The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1900-12-04
Cost OF Ship Building.

At the eighth annual meeting OF the So
ciety of Naval Architects and Marine En-
gineers held in New York on November
Is, George W. Dickie. member Of the
council. read highly interesting paper
on the subject. "can the American ship
builder. under present conditions. com
pete with the German and British ship
builders In the production of the largest
class of ocean passenger and freight
steamers?''
He takes up the question under three
general heads under which comparison
Is to be made between the shipbuilders
OF the United States and those OF Euro
pean countries: skill and design. cost OF
labor and cost OF material. He points out
that the requirements of Lloyd's. for ex-
ample. hamper the designer with rules
that gave him but narrow field in which
to exercise his skill as a naval architect.
These limitations do not completely OPP
pose progress: but before departure can
existing type, the Lloyds experts must
first be convinced of the advantages 20
be gained by the departure. The Lloyd's
requirements. to which all shipbuilders
must conform in order to obtain insurance
protection, are the result of British expe-
rience, embodied in British designs
u t.f.
believes that an American register of
shipping that would be accepted BY the
shipowners and the underwriters the
world over would be a great help to the
American shipbuilder and would lend It.
self more readily to the tendencies OF
American design. He has found among the
younger British naval architects. who feel
most severely the limiting power OF Brit
ish shiphuilding traditions the belief that
the United States in the future Is to be
the rich field for the practice OF their art.
As to the cost of labor. Mr.. Diekle's
conclusion from careful investigations OF
conditions in the British shIpyards ana
those Of this county. Ia that the steel
work cost of construction IL substantially
similar when It comes to fitting out,
including cost OF carpenter and Joiner
work. painting and general finish the la
Dor cost Is fully 30 per cent. higher in the
United states According TO his estimate
the total labor cost OF a vessel IS con-
seauently nearly % per cent higher in
this country lie fnas also that the ma
rlne engine ana It's boilers cost less in
proportion to the hull In Great Britain
than with us. the difference IN wages
paid being 20 per cent He points out
that some prominent engine builders In
this country seem able TO compete with
those Of Great Britain II this can be
done with land engines It can also be done
with marine engines, but not on present
methods we must be content without
the professional luxury Of introducing
some engineering novelty with every ship
We engine" Thts is apparently the key
to ,he whole proposition. where hun
are8s Of engines are built ideutictlly alike
the American genius fqF ecouomizlng Ia
Dor, and the American practice OF using
machinery 70 replace hand labor 70 the
extreme limit have an opportunity 10 toll
When no two engines are exacuy alike.
this aavantaKe Is lost
The most serious question as 20 the cos,
81 material vitb which the American
shipbahdes has 90 deal is the tremendous
asctuatlon On The pslce % steel. and this
is ,be real obstacle 90 the progress OF the
shjphauder in this country Engine ard
other forsiass also cost aso-e uiih ia
taaa Ia Geeat Britain, thc difference be-
ins trom 80 20 q ger cent As near az no
can Judge az che presen, time there is
Il per cent ia cost az material in favor
o. The British ship dealer He concludes
from an she data. we are not yet In
position 60 compete with the shipsullAers
Of Britain. or % Europe. Europe mean
lns Germany Only. shink. In this eonnee-
uon, tAe difference eeiag NOT less than
70 per cent on the finished ship
He hlieves that thbs difference wlH ulti-
| masely disappear, bur pending that dime