HMS VANGUARD.

[Bob Coulson]

While continuing through a local memorial search I came across a man lost when Vanguard exploded.

Googling came up with some excellent info but has it ever been determined exactly what caused the explosion, espionage theories seem to have come into it.

Bob.

[Jonathan Saunders]

It well never be 100% certain but I think it generally regarded as 99.9% certain that the explosion (I think there were two major explosions followed by one smaller explosion) were caused by poorly stored cordite in a magazine, some of which was up against a bulkhead to a coal bunker the other side. In this coal bunker, as was apt to happen, there were a series of small fires (due to coal dust, heat etc) this caused a very high temperature caught in a pocket of air near/around the bulkhead. The bulkhead subsequently conducted the heat through to the otherside and ignited the cordite.

If anything good came of this it was that the Royal Navy completely reviewed their regulations for taking temperatures in magazines and for the storing of cordite.

[Bob Coulson]

Thanks for that Jonathan.

Bob.

[historydavid]

A more recent theory:

Lying at anchor three-quarters of a mile north of Flotta in Scapa Flow, when at 11.20pm she was destroyed by a series of huge internal explosions. A white glare was first seen between A turret and the foremast, possibly from a fire, followed soon after by the initial explosion. A further two very heavy explosions then took place, apparently amidships, probably caused by the detonation of ammunition in 'P' and 'Q' magazines. There were only two seamen who survived the disaster from a complement of 806. The subsequent investigation found that empty coal sacks had been stowed next to the forward magazine, and spontaneous combustion of coal dust was possible, but more likely that they had blocked ventilation to the magazines, causing the temperature to rise. This could have triggered the spontaneous ignition of the old Mark 1 cordite, which was apparently past its safe date, causing a fierce fire and triggering the explosions.

[TNA: PRO ADM.I16/1615A]

Taken from British Warship Losses in the Ironclad Era 1860-1919 by David Hepper.

Best wishes

David

[Jonathan Saunders]

There were only two seamen who survived the disaster from a complement of 806.

To date I have identified 848 men killed in the VANGUARD explosion including a IJN officer on board as an official observer and two Australians from HMAS Sydney, sometimes described as being in the sickbay, other times as being in the punishment cells. Also a minor point, there was one Naval officer, one Naval rating and a Royal Marine that actually survived the explosion. Lt-Commr Duke subsequently dying from his wounds (burns) two days later. There was something in the region of another 120 officers and men not on board at the time of the explosion for various reasons, mainly due to home leave.

This could have triggered the spontaneous ignition of the old Mark 1 cordite, which was apparently past its safe date, causing a fierce fire and triggering the explosions.

[TNA: PRO ADM.I16/1615A]

The mk 1 cordite was obsolete (improved cordite was by then available) but I am not sure it was past it safe date. As far as I can recall there was no cordite past its safe date on board VANGUARD at the time of the explosion (infact the VANGUARD had dispensed with some of the cordite at JUTLAND and gone through a refit in December 1916). A letter had been sent to Capt Dick to remove the obsolete cordite on 29 June 1917 but in all probability this cordite was still on board when the explosion took place 10 days later. What caused the problem was the rising temperature that made the cordite unstable. The blocked ventilation was found to be a feature onboard other ships during the subsequent investigation and in all likeliness contributed to the catastrophe that destroyed the VANGUARD.

I probably need to reacquaint myself with some of the facts as I havent looked at the VANGUARD for sometime.

However, for more information and a transcript of the summary of the findings of the Court Martial please visit:

http://www.gwpda.org/naval/n0000000.htm

[Bob Coulson]

Some really interesting stuff here, thanks very much.

Bob.

[Jonathan Saunders]

Sorry Bob - I didnt give this link after my first reply as I assumed you had found this through googling.

Who is your memorial man killed on VANGUARD?

[Bob Coulson]

Jonathan,

He's Stoker James Martin remembered on Middlesbrough's memorial.

Bob.

[Jonathan Saunders]

Jonathan,

He's Stoker James Martin remembered on Middlesbrough's memorial.

Bob.

Sorry I dont have anything additional on him ... which means you might be able to help me if you uncover a newspaper obituary or photo

[Bob Coulson]

Jonathan,

Will do if I come across anything.

Bob.

[historydavid]

Jonathon,

Might be worthwhile contacting Hepper through his publisher Chatham Publishing, Lionel Leventhal Ltd, Park House, London NW11 9NN and advising him of your research findings.

Best wishes

David

[Jonathan Saunders]

Jonathon,

Might be worthwhile contacting Hepper through his publisher Chatham Publishing, Lionel Leventhal Ltd, Park House, London NW11 9NN and advising him of your research findings.

Best wishes

David

David - with regard to casualty figures then Hepper is reporting the official number. A contact of mine in Orkney (who works at Flotta - about a mile from the wreck) called Brian Budge had a contact at the Admiralty/MOD who dealt with such records. We wrote to her about 5 years ago with our findings but there was never any reply or acknowledgement - so the MOD are happy to continue with the incorrect figure. (I said 848 I have just double checked - it is 843 that died in the explosion). Why the incorrect figure is continued to be put forward I have no idea as there are no errors in the CWGC records that would tally back to my number.

Regarding the cordite I am not sure how Hepper has come to this conclusion. When I had a very quick look through the summary of findings from the Court of Enquiry yesterday I didnt see anything that suggested out of date cordite and I dont recall from my own reading of the various records at Kew a few years ago, that this was given as a possible cause. I would need to go back over old ground to be 100% but I am 99.9% sure that the cordite was considered obsolete (hence the letter from the Admiralty 29 June 1917 to have it removed) but not out of date.

Thanks for your interest.

Jon S