Talk:SS Waratah

South Africa Low‑importance

	South Africa portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject South Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of South Africa on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.South AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject South AfricaTemplate:WikiProject South AfricaSouth Africa
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Ships

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ships, a project to improve all Ship-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other articles, please join the project, or contribute to the project discussion. All interested editors are welcome. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.ShipsWikipedia:WikiProject ShipsTemplate:WikiProject ShipsShips

Australia: Maritime Mid‑importance

	Australia portal SS Waratah is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Australian maritime history (assessed as Low-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Shipwrecks High‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Shipwrecks, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of shipwreck-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ShipwrecksWikipedia:WikiProject ShipwrecksTemplate:WikiProject ShipwrecksShipwreck

High

This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Shipwreck-related priority open tasks:

To Do

Lady Elizabeth (1879)
- Clean up typos Currently working on it-----Completed!
- Improve grammar
- Add any additions if needed Still adding more information
- Discuss desired additions -None

Ratings

High importance for shipwrecks, due to legendary status. This article needs expansion, an infobox, and more referrences to get rated higher than start, in my opinion. Pustelnik (talk) 03:58, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation

There appears to be another ship of this name used for private charters in Sydney Harbour area.

See: "What luck to spend the night on a Victorian coal steamer on Lake Titicaca" article by Matthew Parris, The Spectator, 5 March 2011

“The coal-fired steam-engined tug, Waratah, was launched in Sydney in 1902; nearly scrapped in 1968; then saved by the Sydney HeritageFleet and completely and authentically restored. She makes her living today from private charters, and was carrying a party of sightseers drawn to the arrival of her two great, distant and much younger sisters. The Waratah is about 100 feet long; the Queen Mary 2 more than 40 times that length. The Waratah carries 49 passengers; the two great ships some 3,000 each.”

http://www.spectator.co.uk/columnists/all/6745728/what-luck-to-spend-the-night-on-a-victorian-coal-steamer-on-lake-titicaca.thtml

I can't find a reference to this vessel in Wikipedia, but I am not experienced or very familiar with the system. Apologies if this is irrelevant. Dawright12 (talk) 09:01, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not very got at sums, Mr Parris. By his lights the Queen Mary 2 would be over 4,000 feet long... Mr Larrington (talk) 12:29, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Capsize

Most theories about the loss of this ship involve it capsizing. In the 1950s there was an acoount which stated that the low cost passenger section had proved so lucrative that an extra deck had been added at some later stage and not shown on the original building plans.

If this is correct, being top heavy, this would account for the perculiar rolling and being capsized by a large wave.AT Kunene (talk) 09:29, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The experts

In the 1950s the late Alan Viliers had a BBC TV series "Sea and Ships" and devoted one programme to the "Waratah" and concluded that the ship was top heavy and therefore unstable.

The distinguished naval architect K.C.Barnaby investigated the loss of this ship and also concluded that the ship was unstable.AT Kunene (talk) 09:38, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The experts

In the 1950s the late Alan Viliers had a BBC TV series "Sea and Ships" and devoted one programme to the "Waratah" and concluded that the ship was top heavy and therefore unstable.

The distinguished naval architect K.C.Barnaby investigated the loss of this ship and also concluded that the ship was unstable.AT Kunene (talk) 09:39, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

New research

After some more research a plausible explanation now becomes possible. The earlier steamship had proved very successful and a larger version was to be designed and built, later called Waratah. In trying to increase the first class accommodation the new design included an extra upper deck.

It was a tight specification and the extra upper deck made the ship top heavy. Design wise, too much was attempted on too small a ship. It seems rather unfortunate that the ship encountered very heavy weather before experience was gained in stowing cargo to counteract the design defect or the extra deck could be removed.

It was two weeks before a search for the "Waratah" got started by which time any remains would have been rapidly dispersed by the fast currents that sweep round the Cape of Good Hope. In the end there seems to be little mystery in that a small, unstable, ship encountered very heavy weather and sank. The only real mystery seems to be exactly where the ship actually sank.AT Kunene (talk) 10:08, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Linked

I have added this ship to the List of ocean liners.Ad Orientem (talk) 20:00, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Popular References

A new search for SS Waratah -- "the Australian Titantic" -- was mentioned in the April 4, 2024 episode of the U.S television show Elementary. 173.58.232.212 (talk) 23:31, 4 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

capacity

Contemporary newspaper reports say the ship was equipped for first and third class passenger. It states that all of the first class cabins were on the bridge deck. Looking at photographs of the ship, I would say that Harris' alleged claim that the ship had 100 first class cabins, as highly dubious. It is also currently stated, and apparently attributed to Harris, that the ship had room for 700 third class passengers. However, contemporary newspaper reports say 300 passengers, which is much more plausible for a ship of this size which was also equipped to carry substantial cargo. For example, see ^[1]Lathamibird (talk) 17:42, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I can't recall where I read it, but I seem to recall that Waratah was designed for up to 700 steerage passengers outbound when her cargo holds were partly empty but only 300 on the return voyage to Britain due to the space being given over to cargo. I will see if I can find a source for that. Until then my memory should not be treated as a reliable source. -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:01, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ "LUND'S BLUE ANCHOR LINE". The Australian Star. No. 6514. New South Wales, Australia. 26 September 1908. p. 14. Retrieved 21 July 2016 – via National Library of Australia.

Name

"It was named Waratah after the emblem flower of New South Wales, Australia, "

Is there an actual source for this assertion ? Wilhelm Lund's mansion at Chislehurst, Kent, was named "Waratah", about 15 years before the ship was constructed. He might have named it after his house.... Lathamibird (talk) 05:58, 22 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Daily Mail hoax article?

In the "Aftermath" section, there's a mention of the Daily Mail publishing a hoax article about the Waratah being found in Antarctica and the Daily Standard repeating the story with extra details. There are linked citations to the Standard'ss articles, but not even the title or date of the Mail'ss original article is mentioned. Does anyone know if this article is still available? I've tried a bit of searching on my own and haven't been able to turn up anything, but I honestly don't know much about how to go about digging up archived back issues of newspapers, so my efforts really didn't amount to much more than doing a Google search for "Daily Mail" alongside various keywords, which may not be the most effective way of going about it.

Citing the original article probably isn't necessary for meeting the Verifiability Guidelines, but I'm sure anyone interested in that part of the story would appreciate having it anyway. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BrokenEye3 (talk • contribs) 08:14, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Poor terminology and incorrect information

Capsize theory uses slang to describe the rogue wave that likely sank Waratah.

Wreckage which can definitively be identified as of the Waratah was found on numerous occasions after her disappearance, and it is easy to connect the dots between the recovered wreckage and the wreckage of other capsized vessels, ex. Koombana. Testimony from two sources on land report without a shadow of a doubt sighting the Waratah struggling in the high seas and not long after being sank by rogue wave. Waratah's plans clearly indicate the gravity-based fixture of her machinery to her bottom, much like virtually every other ship of her era. It is certain without a shadow of a doubt that this machinery would be dislodged by her capsizing, as was seen with most other capsizing ships of her day.

The illogical nature of all theories presented except for the rogue wave theory should be pointed out. It is highly unlikely that 300 tons of lead ore concentrate would sink a ship over 10k tons heavier than it. Additionally Waratah was not viewed as unsinkable. Quite the opposite, she quickly became viewed as infamous after her maiden voyage.

Sydney harbour pilots are reported to have been the first people to theorise that Waratah did not sink but broke down and foundered on Antarctica. This should be noted. Basil4383 (talk) 01:56, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

All needs to be properly sourced etc. I don't know of any confirmed wreckage from the ship, and I've read fairly extensively about it. I'm aware of the claimed sighting of the ship capsizing, it is already mentioned in the article, however it is not definitive as it was in the wrong location for where the ship should have been on that date, and the story didn't come to light until 20 years after the disappearance. G-13114 (talk) 18:21, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

[1] "LUND'S BLUE ANCHOR LINE". The Australian Star. No. 6514. New South Wales, Australia. 26 September 1908. p. 14. Retrieved 21 July 2016 – via National Library of Australia.

[1]