Page 8 of 9 FirstFirst ... 6 7 8 9 LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 85

Thread: Submersible missing

  1. #71
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    618
    Thanks (Given)
    21
    Thanks (Received)
    246
    Likes (Given)
    46
    Likes (Received)
    1129

    Default Re: Submersible missing

    Quote Originally Posted by Tony Taylor View Post
    good friend of mine was mate on one of the sisterships, cant recall the name now, but he said they were regularly having it welded it up. Was frame 69 or something? Did you ever run across Terry Wright?
    I know the one he is talking about as i worked for Cast at the time. It was at frame 65 ( cofferdam ) .

  2. Thanks Tony Taylor thanked for this post
  3. #72
    Join Date
    Mar 2022
    Location
    Prenton
    Posts
    3,821
    Thanks (Given)
    468
    Thanks (Received)
    1850
    Likes (Given)
    3126
    Likes (Received)
    5474
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default Re: Submersible missing

    Not exactly the builders finest hour, 6 built two sank. The first of the class was the Furness Bridge and the only one built to the original design she was in service for 21 years being scrapped in 1992.
    Strange how the two vessels built for Bibby Line both sank and the newest one was the first to sink.
    English Bridge renamed Worcestershire and at the time of her sinking/grounding she was the Kowloon Bridge in 1986.
    Liverpool Bridge later named Derbyshire.

  4. Thanks Doc Vernon thanked for this post
  5. #73
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Location
    JOHNSTONE
    Posts
    430
    Thanks (Given)
    13
    Thanks (Received)
    443
    Likes (Given)
    277
    Likes (Received)
    1627

    Default Re: Submersible missing

    Should have said earlier the sister ship I was on was the Sir John Hunter, later renamed the Cast Kittiwake and then Kona. I was on it with the three different names. While I was on it as the Kona a few guys joined after being told it was a new ship to the company only to find out it was the renamed SJH which they had been on before. The ship was not that bad but being a large OBO hardly any runs up the road, apart from 4 weeks in Ulsan drydock which was goood fun.
    Senior Member

    UK003715

  6. Thanks Doc Vernon thanked for this post
  7. #74
    Join Date
    May 2023
    Location
    hertfordshire
    Posts
    128
    Thanks (Given)
    104
    Thanks (Received)
    83
    Likes (Given)
    415
    Likes (Received)
    272

    Default Re: Submersible missing

    Rest in Peace All.

  8. Thanks Des Taff Jenkins, N/A thanked for this post
    Likes Doc Vernon liked this post
  9. #75
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Cooma NSW
    Posts
    10,038
    Thanks (Given)
    11386
    Thanks (Received)
    5671
    Likes (Given)
    48471
    Likes (Received)
    29309
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: Submersible missing

    Hi John.
    Moping oil on the deck was used a lot on some ships I was on, plus the long handled scraper, beat chipping hands down. The Mates never had to worry when we were greasing the blocks or oiling the runners,as the more that went on the deck the better they liked it.
    Des
    R510868
    Lest We Forget

  10. #76
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Sunbury Victoria Australia
    Posts
    26,146
    Thanks (Given)
    9409
    Thanks (Received)
    10577
    Likes (Given)
    111822
    Likes (Received)
    47651

    Default Re: Submersible missing

    Latest news, some of the wreckage from 40,000 feet down has been recovered by the Canadian navy.
    From that they hope to establish what happened.
    There are also what they think may be human remains as well.
    Happy daze John in Oz.

    Life is too short to blend in.

    John Strange R737787
    World Traveller

  11. Thanks Doc Vernon, Des Taff Jenkins thanked for this post
  12. #77
    Join Date
    Mar 2022
    Location
    Prenton
    Posts
    3,821
    Thanks (Given)
    468
    Thanks (Received)
    1850
    Likes (Given)
    3126
    Likes (Received)
    5474
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default Re: Submersible missing

    John 40,000 feet !!! that would be over 3 times deeper than the Titanic rests

  13. #78
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    W.A.
    Posts
    25,426
    Thanks (Given)
    13684
    Thanks (Received)
    14598
    Likes (Given)
    20175
    Likes (Received)
    81624

    Default Re: Submersible missing

    #76. Certainly out of the realms of the patent sounding machine John. Boyle’s law not applicable in this case . Shame though as the makers of glass tubes and the suppliers of yellow chromate stood to make a fortune . JS .
    Last edited by j.sabourn; 30th June 2023 at 02:27 AM.
    R575129

  14. #79
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Sunbury Victoria Australia
    Posts
    26,146
    Thanks (Given)
    9409
    Thanks (Received)
    10577
    Likes (Given)
    111822
    Likes (Received)
    47651

    Default Re: Submersible missing

    That should read James as about 4 kilometers or around 13200 feet imperial.
    Got the original from a news item.
    Happy daze John in Oz.

    Life is too short to blend in.

    John Strange R737787
    World Traveller

  15. Likes James Curry liked this post
  16. #80
    Join Date
    Mar 2022
    Location
    Prenton
    Posts
    3,821
    Thanks (Given)
    468
    Thanks (Received)
    1850
    Likes (Given)
    3126
    Likes (Received)
    5474
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default Re: Submersible missing

    It is all this metric malarkey John, enough to confuse those who never grew up with SI units someone made a reference to 10,000 metres the other day. Somethings do sound better when you mention centre metres when comparing things to inches.

    I remember sailing on a few ships that had Sulzer engines. They had certain parts on those engines that used imperial threaded bolts but mostly they were Metric threads.
    If in the wrong hands sometimes could prove to be very dangerous.
    I was on a Bibby LPG carrier that had a Doxford engine. Some one had fitted a main engine relief valve using a whitworth stud into the engine casing but used a metric nut to tighten the valve in place. The valve was blown off the engine and embbeded in the main switch board. This valve weighed probably 10kgs, so 22lbs or a stone and a 1/2 in old money. It just missed the chief engineer, mind you he was heavy handed on the Air and fuel when trying to start the engine. Best guy on the sticks was usually the 3rd. I could start a Doxford on a whisper of air as long as it was an ahead movement, going astern was a different matter.
    Last edited by James Curry; 30th June 2023 at 09:26 AM.

  17. Likes happy daze john in oz liked this post
Page 8 of 9 FirstFirst ... 6 7 8 9 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •