historydavid Posted 9 May , 2005 Share Posted 9 May , 2005 A cause for concern. There is often a wide discrepency between the stated complement for a ship in reference books, eg Janes, and that for casualty figures quoted elsewhere for that ship when sunk. An example is HMS Invincible sunk at Jutland. Janes states that the complement was 837 Casualty figures, which are generally accepted, give the complement as 1032 (of which 6 survived - see separate post on HMS Invincible by American doughboy). This represents an increase of 23%. Does anyone have any thoughts on this? Best wishes David Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ionia Posted 9 May , 2005 Share Posted 9 May , 2005 A Cause for concern A ship's peace complement was always smaller than her war complement. In addition, INVINCIBLE as a flagship would have carried a small number of flag staff including more signalmen. Approved complements could also change with alterations in armament. There was usually a wider variation between peace and war complements in coal fired ships (e.g. INVINCIBLE) than in oil fired ships because of the extra stokers required to maintain consistently high speed. Her complement at completion was 730; in 1914 it was 799 and in 1916 it was 1032. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
historydavid Posted 9 May , 2005 Author Share Posted 9 May , 2005 ionia I suspected it might be the case that the books quoted the peacetime complement. Does anyone know where I can find figures for war complements for warships? Best wishes David 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