Interpreting Ships Name on WW1 record

[Khloe]

Hi all. 

Trying to figure out what it says in the brackets and the names next to them on this record.   I think its Hecla?. and the other one looks like could be Greenwich??.  struggling to make out what it says in the brackets. please correct me if I am wrong.  Any help is appreciated.

Thank you for reading.

Image courtesy of TNA

Edited 16 January by Khloe

[horatio2]

HMS ACHATES, a destroyer of 4th Destroyer Flotilla, borne on the books of HMS HECLA, a depot ship at Devonport.

HMS GREENWICH was the depot ship for HMS PLOVER in 14th Destroyer Flotilla at Scapa Flow.

Knowing the dates of these entries would be helpful. The above based on June 1917.

Edited 16 January by horatio2

[Khloe]

7 minutes ago, horatio2 said:

HMS ACHATES, a destroyer of 4th Destroyer Flotilla, borne on the books of HMS HECLA, a depot ship at Devonport.

HMS GREENWICH was the depot ship for HMS PLOVER in 14th Destroyer Flotilla at Scapa Glow.

Knowing the dates of these entries would be helpful. The above based on June 1917.

thank you Horatio. Extremely helpful info

HMS Achates 21st June 1916 - 30 june 1916
HMS Plover 1st July 1916 - 31st December 1918

Edited 16 January by Khloe

[horatio2]

That looks good. PLOVER arrived at Portsmouth in January 1919 to pay off.

However, ACHATES was at Scapa Flow with the  Grand Fleet in mid-1916 (and for the Battle of Jutland).

[Khloe]

Also trying to interpret this remark from while he would have been on HMS Plover
he is also recorded on HMS Tyne from July 1914 to January 1916. Wikipedia says HMS Tyne was a depot ship at this time. but from February 1916 to May 1916 he is recorded as being at "Tyne II" which I thought numbers after the Name usually meant it was a Shore Establishment.

Thank you for reading

[horatio2]

@Khloe  Posting  the record piecemeal is unhelpful as entries cannot be seen in context. The extract above refers to an entry elsewhere marked with a 'dotted tick' It possibly reads "vide Greenwich Led[ger] March [???] 1917" and refers to some minor (probably uninteresting) event.

"Tyne II" which I thought numbers after the Name usually meant it was a Shore Establishment. This is not correct, The Roman numerals denote sub-divisions of the ship's pay office. That 'ship' may be a depot ship, naval base, barracks or, rarely, a large sea-going warship. A large base and barracks like Portsmouth (HMS VICTORY) could have ten or more such sub-divisions, which were arranged purely for administrative convenience and might not even be co-located.

 

[Khloe]

3 minutes ago, horatio2 said:

@Khloe  Posting  the record piecemeal is unhelpful as entries cannot be seen in context. The extract above refers to an entry elsewhere marked with a 'dotted tick' It possibly reads "vide Greenwich Led[ger] March [???] 1917" and refers to some minor (probably uninteresting) event.

"Tyne II" which I thought numbers after the Name usually meant it was a Shore Establishment. This is not correct, The Roman numerals denote sub-divisions of the ship's pay office. That 'ship' may be a depot ship, naval base, barracks or, rarely, a large sea-going warship. A large base and barracks like Portsmouth (HMS VICTORY) could have ten or more such sub-divisions, which were arranged purely for administrative convenience and might not even be co-located.

 

Apologise. just thought that way was quicker.  i can post the full record if you would like.

Thank you for clarifying what it is referring too.

as for Tyne II.
Thank you for clarifying and correcting. this is helpful to know for any future research..

Thank you Horatio