H.M.S. Warspite at Queenstown, now Cobh

Download this image

More from this collection

Related by Where

Research Help!

Where: Cork, Ireland

Try to find the spot where the photographer was standing.

When: 01 January 1894

Try to find the date or year when this image was made.
Since we visited Kingstown yesterday, thought we might swing by Queenstown in Co. Cork today, now renamed Cobh.

This photo lacks the usual impeccable clarity of our Lawrence Collection photos, but thought you might be interested in it anyway. For train buffs, I think the engine has no. 89 on it...

Date: 1893-1896

NLI Ref.: L_ROY_05418

Info:

Owner: National Library of Ireland on The Commons
Source: Flickr Commons
Views: 29998
hmswarspite warspite queenstown cobh cork ireland munster ship navy royalnavy train railwaystation trainstation steamers robertfrench williamlawrence lawrencecollection glassnegative 1890s imperieuseclass imperieuse armouredcruiser cruiser tenders whitestarline flyingfox nationallibraryofireland

Add Tags
  • profile

    Vab2009

    • 22/Aug/2012 09:26:37

    Oh lovely! So much action here. I think that is a White Star line pennant on one of the wee ferrying tenders against the quay. (I can't get the notes to move into place this morning!)

  • profile

    Vab2009

    • 22/Aug/2012 09:29:36

    I supect for vintage she was this ship en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Warspite_(1893) which began life as HMS Hermione and was renamed HMS Warspite. But according to Wiki there were nine ships with that name. She could be the next one that was launched in 1913.

  • profile

    derangedlemur

    • 22/Aug/2012 09:31:52

    It's a pre-dreadnought ship, anyway, so 1893 is plausible.

  • profile

    Vab2009

    • 22/Aug/2012 09:32:14

    The name on the closest paddle steamer seems to be ".......... Fox"

  • profile

    derangedlemur

    • 22/Aug/2012 09:34:38

    It's also a cruiser rather than a battleship. In fact, it looks very like the refitted 1884 Warspite: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Warspite_(1884). Scrapped in 1905.

  • profile

    derangedlemur

    • 22/Aug/2012 09:37:10

    "1893...then a port guard ship at Queenstown until 1896"

  • profile

    derangedlemur

    • 22/Aug/2012 09:43:58

    The lok looks like an Aspinall 4-4-0

  • profile

    Vab2009

    • 22/Aug/2012 09:45:45

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected] I think this was the 1884 Warspite as she was stationed at Queenstown.

  • profile

    Vab2009

    • 22/Aug/2012 09:46:46

    The 1893 Warspite was not named that until 1922.

  • profile

    Vab2009

    • 22/Aug/2012 09:47:56

    Yep - I will go with this one en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Warspite_(1884)

  • profile

    Vab2009

    • 22/Aug/2012 09:48:43

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected] So pre 1905 and post 1893.

  • profile

    Vab2009

    • 22/Aug/2012 09:49:53

    I have been hunting names of White Star tenders but only can find America and Ireland. Must go and do some chores here too!

  • profile

    derangedlemur

    • 22/Aug/2012 10:01:23

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/vab2009 Pre-1896, I'd imagine.

  • profile

    Vab2009

    • 22/Aug/2012 10:14:50

    Yes - sorry I got that wrong!

  • profile

    derangedlemur

    • 22/Aug/2012 10:21:04

    There's another warship shaped object out behind the buoy above the Warspite's stern. If we can identify that it might narrow the date down a bit.

  • profile

    Niall McAuley

    • 22/Aug/2012 10:24:57

    Sadly, this sheet is missing from the OS 25" map site. In this streetview, you can see the same roof over the nearer station platform, but I think the original was taken from the High Road above, looking over the wall.

  • profile

    derangedlemur

    • 22/Aug/2012 10:28:26

    There's a list of ships stationed in Queenstown here: www.corkshipwrecks.net/Navalfleetsqueenstown.htm

  • profile

    Niall McAuley

    • 22/Aug/2012 10:34:27

    Father Brown took a picture called Two Cobh Tenders:the Flying Fox and Flying Fish, both paddle boats.

  • profile

    FrigateRN

    • 22/Aug/2012 10:52:15

    Fantastic picture NLI, thank you, and just to let you know, I am receiving some very complimentary private messages about you from other NPOI site members. Your pictures, your attitude to sharing those pictures and your very friendly and open 'give and take' with viewers is very much noted and very much appreciated. The comment has been made that there are other world famous libraries out there who could take a page out of your book!

  • profile

    Vab2009

    • 22/Aug/2012 12:29:57

    I tried to searchfor the tenders in the historical Lloyds Register here www.maritimearchives.co.uk/lloyds-register.html but with no success. Probably my failing.

  • profile

    Swordscookie

    • 22/Aug/2012 12:40:38

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/alimarante Frigate RN that is a nice compliment for Carol and the staff at NLI and one that the many followers of this photostream would most heartily endorse. We can all enjoy the craic and the chase to identify and know as much as we can about things but it's http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected] keeping the pot stirring and putting up very suitable images that makes it so rewarding. Carol me girl take a bow!

  • profile

    marinaluglio

    • 22/Aug/2012 12:41:49

    Beautiful picture!!!

  • profile

    Swordscookie

    • 22/Aug/2012 12:51:08

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/vab2009 ("The name on the closest paddle steamer seems to be ".......... Fox") I am pretty certain that Nialls comment that the White Star Line had two tenders including Flying Fox is correct and that the tender you mention is Flying Fox. I may be deluding myself but I am sure I can see "Flying" partly obscured on the bow. Those two ships out in the harbour appear to be much larger in size that the Warspite, if you look at how far away they are and compare size of the surroundings they appear to be a lot bigger. On Warspite there appears to be some structure on the gunwale like a tube shaped object running along part of the length. In later ships there was a period when they put tubes at sea level to reduce the effects of torpedo's - it didn't work! Was this something similar?

  • profile

    Niall McAuley

    • 22/Aug/2012 12:56:36

    According to this History of Tyne Tugs site, the Flying Fox paddle tug was completed in 1885, and belonged to the Clyde Shipping Company up to WW1.

  • profile

    Vab2009

    • 22/Aug/2012 12:58:42

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/gnmcauley Well done! http://www.flickr.com/photos/swordscookieIt was Flying Fox and Flying Fish I hunted for. I 'll have another go :-))

  • profile

    B..........

    • 22/Aug/2012 13:12:14

    Great photo!

  • profile

    derangedlemur

    • 22/Aug/2012 14:01:56

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/swordscookie That's probably spaced armour but it's not an anti-torpedo measure - it's too far above the waterline.

  • profile

    derangedlemur

    • 22/Aug/2012 14:09:01

    There's a thing that looks like a beached single funneled ship with two masts above the warspite's foremast, but it doesn't look like either the Xema or the Puffin (based on two images I found on the web).

  • profile

    Scadán Dearg

    • 22/Aug/2012 15:06:11

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/swordscookie On the tube like structure. It appears to be an integral part of the superstructure. It may be the housing for broadside guns. There are a number of openings along the side that seem to be covered with canvas. From looking at design of other ships of a similar vintage, guns at deck level were common enough.

  • profile

    Niall McAuley

    • 22/Aug/2012 15:28:37

    [http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]] Here's a diagram of the Imperieuse class showing the deck level gunports and the armour.

  • profile

    National Library of Ireland on The Commons

    • 22/Aug/2012 16:14:48

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/vab2009 Checked on original - the nearest steamer is definitely called Flying Fox... http://www.flickr.com/photos/vab2009

  • profile

    National Library of Ireland on The Commons

    • 22/Aug/2012 16:17:11

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/alimarante http://www.flickr.com/photos/swordscookie Thank you, gentlemen, much appreciated! Shamelessly showed compliment to my guv'nor an' all, I did... :)

  • profile

    Scadán Dearg

    • 22/Aug/2012 16:18:37

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/gnmcauley Thanks Niall!

  • profile

    National Library of Ireland on The Commons

    • 22/Aug/2012 16:20:05

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/gnmcauley Thanks for location, Niall

  • profile

    National Library of Ireland on The Commons

    • 22/Aug/2012 16:24:56

    Brilliantly narrow date - 1893-1896! We'll go with 1894 for the moment (more or less splitting the difference). Thanks a million, everyone. Oh, just thought - is no. 89 on the locomotive engine any good for dating??

  • profile

    Swordscookie

    • 22/Aug/2012 16:44:08

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/nlireland Where's the Flying Snail when you need him? (that always brings them out to do their thing!)

  • profile

    Niall McAuley

    • 22/Aug/2012 16:45:36

    I took a quick look in wikipedia, but I can't make anything from Loco 89. Wait! Spoke too soon: random googling throws up this photo GSWR/GSR clss 60/D14 No 89, designed by Aspinall, and built 1886 at Dublin Inchicore works. Rebuilt in 1925 and again in 1936 with Belpaire Z type boiler.(reclassified to class D13 from 1925 to 1933) Seen here at Limerick shed, with a large white circle on the tender to indicate to signalmen, "fitted for oil burning" Withdrawal came in 1960

  • profile

    National Library of Ireland on The Commons

    • 22/Aug/2012 16:49:00

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/swordscookie It's like waiting outside someone's house until they're finished their tea, and can come out to play!

  • profile

    National Library of Ireland on The Commons

    • 22/Aug/2012 16:50:27

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/gnmcauley Not to worry! 1893-96 is a million times better than 1865-1914. Tomorrow is another day (bringing more lovely ships)... Aaaand, before I'd finished my comment, back you came with more! :D

  • profile

    DannyM8

    • 22/Aug/2012 19:56:24

    Great work everyone and great picture.

  • profile

    FrigateRN

    • 22/Aug/2012 21:06:27

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/swordscookie WHAT HE SAID!

  • profile

    Swordscookie

    • 23/Aug/2012 07:49:18

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/nlireland The interesting thing about this and the shot of Melampus is that these powerful apparently modern ships were still equipped to fire "Broadsides". Broadsides were used from the time cannon were first placed on board ships due to the lack of range, inaccuracy and the difficulty to train or move the guns around. There is a direct link therefore to Nelson, Drake and Henry VIII in the thinking behind and armament of these ships.

  • profile

    Scadán Dearg

    • 23/Aug/2012 08:10:50

    Broadsides were always used, the modern WWII battleships used more manouvreable above deck turretts. See; www.angelfire.com/cantina/que_pasa/Broadside.html

  • profile

    derangedlemur

    • 23/Aug/2012 10:14:58

    The Warspite at least has the main armament either in sponsons or in central turrets, so most of the big guns can be fired straight ahead. Broadsides weren't favoured because of any issue of range or accuracy; It's a simple numbers game. Unless you boat is a very odd shape you can fire an awful lot more guns out the side than you can straight ahead. The advent of armoured ships was the beginning of the end for this configuration as anything less than the biggest guns, and exploding shells capable of penetrating armour became waste of space. Secondary armaments were relegated to keeping off torpedo boats and main armaments were turreted.

  • profile

    derangedlemur

    • 23/Aug/2012 10:33:28

    What I find more peculiar is the whole concept of a guardship. What precisely was the Warspite supposed to do about it if the french navy showed up at Cobh and started shelling the railway station or landing marines?

  • profile

    Swordscookie

    • 23/Aug/2012 10:53:09

    [http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]] [http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]] To my mind it depends on how you define broadside. IMHO a broadside was a line of guns along the flank of the ship on one or more levels and capable of firing only on that side. The Melampus was fitted with two quick firing 6 inchers in turrests but had several guns of similar and smaller sizes fitted along the sides therefore her main armament were broadside only. The US ships in the website on Scadán Dearg's comment could turn their turrets to fire broadside but by my understanding were moving to fire broadside rather than having their main armament on the broadside. See the diagramme attached by Niall McAuley here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Apollo_class_cruiser_diagrams_...

  • profile

    Scadán Dearg

    • 23/Aug/2012 11:41:44

    Fair enough although i think we are splitting hairs. "A broadside" is a term that was used for firing all available guns at the same time from the side of a ship (as opposed to firing at will). Having rotational gun turrets above deck level avoids duplication of guns on both sides.

  • profile

    Swordscookie

    • 23/Aug/2012 12:21:37

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected] I've had split ends for years so hair splitting is nothing new:-D The guns in turrets were much more flexible and rapidly developed so their range and accuracy rendered my definition of broadsides redundant. I like your logo by the way, where does it come from?

  • profile

    patrick.vickers1

    • 23/Aug/2012 14:02:53

    I have just downloaded a panoramic view of Queenstown taken some years ago when it was used as a naval base. Not in the best of condition so I would like your view.

  • profile

    Scadán Dearg

    • 23/Aug/2012 14:12:06

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/swordscookie Thanks! it is the crest on my Boat, based on the Mayo County Crest, I inserted a representation of my Achill Yawl "Saoirse" to personalise it a bit. I love this nautical theme. It's fascinating!

  • profile

    National Library of Ireland on The Commons

    • 23/Aug/2012 15:17:09

    N.B. Everyone! Suggestions for THEMES on here always welcome... http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected] Delighted to see you like the nauticals. There'll be one more tomorrow before we all become landlubbers again.

  • profile

    Scadán Dearg

    • 23/Aug/2012 16:00:33

    I think there are photo collections of indigenious work boats found around the coast of Ireland and many more than most people would imagine.

  • profile

    National Library of Ireland on The Commons

    • 27/Aug/2012 18:06:04

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/patvic67 Excellent! Where did you get your hands on that panorama?

  • profile

    FrigateRN

    • 27/Aug/2012 21:39:15

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/swordscookie Nicely said Swordscookie, nicely said!

  • profile

    patrick.vickers1

    • 30/Aug/2012 08:53:18

    This was in a job lot which I bought in a local East Sussex auction many years ago. Obviously it belonged to someone who had connections with Queenstown when it was a naval base in the early 1900's. If you are of the opinion that it may be worthy of being donated to the museum I will gladly do so. It does need a bit of work but there is plenty of helpful notes written on the back plus a pencil written name which may be deciphered. I note that there is much interest in scenes of long ago on this site.

  • profile

    Swordscookie

    • 30/Aug/2012 09:00:58

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/patvic67 Good morning Patrick, what would be great would be to have that scanned in a good quality Photographic scanner to that it isn't lost. Those notes on the back may be priceless as they add to the fund of knowledge of the image and the timeframe when it was taken. It is a terrific panorama of that beautiful harbour.