What happened to our engineering industry ?

[jjb1970]

As a child of the 80's, engineering in Canada is also a big soup mess...

 

When I was looking for an apprenticeship in Ontario (1995), I couldn't for love or money, find one.  This is in a province of ~5 million people, with the connections of the model engineering societies, and the knowledge of a bunch of passed (mostly retired) P. Eng, Tool & Die, & Machinists.  I heard via the grapevine, that there were 6 (!) apprenticeships in tool and die that year, all from one of the german owned companies around Kitchener (AKA Berlin, prior to 1914...).  Now, how's a kid to get into them?  

 

I did a couple of interviews- one was a guy who wanted a press operator, not to train someone as T&D, which certainly wasn't what I wanted.  The other was in Windsor, where the gentleman said that he knew how his order book looked, and that I'd do far better to go to trade collage than join him- he was working on automotive, and was at the top of the crest looking down, knowing layoffs were coming.  (I'm not 100% why he even interviewed me, but it was worth doing)

 

We're fortunate that CNC has reduced the requirements for skilled machinists, but still...

 

So, in the end, I joined the mob, where my Grade 12 was a ticket to anything I needed.  I have 1/2 of my OAC's, which are totally gone now (grade 13, or pre-university), but I took them as much as anything to give me an extra year to figure out what I was going to do, not because I intended to go to University.  

 

I'm nominally qualified now- I could get either Machinist or Millwright ticket, based on my navy experience.  That's a bit of fraud, in that really I worked as an I & C guy in a totally obsolete world (if you need someone for Bailey Air controls, I might be your guy...), but I did a fair amount of both in the Navy.  Controls of course is very brain heavy, and not usually that hard physically- until you get the job of fixing the final elements, not just the controls on them...mostly because you don't generally @##@$ them up when you touch them, unlike some of our ham handed buckets of monkey ###### who could break solid steel.  I occasionally had to fix other people's problems, most memorably when _my_  guy didn't quite listen to what I told him, and broke a stud off in a one off valve...there were reputedly 2 spares, but they certainly were NOT what they said they were, when they arrived !.  The next time he listened to what I said- take the back cover off first....then slide the front out, replace copper gasket, put front back in, then put back with new gasket in...I did that ~10x, after the 1st time I figured out that it was far easier to do it that way than trying to leave the rear, which the stem of the valve engaged into, in place.  Valve was Steam Temperature Control Valve, so a 6" valve on 600 PSI/820F (2nd pass) steam.   It was NO fun removing what remained of the stud with a pistol drill while hanging on the pipework, trying not to cut too much of the threads out...

 

Still, it is very interesting to me, as a part time machinist (earned a few $$$ that way...) to see the relative shortage of people able to take a P. Eng's plans and make them work.  One of my Lego Club mates has gone on to work in a similar role over at TRUMF, the particle acellerator in Vancouver.  He originally went over there as a Co-op student, and the job followed him home...he's more than clever enough to get his P. Eng, but the job is a good one for him.

 

P. Eng hasn't ever really interested me, I'd love to go take some more engineering courses, but now it'd be for fun not $$$ (at least most likely)

 

James

Not withstanding my own words questioning the motivation for offering advise on career and lifestyle choices, in this case I would recommend that it is probably worth going for PEng if you are able. The reasons I'd offer that advice are basically as follows:

• Even if you do not really want to be PEng or to do the sort of roles associated with PEng, if you get it then you have options. And having options is always good, if you're worried about it damaging your employability for craft roles then just don't put it on your resume if you apply for craft roles.
• Experience tends to indicate that the cost and difficulty of achieving these registrations tends to become onerous now, so if you decide in ten years you want it then it may be a lot harder and more expensive. If I'd gone for CEng ten years before I did I'd have needed BEng/BSc, by the time I did it I needed MEng/MSc.
• I have found in engineering that good crafts people are in critically short supply, but what is much rarer still are engineers who combine both coal face craft experience and an academic education. If you can combine good practical skills and theoretical knowledge then you'll be in real demand.

And the two skill sets are complimentary. I know this is rationalising stuff we hate, but although a lot of analytical engineering isn't especially exciting it does put you in a much better position to understand certain processes and relationships. One of my jobs was doing torsional vibration calculations and analysis of marine power/propulsion systems and although I found it a truly turgid task it also gave me a far better understanding of the shaft line. Just a few thoughts.

[jjb1970]

I posted this link in the thread on ships but it relevant to this thread too, South Korea is desperately trying to prop up its ship builders:

 

https://shipinsight.com/south-korea-to-order-200-vessels-by-2020/

 

South Korea seems to think all they need to do is help their yards through a rough patch but whilst some of their problems are cyclical a lot of them are much more fundamental in losing competitiveness to Chinese yards (and even Chinese yards are looking at building in countries like Vietnam and the Philippines) and some rather unfortunate business decisions.

[PatB]

I posted this link in the thread on ships but it relevant to this thread too, South Korea is desperately trying to prop up its ship builders:

 

https://shipinsight.com/south-korea-to-order-200-vessels-by-2020/

 

South Korea seems to think all they need to do is help their yards through a rough patch but whilst some of their problems are cyclical a lot of them are much more fundamental in losing competitiveness to Chinese yards (and even Chinese yards are looking at building in countries like Vietnam and the Philippines) and some rather unfortunate business decisions.

Twenty years ago my then boss visited Hyundai (we were agents for their range of rock crushers). On a works tour of a seemingly infinitely sized shipyard he was told, IIRC, that something like 25% of the new tonnage under construction worldwide was in that particular yard. Presumably things have changed somewhat since.

[Robert]

• Experience tends to indicate that the cost and difficulty of achieving these registrations tends to become onerous now, so if you decide in ten years you want it then it may be a lot harder and more expensive. If I'd gone for CEng ten years before I did I'd have needed BEng/BSc, by the time I did it I needed MEng/MSc.

 

Agreed - I started the process for my CEng straight after my BEng.  Once the work experience part was complete, I was able to apply, was interviewed and was accepted.

 

It is possible to do a CEng based purely on work experience, but it is a very, very long process!

[jjb1970]

Twenty years ago my then boss visited Hyundai (we were agents for their range of rock crushers). On a works tour of a seemingly infinitely sized shipyard he was told, IIRC, that something like 25% of the new tonnage under construction worldwide was in that particular yard. Presumably things have changed somewhat since.

Not sure what the figures are today but South Korea was the worlds pre-eminent shipbuilder for the 00's and first half of this decade by quite a margin but they've been slipping behind China in terms of new orders over the last couple of years and Japan seems to have recovered their position relative to Korea. At their peak the Korean yards didn't accumulate much goodwill as they were known for having quite an arrogant "take it or somebody else will" attitude. I still find a lot of people in shipping with good ties and a sense of loyalty to the Japanese yards but I'm not sure I've ever found the same warmth towards the Korean yards.

[Robin2]

. I still find a lot of people in shipping with good ties and a sense of loyalty to the Japanese yards but I'm not sure I've ever found the same warmth towards the Korean yards.

And I guess there is nobody living who can remember when ships were routinely built in British yards. 

 

...R

[APOLLO]

I remember doing training at Birkenhead Gas Works (behind the loco shed) back in the early 70's. Coming home the platform at Birkenhead Central was awash with shipbuilders - all in mucky overalls and oily cloth cap !!. More got on at Hamilton Square. Very industrious place was Birkenhead back then.

I think the yard was Camel Laird's.

 

Occasionally I walked down and caught the ferry as Liverpool Exchange was not far from Liverpool Pier Head - lots more shipyard workers got on there also.

 

Grand days - A bus, a train and a ship to get to work !!

 

Brit15

Edited April 11, 2018 by APOLLO

[Clearwater]

And I guess there is nobody living who can remember when ships were routinely built in British yards.

 

...R

I’m sure BAe would beg to differ that ships are no longer built in the uk! The decline of large scale shipbuilding is undoubtedly post WW2 so well within living memory.

[Robin2]

I’m sure BAe would beg to differ that ships are no longer built in the uk!

I would not call what they do "routine shipbuilding" of freighters and tankers.

 

...R

[PatB]

Not sure what the figures are today but South Korea was the worlds pre-eminent shipbuilder for the 00's and first half of this decade by quite a margin but they've been slipping behind China in terms of new orders over the last couple of years and Japan seems to have recovered their position relative to Korea. At their peak the Korean yards didn't accumulate much goodwill as they were known for having quite an arrogant "take it or somebody else will" attitude. I still find a lot of people in shipping with good ties and a sense of loyalty to the Japanese yards but I'm not sure I've ever found the same warmth towards the Korean yards.

 

Their crusher division didn't make many friends either, not least when Kawasaki, the originators of the Hyundai machines, found out that Hyundai were selling them into Australia in violation of their licensing agreement. There was a bit of a legal stink about that one .

[jjb1970]

BAE do routinely build ships in the UK, there are other builders too but the numbers are trivial and in global terms we are insignificant. In terms of the high volume merchant vessels such as container carriers, bulkers, tankers etc the industry is completely dominated by Asian yards. European yards build a handful of the more prosaic cargo types but some yards do well in the specialised niche sectors. Finncantieri in Italy are probably the worlds most successful builder of cruise ships with Meyer Werft still doing well in that market and the old STX yard in France still booking a few orders. Damen in the Netherlands do well enough with various specialised vessels as do some of the Norwegian yards however as a percentage of global orders and output Europe is playing on the margins. Gas carriers are still a Korean forte but Chinese and other Asian yards are muscling in on that market.

 

The era of nationalisation was a baleful one for British ship building. Most of the British yards were heading for the exit door regardless, but some of them were good yards and might have had a future. Unfortunately decisions on which yards to support, direct orders to, invest in etc were made primarily for political reasons and the yards that lasted longest on government support were not generally the yards that might have survived. In my opinion that was a more disastrous set of circumstances for British ship building than the much more visible ones of poor labour relations and management inertia.

[Clearwater]

I would not call what they do "routine shipbuilding" of freighters and tankers.

 

...R

It somewhat disproves your point though that ship building is not within “living memory.” More “routine” ships were still being built at other yards up to the 70s/80s. I think the last Tyne yard closed in around 2006. Hardly that long ago.

 

One of my favourite quotes:

 

“Here's the truth.

 

No politician can re-open this factory or bring back the shipyard jobs. . .

 

or make your union strong again.

 

No politician can make it the way it was.

 

Because we now live in a world without economic borders.

Push a button in New York and a billion dollars moves to Tokyo.

 

In that world, muscle jobs go where muscle labor is cheap,

 

and that is not here.

 

So to compete, you have to exercise a different muscle

 

the one between your ears.”

 

“Routine” work with limited added value will move where its cheapest to do that. UK engineering often focuses on higher value components, r&d etc etc. Check out Rolls Royce’s website (uk listed but operates globally) for example. Modern manufacturing is rarely a start to finish process at a single site. Components are made at various locations before final assembly. Check out how airbus’s aircraft are made as another example. A process that includes a lot of high value engineering within the Uk.

 

Merely because the uk doesn’t make certain engineering products it used to, doesn’t mean that the engineering sector is now a basket case. It’s just that a lot of the value is less visible than it was. The challenge for the politicians, as outlined in the quote above, is to train the workforce so as they have the skills to do the more complex jobs than the comparatively straightforward metal bashing jobs of yesteryear. In any event, I’d wonder whether certain former Uk yards would have the physical ability to accommodate the draughts and beams of the larger present day commercial ships.

 

Harking back to a golden age can be dangerous and falsely glamourises what were some pretty dire manual jobs. Let’s not forget that the UK remains a disproportionately large global economy and correspondingly wealthy country.

[jjb1970]

Something to remember which many seem to ignore is the no politician wants to tank the economy, close industries, turf people out of work etc. People may not like politicians, but they all want to be re-elected, I believe they all want to leave a positive legacy and believe it or not I think most of them are pretty intelligent and well meaning. Their policies may be seen as baleful but they are not wantonly destructive, they may be stupid and result in destruction but the idea that they're industrial vandals out to destroy the country or engineering is absurd. I always find it ironic in that I am a small government libertarian who firmly believe that less is more when it comes to government yet I seem to have more respect for politicians and hold them in higher regard than people who think more government and government intervention is the answer for everything at the same time as dismissing the people who'd be directing those governments as crooks and idiots.

[Robin2]

It somewhat disproves your point though that ship building is not within “living memory.” More “routine” ships were still being built at other yards up to the 70s/80s. I think the last Tyne yard closed in around 2006. Hardly that long ago.

 

When was the last time that a non-military ship of more than (say) 50,000 tonnes was launched in Britain?

 

...R

[chris p bacon]

Can't speak about all shipbuilding but I know from my fathers experience that the last 100,000 ton tankers built for BP in this country were in 1965/6 (British Admiral at Barrow in Furness & B Argosy on the Tyne) from that point they moved to the Far East (Japan) as quality was better and cost was half.

 

Dad always said that post WW2 the yards had not updated,  and were effectively still late Victorian/early Edwardian shipbuilding yards building ships bit by bit in the open air, whereas the Japanese had started to make ships in sections undercover.

[Fat Controller]

Can't speak about all shipbuilding but I know from my fathers experience that the last 100,000 ton tankers built for BP in this country were in 1965/6 (British Admiral at Barrow in Furness & B Argosy on the Tyne) from that point they moved to the Far East (Japan) as quality was better and cost was half.

 

Dad always said that post WW2 the yards had not updated,  and were effectively still late Victorian/early Edwardian shipbuilding yards building ships bit by bit in the open air, whereas the Japanese had started to make ships in sections undercover.

Swan Hunter built a 50 000 t tanker for BP in the 1970s, but by then, they were mainly doing military work.

[chris p bacon]

Swan Hunter built a 50 000 t tanker for BP in the 1970s, but by then, they were mainly doing military work.

 

 

IIRC all the 100,000 ton plus builds went East, I can think of at least 10 builds Dad was involved with between 68-76 in Japan, they in turn then lost out to the Koreans.

[Zomboid]

The simple fact is that as far as heavy duty metal bashing goes, Britain can't compete with the cheap labour available in China etc. The jobs are hard and unpleasant and the end product would be too expensive if British level wages were paid to those doing it.

 

In due course Chinese workers will develop higher expectations and China will find that it can't compete with the likes of Sudan (for example), and ship building will move to Africa or wherever the next place is which can offer cheap metal bashing.

[Clearwater]

When was the last time that a non-military ship of more than (say) 50,000 tonnes was launched in Britain?

 

...R

Others have quoted examples but would add QE2 (1967). The last “ocean liner” was Vistafjord from Swan Hunter (1973). The last mainstream British liners were laid down in the late 50s (eg Windsor Castle, Canberra, Oriana).

 

Of course, passenger shipping was in critical care for many years as the airlines took over long distance point to point travel. Again an industry that existed up to the mid 60s but technology caused it to change.

 

Others will have more technical knowledge than me but I’d wonder whether from a physical perspective the historic uk yards could accommodate the beam and draft requirements of modern large shops (IIRC, the QE aircraft carrier was designed to fit existing infrastructure.). Given the economics of shipping, the market for new builds is generally for larger ships not mid sized vessels. That may mean that irrespective of the labour cost discussion, it may not be viable to build such ships.

 

Appreciate they’re not “commercial ships” but I believe the UK is a leader in the production of super yachts.

[Clearwater]

If you check Wikipedia’s page on Swan Hunter, they were building tankers through the 70s up to 1983 when BP Achiever (66031 GRT) was launched.

 

http://www.tynebuiltships.co.uk/B-Ships/bpachiever1983.html. Site has some good pics showing how tight the build appears, to my non technical view, the dry dock.

 

Discounting ferries, Harland and Wolff were building tankers such as MV Erradale and MV Knock Dun (1994) as well as hulks such as Lowlands Trassry. Wikipedia again has a list of ships

 

David

Edited April 12, 2018 by Clearwater

[jjb1970]

Kvaerner were building large gas and chemical tankers at their Govan yard into the late 90's. There are still smaller vessels built in the UK, and of course the new BAS vessel Boaty McBoatface.

 

Something to note is that the value, engineering challenge and skill associated with building a ship is not necessarily related to size. Quite the opposite, many of the most demanding and valuable projects are for small vessels such as DP3 OSVs.

[chris p bacon]

Appreciate they’re not “commercial ships” but I believe the UK is a leader in the production of super yachts.

 

 

I think Princess (Thrapston?) went bust and Sunseeker in Poole are owned by the Chinese now.

[bike2steam]

I think Princess (Thrapston?) went bust and Sunseeker in Poole are owned by the Chinese now.

 

Yep, my next-door neighbour works for Sunseeker as a Marine Engineer, and spends a lot of his (working) time in Hong Kong. 

[JeremyC]

Something to remember which many seem to ignore is the no politician wants to tank the economy, close industries, turf people out of work etc. People may not like politicians, but they all want to be re-elected, I believe they all want to leave a positive legacy and believe it or not I think most of them are pretty intelligent and well meaning. Their policies may be seen as baleful but they are not wantonly destructive, they may be stupid and result in destruction but the idea that they're industrial vandals out to destroy the country or engineering is absurd. I always find it ironic in that I am a small government libertarian who firmly believe that less is more when it comes to government yet I seem to have more respect for politicians and hold them in higher regard than people who think more government and government intervention is the answer for everything at the same time as dismissing the people who'd be directing those governments as crooks and idiots.

 

I'm afraid I have a more sceptical view; I think today we have lightweight politicians and no statesmen. The major problem with politicians [in my opinion] is everything has to first pass through their political filter. This seems to mean that if a course of action doesn't fit with their political dogma then that solution is ignored even when it is the correct one. 

 

Kvaerner were building large gas and chemical tankers at their Govan yard into the late 90's. There are still smaller vessels built in the UK, and of course the new BAS vessel Boaty McBoatface.

 

Something to note is that the value, engineering challenge and skill associated with building a ship is not necessarily related to size. Quite the opposite, many of the most demanding and valuable projects are for small vessels such as DP3 OSVs.

The problem with saying we're still ship building in Britain is how much of the ship, particularly the high value parts, is actually British?

For Example: One of my last ships was built on the Clyde, but from memory:

Steel: European

Engines: Finland

Generators: Germany or France

Propulsion Motors: Sweden

Aux Engine: Sweden

Rudder and Steering Gear: Norway

Stabilisers: Germany

Switchboards: UK

Machinery Control Systems: UK

Boats: Uk

Boat Launching System: Netherlands

Pumps: Uk. [Though by the time the sister ship was built production of these pumps had moved to China]

Bow & Stern Thrusters: Norway

Most of the Accommodation Fit was German / Polish

Propeller & Shafting: Europe

Edited April 12, 2018 by JeremyC

[meil]

The size of what we are making is irrelevant. What is relevant is to maximise the added value.

Edited April 12, 2018 by meil