BP tanker appeared on Ebay today

zelo1954
9th April 2007, 04:48
Folks:
The enclosed BP tanker appeared on Ebay today. It is incorrectly captioned as British Loyalty. It looks like either a "42" or possibly one of the Italian luminaries. There are lots of clues and I bet this doesn't stay unsolved for more than a day.

Cheers, Geoff

non descript
9th April 2007, 10:12
Please forgive my ignorance, but I guess it was not the ship itself that is being sold on Ebay and just a photograph of it? i.e. so people are selling what we on this Site post for free… now that is a comment on life. (Jester)

zelo1954
9th April 2007, 10:33
Please forgive my ignorance, but I guess it was not the ship itself that is being sold on Ebay and just a photograph of it? i.e. so people are selling what we on this Site post for free… now that is a comment on life. (Jester)

Ha! Actually it was one of Woody-of-IOW's pictures. He's obviously done a major scanning job and is selling off his own printed photos which he has acquired from all over the place. He and his wife are major collectors of postcards and photos of all sorts, not just ships.

Woody then makes all the photos he scans for Ebay available online on www.photoship.co.uk - on which there is a huge, huge, huge collection of old ships. They are also printable.

Some of his ship photo captions however aren't too accurate, and this was one of them.

And thanks for the PM!

Cheers, Geoff

non descript
9th April 2007, 11:06
Thanks Geoff and I'm sure one of our resident BP experts will solve this one soon.

Regards
Mark

John_F
9th April 2007, 11:41
Thanks Geoff and I'm sure one of our resident BP experts will solve this one soon.

Regards
Mark
Mark,
I'm no expert but I'm not too bad at comparing photos......I'll have to leave this one for Alastair as I'm away from home over Easter. If he hasn't named it by tomorrow afternoon (when I'm home again) then I'll throw in my two pennies worth. From what I can see from the photo though, its definitely not one of the Italian 35s & I would go for one of the 42s.
Kind regards,
John.

ruud
9th April 2007, 13:20
Ahoy Geoff,
Yep I noticed her also,as I do receive emails from Ray & Barbara Woodmore,when new photos/postcards appeared on EBay,whilst being a regular customer.
Can't say neither if this is the Loyalty or with one, but sure someone[Alastair] will show up,and will have the answer.
Indeed he has a very huge amount of photos,each week almost up to 1000 new entries,only on Merchant Navy, apart from other vessels and the actor/actress piccies,and the "Buy it Now" fishery boats, and sometimes,but rarely, some misspelled names.

HENNEGANOL
9th April 2007, 16:05
It definitely isn't the Loyalty, the two earlier ships with amidships accommodation had straight funnels!

With two derricks on the aft boat deck, at a guess I would say that she is a 42.

Gerry.

alastairjs
9th April 2007, 20:57
At first sight I don't think she's a "42", not enough stanchions either midships or aft. Looking at her distinctive signal mast and doing a quick stanchion count I think she's a "35" but not, as John rightly says, an Italian one. At the moment I favour one of the two from Swan, Hunter; either the Aviator or the Architect. More homework needed.
Regards,
Alastair

zelo1954
9th April 2007, 21:23
At first sight I don't think she's a "42", not enough stanchions either midships or aft. Looking at her distinctive signal mast and doing a quick stanchion count I think she's a "35" but not, as John rightly says, an Italian one. At the moment I favour one of the two from Swan, Hunter; either the Aviator or the Architect. More homework needed.
Regards,
Alastair

Yes I'm sorry - that's the class I meant. I thought they were 42s. Architect and Aviator were my thoughts too.

John_F
10th April 2007, 16:03
Looking at her distinctive signal mast and doing a quick stanchion count I think she's a "35" but not, as John rightly says, an Italian one. Regards,
Alastair
Hoisted by my own pétard! Stanchion counting again! I've now progressed to counting awning spars.
I agree with Alastair that she's certainly not a 42 nor one of the "Italian Luminaries" as Zelo calls them (Engineers who served on the "Luminaries" may have a different name for them.) She is definitley a 35 & there were only 3 British ones - Architect, Aviator & Energy.
Back to awning spars - an image that I have of the Aviator (& Alastair has this image too) shows her whole poop deck, including the gangway to the Ensign jackstaff, covered in awning spars. These appear to be lacking on this image. As the Architect & Aviator were direct sisters I assume that maybe the Architect has the same awning spar arrangement but I don't have a good enough image to verify this. That said, I will go for the Energy, built by the Fairfield Shipbuilding & Engineering Co. Ltd. of Glasgow.
Kind regards,
John.

alastairjs
10th April 2007, 16:32
John, A good theory that I was about to go along with but there's a pretty clear aerial shot of the Energy in the first edition of "The British Tankers" by Norman Middlemiss and she has the same plethora of awning spas aft as her sisters from Swan, Hunter including the ones over the catwalk to the ensign staff/stern discharge. I think we'll have to resort to counting things again!
Regards,
Alastair

John_F
10th April 2007, 20:24
Alastair,
Interesting - In which case that only leaves the Architect unless, of course, the awning spars over the poop were removed from all 3 35s at some time as they didn't really benefit anyone apart from the 2nd Mate & his mooring crew. A bit less to paint.
As you say - back to the drawing board.
Kind regards,
John

non descript
10th April 2007, 20:39
This is great stuff, well done John and Alastair, I am, as always, impressed by your style. (Thumb)

John_F
10th April 2007, 21:38
Alastair,
Assuming that the name, British ???????, is centralised across the stern of the vessel in the photo, the "h" of "British" appears to fall just to the left of the port side upright of the flying bridge leading to the Ensign jackstaff. In your photo of the Aviator (attached) the "h" of "British" appears to fall just in the centre of the gap between the 2 uprights for the flying bridge. The letter spacing of the name of the mystery vessel would appear to be longer, therefore, than Energy or Aviator. Architect?
Go on! - Put another spanner in the works! The Architect has a history of proving a difficult vessel to identify!
Kind regards,
John

zelo1954
10th April 2007, 23:27
At first sight I don't think she's a "42", not enough stanchions either midships or aft. Looking at her distinctive signal mast and doing a quick stanchion count I think she's a "35" but not, as John rightly says, an Italian one. At the moment I favour one of the two from Swan, Hunter; either the Aviator or the Architect. More homework needed.
Regards,
Alastair

Now doesn't the Destiny have the same stanchion count as the 35s - or am I counting the wrong stanchions? I must say though I find the name over the stern theory of John very compelling for Architect. That alone would also rule out Destiny whatever other considerations might apply.

My only other thought was that if Woody thought the name was "Loyalty" then what was it about the name that caused him to think that? I suspect the name on his photo is rather clearer than on the scan.

Cheers, Geoff

jdvictor
11th April 2007, 01:51
Folks:
The enclosed BP tanker appeared on Ebay today. It is incorrectly captioned as British Loyalty. It looks like either a "42" or possibly one of the Italian luminaries. There are lots of clues and I bet this doesn't stay unsolved for more than a day.

Cheers, Geoff
Could it be the one of the ill-fated T-2's produced in the US in the 50's or 60's

John_F
11th April 2007, 10:22
Now doesn't the Destiny have the same stanchion count as the 35s - or am I counting the wrong stanchions? I must say though I find the name over the stern theory of John very compelling for Architect. That alone would also rule out Destiny whatever other considerations might apply.

My only other thought was that if Woody thought the name was "Loyalty" then what was it about the name that caused him to think that? I suspect the name on his photo is rather clearer than on the scan.

Cheers, Geoff
Geoff,
You're quite right about the number of stanchions on the Destiny being the same as the 35s, at least along the poop deck. I hadn't noticed that before. However, the engine room vent configuration, among other things, is different to that of the mystery vessel. Strange that Woody thoght it was the Loyalty. I have also tried a few tricks with Photoshop to try & bring the remainder of the name into some type of definition but am not having any luck. Still favour the Architect (until Alastair proves me wrong - again!)
Kind regards,
John

barnsey
26th April 2007, 12:16
barnsey here. Can I join in this game too?? It is definitely one of the 3 English 35's. They have the very distinctive stanchion arrangements on the after accommodation at flying bridge level. Just look at the gaps not the number of stanchion. At the forward end of the after accommodation there is 1 small gap, next there are 2 bigger gapos and finally 4 very long spaced gaps down aft. None of the other designs, 50 42' or italian 35's of this era has that very distinctive arrangement. Now which one of the three is she??

John_F
26th April 2007, 14:24
Barnsey,
I still favour the Architect for the reasons stated. Alastair has been strangely silent on this one for a while.
Kind regards,
John

alastairjs
26th April 2007, 21:06
John,
My apologies for neglecting this interesting thread, just as it was moving along nicely I pulled a sickie and "lost the plot". On recovery I got embroiled in other things with Clive and forgot all about it, senile decay I fear. I can't see how Woody, who's site I often refer to, could have ever thought she was the Loyalty. The first one was 10,440 dwt built 1928, number two was a Doxford built "12" from 1949 and number three was a 1968 all aft 24,000 dwt from Eriksberg. The current Hyundai built Loyalty (2004) has a rather squarer funnel than this one and is also all aft.
I think your great piece of applied logic on the name is spot on. As you say, The British Aviator, having 7 letters in each word of her name, had the name on her stern applied with each word equidistant from the centre line. The Energy was almost the same but the Architect's 9 letter second word meant that the two words couldn't be spaced equidistant from the centre line without looking unbalanced. Well done sir, another trick learned in addition to counting sanchions, vents etc! My vote goes to the Architect.
Regards,
Alastair

ruud
29th April 2007, 19:28
Ahoy lads,
Ahoy,
Well finally I'm able to solve this mystery,it's explicit the BRITISH ARCHITECT,100% certitude,as the following shot will show.
Thanks for Ray Woodmore[woody iom] who solved this problem,so not the VALOUR as was mentioned to be.
Btw. piccie was shot by J.K.Byass,so all courtesy/© to him.
So all credits for those who choosed the ARCHITECT,another mystery solved!(Thumb)
Game over & out!

non descript
29th April 2007, 19:42
Well done Ruud, excellent stuff and well appreciated. (Applause)

zelo1954
29th April 2007, 22:21
Well done Ruud, excellent stuff and well appreciated. (Applause)

Seconded!

barnsey
30th April 2007, 01:18
Uh Uh ... not quite finished yet lads.... WHERE was the photo taken ... it looks as though she is tank cleaning as the Butterworth hose is relieving pressure over the side while they change tanks. She is decidedly "Chatty" over the side and due for drydock which may be why she is tank cleaning which would normally be done at sea.

My thoughts lie in the direction of a none tidal harbour such as Antwerp or Grangemouth. They built a new lock at Grangemouth late 60's which I believe could take 35's ...

So come on where was the photo taken.

Barnsey