Dear Stephen,
You may be correct. Some Dutch sources said the vessel was sold ex yard, but I have no evidence seen in that respect. So the LL and BB version might be right.
Thanks FOCA, I was already aware of the ABS publication, unfortunately no info on the anti torpedo nets in there.
However, here
https://www.maritime.dot.gov/sites/marad.dot.gov/files/docs/about-us/history/vessels-maritime-administration/861/arthurmhuddellhaerreport.pdf
one can find some info.
On page 37, section FR. 131 looking aft, you can see the Catch Net Frames. On page 38, Elevation Starboard, it states "Bulwark omitted in way of net" and below "Modifications to boom handling arr'gt at hatch No.4 & 5 for ships fitted with Torpedo Net Defence only"
The trouble is, the plans in this publication were re-drawn and the publication did not intend to comment or give details of the net gear.
It is also evident, that the plans are incorrect in some respect. While the ARTHUR M. HUDDEL did have the net gear, and evidently that bulwark gap as well as estended crosstrees on the fore and aft masts, same is not shown in the drawings on pages 27 and 37, but compare with pictures on pages 15, 16 and 20/21. The bullwark gap is again shown on page 28 and 35, whereas the plan on page 30 shows the raft rack in the standard position, were it would not be with the net gear installed...
I am on the search for a rigging plan of the net gear, plans of the catch net frames and booms as well as the actual construction of the net itself.
A veteran commented as follows:
QUOTE
As you had determined, the pair of long booms mounted forward and aft are to handle and support the torpedo nets. A wire pendant ran from the head of the forward boom to the head of the after boom. The torpedo net was deployed by pulling one end of the net along this pendant, similar to pulling a shower curtain. The booms were then lowered to an almost horizontal position to deploy the nets away from the hull and place the nets deep enough in the water to protect the hull from a torpedo. I have not found in my reading any account of a net "saving" a ship by snagging a torpedo before it reached the ship's hull. On the other hand, I have read several accounts of problems encountered rigging and recovering the nets and the fact that the deployed nets significantly slowed the ship's speed making it difficult to maneuver and keep station in a convoy.
UNQUOTE
As for the usefullness and / or issues regarding the speed, you can find on Wikipedia the following:
QUOTE
Torpedo nets were revived in the Second World War. In January 1940 the UK Admiralty had the ocean liner Arandora Star fitted out with steel booms at Avonmouth and then ordered her to Portsmouth where she spent three months testing nets of various mesh sizes in the English Channel. The net successfully caught all the torpedoes fired at them and reduced the ship's speed by only 1 knot (1.9 km/h), but in March 1940 the nets were removed. In July the unprotected Arandora Star was sunk by a torpedo, killing 805 people.
Booms and nets were fitted to a few ships in August 1941, and by the end of the Second World War they had been fitted to 700 ships. The nets did not protect the whole of a ship, but protected from 60 to 75 percent of each side. 21 ships so equipped were subject to torpedo attacks while the nets were deployed. 15 ships survived as the nets succeeded in protecting them. The other six were sunk because a torpedo either penetrated a net or hit an unprotected part of a ship.
UNQUOTE
I have not checked the records of ALL ships, but in Swayer / Mitchell book the there is at least mentioned that the "RICHARD HOVEY... was streaming her anti-torpedo nets when hit, the torpedoes either going through the net, or under it" and further "JOHN A. POOR Damaged by mines in N. Atlantic, the concussion from three explosions causing considerable damage in the engine room, but no hull damage...at the time of the explosions the JAP was streaming her anti-torpedo nets and these prevented the mines from actually hitting the ship."
While the Wikipedia entry deals with the British trials, I found the following on the US trials (1941/42) in a 1996 interview of Capt. Bill Searle, former supervisor of salvage for the U.S. Navy:
QUOTE
I was placed on a committee to study and try to save ships from being sunk. And we designed and had built a net which we suspended on the side of the ship 60 feet out into the water...For small vessels, the LISP-2 was designed, providing protection for ships up to 450 feet in length. It would weighed 34 tons...we did all our experiemental work in the bay south of Providence, Rhode Island. We would take a loaded ship and use a submarine and fire a dead torpedo at the ship. The net was designed to catch the torpedo by the tail. A torpedo is maybe 20 feet long. And the tail end is the propeller. And we would catch the torpedo by the propeller. And it would be hanging in the net"
UNQUOTE
The last bit makes me somehow believe, that the nets could have been made of a lighter material or construction compared to the steel wire ring nets used for harbour defences, but I am not sure!
QUOTE
And believe me, when a ship got into port, and they lifted up the net and had a live torpedo, it didn't take long to unload that ship full of men. They got out quick"
UNQUOTE
The infamous wreck of the RICHARD MONTGOMMERY in the Thames estuary off the Isle of Sheppey had the nets installed. In early pictures of the wreck, the long booms (derricks) can be seen, with some special fittings on them. Remnants of the net also.
