# Stulcken



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

Possibly the last Stulcken trading vessel the MAGA STAR on her way to scrap,but a can't under stand why this method was not taken up by the obvious company's such as Ellerman,Elder Demster and Clan Line even though they had on charter the fist British owned ship with a Stulcken WAVECREST even the father of heavy lifter Capt.Smith did not adopt this idea


----------



## Pat Kennedy (Apr 14, 2007)

Even that most conservative of British shipping companies had Stulkens on their Super 'P' class, although slightly modified to conform to their own somewhat eccentric, standards. 
I only sailed on one ship with a Stulken derrick, T & J Harrison's Tactician. It was surprisingly easy to use providing everyone involved knew what they were doing.


----------



## Engine Serang (Oct 15, 2012)

It was surprisingly easy to use providing everyone involved knew what they were doing.
Exactly.


----------



## AlbieR (May 18, 2007)

Here's one to practice on.


----------



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

AlbieR said:


> Here's one to practice on.


Where? (Whaaa)practice makes perfect (one way of putting up a flag pole) need one at the foot of the bed.


----------



## AlbieR (May 18, 2007)

A.D.FROST said:


> Where? (Whaaa)practice makes perfect (one way of putting up a flag pole) need one at the foot of the bed.


It's outside this hotel in Wester Ross http://www.garvehotel.com/


----------



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

AlbieR said:


> It's outside this hotel in Wester Ross http://www.garvehotel.com/


Thanks, based on the barge that lifted the MARY ROSE (I wonder if the hotel was built on the proceeds.)(K)


----------



## Engine Serang (Oct 15, 2012)

Albie do you remember how excited the Mate got on the "K" class when he had a 100 tonne lift with the Stulken. Ballast Chits by the dozen, Lecky worked up to a frenzy and two Rustons on the Board. And the lift itself a doddle and a bit of an anti-climax. Professionals.

I do enjoy YOU TUBE and watching other peoples lifts go wrong.


----------



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

Just like the derick was named after some one. The Jumbo derrick was named after a Indian elephant kept at London Zoo, so why wasn't the 747 named after Dumbo[=P]


----------



## AlbieR (May 18, 2007)

A.D.FROST said:


> Thanks, based on the barge that lifted the MARY ROSE (I wonder if the hotel was built on the proceeds.)(K)


You are correct in saying it was the barge that raised the Mary Rose. A lot more information on a thread I started when I found it. http://www.shipsnostalgia.com/showthread.php?t=207706
I took the picture with my Range Rover in the background to give some idea of scale.
Merry Christmas to ES, there are some of us still about lurking in the fridge alleyways!


----------



## saudisid (Mar 17, 2014)

Engine Serang said:


> Albie do you remember how excited the Mate got on the "K" class when he had a 100 tonne lift with the Stulken. Ballast Chits by the dozen, Lecky worked up to a frenzy and two Rustons on the Board. And the lift itself a doddle and a bit of an anti-climax. Professionals.
> 
> I do enjoy YOU TUBE and watching other peoples lifts go wrong.


Engine Serang
When I had lifts of 100 t in a K normally you did not need to keep alterimg the ballast. Most times you had a big GM due to all the steel in the bottom. Only problems were to make sure you were upright [ bit out of the L/H wing tanks for that ] and that you were EK Fixed by the fore peak tank. When in the Asakir in84 we had 3 104 t lococ to dicharge in Q8. Only 20cm clear at each end in the hatch coamings.
Alan


----------



## Engine Serang (Oct 15, 2012)

Sailed on Al Salimiah, Ibn Battotah, Ibn Hayyan all with Stulkens and if the truth be known they had very little heavy lifts, a bit of an expensive ornament. On the Ibn Abdoun we had twin 40 tonne Clarke Chapman cranes that could be coupled to lift 80 tonne and they shifted an almighty amount of cargo. 
I suppose if you want to make money from heavy lifts a 105 tonne Stulken just ain't big enough.
Sometimes big is better.


----------



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

Engine Serang said:


> Sailed on Al Salimiah, Ibn Battotah, Ibn Hayyan all with Stulkens and if the truth be known they had very little heavy lifts, a bit of an expensive ornament. On the Ibn Abdoun we had twin 40 tonne Clarke Chapman cranes that could be coupled to lift 80 tonne and they shifted an almighty amount of cargo.
> I suppose if you want to make money from heavy lifts a 105 tonne Stulken just ain't big enough.
> Sometimes big is better.


They were plenty of general cargo ships of 50 & 60's went from builders to scrap with out using their Jumbos (plenty of the mates prayers were answered when that happened)the lighter Stulckens were a stop gap for carrying containers on conventional vessels and just as deck cranes swl were increasing making the Stulcken obsolete.


----------



## Engine Serang (Oct 15, 2012)

It was always interesting and informative to observe the Mate bring the main boom from working a Ford hatch to work an Aft hatch. The nimble and dexterous Mate could bounce the boom between the Stulcken posts in no time at all. The timid and plodding Mate would read the Blohm & Voss instructions, take an eternity and possibly banana the boom. 
Perhaps it was Hamburgs revenge.


----------



## saudisid (Mar 17, 2014)

Engine Serang said:


> It was always interesting and informative to observe the Mate bring the main boom from working a Ford hatch to work an Aft hatch. The nimble and dexterous Mate could bounce the boom between the Stulcken posts in no time at all. The timid and plodding Mate would read the Blohm & Voss instructions, take an eternity and possibly banana the boom.
> Perhaps it was Hamburgs revenge.


ER Serang
I agree re the twin 40t crane ships. They were better to work as you could move anything on deck from No 1 to No 5 without landing it ashore.

Regarding swing the Stick on a Govan ship I would do it on the box but on a Korean no way. The boxes did not work same way. Both had 2 levers [ controls ] On the Korean one worked the Hook and the other the topping lifts On a Korean box you had to push down to engage. If you took the pressure off the winch went in opp direction. The Glasgow ships the 2 conrtolers worked :-

If both pushed down the hook lowered. If pulled back ith lifted.
if you pushed both out the topping lifts payed out and if you pushed them if it topped the stick.

I used to bring the stick up until the 10T derricks were behind the stick the heave on the hook as it was made fast to the deck in the direction I wanted to go. To go from 2 to 3 was the simple one as most time trimmed by stern. Going from 3 to 2 you had to make sure that you did not get the stick " In Irons " ie almost vertical. Thats when you coul bring it down.

In the 80s the Mate in the Khaldoon went home from Liverpool for a weekend and left written instrutions not to swing the stick as he would do it when her returned. Second Mate had a go and brought it down. The onlything that saved Steves job was that her had put it writting.After that Ikept the keys locked in my cabin.
Alan


----------



## Tony Morris (Oct 7, 2006)

I was on the Ibn Battotah when the deck squad decided to grease the wires of the boom, instead of supporting it on some 12" x 12" wood they hung it off the 12.5 ton crane. The wire sling parted with the result of an impressive ding in the hatch cover.


----------



## China hand (Sep 11, 2008)

Australia Star had a good one in 1967. 300 tonner.


----------



## saudisid (Mar 17, 2014)

Tony Morris said:


> I was on the Ibn Battotah when the deck squad decided to grease the wires of the boom, instead of supporting it on some 12" x 12" wood they hung it off the 12.5 ton crane. The wire sling parted with the result of an impressive ding in the hatch cover.


Always used packs of ply wood about 10 to get the stick right.

Alan


----------

