by Guest » July 21, 2010, 5:56 pm
Hi, this is guest, from Toledo, again,
I'm little surprised there are so few views and 0 replies to this post for any photos of HCJ from 1959 to the mid 70's. You usually get a great response to your posts. It's quite unusual, if not a mystery, why there are no photos for the first 16 years HCJ sailed.
Why would have the HCJ looked different from her launch in 1959 to conversions in the mid 70's? HCJ was built for coal fuel & there had to be a coal bunker aft which "disappeared" in the conversion to fuel oil. There would have been no massive discharge boom aft if it was installed in the mid 70's. The stack is too short for any natural draft for coal-fired boilers. If the HCJ's stack is original, it would have needed fans for the draft issue. A quite different looking ship in 1959 from the HCJ today and no photos.
With this additional information, maybe some other replies, and photos, will come from this post. Thanks.
- Attachments
-

- The original HCJ before conversions in mid-70's.
Hi, this is guest, from Toledo, again,
I'm little surprised there are so few views and 0 replies to this post for any photos of HCJ from 1959 to the mid 70's. You usually get a great response to your posts. It's quite unusual, if not a mystery, why there are no photos for the first 16 years HCJ sailed.
Why would have the HCJ looked different from her launch in 1959 to conversions in the mid 70's? HCJ was built for coal fuel & there had to be a coal bunker aft which "disappeared" in the conversion to fuel oil. There would have been no massive discharge boom aft if it was installed in the mid 70's. The stack is too short for any natural draft for coal-fired boilers. If the HCJ's stack is original, it would have needed fans for the draft issue. A quite different looking ship in 1959 from the HCJ today and no photos.
With this additional information, maybe some other replies, and photos, will come from this post. Thanks.