We can do that. And some.

We can do that. And some.

Postby E28 » Fri Sep 16, 2016 8:35 pm

Sometimes, the shipbuilder is a needless and pointless expense.
There are many other trades who are equally capable and more than competent.
One such was a consortium of these competent engineers, mechanics, tradesmen, who could read a plan in one hand, pint in't t'other, and simply put into practice what was requested.
The Cleveland Bridge & Engineering Co., Head Wrightson & Co., South Durham Steel & Iron Co., Whessoe Ltd together formed such a consortium, being known as the
Stockton Construction Co Ltd,
and as such they fabricated and constructed in their own inimitable way more assorted LCTs, Landing Craft Tank, than any other, over 200 in fact, during WW2, plus many more assorted Landing Craft Support.
Many of the other companies involved were never shipbuilders either but their output was essential for the war effort.
Thats all folks. Sean.
E28
 
Posts: 205
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2013 8:14 pm
Location: Near Conegar Lock.

Re: We can do that. And some.

Postby northeast » Sat Sep 17, 2016 6:34 am

That's true and also the TID tugs were assembled from contracted out sections, plus the midget subs of course built in secrecy at engineering companies ... but the LCT/TID designs were simplistic of course and you can't dismiss the skills of the mainstream shipbuilders who had more complicated hull shapes and of course fitting out, gear to add etc., far removed from the 'floating shoeboxes' like the LCT's.
Incidentally I am shortly to put on line an updated version of the Tees-built site which will now include the Stockton LCT's and similar.
northeast
Site Admin
 
Posts: 6564
Joined: Sat May 12, 2012 5:13 pm
Location: East Yorkshire

Re: We can do that. And some.

Postby E28 » Sat Sep 17, 2016 7:01 pm

Fabricators is a good definition for all involved in the 'fabrication' of all these vessels not constructed in the manner a ship builder would recognise.
Yes, an LCT or other small landing craft is pretty basic, box sections as you say, a motorised pontoon, just reassuring there were plenty of businesses who could fill the breach with their assorted skills.
In 1942 the demand for such vessels was so high, over 1000 men were to be transferred from the established shipbuilders Nationwide to render assistance amongst these multitudes of 'fabricators'.
I am using S C Co as the finest example due to their incredible output, surpassing all others in the UK.
This subject has scarcely been touched anywhere, from what i can ascertain, and is impossibly extensive, with records from some businesses not even determining what exactly they did contribute, such was the haste and needs of the time.
So, better get cracking, as it has only just dawned on me the true significance of these men and their achievements.
Thats all folks. Sean.
E28
 
Posts: 205
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2013 8:14 pm
Location: Near Conegar Lock.

Re: We can do that. And some.

Postby northeast » Sun Sep 18, 2016 11:21 am

Sean, the challenge for me has been to try to trace the post-war lives (if any) of the Stockton LCT's, for some I have later merchant names, and also some merchant names that can't be linked to a specific LCT, usually in LR as 'built at Stockton' or 'by Whessoe' or whatever. When the revised site goes live (soon I hope) then maybe you will look through it.
northeast
Site Admin
 
Posts: 6564
Joined: Sat May 12, 2012 5:13 pm
Location: East Yorkshire

Re: We can do that. And some.

Postby E28 » Tue Sep 20, 2016 7:24 pm

H.M.L.C.T.147 / H.M.L.C.R.147. Now INS Af Al Pi Chen.

Let's get off on a positive footing with this 1941 built S C Co., L.C.T. converted to an R.(Rocket).
She is still extant and has been a museum ship since 1967, almost 50 years.

www.hnsa.org/hnsa-ships/ins-af-al-pi-chen/
for much positive information and images.

When built their numbers were presented as T.L.C.147 for Tank Landing Craft, on earlier vessels,
prior to their L.C.T. title being introduced and standardised throughout.
Thats all folks. Sean.
E28
 
Posts: 205
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2013 8:14 pm
Location: Near Conegar Lock.

Re: We can do that. And some.

Postby northeast » Wed Sep 21, 2016 6:20 am

Sean, thanks, I have now received some detailed lists and histories via Ian Buxton at WSS.
I also still need to add the Teesside Bridge & Eng vessels.

Note for Ron, Ian tells me the TSB were covered in Tees Packet some time back by him and Gareth Butler, can you give me a back reference please?
northeast
Site Admin
 
Posts: 6564
Joined: Sat May 12, 2012 5:13 pm
Location: East Yorkshire

Re: We can do that. And some.

Postby E28 » Wed Sep 28, 2016 7:27 pm

On the 8th June 1944, 12 men were missing, presumed killed, when LCT (4) 875 was attacked and sunk with all crew early that morning in the dark hours by German Schnellboot, known to the Brits as E Boats, of the 9 Fltl, or 9th S boote flotilla, one amongst a number of such flotillas ranged against allied shipping and whose successes were mainly at night.
This was 2 days into Operation Neptune, or D Day, but i cannot establish whether she was en route to France carrying troops, maybe, or empty returning to England. She sank about 8 miles out to sea from the French coast.
The loss of the S C Co built H.M.L.C.T.875., her full official title, and crew, was the largest such loss to any landing craft actively involved in the beach landings on the French coast side during these extensive operations.
Thats all folks. Sean.
E28
 
Posts: 205
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2013 8:14 pm
Location: Near Conegar Lock.

Re: We can do that. And some.

Postby E28 » Fri Nov 11, 2016 7:34 pm

11th November 2016. 98 years on from the 1918 armistice.
To remember all who fell, servicemen and civilians, at sea, on land, in the air, from all Nations, in all conflicts.

The Landing Craft and its numerous variants were in their infancy at the outbreak of WW2, their larger LST brethren and the name Landing Ship did not exist.
All Landing Craft /Ships illustrate the superb cooperation between civilians, who designed and built them, and the Navies and Military who operated them, without either and their sacrifices there would be no Remembrance.
3 men had the task of cohesively bringing all this together. I shall look at them and the increasingly mammoth task they surmounted, in my next post.
Thats all folks. Sean.
E28
 
Posts: 205
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2013 8:14 pm
Location: Near Conegar Lock.

Re: We can do that. And some.

Postby shipbroker » Sat Nov 12, 2016 2:55 am

My Dad was one of the Teesside Bridge men whose war was making things like barges for Mulberry Harbour abd the like during a 10 hour day then doing ARP work at night.

Geoff
shipbroker
 
Posts: 217
Joined: Fri Nov 16, 2012 8:13 pm
Location: North Yorkshire

Re: We can do that. And some.

Postby E28 » Wed Nov 30, 2016 7:55 pm

I will return to the men involved in due course.

Some LCT(3) hulls found another use once launched but before entering service as such.
All the LCG(L), Landing Craft Gun(Large) were conversions to carry 2 x 4.7'' single guns fitted in tandem where the tank deck was, the magazine/shell room was below the forward mounting. These were old redundant guns taken from destroyers and available ex stock from store.
The idea emanated from the earlier slightly smaller LCF(1), Landing Craft Flak(1), which mounted 2 x twin 4" High Angle mounts as fitted to many other warships, Hunt class destroyers, assorted Cruisers and Sloops. Eminently successful.

Plans for the LCG(L) were formulated in late 1942 prior to planning for the Sicilian invasion where they would be employed to give close in shore gunfire support, rather like a baby Monitor, and where more valuable larger ships would be at risk.

Only 1 (one) Stockton C C L was converted so, the ex LCT(3)342, renamed LCG(L)3 in service.
Here is a link to follow with details of her disposal in 1946 and an image taken in dock from starboard bow.
http://www.clydemaritime.co.uk/node/506

I am indebted to the late Angus MacKinnon for all information held there and much else besides.
Thats all folks. Sean.
E28
 
Posts: 205
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2013 8:14 pm
Location: Near Conegar Lock.

Next

Return to Shipbuilding on the Tees

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 20 guests