HM Submarine Usk

[Studious Maggie]

Hi Everyone!,
I am researching for a friend who has an ancestor who was believed to have been a crew member of HMS Usk when it sank. (Possibly 1917) his name was Norman Spencer Gissing. Any help appreciated.
Studious Maggie:

[John Brown]

Maggie

It would appear that your friend has been searching the wrong war. CWGC records show a Petty Officer Norman Spencer Gissing as having died on 03/05/41. He was serving aboard the submarine HMS Usk and his service number was P/J 114873. His Parents were Albert and Eleanor Gissing and his wife was called Irene Lilian. He is honoured on the Portsmouth Naval Memorial.

Hope you find this useful.

[culverin]

HMS USK
Was the first of the thirteen Royal Navy U class submarines to be lost, through all causes, in the Mediterranean theatre during World War 2.
Her cause of loss has yet to be explained. There were no survivors.

[berry]

Good morning,re HMS Usk,my source (H.T.Lenton and J.J.Colledge -British warship losses of WW2) relates that this submarine was mined off Cape Bon 3/5/41.
regards
Sid

[qprdave]

Sid

I have a feeling that a lot of the reasons given for submarine losses are speculation or an "educated guess"

After the war, records of the enemy were cross-checked with ours and if a report said that they sank a submarine at such and such position then they assumed that it was such and such submarine because it was last reported or supposed to be in that area.

If there are no cross-references then, I suspect, a mine is blamed for it.


qprdave

[berry]

Qprdave- thanks for that,as you point out when the position of mine-fields became available post-war,and a submarine had gone missing in one of those areas, it would have been safe to assume that she had become a victim of a mine.If that should then translate into a definative 'mined' in such and such an area,or the more vague though perhaps more honest 'cause unknown' is debatable.
regards
Sid

[culverin]

USK was ordered as such on 4-9-1939 together with 11 further U class and 7 of the T class, and were the very first boats ordered after the the UK declared war on Germany, the previous day.
She was then briefly renamed P41 and then again reverted to USK, and lost as such.
P41 was allocated to a new U class boat and transferred to the Norwegians as UREDD. She was also lost on or about 10-2-1043.

[Clio]

By careful analysis and previous track routing it is usually possible to determine where a boat ought to have been on a given day. By cross referencing this info with German or Italian primary sources we can evaluate evidence of a successful sinking. German records are reasonably reliable 1939-44. We certainly know the precise position of former German minefields and in some cases allied boats were inadvertently routed directly into them (for example Seahorse and Thames). The fact remains that mines break free in rough weather, float free of their plotted sectors and are frequently found to have been responsible for destroying units belonging their own side. I know of at least one E boat wreck off East Anglia, undoubtedly destroyed by a loose British mine. Take both wars together and you see that mines accounted for more submarine sinkings than any other single cause. The emphasis upon mining is invariably, correct (I cannot think of a single mining revision in the past twenty years, can you ?).

If the destruction of a given boat cannot be attributed to enemy action, you are then left with evaluating whether the boat (often with a highly experienced crew) could have been lost as a result of a diving accident. I know of another E class wreck off Suffolk where there is no indication of mining, no damage and no evidence of any contact with the enemy on the basis of KTBs. Did the outside ERA open the wrong valve at the wrong time.....?

[culverin]

Ref # 8
I just love the word ought. Ought to have what exactly.
It is rather like buying a house these days...location location location.
75% of the time boats of this era and operating under the pressures they did MAY have known their location, if they were very fortunate.
One false move and hey presto, food for them fishes i'm afraid.
OXLEY, our 1st loss of WW2 says enough.
Now she ought to have been elsewhere, but was well outside her billet.

[Clio]

It is also the procedural methodology for finding submarine wrecks
and it works

[culverin]

The original 3 U class boats UNDINE, UNITY, URSULA together with UNIQUE, UPHOLDER, UPRIGHT, UTMOST all had 6 - 21 inch torpedo tubes forward of which 2 were external, giving them the bulbous bow appearance.

The next 8, UMPIRE, UNA, UNBEATEN, UNDAUNTED, UNION, URCHIN, URGE and USK introduced the 4 torpedo tube U class, and which is how all the subsequent U class boats would be.

However, i have been led to believe the 6 tube arrangement was abandoned due to trim and stability issues. Seems odd with the success UPHOLDER, UPRIGHT and UTMOST enjoyed.

Does anyone know which tubes were used first on the 6 tube boats, Did they fire the external pair first, with no reloads, or keep them to last ?

[Clio]

I inteviewed George Phillips some years ago. He distrusted the external tubes and avoided using them except in exercises. They were not fired in anger during his tenure of the boat. He was deeply concerned about the bow arrangement of the first three 'U's and blamed this design for the failed attack on U 35 in 9 September 1939 (Admiralty was anxious to blame this outcome on a torpedo drill failure, rather than bad design)

The bow arrangement created a myriad of problems including a pronounced bow-wave while at periscope depth. Worse still, during the Leipzig attack, the bow very nearly broke surface despite the flooding of 'Q'. George Phillips believed this factor had partly been responsible for the loss of Undine in January 1940.

[culverin]

ref # 12
For those who do not know, George Phillips was c/o of URSULA for 30 months and was very experienced, holding a number of senior posts in the sub service during WW2 after leaving URSULA, but not as skipper of a boat.

Clio, i imagine it would have been an eminently interesting meeting the pair of you had. Did he mention his period with URSULA pre war and the duties performed by the original trio ? It seems remarkable in the circumstances bearing in mind the success of the other three 6 tube U class i previously mentioned.

[Clio]

The conversation focussed upon patrols carried out under the aegis of the Sixth flotilla August 1939 - January 1940. I was particularly interested in the Leipzig attack and the far less well known yet infinitely more consequential, discovery/ plotting of the swept channel through the German Declared Minefield. We also covered the Heddernheim incident and wartime events within the Sixth Flotilla. Because he was profoundly hard of hearing at the time (1990) there was time only to examine this brief period of his life. I also corresponded with Aston Piper who as you will know had been Navigator during these patrols.

I believe there were design differences between the bows bestowed on Ursula, Undine and Unity and the second group of six-tube 'U's and I understand the bow of Ursula was significantly 'faired down' and streamlined before she left the Sixth Flotilla.

I have provided detailed structured and sourced accounts of patrols carried out by the first three 'U's here:

http://worldnavalsubmarines.com/forum1/index.php

This will ultimately include pre-war activities with the Sixth Flotilla. Just look under the appropriate boat

[culverin]

HMS USK
Was the ONLY RN U class submarine named after any Geographical feature and as with both other warships of the same name was named after the river USK in South Wales. She shared a 3 letter name with UNA and VOX.

[crolick]

I have provided detailed structured and sourced accounts of patrols carried out by the first three 'U's here:

http://worldnavalsubmarines.com/forum1/index.php

This will ultimately include pre-war activities with the Sixth Flotilla. Just look under the appropriate boatClio I'm unable to locate the right topic. Could you please point it out? TiA.

Andrzej

[Clio]

You will have to register on the home page to see this part of the site

First access Second World War boats

next locate Ursula, Undine or Unity

I am currently inputting my primary research on British submarine ops in home waters 1939-1941. This will ultimately include transcripts of interviews I carried out with personnel, (lower deck as well as gold braid) re Sealion, Sunfish, Triumph, Unity, Ursula, Undine, Sturgeon, Spearfish, Swordfish, Seal, Porpoise, Narwhal, Tribune, H31, Seawolf, Tigris, Trident. It includes material from the staff histories and Naval Historical Branch analyses, minefield charts, swept channels, features on flotilla units and bases

[chris westwood]

HMS USK
Was the ONLY RN U class submarine named after any Geographical feature and as with both other warships of the same name was named after the river USK in South Wales. She shared a 3 letter name with UNA and VOX.
I don't think so.
HMS Seal could be said to have been named after a town, although not strictly speaking: I think it's in Kent and the town adopted her. Then there were the thames class sdubmarines. Then there was HMS Alderney of the A class also S class HMS Solent.

[Dreadnought]

Chaps, this thread was oringinally about HMS Usk (Unity/U-Class Group I - also sometime refered to as Undine/U-Class).

We now seem to be discussing just about all of the U-Class. There is already a thread dedicated to the Unity Class submarines Undine, Ursula & Unity:

http://www.worldnavalships.com/forums/showthread.php?t=7796&highlight=Submarines

As alluded to by Culverin. there were also the Unity/U Class Group 2 boats. The toal in the whole class being some 49 boats.

If this is going to be a miore general thread about U-Class, I will change the thread title and merge it with the existing thread above. Alternatively, I shall take evrything out of this thread not to do with USK, and create separate threads for the Group I and Group 2 Boats.

I can just see us drifitng into more duplication the way this thread is developing ... It was a question about USK specifically....

Let me know what you wish, cos I aint leavin' it the way it is.

So yet the same old plea ..... try and stay on topic, and check for other threads before posting. The reason for this, as I keep repeating, is to avoid duplication, and to keep evrything concise for the benefit of future researchers.

Cheers

[Polycell]

Clive at the risk of annoying and or getting my head bitten off again its difficult knowing whats gone on before when there is such a diversity of topics spread over a large forum such as this.
I requested many many months ago a section devoted to submarines and was told if I wanted that then start my own site which I have done.
I answered Dennis's question.
I don't see why the subject has drifted the question asked by the original postee was answered in the second posting.
From what I can see is that subsequent questions have been asked and as a result questions answered.
The topic has, agreed, then drifted in and out on a 'theme' the theme being HMS/M Usk and the other 40 plus U class submarines.
The decision is yours. You are a 'moderator' moderate!
bon chance and a happy new year! Friend!

[Dreadnought]

No head biting Fred, I promise ..!!

I don't really want to clog this thread up even further, but just to say that the whole question of a separate submarine section was discussed at length by the Moderating Team, and I personally spent many hours stripping out endless threads and consolidating RN submatrines into classes, or in some cases specific threads about a particular submarines where it was warranted. This re-organisation effectively renderd the need for a separate section uneccesary - it would not have aded any additiional value.

It is so so easy to use the search facility (even given you a guidance thread on how to use it ..!), and since rationalising all of the submmarine thread titles, it is easy to view them all in a block. I just fail to see why people can't do this, and even more so, fail to understand why members can't appreciate the value of keeping the foum arranged in some sort of structure. Otherwise, just let everybody post what they want, where they want, and using the myriad of uniformative thread titles that seem to consistently pop up.

The forum then becomes a place to air instantaneous views, submit isolated bits of infomation, all of which is effectively unretriveable for those wanting to learn about the navies and ships of the world in the future. What a lost opportunity. Just a great big pot a valuable material, only available for a few days whilst it remains on the New Posts list. No order, no conciseness, just atreasure box with the key missing.

I really don't understand how people can't grasp this. Totally baffles me ... I actually think that it is in many ways selfish of those members who don't appear to care a fig, just so long as they put their fourpenneth in. Totally blind to the wider purpose of the forum ... exasperates me ...


A very happy New Year to you too Fred ... sincerely

[jbryce1437]

I have moved the posts relating to the photo requests for Usk to the Photo Request thread.

Jim

[dennis a feary]

Clive, my request was for info / pic of USK - and was `specific' to that boat. Any answers were re USK. Did turn into `discussion' re 1st & 2nd Class of that Class of boat, but still appertaining to USK I thought.
No matter - as long as I get the info / pic I require.
As to looking thro the `Search' item - cannot be done for USK - too short a `word' - HMS Usk did not work either. And there were'nt any pics of USK or that class close to.

Happy New Year & keep up good work !

Sadsac

[chris westwood]

Chaps, this thread was oringinally about HMS Usk (Unity/U-Class Group I - also sometime refered to as Undine/U-Class).

We now seem to be discussing just about all of the U-Class. There is already a thread dedicated to the Unity Class submarines Undine, Ursula & Unity:

http://www.worldnavalships.com/forums/showthread.php?t=7796&highlight=Submarines

As alluded to by Culverin. there were also the Unity/U Class Group 2 boats. The toal in the whole class being some 49 boats.

If this is going to be a miore general thread about U-Class, I will change the thread title and merge it with the existing thread above. Alternatively, I shall take evrything out of this thread not to do with USK, and create separate threads for the Group I and Group 2 Boats.

I can just see us drifitng into more duplication the way this thread is developing ... It was a question about USK specifically....

Let me know what you wish, cos I aint leavin' it the way it is.

So yet the same old plea ..... try and stay on topic, and check for other threads before posting. The reason for this, as I keep repeating, is to avoid duplication, and to keep evrything concise for the benefit of future researchers.

Cheers

that's a fair call
but it's a lot to ask human nature being what it is!:D

[Dreadnought]

Clive, my request was for info / pic of USK - and was `specific' to that boat. Any answers were re USK. Did turn into `discussion' re 1st & 2nd Class of that Class of boat, but still appertaining to USK I thought.
No matter - as long as I get the info / pic I require.
As to looking thro the `Search' item - cannot be done for USK - too short a `word' - HMS Usk did not work either. And there were'nt any pics of USK or that class close to.

Happy New Year & keep up good work !

Sadsac
Hi Dennis, and others,

To help everybody, let’s just go through the options on the search facility one more time. You are correct of course, that using the search facility and simply typing ‘Usk’ as a Key Word will yield no results; as you again correctly state, it does not have enough letters – one of the shortcomings of the search facility, but that’s by the bye.

Over the last few months, I have changed all of the threads regarding particular submarines in the ‘Royal Navy Ships & Crew’ Section, to a common format – HM Submarine Thetis, or HM Submarine Truculent, for example. In addition, I have stripped out numerous threads across many sections, to create threads relating to the various classes, also following a common format – RN Submarines: C-Class and RN Submarines: M-Class etc.

With this work completed, and titles changed accordingly for new threads, where appropriate, it facilitates a couple of easy methods that can be used to check whether there is an existing thread on a particular submarine, only three letters or not, or, for an RN submarine Class.

Firstly,
Wherever you are in the Forum, click on ‘Search’ in the blue coloured toolbar near the top of the page.
In the resulting drop down box, click on ‘Advanced Search’.
Type the word submarine (not case sensitive) into the ‘Search By Keyword’ box.
In the ‘Search in Forum(s)’ box, highlight the Royal Navy Ships and Crews forum (click any where in the box, scroll down until you find it, then click on it once).
Leave all other fields as the default settings.
Click once on the ‘Search Now’ button, or hit enter on your keyboard.

You will now be presented with three pages of all of the threads with the word ‘Submarine’ in the titles, and because of the common formatting now established, you will be able to scroll through and search for an existing thread on the submarine you are looking for, including those whose name might have less than four characters.

If instead of typing ‘submarine’ as the Key Word, you type ‘submarines’ (plural), your search result will, again because of the common format, present you with two pages that contain all of the RN Submarines: ?-Class threads.

There is another useful way of getting this information;
From the main forum page, click once on the Royal Navy Ships and Crews forum in the Naval History section.
Scroll down to the foot of the page and locate the ‘Display Options’ box.
In the ‘Sorted By’ drop down box, select ‘Thread Title’.
In the ‘Sort Order’ box, select ‘Ascending’. This is optional. But helps navigation.
Click once on the ‘Show Threads’ button.

You will now be presented with the entire Royal Navy Ships & Crews forum, in alphabetical order.
At the foot of the page on the right hand side, you will find a box where you can select the various page numbers of the forum. You will find:
Pages 10 to 12 list all of the HM Submarine threads, nicely in alphabetical order.
Page 58 contains all of the RN Submarines: ?-Class threads, all together in alphabetical order.

Incidentally, I have also taken the time to re-title all of the RN ships threads in the common format HMS Agincourt, HMS Bulwark etc., changing the plethora of titles that use Hms, hms, h.m.s etc. Where there is more than one ship of the name, I have added the dates of commission. For example HMS Bellerophon 1865-1904, HMS Bellerophon 1907-1922, etc.

The results of again ensuring a common format, means that, in this alphabetic listing mode, pages 14 to 46, list all of the threads regarding HMS ships, all again in neat alphabetical order

Obviously the page numbers I state above will change in time as more ships/submarines are added.

So when you see your thread titles tweaked, and sigh “what was that for … flaming Moderators got nothing else better to do …”, try to understand there is a reason for it.

Please try and structure thread titles with the search facility in mind. You made me hoot this morning Dennis, with your thread titled “Sub/Pongos” …!! What the hell was that supposed to mean? The fact that it was to do with submarine H49 was completely lost. Gives us a clue at least …!! By the way I have now moved it to RN Submarines: H-Class.

As a final whinge … er umm, I mean final note, there is little point in posting the same thread twice or more in other sections of the forum. All members see the new threads the same way as you do, and seeing a thread twice serves no purpose whatsoever.

Please play around with the advanced search facility and the alphabetical form listing. It can be really useful and quick. I admit there is no fun in using the basic search facility, only to be confronted by pages of posts containing your key word(s) – we all soon can’t be bothered with that.

There ….. simples, and I hope helpful.
that's a fair call
but it's a lot to ask human nature being what it is!:D

Not a lot to ask really Chris

[chris westwood]

Hi Dennis, and others,

To help everybody, let’s just go through the options on the search facility one more time. You are correct of course, that using the search facility and simply typing ‘Usk’ as a Key Word will yield no results; as you again correctly state, it does not have enough letters – one of the shortcomings of the search facility, but that’s by the bye.

Over the last few months, I have changed all of the threads regarding particular submarines in the ‘Royal Navy Ships & Crew’ Section, to a common format – HM Submarine Thetis, or HM Submarine Truculent, for example. In addition, I have stripped out numerous threads across many sections, to create threads relating to the various classes, also following a common format – RN Submarines: C-Class and RN Submarines: M-Class etc.

With this work completed, and titles changed accordingly for new threads, where appropriate, it facilitates a couple of easy methods that can be used to check whether there is an existing thread on a particular submarine, only three letters or not, or, for an RN submarine Class.

Firstly,
Wherever you are in the Forum, click on ‘Search’ in the blue coloured toolbar near the top of the page.
In the resulting drop down box, click on ‘Advanced Search’.
Type the word submarine (not case sensitive) into the ‘Search By Keyword’ box.
In the ‘Search in Forum(s)’ box, highlight the Royal Navy Ships and Crews forum (click any where in the box, scroll down until you find it, then click on it once).
Leave all other fields as the default settings.
Click once on the ‘Search Now’ button, or hit enter on your keyboard.

You will now be presented with three pages of all of the threads with the word ‘Submarine’ in the titles, and because of the common formatting now established, you will be able to scroll through and search for an existing thread on the submarine you are looking for, including those whose name might have less than four characters.

If instead of typing ‘submarine’ as the Key Word, you type ‘submarines’ (plural), your search result will, again because of the common format, present you with two pages that contain all of the RN Submarines: ?-Class threads.

There is another useful way of getting this information;
From the main forum page, click once on the Royal Navy Ships and Crews forum in the Naval History section.
Scroll down to the foot of the page and locate the ‘Display Options’ box.
In the ‘Sorted By’ drop down box, select ‘Thread Title’.
In the ‘Sort Order’ box, select ‘Ascending’. This is optional. But helps navigation.
Click once on the ‘Show Threads’ button.

You will now be presented with the entire Royal Navy Ships & Crews forum, in alphabetical order.
At the foot of the page on the right hand side, you will find a box where you can select the various page numbers of the forum. You will find:
Pages 10 to 12 list all of the HM Submarine threads, nicely in alphabetical order.
Page 58 contains all of the RN Submarines: ?-Class threads, all together in alphabetical order.

Incidentally, I have also taken the time to re-title all of the RN ships threads in the common format HMS Agincourt, HMS Bulwark etc., changing the plethora of titles that use Hms, hms, h.m.s etc. Where there is more than one ship of the name, I have added the dates of commission. For example HMS Bellerophon 1865-1904, HMS Bellerophon 1907-1922, etc.

The results of again ensuring a common format, means that, in this alphabetic listing mode, pages 14 to 46, list all of the threads regarding HMS ships, all again in neat alphabetical order

Obviously the page numbers I state above will change in time as more ships/submarines are added.

So when you see your thread titles tweaked, and sigh “what was that for … flaming Moderators got nothing else better to do …”, try to understand there is a reason for it.

Please try and structure thread titles with the search facility in mind. You made me hoot this morning Dennis, with your thread titled “Sub/Pongos” …!! What the hell was that supposed to mean? The fact that it was to do with submarine H49 was completely lost. Gives us a clue at least …!! By the way I have now moved it to RN Submarines: H-Class.

As a final whinge … er umm, I mean final note, there is little point in posting the same thread twice or more in other sections of the forum. All members see the new threads the same way as you do, and seeing a thread twice serves no purpose whatsoever.

Please play around with the advanced search facility and the alphabetical form listing. It can be really useful and quick. I admit there is no fun in using the basic search facility, only to be confronted by pages of posts containing your key word(s) – we all soon can’t be bothered with that.

There ….. simples, and I hope helpful.


Not a lot to ask really Chris
I'll do my best

[Polycell]

You will have to register on the home page to see this part of the site

First access Second World War boats

next locate Ursula, Undine or Unity

I am currently inputting my primary research on British submarine ops in home waters 1939-1941. This will ultimately include transcripts of interviews I carried out with personnel, (lower deck as well as gold braid) re Sealion, Sunfish, Triumph, Unity, Ursula, Undine, Sturgeon, Spearfish, Swordfish, Seal, Porpoise, Narwhal, Tribune, H31, Seawolf, Tigris, Trident. It includes material from the staff histories and Naval Historical Branch analyses, minefield charts, swept channels, features on flotilla units and bases

This site was shut down some months ago due to spammers and nerdowells.
A new site was started up in its place and is here.
http://worldnavalsubmarines.com/forum1/index.php
You will have to register to gain access.
A submarine Web site is being constructed that will go hand in hand with this forum.
Thankyou feel free to delete this post if you feel it is any way detrimental to the WNS forum.

[peter schofield]

HMS USK

Officers Missing
Lt. GP Darling (in command)
Lt. VL Darbyshire
Lt. DW Leggatt
Lt. DA O’Hare

Ratings Missing
Aitchison J Sto.
Amor JP A.B.
Attridge PG Teleg
Brady RFR A Teleg
Bryant RF CERA
Cable RS L.Sto
Cruickshanks JA ERA
Davies J Ldg.Smn
East A Sto. PO
Gissing NS, PO
Green H Teleg
Hall E AB
Jordan D AB
Jones E Ldg. Sigmn
Kellaway HS Sto.
Martin W ERA
Orrell J Ldg. Sto R.F.R
Plant B Sto1
Porter WH PO Teleg
Randall P AB
Richardson W AB
Robinson F Ldg,Smn
Sowden W AB
Stokes J AB
Sutch HV Sto1
Thomas C PO
Twiddy S A/Ldg. Smn
Williams I AB

[dennis a feary]

Clive / Chris, `not a lot too ask' - it is with such as me. Thanks for `HM Submarine USK' tip - will try next time needed.

Sadsac

[culverin]

The U class subs.
First RN full diesel electric boats.

[dennis a feary]

Following on the posting by Peter of the `loss-list' of crew of USK - here is Service Record of Lt D A O'Hare & his service with HMS DWARF at Dunkirk.

O'HARE Desmon Astridge. LIEUT. 6. 5.40.
S/M COURSE. 5. 5.40. DOLPHIN.
SPARE. 15. 6.40. AMBROSE.
DWARF I/C. 29. 5.40. DOLPHIN.
S/M COURSE. 3. 6.40. DOLPHIN.
SPARE. 15. 6.40. AMBROSE.
DUTIES ALLIED S/M's. 2. 8.40. AMBROSE.
CLYDE. 5. 9.40. AMBROSE.
CLYDE. 15.11.40. TITANIA.
SPARE. 10. 1.41. MEDWAY.
USK. 3. 4.41. ST. ANGELO.
MISSING USK. 3. 5.41. WAR SERVICE.
LOST IN `USK'. 26. 4.41.
LIEUT. 1.11.40.
WHILST IN COMMAND OF H.M.LAUNCH `DWARF', SUB-LIEUTENANT O'HARE TOOK HER TO DUNKIRK ON 29TH MAY, 1940. RETURNING WITH HER LOAD OF
SOLDIERS FROM THE BEACHES TO RAMSGATE, O'HARE, AFTER REFUELLING
AND TAKING ON AMMUNITION RETURNED TO DUNKIRK WHERE THE SHIP WAS
BOMBED, THE COXSWAIN BEING INJURED. `DWARF' RETURNED ON TOW TO
RAMSGATE WHERE THE COXSWAIN WAS TAKEN TO HOSPITAL AND S/LIEUT.
O'HARE RETURNED WITH HIS CREW TO H.M.S `DOLPHIN'. (FROM D.A.F).
PORTSMOUTH 45 – 2 – 7 – 499. AGED ; 22.

Sadsac