Approximately how much travel time was saved by the opening of the Suez Canal in 1869? Unicorn Meta Zoo #1: Why another podcast? Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar ManaraHow long would it take to travel from the United Kingdom to America in 1890?How is Gaddafi viewed outside the West?Why did the attempts to keep Africa colonized after World War II fail?Travel time for African Slave tradeWhich trade route took the longest (in time) to travel?How much contact did Sub-Saharan Africa actually have with the rest of the world since the beginning of civilization?Why hasn't Sub-Sahan African developed as fast as other regions between the beginning of civilisation and European colonialism?Why did Europeans and Asian countries develop much faster than African countriesParchment and papyrus costs in Roman EmpireHow did the ancestors of proto-Malagasy in South Borneo reach Madagascar?Are there records of US slaves who practiced Islam following their import from Africa?

PIC mathematical operations weird problem

How to translate "red flag" into Spanish?

What were wait-states, and why was it only an issue for PCs?

My admission is revoked after accepting the admission offer

What is a 'Key' in computer science?

Co-worker works way more than he should

What's the difference between using dependency injection with a container and using a service locator?

What is a good way to write CSS for multiple borders?

Raising a bilingual kid. When should we introduce the majority language?

How did Elite on the NES work?

Change doc string summary of a function on the fly

Will I lose my paid in full property

Where did Arya get these scars?

RIP Packet Format

Retract an already submitted recommendation letter (written for an undergrad student)

"Working on a knee"

How can I wire a 9-position switch so that each position turns on one more LED than the one before?

Like totally amazing interchangeable sister outfit accessory swapping or whatever

Marquee sign letters

/bin/ls sorts differently than just ls

Writing a T-SQL stored procedure to receive 4 numbers and insert them into a table

Why does the Cisco show run command not show the full version, while the show version command does?

Is a self contained air-bullet cartridge feasible?

Using a map function on a 'Map' to change values



Approximately how much travel time was saved by the opening of the Suez Canal in 1869?



Unicorn Meta Zoo #1: Why another podcast?
Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar ManaraHow long would it take to travel from the United Kingdom to America in 1890?How is Gaddafi viewed outside the West?Why did the attempts to keep Africa colonized after World War II fail?Travel time for African Slave tradeWhich trade route took the longest (in time) to travel?How much contact did Sub-Saharan Africa actually have with the rest of the world since the beginning of civilization?Why hasn't Sub-Sahan African developed as fast as other regions between the beginning of civilisation and European colonialism?Why did Europeans and Asian countries develop much faster than African countriesParchment and papyrus costs in Roman EmpireHow did the ancestors of proto-Malagasy in South Borneo reach Madagascar?Are there records of US slaves who practiced Islam following their import from Africa?










18















Understanding that there were a few variables involved, approximately how much travel time was saved by no longer having to travel around Africa after the opening of the Suez Canal in 1869?










share|improve this question

















  • 8





    It depends on where you're travelling from and to. If you're sailing from one end of the canal to the other, then it's the transit time of the canal (162 km) vs the circumnavigation of Africa (9,654km).

    – Steve Bird
    Apr 5 at 7:44











  • Hi Ross! I assume you mean "how much time was saved in a year". Is that right?

    – axsvl77
    Apr 5 at 7:54






  • 4





    I can't speak for the poster, but if it were me I'd take it as "From the UK to India", as that's what its main purpose ended up being, despite it being a French-led effort (and why the UK eventually felt the need to take it over)

    – T.E.D.
    Apr 5 at 13:14







  • 2





    Do you mean travel time for a passenger, or ship time? After all, before the canal it would seem obvious for passengers (or time-critical cargo like mail) to disembark at one side of Suez, travel across on land, and get on a different ship on the other side for the remainder of the journey.

    – jamesqf
    Apr 5 at 16:43






  • 1





    Did anyone else see this question in the HNQ and think it was asking about how much time travel was involved?

    – Obie 2.0
    Apr 7 at 13:27















18















Understanding that there were a few variables involved, approximately how much travel time was saved by no longer having to travel around Africa after the opening of the Suez Canal in 1869?










share|improve this question

















  • 8





    It depends on where you're travelling from and to. If you're sailing from one end of the canal to the other, then it's the transit time of the canal (162 km) vs the circumnavigation of Africa (9,654km).

    – Steve Bird
    Apr 5 at 7:44











  • Hi Ross! I assume you mean "how much time was saved in a year". Is that right?

    – axsvl77
    Apr 5 at 7:54






  • 4





    I can't speak for the poster, but if it were me I'd take it as "From the UK to India", as that's what its main purpose ended up being, despite it being a French-led effort (and why the UK eventually felt the need to take it over)

    – T.E.D.
    Apr 5 at 13:14







  • 2





    Do you mean travel time for a passenger, or ship time? After all, before the canal it would seem obvious for passengers (or time-critical cargo like mail) to disembark at one side of Suez, travel across on land, and get on a different ship on the other side for the remainder of the journey.

    – jamesqf
    Apr 5 at 16:43






  • 1





    Did anyone else see this question in the HNQ and think it was asking about how much time travel was involved?

    – Obie 2.0
    Apr 7 at 13:27













18












18








18


2






Understanding that there were a few variables involved, approximately how much travel time was saved by no longer having to travel around Africa after the opening of the Suez Canal in 1869?










share|improve this question














Understanding that there were a few variables involved, approximately how much travel time was saved by no longer having to travel around Africa after the opening of the Suez Canal in 1869?







trade africa






share|improve this question













share|improve this question











share|improve this question




share|improve this question










asked Apr 5 at 7:35









Ross AlexanderRoss Alexander

9916




9916







  • 8





    It depends on where you're travelling from and to. If you're sailing from one end of the canal to the other, then it's the transit time of the canal (162 km) vs the circumnavigation of Africa (9,654km).

    – Steve Bird
    Apr 5 at 7:44











  • Hi Ross! I assume you mean "how much time was saved in a year". Is that right?

    – axsvl77
    Apr 5 at 7:54






  • 4





    I can't speak for the poster, but if it were me I'd take it as "From the UK to India", as that's what its main purpose ended up being, despite it being a French-led effort (and why the UK eventually felt the need to take it over)

    – T.E.D.
    Apr 5 at 13:14







  • 2





    Do you mean travel time for a passenger, or ship time? After all, before the canal it would seem obvious for passengers (or time-critical cargo like mail) to disembark at one side of Suez, travel across on land, and get on a different ship on the other side for the remainder of the journey.

    – jamesqf
    Apr 5 at 16:43






  • 1





    Did anyone else see this question in the HNQ and think it was asking about how much time travel was involved?

    – Obie 2.0
    Apr 7 at 13:27












  • 8





    It depends on where you're travelling from and to. If you're sailing from one end of the canal to the other, then it's the transit time of the canal (162 km) vs the circumnavigation of Africa (9,654km).

    – Steve Bird
    Apr 5 at 7:44











  • Hi Ross! I assume you mean "how much time was saved in a year". Is that right?

    – axsvl77
    Apr 5 at 7:54






  • 4





    I can't speak for the poster, but if it were me I'd take it as "From the UK to India", as that's what its main purpose ended up being, despite it being a French-led effort (and why the UK eventually felt the need to take it over)

    – T.E.D.
    Apr 5 at 13:14







  • 2





    Do you mean travel time for a passenger, or ship time? After all, before the canal it would seem obvious for passengers (or time-critical cargo like mail) to disembark at one side of Suez, travel across on land, and get on a different ship on the other side for the remainder of the journey.

    – jamesqf
    Apr 5 at 16:43






  • 1





    Did anyone else see this question in the HNQ and think it was asking about how much time travel was involved?

    – Obie 2.0
    Apr 7 at 13:27







8




8





It depends on where you're travelling from and to. If you're sailing from one end of the canal to the other, then it's the transit time of the canal (162 km) vs the circumnavigation of Africa (9,654km).

– Steve Bird
Apr 5 at 7:44





It depends on where you're travelling from and to. If you're sailing from one end of the canal to the other, then it's the transit time of the canal (162 km) vs the circumnavigation of Africa (9,654km).

– Steve Bird
Apr 5 at 7:44













Hi Ross! I assume you mean "how much time was saved in a year". Is that right?

– axsvl77
Apr 5 at 7:54





Hi Ross! I assume you mean "how much time was saved in a year". Is that right?

– axsvl77
Apr 5 at 7:54




4




4





I can't speak for the poster, but if it were me I'd take it as "From the UK to India", as that's what its main purpose ended up being, despite it being a French-led effort (and why the UK eventually felt the need to take it over)

– T.E.D.
Apr 5 at 13:14






I can't speak for the poster, but if it were me I'd take it as "From the UK to India", as that's what its main purpose ended up being, despite it being a French-led effort (and why the UK eventually felt the need to take it over)

– T.E.D.
Apr 5 at 13:14





2




2





Do you mean travel time for a passenger, or ship time? After all, before the canal it would seem obvious for passengers (or time-critical cargo like mail) to disembark at one side of Suez, travel across on land, and get on a different ship on the other side for the remainder of the journey.

– jamesqf
Apr 5 at 16:43





Do you mean travel time for a passenger, or ship time? After all, before the canal it would seem obvious for passengers (or time-critical cargo like mail) to disembark at one side of Suez, travel across on land, and get on a different ship on the other side for the remainder of the journey.

– jamesqf
Apr 5 at 16:43




1




1





Did anyone else see this question in the HNQ and think it was asking about how much time travel was involved?

– Obie 2.0
Apr 7 at 13:27





Did anyone else see this question in the HNQ and think it was asking about how much time travel was involved?

– Obie 2.0
Apr 7 at 13:27










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















36














That would have depended on the ship and your destination.



To get a sense of the savings (the travel times are from today), consider the presentation that's referenced on the Suez Canal wiki page.



Hormuz to London



As a point of comparison, London to New York is a bit over 3,300 nautical miles (6,200km) when traveling by sea. So going through Suez when traveling from Hormuz to London is like avoiding a trip and a half across the Atlantic.



This separate question has a few sources where you will likely be able to locate how much savings in days that would have meant.



In passing, crossing through Suez had an additional benefit: not needing to worry about the at times enormous waves near the Cape of Good Hope. (The sea is even more treacherous at Cape Horn.)






share|improve this answer




















  • 1





    The most extreme is probably shipping between Persia and Turkey if for some reason it couldn't go by land.

    – Joshua
    Apr 5 at 15:33






  • 5





    @whatsisname Why?

    – Azor Ahai
    Apr 5 at 17:40






  • 7





    @AzorAhai: because of the presence of "grey africa" right next to "blue africa", and the seeming pangeafication of the world?

    – whatsisname
    Apr 5 at 18:14






  • 9





    @whatsisname I didn't even see the background. I don't think it's important. Are the routes off?

    – Azor Ahai
    Apr 5 at 18:17






  • 12





    @whatsisname: that's just a "watermark" background for all the slides.

    – kundor
    Apr 5 at 20:20


















17














Three steam ships of the Blue Funnel Line used both routes (round the Cape of Good Hope and via the Suez Canal) between Europe and Asia from 1866 to 1870. Upon switching from round the Cape to through the Suez Canal, these same ships saved between 10 and 12 days.




Arthur Holt's Blue Funnel Line sister ships Agamemnon, Ajax and Achilles all sailed on their first trips from London to Singapore via the Cape of Good Hope in 1866. Agamemnon, the first to sail (in April), took 59 days. Achilles, the last to sail (in August), was the fastest at 57 days.



enter image description here



Cargo steamer SS 'Agamemnon'. After several years sailing round the Cape, this was one of the first cargo ships to pass through the Suez Canal. Image source: magnolia box



The three ships continued to ply this route (they also went on to various Chinese ports) until the Suez Canal opened. Between 1866 and 1869, they averaged 58 days from London to Singapore. By June 1870, these same three ships had all switched to the Suez Canal route, saving 10 to 12 days, but they were not the fastest in that year: the steamship Shantung set a new record when it made the trip form Glasgow to Singapore in 42 days.




Even without the Suez Canal, the Blue Funnel Line ships had already cut the sailing time between Europe and the Far East, being much faster than sailing ships such the Eileen Radford which set the best (non-steamship) London - Singapore time in 1867 at 116 days (see also the Great Tea Race of 1866 - 3 ships took 99 days from Foochow, though they were all beaten by the auxilliary steamship Erl King which took 77 days). Equally important for the shipping company was that the steamers carried far more tonnage than the sailing ships.




Main source:



Macolm Falkus, The Blue Funnel Legend: A History of the Ocean Steam Ship Company, 1865-1973






share|improve this answer

























    Your Answer








    StackExchange.ready(function()
    var channelOptions =
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "324"
    ;
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
    createEditor();
    );

    else
    createEditor();

    );

    function createEditor()
    StackExchange.prepareEditor(
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: false,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: null,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader:
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    ,
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    );



    );













    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function ()
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fhistory.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f51958%2fapproximately-how-much-travel-time-was-saved-by-the-opening-of-the-suez-canal-in%23new-answer', 'question_page');

    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes








    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    36














    That would have depended on the ship and your destination.



    To get a sense of the savings (the travel times are from today), consider the presentation that's referenced on the Suez Canal wiki page.



    Hormuz to London



    As a point of comparison, London to New York is a bit over 3,300 nautical miles (6,200km) when traveling by sea. So going through Suez when traveling from Hormuz to London is like avoiding a trip and a half across the Atlantic.



    This separate question has a few sources where you will likely be able to locate how much savings in days that would have meant.



    In passing, crossing through Suez had an additional benefit: not needing to worry about the at times enormous waves near the Cape of Good Hope. (The sea is even more treacherous at Cape Horn.)






    share|improve this answer




















    • 1





      The most extreme is probably shipping between Persia and Turkey if for some reason it couldn't go by land.

      – Joshua
      Apr 5 at 15:33






    • 5





      @whatsisname Why?

      – Azor Ahai
      Apr 5 at 17:40






    • 7





      @AzorAhai: because of the presence of "grey africa" right next to "blue africa", and the seeming pangeafication of the world?

      – whatsisname
      Apr 5 at 18:14






    • 9





      @whatsisname I didn't even see the background. I don't think it's important. Are the routes off?

      – Azor Ahai
      Apr 5 at 18:17






    • 12





      @whatsisname: that's just a "watermark" background for all the slides.

      – kundor
      Apr 5 at 20:20















    36














    That would have depended on the ship and your destination.



    To get a sense of the savings (the travel times are from today), consider the presentation that's referenced on the Suez Canal wiki page.



    Hormuz to London



    As a point of comparison, London to New York is a bit over 3,300 nautical miles (6,200km) when traveling by sea. So going through Suez when traveling from Hormuz to London is like avoiding a trip and a half across the Atlantic.



    This separate question has a few sources where you will likely be able to locate how much savings in days that would have meant.



    In passing, crossing through Suez had an additional benefit: not needing to worry about the at times enormous waves near the Cape of Good Hope. (The sea is even more treacherous at Cape Horn.)






    share|improve this answer




















    • 1





      The most extreme is probably shipping between Persia and Turkey if for some reason it couldn't go by land.

      – Joshua
      Apr 5 at 15:33






    • 5





      @whatsisname Why?

      – Azor Ahai
      Apr 5 at 17:40






    • 7





      @AzorAhai: because of the presence of "grey africa" right next to "blue africa", and the seeming pangeafication of the world?

      – whatsisname
      Apr 5 at 18:14






    • 9





      @whatsisname I didn't even see the background. I don't think it's important. Are the routes off?

      – Azor Ahai
      Apr 5 at 18:17






    • 12





      @whatsisname: that's just a "watermark" background for all the slides.

      – kundor
      Apr 5 at 20:20













    36












    36








    36







    That would have depended on the ship and your destination.



    To get a sense of the savings (the travel times are from today), consider the presentation that's referenced on the Suez Canal wiki page.



    Hormuz to London



    As a point of comparison, London to New York is a bit over 3,300 nautical miles (6,200km) when traveling by sea. So going through Suez when traveling from Hormuz to London is like avoiding a trip and a half across the Atlantic.



    This separate question has a few sources where you will likely be able to locate how much savings in days that would have meant.



    In passing, crossing through Suez had an additional benefit: not needing to worry about the at times enormous waves near the Cape of Good Hope. (The sea is even more treacherous at Cape Horn.)






    share|improve this answer















    That would have depended on the ship and your destination.



    To get a sense of the savings (the travel times are from today), consider the presentation that's referenced on the Suez Canal wiki page.



    Hormuz to London



    As a point of comparison, London to New York is a bit over 3,300 nautical miles (6,200km) when traveling by sea. So going through Suez when traveling from Hormuz to London is like avoiding a trip and a half across the Atlantic.



    This separate question has a few sources where you will likely be able to locate how much savings in days that would have meant.



    In passing, crossing through Suez had an additional benefit: not needing to worry about the at times enormous waves near the Cape of Good Hope. (The sea is even more treacherous at Cape Horn.)







    share|improve this answer














    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer








    edited Apr 5 at 8:20

























    answered Apr 5 at 8:04









    Denis de BernardyDenis de Bernardy

    14.4k24755




    14.4k24755







    • 1





      The most extreme is probably shipping between Persia and Turkey if for some reason it couldn't go by land.

      – Joshua
      Apr 5 at 15:33






    • 5





      @whatsisname Why?

      – Azor Ahai
      Apr 5 at 17:40






    • 7





      @AzorAhai: because of the presence of "grey africa" right next to "blue africa", and the seeming pangeafication of the world?

      – whatsisname
      Apr 5 at 18:14






    • 9





      @whatsisname I didn't even see the background. I don't think it's important. Are the routes off?

      – Azor Ahai
      Apr 5 at 18:17






    • 12





      @whatsisname: that's just a "watermark" background for all the slides.

      – kundor
      Apr 5 at 20:20












    • 1





      The most extreme is probably shipping between Persia and Turkey if for some reason it couldn't go by land.

      – Joshua
      Apr 5 at 15:33






    • 5





      @whatsisname Why?

      – Azor Ahai
      Apr 5 at 17:40






    • 7





      @AzorAhai: because of the presence of "grey africa" right next to "blue africa", and the seeming pangeafication of the world?

      – whatsisname
      Apr 5 at 18:14






    • 9





      @whatsisname I didn't even see the background. I don't think it's important. Are the routes off?

      – Azor Ahai
      Apr 5 at 18:17






    • 12





      @whatsisname: that's just a "watermark" background for all the slides.

      – kundor
      Apr 5 at 20:20







    1




    1





    The most extreme is probably shipping between Persia and Turkey if for some reason it couldn't go by land.

    – Joshua
    Apr 5 at 15:33





    The most extreme is probably shipping between Persia and Turkey if for some reason it couldn't go by land.

    – Joshua
    Apr 5 at 15:33




    5




    5





    @whatsisname Why?

    – Azor Ahai
    Apr 5 at 17:40





    @whatsisname Why?

    – Azor Ahai
    Apr 5 at 17:40




    7




    7





    @AzorAhai: because of the presence of "grey africa" right next to "blue africa", and the seeming pangeafication of the world?

    – whatsisname
    Apr 5 at 18:14





    @AzorAhai: because of the presence of "grey africa" right next to "blue africa", and the seeming pangeafication of the world?

    – whatsisname
    Apr 5 at 18:14




    9




    9





    @whatsisname I didn't even see the background. I don't think it's important. Are the routes off?

    – Azor Ahai
    Apr 5 at 18:17





    @whatsisname I didn't even see the background. I don't think it's important. Are the routes off?

    – Azor Ahai
    Apr 5 at 18:17




    12




    12





    @whatsisname: that's just a "watermark" background for all the slides.

    – kundor
    Apr 5 at 20:20





    @whatsisname: that's just a "watermark" background for all the slides.

    – kundor
    Apr 5 at 20:20











    17














    Three steam ships of the Blue Funnel Line used both routes (round the Cape of Good Hope and via the Suez Canal) between Europe and Asia from 1866 to 1870. Upon switching from round the Cape to through the Suez Canal, these same ships saved between 10 and 12 days.




    Arthur Holt's Blue Funnel Line sister ships Agamemnon, Ajax and Achilles all sailed on their first trips from London to Singapore via the Cape of Good Hope in 1866. Agamemnon, the first to sail (in April), took 59 days. Achilles, the last to sail (in August), was the fastest at 57 days.



    enter image description here



    Cargo steamer SS 'Agamemnon'. After several years sailing round the Cape, this was one of the first cargo ships to pass through the Suez Canal. Image source: magnolia box



    The three ships continued to ply this route (they also went on to various Chinese ports) until the Suez Canal opened. Between 1866 and 1869, they averaged 58 days from London to Singapore. By June 1870, these same three ships had all switched to the Suez Canal route, saving 10 to 12 days, but they were not the fastest in that year: the steamship Shantung set a new record when it made the trip form Glasgow to Singapore in 42 days.




    Even without the Suez Canal, the Blue Funnel Line ships had already cut the sailing time between Europe and the Far East, being much faster than sailing ships such the Eileen Radford which set the best (non-steamship) London - Singapore time in 1867 at 116 days (see also the Great Tea Race of 1866 - 3 ships took 99 days from Foochow, though they were all beaten by the auxilliary steamship Erl King which took 77 days). Equally important for the shipping company was that the steamers carried far more tonnage than the sailing ships.




    Main source:



    Macolm Falkus, The Blue Funnel Legend: A History of the Ocean Steam Ship Company, 1865-1973






    share|improve this answer





























      17














      Three steam ships of the Blue Funnel Line used both routes (round the Cape of Good Hope and via the Suez Canal) between Europe and Asia from 1866 to 1870. Upon switching from round the Cape to through the Suez Canal, these same ships saved between 10 and 12 days.




      Arthur Holt's Blue Funnel Line sister ships Agamemnon, Ajax and Achilles all sailed on their first trips from London to Singapore via the Cape of Good Hope in 1866. Agamemnon, the first to sail (in April), took 59 days. Achilles, the last to sail (in August), was the fastest at 57 days.



      enter image description here



      Cargo steamer SS 'Agamemnon'. After several years sailing round the Cape, this was one of the first cargo ships to pass through the Suez Canal. Image source: magnolia box



      The three ships continued to ply this route (they also went on to various Chinese ports) until the Suez Canal opened. Between 1866 and 1869, they averaged 58 days from London to Singapore. By June 1870, these same three ships had all switched to the Suez Canal route, saving 10 to 12 days, but they were not the fastest in that year: the steamship Shantung set a new record when it made the trip form Glasgow to Singapore in 42 days.




      Even without the Suez Canal, the Blue Funnel Line ships had already cut the sailing time between Europe and the Far East, being much faster than sailing ships such the Eileen Radford which set the best (non-steamship) London - Singapore time in 1867 at 116 days (see also the Great Tea Race of 1866 - 3 ships took 99 days from Foochow, though they were all beaten by the auxilliary steamship Erl King which took 77 days). Equally important for the shipping company was that the steamers carried far more tonnage than the sailing ships.




      Main source:



      Macolm Falkus, The Blue Funnel Legend: A History of the Ocean Steam Ship Company, 1865-1973






      share|improve this answer



























        17












        17








        17







        Three steam ships of the Blue Funnel Line used both routes (round the Cape of Good Hope and via the Suez Canal) between Europe and Asia from 1866 to 1870. Upon switching from round the Cape to through the Suez Canal, these same ships saved between 10 and 12 days.




        Arthur Holt's Blue Funnel Line sister ships Agamemnon, Ajax and Achilles all sailed on their first trips from London to Singapore via the Cape of Good Hope in 1866. Agamemnon, the first to sail (in April), took 59 days. Achilles, the last to sail (in August), was the fastest at 57 days.



        enter image description here



        Cargo steamer SS 'Agamemnon'. After several years sailing round the Cape, this was one of the first cargo ships to pass through the Suez Canal. Image source: magnolia box



        The three ships continued to ply this route (they also went on to various Chinese ports) until the Suez Canal opened. Between 1866 and 1869, they averaged 58 days from London to Singapore. By June 1870, these same three ships had all switched to the Suez Canal route, saving 10 to 12 days, but they were not the fastest in that year: the steamship Shantung set a new record when it made the trip form Glasgow to Singapore in 42 days.




        Even without the Suez Canal, the Blue Funnel Line ships had already cut the sailing time between Europe and the Far East, being much faster than sailing ships such the Eileen Radford which set the best (non-steamship) London - Singapore time in 1867 at 116 days (see also the Great Tea Race of 1866 - 3 ships took 99 days from Foochow, though they were all beaten by the auxilliary steamship Erl King which took 77 days). Equally important for the shipping company was that the steamers carried far more tonnage than the sailing ships.




        Main source:



        Macolm Falkus, The Blue Funnel Legend: A History of the Ocean Steam Ship Company, 1865-1973






        share|improve this answer















        Three steam ships of the Blue Funnel Line used both routes (round the Cape of Good Hope and via the Suez Canal) between Europe and Asia from 1866 to 1870. Upon switching from round the Cape to through the Suez Canal, these same ships saved between 10 and 12 days.




        Arthur Holt's Blue Funnel Line sister ships Agamemnon, Ajax and Achilles all sailed on their first trips from London to Singapore via the Cape of Good Hope in 1866. Agamemnon, the first to sail (in April), took 59 days. Achilles, the last to sail (in August), was the fastest at 57 days.



        enter image description here



        Cargo steamer SS 'Agamemnon'. After several years sailing round the Cape, this was one of the first cargo ships to pass through the Suez Canal. Image source: magnolia box



        The three ships continued to ply this route (they also went on to various Chinese ports) until the Suez Canal opened. Between 1866 and 1869, they averaged 58 days from London to Singapore. By June 1870, these same three ships had all switched to the Suez Canal route, saving 10 to 12 days, but they were not the fastest in that year: the steamship Shantung set a new record when it made the trip form Glasgow to Singapore in 42 days.




        Even without the Suez Canal, the Blue Funnel Line ships had already cut the sailing time between Europe and the Far East, being much faster than sailing ships such the Eileen Radford which set the best (non-steamship) London - Singapore time in 1867 at 116 days (see also the Great Tea Race of 1866 - 3 ships took 99 days from Foochow, though they were all beaten by the auxilliary steamship Erl King which took 77 days). Equally important for the shipping company was that the steamers carried far more tonnage than the sailing ships.




        Main source:



        Macolm Falkus, The Blue Funnel Legend: A History of the Ocean Steam Ship Company, 1865-1973







        share|improve this answer














        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer








        edited Apr 7 at 5:12

























        answered Apr 6 at 8:45









        Lars BosteenLars Bosteen

        45k9205276




        45k9205276



























            draft saved

            draft discarded
















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to History Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid


            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fhistory.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f51958%2fapproximately-how-much-travel-time-was-saved-by-the-opening-of-the-suez-canal-in%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            Popular posts from this blog

            Adding axes to figuresAdding axes labels to LaTeX figuresLaTeX equivalent of ConTeXt buffersRotate a node but not its content: the case of the ellipse decorationHow to define the default vertical distance between nodes?TikZ scaling graphic and adjust node position and keep font sizeNumerical conditional within tikz keys?adding axes to shapesAlign axes across subfiguresAdding figures with a certain orderLine up nested tikz enviroments or how to get rid of themAdding axes labels to LaTeX figures

            Luettelo Yhdysvaltain laivaston lentotukialuksista Lähteet | Navigointivalikko

            Gary (muusikko) Sisällysluettelo Historia | Rockin' High | Lähteet | Aiheesta muualla | NavigointivalikkoInfobox OKTuomas "Gary" Keskinen Ancaran kitaristiksiProjekti Rockin' High