Messages

106

Shipping News and information / Re: Is this site really 'Ship' spotting?

« on: April 27, 2014, 05:49:42 AM »

It all depends on your definition of the word "ship."

"Officially," from dictionary.com, the definition of Ship we are interested in is: Noun, "a vessel, especially a large oceangoing one propelled by sails or engines."

Since the large, oceangoing port is optional, we can look at the definition of Vessel: Noun, "a craft for travelling on water, now usually one larger than an ordinary rowboat."

That's just one definition however. In my military background we were always told a ship was a vessel large enough to carry it's own boat. Considering the size of some vessels I've seen carrying dinghies, that doesn't generate a very large threshold.

A century ago, if you'd asked an old salt what a ship was, he'd probably have told you it was a sailing vessel with three or more full-rigged masts.

So really, there's not much of a point in arguing over what is a fairly loose term to begin with. The site has its standards, and they allow us to post almost any interesting ships, boats, vessels or craft we encounter. Let's stick with that.

Kind Regards,
Kyle

107

Help and Advice / Re: East Coast USA

« on: February 04, 2014, 05:40:47 AM »

Russ,

In New York, taking the Staten Island Ferry is almost a must for the shipspotter, it's a free ride, and the ferry goes right across the heart of the upper harbor. Plenty of ships anchored around there, especially towards the Staten Island end, and more tugs and barges moving around than you would believe.

What time I've spent in Philadelphia was mostly dedicated to touristy stuff, not ships, but a quick look makes it seem like Proprietor's Park in Gloucester City, NJ might be the best bet for seeing the Philly shipping terminals. Just down the river, there seems to be a park and boat launch at National Park, NJ right across the river from the Philadelphia Naval Yards.

Baltimore and Norfolk are both busy ports, but their layouts can make shipspotting tough. I know Norfolk offers Victory Rover harbor cruises that sail out past the naval base and several cargo terminals as well, one of those would certainly be worth the money. Seems Spirit Cruises of Baltimore also offers harbor tours that cover the inner harbor.

Unfortunately it doesn't look like Wilmington, NC offers much in the way of port views, however look into Cape Fear Riverboats for info on river cruises. Charleston, SC is probably a better bet for photos from the shore, even if it's a fairly quiet port. Patriots Point has some historic ships to tour, and looks like it offers some views of traffic in the harbor. Near Patriots Point, the Shem Creek boardwalk would provide some opportunities to photograph the local fishing fleet.

Lastly Savannah, like many southern ports, also doesn't offer many views from shore. Again you'd have to look into a sightseeing cruise such as Savannah Riverboat Cruises.

I wish you luck in planning your trip.

Kind Regards,
Kyle

108

Shipping News and information / Re: Google Street view of Diesel Submarine.

« on: November 09, 2013, 07:18:08 PM »

Great find!

While not quite as interesting as the interior of the sub, the flight deck of the ex-US Navy aircraft carrier Midway is also available for taking a virtual stroll.

USS Midway

Regards, Kyle

109

Shipping News and information / Re: The Beatles yacht

« on: June 22, 2013, 12:51:28 AM »

From the appearance of the vessel, I do believe this is plausibly the 1941-built VAGRANT, built for Harold S. Vanderbilt, judging from the photo of the yacht here:

http://sparkmanstephens.blogspot.com/2010/12/vangrant-design-380.html

Whether it was actually ever owned by any members of the Beatles is till up in the air, however.

Regards,
Kyle

110

Site related news, functions and modules / Re: Deletions again

« on: April 25, 2013, 10:42:31 PM »

"Perhaps rename the site ShipPhotoArchive.com"
Maybe not such a bad idea, start a sister site for ships 20 years old or classified as dead.
That way people that love to post and look at the old stuff can do so with impunity.
And the rest of us can get on with "shipspotting"

Looking at it that way, however, would we have to migrate all photos taken five years ago of vessels that have since been scrapped? Or can they stay, but I can't post a picture I took five years ago of a vessel that is now dead? Or, if one still can do that, can you draw a line between that five year old picture, and one that is ten, or twenty years old?

Since this site has existed as a place for all manners of "spotted" ships, whether they are the newest on the seas, aging survivors, or long-gone vessels from someone's collection. Why change? The site accepts all photos of ships, from all times, as long as they meet certain standards for quality, and the member has permission to post them.

Of course some slip through the cracks, posted without permission, or not quite up to the standards, but, wouldn't any site where members are free to upload with immediate posting suffer these problems? Stricter sites can have daily posting limits, and sometimes turn away, it seems, 9 out of 10 pictures. Less strict sites acan be filled with distant shots of barely distinguishable ships.

And sure, the site could operate differently, but why change and alienate a few in order to appease a different few? If you want a site with a vastly different set of standards and mission, you can go find one, or start your own. If you want to stay here due to this site's merits, you are also free to do that.

Regards,
Kyle

*Any views expressed in this forum are purely my own and are not to be taken as representative of those of the admin team or site owners.

111

Shipping News and information / Re: Can anyone identify this ship?

« on: March 06, 2013, 12:01:47 AM »

The mystery vessel is certainly not SHIN AITOKU MARU, as that vessel was built as a tanker, and continues to be a tanker. Apart from that, there are too many other differences, such as hull shape, superstructure, and number of sails for it to be the same vessel.

The mystery bulker/gen. cargo vessel does have one feature to note specifically. The extended lattice mast is very similar to the one installed on USUKI PIONEER, indicating, perhaps, that this vessel came out of the same yard. The best bet is she is one of the 14 additional unidentified vessels equipped with those sails apart from SHIN AITOKU MARU, USUKI PIONEER, and AQUA CITY mentioned in some sources.

Regards,
Kyle

112

Site related news, functions and modules / Re: Date Captured vs Date Added

« on: February 15, 2013, 06:28:10 PM »

I too have encountered this problem. The only solution I can recommend is what I do, simply select that day after the date the photo was taken, then it will display correctly. Even for photos taken on, say January 31st, selecting February 1st displays the last day of January for me.

If no other members are encountering this issue, perhaps it has something to do with being in the US Pacific Time Zone. Since Oldkayaker in the Bay Area and I in Seattle both encounter this, perhaps something in the site's clock is off in regards to the time zone conversion.

Regards,
Kyle

113

Shipping News and information / Re: Your favourite yachts on here?

« on: February 01, 2013, 05:10:16 PM »

To get back to the topic:

While my personal favorites would be many of the classic yacht, several which have been mentioned already, I do have some newer examples to add as well.

I'm really drawn to the rugged looks maintained by the salvage tug conversions such as LONE RANGER.

I feel slightly underappreciated are the sleek lines of yachts of the 1980's, such as MICHAELA ROSE.

Lastly, while not truly "yachts," I really do like Damen's yacht tenders such as OBERON. Forget whatever megayacht it tends, I would be perfectly happy to have this as my personal yacht.

Regards,
Kyle

114

Help and Advice / Re: Need advice for setting the IMO in another user's photo

« on: January 19, 2013, 05:59:57 AM »

Hi Bill,

Since only administrators have access to edit the photo information of other members, the simplest and most commonly seen way to have an IMO added is to simply comment on the photo with the IMO near the beginning so that it may be seen from the home page and noticed by an admin and amend the photo.

Of course, there isn't always an admin watching, so some comments do slip through the cracks. In that case, do not hesitate to private message an admin with the IMO and a link to the picture, and we will be glad to help.

Regards,
Kyle

115

Shipping News and information / Re: Sanko Steamship (Sanko Line)

« on: July 05, 2012, 06:04:14 PM »

Thanks for the news. It's always sad to see a company with such a history come to an end.

Perhaps it's appropriate that the one and only time I captured a Sanko vessel, she was sailing off into the distance, about to disappear around a bend...

http://www.shipspotting.com/gallery/photo.php?lid=1339480

116

Shipping News and information / Re: Ship's napes in ALL CAPS

« on: June 19, 2012, 08:37:35 PM »

I'll agree with typing everything exactly as it's printed on the hull when somebody can show me a way to stack "OF" and "THE" on top of each other in tiny font in the name entry of

EXPLORER  OF  SEAS
                  THE

117

Shipping News and information / Re: Ship's napes in ALL CAPS

« on: June 19, 2012, 06:03:43 PM »

So, in your mind, would a "reliable" database be the federal documentation maintained by the flag state?
That seems resonable to me. Those agencies in charge of such registries are in principle the authority for the documentation of every vessel bearing their flag. Such information would then be the official way that the flag state believes the vessel's name exists.

While it would be impossible to take a look at every single flag state database, seeing as many aren't accesible online, we can inspect some that are, such as those of Canada and the United States.

To get a good idea, I decided to pull up a name that would pull up well over 100 results. If the naming style is consistent throughout that sample, I feel it is safe to assume it is consistent throughout the entire database.

First for the Transport Canada query, I searched for all vessel name beginning with the word "star." That search brought up 123 results, and each one was entered in all caps. From this we can see that the Canadian government views the proper presentation of a vessel's name as capitalized.

For the Coast Guard Vessel Documentation search, I queried all names beginning with "snow." This time around, I received 196 results, again all spelled out in all caps. Thus, we come to the same conclusion for US flagged vessels.

The Australian Maritime Safety Authority provides a list of registered vessels instead of a query. Once again, all listed names are in all caps.

Same thing for at least one flag of convenience, here's the list maintained by The Bahamas Maritime Authority.

While this is only a small portion of the world's vessels are noted by this sample, I have noticed a trend. I did not leave any out, each and every country-maintained listing of ships I found shows vessels listed with names in all capitals.

So, if the reality is that individualism in tyopgraphy exists only on the ship's hull as a matter of owner's preference that could be changed on a whim, but officially the name is carried in capital letters, there exists a big argument for all names to be typed in accordance with the official documentation. Or, at this point, for at least all vessels flagged in Australia, The Bahamas, Canada, and the United States.

118

Shipping News and information / Re: Ro/Ro Ships in capitals

« on: June 18, 2012, 02:18:07 PM »

From what I've seen in the past, the recommended proper format for typing a ship's name is for it to be in italics, with the first letters of major words capitalized, thus resulting in Badger, Maersk Arnold and Pride of Dover.

However, it formats where italics are not available, such as mechanical typewriters, some email, and many military communications, the preferred format to distinguish a ship's name is all caps.

Thus, considering the ship's name block on this site, where formatting is not available, we can at least know what writer's guidelines say we should do.

119

Shipping News and information / Re: US tug RESOLUTE

« on: June 17, 2012, 05:32:20 PM »

Bob,

The current RESOLUTE, IMO 7367419, built in 1975, was acquired by McAllister in 2006 through the purchase of Providence Steamboat Company. She retained her previous name.

The former RESOLUTE, IMO 6517550, built in 1950, was acquired by McAllister through the purchase of Barker Whiteley Towing Company, when she was renamed from RESOLUTE to DAVID MCALLISTER. However, for some reason, her name was returned to the original at some point. She would later be sold, I'm not sure of the year, to Patriot Marine, under whom she is still serving under the name OCEAN KING.

Regards,
Kyle

120

Help and Advice / Re: Looking for photo's of the SEACOR QUEST

« on: May 30, 2012, 12:43:01 AM »

Christophe,

Seeing as you put my photo up, I should go ahead and let you know that a have at least a couple more angles of the vessel I can post. I'm in the middle of packing for a move at the moment, so it will likely be a few days until I can find them and add them to the site.

Regards,
Kyle