| Author |
Topic: Cockpit "Jump Seat" |
|
Will Day
TOP BOSS
|
  
 Posted on: Nov 7, 2012 - 3:08pm
|
I remember reading that in at least some cases it was for more freedom of movement in the cockpit area and a desire by some skippers, for the sake of morale, not to be the only ones shielded from incoming fire.
Plus there were always weight considerations.
Will |
Total Posts: 1955 | Joined:
Oct 8, 2006 - 4:19pm | IP
Logged
|
|
TED WALTHER
TOP BOSS
|
Posted on: Nov 7, 2012 - 7:57pm
|
Weight ok, Understood, but if I was the man, I would not want to be the guy with the 1/4 " steel plate or whatever it was, while the rest of my guys were hanging out naked as a jay bird! I would have s---canned it too!
TED
|
Total Posts: 3059 | Joined:
Oct 16, 2006 - 7:42am | IP
Logged
|
|
Will Day
TOP BOSS
|
Posted on: Nov 7, 2012 - 9:32pm
|
Amen, brother. . .
Will |
Total Posts: 1955 | Joined:
Oct 8, 2006 - 4:19pm | IP
Logged
|
|
Black Ops
New Member
|
Posted on: Nov 8, 2012 - 7:59am
|
Ted, a nice sentiment, when writing a Captain Storm comic book, or a good bond drive WWII movie.
However that's a little macho to say, more importantly as a skipper it is your job to see the mission is carried out, the crew/boat is returned to base, and the injured "unprotected seamen" get to an infirmary. Not to see you, your exec, and maybe chief get blow away - being John Wayne. I'm sure the Navy would think it quit childish to endanger every mission just to be one of the guys. Now it would be a different call for RHIB type boats.
I think Will's comment about making more room on the bridge is right on. You can see how restricting the back and wing armor plate is when enclosing the helm area. Many of the photos show the back and wing armor removed but the front and both side armor is in tact, still providing adequate protection, but probably not as much as the Navy wanted.
That's a great shot of the 196, you see just by the enormous amount of weapons they clearly had to loose weight and stripping off "all" the armor was severely needed, and an easy way to shed some needed poundage. WIth weight always an issue, I can't even imagine the weight of all the ammunition let alone all the hardware.
I always thought this was an interesting subject " armor plating removed to be one-with-the-crew ", but that is not an officers job.
I'm sure captain storm didn't have any armor plating !
Trying this image link thing twice to see which one works, bracket style 1 above and bracket style 2 below, we see which one works.
{image}http://i130.photobucket.com/albums/p249/ptboats/CS-04.jpg{/image}
|
Total Posts: | Joined:
Unregistered | IP
Logged
|
|
victorkchun
New Member
|
Posted on: Nov 8, 2012 - 8:56am
|
HI TED,
In your image of PT 196, you mentioned A. Vanderbilt . I assumed he was the one on the
right. What's that "thing" between the two guys blocking Alfred' body?
Victor
Victor K Chun |
Total Posts: | Joined:
Unregistered | IP
Logged
|
|
TED WALTHER
TOP BOSS
|
Posted on: Nov 8, 2012 - 10:38am
|
Black Ops;
I did drive 24' Zodiac Hurricane and USMI 11m Rhibs, as well as 38' Halter HSB, PBR's, PBL's and a few others as a Combatant Craft Crewman for 12 yearrs in NSW. So you see, I am naturally not a real fan of steel armor plate, that extra weight slows speed!!!
Victor;
Both photos I posted are of Ens. Peter R. Gadd's PT 131 RON 7.
The first photo is PT 131 UNREP-ing off the Starboard side of USS Wachapreague(AGP-8) October 1944(sometime between 13-21 OCT)
The second photo is PT 131 moored (Nested) on Port side of USS Wachapreague(AGP-8) OCT 1944.
The photo I have of LT. Alfred Vanderbilt at wheel of PT 196 RON 12, I will post when I get home, with two photos Frank sent me of other boats with "Jump Seat"
Take care,
TED
|
Total Posts: 3059 | Joined:
Oct 16, 2006 - 7:42am | IP
Logged
|
|
Black Ops
New Member
|
Posted on: Nov 8, 2012 - 12:29pm
|
Ted, hold on, I wasn't trying to peeve you off, or demean your bravery.
I was making simple comments related to a WWII 80' wooden PT boat taking on heavy armed barges and other similar craft as well as capital ships. And for the command and control of the boat to remain capable of giving orders and making decisions. Its not up to the seaman to make those decision because a skipper removed all the boats protection just to be one of the good ole boys.
Your boats were special warfare or better said special ops, They were never designed for armor nor was it intended. Your boats didn't take on heavily armed barges, destroyers or cruisers, Your boat were to operate stealthy and deliver and recovers special teams.
I didn't mean to insult you, if I did, I apologize, but this wild ass imagination that PT skippers had distane for their armor because "they just want to be one of the guys" is crap, sure looks like good old boy Kennedy kept his armor. Of course I'm sure he removed it later.
|
Total Posts: | Joined:
Unregistered | IP
Logged
|
|
PeterTareBuilder
TOP BOSS
|
Posted on: Nov 8, 2012 - 3:41pm
|
I think many skippers removed the armour so there would be greater freedom of movement and also less chance of injury. remember that it was the bridge area armour that Kennedy hit that in turn damaged his back.
Cheers
"Give me a faster PT boat for I'd like to get out of harm's way!" |
Total Posts: 494 | Joined:
Jun 24, 2008 - 5:59pm | IP
Logged
|
|
Hadly
New Member
|
Posted on: Nov 8, 2012 - 3:46pm
|
Kennedy's back problems were chronic from earlier in his life. Not a result from the collision or war time activity.
SH
|
Total Posts: | Joined:
Unregistered | IP
Logged
|
|
TED WALTHER
TOP BOSS
|
Posted on: Nov 8, 2012 - 5:18pm
|
Black Ops;
No harm no foul, just stating my background.
I regards to the armor plate, looking at photos it seems this was mostly done on the earlier boats. I still really think it was a weight thing, you must remember, alot of the early Skippers had the opportunity to train on 77' boats that were originally in RON 4 at Melville. The 80' Elco was slightly slower than the 77' Elco, so this was in their thinking at the time, However, how it carried on into later Squadrons like RON 21(also RON 24, 25, 27,) I don't know, maybe because Paul Rennell RON Exec, later RON CO was originally from RON 1 and originally Skipper of PT 21, who knows??? I do know in the later boats, this was not the case, they kept their armor, in fact, Higgins also installed a similar set up on their later boats.
Take care,
TED
|
Total Posts: 3059 | Joined:
Oct 16, 2006 - 7:42am | IP
Logged
|
|
|
