USS Chanticleer (ASR-7) Class

Quick Links Menu.

USS Chanticleer (ASR-7) on 14 December 1942
Click on this photograph for links to larger images of this class.

Class:        CHANTICLEER (ASR-7)
Design        Navy ASR-7
Displacement (tons):        1,653 light, 2,141 lim.
Dimensions (feet):        251.3' oa, 240.0' wl x 42.0' e x 14.8' lim.
Original Armament:        2-3'/50 8-20 mm (ASR 7-11)
Later armaments:        1-3"/50 8-20mmS (1947: ASR 8-10); 1-3"/50 4-20mmS (1947-49: ASR 7-10, 13- 16); 1-3"/50 2-20mmS (1955-57: ASR 7-10, 13-15);
2-20mmT (1970: ASR 7-10, 14-16);
None (1970-75: ASR 8-9, 13-16);
2-20mmS (1977: ASR 8-9, 13-16)
Complement        94 (1944)
Speed (kts.):        14.9
Propulsion (HP):        3,000
Machinery:        1 screw, diesel-electric

Construction:

ASR	Name	Ord.	Builder	Keel	Launch	Commiss.
7	CHANTICLEER	30 Dec 40	Moore DD, Oakland	15 Sep 41	29 May 42	20 Nov 42
8	COUCAL	30 Dec 40	Moore DD, Oakland	30 Sep 41	29 May 42	22 Jan 43
9	FLORIKAN	30 Dec 40	Moore DD, Oakland	30 Sep 41	14 Jun 42	5 Apr 43
10	GREENLET	30 Dec 40	Moore DD, Oakland	15 Oct 41	12 Jul 42	29 May 43
11	MACAW	30 Dec 40	Moore DD, Oakland	15 Oct 41	12 Jul 42	12 Jul 43
13	KITTIWAKE	11 May 44	Savannah Mach & Fdry	5 Jan 45	10 Jul 45	18 Jul 46
14	PETREL	11 May 44	Savannah Mach & Fdry	26 Feb 45	26 Sep 45	24 Sep 46
15	SUNBIRD	11 May 44	Savannah Mach & Fdry	2 Apr 45	3 Apr 46	23 Jun 50
16	TRINGA	11 May 44	Savannah Mach & Fdry	12 Jul 45	25 Jun 46	28 Jan 47
17	VERDIN	11 May 44	Savannah Mach & Fdry	--	--	--
18	WINDHOVER	11 May 44	Savannah Mach & Fdry	--	--	--

Disposition:

ASR	Name	Decomm.	Strike	Disposal	Fate	MA Sale
7	CHANTICLEER	9 Jun 73	9 Jun 73	19 Jun 74	Sold	--
8	COUCAL	15 Sep 77	15 Sep 77	19 Jan 91	Tgt.	--
9	FLORIKAN	2 Aug 91	3 Sep 91	28 Jul 01	MA/T	ca Jul 10
10	GREENLET	12 Jun 70	1 Feb 73	12 Jun 70	Trf	--
11	MACAW	--	25 Mar 44	12 Feb 44	Lost	--
13	KITTIWAKE	30 Sep 94	30 Sep 94	31 Mar 00	MA/T	--
14	PETREL	30 Aug 91	9 Oct 91	1 May 99	MA/T	28 Aug 03
15	SUNBIRD	30 Sep 93	2 Nov 93	1 May 99	MA/T	8 Jul 05
16	TRINGA	30 Sep 77	30 Sep 77	10 Jan 83	Tgt.	--
17	VERDIN	--	--	12 Aug 45	Canc.	--
18	WINDHOVER	--	--	12 Aug 45	Canc.	--

Class Notes:
FY 1941 (ASR 7-11), 1944 (ASR 13-18). On 14 Dec 36 Commander Submarine Force, U.S. Fleet, requested the addition of submarine rescue vessels to the proposed auxiliary vessel program for Fiscal Year 1938 as replacements for the aging converted "Bird" class minesweepers of the ASR-1 class. On 2 Feb 37 CNO informed the Commander in Chief, U.S. Fleet, who had forwarded the ComSubFor request, that the 1938 program did not contain a special type of submarine rescue vessel and that it was not desirable to jeopardize the enactment of the proposed legislation by including submarine rescue vessels at this late date. He then noted that Forces Afloat would work up desired characteristics for submarine rescue vessels and that CNO and the technical bureaus would then study the feasibility of incorporating these characteristics into the designs for new tugs (AT) and minesweepers (AM). In response to this CNO letter ComSubFor submitted on 18 Mar 37 proposed characteristics for a 210-foot, 15-knot submarine rescue vessel, and on 7 Apr 37 CNO forwarded these to the Bureaus "with a view to incorporating them in the design of new ATs and AMs as ultimate replacements for the Submarine Rescue Vessels now in service." The Bureau of Construction and Repair, however, replied on 28 Jun 37 that the incorporation of submarine rescue characteristics in the design of a shallow draft minesweeper was impracticable while adding submarine rescue features to a tug design would make the tug larger and more expensive than otherwise contemplated and not completely satisfactory for either mission. The Bureau concluded that submarine rescue vessels were properly a separate type and recommended that a design be prepared for a ship whose sole duty would be rescue work. On 14 Jan 38 SecNav asked the General Board to study the characteristics for submarine rescue vessels.

The matter languished until 3 Jun 39, when CNO initiated an effort to add one submarine rescue vessel (ASR) and one rescue chamber (YRC) to the building program for Fiscal Year 1941. The request was limited to one of each in the hope that authorization could be obtained during the current session of Congress. On 26 Jun 39 the General Board provided characteristics for an ASR of up to 2,000 tons, at least 16.5 knots speed, and a complete list of rescue equipment including decompression chambers and a rescue chamber. On 10 Aug 39 CNO informed SecNav that rapid Congressional action was no longer possible and suggested that at the next session an effort be made to obtain authorization for the full number (5) of rescue ships that would be required to replace all of those then in service. (One of the six "Birds," CHEWINK (ASR-3), was then out of commission.) The General Board concurred on 6 Sep 39 with this course of action, noting that the existing five rescue vessels, while reasonably efficient, represented an evolutionary development that had greatly increased their displacement and made it necessary to accept certain compromises in equipment and fittings. The vessels were old, their machinery was obsolescent, and it was necessary to accomplish their timely replacement. It was also necessary that spare rescue chambers be available in key locations, and the Board recommended securing three additional ones, one for the Atlantic Coast, one for the Pacific Coast, and one for the Western Pacific. On 5 Dec 39 Commander Henry Hartley, USN, who had commanded FALCON (ASR-2) for four years beginning in October 1924, submitted his own recommendations for the characteristics of a new rescue salvage vessel. He concluded that an improved FALCON of 200-220 feet length and 16 knots would be the best all-round vessel for salvage rescue work and that the general plan for utilization of space should be the same.

Although CNO had initially planned to request funding for only one ship in FY 1941, all five (ASR 7-11) were included in a large group of auxiliaries whose construction or acquisition was directed on 5 Aug 40 along with many combatant ships in the 70% Expansion Program, which was the second increment of the enormous Two Ocean Navy mobilization effort. On 17 Oct 40 BuShips forwarded to CNO and SecNav two proposed designs for submarine rescue vessels (ASR). One followed the lines suggested by the General Board in June 1939 and Cdr. Hartley in December and consisted of an enlargement and modification of the design of the new fleet tug (AT-64). The other was based on the new small seaplane tender (AVP-10) and was larger (300 feet in length compared to 240 feet for the enlarged tug) but had the advantage that many of the working plans were already available. CNO concurred on 25 Oct 40 with the larger design but recommended that both be referred to the General Board, which on 4 Nov 40 firmly recommended the smaller one because salvage experts felt that the larger ship was too large to be satisfactory as a salvage ship (due principally to high freeboard) and would be less satisfactory as a rescue ship than a smaller and less unwieldy vessel. CNO approved this recommendation on 7 Nov 40 and a contract for the construction of all five ships was signed on 30 Dec 40. As also occurred in the contemporary ASR-5 class, the designed speed of 16 knots (or 16.5 knots on trials) appears not to have been realized in service.

On 11 Jun 43 the Auxiliary Vessels Board, when recommending construction of several other types of small auxiliaries, reported that it saw no need for additional vessels of the ASR type. However on 20 Mar 44 CominCh recommended that a building program of 6 ASR's (ASR 13-18) be authorized to replace the five obsolete "Bird" class ASR's still in service along with ASR-11, which had recently been lost. It was understood that this program would not have a high priority as the object was to get the new vessels into service gradually. Noting that an adequate number of properly equipped ASR's would be required not only during the current war but also for the sake of safety of submarine activities subsequent to the war, the Board on 8 Apr 44 recommended that construction of the 6 ASR's be authorized, that they be built similar to ASR 7-10, and that they be completed two each in the second, third, and fourth quarters of 1945.

Ship Notes:

ASR	Name	Notes
7	CHANTICLEER	Sold for scrap to a firm in Teheran, Iran.
8	COUCAL	Sunk as target 19 Jan 91.
9	FLORIKAN	To NDRF 6 Oct 00. Departed NDRF 26 Jul 10, scrapping completed 29 Dec 10 by Marine Metal, Inc., Brownsville, Texas.
10	GREENLET	Loaned to Turkey as AKIN 1970, sold to Turkey 15 Feb 73, still in service 2010.
11	MACAW	Grounded on reef in the Midway Is. channel 16 Jan 44 while assisting grounded USS FLIER (SS-250), breached and slid into deep water 12-13 Feb 44.
13	KITTIWAKE	To NDRF 11 Jun 98. Departed NDRF 18 Feb 10 after donation to Cayman Islands for reefing. Sunk 5 Jan 11 off Grand Cayman as marine life refuge and dive site.
14	PETREL	To NDRF 24 Oct 91. To Navy 10 Jan 95, back to NDRF 3 May 95. Scrapping contract 28 Aug 03, Bay Bridge Enterprises, Chesapeake, Va., from NDRF 11 Dec 03, scrapping complete 9 Sep 04.
15	SUNBIRD	In USN reserve 1946-50 (accepted from builder in preserved condition 29 Jan 47). To NDRF 13 Jan 94. To Navy 12 Jan 95, back to NDRF 3 Jul 96. Scrapping contract 8 Jul 05, Bay Bridge Enterprises, Chesapeake, Va., departed NDRF 17 Aug 05, scrapping completed 21 Nov 05.
16	TRINGA	Trf. to U.S. Marine Corps for use as a target in area BT-9 on Brent Island Shoals in Pamlico Sound for aircraft based at MCAS Charry Point. She was removed from Navy custody on 10 Jan 83, the record date for the transfer.
17	VERDIN	CNO on 11 Aug 45 directed BuShips to terminate contract, contract terminated 12 Aug 45.
18	WINDHOVER	CNO on 11 Aug 45 directed BuShips to terminate contract, contract terminated 12 Aug 45.