Boatyards

Neville Island

Here are my 3 favorite boatyard pix, I think. This is the Streckfus steamer WASHINGTON on the Neville Island ways. More info on Neville Island, please!
In pix 1 in the foreground are Mate Kent Booth and Mrs. Fred Way. Jr.

Can you imagine that boy wandering around loose in one of today's boatyards? OSHA, the USCG, Homeland Security, company police, the insurance company and a flock of other busybodies would all have a bad case of the pip! The poor kid would be imprisoned and fined, no doubt, for being curious.

I agree with Judy that we seem to have lost some of our best posters. For a while this board was a fountain of information. I'll take a crack at info on the Str. Washington photos. If I'm all wrong I hope all you experts come out of the woodwork and jump my case. Fred Way once told me he would slip in a error on a story in the Reflector just to get a real good fight started as to facts. The Str. Washington is on the Dravo ways to repair damage done to her bow by striking the lock gates at Ohio River lock #8, on August 16,1936.

Kent Booth is the man on the left, the man in the white shirt and slacks is Capt. Fred Way, the lady is Charlotte Way ( Fred's first wife), the little girl, partly hidden by her mom is Betty Way ( Bee Rutter), the little boy is Fred Way III and the man in the straw hat is Capt. D.W. Wishard. Right or wrong let's hear more!!

Steamboating colleagues:
Judy has us on a real 'roll' RE: 'Boatyards' and it's comes as a welcomed diversion on the history segment of the web. The Str. WASHINGTON photos fascinating giving us a "that's-how-they-did-it" view. Alan's and Bill's 'follows' are interesting. Bill's keen eye and mind nailed the figures in the picture. I've no doubts as to his identification. I bet Bee Rutter would love to see those photos and I'll see what I can do.

The old 'Cincinnati Marine Railways' here in town on Eastern Ave. adjacent to Fulton was one big business in it's day producing among many the famed Str. QUEEN CITY Etc.. The site today runs due east from the famed high-lift crane and 'Cincinnati Sheet Metal Co.' The prominent Carrel famly [See Str. HERCULES CARREL] were the prime movers and shakers beginning in 1847 on until the end of boat building at that location. Another Carrel became the Mayor of Cincinnati and a street was named for him near old Coal Haven Landing. The term 'railway' itself at the yards indicated the use of slide ways lifting up and returning boats to the water upon construction or repairs without the end slide method. Up until recent years the rail/slides were still in evident and may possibly still be visible. I'd like to know more about how the 'railway system' worked at such yards and if steam engines were the prime power. The HERCULES CARREL had a long life and was one perky little harbor boat known here.

Only one or two of the surviving old 'steamboat houses' still exist near the former site with a decided 'steamboat Gothic' look and a year or so ago I drove Kenny Howe and Jim Reising by for a look/see. The area is undergoing gentrification with new condos and town houses. In the 1920s the old brick offices were torn down and all of the company records, plans, photographs were destroyed. What a loss.

Cheers and keep the postings rolling,
R. Dale Flick

Shot across the bow

I have been a member of this board for "awhile now". I also am not writing this towards any one person nor do I mean to be insulting but please hear me out.
I need a matter cleared up. What is a good or best poster. I know, I'm already off topic. Granted this is the History section. Does this mean that only posting with day, date, time, and event are good postings? There is a great need for "factual" information, regardless of how wrong it may be or who is providing the "facts". Having been involved in several Coast Guard hearings, I can tell you what is on record has little to do with the facts.
I enjoy reading history, however I have always said I'd rather make history than read about it. This is most likely why I have found myself in situations where, in hindsight, I wish I had not been.
There are a good number of well educated people on this board. My education comes from Curbstone University, MS in Hardknocks. I feel, and others have also expressed the same feeling, that unless you meet a certain unspoken level of qualification, my posting is only taking up valuable space which could be used for "better" postings.
By looking at the "views" it is plain to see that there are many more watchers than writers on this board. I spent 3 years riding the M. Q. and D. Q. and 13 more riding other type vessels. Does not my writing from "having been there" qualify me as being as factual as numbers in a book. This board seems very divided, which I find unfortunate, because limiting where your "Facts" come from, to me limits me as a person.
One of the great things about riding the boats was the varity of people I worked with. If you read the "passive voice" of many of the postings on these boards, there is a great desire for those of us "who did, or still do it" to please not take up valuble "fact" space with our stories and memories.
Fred Way liked to get arguments started about "facts". Lets get it on! I cannot tell you how many bucket boards are on the D. Q., but I can darn sure tell you how to replace them. I have done it. I feel that both bits of information have an equal standing. Just as any story about a deckhand can be as enlighting as stories about decades gone engineers. Don't need to worry about no pilot, he'll brag enough on hisself you'll begin to think it's fact.

Fred, perhaps I chose my words badly. What we need more of are just posters. Good, bad, indifferent. All posts in my mind are good, I just wish we would see more. In this history section though we do seem to have lost posters and I'd like to see a comeback. I agree all, from deckhand to company officials, have a story to tell and all should be treated on a equal basis as to content and interest. I personally find the " been there, done that" posts the most interesting.

I disagree. If anything I find this forum very inviting to post anything you want as long as its not a "harmful" thing. And even angry posts are allowed, if it's your opinion and stated as such. Many a time I have vented on this board, very thankful for this avenue given me to blow off steam. And venting here also has taught me a lot, many times people have contacted me and said..."that's not true..." and in the process I learn.

There is nothing richer, more valuable to me and Deb than reading experiences of people that "were there". I see this board as a modern, alternative method of the wonderful stuff that can be found in the Reflector. And if the stories aren't told, how could that be a good thing?

now for the definition of a good poster? My definition is one that starts, or continues to add to, a thread that provides an information flow from the learned to the less learned, i.e me! I feel very privileged to be able to add a bit now and then.

Please, please post your stories, I'm here with baited breath...

Now in that light, in regards to the wonderful pictures in this thread...is it just me our does the timber holding the boats upright look really flimsy or is it something else also holding the boat in place that I'm not seeing here...One big wind, I don't know...were there ever accidents? I suspect the "keel" is on the ground, but still, awful skinny wood holding those beauties upright...

Thanks, Bill for all that info on the photo. CW had annotated the back with the fact that the WASHINGTON was being repaired after hitting a lock gate, and at the bottom he had a 1940 date, which was after the W.'s demise. I think CW dated his photos as to when he received them. He got this one from F. Way.

Dale, for those of us not that familiar with Cincinnati, where was the Marine Railway in relation to the Public Landing, upstream or down?

Fred, As to who should be posting: everyone who has an interest, period.

Our diversity made this board so interesting, and that diversity seems to have homogenized too much lately into more or less one interest. That's why I thought I'd throw out the 'boatyards' thread because there are so many variations that can spin off of it.

Well, here goes with an 'untechnical' explanation of drydocking, and I'll try to find some pix to illustrate it: The boat's hull configuration is taken prior to drydocking and blocks of wood are then strapped to the bottom of the drydock to match the shape of the hull. When the boat comes up out of the water, it is sitting on those piles of blocks - the boat doesn't touch the drydock's wingwalls for support or anything. The two times I've seen the NATCHEZ in drydock, and in passing the Bollinger docks on the West Bank with vessels in them, it sure looks perilous, but unless hurricane winds come through, it works. The blocks are piled several feet high so that workmen can get under the hull to inspect and work. Even if the blocks are placed perfectly, there is always some stress on the boat - after a drydocking, the NATCHEZ usually has some cracks in the flooring around her galley, which is just forward of the engine room - nothing major though. I'll look for the pix now.

The two 1950's era photos of the Kahlke yard are very interesting due to the vessel in the photos. Now I spend most of my time looking at vessels, in the water, out of the water and under the water. I am always amazed in the out of the water vessels as to hull configuration and design. Note in photo #2 the eastern style sharp stem, wide mid-body and tucked in stern hull lines. Also note the upward slope of the stern, makes for easy backing. It also shows the length to width ratio popular in the early days, resulting in narrow boats but fast. When I was a kid I was told by local wood boat builders the ratio should be 5 to 1. Need Bates input here. Also note the raised stern on the green and white boat. Much like modern towboats. The old neat cruiser in the 3rd. photo looks like a Shipyard Sam project. In a later thread on this subject Bruno notes the flimsy props under the boats. I agree that it looks like an accident waiting to happen. Neither of these two boats have a keel to carry any weight. Now days a boat of that size would have six or more big cement block columns to support them. The red and white boat I think maybe has the railway carriage still under it. Neat photos!!

Pictures of drydock interior

Here are some pictures taken at the Zito Drydock in January 1987 when the NATCHEZ went there for her 5 year hull inspection.
1) This shows the blocking setup on the floor of the drydock. We had just been lowered back into the water after a week or so in the drydock in the middle of the picture, and were backing out of the complex. That yellow wing wall to the left is part of the drydock with the red and white towboat in it. The tall buildings in the background downriver are the Ochsner Medical Center complex.
2) This shows the height of the piles; starboard stern. That's the sea chest up on the hull(the thing which undid the MQ in her 12/12/85 'incident').
3) I'm between the rudders looking forward. If you look closely, you can see the light at the bow - these blocks are in rows with a couple of feet between rows. That oblong thing on the hull is a zinc plate to keep undesirable sea organisms off the hull plating.
All of these pix were taken moments after the NATCHEZ came up out of the water, so it was certainly an act of faith that the blocks were set properly and that the boat was secure, that we all went in and under her so quickly.

Steamboating colleagues:
Fred makes some good points in the above. One mistake I've always made in posting is being too long and verbal. I now try to make my points, or share history, as if I'm talking directly to the person. Everybody knows I've stuck my foot in my mouth a number of times. Who hasn't? Franz does a fine job monitoring and keeping things on track. Remember, that which is written isn't always read in the same way. Personalities will always show through. How does Franz do it? The 'Rules of the Road' in posting Franz provides greatly help.

I value each and every posting as a kind of 'letter from home.' When a poster takes valuable time to write and share then, like a personal letter, I read. We don't always agree but it's the intent that counts. 'Steamboat History' on the web is valuable and important as one of three components--all being equal. If we don't get it down now from those "who were there then...had the actual experience" then in time it will be lost forever. Capt. Fred Way, Alan Bates, Barb Huffman, Chuck Parrish etc. and others here who've been published know that. Think what Doc Hawley could write if he were on line. Steamboat History isn't a definite science yet...but it's getting there. I find many fascinating exchanges of data, photos, information are now often being made off-line from one to another or in groups. Many writers/researchers have tapped us either on line or privately and I try to answer their questions or...even better...guide them to those who know more. So, feel free to open up, share and disucss. It often "takes a village" to tell a whole story. The list of great posters present and past here is too long to list. Good stories and memories are worth sharing even if a bit off topic. Even Capt. Fred Way used to say how "discreet" he had to be in writing his books and the REFLECTOR as many of the veterans of his day were still alive. For this he was often criticized. I don't believe the old saing that "History is bunk." Well, what do I know? Keep it coming!

Cheers,
R. Dale Flick

Ok, I'll bite...What 12/12/85 MQ incident...? I think I have an idea, but none the less...and why is it called a "sea chest", looks like a water intake to this ignorant eye...

And Judy, the zincs on my boat are self-sacrificing to prevent electrolisis corrosion of the metal you want to save, i.e. the hull or, in my case, the lower unit and prop of my Mercury. And maybe they keep off the bad guys in the Crescent City but they don't do a darn thing to keep zebra mussels off up here...

I was told that those pads were by order of the CG... there aren't any ocean organisms in the NOLA harbor. So I suspect they do the job that you want done on your boat anyway.

[QUOTE=Bill Judd;9907]
It also shows the length to width ratio popular in the early days, resulting in narrow boats but fast. When I was a kid I was told by local wood boat builders the ratio should be 5 to 1. Need Bates input here.
QUOTE]
The Alan Bates-designed NATCHEZ hull is 236 x44, or a 5.36 to 1 ratio. Looks like Alan and your wood boat builders agree, and that you remembered well!
(With fantail and wheel the dimensions are 265 x 44, which is what is usually given as the length in print)

Bill, Fred Way wrote somewhere that a length-breadth ration of 5:1 is about right. It inspired me to examine this ratio for a number of boats. On a purely subjective basis of longevity, length of ownership, etc., I concluded that the most economical and hence, successful, hulls were in a range between 5:1 and 6:1. Lower ratios were too slow and higher ratios were too expensive. It is sort of like dogs: dogs that look most like foxes, wolves and coyotes are the best. Freaks like pekingese, great danes, English bulldogs with their heads compressed and toy breeds simply are not dog-like enough to succeed as dogs, regardless of the style contests. Boat hulls like the Eclipse, which had a ratio of 9:1 were too expensive. They were faster than lower ratios, but speed does not necessarily confer commercial success. A typical barge is 6.7 times as long as it is wide. An old standard was 6.7 times as long as it was wide. But consider a tow. Standards made up 4 wide and 3 long were 5.15 times as long as wide, which fits within the vicinity of 5:1. The big tows on the Mississippi 8 wide and 7 long work out at about 4.9:1.

On 12/12/85 the Mississippi Queen collided with the Crimson Glory (?) at Bringier Point and sank. A sea chest is a water intake. It's called that because that is its name. It usually consists of a box within the hull, a grill to sift out the catfish and drift, and a pipe with quick shut-off valve leading to pumps or whatever.
The sinking of the MQ, in my opinion, was caused at least in part, by the Coast Guard's refusal to approve longitudinal watertight bulkheads. The problem in the MQ's case was exacerbated by water flowing through sewage pipes, etc., from compartment to compartment. The Natchez hull has longitudinal W.T. bulkheads and was hit by the ship Priamus in virtually the same spot as the MQ. It did not sink. In fact, they had to plug the cross pipes fitted because of USCG requirements to get rid of the water. This comparison is more fully discussed in the Old Boat Column of the Waterways Journal's May 30, 2005 issue.
I once asked a USCG examiner why they are opposed to longitudinal compartmentation. They are concerned about ocean waves and want the loss of buoyanvcy to be concentric about the centerline. I asked what could be done to get the Coast Guard to change its collective mind. He said, "Submit a boat for approval. It will be denied. Then you make an appeal." I asked, "How long does it take to push an appeal through?" He told me, "About two years." It is a rare boat owner who will wait two years for the Coast Guard to make up its mind.

Sea chest is the water intake. That was where the CRIMSON GLORY hit the MQ, thus knocking out her water supply and disabling her from getting 'beached' on her own power. Local harbor boats in the Donaldsonville area did the job for her though.

Early Kahlke Yard photo

Here is a photo of the Kahlke Boatyard in its early days, around 1900. The boat farthest to the right is the rafter J.W. VANSANT, which burned in another boatyard in Wabasha in 1907. You can't see them in the picture, but I presume they had blocks under the boats when they were on this railway????

Genoa, WS Yard?

Does anyone have any information on boats built at any Genoa (WS) Boat Yard? I don't think such a yard ever existed, but my boat was supposedly "built there" in 1977. As it is a masterpiece in steel sculpture, I am convinced that it was not a one-time lucky shot; a master boat builder had to be responsible for such a work of art. Genoa is on the UPR, not far below LaCrosse, WS.

Oddly, my boat was never documented with the USCG, and now I am attempting to do so to have her certified as a Six-Pak, thereby allowing me to carry up to six passengers for hire. Before I can document my beauty, I must prove she was built in the good ole USA; so I have to trace her origins.

Sam,

I can't provide any information on your Genoa shipyard, but will throw another log on the fire. My boat was built by the St. Croix Shipbuilders in Bayport, Minnesota back in 1939. I have had very little luck finding out information on this shipyard. I've been wondering if all the "Shipbuilders" yards where owned by the same people at some point in time.

Speaking on documentation I wish you good luck. I went through the same thing with my ole gov'mnt boat. It took me over a year and countless ours on the phone,e-mailing, writing letters, donating organs, proving US citizenship, etc. to finally get documentation. I guess there was no need for the Government to give official numbers to their boats as they probably thought they'd never see public service. I've heard they didn't start to document their boats until after WWII, but then that doesn't qualify for the NEW DAY.

In regards to more recent history, I enjoyed as a teenager going down to the Tucker Marine Yard here in Cincinnati and looking around at the boats. At that time they had two sternwheelers (BAYER ISLAND, DON ROB'T) plus the COLUMBIA to crawl around under and look at. Would have been neat to have been a kid in the time of the Howards, etc. although I bet the punishment was swift from the yard formans for trespassing.

Shipyard,

WI is the postal designate for Wisconsin!

Check to see if the Vernon County Wisconsin Historical Society has some information.

http://www.vernoncountyhistoricalsociety.com/

JC Petersen

Ratio of length to width in various yards

The postings about the ratio of length to width got me musing on our basketball team bus tonight: did some boatyards use the same or nearly same ratio on all their boats - if you wanted a fast boat you'd go to yard x; if you wanted an efficient boat you'd go to yard y??? Or did yards have different construction chiefs, for want of a better term, who preferred certain ratios? Or was the major reason for using a certain boatyard its proximity to the owner's location? Or could you get whatever ratio you wanted most anywhere?

No, Judy. The boats were usually built to the owners' ideas - the customer is always right. The yard's designers may know the owner is goofing up, and they may try to change his mind, but HE has the money the yard wants.

There are a few guys running around even today who want to build steamboats. They haven't the slightest idea of what they are up against. Fortunately, they don't have the finances to back up their dreams. I feel sure you've met a couple of them.

Another notion about boatyards is that they built ALL of their products. In fact, the boatyard was the nexus of a number of sub-contractors and ten or twenty different specialty firms would be involved. At Howard's a steamboat might have Hegewald boilers from New Albany, Barnes engines from Cincinnati, stacks made by Bridgeford in Louisville and the cabin millwork done by Bell and Coggeshall in Louisville.

Also, at Howard's, they built a lot of things beside steamboats. Records show store fronts, residences and even park benches made by the firm. I feel other yards were just as versatile and just as prone to take on other work.