NACC Argonaut Grounds in the St. Lawrence Seaway 

Great info...thanks!

@@wgowshipping the thing is, Canada lacks surplus population, & is actually a state which needs internal shipping to function efficiently for it's economic survival... it is however a country where shipping is profitable for the mariner... in fact (due to competitive rates) entrepreneurs can get so rich through the Maritime industry, as to become influential oligarchs within the system. In the US, the main profitable export is Democracy(defense & related High-Tech) and Science.... neither of them require bulk shipping. Shipping is needed for import of goods (most of which the US does not produce), but, those who are actually effected by the inefficiency of shipping are mostly either ignorant of what they are losing, or ignorable collateral damage possessing no political voice that cannot be suppressed.

different paul martin

@@kinghenry100 Senior and Junior, I can't keep track of which one.

@@wgowshipping The original Paul Martin, who was PM is dead now.

Thanks for the info!

Hey man, that sucks. However we still need crew to operate the ships. Hope things improve if people are unhappy. Maybe you were looked over because you forgot to capitalize "Canada"

That's your story. I acquired, in the 90's licensing, comin' thru the hawse pipe for a 200 ton master, initially in the Great lakes

@@firstlast1047 This is on the canada side. There were great opportunities on the american side and there still are today. My dream job would be on the aframax tankers running the west coast. But I am canadian not legal for me to work on american ships.

exactly why the jones act is so important

@@rshawiii You have hit the nail on the head! Keep fighting for the Jones Act. It seems like we in Canada have been fighting a losing battle for our cabotage laws for the last 20 years.

That's why he's such a successful professor. He is passionate about the seas and making the work better.

I agree that he is a fantastic and sweet guy, but it feels like there's something to unpack there. You good, boo?

I heard it was Pilot error ... ouch!

That will be a story this week.

It is for foreign flag ships.

A large part of this was the decision in the 1950's to build the St. Lawrence Seaway to the same small dimensions as the Welland Canal, rather than to go bigger, and potentially widen the Welland eventually. Thus we have small Seawaymax vessels. Counter to this is the fact that many spots in the Great Lakes system are very shallow. If they were deepened, there would be a much higher flow of water, and the water levels would drop, resulting in no improvement, and many ports would be too shallow to be usable.

Canadian National railway can get containers from Asia unloaded at Vancouver on their hot shot container trains to Duluth in (I'm guessing) 2 - 4 days. It's hard to compete with that. Those cargo records you mention are from the heyday's of iron ore production which we will never see again.

Did I say NCAA?

Helmsman and/or watch officer hitting the bottle. LOL

A pilot is required for all salties.

Thanks Gary!

some ships have bow-thrusters. I've seen them on GL ore carriers.

Almost all Great Lakes "boats" have a bow thruster, and many a stern thruster. Advantage over a rudder is that they are effective at slow speed or stationary. Most "salties" probably have a bow thruster.

There are narrow parts, and the Thousand Islands.

@@SteamCrane yes, but there are multiple channels, so you can just go round each set of islands using a different route... if you are in one of the narrows and a boat in front of you strikes a shoal, that can be a bad delay, and certainly if you do not know what you are doing you will get beat up on the plentiful rocks... but... it's not like the Suez, or The Mersey in Manchester, where a single ship can stop all traffic both directions!!!

It depends on the company and the findings.

My best trip ever! I was one of four passengers on The Rimouski, a 730 foot bulk carrier owned by CSL. On that trip the ship carried Canadian grain from Thunder Bay, Ontario to Sorel, Quebec, just north of Montreal. It was a six day journey, and my 20 year old eyes were wide open for the journey. We had access to the bridge and I learned a bit about radar operation. The captain was an engaging guy and the meals in the officers mess were pretty interesting. We drank all the beer they brought for us, so near Detroit, the J.M. Westcott, the only US Postal Service mail boat, brought more via an underway replenishment. I still have the chart of of that trip, updated daily by me and one of the bridge crew on the chart table. Sadly , I believe the Rimouski was scrapped a few decades ago.

I will have to check what I said. Downstream would be where the ship was moved after the grounding.

I think we as a nation need to invest in a new fleet on the Great Lakes and promote shipping in that area, along the coasts and on the inland waterways. We can defray costs through low interest loans from the government, tax offsets to ship American and promote American shipping/manufacturing.

​@@wgowshipping US Great Lakes freighters (unlike Canadian boats) run entirely in fresh water, and have a long hull life. All of them have been extensively modernized, and are very productive. Also, since the US decided to deindustialize and decarbonize, there isn't nearly as much demand as previously. A few years ago, I got aboard a 100+ year old working freighter. Canadian lines do replace their boats fairly frequently, due to salt exposure on the lower St. Lawrence and a bit into the Atlantic.

​@@wgowshipping There is a large investment being constructed in the Great Lakes. At present, there is only one lock at the Soo the "new Poe" that can handle the 1000' x 105' "footers". If it breaks down, the most productive freighters will be stuck until it is repaired. A twin to it is under construction, total cost estimated at over $3 billion.

its the canadian side . relax a little.

@@johnthompson7420 I really like that John. We should all relax a little. I crossed the border not so long ago with a drivers license and my mother had a Ottawa bus pass as ID. Coming back into Canada the border folk were stunned. "They let you across with that??". We should all relax a little. Oh, my mother made me cross the border. She wanted to see New York before she passed away. I was not going to stop her. Neither was anyone else.

@@roderickcampbell2105 Now one needs a passport and or Nexis pass - or enhanced driver’s license…

The ships name is NACC Argonaut for the company. www.novaalgoma.com/the-fleet/category/nacc

I was on the Farrell Lines ship Argonaut, container ship. Sister to the Sea Witch, that I watched burn one Saturday night in high school. Years later I did a Meba night job in the engine room of the Chemical Pioneer, the recovered back half on the Witch!!!

That area is brackish, but there has been a great deal of erosion.

Not clear what happened, whether it was navigation, propulsion or human error.

Salties contribute millions to the region's economy. It's their ballast water that's the problem.

Hi EC. I'm a Canadian too and I live in a port city. I do not see the national security issue you mention. Can you relate any specific concerns? Canadian citizens do not present security concerns, but others do? Yes, there is vetting and oversight that has to be conducted, but generally around the world the crews are international. And then you mention "disgrace"? I think your underwear are showing.

Some of the reasons have* already been stated in this and previous videos as to why the US has the Jones Act. My main issues are as follow: By relying on foreign crews and foreign ownership of ships, you are subjected to foreign interference. What if all of a sudden we have a diplomatic incident with a nation of which it’s citizens crew the vessels? Or they withdraw the ships? Secondly by using foreign crews you are reducing the capacity for local seafarers to be able to develop its own talent. Sailing a large commercial vessel is not like a leisure craft and require years of training in order to be an engineer or a master of a vessel. By not building or maintaining ships in Canada, you are again outsourcing your national interest to the highest foreign bidder. What if there is a time of war / national emergency and those foreign shipyards are closed to us? Building a shipyard would take years. Years that we might not have. Think N95 masks - remember how we had no capacity to make any? Now x 1000. I can go on with other reasons but here are my main ones. Not sure what my underwear has anything to do with shipping 😂 In summary, by having Canadian owned / crewed vessels/ shipyards it would provide leverage against uncertainties.

@@Ericc804 Hi EC. You make good points. I don't think you and I are on opposite sides on all issues. But Canada simply does not have all the resources to be completely independent. More Canadian based shipping? I am all for it. I am even willing to pay. I wonder about others though. And you'll recall the west coast work stoppage. Not foreign induced but had a major impact in North America. I agree Canadian shipping needs be properly supported. But shipyards are certainly hard to come by. I don't think there is enough domestic demand. I guess my main point was that I believe international sailors do not pose a risk to Canadian security. I'd sail with Filipinos any day. My underwear comment was "cheeky". It simply meant to say that I thought you had a particular agenda you were pursuing without necessarily saying so.

I have to disagree with you strongly on most of the points you brought up. For the shipyard issue, there is certainly enough domestic demand for the present number of shipyards but it needs to be subsidized. The nature of modern shipbuilding is that it is ALL the major shipbuilding nations subsidize the industry. China? Massively subsidized. South Korea? Massively subsidized. Japan? Massively subsidized. Heck, even in Canada when we were building ships in the 50's, 60's 70's and 80's, it was because of subsidies. But I would argue that there is nothing wrong with it because shipping is a strategic necessity for a nation like Canada. We have lost our ship building capacity, not because we couldn't build the ships economically, but because we refused to admit that the Chinese, Koreans and Japanese and Europeans lower cost were not achieved by subsidization. As for the use of foreign labour, I'm stupefied that our government caved to the lobbying by the Canadian shipping companies like CSL. First, they allow Ukrainian certificates, although the day before the Russian invasion they were a grey list country meaning, you could not trust their validity because of corruption, then they allow the Philippine certificates. And what happens a couple months later? The IMO comes out and say the Philippine tickets are essentially worthless because they have refused to meet the STCW standard for the last 20 or so years. I've sailed with Philippinos as well, but I have to say while some were ok, but a lot of them were not very useful when it mattered, like in an emergency. The real reason they can't get people to work in the marine industry is wages. Period!!@@roderickcampbell2105

@@mithridateseupator3492 Are we all agreeing to disagree? Wages? Yes. Decent wages HAVE to be paid. But that's easy to say but not easily done. You mention politics and legislation. Yes. But REALLY hard. I don't mind opening up my wallet and pay more. But others don't have that choice. You are absolutely correct about emergencies. It matters.