Guest markwinter Posted 27 September , 2006 Share Posted 27 September , 2006 I've got hold of my Grandfathers service record and would like to know how to find out where the ships he served on went while he served on them. Am I correct in assuming that Tamar (Otter) must be Hong Kong? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest markwinter Posted 27 September , 2006 Share Posted 27 September , 2006 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
auchonvillerssomme Posted 27 September , 2006 Share Posted 27 September , 2006 HMS Tamar was the name for the Royal Navy's base in Hong Kong from 1897 to 1997. It took its name from HMS Tamar a ship that was used as the base until replaced by buildings ashore. HMS Tamar was a 4,650 ton troopship launched in Britain in 1863. She had been hulked as a base ship and was dispatched to Hong Kong in 1897. The Tamar served as the Royal Navy's base in the territory until 1941 when it was scuttled (to avoid being used by the invading Japanese Imperial forces) during the Battle of Hong Kong during World War II in 1941. A mast from this ship has been erected outside Murray House in Stanley. At the end of World War II, the RN re-established their naval base at Wellington Barracks, vacated by the British Army. From 1959 to 1962, the Wellington Barracks was upgraded to better serve the colony and reflect the changing times for the Royal Navy in the Pacific region. The RN decided to demolish the Wellington Barracks and rebuild a modern naval facility in Hong Kong. The Prince of Wales Building was completed in 1978 and became the new HMS Tamar. The last base to bear the Tamar name was relocated to Stonecutter's Island, off Kowloon, prior to the handover in 1997. Shortly before the departure of British forces in 1997, the Tamar basin was filled in and the People's Liberation Army of the People's Republic of China occupied the Prince of Wales Building (now Chinese People's Liberation Army Forces Hong Kong Building, or Central Barracks). The last Tamar is now a government marine facility. Can't beat Wikipedia!! Mick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joseph Posted 27 September , 2006 Share Posted 27 September , 2006 Mark, Welcome to the forum, Tamar (Otter)…….. He never actually served at Tamar that was where his pay account was kept, He served on HMS Otter a Destroyer of 385 Tons 210x20ft it was armed with 1x12pdr, 5x6pdr and 2 Torpedo Tubes, she was sold in Hong Kong 25/10/1916 Regards Charles Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joseph Posted 27 September , 2006 Share Posted 27 September , 2006 Mark, Triumph, Battleship 11,985 tons Sunk 25/05/1915 off Gallipoli by U21 Cassandra, Light Cruiser 4,120 Tons built at Vickers 25/11/1916, sunk by a mine in the Baltic 05/12/1918. He survived. Vivid was a shorebase in Devonport. Regards Charles Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest markwinter Posted 27 September , 2006 Share Posted 27 September , 2006 Mark, Welcome to the forum, Tamar (Otter)…….. He never actually served at Tamar that was where his pay account was kept, He served on HMS Otter a Destroyer of 385 Tons 210x20ft it was armed with 1x12pdr, 5x6pdr and 2 Torpedo Tubes, she was sold in Hong Kong 25/10/1916 Regards Charles Thanks for that, so does that mean in the later case of Woolwich(Sesame) he served on HMS Sesame but his pay account was held on HMS Woolwich? If so why were some of his pay accounts held on the ship he was serving on but in other cases not? Is it related to the size of the ship he was serving on at the time? Regards Mark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joseph Posted 27 September , 2006 Share Posted 27 September , 2006 Mark, Destroyers never held there pay account they had depots or depot ships, HMS Sesame was an 'S' class Destroyer, HMS Woolwich its Depot Ship. Regards Charles Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
per ardua per mare per terram Posted 27 September , 2006 Share Posted 27 September , 2006 Some ships were too small to justify the staff to look after, secure etc the pay, mail and sundry administration of the ship so it was handled by a depot ship. 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