Harland & Wolff

fred henderson
1st October 2005, 00:23
I have in my collection "Harland & Wolff - Designs from the Shipbuilding Empire" by Tom McCluskie published by Conway Maritime Press in 1998. Is this the work of our tmac? It is a beautiful book with reproductions of original drawings of the very early ships from H&W. They cover Yard No 5 of 1860 up to Yard No 148 of 1882. Mostly sailing ships, but also some early steamships. If you are interested in this era of shipping buy a copy.

Fred

Doug Rogers
1st October 2005, 06:17
Thanks Fred, will try and locate a copy of same.

Tmac1720
1st October 2005, 17:41
Sussed out by Fred,
I cannot tell a lie for it is I who done the dastardly deed. OK guv it's a fair cop I admit I am the author of the book in question, your very own Tmac. At least it sold one copy (I got mine free!) In any event I'm delighted you liked it.

Doug Rogers
1st October 2005, 23:02
May one enquire whether you have perpetrated any further dastardly deeds?, the membership may be able to revel in further dastardly acts of Maritime mayhem.

Tmac1720
2nd October 2005, 19:20
You really have put me on the spot now, how do I answer that without sounding like a walking advertisement? Forgive me if I just present the facts. I am responsible for three other maritime efforts, they are "Anatomy of the Titanic" a sort of workshop manual of how she was built. "Titanic and her Sisters Olympic and Britannic" co-authored with Michael sharpe and Leo Marriott and finally "Wallchart of the Titanic" a large format pull out book featuring the General Arrangement and Rigging profile drawings together with almost every fact you would wish to know on her and the disaster. Finally I have one more "on the slips" so to speak. Provisionally titled "No Place For a Boy" it is my autobiography of over 35 years in Harland and Wolff and the many characters I encountered there. Hopefully this will be published some time next year.

Doug Rogers
3rd October 2005, 03:22
Well sorry to have put you on the spot but now we all know that we have some interesting reading to catch up on...and more coming hopefully!!.
Well done Oul hand!!.
(Thumb) (Thumb)

Tmac1720
3rd October 2005, 14:21
I never fail to be surprised by the rubbish some people will buy (*)) You have me blushing now with your compliments. I must confess to never having bought any of them. Of them all "No Place For A Boy" is the closest to my heart, lots of laughs and quite a bit of sadness too. Shipbuilding was a dirty and dangerous occupation, like the sea in many ways, each had its own unique hazards and characters and I simply tell it like it was. No gloss and certainly no sanatised version of events, simply shipbuilding from the inside warts and all!!!

fred henderson
3rd October 2005, 16:50
I have always felt tmac, that being involved in either building, operating or sailing ships is addictive. Even when I was actively employed in shipbuilding I was collecting books about ships. Now we have this wonderful site to sustain our nostalgia.

fred

Tmac1720
3rd October 2005, 16:59
I could not agree more Fred, a superb site with wonderful people, just like a home from home for all of us who love ships and the sea. I feel I have made thousands of new friends such is the camaraderie here. (Applause)

Doug Rogers
4th October 2005, 06:09
Well said guys, and long may it continue that way.
(Thumb)

sea_dog
4th October 2005, 07:02
Couldnt agree more guys, I have often tried to explain what a shipmate is but to no avail. There is of course the same connection with the ship herself, to others she is just a machine, but of course we know better :)

Polyglory
5th October 2005, 23:41
All the sentiments I echo 100%,

Do keep us posted on " No place for a boy"

I shall be in the forefront (*))

Gulpers
26th October 2005, 08:15
Oul hand,

With your in depth knowledge of TITANIC and your involvement with Cameron's film, could you clear up a point for me? Am I being thick, or is there a continuity error when, immediately after the collision with the berg, a helm order is given to go hard a starboard. The wheel is then clearly turned to port. Was this the norm at that time i.e. did you have to think "back to front" as if you were steering by tiller?

Forgive me if you have answered this a thousand times already! (Thumb)

John Cassels
26th October 2005, 09:05
Ray,

In those days , helm orders were given with regards to the direction the helm -
not the ships head - was required to be put at.

brgds

Tmac1720
26th October 2005, 16:33
Gulpers,

John has got it sussed and no you certainly aren't thick. The helmsman on a vessel today when receiving the command "Hard to Port" will turn the ships wheel to the left and, consequently the vessel will turn to the left. However in 1912 this logical arrangement was not used, indeed it was reversed so when a command "Hard to Port" was given the vessel would actually turn right or starboard as the ships wheel would have been turned to the right. I don't know why commands were given in this way but I would guess it has its origins in the days of sailing vessels and steering by tiller. There is no doubt this system of command was completely unsatisfactory and was confusing for the inexperienced and so the system was subsequently changed around 1920 to the one we use today. I had a job convincing James Cameron turning right when steering left was the norm in 1912, he must have believed me though as it's in the film.

John Cassels
26th October 2005, 19:51
Tmac;
Thanks again your input. I'm not entirely sure it was so confusing in 1912.
Even today us sailors who sail in yachts with tiller steering will, without thinking ,
put the helm to port if we want to go to starboard. I think it was just standard
practice in those days and your input for the film was certainly valid and acceptable.
It was for sure technically correct . What came in the way was a wheel between the
helsman and the tiller but orders were still given with regards to the helm and not the wheel .Keep up the good work, young sir.
brgds

Tmac1720
26th October 2005, 20:14
Thanks John for your comments, hopefully today steering vessels is a lot easier using a simple joystick, its certainly less atmospheric. There is a school of thought that Titanic's rudder was too small but that's another story.

Gulpers
26th October 2005, 21:51
John and Oul hand,

Thanks for the explanation guys. Nae wonder they hit the bleedin' iceberg with everthing working #### over elbow!

John, I knew Oul hand was in command of the iceberg (without nav lights) but I didn't think you were old enough to have that kind of knowledge or practical experience! (Jester)

Gulpers
26th October 2005, 22:22
Tmac;

............. Even today us sailors who sail in yachts with tiller steering will, without thinking ,
put the helm to port if we want to go to starboard ...........


John,

You haven't sailed with Mrs Gulpers!?!?! Some folk have it, some folk don't! (Jester)

Oops! "Yes dear, just coming. No, I'm not on that bloody SN site again!" ............

Tmac1720
27th October 2005, 17:44
John and Oul hand,

Thanks for the explanation guys. Nae wonder they hit the bleedin' iceberg with everthing working #### over elbow!

John, I knew Oul hand was in command of the iceberg (without nav lights) but I didn't think you were old enough to have that kind of knowledge or practical experience! (Jester)
Is that not #### over tit? or are we in MCA speak again? (*))

Paul UK
27th October 2005, 18:52
In technical speak is it not base over apex (*))