The concept for the River class began in December 1900, with a request from Commander John Michael de Robeck, then the senior destroyer officer in the Mediterranean Fleet, for a new class of destroyer with a longer range and better sea-keeping qualities than the existing "27-knotter" class (the survivors of which would be redesignated the A-class in 1913) and "30-knotter" class (redesignated the B, C and, D classes in 1913). De Robeck's specification called for a range of 1,650 nmi (3,056 km) at a sustained speed of 18 knots (33 km/h); the "30-knotter" could only make 1,400 nmi (2,593 km) at its cruising speed of 13 knots (24 km/h).^[2]

De Robeck also called for various modifications to destroyer design to help make ships more seaworthy, in particular keeping up their speed in adverse weather conditions. The most noticeable change would be to introduce a raised forecastle rather than an arched turtleback^[a] for the hull forward of the bridge, and that the bridge should be placed further aft to keep it clear of spray from waves breaking over the bow. Furthermore, he felt that destroyers should run their speed trials with a more realistic load of fuel and supplies. The "30-knotter" type might have a nominal speed of 30 knots, but even in very good weather this was never achieved in service.^[4]

Other officers serving on Royal Navy destroyers made similar observations about their ships. John de Robeck's commanding officer, Vice-Admiral "Jackie" Fisher, drew a comparison with the German S90-class torpedo boat, which had impressed Royal Navy officers who had seen it.^[5]

In July 1901 the Director of Naval Construction worked on sketch designs for future destroyers, which included many of the features de Robeck and his colleagues advocated, as well as a heavier and more reliable kind of engine. The trials speed was initially 27 knots (50 km/h), though further requirements for increased strength reduced the speed to 25.5 knots (47.2 km/h). While this speed seemed like a significant reduction, it would be measured with a realistic 95 tons of coal loaded on board, and the better sea-keeping properties meant that the new ships would perform better than a "30-knotter" in any seas except for a flat calm.^[6]

As with other early British destroyer classes, the Admiralty invited specialist private firms to submit their own designs for destroyers which would meet the specification. The idea was to use the builders' knowledge of building small, fast, ships to help cram powerful machinery into a small hull. For this reason, details of the hull and internal arrangements differed between ships in the class.

Nevertheless, the River class can clearly be distinguished from previous destroyers because of its raised forecastle. Previous British designs had a low "turtle-back" forecastle, which, although intended to clear the bows, caused them to dig in to the sea, resulting in a very wet conning position. The bridge was also further back than in previous destroyer models.

All ships were coal fired (except Arno which was oil-fired), and all had triple expansion steam engines except for four; Eden, Stour, Test and Arno were powered by steam turbines. Eden was given turbines to test their viability for future destroyer classes, with two propellers on each of her three shafts, to transmit the power at the high revolutions of the direct drive turbines, a feature of the earlier Turbinia.

By 1906 the Russo-Japanese War had shown that the 6-pounder gun was insufficiently effective, so the five 6-pounders in this class were replaced by three additional 12-pounders, creating an "all big gun" armament.^[7]

With a general increase in size and more solid construction, the Rivers became the first truly oceangoing and useful torpedo boat destroyers in Royal Navy service.

Despite making only 25 knots (previous classes had made 27 to 30 knots (50 to 56 km/h) under the most favourable conditions), the increased seaworthiness meant that they could maintain this speed into a sea and that they remained workable and fightable at the same time. Notwithstanding a variety of design differences, all ships had either two broad funnels or two pairs of narrow funnels.

Thirty-three ships were ordered - ten ships under the 1901-02 Programme, eight ships under the 1902-03 Programme , and fifteen ships under the 1903-04 Programme. A further fourteen orders were projected under the draft 1904-05 Programme, but one vessel built by Palmers on speculation in 1902 was instead purchased for the Navy, and the other intended orders were never placed. Two additional vessels (likewise built on speculation by Cammell Laird in 1904-05) were purchased in December 1909 under the 1908-09 Programme, and a similar vessel building in Genoa for the Portuguese Navy was purchased by the Admiralty in 1915 following the outbreak of war.

Apart from the Gala and Blackwater (both lost by accidents in 1908 and 1909 respectively), all these ships were re-designated as the 'E' class in 1913 (including Arno in 1915) and saw service during World War 1, when seven of them were sunk. The 28 ships surviving the war were all sold out of service and scrapped by late 1920.

Note: (a) Laird Brothers were taken over by steelmakers Cammell in 1903, and were renamed Cammell Laird & Co.
(b) Rother was not ordered under the 1902-03 Programme; Palmers laid down 3 ships to the same design in early 1903, but only received orders for two ships, the third ship being built on speculation; this was purchased by the Admiralty in 1904 in lieu of one of the 143 orders projected under the 1904-05 Programme, and was named Rother.

A major distinction in appearance between the ships on the 1901-02 and 1902-03 Programmes on one hand and the ships of the 1903-04 Programme on the other hand is that the former were completed with the forward pair of 6-pdr guns mounted on sponsons extending outwards from the ship's sides (abreast of the bridge). With the 1903-04 Programme these sponsons were deleted, the high forecastle was extended back as far as the bridge and the two foremost 6-pdr guns were mounted directly on the two sides of the forecastle immediately forward of the bridge. The same change was subsequently retro-fitted into the earlier batches.

Note: (c) Stour and Test were not ordered under the 1903-04 Programme but were built concurrently by Cammell Laird on speculation; these were purchased by the Admiralty in December 1909, completed and named Stour and Test.
(d) building as Portuguese Liz pre-war, but purchased by the Admiralty in March 1915 prior to completion, and renamed for the river Arno in Portugal.

As all of these vessels were designed and constructed by their shipbuilders to their own company designs, they differed in detail and in appearance. Even ships built at different times by the individual builders would differ from year to year, not least the ships built in 1903-04 and later after the deletion of the sponsons from the designs.

• Hawthorn Leslie type; all built by Hawthorn Leslie, Hebburn, Newcastle upon Tyne, featuring two short funnels.
  • Derwent
  • Eden
  • Waveney
  • Boyne
  • Doon
  • Kale
• Palmer type; all built by Palmers Shipbuilding and Iron Company, Jarrow, featuring four funnels closely paired.
  • Erne
  • Ettrick
  • Exe
  • Cherwell
  • Dee
  • Rother
  • Swale
  • Ure
  • Wear
• Yarrow type; all built by Yarrow Shipbuilders, Poplar, London, featuring four funnels openly paired and with no raised piece in the eyes.
  • Ribble
  • Teviot
  • Usk
  • Welland
  • Gala
  • Garry
• Laird type; all built by Laird Brothers (from 1903 Cammell Laird), Birkenhead, including two ships built on speculation and purchased by the Royal Navy; they featured two medium funnels.
  • Foyle
  • Itchen
  • Arun
  • Blackwater
  • Liffey
  • Moy
  • Ouse
  • Stour
  • Test
• Thornycroft type; all built by J I Thornycroft, Chiswick, and featuring two high funnels.
  • Kennet
  • Jed
  • Chelmer
  • Colne
• White type; both built by J. Samuel White, Cowes, which had two short funnels.
  • Ness
  • Nith
• Ansaldo type; built by Giovanni Ansaldo & Co, Genoa, featuring two medium funnels.
  • Arno

• Chesneau, Roger & Kolesnik, Eugene M., eds. (1979). Conway's All The World's Fighting Ships 1860–1905. London: Conway Maritime Press. ISBN 0-85177-133-5.
• Colledge, J. J.; Warlow, Ben (2006) [1969]. Ships of the Royal Navy: The Complete Record of all Fighting Ships of the Royal Navy (Rev. ed.). London: Chatham Publishing. ISBN 978-1-86176-281-8.
• Dittmar, F.J.; Colledge, J. J. (1972). British Warships 1914–1919. Shepperton, UK: Ian Allan. ISBN 0-7110-0380-7.
• Friedman, Norman (2009). British Destroyers: From Earliest Days to the Second World War. Barnsley, UK: Seaforth Publishing. ISBN 978-1-84832-049-9.
• Gardiner, Robert & Gray, Randal, eds. (1985). Conway's All The World's Fighting Ships 1906–1921. London: Conway Maritime Press. ISBN 0-85177-245-5.
• Manning, T. D. (1961). The British Destroyer. London: Putnam & Co. OCLC 6470051.
• March, Edgar J. (1966). British Destroyers: A History of Development, 1892–1953; Drawn by Admiralty Permission From Official Records & Returns, Ships' Covers & Building Plans. London: Seeley Service. OCLC 164893555.