Name changes

[Tony Wilding]

DOES ANYONE KNOW WHY MOST SHIPS NAMES ARE CHANGED FOR FINAL VOYAGE TO BREAKERS, ?

[Keith at Tregenna]

Curious: Original research into Tregenna found much that did not match, dates etc. It took a while to fathom that there had been five Tregenna's. It appears normal that if a ship was sold, lost etc, the next on line may be named the same. Also, it was again the norm to rename repatriated ships etc.

I know this will not answer your question directly, but it could seem normal during her life, that a ship may sail in many guises, but why at her end?

Changing her name at the end appears strange — especially as, apparently the changing of her name in the superstitious lore of the sea, is a dread omen of danger.

K.

[Ivan Cloherty]

Changing her name at the end appears strange — especially as, apparently the changing of her name in the superstitious lore of the sea, is a dread omen of danger.K.

Don't know where you found that one Keith, don't know of any seamen who was superstitious about sailing on a vessel which had changed her name. In fact most seaman were proud to serve on a new "whatsitsname" (not necessarly a new ship, but a renamed old ship just purchased) after sailing on the old "whatsitsname"

Changing a ship's name on the way to the knackers yard is done purely for commercial purposes.

A new ship may be ready for commission which is to carry the name of her predecessor. Therefore it is prudent to change the name of the predecessor as that vessel may not reach the knackers yard before the new ship is commissioned, and the rules will not allow two different vessels to have the same name and port of Registry (even if they have different IMO numbers).

Some shipbreakers have been known to purchase vessels and then re-sell them to other operators without changing the name (or operate them themselves) to load a cargo of scrap for the knackers yard and do not bother to change the name or port of registry of the vessel.

This causes the previous owner complications, so prudent owners change the name of the vessel for the last voyage to the breakers so that no legal conflict ensues with their new vessel and some owners do not want other operators using their naming system on other vessels.

Shipbreakers have been known to purchase vessels which have no motive power of their own, load them with scrap and tow them to the knackers yard with another vessel they bought, this happened frequently at Gadani Beach in Pakistan, changing the name of neither.

There is always a logical reason, and nothing to do with the "lore" of the sea but much to do with the "law" of commerce.

Regards

Ivan

[Stuart Henderson]

Yes cant remember anyone being superstitious ,maybe in days of sail perhaps ?

I know I sailed on the Vancouver Star on a coastal voyage back in the fifties and unbeknown to me at the time sailed on another coastal trip when she was Millais. Different coimpanies too of course but think it was a Fort or Park type which were fairly standard.
Stuart H

[Ivan Cloherty]

With Houlders in the 70's we had a ships which I sailed on 3 times and each time her name was different for no apparant reason to those on board. Orotava Bridge, Orotava and Ripon Grange. Maybe someone can enlighten me on that one. I should point out that it was always manned by Houlders and doing similar runs, maybe for differing charters?

Hi Tony

After the 70's there was a prevalence for shipowners to become "Holding" companies so that they retained the "named Line" (e.g. Houlders) but ships became owned by individual companies within that Holding Company, so there could be 20 different companies within that Holding Company but the overall impression was that they were Houlders.

For the legal buffs out there I am only using the name Houlders as "an example only" and are not stating that it was an actual fact within the Houlder Empire, just in case anyone decides to sue me!!!!!!!!!!

The individual companies became registered in Panama, Liberia, Marshall Islands etc, it all had to do with tax and grants, just because the ship was owned by a company registered in a "Convenience Country" it was not necessary to register the vessel's port of registry in that country, so vessels could have "Liverpool" "London" etc on the stern flying the Red Duster with no indication they were under Panama etc ownership, although legally they were supposed to display a glassencased certificate on the bridge for all to see, but whoever looked for it?. Possibly only Marine Marshalls when they under instructions to pin a "Writ" to the mast to prevent a vessel sailing.

The Greeks used the one ship one owner a lot, changing the very long company names of the company by one letter so that if there was a typo in the name (which was easy on a old typewriter)the "writ" was null and void, typo mistakes were easily made as writs tended to be issued in a hurry just before a ship sailed so that the owning company was given little time to respond.

Hope the above helps

Ivan


.