I've often wondered about John Kennedy's treatment after the loss of PT-109, rammed by a Japanese destroyer. This is the equivalent of a semi being able to smack a Corvette with the two alone in a parking lot.

While his actions after the sinking were noble, the destruction of PT-109 wasn't....strange that CAPT Charles McVay III was courts-martialed after I-58 sank USS Indianapolis, yet LT Kennedy was lauded.

As a Navy IG for a few years, I've seen LTs get sacked (against my findings) for less.

quote:

Originally posted by olroy:
After being expelled from Harvard for cheating on a freshman Spanish exam, Teddy enlisted in the army for two years, & did a tour at SHAPE headquarters in Paris. Most biographers credit this plumb assignment to his father's influence.

After his second expulsion from Harvard, Teddy enlisted for four years, and his father got it reduced to a two-year "volunteer for the draft" hitch. He ended up serving several months less than the two years his father negotiated.

quote:

When Teddy enlisted, the Korean War was in full chat. One Kennedy son had been killed in WW II, another came back crippled, and a third had escaped serious danger. I don't know of any father who, after his other sons' sacrifices, would willingly send his son in harm's way if he had the influence to avoid it.

As the father of a son wounded in Afghanistan, I can certainly see that point, and might well concede it. However, I rolled my eyes when Teddy railed against Dubya's special treatment re: military service. He was, of course, quite correct, but there was a little of the pot calling the kettle black.

Having said all that, he did way better as far as military service than most on the Hill.

And if you were/are a minority, immigrant, disabled, old, or generally poor, he did 'way better than most of the Hill'.
Jim

re.semi vs. Corvette Rusty is so right! It has always wondered me how a "great sailer" driving a super fast, manuverable speedboat could allow a cumbersome scow run over it. Except for poor Joe Jr. these sons of a gangster had good PR, didn't they?

quote:

Originally posted by Jim and Tere:
And if you were/are a minority, immigrant, disabled, old, or generally poor, he did 'way better than most of the Hill'.
Jim

You're right about that. I have mixed feelings about the man, and am not attacking him in his entirety. But the man did have serious personal and political flaws.

There's an important difference between the Indianapolis/PT 109 sinkings & the subsequent treatment of the respective captains.

McVay lost his ship while sailing serenely on a quiet moonlit night. When that happens, you're gonna pay no matter what. He was court-martialed for failing to zigzag, as indeed he had, but there was evidence of higher command failure. Higher command, naturally, is ever incapable of error, so that evidence was ignored in the court-martial.

McVay had not been notified of known enemy submarine activity in the area, & the Navy waited too long to recognize the ship was overdue in Leyte. These facts were finally noted when McVay was posthumously exonerated of the error for which he was convicted, but the court martial conviction was never expunged.

Kennedy was engaged in active combat with the enemy. When bullets are flying, the pucker factor is high, & confusion reigns as it never does in armchair or training exercises. Few commanders have ever been court-martialed for losing their ships while they were actively firing their own guns, as Kennedy was when he got run over.

quote:

Originally posted by Dick Dubbs:
re.semi vs. Corvette Rusty is so right! It has always wondered me how a "great sailer" driving a super fast, manuverable speedboat could allow a cumbersome scow run over it.

HERE is an interesting discussion that, as with Rusty's post, compares PT 109 with the Indianapolis.

As I have become older, into my 7th decade now, I have become much more tolerant of others flaws, probably because I have become so much more aware of my own. I don't care who they are, what political persuasion, I look for people who want to try to fix things that are wrong. It seems that most folks on both sides of the issues seem more interested in saying bad things about one another, rather than solving problems. God help us.

quote:

Politics is rife with draft dodgers. And many more whose connections caused safe gravy duty, present and past. Dubya, Quayle, Gore, Teddy Kennedy, etc.

Bill,
I have to take exception to Dubya and his National Guard Service. Granted he didn't go to 'Nam, but he did master the F-102 Delta Dagger in the Texas National Guard. Many of the old Air Force sticks around will tell you it was a handful of an aircraft to fly, prone to high speed stalls due to the critical nature of it's high wing loading.
So he missed the shooting war, possibly under political influence. I have no doubt he would have shown up for duty if his unit had of been activated and sent over there. His old man would've kicked his a%$ if he mentioned otherwise. And truly, just having F 102 Delta Dagger time means he actually did put his butt on the line in just flying that relatively unstable aircraft for a logged 625 flight hours. So like him or not, he has served, and truly risked his life for the cause. I don't even think he trashed out any of those funky aircraft.

quote:

Originally posted by Stratosurfer:
Bill,
I have to take exception to Dubya and his National Guard Service.....So he missed the shooting war, possibly under political influence.

That's really all I was getting at. But I will remove the reference from my post.

quote:

McVay lost his ship while sailing serenely on a quiet moonlit night. When that happens, you're gonna pay no matter what. He was court-martialed for failing to zigzag, as indeed he had, but there was evidence of higher command failure. Higher command, naturally, is ever incapable of error, so that evidence was ignored in the court-martial.

The weather wasn't clear (visibility was generally poor), and McVay had been given discretion to zigzag under those conditions. Both FADM Nimitz and ADM Spruance opposed a courts-martial for McVay, but were overridden by SecNav Forrestal and CNO, FADM King. IJN CDR Hashimto, CO of I-58, testified at the pretrial hearings that zigzagging would not have saved the loss. It is well-known that if a submarine is positioned on or near the base course, zigzagging is generally ineffective. Additionally, if the target is close enough to see, most sub skippers can execute a successful attack. And McVay was denied his choice of counsel, instead assigned a line CAPT with no legal experience.

Finally, McVay's request for an escorting destroyer was denied. When FADM Nimitz became CNO, McVay was restored to duty and retired as a (tombstone) RADM.

Tells you how fallible my memory can be. Relying on a faulty recollection of the Japanese sub commander's testimony, I had him testifying that the night was moonlit. I should have looked it up as I usually do. Mea culpa. Gotta get back in that habit.

I just finished reading all seven pages of comments regarding the sinking of pt 105. A very lot of opinions and few facts. The captain is resonsible for his craft. A military medal for heroic activity required because of neglectful action or lack therof is questionable.
What I gather from some "facts" there were 3 boats because of some misfortune caused to be together in a different situation than originally planned. Non were equipped with radar. Weather was poor, overcast and dark. However one of the boats saw the destroyer at 700 yards and actually attempted to attck it. The boat that got rammed didn't see or hear it until it was too late.
I would like to know how sharply can a ship the size of a destroyer turn at a speed of about 20 knots. The destroyer would have to have seen the pt boat at a sufficient distance to take a collision course, and the boat couldn't get out of way? I hope this makes a little sense...it's late and I am getting a little scopey from reading all those postings.

quote:

Originally posted by olroy:
Tells you how fallible my memory can be. Relying on a faulty recollection of the Japanese sub commander's testimony, I had him testifying that the night was moonlit. I should have looked it up as I usually do. Mea culpa. Gotta get back in that habit.

Your memory wasn't bad. The night was moonlit until around midnight, when the weather deterioated somewhat and visibility lessened.

quote:

I would like to know how sharply can a ship the size of a destroyer turn at a speed of about 20 knots. The destroyer would have to have seen the pt boat at a sufficient distance to take a collision course, and the boat couldn't get out of way? I hope this makes a little sense...it's late and I am getting a little scopey from reading all those postings.

It depends on the speed and a few other things, but typically a DD has a turn diameter of 800-1000 yards. With sufficient time to back an engine, this can be cut down to around 500 yards.