Printed sources for Turkish merchant shipping losses in WW1?
Re: Printed sources for Turkish merchant shipping losses in WW1?
part 8
- Attachments
-
- T016.jpg (201.89 KiB) Viewed 17114 times
-
- T015.jpg (458.17 KiB) Viewed 17114 times
Re: Printed sources for Turkish merchant shipping losses in WW1?
Hello Maurice,
Thanks for posting these old "Nautibel" lists, but unfortunately they are very incorrect and outdated. The same is for the lists published in "Belgian Shiplover". When they were published a long time ago they were useful for researchers, because nearly no one cared about Ottoman-Turkish ships, but after all these years of ongoing researches they seem to be sometimes very very wrong in the fate and the pre-Turkish history of the vessels not to mention the sometimes wrong writing of the vessels names. For todays researchers they may lead to incorrect suggeestions and conclusions.
Regards,
Jochen
Thanks for posting these old "Nautibel" lists, but unfortunately they are very incorrect and outdated. The same is for the lists published in "Belgian Shiplover". When they were published a long time ago they were useful for researchers, because nearly no one cared about Ottoman-Turkish ships, but after all these years of ongoing researches they seem to be sometimes very very wrong in the fate and the pre-Turkish history of the vessels not to mention the sometimes wrong writing of the vessels names. For todays researchers they may lead to incorrect suggeestions and conclusions.
Regards,
Jochen
Re: Printed sources for Turkish merchant shipping losses in WW1?
Merci Maurice Thank you!
For me its Christmas in February.
The problem is not the List. The problem is the three difficult languages to learn with funny alphabets.
Russian (Cerilic) Turk,no formal language rules pre revolution, and of course English. Also three different
calendars lunar, Julian and Gregorian. But i believe that I'm working it out however slowly.
again most grateful to you Maurice
Respectfully,
Joe R
For me its Christmas in February.
The problem is not the List. The problem is the three difficult languages to learn with funny alphabets.
Russian (Cerilic) Turk,no formal language rules pre revolution, and of course English. Also three different
calendars lunar, Julian and Gregorian. But i believe that I'm working it out however slowly.
again most grateful to you Maurice
Respectfully,
Joe R
Re: Printed sources for Turkish merchant shipping losses in WW1?
Are Iskondar and Uskudar the same ship? https://www.clydeships.co.uk/view.php?y ... CRAIGFORTH and see Istanbul's message from Feb.18.
They sure look like identical twins to me Except for how and where "Craigforth" was sunk.
Besides Uskudar mentioned above, I could only find one other. 72 ÜSKÜDAR: 192Tde, F. Schichau GmbH in Elbing, Germany. was built as a passenger ferry at its stalls. It was 148 gross, 64 net tons, and its boat was made of steel. Its length was 33.1 meters, the width was 6.6 meters, and the water section was 2.1 meters. F. Schichau made, 350 horsepower tripil (3-cylinder) steam machine, it was good. It entered service in September 1927. It was speeding 8 miles per hour. It could accommodate 344 passengers in summer / winter. On March 1, 1958, in the Gulf of Izmit, Gölcük caused a major disaster by sinking from the storm. It was removed in the same year and sold as debris. It was a 31-year boat. This one does NOT fit.
Can some esteemed member of this forum please explain.
Respectfully,
Joe R
They sure look like identical twins to me Except for how and where "Craigforth" was sunk.
Besides Uskudar mentioned above, I could only find one other. 72 ÜSKÜDAR: 192Tde, F. Schichau GmbH in Elbing, Germany. was built as a passenger ferry at its stalls. It was 148 gross, 64 net tons, and its boat was made of steel. Its length was 33.1 meters, the width was 6.6 meters, and the water section was 2.1 meters. F. Schichau made, 350 horsepower tripil (3-cylinder) steam machine, it was good. It entered service in September 1927. It was speeding 8 miles per hour. It could accommodate 344 passengers in summer / winter. On March 1, 1958, in the Gulf of Izmit, Gölcük caused a major disaster by sinking from the storm. It was removed in the same year and sold as debris. It was a 31-year boat. This one does NOT fit.
Can some esteemed member of this forum please explain.
Respectfully,
Joe R
Re: Printed sources for Turkish merchant shipping losses in WW1?
The word "Iskondar" doesn`t exists in Turkish language and it is an example how wrong most of the Western sources sometimes writes Turkish words. The only correct writing is "ÜSKÜDAR" which is a districht of Istanbul.
On 04.05.1915 no steamship was sunk by the Russians and only the small AMALIA flying Italian flag was captured by KAGUL.
Regards,
Istanbul
On 04.05.1915 no steamship was sunk by the Russians and only the small AMALIA flying Italian flag was captured by KAGUL.
Regards,
Istanbul
Re: Printed sources for Turkish merchant shipping losses in WW1?
Istanbul, Thanks for taking the time to find an answer. Wrecksite and Clydeships list the ship, the one that
is not a Turkish word. Must have been lost in translation.
Respectfully,
Joe R
is not a Turkish word. Must have been lost in translation.
Respectfully,
Joe R