Start of transcription
NOT TO BE DETACHED – O.S.10C (ESS)
Cut:- 98-21 1939/40.
Period:- March to April 1940
File:- TSD 235/40
---------------------------------
ALLOCATION OF FIRST 40 U.P. PROJECTORS
(UNROTATING PROJECTILE MOUNTINGS)
Approved order of priority on the Clyde or at Scapa, or in both areas.
An adequate number of mountings in the Fleet Anchorage at Scapa is the first consideration.
Submarine and Destroyer Depot Ships should come next when additional mountings become available.
------------
Index:- ARMAMENT – U.P. Projectors (unrotating projectile mountings.) Allocation of first supply.
TSD 234/40
Page break here
Register No. T.S.D.234/40 Minute Sheet No. 1
It is understood from D.T.S.D. that the ARETHUSA class will take this weapon and that two could be mounted in each ship.
2. The following order of priority is proposed:-
(a) If the 8” cruisers are to continue to use the Clyde-
(i) Capital ships.
(ii) SOUTHAMPTON class.
(iii) ARETHUSA class and NEPTUNE
- 8” cruisers
- EREBUS.
(b) If the 8” cruisers are to use Scapa. Place the 8” cruisers before the SOUTHAMPTON class in
the above list.
3. The reason for this proposal is that an adequate number of mountings in the Fleet anchorage at Scapa is the first consideration. The East coast force of cruisers is the more likely to be attacked at sea, but this is of less importance than the security of the Fleet anchorage.
4. It is further considered that, if it is possible to do so, and no reason is seen why it should not be possible, aircraft carriers which are likely to be based at Scapa should have first priority with capital ships.
5. Submarine and Destroyer depot ships should come next on the priority list as soon as additional mountings become available.
Signed (signature illegible)
Director of Plans.
22 March, 1940.
D.O.D. (H) concurs with D. of P. that security of the Fleet Anchorage is of greater importance than security for the East Coast Cruisers at Sea.
2. D. of P’s proposed priority list is concurred in and it is also agreed that any Aircraft Carriers likely to be based at Scapa should be included with Capital Ships.
Signed (signature illegible)
For D.O.D. (H)
23.3.40.
Page break
Note from website staff: This page is a manuscript page showing various reviewers’ proposals to approve the D of P’s recommendations.
Propose to approve on D of P 12/3
Illegible initials
24.3
Propose to Appr.
Illegible initials
25.3
Illegible initials
26.3
Decision note. See action on G.04620/40 and G.04757/40
Signed (signature illegible)
For Asst Controller
22/4/40
Page break
Note from website staff: The next page in the document is a 22 October 1968 page dealing with the retention and reduction in classification of this document. It has not been transcribed herein as it does not affect the actual content of the subject matter.
Page break
Training & Staff Duties Division,
Naval Staff.
15th March, 1940.
ALLOCATION OF FIRST 40 U.P. PROJECTORS.
D.C.N.S.
Submitted.
In Admiralty Letter G.01048/40 of 5th March, 1940, (papers attached) the following allocations of U.P. Projectors to H.M. Ships were promulgated.
HOOD |
5 |
|
SOUTHAMPTON |
2 |
NELSON |
4 |
|
GLASGOW |
2 |
RODNET |
4 |
|
MANCHESTER |
2 |
VALIANT |
2 |
|
NEWCASTLE |
2 |
WARSPITE |
2 |
|
SHEFFIELD |
2 |
DEVONSHIRE |
2 |
|
EREBUS |
2 |
NORFOLK |
2 |
|
|
|
2. The letter added that for other vessels of the same Classes as those above similar arrangements were to be made; and for other Ships, Cruisers and above, similar proposals would be carried out, the actual positions of the mountings being settled in collaboration with the Ship’s Officers.
FIJI, DIDO and C Class Cruisers were excluded, (for reasons of Topweight, space, etc.)
3. The above was not seen by the Naval Staff prior to approval and was based on a memorandum of the First Lord’s to D.N.O., now in possession of D.N.O. (not with these papers.)
4. In view of your conversation on this matter with D.N.O. (after the First Lord’s meeting last Tuesday, 12th March), guidance is requested as to the lines on which you would wish re-allocation to be made. An early decision is desirable, since although the projectors are not expected to be in supply for a month of more, it is necessary to make provision . . . . . .
Page break
Provision now for their mounting in the Ships that will receive them.
5. The U.P. installation is not suitable for vessels smaller than Cruisers on account of the deck pressures involved.
6. Trials take place next Tuesday at Aberporth (S. Wales) which A.C.N.S. and Vice Admiral Somervilles are attending.
Signature (illegible)
For DIRECTOR OF TRAINING & STAFF DUTIES
DIVISION.
Note from website staff: Remainder of page is in manuscript
Paper attached
G01048/40 (part)
D of P
DOD (H)
Please propose re-allocation if considered desirable
“Arethusa” class are now on East Coast – can the weapon be fitted in them?
Initials (illegible)
15/3
End of transcription