sailed on the Forresbank (new) and next ship the Taybank,cant remember if one or both were fitted with Macgregor hatches,but one of them certainly was cos I can remember hanging onto the end of a crowbar when lifting the sections on and off the wheels."Birchbank" and "Streambank" both sisters in the "Firbank" class but having Macgregor hatch covers and raised masthouses, the only two to be so fitted. All the rest of this class of 12,000dwt had slab hatch covers and tarpaulins over sliding hatch beams. Apparently, they were "trial" ships. Bank Line were never a company to take anyone else's word for any improvements! If my memory serves me correctly, the next Macgregor fitted ships were the "Hazelbank" (Harland's 1964) and the "Beechbank" of 1965 (Doxford's)
Hi Alistair:In Bank Line, the "Forresbank" (1962) only had slab hatchcovers, tarpaulins and rolling hatch beams but the "Taybank" (1963) had Macgregopr hatch covers.
I remember when I sailed on "Ernebank" in 1965 we had Macgregors. One time in Calcutta discharging bulk wheat and trimmed well by the stern, when closing the Macgragor cover on No.3 hatch in a blinding monsoon deluge, the covers ran away from us and fell into the hatch opening breaking the starboard side connector chain in the process and leaving the lead hatch section dangling only by the port chain.
Needless to say, the more we tried to fix the calamity and the heavier the downpour we never succeeded in resolving the issue until the weather improved. Grain was soaked but was taken anyway.
I'm not complaining about Macgregors but when it came to providing surface ventilation of gunny and jute cargoes the only method seemed to be raising the steel hatch sections up on their wheels whilst in the closed position. Was there another remedy?