Battling with waves and lawyers : $b a genuine history of perils of the deep and an authentic record of the most important shipping case ever dealt with in the supreme courts of Australasia
History
Battling with waves and lawyers : $b a genuine history of perils of the deep and an authentic record of the most important shipping case ever dealt with in the supreme courts of Australasia
Alert (Ship : 1877-1893); Liability for marine accidents; Navigation -- Australia -- History; Shipwrecks -- Australia -- Victoria
The following remarks I quote from the “British Nautical Magazine,” a
journal which certainly cannot be accused of pandering to the views
of seamen: “In considering the safety of ships, we should not look
to their efficiency in fine, or even moderately rough weather, but
they should have a fair margin to meet any contingency. Indeed, the
whole subject is one which has a right to be judged alone by a very
high standard, as its issues are not ordinary commercial ones, but
_human lives_. The question of the freeboard of ships is at once
one of the most important, and one of the most complex subjects
connected with naval architecture. It is only just to those who have
to encounter the dangers of the sea that the vessel in which they
sail shall not be loaded beyond the limit of safety, and, on the
other hand, the gain of the owner upon his investment may depend
upon that limit being reached. There have been, so far, only three
principal proposals for fixing the load-line. _First_, a certain
proportion of the depth of hold, three inches to the foot being about
the average, _i. e._, the ship should have a freeboard at least about
one-fourth of her depth of hold. _Second_, one-eighth of the beam is
the minimum freeboard for ships whose length is not more than five
times their breadth, and 1/32 of the beam should further be added to
the freeboard for each additional breadth—beyond the five times—in
the length of the ship, _Third_, the actual buoyancy of every ship
should be calculated, and a percentage of the whole (say 30 per
cent.) kept above the load-line, as reserve, or surplus buoyancy. In
calculating the buoyancy of a ship, the measurements should be from
the underneath side of the cargo deck—add to this the capacity of
watertight erections above the deck—and thus the whole cubic content
is ascertained. Allowing thirty-five cubic feet to the ton (since
a ton of sea-water occupies about thirty-five cubic feet of space)
the total capacity of the ship is arrived at, and 30 per cent. of
the whole amount should be kept above water as spare buoyancy in an
ordinary ship loaded with a general cargo. Were a cargo of less
specific gravity than water carried, little or no spare buoyancy
would be required, but a _maximum_ would be needed in the case of a
heavy cargo where there is necessarily much empty space capable of
being rapidly filled by water in the event of a leak. Freeboard has a
good deal to do with the stability of a ship, and there is, probably,
no department of science of which so many false notions are current,
and none in which the terms employed have been so often misunderstood
and misapplied. The terms _stability_ and _steadiness_ are popularly
looked upon as synonymous, although they really have, in connection
with this subject, widely different meanings, so diverse, indeed,
that the presence of one in excess implies a want of the other. The
word _metacentre_, too, has proved a stumbling-block to many people,
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account