# sir john hunter



## lordgregory1 (Sep 13, 2012)

Looking through Houlder Brothers past ship names I noticed a ship I was on is not listed, M.V. SIR JOHN HUNTER. built at the swan-hunter ship yard on the tyne, I think 1973?, a lovely ship an OBO carrier. according to my dishcharge book, she belonged to Thornhope shipping co, Fenchurch st, London. I joined her in europort oct 1974, up to RAS TANURA, to south america back to middle east then back to europort. She was 68,000 tons?, a good crew, good times. Can anybody shed any light about this ship? did you sail on her? when she was scrapped?,would appreciate any info about her.


----------



## A.D.FROST (Sep 1, 2008)

lordgregory1 said:


> Looking through Houlder Brothers past ship names I noticed a ship I was on is not listed, M.V. SIR JOHN HUNTER. built at the swan-hunter ship yard on the tyne, I think 1973?, a lovely ship an OBO carrier. according to my dishcharge book, she belonged to Thornhope shipping co, Fenchurch st, London. I joined her in europort oct 1974, up to RAS TANURA, to south america back to middle east then back to europort. She was 68,000 tons?, a good crew, good times. Can anybody shed any light about this ship? did you sail on her? when she was scrapped?,would appreciate any info about her.


SIR JOHN HUNTER'74 was built at Swan Hunter,Tees.(mgrs.Houlder Bros./Denholm)1979;r/n NORDIC CHALLENGER.1981;r/n CAST KITTIWAKE.1988;r/n EL CARIBE C.1989;r/n SAM HUNT.1991;r/nNAFSIKA M.1997 b/u Bangladesh.Thornhope Shg. was a subsidiary of Hilmar Reksten,and becauce Furness/Houlder were having a sister ship built at the same time HR asked if they would manager her..


----------



## billyboy (Jul 6, 2005)

A warm welcome aboard from the Philippines. Please enjoy all this great site has to offer


----------



## RMM (Dec 28, 2008)

*Sir John Hunter*

Please see http://www.teesbuiltships.co.uk/swanhaverton/sirjohnhunter1974.htm

for information and photos.


----------



## hawkey01 (Mar 15, 2006)

Lordgregory1,

on behalf of the Moderating team welcome to SN. Enjoy all we have to offer.

Hawkey01


----------



## Orbitaman (Oct 5, 2007)

A.D.FROST said:


> SIR JOHN HUNTER'74 was built at Swan Hunter,Tees.(mgrs.Houlder Bros./Denholm)1979;r/n NORDIC CHALLENGER.1981;r/n CAST KITTIWAKE.1988;r/n EL CARIBE C.1989;r/n SAM HUNT.1991;r/nNAFSIKA M.1997 b/u Bangladesh.Thornhope Shg. was a subsidiary of Hilmar Reksten,and becauce Furness/Houlder were having a sister ship built at the same time HR asked if they would manager her..


1983 to 1988 the vessel carried the name 'Kona'

My brother was 2nd Mate for a trip when she was the 'Kona' and he always maintained it was the worst ship he ever sailed on.


----------



## A.D.FROST (Sep 1, 2008)

Orbitaman said:


> 1983 to 1988 the vessel carried the name 'Kona'
> 
> My brother was 2nd Mate for a trip when she was the 'Kona' and he always maintained it was the worst ship he ever sailed on.


Thank you for that,used RMM #4 to look it up.(Scribe)


----------



## ALAN TYLER (Dec 22, 2007)

There,s several photos of her in the gallery under cargo ships. According to the Furness Withy book her tonnage was 91,178 grt and was in the Thornhope Shipping Co, sister ship of the Sir Alexander Glen


----------



## A.D.FROST (Sep 1, 2008)

ALAN TYLER said:


> There,s several photos of her in the gallery under cargo ships. According to the Furness Withy book her tonnage was 91,178 grt and was in the Thornhope Shipping Co, sister ship of the Sir Alexander Glen


part of the DERBYSHIRE(Bibby) class


----------



## Gulpers (Sep 8, 2005)

Both Sir John Hunter and Sir Alexander Glen were managed by J & J Denholm in the late seventies. 
In addition to the previous details for Sir John Hunter, Sir Alexander Glen was declared a total loss in 1994 as Ocean Mandarin under the Chinese Taipei flag.


----------



## A.D.FROST (Sep 1, 2008)

Gulpers said:


> Both Sir John Hunter and Sir Alexander Glen were managed by J & J Denholm in the late seventies.
> In addition to the previous details for Sir John Hunter, Sir Alexander Glen was declared a total loss in 1994 as Ocean Mandarin under the Chinese Taipei flag.


OCEAN MANDARIN Lost rudder 19.3.1994 NE Jappan,towed to Samchompo achorage ,disharged and towed to China for scrap.


----------



## Scelerat (Sep 18, 2012)

I'm surprised that she lasted that long! When I joined her in '86, I think, the Old Man greeted me with the words "Some valves don't pass and some of the bulkheads are sound". He was right.


----------



## oldman 80 (May 7, 2012)

Sir Alexander Glen and John Hunter:-
Denholm Managed for sure - Mid/Late 70's.
Never sailed on either, but they did not have a good reputation throughout the fleet.
But what OBO did ? - apart perhaps from some of the Seateam ones - at least up until maybe 2nd "Special Survey". It would be very much "all downhill " after that.
In those days most of them were falling apart at 1st Special Survey - the First Generation OBO's. - that is.
Seateams Swedish built ones (Gothenburg & Landskroner) were very much 2nd Generation - a huge improvement on the first - apart from the accomodation of course, but it was OK, indeed quite reasonable.
Not "flash" though, not by any stretch of the imagination - Just adequate and functional.

Edit:- Sorry guys - for "Special" read "Quadrennial" in posting above ( YES - 1st quadrennial and falling apart.)


----------



## Plane Sailing (Sep 13, 2008)

Orbitaman said:


> 1983 to 1988 the vessel carried the name 'Kona'
> 
> My brother was 2nd Mate for a trip when she was the 'Kona' and he always maintained it was the worst ship he ever sailed on.




I did a seven month trip on her in the mid eighties. I recall carrying the first oil cargo after a very long time on dry bulk - not a pleasant experience. Got thrown off the berth in Yanbu as the cargo was finding its way out with the ballast, then needed divers at Suez to blank off the overboards before we could transit the canal.

Definitely not one of the nicest ships I was ever on.


----------



## Scelerat (Sep 18, 2012)

How did you find the operation of ballast and main cargo valves? The 3/O and myself (2/O) had to climb down the the bottom plates to start the valves with a giant stilson because the hydraulics couldn't operate the valves without help.


----------



## oldman 80 (May 7, 2012)

Plane Sailing said:


> I did a seven month trip on her in the mid eighties. I recall carrying the first oil cargo after a very long time on dry bulk - not a pleasant experience. Got thrown off the berth in Yanbu as the cargo was finding its way out with the ballast, then needed divers at Suez to blank off the overboards before we could transit the canal.
> 
> Definitely not one of the nicest ships I was ever on.


(Smoke)

Oh yes - that sounds like a first generation OBO for sure.
Cracks, cracks, cracks, and would you believe, - more cracks.
If you look at me - ( the picture) I'm first generation as well.
In my case they weren't just cracks - they were dirty great gaps at the junction between hopper sides and bulkhead stool and up in the TST's as well.
In one instance big enough to slide your hand thro from hold to DB.
I can't quite remember how old she was at the time - but it was in the vicinity of first quadrenial.
Welding, welding, welding - day and night - at sea - just an abomination - but the accommodation was good.
Japanese built - Sumitomo - I think.

The Seateam ones (2nd Generation) were nothing like as bad, but still had their problems when they were Seateam.
Those that eventually went to Cast probably deteriorated (in the crack respect) very, very rapidly indeed, for reasons I will not go into at this time.
I often ponder how many of the Team ships actually made the breakers yard, as opposed to the bottom of the ocean.
*Scandia Team* reached the breakers yard at the end of her life - and there is good reason for that - I believe.
A lot of work went into acheiving it though - and it was largely a result of what was learned, on the one you are looking at now, (1st Generation) - *and attitude also *- of course.
There again - she was also a very special ship - she went to hell one day - and came back again - with all hands - no losses at all.
(Gleam) (Pint)


----------



## Scelerat (Sep 18, 2012)

We went to Sullom Voe to load, with major concerns about the vessel's ability to pass the loading survey because of the cracks in the bulkheads between the ballast tanks and the cargo tanks, but, because of our Red Ensign, we were passed without inspection.....


----------



## Plane Sailing (Sep 13, 2008)

Scelerat said:


> How did you find the operation of ballast and main cargo valves? The 3/O and myself (2/O) had to climb down the the bottom plates to start the valves with a giant stilson because the hydraulics couldn't operate the valves without help.



Yes I remember that all too well - we ended up using a huge ratchet spanner because once the valve was unstuck it was a tricky job to get the stilson off before it started rotating and caused you some serious GBH. 

We'd be up and down the duct keel throughout most of our cargo watches - certainly kept us fit!!

I also recall the cracks which Oldman 80 referred to - wasn't it frame 65 which was the subject of regular inspections?


----------



## John Cassels (Sep 29, 2005)

Oldman 80;

You say " Those that eventually went to Cast probably deteriorated ( in the
crack respect) very very rapidly indeed for reasons I will not go into at this
time ".

Would you now care to elaborate ?.


----------



## John Cassels (Sep 29, 2005)

Plane Sailing said:


> Yes I remember that all too well - we ended up using a huge ratchet spanner because once the valve was unstuck it was a tricky job to get the stilson off before it started rotating and caused you some serious GBH.
> 
> We'd be up and down the duct keel throughout most of our cargo watches - certainly kept us fit!!
> 
> I also recall the cracks which Oldman 80 referred to - wasn't it frame 65 which was the subject of regular inspections?


And what was the problem at frame 65 wich caused so many
regular inspections ?.


----------



## Plane Sailing (Sep 13, 2008)

John Cassels said:


> And what was the problem at frame 65 wich caused so many
> regular inspections ?.


If I remember correctly, following on from the loss of the Derbyshire it was found that the remaining ships of the class were all found to have cracks in frame 65. The considered opinion was that some of the longitudinals didn't extend far enough aft, giving rise to excessive stresses in the region, hence the regular inspections.

Possibly someone has some more details on this?


----------



## oldman 80 (May 7, 2012)

John Cassels said:


> Oldman 80;
> 
> You say " Those that eventually went to Cast probably deteriorated ( in the
> crack respect) very very rapidly indeed for reasons I will not go into at this
> ...



(Pint)

Elaborate you say !!!!!!! Elaborate !!!!!!~
Why should I ? I don't need to.
But as an ex - Cast guy, you should perhaps ponder it at length.
Only you can decide on that one - you worked for them, - Not I.
For my part, it appears to me that you are *full of it* but entitled to your opinion of course.
(Gleam)


----------



## chadburn (Jun 2, 2008)

Plane Sailing said:


> If I remember correctly, following on from the loss of the Derbyshire it was found that the remaining ships of the class were all found to have cracks in frame 65. The considered opinion was that some of the longitudinals didn't extend far enough aft, giving rise to excessive stresses in the region, hence the regular inspections.
> 
> Possibly someone has some more details on this?


As far as I remember it was not the unfortunate "Derbyshire" that highlighted a possible problem in the frame 65 area but the English Bridge when she lost her Rudder and ended up with her Bow hard on to "The Stag's" and her Stern moving around like a Fiddler's Elbow. Moving from a Tramp (in my case) these ship's were very impressive and the facilities were superb but unfortunatly bigger did not mean stronger no matter where they were built as those of us who served on them quickly realised. In the early vessel's the Ballast Control was in the Engineroom and Butterfly type valve's were something new, shin bashing down the Duct Keel was the Engineer's pain.


----------



## oldman 80 (May 7, 2012)

Scelerat said:


> We went to Sullom Voe to load, with major concerns about the vessel's ability to pass the loading survey because of the cracks in the bulkheads between the ballast tanks and the cargo tanks, but, because of our Red Ensign, we were passed without inspection.....


Well I don't know about that one - no dates, no ship name etc.,
But I do believe your conclusion that you were passed to load without inspection was due to your flying the red ensign - is, to say the least, a bit rubbery.
I never went to S.V. to load in an OBO. ( _Straight Tankers only_)
However, one of my OBO's did - when I was on leave.
She had a relatively small oil spill whilst loading, due to some 2/0 failing to re-check the ullage of a slop tank after it was topping off. The reason for that failure to check is not known to me, but I highly suspect it was due to a particularly high work load at the time, coupled with the fact that crew numbers had not long before hand, been substantially decreased - most significantly the removal of the pumpman.
That reduction in personnel was *reasonably appropriate* at the time it was made, when the vessel was running the US West Coast/Canada/East Asia circuit, - however when that trading pattern was changed to US East Coast/ Europe (_Dunkirk in particular_)/ North Sea/ U.S. East Coast , the manning level became inadequate, but was never increased again - to my knowledge.
In addition the ship was getting older - more problems arising, more problems to deal with etc. etc.
Add to that, the deplorable practices and pressures inflicted upon tankers loading at SV (_let alone an OBO_) and it was inevitable that a spill was likely to occur and I do not doubt many did.
The fines impossed would no doubt go someway to pacifying the locals, maybe a new road, a new school, or even just a free night in the pub - who knows ?
Add to that the SV terminal operators (I can't remember who they were), and their public relations exercise designed to create the impression they were genuinely concerned about wild life when their only real concern was the dollar, and getting ships turned around in the shortest period possible - no matter the real cost - the *big picture becomes clearer and clearer and clearer.
*Furthermore I do not understand what you mean by the "pre load survey" and it's relationship with cracks in bulkheads. The vessel surely presented for loading all battened down and fully inerted - but maybe I am wrong. Under such cir***stance the only pre-load survey required would have been a tank dry certificate, and I doubt bulkhead cracking would have been detected / revealed by that, although it is just possible I suppose, - unless I have forgotten something - that is.
I can also advise you of this, the Master in Command at the time, was charged with pollution offences by the Shetland Constabulary, and was convicted of a CRIMINAL offence . I CAN also tell you that that particular Master was certainly NO CRIMINAL - far far from it. He was a long serving, highly committed and totally dedicated individual - a very fine human being indeed.
The terminal operators had their win in the courts - " get tough with the ships" which suited their public profile and no doubt pacified the Island residents for a while, but for just how long I don't know.
All the terminal operators were truly interested in was the EDP process - and nothing else. In my view, in those days they were grossly irresponsible - perhaps even criminally negligent.
In respect of that particular incident whilst I was on leave, somehow my name became associated with it - in Glasgow, presumably because of some time lag in updating current crew lists. The nett result was I received a telephone call at home from glasgow head office warning me that my name had been "inadvertantly" leaked in relation to the incident and to be prepared for - _well anything really._ 
A day later my telephone starts ringing and I'm subjected to menacing Phone calls, including death threats, from some ********
whom I can only conclude were the mad environmentalists - the hippies, the lunatic fringes of society - Whatever.
Thatchers yuppies - no doubt.
When that happens to you on leave - it's a bloody outrage - I couldn't wait to get back to my ship again - away from it all - away, away - Far Away from the Maddening crowds.
And so I conclude this post with the following remark to you Scelerat - I believe your concusion re the red ensign to be wrong, entirely wrong, and absolutely nothing to do with what you suggest. In other words I suggest you are *full of it *too.
I also ask "What was your position on board" ?


----------



## oldman 80 (May 7, 2012)

Plane Sailing said:


> If I remember correctly, following on from the loss of the Derbyshire it was found that the remaining ships of the class were all found to have cracks in frame 65. The considered opinion was that some of the longitudinals didn't extend far enough aft, giving rise to excessive stresses in the region, hence the regular inspections.
> 
> Possibly someone has some more details on this?


Well I never sailed on the Derbyshire/Sir Alexander Glen/John Hunter class but they were first Generation OBO's with which I was very familiar.
However it really doesn't matter precisely which frame number it was as all OBO's were suspect in that region (frame 65 in the case you mention) - Just forward of the Bridge - just aft of the cargo spaces. In the PUMP ROOM in other words - 2nd Generation were no different in that respect - can't remember the precise frame number in a particularly fine 2nd Generation OBO - but the details are on this webside somewhere - I know that, because I put them there.
Somewhere in the Denholm forum I think - Sea Team/Tom McNeil, if my memory serves me correctly - or something quite close to that. 

We all greive over the loss of the Derbyshire, even to this day.
If only she had a welder on board - and someone to adopt the right attitude - then maybe they'd all be with us today - who knows ?
What a terrible loss of so many souls.
*Lest we forget *

Edit:- I do of course refer to that dog on the hatch forward - which sent her to the bottom, I believe - but we will never know for sure. So sad.


----------



## Orcadian (Jan 27, 2006)

Having served aboard the Cast Kittiwake and seen the crack refered to i feel i better put my twopence worth in here. According to the LLoyds surveyor in Japan the problem that we had at the infamous frame 65 was that the longitudinals did not extend through the transverse bullkhead but were stopped either side. The problem being that they did not match up on the other side of the bulkhead but were about 25mm out and set up a vey high stress point that was failing, he described it a bit like a pair of scissors cutting through paper. The solution on the Cast Kittiwake was as far as I am aware cut that section out end ensure that the longitudinal did extend through the transverse bulkhead. I left the ship in Rotterdam whilst discharging her cargo but she was then to go to drydok and get the repairs done which i presume must have happend as she lasted quite a few more years after that.


----------



## Scelerat (Sep 18, 2012)

oldman 80 said:


> Well I don't know about that one - no dates, no ship name etc.,
> But I do believe your conclusion that you were passed to load without inspection was due to your flying the red ensign - is, to say the least, a bit rubbery.
> I never went to S.V. to load in an OBO. ( _Straight Tankers only_)
> 
> ...


You can believe what you like, although I'm not sure why you feel the need to take such an aggressive, if not confrontational attitude.
If you took the time to read the posts properly you will have noticed that the name of the vessel was already given, the approximate date was the winter of 86-87. I'll leave you to search out the vessel's name at your leisure.
The pre-loading inspection might have been a better description of the event. Whatever it was called officially, I was the bloke who went around the ship with him, along with the Mate, on the pre-loading tour of inspection, which was perfunctory to say the least, just a quick walk around the deck, past the bits of rope in place of handrails, across the deck plating that buckled and bounced under our feet. On our return to the Mate's office we were passed, with the comment from the inspector I indicated in my previous post.
We weren't found to have caused pollution during the load, even though there was oil in our ballast tanks, which was clearly visible in the water.
I was 2/0.


----------



## Scelerat (Sep 18, 2012)

There are many posts on the "Derbyshire" thread regarding the structural issues of these vessels, if members wish for further details.


----------



## oldman 80 (May 7, 2012)

Scelerat said:


> You can believe what you like, although I'm not sure why you feel the need to take such an aggressive, if not confrontational attitude.
> If you took the time to read the posts properly you will have noticed that the name of the vessel was already given, the approximate date was the winter of 86-87. I'll leave you to search out the vessel's name at your leisure.
> The pre-loading inspection might have been a better description of the event. Whatever it was called officially, I was the bloke who went around the ship with him, along with the Mate, on the pre-loading tour of inspection, which was perfunctory to say the least, just a quick walk around the deck, past the bits of rope in place of handrails, across the deck plating that buckled and bounced under our feet. On our return to the Mate's office we were passed, with the comment from the inspector I indicated in my previous post.
> We weren't found to have caused pollution during the load, even though there was oil in our ballast tanks, which was clearly visible in the water.
> I was 2/0.


(Applause)

Hmm , I see.
May I be the first to congratulate you on a revealing supplementary posting, Mr. ex - Second Officer now turned White Ensign.
I am inclined not to hold that one against you, but I might.
With reference to the pre-load survey you mention, I recognise that guy you describe doing his “business” on behalf of the Terminal .
That was not a preload survey you were conducting, although the terminology was so widely used for convenience purposes, it is easy to understand why you were clearly under the impression that it was.
You were in fact conducting a pre-load petroleum inspection which is monumentally different from a survey. The guy was a petroleum inspector, which might very well mean he had no grey matter between the ears, but highly trained in the EDP process. Oh yes I recognise him only too clearly – all a part of that "nothing else matters other than the dollar" scenario which was well established in those times and cunningly presented as something else for the beneif of the public, the media, and the politicians of course.
Thank you so much for your supplementary posting, and the clarity with which it is made.
There is now no doubt whatsoever that we are talking about an OBO, and very much a Cast one at that.
I’m sorry if you believed I was being aggressive with you – that’s the wrong impression altogether, although I must have created it somehow.
No I very much sympathise with the situation you were in, and am so glad you were one of those guys who survived. 
As an afterthought, can I just ask :- 
That “oil in the water ” scenario you describe, was that (aaa) inside the ship ? (bbb) outside the ship ?, or was it in fact, (as I now see it in my minds eye), (ccc) both inside and outside, at the same time ? 
I think I can picture it clearly – that terminal was an utter disgrace – nothing to do with ensigns – just the dollar and the Early Departure Procedure. 
The “inspector” you went round with had a with specific purpose in mind – to authorise the flow of oil into the cargo spaces as quickly as possible – and I think we all know precisely where it was going after that.
Cheers, keep up the good work teaching, which I imagine, is honourable and indeed a privilege, - white ensign or otherwise.
Kindest regards.
(Pint)


----------



## Scelerat (Sep 18, 2012)

Blue Ensign actually, but now teaching in the state sector, or business sector really, as the school is an academy, one of those schools now run by private enterprise for the benefit of, well, the kids or the share holders?


----------



## oldman 80 (May 7, 2012)

O.k. - I think I understand what you mean.
I always thought teachers were the real pillars of society, foundation of a nation etc. etc.
Good ones at any rate.
I had some excellent ones, all of whom had had fairly lengthy carrers elsewhere prior to turning to teaching at a later stage in life.
Boy oh Boy could they motivate a kid into wanting to learn - that's why they were so successful - with me and many others. It was fun.
Sounds like you may be one of those types - I hope so.
Good luck.


----------



## oldman 80 (May 7, 2012)

ONE FINAL QUESTION MR ex 2nd Mate Skelerat - if you please ?

I think it is an important one.

I refer to your posting No. 17.
*CAN YOU* by any chance remember who you were Chartered to at the time.
( _probably a difficult one to remember in light of the passage of time_) 
Once again, I thank you for the clarity of your supplementary posting #27 re the Cast O.B.O.


----------



## oldman 80 (May 7, 2012)

Oh dear - #32
Nothing Heard.
Nothing Heard.
Nothing Heard.

(Sad)


----------



## Scelerat (Sep 18, 2012)

Sorry that I wasn't able to reply as quickly as you clearly wanted, but Mr. ex 2nd Mate scelerat works full time and isn't always able to respond with immediacy. No, I can't remember the charterers, lowly ranks such as 2nd Mate were often not informed of such important information. This lowly 2nd Mate, when working for another company, was frequently not even told where we were going, which one might have considered essential for his job to be properly done!


----------



## oldman 80 (May 7, 2012)

Scelerat said:


> Sorry that I wasn't able to reply as quickly as you clearly wanted, but Mr. ex 2nd Mate scelerat works full time and isn't always able to respond with immediacy. No, I can't remember the charterers, lowly ranks such as 2nd Mate were often not informed of such important information. This lowly 2nd Mate, when working for another company, was frequently not even told where we were going, which one might have considered essential for his job to be properly done!


O.k. - got you. I didn't think it likely you'd remember the Charterer so far down the track unless perhaps something very unusual had occurred during the Charter.
I've got a uncanny feeling it may have been B.P. which likely explains why you were not subject to appropriate pre load inspection at Sullom Voe.
Had you been "Occidental" or some other Major, then you may have experienced something worse.
It should not be forgotten that in those days the Major Oil Companies were probably the most guilty of chartering junk tonnage, as often as not their own junk tonnage disguised as some other entity - i.e. an old rust bucket given a new name, a brass plate office somwhere, - a single ship company ship - in other words. (Scrap Values were unbelievably low.)
A new disease had been born - and Glasgow was by no means immune.
Like growing a beard this month, shaving it off next month, then growing it again in accordance with the cir***stances at the time.

*I can* understand what you are saying with respect to not being informed of where you were going, and the effect it had on your ability to do your job. That sort of situation extended to Masters as soon as FOC ops took over. Often passed off as "need to know" in rhetoric, but in reality the situation was often "Must not know under any cir***stances at all".
I can recall a few occassions returning home when I just could not believe where I had been. Just shocking - unbelievable in fact. It was then I realised where I'd be going - same place as "Derbyshire" - and she was probably at least "reasonably sound". It only takes one small fault, one catastophic failure - and you're gone. 
Oh well, at least it's all behind you now - and you obviously haven't been tossed overboard (or something), as I was beginning to suspect, when I posted "Nothing Heard", "Nothing Heard", "Nothing Heard".
It really did get that bad, and in some cases, - even worse.
Give us back the old Board of Trade and the Red Ensign - it wasn't perfect for sure, - but was probably as good as you would get as far as seafarer protection, welfare, well being etc. etc. was concerned. and you would always get your wages/remuneration when due, - or thereabouts. That's security - as well.
FOC was very different in that respect, as it was with health care on board and overseas. That could be totally denied to ships personnel if the master didn't stand up to bad/shocking Managers.
(Sad)


----------



## Scelerat (Sep 18, 2012)

On one of the occasions I referred to I was under the Red Ensign, with a British old man, who seemed to think that I, as 2nd Mate, was beneath his attention level. On one occasion we were heading towards Gib, all I knew was that we were going to the US. When he saw that my courses stopped at the end of the seperation scheme he asked me why they hadn't continued. I told him that it was because I hadn't been told where were going. His view, forcibly expressed, was that I should have come to him to ask for our destination, that it wasn't up to him, as it were, to tell me. Bizarre view, I thought.....


----------



## Malky Glaister (Nov 2, 2008)

Not far from where your course stopped lies the Spey Bridge on the sea bed!

regards

Malky


----------



## Scelerat (Sep 18, 2012)

We discharged our cargo of LPG in Rhode Island. I plotted our courses to Florida, on the strength of my wife overhearing the git telling the C/E where were going next. He still didn't tell me, and never did tell me, and always made a point of only ever asking for an "ETA to our destination", never indicating where it might be.


----------



## A.D.FROST (Sep 1, 2008)

Isn't thats how Chistopher Columbus discovered the West Indies ,he forgot to tell the 2/mate they were heading for Japan and he still got all the credit,because the 2/mate was heading for the Panama Canal(Scribe)


----------



## Scelerat (Sep 18, 2012)

Only Christopher Columbus still thought that he'd arrived in India....


----------



## Tony Crompton (Jul 26, 2005)

And there was the Iron Ore ship bound for Bri****h Steel Redcar (River Tees) telegraphing his agent that he was anchored awaiting Pilot yet
no one could see any sign of the ship.

There was also by coincidence an Iron Ore ship anchored off British Steel at Port Talbot that no one knew anything about !!!

Tony


----------



## BOB.WHITTAKER (Dec 3, 2008)

Sailed on both the "Sir john Hunter" and the "Sir Alexander Glen" as 2cnd. eng. Joined "The Hunter" in Rotterdam October 1974 , the trip after her maiden voyage I think.Ballast to Brazil,iron ore to Japan,ballast to N.W. Australia then iron ore back to Rotterdam.From memory no real problems other than occasional blackouts and exhaust valve spring breakage,Sid Rowlands was Ch. eng.,a grand bloke ! left February 1975.
Joined "The Glen" by helicopter off Capetown August 1975,I think this was her maiden voyage.I can remember the captain,Rex Leech,receiving a telex on that same day advising that inspections for cracks be carried out around the pump room forward bulkhead.Instructions were vague and all we could do was a cursory examination.Left in November 1975 and rejoined in January 1976 for an even briefer trip from Mina al Ahmadi to Le Havre.No major problems on either of the two trips but the telex back in August of 1975 must have been generated by incidents on one of the sister ships. Bob Whittaker


----------



## oldman 80 (May 7, 2012)

Scelerat said:


> On one of the occasions I referred to I was under the Red Ensign, with a British old man, who seemed to think that I, as 2nd Mate, was beneath his attention level. On one occasion we were heading towards Gib, all I knew was that we were going to the US. When he saw that my courses stopped at the end of the seperation scheme he asked me why they hadn't continued. I told him that it was because I hadn't been told where were going. His view, forcibly expressed, was that I should have come to him to ask for our destination, that it wasn't up to him, as it were, to tell me. Bizarre view, I thought.....


I find your report utterly bizarre in this instance, at least the way it is portrayed, or to be more precise, as I read it.
At that time was there one 2nd Mate and one 3rd mate, or alternatively was there two 2nd Mates and no 3rd Mate.
If the latter case, can you assure me now, before all those gathered here present, _now and at all times in the future_, that we are not looking at a case of two 2nd mates simply playing silly buggers and stuffing the master right up.
If that is the case, then beware, but it looks hell of a like it to me.
(It seems likely that you had left some Mediterranean Port and were heading _ US EAST COAST FOR ORDERS_, and that no destination port had yet been nominated for your cargo, and furthermore that at the time the Master didn't know his destination port either and may have been drawing your attention to that fact in a manner you would not forget. (Not a nice situation to be in when heading into the Atlantic and perhaps a bit low on the fuel ROB's, potentially required)
Perhaps he was waiting or wanting you to be a bit more ascertive as 
2nd Mate. *That is known as motivating*, or inspiring, call it what you may. (The " YES SIR, NO SIR", WHIMP's are no use to any master at all, especially with reduced manning levels.)
I note someone has mentioned the end of your course line was near to the last resting place of the Spey Bridge. (_representing me)_
If I were on board right now, (and it was back then) and if the "*Playing Silly Buggers*" scenario (mentioned above), *was the reality*, then it is highly likely that my "*well placed boot*", would propel you in the direction of Spey Bridge, the position of which, has already been accurately described, in an interim posting above.

(When that sort of info (disport) was received on board it was immediately relayed to Chief Engr, 2nd Mate and Ch. Mate,( and probably in that order ) then to every one else soon after. (At least on my ships and all those I had sailed in.)
I'm beginning to suspect you may have had an attitude problem - perhaps even understandable, - but maybe otherwise.
Another possibility of course - the red ensign had really "gone to the dogs'[ it was deteriorating rapidly under Thatcher ] I was transferred Home Fleet to Overseas Fleet, a couple of years before the time under discussion. Unfortunately to ships with what I would call very bad owners. 

(Frogger)


----------



## BOB.WHITTAKER (Dec 3, 2008)

Orcadian said:


> Having served aboard the Cast Kittiwake and seen the crack refered to i feel i better put my twopence worth in here. According to the LLoyds surveyor in Japan the problem that we had at the infamous frame 65 was that the longitudinals did not extend through the transverse bullkhead but were stopped either side. The problem being that they did not match up on the other side of the bulkhead but were about 25mm out and set up a vey high stress point that was failing, he described it a bit like a pair of scissors cutting through paper. The solution on the Cast Kittiwake was as far as I am aware cut that section out end ensure that the longitudinal did extend through the transverse bulkhead. I left the ship in Rotterdam whilst discharging her cargo but she was then to go to drydok and get the repairs done which i presume must have happend as she lasted quite a few more years after that.






ORCADIAN, your description of the problems around frame 65 on the Swan Hunter built OBOs is exactly as it was described to me some 35 or 36 years ago. BOB WHITTAKER


----------



## Scelerat (Sep 18, 2012)

oldman 80 said:


> I find your report utterly bizarre in this instance, at least the way it is portrayed, or to be more precise, as I read it.
> At that time was there one 2nd Mate and one 3rd mate, or alternatively was there two 2nd Mates and no 3rd Mate.
> If the latter case, can you assure me now, before all those gathered here present, _now and at all times in the future_, that we are not looking at a case of two 2nd mates simply playing silly buggers and stuffing the master right up.
> If that is the case, then beware, but it looks hell of a like it to me.
> ...


What a curious response.


----------



## John Cassels (Sep 29, 2005)

"Curious "being the polite word.


----------



## vasco (Dec 27, 2007)

"OLDMAN 80

In the early 70'S I sailed with a Master who would not tell me the next port, he may well have had command for a good 10 years. He was known as d r because those that did not walk off got a d r. He was , basically a bully. These days he would not be employed. After all, phrases such as "does not suffer fools gladly" or even "well placed boot" are now considered bullying and have no place in the work place. I speak with some experience in this matter having reported one Master for such things. He subsequently left and nothing was said to me.

apologies to the originator of this thread for the hijacking


----------



## oldman 80 (May 7, 2012)

vasco said:


> "OLDMAN 80
> 
> In the early 70'S I sailed with a Master who would not tell me the next port, he may well have had command for a good 10 years. He was known as d r because those that did not walk off got a d r. He was , basically a bully. These days he would not be employed. After all, phrases such as "does not suffer fools gladly" or even "well placed boot" are now considered bullying and have no place in the work place. I speak with some experience in this matter having reported one Master for such things. He subsequently left and nothing was said to me.
> 
> apologies to the originator of this thread for the hijacking


(Pint)
Good Lord - would you believe it.
Seems you really must have been one of those unlucky ones who happened to be placed in a bad position.
Early 70's you say - well it certainly must have been around then as that is when the new (at that time) discharge books were issued - the DR no longer existed not indeed the double DR.
I can't say I ever sailed with an old man who wouldn't tell me what the next port was going to be, if, that is (aaa) he knew himself - which believe it or not, sometimes is the case ( quite often in fact ), and (bbb) Provided of course, that I asked him. However when I was cadet I probably wouldn't ask him as one of the mates would have told me, or maybe the bosun, the cook or someone. Quite apart from that I'd probably know before the Captain as our schedules were published in the Newspapers, and I was the cadet that used to go ashore in the mornings to get the newspapers - when on the coast in the uk and continent. 
So I'd be bullying would I ?
Well if that's what it takes !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
(Wave)

Edit:- Another situation which might result in somebody on board not knowing the disport or next port - Perhaps somebody (no names necessary) back in H.O. just did not have the time to advise the ship, and therefore the master, where the ship was required to go to. Maybe even, chaos and carnage on board, was the objective of management - it happens sometimes - usually with some dubious objective.


----------



## oldman 80 (May 7, 2012)

vasco said:


> "OLDMAN 80
> 
> In the early 70'S I sailed with a Master who would not tell me the next port, he may well have had command for a good 10 years. He was known as d r because those that did not walk off got a d r. He was , basically a bully. These days he would not be employed. After all, phrases such as "does not suffer fools gladly" or even "well placed boot" are now considered bullying and have no place in the work place. I speak with some experience in this matter having reported one Master for such things. He subsequently left and nothing was said to me.
> 
> apologies to the originator of this thread for the hijacking


Hmm - I see.
So you reported some master, who subsequently left and nothing was said to you.
Well aint that just fantastic !!!
I can only ask - Why did he leave ?
Was the company really better off without him ?
Was the company better off with you ?
Why did they not say anything to you ?
All valid questions - but what the hell - why should I care ?
I'm long retired, & struggling with health issues, perhaps even linked to persons like you.
Who knows ?
However so long as you're happy and with clear conscience, then that's what is most important to you.
But I think, you should go and get stuffed, - or something like it, at least.
(Fly)


----------



## vasco (Dec 27, 2007)

oldman 80 said:


> Hmm - I see.
> So you reported some master, who subsequently left and nothing was said to you.
> Well aint that just fantastic !!!
> I can only ask - Why did he leave ?
> ...


Fantastic..... Many think so
Leave............He had no choice, leave or be sacked
Better off without ..... Not my place to say so, though I can say that the first words said to me at the interview were "I am not surprised at this allegation"
With me..........I am still here
Say anything..As I had made a serious allegation against him I would have been disciplined if it was false, I was not.
You care......Makes no difference to me wether you do or not.
I am happy and my conscience is perfectly clear. I tried everything over period of years to avoid reporting him.Finally the Company said sail with him, tell us why not or face disciplinary action.
Getting stuffed...Would like to oblige but I am not That way inclined.
I am sorry to hear about your ill health, though not knowing your cir***stances I cannot say if it was my attitude that caused it.I retire in a couple of years and should I need to change my attitude it will be very difficult. So I suppose I must remain as I have been told I am, a capable person carrying out his duties well, keen to instruct others, conscientious and polite.

If anyone reading this does suffer bullying, log all incidents and contact someone in authority, if not union then the DPA.


----------



## oldman 80 (May 7, 2012)

vasco said:


> Fantastic..... Many think so
> Leave............He had no choice, leave or be sacked
> Better off without ..... Not my place to say so, though I can say that the first words said to me at the interview were "I am not surprised at this allegation"
> With me..........I am still here
> ...


OK
Your reference above to I tried everything over a period of *YEARS*, throws a different light on the subject - I did not get that impression from your first posting relating to this matter.
The company saying sail with him, tell us why not, etc., is a bit more enlightening too.
There were some instances from the past which I recall of similar kind that the company put down to simple clashes of personality between two individuals - not nice within the confines of a ship, but these things happen. In many of those cases they were right. (but not all) 
I suppose your company would have given some consideration to that possibility.
Bullies do exist - that's for sure, always have done and I suppose they always will , but one thing for sure, you cannot tell from text postings on web sites, no matter how good the emoticons are.
It's the tone of the voice, - the body language - those sorts of things -they make all the difference in the world.
Without them you can't tell, but you can perhaps get a good idea, or a feel for the situation, from website text postings, I suppose.
Have a good retirement when it comes.
(Pint)


----------

