Global seismic fleet continues expansion

Fleet spared problems of rig contractors

Marshall DeLuca
International Editor

1999 Worldwide Survey of Seismic Vessels [99,617 bytes]!-- this is the link to the survey --

If the last boom, or "boomlet" as some are calling it, is to be remembered for anything, it should be that it gave the industry a much-needed opportunity to add equipment capacity. The best evidence is in the drilling rig markets, where rig contractors signed contracts for the newbuilding of several rigs. The first of these began sailing out of the shipyards in 1998. Similarly, the seismic industry took advantage of a strong market to add to their fleets. This resulted in a separate wave of new seismic vessels entering into the offshore market in 1998.

However, seismic vessel operators have been spared the problems that rig contractors have faced in recent months. Problems include contract cancellations, delays, and massive cost overruns. This is the result of two main differences between the two markets.

First is the issue of cost. Rig contractors are currently building the most technologically advanced drilling rigs available for around $200 million, while seismic companies such as PGS recently completed construction on two state-of-the-art Ramform seismic vessels for an aggregate cost of $170 million. Second, construction time on a newbuild seismic vessel takes on average less than a year, compared to two to three years for a rig.

These factors are due to the totally different sciences needed to build a rig and a seismic vessel. Rig construction involves a great deal of internal construction on the vessel's structure whereas a seismic vessel is basically a hull with the equipment added externally.

The economic reasoning behind the construction also makes for a number of differences and is the cause of some of the rig contractors' problems. Building a rig on spec is seen as an industry taboo, while seismic vessels are in essence built on spec. This is due to the relative cost between the two vessels.

With a lower cost per vessel and the steady, high demand of seismic acquisition, the seismic fleet is offered more security in newbuilding than rigs. Rigs need to secure long-term contracts to justify their construction. This offers the seismic market a greater opportunity to increase the capacity and technology of the fleet compared to other types of vessel-based markets.

1999 Worldwide Survey of Seismic Vessels

The seismic fleet has made some fairly significant changes in the past year. A new company, Aker Geo, joined the ranks and plans to add the first vessel to their fleet this year. Also several new vessels have entered the fleet in the past year with even more on the way.

Some notable additions to the fleet:

Geco Prakla will add the Geco Eagle (SS2000) to its already substantial fleet this year. This vessel will be the largest seismic vessel in existence.
PGS has increased its fleet with four new Ramform design vessels. The Ramform Valiant, Ramform Victory, and Ramform Viking were christened in the past few months, while the Ramform Vanguard is due out in the next few months.
CGG has ordered its fourth seismic vessel, the CGG Alize, due out this year. This is the first custom-built vessel for the company.
Fugro has purchased the Jean Charcot for use in deepwater surveys, route surveys for fiber optic communications cables, and delineation of exclusive economic zones, and has converted the Geo Baltic to become the company's new 2D flagship vessel.
Veritas DGC also launched its new flagship seismic acquisition vessel, the SRV Veritas Viking. The Viking is the newest multi-element vessel in the company's fleet.
TGS NOPEC also increased its fleet with the addition of the M/V Northern Access and M/V Atlantic Access 2D vessels last year.
Horizon also delivered the 121 meter by 23 meter M/V Atlantic Horizon seismic vessel.

The survey includes 193 seismic vessels, a difference of 31 vessels from last year's listing (162 vessels). Each vessel listing in the survey includes: vessel year rigged or converted, vessel measurements, streamer configurations, streamer information, 1998 source array configuration, 1998 acquisition experience, technical capabilities, onboard processing, final primary recording media, and delivery time.

Unless indicated by an asterisk, all data presented was provided by the companies listed. Limited information is provided on vessels belonging to companies with unknown addresses and those that did not respond to the survey.