The PT Boat Forum
http://www.ptboatforum.com/cgi-bin/MB2/netboard.cgi
» Forum Category: PT Boats of WWII
http://www.ptboatforum.com/cgi-bin/MB2/netboard.cgi?cid=101&fct=showf
» Forum Name: PT Boats - General
http://www.ptboatforum.com/cgi-bin/MB2/netboard.cgi?fct=gotoforum&cid=101&fid=102
» Topic:
PT torpeodes....
http://www.ptboatforum.com/cgi-bin/MB2/netboardr.cgi?cid=101&fid=102&tid=1336
Greetings, group:
Two questions about PT torpedoes:
Can anyone give me a definite time period when the PT's in the field began receiving the rack-launched Mk XIII torpedoes in place of the tube-launched Mk VIII's ? If I were to guess, I'd think it was around December 1943/January 1944, at least in the South Pacific. In the Mediterranean, it may have been a little later, and even then it seems to have depended on availability--I have seen a photo (undated) of one Ron 15 boat that carried two Mk VIII's forward and a pair of Mk. XIII's aft.
Second question: Has anyone run across any official Navy correspondence or documentation regarding the performance (or lack thereof) of the Mk. VIII? We've all read about how supposedly bad it was--one PT veteran informed me after an action the PT sailors would sink the unexploded torpedoes with rifle bullets. I'd like to know if any of this ever went up the chain of command.
Thanks all,
Gene Kirkland
Posted By: comcardiv1 | Posted on: May 9, 2009 - 4:20pm
Total Posts: | Joined: Unregistered
Gene;
Sometime after RON 12 arrived in Theatre, since RON 12 Officers developed the roll off rack. My guess is 4-6 months.
Take care,
TED
Posted By: TED WALTHER | Posted on: May 9, 2009 - 5:45pm
Total Posts: 3059 | Joined: Oct 16, 2006 - 7:42am
Gene: We replaced our Mark 8's with Mark 13's on P.T. 242 the first week of Jan. 1944 at Tulagi. We had shoot out with some Jap barges on Dec. 27th 1943 and they blew the war head off the port rear torpedo. The tube was damaged beyod repair and we were sent down to Tulagi to be outfitted with new Mark 13's. I believe we were one of the first boats in Ron 19 to get them. However on a post somertime back I noticed the picture of P.T. 167 when the Jap torpedo went through the bow of the boat and they had Mk 13's at that time. That was the first week of Nov. 1943. Bob Pickett was aboard the 167 at that time. He might could tell you when they got them
C. J. Willis
Posted By: CJ Willis | Posted on: May 9, 2009 - 7:33pm
Total Posts: 464 | Joined: Nov 5, 2006 - 5:02pm
Some rack install e-mails I got a few weeks ago, along with some other answers to questions asked by a modeler. Jack had also forwarded the rack question to Parker (Jack thought Parker may have meant 1944 not 43). I also asked Jack about performance of the Mark VIII and if he knew of any feedback sent up the chain of command. I'll let you know if he sends a response Gene.
I read about Dick offering to host your site, that would be great! Dick is a heck of a nice guy...
*********
Parker Miller, Radioman aboard PT 27:
Our boat got the drop racks in first part of 43. As a radioman I often wondered what that rotten egg smell had against me.. that old black powder shell always stuck with me for at least a week. Every time I passed flatus it would remind me that it was the smoke from the powder not the skipper running over a honey bucket or two. Quite a subject you brought up... to this day i smell rotten eggs and think of some of the different things we put up with... I remember the blue USN bed spreads but not the red paint.. McElroy and Hilner liked the green sick bay paint.. It would help them from getting seasick...and the smell of the burnt shells of the twin 50s that would end up in the quartermasters shack and choke up everyone.
*********
Jack Duncan, torpedoman aboard PT 103 (1943-44, also served on PTs 62 and 318):
As I recall, I believe we switched our tubes for side-launching racks in late '43 -- perhaps at Rendova??? Wouldn't bet the farm on the date or the place, however. Base force personnel did the job.
Hey! Gets murky back there! Seems there was a set of brackets on the top (roof) of the day room canopy for the cranks, one on each side. And the boat hooks were in brackets along the upper sides of the day room canopy if my ancient memory banks are still functioning.
How long to crank? Not long, but never thought of it in those terms. About like, and similar to, an old-fashioned store canvas awning. The firing mallets, one for each tube, were in a 20mm ready box on the Three-Boat. If we had intel reports of possible use of fish, we trained the tubes outboard while leaving our base, so there was no rush -- at least on the Three-Boat.
Tubes -- Not only a flash, but sometimes a fire as the lubricating grease inside the tube was known to ignite. Very embarrassing on a dark night. Otherwise, it was just a momentary flash directly behind the torpedo as black powder goes all at once, unlike smokeless powder that's relatively slower burning.
Were you aware that the 3" powder charge used to blow the torpedoes out of the tubes consisted of large grains of sphero-hexagon black powder? Because electrical connections couldn't be relied upon in the humid tropics to remotely fire the round from the cockpit, a signal light on the deck was supposed to light up simultaneously alerting us to hit the firing pin with a mallet.
As for the "armor plate" in the cockpit aft of the helm, I have seen other references to it, but never saw such a thing on any boat. Could it have been something cooked up by the crew of some boat somewhere or perhaps Elco might have added it to much later boats? Or was it something immediately removed after leaving the factory as horribly in the way??? I joined the boat after she arrived in the South Pacific Theater.
The aft part of the dayroom has a life ring on your model. There was a double hatch there for getting out of the dayroom, part atop the dayroom canopy, part on the aft bulkhead for accessing the engineroom. Your model is as I first joined the crew with the old 20mm heavy mount with a wheel to elevate the gun cradle for anti-aircraft. If I recall, the mount weighed about 1100 pounds. It was replaced with a tripod of channel iron -- then a 40mm Bofors went on later! To counter that added weight and the added armament, we got bigger engines.
Inre your question about muffler actuators - they weren’t in "my department" except to take special care not to touch them in climbing back up on the boat after swimming. Your mention of "grease bags???" I recall nothing that would qualify as such, just rods and swivels that could be bent if stepped upon. That would incur the wrath of the motor macs.
The only way to get back aboard was up over the stern via the mufflers. Except one time at Treasury when some sort of sea snake found a warm spot between the mufflers and the transom. I climbed a rope that was thrown over the side for me on that occasion - of course, all such creatures were "poisonous," whether or not they were.
The factory-supplied dingy usually went missing soon after the first firefight. Splinters, you know. So when we wanted to visit another boat, we would just jump in and swim. Some boats kept them, most did not - besides, we needed all the deck space we could get. The balsa raft usually went atop the chart house inasmuch as we slept on the foredeck under tarps rigged to keep the rain/sun off.
Those fancy names of boats that we hear were not too common back then.
When we painted the below-decks on the 318 a brilliant white and the metal trim around doors a bright red, acquiring officer's blue bedspreads for the bunks, she was given the title of "Show Boat." Otherwise, she was the "18-Boat." Oh, my, revisionist history, eh?
Whenever the boat had to be drydocked -- or when it could -- we would scrape the bottom of marine growth and Copperoid (sp?) paint, let the wood dry as long as we could, then repaint the bottom with Copperoid. Meanwhile, we would usually repaint the sides if it needed it. No recollection of "Base Force B**tards" ever helping. Now, the decks needed repainting even more often, of course -- we lived on them. Below decks was steamingly hot most of the time, so we slept mostly on deck when not on patrol, under our tarp/tent. As I recall, during the rainy season, we could go below to our bunks to keep out of the rain -- the rain which also brought some degree of coolness.
At Stirling Island, we were able to tie up to trees on the shoreline and set up a primitive camp ashore under the rain forest trees -- and another tarp.
Rust was just never allowed to happen and it was a constant fight on the gun mounts and torpedo racks. The torpedoes themselves wore a heavy coat of "rust preventive compound" that was a brownish color. To blacken it, I would burn diesel procured from a PGM (converted 110' subchaser) and catch the soot in tin cans like coffee cans that Chelsea cigarettes came in, dumping the cigarettes over the side. Later on, we could draw a powder called carbon black to reduce the shine of the torpedoes. Much better!!!
Yes, there was some (mostly light-hearted) heartburn with the Squadron 5 Base Force in that they got two trips to civilization -- once to New Zealand, once to Australia. The boat crews got to "go invade new islands."
Of course, as the boats moved up, the Ron 5 Base Force had nothing to do until a new base facility (PT Base), a different command, could establish an operating base. The boats, as described in the "Fishing" story, were on their own until a base arrived to set up housekeeping with mess tents (later Quonset huts), drydocks, armories, torpedo shops, etc., etc. Well, usually, the Seabees who arrived almost with the first wave, would adopt us if we needed something right now.
Wow! You two guys are dredging up memories that hadn't surfaced in 50-60 years, you know!
I have no knowledge about the painting of the boats on arrival in SoPac as the 103 was already at Tulagi when I joined the crew.
BTW, the original turret covers were canvas with leather reinforced seams. I made my knife sheath with the leather salvaged when we got new all-canvas covers. My knife handle was made from the Plexiglas that we removed from the windshield, replacing it with plywood. The knife disappeared -- just didn't show up -- but I still have the sheath with another knife in it. Good leather!
(in response to some test color samples that I sent him, "mixed" from info found on Garth's site)
Is this a test??? The left one seems correct, but I was unaware that there was some sort of standard after the boats left the factory. The one on the right looks too brown. We were GREEN. This is a Supply Corps question from GSK (General Store Keeping), not a crew problem. We just used the paint, we didn't order it. One time somebody came up with idea to paint our deck a light blue to hide in the water. A plane saw us on patrol out of Emirau, reporting that we really stood out! We repainted the deck immediately! Jap planes by that time were getting rare, but you never knew!
At a PT Boat-All Hands reunion at LAX in 1967, I met a guy who claimed to be the Supply Officer of Ron 5. I was unaware 'til then that we even had one! "Officers' Country" was always inviolate, remember. He didn't do a very good job or we wouldn't have always been scrounging.
The paint source? No idea. We would go over to GSK, the supply hut that I suppose was attached to the Base (??), and draw paint in accordance with the chit that we had been handed by the Skipper/X.O./Third Officer. Where did the chit originate? I suppose from the Supply Officer that I met at LAX in 1967.
Posted By: Jeff D | Posted on: May 10, 2009 - 3:18am
Total Posts: 2200 | Joined: Dec 21, 2006 - 1:30am
Mid-1943 ..............
Posted By: TGConnelly | Posted on: May 10, 2009 - 6:31am
Total Posts: | Joined: Unregistered
I previosuly posted a photo of PT 167 coming into Rendova on November 6, 1943, the day after she was hit by the torpedo. This photo shows roll-off racks. See page 4, RON 10 Stripes to Solid Color.
On a recent trip to the National Archives I scanned a number of photos that show roll off racks in January of 1944. Here are some of the more interesting ones.
[image]http://i130.photobucket.com/albums/p249/ptboats/G%20R%20Powell/80G58532.jpg[/image]
[image]http://i130.photobucket.com/albums/p249/ptboats/G%20R%20Powell/80G58533.jpg[/image]
[image]http://i130.photobucket.com/albums/p249/ptboats/G%20R%20Powell/80G58547.jpg[/image]
[image]http://i130.photobucket.com/albums/p249/ptboats/G%20R%20Powell/80G585525857558576.jpg[/image]
[image]http://i130.photobucket.com/albums/p249/ptboats/G%20R%20Powell/80G5857858579.jpg[/image]
G R Powell
Posted By: G R Powell | Posted on: May 10, 2009 - 7:27am
Total Posts: | Joined: Unregistered
G.R.
can you enlarge photo 58533? I think I see something interesting in the backround.
Thanks,
TED
Posted By: TED WALTHER | Posted on: May 10, 2009 - 7:44am
Total Posts: 3059 | Joined: Oct 16, 2006 - 7:42am
Ted,
Here it is.
[image]http://i130.photobucket.com/albums/p249/ptboats/G%20R%20Powell/80G585322.jpg[/image]
G R Powell
Posted By: G R Powell | Posted on: May 10, 2009 - 8:18am
Total Posts: | Joined: Unregistered
Re: Picture 58532 G.R. The archives show this picture taken 22-28 Jan, 1944 at Rendova. That is not correct That is our boat and crew and I was there when the picture was taken and it was at Green Island in July or August of 1944.
C. J. Willis
Posted By: CJ Willis | Posted on: May 10, 2009 - 9:11am
Total Posts: 464 | Joined: Nov 5, 2006 - 5:02pm
G.R.
A very interesting photo. C.J. might be right, If you enlarge the photo some more as I did, you can see the crane hoist next to the boat at the pier. I might be doing some wishful "seeing" here but doesn't the boat outboard of "242" look like a 77' Elco? I also see what looks like a liferaft on its port bow. If so, we all know what this means.....don't we???? maybe?????
The 80' boat in the forground is also interesting as it appears to be Huck Wood's PT 124, but it might also be LTjg Clarke Murray's PT 125 or LTjg Johnny Iles PT 126. 124 and 125 were transferred to RON 10 and 126 went to RON 9 around this time period. The last number does blur as you enlarge it but it is definatly PT 120 something.
Anyway, notice the Mk XVlll launching tube forward and the MK Xlll torpedo and roll off rack aft. These two 80' boats are also painted in what looks like a homemade/local version of Measure 31/5P, as it isn't as sharp as the Factory applied 31/5P as seen on the color photos of 332 and 333.
Take care,
TED
Posted By: TED WALTHER | Posted on: May 10, 2009 - 3:01pm
Total Posts: 3059 | Joined: Oct 16, 2006 - 7:42am
Interesting information from Jeff D., thanks for posting it.
Also interesting that he doesn't recollect the rear cockpit armor on the 103-class 80' Elcos.
There are plenty of vintage photos showing the rear cockpit bulkhead in place on 103 and later-class 80-footers in the forward area. I'm certain these were standard Elco factory installations, not "cooked up" in the field. On some boats the small fore-and-aft "wing" at the starboard edge of the rear cockpit bulkhead was removed, and on others the entire assembly was taken out, but there were many others that retained them, PT 109 for one (check the JFK-in-the-cockpit photos) and PT 117 for another (her high rear cockpit armor shows clearly in the destroyed-117-at-Rendova photo on page 121 of "At Close Quarters").
Posted By: Drew Cook | Posted on: May 10, 2009 - 3:05pm
Total Posts: 1306 | Joined: Oct 19, 2006 - 10:44am
Drew;
On 80' Elcos number of Skippers had it removed because they felt it gave them an unfair advantage in action engagements while the boats gunners and torpedomen were standing out in the wind. Plus it really did allow for easier access to the helm if the cockpit rear splinter shield was removed. Alot of the first series 80' Elcos had this removed by early 1944.
TED
p.s. the 80 Elco was the only one with this type of armour, Higgins did not have this plate and on 77' Elcos they only had a small fold up shield that nobody used except to mount a radio antenna on as in PT 61's case or as a seat.
Posted By: TED WALTHER | Posted on: May 10, 2009 - 3:46pm
Total Posts: 3059 | Joined: Oct 16, 2006 - 7:42am
Ted . . .
Higgins PT Series PT 625 - PT 660 most of which were sent or schedule to be sent to Russia (23), state side (9), had the bridge completely surrounded with armor plate including the wind screen. I have some illustrations below that illustrate this.
Armor was attached to the wind screen and top, then stretch along the side and ended at the gun turret, then another 90 degrees turn as it stretched halfway across the back. I assume the helm wall (back of chart room) had armor plate.
Dick . . .
[image]http://www.gdinc.com/Higgins-01.gif[/image]
[image]http://www.gdinc.com/Higgins-02.gif[/image]
[image]http://www.gdinc.com/Higgins-03.jpg[/image]
Posted By: Dick | Posted on: May 10, 2009 - 8:36pm
Total Posts: 1417 | Joined: Aug 27, 2006 - 6:36pm
Beautiful drawings Dick, thank you for sharing!
And thank you also G. R., interesting photos.
Glad to share Drew, I'll let Jack know he is appreciated. He sent this in response to my torpedo questions:
Q: Can you tell me about the performance of the Mark VIII torpedo, and if any feedback about them was sent back along the chain of command?
[blue]How would you like drawings of the components that we each had to do during Torpedo School? Remember, these are not shop drawings by draftsmen, but by a 17-year-old kid who was assigned the task.
As far as performance and feedback, I can give you the speed and depth setting, but as what is now an E-4 and E-5 (TM3/c and TM2/c) no one ever included us in any briefing -- if indeed any briefings as to performance were held. Besides, what could we do about it? All shop maintenance or repairs were done either on a tender (rarely) or at an MTB Base. They just swapped us torpedoes. I'm not sure why the Ron had Base Force torpedomen -- did they augment the MTB Base or what? Wasn't my job, so I didn't care.
When we got the MK 13s, we were elated due to their each being + or - a thousand pounds lighter, 6 knots faster and we got rid of those hated tubes. I don't ever recall any Ron 5 boats getting to fire a MK 13, however. And I can't remember when we changed -- was it at Rendova???? Not in my log.[/blue]
Q: Yes Jack, I'd love to see the drawings. Are they done by you? As to performance, I was more interested in your personal observations, not "official" specs.
[blue]Yes. Each student in torpedo school had to make these drawings on which we were graded.
The 103 only fired four fish in all of its history as far as I know, got three explosions supposedly, Japs lost no ships, so somewhere a reef got smaller ????? It was protocol to launch and turn quickly due to the MK VIII's slow speed of 27 knots. It was also protocol to launch at low speed, then haul ass in another direction.[/blue]
Q: Interesting, from what I've read you guys did a lot more damage with your guns than the boat's namesake. I've also read that early war torpedoes had more than their share of issues, compounded by higher-ups not willing to listen to sub commanders telling them of the problems.
[blue]Yes, we were primarily MGBs as the Brits designated some of theirs. That's why I eventually became the mortarman, shooting the 60mm mortar to "hold piss call" along the coasts where Jap soldiers were thought to be encamped. Bang one in every now and then. I could also shoot flare shells to illuminate targets -- one didn't go off, but sailed over the row of hills and set ablaze an apparent Jap fuel cache somewhere opposite Dyaul Island -- west coast of New Ireland -- my second fuel dump!!!!
If I had been running the war (with today's knowledge) I'd have dumped two of the torpedoes and added more .50s. I did see a couple of boats with 40mms on their foredecks -- PT 59 was one, the other was an Elco 80 from some other Ron.
The early war torpedoes to which you are referring were the Mark 14s carried by subs with new magnetic exploders that were defective. Destroyers carried Mark 15s and I never heard of any problems with them, except the Japs' Long Lance fish were superb and long-running, although I still don't understand their fire control system to hit moving targets miles away.
I read a book years ago about the awful union running The Navy Torpedo Station at Newport and how the union screwed up most of the programs.[/blue]
I look forward to seeing his drawings...
Posted By: Jeff D | Posted on: May 11, 2009 - 4:07am
Total Posts: 2200 | Joined: Dec 21, 2006 - 1:30am
CJ & Ted,
Thanks for your correction of the location and date of the photo. The photographer who took these shots, CPU 9, also went to Green Island because I got some of his photos there too. The first one below he shows to be at Green Island in March of 1944.
[image]http://i130.photobucket.com/albums/p249/ptboats/G%20R%20Powell/80G59349CAPTION-1.jpg[/image]
The second photo is labeled as Rendova in January. Is this the dry dock at Rendova? Did you have a dry dock at Green? Ted, notice also the camo pattern you mentioned on the other photo.
[image]http://i130.photobucket.com/albums/p249/ptboats/G%20R%20Powell/80G58526.jpg[/image]
G R Powell
Posted By: G R Powell | Posted on: May 11, 2009 - 5:25am
Total Posts: | Joined: Unregistered
G.R.
From the back round the last photo with drydocks looks like Bau Island Rendova. There should be a third drydock to the left of these, notice the line going acroos the photo? To the right across the lagoon was a small dock, then further left a larger dock. notice the two other boats out in the channel off in the distance. Also notice all the props in the forground! I count 7!
Take care,
TED
P.S. Dick, sorry I forgot the late Higgins class boats, if we got these in the field, presumably for the invasion of Japan, I am sure most of the boats would have "lost" this plate too.
Posted By: TED WALTHER | Posted on: May 11, 2009 - 5:57am
Total Posts: 3059 | Joined: Oct 16, 2006 - 7:42am
Thanks Jeff . . .
These are 3 of the 40 plus drawings that are part of my Higgins project. There will be exterior and interior views showing the various differences between the various Higgins series. Typical drawings will illustrate the differences between Series 71-94, 197-254, 265-313, 450-485, and 625-660. However in some cases series will be combined. There will be orthographic views of the side, deck, bow & stern, and isometric views of the each interior compartment.
Dick . . .
PS: TED . . . I would image so, that was a lot of steel armor plating to wrap that large bridge – funny how they stopped it just before the gun turrets.
Posted By: Dick | Posted on: May 11, 2009 - 12:26pm
Total Posts: 1417 | Joined: Aug 27, 2006 - 6:36pm
Dick,
How the @#$%! do you color those? I've been trying to ....... and have been going NUTS.
Garth
Posted By: TGConnelly | Posted on: May 11, 2009 - 12:46pm
Total Posts: | Joined: Unregistered
Garth . . .
I create all the artwork in Adobe Illustrator which is completely different then photo imaging (Adobe PhotoShop or the likes) software you are working in. All the line are hard lines like using a pen and unlike CAD (unconnected short little dashes) the the lines and curves are all Bézier curves (continuos lines and planes). To add a fill color the desired area has to be a closed plane limiting the color to stay with the lines. What might be happening in your Photo-Type case the black is broken or not completely closed causing the color to bleed out ever where you done want it.
To add fill color you must close off the area with a pen or brush tool. Make sure their is no white or light gray showing in the line or the color will bleed out.
Dick . . .
Posted By: Dick | Posted on: May 11, 2009 - 3:18pm
Total Posts: 1417 | Joined: Aug 27, 2006 - 6:36pm
Oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooh.
Posted By: TGConnelly | Posted on: May 11, 2009 - 3:47pm
Total Posts: | Joined: Unregistered
Ted,
I'm aware that some of the 80' Elcos had their rear cockpit armor removed, for the reasons you mentioned as well as a weight-saving measure (one of many).
My point was that many of the boats retained the rear cockpit armor -- didn't have it removed -- and you can see examples of this in photos of all 80' Elcos throughout the war, from Guadalcanal back to the Philippines.
Posted By: Drew Cook | Posted on: May 11, 2009 - 4:38pm
Total Posts: 1306 | Joined: Oct 19, 2006 - 10:44am
With all the talks about armor plates on PT boat, can anyone verify that
they were 1/4 " thick
Victor
Victor K Chun
Posted By: victorkchun | Posted on: May 12, 2009 - 6:42pm
Total Posts: | Joined: Unregistered
C.J.,
Would you mind contacting me by email? I have something I want to send you regarding that photo of your boat getting a new engine, photo 80 G 58532, posted above. Contact me at Gerald_Powell@baylor.edu
Thanks.
G R Powell
Posted By: G R Powell | Posted on: May 12, 2009 - 6:52pm
Total Posts: | Joined: Unregistered
Jack's classroom drawings for anyone interested:
[url]http://www.pt103.com/temp/TorpedoDrawings.zip[/url]
Posted By: Jeff D | Posted on: May 16, 2009 - 8:54am
Total Posts: 2200 | Joined: Dec 21, 2006 - 1:30am
This is great, Jeff--thanks for sharing!
Gene K.
Posted By: comcardiv1 | Posted on: May 18, 2009 - 12:04am
Total Posts: | Joined: Unregistered