Jump to content
Free downloads from TNA ×
The Great War (1914-1918) Forum

Remembered Today:

"Missing Ship"


Guest

Recommended Posts

I have my Father's Service record.

 

It shows him serving from 31.8.1915 to 5 .5.1916 on a vessel named "Hurd"

I can find NO other reference to this vessel.

 

Can anyone help, please?

 

He was Newman Birt EDKINS

(Surely the only serviceman ever with such a moniker

 

Old Pom

 

Peter Edkins.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

HMS Kurd was a minesweeping trawler in WW2, and as Kurd has always been a popular trawler name, there may have been one in the Great War too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

His service record shows him as being on  .....Woolwich (Hurd), I’m assuming (rightly or wrong) that he was based on HMS Woolwich the depot ship. Subsequent entries show him as ...Woolwich (Marlborough) and two of ...Woolwich (Ulster). Would the bracketed name indicate the name of ship being serviced, or is it a division name within the depot ship?

Looking for a naval pal to help out with the interpretation

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the books at WOOLWICH and borne on HURD, I believe. Though I'm a bit confused because the depot ship for Woolwich used to be FISGARD.

 

Moment while I check the Navy List.

 

 

 

 

Edited by seaJane
Link to comment
Share on other sites

HMS WOOLWICH was a  destroyer depot ship at Harwich and from mid-1915 Rosyth. She was base for the 1st Destroyer Flotilla which included HMS HIND.

Edited by horatio2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Computer search for Hurd is picking up nothing but three men called Hurd-Wood, and I can't read the Woolwich results on my phone screen. Later!

 

Or, for anyone willing to try, April 1916 Navy List: https://archive.org/stream/navylistapr1916grea#page/n7/mode/1up/search/Woolwich

Cross-posted with Horatio2....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Knotty said:

His service record shows him as being on  .....Woolwich (Hurd), I’m assuming (rightly or wrong) that he was based on HMS Woolwich the depot ship. Subsequent entries show him as ...Woolwich (Marlborough) and two of ...Woolwich (Ulster). Would the bracketed name indicate the name of ship being serviced, or is it a division name within the depot ship?

Looking for a naval pal to help out with the interpretation

Towards the end of the war WOOLWICH was depot ship for the destroyer HMS ULSTER (13th DF). I doubt that the battleship HMS MARLBROUGH was ever a tender to WOOLWICH. The name in brackets after WOOLWICH is the ship in which he actually served while borne on the books of WOOLWICH.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Knotty said:

His service record shows him as being on  .....Woolwich (Hurd), I’m assuming (rightly or wrong) that he was based on HMS Woolwich the depot ship. Subsequent entries show him as ...Woolwich (Marlborough) and two of ...Woolwich (Ulster). Would the bracketed name indicate the name of ship being serviced, or is it a division name within the depot ship?

Looking for a naval pal to help out with the interpretation

I'm still struggling to make anything of "Hurd" - judging from the writing elsewhere on the record the last two letters seem to be "rd".

 

The two entries which follow are certainly destroyers using HMS Woolwich as their depot ship:

HMS Narborough (not Marlborough): an Admiralty M Class destroyer

HMS Ulster: (in spite of its initial letter): an R Class destroyer.

 

RM

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, rolt968 said:

I'm still struggling to make anything of "Hurd" - judging from the writing elsewhere on the record the last two letters seem to be "rd".

 

 Having said that Hind would make sense as he would have been progressing through more modern destroyers.  However there does seem to be an "r" in the word, but could it be finishing "rel"? Not that I have suggestion for that either.

RM

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Could someone please post the relevant section of the record, so the rest of us can have a look at the writing.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi SiegeGunner

Copy of record for my source is from Ancestry, as this is a payment site I believe it does not constitute public domain and so it would break the Forum rules.

Can Mods confirm this, if it does not break the rules I will certainly post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we are allowed to post sections of records for interpretation purposes but not allowed to post full documents for the purpose of fulfilling somebody else’s request for research. I’m sure admin will help with this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A snippet showing the word concerned and a bit more of the text around it (to compare letter formation) is all that those of us with considerable experience of interpreting/deciphering handwriting would need to venture an opinion.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of the Pink List destroyers parented by WOOLWICH only HIND fits the bill for place (1st Destroyer Flotilla) and time (1915-16). The writer rating (or Admiralty scribe) who made the "HURD" entry in the ledger record may himself have been copying "HURD" from a badly written or incorrect report. There is also an error in the following entry "NARBOROUGH" - the destroyer's name was NARBROUGH (although frequently NARBOROUGH - vide Wikipedia). I believe the Admiral for whom the ship was named also spelled his name both ways. Errors like these are not uncommon in ADM 188 ledger pages. Even primary sources can be incorrect - caveat emptor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for posting the extract, Knotty.  The entry undoubtedly reads HURD, but as H2 shows, that cannot be correct.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am rather overwhelmed by the response to my Query - thank you all so much.

I agree the name is "Hurd" - the form of the "r" matches that for the last letter of "Ulster" - though not matching "Africa" or "Impregnable"

The name in between in the register is "Narborough" - she may be found in ships present at Jutland - and NBE appears on a (partial) crew list I found.

Fortunately for me, NBE transferred to "Ulster" shortly before "Narborough"  collided with ":Opal", causing both vessels to sink - with only one surviver.

As a further query, what ships constituted "Impregnable" in March 1913?  NBE as there until 12 June 1914 - would that be a normal term.

 

Thank you

Old Pom

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...