Ferries: Scotsman To the Rescue

Stuart Ballantyne, Chair of Sea Transport Corporation

It might come as a shock to learn that one of the world’s most successful ferry designers happens to be a Scotsman, yet his repeated offers to build and invest in ferries in Scotland have been rejected by the Scottish Government and its hapless ferry agencies CMAL and CalMac. Dr. Stuart Ballantyne, chairman of Australian-based Sea Transport Corp, is also the inventor of the now standard global ferry type known as the ‘medium-speed ropax catamaran’; ‘ropax’ is the industry term for a drive on/off vehicle and passenger ferry.

ENDING THE MADNESS

By Professor Alfred Baird

I had the immense privilege of working with Stuart and his team on numerous ferry projects and studies over the past thirty years. As a maritime economist, my job was to study the feasibility of ferries and other ship types on different shipping routes worldwide, for public and private sector clients and research funding agencies including the European Commission and Nippon Foundation. Being an academic I also developed and published theoretical frameworks to assist with ferry design and operational analyses and assessments. 

Over this period I was lucky enough to work with several of the best international designers and builders of ferries in all sectors of the business covering: small, medium and large ferries, passenger-only ferries, passenger and vehicles (ropax)ferries, cruise-ferries, high-speed and medium-speed ferries, steel and aluminium hulls or a combination of both, as well as freight-only ferries, pure car carriers, et cetera. This included studies on the smallest car ferries, such as the 2-car capacity ‘Cromarty Rose’ for which the recommendation was to strip away part of the cabin superstructure in order to increase car capacity by 50%, to load 3 cars! And some of the largest, such as the 200m+ long, 50,000 tonne, 2000+passenger, 500-cars/150+ trucks cruise-ferries now running out of Barcelona and Genoa to various destinations throughout the Mediterranean. Numerous ferry services were initially started under the Italian Government’s ‘Autostradedel Mare’ initiative to shift trucks from road to sea, which led in turn to my involvement in helping develop the European Commission’s ‘Motorways of the Sea’ (MoS) policy covering modal shift on all sea areas in Europe. 

Fast Ferries

I was also involved in studies on the fastest ferries too, such as the innovative 40+ knot HSS (high-speed sea service) fleet designed and built by Stena of Gothenburg. The securing of the 2 x 29-knot brand new Superfast cruise ferries for the Rosyth-Zeebrugge service, which started in May 2002, was the outcome of another EU funded study I led, but more on that particular story some other time, and why the service ended prematurely.

In what we might call the ‘small-to-medium’ ropax ferry sector, that is vehicle ferries between 30m-130m in length, and medium-speed (i.e. speeds below 24 knots), Stuart Ballantyne has developed a world leading product in his steel-hull catamaran designs. What I mean by this is that nobody else is able to get anywhere close to his designs in terms of vessel capital and operating cost for a ferry of similar loading capacity and service speed. His is the leading and increasingly standardised solution, designed and built to operate on any ferry route. A more rapid build time is another big advantage of Stuart’s proven designs.

This explains why Stuart’s ferry designs, which his company also manages the building of in different shipyards under license, have been sold worldwide, including in the Americas and Caribbean, Europe, Mid-East, Asia, and of course Australasia and Polynesia where multihulls (catamarans and trimarans) have been around for a long time. 

I worked on various studies and advised ferry operators who subsequently purchased and now operate Stuart’s ferries safely, reliably and profitably. This includes operations in such diverse markets as OmanPhilippines, and Orkney. It is no accident that Stuart is a former chair of the global ferry industry association – Interferry – and was behind the creation of the World Ferry Safety Association, his designs being the safest on the market. His ferry industry expertise and success is recognised globally, and more than merits the honorary doctorate he was awarded by his alma mater, Strathclyde University, where he initially studied naval architecture after a career at sea.

The Stuart Ballantyne/Sea Transport Corp designed 70m/75-car capacity medium-speed ropax catamaran mv ‘Pentalina’, owned and operated by Pentland Ferries

Convincing the slow of hearing

Stuart has tried many times to convince the Scottish Government and its ferry agencies CMAL and CalMac to invest in his world-beating designs. His standard medium-speed, 100-car capacity catamaran ferry design costs only around £15 million to build, yet the Scottish Government are spending more tha three times as much – £50 million – for similar capacity and speed, in-house specified monohull ferries. That’s a massive difference in anyone’s book. In addition, operating costs of the catamaran are half that of the monohull, which in aggregate represents an even bigger saving –£100+ million per vessel – over the expected 25 year life of a ferry. Residual value of the lower cost catamaran is also far superior.

A lesser power requirement for the catamaran, a function of its much lower displacement and hence higher efficiency carrying the same payload, means that fuel consumed and engine emissions are about half that of a CMAL ferry. That suggests a change to catamarans would also help reduce CalMac’s annual operating subsidy, which currently stands at over £100 million per annum, halving emissions at the same time. With lower powered craft there is also greater scope to move to zero emissions sooner using battery and/or other energy sources such as methanol or hydrogen.

Paying double for less

The two CMAL/CalMac specified ferries currently still under construction at Ferguson’s, a yard now owned by the Scottish Government, may eventually cost as much as £150 million each, or £300 million in total. £300 million is more than enough to build 20 ferries of Stuart’s larger 100-car capacity Lloyds Register classed designs, or sufficient to replace the entire 31-ship CalMac fleet with a mix of smaller and larger sizes of proven, low-cost, medium-speed ferries.

From an international ferry industry perspective, what the Scottish Government and its ferry agencies are doing seems like economic and commercial madness. The Holyrood committee of MSP’s investigating Scottish Government ferries procurement were right to describe the ongoing delay and cost overruns debacle surrounding CMAL ferry hulls 801/02 as a ‘catastrophic failure’. However, the real worry is that those same people responsible for that ‘catastrophic failure’, as reflecting the absence of any accountability in the matter, appear to be about to do more of the same, unless a different approach is taken.

Half the time to build

It takes half the time to build one of Stuart’s proven ferry designs than a traditional ‘heavy displacement’ CalMac in-house specified boat. This is because the latter is always a one-off bespoke design, full of ill-considered compromises and unnecessary add-ons, which translates into extra materials, a lot of extra weight, and hence added power needed, plus an inefficient hull form; which is a big added cost and risk factor, as anyone can readily see with the two delayed boats at Ferguson’s. 

CalMac’s in-house specified, one-off, heavy displacement monohull ferries therefore take twice as long to build as a standard production line design (e.g. 4 years for Finlaggan, 3 years for Loch Seaforth), whilst the two CMAL ships still under construction at Ferguson’s have already taken around 5-6 years and are nowhere near completion, all at enormous added and unnecessary cost to the taxpayer. In sharp contrast, Stuart’s proven, high-efficiency designs take just 18-24 months to build for the biggest boats, even less for smaller versions. 

Common sense floats

We might imagine for a moment the challenge and risks in designing and building an entirely new car model, which is twice as heavy as standard models, as opposed to simply buying a proven, guaranteed Ford Fiesta from a car showroom for a third of the price. CMAL/CalMac and the Scottish Government opt to do the former, which explains why it costs three times more and results in horrendous ongoing problems, with added risks and costs over the ship’s lifetime. This also helps explain why Scotland has the highest ferry subsidies in the world and simultaneously one of the most outdated and irregular ferry fleets.

From a maritime economics perspective it is relatively easy to demonstrate how things could be done much better and at lower cost based on superior proven systems and ferry designs. For example, the thirty new ferries (yes 30!), each with 55-car capacity, which Stuart’s company has been building for operations along both east and west coasts of the Philippine archipelago have been rapidly coming on stream, with at least 2 ships being delivered annually as the norm, vessel numbers 19 and 20 recently entering service there. Here the operator also benefits from significant economies of scale in standardised ferry production, keeping the cost of each new ship even lower.

That contract is for what is now the biggest ferry company in the Philippines, the latter working in collaboration with national bus operator Philtranco to provide a truly integrated national transport system as part of the government’s national Nautical Highway Project. Next stage in the company’s development plan is to build even more catamaran ferries for start-up of new international connections.

Clearly, Scotland can learn a great deal from the Philippines and elsewhere about how to develop an advanced ferry transport system, and where the highest levels of efficiency and commercial success is built around the practical and competitive ferry designs of a very skilled Scottish naval architect. 

One of the 30 ferries Stuart Ballantyne’s company has designed and is building for the Philippines

Rejecting an offer that they won’t reject

Stuart’s company, which has enormous global experience and learning in the ferry sector, has several times offered Scottish Government Ministers and officials the opportunity to build under license in Scotland his successful, proven, low-cost, advanced design of ferries, which are world leading in terms of efficiency and low emissions. That offer has been repeatedly rejected in favour of CMAL/CalMac’s far more costly and clearly riskier, in-house specified, one-off ferry designs; the latter are ferry specifications that nobody else anywhere is copying, far less building, and for good reason –they are simply terrible boats, especially in an economic and business sense, as well as environmentally. That also means they are bad news for the Scottish taxpayer, and for ferry users, which reflects the present reality and widespread dissatisfaction with current ferry operations.

Several island ferry user groups, notably Arran and Mull & Iona, have made robust business cases pleading for the Scottish Government to acquire Stuart’s far superior proven ferries. But officials and Ministers continue to refuse these reasonable requests. Island communities are left with a poor and ever deteriorating service as a result, most with little hope of seeing a new ferry in years.

As would be expected of a successful entrepreneur, Ferguson’s former owner Jim McColl expressed strong interest in working with Stuart’s company to build 30 new lower-cost catamarans needed for CalMac under license at Ferguson’s. Jim McColl was also aware that there is a desperate need to build a further 20 new, small-medium size ferries for Orkney and Shetland inter-island routes, giving a total order book potential for at least 50 ferries in Scotland alone. But the blockage on progress remains Scotland’s national ferry agencies, CMAL and CalMac and the Scottish Government, and the RMT union, who still insist on their own in-house ferry specifications and hence far more costly, heavy displacement monohull ferries.

The competition moves in

Meantime, other maritime sectors are rapidly shifting to building catamarans instead of monohulls. This includes hundreds of workboats used in offshore renewables, and in fish farming. Catamarans offer a much wider and hence more stable proven platform, at lower cost to build and operate than a monohull. Stuart Ballantyne’s company also offer its advanced designs for military needs, which it has supplied to various customers including the Indian navy. This means that there are significant opportunities across several maritime sectors for proven catamaran designs, in addition to ferries, and a yard (or yards) in Scotland with this capability and access to the best designs and systems available need never be short of business.

So the offer to build perhaps 50 ferries of arguably the best proven, global, small-medium sized ferry designs, in Scotland, remains blocked by the Scottish Government and its ferry agencies who continue with a preference for their own far more expensive poorly specified boats. This approach inevitably means far fewer new boats will be built, and any that are built will take a lot longer to deliver. CMAL has been unable to deliver even one new ferry a year, which suggests at the current rate they will be unable to replace the present 30-ship CalMac fleet even over the next 30 years, assuming the ferries budget stretches that far. That will only serve to worsen the present unacceptable situation, meaning a continued lack of adequate ferry capacity for the islands, which in turn constrains their economic and social development.

Promoting mediocrity

My other related paper on this matter highlights the ‘mediocre meritocracy’ that is making decisions on ferry procurement policy in Scotland, lacking in the right expertise or insights, and how allegiance to another nation’s interests, culture and political/economic ideology may influence priorities and distort decision making, which ultimately serves to undermine Scotland’s interests. And here Alasdair Gray hit on something when he said that too many Scots are lacking in “confidence in their own land and people”.

The Scottish Government has allocated a further £600 million for ferry investment, though with a spending squeeze on the horizon that figure seems unlikely. The government’s intention appears to be to continue spending money on buying a handful of poorly specified, over-expensive, and highly inefficient ferries that take many years more to build and cost much more to operate than proven designs. This practice has been going on for decades and has never delivered an acceptable outcome, and never will. Moreover, future orders under this scenario now look likely to be built outside Scotland  (again), leaving a question mark over the future of Ferguson’s. 

Alternatively, government could take the more sensible route outlined here, by accepting Stuart Ballantyne’s proposal and building many more ferries of proven designs at much lower cost, all in Scotland. All that would require is to bring in the best global skills and expertise in ship design and build management, which in this case also fortunately happens to be Scottish. Stuart Ballantyne is the Turnaround Director that Ferguson’s (and CMAL) should have had, and still could have.

In summation

By adopting the right strategy and putting in place the right expertise, as well as some passion, Scotland has a chance to create and safeguard many more jobs in shipbuilding and the supply chain, as well as rapidly renewing a desperately outmoded national ferry fleet for the long-term benefit of island communities and the wider economy. Such a strategy would also provide a good basis for building export potential for future ferry production based on superior global designs.

This kind of concrete and positive action, however, requires a change in the cultural mindset and therefore a change in the people who make key decisions on ferries, and with that a change in our priorities, with a focus on the national development of Scotland and its people. That is what an independence-minded national government should be about anyway, investing in and building up the competence and confidence of a people and nation. Given the iconic nature and proud history of Clyde shipbuilding, that would seem a good place to start. The opportunity is there; we can either take it, or continue to ignore it, much the same with independence.

NOTE: Professor Alfred Baird was, prior to his retirement in 2016, Professor of Maritime Business and Director of the Maritime Research Group at Edinburgh Napier University. He has a PhD in Strategic Management in Global Shipping. His specialist area of research and teaching is strategic management in maritime transport. His research activities encompass most of the world’s main shipping markets in Europe, Asia, Mid-East and North and Latin America, and Australasia. He has published more than 200 research articles, plus delivered over 150 conference papers, many as invited speaker at major maritime industry events, also winning several international prizes for his applied research work and development of applied theoretical and analytical frameworks in areas such as port privatisation, strategic management in shipping, container transshipment, and shipping service feasibility studies. He developed his own Masters’ module on ‘Strategic Management in Maritime Transport’ which was taught to postgraduate students at several of the major maritime universities in Europe and further afield. In 2020, Alf published a research-based academic textbook on the subject of Scottish independence – see below for details.

***************************************************

This entry was posted in Scottish Politics, Transportation. Bookmark the permalink.

14 Responses to Ferries: Scotsman To the Rescue

  1. ‘He developed his own Masters’ module on ‘Strategic Management in Maritime Transport’ which was taught to postgraduate students at several of the major maritime universities in Europe and further afield.’
    Has Alf ever been an ‘Advisor’ to the Scottish government? If not, does anyone who are the advisors?

  2. arayner1936 says:

    I have already posted a comment on the Yours for Scotland forum saying that I consider this to be part of the current Scottish Government’s plan to frustrate the cause of Scottish Independence. Not content with accepting Westminster’s policy of no progress on that, they are colluding with their plans to block any move to increase Scotland’s prosperity as that could lead to a belief in our ability to manage our own affairs.
    The Scottish government appears to be keen to demonstrate the contrary. Things that they could be doing, apart from building the sorely needed ferries to support our islands’ populations, include Land Reform with a land tax which could replace the unfair Council Charge and bring more funds to local government, a Scottish investment Bank to finance much needed infrastructure, new ferry routes to continental Europe to ease the problems of our exporters, and more robust challenges to Westminster over thir continuing and flagrant breaking of condidtions of the 1707 Treaty of Union. More examples could be listed.
    I fear our current government, despite the promises made six months ago, is betraying the wishes of the people of Scotland and conniving with the British establishment to prevent the possibility of Scotland leaving the union. If that is not the case, it is well past time that they demonstrated their commitment to Scottish self determination.

    (By the way, thanks for providing a generous space for writing comments which, I hope, will avoid the frequent typos I produce when writing in a restricted window, However, I acknowledge any such that remain uncorrected, as my eyes are not as good as they were!)

  3. alfbaird says:

    LawhillLayabout

    Several years ago I was appointed by then ScotGov Transport Minister Keith Brown MSP to a newly created advisory body called the ‘Expert Ferry Group’, subsequently renamed the ‘Ferry Industry Advisory Group’. This group consisted of around a dozen people, unfortunately almost all of whom were public officials (i.e. not experts) working for Scottish Government and its various agencies and local authorities, ferry quango’s etc; I was one of only two ‘independent’ members appointed – my research expertise is mostly international ferry/maritime strategies and policy so I was able to bring a more global knowledge and awareness of how things were done, usually much better, elsewhere.

    My evidence and suggestions that I gave or presented to this group on how ferry policy was being mis-managed and what actually needed to be done, given limited opportunity to do so, was largely ignored. The group only met twice a year and morphed into a platform for civil servants and ferry officials to present what they had already decided to do. So there was very limited emphasis on them taking advice from anybody.

    The group has not met for the past 3 or so years since the Ferguson’s disaster and other service failings became more evident. Meetings were arranged and chaired by Transport Scotland civil servants and they set the agenda, limiting scope for input from the two independent advisors. They also wrote the minutes, which at times were rather ‘creative’ and needed revising. The lack of recent meetings suggests officials may be too embarrassed by the ongoing policy failures and rising cost of that, also to island communities, and don’t want people like me telling them ‘I told you so’. As far as I am concerned the advisory group has ended and did not serve any useful purpose anyway.

    The irony here was that Keith Brown initially told me he was creating the advisory group in an effort to avoid civil servants and other public officials continuing to make the same horrendous ferry mistakes over and over again for which he and other Ministers had to repeatedly stand up in Holyrood or travel to speak with island communities and apologise for. What he really needed to do, and still needs to do, is to clear out all the dead wood among the bureaucrats and start again on what passes for ‘ferries policy’ preferably this time with people who have some expertise in the matter. Otherwise we really are into third world ferry territory.

  4. Grouse Beater says:

    Comment lifted from Twitter responses:

    “The article is interesting but doesn’t discuss civil costs to convert dozens of island jetties for use by what tend to be wider beam vessels. Any figures on these costs?”

    David Whyte – retired professional engineer.

  5. Thanks Alf, it’s this sort of stuff that needs to get out into the public domain. I wonder what the island communities are saying about it these days. Constant pressure is needed on Scot Gov.

  6. alfbaird says:

    David Whyte

    Recent berthing trials in Arran, Islay, Oban, Mull etc by Pentland Ferries 70m catamaran ‘Pentalina’ as expected went well and presented no issues. Pentalina was bought to replace two ex Calmac monohulls in Orkney.
    https://mullandionaferrycommittee.org/2021/06/14/a-catamaran-is-coming/

    Catamarans have less draft, one third less compared to a monohull, and shorter length, and this actually helps reduce port infrastructure costs relative to monohulls, the latter needing a deeper berth. A further advantage of 4 props on a catamaran (2 props on monohulls) allows for superior turning and manoeuvrability in confined harbour spaces, giving a further benefit. Catamaran also has lower windage than higher structure monohulls, which makes berthing in high winds less problematic.

    So, overall the catamaran is a lower cost (ship and port cost) and a more reliable solution, as explained here: https://mullandionaferrycommittee.org/webinar-videos/

  7. Howard Cairns says:

    I am not saying that someone is getting a kickback? It sort of looks like the behaviour that would point to this???

  8. Howard Cairns says:

    Re retired engineer David Whyte’s comment. Adapting the jetties would be a once off cost which I imagine would not be as expensive as paying through the nose for the old style ferries. Plus the ship building time would mean they are built at much more current costs than what price you would pay for 30 years down the track. We use the twin hulled designs in Australia in many ports and have done for many years. One example: see https://www.sealinkseq.com.au/about-us/fleet

  9. tombkane says:

    Alf, your work is truly inspiring. Being from Greenock, which has suffered all sorts of problems for being the best deep water port in Britain for shipbuilding and martime links to the Americas and the Hebrides, it has cheered me fairly to see what you gave achieved in your career and what your concerns have been as regards shipping and Scottish ports.

    As a consequence of knowing a bit more about that, I further accept that there have been concerted efforts to keep Scotland’s shipping aspirations, achievements and expectations low. There’s no other way to read your work, reflect upon the response to it from ScotGov and Scot Committees, and conclude.

    That you were involved in the attempt to redevelop Inverkeithing as a link to the continent, and that the project was scuppered, is again, both inspiring and disheartening. I will look forward to hearing the story of that one day. Ultimately, though … You set about doing the right thing, and the dull forces of indolence and disrespect for Scotland’s wish to grow did the wrong thing.

    There’s where the battle lies. What a witness you have been, and what a player in the game. If we manage to recover respect and care for Scotland within our Scottish Parliament, everything you have done will be a wonderful marker and signpost for what can be done and what needs to be managed on behalf of our coastal and island communities.

    It seems to me that we need an urgent campaign to push hard for these beautiful and extraordinarily appropriate ships of Stuart Ballantyne’s to be adopted immediately and in big numbers here in Scotland.

    I think such a campaign is wholly necessary, as a response to climate change and sustainability for Scotland.

    All strength tae ye, Alf. Yer a bright star. Respect.

  10. Derek Grainge says:

    You might not be able to name names, but what’s the line management of that Expert Group? WHich departments do the civil servants come from and who do they report to? Does Westminster’s Scottish Office have a say, or is this entirely down to departments managed by Holyrood?Trying to see whether it’s fair to may blame at the SNP’s door …

  11. alfbaird says:

    Derek Grainge
    Pretty much most state institutions in Scotland may trace its line management, and hence ultimate control, back to Whitehall; there is no such thing as a ‘Scottish’ civil service after all. My perspective rather corresponds with that of arayner1936 above, that a constant undermining of independence – the aim of the UK Government after all – seems to be a primary focus for those working for the British state at the highest levels, and more especially in Scotland. As is common across Scotland’s institutions, most of the key decision makers in the case of the ongoing ferries debacle are not Scots, and this includes the leadership of CMAL, Ferguson’s, and the head of ferries policy in the Scottish Government. Scottish Ministers and MSP’s merely sign off budgets and sanction policy decisions as proposed and then implemented by British state officials ‘running’ Scotland. Despite devolution, governance therefore remains of a rather colonial nature, more or less, reflecting an exploited and hence mostly under-developed (oppressed) people, nation and culture, constantly held back from what would be their natural development; ferries policy is merely one example. As for the SNP elite, as Albert Memmi wrote, “colonialism is always a cooperative venture”. https://grousebeater.wordpress.com/2021/08/08/scotland-in-the-21st-century-6/

  12. Arthur Blue says:

    CalMac does not have a good record on containing costs for its shore installations either. Nearly every time a new boat is ordered there has been concomitant alterations to the berths. 801/802, had they been delivered on time, would have been required berth alterations before beginning service, and nothing at all has been done about their proposed emergency berth at Troon. So that excuse for refusing to consider a catamaran does not hold much water.

  13. diabloandco says:

    I regularly travel to Arran – the ferry staff are tremendous BUT the constant threat of ‘risk aversion’ sailings makes planning visits a trial. Since the advent of the new pier expectation of problem free sailings have been dashed because the real problem for the ferry was and is Ardrossan harbour.
    Money would have been better spent on the Ardrossan side rather than Brodick.
    I much preferred the old Brodick pier which one could race along late but hopeful that the crew would hang on for you – which they frequently did. The new pier is tediously long and folk are funnelled through an extremely narrow entrance.
    I would love to see a capable ferry take over the route – keep the crew , ditch the boat.
    I find it incomprehensible that those in Holyrood would not investigate all possible means of improving services ,recognise the job possibilities and the advantages offered to the islands.

  14. Hamish Dow says:

    I once worked for an engineering consultancy company that joined with another consultancy company in an effort to increase market coverage. Initially, the new company was managed by engineers who knew the business. Eventually, a “professional” manager took over the helm. The new guy likened the company to one that made baked beans. He didn’t need to know how the cans were made, he just needed to know how to market them. Within a year, the new guy was asking and making suggestions about how the cans were made. I see a similar diversity in how the Scottish ferries operate. Its management is run by folk that have no idea about how ferries are built or operated. Apart from that they probably don’t know how to make a can of beans.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s