Calling all Royal Navy Tribal-class fans

[Jamie Alguire]

Hi All:
Researching Tribals, I found the apparent load for depth charges was usually 30-40, question is, where were they stowed? The stern racks didnt hold that many, and the throwers didnt have stowage cages. Were they below decks? Thx

[Brett Morrow]

Ready use spare DC`s were normally carried on a wooden stock fitted on the quarterdeck close to the rail.

Dependent on the type of projector (thrower) fitted, the ready use spares were stored close to the thrower for quick reload.
The attachment shows a MK II DCT, because the MK II fired the DC and arbour attached, the ready use spares were stowed upright in a hollow pedestal, usually a bank of 3, attached to the arbour ready for reload, the arrow shows the spare arbours against the bulkhead, the circle shows the spare DC attached to cradle/arbour, and stowed into a pedestal.

The MK IV thrower was of different design and retained the cradle/arbour only firing the DC, and the reloads were stowed in a 2 tier rack.
This is how you at first glance can identify if the ship is fitted with MK II or MK IV throwers, by it`s DCT stowage arrangement.

Any remaining DC`s were stowed below deck in a magazine, in this case probably the HA warhead room.

[Jamie Alguire]

Awesome Brett thanks for the explanation! I figured there had to be 2 different DC thrower designs, since some had the arbours and some didnt.
Also, had no idea the DC were stored below decks. Thx again for the pics too.

[Jamie Alguire]

I have a question about the 2 stacks on the tribals too...Trumpeter suggests a 'top' on the stacks, but were they not hollow? I have the Munro plans and it doesnt really show

[Brett Morrow]

I don`t have the kit, but are you sure they are not referring to the funnel cravat?
I can see on the sprues that they have supplied these, and also 2 basic PE funnel cages.
Apart from any gallery outlets, the funnels were hollow with a grate platform inside, and a descend ladder, similar to the attached Hobart funnel but of course smaller.

The Arunta shot shows workmen standing on the grate inside the funnel.

It may have been mentioned in the past and I missed it, but what I did notice on the sprues, they have supplied the wrong props, Tribals had 3 blades, not 4.

[Jamie Alguire]

Thanks again Brett! Yes, I have now modified my trumpeter stacks as per your ref photos.
Regarding the previous message you supplied about the depth charge stowage, does your second picture show the ready-use DC stored in a pedestal alongside the actual thrower? Or are they stored against the bulkhead?

[Brett Morrow]

Different ships had different stowage arrangements, in the case of RN/RAN tribals fitted with MK II throwers, the readyuse spares were stored in upright pedestals, usually 3.
The pedestals where arranged with the centre pedestal offset to allow space for the loading davit and its operation.

In the case of the previous attachment which is Arunta, the spare arbors are stowed against the bulkhead WITHOUT the DC, other ships had different arrangements like the Vervain attachment ( arbors already attached to spare DC`s against bulkhead) note NO pedestal mounts are fitted.
If the ship was fitted with pedestals, spare DC`s would be brought up from magazine below as required, and fitted to spare arbor, then loaded into pedestal previously emptied.
The Eskimo shot shows a spare DC/Arbor being loaded into its pedestal.

Because refits were always being carried out, many MK II were replaced by MK IV later in the war, so it is important to check your references, as previously stated, any thrower which has a spare DC rack located in close proximity is a MK IV.
As an example Warramunga as built was fitted with MK II`s but by mid 44 these had been replaced with MK IV`s.
All the best.

[Brett Morrow]

As a followon to my previous post, the attachment shows a typical MK II arrangement with pedestals, a spare arbor is on the deck behind the pedestals, the canister in the thrower is not ready for firing as it is still lashed to the thrower.
The second shot shows the DC fitted to the arbor via a cable attached to the cradle points.

The pedestal set on a RN tribal appears to be aft of the thrower, on the RAN tribal sisters the set is located forward of the thrower, not sure about the Canadians so check your references.

Different sources quote different info, but it is my understanding that the DC fitted on the MK II was lashed to the cradle, when fired a shear pin would release the arbor cable from the DC, and the arbor would fall away from the DC in decending flight.
Mk IV throwers also had a shear pin/cable arrangement on the cradle which broke in the firing sequence, the DC continued it`s travel and the cradle and spigot were retained and arrested by the damping pistons on either side of the thrower barrel.

Some photos show the DC just sitting within the cradle, to my mind this would be perilous as a heavy swell could actually drop the DC over the side before it is fired, if any of my information is incorrect I`m sure I`ll hear about it.

[j Alguire]

Cool Brett, you have quite a knowledge on this...Im building Haida and have the Munroe plans and it does show reload DC with arbour attached stowed against the bulkheads behind the 2 throwers, one each port & starboard side.

[Admhawk]

HMCS Athabaskan II 1955 with refit funnel caps.




HMCS Huron 1940's
Forward

Aft

[Brett Morrow]

Great shots Darren.
Do you have any clear stern shots of a Canadian tribal in drydock, showing props?
Cheers

[Jamie Alguire]

Hey Darren & Brett: You are helping me make this Haida very accurate & detailed!
Brett - Here is the Munro plan showing Haidas starboard side DC stowage

[Admhawk]

Great shots Darren.
Do you have any clear stern shots of a Canadian tribal in drydock, showing props?
Cheers

Sorry, no. All the DD pics I could find are from the Bow.
I have good pics of Haida when she was pulled out a few years ago. Doesn't look like she changed much from the war.
Her Prop is on land beside her, looks original.

[Brett Morrow]

Unfortunately, stern photos of tribals out of the water do not exist within the public domain, I certainly cannot find any.
Pity any drydock stern shots of Haida don`t show the props attached to the shafts.

Darren, do you know if the Haida prop exhibit is orientated correctly?
Viewed from the name plaque side, is the left prop actually the port, and the right actually the starboard?

[Brett Morrow]

From the references available, it looks like any Canadians that saw war service were fitted with MK II`s, but without any pedestal arrangement.
It appears the plan is correct for a Canadian tribal before mid 45, the spares would be fitted to arbors and collared to the bulkhead, unlike the RN/RAN ships, the fitted spares would need to be trolleyed to the loading davit.
The previous shot of the single MK II, is interesting as it shows a line of empty arbors, and also a DC sitting in a stock, the cleat behind the crewman may indicate an abor, or several of them fitted to DC`s.

[Admhawk]

Darren, do you know if the Haida prop exhibit is orientated correctly?
Viewed from the name plaque side, is the left prop actually the port, and the right actually the starboard?

I do not know, I'll do some digging, see what I can find

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:HM ... rio_12.jpg

[Jamie Alguire]

Awesome Brett, I will include a MkII thrower & stowage as per the plan. Thx again for the advice.

[Brett Morrow]

post deleted

[Admhawk]

Here's a pic of HMCS MICMAC's Props in 1961. So far the only Tribal Prop image I can find.

[Brett Morrow]

Thanks Darren, a rare find.
I also managed to find this shot of Arunta, props are hard to make out, but I can just distinguish the blade pitch.
They appear to match the pitch in your photo also, but I feel there may be an anomaly here.

Both shots do NOT appear to match the blade pitch of the Haida display as presented, what do you think?