I’d also think twice before catching said train after 8pm.

  • YangachiBastardo

    Hoju: yes as much as i hate to say nice things about Europe i have to agree :)

    IMHO 70% of Korea is ahead of Europe, the poorer 30% indeed enjoy a Chinese type of brutal poverty, unknown even in a depressed country of Europe (Greece may be a major exception and the first fully dysfunctional Western Europe third world country).

    You’re totally right about the big/small city dynamic here, a dynamic reversed in Korea, which might explain the Portugal type of GDP the country still display, an economic level that would be unexplainable if you limit your visits to Seoul/Daejon/Ulsan.

    If we think about it this might actually be for the nation the biggest challenge in the future: manage to do something to cancel the abject level of desperation still suffered by some (yes i was shocked too by how the elders are treated, esp. in a Confucian society) without taking the Euro highway to financial hell

  • Arghaeri

    They can see whats happening with the Euro and EU right now

    and yet they’re going on ahead anyways, universal benefits get vites, votes get you into power :-)

  • http://dok.do/4aVK41 Year of the Dragon

    People do not realize how much of a shipbuilding superpower Korea is. Korea alone builds more ships than entire Europe combined. And Korea’s labor used for building ships is NOT cheap at all — Ulsan has the highest average income in all of Korea.

    That’s weird. When I was down in Pohang and Ulsan, most of the shipbuilding yards were using 3D labor from India, Bangladesh, etc and their wages were dirt poor.

    Maybe the Hyundai car-manufacturing place in Ulsan is keeping Koreans rich in Ulsan?

  • Wedge

    These ships will be built using a goodly number of British engineering consultants based in Okpo, a city which is lousy with foreign engineers, and no doubt a good chunk of the components wil be British and from other countries. Also, note that no British shipyards bothered to bid. If I were a British taxpayer I wouldn’t get too bent out of shape.

  • SomeguyinKorea

    “Critics said the decision was a blow to Britain’s declining shipbuilding industry and to the proud naval tradition of what was once the world’s greatest seafaring nation.”

    …Someone forgets that this wouldn’t have been so if it wasn’t for the shipbuilding yards of New Brunswick and Nova Scotia, Canada.

    PS. A bit off topic, but historians believe that the stories of Paul Bunyan, the mythical folk hero, originated in the Madawaska region of New Brunswick, where the tallest and largest pine trees grew (these were used to make the masts of British sailboats).

    http://books.google.co.kr/books?id=UAvyE0pN5akC&pg=PA72&lpg=PA72&dq=paul+bunyan+madawaska&source=bl&ots=T_MmTJDl7_&sig=aM0Uol2Gu37WoDWky3xm0OHouZU&hl=en&sa=X&ei=9QRHT4jBAY2UiAfM0MizDg&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=paul%20bunyan%20madawaska&f=false

  • Arghaeri

    <Someone forgets that this wouldn’t have been so if it wasn’t for the shipbuilding yards of New Brunswick and Nova Scotia, Canada.

    Would you care to back that up, how many ship did they build for British Navy before its zenith at the turn of the 19th Century.

  • keith

    The reason why Britain doesn’t build much stuff these days is because of the vandalism done to the British manufacturing industry by that old bitch Margaret Thatcher. Lots of Americans idolise her for some strange reason, but she caused irreparable damage to industry and working people in the UK. Her policies directly lead to my dad having to start all over again, and start a new business at a time of his life when he should have been happily anticipating retirement (he almost had a mental breakdown with the stress it caused him).

    The UK does still make some things, but it’s very niche oriented stuff like Bentley motors, Rolls Royce, BAE, lots of big drug companies, lots of big arms manufacturers, agriculture, publishing, precision engineering, the music industry is huge, arts and academia are big industries.

    Britain and most of Europe is stifled by over regulation, especially in regards to small businesses. My brother runs a very small business in the UK and the rules and regulations are ridiculous and make the cost of doing business insane. One example is he got told off by a policeman for smoking in his van, they demanded to know if he owned the vehicle, who else used it and other crap. You can’t smoke in the workplace in the UK these days! I used to work for a British-American company selling health and safety equipment and they made a lot of money, all because of the daft health and safety regulations. Many of the H&S regulations make sense, but a lot of them are utter nonsense and cost businesses a lot of money.

    Taxes are also insane, and the fact that some people are better off financially on benefits rather than working for a living is absolutely scandalous.

    Britain, Europe and the US need to go back to basics. Start making stuff! A lot of the highly skilled expat engineers who work in the ship building and auto industry in Korea are Europeans, Koreans often do the grunt work, but we have enough unemployed semi skilled labourers in the UK to do the same semi skilled work.

    As a Briton I do admire Korea’s success in the shipbuilding industry, but I’m also ashamed that my country, that was formerly the greatest industrial nation on the planet and the best at building boats, has to outsource that job to Asia now.

    As a half Scot I’ll be applying for my Scottish passport if they get their independence. The weather might be a bit grotty up there, but on a good day Scotland is one of the most beautiful countries in the world.

  • SomeguyinKorea

    #26,

    Most of them. Look it up.

  • holterbarbour

    #10: If you’re referring to Aker Yards, I’m afraid they were bought out by Korea’s own STX a while back. It’s pretty much Koreans everywhere with big boats now, at least those with any meaningful added value (e.g., LPG vessels, platforms, tankers). The Chinese can still compete with more basic vessels such as container ships.

    #9: That’s pretty much how the legend goes, but let’s not kid ourselves that the decision to finance like Hyundai in an untried venture like shipbuilding was simply because Chairman Chung was plucky. He had a customer lined up, western engineers at the ready, and all sorts of support from the Korean government. He *was* plucky, but you don’t get a bajillion dollar loan with pluck alone.

  • yuna

    Isn’t Rolls Royce Volkswagen now?

    I used to like the Creative Industry of Britain (especially its comedy) however, nowadays I am mostly watching recycled youtube clips of old things like Harry Enfield and Blackadder, Have I got news for you etc. even as recently as Rory Bremner, Little Britain. I think what’s on the British TV nowadays is quite shite (Britain’s got Talent variety) and I don’t know if there are any funny people anymore.
    Maybe it’s just my taste is changing.

  • yuna

    But Creme Eggs, eh? That’s a pure marvel of structural engineering and pinnacle of taste.

  • yuna

    No, No, I was wrong – it appears there are still funny people in Britain, but like Korea, the real comedians are doing politics.

  • cm

    Chosun Ilbo has a short article today about the shock reactions in Britain that their military ship contract was given to a Asian “peripheral” country. It noted all the angry comments from the readers about their government giving the contract to South Korea. They need to realize and accept how the world has changed, including the fact that South Korea is not a slave labor country that makes cheap low quality ships. If the British firms didn’t put in a final bid, it was because they couldn’t compete, and the UK government had no choice.

    http://news.chosun.com/site/data/html_dir/2012/02/24/2012022401665.html?news_Head1

  • yuna

    #33 Yeah, but I really don’t like how the main Korean press use “comments section” as fodder for an article. Surely there should be a minimum standard of integrity of the press when it comes to doing this. In general people who comment have negative things to express.

  • yuna

    Also, I think the Daewoo (and the Hyundai) image as a carmaker is not doing any favours. Unlike Samsung which seems to have successfully branded itself as one of the top-tier electronic giants (and wisely tried to stay out of the car manufacturing), Daewoo and Hyundai (at least to the Europeans) still come across as no-middle man granny cheapo shopping trolley vehicle with easy financing option. So to the British, when they read Daewoo is going to build their military ships, all they can think of is the
    “Zero percent financing for 100 years and free MOT for the next 1000 years? That will be the Daewoo” type catchphrase on the TV commercial before it went bust.

  • cm

    #35 – I don’t think it’s just the name “Daewoo”, it’s the name “Korea” that comes to the fore, which bothers a lot of Brits.

  • yuna

    Yeah, but it’s also the vice versa thing of (Daewoo/Hyundai=Korea therefore shite Samsung=? might not be shite)

    At any rate, trying to force brand/image changes of a country is a very bad idea, as is underselling is detrimental in the long term. It’s ironic how Koreans embrace the idea of “expensive, therefore good” but when it comes to selling Korean goods they still stuck to “sell it cheap” for longer than necessary. I know it’s because it’s export driven and all that, but I think this can change now. Don’t worry about image and just keep on making good stuff and sell it at the market price.

  • keith

    The top end stuff is still done in the UK. The cheaper stuff is outsourced, the contracts that Daewoo were awarded were for refueling ships. It’s not like Korea is going to be building Britain’s nuclear subs any time soon, they’ll still be made in Scotland. British shipyards are perfectly capable of building those ships, Korea is too, but can do it cheaper.

    Personally I think with the crap state of the British economy at the moment it was foolish to contract out the work. There are way too many unemployed people in the UK now, and Britons could have benefited from the jobs. Whilst the Tories are happy to bail out the bankers, and some have even suggested buying the queen a multi million pound yacht as a present, they have little interest in helping industry. No suprise there, Gove was probably after a knighthood when he made that suggestion. Tories disgust me at times.

  • YangachiBastardo

    cm: i’ve read The Sun commentariat on this issue and it doesn’t seem overtly negative toward Korea:

    http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/4146818/Royal-Navy-ships-to-be-built-by-South-Koreans.html

    There are some idiots (quickly rebutted by other posters) who mention slave labour, but the majority of the vitriol seemed aimed at the sorry state of the British industry. There’s even some snickering that at least with the contract going to Korea ships will be delivered on time.

    I have to say in the 3+ years i dealt with Korean companies, at least in my nation, the perception of the country really changed a lot. I still occasionally bump into some Tony Retardo who thinks Korea is like Bangladesh but they’re fewer and fewer.

    (i have a friend of a friend, a fervent animal rights supporter, who loves to tease me referring to Koreans as “fuckin’ dog-eating geeks” )

  • yuna

    You’re an anomaly Yangachi, you know that.
    All my friends must be from the Retardo family, as when they are polite they say things like “the only thing we know about Korea is some Italian expression for “Korean Collar” to express Mao jacket like collar (which I have not come across in English but I don’t work in the fashion industry).

    When they are not polite they say things like “If all the restaurants we want to try to go do not let us in (because I take my dog everywhere), let’s just go home and cook him, they know the perfect recipe for goats from their nona which they can try on him.

  • eujin

    <Someone forgets that this wouldn’t have been so if it wasn’t for the shipbuilding yards of New Brunswick and Nova Scotia, Canada.

    (Arghaeri) Would you care to back that up, how many ship did they build for British Navy before its zenith at the turn of the 19th Century.

    (SomeguyinKorea) Most of them. Look it up.

    Because I’m a sucker for things that sound wrong, I did.

    Dreadnoughts, most of these at Battle of Jutland;

    HMS Dreadnought – built Portsmouth UK, 1906
    HMS Bellerophon – built Portsmouth UK, 1909
    HMS Superb – built Newcastle UK, 1906
    HMS Vanguard – built Barrow UK, 1909
    HMS Neptune – built Portsmouth UK, 1909
    HMS Colossus – built Greenock UK, 1910
    HMS Orion – built Portsmouth UK, 1910
    HMS King George V – built Portsmouth UK, 1911
    HMS Ajax – built Greenock UK, 1912
    HMS Iron Duke – built Portsmouth UK, 1912
    HMS Canada !!!! – built Newcastle UK, 1913
    HMS Queen Elizabeth – built Portsmouth 1913

    OK, getting bored of the dreadnoughts now, try something earlier

    Ironclad battleships;

    HMS Collingwood, built Pembroke UK, 1882
    HMS Rodney, built Chatham UK, 1884
    HMS Victoria, built Newcastle UK, 1887
    HMS Trafalgar, built Portsmouth UK, 1887
    HMS Royal Sovereign, built Portsmouth UK, 1891
    HMS Centurion, built Portsmouth UK, 1892
    HMS Majestic, built Portsmouth UK, 1895
    HMS Canopus, built Portsmouth UK, 1897
    HMS London, built London UK, 1899
    HMS Commonwealth, built Govan UK, 1903

    Try to go further back, sea-going ironclads;

    HMS Warrior, built Blackwall UK, 1860
    HMS Achilles, built Chatham UK, 1861
    HMS Enterprise, built Deptford, 1864
    HMS Audacious, built Govan UK, 1869
    HMS Penelope, built Pembroke UK, 1867

    Maybe the problem is too much metal. Try ships at Trafalgar;

    HMS Victory, built Chatham UK, 1758
    HMS Temeraire, built Chatham UK, 1798
    HMS Conqueror, built Harwich UK, 1801
    HMS Britannia, built Portsmouth UK, 1762
    HMS Royal Sovereign, built Plymouth UK, 1786
    HMS Achille, built Gravesend UK, 1798
    HMS Rotherhithe, built Rotherhithe UK, 1783
    HMS Prince, built Woolwich UK, 1788

    I must have missed the point somewhere…

  • Arghaeri

    Most of them. Look it up.

    So you can’t back it up then, thought not.

  • Arghaeri

    Isn’t Rolls Royce Volkswagen now?

    Only the cars, the important part the aeronautic and naval engines is not.

  • Arghaeri

    Thanks Eujin!

  • SomeguyinKorea

    #41,

    So, they used masts on iron ships?

    But, since you brought up the early 20th century…Where was the largest drydock in the world at that time?

    #42,

    Not at all.

    http://shipsstarthere.ca/history/history-of-shipbuilding/

    http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/articles/shipbuilding-and-ship-repair

  • SomeguyinKorea

    #44,

    Yeah, thanks…

    “In 1858, of the 100 sailing ships of 1200 tons or more that cleared Liverpool, Eng, for Australia, 64 were Canadian built. The Shipping Register of Liverpool showed that more than 85% of the ships over 500 tons were built in British North America. In 1875, the peak year, nearly 500 ships were built in Canadian shipyards. A prominent vessel of that glorious period was MARCO POLO, built at Saint John in 1851. She was big, 1625 tons, strong, and for a time “the fastest ship in the world.” Another was W.D. LAWRENCE, 2458 tons, built in 1874 at Maitland, NS, the largest Canadian-built full-rigged ship afloat. ”

    From the second links in my previous comment.

    And while we’re at it:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel_Cunard

  • SomeguyinKorea

    …His brother, Joseph, built ships in Miramichi, New Brunswick, by the way.

  • SomeguyinKorea
  • redwhitedude

    #43
    Rolls royce is an aerospace company that had sold its car division to Vickers the largest defense firm in the UK. Several years back Vickers was looking to sell the car maker rolls royce. Volkswagen put a bid for it but BMW was also interested in acquiring Rolls Royce. A deal was struck that Volkswagen will keep rolls royce for a couple of years but then it would have to surrender the brand to BMW. This was because Rolls Royce the aerospace company favored BMW because they had both collaborated in aerospace projects in the past. BMW would set up a separate company with the Rolls Royce brand and Volkswagen would only get to keep the Bentley brand which was also under rolls royce.

  • redwhitedude

    Let’s face it. The Sun is a tabloid not a newspaper. Tabloid reporting is crap. I wish it were reported by newspapers like the Times over there.

  • Arghaeri

    Well the first link mentions no British Navy ships at all, and the second mentions HMS St Lawrence an impressive ship, notable but unfortunately built in the Royal Naval Dockyard in Ontario.

    So without plowing through doesn’t seem to back up a claim that “it wouldn’t be so without the shipbuilding yards of New Brunswick and Nova Scotia.

  • yuna

    The #50 Times is buttressed by the Guardian and the Telegraph so I guess it tries to stay off things with “them fuckers taking our jobs” theme until it’s actually worth it:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/9099574/Navy-fuel-tankers-to-be-built-in-South-Korea.html

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/feedarticle/10107510

  • Arghaeri

    Well still haven’t told me how many ships for the British Navy up to its zenith.

    It was the British Navy that established the proud naval tradition if the seafaring nation, without the projection of power the mercantile navy could not have prospered. This was well established before the examples of mercantile shipbuilding that you have cited.

    So difficult to see how, however productive the new brunswick and nova scotia shipyards, it couldn’t have been done without them.

    Would’ve just bought them from someone else.

  • redwhitedude

    Funny how this criticism of picking another country is beginning to sound a little bit like mercantalism of the past. If the british shipbuilders didn’t put a bid in or were not competitive is their fault.

    In the long run even Koreans are going to end up seeing some of their share of shipbuilding go to the chinese. Just because Chinese can build them at lower cost the simpler vessels. The low end stuff will be going more to the chinese.

  • Arghaeri

    Already is going ti the chinese, hence Korea’s moves to buy into the cruiseline business.

  • Arghaeri

    But, since you brought up the early 20th century…Where was the largest drydock in the world at that time?

    I’m sure this has as much relevance to the post and korea related blog as your previous comments about Nova Scotia @ New Brunswick, but since you ask in 1911 Belfast in Ireland claimed that honour.

  • dogbertt

    It was the English who chose to keep Maggie in power as long as she was, yet the whiner still finds a way to take a dig at Americans. And yes, Reagan liked her, doesn’t mean she was some sort of folk hero to the rest of us.

    Americans didn’t take your dad’s job, chavmeister.

  • cm

    “Already is going ti the chinese, hence Korea’s moves to buy into the cruiseline business.”

    Not quite and not yet. Chinese ship yards have struggled all through 2011 and are basically propped up by the Chinese government orders. Korea took back the title of the undisputed king of ship making last year. China still has a long way to go match Korea. Korean ship builders have done a rip roaring business last year, and they’re expected to widen the gap even further with China this year.

    http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/shipbuilding-the-market-china-hasnt-cracked-10132011.html

  • redwhitedude

    cm,
    Given their determination at their current state they are probably going to have to undergo reorganization and shake up. The quality of the shipyards seem to vary from what I hear some are really well ran others not so. Ordering from China is considered chancy, but then again getting ships from Korea in the 70s was also somewhat taking a chance. Japan was eons ahead of Korea back then. The annual results are going to vary both countries are going to have up and down. However if they get the hang of it they will quickly gain ground this being an advantage of being a laggard.

  • SomeguyinKorea

    #51,

    Can’t admit when you’re wrong?

    Did I say anything about the Royal Navy? Besides, merchant ships are just as important as navy ships, if not more. Just compare the current American fleet of merchant and fishing vessels with it’s navy.

    #53,

    Nope. The largest drydock for most of the 20th century: St John Shipbuilding, St John, New Brunswick. Construction was announced in 1918, completed in 1923.

  • Arghaeri

    #51,

    Can’t admit when you’re wrong?

    Did I say anything about the Royal Navy?

    Sure when you show me. I specifically asked how many ship built for the Royal Navy by Nova Scotia and New Brunswick

    You very clearly responded with “most of them” and have singularly failed to back that statement up.

  • Arghaeri

    Nope. The largest drydock for most of the 20th century: St John Shipbuilding, St John, New Brunswick. Construction was announced in 1918, completed in 1923.

    How on earth do you get a “nope” , you asked a question I gave a specific and correct answer, you can’t qualify the question later with “nope thats not the one I mean’t, I meant the one after that” :-)

  • Arghaeri

    So far you have only demonstrate that Nova Scotia and Nrw Brunswick were major shipbuilders, you have in no way demonstrated your claim that “it wouldn’t have been so without the shipbuilders of NB & NS”

  • SomeguyinKorea

    #63,

    As shown in the article I linked to, 85% of ships docking in Liverpool Canadian-built. That’s not an insignificant number.

    It’s quite simple. For a number of years, the only lumber available to British shipyards was Canadian wood (politics), but since the voyage across the Atlantic was long enough that the quality of the wood suffered, many simply bought ships built and rigged in Canada.

    But, hey, don’t let facts get in the way of your argument.

  • keith

    Dogdirt is stalking again! I was simply pointing out that a lot of Americans I’ve met seem to think that the mangy old bitch was some kind of awesome PM. She pretty much single handedly destroyed British manufacturing and the economy. I’ll be very happy when the bitch is dead, her biggest achievement was blowing up a bunch of Argentinian teenagers on a retreating warship – hardly something to be proud of really.

  • eujin

    Yeah Arghaeri, can’t you admit when you’re wrong? And if you’re going to move the goalposts, can’t you at least have the common courtesy to move them somewhere you’ll actually win?

    The quote from the link;

    “The Shipping Register of Liverpool showed that more than 85% of the ships over 500 tons were built in British North America.”

    The Shipping Register of Liverpool was not the main register of ships, which was of course the Lloyd’s register. Fortunately the Lloyd’s register is online thanks to Google. Looking at the 1845 list (the same year as the only edition of The Liverpool National Registry Book of Shipping came out) then we do see quite a few large, 500 ton plus, ships from New Brunswick and Nova Scotia. There are also quite a few from Quebec, in fact I would say as many. But these are by no means most of the ships in the registry, most of which seem to be built somewhere in the UK.

    So if we redact the statement from “most ships in the British Navy before the turn of the 19th Century were made in Nova Scotia and New Brunswick”, to “most of the wooden merchant ships above 500 tons in the Liverpool Registry of 1845 were made in Canada including Quebec” then we might be reaching convergence of fact.

    The famous sailing ships that Cook used on his three voyages of (re-)discovery, or Darwin sailed on to the Galapagos, or Scott used to get to Antarctica, or the British used to establish colonies in New Zealand or on the Malvinas, were all built in the UK. Brunel’s big transatlantic ships, the Great Western, the Great Britain and the Great Eastern were all built in Britain, as was the Cutty Sark, famous from the Cutty Sark Tall Ships Race and for burning down in 2007.

    On the dry dock question; the figures I have were that the dry dock, opened in 1923 in Saint John, New Brunswick was 1150 ft by 125 ft. The dry dock in Saint Nazaire, France, opened in 1934, was 1150 ft by 160 ft. Judging by the existence of the Queen Mary 2, the one in Saint Nazaire is still in existence in the 21st Century. The link provided by SomeguyinKorea says “…the Saint John Shipbuilding & Dry Dock Co Ltd, which when built in 1914, and for 40 years after, was the largest in the world.” 1914 doesn’t seem to be a very reliable date for its construction and 40 years is not most of the 20th century where I come from, so unless those dimensions I have are wrong or misleading, we have to redact the statement “The largest drydock for most of the 20th century: St John Shipbuilding, St John, New Brunswick” to, “plausibly the largest dry dock in the world between 1923 and 1934″.

  • Arghaeri

    But, hey, don’t let facts get in the way of your argument.

    I won’t any time you want to present all the dacts with a logical analysis of how it wouldn’t have been possible without the NB & NS instead of selective cherry picking.

    I note you still haven’t provided a number for your “most if them claim”, nor admitted your wrong fir saying nope toy correct statememt regarding Belfast dry dock. z
    But I guess you can’t admit when you’re wrong.

  • http://pawikoreapics.blogspot.com/ pawikirogii 石鵝

    the koreans had the japanese to hate which lit a fire under the collective ass of korea. the chinese have the koreans to hate and run around all over the world declaring that they will better than korea in 20 years. uh no they wont be. perhaps in some 70 to a 100 years from now.

    korea can never rest.

  • H.Schmidt

    It’s quite obvious Korea is a leader in ship technology. The Brush chose Daewoo because their shipbuilding satisfies their quality and efficiency requirements

  • H.Schmidt

    It’s quite obvious Korea is a leader in ship technology. The British chose Daewoo because their shipbuilding satisfies their quality and efficiency requirements

  • H.Schmidt

    I misspelt British hence the second post.

  • Arghaeri

    Dunno, think the Brush has a nice ring to it!

  • keith

    @ 70. No, H.Schmidt. Korea is certainly a leader in manufacturing ships, of that there is no doubt and I doubt anyone would argue with that rather obvious fact. When it comes to the actual tech stuff though it is largely Europeans and north Americans who invent the technology.

    The Korean companies are very good at making stuff- on time, to spec, and very competitively priced. What they’re not so good at is inventing new stuff, the real innovations in shipbuilding come from the west. Koreans companies are very good at making things, innovation wise they’re still way behind.

    I know quite a few Europeans who have worked or work in Korea’s shipbuilding industry, none of them wield a blow torch. They’re all designers, engineers, consultants, project managers, inventors or QA people.

    The ‘Daewoo boats’ were designed by a British firm, most of the key components on the vessels are British design. They’re making the boats in Korea, because it’s cheaper.

  • john in la

    #73.
    Actually I think your statement is not that accurate. I wouldn’t say so easily that the Korean companies are way behind innovation wise. The Europeans and n Americans did and do invent new technologies but so do others, including Koreans.

    Just look at the # of US patents given out by USPTO. Samsung has been in #2 spot for almost a decade, after IBM. I never knew this until I started following the Apple/Samsung saga.
    http://www.ificlaims.com/index.php?page=misc_Top_50_2011

    AND EVEN if all core techs were held by Europe/US (which I’m pretty sure is not true), it’s quite an achievement for a company to bang out ships weighing tens of thousands of tons on time and within budget every time, for years. And S Korea has a number of companies that are doing this.

    And I don’t think Daewoo went for this project to make $ but to gain the prestige. S Korean shipyards today are building some of the most complicated/biggest ships. I’m pretty sure Daewoo could’ve built almost all the systems on the tanker if it had to…

  • H.Schmidt

    #73. Keith, the Koreans are a technologically more advanced than the west. Go to any western European country and compare them to Korea.

    The British are miles behind Korea in terms of technology.

    Korea is the most technologically advanced nation in the world.

  • Pingback: Daewoo royal | Hunroom