View Full Version : Winter Refit Costs

07-06-2013, 16:47
Winter refit costs seem to have escalated enormously in recent years to the point where they are about £ 0.5 million for Waverley and £ 0.25 million for Balmoral - give or take

These costs are after the input of enormous amounts of volunteer time

These costs weigh extremely heavily on the business bottom line and from what I can see are at a level which surely could not be carried by the numerous steamships operating around Europe based on their passenger numbers and estimated turnover (even pro-ratad for size of ship)

Is there something which makes our ships that much more expensive to maintain - and if so, is there something that could be done to reduce this fixed cost ?

I am no expert, but could it be reduced if the annual sailing programme is reduced ?

What if the sailing area is limited to inshore waters only ?

It may not be enough in itself to save the ships (and may not be worth it if it means that the ships cannot tap into profitable revenue streams), but I would still like to know if there is anything that can be done.

It seems strange if our ships are bearing massive costs if historic ships operating elsewhere (under EC rules and equally concerned local certifying authorities) are able to survive without such massive fixed costs.

I will for sure accept that we are "stuck" with such costs, but can anyone put me straight on this ?

07-10-2013, 15:14
I'm just reminding the board about this by bringing it back into sight on to the 10 most recent threads list in the hope that one of the experts on this board can shed some light here for me

If nothing, I'll let it slip

07-11-2013, 21:30
I see that it cost Shieldhall £ 134 k for dry docking and in-water inspections in 2012 (£ 50 k in 2011)

Almost all other work is done as far as practicable by volunteers but in 2012 £ 101 k was reported for ship repair, maintenance AND fuel (OK not many cruises and her longest one was to go to the dry dock !) (£ 39 k in 2011)

At this cost, ships might just have a chance

07-11-2013, 22:33
Interesting idea Gordon Open seas more likely to put stress on hull on the other hand inland waters more polluted unless one accepts the story
about ships going back down the Clyde a knot faster than they came up because all the barnacles were kiled off On the other hand the old Glencoe lasted 85 years in outer waters but she was made of iron !

07-11-2013, 22:56
Hi Gillon

I don't see that many plates needing replacing every year though - are that many ultrasonic tests done on the structural members every year that would not be done for an equivalent vessel even if it was a fresh water paddler - or a sea water screw steamer (such as Bohuslan) ?

Not sure why it would make too much difference -

So, it might be that if W stayed in calm waters not so much testing might be needed ?

07-11-2013, 23:08
When the NBR sent the Redgauntlet to the Forth in 1909 her hull had to be strengthened to meet the steeper seas of the Forth which obviously cost money suggesting at least that the more exposed the journey the greater the expense but I am no engineer

07-11-2013, 23:15
Maybe as Waverley was never designed for what she does now,there is a more stringent testing regime than might otherwise be required. I am sure we have someone watching who has been involved in this

It would then alter the financial analysis of Waverley's sailing strategy (discussed elsewhere). The figure expended just seems unbearable to me (for sure!) and the business (more than likely!)

Good old Shieldhall was really supposed to be on the Clyde only ...... but if she had these costs to bear.... well she wouldn't have to because she wouldn't be here ............ she would have gone the way of that parrot around the time Monty Python wrote that famous sketch