The Ship Model Forum

Can anyone say with any authority what Mod (Mk ?) of torpedo Exeter was carrying when she was sunk in 42?

I know they were 21" and in two triple banks, but what 'Mk' were they?

TIA, Kevin

_________________
“We are off to look for trouble. I expect we shall find it.” Capt. Tennant, HMS Repulse. 8 December 1941
“A review of the situation at about 1100 was not encouraging.” Capt. Gordon, HMS Exeter. 1 March 1942

Hello Kevin,

While not pretending to be a RN expert, I have looked at different sources. In A.Raven & J.Roberts "British cruisers of WW2", torpedoes should be Mk VII type. It is not mentioned anywhere, this type was replaced by Mk IX or Mk X.
According to NavWeaps: http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WTBR_PreWWII.htm , Mk VII is as well mentioned for the 8" Cruisers.

Hope this helps
Gilbert

Thanks for the input Gilbert. Consensus elsehwere seems to point to MkVII.

The only info I have besides what’s on NavWar is from the book Naval Weapons of WWII by John Campbell.

In that he states re the MkVII;
“…..was carried by Australia, Canberra, the London and subsequent 8” (203cm) cruisers but was later replaced by the MkIX as opportunity offered. Only nine MkVII were expended.”

For the MkIX he states;
“………………If available it was issued to the Leander and later cruisers and destroyers from the A Class onwards, with a few exceptions. It also replaced the MKVII in some 8” cruisers during the war. Expenditure to September 1944 was 361.”

Now the reason I am trying to discern what Mk torps Exeter carried is that an ‘object’ we discovered under the port tubes on Exeter ‘may’ be a warhead, as a recent closer inspection and measurements seems to possibly point to. (See pic of object below). Including the coral encrustation the width of this ‘object’ is 550mm (or just over 21”) the length is 1500mm, while the ‘knob’ on the front is approx 120mm and the end that can’t be seen is convex.

And yes I know she supposedly fired off a salvo from the port tubes just prior to her fatal hit but……………… did they all fire? Unfortunately the diver that was recently there did not look inside the tubes to see if one still had part of a torp in there. (Loading 'Hatches' at the aft end of tubes are closed on all three.)

However, I have no schematic of a MkVII so don’t have measurements of the warhead, nor have I seen a photo of one. Do they have that knob like protrusion on the nose like this?

The only schematic I have is of a MkVIII but am unsure of the correct warhead dimensions for it as there seems to be an error in the schematic. (Am not implying it is a MKVIII or she carried same, just trying to ascertain some ballpark measurements) Note the figures below marked with a red dot; when the top two are added together they do not match the bottom one although they seemingly cover the same distance. So I wonder which is the correct measurement, the top or bottom figures?

Be that as it may, it would be interesting (for us) to positively ID this object.

Regards, Kevin

_________________
“We are off to look for trouble. I expect we shall find it.” Capt. Tennant, HMS Repulse. 8 December 1941
“A review of the situation at about 1100 was not encouraging.” Capt. Gordon, HMS Exeter. 1 March 1942

You are most welcome, Kevin.


I have looked at my copy of J.Campbell "Naval weapons of WW2". It's difficult to say if the bottom measurement is a typo.



I don't know about Mk VII but clearly, according to John Lambert's drawing, there is no protrusion on Mk VIII. On the other hand, if you go to page 87, you will notice a similar protrusion on the 18" Mk XV, XVII drawing. Therefore, it seems possible to have it on a Mk VII.

Maybe, John Lambert would have the answer to your question, the cherry on the cake being a Mk VII drawing with correct measurements

Cheers
Gilbert


PS-By the way, I have downloaded on my PC your latest report about HMS Prince of Wales loss. I have spent a lot of time reading it and would like to thank you for sharing this outstanding work with us

Merry Christmas!

My lovely wife has bought me the Iron Shipwright Exeter for christmas! Give the fact that she hates all the time i'm spending on Repulse this was a pretty amazing gift!
As with the other ships I will do, I would like to make her as we dived her... i.e. as sunk. The model is as at the Battle of the River plate. Does anyone have details of the changes made in the 1940 refit?

thanks


Andrew

Wow, that is going to be a lot of work---but seeing how you've forged ahead with the lovely Repulse build, I note this is clearly not an impediment

Exeter had most of the amidships and after superstructure and hull section rebuilt, with the new four twin 4" mounts much further aft around the two funnels. I don't recall if a new catapult was fitted, but the aft superstructure was modified with two octuple pom-poms and their directors.

The masts were also changed to tripod fore mast, not sure about main mast. After that I assume some kind of surface radar, plus 0.5" Vickers and I think two 20mm Oerlickons.

I too would be interested in hearing what the best references for this late-war Exeter might be.

_________________
Gernot Hassenpflug
Find out how it works, then functionality and limits

For the as sunk configuration of EXETER this is a 1:192 plan that has been around for some time and won't have had the benefit of any recent discoveries, including the finding of the wreck

http://www.myhobbystore.com/product.asp?p=17127

I understood from some messages on SteelNavy that Alan Raven had done a more comprehensive plan last year but that it was not for direct commercial release - anyone able to say more?

Francis Macnaughton

HI Francis,

thanks for the link.

Are those drawings available from anywhere else as a download?

Andrew

Hi Andrew,

As far as I know that plan is only available from the MyHobbyStore as a paper copy.

Francis Macnaughton

In recent communication with Alan Raven he wanted 500USD for his 'as refitted' Exeter plans, which was unfortunately way too much for me for my research purposes.

The twins were actually just spaced further apart, as opposed to being moved ‘much’ further aft. The black dots on the 'as fitted' plan below show approximately where the dual 4” were placed aft her refit, with one a touch further aft and the other a touch further forward than the previous singles. Torp tubes were also moved slightly further forward. (See historical images below.)


Main mast was also tripod.


Quad 0.5 Vickers are abreast the forward superstructure (but weren’t they already there pre refit?), while the single 20mm’s were placed on top of B and Y 8” turrets.

_________________
“We are off to look for trouble. I expect we shall find it.” Capt. Tennant, HMS Repulse. 8 December 1941
“A review of the situation at about 1100 was not encouraging.” Capt. Gordon, HMS Exeter. 1 March 1942

I posted that message folks, not sure why it showed up as 'guest' poster. (Probably, because I was not signed in at the time!)

KevinD

_________________
“We are off to look for trouble. I expect we shall find it.” Capt. Tennant, HMS Repulse. 8 December 1941
“A review of the situation at about 1100 was not encouraging.” Capt. Gordon, HMS Exeter. 1 March 1942

Although tubs/bins were fitted on B and Y turrets in anticipation of 20mm during her Devonport rebuild 1940-1941, Oerlikons were not fitted then. Other MGs (Vickers?) were put there. This is the top of Y turret.

Thanks for the info on the twin 4" positions (and tubes), mainmast, and the info on the Oerlickons not being fitted. So in the photos of Exeter off Sumatra and in the Banka Straits firing at aircraft, where it looks as though something might be in the tub visible, is that what you show above? (date please?) Looks like two Vickers fitted (shadows visible underneath?) and one empty mounting, for a total of three possible?

Seems most of the ships sent to the Far East in late 1941 were under-equipped against air attack, compared to those that stayed in Home and Med waters.... I guess that is the price to pay when there are too few weapons to go around.

I browsed my copy of Raven & Roberts' British Cruisers of World War II and found slight information on Exeter, and only a brief note that no light AA additions known of were ever made to her or York. However, I think it is known that York did have at least two Oerlickons fitted, so I assumed that more up to date information might be available.

Are there any other decent references in English for Exeter and York: perhaps where Mr. Raven's expensive but undoubtedly excellent plans might be found (or simplified versions thereof)?

_________________
Gernot Hassenpflug
Find out how it works, then functionality and limits

That is a bit cheeky considering he used my set of 'as fitteds' and photos as his template and research material.
One wanders how much is made from Norman Friedman's publishers for such RN cruiser drawings.

Laurence,

Does that mean that the recent EXETER drawings will also be part of the forthcoming Friedman book on RN cruisers that, according to a recent SN message, will also have NORFOLK and DORSETSHIRE drawings?

Francis Macnaughton

No idea for certain if Exeter will find its way in Norman's forthcoming RN cruiser volumes. I suspect with Dave Baker having enquired about what Exeter as fitteds exist on SN at the Brass Foundry he will likely purchase a copy and interpret and re-draw Exeter?
I expect to see possibly Norfolk and Sheffield from Alan in wartime fits in there though.

Gernot,

Here are a selection of photos of Exeter in her final form with dates:

http://picasaweb.google.co.uk/dickfalmo ... r19411942#

Good luck!

Re AR's plans, as far as I am aware they are not available anywhere except direct from AR. And the very very few lucky ones who have them are under strict orders not to disseminate them. AR is probably 'saving' them for Friedmans upcoming companion version (to the following) on British cruisers.

http://www.amazon.com/British-Destroyer ... 193&sr=1-1

_________________
“We are off to look for trouble. I expect we shall find it.” Capt. Tennant, HMS Repulse. 8 December 1941
“A review of the situation at about 1100 was not encouraging.” Capt. Gordon, HMS Exeter. 1 March 1942

@Dick: thank you very much. There several there I was not aware of despite having trawled the net for hours at a time several times in the past few years searching for Exeter photos. Much appreciated.

@KevinD: I would certainly buy the Friedman book at once, not only for the Exeter views, but for the other new or revised material expected to be found. I do not reproach AR for his pricing or conditions, that is his right, and if I can get a less extensive and less pricey option in the book, good for all parties concerned.

_________________
Gernot Hassenpflug
Find out how it works, then functionality and limits