Talk:SS Oceanic (1870)

Untitled

Can somebody clarify "gross tonnage"? Is this (as I presume) a ref to grt? Trekphiler 20:50, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

See the entry for Tonnage for information. Akradecki 19:15, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Questions

From a direct descendant of the people who built the Oceanic, I heard that (1) she had a single screw, and (2) an important aspect of her profitability was the entertainment provided aboard, which was considered extraordinary; if I recall correctly, it included musical comedies by Gilbert & Sullivan. Unfree (talk) 23:59, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Sounds unlikely that such entertainment would have been held onboard, other than spontaneously by passengers. FarbrorJoakim (talk) 21:36, 2 July 2022 (UTC)

Rig

Is the rig not that of a four-masted barque, rather than ship-rig? Kablammo (talk) 14:47, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

I am changing it to barque, as stated here. Kablammo (talk) 15:28, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

Page move without discussion

This page has been moved from SS Oceanic (1870) to RMS Oceanic (1870) without discussion and without references, just a jingoistic claim about her being British. The editor concerned appears to be confusing her with the later ship of the same name. I intend to revert the move unless anyone can come up with evidence that she was certified as a Royal Mail ship. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 16:04, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

I find it fascinating how much people care so deeply about this particular prefix. That aside—from a cited statement in White Star Line, it looks like they started using RMS in 1877, so at best Oceanic wouldn't have used the prefix until then. This 1912 source and this 2018 source uses SS, but one modern source uses RMS [1]. Many other sources don't use any prefix at all, e.g. 1911 Britannica, The Times. Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 17:05, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

Your modern source applies to the second ship of the name, the 1899 version. By 1877 she was on charter to an American line so wouldn't have been used forRoyal Mail work.Murgatroyd49 (talk) 17:59, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

@Murgatroyd49 and The ed17: I've started a requested move discussion. Please feel free to join in. Mjroots (talk) 05:25, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

Requested move 20 August 2023

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: consensus not to move the page to the proposed title at this time, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 08:35, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

---

SS Oceanic (1870) → RMS Oceanic (1870) – Per the above discussion, we need to thrash this issue out to settle the article title. That she flew the blue ensign does add a little weight to the claim for RMS Oceanic above SS Oceanic. Mjroots (talk) 05:23, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

The designation RMS didn't come into use until two years after the Oceanic was leased to Occidental and Oriental, an American company, for use on Pacific Ocean services. In that service she flew the Stars and Stripes, not the Blue Ensign. The whole business is caused by confusion between her and her later successor. The page has been moved before because of the same mistaken identity. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 07:17, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose I can only assume that the proposed change, made earlier by A normal commentor (talk), resulted from mistaken reference to RMS Oceanic (1899). White Star Line did not have a Royal Mail contract until the reorganisation of December 1877, by which time Oceanic was indeed being operated by an American company in the Pacific. It is true that sometimes WSL referred to Oceanic and her cohorts as "mail ships", but this was founded on their contract with the US Post Office, not the Royal Mail.

I think that the comments about the British ensign are a blue herring. I have not found a source for either the wearing of the Blue ensign by this ship, or for such use being authorised by holding a RM contract. If it was actually worn, it would most likely have been as a consequence of the ship meeting the manning requirments for a certain number of former RN personnel or RN reservists, introduced in 1864. (Incidentally, Oceanic remained on the British register throughout her charter to OandO, and would not have flown the US flag as an ensign, thou maybe as a masthead courtesy flag from time to time, as here.) Davidships (talk) 13:42, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

@Davidships: are you saying the blue ensign is more likely than not to be incorrect. If so, we should change to the red ensign in the infobox. Mjroots (talk) 17:52, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

@Mjroots:Yes. It was changed from the red ensign a decade ago with summary "RMS, not civil", which is a mistaken concept. Olympia was always a civil merchant ship. Davidships (talk) 19:13, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 13:46, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose. Kablammo (talk) 13:53, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose per above. Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 18:00, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose unless there's proof that it held a Royal Mail contract, which seems quite unlikely. G-13114 (talk) 18:17, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose - unless reliable sourcing can be provided that shows this ship had the "RMS" prefix and was/is more commonly known with it over the "SS" prefix. - wolf 02:16, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
• Comment - I think we're now at a stage where an uninvolved editor can close this discussion. Mjroots (talk) 05:40, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.