Basic Statistics for Business and

Economics Canadian 5th Edition Lind

Solutions Manual
Visit to download the full and correct content document: https://testbankbell.com/dow
nload/basic-statistics-for-business-and-economics-canadian-5th-edition-lind-solutions
-manual/
Basic Statistics for Business and Economics
Canadian 5th Edition Lind Solutions Manual

To download the complete and accurate content document, go to:

https://testbankbell.com/download/basic-statistics-for-business-and-economics-canad
ian-5th-edition-lind-solutions-manual/
Basic Statistics for Business and Economics Canadian 5th Edition Lind Solutions Manual

CHAPTER 9
ONE-SAMPLE TESTS OF A HYPOTHESIS

1. a. H0 = 2
H1 ≠ 2
b. H0 ≥ 40
H1 < 40
c. H0 ≤ $1750
H1 > $1750
d. H0 = 3.25
H1 ≠ 3.25 (LO9-5)

2. a. H0 ≥ 1.5
H1 < 1.5
b. H0 ≥ 1500
H1 < 1500
c. H0 = 2000
H1 ≠ 2000
d. H0 = 500
H1 ≠ 500 (LO9-5)

3. a. Two-tailed
b Reject Ho and accept H1 when z does not fall in the region from – 1.96 and 1.96
49 − 50
c. −1.2, found by z =
(5 / 36)
d. Not enough evidence to reject Ho and conclude the mean is not different from 50.
e. p = 0.2302, found by 2(0.5000 – 0.3849). A 23.02% chance of finding a z value this
large when Ho is true. (LO9-5 & 9-6)

4. a. One-tail (LO9-5 & 9-6)

b. Reject Ho when z > 2.33
12 − 10
c. 4, found by z =
(3 / 36)
d. Reject Ho and conclude that the mean is greater than 10
e. p-value is very close to 0, given a z value of 4.00. Very little chance Ho is true. (LO 9-5
& 9-6)

5. a. One-tailed
b. Reject Ho and accept H1 when z > 1.645
21 − 20
c. 1.2, found by z =
(5 / 36)
d. Not enough evidence to reject Ho at the 0.05 significance level.
e. p = 0.1151, found by 0.5000 – 0.3849. An 11.51% chance of finding a z-value this large
or larger. (LO9-5 & 9-6)

1 Chapter 9

Visit TestBankBell.com to get complete for all chapters

6. a. One-tailed
b. Reject Ho and accept H1 where z < −1.88
215 − 220
c. −2.67, found by z =
(15 / 64 )
d. Reject Ho and conclude that the population mean is less than 220 at the 0.03 significance
level.
e. p = 0.0038, found by 0.5000 – 0.4962. Less than 0.5% chance Ho is true. (LO9-5 & 9-6)

7. a. Ho:  = 96 600
H1:   96 600
b. Reject Ho if z < −1.96 or z > 1.96
95795 − 96600
c. −0.69, found by z =
8050 48
d. There is not enough evidence to reject Ho
e. p = 0.4902, found by 2(0.5000 – 0.2549). Crosset’s experience is not different from that
claimed by the manufacturer. If the Ho is true, the probability of finding a value more
extreme than this is 0.4902. (LO9-5, 9-6 &9-7)

8. a. Ho:   3 H1:  < 3; choose α = 0.05

b. Reject Ho if z < −1.645
2.75 − 3.0
c. −1.77, found by z =
(1 / 50 )
d. Reject Ho
e. p = 0.0384, found by (0.5000 – 0.4616). We conclude that the mean waiting time is less
than three minutes. When Ho is true, the probability of obtaining a value smaller than
−1.77 is 0.0384. (LO 9-5, 9-6 & 9-7)

9. a. Ho:   6.8 H1:  <6.8

b. Reject Ho if z < −1.645
6.2 − 6.8
c. −7.2, found by z =
(0.5 / 36 )
d. Reject Ho at a significance level of .01.
e. p-value is almost zero; the mean number of DVD’s watched is less than 6.8 per month. If
Ho is true, there is virtually no chance of getting a statistic this small. (LO9-5, 9-6 &
9-7)

10. a. Ho:   80 H1:  >80

b. Reject Ho if z > 2.33
$84.65 − 80.00
c. 8.49, found by z =
$3.24
35
d. Reject Ho at a significance level of .01.
e. p-value is almost zero; the mean amount of tips per day is larger than $80.00. If Ho
is true, the probability of obtaining a sample mean this far above 80 is virtually
zero. (LO9-5, 9-6 & 9-7)

Chapter 9 2
11. a. Reject Ho when t > 1.833
12 − 10
b. t= = 2.108
(3 / 10 )
c. Reject Ho; the mean is greater than 10. (LO9-6)

12. a. Reject Ho if t < −3.106 or t > 3.106

407 − 400
b. t= = 4.041
(6 / 12)
c. Reject Ho, the mean does not equal 400. (LO9-6)

13. Choose α = .05

Ho:   40 H1:  > 40; Reject Ho if t > 1.703
42 − 40
t= = 5.040
(2.1 / 28 )
Reject Ho and conclude that the mean number of calls is greater than 40 per week. (LO9-6)

14. Ho:   42.3 H1:  < 42.3 Reject Ho if t < −1.319

40.6 − 42.3
t= = −3.085
( 2.7 / 24)
Reject Ho. The mean assembly time is less than 42.3 minutes. (LO9-6)

15. Ho:   35 600 H1:  > 35 600 Reject Ho if t > 1.740

37675− 35600
t= = 3.645
2415 / 18
Reject Ho and conclude that as the mean life of the spark plugs is greater than 35 600 km, the
claim is true. (LO9-6)

16. a. The population of complaints follows a normal probability distribution.

3 Chapter 9
 Histogram of Complaints, with Normal Curve

4
Frequency

0
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Complaints

b. The assumption of normality appears reasonable.

c. H0 :  15 H1 : < 15 Reject H0 if t < –1.729
(13.5 − 15)
t= = −4.46
(1.504 / 20)
Reject the null hypothesis. The mean number of complaints is less than 15. (LO9-6)

17. a. Reject Ho if t < −3.747

(85) 2
1495 − 17 − 20
b. X = 17 and s = 5 = 3536
. t= = −190
.
5−1 3536
. / 5
c. Do not reject Ho. We cannot conclude the population mean is less than 20.
d. Between 0.05 and 0.10, about 0.065; by computer, the p-value = .0653. (LO9-6 & 9-7)

18. a. Reject Ho if t < −2.571 or t > 2.571

111667
. − 100
b. t= = 4.72
6.055 / 6
c. Reject Ho. The population mean is not equal to 100
d. less than 0.01 (between 0.001 and 0.01); using a computer, the p-value = .0052
e. 105.31 to 118.02; the hypothesized mean does not fall in the confidence interval, and so
Ho is rejected. (LO9-6 & 9-7)

Chapter 9 4
19. Ho:   4.35 H1:  > 4.35 Reject Ho if t > 2.821
4.368 − 4.35
t= = 168
.
(0.0339 / 10 )
Do not reject Ho. The additive did not increase the mean weight of the puppies. The p-value is
between 0.10 and 0.05. Using a computer, the p-value = .0639 (LO9-6 & 9-7)

20. Ho:   2160 H1:  > 2160 Reject Ho if t > 2.306

2172.44 − 2160
t= = 3.98
(9.3823 / 9 )
Reject Ho. The mean chlorine shelf life has increased. The p-value is less than 0.005. Using a
computer, the p-value = .0020. (LO9-6 & 9-7)

21. Ho:   4.0 H1:  > 4.0 Reject Ho if t > 1.796

4.50 − 4.0
t= = 0.65
(2.68 / 12 )
Do not reject Ho. The mean number of kms travelled has not been shown to be greater than 4.0.
The p-value is greater than 0.10. Using a computer, the p-value = .2657. (LO9-6 & 9-7)

22. Ho:   53 H1:  > 53 Reject Ho if t > 1.761

56.4 − 53.0
t= = 352
.
(3.7378 / 15 )
Reject Ho. The mean number of surveys conducted is greater than 53. The p-value is less than
0.005. Using a computer, the p-value = .0017. (LO9-6 & 9-7)

23. a. Ho is rejected if z > 1.645

0.75 − 0.70
b. 1.09, found by z =
0.70(0.30)
100
c. Ho is not rejected (LO9-8)

24. a. Ho is rejected if z < −1.96 or z > 1.96

0.30 − 0.40
b. −2.24, found by z =
0.40(0.60)
120
c. Ho is rejected (LO9-8)

25. a. Ho: p  0.52 H1: p > 0.52

b. Ho is rejected if z > 2.33
0.5667 − 0.52
c. 1.62, found by z =
0.52(0.48)
300
d. Ho is not rejected. We cannot conclude that the proportion of men driving on Hwy 400
is larger than 0.52. (LO9-8)

26. Ho: p  0.33 H1: p > 0.33 Ho is rejected if z > 2.05

5 Chapter 9
 0.40 − 0.3333
2.00, found by z =
0.3333(0.6667)
200
Ho is not rejected. The proportion of students with jobs is not larger. (LO9-8)

27. a. Ho: p  0.90 H1: p < 0.90

b. Ho is rejected if z < −2.33
0.82 − 0.90
c. −2.67, found by z =
0.90(010
. )
100
d. Ho is rejected. Less than 90% of the customers receive their orders in less than 10
minutes. (LO9-8)

28. Choose α = .05

Ho: p  0.50 H1: p < 0.50
Ho is rejected if z < −1.645
0.48 − 0.50
−0.40, found by z =
0.50(0.50)
100
Ho is not rejected. The proportion of student changing their major has not decreased. (LO9-
8)

29. Ho:  = $60,000 H1:   $60,000

62 500 − 60 000
Reject Ho if z  1.645 or z > 1.645 z= = 4.56
6 000 120
Reject Ho. We can conclude that the mean salary is not $60,000. The p-value is very close to
zero. The confidence interval is from $61 599 to $63 401. As $60 000 falls outside of the
confidence interval, the hypothesized mean is rejected. (LO9-6 & 9-7)

30. a. Ho:   50 H1:  < 50 Reject Ho if z  −2.33 X = 4818

.
48.18 − 50
z= = −1.92
3 10
Ho is not rejected. The mean weight is not less than 50 kgs.
b. Mr. Rutter can use the z distribution as the test statistic because the population follows a
normal distribution and the population standard deviation ( = 3) is known.
c. p-value = 0.5000 – 0.4726 = 0.0274 (by computer p-value = .0275) (LO9-6 & 9-7)

31. Ho:   10 H1:  <10

9.0 − 10.0
Reject Ho if z < −1.645 z= = −2.53
2.8 / 50
Reject Ho. The mean weight loss is less than 10 pounds. The p-value = 0.5000 – 0.4943 =
0.0057. (LO9-6 & 9-7)

Chapter 9 6
32. Ho:   450 H1:  >450
451.4 − 450
Reject Ho if z > 1.645 z= = 11.65
.85 50
Reject Ho. The cans are being overfilled. The p-value is very close to 0. (LO9-6 & 9-7)

33. Ho:   7 H1:  < 7

(6.8 − 7)
t= = −1.57
0.9 / 50
The p-value is 0.0613, so at a significance level of 5%, do not reject the null hypothesis.
University students sleep no less than the typical adult male. (LO9-6 & 9-7)

34. Ho:   90 H1:  >90 Reject Ho if t > 1.290

94 − 90
t= =1.82
22 / 100
Reject Ho. At the 0.10 level we can conclude that the vacation selling time has increased. The p-
value is .0360. (LO9-6)

35. Ho:   1.25 H1:  >1.25 Reject Ho if t > 1.691

1.27 − 1.25
t= = 2.37
(0.05 / 35)
Reject Ho. The mean price of gasoline is greater than $1.25. The p-value = .0119 (by computer)
(LO9-6 & 9-7)

36. Ho:  = 40 H1:  ≠ 40 Reject Ho if t < − 1.671

37.8 − 40
t= = -1.40
12.2 / 60
Ho is not rejected. The p-value = .1677 (by computer). We cannot conclude that the mean leisure
time is untrue. (LO9-6 & 9-7)

37. Ho:   14 H1:  > 14 Reject Ho if t > 2.821

15.64 − 14
t= = 3.32
1.561 10
Reject Ho. The mean rate charged is greater than 14 percent. (LO9-6)

38. H0 :  6 H1 : < 6 Reject H0 if t < –2.998 [Assuming the population is normally distributed]
5.6375 − 6
t= = −1.62
0.6346 / 8
Do not reject H0. The mean rate could be 6.0 percent. The p-value is 0.075. (LO9-6 & 9-7)

7 Chapter 9
39. Ho:  =1.92 H1:   1.92 Reject Ho if t < −2.201 or t > 2.201
X = 2.08667 sd = 0.40484
2.08667 − 1.92
t= = 1.43
.40484 12
Do not reject Ho. There is not a difference in the mean amount of water consumed at the college
surveyed and the national average.
The confidence interval is from 1.82945 to 2.34389. The hypothesized mean falls in the
confidence interval, and so Ho is not rejected. (LO9-6)

40. Ho:   25 H1:  > 25 Reject Ho if t > 2.624

X = 26.07 s = 1.5337
26.07 − 25.00
t= = 2.702
15337
. / 15
Reject Ho. The mean number of patients per day is more than 25. The p-value is less than 0.01.
Using a computer, the p-value is .0086. This is lower than the significance level, and so, the null
hypothesis is rejected. (LO9-6&7)

41. Ho:   6.5 H1:  < 6.5 Reject Ho if t < −2.718 (LO9-6)
X = 5.1667 s = 3.1575
51667
. − 6.5
t= = −1463
. Do not reject Ho. The mean is not less than 6.5.
31575
. / 12

42. Ho:   3.5 H1:  < 3.5 Reject Ho if t < −1.746

2.9553 − 35
.
t= = −4.013
0.5596 / 17
Reject Ho. The mean time to complete a game is less than 3.5 hours. The p-value (by computer)
= .0005. (LO9-6 & 9-7)

43. Ho:  =0 H1:   0 Reject Ho if t < −2.110 or t > 2.110

X = −0.2322 s = 0.3120
−0.2322 − 0
t= = −3158
.
0.3120 / 18
Reject Ho. The mean gain or loss does not equal 0. The p-value is less than 0.01, but greater than
0.001, so the probability of no time gain or loss is very small. Using a computer, the p-value =
.0057, and as this is less than the significance level, the null hypothesis is rejected. (LO9-6 & 9-
7)

44. Ho:   4.50% H1:  > 4.50% Reject Ho if t > 1.796

X = 4.5717 s = 0.2405
4.5717 − 4.50
t= = 1033
.
0.2405 / 12
Do not reject Ho. The mean number rate of return is not more than 4.50%. (LO9-6
& 9-8)

45. H0 : ≤ 100 H1 : > 100 Reject H0 if t > 1.761.

[Assuming the population is normally distributed]

Chapter 9 8
 109.4 − 100
t= = 3.655
9.96 / 15
Reject H0. The mean is greater than 100. (LO9-6)

46. Ho:   267 H1:  > 267 Reject Ho if t > 2.681

288.31 − 267
t= = 3.421 Reject the Ho. The fare is higher than 267. p-value < 0.005;
22.46
13
using a computer, the p-value = .0025, and as this is less than the significance level, the null
hypothesis is rejected. (LO9-6 & 9-7)

47. Ho: p  0.60 H1: p >0.60 Ho is rejected if z > 2.33

0.70 − 0.60
z= = 2.89
0.60(0.40)
200
Ho is rejected. Ms. Dennis is correct. More than 60% of the accounts are more than 3 months
old. (LO9-8)

48. Ho: p  0.55 H1: p >0.55 Ho is rejected if z > 1.645

0.60 − 0.55 0.05
z= = = 0.841
0.55(0.45) 0.0595
70
Ho is not rejected. We cannot conclude that more than 55% of the commuters would use the
route. (LO9-8)

49. Ho: p  0.44 H1: p >0.44 Ho is rejected if z > 1.645

0.480 − 0.44
z= = 2.55
0.44(0.56)
1000
Ho is rejected. We conclude that there has been an increase in the proportion of people wanting
to go to Europe. (LO9-8)

50. Ho: p  0.10 H1: p >0.10 Ho is rejected if z > 1.645

9
− 010
.
z = 50 = 189
. (LO9-7 & 9-8)
010
. (0.90)
50
Ho is rejected. More than 10% of the sets need repair. p-value = 0.5000 – 0.4706 = 0.0294

51. Ho: p  0.20 H1: p>0.20 Ho is rejected if z > 2.33

56
− 0.20
z= 200 = 2.83
0.20(0.80)
200
Ho is rejected. More than 20% of the owners move during a particular year. The p-value
= 0.5000 – 0.4977 = 0.0023 (LO9-7 & 9-8)

9 Chapter 9
52. Ho:   10 H1:  < 10 Reject Ho if t < −1.895

78.3 5.889
X= = 9.7875 s= = 0.9172
8 8 −1
9.7875 − 10
t= = −0.655 Do not reject Ho at a significance level of .05. We cannot
0.9172 / 8
conclude that the cost is not less than $10,000. (LO9-6 & 9-7)

53. Ho:   42 H1:  > 42 Reject Ho if t > 1.796

51 − 42
t= = 3.90
8 / 12
Reject Ho. The mean time for delivery is more than 42 days. The p-value is less than 0.005;
using a computer, the p-value = .0012. (LO9-6 & 9-7)

54. Ho:   9 H1:  > 9 Reject Ho if t > 2.998

X = 9.488 s = 0.467
9.488 − 9.00
t= = −2.96
(0.467 / 8)
Do not reject Ho. The mean waiting time does not exceed 9 minutes. The p-value is more than
0.01; using a computer, the p-value = .0107. (LO9-6 & 9-7)

55. Ho:   8 H1:  < 8 Reject Ho if t < −1.714

7.5 − 8
t= = −0.77 Do not reject Ho. The time is not less than 8. (LO39-6)
3.2 24

56. Ho: p = 0.50 H1: p  0.50 Reject Ho if z is not between –1.96 and 1.96
0.482 − 0.500
z= = −1.14 Do not reject Ho. There is not enough evidence to indicate
(0.5)(0.5)
1002
that the results have changed. (LO9-8)

57. Ho:   50 H1:  > 50 Reject Ho if t > 1.796

82.5 − 50
t= = 1.892
(59.5 / 12
Reject Ho and conclude that the mean number of text messages is greater than 50. The p-value is
less than 0.05. There is a slight probability (less than one chance in 20) this could happen by
chance. (LO 9-6)

58. a. This is a binomial situation with both the mean number of successes and failures equal
to 22.5, found by 0.5(45).
b. Ho: p = 0.50 H1: p ≠ 0.50
c.

Chapter 9 10
 Distribution Plot
Normal, Mean=0, StDev=1

0.4

0.3

Density

0.2

0.1

0.005 0.005
0.0
-2.576 0 2.576
z value

Reject Ho if z is not between –2.58 and 2.58.

31
− 0.5
d. z= 45 = 2.534
0.5(1 − 0.5) / 45
Do not reject the null hypothesis. This data does not prove the coin flip is biased.

e. The p-value is 0.0114, found by 2(0.5000 – 0.4943). A value this extreme will happen
about once out of ninety times with a fair coin. (LO 9-7 & 9-8)

59. Ho:  = 1.5; H1:  ≠1.5 Reject Ho if t is not between -3.25 and 3.25
1.3 − 1.5
t= = −0.703 Do not reject Ho. This data does not contradict the publisher. (LO 9-6)
0.9
10

60. a. This is a binomial situation with both the mean number of successes (6, found by
60(0.10)) and failures (54, found by 60(0.90)) greater than five.
b. Ho: p = 0.10 H1: p ≠ 0.10
c. Reject Ho if z is not between –1.960 and 1.960.
3
− 0.1
z= 60 = −1.291 We fail to reject the null hypothesis. This data does
0.10(1 − 0.10)
60
not show a lower failure rate at Short’s slots.
d. The p-value is 0.1970, found by 2(0.5000 – 0.4015). A value this extreme will happen
about once out of five times with that failure rate. (LO 9-7 & 9-8)

61. Ho: p ≤ 0.40 H1: p > 0.40 Reject Ho if z is greater than 2.33
(16 / 30) − 0.40
z= = 1.49 Do not reject the null hypothesis. This data does not show
(0.40(1 − 0.40)) / 30
college students are more likely to skip breakfast. (LO 9-8)

11 Chapter 9
62. Ho:  ≤ 2.5 H1:  > 2.5 Reject Ho if t < –1.711
2.86 − 3.13 2.86 − 2.5
t= = −1.125 t = = 1.70
1.20 / 25 1.20 28
Do not reject Ho and conclude that the mean number residents is not necessary more than 2.5.
(LO 9-6)

63. Ho:   370; H1:  > 370 Reject Ho if t > 2.681

388.31 − 370
t= = 2.939 Reject the null. The fare is higher. p-value < 0.01 (LO 9-6 & 9-
22.46
13
7)

64. Ho: p = 0.56 H1: p ≠ 0.56

Ho is rejected if z is not between 1.96 and 1.96
 180 
  − 0.56
The test statistic is 1.396, found by z =  300 
0.56(0.44)
300
There is not enough evidence to reject Ho. Conclude the proportion is 56%. (LO 9-8)

65. Ho: p ≥ 0.5; H1: p < 0.5 Ho is rejected if z < –1.645

0 .4 − 0 .5
z= = −2.828
0.5(0.5)
200
Ho is rejected. The proportion of alumni who supports the coach is less than 50%. (LO 9-8)

66. Ho: p ≥ 0.0008; H1: p < 0.0008 Ho is rejected if z < –1.645

0.0006 − 0.0008
z= = −0.707
0.0008(0.9992)
10,000
Ho is not rejected. This data does not prove there is a reduced fatality rate. (LO 9-8)

67. (LO9-6 & 9-7)

438,830.59 upper confidence limit

287,074.53 lower confidence limit

b)
H0: μ = 450 000
H1: μ ≠ 450 000

Hypothesis Test: Mean vs. Hypothesized Value

450,000.000 hypothesized value

362,952.563 mean Jan-14
154,855.971 std. dev.

Chapter 9 12
 38,713.993 std. error
16 n
-2.25 z
.0245 p-value (two-tailed)

Since the p-value .> .02, there is not enough evidence

to reject the null hypothesis,
so we conclude that the mean could be $450 000.

c)
H0: μ = 275 000
H1: μ ≠ 275 000

Since the value of $275 000 does not fall within the limits of the 95% CI from
part a), H0 is rejected and so we conclude that the mean could not be $275 000.

d)
Hypothesis Test: Mean vs. Hypothesized Value

275,000.000 hypothesized value

362,952.563 mean Jan-14
154,855.971 std. dev.
38,713.993 std. error
16 n
2.27 z
.0231 p-value (two-tailed)
Since the p-value < .05, the null hypothesis is
rejected,
so we conclude that the mean could not be $275 000.

68. (LO9-6, 9-7 & 9-8)

a)
H0: µ ≤ 600 000 Hypothesis Test: Mean vs. Hypothesized Value
H1: µ > 600 000
600,000.000 hypothesized value
567,496.755 mean List Price
416,469.287 std. dev.
42,069.751 std. error
98 N
97 Df

-0.77 T
.7792 p-value (one-tailed, upper)

The p-value > .01, so there is not enough evidence to reject the null hypothesis.
We conclude that the list price is not greater than $600 000.

13 Chapter 9
b)

H0: μ ≤ 2100 Hypothesis Test: Mean vs. Hypothesized Value

H1: μ > 2100
2,100.000 hypothesized value
1,710.010 mean Total Square Feet
1,103.162 std. dev.
111.436 std. error
98 N
97 Df

-3.50 T
.9996 p-value (one-tailed, upper)

Note: the p-value is very large, so the possibility of the null hypothesis being true is a certainty.
The p-value > .01, so there is not enough evidence to reject the null hypothesis.
We conclude that the mean number of square feet is less than or equal to 2100.

c)

# of apartments = 58 proportion = 58/98 =.5918

H0: p ≤ .60
H1: p > .60

Observed Hypothesized
0.5918 0.6 p (as decimal)
58/98 59/98 p (as fraction)
57.8 58.8 X
98 98 N

0.0495 std. error

-0.16 Z
.5816 p-value (one-tailed, upper)

The p-value > .05, so there is not enough evidence to reject the null hypothesis.
We conclude that the proportion ≤ .60.
Observed Hypothesized
0.5918 0.6 p (as decimal)
58/98 59/98 p (as fraction)
58. 58.8 X
98 98 N

std.
0.0495 error
-0.16 Z
.5655 p-value (one-tailed, upper)

Chapter 9 14
 The p-value > .05, so there is not enough evidence to reject the null hypothesis.
We conclude that the proportion ≤ .60.

d)

H0: p ≤ .60
H1: p > .60

# with more than 2 bedrooms = 37 proportion = .378

Observed Hypothesized
0.378 0.6 p (as decimal)
37/98 59/98 p (as fraction)
37.044 58.8 X
98 98 N

std.
0.0495 error
-4.49 Z
1.0000 p-value (one-tailed, upper)

Note: the p-value is very large, so the possibility of the null hypothesis being true is a certainty.
There is not enough evidence to reject the null hypothesis.
We conclude that the proportion ≤ .60.

69. (LO9-6, 9-7 & 9-8)

a)
H0: µ = 350 000 Hypothesis Test: Mean vs. Hypothesized Value
H1: µ ≠ 350 000
350,000.000 hypothesized value
331,233.980 mean List Price
197,121.891 std. dev.
27,877.245 std. error
50 N
49 Df

-0.67 T
.5040 p-value (two-tailed)

256,524.302 confidence interval 99.% lower

405,943.658 confidence interval 99.% upper
74,709.678 margin of error

The p-value > .01, so there is not enough evidence to reject the null hypothesis.
We conclude that the list price is $350 000.

15 Chapter 9
 The mean of $350 000 falls in the 99% CI, which confirms that we do not have enough
evidence to reject the null hypothesis.

b)
H 0: µ =
1500
H 1: µ ≠
1500 Hypothesis Test: Mean vs. Hypothesized Value

1,500.000 hypothesized value

1,250.780 mean Total Square Feet
730.875 std. dev.
103.361 std. error
50 n
49 df

-2.41 t
.0197 p-value (two-tailed)

1,043.068 confidence interval 95.% lower

1,458.492 confidence interval 95.% upper
207.712 margin of error

The p-value < .05, so we reject the null hypothesis.

We conclude that the list price is not 1500 square feet.
The mean of 1500 does not fall in the 95% CI, which confirms that we should reject
the null hypothesis.

c)
# of houses = 24 proportion = 0.48

H0: p ≤ .50
H1: p > .50 Observed Hypothesized
0.48 0.5 p (as decimal)
24/50 25/50 p (as fraction)
24. 25. X
50 50 n

std.
0.0707 error
-0.28 z
.6114 p-value (one-tailed, upper)

Note: the p-value is large, so the possibility of the null hypothesis being true is fairly certain.
There is not enough evidence to reject the null hypothesis.
We conclude that the proportion ≤ .50.

d)
H0: p ≤ .50
H1: p > .50

Chapter 9 16
 # with more than 2 bedrooms = 23 proportion = .46

Observed Hypothesized
0.46 0.5 p (as decimal)
23/50 25/50 p (as fraction)
23. 25. X
50 50 n

std.
0.0707 error
-0.57 z
.7142 p-value (one-tailed, upper)

Note: the p-value is large, so the possibility of the null hypothesis being true is good.
There is not enough evidence to reject the null hypothesis.
We conclude that the proportion ≤ .50.

70. (LO9-6, 9-7 & 9-8)

a)
453,014.7771 upper confidence limit
272,890.3479 lower confidence limit

b)
H0: μ = 300 000
H1: μ ≠ 300 000

Hypothesis Test: Mean vs. Hypothesized Value

300,000.0000000 hypothesized value

362,952.5625000 mean Jan-14
154,855.9707690 std. dev.
38,713.9926922 std. error
16 n
1.63 z
.1039 p-value (two-tailed)
the p-value > .05, so we do not have enough evidence to reject the null hypothesis
and conclude that the mean
list price is = $300 000.

c)

H0: μ = 400 000

H1: μ ≠ 400 000

453,014.7771 upper confidence limit

272,890.3479 lower confidence limit

17 Chapter 9
Basic Statistics for Business and Economics Canadian 5th Edition Lind Solutions Manual

Since the hypothesized population mean of $400 000 does fall in the 98% CI, there is not
enough evidence to reject the null hypothesis and conclude that the population mean could be $400 000.
Since the hypothesized population mean of $400 000 does not fall in the 98% CI, we reject the null
hypothesis and conclude that the population mean is not $400 000.

Hypothesis Test: Mean vs. Hypothesized Value

400,000.0000000 hypothesized value

362,952.5625000 mean Jan-14
154,855.9707690 std. dev.
38,713.9926922 std. error
16 n
-0.96 z
.3386 p-value (two-tailed)
The p-value > .02, so we do not have enough evidence to reject the null hypothesis and conclude that the
mean list price is = $400 000.

Chapter 9 18

Visit TestBankBell.com to get complete for all chapters

Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
down there, but a whole battalion of men. The fires were fiercely
glaring from a long row of furnaces, and over them were eight huge
boilers.”
The accompanying picture, which is taken from a lithograph
printed in 1855, shows two of the finest contemporary Mississippi
steamboats. The Eclipse was propelled by a high-pressure engine
with a single cylinder, the paddle-wheels being 40 feet wide. Her two
boilers were placed forward about 3½ feet above the deck, having
internal return tubes, such as we discussed at an earlier stage. The
waste gases returned through the tubes and escaped through the
funnels, which rose 50 feet above the hurricane deck. This ship only
drew 5 feet, and measured 360 feet long and 42 feet wide, whilst the
hull was 8 feet deep. For fuel, rosin and pitch pine as well as coal
were used. Mark Twain has left us some details of the keenness with
which these and similar Mississippi steamboats used to race.
“In the olden times,” he wrote, “whenever two fast boats started
out on a race, with a big crowd of people looking on, it was inspiriting
to hear the crews sing, especially if the time were night-fall, and the
forecastle lit up with the red glare of the torch-baskets. Racing was
royal fun. The public always had the idea that racing was dangerous;
whereas the opposite was the case.... No engineer was ever sleepy
or careless when his heart was in a race. He was constantly on the
alert, trying gauge-cocks and watching things. The dangerous place
was on slow, plodding boats, where the engineers drowsed around
and allowed chips to get into the ‘doctor,’ and shut off the water
supply from the boilers. In the ‘flush times’ of steam-boating, a race
between two notorious fleet steamers was an event of vast
importance.... Every encumbrance that added weight, or exposed a
resisting surface to wind or water, was removed.... When the Eclipse
and the A. L. Shotwell ran their great race many years ago, it was
said that pains were taken to scrape the gilding off the fanciful device
which hung between the Eclipse’s chimneys and that for one trip the
captain left off his kid gloves and had his head shaved. But I always
doubted these things.”
In 1870 the Natchez ran from New Orleans to Natchez, a
distance of 268 miles, in seventeen days seventeen hours. The most
famous race of all, and one that created national interest, was that in
the year 1870, between the Robert E. Lee and the Natchez, from
New Orleans to St. Louis, a distance of 1,218 miles. The former
covered the journey in three days eighteen hours fourteen minutes,
the latter in three days twenty-one hours fifty-eight minutes, but the
officers of the Natchez claimed seven hours for having had to stop
through fog, and repairs to the machinery.
But let us pass further North. The Hudson has, since the time of
Fulton, been famous for its steam-craft, and the impetus which
necessarily followed after the success of the Clermont, and her
successors, has not yet ceased to exist. As representative of the
Hudson River type of boats in vogue during the ’sixties, the model of
the steamer Empire facing page 258 is not without interest, since it
shows, the half-way transition between the Clermont and the ultra-
modern built-up ship as in the illustration facing page 262. Like her
other sisters, the Empire, it will be seen, has a very light draught,
and a characteristic feature of the development of the North
American passenger side-wheel steamer is here to be noted in
embryo, and as pushed to its furthest limits, in the case of the
Commonwealth. I am calling attention to the manner in which the
American custom extends the steamship’s sponsons or “guards” (as
they are called). In a British paddle-wheel steamer, such as one finds
employed on passenger or tug service, the sponsons are quite short.
(This can easily be seen by reference to the Dromedary opposite
page 240.) But the American fashion is to allow these not to end
suddenly, but gradually fine off at bow and stern so that the deck is
carried well out-board. Forward is the pilot house, the passenger
accommodation being provided in the centre of the “guard” deck and
upper deck. The length of this vessel was 336 feet, whilst the
breadth of the hull proper was 28 feet, though including “guards” 61
feet. In many of the Hudson steamers the strange sight is still seen
of the use of the old walking-beam which penetrates through the top
of the deck. As we have already discussed this elsewhere, it is
scarcely necessary here to refer to it further, but the sectional model
illustrated opposite this page will show quite clearly this principle.
 THE “COMMONWEALTH.”

BEAM ENGINE OF AN AMERICAN RIVER STEAMER.

From the Sectional Model in the Victoria and Albert Museum.
 One of the best known steamship companies in the United
States is the Fall River Line, belonging to the New England
Navigation Company. The Fall River Line runs from New York to
Boston, and their vessels are of exceptional interest as being
propelled by paddle-wheels notwithstanding that their size is in some
cases of from four to six thousand tons. Characteristic, too, is the
extent to which the decks tier aloft and spread out beyond the hull of
the ship. Among their fleet may be reckoned the Priscilla, Puritan,
and Providence, vessels which vary in length from over, to just
under, 400 feet, with a beam of about 50 feet, but including “guards”
about another 30 feet. Opposite this page will be seen the
Commonwealth, the flagship of this celebrated fleet, and the most
modern. Instead of the paddle-boxes rising to a great height, they
are absorbed by the excessive amount of top-hamper. To such an
extent, also, has the widest beam of the ship been pushed that the
paddle-wheels are scarcely discernible, being quite underneath the
“guards,” instead of projecting from the hull. The Commonwealth
plies between New York and Boston via Newport and the Fall River,
and is the largest and most magnificent steamship built for service
on inland waters. Some idea of her value may be gathered when we
remark that she cost £400,000 to build. It will be seen that she has
been given a high bow, for the reason that she must be a good sea-
boat, since part of her route is exposed to the Atlantic. She is 456
feet long, 96 feet wide (reckoning in the “guards”), and has sleeping
accommodation for two thousand people. This voyage is performed
in about twelve hours, mostly by night, from New York to the Fall
River, and the retention of the paddle-wheel gives an absence of
vibration, and enables the nerve-wrecked citizen to sleep as
peacefully as on shore. The Commonwealth is steady in a sea-way,
and has pushed the cult of luxury just about as far as it can go, whilst
yet retaining any of the accustomed characteristics of the ship.
Practically these craft are remarkably up-to-date hotels moved by a
pair of paddle-wheels. Replete with their barber’s shops, cafés,
libraries, saloons, orchestra, galleries, stairways, dining-rooms,
spacious bedrooms, kitchens, and other features too numerous to
mention, they are representative afloat of the prevailing passion
ashore for luxury and personal comfort. The Commonwealth, like her
sisters of the same fleet, is built of steel, and for greater safety she
has seven bulkheads, which extend to the main deck, and are so
installed that no carelessness can leave the doors open. Her hull is
double and the space between the bottoms is divided into numerous
water-tight compartments, whilst collision bulkheads are also placed
at each side of the steamer at the “guards.” Her speed is twenty-two
knots per hour, which is obtained by compound engines, with two
high-pressure cylinders. The paddle-wheels are of the feathering
type, with curved steel buckets, and in addition to the usual steam
pumps, there is a large pump for use on the fire-sprinkler system
which covers the whole interior of the ship. The ship has a powerful
search-light, and an electric lift to the kitchen. In case both her
steam-steering and hand-gear should get out of order the ship can
be steered by independent auxiliary gear attached direct to the
rudder stock.
Having regard to the fact that it was North America which played
so prominent a part in the history and introduction of the steamship,
it is by no means unfitting that that country should also have
developed the paddle-wheel steamboat to an extent that is entirely
unknown in Great Britain. The difference in types is partly owing to
the difference in tastes and habits between the two peoples, but also
owing to the contrast in geographical arrangement. We in England
have nothing comparable with the Hudson, for instance, and its fine,
long sweep of navigable water; nor with the vast American Great
Lakes, which, in a unique manner, have held out a special kind of
encouragement to the steamship. As carriers not merely of cargoes,
but also of passengers, especially during the tourist seasons, the
steamships on the Great Lakes have attained the character rather
analogous to the ocean liner than to the inland steamboat. The spirit
of luxury is not concealed in these Lake liners, and some idea of one
of the two-funnelled passenger steamboats now plying on the Great
Lakes of America may be seen in the illustration facing this page of
the City of Cleveland. The two characteristics already noted in the
case of the Hudson and the Fall River steamships will here be
noticed still further. We refer to the extent of the added decks, and to
the increased beam which is given to the ship by means of the
“guards.”
 THE “CITY OF CLEVELAND.”

AN AMERICAN “WHALE-BACK” STEAMER.

 But perhaps the most extraordinary looking American steamship
is the well-known “whale-back” which is in use on the Great Lakes as
a cargo-carrier. Practically speaking she is just a whale-like steel
tank with an engine and propeller at the stern. Anything but comely
in appearance, she is something of the American counterpart of the
British turret-ship, but with one difference. The American type has no
turret, but is just a long curved box with two comparatively small
erections at bow and stern respectively, as will be seen by examining
the photograph of one of these vessels reproduced opposite page
264. But the design of these Lake steamers is to carry the largest
amount of cargo with the lowest registered tonnage, and this object
is attained with satisfactory results, for there is scarcely any space at
all in the ships but is thus employed.
And with this we may bring our chapter to an end. We have now
seen the rise, the gradual growth, and the specialisation of the
steamship in many ways, and in many different localities whenever
employed as a commercial money-earning concern. But the
steamship, like the sailing ship, is not exclusively employed either for
commerce or for war. With the latter kind of ships we have in the
present volume no concern; but with regard to the development of
the steam yacht we shall now have something to say.
 CHAPTER X
THE STEAM YACHT

That the steamship should become for the sportsman what for
some time the sailing vessel had been was a natural prophecy. Even
if steam were not to oust the simpler craft, at least both might sail the
seas together without let or hindrance. But, of course, the old
prejudice asserted itself again in yachting just as we have so
frequently through the pages of this book seen that it did in the
evolution of the purely commercial and experimental ships.
The pioneer of the steam yacht was undoubtedly the late Mr.
Assheton Smith, of Tedworth, near Andover. A man of substantial
means, a keen sportsman, who was well-known among both hunting
and yachting men, he was rather more far-sighted than his
contemporaries, and considerably less prejudiced. He had owned a
number of sailing yachts, was a member of the Royal Yacht
Squadron, and had it in mind to extend the encouragement of the
sport also to vessels using steam. But to the select and conservative
minds of the Royal Yacht Squadron this was by no means a happy
suggestion, and they promptly showed their resentment by passing a
resolution on May 5th, 1827, to the effect that since a material object
of the club was to promote seamanship and improvements of sailing
vessels to which the application of steam-engines was inimical, no
vessel propelled by steam should be admitted into the club, and that
any member applying a steam engine to his yacht should cease to
be a member. As the late Mr. Montague Guest, in his history of the
Royal Yacht Squadron, remarked, this prejudice was no doubt
caused by the objectionable vomits of smoke which contemporary
steamers in that locality were wont to emit, so that the fair shores of
Southampton Water were polluted, and distant objects completely
obscured. Smith was taunted with the remark that in wishing to
introduce the steam yacht he was intending to make a connection
between business and pleasure, and this insult stung him so
severely that he eventually resigned his membership.
In August of 1827, the Northern Yacht Club offered at their
regatta a twenty guinea cup, to be awarded to the swiftest
steamboat, and so far as I am able to ascertain this was the first
occasion when steam craft ever raced against each other under
such conditions. Several steam vessel owners sent in their entries
for the race, and after an exciting contest for three hours round a
marked course, a paddle-ship, named the Clarence, won. This is
especially interesting, inasmuch as that boat had been engined by
the famous Robert Napier to whom we referred earlier in this book,
and in more ways than one this success led to considerable
success. The incident attracted the attention of Assheton Smith,
who, although he was then fifty years old, was fired with enthusiasm
over the possibilities of the new sport. He had already had five
sailing yachts built for him, and after resigning from the Royal Yacht
Squadron, wrote to Napier asking him to come south to his place
near Andover. Neither had met before, and the upshot of the
northerner’s visit was that he was commissioned to build a steam
yacht, the cost of which came to £20,000, Napier being given a free
hand in regard to her entire construction. A recent writer has seen fit
to remark that “no account exists of the first steam yacht built by Mr.
Smith,” so that it may be worth while to add that this vessel was
named the Menai, that she was built in the year 1830 and delivered
at Bristol. She measured 120 feet long and 20 feet wide, her tonnage
being 230, and her nominal horse-power 110. She was, of course, a
paddle-wheel craft and driven by Napier’s double side-lever engines,
of which we have already explained the detailed working. Those who
wish to see what this first historic steam yacht was like can examine
a model of her in the Glasgow Art Galleries.
The Menai turned out a great success, and so pleased was her
owner, that he commissioned Napier to build him another boat,
which was named the Glowworm, a vessel of 300 tons and 100
horse-power. She was made ready by 1838. Until Smith was eighty
years old the connection thus formed between the two men was
continued, and during the period of twenty or thirty years Napier built
quite a fleet of steam yachts for his patron. The Glowworm was
followed by the Fire King in 1839—this being a 700-ton ship and the
biggest of them all. Afterwards came at different dates three Fire
Queens (in honour of Queen Victoria, who had come to the throne
since the first steam yacht had been launched), the Jenny Lind, and
the Sea Serpent; the latter about 1851. The Fire King was designed
with hollow water-lines, and was a vessel possessing considerable
speed. Before her trials were run, Smith issued a public challenge in
Bell’s Life that she would run against any steamer then afloat, from
Dover Pier to the Eddystone Lighthouse and back, for 5,000
guineas, or even higher stakes if desired. One of the three Fire
Queens was the fastest vessel of any kind at that time, and
possessed the exceptional speed of 16 knots. This was the third
vessel of that name, and was built in 1846, her tonnage being 300
and her horse-power 120. She was driven by steeple engines which
actuated a screw, and the Admiralty thought so much of her that they
purchased her as a packet. Smith, however, did not like the screw,
and his next ship reverted to the use of paddle-wheels.
In 1844 the Royal Yacht Squadron began to climb down
gradually from their haughty position of serene isolation, for in that
year they showed some slight recognition of the steam yacht by
resolving that “no steamer of less than 100 horse-power should be
qualified for admission into, or entitled to the privileges of the
Squadron,” and in 1853 the last objection to the steam yacht was
withdrawn by the rescinding of all rules which prohibited her use.
Thereupon a number of the Royal Squadron members had auxiliary
engines fitted to their sailing craft, but by 1856 there were not more
than a score of steam-engined yachts as against seven or eight
hundred sailing ones. In 1868 a unique race, which excited some
derision at the time, was run between Lord Vane’s steam yacht
Cornelia and Mr. Talbot’s Eothen. During the early ’eighties many of
the non-racing yachts flying the Squadron’s colours, and used solely
for cruising, were either purely steam or auxiliary steam yachts. By
1883, out of 2,000 yachts no fewer than 700 were steam, which had
cost originally two and a half millions sterling. To such an extent had
this new development of the sport gone ahead that it was even
seriously suggested by the Field that ordinary cruising would be
extinguished by the steam yacht. During the ’eighties the number of
English steam yachts multiplied in all parts of the Kingdom owing to
several causes. The improvements which had been going on, as well
in the making of marine engines as in yacht building and designing,
were assisted by the more economical consumption of coal which
was now possible. But the sport of steam-yachting is entirely, by
reason of its nature and its costliness, confined to the rich man.
Apart altogether from the advantages which steam gives in that it
renders the yacht independent of calms and tides, yet it carries with
it especially a social feature. The influence of Cowes week, the
dispensing of hospitality, and the privilege of enjoying a floating
home anything but bereft of the highest comfort, must be reckoned
as among the potent factors of an extent equal to, if not greater than,
the sheer delight of voyaging from one port to another. Many steam
yachts spend their time within the comparatively sheltered waters of
the south coast of England, or the west coast of Scotland, perhaps
running out to the Riviera in December or January. But a few, such
as Lord Brassey’s celebrated Sunbeam, go round the world,
penetrate to the Arctic circle, cross the Atlantic, and go east through
the Suez Canal.
 TYPICAL STEAM YACHT OF ABOUT 1890.
By permission of “The Yachting Monthly.”

For a long time the steam yacht naturally enough retained most
of the features of the sailing yacht. I say naturally, not merely
because steam was still distrusted, and, therefore, canvas was
retained, but because beauty of form and symmetry are demanded
more in the steam yacht than in the steamship designed for
commercial purposes. For the creators of steam yachts were rather
yacht-architects than steamship-designers. We have only to quote
the admirable work of such men as St. Clare Byrne and G. L.
Watson to emphasise this point. Indeed, with the exception of the
Triad, so recently added to the fleet of steam yachts, and to which
we shall refer fully in due course, the lines and general appearance
of the steam pleasure vessel is far more “yachty” than perhaps one
might have imagined would be the case, having regard to the
differences which have sprung up in the appearance of the
commercial steamship. The illustration on page 271, which is typical
of the steam yacht about the year 1890, shows how markedly the
influence of the clipper sailing ships of the ’sixties was at work. The
gilding at the bow, the figure-head, the fine entrance, and the
bowsprit have existed long after the latter was required for setting a
jib at the end of it. As a rule, the schooner rig has prevailed, though
some ocean-going steam yachts are rigged as barques, ships, and
barquentines. For long voyages between distant ports the retention
of the sail as a saving of the limited coal supply is but natural, and
also for the purpose of steadying the ship in a sea-way.
In the early days the steam yacht was usually of the type which
has one flush deck. But to-day she varies to the same extent as the
sailing yacht. Topgallant forecastles, quarter decks, bridge-houses,
awning decks, shade decks, spar decks, and many other features
have been added. Three masts have given way to two, and now only
one is being retained, and that merely for signalling purposes or for
wireless telegraphy. Formerly, the steam yacht was a long, narrow
creation carrying a considerable quantity of ballast, but to-day she is
given greater beam, and in many points is coming far more under
the sway of the ocean steamship than ever she has in the whole of
her history. The accommodation is being modified and improved,
and the elemental features are undergoing a change. Whereas the
older types carried their dining and drawing-rooms below, nowadays
these, as well as the state-rooms, are, whenever possible, placed on
the main deck. Much more room is afforded for promenade by the
adding of deck upon deck, and a noticeable characteristic of the
modern steam yacht is the extent to which the deck-house and pilot-
house have been carried. Like their bigger sisters, the steam yachts
of to-day are fitted with every thought for comfort. Electric light,
refrigerating plant, exquisite decorations, heating apparatus, search-
lights, and a thousand other details go to swell the long bill which
has to be paid for the private steamship.
The old square stern inherited from the Dutch, through the
British Navy of yesterday, and, finally, through the royal yachts, is
modified nowadays from a clumsiness to resemble more nearly the
counter of the smart sailing yacht. Ample overhang at bow and stern
gives both increased deck space and makes a drier ship, and at the
bows this additional room is advantageous for working the anchors.
As compared with the liner, the yacht has far more opportunities of
showing what a graceful creature the ship really is: for she has not to
rush across seas at break-neck speed, nor has she to waste her
internal space with accommodation for cargo and mails. She need
not clutter up her decks with clusters of derricks, but go about her
easy work in a quiet and dignified manner, not forgetting to look
pretty all the time. And yet she is able nowadays, by reason of her
size, to carry large enough quantities of water, coals and stores to
last her for lengthy voyages, independent of the shore. The question
of speed is subservient to fuel-endurance, and to get her owner and
his guests to their destination with the least degree of discomfort is
of far greater import than to set up new steaming records. She is a
good sea-boat, for she is not harassed by the limitations as to the
distribution of weights which have to be studied so closely in the
case of the liner. The single-screw is giving way to the twin-screw,
and the triple-expansion engine is usually adopted, with its absence
of any great vibration.
The steam yacht, has, however, found out the advantages of the
turbine, and the first to be fitted thus was the Emerald, built on the
Clyde in 1902 for Sir Christopher Furness. She has a Thames
measurement of 797, and is propelled by three separate propellers,
with their individual shafts actuated by three sets of turbine
machinery. Her speed is about 16 knots on an exceptionally low coal
consumption, and she showed her ability by crossing the Atlantic in
the year following her birth. The recent adaptation of the Parsons
turbine for moderate speeds, already discussed, will doubtless pave
the way for a much more general adoption of this form of propulsion
in the yacht. Otherwise speed in the steam yacht is a doubtful
advantage, for with reciprocating engines there is demanded a
greater amount of space which could be better used for extra cabin
room. Water-ballast and bilge-keels are used to a large extent, and
steel has long since proved its worth for the making of the hull as
well as many other features of the ship. Now that the engines of a
steam yacht have proved themselves to possess that reliability which
was for a long time not conceded, the need for sails, except for
steadying the ship, or, as already mentioned, for long ocean
voyages, has disappeared. It is much more common to see a steam
yacht given the rig as seen in the illustration on page 275, with stay-
sails and try-sails, than the yards and gaff-sails of yesterday. Indeed,
one might go so far as to assert that the retention of the two masts is
based on appearance more than with a view to utility.
 A STEAM YACHT TO-DAY.
By permission of “The Yachting Monthly.”

THE RUSSIAN IMPERIAL YACHT “LIVADIA.”

From the Model in the Victoria and Albert Museum.
 One of the most extraordinary steam yachts ever built was the
Livadia, of which a capital model is illustrated opposite page 276.
She was built in 1880 by Messrs. John Elder & Co. for the Russian
Admiralty. Her unusual design was based on the idea of a circular
floating battery invented by John Elder in the ’sixties, and
reintroduced by Admiral Popoff ten years later. From a technical
paper read some years ago by her builder, we gather that she was
constructed in accordance with Admiral Popoff’s designs to give 14
knots per hour. In case of her failing to come up to the required
standard, the Russian Admiralty were to be allowed to reject her.
Previous to her actual building, elaborate experiments took place
with a model, and both before and after the appearance of the ship
she was subject to considerable criticism, some of which, no doubt,
was owing to the radical departure from accepted custom. Her
builder described her as being turbot-shaped with a super-structure
which contained the Imperial apartments and the accommodation for
suite and crew. After her trials, she sailed from the Clyde to Brest in
fine weather. Thence she crossed the Bay of Biscay, and the bad
weather which had sprung up increased to a gale of exceptional
violence, which also afforded the most conclusive test for her
steadiness. It was found that she was wonderfully endowed with the
latter virtue, and that although she had been designed for service on
the Black Sea, she was able to take the seas of the Bay in a most
satisfactory manner. The height of the waves was adjudged by the
experts on board as being from twenty to twenty-five feet, but the
receding formation of the turbot had the effect of dividing the wave
against itself. In no case did the waves succeed in reaching the
keels of the ship’s boats hung in davits 22 feet above the load-line,
and although the table was loaded with candelabra and other easily
capsizable articles, the ship never lurched so as to send them
moving. It is true that when she put into Ferrol, owing to the
exhaustion of the crew, two of the thirty-seven cells on the external
rim of the turbot were damaged, yet this did not vitiate the general
principle of her construction. She was driven by three propellers and
three independent engines, and was easily handled. During the gale
she only required one man at the wheel. She displaced nearly 4,000
tons, measured 235 feet in length, 153 feet in extreme width, and
drew only 6½ feet.
Perhaps the one conspicuous example where the steam yacht
has been designed not by a yacht architect is in the case of the
steam yachts possessed by the Royalty of this land, and it is a
matter of regret that some of the worst and most old-fashioned
traditions should be perpetuated in what one would have expected to
have been the most up-to-date and efficient steam craft afloat. There
has ever been displayed in the royal steam yachts far more of the
Admiralty influence of yesterday than of the modern factors at work
in yacht-design. Grace and delicacy have been avoided for a kind of
clumsy impressiveness, and the worst features of the eighteenth and
early nineteenth centuries naval architecture are retained with a
surprising obstinacy. The heavy quarters and counter, the tasteless
display of external carving and gold leaf have had to make a
pretence of affording what should have come spontaneously from
the beauty of the vessel’s own lines. The Victoria and Albert,
launched a few years ago, is especially expressive of the defects
which she ought never to have exhibited. And the latest English royal
yacht which was launched in 1907, has but little character that is
superior to her predecessor. This Alexandra will be seen at her trials
in the illustration facing page 278. True, the heavy quarters have
been very much modified, but in any assemblage of steam yachts or
modern ocean-going steamships, she stands out less owing to her
inherent beauty, than for the impression of solidity which she
conveys. The Alexandra has a registered tonnage of 2,157, and is
driven by three turbines.
 THE ROYAL YACHT “VICTORIA AND ALBERT.”

THE ROYAL YACHT “ALEXANDRA.”

From a Photograph. By permission of Messrs. A. & J. Inglis, Ltd.
 The illustration of the Sagitta, facing page 280, is of particular
interest, for when she appeared in the summer of 1908, she was the
largest steam yacht ever built on the south coast. Constructed by
Messrs. Camper and Nicholson for the Duc de Valençay, she has a
Thames measurement tonnage of 757, and on her trials showed a
speed of 15·2 knots, which was 2·2 knots above that contracted for.
Steam yacht building has more usually been the work of the northern
yards. Two of her features are especially noticeable as showing a
divergence from the stereotyped design of the steam yacht. Firstly,
the three, and even two, masts, have gone altogether, and only one
is retained, in a most unusual position, for signalling purposes.
Secondly, her stern goes right away from the accepted clipper-bow-
plus-bowsprit end, although the yacht-like overhanging counter is
retained. In matters of this nature personal taste will enter quite
independent of the demands put forward by naval architecture, but it
can scarcely be said that this hybrid arrangement makes for beauty,
for the nice balance which is so significant a feature of the ends of a
yacht is here hardly possible. Much more acceptable is the design of
the Triad, which, amid considerable adverse criticism for her
originality, made her appearance in the summer of 1909. An
interesting photograph of this novel yacht appears opposite page
280, but it conveys little idea of her size. With her two funnels, her
straight stern and modified turtle-deck stern, she is a “whole-hogger”
as compared with the compromise which the Sagitta represents. In
the Triad the steam yacht breaks right away from accepted
conditions and shows the first real approach to the contemporary
ocean-going steamship. To some extent, no doubt, she exhibits
some resemblance to the well-known German Imperial steam yacht,
the Hohenzollern, but she is rather a deep-sea liner in miniature,
capable of going anywhere, and performing practically any service
which could be asked of her. She has been built on steamship lines
by a firm which, I believe, had never previously constructed a steam
yacht. Her size of 1,416 tons would alone make her interesting, but it
is her business-like appearance which causes her to be especially
noticeable. Her stem has come in for a good deal of criticism, some
of which is doubtless justifiable, but not a little is obviously based on
the fact that convention was thrown aside. It is claimed that the
clipper-stem is not merely advantageous in regard to looks, but
besides giving increased deck space where it is needed to work the
anchors, permits of a generous amount of flare to protect the fore
decks from water coming aboard. The older form also provides a
useful “false” end in the case of a ship colliding, while, on the other
hand, the straight stem possesses considerable merits for docking
and berthing in a congested harbour.
The Triad measures 250 feet long, between perpendiculars, and
35 feet wide, and is equipped with twin-screw engines, which give
her a speed of 16 knots. She has two double-ended boilers, and one
auxiliary boiler for driving the electric installation when in port. Some
of her minor features are sufficiently unusual to merit remark. Thus,
for instance, the windlass on her forecastle is fitted with a special
indicator which shows the amount of cable run out, and an
arrangement something similar in principle to that mentioned as
existing on liners is installed, whereby the engineer cannot easily
make a mistake in carrying out the captain’s orders from the bridge.
If the engines are going ahead the captain knows this by an electric
lamp which shows red; if they are going astern the lamp shows
green, the movement of the engines themselves indicating
automatically. In matters of personal comfort this miniature liner is
amply fitted. Besides the usual accommodation, she has dining-
room, drawing-room, music-room, maids’ room and ample
bedrooms, all upholstered and furnished with due regard to modern
luxury.
It would be impossible within the limits of our subject to refer in
detail to all those magnificent stately steam yachts which are afloat
in European and American waters. Such vessels as the Vanadis,
with her 1,233 tons (Thames measurement), triple-screws and triple
turbines built in 1908; the well-known Ioland, built for Mr. Morton F.
Plant of New York, by a Scotch firm; the Wakiva, twin-screw steam
yacht, the Lysistrata, the Liberty, are representative of the
magnificent fleet which has come into being so speedily, in spite of
the chilly reception and opposition which greeted the steam yacht
during the first half of the past century. The Liberty, something of
whose internal comfort we shall show in another chapter, is of 1,571