Jump to content

HONFLEUR - New Build for Ouistreham Route - CANCELLED


Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, jonno said:

My argument was why would a new owner want it ripped out in favour of an alternative

The thing is that the crane, as far as I can tell,  hasn't actually been assembled yet so is there still the time and opportunity to take a different route, especially if she goes to an alternative owner? Ed. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 2.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

That may well be the view being presented for now, but things can change. My point being that until the several thousand tons of hull sat floating actually have a decided future, I wouldn't 100% disco

I get the impression we've put more hours into this thread than the German shipyard have into the real ship. Ed. 

And don't forget that the ship's real achievement was the production of zero CO2 emissions, zero waste water and zero satisfied passengers for the whole of the 2019 summer season. Ed. 

Posted Images

33 minutes ago, Cabin-boy said:

The thing is that the crane, as far as I can tell,  hasn't actually been assembled yet so is there still the time and opportunity to take a different route, especially if she goes to an alternative owner? Ed. 

For me Ed it would be simpler, cheaper and easier to fit the twin gantries and the rails.

1134881355_Honfleursbum.jpg.e8d5163432fd65f56f7f09ed0f6532c7.jpg

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, jonno said:

The thing is that the crane, as far as I can tell,  hasn't actually been assembled yet so is there still the time and opportunity to take a different route, especially if she goes to an alternative owner? Ed. 

Looking carefully at second image down https://www.niferry.co.uk/brittany-ferries-honfleur-cancelled/ I would say the rails have been installed but not the crane gantry.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Shippax is reporting that the Honfleur is due to leave Flensburg on Sunday, and will be towed to an unspecified port in Norway to await a buyer. She would the be towed to a shipyard for finishing. 

Photo taken today - plenty of work
left to do sadly! 

DCCF2D5E-B362-4BEB-8672-A4C45AD2A093.jpeg

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, David Williams said:

A tug ( SVITZER THOR) has just arrived from Denmark (Korsor) and the CARLO MARTELLO (in picture) has just arrived from Rotterdam.

It's interesting that the report also mentions that BF have now opted for a plan B to replace Normandie.

This is the release form Shippax:

The unfinished HONFLEUR, acquired by Kristian Siem’s Siem Offshore in July, is ready to leave Flensburger Schiffbau-Gesellschaft (FSG). Weather permitting, the 42,200gt ro-pax is set to leave Flensburg on Sunday, 25 October, under tow of two tugs.

No final buyer has yet been found for the 1,680-passenger, 261-cabin and 2,400-lanemetre capacity dual fuel ro-pax ferry and Siem will therefore bring the ship to a yet unspecified port in Norway.

It is understood that the vessel will be laid up until a buyer has been found, after which it will be towed to a yard for finishing. FSG earlier stated that completion of HONFLEUR would take another 11-12 months.

HONFLEUR was ordered by Brittany Ferries in June 2017 with delivery set for June 2019. Yet, Brittany Ferries and SOMANOR cancelled the EUR 200 million contract for the much-delayed ro-pax ferry in June this year.

Purpose-built for the Ouistreham (Caen)-Portsmouth route, HONFLEUR was earmarked to replace the 1992-built NORMANDIE. Brittany Ferries recently declared that it was not interested in buying the ship from Siem. However, tactics could be at play here, although Shippax understands that Brittany Ferries has meanwhile embarked on a Plan B to replace NORMANDIE, a plan that would take much longer than finishing HONFLEUR.

With the money Kristian Siem paid for the unfinished HONFLEUR, the Tennor Holding-controlled FSG can keep the yard running until March. The troubled yard has no ships on order but is reportedly tendering for new German navy vessels.

© Shippax / Philippe Holthof / Frank Behling

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, jonno said:

It's interesting that the report also mentions that BF have now opted for a plan B to replace Normandie.

This is the release form Shippax:

The unfinished HONFLEUR, acquired by Kristian Siem’s Siem Offshore in July, is ready to leave Flensburger Schiffbau-Gesellschaft (FSG). Weather permitting, the 42,200gt ro-pax is set to leave Flensburg on Sunday, 25 October, under tow of two tugs.

No final buyer has yet been found for the 1,680-passenger, 261-cabin and 2,400-lanemetre capacity dual fuel ro-pax ferry and Siem will therefore bring the ship to a yet unspecified port in Norway.

It is understood that the vessel will be laid up until a buyer has been found, after which it will be towed to a yard for finishing. FSG earlier stated that completion of HONFLEUR would take another 11-12 months.

HONFLEUR was ordered by Brittany Ferries in June 2017 with delivery set for June 2019. Yet, Brittany Ferries and SOMANOR cancelled the EUR 200 million contract for the much-delayed ro-pax ferry in June this year.

Purpose-built for the Ouistreham (Caen)-Portsmouth route, HONFLEUR was earmarked to replace the 1992-built NORMANDIE. Brittany Ferries recently declared that it was not interested in buying the ship from Siem. However, tactics could be at play here, although Shippax understands that Brittany Ferries has meanwhile embarked on a Plan B to replace NORMANDIE, a plan that would take much longer than finishing HONFLEUR.

With the money Kristian Siem paid for the unfinished HONFLEUR, the Tennor Holding-controlled FSG can keep the yard running until March. The troubled yard has no ships on order but is reportedly tendering for new German navy vessels.

© Shippax / Philippe Holthof / Frank Behling

 

Just to be totally correct here "Shippax understands" isn't "BF have now opted" it is "Shippax understands that BF have now opted".  Even if true, plan B can be right back at the stage of saying "what is it that we want".

Semantics but significant from a factual point of view.

Edited by RickOShea
  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

How do they reckon it will take another 12 months to finish her?  Is she still just a bare shell, surely all the cabins are finished there should only be joining all the bits left to do or has there been a problem with her like the Yeats?

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, RickOShea said:

Just to be totally correct here "Shippax understands" isn't "BF have now opted" it is "Shippax understands that BF have now opted".  Even if true, plan B can be right back at the stage of saying "what is it that we want".

Semantics but significant from a factual point of view.

I get that but historically Shippax don't tend to print rumour or whispers. The shipyards and shipping companies speak to them first hand plus it's a trusted industry publication with a £350 annual subscription if you want the full story. 

They've been told something straight from the horses mouth and in equal measure have been told not to let too many cats out of the bag.

BF know what they want, they thought they were getting it in Honfleur and as Solo says another 12 months is stretching it... It only takes the Chinese that long to fit out a E-Flexer from scratch. Honfleur's modules arrived from Gdansk fully fitted and McGregor fitted the internal vehicle ramps & hoists prior to launching the hull.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, jonno said:

I get that but historically Shippax don't tend to print rumour or whispers. The shipyards and shipping companies speak to them first hand plus it's a trusted industry publication with a £350 annual subscription if you want the full story. 

They've been told something straight from the horses mouth and in equal measure have been told not to let too many cats out of the bag.

BF know what they want, they thought they were getting it in Honfleur and as Solo says another 12 months is stretching it... It only takes the Chinese that long to fit out a E-Flexer from scratch. Honfleur's modules arrived from Gdansk fully fitted and McGregor fitted the internal vehicle ramps & hoists prior to launching the hull.

I think you are being rather naïve about Shippax - it's not the publication it was in the Klas Brogren era.  It's very rare that they have exclusive information any longer and you get the impression that their  relationship with some people in the industry is rather strained.  Did you read the interview with Stena Line's CEO recently?  https://www.shippax.com/en/news/discourse-with-niclas-martensson-on-strategies-visions-and-challenges-.aspx

I am not continuing my subscription when it is due for renewal given the excellent quality of some free online resources including https://ferryshippingnews.com/  

My well informed sources suggest that it will be sometime before you see BF making any newbuild moves.  The utter commitment right now is securing the business.

But none of that alters my point that your post was misleading as you said something as fact that isn't.

 

Edited by RickOShea
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Solo said:

How do they reckon it will take another 12 months to finish her?  Is she still just a bare shell, surely all the cabins are finished there should only be joining all the bits left to do or has there been a problem with her like the Yeats?

I believe she is some way off finished.  With the right will, resources and yard she probably could be finished faster but let's not forget that now she is not going to BF, any other operator will probably need to make quite substantial changes to what is a very bespoke vessel.

Edited by RickOShea
Link to post
Share on other sites

Tug Carlo Martello, currently with Honfleur will be enough to tow her to Norway, rumoured to be going to the Fosen Shipyard. Tug Svitzer Thor will most likely be for support only or to take her as far as the North Sea.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The BF videos from the beginning of the year highlight the position then, there was an awful lot of 'second fix' stuff to do.

https://www.facebook.com/381366928634619/videos/3404417432963105/

Other videos from the time:-

https://www.facebook.com/381366928634619/videos/720669555125033

https://www.facebook.com/381366928634619/videos/200753277731656

https://www.facebook.com/381366928634619/videos/2624202174491247

 

Edited by David Williams
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, RickOShea said:

But none of that alters my point that your post was misleading as you said something as fact that isn't.

Yes in a similar way to how shippax "understands" that the vessel will be laid up until a buyer is found... a term which many others seem to accept as a fact?

You can't be pedantic about the plan B aspect of the article without being pedantic regarding the semantics about this too... A point you've highlighted in a previous post?

Naive? Thanks... I thought I'd become over cynical over the years, it's nice to still be naive about some things.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, jonno said:

Yes in a similar way to how shippax "understands" that the vessel will be laid up until a buyer is found... a term which many others seem to accept as a fact?

You can't be pedantic about the plan B aspect of the article without being pedantic regarding the semantics about this too... A point you've highlighted in a previous post?

Naive? Thanks... I thought I'd become over cynical over the years, it's nice to still be naive about some things.

It's a fair point on the wording of the lay-up aspect.  Though that one seems pretty obvious to be accurate.

 

Your comment that "BF  have now opted for a plan B to replace Normandie" was repeating something that is quite clearly unlikely in the current situation.

 

I'm not going to keep a petty debate going on this - I just wanted to highlight the risk that happens when people appear knowledgeable but unwittingly spread false information.

 

  • Shocked 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Re plan B, I am sure that BF have mapped out the next 5 years and are clear where the investments etc will take place as part of their recovery plan.

Who knows what that is, possibilities could include:-

Honfleur  delivered in 2022, Amorique taking over from Normandie, shortened eflexer , can of paint etc etc

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, RickOShea said:

 plan B can be right back at the stage of saying "what is it that we want".

 

I imagine this is how BF will end up buying ‘Honfleur’ because they’ll end up realising that they’ve already got what they want in ‘Honfleur’ (larger freight capacity, modern interiors, eco-friendly) and then buy Honfleur off of Siem instead of starting from scratch and making an entirely new ropax ferry, considering they have the deck plans and interior spaces already planned out so wouldn’t it just be easier and cheaper to buy ‘Honfleur’ and get her finished at wherever she’s meant to be finished.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, David Williams said:

Re plan B, I am sure that BF have mapped out the next 5 years and are clear where the investments etc will take place as part of their recovery plan.

Who knows what that is, possibilities could include:-

Honfleur  delivered in 2022, Amorique taking over from Normandie, shortened eflexer , can of paint etc etc

You can't be asking for support to protect jobs and be investing at the same time!  The world has changed fundamentally and there is still no sign of normality re-appearing.

That said - a shortened E-flexer isn't a bad idea especially in view of financing.  These ships appear to be a good fit for most routes.

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, RickOShea said:

You can't be asking for support to protect jobs and be investing at the same time!

Why not, a good investment makes money either by giving more capacity or by cutting running costs, financing costs are very low at present.

 Interestingly BF are selling the turnaround plan to the regions as a way of bring money spending tourists to the region not as an employer !

Edited by David Williams
Link to post
Share on other sites

If Stena see an opportunity and pricing/costs are everything, its entirely feasible that they could buy it, fit it out and lease it to BF for its intended route. No immediate cash outlay but purpose served.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, David Williams said:

Could  a current eflexer fit into Ouistreham by turning before the channel and backing in ?

 

I don't think so due to the overall length of the quayside. Ed 

Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Paully said:

If Stena see an opportunity and pricing/costs are everything, its entirely feasible that they could buy it, fit it out and lease it to BF for its intended route. No immediate cash outlay but purpose served.

Interesting suggestion.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, David Williams said:

Could  a current eflexer fit into Ouistreham by turning before the channel and backing in ?

 

Forgetting the company structure for a moment Armorique is an interesting solution, she certainly has the passenger capacity in terms of berths for the night crossings.

On the down side she lacks the public spaces for the day crossings, doesn't have the apparently all important A la Carte and is lacking in the freight department.

Ouistreham is the one route the group wouldn't be looking at to lower their customer offering... It's their blue chip - flagship service.

The third E Flexer variant, the newly announced 200m RoPax Stena are working on, is still too long but maybe seen by them as their long term solution in replacing the Belfast based Superfasts.

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Gareth locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...