Design and Description
Biter was an Avenger-class escort carrier. These carriers were converted American merchant ships. Their design was based on the U.S. Navy′s Long Island-class (AVG); to differentiate between the two classes, the Royal Navy added the prefix "B" (BAVG). HMS Biter (BAVG3) was built by the Sun Shipbuilding and Drydock Company, originally named the Rio-Parana; she was laid down on 28 December 1939, launched on 18 December 1940 and delivered on 4 September 1941. She was converted to an escort carrier in the Atlantic Basin Iron Works at Brooklyn New York and commissioned into the Royal Navy on 6 May 1942, under the command of Captain Abel-Smith.
Biter had a complement of 555 men and an overall length of 492 ft (150 m), a beam of 66 ft 3 in (20.19 m) and a height of 23 ft 3 in (7.09 m). She displaced 8,200 long tons (8,300 t) at normal load and 9,000 long tons (9,100 t) at deep load. Propulsion was provided by four diesel engines connected to one shaft giving 8,500 hp (6,300 kW), which could propel the ship at 16.5 kn (19.0 mph; 30.6 km/h).
Aircraft facilities were a small combined bridge–flight control on the starboard side and above the 410 ft (120 m) long wooden flight deck, one 43 ft × 34 ft (13 m × 10 m) aircraft lift, one aircraft catapult and nine arrestor wires. Aircraft could be housed in the 190 ft × 47 ft (58 m × 14 m) half hangar below the flight deck. Armament comprised three single mounted 4 in (100 mm) dual purpose guns and fifteen 20 mm cannons on single or twin mounts. She had the capacity for fifteen aircraft which could be a mixture of Grumman Martlet or Hawker Sea Hurricane fighters and Fairey Swordfish or Grumman Avenger torpedo bombers (also used for anti-submarine patrols).
Read more about this topic: HMS Biter (D97)
Famous quotes containing the words design and/or description:
“Humility is often only the putting on of a submissiveness by which men hope to bring other people to submit to them; it is a more calculated sort of pride, which debases itself with a design of being exalted; and though this vice transform itself into a thousand several shapes, yet the disguise is never more effectual nor more capable of deceiving the world than when concealed under a form of humility.”
—François, Duc De La Rochefoucauld (1613–1680)
“Why does philosophy use concepts and why does faith use symbols if both try to express the same ultimate? The answer, of course, is that the relation to the ultimate is not the same in each case. The philosophical relation is in principle a detached description of the basic structure in which the ultimate manifests itself. The relation of faith is in principle an involved expression of concern about the meaning of the ultimate for the faithful.”
—Paul Tillich (1886–1965)