P.S Ryde - being scrapped?

Pages : [1] 2

karbine
14th June 2008, 21:29
P.S RYDE that has been laid up and deteriorating sadly for the last 40 years at Binfield Marina, near Newport, IOW.

I have heard that she has been pulled over onto her side prior to demolition starting.

Can anyone confirm this and does anyone have any recent photographs showing her on her side?

doyll
15th June 2008, 08:55
Most recent I can find are from 02/02/2008. http://www.28dayslater.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=27062

She's in a bad state.

Tony Breach
15th June 2008, 10:54
According to current Marine Modelling International the engines MAY be saved for possible display later. Anyone have furher news on that?

nhp651
15th June 2008, 18:33
A sad but inevitable outcome really.Lets just hope that our modelling nation can do her justice.At least there'll be something to remind us of her.

Pompeyfan
16th June 2008, 00:11
If I get a chance I will go down and have a look.

David

Pompeyfan
16th June 2008, 16:56
Hi Ben

As promised I went down today Monday 16th June 2008. Below are the pictures as she is today with work going on around on her port side. As you can see she has not been pulled on her side other than her funnel which has been like that for a long time.

I spoke to the lock keeper, and he said there is no plans that he is aware of to scrap her. The marina is being developed but they cannot demolish PS Ryde because the owner pays the mooring fees so unless the owner has her broken up, there is nothing they can do. That is what I was told anyway.

The lock by the way is the only lock on the Isle of Wight.


And the small paddle steamer is the Monarch so I am told.

David

Peter4447
16th June 2008, 17:28
Many thanks for the update David
Peter(Thumb)

karbine
16th June 2008, 18:10
Hello David

Many thanks for popping down. I can now say the what i heard from a friend of her being on her side is not true. She has got alot more rust on her than a few months ago though.

Many thanks for the updates

robandbarbara
16th June 2008, 19:35
A sorry sight for sure. A picture of happier days attached..
Bob

Keltic Star
17th June 2008, 03:31
Thanks for the pictures David, the Ryde brings back many teenage memories.

billyboy
17th June 2008, 08:51
I can remember her from when i was a young lad. She used to come to Newhaven for her annual refit. there was I think another two would come to Newhaven as well. The Sandown and i cant remember the third one. could it have been the Brade?

andysk
17th June 2008, 09:59
Another pic, taken in May 1978 - just over 30 years ago ! A bit rusty then, but at least the funnel was intact & in the right place !

Pompeyfan
17th June 2008, 23:17
I can remember her from when i was a young lad. She used to come to Newhaven for her annual refit. there was I think another two would come to Newhaven as well. The Sandown and i cant remember the third one. could it have been the Brade?

PS Sandown, Whippingham and Ryde Billy. The Brade was Brading, but not paddle. There was a PS Shanklin I think but replaced by another Shanklin in 1951, the MV Shanklin along with two others MV Brading and Southsea. All but Southsea are Isle of Wight town names although Whippingham is a village near to East Cowes, all vessels on the Ryde-Portsmouth service.

David

billyboy
18th June 2008, 00:38
that was it David, The Whippingham.
One of the three had a destroyer whistle fitted. Used to sound great as she Whoooop whooooped down the river after a refit on her way back to the solent.

robandbarbara
2nd July 2008, 23:37
David. The first Shanklin (399/1924) was, as you say a paddler. In about 1946 or maybe earlier , she was beached on the south side of the A27 road at Portchester and was being used as a cafe. I am not sure when she eventually met her end.

Bob.

robandbarbara
3rd July 2008, 23:59
Sorry about the above comment - I had got my paddlers mixed up !. The vessel I said was the Shanklin was in fact the 'Solent' 161/1902
A paddler needless to say. The Shanklin of 1924 was sold to Cosens of Weymouth in 1951 and renamed Monarch. Scrapped in 1961.

Rob

voyagerx1
22nd January 2009, 00:33
Hi, I have a pic of the Ryde Queen in her day as a Boatel/Disco/Bar.well just the side with entrance and bridge. See my profile and you'll see that I was waiter on her in '72, fond memories.
greetings
Bernie Granger

voyagerx1
22nd January 2009, 00:38
May '78 not possible because she was moored and dry on the Medina at Binfield in 1973 and going nowhere.
greetings from someone who knows
Bernie

andysk
22nd January 2009, 11:28
May '78 not possible because she was moored and dry on the Medina at Binfield in 1973 and going nowhere.
greetings from someone who knows
Bernie

Hi Bernie ...

I'll take another look at the original slide and check.

Quite possible I have misread the date, maybe a visit to the optician is overdue !

Trader
22nd January 2009, 23:01
Here is another photo of her on the pontoon in Newhaven when I was on the coaster Scheldt in around 1969.

Alec.

voyagerx1
24th January 2009, 14:21
Thank you for that Trader. pic was probably from '68 not '78. as the hull started to go it was filled with concret so they would only have moved her in '78 on a pontoon but she is still at Binfield as far as I know...

voyagerx1
24th January 2009, 14:23
LOL andysk looks like we are all going that way, I need glasses for reading,, oh those were the days when the olny glasses we needed were for beer and doubles in the 'Pig'.........ocean going of course :)

andysk
25th January 2009, 23:06
I found my slide, it is actually dated May 1970, an easy mistake (at least for me that is) - is spite of the glasses, or perhaps because of them !!!!

voyagerx1
26th January 2009, 21:47
LOL yes 1970 can look like 1978 without glasses andysk, just after your pic was taken the Ryde was bought by a private consortium and moored on the Medina at Binfild and turned into the floating 'Boatel' that was the Rdye Queen Boatel, The PS Medway was moored line astern and was used as a disco for a number of years, She had a better future that the now humble Ryde, being bought by the Medway preservation society and I believe she's in a better state now than her last days on The Medina Nr Newport IoW... happy memories andysk...

peterfar22
24th May 2009, 23:55
5 year ago i went down and saw her it was a sad site i have made a great model of her about 5 feet long and live steam if any one to have a look at them i can post them

peter

Driver 8
6th June 2009, 16:02
5 year ago i went down and saw her it was a sad site i have made a great model of her about 5 feet long and live steam if any one to have a look at them i can post them

peter


Peter, that's a great model. Good job!!

dave thorne
29th July 2009, 21:35
5 year ago i went down and saw her it was a sad site i have made a great model of her about 5 feet long and live steam if any one to have a look at them i can post them

peter

what a great job you have done peter ,i would be very proud of myself if i could make a ferry as good as that,DAVE THONE(Thumb)

marwhite
21st August 2009, 13:30
Hi, I went down to see the PS Ryde a few weeks ago, pictures are at

http://www.martinrwhite.co.uk/Ryde%20Queen%20June%202009/index.html

A very sad sight. I understand the scrapping is iminent.

shamrock
21st August 2009, 13:34
Hi, I went down to see the PS Ryde a few weeks ago, pictures are at

http://www.martinrwhite.co.uk/Ryde%20Queen%20June%202009/index.html

A very sad sight. I understand the scrapping is iminent.

What a shame to see her like that :(

Wish they would get it over with and just scrap her now, she used to look reasonably decent at one time...derelict but you could still tell what she was.

Abbeywood.
23rd August 2009, 11:43
What a shame to see her like that :(

Wish they would get it over with and just scrap her now, she used to look reasonably decent at one time...derelict but you could still tell what she was.

Sad to say but its a complete eyesore now hardly anything remaining worth scrapping. Only the rust holding it together.

Abbeywood.
23rd August 2009, 11:50
I can remember her from when i was a young lad. She used to come to Newhaven for her annual refit. there was I think another two would come to Newhaven as well. The Sandown and i cant remember the third one. could it have been the Brade?

The third ship could, possibly, have been the Whippingham.
Question: Whereabouts in Newhaven did these overhauls take place. ?
Dont bother answering. have seen photo' of her stting on the gridiron by Newhaven Railway Workshops. The gridiron is still there.

billyboy
24th August 2009, 11:03
Whippingham it was indeed. thanks for jogging my memory

Pompeyfan
18th September 2009, 17:03
This report was in the Country Press today

http://www.iwcp.co.uk/news/wight-living/a-new-lease-of-life-for-the-old-lady-of-the-sea-28620.aspx

David

Stevo
19th September 2009, 10:53
'Looks a lot worse then it is' Really I hadn't noticed!!
These guys are nut jobs, and for God sake don't get excited over it just because there's a trust dosn't mean it's going to happen. Buying the ship will be easy but then they will have to pay to keep her on the land. I wouldn't move to buy the ship until I have a bottomless pit of money to waste.

The chairman of the Medway Queen group is involved - sorry last I heard she was in bits!! They might want to finish that project first before they look at the Ryde.

MarkYoungIW
17th October 2009, 11:22
I personally have been involved in trying to secure Ryde's long term future for over 10 years now, and unfortunately with the greed of previous owners, and the amount of people who shout 'its not possible!!', it has been somewhat of an uphill struggle.

Anyway The Paddle Steamer Ryde Trust is in talks with the administrators, and once the ownership is secured, things can start.

Yes, you are quite right Stevo, Ryde will have to be kept on the land until the first phase of shawing up the ship is complete, we have had marine surveyours onboard the vessel 2 years ago, and they will obviously be returning soon to go over her again, I have seen their comments, so I can say 'she does look worse than she is'!!

Lots of work will require doing, and to be honest, by the time it is done, the vessel will have had a lot of original material replaced, but this would have been the case over the years anyway.

Nobody is saying its going to be cheap, or easy, but I have witnessed so many people say the words 'its a shame nothing was done' and 'why didnt someone do something' (I always wondered who someone was until I got involved with Ryde!!!). Anyway, I am a fond believer if someone does decide to be the people who will try and do something, then get behind us and show support. I know I would certainly support anyone attempting the same sort of project.

With regards to bringing the Medway Queen into this, please feel free to watch her current reconstruction on the webcam on their website. I believe it is fair to say with the Medway Queen being a Paddle Steamer which was in the same sort of situation as Ryde, I can only say the Medway Queen Preservation Society should be praised for their success story, and not brought down!! She is under reconstruction, which will mean soon constructed!! I personally am proud that there are such people who have been a part of that Society and have achieved such great things, and I have no doubt shrugged off hundreds of people questioning their sanity!!

Anyway, to sum up briefly, Charitable Status should be in place for the Trust any time now, money is starting to roll in, although like I say, a lot more is needed. Securing the ownership of the vessel is underway. Please offer us support, and not negativity.

'Nut Jobs'!? You could well be right!!! Trouble is it doesnt seem that long ago to me that she was just about floating, and that is where I got involved, and since then, its very difficult not to see something through, and as long as it is still possible, myself and the other Trustees have every intention of seeing it through!!

I do appreciate all your comments though, I would rather hear peoples thoughts, than them go behind our backs. Most of the positivity I have had over the years is what keeps me going!

Kindest Regards

Mark

Pusser509
17th October 2009, 14:12
I, for one, wish you well with your venture. I'd be very interested in seeing a progress report now and then. Regrettably there is a lot of water between you and I or I would offer to get down there with a chipping hammer.

Best of luck.

Don K.

MarkYoungIW
17th October 2009, 14:37
Many thanks Don,
Hopefully there wont be too much of chipping!! Most of the work on the vessel itself is likely to have to be done at the shipyard. We are all well aware she has gone past a bit of paint now, but like I said, things are promising, and as things stood a couple of years ago, although the bulk of the platework is shot, the majority of the framework was looking good.

Hopefully the new website will be online soon, so progress will be regulary updated on there.

Its a hell of a task, but a task worth doing.

Kindest Regards

Mark

steamfan1970
17th October 2009, 22:24
5 year ago i went down and saw her it was a sad site i have made a great model of her about 5 feet long and live steam if any one to have a look at them i can post them

peter

Hi,
I too have a working model of the IoW paddlesteamer made by my late father, it's of P.S Sandown, 4mm-1' scale and powered by 2 electric motors, he also built M.V Southsea in the same scale, Sandown is in her Southern Railway livery with black/buff funnel and Southsea is in British Rail blue/white livery, Southsea won a model engineers bronze medal.

steamfan1970
17th October 2009, 22:51
Hi Mark,
I agree with some of the comments about PS Ryde that she does look rather sorry for herself and almost a shadow of her former self but, given time, money and a lot of well deserved love she could be back looking as she did in her glorious days on the solent and for all the non-believers out there then perhaps they should look at the numerous steam locomotives that have been brought back to life despite calls of "impossible", "won't work", etc don't get disheartened Mark this world needs preservationists with a degree of maddness, after all its the "Nutters" that have the vision that we can all thank for the wonderfully restored examples of our transport heritage:-
Ships
Buses
Cars
Aircraft (didn't see the Vulcan group quit when everything seemed against them and now our skies are graced with her wonderful sight once more (==D) )
and trains

Good luck to her rescuers
Kind Regards
Andy

Stevo
17th October 2009, 23:18
The Vulcan bomber is still not safe and steam trains are not nearly as vulnerable to the elements as a ship, not to mention these projects are not nearly as big as the Ryde project.
Mark, I'm not knocking your desire to save the ship but I am personally not a fan of a ship being supposedly saved when in actual fact the project will involve replacing much of what was the original ship. Why not build a new ship?

MarkYoungIW
18th October 2009, 07:48
Many thanks for all of your support above, in fact things are coming together very fast at the moment, which will all be documented as soon as the new site comes online (hopefully within the next fortnight).

I understand what your saying Stevo, but what ship of Ryde's age contains much of its original fabric? If we look at Waverley, a much newer vessel than Ryde, a great deal of her has been replaced, and she has never been out of service. I personally own a (smaller albiet) 1934 vessel, which again has been in service all her life, and still is, and I doubt much of her is original.

Like you say, ships are vunerable to the elements.

Also a 'new' ship in many ways does not have the appeal, than a ship which some of it is original. Doing it this way does at least preserve something.

With regards to the project being big, well yes, but look at SS Great Britain, Warrior, Cutty Sark, Mary Rose!!! None of these were a walk in the park, but all essential in my opinon and also in the eyes of the millions who have been to see them I would think.

@Peter
Your model of Ryde was fantastic, and would be keen on seeing it in the flesh eventually.

@Steamfan1970
Anu chance of some photos of your model of Sandown.

Always been a bit of a fan of models, I think its something to do with the love that has obviously gone into them. I either of you fancy Youtubing your models working, I'm fairly sure you would get quite a few hits!!

Ben Masey
18th October 2009, 13:53
Here is another photo of her on the pontoon in Newhaven when I was on the coaster Scheldt in around 1969.

Alec.

No she is on the gridiron at Newhaven.
Ben Masey

NoMoss
18th October 2009, 14:49
I wish you every success Mark. I remember the paddlers when I was a kid. I now edit a newsletter and have published a couple of articles about the Ryde and would be glad to have some good news in the future.
One of my articles was a letter from Tony McGinnity who was responsible for the charter of the Ryde when she went up to London as a 'Gin Palace' for Gordons.
Tony, who is no longer with us, was our Founder and President. He was the first secretary of the Paddle Steamer Preservation Society and heavily involved in managing and running several paddle steamers.

Pompeyfan
18th October 2009, 17:29
Hi Mark

You are not the same Mark Young who lived in Atherfield are you?!.

David

MarkYoungIW
19th October 2009, 10:21
No, in Cowes. Many thanks again for the support.

steamfan1970
27th October 2009, 00:31
No, in Cowes. Many thanks again for the support.

Hi, i thought i would share this picture of PS Ryde, she's obviously in her glorious years here, i'm afraid i don't have any details as it was taken by my late Father (i'm going through his old slides and digitalising them when i came across it)

MarkYoungIW
4th November 2009, 09:05
Have you any more of Ryde!? Looking at that one, she is at Newhaven I think.

Just putting the new website online, the Trust's charitable status should be through any day now, and fingers crossed, we will soon tie up negotiations to gain ownership of the vessel.

Will be glad when some of the paperwork is over, and the practical work can commence!!

steamfan1970
5th November 2009, 09:52
Have you any more of Ryde!? Looking at that one, she is at Newhaven I think.

Just putting the new website online, the Trust's charitable status should be through any day now, and fingers crossed, we will soon tie up negotiations to gain ownership of the vessel.

Will be glad when some of the paperwork is over, and the practical work can commence!!

Sorry Mark but that is the only slide that i have found that Dad took of her,
thanks for telling me that it's possibly Newhaven as i have no idea as to when or where the photo was taken, if i find any more i will post them here.
Good luck with gaining ownership.

paull.happyhiker
5th November 2009, 13:48
I would like to wish you all the best for the ps ryde. Would you be able to post a link to the website when its up and running

MarkYoungIW
6th November 2009, 19:48
@steamfan1970
Thanks for that, I am fairly sure its Newhaven.

@paull.happyhiker
The website address is http://www.psryde.co.uk

The old site is just in the process of being replaced, so it may be a bit incomplete for the next few days.

billyboy
6th November 2009, 21:57
If its any help I can guarantee its Newhaven. I was born and bred there. Marine shops in the background. the lighter roofs to the left of the marine shops used to be the engine sheds for the railway

MarkYoungIW
9th November 2009, 13:14
OK, I am in need of help!!!

The new website is nearly ready to go.......but!!

I need some people who enjoy adding the wikipedia............only...........I need them to add to a wiki that is just about to go online on the Ryde site. A Rydeapedia shall we say.

It will be along the same lines as the Festiniog Railway's wiki (http://www.frheritage.org.uk/wiki/Home_Page), only all about Ryde.

If you can help and what to help, please contact me, and I will get you involved. The more information relating to Ryde, her career, her engines, her builders etc etc, the better on it really.

Obviously a good place to source some information will naturally be wikipedia!!

Mark.

paull.happyhiker
27th January 2010, 18:14
I have just been sent an email with some news regarding the ps Ryde. It says that the ps ryde is being broken up and the demolition and asbesdos crews began work last weekend there are also some pictures included showng a huge hole in the side of her. Can anyone confirm this

paull.happyhiker
27th January 2010, 18:17
this is a copy of the email:
Bad news for the PS Ryde. As of Saturday/Sunday, the asbesdos and demolition contractors moved in on the Ryde. Work is already underway, and the starboard sponson is already gone. It's a shame, and it appears no contact was made to the Ryde Trust, who were still negotiating to buy the ship! It's a shame, but it was inevitably going to happen.

There are some pictures here; http://s1023.photobucket.com/albums/af354/e-trotters/PS%20Ryde/

Stevo
27th January 2010, 20:05
It was going to happen sooner or later and the Ryde Trust were hardly going to suddenly come up with millions, so it's understandable that the Marina owners should dispose of the ship if they wish to sell the site.
I shall miss the old Ryde but am glad she is being put out of her misery, in my view she died in the early 90s when the PSPS failed to get her. Ryde's old skipper Eric Yealland visited the ship at Binfield in the early 1970s and declared then that she would rot there. Captain Yealland rather she had been broken up like the Sandown then suffer a slow ignoble deterioration, this was nearly 40 years ago and he was right.
To all those people who wished to preserve the ship maybe now you will concentrate your energies on preservation projects that are viable and realistic rather then pipe dreams and nostalgia.
RIP Ryde

paull.happyhiker
27th January 2010, 21:07
I have to agree with you Stevo but perhaps something could be done with her engines if they are still there. The ps ryde website seems to have gone quiet with no news regarding this

goldeneye
27th January 2010, 21:49
I heard last night 26.01.10. That PS Ryde was started to be broken up. I popped down there today 27.01.10. There are asbestos guys down there. The funnel has been removed and lying on the side, and midships by the damaged paddle box area has been ripped into. The bow and stern are intact at the moment, but i fear it wont be long maybe a week, to clear the asbestos, and then she will be torn apart. What a sad sad end to a fine paddler.

MarkYoungIW
29th January 2010, 08:57
Unfortuantely it does seem that the administrators did not take the offers made by the Trust seriously. With regard to it always going to of happened, its saddening that after all the hard work done by the Trust, and PSPS and the NHS that this has happened, work should have stopped at the moment, as to our knowledge the ASB 5 allowing the asbestos work to be carried out expired on the 23rd and takes 14 days to apply for a new one, so if as you say goldeneye the asbestos team was back down there on the 27th, something is amiss.

We are working towards seeing if we can get a stay of execution for the vessel at the moment, and trying to find why the administrators felt rather than accepting our offers which would have at least brought them some money and shifted the liability, why intead they felt it best to pay money towards getting the vessel broken up.

With regards to the Trust not being able to come up with Millions, as I am sure you well know, funding comes with ownership, and it is fair to say that once Ryde is gone, I am very unlikely to to remain putting time and money into preservation circles again, as I have never found my efforts met by so much ungratitude and negativity in anything else I have done. At least the PS Ryde Trust, the PSPS and the NHS have done their best, its better to be able to say we did everything we could, instead of just saying 'its a shame nobody did anything about that'.

At the moment the damage that has been inflicted is mainly to the superstructure, which would have contained very little reusable material anyway.

We will fight on until the bitter end.

Regards

Mark

paull.happyhiker
29th January 2010, 13:40
The biggest hurdle would have been getting the Ryde. If the Ryde had have been taken over by the trust then i am sure more people would have made contributions including myself. The question remains why was something not done sooner.

breezer10
29th January 2010, 14:48
here is a link to a piece in the iwcp about the ryde http://www.iwcp.co.uk/news/news/rescue-heads-for-the-rocks-30932.aspx

MarkYoungIW
29th January 2010, 18:44
@paull.happyhiker

You hit the nail on the head. Without ownership very little find raising can be done. Virtually all major funding opportunities require the ownership of a vessel to be in that of a trust.

Unfortuantely for some reason that is very much unknown, is even this time, the administrators feel rather than just giving the vessel away or even in the end accepting the offer we had made, considering we were told they had recieved higher offers than ours, and shifting their liability on, it made more financial sense to spend yet more money.

I am not sure if the creditors of the Harbour would have been too pleased if they had known of this.

Still alot going on within the Trust, PSPS and NHS, but its all taking time. Just hopefully not too much time.

Stevo
29th January 2010, 21:17
There is nothing reusuable that's the point!! The ship is dead, build a new one, it would be exactly the same ship as you are proposing to ressurect.
The owners obviously don't take you seriously and not many others do, as they have all seen the obvious, it's not negativity (that's a poor argument) the truth is Ryde died years ago.
Why would the creditors of the harbour be pleased to see the ship in the Trust's hands? There would still be a rusting heap of rubbish on their property only now it would be in someone elses hands and so they would have less control over the issue. If they wish to sell the site at any time, the Ryde will make it less attractive purchase.
Apart from the enthusiasts no one cares about the Ryde. Nostalgia for the past is dying as those from that Paddlling generation pass away. I infomed Capt Yealland's (former Ryde skipper) wife of the ship's demise and her words were 'good!' Mrs Yealland also worked on the ship in the engine room and is the leading authority on the ship having wrote the papers on the Ryde now held in the Maritime museum archive at Greenwhich. She had felt that the ship should have been broken up years ago and thought all the preservationists were mad.
As for all the groups who have tried to save the paddler, what ship have the PSPS ever saved???

MarkYoungIW
30th January 2010, 10:45
There is nothing reusuable that's the point!!

I must have got it wrong then, I was sure as well as the machinary, the surveyours pointed to at least 80% of the framework being reusable, then again, what would they know!!

The owners obviously don't take you seriously and not many others do

Thanks!!

Why would the creditors of the harbour be pleased to see the ship in the Trust's hands? There would still be a rusting heap of rubbish on their property only now it would be in someone elses hands and so they would have less control over the issue. If they wish to sell the site at any time, the Ryde will make it less attractive purchase.


I guess the fact we had the ability to move the vessel in 6 months, and its taken them 9 months to occur costs for their creditors would be why they should have been pleased.

Apart from the enthusiasts no one cares about the Ryde.

Oh, must be the same with Waverley then I take it. All those families that line the decks and arent enthusiasts must have a gun pointed at their head to smile!!

As for all the groups who have tried to save the paddler, what ship have the PSPS ever saved???

I guess Balmoral,Waverley & Kingswear Castle would have been kept in operation without the PSPS, and Maid of the Loch and Medway Queen would have got support from someone who didnt stump up any because of the PSPS.

I have no intention of getting into a flaming match over this. You have said your piece, I have said mine. And to be honest it looks like everyone other than the enthusiasts are likely to get their wish, but at least I will know I have tried.

Well over 10 years I have been trying to save Ryde, in fact she still floated when I started, so I am sure some people might understand my dismay that even when money has been offered, and immediate funding has been in place to remove her within 6 months, it has come to this.

Regards

paull.happyhiker
30th January 2010, 18:04
The creditors must be a bit slow on the uptake, you offered money for her but instead it must be costing them to have it removed unless they have had an offer for the engines. I wonder how many pieces of the Ryde are in peoples houses

SDCsmeron
31st January 2010, 01:44
In reply to the comment on PS Ryde

"There is nothing reusuable that's the point!! The ship is dead, build a new one, it would be exactly the same ship as you are proposing to ressurect.

It is likely that much of the material aboard would, indeed, be unusable. However, the comment about building a new one that would be 'exactly the same ship' ignores the fact that such a vessel, built by the same methods and to the same design as the Ryde, would not be granted the necessary certification to enable commercial operations to be undertaken. It would be a new vessel and, therefore, it would have to be constructed to meet current standards. I doubt if it is possible to do that now and I doubt if any shipbuilder would take on such a job. The Loch Lomond Steamship Co (the charitable trust company that owns the currently statically preserved 'Maid of the Loch') have recently completed prolonged negotiations with the MCA with regards to changes that would be necessary to that vessel prior to her re-entry into service. I am afraid I cannot detail the changes as they were the subject of confidential discussions between PSPS and LLSC.

As to PSPS support for paddle steamer preservation I will first declare my interests - I was a member of the Scottish Branch Committee for 12 years up to April 2009 when I withdrew for various reasons, mainly related to businnes commitments. I was also the Scottish Branch representative on the PSPS Council of Management (the charitable company's Trustees/Directors) for about 7 years up to April 2009. During that period the PSPS provided substantial support towards the preservation of Waverley and Kingswear Castle. This has included short term revenue support loans, grants for CAPEX activities and, in the case of Waverley's significant 7m refurbishment in 2000-2003, the PSPS provided substantial partnership funding to help secure the Heritage Lottery Fund grant that made the project possible - from memory at that time HLF provided approx 75% funding for such projects. In addition to the direct financial support many volunteer members of PSPS provide substantial 'in kind' support to the operation of the vessels both during the winter maintenance periods and summer sailing times.

It should be recognised that the PSPS cannot undertake any substantial work or expenditure on any over these vessels unless it is requested and approved by the owners. In the case of Kingswear Castle PSPS trustee hold 100% of the issued shares of the owning company and a majority shareholding in Waverley's owners. Even then, to meet the increasingly strict legal requirements pertaining to the mangement of registered charitable trusts any such support has to be the subject of a proper due diligence exercise before any financial commitments can be made. At the very least a realistic and viable forward business plan would be expected. In a survey of the membership undertaken around 5 or 6 years ago the PSPS membership indicated that the Society should consider any new preservation exercise but not at the expense or threat to the preservation projects that it has been supporting over many years. I think that any new viable project came to the PSPS would be addressed by support for a new fund-raising exercise rather than commitment of pre-existant funds. However, that would be a decision for the Council of Management at that time to take. Mostly the try to strike a fair balance.

I hope that this brief explanation is useful in understanding the realities of the preservation of historic vessels in the UK in the 21st Century. It is my personal opinion that operational preservation of historic ships is the only long term viable option as it is usually extrmely difficult for non-operational project to generate sufficient revenue to enable long term preservation.

Stuart Cameron
Chartered Engineer

MarkYoungIW
31st January 2010, 11:01
Hi Stuart,
Many thanks for your points above. As you say, Licencing is something that is greatly affected in building a new ship as a pose to restoring an old one, and also funding is a lot less forthcoming, so a new ship is very unlikely to be viable if it is anything like Ryde, as its passenger numbers would be reduced so much she would be unlikely to stand a chance at covering costs.

The material aspects are always difficult to say, when she was last looked at everything under the mud had been well preserved. The tidal zone (wet to dry and back to wet again!!) was to say the least not in a good way. Superstructure, some good, some bad. But like anything on closer examination, some will be worse, and some may be better. Either way, it would obviously be a major restoration job!!

When you mention Waverleys major refit, I think to be totally honest, that has to be one of the major inspirations. Anyone that has even read the book, and seen the ship taken down to the main deck, with no sponsons on, plates missing, frames being replaced, its all part of keeping a ship of this age in service.

Unfortunately things do look bleak at the moment, although we have had a lot of support, we have also had a minority of people discredit any chance of a rescue directly to the harbour, and at this time, it does seem the administrators may have taken these peoples views into account.

The NHS and PSPS are working hard with the trustees of the PSRT along with companies that would have been involved in the removal of the vessel.

I think like many others, I would have to agree with Stuart that operational preservation is pretty much the only way forward for ships like these, and the revenue generating possibilies from the South Coast would be in Ryde's favour.

Regards

Stoneroad
31st January 2010, 20:15
The scrapping of the PS Ryde should not be allowed!

How can I, and others of the same opinion help??

This happens all too often, once the original is gone it is lost forever, even a replica is not the same! I know the problem - of too little resources over too many projects BUT .... surely something can be done, even at this late stage??

Stevo
1st February 2010, 00:42
Mark it's nothing personnal against you but it's time we let the Ryde go. This once beautiful ship has had an agonising decline which has gone beyond terminal. Just because she remains today dosn't entitle her to a place in the next decade. Ryde has had her day, had a post operational career and has now reached its conclusion.
Ultimately preservation projects have to be run as a business to suceed and one wonders how the Ryde can be justified when there are paddlers in far better condition still waiting to be saved. Indeed one has to wonder at the preservation of the Medway Queen and does the cost (including public funds) justify the means? Medway is still in bits awaiting a phoenix from the flames rise from a ship yard and the Maid of the Loch is hardly in operational condition yet. Once complete then what? If rumours are to be believed the Waverley almost didn't come out last year and is struggling to survive despite those crowds you witnessed lining her decks. The Medway won't have the certificate to travel as far and wide as the Waverley and certainly does not have the deck space for high revenue. This is where it all went wrong in 1984, they took the wrong ship from the Medina River!!! And if the Medway which left Binfield over 25 yrs ago is still not yet ready what hope have you for the Ryde?
The ship you propose to resurect will not be the Ryde, it will be a new ship with bits of the old. I'm not convinced of the reuse of 80% of the frames and machinery and once you move her you still need a place to store the ship which will just drain even more funds, all the while the ship will decline even further. The Balmoral, Kingswear and Waverley were not wrecks when they were handed over for preservation and so were realisitc projects, this is not. Lets deal with the ships that have a fighting chance......

Magic Fingers
1st February 2010, 11:03
Well said Stevo. That has been my argument for years. We cannot save everything just because it is old.
Richard.

paull.happyhiker
1st February 2010, 20:08
Well said Stevo. That has been my argument for years. We cannot save everything just because it is old.
Richard.

My mother in law is old please dont save her..... Mind you she would need more work on her than the Ryde does

Billieboy
2nd February 2010, 08:55
My mother in law is old please dont save her..... Mind you she would need more work on her than the Ryde does

Bit of a rough Ryde?

MarkYoungIW
2nd February 2010, 10:59
At the moment it looks like we have a bit of luck. Hopefully until the end of February at the minimum before demolition works commence. We are still working on trying to do more than that though.

I will keep you posted.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1247465/Mine-sweeper-ship-defied-Germans-D-Day-set-scrapped-health-safety-reasons.html

MarkYoungIW
2nd February 2010, 17:02
Please please, can everyone add their names to the following e-petition, and spread the word!!

Many thanks.

http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/PSRyde/

paullad1984
2nd February 2010, 17:32
Wouldnt the money be better spent on something else, like HMS Whimbrel? we allready have 1 sea going paddle steamer, and several others preserved but there is only 1 black swan sloop! a fitting battle of the atlantic memorial.

MarkYoungIW
2nd February 2010, 20:20
But would she bring a good commercial passenger vessel to the Solent and South Coast taking passengers from pier to pier, round the Island, from the Isle of Wight Railway to Swanage Railway, Portsmouth Harbour and much more.

That is where Ryde does fit in. In the Solent she can be a commercially viable passenger vessel all year, which no other vessel can offer the South Coast. She can earn her keep.

Please help us.

MarkYoungIW
2nd February 2010, 21:08
Please also bear in mind what the petition is trying to achieve. If you dont sign it for Ryde, please sign it for all the other vessels needing protection. We are well aware there is a good chance by the beginning of next month Ryde may well being demolished, but lets not her demise be in vain:-

We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to do everything possible to prevent the proposed imminent scrapping of the historic paddle steamer Ryde on the Isle of Wight. Ryde is one of only 200 vessels on the register of historic vessels. A veteran of World War II, and one of few remaining Paddle Steamers in the UK. The ship has been inspected by a shipyard and deemed viable for restoration. A Conservation Plan has been drawn up, and a Trust set up to steer its rescue and conservation, for which funding seems likely to be available.

We further petition to put legislation in hand to safeguard Ryde and similar historic vessels by law, by introducing protection such as is available for historic buildings. At present, short-term economic interests are overwhelmingly destructive to the conservation of ships. Britain is a historically seafaring nation and should be proud to preserve, display and operate surviving historic vessels, as glories in themselves, tourist attractions and educational tools for future generations. Once restored, Ryde will bring long-term economic benefit and civic pride to the communities it serves.

Stevo
3rd February 2010, 10:18
Mark's right Paul, the ship has to earn it's keep. Static displays are always going to struggle especially in the winter. 2010 was a good year for domestic tourism and daytrippers but with the end of the recession we will see tourists heading overseas again so don't expect the crowds to poor into your static display. Consider the plight of the HMS Plymouth and Bronington, one might even consider the poor state of HMS Alliance and the failure of the Explosion Museum at Gosport (this is actually a good museum!) Static displays enevitably struggle without funding. Having worked with the Historic Ships at Portsmouth I can tell you that Warrior does a good trade in corporate events and weddings whilst Mary Rose delivers on the educational front (Tudor history being in the curriculum) hence why she gets some public funding, whereas there is no call for kids to study the battle of the Atlantic. Curiously the Mary Rose does get a tremendous amount of support from the US where they have an intense facination with the Tudors and British history. Should the Ryde end up in the Trust's ownership, the US is somewhere they should consider for support as we all know the Yanks have a way of making things happen and D Day and all things connected are something they hold dear.

MarkYoungIW
3rd February 2010, 14:06
Thanks for the above Stevo. Although I am personally keen to see as much of our past as possible preserved, as I for one love a bit of ghost trampling, it does seem more and more it has to be a viable business if its going to survive.

Just a quick note to say looks like we will have 100 signatures in less than 24 hours, which is a good start, but many many more are needed. Good work to everyone spreading the word. Keep it up!!

Regards

paullad1984
6th February 2010, 09:44
Just as a matter of interest, how much money is reckoned to restore Ryde, by restore i mean to full sea going condition

Stevo
6th February 2010, 10:33
Paul, to give you an idea, the MV Southsea would have required a 2-4million refurb to get her in full perfect sea going condition (this was quoted in the late 1980s!)

paullad1984
6th February 2010, 11:25
I just ask because of the prices id heard bandied about for Manxman, would be very interested to know what the ryde people had worked it out to

Stevo
6th February 2010, 12:08
So what quotes are there for the Manxman?

paullad1984
6th February 2010, 14:06
well ive heard varying quotes from varying sources

breezer10
6th February 2010, 18:49
7.000.000 is the figure being quoted in the press

paullad1984
6th February 2010, 19:46
perfect incentive to buy my euromillions ticket!

MarkYoungIW
6th February 2010, 23:53
Yeah, about 7 million is estimated!! And yes, have brought a euromillions ticket.

It is always difficult to say though, shipyards tend to treat heritage projects as a licence to print money, so the true figures would only start to come out once its being tendered for.

BTW. If anyone does win the euromillions!! Think of us!! (Thumb)

paullad1984
7th February 2010, 10:37
If i win, my moneys going towards HMS Zenith, always wanted my own destroyer!

breezer10
7th February 2010, 11:38
you could always mount a gun on ps ryde

paullad1984
7th February 2010, 11:45
i suppose you could, but im an RN man through and through.

MarkYoungIW
7th February 2010, 13:40
What? Like this!?

http://img294.imageshack.us/img294/5708/rydewar1.jpg

(Thumb)

MarkYoungIW
7th February 2010, 13:45
Also as far as RN goes, what more did you want her to have done!! ;)

http://img188.imageshack.us/img188/4314/warplaque.jpg

breezer10
7th February 2010, 15:37
we could also paint it in royal navy colours as well as the two guns (Jester)

MarkYoungIW
7th February 2010, 18:03
500 sigs have been reached which is excellent!! Whether it helps Ryde or not, now No. 10 have to reply, and it brings the issue of a lack of protection for our historic vessels back into their mind. So maybe it will make a difference.

Any which way, now they have to look at the petition, and the more signatures on it when they do, the harder they will have to look at addressing the issues brought up!!

So, hopefully some good will come.

Thanks to all those who have signed so far, and for those that havent, whether it be for PS Ryde, or a ship that may need a legislation to have been put in place in the future to save it!! Please please sign.

Many thanks!! (Thumb)

S. Toth
12th February 2010, 11:50
Mr Young let me just say I have been a supporter of the cause of saving ryde since learning of her about 2yrs ago, All I want to say is its not over yet, hope and maybe she will make it. I hope she will. Any new news on her?

goldeneye
12th February 2010, 16:07
According to the IOW County Press dated ( 12.02.10 ) she has been thrown a lifeline for the moment. The National Historic Ships a group funded by the government has stepped to try and save the vessel from the blowtorch, by contacting the enviroment Agency as well as the current owners of the vessel BDO.

National Historic ships has been in contact with Enviroment Agency to call a halt to the scrapping as the ship is in a enviromentally sensative area. Martin Heighton director of National Historic Ships said his organisation did not have specific powers to halt the dismantling work but hoped it would because of the area of scentific interest.

The contractors have confirmed that no more work would take place until they get an enviromental Licence.

S. Toth
12th February 2010, 21:44
Its a good start, maybe the preservation groups, can secure her with the time given

MarkYoungIW
13th February 2010, 09:56
That is correct. We are working closely with the National Historic Ships, and PSPS to try and find a sensible solution, and currently the demolition cannot proceed as there are not licences in place to demolish her because of the SSSI she is situated in.

This however is only very short term, so we are working hard and as fast as we can to come up with a solution that works for everyone.

In the meantime, the more the word can be spread about the petition, the better as it undoubtable helps to show support for such projects.

Many thanks

S. Toth
13th February 2010, 12:45
Me and my you tube partner are both planning ideos to be uploaded today, I had a video but my old channel was deleted, and can now be found at ssunitedstateslife52. As for ryde she is a lovelt ship, i hope with the spare time she can be rescued. I tried signing but i need a postal code from England?

MarkYoungIW
13th February 2010, 16:02
Yes, unfortuantely the UK Governments Petitions only allow British or expat's to sign them. Expats can select out of the dropdown menu, and then they dont need a postcode.

Its a shame really, but I guess the government are effectively looking for the British publics opinion. :(

scorcher
13th February 2010, 16:57
Please help us.

Mark have you a link to the petition? I am assuming it is online?

MarkYoungIW
13th February 2010, 18:46
Hi,
Yes, the link to the petition is:-

http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/PSRyde

Kindest Regards

PSVSlave
13th February 2010, 21:02
Good Luck with getting ownership with the Ryde-it would be great to see her back in service.

When she is restored will you have same problems of the Medway Queen being a rivetted hull eg not being given a passenger license and fundariaising for a conference centre-which I think is a con? My grandmother travelled on the Ryde regularly and has many photographs that hang in my dads study, so I would love to be able to see her in the flesh as she did!!

It would be a shame if legislation killed such a fine and wonderful asset to Pompy as it has with the Medway.

Stevo
13th February 2010, 22:22
Legislation!!! The ship is dead!!! Wake up people, it ain't going to happen.........

MarkYoungIW
14th February 2010, 08:52
We are back onboard Ryde at the end of the week with Naval Architects, so hopefully will be able to give a clearer picture. We would be aiming to comply with the MCA to make sure Ryde has a full passenger carrying capacity though.

At the moment what the project hinges on is whether or not we can secure a deal with the administrators.

In the end, whatever the material condition of the ship, to bring the vessel back to life, it can always go as far as doing what the Medway Queen Preservation Society have done. In the end, this is a perfectly acceptable outcome, but I would say Ryde's hull (below the main deck) was last time I was onboard still in fairly good shape. Although replating is needed (pretty much everywhere), most of the framework below the main deck appeared to be in reasonable condition. In the end though, this is what we have surveyours to determine as and when the time is right.

PSVSlave
14th February 2010, 10:31
When will the surveyors report be available-and will you publish it in full on the Ryde Trust website with a business plan for investors/donors to view and make comment on? That might stop a lot of the bar room experts on the internet...but also on the other hand may expose major flaws in the plan; bit of a gamble, but I think people would like sight of those documents.

Best of luck with the survey!!

Stevo
14th February 2010, 18:09
Good call 'PSV' I was wondering when someone would mention business plans and monetry figures not just a floated estimate. Also I would be keen to know how the ship will be moved from the dried out millpond, within an area of so called scientific importance. How much will that cost, what will be done with the dredged mud? Do you intend dredging a channel down to the main river and then float the ship onto a barge and then where will you store it? Admittedly that's a lot of questions in a short breath but if you are to move quick to save the ship I take you have ideas??

MarkYoungIW
15th February 2010, 00:13
Alot of questions. Yes, business plans and conservation plans are in place, although naturally the business plan will be kept as a live document.

Shipyard quotes for restoration of 7m are indeed estimates, and nothing more solid can be given on this until the actual project is tendered for.

A removal strategy is in place, to keep it brief it will require about 6 months of remedial works to the vessel, mainly strengthening, plating, wrapping general makings safe for the vessel to be refloated. This will cost in the region of 500k. However we are on site at the end of the week to reassess the damage done by the initial demolition work that has been carried out.

A channel would indeed need to be dredged between her current location and the river, and she would need to be moved a way down the river before it is deep enough to sink the barge to get her ontop of.

We have offers of storage for the vessel already.

There is an awful lot going on, and obviously exact figures are not on the table, as its almost impossible to be exact with these sort of things. We can only be as acurate as we can be!!

Hope this gives an idea.

PSVSlave
15th February 2010, 17:12
I'm really sorry to sound a bit negative here, but I've read this thread from end to end now, as well as posts on many other forums and feel the need to offer a little bit of 'tough love'.

What you are proposing with the Ryde is first and foremost a business, the product/prime asset of which (the ship) cannot be seen as a pretty or romantic bygone but a saver and preserver of life-and in the wrong hands or circumstances a taker of life. You flit from describing the ship as the only ship in the south coast to offer a pier to pier service (which she is not) to accepting that the Medway Quen model would be a satisfactory model as an outcome. This tells me that far from having a 'live' business plan you do not have one at all! If I went to the bank manager and said that I wanted to build a supermarket and found later down the line that my plan was unworkable, the project would be considered a failure and funding would be withdrawn.

The Medway Queen has lost a lot of supporters as the project was initially to return a paddle steamer to regular service, this has now changed to building a replica of the Medway Queen to be used as a 'venue'. You must be clear from the outset as to whether you propose to return the vessel to service or cosmetically restore the ship as a venue-not either or. I notice that on the PS Ryde website none of the directors have published their CV's, I am assuming that you are all professionally qualified in the business of ship building and hold a minimum of OOW to understand tugging plans and port ops to a level required for this kind of project.

I asked you a couple of direct questions, as have many other people, and you failed to answer them. Steve is correct, your initial bid and current urgent bid to save the Ryde must have contained many of the elements that I have just described; and sadly if they were lacking-I would certainly not take it seriously. Has it occured to anybody that the harbour where she is based is soon to be sold with a condition of sale being the removal of the wreck? I have certainly never heard of receivers actually PAYING money for a company in administration-in fact they are unable to....it is the creditors who will be investing in this....ie it is their will for the wreck to go.

I also fear that telling tales to the environment agy about contractors cutting up the wreck will backfire-as cutting up in situ is far less damaging to a SSSI than dredging a channel through it as this will change the ecology of the plot forever.

Sorry to be pessamistic-I wish you all the luck in the world with this, I really do-nothing would please me more than to see it running again. And please stop using the Waverley as an example; she was purchased for 1, had been running commercially, albeit for charitable purposes, for some years and was sold at a time when she was contemporary-absolutly the opposite to the Ryde situation.

Why don't you channel your obvious talents, goodwill and enthusiasm into the Waverley herself-because she is in desperate need of more volunteers-especially younger ones.

Again....sorry :oS

paullad1984
15th February 2010, 19:09
Preservationists as a whole do tend to view projects with rose tinted spectacles, ive seen it in other spheres, railway buses and cars! perhaps it would be better to let the old girl die quickly,rather than a long slow lingering death, and there is the Waverley, do we need 2 sea going paddle steamers? the waveley seems to of cornered the market. There are hundreds of projects, and only so much money, and with the downturn of heritage lottery grants since the olympics were annouced, funding is drying up, so unless someone has a huge bank account, it may be a paddler too far?

Stevo
15th February 2010, 19:54
Mark if it is permanent Solent based paddler you want to operate then look no further then the Lincoln Castle she's boiler less but in pretty good nick so the costs would not be anything like what you would have to deal with the Ryde, and more to the point is currently up for sale. This is viable and much more realistic project.
No one can doubt your passion and drive and I would be 100% behind you if you had the right project with the right ship and a business plan, not a folder full of postcards which no doubt one or two of your directors carry around with them.

http://commercial.apolloduck.com/display.phtml?aid=124525
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PS_Lincoln_Castle

paullad1984
15th February 2010, 20:02
Seen the adverts online for this paddler, apart from boilers and a touch of mechanical attention she looks good, perhaps some artifacts from ryde could be permanently displayed on her, if ryde should end up going to that big scrapyard in the sky.

PSVSlave
15th February 2010, 20:08
I looked into buying her with a group of rose tinted glasses people!! LC is in pretty good nick as a static job, but would need drydocking and replating, superstructure removing and boilers purchasing. All in all about 2 million quids worth....and that really is to make her sea going again!!

Hell of a lot cheaper than many DP Vessel refits to come!!

paullad1984
15th February 2010, 20:21
and way cheaper than ryde, even adding in the purchase price! No company, when offered the chance to buy and refit a vessel, would buy one in worse condition and spend 4 times as much!

wighttool
15th February 2010, 20:47
As an Isle of Wight native, a retired chief engineer, a past passenger on the PS Ryde and for sometime an employee of WightLink (successor to Sealink and Southern Railways) I have to say it would have to be a very brave and very rich person to entertain any thought of restoration. Removal from site would be difficult and deterioration I believe is far worse than Medway Queen. A sad state of affairs

PSVSlave
15th February 2010, 21:31
It is a huge shame-worse still that questions remian unanswered before commencing a project such as this!

iwben
17th February 2010, 16:27
not being funny everyone but lets knock the nay-saying on the head please, there are people who are serious about investing their time and money in the ps ryde and if it is their belief or wishes that she is restored then let them have it and dont keep pounding on about the ship being dead or knocking them for having the enthusiasm to try and save the ship, did anyone say the cutty sark was dead after her fire? did anyone knock the people who have donated money into restoring her? same as the people who are trying to save the adelaide, we already have the cutty sark so why do we need 2 clipper ships? because its an important piece of history and if you just give up and let it happen then you lose it forever and you cannot say shame we didnt try and save it, if you fight for it and lose then you tried your best and sadly it wasnt enough but then just maybe you could fight and win! why fight for it? because the ps ryde is historically more important than the waverly and even if it were not then still why not fight for it? wouldnt it be grand to have a solent paddler in the solent?

as for dredging, speaking as an ex digger driver and ex recovery operative i can say if the ryde is properly supported there is no reason why she shouldnt draw more than 5 foot of water when afloat, on a high spring tide you have at least 2 foot of water by the wall seperating the ryde from the river so minimal dredging is required, the material around the ryde is not SSSI so there are no problems with dredging that out, the river bank itself is mostly mud and there would be little damage caused in reinstatement, certainly no more than will be caused when vestas have their new dock installed on the opposite side of the river at the cement mills. mark says the ps ryde trust has a business plan, that should be sufficent, the only people that have to see it are members of the trust and anyone who wishes to invest money, he doesnt have to disclose any part of it here or on the ps ryde website.

i wish the ps ryde trust every bit of luck they can get because i would love to see the ryde active again.

sorry if ive gone on

ben

S. Toth
17th February 2010, 21:19
I agree with ben he is 100% correct everyone has such a negative tone over saving it, why not save it? Why not support the trust, and the cause rather then pick problems out. If you do not agree simple, do not post. Mark needs our support in saving ryde, and instead of supporting the cause everyone is bashing. Since when has it been a crime to like something, and want to preserve something??? All you negative posters, and you know who I mean, dont even bother the reply.

Stevo
17th February 2010, 22:45
If you have the money to spend then go ahead, but don't go cap in hand to lottery groups asking for public funds! The cost is NOT justifiable and further more such projects as Medway Queen and Ryde will just drain the coffers for projects which are viable. Have you ever stopped to think about the damage you might cause to future realisitic preservation projects.
It's negative just realistic!!

paullad1984
18th February 2010, 09:34
Not being negative, just realistic.

Pompeyfan
18th February 2010, 09:34
Alot of questions. Yes, business plans and conservation plans are in place, although naturally the business plan will be kept as a live document.

Shipyard quotes for restoration of 7m are indeed estimates, and nothing more solid can be given on this until the actual project is tendered for.

A removal strategy is in place, to keep it brief it will require about 6 months of remedial works to the vessel, mainly strengthening, plating, wrapping general makings safe for the vessel to be refloated. This will cost in the region of 500k. However we are on site at the end of the week to reassess the damage done by the initial demolition work that has been carried out.

A channel would indeed need to be dredged between her current location and the river, and she would need to be moved a way down the river before it is deep enough to sink the barge to get her ontop of.

We have offers of storage for the vessel already.

There is an awful lot going on, and obviously exact figures are not on the table, as its almost impossible to be exact with these sort of things. We can only be as acurate as we can be!!

Hope this gives an idea.

Hi Mark

I heard you on BBC Radio Solent the other day talking about PS Ryde.

David

S. Toth
18th February 2010, 11:21
If you have the money to spend then go ahead, but don't go cap in hand to lottery groups asking for public funds! The cost is NOT justifiable and further more such projects as Medway Queen and Ryde will just drain the coffers for projects which are viable. Have you ever stopped to think about the damage you might cause to future realisitic preservation projects.
It's negative just realistic!!
Unbelievable, I see you point of view, All I say is let mark, and all the supporters alone!!! Alright end of story I don't want to make enemy's just friends, I see were your coming from, but I don't truly think you see were mark and the trust is coming from. "Not being negative, just realistic" no its negative if you were being realistic you would have stated you opinion, and then been done.

Best Regards Save the RYDE!!!

izzy_duranie
18th February 2010, 12:00
I guess I'm a steam enthusiast rather than a ship enthusiast. But in a way, neither is why I am joining the plea to save the PS Ryde - I think she is a very important piece of history and as such should be saved.

I'd just like to re-post the link to the petition:

http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/PSRyde

and the website

http://www.psryde.co.uk

Please help us!!

http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/PSRyde/

R58484956
18th February 2010, 14:20
Greetings Izzie and welcome to SN. Bon voyage.

iwben
18th February 2010, 15:31
hang on a minute stevo, the lottery heritage fund is for preserving things and as i understand it anyone who has a project can apply and its up to the lottery to decide if its justifiable. i play the lottery regularly so some of it is my funds yet i dont get to decide where it gets spent, personaly i dont like some of the projects they have given money to but they were obviously justifiable in the eyes of the lottery so if the ps ryde trust choose to go to the lottery and ask for some help then i say let them.

just because something is going to cost a lot of money to preserve doesnt mean it shouldnt go ahead, look at how much its cost for the flying scotsman over the years since alan pegler saved it from scrap and how much of that is original? not the wheels because br replaced them before it was sold, i think its on its third or forth boiler so thats not original so why has it been saved? because some people thought it a worthy cause

just because the ryde is in a bad way and its going to cost money doesnt mean everyone should give up, if people are prepared to put time and effort into something then hats off to them, it doesnt matter if you agree with them or not because they arent forcing you to do anything, if you dont want to help financialy or volunteer your spare time then fine end of chat but dont keep knocking peoples hopes, beliefs and wishes because the day may come that you find a project you want to back and people will do the same to your hopes and wishes

ben

PSVSlave
18th February 2010, 15:51
To be fair, this isn't actually a steam preservation website-it is a forum for those either involved in or retired from the shipping industry.

In other places on the internet I've noticed the same arguement as on here; mainly negativity vs realism, I've also noticed that once the back slappings and best of luck messages are worn out and questions are asked things get very personal.

The Ryde is a valuable historic asset that needs to be patched up and floated before possibly being cut up and a replica hull produced-whether for static or operational use. There are no fittings left on the ship after beibg exposed for so many years, the decks are rotten, the hull is shot, the superstructure is unsound the boilers are removed and the steelwork-NO MATTER what any surveyor says has withstood two major fires which will have weakened the steel causing metal fatique and other potential unseen dangers. All that seems valuable about the ship is the engine.

Why not simply buy it, build a modern (and by that I mean SAFE) hull and provide the nation with a steam powered paddler called the PS Ryde II taking into account modern boiler technology. That is a realistic proposal which allows a vintage engine to do what it does best, ensures a future passenger license and allows a the ship a realistic chance of survival.

I would be negative to say the Ryde is dead, don't waste your money on it because it is not. The rivetted hull is a dangerous design with many millions of potential weak spots-the preservationists see that viewpoint as a nonsense, hence the Medway Queen Soc ignoring the obvious and accepting lottery money to build a ship outside of the law which will never see service in the future. Their website states that they hope for the MCA to provide an exemption to allow them a license to operate!

As I have said, I would love to see Ryde back on the water-but she must be entirely rebuilt to modern standards for this to be a reality. It would be more affordable, therefore better able to weather future financial storms, it would be safe and it would still be authentic. The national railway museum successfully build and operate replicas with no disdain from enthusiasts, the many replica tall ships are just as impressive and important as their older sisters and the Globe Theatreis never accused as being fake-so why would Ryde?

I am somewhat concerned at the lack of actual information coming from Mark Young, and actually wonder if he is the real man or somebody enjoying the attention that he's getting on the internet. If it is the real man, then I doubt that he has the ability to project manage a multi million pound build. He is representing a charity that is currently accepting money for this project, and yes he should be open about the plans for this as he is therefore publicly accountable.

I would like the results of the survey and a business plan publicly available, not to be picky-but actually to help. There is definately enough room on the water for another paddle steamer, but to begin a project along side the same lines of the Medway Queen without applying the lessons learned would be a huge mistake and any lottery/public funding would be a misappropriation. Save all of the bits of Ryde that you can-so long as they are only decorative or needed for the engine, then cut the thing up where it is to save 500k's worth of work to move the hulk somewhere else to do exactly the same job somewhere else. Spend that money on the boilers that you're going to need to buy or better still buy a tv advert with it which not only advertises the Ryde but all of Britains paddle steamersl...not that are are many!!

I am positive about Ryde, but I am also realistic-that does not equate to negativity.

Santos
18th February 2010, 16:16
Quite honestly I find the Manxman a far more viable proposition than the Ryde yet that has failed. I would be very annoyed if the Ryde went ahead, as I agree with everything that PSVSlave said, that the state of the vessel does not deserve the ammount of money required being spent on it and before anyone shouts, this is not sour grapes because the Manxman project failed its because it would be a waste of money, which lets face it, is in very short supply where the preservation of historic ships is concerned.

The Manxman is still in a far better state than the Ryde and the money would have preserved a historic vessel, albeit not as old as the Ryde, however a historic vessel in its own right and one not too far gone to be put back into operational and safe condition. Also I might add, the only one of its type left. There is still the Waverley and the Medway Queen paddlers but only one of the Manxman.

By all means preserve the engine and any other bits that may have survived, even as has been suggested, putting it into a replica but dont waste money which could be well spent on much more deserving historic ship preservation projects - sad as the demise of the Ryde may be.

Chris.

iwben
18th February 2010, 16:30
hi psvslave maybe i came across wrongly, i was only using the flying scotsman as an example of something which was saved as the scotsman is one of my many interests, i apologise if i seemed like i was going off course. i understand where you are coming from and can see your point.

i know mark young pretty well and i can honestly say he is the genuine article and does have the ability to manage the project, he has been one of many who have been the driving force behind setting up the trust to preserve the ryde and have been trying for many years but it is only now that more of it is known because of how close to demolition the ship is.

i agree there are many lessons to be learnt from what has happened with the medway queen and they would of course be put into practise before considering to place a bid to the heritage fund. not all preservationists ignore sound advice nor do they rush into things, i will admit im not fully versed on what has occured with the medway queen but i can see both sides of the argument for and against having the riveted hull.

i wasnt implying that realism is the same as negativity, yes you need to have realism and realism is good when its accompanied by a positive attitude, the problem that keeps ive found both online and offline is that people arent prepared to consider before just saying its dead, a waste of time and money, forget it. ive come across this in several things not just about the ryde and its the negativity that people tend to hear about and in some cases has ruined chances of preserving something that should be preserved because the owner has heard all the negative comments and got it into their head that its not worth letting anyone save it and its gone before the preservationists get the chance to try, ive encountered this recently on a project of my own so will admit im still smarting a bit so ill apolgise if ive seemed anti realism that wasnt my intention at all, im just anti really negativity :o)

ben

paullad1984
18th February 2010, 16:36
I thought long and hard about ryde before airing my feelings, and i agree manxman would be a far better proposal, but i realise that both items will probably end up being broken up. As i said lottery money isnt as forthcoming as of late, thankyou olympics!

iwben
18th February 2010, 16:37
hi chris like yourself im very disappointed that the manxman hasnt been preserved, its another ship which i believe should be still sailing so that people can enjoy her. please correct me if im wrong but the last i heard the manxman had been attacked by people stripping copper and brass and had flooded on several occasions, whats her status now?

ben

Santos
18th February 2010, 16:47
Hi Ben,

Manxman is still in drydock in the North East as far as I know. She had some engineroom piping removed which caused her to flood some time ago but she has been in drydock ever since I believe. She was certainly a viable proposition however Peel Ports denied her a berth so everything fell through, developers ( spit ) have alot to answer for in the cause of profit and history does not appear to concern them whatsoever, they must be pretty heartless people.

Chris

iwben
18th February 2010, 16:54
hi chris

typical developers, i dare not say what i truly think of them here, i imagine peel ports are going to build apartments or something on the berth space the manxman could of used proving yet again that history and beauty comes second to overpriced concrete blocks.

it would be good if the manxman is still in drydock and hopefully the preservation she deserves may yet still arrive *fingers crossed*

ben

Santos
18th February 2010, 16:57
Ben,

Thank you, fingers crossed and everything else crossed too but I fear it will not happen now.

Chris.

PSVSlave
18th February 2010, 17:07
I think that it's important to remain civil and also be able to understand and respect all points of view. This has actually become an interesting debate about aportionality and jusitification.

Ryde is dead in a way, as to retain any part of the hull could put the public in danger-again I will quote metal fatigue here as a major example. I would take an active role in blowing the whistle on anybody that tried to say or think otherwise on that matter as when the ship is open to the public again it could pose a threat to their safety. But on the positive side, there is much about the Ryde that is reusable and would make an excellent project to embark upon.

I came to the Isle of Wight last year and travelled on a tiny paddle steamer from Newport Quay just to see the Ryde from the water. I spoke to the coxswain who explained that the boat is owned by two blokes who rebuilt her themselves and got it into service from a very poor state-really very inspirational when you look at the photo album onbaord. It was when I travelled on this boat that I was made aware of the internet squabbles between themselves and supporters of the Ryde Trust because of the few salvaged items onboard that have been restored and displayed and a restored brass console which they were going to sell on the television. I searched and found these squabbles and watched them intently and i have to be honest I was disgusted at the waspish comments flying backwards and forwards.

I couldn't believe that groups wanting to operate a paddle steamer could behave in such a manner to those that are already doing the job on their doorstep-and vise versa. Preservationists will always have their spats, partly due to the fact that preservation is driven by a desire to care deeply for a cause. However, realism and commercial sense must always prevail. I have been involved with many charity launches in the past, and we always raised enough money in the first instance to pay for a professional fundraiser and specialist charity accountant-it didn't matter how much we cared about any part of the cause because nothing happened without their prior say so and advice.

The reality of charity in this day and age is commercial viability, and it is that aspect that really needs some attention. It seems to me that the recievers are doing the Ryde Trust a big favour by cutting it up as it will save the trust a lot of cash themselves!! Their offer to buy the boat should be ammended as a proposal to buy the engine and various fittings alone. I would definately support a project for that, and it gives valuable time to get the heart of the ship in fantastic working order before dunking it into a new hull.

PSVSlave
18th February 2010, 17:10
You would have thought that a working port is far more profitable and useful than a block of flats! Manxman is indeed a very worthy project and I wish something could have been done to help stabilise her.

Stevo
18th February 2010, 18:21
IW Ben it's not a case of knocking peoples wishes, I have followed the PS Ryde for many years and there was a time when I would have fully supported the paddlers preservation but not like this. As I have stated before I would like to see a replica Ryde which would be cheaper to build and make more sense then building a new ship with bits of the old and saying it original (that makes no sense!) I have also stated as well that there are projects out there such as Lincoln Castle which are possible. Furthermore as for wishes being broken I wanted to see the MV Southsea running and was a member of the society, but I was also aware that it had to be operated as a business and not a preservationists hobby. When it became apparent the Southsea had no future I felt it better she was scrapped then to fall to bits, it's tough love but was for the best.
As for lottery money, too often it is wasted I agree, but that dosn't make it anymore justifiable money being thrown at the Ryde.

paullad1984
18th February 2010, 18:34
Just out of curiousity, is manxmans hull rivetted or welded, i would suspect the latter given her age, also same question about lincoln castle

PSVSlave
18th February 2010, 18:47
lincoln castle is mainly ferrocrete these days!!

paullad1984
18th February 2010, 18:52
ah i see, probably that and lack of boilers points to the 20k price tag!

MarkYoungIW
18th February 2010, 18:54
I came to the Isle of Wight last year and travelled on a tiny paddle steamer from Newport Quay just to see the Ryde from the water. I spoke to the coxswain who explained that the boat is owned by two blokes who rebuilt her themselves and got it into service from a very poor state-really very inspirational when you look at the photo album onbaord. It was when I travelled on this boat that I was made aware of the internet squabbles between themselves and supporters of the Ryde Trust because of the few salvaged items onboard that have been restored and displayed and a restored brass console which they were going to sell on the television. I searched and found these squabbles and watched them intently and i have to be honest I was disgusted at the waspish comments flying backwards and forwards.

I couldn't believe that groups wanting to operate a paddle steamer could behave in such a manner to those that are already doing the job on their doorstep-and vise versa. Preservationists will always have their spats, partly due to the fact that preservation is driven by a desire to care deeply for a cause. However, realism and commercial sense must always prevail. I have been involved with many charity launches in the past, and we always raised enough money in the first instance to pay for a professional fundraiser and specialist charity accountant-it didn't matter how much we cared about any part of the cause because nothing happened without their prior say so and advice.

Hi PSVSlave,
Sorry to not answer half of the questions asked in the last flurry of posts here, but I do have one question I would like to ask.

As far as I am aware any communications regarding the above, that were made by the PSRT, were in confidence between ourselves, and the owners of PS Monarch.

Could you confirm where you have heard the PSRT behaving in this manner, as naturally we need to put a stop to this, as I would also agree this matter should not be aired in the public eye between the groups as it would not do either group any good!! I am hoping from what I can see from a quick sweep through the internet, its more a case of members of the public arguing openly about this matter, I cannot see any involvement by the PSRT.

With regards to all the other questions, I will try and answer these as soon as I can, but I am sure you will apprieciate, time is lacking for any attempt we make at the moment so ideally I am trying to spend it on making sure our proposition is viable.

I do also understand other peoples views, and some things I cannot comment on too much as obviously we seek professional advice on things outside our own areas of expertise., With regards to peoples concerns about safety too, this is obviously always a priority.

I would be grateful for your patience in this matter though, as I am struggling a bit to answer posts on forums........in fact we are running at capacity answering eMails too, and in the end making an effort is what counts. With regards to the possibility of doing this for the fame.........no chance, if someone else had been doing this 10 years ago, I would have never got involved. It has been a long slog, and unfortunately one thing I'm sure we can all agree on is a lot of these ships struggle because of a society not being able to negotiate ownership.

I would also like to say I do understand everyone has differing levels of support to different projects. It is heartening that the level shown by the petition for this project so far is 2500 within just over a fortnight, but I do understand that there will always be projects more worthy, that unfortunately for what ever reason dont suceed. The main thing is with all these projects, at least someone tried!!

@beniw
Many thanks for your posts, it is always useful to have a diplomat at hand!!

James_C
19th February 2010, 07:00
For all the doom mongers out there:

If Preservations (be it ships, railways or aircraft) took any notice whatsoever of "sound business sense" and "realism" then the likes of Waverley, Cutty Sark, HMS Warrior, just about every preserved Steam Locomotive (there are hundreds in the UK alone), Vulcan Bomber etc would have all been turned into scrap many years ago.
All credit to those with the dreams and willingness to invest money, blood, sweat and tears in these projects - our world today and that of our children would be much poorer.

Regarding Riveted vs Welded Hull - with regards to strength, I was always under the impression that the former was far superior to the latter precisely because there's literally millions of rivets holding it all together as opposed to thin strips of weld here and there.

Billieboy
19th February 2010, 08:38
Regarding Riveted vs Welded Hull - with regards to strength, I was always under the impression that the former was far superior to the latter precisely because there's literally millions of rivets holding it all together as opposed to thin strips of weld here and there.

The strength of a riveted joint is the strength of one rivet. The strength of a butt welded joint is about 98% of the strength of the plate. Usually the welded joint wins.

MarkYoungIW
19th February 2010, 09:04
Unless you bring up fracture resistance!! ;)

With a rivited hull, fractures are confined to an individual plate. With a welded hull, any cracks are in no way confined.

A good example of how fractures can spread in a welded hull is probably the T2 tanker SS Schenectady (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SS_Schenectady)

Riveted hull are in theory weaker though. For a start they have multiple holes drilled in them for accomodate the rivets, which obviously takes its toll on the strength of each plate, In collisions rivets will indeed sheer off or pull through the plate, and as its the pressure exerted by the rivet that stops water getting between the plates, this is obviously not good.

However I would say you cannot class a rivet hull as being unsafe, as they are certainly not. If you were to say that, all wooden vessels would also be unsafe, as I am fairly sure roves and rivets in a wooden vessel are extremely likely to pop in a collision.

In the end, a riveted hull is educational tool in the fact it shows the technolgy used at the time.

paullad1984
19th February 2010, 09:46
Forgive my lack of knowledge, but assuming the ship was saved, if the hull plating needs replacement on a vast scale, could the hull be changed from rivetted to welded, just the plating?

Billieboy
19th February 2010, 11:13
Forgive my lack of knowledge, but assuming the ship was saved, if the hull plating needs replacement on a vast scale, could the hull be changed from rivetted to welded, just the plating?

Changing the hull from riveted to welded, would be a lot cheaper, safer, and faster. Presently it's almost impossible to find a riveting gang in the UK, after the gang has been found, then tools have to be found or made from scratch. On completion, there would be a new hull, whether this would be accepted is a moot point. There would be a query on the quality of the frames and bulkheads.

paullad1984
19th February 2010, 12:18
How about an "accountants" re build?

Billieboy
19th February 2010, 12:39
How about an "accountants" re build?

That would be at least 100K/year off the top!

paullad1984
19th February 2010, 13:30
Sorry, perhaps i should of explained that, basically you build a vitually new craft, but class it as a rebuild.

S. Toth
20th February 2010, 02:07
mark at this point now that we are advanced into the lull of the destruction, is there still hope of saving her? In my personal opinion I hope so, she is such a beauty, and has some history, if not tho please transfer your drive to another historical ship in need, there are a few in need of a home sadly

Best Regards

S. Toth
24th February 2010, 22:42
Any new news on Ryde at this time?

PSVSlave
25th February 2010, 11:34
Sorry not to have responded-my computer's keyboard stopped working! Re: Mark's ideas about rivetted hulls....

Your example of SS Schenectady is absolutely daft! Welded ships were very much in their infancy then and the technology not only to weld effectively but also to then examine the subsequent unions was not fully available. Steel making for rivets was an exact science at the time of rivetted hulls and allowed for stress tolerences as well as absolute purity of the metal-as a small piece of s lag or a void would weaken the union. Wooden hulled vessels take advatage of the dampening and supressive quality of the planking and framing as well as having the advantage of fixings much greater in size than that available for use on a steel hull.

Take a look at this clip..... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qEkErF51Uxg

And watch how much the hull flexes, obviously this is a far larger ship than the ryde but it does illustrate the forces at work. Imagine if that ship were held together by stiff rivets-it would just weaken over time and unzip itself....might this be why the MCA considers a rivetted hull unsafe??

It is a poor arguement to say that we need a dangerous, outdated form of ship building carrying passengers as an educational tool-why not stick some split peas on a welded hull like the Spitfire!!

I'm pleased that so many people are signing the petition, but I'm afraid that when the country is about to announce some of the biggest cuts on record to health, education and vital services....priorities may well change. Like I say, buy the engine, take out a bank loan and drop the thing into a nice safe new hull.

MarkYoungIW
25th February 2010, 23:54
@PSVSlave

My example of SS Schenectady was indeed an extreme. What it was to show was that in welded ships there is nothing that stops fractures from spreading, where as in Rivitted ships there is. Obviously a welded hull is in many many ways better, otherwise we would more than likely still use riveted hulls today!! But this was an example that all designs have their falts so we cant point out all the faults in rivetted hulls, without pointing out the all the faults in other designs too.

I fail to see how riveted hulls are dangerous though, and feel I need enlightening, as I can think of rivetted ships that are still in passenger service now, and they seem to be doing reasonably well.

Anyway, this thread alone makes it is obvious why people lose enthusiam with any project of this sort, it is indeed all the people that critisice. To be honest after the last few posts, with the fact that a rivetted hull is so dangerous, I guess perhaps the steam engines should be swapped for diesels too while we are at it. The paddles for a prop, and the bow rudder for a bow thruster!!

I dont really feel I have much more to say on this matter. The fact you ask me for questions, which I try to answer, and you bring up all these failings in my answers, you question if I am indeed a real man, and if I am somehow just on a attention trip, numerous other things that could be considered a personal attack, and I ask you one question:-

As far as I am aware any communications regarding the above, that were made by the PSRT, were in confidence between ourselves, and the owners of PS Monarch.

Could you confirm where you have heard the PSRT behaving in this manner, as naturally we need to put a stop to this, as I would also agree this matter should not be aired in the public eye between the groups as it would not do either group any good!! I am hoping from what I can see from a quick sweep through the internet, its more a case of members of the public arguing openly about this matter, I cannot see any involvement by the PSRT.


Which you fail to answer.

I have not the time, nor the inclination to deal with personal attacks. It seems strange how you have joined this board just to discredit my works, and that of my collegues. Did we wrong you in some way?

I really am at a loss where your apparent hatred for the older vessels come from, or is it just this one?

@S. Toth
Sorry for the delay, news on Ryde is sketchy at the moment. The works that have been undertaken have indeed taken their toll on the vessel, which has made a removal attempt considerably more difficult, but not impossible. We are working with Naval Architects, Shipwrights, and the National Historic Ships to try and progress the direction in which the project needs to take now.

Thank you for your interest, we are currently handing the website over to a new webmaster, so hopefully from now on, any updates will come from there.

Regards

PSVSlave
26th February 2010, 11:43
@PSVSlave

I fail to see how riveted hulls are dangerous though, and feel I need enlightening.

Regards

Speak to an MCA surveyor...they will explain everything!! With regards to the PS Monarch people, my comments were in relation to why you were not using them to support the Ryde project more-I have obviously stumbled on something political and so apologise completely and will refrain from further comment on that matter.

I joined this forum because it comes up first in Google for PS Ryde being Scrapped. As I have already said, I want to see Ryde sailing again-albeit in a new hull. I travel the world every year to experience paddle steamers, mountain railways and other vintage transport stuff! I am a member of the PSPS and regular passenger on Waverley.

With this being a public forum, and yourself and your colleagues taking on what is hoped to be a publicly funded project, you are going to get a lot of people debating the whys and wherefores of what you are doing-it is not something that you can control-nor should you! I have seen you post on paddleducks about negetivity appearing on a Mamod forum and asking people to step in and deal with it-this is not the right way to go Mark.

You have been asked about:
SSSI issues and how you intend to deal with them ie mud disposal, environmental impact assessment etc,
Whether you will be publishing your business plan on the PS Ryde website (and no there is no arguement about that being a private matter-just look at the reports section on the PSPS website),
Will you be posting the CV's of the trusts trustees etc etc

As I have said before, these forums contain your soft targets, people only engage in good debate when they care about something. I come on this site to have a good debate about a subject that I am passionate about-it's entertainment! I've got to be honest, if I were on the brink of multi million pound project, I would be making sure that every moment of my time was devoted to that project and not monitoring discussion boards in case somebody says something that might make me cry.

Lots has been said about the condition of the hull and the merits of rivets vs welds-but what state is the engine actually in? Is there frost damage to the cylinders etc etc?

MarkYoungIW
27th February 2010, 18:48
Once again I will state, rivetted hulls cannot be classed as dangerous. Otherwise I am sure the MCA would withdraw the licences of all vessels still in commercial use with rivetted hulls. Every hull has one flaw or another.

With regards to the PS Monarch people, my comments were in relation to why you were not using them to support the Ryde project more-I have obviously stumbled on something political and so apologise completely and will refrain from further comment on that matter.

This is not what you said, but to clarify I know the people from PS Monarch as we have spoken about Ryde and other things a few times, and I am naturally appreciative of any support they can give.

They know of the PSRT as we have been negotiating after Ryde for a number of years, pretty much carrying on from the PSPS's attempts to secure the vessel in the 90's. Unfortuantely the circumstances around Ryde always seem to have made securing her slightly out of reach, like finding the holy grail really!!

With regards to your initial comment intimating that the PSRT and PS Monarch owners have been having slanging matches in public, this is untrue!! Both groups are wise enough not to tarnish their reputations by doing this, anything you may have seen is likely from members of the public.

Anyway, I hope this puts this matter straight as neither groups need rumours and allegations like this running around.

With regards to your questions on the SSSI on the Medina Riverbank, the way we will proceed with this is by consulting with the Enviroment Agency.

It is intended that as much reusable material from the existing hull will be reused, obviously this will be judged by experts, and comply with MCA regulations.

With regards to the engines, they are largely complete. There are a few missing items, but nothing that cant be replaced.

It is unlikely that CV's and business plans will be put on the website at this time.

With regards to your concerns about my usage of time, I hope I can allay your fears by telling you that virtually all of my time is taken up with my own business, and the project to save PS Ryde. The few moments I have spare, normally whilst eating my dinner, or coming in from the rain at the moment is pretty much all I use to scan through the web and try to effect some damage control. After all negotions to secure the vessel are hard, without people adding ammunition on the internet as to why Ryde 'shouldnt' be saved.

I hope this helps clarify some of the situation.

Regards

K urgess
27th February 2010, 20:47
I think it's time for you both to make this a private argument.
By batting it back and forth like this you are only adding fuel to the fire.
Up to now no-one has contravened site guidelines but you're getting close.
So please continue via private messages.

K urgess
28th February 2010, 12:16
Threads are not removed because of differences of opinion.

MarkYoungIW
28th February 2010, 12:30
No problems.

I will strive to answer any questions then as best as I can.

iwben
28th February 2010, 12:55
with regards to the siting of the ryde being an SSSI id like to point out only the river bank itself could be considered an SSSI as the mud around the ryde inside the mill pond is largely built up from dredging tailings from work carried out on the marina some years ago so there would be no restriction on the movement of that mud, the mud of the river bank itself shouldnt need much work on it if the ryde is moved out on a high spring tide, i shouldnt of thought it would need much deeper excavation than the depth the bait diggers who regularly dig there would cause, allbeit over a larger area, speaking as an ex digger driver i can honestly say an experienced digger driver could remove layers of mud and keep them seperate with little problem which would make reinstatement easy. and further to the point i dont think it would be very hard to get permission from the various authorities because of the work being carried out at the cement mills on the opposite bank for vestas which will be having marine work carried out in the not so distant future.

whilst im not a naval achitect or engineer by any means i fail to see how a rivetted hull could be classed as dangerous, surely if it was that dangerous then you wouldnt be allowed to use rivetted boilers for steam engines as a boiler is like a pressure cooker and failure of a rivet there would be like a bomb going off.

ben

Stevo
28th February 2010, 17:39
This is proving to be a very good debate with some good arguments on both sides. I don't feel that it has to get personal, and don't feel the people on here have that intention. It is healthy to debate ship preservation and what ships should be saved and also at what point there is a cut off.

People who visit this site on regular basis clearly have an interest in ships, and whilst not every one can or should be saved we have this wonderful site to place images and pass comments which in time may act as primary/secondary sources for tomorrows historians and enthusiasts.

With that in mind, I have attached links to images of the Ryde taken late Feb 2010, as surprisingly no one has yet to post images of the ship in her recent state.

One final thing....If the Ryde is saved (big if!) Will she be the ultimate example of a ship being returned to operational use from derelict? Is there any other examples. The closest examples of ships returning from the dead (that I can think of) is the SS Great Britain but she's static in dry dock.

http://www.shipsnostalgia.com/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/223302http://www.shipsnostalgia.com/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/223303http://www.shipsnostalgia.com/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/223304http://www.shipsnostalgia.com/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/223305
http://www.shipsnostalgia.com/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/223306
http://www.shipsnostalgia.com/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/223307

billyboy
28th February 2010, 23:48
Having studied the pictures submitted by Stevo.
I have to say that this looks very much like a non starter to me. Shame, I used to like seeing her when she came to Newhaven for refits.
But the state of her plates makes her future as scrap look awfully immenent to me.

Stevo
1st March 2010, 19:32
News of the Ryde as reported by the National Historic Ships Organisation following the recent visit and assessment by an naval architect, shipwright. The news is hardly surprising to many of us....

http://www.nationalhistoricships.org.uk/news.php/83/visit-to-paddle-steamer-ryde

PSVSlave
1st March 2010, 21:44
I really am very sorry if my comments have been deemed to be getting personal...in fact Ryde is very personal to me as relatives of mine served on her as HMS Ryde and my grandmother travelled on her as bog old PS Ryde! As an MM, now shoreside, I am very interested to know about the qualities of those who have taken the project on-especially as the trust seems a bit of a closed shop.

I wish her the best of luck, but reiterate, at risk of moderation, the need for commercial foresight in a project such as this for the poor old love to survive another 40 years.

I am going to the island for another cruise on the Monarch this week, and we are to pass the Ryde, so I will take photographs and post them on here.

larsongreen
2nd March 2010, 21:30
Hi
Have been to look at SS Ryde tonight (5.00pm 2 March.)
Sad but still in tact.
Have taken some pics but don't know how to post.
In total unzipped file is 45 mbit.
Happy to share if someone points me in the right direction.

Andy Price ( Isle of Wight)

frederic
4th March 2010, 13:12
Photos of Andy have been uploaded to the site:

http://www.psryde.co.uk/ryde/modules.php?name=coppermine

PSVSlave
7th March 2010, 07:56
I went over to the island yesterday and saw the Ryde again-she doesn't actually look too bad from a distance!! The tide was very low and so the coxwain couldn't take us too close...there also seems to be a static caravan which has sunk just in front of the ship. I know that erosion on thw IOW is bad...but that's taking the biscuit!! ;)

I was with a group from PSPS and the general consenus was although very sad-it's time for her to go. I might have been seeing things, but I am fairly sure that I saw somebody working on deck-perhaps the cutting up has resumed?

Lets hope that the engine finds a good home.

MarkYoungIW
7th March 2010, 16:27
Hi Frederic,
Thanks for posting Andys photos.

Just for an idea of the work that goes into keeping a ship such as this operational, its worth having a look at some of the replating snaps taken in Waverley rebuild diarys.

http://www.psps.freeserve.co.uk/rebuild/diary.htm
http://www.btinternet.com/~Paddlers/PSWaverley/completion/diary/index.htm

This is probably the best way to show that all operation ships undergo a great deal of steel renewal in their lives.

In fact, looking through these photos is really inspirational for anyone involved in ship preservation.

@PSVSlave
Its a shame I missed you on your visit yesterday, I was in fact working one of our boats at East Cowes Marina, as its where we keep some of our vessels, my pride and joy being a 1930's wooden passenger launch.......that was sunk at Scapa Flow (and luckily for me brought back up!!)

I could have brought some of the documents and plans relating to the project along for you to look through privately. Not only that, its always nice to put a face to a name. In fact I had no idea really that the group on the pontoons was PSPS. I take it they were just members, as I have to say, I dont think I recognised anyone. They should speak to Ian McMillan who was the project manager on Waverleys rebuild. I would imagine after that, he would agree that anything is possible!!

Hope you enjoyed your day over on the sunny Isle of Wight, it was certainly what appears to be the start to our summer!!

S. Toth
9th March 2010, 00:00
hey mark, any news updates on the dear old ryde I see the website is following a new format, but as of now no news has been updated onto her current situation. Just thought Id check in. Best of Luck, and
Best Regards, Steve.


PS: I would like to publicly apologize for any ill behavior I may have shown, I had a talk with a moderator and it seems I may have been very rude at times. I would just like to say sorry, and beg your forgiveness.

MarkYoungIW
9th March 2010, 10:13
No need to beg my forgiveness. I happened to agree!!

With regards to news, at the moment, the general consensus is that it is still possible to remove the vessel from site, therefore saving all the reuseable material.

The trouble obviously is the cost. Anything is possible, but until we can buy more time for the vessel to raise funds (as at the moment the demolition could start again anytime really), it is a little difficult to see a way forward.

We are pushing on with all possibilities, and a number of groups are supporting our plea to the DCMS to consider spot listing protection (which would give us more time to get funds together and move the vessel).

Its a tough one at the moment though in the fact we either need a great deal of money quickly to move the vessel (circa 1m) or we need time to assess the whole new situation since the initial demolition properly.

Thanks again for the support.

Mark

geoffrey1
10th March 2010, 17:50
ON reading the technical press (March 2010) the PS Ryde is to be broken up

Know any different aqnyone(Cloud)

MarkYoungIW
10th March 2010, 19:14
The intent of the administrators at the moment is indeed to break the vessel up. The Paddle Steamer Ryde Trust are trying to stop this, and will obviously pursue this all the way.

The 'Technical Press'? Not one I have read (or heard of). Wouldnt mind knowing what they have said, as so many rumours are flying around.

Regards

S. Toth
11th March 2010, 01:22
Indeed many rumors are going around thats why I only get my info from the web site, or clarify it personally from you =) Best Regards in Saving Ryde be sure to keep us updated with the current news,
Steve

geoffrey1
11th March 2010, 07:31
HELLO IT IS Geoffrey1
The technical Press I refer to is Sea Breeze mgazine (in shops now!) they say its is now being prepared for breaking

PSVSlave
12th March 2010, 21:10
umm, in return to Mark Young's response....you knew where I was and I had no idea where you were! We were originally being picked up at Gridiron but the cox was unable to do that so East Cowes was a last minute plan. The cox also mentioned how he had told you about our visit and pointed out your taxis to us-he explained about how you have helped the Monarch over the years.

Sorry to say that Ryde is gone now-you even seem to agree with that-will you be putting in a bid for the engine?

Martin

MarkYoungIW
12th March 2010, 21:42
@PSVSlave
Sorry we must have had cross wires here. I knew Monarch was doing a PSPS trip from East Cowes Marina (as I had spoken to Matt briefly at Newport Quay the day before), but I hadnt worked out you were down on that trip as I believe she does a few. I do see above you were coming down during the week, but I guess this didnt register with me, and I didnt put two and two together so my apologies on that.

Its kind of Matt to say I have helped, but to be honest, probably no more than a bit of a tow, which I would do for anyone (as working with boats, you never know when your going to be in the same situation).

With regards to Ryde being gone, she isnt at the moment, so like I have said, we will be doing everything we can, right through to the end for the best possible outcome for any future preservation.

With regards to bidding for the engines, I can say its something I dont see I personally will be doing, I have heard rumours (although these may well be just that......rumours), that they are expecting to get around 70k for the engines, and have had offers from foreign bidders, although to be fair, I have heard about all these offers time and time again over the years, but I guess they may well be true.

I know that the DCMS are likely to take a while deciding what to do with regards to the petition, and although I am not that hopeful that they will step in and finally give spot protection powers to the NHS, you never know.

In the end, we are doing everything we can do, and trying to cover every angle we possibly can.

We have been in talks with the NHS about a number of options, we are also keeping the PSPS briefed as much as we can, and I can say that at the least the demise of the ship will be properly documented as agreed between the NHS, our conservation expert, and the demolition company (obviously not that this will be of much consolation to ourselves with the work we have put in to see her survive, but its better than doing nothing).

I have always set out in this with the best intentions, and its fair to say if at any point the vessel had come for sale we would have found a way to save her, but in the end, if you have no control over the vessel, its always going to be an uphill battle. And that long long uphill battle is the reason we wont give up until the bitter end, as otherwise it could have all been a waste.

Anyway, like I said, its not over until the the large lady, and all that!!

We have a number of possible avenues this could still take.

Sorry again I missed your visit.

Also out of interest, we are still trying to complete the list of names on the crews during her time as HMS Ryde (The Navy dont make their documents easy to follow), and wonder which names dates and ranks you might have (really any material about that vaguely documented time in her history). Obviously her movements are fairly well documented in the Red Lists, but trying to work out who joined her and where is slightly more difficult.

@Geoffrey1
Many thanks for that. Will grab a copy when I'm next in WHSmiths. Always interesting to see what people are saying.

MarkYoungIW
12th March 2010, 21:57
Just while I think of it, I think someone asked about Lincoln Castle somewhere in this thread. I know its a bit off topic, but I visited her last year, and whoever it was who mentioned her is quite right. She is also a good candidate for restoration. Not quite as colourful a history as Ryde, and no where near as heavily built, but certainly above the water line, she is in reasonable condition.

The PSPS have a working party looking at options for her now, so fingers tightly crossed.

Although not many photos of frames, and plating there are some here in some photos I took last October. It was quite an interesting trip actually, I was looking at her on behalf of someone looking for a novelty pub!!

http://s1023.photobucket.com/albums/af354/e-trotters/Lincoln%20Castle/

S. Toth
13th March 2010, 00:54
Mark, I am so very sorry if I annoy you on this site with small questions, but what would happen in the worst case scenario with the preservation group that you have set up. Would you transfer your efforts to another deserving ship? Not that the Ryde preservation campaign is faltering, I was just wondering what would happen. In the end hopefully nothing has to be rethought and the Ryde is saved for future generations. Just Wondering.

Sorry to be a bother,
Best Regards, and Luck, Steve

MarkYoungIW
13th March 2010, 06:57
I cant speak for the rest of the group, but I personally wouldnt intend to do anything else after this. It has been exceptionally interesting, but also very expensive,time consuming and at times soul destroying!! Its amazing really, how even bits of research over the years really eats up the pennies!!

However, that said I have always been interested in preservation, so I think its more a case of it depends on what comes along. I know people who have also said never again, and that didnt stop them!!!

I think its a case of time will tell!!

I take my hat off to all who try and save something for the future though, as I now know what a lot of time and effort go into these things, so I would encourage anyone to do the same. Its just for me personally now, its been over 10 years, and in this particular project the odds have always been stacked against us.

Rafal Zahorski
13th March 2010, 07:45
Dear Mark, I read the last 20 maybe more posts. I do not want to interfere in all these arguing. But I can only say - this vessel is extremely beautiful. If you will take over all these rust and repair a steel hull can be preserved for many years being a really beauty. I know her - my friend Berry who helping us on IOW with our vessel is very often going over there with his dog. I saw many pictures of Ryde. It is amazing that she has got engine steel and I am sure she can be restart once again.

I do not know if riveted hulls are safety or not but our Bembridge - our thread is near your one ( http://www.shipsnostalgia.com/showthread.php?t=24193&page=19 ) - was repaired in a simple way - we have here in Poland a method how to weld such a steel and how to make an artificial rivets. It looks nice and what is the most important it is very safe method. We have here in Poland the same style technical supervision like you have in UK Lloyds Register - we have Polish Register of Ships - PRS. We spent huge money for our documentation - every welding technique was placed on a new drawings and later on tested. PRS is known that they have terrible huge requirements for safety. Our old hull must full fill all safety requirements as for the new ocean sailing vessel. So min 8 mm of steel thickness was required. So we replaced 80 m2 of steel on her hull and 220 m2 on her deck. We know that she has now a very strong hull and this hull will stay like that many years - especially standing in fresh water and when our vessel will go for a dry docking every 10 years.

Don't let her to leave us for ever. Our Bembridge looked even worst - she was beautifully painted - but paint was covering sometimes 2 cm thick rust.

It is a very expensive project but it is worth to do - even if many will be against or many will say - "you idiot" or "naive guy" I had the same experiences - so I know how it is.

In whole UK there are many old beautiful vessels. Every year many of them are towed to a breakers and even nobody knows later on what happened with them. I was looking myself THPV Kihna and THPV Penlee - last name Seatrans Surveyor - only what I know that nobody knows what happened with them - so we can be sure they are not anymore existing.

Please try to do your best and do not give up. If you like I can sent you all pictures from our restoration - so you will have a full documentation how looks in practical way such a job.

I am always staying in your disposal if you will look for any arguments for "yes" or to convince anybody that you should do it.

Our Bembridge was waiting for breakers too - we bought her in really the last moment.

She is today every day more beautiful. So I am sure that P.S. Ryde - can be again Ryde Queen. (Thumb)

I hope will meet her during my vacation - I will be this summer on IOW to meet Berry and other friends. I hope she will be still there.

Best greeting from other restoration battle field in Szczecin.

GOOD LUCK!!!

Rafal and whole our Team.

MarkYoungIW
13th March 2010, 11:28
Hi Rafal,
Many thanks for your kind words. We will do everything we can, but in the end it will fall down to cooperation of the owners, and of course........money!!

Its a small world really, my Dad used to work on the Bembridge (Brook, Gurnard & Penda as well), he has spent most of his life on pilot boats with Trinity House, and then ABP. Although I'm sure they did actually do some work onboard the boats at some point (2 weeks at a time I believe), I do hear a lot about their fishing exploits whilst onboard too!!

Thanks again for you encouragement. With regards to photos of the work entailed with any ship/boat/dingy restoration its always useful to point people to what actually goes on. There is this tendancy to see a few rusty holes, and think its all over.

Thanks again for you support though, and if you happen to bump into anyone on your travels who have a spare 10million, dont hesitate to point them our way!!

Regards

Rafal Zahorski
15th March 2010, 19:29
Dear Mark,

First of all please sent my best greeting to your Father. Presently I am looking for any documents, pictures, drawings or fact related to Bembridge or any THPV. Maybe he can help us. We are making scans and we are sending back all originals.

Please show him these two movies:

http://www.bembridge.pl/cms.php?cid=372 - Pilot cutters is action

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qmkx_-h39oY - our entering to Swinoujscie.

Mark - I can ensure you - you can restore your vessel in Poland for less like GBP 1000 000 including towing to and back to UK.

I can help you - think about it - do not lose a hope. She is really beautiful old vessel which can have a better life.

If you need any help - just let me know. I know a full team of good companies ready to made a good job.

In the summer there will be a towing of a special pontoon from Szczecin to London.

So think about it.

Remember - she is worth to love her a lot!

Greeting Rafal

scorcher
17th March 2010, 22:43
Hello all .....I made the most of a bright sunny day yesterday and walked to see the RYDE (QUEEN.) This is what I saw........
Not a pretty sight.:eek:

S. Toth
22nd March 2010, 21:19
Mark has the society given up, on youtube there was a comment posted 4 days ago that you had stopped. I don't take this as factual information unless you directly post it so I thought I would ask rather then get from unreliable second third hand sources.

Best Regards, Steve

chadburn
23rd March 2010, 17:54
I read that the "Shieldhall" is also having funding difficulties with no chance of any Lottery money as that appears to be going to the Olympic's, I wonder who made the decision to forget about our Maritime Heritage in the meantime?

MarkYoungIW
25th March 2010, 09:53
@S. Toth
No, far from it. Still fighting an uphill struggle, but indeed still fighting!!

Will keep you posted as and when there is news, although at the moment, there is little to tell.

@Rafal
Will have a word with my Dad, and get him to get in touch with anything he has. In fact I was speaking to an ex Pilot who spent a lot of time on Bembridge & Brook the other day, so will see if I can get him to contact you as well. If your yard are in the UK anytime soon, its always good to have as many views as possible with regards to Ryde, at the moment we have only consulted with UK yards, but like I say we would certainly be interested in any opinions/advice/assistance you can offer. Does Barrie Davey have any of your business cards? Just thought I could pass a few on to Dad and he can pass them on to anyone he can think of?

Regards

Rafal Zahorski
28th March 2010, 00:24
Hello Mark,

Thank you for your help.

Please send me a private message.

If any help I can offer you got me.

I have just visited many guys related to our Bembridge.

You can find me always her on SN: http://www.shipsnostalgia.com/showthread.php?t=24193&page=20

Best greeting from Dover where we are finishing our trip in UK for this time

Rafal

Best greeting to you Father.

PSVSlave
30th March 2010, 14:22
Sorry for not being around...I've been at work (yuck!). Did a quick search today on the net and found this:
http://ventnorblog.com/2010/03/30/government-dead-end-for-paddle-steamer-ryde/
Sad news

MarkYoungIW
30th March 2010, 17:29
The governments response was indeed probably what most people would of expected from them. However, it does once again bring to the forefront the lack of protection on these vessels.

As it stands though, although in a nearly impossible position, we are still working to make the best of a bad lot. As long as there is a chance, we will keep going, as we have always intended to finish what we have started.

Thanks again for all the support.

Also, @PSVSlave, just to reask:-

Also out of interest, we are still trying to complete the list of names on the crews during her time as HMS Ryde (The Navy dont make their documents easy to follow), and wonder which names dates and ranks you might have (really any material about that vaguely documented time in her history). Obviously her movements are fairly well documented in the Red Lists, but trying to work out who joined her and where is slightly more difficult.

S. Toth
30th March 2010, 20:18
so mark is this the end? As I say "The fight isn't over till the torch hits the bow" Don't stop fighting, and if the end does come please don't stop fighting for historic vessels. You have come such a long way with ryde, I am sure you could transfer over to saving another in need.

Best of Luck
Steve

PSVSlave
31st March 2010, 10:11
I'm currently putting together everything that I have so that it can be sent to the PSPS collection. There's a lot of info to get through as the family served on so many ships...bit of a headache really!

MarkYoungIW
2nd April 2010, 08:57
@S. Toth
We are still working on a few last minute options, but it is fair to say, we are getting nowhere with BDO at the moment, which is the biggest hurdle.

@PSVSlave
I will look forward to any names and dates of when your relatives served onboard HMS Ryde, like I say we have a good amount of information, but it is almost certainly not complete. Likewise, copies of our many years of work will eventually make it to the PSPSs collection.

paull.happyhiker
2nd April 2010, 21:12
What beautiful footage of PS RYDE. Lets hope we will see her again sailing looking majestic

PSVSlave
5th April 2010, 21:39
Sorry for being boring and not posting, but got heaps of safety management crap to go through at the mo!! .....

Mark, if the governement response to the petition is simply to record the shipfor archival reasons, and the receivers negetive response is for economic reasons-then the ship is a gonner. I am concerned at the lack of information on the PS Ryde website in respect of your last comments, you are still advertising press releases about the scrapping of the ship being a rumour (which it obviously was not) and giving people the impression that if they donate money to you the Ryde could be saved...isn't that a tiny bit fraudulent? I'm not saying this in an antagonistic manner-just pointing something out that may help your defense should you later rely on it in court......(i.e you are activle asking for donations for a ship that you do not, and are not likely to, own)!!!!

scorcher
5th April 2010, 23:23
I do not wish to pour water over all the effort that some members have invested. I sailed on her many times in the past on my holidays so have fond memories and would willingly make a modest contribution but we need a reality check here.
I fear she is well past saving. That is not a negative reaction but a realistic one. I uploaded a close up of her hull recently and quite expected some comments to be made.The silence was deafening.It is not the news some want to hear but it is truthful.

PSVSlave
6th April 2010, 10:10
The problem is that anything 'negative' that is mentioned gets shot down in flames by supporters that do not want to listen, as a result many of the original posters on this thread have abondoned the debate.
A lot of people, myself included, would make a contribution to the Ryde's rebirth-so long as the project is viable and led by experience. I worries me that there is a bank account out there accepting money from donors for a cause that one of it's signaturies says is basically lost. If I opened a business and took money for goods that I could not provide, I would be arrested and tried for fraud.

scorcher
6th April 2010, 15:02
PSVSlave I agree with you and share your concerns. I am not a Lloyds assessor but if I was and I could poke my finger through the hull due to advanced corrosion I would not be too happy about its future even as a static exhibit.

PSVSlave
10th April 2010, 14:09
Hence the government and NHS's responses I guess. It's a lost cause now, and I don't believe that it was much other than that in the first instance. I'm still very concerned about the trust asking for donations though-they are not even a charity!!

MarkYoungIW
12th April 2010, 09:38
Hi PSVSlave.
Once again, I am sorry not to have taken so long to reply. With the season starting, and taking on yet more boats, I have had my work cut out a bit, so unfortuantely had to leave the others in the Trust to pick up my slack.

I totally understand your concerns about the donations thing. I am sure though, you will notice that you cant actually donate anything to us, as we have not enabled that feature in the site. We are taking pledges of donations, but thats about it.

You can see from someone who has apparently tried to donate here (http://ventnorblog.com/2009/06/16/ryde-queen-raises-600-for-ps-monarch/#comment-80517)


Also taking into account your remarks about the Ryde Trust, I would take just a guess they have held things down fairly tight with regards to charity etc because until the ownership is sorted out, there is little point in taking peoples money. I am sure you will have noticed at the moment if you offer money they are taking it as a pledge! Some of us have tried, I had mine returned to me on an eBay auction and taken as a pledge.

Read more: http://ventnorblog.com/2009/06/16/ryde-queen-raises-600-for-ps-monarch/#comment-80517#ixzz0ksDeh6WN


I hope this clears up your concern. I will have a word with the others, and see what has happened to the PR concerning current affairs.

It is true to say that things look bleak, but we will see it through to the end.

With regards to the NHS's response, we are still infact working with them to try and save the vessel.

Like I say though, I hope I have managed to address your concern.

PSVSlave
15th April 2010, 23:11
No I'm sorry but it does not! You are still promoting the donations button and gift aid donations. Please publish the value of donations that you have received via the postal address that you publish and expalin what will ahppen to them shouls you fail to aquire Ryde.
This is a serious point that might even verge on criminal, I am considering passing this onto the Police to investigate as it could seriously undermine serious conservation groups.

MarkYoungIW
16th April 2010, 09:37
@PSVSlave
We have nothing at all to hide, so I would have no problems with you persuing the course of action you suggest. However, it would be a waste of everyones time and obviously be detrimental to the speed at which the Trust can proceed with the works towards saving the vessel. All cheques that have been sent to the postal address have not been cashed as of yet, as there is little point in taking peoples money until there is an opportunity to purchase the vessel, but if they were to be, they would be used to save as much as can be saved of Ryde, or in the event this could not be achieved, they would be gifted to the likes of the PSPS & MQPS.

I am still confused where your apparent agression comes from though, considering the Ryde Trust has set out with the best of intentions to save the Ryde, and the Trustees, myself included have spent a great deal of our own time and money to try to achieve this.

I have no idea who you are however, and although you had an opportunity to meet me and discuss this, you did not, and chose to try and put the ball back in my court saying that I knew where you were? Even though I couldnt of really worked out that a post (which I did not read) said you were coming down during the week for a cruise on PS Monarch, when in fact you were coming down at the weekend for a cruise? Was I meant to hold a banner up asking saying 'PSVSlave' for every trip Monarch did that week? I am concerned you hide behind a alias, and do nothing but spread accusations? Like I have said before, this feels like a personal attack. Considering this is a ship one of your family members served on, I am surprised you are not offering any support. In fact the opposite. Please at least give me some idea who you are, as I am now guessing you are the person with the camera who has gone round spreading doom and gloom on other boards.

Anyway, like I say, the trust has nothing to hide and the intent is to save the whole ship still. If this cannot be saved, we will do our best to make sure that everything is not lost, and save as much as we can.

I think it is fair to say that this thread has now become a warning to anyone that wishes to spend their time and money trying to bring something great for others, that their will always be someone that will show no apprieciation, and attack everything you do for reasons completely unknown.

To those who are keen to see the survival of this ship though, I will state once again we are still working with the assistance of the NHS to secure the vessel. The project is very well advanced, but still lacking the ownership of the vessel, which is what we are working towards.

Stevo
16th April 2010, 14:49
Funny, many might consider this thread as a warning of how not to go about a preservation project and what ship is a realistic viable preservation project!

Lincoln Castle had been offered to the PSPS now why you lot are not looking to save that ship rather then the lost cause that is the Ryde is beyond me. I can't imagine there is much to save from the Ryde, of course you will say 'engines' but I will say 'why?' it goes on and on.

Crt
17th April 2010, 00:22
I really can't understand what's going on here, am I naive? The Ryde Trust is putting loads of time into trying to save a historic ship, I would have thought the very least they should be getting is thanks for all the effort? Isn't the spirit of this website to further the preservation of ALL historic ships? Surely all the people who have sent in cheques and tried to donate to the Ryde Trust have done so because they want to see the ship saved, it's not as if everyone's been kept in the dark about the problems involved with saving the ship, so why on earth should one member think that the police should be called?? And if another member thinks that the attention should be directed to another ship, then surely they themselves ought to put a similar amount of their own time and effort into saving that ship, not to chastise other people's efforts? It's all totally beyond me, so all I can say is I take my hat off to these people who preserve our heritage for future generations for very little reward and thank you very much for all your time and effort.

Stevo
17th April 2010, 09:27
Saving the ship.... You are naive. If and that is a big if Mark was to purchase the ship and restore it after raising millions and millions and millions in funding including public funds (thus giving people a right to have their say) you won't be left with the original Ryde infact barely anything will be original. HOW IS THAT PRESERVATION?

There are real preservation possibilities out there; people use your common sense and look at supporting realistic projects that have a good chance, not waste your time with rusted remains otherwise you will end up losing everything. Will you be saying thank you then?

Common sense over obsession!

James_C
17th April 2010, 10:22
Much of the Waverley has been renewed over the years, with really the only 'original' bits being the actual main engine and about 75% of the hull, everything else has been renewed - All Decks/Boilers/Wheelhouse/Paddleboxes/Deck Saloons/Bars/Dining Room etc.
Therefore does that make her stop being the preserved Waverley? Of course not.
Then there is the Medway Queen - a complete reconstruction. with the only original pieces being effectively the main engine and a few other odds and sods.
Ryde is in much better condition than the MQ was, and whilst the project is certainly ambitious it's certainly achievable whilst maintaining a reasonable amount of the fabric of the ship - as highlighted by the most recent surveyors report.
If it wasn't for these much derided individuals who put Obsession BEFORE common sense, then not only would Waverley no longer exist, then neither would HMS Belfast, HMS Warrior, HMS Gannet, Shieldhall, Cutty Sark and not to mention the veritable legion of preserved steam locomotives out there.
Preservation by it's nature cannot go on indefinitely - sooner or later a preserved object (be it a ship, railway engine or car) WILL rot away and disintegrate, there is absolutely nothing we can do about that. Perpetual preservation is just as much about authentic renewal/replacement as anything else and the best way to see a preserved ship or railway engine is to see it working - it brings in a lot more revenue, arouses and sustains interest and is therefore vital for its long term survival.

Stevo
17th April 2010, 10:38
Locomotives are not exposed to the elements of the sea so you can't compare the two. Medway Queen is a smaller vessel and is not even restored yet 25 years on and even then as a static attraction which she will be (not the original aim) will struggle to make money no doubt. Statics don't work! As for the shieldhall and Waverley they were not derelict wrecks and were able to earn their keep from the moment the key was turned. Warrior , Belfast and Gannet were all floating and had armored/protected hulls where as Ryde was built of inferior materials.

Ryde will not be continous presevation but rather a new build and as said before you might as well build new as it will be the same thing then. Another thing....at what point will the Ryde be self sustainable? Donations and collection tins in truth are paultry sums and it will be massive donations you will be looking at and I can't see Alan Sugar saying to Mark Young ' your hired!'

Again Mark I respect your drive and determination and your passion for nostalgia but I don't agree with your choice of ship.

paull.happyhiker
17th April 2010, 12:15
A new build would be nice Take the stem train tornado look at what can be done

Billieboy
17th April 2010, 19:02
A new build would be nice Take the steam train tornado look at what can be done

Rebuilding and/or building from scratch a new paddle steamer is not quite the same as building a complete A4 locomotive, the costs will probably be higher, with the problem that the original drawings of a similar vessel will class her as unseaworthy and incapable of obtaining a license to carry passengers!

paullad1984
17th April 2010, 19:46
Tornado's an A1, not an A4 :-D

James_C
18th April 2010, 00:29
Locomotives are not exposed to the elements of the sea so you can't compare the two. Medway Queen is a smaller vessel and is not even restored yet 25 years on and even then as a static attraction which she will be (not the original aim) will struggle to make money no doubt. Statics don't work! As for the shieldhall and Waverley they were not derelict wrecks and were able to earn their keep from the moment the key was turned. Warrior , Belfast and Gannet were all floating and had armored/protected hulls where as Ryde was built of inferior materials.
Ryde will not be continous presevation but rather a new build and as said before you might as well build new as it will be the same thing then. Another thing....at what point will the Ryde be self sustainable? Donations and collection tins in truth are paultry sums and it will be massive donations you will be looking at and I can't see Alan Sugar saying to Mark Young ' your hired!'


Railway preservation is, I would say, a particularly valid comparison - corrosion and location of said object has nothing to do with it.
I would suggest you get onto Google and look up 'Barry Scrapyard' and look at some of the absolute wrecks that came out of that yard and were restored to their former glory - the unit may be smaller but surprisingly enough the costs aren't much different! The rebirth of 'Duke of Gloucester' is a particular eye opener.
To fully overhaul a main line steam loco these days you're looking towards 1 million - this has to happen every 7 years and that cost is for a steam loco that actually still has all of its bits and pieces.
A few years back a group of enthusiasts decided they wanted to fill a gap in the preservation scene - that of an LNER 'A1' class which wasn't preserved. This group of enthusiasts then formed a very successful group and marketed their proposal well so that this loco was in fact built - for a cost of 3 Million, 3 million for a loco 22m long! Ryde requires some 7 million for something that's 65m long and 6 times the weight.
The surveyors say Ryde could be restored to operating condition for some 7 million - which is pretty much what it cost to rebuild Waverley in 2000/2003. Without that lottery funded rebuild Waverley would be a static vessel today - she was absolutely knackered and in due course would have failed her subsequent MCA inspections.
You mention Warrior and Belfast having 'armoured' hulls - Belfast was in good nick, but she certainly was not and is not economic in any shape or form. Regardless of the condition of her hull, Warrior was a complete wreck, as was what is now HMS Gannet and also SS Great Britain. All 3 of those projects are directly comparable to that of Ryde in terms of the rebuilding work necessary, and that's before we even broach the subject of 'Cutty Sark' after her disastrous fire - going by your measure of cost/practicality should we have allowed her to be scrapped?
I would agree that static vessels are at continuous risk which means that realistically any proposal for Ryde must be one which returns her to operational condition. As a result of Waverley's substational rebuild in the early part of this decade together with some 35 years of operating experience there is a large pool of expertise available to the Ryde Trust for the conservation, rebuild and operating stages. In comparison to many other ship preservation projects Ryde has a LOT going for her, as not only is she a historic vessel in her own right, should she be rebuilt to running order there is a very good chance she could at least cover costs if marketed properly in the potentially incredibly lucrative Solent/South coast tourist trade (far more than the financial possibilities of the River Clyde for Waverley).
Medway Queen is being completely rebuilt, yet I would still call that preservation as quite simply she will still be around next year and the year after. If she'd have been left as 'original' she would have undoubtedly collapsed into a heap of rust within a decade.
Waverley/Shieldhall have never earned their keep in preservation - and most likely never will, although post rebuild Waverley has been borderline solvent. Due to successive poor summers (weather wise) and mechanical problems Waverley in particular requires continuous grants from the PSPS to keep her operational and Shieldhall is continually living on the edge of financial abyss. So why do the volunteers do it - because if they didn't the ships would simply disappear. You can't bring these kind of projects down to basic economics because not only will they never be economic but that also completely ignores their social and cultural significance - something you won't find quantifiable on a balance sheet. Obsession over Common Sense - absolutely!
Regarding Lincoln Castle, PSPS members have been asked to vote on whether to accept the vessel or not and the chances are they will accept her. She is, however a genuine case for static preservation as she is perfectly suited to act as a bar/clubhouse - a function in which she operated profitably until closure a couple of years ago due to hull concerns (since rectified). You say that Mark and his merry band should perhaps diver their efforts to this ship - why? It is of no local relevance to them whatsoever and is some 200 miles away where there are already a group of local individuals who will probably be willing to take her on.
If Ryde can be preserved by a local group in the IOW then bravo, it if fails it fails, but I simply cannot understand the constant need to tell them they're attempting the impossible/the plan is lunacy etc.

Billieboy
18th April 2010, 09:47
Tornado's an A1, not an A4 :-D

Sorry Paul, it's more than fifty years since I built one.

scorcher
18th April 2010, 10:09
James C wrote ; "The surveyors say Ryde could be restored to operating condition for some 7 million ...."

I am impressed by James C's knowledge and optimisim. I am not a pessimist I have sailed on the "Waverley" as and when I can . The first time in 1979.
My question is , would the surveyors GUARANTEE that the limit wouldbe 7m.
I fear not. If they say 7m it would probably rise to 12m by the time the project is finished (if it ever got started). The question that needs asking is ;
Would supporters agree to finance the project at 12m + ?.
I fear that hard times are ahead and I can visualize any future government cutting back on financing bus passes. These are essential to many and would be my priority over saving the P.S.RYDE. Which I sailed on many times in the 50-60s.
I do regret slanging matches on what is a friendly site. How can any 'estimation' be proven if we are looking ten years ahead?

James_C
18th April 2010, 10:29
James C wrote ; "The surveyors say Ryde could be restored to operating condition for some 7 million ...."
I am impressed by James C's knowledge and optimisim. I am not a pessimist I have sailed on the "Waverley" as and when I can . The first time in 1979.
My question is , would the surveyors GUARANTEE that the limit wouldbe 7m.
I fear not. If they say 7m it would probably rise to 12m by the time the project is finished (if it ever got started). The question that needs asking is ;
Would supporters agree to finance the project at 12m + ?.
I fear that hard times are ahead and I can visualize any future government cutting back on financing bus passes. These are essential to many and would be my priority over saving the P.S.RYDE. Which I sailed on many times in the 50-60s.
I do regret slanging matches on what is a friendly site. How can any 'estimation' be proven if we are looking ten years ahead?

7 million was an old(ish) estimate, and yes I could quite forsee it going higher in certain areas - Mark knows more than I do. I think it has to be remembered that much of that will be devoted to replacing steelwork and also a new boiler (generally the largest capital cost) . As a 1930s inshore ferry she's not the most technologically complicated vessel around, and that will work in her favour.
The big bonus such a project would have is the volunteer labour and knowledge available, especially since Wavereley's rebirth in 2000/2003 and that of MQ. Although that job was spec'd they were really heading into the unknown. She was rebuilt throught a combination of private Grant Aid together with a serious chunk of Lottery money, which is of course is under severe pressure at the moment due to the Olympics raiding the kitty - but it has to be remembered that's only for another couple of years.
A fully funded rescue operation and rebuild for Ryde would I suspect be only possible through HLF Funding or through serious private/corporate donations.
The HLF does have a pretty good record in this regard, as it's not only funding Medway Queens 'reconstruction', but also as mentioned Waverley's, has donated significant sums to the Maid of the Loch project, particularly in rebuilding the slipway so essential to her future operation, not to mention the more famous and far more expensive Cutty Sark project.
Although her hull is being fully rebuilt and her engines overhauled, it is unlikely MQ will sail again for some time due to regulatory issues with her new (but original design) hull. However nothing is being done which will unduly hinder that process in time to come.
Personally I'd always thought Ryde was the more likely to survive than MQ as she's much more modern, has a potentially large passenger capacity and will be resident in one of the UK's Tourist hotspots.
So I think it's not unfair to say there is a fighting chance of making a go of it and there could be the beginnings of a reasonably decent long term business plan - vitally important if she is to bid for funding.
One of the reasons for Waverley's financial woes is that as the last remaining seagoing operational Paddler she has obligations to visit parts of the UK outside her normal sphere of operation in order to keep the memory alive - i.e. Bristol Channel, South Coast and Thames/Medway. This involves a lot of unfunded steaming and due to her necessarily brief visits marketing and then passenger take up (especially in less than great weather) can be a problem, although the Thames sailings are generally very lucrative.
The continued survival of the Ryde is optimistic certainly, but you can never give up as once she's gone, she's gone forever
Unlike Railway preservation, there is no scope for a new build 40 years down the line as unfortunately ships don't have the same 'Grandfather rights' to exclude them from some of the more extreme and technologically intense regulations, so really it's now or never.

paullad1984
18th April 2010, 19:38
Sorry Paul, it's more than fifty years since I built one.

Braver man than me, i just break em!

paull.happyhiker
18th April 2010, 20:37
Rebuilding and/or building from scratch a new paddle steamer is not quite the same as building a complete A4 locomotive, the costs will probably be higher, with the problem that the original drawings of a similar vessel will class her as unseaworthy and incapable of obtaining a license to carry passengers!

elf and safety spoil everything

paull.happyhiker
18th April 2010, 20:41
Rebuilding and/or building from scratch a new paddle steamer is not quite the same as building a complete A4 locomotive, the costs will probably be higher, with the problem that the original drawings of a similar vessel will class her as unseaworthy and incapable of obtaining a license to carry passengers!

Thats a real shame as money could be made by getting models done and im sure more people would be interested if it was started from scratch. Surely it would be better to put the poor lady out of her misery

Stevo
19th April 2010, 00:17
Hmm! That's just how Ryde's skipper Capt Yealland's wife feels. She knows the ship more then anyone, put her out of her misery. The Capt used to say the Ryde will just fall to bits and it would be on her terms, she would have the last laugh.

MarkYoungIW
19th April 2010, 18:53
@Stevo
I agree with you as far as Lincoln Castle, although I stongly believe she will indeed be restored. The fact that she is being given away is always a great start. I have been to see her at the end of last year, and her condition is indeed fairly good, but from my point of view, I am more interested in Ryde, not only because I have grown up with her being a local icon, but also because of her history and revenue potentials in her home waters on the South Coast & Solent.

With regards to Mrs Yelland, I find it a shame that she now wishes to see the vessel scrapped. I remember for many years she would phone Island Harbour regularly to see how Ryde was holding up, and I was told she was pleased when the PSPS were trying to save her.

I have spoken to many people who have worked, and served onboard Ryde over the years, who very much wished to see her saved too though, and obviously many people as shown by the petition would also be pleased to see her saved.

As James_C has so rightly pointed out most ships of this age have had a great amount of steel renewal, so the rust you see in Ryde, would obviously not be there after any rebuild. If you take a walk around inside her, there is still quite an amount of material in a good state, so that would live on.

Obviously it would be nice to preserve something that is in perfect condition already, but there are a lack of Paddle Steamers that are in that condition.

It gravely concerns me that it seems acceptable to lose Ryde.

Anyway, like I say, the main hurdle at the moment stopping anything proceeding too far is still and always has been is ownership.

Regards

Stevo
20th April 2010, 20:05
Hi Mark
I have been keeping Mrs Yealland informed of the Ryde's predicament for over 20 years, and in the early days there was a general feeling the ship could be saved. I recall going onboard and having a drink at the bar and being told that the ship would float in the mill pond during a rainy period. With the end of the PSPS efforts in the early 90s Pat felt the ship would fall to bits as predicted by Capt Yealland on his visit in the mid 70s, and to be fair she has pretty much done that.

I think now that the ship is in the state she is in, Pat feels that it would be kinder to let her go. She knew the ship well and was privy to the ship's condition (indeed Pat used to work in the Ryde's engine room on weekends) and was aware of the Ryde's failings on her final survey in 1969.

I do understand your reasons for saving the Ryde, as an Islander and a lover of all things nautical, the ferries were a big part of my life and provide a ton of happy childhood memories crossing the Solent. The thought of seeing one of those lovely old boats on the Solent again is certainly appealing.

Just a final mention, should you be needing research sources for your PS Ryde archives, Portsmouth City Museum has a lot of good stuff on the ferries and also another good avenue is Kew Public Records Office which I used when researching the construction of the MV Southsea.

Regards
Steve

S. Toth
21st April 2010, 00:58
(It gravely concerns me that it seems acceptable to lose Ryde.)

It also concerns me, that is one of the main reasons I hardly post in this thread as of now. Because everyone seems to have a touch of negativity about it. Keep at it, it is not over yet. All that I have to say is May the Mighty Ryde be saved!

PSVSlave
21st April 2010, 09:17
Comments on here are actually very positive, some people, however, are just hoping for some business acumen to be shown! I had a chinwag with one of my colleagues over a well deserved pint after coming ashore recently and we did a few sums on the back of a fag packet.

We worked out that should a ship such as Ryde sail again, assuming that she burnt approx between 8-10 tons of HFO per day (taking into account of boilers and ancilliaries) she could be looking at a fuel bill of between 50-75k pcm. A ship of her size, complexity and future capacity would require a full compliment of DOOW's and EOOW to oversee approx 8-10 AB's working accross both Deck and Engine Depts-plus some staff for catering and hospitality which would (at current acceptable pay rates) cost in the region of 50k pcm.

This would give a total staffing and bunkering bill of around 125k pcm or 1.5m pa.

We worked out that should she sail every day as part of a 7 month season, with passengers paying 30 per head, you would need to attract 7141 passengers per month simply to pay for the basic running costs.

Therefore, assuming that Ryde could accomodate 700 pax, she would have to complete a minimum of 11 full capacity voyages per month to cover the basics and a further 11 to cover bulk lubricants, maintainance and contingency fund.

22 full capacity voyages on the 'lucrative south coast' would be very difficult
Mooring and port fees for such a ship would likely be in the region of 50k pa but could obviously attract local subsidies or donations in kind-so we decided not to include that in our pub accountancy!

None of this takes into account office costs, marketing, taxation, PPE & uniform, dry docking, survey and certification, pilotage or pension contributions.

I think in terms of money and feasability-there is no point in restoring something that will need propping up throughout it's new working life as one day that important prop could easily give way and she will end up on the banks of the Medina again to rot.

Making a comparison between a ship and a railway locomotive is madness, the costs are much lower and most of what you see on the track is simply a boiler, tanks and a cab-they really are not that complicated! With a ship you are dealing with 3 phase electricty, massive scale engineering and requirements for highly experienced (and therefore expensive) crew; actually everybody on this forum will be aware of that so I won't teach granny to suck eggs.

I want to see Ryde restored and working, but I am also aware of the fact that that I would like to to see my parents restored and working as well (they are dead)-ship building and operations are not for hobbiests and dreamers. The PSPS have shyed away from the Ryde project for good reasons-and they really are the experts when it comes to something like this.

Let the poor thing get cut up, save what can be saved and then have a large glass of wine to congratulate yourselves for a vallient attempt. Sorry to be 'negetive', but the world is stacked against Ryde unless the steam engines get ripped out and replaced with something more fuel efficent.

MarkYoungIW
21st April 2010, 10:08
@Stevo,
Many thanks for you input. To be totally fair I do take 'most' of your critism to be constructive. Thanks for clearing up Mrs Yellands position. I have only ever had it second/third hand.

Many thanks for the pointers in research too, although our Conservation expert has been up and down the country whilst producing the Conservation document, and I know he has covered these places.

Interesting you were involved with Southsea. I did see her shortly before she left for scrapping, and she was indeed another worthy candidate.

@S. Toth
Many thanks for following the progress, however slow it may be!

@PSVSlave.
Your bar accounting is indeed very accurate in places, as it almost mirrors Waverleys accounts exactly, and size wise the vessels are similar. However, Waverleys crewing costs are indeed greater than Ryde's would be, due to the catergories of water she operates in, and needing crew 24/7. With volunteer labour too, this would cut Ryde's crewing cost.

Should 'Heavy Fuel Oil' be used, your estimates again are fairly accurate (nearer the 50k though), however coal is currently cheaper although harder to deal with, so naturally a 'dual fuel' boiler is also a consideration that is factored in.

In the end, nobody could say it will be easy, but once again I will stand by and say Ryde would indeed stack up as being as nearly viable as any ship preservation can be.

With your bar observations, you would be writing off the likes of Waverley, and pretty much any other historic ship.

With regards to you stating that comments on here are very positive though, I think we will have to bring that down to being a matter of opinion.

James_C
21st April 2010, 10:59
PSVSlave,
Ryde is a smaller ship than Waverley, yet has a comparable passenger capacity (different design of accommodation) and has a smaller, therefore more fuel efficient engine.
I'm not at home at the moment, and so don't have Waverley's operating figures to hand, but one thing I will say is that if all of your above figures were correct, not only would Ryde possibly be a financial no hoper then Waverley most certainly would be!
As it is, she's usually turns in a small operating profit every year and in recent years the cause of WavEx only breaking even/slight loss has actually been them losing money on the far more commercially efficient 'Balmoral' - mainly due to her having no steam appeal.

Crewing costs are slightly less than you suggest - Waverley, from memory, runs around with Master +1 Mate, Bosun+3 ABs, 2 Engineers and 1 Fireman. I can't remember just how many are on the catering side. These are 'seasonal' workers, employed from May-October with only the Masters, 2 x ABs and the Engineers kept on over the winter.

Fuel costs are in the region of 4000 for a full days sail, and Waverley generally runs 6 days a week, every week from May to the end of September. Most of her winter overhaul work is covered by the Engineers together with a large band of Volunteers who appear on weekdays and organised Saturdays.

She receives a tremendous amount of support, in financial sense but also in a major way in 'kind', both locally (Scotland) and nationally. Having another operational paddler would compliment that and also (hopefully) be able to tap in on it. In relation to that, should she survive it is very likely that the Ryde Trust will have a very close working relationship with the PSPS, as does the MQ Trust and the Loch Lomond Steamship Coy (Maid of the Loch), with regards to seeking funding/publicity/other areas of mutual interest - they won't be on their own.

Steam locomotives are a lot more complicated and expensive than you suggest, in any event they were only mentioned in a comparative sense during the discussion regarding repair/overhaul/originality as quite often they're brooms with 8 new handles and 6 new heads. As I've said before, running costs and in many ways methods of operation (the market you're looking at specifically) have a lot in common with running a preserved ship, except of course on a smaller scale (though not much smaller, in essence we're still talking millions - steam locos are a hobby for very rich men).

The PSPS 'shyed' away from the project in the early 90s because there was no forthcoming agreement with the owner over ownership/sale, by that point they'd spent a considerable amount of time and effort trying to secure her future but to no avail and it was then decided to concentrate on their own ships.
The Ryde trust took up the mantle about then, however the PSPS does maintain an active interest in the fate of the Ryde (there is a report about her in every issue of the PSPS in house magazine) and are in continual dialogue with the Ryde trust, as well as having offered to help in whatever way they can. They won't get involved at present in a financial sense, as it part of the PSPS constitution that they will not make a financial commitment which could jeopardise Waverley/Kingswear Castle/Balmoral - hence why they're going to have a long hard think about taking on Lincoln Castle, a ship in essentially very good condition.

MarkYoungIW
21st April 2010, 11:26
Off the top of my head, I seem to recollect Waverleys Fuel+Oil cost is about 300k for the year. I am neither at home at the moment. But I seem to remember it being around that for the year. Naturally Waverley was the best model to work our figures from.

Dickyboy
21st April 2010, 13:12
Hi all,
I tend to agree with Steveo over the pro's and con's of PS Ryde, and is now worth nothing more than scrap value. Not even that now, as it would probably cost more to haul the scrap away than it is actually worth. Probably the true reason she is still where she is.
She just might have been worth saving soon after she came out of service, but obviously her then owners didn't think so, and as it's all about money, she could, and was turned into a Disco/Club where a few more years of moneymaking could be screwed out of her, until she wasn't even fit for that. It's many years since she was even in that role, and to think that she could now be ''Preserved'' is in my opinion idiotic.
I travelled on the Ryde as a child, and enjoyed the experience (As a child) very much, but I do recall the disappointment of many passengers when realising that they had to travel on ''That Smokey Old Thing'' and not one of the new Diesels.
I believe that she should be left where she is to rot as a testament to mans greed, and I'm sure that some people still make money out of this no hoper, but I for one wouldn't back any scheme that plans to resurrect her to her ''Former Glory'' What ever that Glory was, after all at the end of the day all she was was a dirty old Isle of Wight ferry.
And if anyone mentions ''Dunkirk'' I'll scream, hundreds of vessels did that trip.

Stevo
21st April 2010, 17:29
Crikey Dicky! Don't let Mrs Yealland here you say that.... One of the common mistakes made is that the Ryde went to Dunkirk, she was in Southampton at the time having minesweep gear installed. I believe Sandown and Whippingham went over though. Ryde was at D Day but as you said so were many other ships.

Harry Pounds was asked once by Mrs Yealland if he would have considered taking the Ryde for breaking, he said he would have declined on cost grounds.

Dickyboy
21st April 2010, 21:25
Crikey Dicky! Don't let Mrs Yealland here you say that.... One of the common mistakes made is that the Ryde went to Dunkirk, she was in Southampton at the time having minesweep gear installed. I believe Sandown and Whippingham went over though. Ryde was at D Day but as you said so were many other ships.

Harry Pounds was asked once by Mrs Yealland if he would have considered taking the Ryde for breaking, he said he would have declined on cost grounds.
Well that's it then, if Harry Pound wouldn't take her...............:o
I just assumed Ryde went to Dunkirk.
What was the one that blew up on the Swashway during the war? Either by a boiler explosion or a mine I believe. Don't hear much or anything about that one. Wightlink, the owners predecessors, don't seem to know anything.

Stevo
21st April 2010, 22:21
PS Portsdown was mined, supposedly her wreck could be seen at low tide and so was blown up to disperse the remains to avoid being a hazard to shipping.

Dickyboy
21st April 2010, 23:53
PS Portsdown was mined, supposedly her wreck could be seen at low tide and so was blown up to disperse the remains to avoid being a hazard to shipping.

A case of Once seen and forever forgotton methinks.
My Late father was in the RAF during the war and could have well travelled on her too and from leaves. He never mentioned her, nor any of my other relations.

PS A link with PS Portsdown mentioned....< http://www.history.inportsmouth.co.uk/events/ferries-ww2.htm >

Stevo
22nd April 2010, 09:59
Nice web site Dicky, Pompey has so much history and I have been looking for a good historical web site.

Dickyboy
22nd April 2010, 11:29
I forgot how easy it is to just Google a ships name, or whatever, and come up with some very intresting stuff. That site being a case in point.

PSVSlave
24th April 2010, 20:46
I agree with the Dunkirk statement-so many other ships did the trip that to single one out as being a heroine is daft. Ryde is a ferry, not a historical relic and her war service is nothing much to write home about compared to others.
We're on page ten of this thread and only recently have monetory figures been mentioned....although this was asked about at the start, and they just don't stack up. People mention running costs being similar to Waverley, but that is an unfair example as she went into preservation stright out of service and was purchased for 1. This would put Ryde approc 7m behind-NOT a situation any project should be in!!

James_C
24th April 2010, 21:12
"her war service is nothing much to write home about"

She was present at Normandy - do you know how many ships survive from perhaps one of the most momentous days in modern history?
Four! USS Texas, Jeremiah O'Brien, HMS Belfast and the humble Ryde, esteemed and unique company wouldn't you agree?
Regarding the Dunkirk sentiment, I would certainly agree with what has been said, but in a similar vein to the Normany landings it must be asked just how many ships survive from Dunkirk? Only two: Princess Elizabeth and Medway Queen - two Paddle Steamers no less.
You say Ryde is not a historical relic, what makes you say that? Are there far more similar Paddle steamers of a similar heritage lurking around the UK?
Like Medway Queen, Ryde actually has a history behind her that moves beyond that of simple excursion steamer and ferry, she represents a British Merchant vessel that served in both peace and war. There are incredibly few of such ships around, and in that sense Ryde is probably much more historically valuable than Waverley ever will be.
You say the figures stack up, well the operating figures for just about every preserved ship on gods green earth don't stack up and never will, such is the nature of it. Waverley is the most relevant comparison you're likely to get in what is a unique sphere of operation.
You mention the 7 million figure again, but lets remember that's exactly what it cost to rebuild the (larger) Waverley in 2000/2003 - without which she simply would not be sailing today.
If that figure was achievable a full 10 years ago for a ship which has had a much quieter and subdued life than Ryde then it stands to reason that it's perfectly possible for a ship with the history of Ryde.

Stevo
25th April 2010, 04:04
Regardless of how many ships survive Dunkirk and D-Day, you might want to ask yourselves how many people care? I mean no disrespect in that sentence but I fear the future generations have little interest in history and pretty much less interest in paddle steamers. Obviously everyone on this web site will say 'I care' but we are a small minority.

The key thing Mark and the Waverley/PSPS need to do is appeal to the younger generation as they are the future and not the fast fading out nostalgia fans. At the moment the paddle steamer web sites including the Ryde's look like a history book and not an exciting vision of the future.

Dickyboy
25th April 2010, 08:48
Regardless of how many ships survive Dunkirk and D-Day, you might want to ask yourselves how many people care? I mean no disrespect in that sentence but I fear the future generations have little interest in history and pretty much less interest in paddle steamers. Obviously everyone on this web site will say 'I care' but we are a small minority.

The key thing Mark and the Waverley/PSPS need to do is appeal to the younger generation as they are the future and not the fast fading out nostalgia fans. At the moment the paddle steamer web sites including the Ryde's look like a history book and not an exciting vision of the future.

Q. When is a paddle steamer not a paddle steamer?
A. When its a pile of rusting metal on a river bank.
I love ships, of all sorts and sizes over the years. I like what they do, plough the worlds oceans carrying on their buisness of trade.
A ship that dosn't do the job that it's designed for isn't of much use to anyone, except if it's in really good condition, then it might become a tourist trap. And all preserved vessels are Tourist Traps. There are preserved to make money as much as for any history they might have. Victory=Tourist Trap. Queen Mary=Tourist Trap (Not even in THIS country!) Cutty Sark=Tourist Trap. Great Eastern=Tourist Trap. Warrior=TouristTrap. Belfast=Tourist trap etc etc.
It seems to me that preservation societies do things wrong, they wait until the last minute, when there are only one or two of a type left, as opposed to perhaps dozens a few years before. These one or two will probably be in pretty bad shape, then the preservation society will create a hoohaa and declare that this particular vessel must be saved, "It's part of our maritime History" "The last of the few" "Something to pass down to our future generations" or some other such line.
If Preservation societies are really serious about preservation, how about looking at todays vessels now, with a view at preserving them in the future.
How about looking now at Red Osprey or Wight Ryder 1? One day they will become old and, to someone, worth preserving. I suggest they start the ball rolling now, then they might be able to pick up a vessel that's worth preserving at a later date.

breezer10
25th April 2010, 08:54
Q. When is a paddle steamer not a paddle steamer?
A. When its a pile of rusting metal on a river bank.
I love ships, of all sorts and sizes over the years. I like what they do, plough the worlds oceans carrying on their buisness of trade.
A ship that dosn't do the job that it's designed for isn't of much use to anyone, except if it's in really good condition, then it might become a tourist trap. And all preserved vessels are Tourist Traps. There are preserved to make money as much as for any history they might have. Victory=Tourist Trap. Queen Mary=Tourist Trap (Not even in THIS country!) Cutty Sark=Tourist Trap. Great Eastern=Tourist Trap. Warrior=TouristTrap. Belfast=Tourist trap etc etc.
It seems to me that preservation societies do things wrong, they wait until the last minute, when there are only one or two of a type left, as opposed to perhaps dozens a few years before. These one or two will probably be in pretty bad shape, then the preservation society will create a hoohaa and declare that this particular vessel must be saved, "It's part of our maritime History" "The last of the few" "Something to pass down to our future generations" or some other such line.
If Preservation societies are really serious about preservation, how about looking at todays vessels now, with a view at preserving them in the future.
How about looking now at Red Osprey or Wight Ryder 1? One day they will become old and, to someone, worth preserving. I suggest they start the ball rolling now, then they might be able to pick up a vessel that's worth preserving at a later date.

they could start with cowes and norris castle which are in scrapyards but not sure if still in one bit or not. too late for c class as one has been cut up already.

Dickyboy
26th April 2010, 10:04
they could start with cowes and norris castle which are in scrapyards but not sure if still in one bit or not. too late for c class as one has been cut up already.
Save the Norris! I did a Summer season on her in the 70s. :o

PSVSlave
30th April 2010, 08:28
Sorry for being disparaging about Normandy etc-but the ships really weren't the stars, it was the people. The momentous part of the war, in terms of maritime history, was the unprecedented consciption of small ships to bring the troops home.
In my opinion, and probs that of the country, the most famous and historically important ship would be something like the Canberra which actually did something amazing and defied the odds. As has already been said, Waverley was preserved by forward thinking people who realised that in the future she would become important-at the time she was just an aging and uncooperative ferry...but she worked. Ryde has had her day now and with regards to the trust set up to save her, they can't even keep their website up to date-how on Earth would they deliver a multi million pound project on time and within budget!
Preservationists must take the lead from the PSPS and work to save contempory ships before they become important and rare-otherwise the whole movement will die.

MarkYoungIW
5th May 2010, 14:11
As things stand, we are still unable to negotiate to purchase the vessel. As far as we can see, there is little more we can do other than carry on these negotiations. Obviously it is always good to have peoples suggestions, and some of the points brought up on this thread are indeed worth consideration.

Stevo is in many ways right with the 'how many care' remark, you only have to go to a rememberance day nowadays and they are greatly deminished.

However, like I have said, we would intend to be operating Ryde as an attraction, and a trip along the coast will always be popular, no matter how you look at things, and as a result Ryde can tell her story whilst people enjoy the scenary.

@PSVSlave
I really dont know what more I can say to you. Like I say, your comments seem to have been based along the lines of you wanting to see the ship scrapped, and the Trust fail? From this, there is obviously little I can say. It seems apparent that your love for the ship as your family served on it during the war is perhaps a little less than my love for the ship. After all, if I loved a ship, I would offer my support, or do something myself, rather than keep trying to discredit any attempt to save the vessel.

At the moment, there is I can tell anyone other than we are still working with NHS to reach a deal with the administrators, although as it stands, any agreement has failed to be forthcoming.

The Trust has offered a sum of money for the vessel, and the rent of the hardstanding/mud she is sat on, while works are carried out enabling removal of the vessel.

I personally feel that the Trust has done everything within its powers to save the ship, and have always welcomed input from those who are able to help us and the ship, but in the end, without ownership as has been found out before in Ryde's case, you can invest a lot of time and money and it will result in nothing.

Ownership is the key.

PSVSlave
7th May 2010, 09:51
How dare you make personal comments about my family, I come on this forum to discuss the pros and cons of saving the Ryde-not make personal comments about my feelings of pride about my family's war service.
No I do not want the Ryde Trust as the face of an ambition to fail, I simply feel that if you were a charity that I could join and vote within, I would be asking for more experienced and business minded leadership.

My questions to you have been:
What is your exact business plan
How will you ensure that the ship is restored/rebuilt with conventional build methods in order to obtain MCA certification
How will you deal with the environmental concerns of the ship's current location
What relevent experience do the Directors of the Trust have between them
If the Trust fails-what will happen to the money that you have collected, and please don't tell me that you have only collected pledges-because I came across a leaflet from you which stated that the new owners of Island Harbour had donated the ship to you, and I gave a donation of 20 quid.
Will you be making the surveyors reports of the ship public

etc etc.

These are not attacks against your Trust, nor are they statements that wish you to fail-they are perfectly justified questions that a charity wishing to take millions of pounds of public money should be able to answer in a blink. Instead you offer vague, and somewhat combative answers. If I, or others on this board, didn't actually care about the ship-none of us would write so many words on the issue.

MarkYoungIW
7th May 2010, 10:58
Hmm. Like I say I do not know what more I can say to you. With regards to a leaflet saying that the ship had been donated to us, I have no idea where you got that, but we have never produced such a thing, nor did the administrators.

With regards to your donation, please PM me with your details as so far I do not know exactly who you are so I can track down this donation, as to my knowledge we only have pledges, and a couple of unbanked cheques.

With regards to experience in this field, most will come from consultation, as no single man can run a project of this size. We have a couple of Naval Architects at our disposal, a conservation expert, a shipyard capable of removal. The Enviromental aspect of the move would be under consulation from the EA, much the same as demolition on site would be. Obviously though none of us are personally millionaires, so can only pay for further reports as things go along, and However, David has worked in many sucessful heritage railway projects as well as running his own business, John obviously the Chairman of the Medway Queen Preservation Society so experiences in exactly the same circles, and myself again a business owner, and working in various marine areas. Our patron is very familiar with the vessel as well as managing business on a larger scale than this.

As time goes on, naturally more and more experts would get involved, but at the moment without ownership it would be a waste of time and money contracting in more people.

As I am sure you are aware, charitable status takes some time and money to get, but we are a charity, and if we can get some sort of indication from the administrators will almost certainly start taking donations to either save the whole ship, or as much of the historic materials as we can, rather than let it be a complete loss, or items being lost to private collections.

With regards to your family, that was certainly not meant as a personal attack, more a suggestion of giving support as a pose to looking for flaws considering we are both meant to be aiming for the same goal. I would be grateful to know what you would do in our situation, and to why you have as of yet not approached us with your expertise. We are always on the lookout for people more qualified than ourselves that are happy to give their time and money to further this project.

Anyway, to try and answer your questions again:-

What is your exact business plan
I am sure you will note that in most projects this isnt usually put into the public domain.

How will you ensure that the ship is restored/rebuilt with conventional build methods in order to obtain MCA certification
Again, this is not entirely the primary concern at the moment, but indications are good that the vessel will be able to restored to very close to her original build without causing a problem, but obviously Lloyds/MCA will be consulted as things progress.

How will you deal with the environmental concerns of the ship's current location
With the Enviroment Agency

What relevent experience do the Directors of the Trust have between them
As above

If the Trust fails-what will happen to the money that you have collected, and please don't tell me that you have only collected pledges-because I came across a leaflet from you which stated that the new owners of Island Harbour had donated the ship to you, and I gave a donation of 20 quid
We have only collected pledges and a couple of unbanked cheques, the majority of any physical monies currently held by the trust have been funded by the trustees. If the project should prove unable to secure any of the vessel, the funds will be used to cover some of the costs associated with the works already done, such as the Conservation Plan, which would most likely be used in conjunction with the NHS for the documenting of her dismantling. If by chance there is anything else left we hold the MQ very close to our hearts as well as the Waverley.

Will you be making the surveyors reports of the ship public
Probably not, as all works like this have been done so far have been done at the personal expense of the companies involved.

I am sorry you feel that the trustees and patron of the Trust are not business minded enough, and I can assure you my comment with regards to your family was not made as an attack, just an observation that not once have you had anything of value to the attempt to say.

I cannot really work out how you have donated physical money, but as I say, if you would like to disclose who you are, I will look into it for you, also if you could tell me when this was, it would help.

Although I hope the above has answered your questions, I fear that will not be the case.

Regards

PSVSlave
8th May 2010, 22:57
I've not offered my services as I am a Master Mariner and company safety officer and am currently enslaved offshore due to a staff shortage. My donation was cash to the address in Bath that has been published to accept them.
The following links also publish this address and your plee for donations!

http://www.newportwight.org.uk/docs_committees/view.php?file=Full%20Council/Agendas%202009/Meeting%2014th%20September%2009/Paddle%20Steamer%20Ryde%20(Paper%20D).pdf

http://www.crookhamtravel.co.uk/html/Ryde.htm

I gave my leaflet, which bore your name, to the lock keeper at Island Harbour as they were surprised at the statements contained within it. As far as I know, they kept a file on the output of the Ryde Trust and imagine that they still do-perhaps you would need to speak to them?

With regards to your answers, no they do not satisfy me. A business plan for projects such as this are always publicly available, as are a set of accounts (see psps website). I know that you have received donations, I would just like to know how many and also how they were spent.

Your website is entirely out of date, which for a project so immediate as this I cannot comprehend. Certainly, from outward appearances, the PSRT are not as professional outfit as they should be for the project that they are proposing.

I will also keep my right to anonymity in this instance as to remove this would not achieve anything.

Like it or not, you have had constructive critisism from other people than myself, and have chosen to ignore it or actively argue what is, in fact, maritime law-like it or loathe it.

My point has always been, how will you prevent the Ryde from being another Medway Queen. That project is a laughing stock having spent millions on a ship that will carry 12 passengers and 4 inexperienced crew at best, when most of those who donate to her truely believe that she is being restored and will carry passengers once again!!!!

I would say that having a Medway Queen society member is a hinderence to you as this is an gleaming example of a project gone horribly wrong.

D Sutton
9th May 2010, 09:18
The following links also publish this address and your plee for donations!

.
I have read the press release and it states
"As time will be of the essence once negotiations are concluded, the Trust will urgently need working capital, and donations from supporters and friends will be most welcome."

Seems clear to me.

And from your post of 7th May 09.51 you started with
"How dare you make personal comments about my family" but finished your last post with
"I would say that having a Medway Queen society member is a hinderence to you as this is an gleaming example of a project gone horribly wrong"

Rather rude to the person concerned I would of thought, so give it but not take it.

I look at this thread occasionaly as I am always interested in rebuilding/restoration from a re-engineering point of view, whether Ryde can be saved as a whole I do not know as the only limit to that will be money, but we should not attack someone whose ambition (unpaid and without thanks it seems) is to at least save some of it.
As for making information public I think Mark is correct, the trust are in negotiation to take ownership/purchase Ryde and are effectively in competition with scrap merchants, to reveal your monetary position would be silly, and as any surveys have so far been funded from private pockets then that has to be their right.
As a final point to PSVSlave, I fail to see how keeping anonimity can be any kind of help at all, you have made a direct accusation to a named individual on a public forum that he and the trust are obtaining monies through deception and false representation, if you are concerned that you have been mislead then you should report it to the appropriate authorities which in this case is the police. Of course you will be required to produce your evidence ...............oh yes .......you gave that away.......(EEK)
I think you are verging on being a Troll.


On a seperate note just what is a master mariner? what distinguishes a Mariner from a master mariner? is there a qualification or is it just an individuals perception of worth.

Stevo
9th May 2010, 10:12
There will be limited if any interest from a scrapman and certainly not a shipbreaker. If anything the owners would and were paying someone to demolish the wreck. Anything of value could and has been removed for private sale. The engines might get a good price but at what price to remove them?
It seems pretty clear the owners want The Ryde gone ASAP not on a promise of 6 months or even less but NOW.

PSVSlave
9th May 2010, 10:51
With regards to my comment about the Medway Queen society member, this was a project initially intended to restore a ship to full operational use-much like the Ryde. After about 20 years of trying, and failing, to do this they have scrapped the ship and are in the process of building a new one using unconventional build methods which will not pass modern safety standards.
Many preservationalists rather bullishly assume that their project will assume "grand father rights"-which I am afraid don't actually exist in law, only a few "exemptions" exist which are intended to allow a vessel to survive it's full operational life until time to either refit or scrap. The Medway Queen will have cost the tax payer and individual donors many millions of pounds for a ship that can only legally carry 12 passengers under certification from the Public Health Act, and only within a very tight area of operation. In that sense, I do not believe it to be a successful attempt at preservation.

In terms of my status as a Master Mariner, it is not a percieved sense of worth as you mention-but recognition of the fact that I hold the highest level of professional qualifications available to a mariner in the world. I am titled, Captain and use the post nominal letters MM to distinguish myself. So yes, I am somewhat qualified. I also happen to be one of the few people used by the Maritime and Coastguard Agency, on a consultancy basis, to assess preserved ships and crew competance-therefore my need to remain anonymous should be somewhat apparent.

D Sutton
9th May 2010, 12:02
With regards to my comment about the Medway Queen society member, this was a project initially intended to restore a ship to full operational use-much like the Ryde. After about 20 years of trying, and failing, to do this they have scrapped the ship and are in the process of building a new one using unconventional build methods which will not pass modern safety standards.
Many preservationalists rather bullishly assume that their project will assume "grand father rights"-which I am afraid don't actually exist in law, only a few "exemptions" exist which are intended to allow a vessel to survive it's full operational life until time to either refit or scrap. The Medway Queen will have cost the tax payer and individual donors many millions of pounds for a ship that can only legally carry 12 passengers under certification from the Public Health Act, and only within a very tight area of operation. In that sense, I do not believe it to be a successful attempt at preservation.

In terms of my status as a Master Mariner, it is not a percieved sense of worth as you mention-but recognition of the fact that I hold the highest level of professional qualifications available to a mariner in the world. I am titled, Captain and use the post nominal letters MM to distinguish myself. So yes, I am somewhat qualified. I also happen to be one of the few people used by the Maritime and Coastguard Agency, on a consultancy basis, to assess preserved ships and crew competance-therefore my need to remain anonymous should be somewhat apparent.

Your comments are noted, but I fail to see how you can justify what was essentially a rude comment.
I also fail to see why you should wish anonimity, if you are a person who is respected by the MCA and CA, surely if you identified yourself that would give more value top your posts.
Anonimity suggests you are Trolling and have a grudge to bear, the reading of the tone of your posts does seem to back that up.

I must also thank you for the explanation of the title Master Mariner it was as I expected self given, If i had earned the title Captain through hard work and qualification I would not feel the need to impress by the use of a title inferring self importance above those of a similar position.
your use of the term MM is to add further credence to your posts and is another indication that you are a Troll with a grudge.

How's the call to the police going then? got your evidence to back up your allegations of gaining money by false representation...........thought not.

fred henderson
9th May 2010, 16:42
Gentlemen

I feel that I must remind all of you of the site rule that while anyone may express their disagrement with the opinions of a fellow Member, personal attacks on a Member are not permitted. A number of the posts in this thread are sailing close to the wind. Please try to advance your arguments in a calm and civilised manner.

PSVSlave
9th May 2010, 17:34
I must also thank you for the explanation of the title Master Mariner it was as I expected self given... your use of the term MM is to add further credence to your posts and is another indication that you are a Troll with a grudge.

How's the call to the police going then? got your evidence to back up your allegations of gaining money by false representation...........thought not.

My response to you was to make the point that my title, which has been earnt through hard work, many years of experience and study is certainly not self given. I hold an unlimited Masters Ticket because I have through the years been responsible for Billions of pounds worth of cargo, hundreds of crew and the safety of millions of passengers. I have overseen God knows how many refits, dry dockings, tug plans, environmental impact assessments and budgets that would blow your mind.

I have not disclosed the details of my profession until recently, and am agast at your ignorance.

Stevo
9th May 2010, 18:44
Hmmm! I think someone with expertese has spoken and we should listen don't you think?

On the plus side the web site http://www.crookhamtravel.co.uk/html/Ryde.htm has given us our first true insight at what the Ryde Trust proposes to do with the ship when she is operational. This vision has been lacking throughout the Trust's other material and for me personally suggested that the project was not forward thinking and rather a weekend hobby! The Ryde Trust web site has (as said before) been a collection of photos of the ship and nothing more. The trustees are all business people so you folks need to look at the future and not the past.

Here in lies another problem.... You propose running the ship as she was in Southern Railway late 1930s, complete with crew in nostalgic uniform and a two class system. So you are running the ship as a 1930s ferry. This is a bad idea! You have already set a target market of nostagic ghost ramblers and not the wider public. I suspect this idea was thought up by someone who adores SR and paddle ships of a bygone era and has a collection of post cards to boot. What of the class system? That really is taking the mick. If I pay good money to travel on a ship I don't expect to have certain parts off limits especially when public funds have gone into restoring the ship. Then of course you risk travelling with certain parts of the ship busier than others areas. How do you market the class system product when we are talking 1930s passenger ferries.

Apart from us maritime fans who is going to want to travel on 1930s ferry? You need to ask these questions. Myself I would look towards corporate functions and hospitality and a 1930s ferry does not match modern demands. The ship cannot simply be a ferry she needs to earn her keep outside of cruising and if you go down nostalgic avenues you loose more viable options to market the ship.

Please please please!! Before anyone says 'why don't you back off and let people save the ship if they want to..' Again folks, build a new one if you feel that confident on your business plan. And.... Quoted from the aforementioned Crookham Travel web site “The restoration will need major Heritage Lottery support, for which the ship is grant-eligible, being on the National Register of Historic Vessels". Lottery money is public money and therefore I/we have a right to express our opinions like it or not.

Maybe that puts me in troll bracket too, I'm okay with that because its seems Team Troll have common sense on their side.

Ryde Trust, give us a convincing vision and give us reason to believe in what you can do. Don't just say this and say that; that is exactly what is happening in UK politics and that is why people start dismissing you.

Andy Lavies
9th May 2010, 19:16
Doesn't "MM" behind your name mean that you hold the Military Medal? I thought that "Mast. Mar." could be used by suitably qualified seafarers. Oh! And I passed as Master Mariner (FG) in 1967 and spent the whole of my working life on the water.
Andy

PSVSlave
9th May 2010, 21:20
That's certainly true of the good old days, but now (in some way thanks to the yanks) we are designated MM-either way it shows your experience to those that need to know. Where are you from-I'm a Warshash man?
It frightens me when I visit our co. cadets these days to think how young I looked when I started out...sometimes you have to remember that you are looking out of the same eyes that you had as a nipper.

MarkYoungIW
10th May 2010, 11:56
@PSVSlave
I have done all I can to check your claim with regards to monies you have sent, and we have recieved no 'Cash' payments to the registered address.

I can confirm that at the moment we are waiting on CAF to confirm they are ready for us to start taking donations too, so as things stand today, I can once again confirm that we have taken no money. We have a few unbanked cheques.

I will pop up to Island Harbour later today, and get a copy of this leaflet you have found, as naturally we need to find out who has produced this leaflet and why.

With regards to you being a Master Mariner (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Captain_(nautical)), I fail to understand why you have been asking the questions you have then, as you should already know most of the answers, and could contribute.

Once again I would be grateful if you could identify yourself to me via PM, as it would seem if you have sent cash in the post, we need to alert Royal Mail as it would appear it has gone missing.

Can I ask as your an advisor to the MCA for preserved ships, if you advised on Waverley? Or which vessels you have advised on?

Off topic a bit, when did you do MM Unlimited at Warsash Maritime Academy? And did they do it all with you? Just that bit by bit profesionally I am heading that way, and thought you just started off at Warsash, then worked your way up? Wasnt to clear on the open day I attended.

PSVSlave
11th May 2010, 09:35
I took my Masters orals in 1998, served as a C/O for two years with it and then was lucky enough to be promoted by my company. If you want to start getting your stripes, you would join as a cadet and work hard for about 10-15 years whilst rising through the ranks 4/O, 3/O, 2/O, 1/O and Master. I started out on cruise ships, then went to box boats for better career prospects, did a stint with BP to gain a dangerous cargo endorsement (thought at the time that I would find it useful) and then joined up with an offshore standby and supply company as my kids were then beginning to appear and I needed to have more time at home. It was with my present company that I qualified as a surveyor and will be joining the MCA full time once my youngest goes to school, to come ashore permanently.
It takes 3 years these days to achieve your first certificate of competancy as OOW, then a good couple of years at sea (min) before your go for the second (C/O) CoC, and then another few years (min) before you go for your Masters. Whilst the minimum sea time accrual seems very achievable in a short space of time to gain a Masters ticket, it's really very rare and unwise to rush through the process...indeed companies that allow their staff to complete higher CoC's within the minimum timeframes are dubious to say the least-unless of course they have a highly receptive student.

I have quite a lot to do with our cadets which are based at Warsash as I don't live too far away and mentor two of them under the The Honourable Company of Master Mariners Apprentice Scheme. One of our girls is an older cadet and has 5 years experience at sea already and holds an MCA Boatmaster License which she thought would help her. The reality is that when your train for your first Certificate of Competancy you are trained to work on any ship and as such study cargo ops (dry, wet, bulk, box.....), stability calcs, etc etc etc. It's a hard course, it's very condensed (in my view crammed into too short a space of time) but very rewarding at the end as you are literally qualified to take your part in the command of anything afloat-anywhere in the world (with a few minor execptions!).

Yes, I sent some cash in the post about 3 years ago, it aint gonna show up-but I can assure you that it went. I gave my leaflet to the Harbour Master who asked for it-can't remember his name, but I did find it quite funny when his accent slipped from polished Henley smarm to fairly broad cockney within about 5 minutes of talking to him.

I have been asking questions of you to try and prompt a bit of sensible action, same with Stevo I would suggest. I note that the Ryde website has been updated with the current situation and your plans for the future-that's good progress Mark. Yes I have looked over the Waverley and I have also helped a colleague assess the legal future afloat for the Maid of the Loch.

I cannot identify myself to you, as if you were successful in restoring/rebuilding Ryde-I am might be one of the people who when finding a rivet under the waterline, metal fatigue in the frames or inadequate bulkheads etc etc would be sending you off to the local council to pick up your license for 12 passengers like the Medway Queen. I don't make direct contact with those involved in ships that I may become involved in-but if I can help tease some sense out anonymously then no harm can be done. Read through my posts and you will see a lot of tips and points to cover which you might find helpful.

I'm not an ogre, but I am pedantic when it comes to safety and realism. Waverley suffers badly from the fact that, especially on the South Coast, the infrastructure for pleasure steamers is delapidated and to run a viable and regular service would take a lot of investment, not just in the ship, but also the piers and ports that it might call on.

I'm off to work for a few weeks and will obviously not be able to reply as our internet connections are powered by a large athletic hampster.

Be honest and open about the Trust's intentions, sell it to the public as viable, publish the details and make the decision to opt for a rebuild if there are any doubts about the viability of the hull. If you went for full restoration of what is left of Ryde in order to circumnavigate the newbuild regs, I would suggest that the MCA would cut up rough once complete-even if they supported you at the shipyard stage, no binding decisions are ever made until the project is complete.

If you're serious about training for a career at sea, I would suggest that time is of the essence as there is a massive increase in applications at the moment-and some applicants are on a 12 month waiting list to start their courses.

Anyhow, signing off for a bit-so everybody can call me all the names under the sun! (K)