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-109 information
http://www.ptboatforum.com/cgi-bin/MB2/netboardr.cgi?cid=101&fid=102&tid=2295
Hello----new to the site, nice place with lots of good information. I have the old Revell 1/72 PT-109 and plan on doing it OOB and if it comes out good maybe trying to do some customizing and scratch building to do it as it was on it's last mission. My father was a WWII vet and got me into modeling way back in the early 60's. I remember he had done an LST and the battleship Arizona, Odd I thought as he was with the USAAF building airstrips on Guam and Okinawa for the bombers on their way to Tokyo.He even said he "tried" flying a B-17, he was training in Nevada I think and the pilot put him in co-pilot seat and "gave him the controls". He kiddingly said he had the wings flapping! So much for my Dad's stories.I am guessing that PT 109 had no A frame behind the cockpit, it was painted tropical green, and before the August 2-3 mission it would have had the balsa float on the deck in front of the cockpit? Thanks for having a great site and hoping i can do this kit justice. I just finished the old Revell 1/249 USS Buckley and will post pictures asap.---tHANKS---John
Posted By: John V | Posted on: Sep 4, 2011 - 7:46am
Total Posts: 45 | Joined: Sep 4, 2011 - 7:19am
Welcome aboard John. You may want to check out Dave's build on an earlier post. Should give you some real insiration.
[url]http://www.ptboats.org/cgi-local/sitenetbbs/netboardr.cgi?fid=102&cid=101&tid=1847&sc=20&pg=1&x=0[/url]
Gary
Posted By: Gary Paulsen | Posted on: Sep 4, 2011 - 9:18am
Total Posts: 249 | Joined: Feb 14, 2009 - 6:31am
Or, ... go to www.ptboatworld.com and look at the build by Fritz Koopman, ... it's pretty accurate in my view.
Garth
Posted By: TGConnelly | Posted on: Sep 4, 2011 - 12:33pm
Total Posts: | Joined: Unregistered
Welcome to the site John and thank you Gary for the reference to my model. It's great to see another person building this wonderful boat.
The evidence does indicate that the mast was removed at some point I was looking at a letter I received from Dick Keresey of PT-105 and he told me that a lot of skippers either removed the mast or folded it down out of the way. The pictures of 109 indicate it is gone and the photos indicate it was gone before JFK was her skipper. The photos of 109 don't show the balsa raft and it was definitely not there during her sinking or I'm sure they would have used it.
I'd like to direct you to the following site which has a wonderful history of the 109 boat.
http://pt-king.gdinc.com/index.html
Also check out this site which has wonderful drawings of 103 class PT's and will help you with any detail you wish to add to your boat.
http://www.pt103.com/
Finally you'll find Dr. Al Ross very helpful with all things PT Boat.
I hope you have fun with your build and if I can be of any help please let me know.
Dave
David Waples
Posted By: David Waples | Posted on: Sep 4, 2011 - 6:34pm
Total Posts: 1679 | Joined: Jan 2, 2007 - 9:55pm
Steve Sobieralski back-dated the big Italeri kit to the 109, that build (featured in the new BUILDING, DETAILING AND CONVERTING THE 1:35 SCALE ITALERI PT-596) could be a helpful reference for you, sir.
He depicted the boat with the mast folded down, rather than being removed. Personally, I feel that would be more accurate than having it totally removed.
Because, wasn't there a light on the top of the mast? Wouldn't the boats need that light to aid in navigation and to help in keeping formation?
But, what do I know? Apparently nothing.
Posted By: TGConnelly | Posted on: Sep 5, 2011 - 6:21am
Total Posts: | Joined: Unregistered
Thanks Gary, Garth and Dave. I will definitely check out those other sites for information. I have no clue about the balsa float or if or when it disappeared.
Another question is Kennedy's second boat. I heard it was a 77 foot Elco converted to a gunboat, removing the torpedo tubes and adding extra guns. i think there were three of these boats, PTs 59, 60, and 61. Is there a model kit for a possible 77 foot Elco boat? Thanks for all the help it is much appreciated.---John
Posted By: John V | Posted on: Sep 5, 2011 - 6:21am
Total Posts: 45 | Joined: Sep 4, 2011 - 7:19am
Yes, he assumed command of the 59, just as it was being converted to, what I call a PTGB ... As a PTGB, the 59 had two 40mm Mk3 guns (fore and aft), retained the two twin .50s in the turrets, had her tubes removed and had three (to each side) single, shielded .50 where the tubes were located, and there is photographic evidence that she carried two twin (and shielded) .50s at frame 22.
Go to www.ptboatworld.com to see "in action" shots of her on a training run provided by B.G. Marshall.
Currently, there was only the now out-of-production 1:96 resin kit from Gulfstream of a 77 footer (first series) and there are a couple of resin 1:350 kits of the 77 footer from WHITE ENSIGN MODELS and a Russian company - that I forgot the name of.
Garth
Posted By: TGConnelly | Posted on: Sep 5, 2011 - 7:04am
Total Posts: | Joined: Unregistered
Garth
Surprised at your post about using the mast light. Unless I miss my guess, I would say these were never lit up in the War Zone. My God, it would be like taking out an ad and telling the enemy where they were. In my many conversations with PT BOAT VETERANS over the years, not one can recall ever using a mast light in the War Zone. In fact, I recall several had mentioned they would tape over the switch for certain lights so as never to make a mistake in putting it on.
Skippers were very cautious about any light escaping from the boat, and would even tape a good portion of the illuminating dials, black out any windows, and black over the sky lights. You do bring up a good point about the mast being removed. I have seen several shots of the 103 class boats with the mast's in the stowed positions. Also, some boats had their mast's removed in photo's by the censor's, which could be mistaken for boats having the mast's removed. In 1998 PT-109 Crewmember, Gerard Zinser told me the boats mast was down. In my haste, I never really asked if he meant removed, or stowed. As far as the mast light, I never knew anyone in my conversations that put one on. This again does not in any way mean that it was never done during the War, but highly remote.......
Posted By: Frank J Andruss Sr | Posted on: Sep 5, 2011 - 7:57am
Total Posts: 3497 | Joined: Oct 9, 2006 - 6:09am
Frank ...
What I mean, and what I meant, is - IF anyone would just LISTEN to me; is they would not have the light(s) on during the time that they were "on station" or in action; BUT in port or at their bases or while enroute to the patrol areas, ... to help avoid collisions in port and help the boats stay in formation while getting to the patrol areas ...
A most logical and thought-out assumption to make; as based on things my father told me about what they did in the Philippines on SC-699.
Understand now?
I'm not saying these things willy-nilly ...
As for the mast? In my OPINION ... folded down ...
Garth
Posted By: TGConnelly | Posted on: Sep 5, 2011 - 8:28am
Total Posts: | Joined: Unregistered
Sorry Garth, that is not what you said in your previous post. Had you done so, I might have amended my comments. Not a mind reader here:
Posted By: Frank J Andruss Sr | Posted on: Sep 5, 2011 - 8:38am
Total Posts: 3497 | Joined: Oct 9, 2006 - 6:09am
Well, ... if someone had asked me ... maybe I could have been afforded the opportunity to clarify my statements as opposed to being dismissed by two individuals here all of the time ...
But, hey ... no skin off my nose ...
Posted By: TGConnelly | Posted on: Sep 5, 2011 - 8:45am
Total Posts: | Joined: Unregistered
John,
If you're into scratch-building, there are two 77' hulls available. MicroGlass [url] microglass.net [/url] offers a 1/32 scale fiberglass hull with your choice of plans. Wayne Traxel, who lurks on this site [:-veryhappy-:] offers a fiberglass hull, deck, and superstructure for the 77' boats in 1/24.
Al Ross
Posted By: alross2 | Posted on: Sep 5, 2011 - 9:48am
Total Posts: 993 | Joined: Oct 30, 2006 - 8:19pm
Since John said that he was doing the Revell kit; I don't THINK he wants to do a BIG model, Mr. Ross. That's why I did not mention those semi-kits ...
Garth
Posted By: TGConnelly | Posted on: Sep 5, 2011 - 10:11am
Total Posts: | Joined: Unregistered
John,
Here''s a shot of the 1/96 Gulfstream and 1/350 WEM 77' hulls. As moulded, both are of the first series boats, but they can be fairly easily- modified to a second series. The gray hull has been partially modified to the later boat configuration by recarving the back of the cockpit to the streamlined curve and removing the boot on the front face of the charthouse. I still have to add the deck stiffeners and locker aft of the turrets, along with some other items. Might finish it someday...
[IMaGe]http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i204/alross2/IMG_0526.jpg[/IMaGe]
Al Ross
Posted By: alross2 | Posted on: Sep 5, 2011 - 11:30am
Total Posts: 993 | Joined: Oct 30, 2006 - 8:19pm
Greetings John,
Well we've managed to open up the dark cloud than hangs over this forum. I hoped it wouldn't happen but I thought when I answered your question about the 109 mast I guess it was inevitable. Every photo of the 109 in combat shows no indication of a mast. The most telling photo is that of the 109 under Kennedy which appears on the jacket of the National Geographic book "Collision with History, The Search for John F. Kennedy's PT109". That photo isn't great but there is clearly no sign of a mast laying down on the day cabin. Until somebody can produce evidence that the 109 had her classic A frame mast, my belief and my interpretation is that she did not.
John, if you wish to model your boat with the mast I think that's fine. I love those masts myself and would have been very happy to model the boat that way had the evidence been there. That's just how I model. I have no problems with anyone doing it their own way because we do this hobby for enjoyment.
For the 77' Elco the only thing I can add that hasn't been said already is that Frank's Mosquito Boat Hobby lists a 1:20 77' Elco and he offers this in the 59 configuration. It's very expensive and geared more towards RC operations. I don't know if Frank's is still in business. You would have to reach out to him to find out but his web site is still active. Here's a link if you're interested...
http://www.franksmosquitoboathobbies.com/pt59.htm
I hope you enjoy your build and that our little dark cloud doesn't run you off. There are some very good people here. We look forward to seeing your progress.
Dave
David Waples
Posted By: David Waples | Posted on: Sep 5, 2011 - 11:34am
Total Posts: 1679 | Joined: Jan 2, 2007 - 9:55pm
Here's my boat so far. I can't do tropical green, no airbrush yet, am relocating so it won't be up and running until I relocate next year.So its rattle cans and bottles for this build. I am using Testors medium green for this OOB build. As for the mast from what that ex 109 member said it almost can be taken that "down" ment folded in the down position? Just an educated guess.---John
[IMG]http://i90.photobucket.com/albums/k256/john5353/P9050010_01.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]http://i90.photobucket.com/albums/k256/john5353/P9050011_01.jpg[/IMG]
Posted By: John V | Posted on: Sep 5, 2011 - 11:39am
Total Posts: 45 | Joined: Sep 4, 2011 - 7:19am
Sorry I opened a can of worms, NOT my style. I am not going with a mast up or down. The only picture I have is of Kennedy and his crew in front of cabin and there is no mast present in any form. Again thanks to ALL and hope I didn't start a "family feud". I will post pictures as soon as I figure it out.---John
Posted By: John V | Posted on: Sep 5, 2011 - 11:46am
Total Posts: 45 | Joined: Sep 4, 2011 - 7:19am
Boy, I just stopped by to see "what condition my condition was in" and what a hornets nest I found.
John, on your links you need to change "IMG" to be spelled out "image"
Here is the clickable links from John's message,
[image]http://i90.photobucket.com/albums/k256/john5353/P9050010_01.jpg[/image]
[image]http://i90.photobucket.com/albums/k256/john5353/P9050011_01.jpg[/image]
SH
(yes these are my real initials - I didn't know Dick want us to use our real names spelled out, I apologize Dick)
Posted By: Hadly | Posted on: Sep 5, 2011 - 11:52am
Total Posts: | Joined: Unregistered
It's not your fault John. Just have fun with your build.
FYI, Revell is actually considering updating this kit. Nothing for sure but I'm hoping that they do much as they did with their B-17 recently released.
Dave
David Waples
Posted By: David Waples | Posted on: Sep 5, 2011 - 11:56am
Total Posts: 1679 | Joined: Jan 2, 2007 - 9:55pm
Test picture---John
[image]http://i90.photobucket.com/albums/k256/john5353/P9050003_01.jpg[/image]
Posted By: John V | Posted on: Sep 5, 2011 - 11:58am
Total Posts: 45 | Joined: Sep 4, 2011 - 7:19am
THANKS!!!!!!! It WORKED!!!!
Heres my PTGB-59 picture----thanks again---John
[image]http://i90.photobucket.com/albums/k256/john5353/PT592.jpg[/image]
Posted By: John V | Posted on: Sep 5, 2011 - 12:01pm
Total Posts: 45 | Joined: Sep 4, 2011 - 7:19am
My last "boat" Hoping this one betters it. 1/249 Revell USS Buckley.---John
[image]http://i90.photobucket.com/albums/k256/john5353/P9030011.jpg[/image]
[image]http://i90.photobucket.com/albums/k256/john5353/P9030009.jpg[/image]
Posted By: John V | Posted on: Sep 5, 2011 - 12:41pm
Total Posts: 45 | Joined: Sep 4, 2011 - 7:19am
Hi everybody,
I learned long ago never to mention anything about the mast on PT109 or the real color green it was painted. Those two subjects seem to cause everybody around here to go into some sort of conniption fit....LETS ALL JUST DROP IT! and get on with business.
JERRY GILMARTIN
No hesitation to spell out my real name
Jerry Gilmartin
Posted By: Jerry Gilmartin | Posted on: Sep 5, 2011 - 2:27pm
Total Posts: 1472 | Joined: Oct 8, 2006 - 11:16pm
I don't recall any real HORNETS NEST opened here at all. Garth made a statement and I made mine. That's all there is to it really. I do not think anyone is angry at all. Am I wrong here........................
Posted By: Frank J Andruss Sr | Posted on: Sep 5, 2011 - 4:41pm
Total Posts: 3497 | Joined: Oct 9, 2006 - 6:09am
Oh, brother...not the "109-under-JFK's-phantom-mast-subject" AGAIN!
T. Garth, you do have a brain, and you do know a lot about WWII PTs, (way too much to strangely speculate about using mast lights on patrol on combat-area boats... Good Lord -- think, man!).
You just have some inexplicable kind of contrarian, cognitive dissonance about accepting the astronomically high probability, based on photographic evidence, that PT 109 under JFK DID NOT have an A-frame mast.
Come, come away with us out of the darkness, my friend! Come into the light of evidence-based knowledge! Its easy, if you try. USE that brain we know you have! Ignore your unreasonable "feelings" on the matter!
And John V -- In my opinion (and that of many others), Dave Waples's build of the 109 from the Revell 1/72nd scale kit is by far the best model 109 I've ever seen in 50 years of looking at PT 109 models, and is closest to what the 109 probably looked like, in reality, under JFK.
Posted By: Drew Cook | Posted on: Sep 5, 2011 - 5:06pm
Total Posts: 1306 | Joined: Oct 19, 2006 - 10:44am
Thanks, I have seen the aforementioned model and it's one of the most incredible builds I have ever seen. Again I came for information, not to start a flame war. But from going over the "subliminal messages" I have seen I am almost afraid to ask the ultimate question. "Was there a thin black boot between the tropical green and anti foul red colors" I tried using my Vulcan mind probe but i haven't used these methods in eons. Thanks to everyone and a simple yes or no is OK....really----John
Posted By: John V | Posted on: Sep 5, 2011 - 5:44pm
Total Posts: 45 | Joined: Sep 4, 2011 - 7:19am
"Was there a thin black boot between the tropical green and anti foul red colors"
Based on photographic evidence, no.
Al Ross
Posted By: alross2 | Posted on: Sep 5, 2011 - 6:18pm
Total Posts: 993 | Joined: Oct 30, 2006 - 8:19pm
Thanks Drew, I appreciate your comments a great deal. I worked very hard to get it right and there are still a couple of things I would do differently. First I would have made the torpedo tubes uncovered and gone with a bronze torpedo head. Then I would have moved the depth charges closer to the forward torpedo tubes as indicated in the photos.
Maybe if Italeri back dates their big 1:35 kit I may take another run at it. But for now as soon as I get my new workbench completed (a.k.a. man cave) I'm completing the 1:48 PT-105.
I sure hope Mr. Iles is still with us. I would like to share this one with him.
Take care
Dave
David Waples
Posted By: David Waples | Posted on: Sep 5, 2011 - 7:53pm
Total Posts: 1679 | Joined: Jan 2, 2007 - 9:55pm
Based on opitical-historical evidence, I believe the sun may just rise in the east tomorrow morning (weather permitting, of course). Any other opinions? I know, I know, the sun set to the east in THE GREEN BERETS, but who of us is fit to argue with The Duke?
Will
Posted By: Will Day | Posted on: Sep 5, 2011 - 10:29pm
Total Posts: 1955 | Joined: Oct 8, 2006 - 4:19pm
Okay, Okay, I'm sorry I took the day off - wow. Came onto the board tonight to do my nightly spammer scan, got one that made it through for a short time, nuked him and thirteen others that joined up but couldn't post because they gave bogus email addresses. Banned all of their IP's. But what the heck happen here - Yes Kennedy or the 109, the blessed curse of all that is PT Boats.
John, welcome aboard and please ignore the "Chatter", love that description someone wrote in a post. Its all-good here John, you just got caught in our newbie induction hazing. No, kidding aside you won't find the amount of PT info anywhere else, just bear with us because you're one of us now. Please enjoy.
This ordeal reminds me of a new commercial shown on TV, the newest one has a very cranky Joe Pesci standing aside a young friend talking to a couple of girls (whom aren't impressed). Joe's friend takes him aside a gives him a Snikers bar to relieve his crankiness and wa-la Joe is replaced by a nice young man. I need to devise an Electronic Snikers' Button (ESB) and install it on the board. When someone gets cranky, someone else can push the button and magically a candy bar is dispensed through the cranky persons monitor!
Lets all behave and not scare away the new members, new blood is always needed.
Again John, welcome aboard, please fasten your seat belt.
Dick . . .
Posted By: Dick | Posted on: Sep 5, 2011 - 11:30pm
Total Posts: 1417 | Joined: Aug 27, 2006 - 6:36pm
Thanks Dick. All kidding aside this is one of the most informative boards I have ever seen. Already I have enough information needed to finish my OOB project and plans for a more complex build. Not only is the information here great but your LINKS to other helpful sights amazes me. Thanks again and sorry if I in any way opened up any "old wounds".---John
Posted By: John V | Posted on: Sep 6, 2011 - 3:01am
Total Posts: 45 | Joined: Sep 4, 2011 - 7:19am
David;
Yes Mr. Iles is still with us, I am working on sending him a list of his crew on PT 48, which I think went with him to PT 125 after RON 6 "loaned" the 125 to RON 3, to replace 48 which was damaged and sent back to Tulagi.
Take care,
TED
Posted By: TED WALTHER | Posted on: Sep 6, 2011 - 8:27am
Total Posts: 3059 | Joined: Oct 16, 2006 - 7:42am
All Hands:
I found T Garth's reference to the boats moving under cover of darkness in the war zone and while using their navigational lights to be a bit confounding and then found Frank's response to be reasonable, but....... then I remembered a document that I discovered while doing my research for my book on Div 17 and T.G. 50.1. I have located it and I think it "enlightening", to say the least.
T. Garth: HEADS UP !!
In an Operational Order issued to Rons 32 and 37 by Lt. C.W. Faulkner (Ron 37) on 19 Dec 1944 he states that, while underway and relocating from Tulagi to Treasury:
"4. Use navigation and stern lights when underway until daylight."
Later in that document he orders that all guns "should be manned and ready". It seems to me that at least the sixteen boats moving within this group were using their lights (okay, not their mast lights) while in enemy waters. A "thinking man" would find this odd, perhaps nonsensical. But there it is- an order from a well respected and seasoned Ron commander.
I just wanted to put this out there because I have seen much supposition and I have come to have a great appreciation and an unshakable preference for factual and verifiable information. That is what is going to make my book interesting- and that is what is taking me so d----d long to get her done. Four hundred pages of facts, and counting!
Please, please accept this in the spirit in which it is intended. It's all good!
Allan
Posted By: Allan | Posted on: Sep 6, 2011 - 4:42pm
Total Posts: 161 | Joined: Sep 18, 2007 - 7:07pm
Hi Ted,
That is great news. I hope he's doing well.
Alan, that is excellent information. Just goes to show that you can never assume anything. Red on port, green on starboard, and white on the flagstaff (at least for earlier Elco's). It makes sense, otherwise on very dark nights these boats could be banging into each other.
Dave
David Waples
Posted By: David Waples | Posted on: Sep 6, 2011 - 7:30pm
Total Posts: 1679 | Joined: Jan 2, 2007 - 9:55pm
But maybe the key here is the phrase: "while underway and relocating from Tulagi to Treasury:"
If they were relocating and not "on patrol", not expecting enemy action, but still having the guns manned in case something pops up, that would make some sense.
Actually on patrol looking for the enemy and action, then, no, they wouldn't use lights since stealth was the only thing they had going for them.
Charlie
Posted By: 29navy | Posted on: Sep 7, 2011 - 4:50am
Total Posts: 600 | Joined: Dec 28, 2006 - 3:02pm
Allan, thanks for sharing your research. Those three lights would make the boat visibly lit all the way around. One interesting bit is that the navigation light switch on the bridge control panel was a dimmer switch.
The mast light was also known as the anchor light which seems to provide a clue into how it was used. It would be a good overall light while anchored / docked in a secure area. It doesn't make sense to use it during any night operation since it probably killed night vision beyond its limited lighting range. The same maybe with the bow light. All this is guesswork of course, I hope you dig up more reports that explain official light doctrine Allan.
I agree Charlie. Any lights on at night would be highly visible and make this unlikely:
[url]http://www.hnsa.org/doc/pt/doctrine/part1.htm#pg11[/url]
[green]CHAPTER 4. ATTACK DOCTRINE[/green]
[green]Night and Low Visibility Torpedo Attacks[/green]
[green]1401. The effectiveness of an attack under these conditions depends primarily on approaching the enemy to close ranges undetected, where a reasonably accurate estimate may be made of his rate and direction of movement.[/green]
I hope some veterans can (cough)shed some light(cough) on us regarding use of the various lights. It's one thing to know official doctrine, and another to know if experience taught you guys another way.
Posted By: Jeff D | Posted on: Sep 7, 2011 - 10:08am
Total Posts: 2200 | Joined: Dec 21, 2006 - 1:30am
The date of the operational order by Mr. Faulkner was dated Dec. 19, 1944. I can tell you that things were pretty secure from Tulagi to Treasury at that time. There had not been any enemy activity in that area of the Solomons for probably 6 months or more. If they had been running up around Rabaul (New Britain and New Ireland) at that time they sure would not have been running with any lights .Enemy float planes were still operating out of Rabaul.
C. J. Willis
Posted By: CJ Willis | Posted on: Sep 7, 2011 - 4:31pm
Total Posts: 464 | Joined: Nov 5, 2006 - 5:02pm
All good points. But lets review: the light at the top of the mast was an anchor light. Anchor lights are standard around the world- a 360 degree light, clear in color, and used to denote that the vessel is at anchor. This is a part of small boat handling doctrine. And when a small boat is at anchor, the anchor light is the only light to be shown.
Now, I think a certain point has been missed here. In my opinion, the mere fact that Mr. Faulkner had to tell the CO's to use the navigational lights indicates that it was an unusual move to take. For sure, he weighed the safety of moving the boats with and without lighting them during the relocation against what appears to have been a limited chance of encountering enemy activity during that move (taking CJ's comments into account here).
I think the original discussing surrounded potential use of navigational lights under some, perhaps unusual, circumstances while operating in the combat area. In light of Mr. Faulkner's order, to say that it was never done would not be accurate, in my view, as evidenced by Mr. Faulkner's order. It really is just that simple.
It pleases me to be able to produce a document that changes a mere supposition to a fact.
Allan
Posted By: Allan | Posted on: Sep 7, 2011 - 7:24pm
Total Posts: 161 | Joined: Sep 18, 2007 - 7:07pm
Hey Allen,
Good points to be sure, However, it appears that your decision hinges on your defintion of "Combat Areas" From Tulagi to Treasury at the time of Faulkners order in December 1944 was pretty much a backwater, very far removed from actual "Combat Areas".Just as CJ said. Remember, we invaded the Phillipines in Fall of 1944? I think there was about as much enemy activity between Tulagi and Treasury as there was in the Hawaiian Sea Frontier at that time in the war. This would be far different from the waters off Guadalcanal and Rendova in April 1943 when JFK reported aboard PT109. So having an Anchor Light on in a true Combat Area in my opinion was indeed "Never done". Faulkners order is not about a Combat Area, and therefore does not apply to this situation. I love the discussions we have on this board! And Garth is not crazy. Enjoy! Jerry
Jerry Gilmartin
Posted By: Jerry Gilmartin | Posted on: Sep 7, 2011 - 11:00pm
Total Posts: 1472 | Joined: Oct 8, 2006 - 11:16pm
Right on, Jerry. I know I wouldn't have had running lights on if I had been patroling the Slot in '43!
Will
Posted By: Will Day | Posted on: Sep 7, 2011 - 11:46pm
Total Posts: 1955 | Joined: Oct 8, 2006 - 4:19pm
This was the point I was trying to make in my previous point. Take into consideration the items that were disgarded on a PT BOAT when she was in the Combat Zone. When the boat came directly from the builders ( Elco, Higgins, Huckins) I am sure items such as the stantions were taken out. Life Rafts were always being moved, and other things not being used. Check List's were on each boat, saying use this and use that, but we all know that things changed once in the Combat Zone. Hence, the Lights on the boats. It didn't take long to realize that turning on lights in a combat rich enviroment would spell death to any boat within reach of Japanese Ships, or Shore Batteries.
My comment also made mention that I am sure in some capacity the lights were used, but I felt never in a Combat Zone. As C.J. has said, once the boats moved up the line, an area would be pretty void of enemy activity, thus maybe, the lights might have been used in some capacity for in close formations. Even though Allen has provided us a document, this does not mean the Skippers of the boats followed those orders. In my post I never found one PT Boat Crewmember that ever used any running lights on the boats. This might be a good question to use in the next ALL HANDS, maybe we might find a PT Boater that could recall using running lights anywhere in the Combat Zone..............
Posted By: Frank J Andruss Sr | Posted on: Sep 8, 2011 - 1:54am
Total Posts: 3497 | Joined: Oct 9, 2006 - 6:09am
Hey Guys:
Frank made an excellent point and some others are splitting fine hairs. The order given was indeed to assist sixteen boats to move collectively from Tulagi to Treasury. Was it a combat area- of course it was. Was it heavy day-to-day fighting? Not at all. The document was very specific: itmade six points and even established the speed at which they would travel- 1600 rpm's. The simple conclusion? The boats were in more danger from crashing into each other than they were from enemy activity, hence the lights.
I don't think the document changes anything. The boats clearly would not use any lighting while patrolling or during attacks, since stealth was their only ally. But while moving in enemy waters for other purposes they clearly did---- at least this one time..
And there is no way that the boat CO's did not follow Mr. Faulkner's orders. Among these sixteen boats Mr. Faulkner assigned four division commanders with each responsible for three boats and one with four. He then ran as the task force commander with his own three-boat division and the division commanders under him. Each div comdr then was to maintain limited radio contact with him as they moved within "Vee" pattern for each div. Everything was spelled out in detail.
I think the best information to be taken from this is that the lights were ordered to be used, which clearly shows to me that it was an unusual undertaking- one that required calling out in detail and covering with an order to do so. Based upon that simple fact then, it would seem that under all other circumstances, no lighting was used for any boat movements whatsoever. That's what I take away from this.
This has been fun. What's next?
Allan
Posted By: Allan | Posted on: Sep 8, 2011 - 4:12am
Total Posts: 161 | Joined: Sep 18, 2007 - 7:07pm
Well Allan and Frank, Thank you I am sure glad this came to an end. I was going to dodge this one, but here is my two sense: Since I started doing this sort of stuff 40 years after the originals, I can say this from my own observations:
1. When stealth is paramount....No Lights.
2. During combat patrols.....No Lights. Regardless of sea state.
3. If there is any degree of celestial illumnation, your eyes acclimate and you don't really need lights.
4. As Allen has stated this was a MOVE EX performed by RON 37 and LCDR Faulkners orders were specific.
My work is done here.....Now on to other things!
Take care,
TED
Posted By: TED WALTHER | Posted on: Sep 8, 2011 - 8:25am
Total Posts: 3059 | Joined: Oct 16, 2006 - 7:42am
Lower hull painted red. Sorry for the crappy pictures but dark green plastic is miserable to photograph.---John
[image]http://i90.photobucket.com/albums/k256/john5353/P9100005.jpg[/image]
[image]http://i90.photobucket.com/albums/k256/john5353/P9100006.jpg[/image]
Posted By: John V | Posted on: Sep 10, 2011 - 11:12am
Total Posts: 45 | Joined: Sep 4, 2011 - 7:19am
Thanks for sharing your work John.
David Waples
Posted By: David Waples | Posted on: Sep 11, 2011 - 9:02am
Total Posts: 1679 | Joined: Jan 2, 2007 - 9:55pm
Masked off bottom hull and painted upper hull and deck. The only choice I had was Model Master dark green in the spray can.---John
[image]http://i90.photobucket.com/albums/k256/john5353/PA290019.jpg[/image]
[image]http://i90.photobucket.com/albums/k256/john5353/PA290006_01.jpg[/image]
Posted By: John V | Posted on: Oct 29, 2011 - 12:36pm
Total Posts: 45 | Joined: Sep 4, 2011 - 7:19am
John;
Are you doing PT 109? (YES, I diud it again!!), anyway, John remove all life raft fixtures with a xacto knife. You painted too soon. if you want more conversions, write here.
TED
Posted By: TED WALTHER | Posted on: Oct 29, 2011 - 4:20pm
Total Posts: 3059 | Joined: Oct 16, 2006 - 7:42am
OK, but I am not doing the 109 on it's last mission with the cannon minus the wheels tied down to the fore deck.Any help on it in it's pre last mission configuration would be very much appreciated.---John
Posted By: John V | Posted on: Oct 30, 2011 - 6:30am
Total Posts: 45 | Joined: Sep 4, 2011 - 7:19am
garth
was the sc-699a army air corp boat? its been some time but maybe a refresher is in line.
Posted By: jerrad strehle | Posted on: Nov 2, 2011 - 5:27pm
Total Posts: | Joined: Unregistered
More work done. I got tired of the stand flopping around so I super glued it to the hull.I added the rear torpedo tubes, Orlikon gun and guard, smoke generator and a few other small bits.---John
[image]http://i90.photobucket.com/albums/k256/john5353/PB190003.jpg[/image]
[image]http://i90.photobucket.com/albums/k256/john5353/PB190011.jpg[/image]
Posted By: John V | Posted on: Nov 19, 2011 - 5:11pm
Total Posts: 45 | Joined: Sep 4, 2011 - 7:19am
More work done, almost there.---John
[image]http://i90.photobucket.com/albums/k256/john5353/PB210002.jpg[/image]
[image]http://i90.photobucket.com/albums/k256/john5353/PB210006.jpg[/image]
Posted By: John V | Posted on: Nov 21, 2011 - 4:32pm
Total Posts: 45 | Joined: Sep 4, 2011 - 7:19am
Done. I didn't use safety lines or stanchions, found no photos of them in boats in that theater. The only item I added was a stretched sprue antenna.---John
[image]http://i90.photobucket.com/albums/k256/john5353/PB230013.jpg[/image]
[image]http://i90.photobucket.com/albums/k256/john5353/PB230006.jpg[/image]
[image]http://i90.photobucket.com/albums/k256/john5353/PB230001.jpg[/image]
Posted By: John V | Posted on: Nov 23, 2011 - 7:00pm
Total Posts: 45 | Joined: Sep 4, 2011 - 7:19am
Congratulations John! Thanks for sharing your project with us.
Dave
David Waples
Posted By: David Waples | Posted on: Nov 23, 2011 - 7:53pm
Total Posts: 1679 | Joined: Jan 2, 2007 - 9:55pm
Thanks. Next build will be a bit more accurate. I have a question on the ventilator pipes on the rear deck. Are they suppose to be facing away from each other or all going in the same direction. I believe when the 109 was on the liberty ship they were in the position I now have them but they looked cocked a bit. Were they positionable? Thanks for all the help.---John
Posted By: John V | Posted on: Nov 24, 2011 - 5:58am
Total Posts: 45 | Joined: Sep 4, 2011 - 7:19am
Here's what I meant about the ventilator pipes.---John
[image]http://i90.photobucket.com/albums/k256/john5353/ship_pt7.jpg[/image]
Posted By: John V | Posted on: Nov 24, 2011 - 6:05am
Total Posts: 45 | Joined: Sep 4, 2011 - 7:19am
If memory serves ....
Those vents were positionable.
Posted By: TGConnelly | Posted on: Nov 24, 2011 - 7:22am
Total Posts: | Joined: Unregistered
Jeff, this looks like an opportunity for one of your fabulous drawings!
Dave
David Waples
Posted By: David Waples | Posted on: Nov 24, 2011 - 8:35am
Total Posts: 1679 | Joined: Jan 2, 2007 - 9:55pm
From the ELCO parts catalog:
[IMaGe]http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i204/alross2/vent.jpg[/IMaGe]
Posted By: alross2 | Posted on: Nov 24, 2011 - 8:49am
Total Posts: 993 | Joined: Oct 30, 2006 - 8:19pm
Thanks for the info, great help. And now here's my PT" under glass"---John
[image]http://i90.photobucket.com/albums/k256/john5353/PB240024.jpg[/image]
[image]http://i90.photobucket.com/albums/k256/john5353/PB240028.jpg[/image]
Posted By: John V | Posted on: Nov 24, 2011 - 9:16am
Total Posts: 45 | Joined: Sep 4, 2011 - 7:19am
Thanks Al,
I had this impression that the crew might be able to position the vent from below decks. The drawings don't seem to indicate that. It looks like they can be positioned and tightened with a thumb screw. Any information or thoughts?
Dave
David Waples
Posted By: David Waples | Posted on: Nov 24, 2011 - 11:13am
Total Posts: 1679 | Joined: Jan 2, 2007 - 9:55pm
I started doing research over a year ago for this project. I came across this picture and don't remember where. I think I asked somewhere but don't remember where if this was an actual picture and thought someone told me it was from a movie? I don't think it could be the 109 as it has a mast.---John
[image]http://i90.photobucket.com/albums/k256/john5353/PT1092jpg.jpg[/image]
Posted By: John V | Posted on: Nov 24, 2011 - 3:55pm
Total Posts: 45 | Joined: Sep 4, 2011 - 7:19am
Hi John,
That's the boat from the movie PT-109. I believe somebody can give you more information about what type of boat this is. In any event, I thought the film makers did a great job with what they had. They looked like Elco boats. If I remember correctly a member of PT-109 participated in the movie and had a small part. I think it was the chief that Pat Robertson dumped the oily water on.
Dave
David Waples
Posted By: David Waples | Posted on: Nov 24, 2011 - 4:34pm
Total Posts: 1679 | Joined: Jan 2, 2007 - 9:55pm
RARE PT109 PHOTOS FOUND!!!!
Hey guys! Look what I found! extremely rare photos of PT109 never before seen! You may even be able to spot JFK if you look hard enough! Jerry
stern view
[image]http://i130.photobucket.com/albums/p249/ptboats/Jerry%20Gilmartin/PT109sternmovoeset.jpg[/image]
Bow at pier, (maybe Todd City Rendova?)
[image]http://i130.photobucket.com/albums/p249/ptboats/Jerry%20Gilmartin/PT109moviestill.jpg[/image]
gangplank to PT109 at pier
[image]http://i130.photobucket.com/albums/p249/ptboats/Jerry%20Gilmartin/PT109moviepic.jpg[/image]
PT109 in port
[image]http://i130.photobucket.com/albums/p249/ptboats/Jerry%20Gilmartin/PT109moviepicb.jpg[/image]
Unknown crewman in front of PT109 gun mount
[image]http://i130.photobucket.com/albums/p249/ptboats/Jerry%20Gilmartin/PT109moviepicc.jpg[/image]
rare color photo of PT109 in port
[image]http://i130.photobucket.com/albums/p249/ptboats/Jerry%20Gilmartin/PT109atmoviedock.jpg[/image]
Rare photo of Todd City Rendova
[image]http://i130.photobucket.com/albums/p249/ptboats/Jerry%20Gilmartin/PT109movietoddcity.jpg[/image]
Have you figured it out yet?
[image]http://i130.photobucket.com/albums/p249/ptboats/Jerry%20Gilmartin/PT109moviesetshowers.jpg[/image]
I'm just messing with you guys, (this is the movie set in Florida) Commander Ritchies Hut
[image]http://i130.photobucket.com/albums/p249/ptboats/Jerry%20Gilmartin/PT109moviesetcommanderhut.jpg[/image]
Mess Hall photo!
[image]http://i130.photobucket.com/albums/p249/ptboats/Jerry%20Gilmartin/PT109moviesetmesshall.jpg[/image]
Blood sweat and tears
[image]http://i130.photobucket.com/albums/p249/ptboats/Jerry%20Gilmartin/PT109moviesetblood-sweat-tears.jpg[/image]
Half of a PT Boat towed back to port
[image]http://i130.photobucket.com/albums/p249/ptboats/Jerry%20Gilmartin/PT109aftercollisionmovieset.jpg[/image]
Sorry if I upset you I couldnt help but yank your chain just a little over the whole PT109 mystique! Happy Thanksgiving! Jerry
Jerry Gilmartin
Posted By: Jerry Gilmartin | Posted on: Nov 25, 2011 - 1:58am
Total Posts: 1472 | Joined: Oct 8, 2006 - 11:16pm
Jerry
Too funny, although you didn't fool me. I had these photos before in my collection. You should not have said anything at the end, I would have loved to see the feedback on that one.
Posted By: Frank J Andruss Sr | Posted on: Nov 25, 2011 - 4:33am
Total Posts: 3497 | Joined: Oct 9, 2006 - 6:09am
Yes, the boats in the movie were 85 foot crash boats, and the crew man in the movie was George "Barney" Ross ...
Posted By: TGConnelly | Posted on: Nov 25, 2011 - 6:24am
Total Posts: | Joined: Unregistered
Hah, with quick first looks you had me going for a bit. The tilted turret on the 4th photo gave it away though. [:-stong-:]
Posted By: Jeff D | Posted on: Nov 25, 2011 - 8:59am
Total Posts: 2200 | Joined: Dec 21, 2006 - 1:30am
Dear John, I noted your writing & had a question for you. If you are still on deck, could you pls let me know & I will respond. Sometimes a tad slow, but I keep my word. Cheers, B.J. 13 Feb 2012
B.J.
Posted By: pappy bj | Posted on: Feb 13, 2012 - 9:25am
Total Posts: | Joined: Unregistered
John, I'm looking forward to your pics of your Buckley. I'm working on her now myself, though my build is on hold while I wait for some parts from H-R Productions. As soon as I get them I'll finish mine and post some photos.
Bob
Currently building: P.T. 596 (Italieri 1/35); and U.S.S. Laffey (Dragon 1/350).
Posted By: robtmelvin | Posted on: Feb 16, 2012 - 9:54am
Total Posts: | Joined: Unregistered
Dear John, we have some interesting things in common, not the least of which is our names. Mine is actually John V aswell. Any chance of an email sometime sir? My email A/D is... pappybj1@yahoo.ca.... Cheers, B.J.
B.J.
Posted By: pappy bj | Posted on: Feb 16, 2012 - 4:04pm
Total Posts: | Joined: Unregistered
I finished my out of box PT-109.---John
Posted By: John V | Posted on: Dec 12, 2013 - 7:15am
Total Posts: 45 | Joined: Sep 4, 2011 - 7:19am
Bob---a little late but here are my USS Buckley pictures---John
Posted By: John V | Posted on: Dec 12, 2013 - 7:34am
Total Posts: 45 | Joined: Sep 4, 2011 - 7:19am
