Difference between revisions of "Laforey Class Destroyer (1913)"
(add to featured ship class cat) |
|||
(33 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
! align=center | Fate | ! align=center | Fate | ||
|- align=left | |- align=left | ||
− | | {{UK-Llewellyn | + | | {{Template:UK-Llewellyn}} |
− | |[[Beardmore]] | + | |[[William Beardmore & Company]] |
| | | | ||
|30 Oct, 1913 | |30 Oct, 1913 | ||
Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
| Mar, 1922 | | Mar, 1922 | ||
|- align=left | |- align=left | ||
− | | {{UK-Lennox | + | | {{Template:UK-Lennox}} |
− | |[[Beardmore]] | + | |[[William Beardmore & Company]] |
| | | | ||
|17 Mar, 1914 | |17 Mar, 1914 | ||
Line 31: | Line 31: | ||
| Oct, 1921 | | Oct, 1921 | ||
|- align=left | |- align=left | ||
− | | {{UK-Loyal | + | | {{Template:UK-Loyal}} |
− | |[[Denny]] | + | |[[William Denny & Brothers]] |
| | | | ||
|11 Nov, 1913 | |11 Nov, 1913 | ||
Line 38: | Line 38: | ||
| Nov, 1921 | | Nov, 1921 | ||
|- align=left | |- align=left | ||
− | | {{UK-Legion | + | | {{Template:UK-Legion}} |
− | |[[Denny]] | + | |[[William Denny & Brothers]] |
| | | | ||
|3 Feb, 1914 | |3 Feb, 1914 | ||
Line 45: | Line 45: | ||
| May, 1921 | | May, 1921 | ||
|- align=left | |- align=left | ||
− | | {{UK-Laforey | + | | {{Template:UK-Laforey}} |
− | |[[Fairfield]] | + | |[[Fairfield Shipbuilding and Engineering Company]] |
| | | | ||
|28 Mar, 1913 | |28 Mar, 1913 | ||
Line 52: | Line 52: | ||
|Mined 25 Mar, 1917 | |Mined 25 Mar, 1917 | ||
|- align=left | |- align=left | ||
− | | {{UK-Lawford | + | | {{Template:UK-Lawford}} |
− | |[[Fairfield]] | + | |[[Fairfield Shipbuilding and Engineering Company]] |
| | | | ||
|30 Oct, 1913 | |30 Oct, 1913 | ||
Line 59: | Line 59: | ||
| Aug, 1922 | | Aug, 1922 | ||
|- align=left | |- align=left | ||
− | | {{UK-Louis | + | | {{Template:UK-Louis}} |
− | |[[Fairfield]] | + | |[[Fairfield Shipbuilding and Engineering Company]] |
| | | | ||
|30 Dec, 1913 | |30 Dec, 1913 | ||
Line 66: | Line 66: | ||
|Mined 31 Oct, 1915 | |Mined 31 Oct, 1915 | ||
|- align=left | |- align=left | ||
− | | {{UK-Lydiard | + | | {{Template:UK-Lydiard}} |
− | |[[Fairfield]] | + | |[[Fairfield Shipbuilding and Engineering Company]] |
| | | | ||
|26 Feb, 1914 | |26 Feb, 1914 | ||
Line 73: | Line 73: | ||
| Nov, 1921 | | Nov, 1921 | ||
|- align=left | |- align=left | ||
− | | {{UK-Laertes | + | | {{Template:UK-Laertes}} |
|[[Swan Hunter]] | |[[Swan Hunter]] | ||
| | | | ||
Line 80: | Line 80: | ||
| Dec, 1921 | | Dec, 1921 | ||
|- align=left | |- align=left | ||
− | | {{UK-Lysander | + | | {{Template:UK-Lysander}} |
|[[Swan Hunter]] | |[[Swan Hunter]] | ||
| | | | ||
Line 87: | Line 87: | ||
| Jun, 1922 | | Jun, 1922 | ||
|- align=left | |- align=left | ||
− | | {{UK-Lance | + | | {{Template:UK-Lance}} |
− | |[[Thornycroft]] | + | |[[John I. Thornycroft & Company]] |
| | | | ||
|25 Feb, 1914 | |25 Feb, 1914 | ||
Line 94: | Line 94: | ||
| Nov, 1921 | | Nov, 1921 | ||
|- align=left | |- align=left | ||
− | | {{UK-Lookout | + | | {{Template:UK-Lookout}} |
− | |[[Thornycroft]] | + | |[[John I. Thornycroft & Company]] |
| | | | ||
|27 Apr, 1914 | |27 Apr, 1914 | ||
Line 101: | Line 101: | ||
| Aug, 1922 | | Aug, 1922 | ||
|- align=left | |- align=left | ||
− | | {{UK-Laurel | + | | {{Template:UK-Laurel}} |
− | |[[J. | + | |[[J. Samuel White]] |
| | | | ||
|6 May, 1913 | |6 May, 1913 | ||
Line 108: | Line 108: | ||
| Nov, 1921 | | Nov, 1921 | ||
|- align=left | |- align=left | ||
− | | {{UK-Liberty | + | | {{Template:UK-Liberty}} |
− | |[[J. | + | |[[J. Samuel White]] |
| | | | ||
|15 Sep, 1913 | |15 Sep, 1913 | ||
Line 115: | Line 115: | ||
| Nov, 1921 | | Nov, 1921 | ||
|- align=left | |- align=left | ||
− | | {{UK-Lark | + | | {{Template:UK-Lark}} |
− | |[[Yarrow]] | + | |[[Yarrow & Company]] |
| | | | ||
|26 May, 1913 | |26 May, 1913 | ||
Line 122: | Line 122: | ||
| Jan, 1923 | | Jan, 1923 | ||
|- align=left | |- align=left | ||
− | | {{UK-Landrail | + | | {{Template:UK-Landrail}} |
− | |[[Yarrow]] | + | |[[Yarrow & Company]] |
| | | | ||
|7 Feb, 1914 | |7 Feb, 1914 | ||
Line 129: | Line 129: | ||
| 1 Dec, 1921 | | 1 Dec, 1921 | ||
|- align=left | |- align=left | ||
− | | {{UK-Laverock | + | | {{Template:UK-Laverock}} |
− | |[[Yarrow]] | + | |[[Yarrow & Company]] |
| | | | ||
|19 Nov, 1913 | |19 Nov, 1913 | ||
Line 136: | Line 136: | ||
| May, 1921 | | May, 1921 | ||
|- align=left | |- align=left | ||
− | | {{UK-Linnet | + | | {{Template:UK-Linnet}} |
− | |[[Yarrow]] | + | |[[Yarrow & Company]] |
| | | | ||
|16 Aug, 1913 | |16 Aug, 1913 | ||
Line 143: | Line 143: | ||
| Nov, 1921 | | Nov, 1921 | ||
|- align=left | |- align=left | ||
− | | {{UK-Lochinvar | + | | {{Template:UK-Lochinvar}} |
− | |[[Beardmore]] | + | |[[William Beardmore & Company]] |
| | | | ||
|9 Oct, 1915 | |9 Oct, 1915 | ||
Line 150: | Line 150: | ||
| Nov, 1921 | | Nov, 1921 | ||
|- align=left | |- align=left | ||
− | | {{UK-Lassoo | + | | {{Template:UK-Lassoo}} |
− | |[[Beardmore]] | + | |[[William Beardmore & Company]] |
| | | | ||
|24 Aug, 1915 | |24 Aug, 1915 | ||
Line 157: | Line 157: | ||
|Mined 13 Aug, 1916 | |Mined 13 Aug, 1916 | ||
|- align=left | |- align=left | ||
− | | {{UK-Leonidas | + | | {{Template:UK-Leonidas}} |
− | |[[ | + | |[[Palmer Shipbuilding and Iron Company]] |
| | | | ||
|30 Oct, 1913 | |30 Oct, 1913 | ||
Line 164: | Line 164: | ||
| May, 1921 | | May, 1921 | ||
|- align=left | |- align=left | ||
− | | {{UK-Lucifer | + | | {{Template:UK-Lucifer}} |
− | |[[ | + | |[[Palmer Shipbuilding and Iron Company]] |
| | | | ||
|29 Dec, 1913 | |29 Dec, 1913 | ||
Line 172: | Line 172: | ||
|} | |} | ||
</div name=fredbot:ships> | </div name=fredbot:ships> | ||
+ | ==Electric Logs== | ||
+ | In March, 1914, it was ordered that these ships were to receive two [[Trident Electric Log]]s and one Charthouse Receiver during the 1914-15 financial year.{{AWO1914|967 of 27 Mar, 1914}} | ||
+ | |||
==Performance== | ==Performance== | ||
The ships averaged a little over 30 knots on their 8 hour trials, with a few units making only a little over 29.5 knots.{{March|p. 134}} | The ships averaged a little over 30 knots on their 8 hour trials, with a few units making only a little over 29.5 knots.{{March|p. 134}} | ||
Line 179: | Line 182: | ||
The ships had recurrent problems with their dynamos. By October 1914, the issue was proving so serious that a reversion to reciprocating engines from the turbo generators was requested. The generators ran so hot that the hatches to the compartment were often left open, admitting spray which caused stoppages.{{March|p. 141}} | The ships had recurrent problems with their dynamos. By October 1914, the issue was proving so serious that a reversion to reciprocating engines from the turbo generators was requested. The generators ran so hot that the hatches to the compartment were often left open, admitting spray which caused stoppages.{{March|p. 141}} | ||
− | In May 1915, {{UK-Lark}}'s commander said the ship was very unreliable in steering at speeds over 20 knots, that helm less than 15 degrees did little, and that 20-25 degrees did more than 35 degrees did. At the [[Battle of Dogger Bank]], the ship proved utterly unresponsive five times to full helm despite the gentle sea conditions, prompting him to state, "I consider H.M.S. ''Lark'' to be dangerous at high speed..." He recommended that the ship either lead its division or be tail-end charlie to reduce the peril. | + | In May 1915, {{UK-Lark}}'s commander said the ship was very unreliable in steering at speeds over 20 knots, that helm less than 15 degrees did little, and that 20-25 degrees did more than 35 degrees did. At the [[Battle of Dogger Bank]], the ship proved utterly unresponsive five times to full helm despite the gentle sea conditions, prompting him to state, "I consider H.M.S. ''Lark'' to be dangerous at high speed..." He recommended that the ship either lead its division or be tail-end charlie to reduce the peril. {{UK-Lark}} was moved to the last position in her division and a comparative turning trial with {{UK-Miranda}} confirmed the dismal turning performance. Sister ships with the same rudder, propellors and design did not seem to experience the same issues.{{March|p. 142}} |
==Armament== | ==Armament== | ||
===4-in Guns=== | ===4-in Guns=== | ||
− | Three 4-in Q.F. Mark IV guns on P IX mountings on the centre line | + | * Three 4-in Q.F. Mark IV guns on P. IX mountings on the centre line. |
− | + | These quick-firing guns had also been fitted to the last seven of the previous [[Acasta Class Destroyer (1912)|''Acasta'' class]], but their use here reflected their standardisation over the earlier B.L. models.{{UKTHVol4Part34|p. 11}} There were 120 rounds per gun. | |
− | + | The mounting could elevate 20 degrees and depress 10 degrees, but its sight could only elevate 15 degrees and the range dial was actually only graduated to 12.5 degrees (7,900 yards). "This was soon remedied by the supply of additional sight strips graduated to the extreme range of 10,200 yards."{{UKTHVol4Part34|p. 13}} A photo of a weapon from {{UK-Lance|f=p}} on museum display shows that the range dial's markings to 10,200 yards required it to rotate through about 440 degrees – a revolution and a half. That is, the range graduations were helical.<ref name=Hartley>[https://twitter.com/dhartley_NMRN/status/1164512882530422784/photo/1 photo] by Dave Hartley of the The National Museum of the Royal Navy.</ref> | |
− | Unlike some P IX sights, these were not {{FTP}} sights. | + | These gear-worked sights had gearing constants of 26.66 and range dials for 2200 fps, and 1-in aiming rifle, though at least one was marked for 0.303 aiming rifle on its reverse.<ref name=Hartley/> M.V. could be corrected by a cam pointer allowing for a decrease to 2000 fps. |
+ | |||
+ | Unlike some P. IX sights, these were not {{FTP}} sights. | ||
The midship gun was supplied with ammunition from the forward stores.{{March|Plate 17/A}} | The midship gun was supplied with ammunition from the forward stores.{{March|Plate 17/A}} | ||
Line 203: | Line 208: | ||
During the war, some of the ships were required to land their aft gun to accommodate depth charges.{{UKTHVol4Part34|p. 14}} | During the war, some of the ships were required to land their aft gun to accommodate depth charges.{{UKTHVol4Part34|p. 14}} | ||
+ | |||
+ | As the midship 4-in mounting could train in a full circle and thus might break the electrical firing circuit wires, in June 1914 it was ordered that the pedestal to these guns have a warning plate fitted to them reading, "See circuits clear when training across limit stops."{{AWO1914|76 of 3 July 1914}} | ||
+ | |||
+ | In late September, 1914, the Admiralty ordered that the guns on the [[Tribal Class Destroyer (1907)|Tribals]] and later classes were to be given loading lights, initially on temporary circuits.{{AWO1914|416 of 29 Sep, 1914}} | ||
===Other Guns=== | ===Other Guns=== | ||
Originally, the ships may have been provided a single .303-in Maxim machine gun on a portable mounting.{{March|p. 133}} | Originally, the ships may have been provided a single .303-in Maxim machine gun on a portable mounting.{{March|p. 133}} | ||
− | By 1920, some or all had one 2-pdr pom-pom for air defence. | + | By 1920, some or all had one 2-pdr pom-pom for air defence.{{UKTHVol4Part34|p. 16}} |
===Torpedoes=== | ===Torpedoes=== | ||
− | + | [[File:ARTS1913Plate15.jpg|thumb|512px|'''21-in D.R. [Double Revolving] Torpedo Mounting Mark II'''{{ARTS1913|Plate15}}<br>The "L" Class's Mark I mounting had just a single trigger<br>The guard rails on the training platforms were not installed in destroyers]] | |
+ | [[File:ARTS1913Plate16.jpg|thumb|512px|'''Firing Mechanism'''{{ARTS1913|Plate16}}<br>Training Brake ball on right, Firing Ball on left with safety pin "D"<br>Safe arc interlock illustrated on right side<br>Modified design fitted to aft mounting in {{UK-Laurel}}]] | ||
− | + | * two [[21-in D.R. Torpedo Tube (UK)|21-in D.R. Mark I torpedo tubes]] on the centreline (2x2) w/ 50° (perhaps later reduced to 20°) arcs centered on the beam.{{March|Plate 17/A}}{{ARTS1913|p. 36}} | |
− | The new double tubes were found satisfactory, | + | These ships were the first British destroyers to have D.R. (Double Revolving) tubes, a doubling of previous torpedo armament standards. The [["W" Class Destroyer (1917)|"W" class]] was to debut the triple mounting in 1917.{{March|p. 513}} |
+ | |||
+ | In 1914 firing trials in {{UK-Liberty}}, it was found that the torpedoes from the aft torpedo mount struck the ship's deck when fired on extreme bearings. While investigations were undertaken, the expedient precaution was taken of restricting fire to 10 degrees to either side of the beam. After fitting plugs of some kind it was eventually determined that the full 50 degree arc could be used and the torpedo would always clear the gunwale by 19 inches.{{ARTS1914|pp. 39-40. (T.O. No. 61 of July 1914. G. 16299/14)}} | ||
+ | |||
+ | The new double tubes were found satisfactory in the end, though they were slow to train and the slow response to the firing lever would make firing under helm worrisome. {{UK-Laurel}}'s tubes were initially found to require four men working the training wheel and four more pushing the ends of the tubes around. {{UK-Lysander}} reported better, if still abysmal results: two men could barely train the tubes when the tubes were loaded.{{March|pp. 138-9}} Testing revealed that the design was sensitive to alignment during erection, and alterations improved things to a point that a training speed of 8° per second was achievable with two men. The firing timing in ''Laurel'' was measured as:{{ARTS1913|p. 37. This source described the D.R. mountings as being based on the Mark II, which I feel is a likely error}} | ||
+ | |||
+ | {|border=1 | ||
+ | |rowspan=2|'''Mounting'''||colspan=4 align=center|'''Timing in Seconds (after trigger press)''' | ||
+ | |- | ||
+ | |'''Striker fell'''||'''Torpedo Moves'''||'''Air Lever hit<br>by Tripper'''||'''Gyro released''' | ||
+ | |- | ||
+ | |stock Mark I mounting||align=center|0.497||align=center|0.62||align=center|0.747||align=center|1.077 | ||
+ | |- | ||
+ | |modified Mark I mounting||align=center|0.283||align=center|0.35||align=center|0.431||align=center|0.761 | ||
+ | |- | ||
+ | |earlier, single tubes||align=center colspan=2|N/A||align=center|0.144||align=center|0.474 | ||
+ | |} | ||
===Other Weapons=== | ===Other Weapons=== | ||
Line 232: | Line 258: | ||
===Rangefinders=== | ===Rangefinders=== | ||
+ | A 1-m base rangefinder was supplied to all destroyers of the "Tribal" class through "L" class around 1916, but this was later withdrawn.{{UKTH23|pp. 31, 32}} | ||
===Directors=== | ===Directors=== | ||
+ | The first installations of the [[British Destroyer Director Firing System]] were being effected in this class in May 1918.{{UKTH23|p. 12}} | ||
==Torpedo Control== | ==Torpedo Control== | ||
+ | [[File:ARTS1917Plate85.jpg|thumb|300px|'''Fire Gong and Lamp Reply Circuits, 1917'''{{ARTS1917|Plate 85}}]] | ||
+ | A single sighting position was located high up in the centre of the bridge, thus requiring only a single set of firing pushes or keys as well as keys for operating a buzzer at the forward torpedo mount and a rattler at the aft mount.{{ARTS1917|p. 211}} | ||
+ | |||
+ | The "L" class differed from most of their contemporaries by using primarily non-electrical instruments for orders and deflection: [[Wise Pressure Telegraphy System Type C|Wise Type C]] for both purposes except in {{UK-Loyal}}, {{UK-Lance}} and {{UK-Laertes}} which had [[Chadburn's Torpedo Order Telegraph]] and [[Wise Pressure Telegraphy System Type B]] for deflection. Electrical lamps worked off a battery provided the reply function the mechanical and pressure systems lacked. {{ARTS1917|p. 211}} | ||
==Alterations== | ==Alterations== | ||
Line 241: | Line 273: | ||
==See Also== | ==See Also== | ||
+ | {{refbegin}} | ||
{{WP|http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laforey_class_destroyer_(1913)}} | {{WP|http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laforey_class_destroyer_(1913)}} | ||
+ | {{refend}} | ||
==Footnotes== | ==Footnotes== | ||
Line 275: | Line 309: | ||
name=Llewellyn | name=Llewellyn | ||
pend=H.99 (1914)<br>H.61 (Jan 1918){{DittColl|p. 64}} | pend=H.99 (1914)<br>H.61 (Jan 1918){{DittColl|p. 64}} | ||
− | builder=[[Beardmore]]{{Conways1906|p. 76}} | + | builder=[[William Beardmore & Company]]{{Conways1906|p. 76}} |
order= | order= | ||
laid= | laid= | ||
Line 286: | Line 320: | ||
name=Lennox | name=Lennox | ||
pend=H.95 (1914)<br>H.55 (Jan 1918){{DittColl|p. 64}} | pend=H.95 (1914)<br>H.55 (Jan 1918){{DittColl|p. 64}} | ||
− | builder=[[Beardmore]]{{Conways1906|p. 76}} | + | builder=[[William Beardmore & Company]]{{Conways1906|p. 76}} |
order= | order= | ||
laid= | laid= | ||
Line 297: | Line 331: | ||
name=Loyal | name=Loyal | ||
pend=H.80 (1914)<br>H.63 (Jan 1918){{DittColl|p. 64}} | pend=H.80 (1914)<br>H.63 (Jan 1918){{DittColl|p. 64}} | ||
− | builder=[[Denny]]{{Conways1906|p. 76}} | + | builder=[[William Denny & Brothers]]{{Conways1906|p. 76}} |
order= | order= | ||
laid= | laid= | ||
Line 308: | Line 342: | ||
name=Legion | name=Legion | ||
pend=H.79 (1914)<br>H.54 (Jan 1918)<br>F.94 (Sep 1918){{DittColl|p. 63}} | pend=H.79 (1914)<br>H.54 (Jan 1918)<br>F.94 (Sep 1918){{DittColl|p. 63}} | ||
− | builder=[[Denny]]{{Conways1906|p. 76}} | + | builder=[[William Denny & Brothers]]{{Conways1906|p. 76}} |
order= | order= | ||
laid= | laid= | ||
Line 319: | Line 353: | ||
name=Laforey | name=Laforey | ||
pend=H.03 (1914){{DittColl|p. 63}} | pend=H.03 (1914){{DittColl|p. 63}} | ||
− | builder=[[Fairfield]]{{Conways1906|p. 76}} | + | builder=[[Fairfield Shipbuilding and Engineering Company]]{{Conways1906|p. 76}} |
order= | order= | ||
laid= | laid= | ||
Line 332: | Line 366: | ||
name=Lawford | name=Lawford | ||
pend=H.06 (1914)<br>H.53 (Jan 1918){{DittColl|p. 63}} | pend=H.06 (1914)<br>H.53 (Jan 1918){{DittColl|p. 63}} | ||
− | builder=[[Fairfield]]{{Conways1906|p. 76}} | + | builder=[[Fairfield Shipbuilding and Engineering Company]]{{Conways1906|p. 76}} |
order= | order= | ||
laid= | laid= | ||
Line 343: | Line 377: | ||
name=Louis | name=Louis | ||
pend=H.07 (1914){{DittColl|p. 64}} | pend=H.07 (1914){{DittColl|p. 64}} | ||
− | builder=[[Fairfield]]{{Conways1906|p. 76}} | + | builder=[[Fairfield Shipbuilding and Engineering Company]]{{Conways1906|p. 76}} |
order= | order= | ||
laid= | laid= | ||
Line 356: | Line 390: | ||
name=Lydiard | name=Lydiard | ||
pend=H.08 (1914)<br>H.66 (Jan 1918){{DittColl|p. 64}} | pend=H.08 (1914)<br>H.66 (Jan 1918){{DittColl|p. 64}} | ||
− | builder=[[Fairfield]]{{Conways1906|p. 76}} | + | builder=[[Fairfield Shipbuilding and Engineering Company]]{{Conways1906|p. 76}} |
order= | order= | ||
laid= | laid= | ||
Line 389: | Line 423: | ||
name=Lance | name=Lance | ||
pend=H.23 (1914)<br>H.46 (Jan 1918){{DittColl|p. 63}} | pend=H.23 (1914)<br>H.46 (Jan 1918){{DittColl|p. 63}} | ||
− | builder=[[Thornycroft]]{{Conways1906|p. 76}} | + | builder=[[John I. Thornycroft & Company]]{{Conways1906|p. 76}} |
order= | order= | ||
laid= | laid= | ||
Line 400: | Line 434: | ||
name=Lookout | name=Lookout | ||
pend=H.24 (1914)<br>H.62(Jan 1918){{DittColl|p. 64}} | pend=H.24 (1914)<br>H.62(Jan 1918){{DittColl|p. 64}} | ||
− | builder=[[Thornycroft]]{{Conways1906|p. 76}} | + | builder=[[John I. Thornycroft & Company]]{{Conways1906|p. 76}} |
order= | order= | ||
laid= | laid= | ||
Line 415: | Line 449: | ||
name=Laurel | name=Laurel | ||
pend=H.91 (1914)<br>H.51 (Jan 1918){{DittColl|p. 63}} | pend=H.91 (1914)<br>H.51 (Jan 1918){{DittColl|p. 63}} | ||
− | builder=[[J. | + | builder=[[J. Samuel White]]{{Conways1906|p. 76}} |
order= | order= | ||
laid= | laid= | ||
Line 426: | Line 460: | ||
name=Liberty | name=Liberty | ||
pend=H.81 (1914)<br>H.57 (Jan 1918){{DittColl|p. 63}} | pend=H.81 (1914)<br>H.57 (Jan 1918){{DittColl|p. 63}} | ||
− | builder=[[J. | + | builder=[[J. Samuel White]]{{Conways1906|p. 76}} |
order= | order= | ||
laid= | laid= | ||
Line 441: | Line 475: | ||
name=Lark | name=Lark | ||
pend=H.34 (1914)<br>H.49 (Jan 1918){{DittColl|p. 63}} | pend=H.34 (1914)<br>H.49 (Jan 1918){{DittColl|p. 63}} | ||
− | builder=[[Yarrow]]{{Conways1906|p. 76}} | + | builder=[[Yarrow & Company]]{{Conways1906|p. 76}} |
order= | order= | ||
laid= | laid= | ||
Line 452: | Line 486: | ||
name=Landrail | name=Landrail | ||
pend=H.54 (1914)<br>H.47 (Jan 1918){{DittColl|p. 63}} | pend=H.54 (1914)<br>H.47 (Jan 1918){{DittColl|p. 63}} | ||
− | builder=[[Yarrow]]{{Conways1906|p. 76}} | + | builder=[[Yarrow & Company]]{{Conways1906|p. 76}} |
order= | order= | ||
laid= | laid= | ||
Line 463: | Line 497: | ||
name=Laverock | name=Laverock | ||
pend=H.53 (1914)<br>H.53 (Jan 1918){{DittColl|p. 63}} | pend=H.53 (1914)<br>H.53 (Jan 1918){{DittColl|p. 63}} | ||
− | builder=[[Yarrow]]{{Conways1906|p. 76}} | + | builder=[[Yarrow & Company]]{{Conways1906|p. 76}} |
order= | order= | ||
laid= | laid= | ||
Line 474: | Line 508: | ||
name=Linnet | name=Linnet | ||
pend=H.43 (1914)<br>H.59 (Jan 1918){{DittColl|p. 63}} | pend=H.43 (1914)<br>H.59 (Jan 1918){{DittColl|p. 63}} | ||
− | builder=[[Yarrow]]{{Conways1906|p. 76}} | + | builder=[[Yarrow & Company]]{{Conways1906|p. 76}} |
order= | order= | ||
laid= | laid= | ||
Line 489: | Line 523: | ||
name=Lochinvar | name=Lochinvar | ||
pend=G.06 (Sep 1915)<br>F.42 (1916)<br>F.52 (Jan 1918){{DittColl|p. 64}} | pend=G.06 (Sep 1915)<br>F.42 (1916)<br>F.52 (Jan 1918){{DittColl|p. 64}} | ||
− | builder=[[Beardmore]]{{Conways1906|p. 76}} | + | builder=[[William Beardmore & Company]]{{Conways1906|p. 76}} |
order= | order= | ||
laid= | laid= | ||
Line 500: | Line 534: | ||
name=Lassoo | name=Lassoo | ||
pend=G.01 (Sep 1915)<br>F.41 (1916){{DittColl|p. 64}} | pend=G.01 (Sep 1915)<br>F.41 (1916){{DittColl|p. 64}} | ||
− | builder=[[Beardmore]]{{Conways1906|p. 76}} | + | builder=[[William Beardmore & Company]]{{Conways1906|p. 76}} |
order= | order= | ||
laid= | laid= | ||
Line 513: | Line 547: | ||
name=Leonidas | name=Leonidas | ||
pend=H.20 (1914)<br>H.56 (Jan 1918){{DittColl|p. 64}} | pend=H.20 (1914)<br>H.56 (Jan 1918){{DittColl|p. 64}} | ||
− | builder=[[ | + | builder=[[Palmer Shipbuilding and Iron Company]]{{Conways1906|p. 76}} |
order= | order= | ||
laid= | laid= | ||
Line 524: | Line 558: | ||
name=Lucifer | name=Lucifer | ||
pend=H.22 (1914)<br>H.64 (Jan 1918){{DittColl|p. 64}} | pend=H.22 (1914)<br>H.64 (Jan 1918){{DittColl|p. 64}} | ||
− | builder=[[ | + | builder=[[Palmer Shipbuilding and Iron Company]]{{Conways1906|p. 76}} |
order= | order= | ||
laid= | laid= |
Latest revision as of 20:59, 23 June 2021
Twenty-two destroyers of the Laforey Class were completed, twenty as part of the 1912-1913 Programme, and two as part of the 1914 War Emergency Programme.
They were the first Royal Navy destroyers to ship twin torpedo tubes, effectively doubling their outfit.
Electric Logs
In March, 1914, it was ordered that these ships were to receive two Trident Electric Logs and one Charthouse Receiver during the 1914-15 financial year.[1]
Performance
The ships averaged a little over 30 knots on their 8 hour trials, with a few units making only a little over 29.5 knots.[2]
Anti-rolling tanks were tried in at least some of the ships. Turning circles had the same perplexing variety as seen in other classes. At 35 degrees helm, Laurel averaged 535 yards, whereas Liberty reported 953 yards. and Landrail 1127 yards. Leonidas required a full 1405 yards! Yarrow-built specimens and Lydiard were most fuel economical, using 17.5 tons less fuel on 8 hour full power trials. Landrail burnt 33.01 tons and Laurel 51.33 tons in a 24 hour test.[3]
The ships had recurrent problems with their dynamos. By October 1914, the issue was proving so serious that a reversion to reciprocating engines from the turbo generators was requested. The generators ran so hot that the hatches to the compartment were often left open, admitting spray which caused stoppages.[4]
In May 1915, Lark's commander said the ship was very unreliable in steering at speeds over 20 knots, that helm less than 15 degrees did little, and that 20-25 degrees did more than 35 degrees did. At the Battle of Dogger Bank, the ship proved utterly unresponsive five times to full helm despite the gentle sea conditions, prompting him to state, "I consider H.M.S. Lark to be dangerous at high speed..." He recommended that the ship either lead its division or be tail-end charlie to reduce the peril. Lark was moved to the last position in her division and a comparative turning trial with Miranda confirmed the dismal turning performance. Sister ships with the same rudder, propellors and design did not seem to experience the same issues.[5]
Armament
4-in Guns
- Three 4-in Q.F. Mark IV guns on P. IX mountings on the centre line.
These quick-firing guns had also been fitted to the last seven of the previous Acasta class, but their use here reflected their standardisation over the earlier B.L. models.[6] There were 120 rounds per gun.
The mounting could elevate 20 degrees and depress 10 degrees, but its sight could only elevate 15 degrees and the range dial was actually only graduated to 12.5 degrees (7,900 yards). "This was soon remedied by the supply of additional sight strips graduated to the extreme range of 10,200 yards."[7] A photo of a weapon from H.M.S. Lance on museum display shows that the range dial's markings to 10,200 yards required it to rotate through about 440 degrees – a revolution and a half. That is, the range graduations were helical.[8]
These gear-worked sights had gearing constants of 26.66 and range dials for 2200 fps, and 1-in aiming rifle, though at least one was marked for 0.303 aiming rifle on its reverse.[8] M.V. could be corrected by a cam pointer allowing for a decrease to 2000 fps.
Unlike some P. IX sights, these were not F.T.P. sights.
The midship gun was supplied with ammunition from the forward stores.[9]
The deflection gearing constant was 52.6 with 1 knot equal to 3.18 arc minutes, corresponding to 2200 fps at 2000 yards. Drift was corrected by inclining the sight about pivot pins 2 degrees.
The layer's telescope sight line was 12.5 inches above the bore, and 21.45 inches left. The trainer's telescope sight line was 12.5 inches above and 17.4 inches right. Open sights were 13.3 inches above the bore and 24.35 inches left for layer and 20.3 inches right for trainer.
The sight had a temperature correcting scale plate and a "C" corrector.
The layer had an open sight. The trainer's sight could be used as a free sight with a counterweight.
During the war, some of the ships were required to land their aft gun to accommodate depth charges.[10]
As the midship 4-in mounting could train in a full circle and thus might break the electrical firing circuit wires, in June 1914 it was ordered that the pedestal to these guns have a warning plate fitted to them reading, "See circuits clear when training across limit stops."[11]
In late September, 1914, the Admiralty ordered that the guns on the Tribals and later classes were to be given loading lights, initially on temporary circuits.[12]
Other Guns
Originally, the ships may have been provided a single .303-in Maxim machine gun on a portable mounting.[13]
By 1920, some or all had one 2-pdr pom-pom for air defence.[14]
Torpedoes
- two 21-in D.R. Mark I torpedo tubes on the centreline (2x2) w/ 50° (perhaps later reduced to 20°) arcs centered on the beam.[17][18]
These ships were the first British destroyers to have D.R. (Double Revolving) tubes, a doubling of previous torpedo armament standards. The "W" class was to debut the triple mounting in 1917.[19]
In 1914 firing trials in Liberty, it was found that the torpedoes from the aft torpedo mount struck the ship's deck when fired on extreme bearings. While investigations were undertaken, the expedient precaution was taken of restricting fire to 10 degrees to either side of the beam. After fitting plugs of some kind it was eventually determined that the full 50 degree arc could be used and the torpedo would always clear the gunwale by 19 inches.[20]
The new double tubes were found satisfactory in the end, though they were slow to train and the slow response to the firing lever would make firing under helm worrisome. Laurel's tubes were initially found to require four men working the training wheel and four more pushing the ends of the tubes around. Lysander reported better, if still abysmal results: two men could barely train the tubes when the tubes were loaded.[21] Testing revealed that the design was sensitive to alignment during erection, and alterations improved things to a point that a training speed of 8° per second was achievable with two men. The firing timing in Laurel was measured as:[22]
Mounting | Timing in Seconds (after trigger press) | |||
Striker fell | Torpedo Moves | Air Lever hit by Tripper |
Gyro released | |
stock Mark I mounting | 0.497 | 0.62 | 0.747 | 1.077 |
modified Mark I mounting | 0.283 | 0.35 | 0.431 | 0.761 |
earlier, single tubes | N/A | 0.144 | 0.474 |
Other Weapons
The ships were able to accomodate four Vickers Elia Mark IV mines and had a hatch and derrick to support their laying and handling. The mines had 220 pounds TNT and weighed about one half ton.[23]
The "H" type mine replaced the Mark IV in 1917, but only Lawford and Legion may have been switched over to the new munition, presumably removing minelaying from the job description for the other ships.[24]
Depth charges were added to most of these destroyers during the war, requiring some of this class to surrender their aft gun.[25]
Fire Control
By 1915, at least, these ships also had fixed voice pipes installed between decks with the last lengths being flexible (one voice pipe for gunnery, one for torpedoes) fitted between bridge and guns, torpedo tubes, and searchlights. A third voicepipe, entirely flexible, ran from bridge to the forward gun.[26]
Being completed later than their sisters, Lassoo and Lochinvar had or were to be provided the same range and order data system being given the "M" class.[28] The scheme placed the combined transmitter on the forebridge, and a combined receiver near the sightsetter position of each gun. Ranges from 0 to 9900 yards in increments of 100 yards, and orders were "Independent", "Control" and "Fire" with illuminated indicators and a red indicator on the receivers to signal loss of power from the battery pack located below decks.
By 1920, the ships in Acorn to Laforey classes had Wise Pressure Telegraphy Systems in place to support fire control.[29]
Rangefinders
A 1-m base rangefinder was supplied to all destroyers of the "Tribal" class through "L" class around 1916, but this was later withdrawn.[30]
Directors
The first installations of the British Destroyer Director Firing System were being effected in this class in May 1918.[31]
Torpedo Control
A single sighting position was located high up in the centre of the bridge, thus requiring only a single set of firing pushes or keys as well as keys for operating a buzzer at the forward torpedo mount and a rattler at the aft mount.[33]
The "L" class differed from most of their contemporaries by using primarily non-electrical instruments for orders and deflection: Wise Type C for both purposes except in Loyal, Lance and Laertes which had Chadburn's Torpedo Order Telegraph and Wise Pressure Telegraphy System Type B for deflection. Electrical lamps worked off a battery provided the reply function the mechanical and pressure systems lacked. [34]
Alterations
By November 1918, Legion was fitted to carry 38 mines, as she was operating with the Twentieth Destroyer Flotilla which was uniformly capable in this regard. The torpedo tubes and guns removed when the mines were shipped could be placed back aboard with enough notice.[35]
See Also
Footnotes
- ↑ Admiralty Weekly Order No. 967 of 27 Mar, 1914.
- ↑ March. British Destroyers. p. 134.
- ↑ March. British Destroyers. pp. 139-140.
- ↑ March. British Destroyers. p. 141.
- ↑ March. British Destroyers. p. 142.
- ↑ The Technical History and Index, Vol. 4, Part 34. p. 11.
- ↑ The Technical History and Index, Vol. 4, Part 34. p. 13.
- ↑ 8.0 8.1 photo by Dave Hartley of the The National Museum of the Royal Navy.
- ↑ March. British Destroyers. Plate 17/A.
- ↑ The Technical History and Index, Vol. 4, Part 34. p. 14.
- ↑ Admiralty Weekly Order No. 76 of 3 July 1914.
- ↑ Admiralty Weekly Order No. 416 of 29 Sep, 1914.
- ↑ March. British Destroyers. p. 133.
- ↑ The Technical History and Index, Vol. 4, Part 34. p. 16.
- ↑ Annual Report of the Torpedo School, 1913. Plate15.
- ↑ Annual Report of the Torpedo School, 1913. Plate16.
- ↑ March. British Destroyers. Plate 17/A.
- ↑ Annual Report of the Torpedo School, 1913. p. 36.
- ↑ March. British Destroyers. p. 513.
- ↑ Annual Report of the Torpedo School, 1914. pp. 39-40. (T.O. No. 61 of July 1914. G. 16299/14).
- ↑ March. British Destroyers. pp. 138-9.
- ↑ Annual Report of the Torpedo School, 1913. p. 37. This source described the D.R. mountings as being based on the Mark II, which I feel is a likely error.
- ↑ March. British Destroyers. p. 142.
- ↑ Conway's All the World's Fighting Ships 1906–1921. p. 76.
- ↑ The Technical History and Index, Vol. 4, Part 34. p. 14.
- ↑ Manual of Gunnery, Vol. III., 1915., p. 150.
- ↑ Admiralty. Handbook of Fire Control in Torpedo Boat Destroyers of "M" Class and Later and Flotilla Leaders, 1915, Plate XVI.
- ↑ Admiralty. Handbook of Fire Control in Torpedo Boat Destroyers of "M" Class and Later, and Flotilla Leaders, 1915, Plate XVI.
- ↑ Technical History and Index Vol. 4, Part 34, pp. 15-16.
- ↑ The Technical History and Index, Vol. 3, Part 23. pp. 31, 32.
- ↑ The Technical History and Index, Vol. 3, Part 23. p. 12.
- ↑ Annual Report of the Torpedo School, 1917. Plate 85.
- ↑ Annual Report of the Torpedo School, 1917. p. 211.
- ↑ Annual Report of the Torpedo School, 1917. p. 211.
- ↑ Admiralty. Annual Report of the Torpedo School Mining Appendix, 1917-1918, p. 11. Plate 7.
Bibliography
- Gray, Randal (editor) (1985). Conway's All the World's Fighting Ships 1906–1921. London: Conway Maritime Press. (on Amazon.com and Amazon.co.uk).
- March, Edgar J. (1966). British Destroyers: A History of Development, 1892-1953. London: Seeley Service & Co. Limited. (on Bookfinder.com).
- Admiralty, Technical History Section (1920). The Technical History and Index: Alteration in Armaments of H.M. Ships during the War. Vol. 4, Part 34. C.B. 1515 (34) now O.U. 6171/20. At The National Archives, Kew, United Kingdom.
Laforey Class Destroyer | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Admiralty Design | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Llewellyn | Lennox | Loyal | Legion | Laforey | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Lawford | Louis | Lydiard | Laertes | Lysander | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Lance | Lookout | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
White 2-Funnelled Type | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Laurel | Liberty | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Yarrow 2-Funnelled Type | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Lark | Landrail | Laverock | Linnet | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
War Emergency Repeat "L" Class | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Lochinvar | Lassoo | Leonidas | Lucifer | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
<– | Acasta Class | Destroyers (UK) | "M" Class | –> |