The Flower Class Corvette At War 1939-45 World Naval Ships Forums Archive

Naval History by Country :

ROYAL
NAVY

US
NAVY

GERMAN
NAVY

FRENCH
NAVY

*VIEW ALL OF OUR CURRENT ART SPECIAL OFFERS ON ONE PAGE HERE*
NAVAL ART	AVIATION ART	MILITARY ART	SPORT ART

ALWAYS GREAT OFFERS :

20% FURTHER PRICE REDUCTIONS ON HUNDREDS OF LIMITED EDITION ART PRINTS

BUY ONE GET ONE HALF PRICE ON THOUSANDS OF PAINTINGS AND PRINTS

FOR MORE OFFERS SIGN UP TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER

The Flower Class Corvette At War 1939-45 World Naval Ships Forums Archive

The Flower Class Corvette At War 1939-45

Posts 1 to 26

[B][B]The Flower Class Corvette at war in WW2[/B][/B] Flower-class corvettes were used extensively by both the RN and RCN during the Battle of the Atlantic. They also saw limited service elsewhere with the RN, as well as the USN and several Allied navies such as the Royal Netherlands Navy, the Royal Norwegian Navy, the Royal Hellenic Navy, the Free French Naval Forces, the Royal Indian Navy, and the Royal New Zealand Navy. Most Royal Navy Flower-class ships drew their officers and crew from the Royal Naval Reserve and the Royal Navy Volunteer Reserve (RNVR). Many RN Flowers had captains drawn from the Merchant Navy. Service on Flowers in the North Atlantic was typically cold, wet, monotonous and uncomfortable. Every dip of the forecastle into an oncoming wave was followed by a cascade of water into the well deck amidships. Men at action stations were drenched with spray and water entered living spaces through hatches opened to access ammunition magazines. Interior decks were constantly wet and condensation dripped from the overheads. The head (or sanitary toilet) was drained by a straight pipe to the ocean; and a reverse flow of the icy North Atlantic would cleanse the backside of those using it during rough weather. By 1941, corvettes carried twice as many crewmen as anticipated in the original design. Men slept on lockers or tabletops or in any dark place that offered a little warmth. The warships were nicknamed "the pekingese of the ocean". They had a reputation of having poor sea-handling characteristics, most often rolling in heavy seas, with complete 80-degree rolls (40 degrees each side of the normal upright position) being fairly common; it was said they "would roll on wet grass". Many crewmen suffered severe motion sickness for a few weeks until they acclimatised to shipboard life. It should be noted however, the general design of the Flowers was extremely seaworthy (just poor sea-handling characteristics), as no Allied sailor was ever lost overboard from a Flower during World War II, outside of enemy action. A typical action by a Flower during convoy escort duties should she encounter a surfaced U-boat was to run directly at the submarine to force it to dive (thus limiting the speed and manoeuvrability of the U-boat). The corvette would then keep the submarine down and pre-occupied with avoiding depth charge attacks long enough to allow the convoy to safely pass. The 16-knot (30 km/h) top speed of the Flower-class ships made effective pursuit of a surfaced U-boat (approximately 17 knots) impossible, though it was adequate to manoeuvre around submerged U-boats or convoys, both of which ran at a typical maximum of 8 knots, and sometimes much less in poor weather. The low speed also made it difficult for Flowers to catch up to the convoy again after action. This technique was hampered when the Kriegsmarine began deploying its U-boats in "wolf-pack" attacks, which were intended to overwhelm the escort warships of a convoy and allow at least one of the submarines to attack the merchant vessels. Upgrades in sensors and armament for the Flowers, such as radar, HF/DF, depth-charge projectors, and ASDIC, meant these small warships were well equipped to detect and defend against such attacks, but the tactical advantage often lay with the attackers, who could operate a cat-and-mouse series of attacks intended to draw the defending Flower off-station. Success for the Flowers, therefore, should be measured in terms of tonnage protected, rather than U-boats sunk. Typical reports of convoy actions by these craft include numerous instances of U-boat detection near a convoy, followed by brief engagements using guns or depth-charges and a rapid return to station as another U-boat took advantage of the initial skirmish to attack the unguarded convoy. Continuous actions of this kind against a numerically superior U-boat pack demanded considerable seamanship skills from all concerned, and were very wearing on the crews. Thirty-six ships in the class were lost during World War II, many due to enemy action, some to collision with Allied warships and merchant ships. One, sunk in shallow water, was raised and repaired. Of the vessels lost to enemy action, 22 were torpedoed by U-boats, five were mined, and four were sunk by enemy aircraft. The Flower-class corvettes are credited with participating in the sinking of 47 German and four Italian submarines. Construction of the Flower class was superseded toward the end of the war as larger shipyards concentrated on River-class frigates, and smaller yards on the improved Castle-class corvette design. The Flower class represented fully half of all Allied convoy escort vessels in the North Atlantic during World War II. jainso31

Nice article Jim - another tribute to fine little ships , closest I got to that size was a CH Class Destroyer and I thought at times conditions on her in rough weather were bad but it was probably ten times worse in the Flowers. It is reported that the German U Boat Commanders hated them because it wasn't considered "macho" to be sunk by a Flower. Dave H

Many thanks "my old" for "kicking off" this small tribute to these hard worked little ships; and the officers and men who sailed in them-not many of them left today according to the FCCA; of which I am an associate member. jainso31

I built one from a kit [Revell] years ago and converted it for Radio Control. She looks great on the water and is still going strong after ten years albeit she was a plastic kit. The FC is probably the most built model warship and a lot of modellers have modified the original kit to the various builds there were of this gallant little ship. The original builders [fullsize] took a design that was intended for whalers and produced a fine ship of war. Dave H

[quote=Dave Hutson;10017018]The original builders [fullsize] took a design that was intended for whalers and produced a fine ship of war. Dave H[/quote] Well... going from hunting one large deep-swimming denizen of the ocean to hunting another large deep-swimming denizen of the ocean... how many changes were needed? ;) :D :p

Thank you for your enquiry BB242 [B][B]DESIGN[/B][/B] The design of the Flower class was inspired by whale catcher Southern Pride, constructed by the Smiths Dock Company of Middlesbrough. The class was intended to be a "stop-gap" measure for the Allied navies in their battle against Kriegsmarine U-boats. They were intended as small convoy escort ships that could be produced quickly and cheaply in large numbers. Despite naval planners intentions that they be deployed for coastal convoys, their long range meant that they became the mainstay of Mid-Ocean Escort Force convoy protection during the first half of the war. The Flower class became an essential resource for North Atlantic convoy protection until larger vessels such as destroyers and frigates could be produced in sufficient quantities. The simple design of the Flower class using parts and techniques (scantlings) common to merchant shipping meant they could be constructed in small commercial shipyards all over the United Kingdom and eastern Canada, where larger (or more sophisticated) warship could not be built. Additionally, the use of commercial machinery meant the largely Royal Naval Reserve and Royal Naval Volunteer Reserve crews to man them would be familiar with their operation. Flower-class vessels were slow for a warship with maximum speed of 16 kn (30 km/h). They were also very lightly armed as they were intended solely for anti-submarine warfare; many of the RCN's original Flower-class ships were initially fitted with minesweeping equipment, while virtually all of the modified Flowers were fitted with a limited anti-aircraft capability. The original Flowers had the standard RN layout, consisting of a raised forecastle, a well deck, then the bridge or wheelhouse, and a continuous deck running aft. The crew quarters were in the foc'sle while the galley was at the rear making for poor messing arrangements. The modified Flowers saw the forecastle extended aft past the bridge to the aft end of the funnel, a variation known as the "long forecastle" design. Apart from providing a very useful space where the whole crew could gather out of the weather, the added weight improved the ships' stability and speed and was retrospectively applied to a number of the original Flower-class vessels during the mid and latter years of the war. The original Flowers had a mast located immediately forward the bridge, a notable exception to naval practice at that time. The modified Flowers saw the mast returned to the normal position immediately aft of the bridge; however, this does not seem to have been done in all of the modified builds or conversions of the original vessels. A cruiser stern finished the appearance for all vessels in the class. jainso31

Thank you for the info... but I was really just making a joke about the synchronicity of hunting both whales and submarines from the same basic ship design. Similar targets, similar hunter design, right?

Well BB I should not have joined- if I could not take a joke- and what I have added embellishes the thread anyway.Cheers jainso31

Thanks Jim for an excellent tribute to the Flowers. I have nothing but admiration for these little ships and those who sailed in them. They certainly proved their worth in the relentless war with the U-Boats and IMO saved the day for us until larger and better armed ships could be built. Brian

Jim: Well done piece about a sometimes overlooked gladiator. Seems to me that the 50% of all North Atlantic escorts might be a little overstated, although maybe not if one considers the fact that the danger on the NA was much reduced after mid/late 1943 and focuses on the 39-43 period. There were about 250 of the Flowers, Canadian Flowers and modified Flowers. Now consider the number of old British destroyers, ex-US four pipers, US and Canadian DDs, and USCG cutters [admittedly fewer] used on the pre-43 convoys and even a few of the new US and British DEs which had come into service in the North Atlantic by mid-43. I would agree though that they were a very substantial portion of the escort forces. Bill

Dear Jim, this opens a whole new line of discussion, we had something similar a few years ago, on the cost of warship hulls, what makes a good weapons platform, and what constitutes "good value" over time in Naval procurement. The Flowers were excellent value, the emergency class destroyers were obselete witihn 5 years until converted to type 15 frigates, expensively. Looking at our current defence commitments, do we need more/less type 45 ships or do we need five times more up-dated equivilents of the FCs? well done tim

Brian-my old friend-thank you for the interest and comment.It is much appreciated Kia Kaha jainso31

[QUOTE=WGVSr;10017148]Jim: Well done piece about a sometimes overlooked gladiator. Seems to me that the 50% of all North Atlantic escorts might be a little overstated, although maybe not if one considers the fact that the danger on the NA was much reduced after mid/late 1943 and focuses on the 39-43 period. There were about 250 of the Flowers, Canadian Flowers and modified Flowers. Now consider the number of old British destroyers, ex-US four pipers, US and Canadian DDs, and USCG cutters [admittedly fewer] used on the pre-43 convoys and even a few of the new US and British DEs which had come into service in the North Atlantic by mid-43. I would agree though that they were a very substantial portion of the escort forces. Bill[/QUOTE] Hi Bill-About these numbers-taking in British destroyers incl ex US four pipers-I would say about a 100 /125 add US and Canadian DD's maybe a 100;all the rest 40-60.That is about 50/50. The relevance is all about these little stop gap ships who did such sterling work as escorts to Atlantic Convoys. jainso31

Exactly... the exact ratio is unimportant... what matters is how things would have been without them.

[QUOTE=tim lewin;10017150]Dear Jim, this opens a whole new line of discussion, we had something similar a few years ago, on the cost of warship hulls, what makes a good weapons platform, and what constitutes "good value" over time in Naval procurement. The Flowers were excellent value, the emergency class destroyers were obselete witihn 5 years until converted to type 15 frigates, expensively. Looking at our current defence commitments, do we need more/less type 45 ships or do we need five times more up-dated equivilents of the FCs? well done tim[/QUOTE] Dear Tim-you have posed a very difficult question and would answer as follows:- Five times more updated equivilents of of the FC's- no I do not think that-the original FC's were for Convoy Escort specifically-that need no longer exists. Although they were "seaworthy" their "sea handling" qualities were wretched. Life on board in heavy seas was appallingly miserable for the focsle men-my father, an hardened far water fisherman;told me of the horrors of the focsle in a storm; and had to watch young HO's wishing they were dead- crying for their mothers; but they had a job to do so and there was no room for sentiment. I therefore cannot share your vision of a navy filled with modified FC's-I am sorry Tim; but that is how I see things today. jainso31

Thanks BB you have hit that nail squarely on the head-[B][B]where indeed would we [/B][/B][B][B]have been without them.[/B][/B] My father,an RNR seaman following a spell in the Denmark Strait in AMC Chitral in 1939/40 and then in a minesweeper in the Channel; where he was wounded.When he was fit again was drafted to Anemone (K48) and spent the next thirty months [B][B]sailing almost perpetually [/B][/B]out of Liverpool and then Londonderry. I have a document from the Admiralty singling out for praise for "steaming" during the period 1941/42- a handful of corvettes including Anemone. Anemone sank only one Uboat,the large Italian NANI ;and that she did on her own- over a six hour period in Jan 1941. jainso31

you take me a bit to literally Jim; i didnt mean that we should fill the Navy with cheap ships with poor seakeeping qualities, rather i was questionning the "value for money" of something as super sophisticated as a type 45 when compared with the cost of a cheaper, but more numerous hulls as a weapons platform? how much of the sophistication do we actually need or even use? actually, now i think about it, Govt parsimony would probably mean that if the cheaper ship was acceptable we would still end up with fewer of them!

I'm sure you are right Tim-I misread you entirely-and truly modernised Flowers would certainly answer some of our naval capability demands. Faster ,cheaper offshore patrol boats,fishery protection vessels,sub chasers and even mine sweepers to name but a few tasks yhat could be laid at their door-but would Government buy into such an idea.??? jainso31

[QUOTE=jainso31;10017459]I'm sure you are right Tim-I misread you entirely-and truly modernised Flowers would certainly answer some of our naval capability demands. Faster ,cheaper offshore patrol boats,fishery protection vessels,sub chasers and even mine sweepers to name but a few tasks yhat could be laid at their door-but would Government buy into such an idea.??? jainso31[/QUOTE] More a case of "may have to" rather than "would" Jim. If we are to continue our worldwide capability with our bigger ships then with the constant cutting of the defence budget and governments of whichever party ignoring the fact that we are an island nation smaller faster units with effective weaponry may be the answer. For instance, in the case of the sinking of the Israeli Destroyer Eliat by a Russian built Egyption Fast Attack Craft without the FAC even leaving harbour. The Flowers did a magnificent job in their time but as technology has continued so has ship design and capability and we must keep pace. Dave H

Good morning Dave-I was not quite sure what Tim was driving at- other than completely modernising the FC Corvette to fill gaps where smaller warships are needed-whether this was due to the original hull design being cheap to build does not serve any purpose today I don't think-as you say, all design of all parts of a ship today;must be the best.Not the "best of a bad job"and the original Flowers were nightmares to serve in because of their design.As the old uns used to say they would "roll on wet grass". jainso31

The new Kiwi offshore patrol vessels are a good example of a less costly ship. ( see thread 'RNZN - Protector Class ') They have been operating from Antarctica to the Pacific islands with great success . Not every ship needs to be a destroyer. Brian
Attachments :

Thanks for your interest and contribution; which does tend to support the proposition floated by Tim-I too realise-like you say Brian that "not every ship needs to be a destroyer" jainso31

Jim you are quite right to highlight the huge part played by the corvettes during WW2. As you rightly say they were used extensively by most allied navies and in particular the RN and the RCN. Very few Atlantic convoys after 1941 sailed without at least one of these versatile little ships providing escort. Here is a small selection of them to illustrate your thread. 1. HMCS FENNEL 1942. 2. HMCS MAYFLOWER 1942. 3. HMCS SNOWBERRY 1942.
Attachments :

Many thanks to you Terry for your interest and the provision of the very fine photographs of three such ships. Here is Anemone in 1942 [ATTACH]112356[/ATTACH] Click to enlarge jainso31
Attachments :

[QUOTE=astraltrader;10017626]Jim you are quite right to highlight the huge part played by the corvettes during WW2. As you rightly say they were used extensively by most allied navies and in particular the RN and the RCN. Very few Atlantic convoys after 1941 sailed without at least one of these versatile little ships providing escort. Here is a small selection of them to illustrate your thread. 1. HMCS FENNEL 1942. 2. HMCS MAYFLOWER 1942. 3. HMCS SNOWBERRY 1942.[/QUOTE] Nice to see pictures of the Flower class, my father served on the Vervain and I have been looking for a picture for a long time. would you know of one or could you direct me to the best place to search please. I am new to this site. Bryan

Bryan -use our Search facility- near to the top of the page.Click on that and a window will open Enter HMS Vervain and see what is in our data base about your ship.IF you get a multiple answer- look at ALL of them-OK?? NB There are seven entries; but none specific so look at them all jainso31

Everything we obtain for this site is shown on the site, we do not have any more photos, crew lists or further information on any of the ships.

COPYRIGHT NOTICE. ALL IMAGES DISPLAYED ON THIS WEBSITE ARE PROTECTED BY COPYRIGHT LAW, AND ARE OWNED BY CRANSTON FINE ARTS OR THEIR RESPECTIVE OWNERS. NO REPRODUCTION OR COPYING ALLOWED ON OTHER WEBSITES, BOOKS OR ARTICLES WITHOUT PRIOR AGREEMENT.

Contact Details
Shipping Info
Terms and Conditions
Cookie Policy
Privacy Policy

Sign Up To Our Newsletter!

Stay up to date with all our latest offers, deals and events as well as new releases and exclusive subscriber content!

This website is owned by Cranston Fine Arts. Torwood House, Torwoodhill Road, Rhu, Helensburgh, Scotland, G848LE

Contact: Tel: (+44) (0) 1436 820269. Email: cranstonorders -at- outlook.com

Return to Home Page