# Where are the experts on LIBERTY (EC-2) ships?



## FSG631 (Nov 23, 2006)

Hi guys!

(sorry, I was absent for quite a while!)

I am currently building a 96th scale model of the wartime Liberty ship FORT ORANGE.

Having been in love with these ugly ducklings since decades, with books and plans flying about all around me, and the nowadays typical internet research, I have run into some queries, with so far could not even be solved by the Crews of the JOHN W. BROWN, JEREMIAH O'BRIEN or HELLAS LIBERTY (Ex. ARTHUR M. HUDDELL).

It concerns the layout of the masts on various types of the EC-2 Liberties and the installation of additional derricks / booms for the deployment of anti torpedo nets...with possibly removing the bullwark partially and moving the rafts, installing additional frame structures on deck for the net and the layout of the entire set up.

Maybe someone can help and guide me on this!

Cheers!


----------



## IAN M (Jan 17, 2009)

Fort ships and Liberty ships were entirely different. Forts were coal burners built in Canada. Liberties were oil burners built in the USA.


----------



## Roger Griffiths (Feb 10, 2006)

Hello Ian,
FORT ORANGE was a Liberty Ship. Ordered as TOBIAS LEAR completed as FORT ORANGE.
https://plimsoll.southampton.gov.uk/shipdata/pdfs/43/43b1131.pdf

regards
Roger


----------



## Stephen J. Card (Nov 5, 2006)

Number 505 Launched as TOBIAS LEAR 

1944 renamed FORT ORANGE

1946 renamed ERASMUS (reportedly)

1946 renamed FORT ORANGE

1947 renamed BLIJDENDIJK (Holland America Line. Search as BLIJENDYK)

1957 renamed TRANSILVANIA Italian flag.

1965 renamed MOUNT ATHOS Liberian flag.


----------



## FSG631 (Nov 23, 2006)

Indeed!

The FORT ORANGE was a Liberty allright! Thanks Roger for confirming!

New England Shipbuilding Hull Yard Number 241, just 11 hulls (same yard) after JEREMIAH O'BRIEN, the survivor!
I think the renaming happened latest upon delivery in September / October 1943. The Dutch Government bought the ship outright!

Only Liberty under Dutch Flag during WWII, if I am not mistaken, veteran of the Normandy Invasion (after D-Day!) and under the Command of a Captain of the Dutch managers N.A.S.M., who happened to be German, born in Essen! Hans Lohr! US built ship, under Dutch Flag, German Master, delivering Supplies to US troops off Omaha Beach! (Applause)

Torpedo Net Set up is the query!


----------



## Stephen J. Card (Nov 5, 2006)

The ship was completed by the United States Govt for Lend Lease to the Netherlands Govt, London (in exile) on Bare-Boat Charter from the US War Shipping Administration.


When completed the ship was MANAGED by NASM and Dutch flagged and named as FORT ORANGE, She was not bought by the Dutch Govt until 1946 but was then Bare-Boat Chartered to NASM and in 1947 she was renamed as BLIJDENDYK.



Stephen


----------



## Foca (Aug 25, 2012)

*The Workhorse of the fleet*

https://ww2.eagle.org/content/dam/e...y-information/workhorse-of-the-fleet-2019.pdf
Last Liberty I sailed on was Samiday..ex Harrison Scholar....Konstantis Yemelos(Greek) as supercargo 1968

Have a look at this might be of some interest to you
Regards


----------



## FSG631 (Nov 23, 2006)

Dear Stephen,

You may be correct. Some Dutch sources said the vessel was sold ex yard, but I have no evidence seen in that respect. So the LL and BB version might be right.

Thanks FOCA, I was already aware of the ABS publication, unfortunately no info on the anti torpedo nets in there.

However, here
https://www.maritime.dot.gov/sites/marad.dot.gov/files/docs/about-us/history/vessels-maritime-administration/861/arthurmhuddellhaerreport.pdf
one can find some info.

On page 37, section FR. 131 looking aft, you can see the Catch Net Frames. On page 38, Elevation Starboard, it states "Bulwark omitted in way of net" and below "Modifications to boom handling arr'gt at hatch No.4 & 5 for ships fitted with Torpedo Net Defence only"

The trouble is, the plans in this publication were re-drawn and the publication did not intend to comment or give details of the net gear.

It is also evident, that the plans are incorrect in some respect. While the ARTHUR M. HUDDEL did have the net gear, and evidently that bulwark gap as well as estended crosstrees on the fore and aft masts, same is not shown in the drawings on pages 27 and 37, but compare with pictures on pages 15, 16 and 20/21. The bullwark gap is again shown on page 28 and 35, whereas the plan on page 30 shows the raft rack in the standard position, were it would not be with the net gear installed...

I am on the search for a rigging plan of the net gear, plans of the catch net frames and booms as well as the actual construction of the net itself.

A veteran commented as follows:
QUOTE
As you had determined, the pair of long booms mounted forward and aft are to handle and support the torpedo nets. A wire pendant ran from the head of the forward boom to the head of the after boom. The torpedo net was deployed by pulling one end of the net along this pendant, similar to pulling a shower curtain. The booms were then lowered to an almost horizontal position to deploy the nets away from the hull and place the nets deep enough in the water to protect the hull from a torpedo. I have not found in my reading any account of a net "saving" a ship by snagging a torpedo before it reached the ship's hull. On the other hand, I have read several accounts of problems encountered rigging and recovering the nets and the fact that the deployed nets significantly slowed the ship's speed making it difficult to maneuver and keep station in a convoy.
UNQUOTE

As for the usefullness and / or issues regarding the speed, you can find on Wikipedia the following:

QUOTE
Torpedo nets were revived in the Second World War. In January 1940 the UK Admiralty had the ocean liner Arandora Star fitted out with steel booms at Avonmouth and then ordered her to Portsmouth where she spent three months testing nets of various mesh sizes in the English Channel. The net successfully caught all the torpedoes fired at them and reduced the ship's speed by only 1 knot (1.9 km/h), but in March 1940 the nets were removed. In July the unprotected Arandora Star was sunk by a torpedo, killing 805 people.

Booms and nets were fitted to a few ships in August 1941, and by the end of the Second World War they had been fitted to 700 ships. The nets did not protect the whole of a ship, but protected from 60 to 75 percent of each side. 21 ships so equipped were subject to torpedo attacks while the nets were deployed. 15 ships survived as the nets succeeded in protecting them. The other six were sunk because a torpedo either penetrated a net or hit an unprotected part of a ship.
UNQUOTE

I have not checked the records of ALL ships, but in Swayer / Mitchell book the there is at least mentioned that the "RICHARD HOVEY... was streaming her anti-torpedo nets when hit, the torpedoes either going through the net, or under it" and further "JOHN A. POOR Damaged by mines in N. Atlantic, the concussion from three explosions causing considerable damage in the engine room, but no hull damage...at the time of the explosions the JAP was streaming her anti-torpedo nets and these prevented the mines from actually hitting the ship."

While the Wikipedia entry deals with the British trials, I found the following on the US trials (1941/42) in a 1996 interview of Capt. Bill Searle, former supervisor of salvage for the U.S. Navy:
QUOTE
I was placed on a committee to study and try to save ships from being sunk. And we designed and had built a net which we suspended on the side of the ship 60 feet out into the water...For small vessels, the LISP-2 was designed, providing protection for ships up to 450 feet in length. It would weighed 34 tons...we did all our experiemental work in the bay south of Providence, Rhode Island. We would take a loaded ship and use a submarine and fire a dead torpedo at the ship. The net was designed to catch the torpedo by the tail. A torpedo is maybe 20 feet long. And the tail end is the propeller. And we would catch the torpedo by the propeller. And it would be hanging in the net"
UNQUOTE

The last bit makes me somehow believe, that the nets could have been made of a lighter material or construction compared to the steel wire ring nets used for harbour defences, but I am not sure!

QUOTE
And believe me, when a ship got into port, and they lifted up the net and had a live torpedo, it didn't take long to unload that ship full of men. They got out quick"
UNQUOTE

The infamous wreck of the RICHARD MONTGOMMERY in the Thames estuary off the Isle of Sheppey had the nets installed. In early pictures of the wreck, the long booms (derricks) can be seen, with some special fittings on them. Remnants of the net also.


----------



## FSG631 (Nov 23, 2006)

As stated, there is the question on how the booms / derricks were constructed and what the story is on the cross trees, long vs. short.

I have compared 37 pictures of mainly *post war* liberty pictures so far.
There seems to be a pattern emerging, but I am not sure yet. Out of these 37 pictures, there were ten pairs of railing and long cross trees (net equipped?) vs. 19 of closed bulwark and short, stubby cross trees.
8 were inconclusive, i.e. a combination of masts (fore / aft) or long cross trees, but bulwark.

At this low number, it is hardly representative.

As it is known, many Liberties were converted, in some cases even salvaged fore and aft ships from different ships matched. So, the 8 odd ones could have several reasons. Strange though, the JEREMIAH O'BRIEN has the railing, but short cross trees. I have not been able to varify yet, if she might have been re-masted?

I have also not been able (yet) to establish, if it could have been a yard / timing issue regarding this. While most ships were delivered ex yard with closed bulwarks (but later got converted!), some later launches show the change already during the building.

It seems also unclear, if the broad cross tree was a general evolution unrelated to the net gear. Here also interesting to compare merchant liberties to those used by the Navy. But the longer cross tree had brackets for the booms on the side. It would be awkward to cradle a derrick there wich is installed on the fore / aft side of the deck house, unless the bracket would ba at an unusual angle.

I attach a picture of the Navy Transport BOOTES AK91 at a yard pier during conversion for the Navy. Although THIS vessel seems not to have been fitted the net gear, it features the long cross trees (3) and the bracket for the booms installed on the sides (2) as well as the gooseneck for potentially the boom installation (1). The gap in the bulwark is more neatly cut as on merchant Liberties. I am not sure about the boom installed there, which could have soemthing to do with a torpedo net, but possibly also with boarding landing craft etc. I have only seen this on Navy Liberties, not civilian ones.

I also attch a picture of the RICHARD MONTGOMMERY still sailing, with the topped net booms and nets hanging.


----------



## Stephen J. Card (Nov 5, 2006)

Here is a photo of the FORT ORANGE.

Have you seen this one before? Seems to answer of your questions.

Also a couple of BLIJDENDK photos.

My painting of BLIJDENDYK. The original painting hangs on board the EURODAM... so 'FORT ORANGE' still sails!


Stephen


----------



## FSG631 (Nov 23, 2006)

Dear Stephen,

yes, indeed the pictures are known to me. That is a beautiful painting of yours! 
Great to know she is still "sailing" with HAL. My RC model, although not finished yet, has been on the water already, sailing in 1:96!

The one WWII picture is dated11-22-43 and is quite interesting. Can you see that strange "bulb" aft on the hull, just below the raft?

I wonder what that might be!? Or is it an illusion? But I sense a shadow there!

It was indeed this picture which got me on to the net story. I could not figure out what the two large triangular frames were next to the aft mast. I thought it had something to do with the raft and life saving appliances, when I found the designation "catch net frames" for them. But that really did not make sense at all! 

One explanation for these frames might be to prevent the net hanging from the top of the boom in the stored position to get entangled in the winches or other obstructions on deck, or the weights moving and damaging installations. I would also gather from the Vet that there was a stay cable between the forward net boom and the aft one, with the net being permanently fixed. The Navy Vet said it was drawn like a shower curtain, prior to the booms being lowered with the net nearly in horizontal position. That indeed sounds plausible. The procedure COULD have been:

a. permanent stay cable between fore and aft booms, net on shakles or similar attached to it
b. topped aft boom with net attached, net stored hanging and lying on deck between the "Catch Net Frames", possibly with some weights
c. in deploying, railing is collapsd / removed. It would have no bars, but wires and / or chains
d. both, or only aft boom, unlasched from cross tree, slightly lowered. Net with weights pusched over the side aft, where railing removed, now hanging outside.
e. both booms lowered further, wire attached to net hanging on aft boom, put on a forward winch (anchor windlass?) and pull the net on the stay cable forward. There would be no obstruction, since the net hangs overboard. Question: how to run the wire?????
f. After net has reached it's end position forward, lower both booms horizontally. The net is now 30ft away from the hull and hangs vertical into the sea, possibly weight down by some weight on it.
g. secure booms in that position and tie net tight to a forward and aft bollard, to minimize it giving way upon impact. Since it is only covering abt 70% of the hull length and hangs on the boom ends some 30ft out, it might only marginally be drawn closer to the hull fore and aft. The interesting question here would be, how deep was it?

Retrieve: reverse the process and use the aft boom to heave it in.

Hmm, maybe the net would not need to be winched. Would it just slide if you have the stay cable at an angle by lower one boom and hoist the other???? But 34ts is a hell of a weight!


----------



## Supercargo (Mar 15, 2014)

*City of Ely*

Model by Chief Engineer Brian Smith.


----------



## FSG631 (Nov 23, 2006)

Nice looking model by Brian Smith.

When I am finished with the FORT ORANGE, I plan a civilian post war Liberty as well. East German ERNST MORITZ ARNDT.

But first, this net gear issue needs sorting...

I notice that on the BLIJDENDYK the bulwark was re-built again. That makes it difficult to get a match between broad cross trees and reeling on pictures of post war Liberties. However, If I was the Owner, I would have done it as well!


----------



## FSG631 (Nov 23, 2006)

Nice picture...I added some remarks...


----------



## Alan Rawlinson (Dec 11, 2008)

FSG631 said:


> Nice picture...I added some remarks...


Hey Guys,

There was a war on which lent some urgency to the situation. Might it not be that different batches of Libertys had different ' long splices', so to speak? I can easily imagine the different yards adopting their own solution to the efficient use of nets. Uniformity with engines and the hulls etc, yes, but no time for pedantic matching of fittings.

Just a thought!


----------



## FSG631 (Nov 23, 2006)

Hi Alan,

yes, I hear what you say, indeed, there was a war on!

However, the U.S. was not as battered as Britain or Germany under constant bombardment and cut of from supplies.

The ships were constructed on an enormous industrial scale, and to have deviated from standards, would have resultet in chaos, with major components being produced far away from the shore and the shipyards, with production output somewhere in the midwest, not knowing if parts were sent to the east or west coast or Gulf area, before they left the maker's premises. This, plus "untrained" workers in the yards, would mean, that any kind of "make shift" would have caused chaos!

And knowing our American friends, nothing happens without a plan or a manual! And the ship's Crews were also no old seasalts! Was not LORAN introduced to facilitate navigation by mathematicians dressed in Mate's uniforms on board? (slight punch here!)

Yes, there was a war on! But looking at it from the view point of a streamlined industrial massproduction of ships to be assembled by untrained personell, it seems highly unlikely that "they could do what they deemed fit", the more so because they were not really bound by shortages.

It is evident that ships got converted to fit the net (ARTHUR M. MONTGOMMERY being the prime example). It is however logical that at one point the ship construction made the neccessary changes during the initial building before launch and delivery to allow for the fitting of the installation. This may have even continued after the project was stopped in 1944?

On a side note, as far as I know, not a single Jeep was delivered ex factory on a weekend or holiday! There was a war on, you know! Who would have thought!


----------



## Alan Rawlinson (Dec 11, 2008)

*Libertys*

Hi Lars,

Interesting to read your in-depth take on the Liberty Ship and the amazing achievement that played a huge part in winning the Atlantic war.

On the question of uniformity, there were variances, and it's not surprising, given the 2700 plus Libertys that were produced. 

Visiting Beaumont, Texas, after the war, there was the sight of huge rows of the reserve fleet - Victories and Libertys, all head and tail like rows of toy soldiers. I think I am right in saying that it was possible to detect differences. The gun bays on the bridge front were not always present, for instance. The one I sailed on had them.

Over the production period 43/35? it would also be surprising if modifications were not introduced, but I bow to your superior knowledge as someone who has studied the subject.

Personally, I was never one to get interested in whether the derrick crutch at number 3 hatch went this way or that! It's the Maritime History aspect that fascinates me - lights my fire!
very best wishes/Al


----------



## FSG631 (Nov 23, 2006)

Dear Alan,

I would not describe myself as an expert on the subject at all. And yes, there would probably be slight variations. The Ships operated by the Navy for sure had "specialities". But looking at the ships in the reserve fleet in lay up might be misleading, since many got converted and substantially rebuilt for a special purpose job, or simply repaired, even during the war.

Having said that, it may not be excluded that different yards handled items slightly different and for sure there was some evolution over time also. Flaws in design would be ironed out and possibly simplyfyed construction along the way.

But I would expect that the way they were made, the basisc remained uniform and generally conversions were made after delivery from the yard so that the production is not held up.

My interest regarding the detail stems from the model building. If you spent so much time and effort (and money) into such a project, you want it to be correct and true.

In the over all picture and history, it probably would be irrelevant what size of shoes the Chief Mate was wearing!(*))


----------



## Alan Rawlinson (Dec 11, 2008)

*Liberty ship models*

Lars, Interesting about model building. Tons of patience, I guess? but rewarding.

Somewhere, maybe online, there might be a set of detailed specifications, do you think? 

Looking back, the beauty of the project was the simple design. People including the President called them 'ugly ducklings' at the time, but this disguises the genius of the whole project. I have written about the time on the Libertys enthusiastically in books and articles. (https://banklineonline.com ) and described the engine as " A big 'TONKA toy'". So simple and reliable. All of the fittings were solid and clunky, and the central heating in the accommodation was powerful. Most people who sailed on them loved them, and when they were purchased after the war, conditions on board were better than more expensive purpose built ships.

Cheers/Al


----------



## IAN M (Jan 17, 2009)

There are two pictures of the Samforth's torpedo nets in my gallery.


----------



## FSG631 (Nov 23, 2006)

Dear Ian,

thanks for your heads up! That helps. I sent you a PM.

Dear Alan,

it is amazing that items even developed and built under stress and strain resulted in something beautiful! The WILLYS WWII Jeep is such a example. It had to be cheap and was expendable, developed within weeks...but no later model can match the iconic lines and looks. Enzo Ferrari said something like "...the only sports car America ever created!" I guess the same is true for aircraft such as the De Haviland Mosquito. While I would not call a Liberty ship a super yacht, the simplicity and purety and slender appearance, do for sure not deserve the name "ugly duckling", which served it's Owners nearly 40 years!

Interesting that you praise the accomodation! It seems, these "emergency ships" were stripped of many amneties US ships already had in the 1930s!!!

But, hey, there is a war on, you know!?


----------



## Alan Rawlinson (Dec 11, 2008)

*Liberty Accom*

Can recall being pleasantly surprised at the wide bunks. They had solid wood boards rather than slats to support the mattress. The little things mattered.

All the bridge kit was chunky and basic with no frills. One thing that stands out for many navigators was the optical arrangement to project the compass card up to the top bridge for steering. From pictures of various Libertys, it seems the ' cabin' above could be rather flimsy or on some vessels - a more solid structure, depending on the mods that were made. Was there a standard design, I wonder? How is this treated in modelling? Here is a pic of me steering from the top (monkey island) position. Ship was the Maplebank ( old Samwash).
Cheers/Al


----------



## Engine Serang (Oct 15, 2012)

Master: Chief Officer, tell that cadet to get his hair cut.

Chief Officer: Yes Sir. The Second Cook will give him a wee trim when he comes off watch.

Chief Officer: Rawlinson, get your bloody hair cut.

Cadet Rawlinson: Yes Sir. (Sh1t, I should have joined Souters).


----------



## Alan Rawlinson (Dec 11, 2008)

*Right now! Maltese Chippy / barber*



Engine Serang said:


> Master: Chief Officer, tell that cadet to get his hair cut.
> 
> Chief Officer: Yes Sir. The Second Cook will give him a wee trim when he comes off watch.
> 
> ...


Maltese 'Chippy' doubling as barber on the Liberty " Maplebank"


----------



## Engine Serang (Oct 15, 2012)

Chief Officer keeping the Captain happy, another step up the ladder. And Chippy up 6 cans. Everyone happy.


----------



## FSG631 (Nov 23, 2006)

ehhmmm,

since this was about nets, a hair net could have done the job?(Hippy)


----------



## FSG631 (Nov 23, 2006)

Dear Alan,

I believe most, if not all, Liberties came with the open fly bridge / compass. At least that is what the ship yard pictures show.
The "cabins" were added later at different points in time and differed widely, maybe self made using dunnage? or whatever available or provided by the managers. They may look similar in size and height, if the existing railing around the compass was used to fix the panels.

But that is only my guess!


----------



## Alan Rawlinson (Dec 11, 2008)

FSG631 said:


> Dear Alan,
> 
> I believe most, if not all, Liberties came with the open fly bridge / compass. At least that is what the ship yard pictures show.
> The "cabins" were added later at different points in time and differed widely, maybe self made using dunnage? or whatever available or provided by the managers. They may look similar in size and height, if the existing railing around the compass was used to fix the panels.
> ...


I think that is right because each picture shows a different solution. The one I knew was a crude affair but functional (again!). Not particularly nice to look at, but more or less adequate. Garden shed type of structure. As a side note, it was possible for the helmsman to steer the ship, ring the telegraph, and pull the steam whistle cord when needed, and I did this on a few occasions arriving or leaving port or transiting the Panama canal. Great fun if you were 18 years old!


----------



## Wallace Slough (Mar 21, 2009)

I piloted the Jeremiah O'Brien on many occasions and she was a totally unaltered Liberty. We'd normally conn the ship from the Flying Bridge as the visibility was so poor from the wheelhouse. On rare occasions we'd retreat to the wheelhouse in inclement weather, but rarely. I can see why so many Liberty ships post war in commercial service had the small doghouse built on the Flying Bridge due to the poor visibility from the existing wheelhouse. I'm sure the wheelhouse would have been a great place to be during wartime as it offered some limited protection versus the totally open Flying Bridge.


----------



## FSG631 (Nov 23, 2006)

Wallace,

...many war time pictures show the make shift protection as well. I guess Merchant Crews and with commerially managed ships on BB Charter did not follow guidelines strictly, if there were any in this respect, anyway!

My favourite place on my more modern ships was always the bridge wing, lee side! But, mainly we were trading the south pacific during summer or caribbian anyway!

In WNA or on a run to Archangelsk or Murmansk, it might have been different!


----------



## FSG631 (Nov 23, 2006)

Not a Liberty, but same installation!








© IWM (A 17352)


----------



## IAN M (Jan 17, 2009)

Lars

I have tried to reply to your private message without success. Please email me at [email protected]


----------



## FSG631 (Nov 23, 2006)

On it's way in a sec.!


----------



## noelmavisk (Oct 14, 2012)

*First ship I sailed on was the RMS Balantia, originally called the ss Samfaithful. Royal Mail Lines had 4 of these Sam-boats/ Liberty ships, the Berbice, Barranca, Beresina, and the Balantia. I believe they were purchased from the government at war end.*


Foca said:


> https://ww2.eagle.org/content/dam/e...y-information/workhorse-of-the-fleet-2019.pdf
> Last Liberty I sailed on was Samiday..ex Harrison Scholar....Konstantis Yemelos(Greek) as supercargo 1968
> 
> Have a look at this might be of some interest to you
> Regards


----------



## Victor J. Croasdale (Nov 28, 2016)

FSG631 said:


> Hi guys!
> 
> (sorry, I was absent for quite a while!)
> 
> ...


Here's a website
https://wrecksite.eu/wreck.aspx?140630


----------



## Davesdream (Jun 24, 2009)

*Liberty Ships*

I have found a do***ent that covers the use of anti-torpedo nets. I have read in that do***ent there No additionally equipment needed. REF: page 21

https://tpwd.texas.gov/publications/pwdpubs/media/pwd_rp_v3400_0491.pdf


----------



## Davesdream (Jun 24, 2009)

*Liberty Ships*

Here is a picture of the netting in use.


----------



## noelmavisk (Oct 14, 2012)

noelmavisk said:


> *first ship i sailed on was the rms balantia, originally called the ss samfaithful. Royal mail lines had 4 of these sam-boats/ liberty ships, the berbice, barranca, beresina, and the balantia. I believe they were purchased from the government at war end.*


----------



## spongebob (Dec 11, 2007)

I was invited aboard a liberty ship in Apia harbour in 1958.
I had met the ships second mate on shore when we were loading bananas for NZ and his ship was anchored while negotiating to carry a load of copra to the USA . 
It seemed to be a very schooner rigged tramp outfit but very tidy below in its triple expansion steam engine room .
One thing that struck me was the all steel fit out , bunks , doors , drawers desks all steel and not a bit of Mahogany in sight .
It made the little post war built Navua feel quite luxurious on my return. 

Bob


----------



## rcarl616 (Jan 9, 2013)

"... many war time pictures show the make shift protection as well. I guess Merchant Crews ... did not follow guidelines strictly ..."

I am a volunteer crewman aboard restored Liberty ship SS JOHN W BROWN and an occasional helmsman. Old-timers on the ship told of wooden enclosures being constructed around monkey island on the flying bridge by the carpenter to afford some minimal protection from weather and sea. As necessary, an enclosure might extend a few additional feet back to the forward surface of the funnel, thereby capturing some small amount of heat. But supposedly when the ship reached port somebody in authority would demand that the structure be removed so as to correspond to standard appearance. I acknowledge my information is hearsay and 2nd/3rd/nth-hand so hardly reliable.


----------



## Alan Rawlinson (Dec 11, 2008)

Davesdream said:


> I have found a do***ent that covers the use of anti-torpedo nets. I have read in that do***ent there No additionally equipment needed. REF: page 21
> 
> https://tpwd.texas.gov/publications/pwdpubs/media/pwd_rp_v3400_0491.pdf


A great site! Many thanks for the link which will take a bit of studying as it's full of interesting info for Liberty Ship buffs!


----------



## holland25 (Nov 21, 2007)

I sailed on the Speaker ex SAMBALT,Lilian Moller. The furniture in my cabin was wood including desk,wardrobe and drawers. The bunk was a wider than usual and I had two portholes,one facing aft and one to port. I think I had what was probably the Chief R/Os cabin in its wartime configuration.It was quite comfortable and compared well with other ships I sailed on.


----------



## FSG631 (Nov 23, 2006)

Thanks guys!

...keep it coming!

Davesdream, thanks for the interesting site you mentioned, which I was unaware of.

However, both pictures, the one from behind as well as the one in the PDF from above *DO NOT SHOW A LIBERTY* ship using the nets.

If I am not mistaken, it is a Britisch ship in 1940 whhile the Admiralty carried out trials of the gear...


----------



## Alan Rawlinson (Dec 11, 2008)

*Effectiveness of torpedo nets*

Can anyone point to a site giving stats re the effectiveness of the nets deployed on Libertys? I read somewhere that there were 20 recorded incidents of nets being hit. Did they prevent damage, or were they useless? Would be nice to know.


----------



## FSG631 (Nov 23, 2006)

Dear Alan and All!

Do***entation does exist in archives. Unfortunately, I have not been able to view it personally (yet). In the meantime, some comments and quotes from books and other sources is all I have.

A fact is, that the concept of net defence for ships was abandoned around 1916, that is for sailing (as in moving!) ships. Such net and boom defences were, however, still used later and in WWII for protection of harbours and other areas / installations or anchorages. This was the "heavy" type of WWi.

A fact remains, the nets were installed and re-introduced post 1940 on sailing ships. This, at first glance, seems odd. The drawbacks were known:

- rate of efectiveness
- reduction of speed (about 17%) plus increas in consumption
- ***bersome deployment, especially for untrained crews
- only 60 - 75 % of the hull protected (not at bow / stern)
- hampering manouverability
- danger of entanglement in propeller
- loss in carrying capacity in tons and deck space
- no protection against new torpedo techniques like magnatic or acustical fuses
- danger of shipwrecked crew in getting stuck in it, when ship goes down

But, nearly 700 merchant ships got equipped with the nets in WWII, even if expensive. And this happened 25 years after they were abandoned during the first world war. The USN never really bothered, the RN dumped them in 1915 and the German Imperial Navy after the battle of Jutland in 1916, with a German Commander damning them entirely after the battle.

The consensus was, the negative aspects had more bearing than any benefit in using them.

The WWII nets (streamed by ships), however, seemed to follow a slightly different approach vs. the WWI designs. Whereas the WWI nets were designed to not let the "fish" pass through the net and make the torpedo detonate at the net prematurely, the WWII (leight) version tried to catch the torpedo, i.e. have it's fins and props entangle in the net and stop them thereby reaching the hull and explode. The idea was not to have them explode at all...
This may have been the result of torpedoes having been fitted with net cutters for the WWI version, which made them cut / blast their way through the heavy nets of that period. A 60' distance of the net from the hull was designed, so that in case of a detonation at the net the ship got the concussion (and subsequent damage) but no breached hull plating.

It might have been a desperate attempt. Consider the situation in 1940! However, the Admiralty did conduct tests in 1940 involving the SS ARANDORA STAR. The following from Wikipedia:

"Torpedo nets were revived in the Second World War. In January 1940 the UK Admiralty had the ocean liner Arandora Star fitted out with steel booms at Avonmouth and then ordered her to Portsmouth where she spent three months testing nets of various mesh sizes in the English Channel. *The net successfully caught all the torpedoes fired at them and reduced the ship's speed by only 1 knot (1.9 km/h), but in March 1940 the nets were removed.* In July the unprotected Arandora Star was sunk by a torpedo, killing 805 people"

So, without checking it, I would guess that *technically, it worked*!

I think, that the tanker EMPIRE RAYNOLDS was the first ship equipped with it, but I am not sure...

So, in principle, the gear was a British invention and design. The trials in 1940 pre-date the Liberties. However, the idea carried over. I belive the first EC-2 ships (as well as Forts) had the equipment installed.

The Americans carried out their own tests in 1942/43, probably based on the then existing British design. 
(I think further up in this thread you will find my post in that respect).

This led to a field trial, having 590 vessels so equipped.

The initial assessment report is held in US archives, but again, I have not seen it myself. Only partial quotes are at hand right now. Unfortunately I do not know how many ships were involved over what period of time and in which geographical area. But even so, some information can be retrieved. But as you know, anything may be proven by stats. (1944/45 Office of Scientific Research and Development and the United States Navy)

It is interesting that the initial assessment in 1942 gives figures of torpedo types used by the enemy. I honestly have no clue, how they could have known. It states that the Kriegsmarine used about 60 % G7e and 40% G7a types in attacks. Out of these 85% of the G7e types and 20% of the G7a types could be intercepted by the net. That would give a "protection factor" of 59%, or, considering only 75 % of the hull being covered by the nets, 44%. This percentage being based on ships ATTACKED, not the entire group of ships at sea, some of which unmolested by this U-Boat peril!

It was after the initial assessment, that (against opposition!) these 590 vessels got equipped in order to have a better data base for further asessment.

Considering that in the winter of 1942 the Battle of the Atlantic was in favour of the U-Boots, with ship building not having reached it's peak and Convoys loosing ships left, right and centre, the prospect of saving 44% of the transport capacity is worthwhile considering.

So, the accountants looked at it.

- The gear was expensive
- ships (turn around and in convoy!) was slowed down
- fuel consumption increased
- cargo capacity reduced
- cost and labour in maintaining the gear

Would the nets pay for themselves?

It seems, any considerations as far as saving lives are not included in this assessment. It was about cost and tonmiles. Money rules the world!

If the below figures are distorted because of new types of torpedoes in use, their effect remains unclear. 

25 ships were part of the basis for the below:

"12 ships, nets not in use at time of attack: 9 Sunk, 3 Damaged, 0 Undamaged
10 ships, nets in use: 4 Sunk, 3 Damaged, 3 Undamaged
3 ships, use of nets unknown: 3 Sunk, 0 Damaged, 0 Undamaged

Totals: 16 Sunk, 6 Damaged, 3 undamaged

If the 10 ships with nets streamed had not had their nets in use, we should expect 7 1/2 to have been sunk and 2 1/2 damaged. The nets had thus saved the equivalent of 3 1/2 ships and cargoes. But a total of 590 ships had been fitted with nets at an initial cost equal to about twice that of 3 1/2 ships and cargo, not to mention costs of maintenance, etc. Thus the program had not paid for itself, and the report of the findings recommended that no further ships be equipped with nets."

Still searching for more info!


----------



## Alan Rawlinson (Dec 11, 2008)

*net worth*

That's brilliant, Lars. So much info.

However, my gut feeling is that looking back 75 years after the end of it all, the provision of nets was an expensive failure in that it had little or no value re the ships torpedoed. There was value, hard to quantify, in boosting moral, and of course the final verdict was then only to be judged in the future - where we are now. Nets were only one of the desperate measures, passive and offensive, that the powers to be resorted to in a perfectly understandable effort to reduce losses. How much effort went into it all!


----------



## Split (Jun 25, 2006)

Roger Griffiths said:


> Hello Ian,
> FORT ORANGE was a Liberty Ship. Ordered as TOBIAS LEAR completed as FORT ORANGE.
> https://plimsoll.southampton.gov.uk/shipdata/pdfs/43/43b1131.pdf
> 
> ...


I sailed on Forts. I've heard them called, but not often, Canadian Liberties. In any case, they were completely different in looks, the Forts being flush deck three islanders and the Liberties, or Samboats, had everything amidships.


----------



## Split (Jun 25, 2006)

spongebob said:


> I was invited aboard a liberty ship in Apia harbour in 1958.
> I had met the ships second mate on shore when we were loading bananas for NZ and his ship was anchored while negotiating to carry a load of copra to the USA .
> It seemed to be a very schooner rigged tramp outfit but very tidy below in its triple expansion steam engine room .
> One thing that struck me was the all steel fit out , bunks , doors , drawers desks all steel and not a bit of Mahogany in sight .
> ...


Yes, that was another difference between the Forts and Liberties. The former had wooden furniture in all the cabins and bridge and boat becks were wood.


----------



## kewl dude (Jun 1, 2008)

*This US Government picture is on the Texas Liberty Reef PDF*

Attached
Liberty-Ship-Anti-Torpedo-Nets.jpg (75.1 KB)


----------



## Stephen J. Card (Nov 5, 2006)

kewl dude said:


> Attached
> Liberty-Ship-Anti-Torpedo-Nets.jpg (75.1 KB)



Great anti torpedo nets.

The photo was taken from a Nazi bomber!


----------



## Alan Rawlinson (Dec 11, 2008)

Liberty in a bottle - ex Samwash


----------



## FSG631 (Nov 23, 2006)

As I mentioned already in my post #43 , although the picture is a great example and does show the use of the nets, the vessel pictured is *NOT A LIBERTY*. The text in the PDF is wrong!

The IWM has a series of pictures of the same ship, while the nets are testet. I have not identified the ship yet, but it could be a FORT or PARK type. It only has two masts, looks like 3 islands and a really big funnel. It looks very similar to a Liberty...


----------



## FSG631 (Nov 23, 2006)

Hi Guys!

I am working on more details, but it is kind of tough...

- length of the net boom
- diameter of the net boom
- layout of the rigging

I looked at a SAM ship picture and did some measurements and calculations. Because of the picture angle and quality, it will only be all just "about". But at least it is a start.

Although not confirmed, the out board distance of the net was to be 60'. Bearing this in mind, the breadth of an EC-2 was 57'. The mast height only 47', but the cargo derrick at No. 1 hatch 55' (a).

Looking at this picture, the net boom seems 1,372 times longer than the cargo boom / derrick. That would mean 75.5' in length (b). Obviously, the booms stand at different angles, but this picture seemed to be a good starting point. I also marked changes to the standard configuration:

- rear raft moved further aft (c)
- bulwark removed, re-movable reeling instead at aft mast
- "catchh Net Frames" (not visible in picture) (f)
- extended cross trees at fore and aft masts (with net booms) (e)
- 20mm Oerlikon gun tub (forward) moved slightly aft, to make room for lowered boom at fore mast (d)

The net can be seen aft on the topped booms.

Interesting in this picture also the white paint used on top half of masts and booms as well as funnel. I did not notice this on any other Liberty ships but British SAMs. I wonder when this was introduced...?

*Any comments welcome!*

(sorry, legend is in German!)


----------



## Alan Rawlinson (Dec 11, 2008)

*top steering position*



FSG631 said:


> Dear Alan,
> 
> I believe most, if not all, Liberties came with the open fly bridge / compass. At least that is what the ship yard pictures show.
> The "cabins" were added later at different points in time and differed widely, maybe self made using dunnage? or whatever available or provided by the managers. They may look similar in size and height, if the existing railing around the compass was used to fix the panels.
> ...


Came across this pic of the KELVINBANK ( ex SAMUTA) top deck (monkey island) showing extensive awnings instead of a wooden hut.


----------



## Ian Steele (May 11, 2019)

Hi Guys
Fascinating stuff, I have heard of ships towing 'noise making vessels' to attract acoustic torpedoes, but who came up with the idea of draping nets around a ship, brilliant......well, maybe!


----------



## Bill.B (Oct 19, 2013)

That is what they did on the John W Brown over the steering wheel. Rest of deck is not covered. There is a covered chart table behind that with a canvas drop screen.


----------



## tunatownshipwreck (Nov 9, 2005)

Ian Steele said:


> Hi Guys
> Fascinating stuff, I have heard of ships towing 'noise making vessels' to attract acoustic torpedoes, but who came up with the idea of draping nets around a ship, brilliant......well, maybe!


Probably slowed the ship down, but at least it made the voyage.


----------



## jtennier (Feb 13, 2011)

*Post War Weyerhaueser Liberty Fleet*

Good Day!

I am also making a model of a Liberty, postwar. I noted that Weyerhaueser bought six or seven after the war, and converted them later for the lumber trade.

Anyone know the names of the ships they bought/renamed? 

Need a starting place to look for photos, drawings, etc.

Many thanks!

john


----------



## Stephen J. Card (Nov 5, 2006)

Alan Rawlinson said:


> Came across this pic of the KELVINBANK ( ex SAMUTA) top deck (monkey island) showing extensive awnings instead of a wooden hut.


Alan,

Took me a few minutes to look at your photo. I now see the creases in the photo. I thought it looked like you were crossing a sea or porridge!

Stephen


----------



## IAN M (Jan 17, 2009)

Re post #17 - It's the Maritime History aspect that fascinates me - lights my fire!

From 1943 until 1947, I sailed on the Liberties SAMITE, SAMFORTH and SAMNESSE, managed by Alfred Holt & Co. for the MOWT. 

The story on my time on the first two is told in my book, LIFE ABOARD A WARTIME LIBERTY SHIP, while that of the SAMNESSE is told in my book, OUTWARD BOUND. 

Both books are available on Amazon.


----------



## Alan Rawlinson (Dec 11, 2008)

*Bank Line Liberty's*

Pictures and accounts of the 12 Liberty Ships post war that were in the Bank Line fleet can be viewed on https://banklinonline.com. 
CORABANK ex SAMFLEET shown


----------



## jtennier (Feb 13, 2011)

Many thanks. I counted from the website a total of eight Liberties:
Corabank, Edenbank, Kevinbank, Tielbank, Ericbank, Rowenbank, Maplebank, and Ivybank.

I am guessing they would have had post war conversions. Did the Bank Line have a yard of choice? It might be drawings have survived of the conversion in the shipyard. 

That would be ideal for modelmaking.

I can look up the original names in Sawyer tonight.

John


----------



## DHendrickson (Dec 29, 2013)

Regarding the question above about the Weyerhaeuser Company's Liberty Ships: off the top of my head I recall the following: Geo. S. Long, F.E. Weyerhaeuser. Horace Irvine, W.H. Peabody, John Weyerhaeuser, C.R. Musser, F.S. Bell and possibly W.L. McCormick (not entirely certain about the W.L. McCormick). As an aside, at some point the company had the ships' superstructures rebuilt and modernized, including replacing the original funnels with new streamlined stacks. The ships looked strikingly modern and handsome afterward.
David


----------



## Alan Rawlinson (Dec 11, 2008)

*Bank Line Liberty ships*



jtennier said:


> Many thanks. I counted from the website a total of eight Liberties:
> Corabank, Edenbank, Kevinbank, Tielbank, Ericbank, Rowenbank, Maplebank, and Ivybank.
> 
> I am guessing they would have had post war conversions. Did the Bank Line have a yard of choice? It might be drawings have survived of the conversion in the shipyard.
> ...


There were 12 and the other 4 were Marabank, Willowbank, Springbank and Titanbank. ( I am still adding the names and pictures to the site). As far as I know there were no specific conversions made, certainly not in one yard. There were changes made on an ad hoc basis like removing gun mountings and the most noticeable one being the removal of the t'gallant mast on some, which was a shame in my opinion as it robbed them of a very distinctive look. 

On the 2 years I spent on the Maplebank as senior apprentice we spent a lot of time patching bulwark plates with chart paper which we then painted over with white gloss paint. Looked great!


----------



## jtennier (Feb 13, 2011)

What's that saying? "A little bit of putty and a little bit of paint....."

Thanks for the rest of the names. There is a truly excellent quarter aft view of Tielbank I found on a website. 

I am thinking of changing to making it one of the Bank ships, there seems to be much more significant photographic record of the ships. Very few on the WeyCo ships I have found.

Half the fun is the research.

J


----------



## jtennier (Feb 13, 2011)

*WeyCO Ships*

Yes, I agree, they are very handsome ships. Why I want to model one. But there is a real dearth of photos of the ships. And I'd love to know where they might have been converted. I will try a few letters and emails to the west coast archives and cities to see what I can scare up. I sent a note to the successor company, but no reply. Hard to say about getting information in these COVID days.




DHendrickson said:


> Regarding the question above about the Weyerhaeuser Company's Liberty Ships: off the top of my head I recall the following: Geo. S. Long, F.E. Weyerhaeuser. Horace Irvine, W.H. Peabody, John Weyerhaeuser, C.R. Musser, F.S. Bell and possibly W.L. McCormick (not entirely certain about the W.L. McCormick). As an aside, at some point the company had the ships' superstructures rebuilt and modernized, including replacing the original funnels with new streamlined stacks. The ships looked strikingly modern and handsome afterward.
> David


----------



## Intreno (May 10, 2020)

*1/350 Liberty under torpedo attack*

Well, 
Thanks a picture in this thread showing a Liberty with torpedo net from behind i was able to finish my diorama. It is a Liberty ship with torpedo net deployed moving at full spead under torpedo attack. Possibly the Martin Van Buren, that indeed sunk after been hit in the rear part by one torpedo. Due to covid i spent more than 2 months home and could dedicate at least 2 hrs per day to the project, that indeed had started 18 months ago. The base model is from Trumpeteer, with many many things handmade. I did not use any PE kit, just some PE from the spare box (from DDG The Sullivans).


----------



## Alan Rawlinson (Dec 11, 2008)

*Liberty Ship models*

Brilliant work - thanks for posting the pics.


----------



## Intreno (May 10, 2020)

*Really thanks*

It is really an honour to receive a compliment from you, given your experience in the field. Really thanks indeed.


----------



## Keith Adams (Nov 5, 2006)

Foca said:


> *The Workhorse of the fleet*
> 
> https://ww2.eagle.org/content/dam/e...y-information/workhorse-of-the-fleet-2019.pdf
> Last Liberty I sailed on was Samiday..ex Harrison Scholar....Konstantis Yemelos(Greek) as supercargo 1968
> ...


----------



## NicholasLB (Oct 26, 2020)

It is so nice to see a discussion about Mount Athos by people who are really passionate about ships! The beach my family goes for vacation since I was a child has the remnants of this ship. I've always wondered what they were and the story behind it and just recently started a more in depth research.

It was so cool when I discovered those strange metal columns were actually what was left (I believe they are part of the ship's engine, correct me if I'm wrong) of a ship that was in action during the Second World War!

I'm planning to do a video about it and am going there in the next weeks so I can take some cool photos of it.

Here is what remains of the ship:


----------

