Hey all,

Here is a bit of history for you. Were the Catchers of the 1880's really the forrunners to Destroyers?

I believe they were to a certain extent, they really didn't have the leg's or the sea worthiness but they did fill a gap untill better ships were designed.

Also;
In naval terminology, a destroyer is a fast and maneuverable yet long-endurance warship intended to escort larger vessels in a fleet or battle group and defend them against smaller, short-range but powerful attackers (originally torpedo boats, later submarines and aircraft).

Did the destroyers in ww2 fit this description? I always thought they needed better legs to stay at sea with out their tenders.

I don’t know much about the catchers but I’ld take a guess no based on your date.
The first destroyer was the Japanese Kotaka that was built itself in 1885.

Of course I’m far from an expert on this and could be wrong.


Can’t really comment on the second part.

Redneck,
They were and weren't similar. They were similar in the way they protected other ships and tried to use the new technology(torpedo's) but then they weren't if you look at what the navy says the definition of a destroyer is(fast, long enduriance). Has any one on the site modeled a "Catcher"?

I have never heard of a catcher. What nation? Any ship names? Where did you see/ hear of it? Might it be a steam generation of a sailing ketch?

Redshirt,

I got this from "en.wikipedia.org"

The emergence of the destroyer, and development up until WWII, was related to the torpedo. The invention of the self-propelled torpedo in the 1860's gave the potential for a nation to destroy a superior enemy battle fleet using only steam launches from which torpedoes could be dropped. Fast boats to carry torpedoes were built and called torpedo boats, and these had developed by the 1880's into little ships of 50-100 tons, fast enough to evade enemy picket boats.

One response to the torpedo boat threat was the building of faster and more heavily gunned picket boats called catchers. At first the threat to a battle fleet was considered only to exist when at anchor, but as faster and longer range torpedoes were developed the threat was extended to cruising at sea. As catchers were then needed to escort the battle fleet at sea they needed the same seaworthiness and endurance, and as they necessarily became larger they were now officially termed torpedo boat destroyers, soon contracted to destroyer (in French (contre-torpilleur), Italian (cacciatorpediniere), Spanish (Contratorpedero) and Polish (kontrtorpedowiec).

I haven't been able to dig anything else on "catchers" but I'm at work and it's hard to get into a search when they want you to do work at the same time. I have the next 2 days off so I may give it a go and see what I can dig up.

I looked in all my usual places;
Not much more than a mention on British
Torpedo boat destroyers other than HMS Havoc HMS Hornet 1894
http://www.royal-navy.mod.uk/server/show/nav.3854
(My British resources are kind of thin)

On US ships I found
The torpedo was the destroyer’s original reason for being. In 1864, US Navy Lt. William B. Cushing attacked and sank the Confederate ironclad Albemarle from a small steam launch using an explosive device mounted on a long pole—a “spar torpedo”—which he detonated under water.

“Torpedo boats” US Navy, Cushing class. 1890, 35 in class.
Displacement 116 tons, Length 140”, Beam 15’1”, Draft 4’10”, Speed 23 knots, 3 8-pdr, 3 torpedo tubes, commissioned 22 April 1890

“Torpedo boat destroyers” Bainbridge (later designated DD 1) class mounted two torpedo tubes and two 3-inch guns. Commissioned in 1902, they were 400-ton coal-burners with reciprocating steam engines that occupied most of their internal spaces.
Displacement 420 tons, Length250”, Beam 23’7”, Draft 9’6”, Speed 29 knots, 2x3”, 2x18 torpedo tubes
One photo
http://www.destroyerhistory.org/destroyers/introduction.html
USS Cushing TB 1, two photos
http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/sh-usn/usnsh-c/tb1.htm
USS Bainbridge DD1, fifteen Photos
http://www.navsource.org/archives/05/001.htm
size speed and armament found on
http://www.hazegray.org/danfs/

No mention of “Chasers” though.

Tin cans could stay underway as long as they were unreped. Fuel, ammo, fresh water, food. The same as any other ship in the fleet. Fuel and fresh water were usually unreped every few days. Fresh water was a major problem as their evaps were woefully inadequate. Tin can sailors spent a lot of time on water hours.

Tenders for tin cans basically served the same purpose as sub tenders. Due to the size of the ship and boats, most repairs requiring additional staff, or skilled ratings were done along side tenders. While along side they would receive their support - steam, electricity, fresh water from the tender, so their own equipment could be repaired and overhauled. The tender basically operated as a small shipyard or pier for the tin cans and subs.

In loo of an oiler or supply ship, tin cans were unreped from larger captial ships. We normally unreped our escorts at least one a week while underway with fuel, and fresh water. Remember the supply ships needed to return to port to resupply themselves also, and we had the longest legs. Todays carriers being nukes, have even longer legs, as all the old engineering fuel bunkers are now avation fuel bunkers.