HMS Stratton 1969

[Michael Dobbs]

I have received the following query:

[color=maroon]I've been chasing information on a cover I have with a cachet on it -
"Commanding Officer, 11th August 1969 H.M.S. Stratton "
This is a bit of a mystery as I've been in contact with Peter Down ( TCA 2000) and he has confirmed HMS Stratton was on the reserve list before being sold to the South African Navy in 1959, some years before the cachet. I've also had a look at the list of Shore Stations ( https://military-history.fandom.com/wiki/List_of_ship_names_of_the_Royal_Navy_(R–T)#S ) and there is no mention of HMS Stratton. Darrel Drury suggested I contact a Michael Dobson who has pointed me in the direction of this Web site. I'll send on a copy if required.[/color]

Are any of our Naval specialists out there able to help please?

Thanks, Mike

[Neil Williams]

Mike

I'm not a 'naval expert' - but this looks very fishy to me!

1. The naval cachets I have for the 1960s are more professionally done than this which is obviously off-centre

2. The covers I have from 1967 going to a military collector in Austria are franked at 9d, which would have been the FPO and UK rate. No way is 1d a valid rate.

3. The 'cancellation' looks homemade. Even if the datestamp was accidently missed, the lines are too thick and not in sections in the way I would expect machine cancels of this period to be.

and the fact this ship was no longer in the Royal Navy.......

Neil W

[Michael Dobbs]

Neil

Many thanks for your comments - I have had another look at the illustration and I am beginning to agree with you on all aspects.  Having a closer look, the Ships' cachet does not look as though the date is moveable, in other words a 'one-off' datestamp for that date only and as you say off-centre.

Thanks again, Mike

[Michael Dobbs]

Neil

Once again many thanks for your response.  Having taken a close look at the cover I have now responded as follows:

[color=maroon]I have not had many responses but the one I have had and would agree with suggests that the cover is a fake for the following reasons:

1. The naval cachets he has for 1960s covers are more professionally created than this; the text is off-centre and the gap at the top and bottom is not equal and appears too large.  Also the date appears to be a fixed date and not a moveable one as one would expect on a unit (ship) datestamp.

2. The covers he has from 1967 going to a military collector in Austria are franked at 9d, which would have been the FPO and UK rate. No way is 1d a valid rate.

3. The 'cancellation' looks homemade. Even if the machine cancellation die head was accidently missed, the wavy lines are not identical to British machine cancellation wavy lines of the period - they are too thick and the wavyness too great compared with genuine British machine cancellations.  It is also suspicious that there is no die head shown.

4. Last but not least this ship was no longer in the Royal Navy.

For these reasons we do feel that the cover is a fake.[/color]

Regards, Mike