Ships Nostalgia banner
ALCYON

ALCYON

Norwegian steel barque ALCYON was built in 1893 at Port Glasgow as SERENA for British account. Broken up in 1924. Details here: http://www.clydeships.co.uk/view.php?ref=19653

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,092 Posts
She looks dainty for a bald-header (no royals), especially so as built by Russell, who seemed to specialize in full-built carriers.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
41,200 Posts
.





IMO / ID 1102373 , Dead.
Ship Type : Steel Sailing ship.Rigged as 3-masted barque.
Dim : Lpp x Beam : 75.17 x 11.46 mtr.
Built in 1893 as " SERENA " by Russell & Co Ltd Port Glasgow Scotland Great Britain for Serena Ship Co. Ltd (McDonald, Adams & Co.) Greenock Scotland Great Britain. Launched 05/06, delivered in July.

Tonnage : grt / nrt / tdw - 1.648 / 1.521 / -.---.

1909 Sold to A/S Alcyon ( Sigurd BruusgaardRederi Drammen ) Drammen,renamed " ALCYON ".
1923 Sold for NOK 65.000 by A/S Passat (I. W. Olsen & T. Wilhelms Rederi Fredrikstad) Fredrikstad Norway.renamed " MATTANJA ".
1924 Broken up during 2nd quarter by Pettersen & Ahlbeck, København, Denmark.




.
(Thumb)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,092 Posts
Well, sleek she was actually not, I was fooled by above picture. Watching a photo of her as Mattanja she looks wall-sided even at the stern. And for her Fredrikstad owners she performed miserably. From Fredrikstad with plank for Australia she could not get through the channel and had to steer north of England. And she reached no speed later on that voyage either, arrive she did only after half a year. Where the first of the crew sensibly skipped out. The rest of the original crew would follow later. Two months she then spent to arrive in Chile for a load of Saltpeter, and the return to Europe, Falmouth or Queenstown, took another six months, this with severe rationing of food and water. With the saltpeter unloaded in Aarhus , she was sold. My source says she was sold to a foreign owner, but presumably that was the Danish breakers named by Bno. (The picture on the site linked to by Gijsha probably gives a much truer picture of her sailing capabilities.)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,559 Posts
The one barque performs much better than a similar one. Is that owing to the construction, or to the capabilities of the master?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,092 Posts
Both I would say. As Lubbock observes, the giant Lancing made constantly good passages as Norwegian owned, but the British could never make her go. And some ships were built for speed, like those who carried passengers, for those short passages was a serious sales argument. They often had large sail area as well as a large crew and were able to keep sails standing for a longer time, and reset them earlier. Perishable cargoes demanded fast ships as well, but for nonperishable bulk cargoes, cargo capacity rose in importance, as did reduced outlay on crew. Any bald headed ship must be presumed to be built for cargo capacity and not for speed, but the above one seemed to me to have a beautiful sheer line and a substantial rig... Of course one may presume that when the newly acquired Mattanja had to give up the English Chanel in 1923, the winds were not at all on her side, the master may have been exceedingly cautious, and .the crew only what was left after the steamships had had their pick. It is far from unthinkable that she had been a handier vessel when British

However, the theories concerning the hull's resistance in movement through water were deficient and at times wrong, but the architects had of course a good general knowledge with which to satisfy a client's demand. So look at this one - a fine run aft ??? https://skipshistorie.net/Fredrikstad/FRE548%20T%20Wilhelms/Tekster/FRE54819230100000%20MATTANJA.htm I have not seen an uglier after-end on anything afloat. She could not beat her way through the Channel? - I will believe you
 

Media information

Category
Sailing Ships
Added by
Gijsha
Date added
View count
335
Comment count
5
Rating
0.00 star(s) 0 ratings

Share this media

Top