| Author |
Topic: PT 370 Anyone there? |
|
TED WALTHER
TOP BOSS
|
  
 Posted on: Jul 19, 2013 - 7:06am
|
Will;
Thanks. Really nice photo of PT 369(Sad Sack).
Take care,
TED
|
Total Posts: 3059 | Joined:
Oct 16, 2006 - 7:42am | IP
Logged
|
|
Frank Andruss
TOP BOSS
|
Posted on: Jul 19, 2013 - 7:11am
|
This would make for a nice model project, which of course would have to be scratch built.
|
Total Posts: 3964 | Joined:
Feb 9, 2007 - 11:41am | IP
Logged
|
|
 |
TED WALTHER |
TOP BOSS
|
Posted on: Jul 19, 2013 - 7:15am
|
Frank;
Didn't Stan move already?
Take care,
TED
|
Total Posts: 3059 | Joined:
Oct 16, 2006 - 7:42am | IP
Logged
|
|
Michael Vorrasi
Advanced Member
|
Posted on: Jul 19, 2013 - 12:23pm
|
Hi Al,
We chatted about these four and the other CPB Dutch boats in another forum some years back. Would you consider these closer to a PT-9 clone or to an Elco 70 footer? or somewhere in between/
Mike
Mike |
Total Posts: 72 | Joined:
Jul 1, 2013 - 11:46am | IP
Logged
|
|
Frank Andruss
TOP BOSS
|
Posted on: Jul 19, 2013 - 12:26pm
|
Not yet Ted, but he is thinking about it. read your E-Mail for another project on the books.
|
Total Posts: 3964 | Joined:
Feb 9, 2007 - 11:41am | IP
Logged
|
|
alross2
TOP BOSS
|
Posted on: Jul 19, 2013 - 1:52pm
|
Quote:
Hi Al,
We chatted about these four and the other CPB Dutch boats in another forum some years back. Would you consider these closer to a PT-9 clone or to an Elco 70 footer? or somewhere in between/
Mike
Mike
|
|
None of the above. They're a standard 70' BPB design. Look at the plans on page 2.
Al
|
Total Posts: 993 | Joined:
Oct 30, 2006 - 8:19pm | IP
Logged
|
|
Michael Vorrasi
Advanced Member
|
Posted on: Jul 19, 2013 - 4:15pm
|
Hi Al,
Wasn't the standard BPB boat a Scott-Paine design derived from the PV-70 prototype, that became PT-9? Seems to me, if you updated the armament, added roll off racks, a radar mast and the Elco deck stiffeners to PT-9, you would have a hard time distinguishing her from PT-368-371. I think those deck stiffeners were added at Fifes, where it is said, they received Elco fittings. Forgive my probing. I have scant good info on the BPB/CPB boats. That's why I was so looking forward to ACF Vol.3. How is the Higgins book you mentioned a while back coming along?
Mike
Mike |
Total Posts: 72 | Joined:
Jul 1, 2013 - 11:46am | IP
Logged
|
|
alross2
TOP BOSS
|
Posted on: Jul 20, 2013 - 8:30am
|
Quote:
Hi Al,
Wasn't the standard BPB boat a Scott-Paine design derived from the PV-70 prototype, that became PT-9?
|
|
No. The boat that became PT9 was built specifically for ELCO in 1939. It was predated by the boat which was shipped to Canada as CMTB1, eventually becoming V-250, then MTB 232, then HSL 232. Eleven other boats (MTB233-243) were built for the RCN and additional boats for the RNN (TM22-37). TM34-37 became PT 368-371.
MASB 6, a third 70' prototype followed the other two and served as the basis for the RN's 70' MASB and MGB.
Get a copy of Adrian Rance's Fast Boats and Fighting Boats for more details.
Al Ross
|
Total Posts: 993 | Joined:
Oct 30, 2006 - 8:19pm | IP
Logged
|
|
 |
Michael Vorrasi |
Advanced Member
|
Posted on: Jul 21, 2013 - 10:14am
|
Hi Al,
I checked the price of the book you mentioned on Amazon. Not likely I'll be owning it soon! Anyway, the title was close enough to another book I had and not looked at in years, Fast Fighting Boats, by Harald Fock. He concentrates on German boats but does cover everybody else's. He indicates that the PV boat was built in 1938 and tested by the Royal Navy in November 1938 against Vosper MTB-102. The Admiralty picked Vosper, but many experts disagreed. He states on P.69, that after the rejection, BPB:
"then sent this vessel to the USA to take part in a competition organized by the US Navy....Taken over by the US Navy as PT-9 this boat was the basis of all ensuing American development by the USA." "Eighteen boats of this type ordered by the French Navy first sailed in 1940/41 and were commandeered by the Royal Navy as MGB 50-67. Another vessel was taken over by the Canadian navy, CMTB.1 and at the same time the sister company Canadian Power Boat Company was set up in Montreal.
Another boat was ordered by the Dutch navy, TM.51 who also obtained the license to have nineteen additional boats, built by Gusto of Schiedham in the Netherlands."
So according to Falk, the PV70 prototype boat was the same boat tested by the RN in late 1938 and later purchased by Elco in 1939 as PT-9. This same design was used in the CMBT-1 and also the Dutch boats. Several of these Gusto built boats were completed by the Germans and given to Bulgaria and Rumania. Further on, page 129, Fock indicates that in 1939, the Dutch Navy ordered, in addition to TM 51, built by BPB, and the Gusto vessels, a further eight from CPB, TM 22-29 and a further eight, TM 30-37 from Fyff's Shipyard in New York. He refers to all of these boats as the PV design. Its is a bit unclear as to what Fyff's eventually built.. It looks like CPB built the entire eight of that order, while Fyff's did the fitting out on the four that the USN took over.
It does seem to be though, that PT-368- 371 were basically updated PT-9's (or, if you will, production versions of the PV70 boat). Even the window spacing on the deck-house is the same. Only the softer contours of the pilot house on the PT-9 / PV70 prototype seems different. The production boats have sharper corners on the side windows of the pilot house. They have the deck stiffeners that Elco added to the 77 footers, so the common design heritage is clear. They do seem a lot closer to PT-9 than the Elco 70 footers though, due to the Elco's having the improved deck-house and larger cockpit that Elco designed.
The Dutch boats have been as illusive as PT-368-371. Fock mentions that of the boats TM-22 - 37 built in Canada and the USA, that TM-23,24,25,27 were lost in the Far East in 1943 and TM-31 was lost in 1944. The TM-32, 33, 36 and 37 were taken over by the USN as PT-368-371. I have seen photos of them in service with US SO-A radar masts, but I have never encountered any combat history of these Dutch boats in 1943/44 in the Far East. Wonder where they operated from and what action they saw?
Mike |
Total Posts: 72 | Joined:
Jul 1, 2013 - 11:46am | IP
Logged
|
|
alross2
TOP BOSS
|
Posted on: Jul 21, 2013 - 12:36pm
|
Fock is a very credible researcher and I have a great deal of confidence in his work. In this instance, however, he is wrong. Rance, whose work was published at least ten years later than Fock's, was at the time (1989) Head of Cultural Services with the Southampton City Council and had been with Southampton City Museums since 1976. Southampton was the home of British Power Boat Company and Rance worked directly from BPB archives. I would, therefore, have greater confidence in whatever Rance wrote on the topic.
Here are a couple excerpts from Rance's book:
For lots of photos of the CPB boats in RNN service (TM22-37), go here:http://www.maritiemdigitaal.nl/index.cfm?event=search.getsimplesearch&saveToHistory=1&database=ChoiceMardig&needImages=YES&searchterm=tm
Al Ross
|
Total Posts: 993 | Joined:
Oct 30, 2006 - 8:19pm | IP
Logged
|
|
|
