A rather insulting email .

To my Readers,
from all the many emails I receive on a daily basis regarding shipping matters and also the ss Waratah, I can honestly say I am disgusted by the one sent by Andrew Van Rensberg whom I have on the odd  occasion  pointed out mistakes (obvious ones) in some of his blogs. It reads as follows,
So glad your health is improving. MOLE, who is a female yes, has her own blog, MOLE'S GENEOLOGY BLOG. When the bickering is all said and done and I am unilaterally put in my place by an EXPERT, take a moment to read MOLE'S posts. They are informative accurate and most importantly an example of how to set the bar high. We can all learn from this,...... enough for now, back to my task of 'sweeping statements and feeding the public incorrect figures. Take care.

A lot of people are aware of your figures etc, Having insulted me privately Andrew, you start sending me emails about my earlier blogs being complimentary and now in public in your blogs, you are praising my posts in an acclamatory manner a far cry from earlier comments in the public forum, calling me a spoilsport, agreeing with MOLE that I am a nit picker. Attack is always a good means of defence when you are made aware of your short comings. However I shall continue to write on with good grace and dignity , but in the meantime  I would like to point out that I do not wish to have my name used in your posts in future for whatever means, or to be associated with  you in way whatsoever.   Captain S. J. Robinson.
To those that follow my posts I will be posting this week once again, and have some interesting articles lined up for you, and thank you to those of you that have offered kind words of support.
     

Top heavy ships, add some ketledge.

 

Ketledge, usually comes in the form of pig iron billets and was often used as ballast in larger ships. Ballast comes in many forms and did so before the introduction of water ballast in early steamships. Sand , mud, rocks, and foundry dross were often used but the effort of loading it and discharging it by shovel was costly and time consuming on ships wishing to spend less time in port. I was not aware of foundry dross until I spent some time on Ascension Island in the South Atlantic Ocean. During my stay en-route to South America. I became friendly with one of the local inhabitants who brought to me one day what appeared to look like a piece of clinker (hardened ash or partly burnt coal) from a ships furnace.  It had speckles of what I thought was brass in it and the local thought it was gold and it was very heavy for its size about 5 inches in diameter and 1inch thick. We took a hacksaw to it and found more of the shiny metal was right throughout . He told me that he was diving and came across a massive patch of it in amongst some old ships timbers, he also produced some heavy copper fastening bolts. It was now obvious that he had found and early shipwreck, and naturally kept the spot to himself. I was very curious as to what the clinker could be and at his request would I take a sample with me to determine what it was. This I duly did this and after eventually arriving in England on my way home, took it a marine archaeologist who informed me that it was dross from a foundry that probably  cast bronze cannons and fittings for early sailing ships and was used as a heavy ballast in wooden vessels. The main content in the dross was bronze and I duly messaged my friend on the island and he  replied that he was going to salvage the remainder for the bronze content as scrap metal. This was my first lesson in unusual ketledge as I knew it.  

 

                                                   Unstable M.V. Rangitiki.

The M.V. Rangitiki was a New Zealand  passenger ship one of three in the same class, launched on the 29th of August 1928 ,on sea trials she was found to be unstable in ballast. Before her maiden voyage was undertaken some topside weight was removed. Modifications were made which included the removal of two sets of Samson posts, (Strong pillars fixed to the deck for the support of ships derricks). On the 31st of January 1929 she was taken over by her owners and set sail for New Zealand on February 15th 1929 taking 5 weeks for the voyage. During the 1st voyage stability problems were still found to exist and on her return to England she underwent further alterations. These consisted of removing most of the bridge structure including the associated deck, shortening of her two funnels and the installation of additional permanent ballast. After this the ship went on until scrapped in 1962. 

                                                        Rangitki with high funnels.

                                                  Rangitiki with cut down funnels.

 

The ss Imperator.

On her sea trials stability issues were discovered but she still sailed on her maiden voyage from Germany to New York on the 10th of June 1913. On her arrival at New York the pilot Captain George Seeth noted that the ship listed from side to side when helm changes were made to her change of direction. It wasn't until October 1913 that the Imperator  was returned to the ship yard that built her to have alterations made to improve her stability which was caused by her centre of gravity being to high. The marble bathrooms in 1st class were removed along with all heavy furniture and replaced with light cane furniture. Her funnels were reduced by 9.8 feet (3metres) and 2,000 tons of concrete were poured into her double bottoms as fixed ballast.

I

 

                                   Imperator (leaning Lizzie docking at New York.

 

                                            A true birds eye view of the Imperator.

The ss Principessa Iolanda.

The ss Principessa Iolanda was launched in Italy at 12.25 pm on the 22nd of September 1907 and was almost at the completion stage. After leaving the slipway the ship became unstable and heeled over to port. Some 20 minutes later the vessel began taking in water (Downloading) through open ports. She eventually capsized and lay at 90 degrees. There were many errors caused during her launching but the main error seems to be launching an almost complete ship without ballast, it was denied that it was due to her design.

                                                      ss Principessa Iolander

                                                     Launching in progress.

                                                                 Starting to take water.

At rest at 90 degrees, could you imagine the Waratah recovering from this with cargo on board that would have shifted in heavy seas along with water rushing in through her vents and openings. It would appear beyond any shadow of doubt that in this case the righting lever (GZ) is no longer apparent. Hope the men in the picture are not looking for it.(please excuse my sense of humour). Readers can view Wikipedia for information on the three ships mentioned here.

 

                                                   A comment on stability.

You can play around with all the figures on the stability of the Waratah but I am convinced that not all the true figures were not  put into the public arena, if she was such a wonderful stable ship what happened to her? It is impossible to thoroughly determine the stability of any particular ship using commonly published specifications. It must be remembered that stability is so complex and influenced by so many factors that even professional ship designers find it hard to quantify. Before computers were available the calculations involved were so complicated that certain aspects of stability were only estimated rather than accurately determined. When reading the figures on the Waratahs stability presented to the court this is what precisely happened. In this present age of computers doing the workload on numbers, stability calculations are one of the most trying tasks the naval architect has to contend with and perform.   

  

 

 

                                                                      .

 

 



To the many readers that follow my blogs.

Thank you to all those readers for their lovely get well emails. I have had a spell in the sick bay but my doctor assures me that I am not ready to pass over the bar just yet. It is so nice to be back on deck and  in the relative comfort of my quarters once again. To those readers that sent emails regarding information on ships in general and also queries on the Waratah, I have cut back my work load but will get around to answering you in the near future. To those of you  requesting information as to where you can find information on the Court of Marine Inquiry, there is a 23 page annex to the full report of the ss Waratah available on line. I must remind you however it is only a short annexure but will give you some interesting reading on the case. The full report is held at the Guild hall in London and is a very lengthy document indeed. If you go to Google and type in "Wreck report for Waratah', 1909-Port Cities Southampton you will bring it up, (the short annexure only).

 

During my absence I have evidently been a naughty boy for pointing out some of the mistakes that Andrew Van Rensberg has posted in some of his blogs, especially a recent blog "Waratah continued part 8". Readers can refer to the comments on this blog and make up their own minds. One blog which I have taken exception to was posted by a female who blogs under the name Mole, in her blog she had the following to say to me. "Pointless having a go at Andrew who is producing an informative and unbiased blog for our delectation and delight. If anyone wants to take issue with the nuts and bolts of the stats, fine. There is such a thing as nit picking. Anyway we're all on the same side- that is the Waratah- aren't we"?
My answer is yes Mole, and in reply to your arrogant response we are on the same side when it comes to the Waratah, nit picking as you call it has saved many lives at sea, someone has to take issue with loose nuts and bolts otherwise everything comes loose and eventually falls apart. If my constructive criticism is seen as nit picking so be it, the public is entitled to correct information and there is no room for loose nuts and bolts. I will not see readers fed incorrect figures or sweeping statements thrown around loosely on nautical matters whatever the ship being discussed, (near enough is not good enough).

To my dedicated readers, my next blog will be on stability in a form you will readily understand, until then once again thank you for your good wishes.

                                Myself Conducting ships business in Beira Mozambique 1992