The fate of Irish Lightships

I am still waiting for those documents from the National Archives. :mad:

Meanwhile Simon has not been idle. When the day job is not interfering he is getting on with the renovation. The starboard side needed scraping and painting with de-ruster. It certainly looks a lot better, but his new kitchen window is looking rather crowded! :P
David

With Winter approaching, young men’s fancy turns to – dryness and warmth‼ Because most of the teak decking has long gone, there is only rusty metal plate between the cold night air and the (future) living space below deck. Condensation is also quite a problem and because the drain holes are above the plate level, there are all sorts of leaking opportunities when it rains. Hopefully we have a cunning plan which will solve both problems. The sides of the ship are a separate project!
I related earlier how the plan was to fill in the space left by the absent decking with a thick layer of all-weather ‘tennis court’ surfacing. This was going to be very difficult (the deck has a slight curve to facilitate drainage and following that curve with a fluid whilst maintaining a constant thickness …. need I say more?).
So now Simon is being advised by a professional roofer and a more complicated, but more feasible plan is emerging. Looking at the more difficult part of the deck – the curved walkways down each side, which have light-boxes built in ….. (Photo)



First the deck will be given a coat of primer. Then short lengths of timber, about the thickness of scaffolding-type planking, will be wedged across the walkways, at 5ft intervals, between the superstructure and the wide baulks of timber which edge the ship. The intervening spaces will be filled, to the same height, with roof insulation panels.... (Photo)


Then bitumen is poured into all the gaps


Sheets of marine ply are now laid over and secured to the planks. The surface is then treated like a roof – with bitumen and that gravelly bitumen sheeting you see on flat roofs.... (Photo)


The green colour of the bitumen sheeting is merely to differentiate it from the ply.

Then Simon can have a thin coat of tennis court material if he chooses. The light boxes will be double-glazed and the deck will then be insulated and leak-proof.


That's the plan anyway!
David

The long-awaited documents finally arrived from the National Archives – well the first batch anyway. We did not expect these to be helpful in resolving the puzzle of whether Cormorant was the same vessel as the one in the Belfast Pilot Station photo, however they were fascinating in their own right.

Firstly, the origin of the paperwork was a request from the Belfast Harbour Commissioners to have the Cormorant registered as a British ship and to have her surveyed and measured. The Cormorant was obviously still in Dublin at this point in time. I assume the nationality distinction arose because the body responsible for ‘lights’ (lighthouses and lightships) around Ireland has always been combined north and south (and still is). Now that Belfast Harbour was going to use the ship for purely Belfast purposes, they wanted it ‘properly’ registered. On the face of it there was no problem, but a question arose as to whether the term ‘ship’ was appropriate! The Merchant Shipping Act 1894 stated that if a vessel is not used in navigation, it is not a ship within the meaning of the Act and, if solely employed as a lightship, would fall under the definition of a lighthouse!

However, it was accepted for registration on the grounds that a Ministry of War Transport 21 (a derrick pontoon) has been accepted, so why not this lightship? This was in no way to settle the question of whether it could be called a ship – “… this being a matter for the courts”.

There was also a question of fees for the Belfast surveyors visiting Dublin. In the end ‘normal’ fees and expenses were charged (but not listed) as Dublin could be considered as not being ‘abroad’ ‼
Although many records state that Cormorant was 91 ft long, these documents have her at 98ft 6in, with a beam of 20ft. Her Gross Tonnage was 182.98 and Register Tonnage 136.33, although I have not yet determined the reason for the difference. Her Official Number was 168531. She had no means of propulsion, but did have a rudder.

Finally, the alterations to the vessel were to be carried out in Dublin. She was to become a combined lightship and pilot station, with a crew of 10 and accommodation for 9 pilots.

The second batch of documents should be here next week. I can hardly wait!

I wonder if someone out there can help us with one aspect of the project. I have been wondering why the stanchions at the bow are much taller than those elsewhere and what the two massive beams were for at the bow. (Photo) That rail is a definite afterthought and originally the whole of the bow was covered in and built up to the top of those two pillars, rather like on the Gull (Photo).

Our plan is to reduce the height of those stanchions, to make them about the same as those in the rest of the ship. They will be boarded in, to match the stern – or the stern as it will be when the seating is in place. (Photo) This will leave about a foot or two of the beams still projecting and we think this lends itself to some sort of figure head(s). (Photo)


So, if anyone out there knows of a wood sculptor (no chain saws please) who would like to leave his mark (and not too big a bill), please get in touch.

Returning to the mystery of the main mast….
We did not know whether the mast extended below the lower deck, or ended on that deck. Now the plans show us that the mast goes right down to the bilges. There is an impressive supporting structure around the mast at the main deck level. The first photo is of this structure taken in Cormorant and viewed on the lower deck.
The second picture is from Gull (R.I.P.) and taken on the upper deck, where graffiti artists obviously plied their lonely, sad trade.

According to the various historical documents:-
“There were two openings in the mainmast, one below the deck and another on the level of the lantern when hoisted up. Inside the mast was a ladder which the lamplighters climbed to trim the lamps. Both openings were stiffened round the edges with wrought iron frames.”
“In this mast were two openings, one below the deck nearly on the fore side, and another on the level of the lantern when hoisted up. Inside the mast was a ladder, up which the men climbed to trim the light when it was mast-headed. The lower opening was 5 feet 3 inches high, and 1 foot 4 inches wide, and was of rectangular form…”

Well there is no evidence of any wrought iron frames anywhere on the remaining piece of mast that stretches between decks, although there are a number of ‘layers’ apparent. (Photo and diagram)

I think that when the original ‘hoist-able’ lamp was replaced by a fixed lamp with outside ladder access, the openings in the mast were welded up to improve strength.

On the plans we can see that one lamp operating procedure was to be carried out remotely and the mechanism for this includes a shaft which goes right through the mast. That steel projection which can be seen pointing towards the camera might well be the remains of a supporting bracket for the mechanism and the small circular hole just above it was the entry point for the shaft. (Mast Photos)

I have enhanced the mast in the side views to make it clearer.
I have yet to work out what this mechanism actually does. It seems to be a manual system, so it would not be anything to do with rotating the light. Perhaps it swivels the mirrors and directs and/or focuses the beam(s). Are there any experts out there?
David

Well I had never heard of a Diaphone before! Why didn’t they call it a foghorn, which is what it is in form and function? Anyway, the plans revealed a ‘Diaphone Turret’ on the roof of the superstructure, just in front of the lantern mast. The structure is about 10ft tall overall and 5ft diameter. (Photo)


As it is called a turret, I assume that it rotates, although I am not sure why. It would explain the ‘MOTOR DRIVEN TURNING GEAR’ label inside the turret – assuming I have interpreted the rather indistinct third word correctly.


The Diaphone can be seen (just) in the 1950s photo of the Lady Dixon on station near Carrickfergus. (Photo)


I found a photo of an up-to-date version, which has the ‘deflector’ at the business end, although the noise-generating end has a 90° bend. (Photo)

The diaphone horn was based directly on the organ stop of the same name invented by Robert Hope-Jones creator of the Wurlitzer organ. Hope-Jones' design was based on a piston which was closed only at its bottom end and which had slots, perpendicular to its axis, cut through its sides; the slotted piston moved within a similarly slotted cylinder. (Photo)


Outside of the cylinder was a reservoir of high-pressure air. Initially, high-pressure air would be admitted behind the piston, pushing it forwards. When the slots of the piston aligned with those of the cylinder, air passed into the piston, making a sound and pushing the piston backwards to its starting position, whence the cycle would repeat. A modification of Hope-Jones' design was patented by John Pell Northey, who added a secondary compressed air supply to the piston in order to power it during both its forward and reverse strokes and thus create an even more powerful sound, which carried for miles. The entire horn apparatus was driven by a compressor.


There is unfortunately nothing remaining of this wonderful sea organ, but that is probably a good thing as the temptation to try it out would be overwhelming.

Thanks for that Goldie. I must find one!
David

Simon’s poor luck with his tradesmen continues. He thought he was having the odd bit of good fortune. Searching for some slate tiles for his new kitchen floor, he found 475 going for free in London. In addition, he was anxious to get rid of several large and very heavy sheets of rusty iron (old bulkheads?), which he could not manage on his own. A London scrap merchant agreed to come to Hoo and remove the sheets as a quid pro quo for collecting the tiles and bringing them to the ship. A good deal all round – but they didn’t turn up, so Simon had to go and get the tiles! On the other hand, Simon needs only 250 of those tiles and has still got the scrap for sale, so may well end up in profit!

Continuing my examination of the blueprints, I was interested to see that on the plan view of the galley the cooker is labelled ‘Aga’, while on the elevation it is labelled ‘Agha’. (Photo)

Accepting the first as the correct one, I contacted Aga and sent them a photo of the cooker, in the faint hope that they may still have some record of their 1940s products. They were extremely helpful and identified the cooker, not as an Aga, but as a Rayburn – a No3 Rayburn in fact. Not only that, they actually sent me a photocopy of a user’s handbook for that model and indicated that some parts may still be obtainable!(Photo)

Well with his new kitchen he does not need any more cooking appliances, but the words ‘all the hot water you need’ are very welcome. Besides the traditional background heat, this could supply a few radiators below deck. Mind you, moving 1.5cwt (75Kg) of fuel along that 400ft of causeway once a week ………

Although we accept that restoration as a lightship is out of the question, we are both determined to preserve anything that remains of the old Cormorant / Lady Dixon. So the Aga/Agha stays and I have been looking at the remains of the mizzen mast with its two booms.(Photo)
The anchor points of the two booms are still there, fore and aft of the mast, but there are also a number of other anchor/securing eyes close by, the purposes of which are not apparent. I have inserted a fake mizzen mast at the point it obviously emerged. (Photo)

Note also the temporary (nick) name plate hung there by a not-to-be-identified family member!
David

Hoping to save myself a December crossing to Belfast, I asked a friend over there if he would be prepared to do some preliminary research at the Public Records Office (Northern Ireland) – known for short as PRONI. Within a very few days he visited PRONI, but unfortunately chose the week they were in update mode and had only a skeleton staff working! However he did elicit some information about Lady Dixon and, following up these leads, I now know that PRONI does indeed have some Lady D records. The first group are the Master’s Log Books from 1943 to 1956. Each volume covers 3 or 4 years and contains 455 pages! As an example:-
Log Book of the Pilot Masters A. P. Kennedy and J. Owens, Deputy Pilot Master D. Hunt, on duty in the Lt. V. Lady Dixon, with folio entries under the headings of Date, Name of Pilots, Vessels Boarded, Tons, Time, Weather and Remarks and Watches (ie names of men on duty on each watch).

The second group are records of wireless traffic between the Harbour Office and Lady D from 1947 to 1957. There are 80 pages. This is titled as follows:-
Wireless Messages Sent and Received Between the Pilot Light Vessel Lady Dixon and the Harbour Office. Record of messages under headings of Date, Time, No., From, To, Message and Charge. Messages usually queries as regards time of arrival, weather conditions, docking instructions.

Now I cannot see myself copying three log book volumes of 455 pages each, nor 80 pages of wireless traffic. However, I think a few pages of each, bound in a posh cover, would be nice to have. Simon has also suggested we (i.e. I) should go through the log books and make a list of every man who served aboard from 1943 to 1956. My friend in NI has offered to accommodate me if I want to do any research over there, but I don’t think he realises how long Simon’s idea would take!

Meanwhile, back to mundane matters. The whole deck is now sealed with a combination of bitumen and rust proofing. The small area of teak decking at the bow, which we hoped to preserve, was too far gone and had to be removed. (Photo) This of course exposed bolt holes etc and these needed filling before the primer went on. (Photo)

The primer, applied with a dustpan and brush type of brush, needed a dry deck and some parts were obstinately damp. They had to be dried with a blow-torch (it is not the time of year to be waiting for a run of fine days!) and this took some time. The deck is now ready for the full process I described in an earlier post and meanwhile it is at least rain proof. (Photo)
David

Well done Harry Gibbon, who directed me to the Merchant Shipping Act of 1894. I have extracted the relevant bits from what is a huge tome....

Deductions for ascertaining tonnage.
In measuring or re-measuring a ship for the purpose of ascertaining her register tonnage, the following deductions shall be made from the space included in the measurement of the tonnage, namely:—
(i) any space used exclusively for the accommodation of the master; and any space occupied by seamen or apprentices and appropriated to their use, which is certified under the regulations scheduled to this Act with regard thereto.
(ii) any space used exclusively for the working of the helm, the capstan, and the anchor gear, or for keeping the chart, signals, and other instruments of navigation, and boatswains stores;

There must be permanently marked in or over every such space a notice stating the purpose to which it is to be applied, and that whilst so applied it is to be deducted from the tonnage of the ship:

The 66/60 therefore refers to the allowed deduction, not the actual.

I have just returned from spending two days with Simon aboard Cormorant / Lady Dixon / The Beast / The Lightship. I suppose the official name is ‘The Lightship’ as it is now registered with that name at National Historic Ships UK. A few days before I left home Simon reported that the kitchen ceiling was bugging him, as it had been rather badly plaster-boarded and bulged in waves down the length of the kitchen. So he took it all down again (Photo). He discovered large areas under there which had no insulating boards fitted. I wonder if that graffiti is original!
By the time I arrived all was well again and the plasterer has been booked to finish the job (Photo).

Wearing my historical research hat (one way of avoiding too much labouring!), I went over the ship with arc-lights and camera. My first investigation was the mast and the light operating mechanism I reported in an earlier post. I wanted to confirm the positioning of the shaft through the mast and sure enough it all lined up (Photo).
In addition, where that shaft emerged on the far side of the bulkhead on the left, the blueprints showed a pulley wheel with two wires going aloft through the roof / ceiling / overhead and sure enough there are two holes in exactly the expected spot (Photo).

I was rather saddened to find the remains of the mizzen mast, but at least it was being put to good use – keeping the ship away from the causeway (Photo). A neighbouring boat owner remembers it being cut down years ago because it was becoming dangerously rotten.

At least the riding lamp (is that the right terminology?) which is about 3ft in diameter, used to fit around the mizzen and be hauled up and down, is still aboard and reasonably intact. That and the other artefacts deserve a blog of their own, so watch this space.
David

I did not return from my visit to the ship empty handed. Simon gave me some homework to do. About 9 inches of the base of both ventilation funnels had rusted away in spite of being galvanised and some rust holes remained even on the main part of the funnel. (Photo)

The rusty part was cut away and two tubes manufactured out of 1mm galvanised sheet. The little blue car you can just see in the photo is my Austin 7 and the chap who sold me the sheet turned out to be an old car enthusiast. He was so enamoured of the car that he cut the two bits I needed out of a new sheet, rolled them into the tube shape required and charged me only £20. The deal is that, if and when I sell the car, I have to give him first refusal! The new tubes were welded onto the cleaned-up main parts and all bare metal and weld given a coat of zinc-rich primer. (Photo)

Everything will be given two coats of ‘High Build Vinyl’ in a biscuit colour to match the original colour – less some of the fading. We do not want the dreaded rust to take hold again. Simon wants the interiors to be pillar-box red. I will leave that to him.

Meanwhile, back on the historical front, the original cabin door does in fact open (we thought it was sealed) and has its own little artefact – a porthole. (Photos).

Ignore the modern coat hooks; I am sure we can find more appropriate ones! And we shall have to find a wing nut for the porthole as well.

Finally there is one surviving ‘Deck Light’ which is not the switch on/off type, but thick glass blocks set into a brass holder. (Photo)

This allowed natural light to get through to the lower deck. It is only about 9 inches long, so not much light would be getting through! The maker’s name is HAYWARD and the other inscription is PATENT. Simon is installing his own 3 ft long versions as you will have seen in an earlier post.
David

I have identified a fresh water tank under the deck of the lower deck – or in English, under the floor of the lower level! (Photo) There are/ were 16 of these containing a total of 30 tons of water. Considering that I stuck my hand (holding my camera) through a hole in the deck, this is not a bad photo!

Another structural photo taken on my trip was of the bow hawspipes (that’s better nauticalese) alongside the companionway. (Photo)

There are a lot of pretty sizeable nuts to be found around the vessel, some are a very pretty colour! (Photo)

Now it is puzzle corner. There are several objects fixed around the superstructure that I can only describe as ‘double horns’. Are they ventilation, lighting, tannoy or what? (Photo).
And there is a 2ft ‘post’ fixed right at the edge of the stern, with a cap on top. Ventilation?

No prizes for the right answers, but it would be nice to know!
David

Delving into the stern recess and taking away some rotting wood, the rudder tube was exposed. The uneven top is the result of hammering it down so that the new aft deck plating could be installed. I have included a ‘key’ so that the various bits can be identified. (Photos)

Some more history. Lego Legere put me on to a bit of European legislation from 1966, designed to curb the activities of pirate radio stations. Lady Dixon was destined to be ‘Great Britain OK’ (probably ‘OK Radio’ for short) and is specifically mentioned, along with more famous stations like Radio Caroline etc. The document is in French – I hope my translation is accurate …..

“The Suppression of the broadcasts by stations outside national territories. - National legislation and European Agreement. 1966
Great Britain OK has a radius of action covering the French and British coasts. It emits a wavelength already in use by stations in Stockholm, Spain and the Soviet Union. The station is installed on a vessel, the 'Lady Dixon', off the coast in the mouth of the River Thames”.

Of course Lady Dixon never made it out to her intended position as Customs & Excise seized all the radio equipment before she could be moved there. Spoil sports!

Amongst the documentation from the National Archives was a 1944 minute confirming that Cormorant had been registered as Lady Dixon (Photo).

The word ship is not used. There was a discussion going on about whether a vessel ‘not used in navigation’ could be called a ship. According to the Merchant Shipping Act of 1894, Cormorant was a lighthouse!


This was eventually fudged by allowing Lady Dixon to be registered as a ship so long as this did not imply that the matter was resolved. (Photo)

Other discussions concerned the use of the Pilots’ toilets by officers of the crew, and whether Belfast surveyors could claim special allowances if travelling to Dublin could be classified as ‘going abroad’.
Plus ça change.
David

I have found another possibly interesting document in the National Archives. The trouble is that search results have but a very brief description of content. My latest find is dated 1912 and states :-

“Board of Trade Harbour Department: Correspondence and Papers. Lights.
Sanction for expenditure by the Commissioners of Irish Lights for the provision of portable fire extinguishers at each lighthouse and lightship under their jurisdiction.”

The document is 29 pages long, costs £29 to copy and may contain only a mention of Cormorant as one of the many lightships and lighthouses to receive a portable fire extinguisher. However, the last two batches have been absolute gems, so I am taking a risk and ordering this one. I suppose the best way to proceed in an ideal world would be to go to the National Archives and examine what is on offer, but Kew is over 200 miles away. I think that will be all paper-wise until I can get over to the Public Record Office in Belfast to have a look at the Masters’ Logs and Crew Lists for Cormorant. At least I know what I am going to see.

I am on the trail of a contemporary Diaphone fog-horn, but unfortunately, even if I get it, the working parts are missing. If anyone knows where I might find some ……….

Two other small artefacts are still in situ – the side door in the superstructure has a brass handle matching the little porthole I mentioned in an earlier post and the bow companionway door has a quaint little handle which must date from at least the 1943 refurbishment. (Photos)

Meanwhile Simon is painting the kitchen a very nice shade of grey. He was about to reinstate the skylight (Photos) but a sheet of toughened glass turned out to be not so tough!

I know he’s my son, but I have to say he has been very resilient in the face of some pretty low blows from Fate!
David

More gems from the National Archives. On the 4th of October 1910 the Irish Lights Office (ILO) asked the Board of Trade (BoT) to agree to the purchase of 16 fire extinguishers for use on their light vessels, at a total cost of £54 (£4,500 in today’s money). Presumably therefore there were 16 light vessels being operated by the ILO in 1910. The letter, signed by Mr H. Cook, the ILO Secretary, was couched in charming, Victorian language (Photo).

Three officials at the BoT agreed to sanction this expenditure, but one awkward chap in F Dept stuck his oar in saying that the Trinity House lightships (about 60 of them) did not have these extinguishers and that, “ …having investigated the specifications for the Irish lightships, I see that it provides for water tanks and various pumps (including fire engine pump and hose) for flooding and washing. Should we not ask what provision is made at present and why it is considered inadequate?”

So, on 10 October, the BoT asked the ILO for details of existing provision and reasons why that provision was considered inadequate. On 4 November the ILO’s Mr Cook replied “I am directed to state, for the information of the Board of Trade, that the wood light vessels are fitted with portable 3” fire pumps of Messrs Stone’s manufacture, with hose long enough to reach any part of the vessel. In the steel, wood-sheathed and iron ships, in addition to the portable 3” fire pumps, there is in each vessel a 6” Stone’s pump of the Downton type with sea cock connection and hose, fire buckets also are borne in each vessel”.

Unfortunately Mr Cook did not elaborate on the second part of the BoT’s query (reasons why this provision was inadequate) and merely stated that the Commissioners considered that it would be advisable to supplement these appliances with a suitable patent Fire Extinguisher.

The BoT then sought ‘professional’ advice by asking a Capt Monro for his opinion. The good Captain thought the proposal ‘quite reasonable’, but then hedged his bets. (Photo).

The killjoy from F Dept then stuck in another oar saying there was no record of any fire on board a light vessel and recommended asking Trinity House for their opinion.

On 23 November Trinity House reported on the observations of the Elder Brethren (sic), saying that the provision on their light vessels was ‘regarded as sufficient for the purpose’ and went on to say that their appliances were practically the same as those on the Irish light vessels. Mr F Dept leapt in gleefully, saying that Trinity House had four times as many lightships as the ILO. I think he went rather over the top by suggesting that extra fire extinguishers were not needed as the Irish lightships were stationed near the coast and were provided with life boats‼ (Photo)
And so on 1 December 1910 the BoT informed the ILO the expenditure was not sanctioned. There it rested until two years later when the ILO had another go. On 7 August 1912 the new Secretary of the ILO, Mr J Philps, wrote “I am directed by the Commissioners of Irish Lights to state that they are convinced of the importance of furnishing lighthouses and lightships with efficient fire appliances…..”. Notice that lighthouses have crept in alongside lightships and the requested expenditure shot up to £278 (£19,000 today).
The Elder Brethren at Trinity House were again consulted and replied listing the provision of Chemical Fire Extinguishers at their 70 lighthouses – the list shows the name of the lighthouse; the number of extinguishers at each; and the location of each extinguisher (in the lamp room, the tower base, the dwelling or ‘other’). No lightships were listed and TH recommended that the ILO should state their reasons if they wanted provision on their lightships. However their letter concluded with the words “… should they consider further safeguards necessary on board their lightships, a portable Chemical Fire Extinguisher would perhaps best meet their needs”.
There seemed to be a softening of the BoT approach and the expenditure on the Irish lighthouses was approved, but F Dept was still muttering in the background against the lightships. On 5 October the ILO was again invited to state why they thought current provision was inadequate. On 8 October the ILO responded, but without any justification apart from saying they considered the supply of these fire extinguishers ‘absolutely necessary’. The reaction in the BoT was negative all the way up the food chain until the memos reached a Mr Robertson on 25 October. Swimming against the tide (Tide? What tide?) he merely opinoned that the request should be grants (Photo)
He must have been fairly senior as there was no more dissent, not even from F Dept, and the ILO were given sanction to spend the extra £40 :10s on 28 October 1912. Pity they did not go straight to Mr Robertson in October 1910.
David

It’s nice to see Simon making good progress and he certainly works hard enough in his ‘spare’ time. The story so far has shown the good bits and the bits that he has made good, but, even leaving aside the complete refurbishment of the cavernous areas below deck, there are a lot of bad bits which need to be addressed. These include the hull itself where the 136-year-old teak is showing its age. The massive beam which goes right round the edge of the ship (technical term please someone) has crumbled away in places – especially at the stern – and a previous owner has back filled it with concrete. This concrete is itself crumbling in places. I don’t know whether concrete is a recognised repair material, but I cannot think of any other way to fill a jagged hole easily. (Photo)

The ‘repairs’ go right around the stern and look quite fresh on the port side. (Photo)

Most of the sides of the hull look sound, but there are areas where close inspection and perhaps repairs are needed. The forward starboard area is a case in point (Photo)

As the vessel is floating higher than she was in her working days and will not (hopefully) be subjected to anything more than a gentle lifting and lowering on the tide, this may not be a problem. A good scrape and paint is indicated!

Wood rots and metal corrodes – especially when exposed to salty sea air and moisture. A temporary repair has been done on the lifeboat platform supports. Although the lifeboat and its davits have long since gone, the platform was definitely at risk. A more permanent repair will be effected. (Photo)

Finally, the old mizzen mast is doing a reasonable job keeping the ship off the mooring posts, but a gentler medium is needed. We found a neighbouring contractor about to dispose of some big dumper truck tyres, which will be ideal fenders. (Photo)

The only problem now is how to get them from N Wales to Kent‼
David

Fate continues to deal Simon some low blows. His Cherokee broke down (again) and this time it is terminal. It is very difficult to find a replacement vehicle without any transport to get around; while earning enough to keep the wolf from the door; while repairing the door; etc etc. Still, he remains cheerful. I am searching up here in N Wales, but of course that means getting any vehicle down to Kent if I succeed.

My trip to the Public Records Office in Belfast is now arranged. I am allowing two days to peruse their records of wireless traffic between the Harbour authorities and the Lady Dixon, plus the Masters’ log books of the ship from 1943 to 1956 – and anything else I can find!

Meanwhile the Devil finds work ……. I am on the track of a Diaphone fog-horn to replace the one missing from the ship. You will remember that it was shown on the 1943 blueprints I got from the National Archives (Photo).

Unfortunately it is proving difficult to get a decision from the owners. Only the ‘trumpet’ remains, but it would be a start. So meanwhile I have had a cunning plan.

Simon needs some sort of doorbell to alert him to visitors when he is working in the depths. So I have made use of a redundant speaker to provide a basis for a very appropriate alerting system.

First I gutted it, then made up a little circuit board (a kit of parts purchased from Germany) which required some delicate soldering. I also purchased a suitable little speaker, made a mounting board for it and installed a push-button to operate the device. (Photo).

The finished article looks very smart (Photo) and makes quite a good sound. I had to zip the mpv file, but try it if you can....
David

Just a couple of small items, finishing touches and odds and ends. The skylight has been finished off nicely on the outside with metal cladding (Photo).
The inside has been packed, plaster-boarded and plastered. It just remains to add a bit of paint and that’s another project finished (Photo).
The toughened, double-glazed glass came with integral venetian-type blind. I don’t think it functions when the glass is horizontal, but there is plenty of light coming through and on a hot summer’s day (we wish!) I think Simon will be glad it is not clear glass.

With a few hours to spare, Simon set about the entrance hatch to the forward companionway. This was very rusty and holed in places. Some time ago it was welded up and this week Simon stripped and painted it. It looks much better now, but shows up the door, which needs stripping and varnishing. (Photo)

So I am off to Belfast on Monday to see what the Public Records Office has to offer concerning the Lady Dixon from 1943 to 1956, when she was moored off Carrickfergus in the dual role of lightship and pilot station. Incidentally, I apologise for some careless writing in earlier blogs when I referred to Lady Dixon as the Harbour Master’s wife. The Cormorant was in fact renamed after a Harbour Commissioner’s wife - most probably Lady Edith Dixon, married to Sir Thomas James Dixon, whose names were given to one of Belfast’s best-known parks in 1959. Alternatively, the vessel may have been named after Sir Thomas’s mother, Lady Eliza.
David

To help the Belfast Harbour Commissioners come to a decision about buying Cormorant from Dublin, the surveyors they sent down to examine the ship were Messrs James Maxton & Co. Google told me they are still in business and, more in hope than expectation, I sent off an e-mail asking if they have any records of the survey. The reply was swift but disappointing – their offices were destroyed in a WWII blitz. The firm was also tasked to produce ‘an outline specification and drawing of the adaptions which would be necessary to make the vessel suitable for the pilotage service’. The blueprints from which I obtained copies must have been drawn up from those Maxton documents and they are labelled ‘Liffey Dockyard’, where the work was done. Maxtons were also paid ‘200 guineas’ to supervise the work. You may remember the correspondence I found back in October, which debated what allowances the surveyors should receive for travelling from Belfast to Dublin. Those were the Maxton surveyors and they received only ‘normal’ expenses as Dublin was not considered to be ‘abroad’!


Another little nugget from the minutes enabled me to plot the location of the Lady Dixon during her time on station in Belfast Lough. All I knew before my visit was that she was stationed ‘off Carrickfergus’ and to me that meant a few hundred yards from shore, warning ships off the Carrickfergus rocks. The only photo we had of the ship on station was taken in the 1950s by Wil Smith (New Zealand) and showed a rather distant shoreline (Photo).



I thought perhaps the photo had been taken from the Carrickfergus shore. However, in the minutes of June 1942, where the purchase of a lightship was discussed, it was stated that it would be stationed in Belfast Lough ‘mid-way between No1 Buoy, Victoria Channel, and Grey Point’.

Well assuming that the location of No1 Buoy has not changed much – 1.5 miles SE of Carrickfergus – and Grey Point is easily found on local maps, it has been possible to estimate (note the word!) where Lady Dixon was moored, and it is right across on the south side of the Lough (Photo), which explains the photo.

All this was of course very exciting (am I turning into a nerd?) but there was more to come.


I continued my trawl through the library of the Belfast Harbour Commissioners, having found plenty of interesting nuggets in the early minute books. In September 1943 “The Chairman intimated that, in accordance with the wishes of the Board, he had asked Lady Dixon, D.B.E., J.P., wife of their esteemed colleague, The Rt. Hon. Sir Thomas J. Dixon, Bart., H.M.L., if she would consent to the pilot lightship “Cormorant” (which name the Board desired to alter) being named after her, and that Lady Dixon had kindly consented”. Well that settled my question as to whether the ship was named after Sir Thomas’ wife or mother. It was resolved “That the pilot lightship be named “Lady Dixon”, and that the grateful thanks of the Commissioners be conveyed to Lady Dixon for the honour which she has conferred upon them by allowing the vessel to bear her name”. Isn’t the language lovely? This is of course the period when the Master of the lightship, Mr A.P. Kennedy, did not know what name to write in the headings of his log pages!

Things soon became rather routine and repetitive in the Minutes, as they had in the Log Books and not wishing to take undue advantage of the Commissioners’ generosity, I kept the free photocopying down to a minimum and made extensive notes. These tell me that in January 1955, the ship’s repair bills were mounting – well she was 83 years old by this time. Her regular overhaul cost a total of £1,760 (over £57,000 today) although this did include examination and renewal of her mooring. This did not include ‘repairs to the Aga and Esse cookers, the Pilots’ Mess Room heater, any repairs needed underneath, nor the repairs to the boarding platform damaged on 8 December 1954 in a gale’. The last entry in the last Log Book available was on 14 September 1956, but the Minutes continued and included a commendation from the Commissioners to the pilots and crew of the Lady Dixon for the rescue of three occupants of a small yacht which capsized in Belfast Lough on 7 September 1958. The end was fast approaching, but I will deal with that next time.

The final nugget I found before I left the Commissioners was a big one. There were several photograph albums on the shelves and in one I struck real gold! Up until then, the only photograph we had of Lady Dixon was Wil Smith’s. In one of the albums I found not one, but three photographs of the ship taken on 21 May 1957. Any doubts I may have had about Wil’s photo being of the Lady Dixon were dispelled because the name is clearly visible on two of the photographs and the planking of the ‘boarding platform’ at the stern can be seen. This platform had caused me doubts because it made the stern look very rectangular – not at all like the ship as she is now (and was underneath the platform). (Photos)
David