Greetings to all on this cold Ohio day.

Part of my job at the Ohio Historical Society involves historic
preservation. The following was passed on to me by the assistant
preservation officer. I wondered if it might be of interest to the list
members, or if the collective might provide any amplification to the
original posters.

Cheers,

Carlos R. Rivera
>
>———- Forwarded message ———-
>Date: Tue, 3 Feb 1998 21:29:21 -0600
>From: “A. Michael Pappalardo”
>To: Multiple recipients of list
>Subject: US Navy burial practices in the 19th and 20th centuries
>
>The Northern Division Naval Facilities Engineering Command of the US
>Navy is currently involved in a research project on the former Naval
>Hospital cemetery at the Brooklyn Navy Yard. In our search for more
>information relating to the site and to US Navy burial practices in the
>19th and 20th centuries we have consulted records, photos, and maps at
>the following:
>
>National Archives (New York Washington and College Park (numerous record
>groups);
>the Naval Historical Center, Washington;
>the Smithsonian Institution;
>the Navy Bureau of Medicine (BU Med);
>New-York Historical Society;
>Brooklyn Historical Society;
>Museum of the City of New York;
>Casualty assistance Center (Great Lakes);
>New York City Bureau of Vital statistics;
>New york State Museum and the Historic Preservation Office;
>New York City Landmarks Commission; and,
>the (former) Naval Station , New York.
>
>We are trying to find plot plans and 19th and early 20th century Navy
>regulations relating to burials on land. In particular we are trying
>to determine whether or not Navy cemeteries of this era were segregated
>by race or religion.
>
>We would greatly appreciate any suggestions for further resources or
>references from list members.
>
>Please reply to either:
>
>Steven Bedford Ph.D.
>TAMS Consultants Inc.
>655 3rd Avenue
>New York, NY 10017
>212-867-1777 ext. 352 Please leave message
>SBedford@tamsconsultants.com
>
>or
>
>Tina A. Deininger P.E.
>Northern Division
>Naval Facilities Engineering Command
>10 Industrial Highway
>Mail Stop #82
>Lester, PA 19113-2090
>610-595-0761
>e-mail: tadeininger@efdnorth.navfac.navy.mil
>
>Please crosspost

Tim Francis pointed out that the article on Bath Iron Works turned out to
be not quite accurate – a good point, since I didn’t crosscheck before
posting it. The author of the LAFFEY article and the sidebar on Bath
production was a Bath employee during WWII, BTW.

AS for Japanese production – well, off the top of my head, Post 7 Dec 41
production would be something like 20 YUGUMO class only the first of which
was in comm. before 7 Dec 41; the SHIMAKAZE experimental high speed DD
(but with 15 torpedo tubes!); something like 12-14 AKIZUKI class AA
destroyers. The rest would have to be MATSU / TACHIBANA class light
destroyers, something more akin to US DE’s (but a bit more powerful).
IIRC only the last few AKIZUKIs and the MATSUs would have been laid down
AFTER 7 December. The last couple of KAGEROs might also have been
commissioned after 7 Dec 41, overlapping the YUGUMOs – check Jentschura,
Jung & Mickel, or the Nihon Kaigun website to confirm. (Note that some of
the last of the AKIZUKI class and many of the ordered TACHIBANA class were
never completed.)

Sounds like we need a wartime USN construction summary by yard, a manner
of presentation we don’t usally see. I thought the National Recovery Act
summary by Yard that Mr. Francis posted was quite useful.

-Brooks

I’m afraid it’s not technically true either. Bath Iron Works only
received contracts for 64 destroyers during the war (6 of which had been
transferred from Federal SS Co.) but had 12 cancelled, thus only
completing 52 destroyers (from contract to delivery).

But, if you include destroyers whose contracts were awarded to Bath
pre-war but were finished after 7 December 1941, the total number rises
to 76. If you include destroyers completed after September 1939, then
the number rises to 84.

Source: Contracts Awarded Private Shipyards for Construction of Naval
Vessels since 1 January 1934, Navy Department, Bureau of Ships, 15
January 1946

It would be interesting to find out what the specific dates are for
those 63 Japanese destroyers, maybe Bath didn’t beat them after all…

Hmm, perhaps this is a good example of why clarity of expression and
careful definition is very important in historical writing.

An example. Production tonnage of iron/steel during WW2 is often
misleading because the sources fail to declare whether it is in short
tons (2000 pounds, used in the U.S. for steel production), long tons
(2,240 pounds, common in Britain for steel and used in North America for
iron ore), or metric tons (2,204.6 pounds, used by the United Nations
for agricultural, manufacturing, and mining statistics).

Timothy L. Francis
Historian
Naval Historical Center
email address: Francis.Timothy@nhc.navy.mil
voice: (202) 433-6802

The above remarks are my opinions, not those of the U.S. Navy or the
Department of Defense

> ———-
> From: John Snyder[SMTP:John_Snyder@bbs.macnexus.org]
> Reply To: mahan@microworks.net
> Sent: Tuesday, February 03, 1998 10:53 PM
> To: MARHST-L@POST.QUEENSU.CA; mahan@microwrks.com
> Subject: Kamikaze attack on USS LAFFEY DD724 in WWII: Bath Iron
> Works
>
>Brooks Rowlett wrote:
>SNIP
>”….from Pearl Harbor to the war’s end, 82 destroyers were built
>and delivered – about 25 percent of all destroyers built for the Navy
>during the war. During the same period, Japanes shipyards built only
>63 destroyers. The Bath Iron Works alone outproduced the Japanese
>empire.”
>SNIP
>
>That’s one of the more amazing WW2 statistics I’ve seen.
>
>John Snyder

bill riddle wrote:
>
> Besides, one would need a “Context Checker” rather than a Spell
> Checker to catch this one.

As the following poem illustrates, there
is no substitute for proofreading:

I have a spelling checker,
it came with my PC.
It plainly marks four my revue,
Mistakes I cannot sea.
I’ve run this poem through it,
I’m shore your pleas too no,
It’s letter perfect in it’s weigh,
My checker tolled me sew.

(I resurrect this thing periodically.)

—
Tracy Johnson
Computer Associates International Inc.
Manufacturing Knowledge (MK) Group
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
(For interactive games…)
Minister of Propaganda, Justin Thyme Productions
Last Two Wargames Played:
Gettysburg (Command #17 version)
Axis & Allies
Paint Ball
tjohnson@adnetsol.com
“Trust No One”
“Semper Pollus”
ADC-2239-5531

Brooks Rowlett wrote:
SNIP
“….from Pearl Harbor to the war’s end, 82 destroyers were built
and delivered – about 25 percent of all destroyers built for the Navy
during the war. During the same period, Japanes shipyards built only
63 destroyers. The Bath Iron Works alone outproduced the Japanese
empire.”
SNIP

That’s one of the more amazing WW2 statistics I’ve seen.

John Snyder
John_Snyder@bbs.macnexus.org

In the latest issue (March 1998 cover date) of WORLD WAR II magazine,

(see:

although the highlights of this issue are not yet posted as I type, the
Feb 98 issue being there instead) there is an article on the 12 April
1945 ordeal of USS LAFFEY (DD724) which on radar picket station off
Okinawas was attacked by *22* japanese aircraft, shooting down 9, being
hit by *6* Kamikaze attackers and in addition four bombs – and
surviving.

The USS LAFFEY is preserved at Patriot’s Point, Charleston South
Carolina; their URL is:

http://www.state.sc.us/patpt/

An interesting sidebar to this article is on the Bath Iron Works, in
Bath, Maine, on the Kenenebec River, some 12 miles from the sea. The
interesting thing about the sidebar is its end, which says that….
“….from Pearl Harbor to the war’s end, 82 destroyers were built
and delivered – about 25 percent of all destroyers built for the Navy
during the war. During the same period, Japanes shipyards built only
63 destroyers. The Bath Iron Works alone outproduced the Japanese
empire.”

I had never seen it put quite that way….an interesting commentary on
production capabilities.

By the way, uss-salem.org has a complete lsit of ships built by Bath,
at this URL:

http://www.uss-salem.org/navhist/other/biw.html

The cover illustration on this issue of WORLD WAR II is USAAF B-24’s at
low level exiting the vicinity of Ploesti.

-Brooks

Last weekend, I came across a used copy of William Fowler’s _Under Two
Flags: The American Navy In the Civil War_ (New York: Avon Books,
1990. ISBN 0-380-71551-1). In the chapter dealing with the Battle of
Mobile Bay, Fowler mentions two additional Confederate ironclads besides
the CSS Tennessee. Fowler indicates that these two ships were both
launched on February 7, 1863 and that their top speed was no better
than three knots in a calm sea. Can anyone provide me with technical
data on the CSS Huntsville and the CSS Tuscaloosa? In particular, I
would like to know armament, general dimensions, and armor thickness.
Also, were these two ships sisters? Thanks in advance, Ed.

Edward Wittenberg
ewitten507@aol.com

p.s. Can anyone on the list identify the civil aircraft designated HS 125.
I recently ran across a reference to this aircraft in conjunction with
some reading I was doing on the Falklands War. In conjunction with
Learjets commandeered by the Argentine Air Force, these aircraft
operated as part of the Fenix Escuadron performing reconnaissance,
decoy, and command&control functions. Thanks.

As a supplement to the information about the British Pacific Fleet in
1945, the newly revised carriers list at

http://www.uss-salem.org/

has information agbout the re-designations of British Escort carriers.
Several got ‘D” pennant/pendants, a few got “A” pendants for Pacific
service. This is poorly documented and some of the “A’s” identities are
not known to us – see the link to “An aircraft carrier myster” on the
World Aircraft Carriers main page.

In addition, there is a Mystery Photo #123 published in WARSHIP
INTERNATIONAL No 2 1996. It shows ex-Commmonwealth “River” Class
friagtes wearing an undocumented “B” pennnant number, after return to
US, with weapons stripped. In response to this mystery photo, there is
the following letter (extracted) in WI #1, 1997:

“About July 45, ships attached to the British Pacific Fleet were given
B numbers….the numbers below, for Australian “Bathurst” class escorts,
are taken from Campbell’s NOTABLE SERVICE TO THE EMPIRE published by
Naval Historical Society of Australia Inc. 1995, adn give an example of
how these were assigned.

Ship Name (Old) pennant (New) Pennant
BALLARAT J184 B236
BENDIGO J187 B237
BURNIE J198 B238
CAIRNS J183 B239
CESSNOCK J175 B240
GAWLER J188 B241
GERALDTON J178 B242
GOULBURN J167 B243
IPSWICH J186 B244
KALGOOLIE J192 B245
LAUNCESTON J179 B246
LISMORE J145 B247
MARYBOROUGH J195 B248
PIRIE J189 B249
TAMWORTH J181 B250
TOOWOOMBA J157 B251
WHYALLA J153 B252
WOLLONGONG J172 B253

“These vessels formed the 21st and 22nd minesweeping flotillas from
November 1944 to November 1945.
“Some of these ships occasionally had other pennant numbers; in a VJ
Day photo taken at Manus Island, TAMWORTH is wearing A124, although
SbLt. Campbell cannot recall this event.
” A State of the Fleet dated 26 january 1945 lists the following
British (not AUstralian ) frigates on strength. Note that the
Australian BURNIE and GAWLER were omitted from this list.
Ship name Class
CRANE BLACK SWAN
WHIMBREL BLACK SWAN
PARRETT RIVER
REDPOLE BLACK SWAN
BARLE RIVER
PHEASANT BLACK SWAN
HELFORD RIVER

“either BARLE (K289) ex-USN returned 27 Feb 46) or PARRETT (K304)
(ex-USN returned 5 Feb 46) is probably the mystery ship.”

The Campbell book above is Hugh Campbell, with the title/date cited.

The letter is signed A.J. Lee, Tasmania, Australia (no town given)

This alphabetical assignment of new pennant numbers may provide a clue
into British CVE mystery designations as well.

-Brooks

I’ve got the information somewhere, but I’ve forgotten how to subscribe to
mahan. Could someone save me a battle with Eudora’s search engine and send
the info to Mr. Beard. Aint technology grand?

>Eric, I do not know if it was deliberate, but could you post the
>listserv address for Mahan to the H-War list or at least send it to
>me? I would like to sub it.
>
>Jonathan
>Jonathan D. Beard
>Science Writer-Photo Researcher
>938 N. Alameda, Las Cruces, NM 88005-2125
>jbeard@nasw.org voice 505-647-0850
>
>
>
Eric Bergerud, 531 Kains Ave, Albany CA 94706, 510-525-0930

Thanks for the info, I have just succeeded in subbing Mahan. But
when I found Microworks web page earlier today, I could not get most
of the clickables to work–got error messages on lists and another of
them….

But I will now just wait for my ships to come in….

Jonathan
Jonathan D. Beard
Science Writer-Photo Researcher
938 N. Alameda, Las Cruces, NM 88005-2125
jbeard@nasw.org voice 505-647-0850