Normandy to Berlin

[quincannon]

Take it away Elwood. Take it away

[Elwood]

I only just noticed this thread! I'm sure we'll be using this often.

Well,speaking of Normandy, I've been trying to keep up with the work being done on the Texas in dry dock in Galveston. Scheduled to be there at least until May. Anyway, heard a great story, forget where. Texas was at Normandy providing fire support. At one point US troops had advanced far enough inland that they were out of Texas' range. So, the captain had one side of the ship partially flooded just enough to give the ship a list of a few degrees, enough that the 14 inch guns would have a higher trajectory. It was successful. Probably not normal procedure, right?

[quincannon]

I would not think so, but I have also heard the story. To answer your gunnery question though, that is exactly what was called for. Tanks in Korea used much the same method. Tank guns of course are direct fire weapons, but when you run a tank's nose up on a berm of some sort, thus allowing the tube to elevate a bit higher, the tank is capable of indirect fire (in theory). Sure as hell would not like to compute their fire for accuracy though

Texas and her sister New York were our first really capable dreadnought battleships, although we had built several sort of dreadnoughts before, starting with Michigan and South Carolina. The fourteen inch guns made a lot of difference over the twelve inch guns our BB's carried prior to the New York Class coming on line. Sometime in the mid 1930's my dad who worked at the Naval Gun Factory in Washington DC worked on upgrading the guns on both TX & NY, and others as well as part of their modernization. To the best of my knowledge the main gun battery tubes that are on board Texas today, are the same ones my dad help refit.

For the last eight years of his life my father was quite ill. One time he was in the hospital, with my wife and I visiting, a story came on the TV about the gun exploding on USS Iowa, You probably remember the incident. Initial reports were blaming one of the gunner's mates intimating that he had done it on purpose having some sort of mental health issues. My dad ask my wife for a piece of paper and a pencil, and he proceeded to sketch out the breech block of a 16" gun. He studied what he had drawn for a few minutes, looked up and said to both of us. That kid did not do anything wrong. It was a design flaw in the gun itself, a one in a million accident. If memory serves that is just what the court of inquiry found too.

[Elwood]

Dec 15, 2022 23:53:09 GMT quincannon said:

Sometime in the mid 1930's my dad who worked at the Naval Gun Factory in Washington DC worked on upgrading the guns on both TX & NY, and others as well as part of their modernization. To the best of my knowledge the main gun battery tubes that are on board Texas today, are the same ones my dad help refit.

For the last eight years of his life my father was quite ill. One time he was in the hospital, with my wife and I visiting, a story came on the TV about the gun exploding on USS Iowa, You probably remember the incident. Initial reports were blaming one of the gunner's mates intimating that he had done it on purpose having some sort of mental health issues. My dad ask my wife for a piece of paper and a pencil, and he proceeded to sketch out the breech block of a 16" gun. He studied what he had drawn for a few minutes, looked up and said to both of us. That kid did not do anything wrong. It was a design flaw in the gun itself, a one in a million accident. If memory serves that is just what the court of inquiry found too.

Very cool about your Dad working on the Texas' battery.  I intend to visit her when she leaves dry dock.   

3-4 years ago I visited the Iowa, she's in San Pedro just north of Long Beach.  Very good, I thought, display regarding the turrent explosion.   Just a horrible accident, nothing nefarious as you say.    

[quincannon]

Horrible accidents don't make as big a splash on cable news, as much as deranged sailors trying to commit suicide, taking twenty or thirty of his friends along for the ride. Then you have (Service - fill in the blank) that cannot bring itself to admit they made some sort of error. If you wish to know what is wrong, picking the Navy for this particular example look at the Littoral Combat Ship waste of money for absolutely no tangible return, two destroyer collisions, a submarine sinking a Japanese research ship, by ramming, and an aircraft carrier whose ordnance elevators don't work. I could go on and on. It would be quite easy to fill in those blanks above with examples from the Army, Air Force, and Marines too.

[Elwood]

Dec 16, 2022 2:32:11 GMT quincannon said:

Then you have (Service - fill in the blank) that cannot bring itself to admit they made some sort of error. If you wish to know what is wrong, picking the Navy for this particular example look at the Littoral Combat Ship waste of money for absolutely no tangible return, two destroyer collisions, a submarine sinking a Japanese research ship, by ramming, and an aircraft carrier whose ordnance elevators don't work. I could go on and on. 

I've been poking around online just a bit re: the Iowa explosion.  Really looks like that was an accident waiting to happen.   On the Iowa, Ensigns and below were constantly bringing up concerns with maintenance, training and general conditions of not necessarily the guns themselves but the turrents.   Navy brass wouldn't listen.  Funds approved for work on the turrents were siphoned off and used for other parts of the ship.   Just an awful mess really.   Then you have the explosion.   I guess the brass did the best they could to deflect blame off themselves.    

[quincannon]

Iowa was launched on 27 August 1942, and placed in commission on 22 February 1943. That was a month after I was born, and I will be 80 in less than three weeks. She was brought back into commission in the mid 1980's when she was nearing fifty years old. I don't know about you Elwood, but by the time I was fifty I needed a lot of maintenance and upkeep too. Ships launched in Iowa's time were designed for about 20 year's service. The Navy was trying to add ships to the fleet when Iowa was recommissioned, as part of a build up to 600 (never achieved). Part of that was the fault of the USMC too. They wanted gunfire support for Guadalcanal style landings. They were not bright enough to understand then that those days were long gone due to new and emerging technology.

Yes, it was an awful mess, and the Navy/Marine Corps leadership was totally responsible for it. You guessed right. They always do, which is cowardness to the highest degree possible. They would rather lay the blame on so relatively low ranking enlisted man, and say he was at fault. Whomever made those decisions, in my view, should go to prison for malfeasance, incompetence, and yes, manslaughter.

[yanmacca]

This is the best web site on the M24 Chaffee I have ever seen, the long list of photos are amazing, well worth a long slow scroll link

Ian

[Elwood]

Greats pics on that site!

So the Chaffee was essentially a lighter armored Sherman? Or were there other differences? Excuse my ignorance.

[quincannon]

The M24 Chafee was the successor to the M5 Stuart, meant to equip the tank companies of the cavalry reconnaissance squadrons. The M24 was much better than both the Stuarts (M3 and M5), mounted a 75mm main gun similar, but not the same as the early Shermans. Was replaced by the M41 Walker during the Korean war. Some are still operational around the world.

Good stuff Ian.

[Elwood]

Well 78 years ago (if my math is correct) Battle of the Bulge going on. Today, 12/22, the answer "Nuts" sent back to the Germans.

[Elwood]

Finally got a good start on . . . Trumpets, as you recommended. Traveled to Texas for several weeks over Christmas and you always forget something when you travel. I forgot to bring the book. On it now about 70 pages in. Very well written. Huge book but so interesting it reads fairly quickly. Thanks again for recommendation.

[quincannon]

You are quite welcome. Charles MacDonald was the best of the bunch in my view, and even better when he had the restrictions of the U S Army Center Of Military History removed. You really must read his "Company Commander" There is no better depiction of life in the average U S Army rifle company. Of course, his two companies were part of the Second Infantry Division, which, also in my view, makes them far above average. Old school ties you know.

[Elwood]

Well the battle has started. Amazing the amount of intel US had concerning German buildup in the area pointing towards action but simply got ignored, lost in the shuffle or just not processed soon enough.
Also talking of weaponry utilized by both sides. Very familiar with the M-1 Garand but German main battle rifle was bolt action? They did not have M-1 equivalent? Semi-auto? Or just not utilized in large numbers.

[yanmacca]

They would have had these in their Volksgrenadier Companies link

These were also knocking about but in smaller numbers link

But the 98K was still issued in large numbers plus the MP40 SMGs, so the Infantry still relied on their LMGs (MG34 & MG42)

Ian