It's too early for Russia to talk about the revival of its own shipbuilding


Our country was not so long ago one of the leading maritime powers, but today it has largely lost this status. The point is not only the weakness of the surface component of the Russian Navy, but also that the Russian civilian fleet is also a rather sad sight.


The civilian fleet is aging and decreasing in tonnage, their owners prefer to buy new ships abroad and fly under foreign flags. The average age of ships flying the Russian flag is about 20 years, which makes it one of the oldest in the world. The domestic fishing fleet has sharply decreased, and with it the catch of fish. Until recently, many icebreakers, the pride of our Arctic fleet, were produced abroad.

It must be admitted that certain conclusions were drawn by the authorities. In recent years, due to fear of Western sanctions, large state funds have gone into the domestic shipbuilding industry. In 2018, 82 new vessels were launched, in 2019 - 76, by the end of this year this figure will be 60. In the short term, the share of Russia in the world orders of the shipbuilding industry was 27%, with 26% from China and 45% from South Korea. Dry-cargo vessels of the RSD 59 project are being built most actively now, of which 16 vessels have been ordered at once. More than 40 fishing trawlers have been laid down and are under construction, a few days ago a flag was raised over the diesel-electric icebreaker "Viktor Chernomyrdin", the nuclear-powered icebreaker "Arktika" was put into operation. On the way, the delivery of an ice-class tanker of the Aframax type of project 114K, built at the Zvezda shipyard. For the first time in several decades, a four-deck cruise liner "Mustai Karim" was built in Russia.

This is a pretty positive dynamic, which can definitely be considered “good the news". However, every barrel of honey has its own bucket of tar. It is necessary to point out a number of serious problems that do not allow us to speak of an unambiguous breakthrough in the revival of domestic shipbuilding.

At first, there is still a critical dependence on the use of imported marine equipment, in particular, engines. The global sphere of shipbuilding services has long been divided among serious players who have their own specialization in it. The inclusion of Russia in it simply killed many enterprises that turned out to be uncompetitive, and now the domestic industry is simply not represented in a significant segment of ship equipment. It is very problematic to substitute import for it on our own, and the Russian market is not yet capacious enough to make it profitable for foreign producers to localize production in our country. And, apparently, there is no particular desire.

Secondly, a big problem is the extremely low speed of order execution by shipyards. In South Korea, China or Japan, ships are built on average 3-4 times faster than ours. The example of the icebreaker Viktor Chernomyrdin, which was designed with errors, burned, rose in price from 8 to 10 billion rubles, and its delivery time increased by 5 years from the originally planned one.

Thirdly, it is necessary to talk about the measures of state support provided to the shipbuilding industry in different countries. There are rules that ensure a level playing field, adopted under the agreement of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), which define uniform credit conditions for all. In accordance with them, the size of the loan should be 80% of the value of the vessel at 8% per annum, and its term is 10 years. It is also allowed to partially subsidize the cost of building a ship by the state in the amount of 9%. However, the United States gives loans to its shipbuilders for 25 years, and not 80% of the cost, but 87,5%. Japan gives targeted loans at 5%, and the size of state subsidies in Tokyo, like in Berlin, can reach 30%. In order to support the industry, many countries are reducing duties on the import of ship equipment, and China and Poland have abolished them altogether. American Jones Act requires domestic and coastal shipping only on US-built ships and only under the Stars and Stripes.

This is more complicated for us. As a rule, commercial banks issue targeted loans to shipbuilders at 15-20% for a period of up to 2 years. If you turn to foreign banks for help, the terms of the loan may imply the need to purchase imported equipment. The cost of production in Russia is increased by high taxes and customs duties on foreign equipment, which has now become even more expensive due to the devaluation of the ruble. It may seem wild, but it is more profitable for customers to build a naked hull in our country, and then overtake it abroad, where the ship will be completed and equipped.

Thus, some positive shifts in the domestic shipbuilding industry are indeed observed, but there is still a long way to go before a full-fledged revival. To do this, you first have to solve a whole range of problems.
10 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. gorenina91 Offline gorenina91
    gorenina91 (Irina) 10 November 2020 13: 23
    -1
    It's too early for Russia to talk about the revival of its own shipbuilding

    - Yes, of course ... - What can we talk about at all ... - it's just an anecdote ...
    - In this area (shipbuilding), Russia has an even worse situation than in domestic aviation ...
    - The weak backward industry of Russia is stuck somewhere at the level of the late 80s ... - Russia has simply completely lost its industrial potential; lost her Cosmos; lost its own shipbuilding; own excellent aircraft construction and design; lost its industrial military potential ...; lost healthcare (tens of thousands of cities in Russia stand with dilapidated hospitals built during the Soviet era and with such dilapidated outdated medical equipment that it cannot even be called equipment) ... - you may not continue ... - What is it. .. domestic shipbuilding ... - even ships for non-walking patients ... - and then Chinese ...
    1. xalexey Offline xalexey
      xalexey (alex x) 23 December 2020 12: 31
      -1
      You have written complete nonsense here.
  2. Bulanov Offline Bulanov
    Bulanov (Vladimir) 10 November 2020 14: 42
    +3
    First of all, it is necessary to reduce the cost of loans for industry. It is impossible to establish production at 15-20%. That is why there are troubles in Russia. It is necessary to strengthen the ruble and reduce loans, then the industry will start spinning.
  3. Sergey Latyshev Offline Sergey Latyshev
    Sergey Latyshev (Serge) 10 November 2020 15: 03
    +1
    Nothing, now banks are massively reducing deposit payments, i.e. pump out money from savings, and shipbuilding will be launched.
    Just hold on))))
  4. 123 Offline 123
    123 (123) 10 November 2020 16: 58
    +2
    It is very problematic to substitute import for it on our own, and the Russian market is not yet capacious enough to make it profitable for foreign manufacturers to localize production in our country.

    The share of Russia in the world orders of the shipbuilding industry was 27%

    Somehow these two statements are not very compatible No. On the one hand, "every fourth" ship is being built in our country, on the other hand, there is an insufficiently capacious market. What do you think should be the market share that would be profitable to localize production? 90%?

    The example of the icebreaker Viktor Chernomyrdin, which was designed with errors, burned, rose in price from 8 to 10 billion rubles, and its delivery time increased by 5 years from the originally planned one.

    And how is it visualized? An icebreaker and a dry cargo ship are slightly different and more difficult to build. Who built the lead vessel of a project of similar complexity faster? Is there anything to compare with?

    it is necessary to talk about the measures of state support provided to the shipbuilding industry in different countries.

    At the same time, it is modest to keep silent that such measures are in effect in Russia. repeat

    Of course, it is more complicated with loans, but subsidies are coming.

    State program "Development of shipbuilding and equipment for the development of shelf deposits for 2013–2030"
    http://government.ru/rugovclassifier/845/events/

    Decree of December 4, 2019 No. 1584 "On approval of the Rules for the provision of subsidies from the federal budget to Russian organizations for financial support of part of the costs associated with the construction of large-tonnage vessels."
    http://www.consultant.ru/document/cons_doc_LAW_340114/

    American Jones Act requires domestic and coastal shipping only on US-built ships and only under the Stars and Stripes.

    But aren't we taking such measures? This also applies to the Northern Sea Route and fish catch quotas issued to vessels built in Russia.

    In general, the Germans with the Americans and all sorts of Poles are all great fellows. good shipbuilding is supported in every possible way and everyone is thriving and there are no problems, but we have a mustache with a creak and continuous problems, and we are "sivolapes" in second place in terms of shipbuilding.

    And where can you read about the successes of shipbuilding in Poland, Germany or the United States? sad

    The share of Russia in the world orders of the shipbuilding industry was 27%, with 26% for China and 45% for South Korea.

    The total is 98%. That is, Japan, Europe and so on account for 2%, do I understand correctly? Two years ago, Europe accounted for 10% of ordered ships, Japan for 22%



    I mean that something is not heard about a complete stop of shipbuilding in these countries, and the entire volume is usually taken for 100% and no more, unless of course it concerns the turnout in the elections in the USA laughing
    In general, you did not manage to bring another "positive" news to the public, as they say do not steal do not watch winked
    1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
      Marzhecki (Sergei) 11 November 2020 08: 28
      0
      Quote: 123
      The share of Russia in the world orders of the shipbuilding industry was 27%, with 26% for China and 45% for South Korea.

      The total is 98%. That is, Japan, Europe and so on account for 2%, do I understand correctly? Two years ago, Europe accounted for 10% of ordered ships, Japan for 22%

      You are confusing orders and volumes of real production. And also do not consider periods. Your usual branded demagoguery.
      1. 123 Offline 123
        123 (123) 11 November 2020 13: 17
        +2
        You are confusing orders and volumes of real production. And also do not consider periods.

        I guess in this case you are right hi , the article contains data for the 3rd quarter of 2020.

        The first place is Korea with 1,42 million CGT, or 45%, followed by Russia with 860 thousand CGT (27%), the third is China with 830 thousand CGT (26%).
        For 10 months, China 5,22 million CGT, Korea 3,77 million CGT, Japan 1,05 million CGT with an overall decrease in orders in the world by 48% compared to the analytical period of 2019.
  5. Praskovya Offline Praskovya
    Praskovya (Praskovya) 3 January 2021 13: 49
    0
    Recently a ship sank near Murmansk. Built in 1971. People died. We can build a lot, but not what we need.
  6. igor.igorev Offline igor.igorev
    igor.igorev (Igor) 1 February 2021 21: 30
    +1
    the author tries to pull an owl onto the globe, comparing the USSR and Russia. Is it okay that there are 2 times less population in Russia than in the USSR and we don't need such a large fleet? In addition, the most modern ports were the ChMP in the Baltic states, and all this went to our "brothers". And Russia was essentially left with nothing.
  7. 1331 Offline 1331
    1331 (Andrey Pershin) 6 February 2021 20: 08
    0
    The global sphere of shipbuilding services has long been divided among serious players who have their own specialization in it. The inclusion of Russia in it simply killed many enterprises that turned out to be uncompetitive, and now the domestic industry is simply not represented in a significant segment of ship equipment.

    The IMF provided loans to banks only after the complete privatization of all sectors. Here is the history of the privatization of "Russian Diesel".

    By definition of the Arbitration Court of St. Petersburg and the Leningrad Region. from 31.03.98 external management was introduced at the enterprise for a period of 18 months. EP Gulyaev, a geologist by training, was appointed as the external manager. According to his own statements and press reports, he previously worked in the group that carried out the privatization and restructuring of the Norilsk Nickel plant. In addition, from his own interview with the newspaper "Nevskoe Vremya" on September 3, 1999, it is clear that he was in 1989 - 1991. was associated with the unknown Norwegian company Sevotin. Now the most frostbitten intellectuals guess what services such firms are covering.
    In the course of the restructuring, the city site of "Russian Diesel" was liquidated, equipment was torn from the foundations and the technological process of the old plant was destroyed. The equipment, including the equipment of the new plant, was sold at the price of scrap metal.
    In the winter of 1998/1999. at the city site of the "Russian Diesel" plant, the boiler house was not put into operation, and the labor collective was frozen out of the plant.
    According to the restructuring plan, the number of personnel after the liquidation of the city site of the Russian Diesel plant and the transfer of production to the LDZ was supposed to be 500 - 600 people and ensure the production of 30 diesels per year, that is, it was planned to reduce the production capacity of the enterprise by 6 - 7 times.
    In fact, the production of diesels became impossible as a result of the restructuring and ceased.
    At the Leningrad Diesel Plant, the restructuring was carried out in the form of spinning off from a single large enterprise five small firms that are part of the "holding". In this way, the production process was destroyed and the trade union and labor collective were weakened and then liquidated.
    As a result of the restructuring, the Russian Diesel plant, as a major manufacturer of defense and engineering products, was destroyed. What is now called the "Russian Diesel" company is just a hardware factory owned by A. Sabadash, a vodka man, and capable of producing a limited range of spare parts and blanks.
    But the restructuring did not stop there. Well-equipped test benches were blown up at LDZ, which finally made the production of diesel engines impossible.
    Unique equipment, including the processing of fuel equipment and crankshafts, was sold at prices many times lower than the face value.
    Already in 2002 the invaluable Wallenberg machine for machining crankshafts was sold to South Korea. There are only two or three such machines in the whole world. Unique machines for machining bodies from Waldrich Koburg went there as well.
    Design and technological services, that is, the mental potential of the enterprise - its "brain" - has been completely eliminated.
    Instead of producing diesel engines and diesel generators, vodka is poured in the workshops built with the latest construction technology.
    Thus, the project for the privatization of the Russian Diesel enterprise, drawn up by foreigners from Cooper and Laybrands at the behest of the IMF in the interests of foreign manufacturers of diesel products and the NATO military, has been repeatedly overfulfilled by our rulers and restructurers.