PT Boat Forum


Moderated by: Dick, Jeff D

The PT Boat Forum ª PT Boats of WWII ª  PT Boats - General

Page: 1 of 1

« Back to Topic Index Page 130 | Replies: 7

 Author  Topic: Meaning of Senior Officer
Allan

MASTER
  

    
Post a Reply To This Topic    Reply With Quotes     Edit Message     View Profile of Allan   Send Email To Allan Posted on: Jan 7, 2012 - 9:25am
Board Members:

Another mystery: I have an important reference made iIn normal WW II Navy jargon, that a PT boat was moving in eschelon formation and commanded by a Lieutenant and was following the lead boat, commanded by a Lt (jg). The two PT's weere traveling as a pair and no other boats were in company. Regarding just those two boats the Lieutenant makes the statement that he was not the senior officer and had not been designated the TOC and, therefore, he had no authority to make changes to the indicated course being followed.

Based upon that information is it fair for me to conclude that there was an officer of higher rank (Lt. Comdr. or above) or could there simply have been a Lieutenant on the lead boat with more time in grade than the Lieutenant in command of the following boat? Is guess my question is: does time in grade factor into who is a senior officer? Or is a senior officer simply an officer of higher grade?

Thanks again for your help.

Allan


Total Posts: 161 | Joined: Sep 18, 2007 - 7:07pm | IP Logged

Will Day

TOP BOSS
  

    
Post a Reply To This Topic    Reply With Quotes     Edit Message     View Profile of Will Day   Send Email To Will Day Posted on: Jan 7, 2012 - 10:09am
Quite often there was an OTC (Officer in Tactical Command) who rode one of the boats and was technically in charge of the patrol (or in some cases was simply one of the boat captains so designated).

Will

Total Posts: 1955 | Joined: Oct 8, 2006 - 4:19pm | IP Logged

newsnerd99

New Member
  

    
Post a Reply To This Topic    Reply With Quotes     Edit Message   Posted on: Jan 7, 2012 - 2:31pm
I've encountered this in several Ron15 papers - everytime I saw it it involved men who had more combat experience vs. rank. For example (this is from memory, so forgive me if it wrong) Steve Nugent's father was a LTJG in the USNR but often commanded patrols even though the skipper's on other boats (like my Grandfather's) were USN LT's. In each case I came across, the commanding skipper was a combat veteran and the LT's were either not or, if they had been theatre for a while, had not yet let a group of boats on patrol.

It was because of this that I was always impressed with Stan Barnes (Ron 15 CO) for putting experience over rank and for knowing his skippers well enough to make sure the guys who had proven themselves were on point when the shooting started. Helped get my grandfather home!

I found two examples/references on pistolpackinmama.net:

"According to MTBRon15 Action Report No. 44, which is dated July 26, 1944 by Commander Boat Squadrons, Eighth Fleet (Stanley Barnes), there were nine groups of PT's taking part. Folbert Group was comprised of PT 209 and PT 210 under the command of Lt. (jg) Harold J. Nugent in the 210; their mission was to get six commandos onto the southern coast of the island."

And...

"According to MTB Ron15 Action Report No. 48, which was submitted by Commander Stanley Barnes on July 14th, the three boats were to patrol the west coast of Italy between Sestri Levante and Volti, destroying any enemy coastal traffic they found. The group left Bastia, Cosica around dark. The 209 was captained by Lt. James MacArthur with Lt. (jg) Richard Nahstoll as the XO. The group of three boats was led by senior officer Lt. (jg) T. Grundy on PT 208. The trio of boats headed east on a calm sea with no moon and arrived around four miles off Portofino at 2300 hours. They then began patrolling to the southeast."

In both cases the 209 was skipper'd by Lt. James McArthur, a replacement Lt. who was on a boat with at least six other replacement sailors who arrived in theatre in May of 1944. Those missions above occured in June and July of 1944.



Grandson of James J Stanton
RON 15 PT 209 and RON 23 PT 243
Check out: www.pistolpackinmama.net

Total Posts: | Joined: Unregistered | IP Logged

TED WALTHER

TOP BOSS
  

    
Post a Reply To This Topic    Reply With Quotes     Edit Message     View Profile of TED WALTHER   Send Email To TED WALTHER Posted on: Jan 7, 2012 - 2:36pm
Allan;
Will is correct, and it also had to do with experiance. In most cases, especially, the area you are researching, you could have a OTC, who was a LT or LT jg with more training and combat experiance in tactical command. LCDR's and Senior LT.'s were usually the Squadron Commanders and Squadron Executive Officers, who were normally the OTC's but if they were ashore, they named an experiance officer as OTC.
FYI: This is the same as today. Today they are called Patrol Officers and they are trained as such, once they are fully qualified and designated by the Commanding Officer, they are in Tactical Command of the Patrol. If the Patrol Officer is a Chief, Senior Chief, Master Chief, Chief Warrant Officer, LTjg, etc. It does not matter if their is a senior LT or whatever rank of officer on board, the designated Patrol Officer is in tactical command.
Hope this helps.
Take care,
TED


Total Posts: 3058 | Joined: Oct 16, 2006 - 7:42am | IP Logged

Allan

MASTER
  

    
Post a Reply To This Topic    Reply With Quotes     Edit Message     View Profile of Allan   Send Email To Allan Posted on: Jan 7, 2012 - 7:33pm
Thanks to you "regulars". You can always be counted on for information. In this particular instance a lieutenant states: I was not the senior officer and I was not designated as OTC. The officer in the lead boat was a Lieut (jg) and was not designated as being OTC. So.... if no one was OTC, and the full Lieut. was not the "senior officer" was there another officer on board that lead boat who outranked the Lt and the Lt(jg) or may there have been simply a Lieut. with more time or experience aboard?

Your refereneces seem to indicate that there might simply have been a Lieut. aboard the lead boat with more experience than the Lieut. in the following boat and that Lieut. considered him to be the "senior officer", even though he was not in command of the boat and was not designated OTC. Does that make any sense?

It would be easier to just assume that there was an officer aboard the lead boat of higher rank, but I want to get this right!

Allan


Total Posts: 161 | Joined: Sep 18, 2007 - 7:07pm | IP Logged

TED WALTHER

TOP BOSS
  

    
Post a Reply To This Topic    Reply With Quotes     Edit Message     View Profile of TED WALTHER   Send Email To TED WALTHER Posted on: Jan 7, 2012 - 7:52pm
Alaan;
Are you reading a after action report or a personal narative/interview?
TED


Total Posts: 3058 | Joined: Oct 16, 2006 - 7:42am | IP Logged

Allan

MASTER
  

    
Post a Reply To This Topic    Reply With Quotes     Edit Message     View Profile of Allan   Send Email To Allan Posted on: Jan 8, 2012 - 4:46pm
Ted:

I'm reading a letter of reprimand to a Lt who lost the 113 boat who claimed he was not the lead baot but the following boat and had no authority to change course because he was not designated the OTC and was not the senior officer within the two boats, although the officer in the lead boat was a Lt(jg). I'm wondering if that simply means that there was an officer of higher rank aboard the lead boat (PT 152) that night.

Allan


Total Posts: 161 | Joined: Sep 18, 2007 - 7:07pm | IP Logged

TED WALTHER

TOP BOSS
  

    
Post a Reply To This Topic    Reply With Quotes     Edit Message     View Profile of TED WALTHER   Send Email To TED WALTHER Posted on: Jan 9, 2012 - 6:57am
Allan;
Maybe, but I find it unsual that this OTC is not mentioned in the report, as he would be the first guy the Squadron Commander would ask "what happened to PT 113, why did she run aground"? A written statement would have to be written by this same officer and submitted up the chain of command in an incident report.
Take care,
TED


Total Posts: 3058 | Joined: Oct 16, 2006 - 7:42am | IP Logged


Lock Topic

 

Forum Legend

New Member

Reply to topic

More than 25 posts | Full Member

Reply to topic with quoted message

More than 50 posts | Advanced Member

Edit Message

More than 150 posts | MASTER

View profile

More than 300 posts | TOP BOSS

Email member