The Southern Cross

[Brian Probetts (Site Admin)]

The Southern Cross

1 Comments by Brian Probetts (Site Admin) Published on 5th January 2016 12:44 PM

How passenger ships have grown and the passenger ship business expanded!

Sixty years ago, in the winter of 1955, workers at the Harland & Wolff shipyard at Belfast were adding the finishing touches to the 20,000-ton Southern Cross, the innovative flagship of Britain's Shaw Shaw Line.
The new liner had aroused and intrigued the press, the shjipping industry and ocean travelers across the globe.
In many ways, the 20-knot, twin-screw vessel would be a "ship for tomorrow".
She would be the first major liner to have her engines and therefore her funnel placed aft -- and creating a design style that became increasingly popular.
She was also one of the first all-one class, all-tourist class passenger ships (meaning a passenger in a top-deck suite would share, say, the public areas used by migrants in an inside six-berth down on D Deck).
Indeed, it was the beginning of a new social age at sea! The 604-ft long Southern Cross was also the first passenger liner of size and note that carried no cargo (other than passengers' baggage) whatsoever and so earned her keep exclusively from passenger fares.
She was also designed for a unique service: continuous 76-night around-the-world voyages out of Southampton.

The Southern Cross went on to a long and varied career -- later becoming the Calypso, then Azure Seas and finally Ocean Breeze -- before meeting the scrappers in faraway Bangladesh in 2003.
Photo: As the Ocean Breeze, the former Southern Cross is seen above at Nassau and moored alongside the far newer and larger, 102,000-ton Carnival Triumph, a new generation, 3,500-passenger ship that is in fact five times the size of the older liner. Times on the high seas had changed!

PS: If you have any stories to share about the Southern Cross and her long career, kindly forward them on. We enjoy hearing from others.

[j.sabourn]

Peter you haven’t worked out the difference in fuel costs have you.? Would be interesting to know. The bean counters must have done their sums. Know that going from Liverpool to Auckland was quickest via the Panama, as had to work it out one time when second mate. Can’t remember the mileage now, anyone with the appropriate distance tables could tell you today. Most of those distance tables in any case were made up from the history of ships who had done and reported in. On thinking back we only bunkered once in Panama. Going via the cape would probably either bunker in Dakar or Capetown/Durban, whichever was the cheapest. Going from A to B in a deadweight ship was not as straight forward as the layman thinks. There were also the various zones one had to pass through re. the vessels freeboard, which also meant the time of the year. Likes of passenger ships rarely had such problems as freeboard was not a big concern to most. When having to work out such distances beforehand on a Rhum line track used to pick a figure of the expected daily run and work out the distance by Mercator which was good for up to 600 nautical miles. Add all together to get the total. Had to do this for alternate tracks to see which was shorter. Was nearly as bad as working out the deck crews overtime for the week. Everything in those days was paper and pencil, no calculators and computers doing the job for you. Was still a better world to live in. Cheers JWS.

[robpage]

if my memory is correct the UCL mail ships travelled 6005 miles from Southampton to Capetown at almost 600 miles a day . 300 tons of fuel a day at £4 a ton , bunkers at Las Palmas .

[j.sabourn]

4 pound a ton.? If I remember correctly it was approx 100 pound a. Ton in the 80”s. Diesel of course. You must have been burning bunker C Rob. used to burn way over 20 tons a day on 4 engined purpose built vessels. Why most of time went on two. Brian should have no room for complaint on his little 4 piston car he drives very little of. 4 quid would last him well over a year. A near enough distance check between Southampton and Capetown to within a couple of hundred miles would have been your dlat. Didn’t need navigators for that run just follow the garbage thrown over the wall if someone knocked the signposts over. For example say Southampton latitude 51 degrees north and Capetown 31 degrees South then dlat is 82 degrees x 60 is 4920 nautical miles. To be more accurate would have to be more precise with the latitudes and would be distance as the crow flies and the way the shipowner wanted you to go. Cheers JWS.

[j.sabourn]

Just looked at my Atlas and may be a much bigger difference than that stated. Didn’t realize Capetown was so far to the east of Greenwich , about 18 degrees and Southampton. To the West over a degree. Must be getting old. Cheers JS.

[Captain Kong]

Captain, Sailing times to Fremantle from the UK is only a five or six hours difference going round the Cape or via the Suez Canal so why pay a quarter of a million to use the Canal ?? Regards Peter in NZ.

The reason for going round the Cape instead of through Suez and the Red Sea again at that time of year , was because FIVE Children Died due to the heat. The old GEORGIC, had been built in 1932, for the North Atlantic service of the White Star Line, and NO Air Con, Ten People to a cabin. So the ship was an Oven.
So the Cape Route was much Cooler than a Red Sea Summer. It was August, It had nothing to do with the extra mileage, or cost, it was to save childrens lives.
The ship was owned by the Ministry of War Transport , so cost do not come into the operation. Passengers only paid £10 per family.
Cheers
Brian

[robpage]

Going back to what Peter was saying about boiler tube fouling , I had thought the higher levels of contaminates , Vanadium and sulphur were in oil sourced from Venezuelan crude , but I would have thought the Southern Cross would have bunkered Las Palmas , and in my ignorance would have thought the crude was sourced elsewhere . we used to load Angola and that was so sulphurous only Port Arthur would take it . never realised how poor quality fuel could wreck a boiler . On Gulf tankers under UK flag the burners were steam assisted supposedly to create better combustion

[robpage]

If asked that I would say an advancement from it

[robpage]

True Rob just a Mk 2 version and obviously a lot bigger. If memory serves I think a lot of the Canberra upper decks contained a fair amount of Aluminum. Also power wise the Canberra was Turbo Electric drive??

One of the electricians was killed in the early days , I believe it was similar to T2 tanker propulsion 6000 V on the main engines 3- phase , almost 40 years service

[robpage]

I had over 25 years with a site on 11 kV , you learn a great respect for those voltages , once bitten = dead

[vic mcclymont]

In the old days East Midlands Electricity Board ran H.V. courses at Ashover. The courses and the facilities were recognised as one of the best in the World. People came from all over to learn about H.V.
Started off by frightening the sh 1 t out of you before building your confidence up.
Vic