CHESHIRE-L Archives

Archiver > CHESHIRE > 2006-05 > 1148326541


From: Ellen Edwards <>
Subject: Re: [CHS] : HMS WOOLSTON
Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 12:38:51 -0700
References: <31c.4d6dc82.31a36879@aol.com>


Yes, you'd need some sort of drink - with such profound images going on
about those destroyers and the hectic life on board...
Keep up the stories!
And I'm sure that Shirley and company at the museum will be most pleased to
have your model of HMS Woolston.
Ellen

----- Original Message -----
From: <>
To: <>
Sent: Monday, May 22, 2006 12:18 PM
Subject: [CHS] : HMS WOOLSTON


> Hi Listers,
> This is about Cheshire - Honest.
> At the end of WW1 we had an embarrassment of "State of the Art" Destroyers
> recently completed. More than 50 in fact. These had been designed to go in
> fast
> against the German ships - fire torpedoes and then run away at a great
> rate
> of knots. We had little alternative but to let them grow old whilst
> waiting
> for WW2.
> Because we had so many destroyers - there was no incentive to build
> any
> more or produce any design improvements.
> WW2 was a different war for the Destroyers, they were not expected to
> fight German ships with their guns and torpedoes. The new enemy was up in
> the
> sky and down under the sea. One of the first destroyer casualties
> happened at
> the Dunkirk evacuation - she was sunk by enemy aircraft with little
> armament
> suitable to defend herself.
> Quick refits were necessary - half of the torpedo tubes were removed
> together with some of the 4" guns. High angle guns and Anti Aircraft guns
> were
> fitted and off they went to do battle in the Atlantic, Mediterranean and
> North Sea.
> More trouble and more refits. Convoy escort Destroyers required
> endurance, so these had a steam boiler removed and replaced with more
> fuel
> containers. Anti submarine Destroyers required loads of depth charges and
> the means
> to propel them, so these were fitted at the rear end. By this time, new
> modern Destroyers such as the type 3s were being introduced, replacing
> the old WW1
> stock.
> In 1942, the civil population had a "Warship Week" where towns could
> adopt a ship.
> Congleton adopted a WW1 Destroyer called "HMS Woolston". How did I find
> this
> out ?
> Because I joined the Local History Society recently. How did I know about
> these destroyers ?
> Because I built a model of one about 10 years ago. So what ? Well there is
> nothing in the Museum to recognise Congleton's "Boat" and I still have the
> plans to build a new model.
> I'm thinking about it. Could HMS Tanatside do more than the old
> Destroyers'
> 35 knots ?
> For those interested in the social side - the toilet facilities were
> minimal, the sleeping arrangements were "one out-one in", most sailors
> went to
> Russia and back without a change of clothing, lifeboat drill was not
> practised on
> the Russian convoys - what was the point you only lasted 4 minutes in
> those
> temperatures, boots were seldom removed because the decks were continually
> awash, you couldn't touch anything outside the ship or it would take your
> skin
> off.
> I'm off for a hot cup of tea.
> Ricky Cooper.
>
>
> ==== CHESHIRE Mailing List ====
> Cheshire Surnames Interest Directory:
> http://www.fhsc.org.uk/surnames/
>
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.392 / Virus Database: 268.6.1/344 - Release Date: 19/05/2006
>
>


This thread: