LCT 7074

She never was originally though – the Mk III* series were all equipped with Sterling Admiral petrol engines. But as she is never going to go to sea again, the engines would have added excess weight and maintenance problems to an already weak hull. Instead, the engine room provides the only internal space for visitors, so is very useful for interpretation.

 

Yes, it could be that simple! Bit of a dodgy skipper if he allowed them to move to an embarkation hard for loading with a clothes line still in the way though!

 

Anyone who is interested in learning a bit more about LCT 7074's restoration may enjoy this webinar that I'm doing on her archaeology, on Wednesday 24th March. All welcome, and it's free. Products – CBA Wessex

 

Stephen,

Just to say that I watched the LCT 7074 webinar last night and really enjoyed it. Your 80 minutes or so worth of presentation was absolutely riveting (including when talking about rivets!) and really explained a lot of things about the current configuration of 7074 as compared to what can be seen in the pictures from 1944 - for example the tank deck side bulwarks must have been changed from the original inwards sloping configuration to the vertical as part of the conversion to a repair barge and the cowl vents on the foredecks would presumably have been removed then as well.

There was mention of the talk hopefully being available on You Tube eventually and I would strongly recommend seeing it to anyone interested in the subject.

A couple of questions if I may:

Was there a reason that the "Dum Spiro Spero" motto shown in the Gold Beach Photo on the front of the bridge hasn't been used?

Has the bridge area been given a full set of chart table, gauges, indicators, voice pipes etc as in an operational vessel or are things there still as in the single glimpse you showed when talking about drainage on the superstructure?


Many thanks again for a most informative evening.

Francis

 

It's up!

 

Thank for posting the link to the video Idler!

I could not attend the real-time webinar, so this is much appreciated.

Among (many) other snippets, I learned that (on 7074 at least) the craft pennant had been scored into the hull plates at some point, probably at the shipyards themselves.

Michel

 

Crikey, you found it before it had even been sent to me! Hope you enjoy it.

 

Thanks Francis, I'm glad you enjoyed it! In answer to your questions:

The Dum Spiro Spero quote is in place now - it was one of the last things to be added and just wasn't in the photos I used that were taken shortly after the move.

The bridge has a chart table, a flag locker, a compass binnacle and a few other small details. It is not as a complete as an operational vessel, as that would make it difficult for the public to get into it (indeed, when built access to the bridge was via a ladder across the screens, rather than through the gap which is there now). So it looks bridge-like, but tailored for access reasons.

Cheers,
Steve

 

I enjoyed it so much that I may not have been referring to the video...

It was a bit stupid of me to start watching it at a quarter to eleven on a school night, though.

One thing that didn't really come across in the video was the size of it (her?), until the later footage of her 'loaded' with a piddly little Churchill looking lost at the back. I will try not to get too grizzly about the Sherman stand-in...

Are there any plans for future works/tweaks? One absence I think I noticed was the kedge anchor; one would be nice as a point of conversation. Is there a funded maintenance plan for her or is she being left to take her chances?

You were definitely the right man for the job

 

Steve,

Thanks for the explanation - can you say if there was detailed information available such as dedicated drawings of the bridge layout or would some educated guesswork have had to be used to get a reasonably realistic layout of the bridge?

Francis

 

There were - you see a few ship's drawings in the talk, but some of the team also found thinks like carpenters drawings of items like the chart table. So we know that what's there is in the right place and looks the part.

 

Thank you!

Unfortunately some things did have to be left out for budget reasons, and others for the sake of the ship's fabric. You'll notice that there's no propellers or rudders for instance. Likewise we couldn't install a genuine anchor on the stern. However, there might be future fundraising projects to create light weight replicas of things like that, that can be added later.

Conservation wise, she's very well set up for future maintenance. Every part of the vessel's fabric is accessible for inspection, which NMRN will carry out periodically and address issues before they become problematic. The hull has been treated as well as painted to give her the greatest longevity, although as with any metal object exposed to the air, she will eventually rust. Hopefully we're looking at decades before any new serious maintenance is needed though.

 

Astonishing work throughout Steve!

Definitely on my must see list next time I get to cross the Channel.

What about the 'masts'? I know there are no Mulock ramp extensions, but the masts should not be too expensive to replicate, and they were a distinctive feature of this craft in Normandy...

Michel

 

Actually, I hadn't. Keep that to yourself so I don't look stupid...

 

Alas that wasn't an option for another reason – the canopy! By the time I spotted this the canopy was already designed and doesn't leave enough space at the bow, where it curves quite low. As it is, one of the FAMs doesn't quite fit, so has been artistically lain on a work bench as if it is being serviced.

 

The guide book for LCT 7404 can now be bought from the D-Day Story on-line shop and puts the whole story of the vessel together very well I thought. One thing I noticed is a shot of an earlier LCT Mk 3 with a couple of Churchills onboard which shows the tank deck surface having a typical alternating chequer plate tread. This seems different to the other photo I know of (from the Particulars of Landing Craft CB04304) which has continuous rows of tread instead. The photos of 7074 in her present state seem to have no tread at all apart from the continuous strips over the whaleback section.

Does anyone know which of these 3 variations was the most common in the Mk3s by any chance?

 

Francis,

This is an interesting detail. It indeed looks like LCT Mark III of the second series (i.e. with hull number from 7001) did not have treads on the tank deck (just like the Mark IV), probably for simplication purposes, while those of the first series (hull number 300-499) had them, in at least two variations, possibly depending on the shipyard:

Aligned treads (LCT 302, from Arrol):

Source: Beeldbank WO2.nl 13445

Aligned treads (possibly LCT 398, also from Arrol):

Source: IWM A12355

Alternating treads - LCT 314 (Tees-Side Bridge):

Source: British Pathé 1338.11 frame 21

Alternating treads - LCT 453 (Redpath Brown):

Source: Critical Past 65675051425

Alternating treads - LCT 465 (Motherwell Bridge):

Source: IWM A20681

Michel

 

As Michel says, the strips appear to be be common to the Mk III, but not the Mk III*. This is the deck of 7071, built at the same time in the same yard as 7074. Additionally, I could find no evidence of 7074's tank deck ever having had strips, or of the deck being relaid during any of her 1945+ modifications.

 

Many thanks indeed gents for your very helpful answers. I wonder if the cumulative experience of operating these craft with different vehicles and loads showed that the tread on the horizontal section of the deck wasn't really needed and thus time could be saved in building the later batch perhaps.

Francis

 

Another question about LCT 7074 as seen at the D-Day Story at Southsea if I may.

As I understood it, the larger landing craft allocated to the British beaches used a band of colour to identify which one and these were Blue for Gold , Red for Juno and Green for Sword. If this is the case, can anyone say what the orange/yellow used on 7074 indicates and why not Blue? Were there any other variations used?