"Not handed " propellers

Post anything about Marine Engineering on this thread
greendragon
Posts: 103
Joined: Sat Sep 14, 2019 6:16 am

"Not handed " propellers

Unread post by greendragon »

I have purchased another book about my "favourite" DDs which were Flushdeckers /Town Class in HMN.
It is Town Class Destroyers .A Crirtical Assessment by J.Henshaw.
The latter part of the title actually was a warning that the Towns will be criticized - one may say they fully deserve for.
Anyway, one of the information passed to a reader is that the Towns/fluschdeckers had no handed propellers with additional remarks that due to this they would "turn more easily one way and would be more difficult the other way "
I have had my memory, eyes and shelfs open for the a/m DDs and have never heard this I must say rather fake news.
Checked quickly navsource plus my books and whenever flushdeckers are shown in drydock stern forward to photgrapher they ALL have "handed" propellers. I can prove in some 15 photos that the DDs had sure handed propellers.
I have found also many other photos of ships even from before WW1 era and have found they had handed propellers.
Are my doubts correct?

Regards,

gd
User avatar
Little h
Posts: 1716
Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2018 6:53 pm

Re: "Not handed " propellers

Unread post by Little h »

Wiki carries references to the props being unhanded and not much liked by officers of the watch. Also this excerpt from Avalanche Press:-

The 'V'/'W'-Class Destroyers

The Town-class destroyers’ greatest contribution to the British war effort may well have been freeing up the British V/W-class destroyers for reconstruction as long-range escorts, and to be fitted out with the most up-to-date weapons and sensors for the short-range escort role.

Unlike the American flush-deckers, the British V/W-class ships were superb sea boats, with a good hull-form compromise between speed, stability and manœuverability. More importantly, they had counter-rotating propellers, where the flush-deckers did not. This meant that the British ships’ manœuverability was markedly superior to the American ships — indeed, the flush-deckers had a “tactical radius” only slightly smaller than that of a British battleship, certainly not an advantage when dealing with submarines.


http://www.avalanchepress.com/Town-Class.php

Hope that helps
Little h
greendragon
Posts: 103
Joined: Sat Sep 14, 2019 6:16 am

Re: "Not handed " propellers

Unread post by greendragon »

Thank's Little H for your response.

Unfortunately - as for me - this Avalanche article is not -as for me any sort of realiable or documented source of information.
My knowledge obout this subject comes from books of authors like
-A.Hague (destroyers For Great Britain): detailed report to Admiralty ....that hulls and main machinery were in good condition. No problems on manoverability due to unhanded propellers were reported. Wouldn't such significant design deficience went unnoticed by the British officers? I am sure not.
-J.D.Alden (Flush Decks....) no remarks;
-J.H.Patric (To War in a Tin Can); all the war on deck of HMS Badger - no remarks;

Attached photos of three of a dozen I found in the navsource showing the Flushdeckers propellers.
They are all handed.
Even in the Mr Henshaw book there is a photo of two Towns in a drydock which shows handed propellers of one of the Towns saying "....appears to contradict ..references ..the Towns not having handed propellers".Obviously it is clear they were handed.

Of course there are much more interesting subject to be presented but I am for well documented information and avoiding spreading sort of rumorous ones.Image[/img]

gd
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Post Reply Previous topicNext topic

Return to “The Stokers Thread”