PT Boat Forum


Moderated by: Dick, Jeff D

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

Prev Page | Next Page | Page: 5 of 15

Back to Topic Index Page 1 | Replies: 143 | Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

 Author  Topic: PT 59
Lew Zee

Advanced Member
  

    
Post a Reply To This Topic    Reply With Quotes     Edit Message     View Profile of Lew Zee   Send Email To Lew Zee Posted on: Feb 6, 2016 - 2:07pm
Thanks for looking. Ted, I got the PT-45 sub class in. David, I found that quote somewhere but I can't remember. Both me and my son had a good laugh on that too. There were pretty mean looking boats with all those arms aboard.

The only boats (at that time) that one would think would surpass these might be those with the 4.5" rockets. But I read they were not very accurate and were only effective as a barrage weapon. How many would the have to fire to hit a barge? I certainly would not want to be in a barge with those rockets heading my way, accurate or not. But to have a gunboat firing a broadside would be an awesome site. I cant wait to get the model done and get a video up.

I update the site including adding the other pages in.

Lew

Lew Zee

Total Posts: 127 | Joined: Dec 12, 2013 - 12:04pm | IP Logged

Lew Zee

Advanced Member
  

    
Post a Reply To This Topic    Reply With Quotes     Edit Message     View Profile of Lew Zee   Send Email To Lew Zee Posted on: Feb 6, 2016 - 2:07pm
Thanks for looking. Ted, I got the PT-45 sub class in. David, I found that quote somewhere but I can't remember. Both me and my son had a good laugh on that too. There were pretty mean looking boats with all those arms aboard.

The only boats (at that time) that one would think would surpass these might be those with the 4.5" rockets. But I read they were not very accurate and were only effective as a barrage weapon. How many would the have to fire to hit a barge? I certainly would not want to be in a barge with those rockets heading my way, accurate or not. But to have a gunboat firing a broadside would be an awesome site. I cant wait to get the model done and get a video up.

I update the site including adding the other pages in.

Lew

Lew Zee

Total Posts: 127 | Joined: Dec 12, 2013 - 12:04pm | 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: Feb 6, 2016 - 5:29pm
Or there's the John Bulkeley method. Board the bastards with a .45 and a Thompson Gun.

Will

Total Posts: 1924 | Joined: Oct 8, 2006 - 4:19pm | IP Logged

David Buck

TOP BOSS
  

    
Post a Reply To This Topic    Reply With Quotes     Edit Message     View Profile of David Buck   Send Email To David Buck Posted on: Feb 7, 2016 - 4:49am
AAAARH WILL,

That's my kind of bloke, "Dam the torpedos full speed ahead",

OK I have found photos for the years that I could not find before, and aaaarh I blew it, the remains inside the cove are not from the PT 59, they are from a barge that had been placed there to act as a pier.

O-well back to the drawing board, I will say that what remains of her does appear to still be there in 2004 and maybe later as the area that she is in still lies within the mudflat area, "rather hard to get at" one would think, and there are still shadows that I can't identify in later years photos, so one day either there will be a nice low tide at the time of an aerial survey or maybe I will visit the area and walk the mudflats just for my own interest.

I have been trying to find any form of report that would help nail down the date she was removed, however no luck with that should be something around but nothing yet, anyone know who to ask to find something official?

Anyone interested try, HistoricAerials.com, search Harlem River then navigate your way to Inwoods North Cove start at 1974 on the left hand side and work your way up the years.

This has been fun and I'm a little sad that she may be gone but one can always hope!

Dave.

P.S. By the 1974 photo she appears to still be 77' long. this is rough as guts but in the photo she is roughly 5mm wide and 20mm long so 5 into 20 =4, 77' Elco is roughly 20' wide so roughly 77' not 65' as I said rough as guts!

Total Posts: 332 | Joined: May 4, 2008 - 2:59am | IP Logged

Jimbo Melanson

New Member
  

    
Post a Reply To This Topic    Reply With Quotes     Edit Message   Posted on: Feb 8, 2016 - 5:40am
find when the next extreme low tide is and take a good look around. IT WILL ALWAYS BE WORTH IT! I too fear she is gone as I have said but.........no harm is looking.

Jimbo

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: Feb 8, 2016 - 6:16am
Dave
Wow great detective work, the 1974 aerial on that site clearly shows her before she burned, so the photo was probably taken in 1973 or so. Awesome. Then in the 1980 photo, she is sunk in the same place, a little different location than what we thought, I thought it was on the corner of the pier area. 2004 you can still see her. All the other photos must have been taken at high tide. But if someone can get up there, they know exactly where to look.
Thanks!
Take care,
TED


Total Posts: 2906 | Joined: Oct 16, 2006 - 7:42am | IP Logged

Jimbo Melanson

New Member
  

    
Post a Reply To This Topic    Reply With Quotes     Edit Message   Posted on: Feb 8, 2016 - 7:15am
Where are these photos? Would love a look

Jimbo

Total Posts: | Joined: Unregistered | IP Logged

David Buck

TOP BOSS
  

    
Post a Reply To This Topic    Reply With Quotes     Edit Message     View Profile of David Buck   Send Email To David Buck Posted on: Feb 8, 2016 - 8:54pm
Hi Ted,

Thanks, for some reason I just had to keep looking, glad I did the photos really help to nail a timeline and position down also as you can see in the 2004 colour shot the mudflat extends much further than where she is..It has been said that she was dredged up in 2003 but I really wonder if they would get that close with it being so shallow, o-well time will tell.

Jimbo,

HistoricAerials.com

Put Harlem River New York in the search box click search and with a little luck it will take you there, the first time I tried it I ended up in Miami ??? WHAT THE ---- so I tried again and it worked .

Once there, there are a line of year dates on the left and as you move between dates the same area of the photo is displayed, not bad!

If you do go and look let us know what you find, might not be the right time of year at the moment but you will know that better than I!

Good luck.

Dave.


Total Posts: 332 | Joined: May 4, 2008 - 2:59am | IP Logged

William Doyle

Advanced Member
  

    
Post a Reply To This Topic    Reply With Quotes     Edit Message     View Profile of William Doyle  Posted on: Feb 9, 2016 - 4:24am
Amazing detective work! The remains of the boat were not destroyed around 1974. The 2004 aerial photo, taken evidently at low tide, clearly reveals the shape of the boat in the right spot. I will go up there as soon as I can, though it may be tricky to access that area if it is a fenced-off transit yard as it appears. I shall report, I expect in the next few weeks.

William Doyle

Total Posts: 55 | Joined: Jan 5, 2015 - 10:20am | IP Logged

Jimbo Melanson

New Member
  

    
Post a Reply To This Topic    Reply With Quotes     Edit Message   Posted on: Feb 9, 2016 - 7:51am
I looked. 74 and then again 1980 she is in the same spot I check a few others approaching the year 2004 but those pics were too merky. It looks like she was still there in 2004 but after that gone. Again....maybe......she is still there covered in silt.

Jimbo

Total Posts: | Joined: Unregistered | IP Logged

Prev Page | Next Page

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15


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