wellsms Posted 25 October , 2004 Share Posted 25 October , 2004 Hi, I am struggling to understand what this service record is telling me. From what I can see on this forum and on the wider web, all of the 'ships' seem to be moored, is that right? Also does the 'Chatham' at the top relate to the Chatham Btn of the RMLI (which would make sense as I think this may be the man Other thread Any guidance appreciated thanks Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kin47 Posted 25 October , 2004 Share Posted 25 October , 2004 Hello Mike Your man is from Chatham Barracks of the R.N., not the Chatham Division of the RMLI. Note the service number J 10804, which indicates he is from the deck division. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GavinH Posted 25 October , 2004 Share Posted 25 October , 2004 The 'Pembroke' listed on the record refers to the naval base at Chatham. Regards Gavin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terry Denham Posted 25 October , 2004 Share Posted 25 October , 2004 The shore bases/depot ships here are Ganges II - Shotley training base, Suffolk Africa - Accommodation ship, Portsmouth Pembroke I - Chatham Dido - Training Ship, Sheerness Sandhurst - Destroyer depot ship, Scapa Flow Hecla - Depot ship, Buncrana Blake - Depot ship, Harwich Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wellsms Posted 25 October , 2004 Author Share Posted 25 October , 2004 Guys Thanks for the replies, and apologies to everyone who now has stiff necks..... I could have sworn I rotated the damn thing. What does 'deck division' mean? (the navy is as new to me now as the army was 6 months ago!!) thanks Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kin47 Posted 25 October , 2004 Share Posted 25 October , 2004 Sorry, deck division is someone who works in the ship, but not a stoker who in your man's period would have had a K prefix, an E.R.A., Cook, Clerk, etc who would have had a M prefix. Anyway, someone in the deck division was involved in any of a host of non specialty jobs and had the rating of Ordinary Seaman, Able Seaman, Leading Seaman. Also, of note, is the fact that the depot ships shown would have held his pay and victualling records, but they were not necessarily the ship he served in. The smaller ships did not have paymasters, so the men were shown in the depot ship and frequently then with his actual ship in parenthesis afterward. don Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now