FNS
Voyager
The Empire Builder train of yesteryear in HO scale
Posts: 4,948
|
Post by FNS on Sept 4, 2009 20:39:33 GMT -8
The photo to be ID'd would very much appear to have been taken in the area circled in the photo below. The 1956 date however, is a problem as the P Victoria was decommissioned in 1952 following 47 years of service. Princess Victoria of CPSS's BCCS in Vancouver Harbour c 1950. This is a scan of a print contained in my brother's [DOT] collection. The same photo can be seen on page 125 of Robert Turner's excellent book Those Beautiful Coastal Liners. There, it is identified as being from the Jim Stephen collection. The photographer's name is unknown. Did she have any sisters in service at that time ('58), that could have been on that route? The PRINCESS VICTORIA was the only ship in her class. She worked with the PRINCESS ELAINE and PRINCESS OF NANAIMO on the Nanaimo run. I think that the PRINCESS MARGUERITE and PRINCESS PATRICIA took turns doing the evening and early morning supplement sailings during that time. One of these two ships would start in Seattle in the morning, go to Victoria, go to Vancouver, and end up in Nanaimo that night. The other would start in Nanaimo in the morning, go to Vancouver, go to Victoria, and end up in Seattle that night. Passengers were welcomed to board the night before during either of these ship's overnight stay at Nanaimo and wake up in Vancouver before docking.
|
|
Mill Bay
Voyager
Long Suffering Bosun
Posts: 2,886
|
Post by Mill Bay on Sept 4, 2009 21:36:52 GMT -8
Did she have any sisters in service at that time ('58), that could have been on that route? No! The P Victoria was the first of the luxury coastal day liners that served on what became known as the 'triangle service' connecting Vancouver, Victoria & Seattle. Although she resembled in some respects some of the other pre WW1 boats, she had no twins, no real sisters. CP's later boats mostly came in pairs. She didn't have any identical sisters or twins, but the Princess Royal was built to closely resemble the lines of the 'Vic, although she was markedly different in size and length, they both did show a similar superstructure layout. The Princess Royal was almost a smaller, economy version of the Victoria, with a wooden hull, smaller engine and machinery and although the accomodations were said to closely match those of the Victoria, though slightly less deluxe.
|
|
Kam
Voyager
Posts: 926
|
Post by Kam on Sept 4, 2009 22:57:36 GMT -8
Very cool!
I've sent her a note to see if she can confirm the date.
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Sept 8, 2009 21:11:18 GMT -8
My brother, Mr. DOT, has been looking at the original photo in this thread, and is certain that the photo is of the P Victoria. His original artwork nicely depicts the area of the forward mast & wheelhouse where we believe the photo was taken. www.flickr.com/photos/41465870@N04/3902237833/David says this about the photo... On the other hand the photo's background seems to show smoke coming from the forward stack indicating an in-service vessel. We do know that the Vic did operate on the Vancouver - Nanaimo route c1950. I also asked David whether or not this photo could be of some other CP steamer and the date given of Labour Day 1956 could somehow be correct. He says 'no'. The ship is the Victoria and the date would have to be at least five years earlier.
|
|
Mirrlees
Voyager
Bathtub!
Deck Engineer- Queen of Richmond
Posts: 1,013
|
Post by Mirrlees on Sept 8, 2009 21:28:21 GMT -8
I just looked at the photo again and it says Labour Day 1946. Yes, Princess Victoria was very much still in service likely on the Vic-Van route.
|
|
|
Post by Barnacle on Sept 9, 2009 6:28:42 GMT -8
I'm mostly impressed with the design "feature" that places the mast RIGHT in front of the wheelhouse. FAIL!
|
|
FNS
Voyager
The Empire Builder train of yesteryear in HO scale
Posts: 4,948
|
Post by FNS on Sept 9, 2009 6:43:30 GMT -8
I'm mostly impressed with the design "feature" that places the mast RIGHT in front of the wheelhouse. FAIL! On the other hand, makes for a nice steering guide (if you can see around it). This was a feature on sailing ships. Also, many cargo ships have this, too. Man, I wished I was born many years earlier to see and ride the beautiful PRINCESS VICTORIA! Mr. Thorne, that drawing of her is magnificent.
|
|
|
Post by Barnacle on Sept 9, 2009 6:51:59 GMT -8
It would make a LOUSY steering guide. You have to be able to see OVER and AROUND a steering guide, otherwise you can't see what you're lining your steering guide up on and it's just a post (okay, and a nuisance). This is why jackstaffs (steering guides) aren't particularly burly. It would be like trying to drive your car without taking the sun shade off the windshield first.
However, it's my understanding that many WWII warships of British design, particularly the corvettes, also had this problem.
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Sept 9, 2009 7:02:49 GMT -8
I posted the first reply in this thread, and thought that the ship was the Joan or Elizabeth. I even included a picture of the Joan, to show for comparison.
While all the previous posts have been emphatic that the ship is the Princess Victoria, no one has commented on why it would not be the Joan or Elizabeth.
I'm interested in understanding why the mystery ship is Not the Joan or Elizabeth, given the comparison photo that I posted. Please tell.
|
|
Kam
Voyager
Posts: 926
|
Post by Kam on Sept 9, 2009 7:55:55 GMT -8
On the other hand the photo's background seems to show smoke coming from the forward stack indicating an in-service vessel. We do know that the Vic did operate on the Vancouver - Nanaimo route c1950. I also asked David whether or not this photo could be of some other CP steamer and the date given of Labour Day 1956 could somehow be correct. He says 'no'. The ship is the Victoria and the date would have to be at least five years earlier. If you look carefully you can also see two people in the wheelhouse windows.
|
|
Mill Bay
Voyager
Long Suffering Bosun
Posts: 2,886
|
Post by Mill Bay on Sept 9, 2009 9:09:21 GMT -8
I posted the first reply in this thread, and thought that the ship was the Joan or Elizabeth. I even included a picture of the Joan, to show for comparison. While all the previous posts have been emphatic that the ship is the Princess Victoria, no one has commented on why it would not be the Joan or Elizabeth. I'm interested in understanding why the mystery ship is Not the Joan or Elizabeth, given the comparison photo that I posted. Please tell. Look at the mast, Flugel. The ship in the mystery photo clearly has a mast right in front-center of the wheelhouse, while your picture of the Joan/Elizabeth shows that on the ships, the forward mast was located behind the bridge.
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,177
|
Post by Neil on Sept 9, 2009 9:14:03 GMT -8
Also, the ship in the picture in question has a flat wheelhouse roof (as did the 'Victoria, whereas in yours the roof is tapered. The window profile also matches the 'Victoria, as does the lowered cabin behind the wheelhouse.
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Sept 9, 2009 10:13:10 GMT -8
Thanks guys, for explaining the non-Joan aspects.
....although I still can't see a mast in the mystery-ship photo, unless you are referring to the out-of-focus black thing on the roof.
The mystery-photo has a support-column on the right-side of the photo, with a bell attached. I still think that this could be the Joan, on a deck that is 2-decks-below the wheel-house.
In the mystery-photo, I'm assuming that the photo was taken from the port-side of the ship, and that the lady & baby are facing port, not forward. - that would make the rounded-column & bell a support-column on the port-side of the ship.
So, are you guys saying that the rounded-column on the right-side of the photo is the mast? Which would mean that the lady & baby are facing forward?
|
|
Mill Bay
Voyager
Long Suffering Bosun
Posts: 2,886
|
Post by Mill Bay on Sept 9, 2009 10:35:28 GMT -8
Just to ponder... why would they have a bell on a mere support column and not the mast, and, if that is the Princess Joan, from that point on the forward deck, which would be the starboard side, not port (remember the photo reverses the aspect), would you still be able to see a funnel in the background, or an open deck?
From the picture of the Princess Joan, there would clearly be a couple decks of superstructure above and behind where you're implying the photo could be located. If nothing else, the details in the background don't fit that location on the Princess Joan, even is there was no most or support column in the photo.
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Sept 9, 2009 11:00:48 GMT -8
Thanks for clarifying that, Ernie. I'm not trying to be argumentative, I just was struggling with the perspective of the ship and needed help in seeing what the other people were supposedly seeing. My initial though was that the mast & bell were on the side of the ship, which matched my hoped-for Joan conclusion. Tunnel vision of the ferry nerd. I never considered that the view was from the bow, and I never clued-in that the black-blob on top was a funnel. Good thing that I don't have any pre-conceived notions in the rest of my life....... ha ha. ;D I'm so ashamed....
|
|
|
Post by lmtengs on Dec 1, 2009 7:27:08 GMT -8
Can anyone ID this C-Class, seen here posing with Nick Odanadas? It's either Cow or the Coquitlam
|
|
|
Post by Ferryman on Dec 1, 2009 18:15:41 GMT -8
It appears to me that it took place at Langdale. Any idea what year that film was shot? For most of the early 90s until 95/96, the Queen of Cowichan was the main vessel on that route. After that, the Surrey was brought in of course. The Queen of Coquitlam would also run on that route when the Surrey was in refit too, so much hasn't changed on that route since 1996.
|
|
|
Post by lmtengs on Dec 1, 2009 18:19:46 GMT -8
It appears to me that it took place at Langdale. Any idea what year that film was shot? For most of the early 90s until 95/96, the Queen of Cowichan was the main vessel on that route. After that, the Surrey was brought in of course. The Queen of Coquitlam would also run on that route when the Surrey was in refit too, so much hasn't changed on that route since 1996. it's in the '80s or '90s. Most likely the '90s. It's an episode of "the Beachcombers".
|
|
|
Post by nolonger on Mar 4, 2010 12:44:22 GMT -8
that's a tough one. The Beachcombers ran until 1990. The Cowichan was there as Ferryman says until about 1996. Depends on the year of the episode but I'd say it's the Coquitlam as the Cowichan was based in Nanaimo for most of the '80s.
|
|
|
Post by fargowolf on Mar 4, 2010 18:32:28 GMT -8
It would be in the 80's sometime, given that the mystery vessel is painted in the "Expo" colours.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 4, 2010 21:42:33 GMT -8
I did the Sunshine Coast route in 1990. The ferry we took from Gibson's to Horseshoe Bay was the Oak Bay. It was the first and only time I rode on the Oak Bay. Some of my relatives help build the Oak Bay.
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Jul 10, 2010 12:10:13 GMT -8
The is definitely one of the B's as they appeared prior to stretching. I would agree with Scott that it is the Burnaby, though it might be the QNWM. The location is, no doubt about it, Departure Bay.
The ship's name is partially visible just to the left of the stern car deck door. That last letter looks to be a 'Y' though it could be an 'R', but not an 'O'.
There is a large group of people (crew perhaps) waiting to disembark, which suggests that this is crew change time. According to the Peter Flavelle book The Queens of British Columbia, the Burnaby was based at that time in Nanaimo. Therefore, my guess is that this is the Burnaby coming into Departure Bay with the ~1:00 pm sailing from the Mainland. You are looking at crew members waiting to be relieved by the afternoon shift.
Just possibly these are passengers waiting to disembark. There were no overhead walkways at that time. Passengers, however, would have had to stand further back from the stern, than the people visible here.
Nice historical pics you have there Mr. EGF!
Late edit: I zoomed in on the portion of the name that is visible and it looks fairly certain to me that we have the letters 'B' & 'Y'.
|
|
|
Post by Ferryman on Sept 24, 2010 11:15:01 GMT -8
Picture taken near Mary Ann Light Mayne Island, with Galiano Island on the opposite shore to left. That would actually be Georgina Point light. Mary Ann Point is on Galiano Island, which is the first turn to starboard through the Pass if you're headed Southbound.
|
|
Mirrlees
Voyager
Bathtub!
Deck Engineer- Queen of Richmond
Posts: 1,013
|
Post by Mirrlees on Sept 24, 2010 13:46:54 GMT -8
The first photo is Queen of Saanich. The length of the name seems to support my theory. ;D
|
|
|
Post by lmtengs on Sept 24, 2010 20:36:06 GMT -8
Here's another ship to ID. It could be the 'Cumberland or the 'Capilano. It's an older photo, taken between 4 and 9 years ago. I'd like to know the ship name and the terminal in the background, if possible.
|
|