Subject: WWII-L Digest - 7 Apr 1995 to 8 Apr 1995

From: Automatic digest processor <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 9 Apr 1995 00:00:43 -0400

There are 42 messages totalling 1499 lines in this issue.

Topics of the day:

  1. USN Ship Designations (6)
  2. Spam (4)
  3. USN designations
  4. Rudolph Hess (7)
  5. WEAP: Ship designators
  6. Panzer IV & Galland (2)
  7. INF: USN Chronology 04-08-95
  8. Letter C Designates
  9. WEAP: Ship designations
 10. USSR in the War (2)
 11. WEAP: "V" origins (?)
 12. Books On The Pacific War (2)
 13. WHAT IF -- Hitler hadn't declared against the US
 14. WEAP: Naval Gunfire Support Useful?
 15. THUNDERBOLT
 16. INF:  USS NEVADA at Pearl Harbor
 17. U.S. Navy Ship photos? (2)
 18. Whitmann vs Pool
 19. Rommel (2)
 20. INF: 50 Years Ago - 08-APR-1945
 21. Raid on Cabanatuan Resumed #'s 13, 14 & 15
 22. WEAP: Attack Transports -- MODEL reissued!
 23. Photo Service, Naval Institute

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date:    Sat, 8 Apr 1995 00:05:40 -0400
From:    Paul Silverstone <[email-masked]>
Subject: USN Ship Designations

The Navy ship classification system (BB, DD, CV, etc) was instituted in
1920.  The original list was divided into categories, i.e.
B  Battleship
C  Cruiser
D  Destroyer
S  Submarine
P  Patrol Vessel
A  Auxiliary
Y  District (yard) craft

The second letter distinguished the type.
BB  Battleship
BM  Monitor
CC  Battle Cruiser
CA  Cruiser, 1st line (armored)
CL  Cruiser, 2nd line (light)
CV  Aircraft carrier ("cruiser, aviation")
CM  Minelayer (the 1st minelayers were converted cruisers)
DD  Destroyer
DL  Destroyer leader
DM  Light minelayer

and so forth.
A complete list of WWII designations (excluding yardcraft) may be found
in my book "US Warships of World War II"
Paul Silverstone ([email-masked])

------------------------------

Date:    Sat, 8 Apr 1995 00:40:38 -0400
From:    Jodi Berls <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Spam

Cris Whetton wrote:

>Does anyone remember any others?

My grandmother used to tell us about a type of "margarine" that always
sounded to me like lard into which yellow food coloring had to be mixed to
make it look sort of like butter. According to her account, the yellow
coloring came in a kind of capsule, sort of like a Contac cold capsule, and
you had to dump the two into a bowl and mix them together. Yuck. Later in
life she never would eat margarine,  fearing it was the same stuff. (Maybe it
is, for all I know.) If the wartime concoction had a particular name, I don't
recall her mentioning it.

Jodi Berls
[email-masked]

------------------------------

Date:    Sat, 8 Apr 1995 00:48:25 -0400
From:    Paul Silverstone <[email-masked]>
Subject: USN designations

I have read a lot of interesting theories as to where BB came from.  The
designations were not in use before 1920.  The original battleships were
designated "Battleship No.1" which was named Indiana, "Battleship No.2",
etc.  These numbers were used retrospectively for these older ships in
1920.  The confusion over cruiser numbers resulted from the new
classifications.
For those interested, the original auxiliary designations were:
AD  Destroyer tender
AS  Submarine tender
AZ  Lighter-than-air aircraft tender
AV  Heavier-than-air aircraft tender
AR  Repair ship
AF  Storeship
AO  Oiler
AE  Ammunition Ship
AK  Cargo Ship
AP  Transport
AH  Hospital Ship
AT  Fleet tug (later Ocean Tug)
AM  Mine Sweeper
AG  Auxiliary, miscellaneous

There were many unofficial designations, such as APA, animal transport.
This was later revived in WWII as Attack Transport.  Duiring WWII, PGE
was used for corvette.  This was a British type.  The corvettes taken
into the US Navy in 1942 were given PG numbers.

Paul Silverstone

------------------------------

Date:    Sat, 8 Apr 1995 00:39:42 EDT
From:    William Lippert <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Rudolph Hess

Ken,
   I've read a little about Rudolf Hess.  Why do you interested in him?
He does not seem to get the coverage of many of the other leading Nazis =
probably because he was absent during most of the war and the Final
Solution.
   Here is my opinion of him: I do not have very much respect for him nor
do I think much of him.  First, he was a poor secretary (which was supposed
to be his job).  Unlike Bormann, who placed concreteness and substance
to Hitler's ideas, Hess would often make Hitler's ideas even more abstract
and unrealistic.  Second, unlike Himmler, Hess was entirely bounded in a
fantasy world.  Himmler was able to move from fantasy to realism relatively
easily and even exist within the two.  History has more or less proven
Himmler's ability to funcion in the world.
   Finally, Hess was never really tested in life, unlike the other Nazis
who faced defeat and destruction.  I commend his ability to have lived
in Spandau for so long and under those particular conditions; the hardest
being the isolation from his wife and family.
   Well, those are my quick thoughts on Hess.  Comments?  Any other persons
interest you?

William Lippert
The American University

------------------------------

Date:    Sat, 8 Apr 1995 01:16:58 EST
From:    "Carl Wernke - [email-masked]" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: WEAP: Ship designators

 Jorge Merino wrote on Fri, 7 Apr 1995 13:00:14 CCS

 > Did the Japanese have also any kind of designation for their ships ?

 With four exceptions, the Japanese reader can tell the type of warship
 by its name.

 Carriers: Named after mythical flying objects or animals or large birds.
 Battleships: Named after ancient provinces. However, four battle cruisers,
 the HARUNA, KONGO, KIRISHIMA, and HIEI, were given mountain names. The
 distinction between battleships and battle cruisers was later dropped and
 these four ships were regarded as battleships, without any change of name.

 Heavy cruisers: Named after mountains.

 Light cruisers: Named after rivers.

 Destroyers: Given poetic reading of weather conditions: e.g., KAWAKAZE ------
 "River Wind;" SHIGURE ----"Drizzling Autumn Rain." In 1944 the Japanese Navy
  tried to speed up destroyer construction and save shrinking building
  material. It began to produce only 1,250 and 750-ton destroyers and named
  them after flowers, fruit, and trees.

 Submarines: The Japanese language, while ideographic, can also be written
 phonetically --- not with an alphabet but with syllabary. There were three
 classes of submarines, I, RO, and HA, corresponding to A,B.and C.

 I hope the above info helps.

 Carl Wernke
 [email-masked]

------------------------------

Date:    Sat, 8 Apr 1995 02:13:55 -0400
From:    Scott C Stathis <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Panzer IV & Galland

>
> I am a moddler & history buff and was wonderi9ng if anyone could help me
> out on my current project.
>
> 1. Panzer IV AusfD - was this tank used by the Afrika Korps
>
> 2. Could anyone fax or post me a photo of the interior of the Panzer IV or
> suggest a book which deals with this vehicle internally. (Fax: 614/797-2827).
>
> 3. Is Adolf Galland still alive. He does not appear on many programs now.
>
> --
> Andrew Herd
> [email-masked]
>
Andrew

     I'll look in my reference library for the interior of the Panzer Iv D
as for Galland as far as I know he IS still alive, but he is also 85 years
old and probably has slowed down quit a bit.

Fellow Armor Modeler
Scott
[email-masked]

------------------------------

Date:    Sat, 8 Apr 1995 04:00:15 PST
From:    "Keller, Theron P." <[email-masked]>
Subject: INF: USN Chronology 04-08-95

UNITED STATES NAVY CHRONOLOGY
from:
//byrd.mu.wvnet.edu/pub/history/military/wwii/naval_chronology/chr4(4,5).txt

1945
04/08 Sun.  United States naval vessels damaged, Okinawa area:
             Destroyer CHARLES J. BADGER (DD-657), by suicide boat,
              26 d. 18'N., 127 d. 39'E.
             Destroyer GREGORY (DD-802), by suicide plane,
              27 d. 07'N., 128 d. 39'E.
             Motor minesweeper YMS-92, by mine,
              26 d. 12'N., 127 d. 53'E.
             Attack cargo ship STARR (AKA-67), by suicide boat,
              26 d. 20'N., 127 d. 44'E.
             LST 939, by collision,
              26 d. 22'N., 127 d. 44'E.
             LST 940, by grounding,
              26 d. 20'N., 127 d. 45'E.
            Japanese naval vessel sunk:
             Submarine chaser NO. 101, by naval  gunfire, Netherlands
              East Indies area,
              04 d. 43'S., 122 d. 17'E.

Information compiled by U.S. Navy Historians.  For more information,
contact the Naval Historical Center at (202) 433-3940.
Archived by: "Larry W. Jewell" <[email-masked]>
Posted by:
Theron P. Keller
Logicon, Inc.
Dahlgren, VA  22448 USA
[email-masked]

------------------------------

Date:    Sat, 8 Apr 1995 18:40:29 +0700
From:    "Peter E. Beal" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: USN Ship Designations

On Sat, 8 Apr 1995, Paul Silverstone wrote:

> The Navy ship classification system (BB, DD, CV, etc) was instituted in
> 1920.  The original list was divided into categories, i.e.
> B  Battleship
> C  Cruiser
> D  Destroyer
> S  Submarine
> P  Patrol Vessel
> A  Auxiliary
> Y  District (yard) craft
>
> The second letter distinguished the type.
> BB  Battleship
> BM  Monitor
> CC  Battle Cruiser
> CA  Cruiser, 1st line (armored)
> CL  Cruiser, 2nd line (light)
> CV  Aircraft carrier ("cruiser, aviation")
> CM  Minelayer (the 1st minelayers were converted cruisers)
> DD  Destroyer
> DL  Destroyer leader
> DM  Light minelayer
>
> and so forth.
> A complete list of WWII designations (excluding yardcraft) may be found
> in my book "US Warships of World War II"
> Paul Silverstone ([email-masked])
>

I believe the U.S. had two battle cruisers in WWII, the Alaska and one
other, possibly named the Hawaii.  I recall (from Morrison's works) that
their designations were "CB".  Is my memory failing?

------------------------------

Date:    Sat, 8 Apr 1995 07:11:11 -0500
From:    Drew Halevy <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Spam

Would that be Oleo?-drew

Drew Philip Halevy    |
Grad Student          |         Is it tomorrow,
Department of History |         or just the end of time?
University of Arkansas|         -J.H.
[email-masked] |

> My grandmother used to tell us about a type of "margarine" that always
> sounded to me like lard into which yellow food coloring had to be mixed to
> make it look sort of like butter. According to her account, the yellow
> coloring came in a kind of capsule, sort of like a Contac cold capsule, and
> you had to dump the two into a bowl and mix them together. Yuck. Later in

------------------------------

Date:    Sat, 8 Apr 1995 08:34:00 EDT
From:    mc killop <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Letter C Designates

 >C as in Cessna Aircraft Co. Inc as well as Culver Aircraft Corp.
 >according to my vintage Janes.

The US Navy WWII (1939-45) Manufacturers' Idntification Letters
were:

A - Allied Aviation Corp (gliders only)
A - Brewter Aeronautical Corp
B - Beech Aircraft Co
B - Boeing Aircraft Co
B - Edward G. Budd Manufacturing Co
C - Cessna Aircraft Corp
C - Culver Aircraft Corp
C - Curtiss Aeropland & Motor Co
D - Douglas Aircraft Corp
D - McDonnell Aircraft Corp
D - Radioplane Corp (drones)
D - Frankfort Sailplane Co (target drones)
E - Edo Aircraft Corp
E - Gould Aeronautical Corp (gliders)
E - Piper Aircraft Corp
E - Pratt-Read (gliders)
F - Fairchld Aircraft Ltd
F - Gurmman Aircraft Engineering Corp
G - Goodyear Aircraft Corp
G - A.G.A. Aviation Corp (gliders)
H - Hall-Aluminum Aircraft Corp (bought by Consolidated in 1940)
H - Howard Aircraft Corp
H - Snead and Co (gliders)
J - North American Aviation Corp
K - Fairchild Aircraft Corp
K - Fleetwings Divison, Kaiser Cargo, Inc
K - Nash-Kelvinator Corp
L - Bell Aircraft Corp
L - Columbia Aircraft Corp
L - Langley Aviation Corp
M - The Glenn L Martin Co
M - Eastern Aircraft Divison, General Motors Corp
N - Naval Aircraft Factory
O - Lockheed Aircraft Corp (Plant B)
P - Piper Aircraft Corp (gliders)
P - P-V Engineering Forum
P - Spartan Aircraft Co
Q - Bristol Aeronautical Corp (gliders)
Q - Fairchild Engine and Airplane Corp
R - Aeronca Aircraft Corp (USAAF TG-5 glider)
R - American Aviation Corp (gliders)
R - Brunswick-Balke-Collender Corp
R - Interstate Aircraft & Engineering Corp (drones)
R - Maxson-Brewster Corp
R - Radioplane Divison, Northrop Corp (target drones)
R - Ryan Aeronautical Co
S - Schweizer Aircraft Corp (gliders)
S - Sikorsky Aviation Corp
S - Stearman Aircraft Co (became Boeing-Wichita in 1939)
S - Vickers-Supermarine (Spitfire)
T - Taylorcraft Aviation Corp (USAAF TG-6 glider)
T - Northrop Aircraft Inc (USAAF P-61)
T - Timm Aircraft Corp
U - Chance Vought Corp
V - Lockheed Aircraft Corp (Vega, Plant A)
V - Canadian Vickers Ltd
V - Vultee Aircraft (bought by Convair in 1942)
W - Waco Aircraft Corp (gliders)
W - Canadian Car & Foundry Co, Ltd
Y - Consolidated Aircraft Corp (to Convair  in 1942)

-------------------------------------------------------------------
|  Jack McKillop              |  Those who have long enjoyed such |
|  Bellcore                   |  privileges as we enjoy forget in |
|  Piscataway, NJ USA         |  time that men have died to win   |
|  [email-masked]  |  them.                     FDR    |
-------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date:    Sat, 8 Apr 1995 06:47:56 -0700
From:    Steve New <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Spam

You wrote:

>
>Cris Whetton wrote:
>
>>Does anyone remember any others?
>
>My grandmother used to tell us about a type of "margarine" that always
>sounded to me like lard into which yellow food coloring had to be mixed
to
>make it look sort of like butter. According to her account, the yellow
>coloring came in a kind of capsule, sort of like a Contac cold capsule,
and
>you had to dump the two into a bowl and mix them together. Yuck. Later
in
>life she never would eat margarine,  fearing it was the same stuff.
(Maybe it
>is, for all I know.) If the wartime concoction had a particular name, I
don't
>recall her mentioning it.
>
>Jodi Berls
>[email-masked]
>
>
Jodi,

That wasn't a wartime consideration, it was the result of the dairy
industry having laws passed to protect their product.  When margarin was
first introduced, the dairy lobby got a law passed that prevented the
margarin producers from coloring their product (it was supposed to
protect the public from fraud).  If you wanted your margarin to look
like butter, you had to add the color yourself after you got it home.

--

Steve L. New
[email-masked]
Just an armadillo on the shoulder of the information superhighway.

------------------------------

Date:    Sat, 8 Apr 1995 09:58:52 EDT
From:    Ken Martin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Rudolph Hess

>   I've read a little about Rudolf Hess.  Why do you interested in him?
>He does not seem to get the coverage of many of the other leading Nazis =
>probably because he was absent during most of the war and the Final
>Solution.
>   Here is my opinion of him: I do not have very much respect for him nor
>do I think much of him.  First, he was a poor secretary (which was supposed
>to be his job).  Unlike Bormann, who placed concreteness and substance
>to Hitler's ideas, Hess would often make Hitler's ideas even more abstract
>and unrealistic.  Second, unlike Himmler, Hess was entirely bounded in a
>fantasy world.
>
>William Lippert
>The American University
>
>

  Thanks for responding William. I find all the Nazi hierarchy interesting
not just Hess.  As you said Hess wasn't there for much of the Final
Soloution so I assumed he was left in Spandau for his beliefs.  Agreed, he
was nuts but why would he kill himself when he was over 90 years old?  There
seems to be enough evidence for questions on Hess's jailing. Then again I
love a good conspiracy theory :-).  None of the top Nazis deserve respect
except for maybe Rommel.  Don't mistake my interest in Hess for somrthing
more then it actually is.  Another question is Hess believed he was doing
something good flying to Scotland.  Did Hitler send him to hold out an olive
branch to England and when it failed claimed no knowlege of the flight.
Just wondering.  Thanks again.

                             Ken  [email-masked]

------------------------------

Date:    Sat, 8 Apr 1995 08:58:10 -0500
From:    "Roddy R. Rupert" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: WEAP: Ship designations

On Fri, 7 Apr 1995, Jorge Merino wrote:

> The "V" in the Aircraft Carrier designations comes from "Fixed Wing",
> rather than "Vessel". I really don't know how was the "V" originated,
> but the Navy likes very much to use it to indicate "Fixed Wing" :-)
>
> Just remember how are designated the Fixed Wing squadrons
> (VF, VA, VAW, VAQ, VS, VC, etc), while the helicopter squadrons
> are designated with "H" (more logical, of course....)
>
> Jorge Merino
>

I can't remember where I read the 'Carrier Vessel' explaination. I'll
post if I find it. It may have been a guess by someone.

-------------------------------------------
Rod Rupert    [email-masked]
Springfield, MO

------------------------------

Date:    Sat, 8 Apr 1995 09:24:34 -0500
From:    "Roddy R. Rupert" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: USN Ship Designations

On Sat, 8 Apr 1995, Peter E. Beal wrote:

>
> I believe the U.S. had two battle cruisers in WWII, the Alaska and one
> other, possibly named the Hawaii.  I recall (from Morrison's works) that
> their designations were "CB".  Is my memory failing?
>

Actually there where three, officially described as "Large Crusiers":

        CB1  Alaska
        CB2  Guam
        CB3  Hawaii

Three more, Philippines, Puerto Rico, and Samoa, were authorized in 1940
but cancelled on June 24, 1943.

>From 'Jane's Fighting Ships of WWII' page 263

-------------------------------------------
Rod Rupert    [email-masked]
Springfield, MO

------------------------------

Date:    Sat, 8 Apr 1995 05:56:00 -0500
From:    Frank Scheidt <[email-masked]>
Subject: USSR in the War

When Italy entered the war, on the side of Germany, and attacked
France, this enraged Franklin Roosevelt.  After all France was
about to lose the war anyway and Italy's attack was unprovoked -- a
cowardly act.

FDR gave a speech about it in which he said something like "the
hand that held the dagger has plunged it into its neighbor's back!"

When the USSR entered the war, on the side of the U.S., and
attacked Japan this should have enraged Franklin Roosevelt for the
same reason:  After all Japan was about to lose the war anyway and
the USSR's attack was unprovoked -- a cowardly attack.

Oddly enough, FDR didn't seen to see the analogy ...

BTW, even *I* didn't protest -- even mildly -- at the USSR's entry
into the war against Japan.

          [email-masked]

___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.12

------------------------------

Date:    Sat, 8 Apr 1995 21:43:59 +0700
From:    "Peter E. Beal" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: USSR in the War

On Sat, 8 Apr 1995, Frank Scheidt wrote:

> When Italy entered the war, on the side of Germany, and attacked
> France, this enraged Franklin Roosevelt.  After all France was
> about to lose the war anyway and Italy's attack was unprovoked -- a
> cowardly act.
>
> FDR gave a speech about it in which he said something like "the
> hand that held the dagger has plunged it into its neighbor's back!"
>
> When the USSR entered the war, on the side of the U.S., and
> attacked Japan this should have enraged Franklin Roosevelt for the
> same reason:  After all Japan was about to lose the war anyway and
> the USSR's attack was unprovoked -- a cowardly attack.
>
> Oddly enough, FDR didn't seen to see the analogy ...

Well, for one thing, by the time the Russians invaded Manchuria, FDR was
dead about four months.

------------------------------

Date:    Sat, 8 Apr 1995 11:01:02 -0400
From:    Carlos R Rivera <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: WEAP: "V" origins (?)

If my memory sustains the issue, "V" came from Professor Samuel Pierpoint
Langley and his calculations-either as a coefficient for/of flight or to
designate heavier than air.  Anyone else recall his work?
CRivera

------------------------------

Date:    Fri, 7 Apr 1995 16:14:00 -0600
From:    George Bauer <[email-masked]>
Subject: Books On The Pacific War

Please pardon me if this book has already been mentioned, but an
excellent book about the Pacific war is Warpath Across the Pacific
by Lawrence J. Hickey.  It is the illustrated history of the 345th
Bombardment Group.  Published by International Research and Publishing Corporation, Boulder, 1989.

[email-masked]

 * RoboBOARD/FX 1.04

------------------------------

Date:    Sat, 8 Apr 1995 11:03:10 PDT
From:    Jim Brady <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: WHAT IF -- Hitler hadn't declared against the US

>  Reply-to:    Christopher Dale Bailey <[email-masked]>
>
>>      I was researching the topic of Rommel in the library the other
>> day, and came across an intteresting article from National Review
>> magizine dated March 1, 1993.
>>      The article states that the balance of the entire war was
>> changed on December 11, 1941.  The article goes on to state that
>> Hitler did not have to declare war on the U.S., His treaty signed
>> with Japan only obligated him to go to war with Japan if they were
>> attacked by the United States.  This poses a question for me:
>>
>>      1.  Suppose Hitler had declared neutrality in the Pacific.
>> Suppose he had gone before the Reichstang and declared that he had
>> no quarrel with the United States.  I wonder if FDR would have
>> dared asked for a declaration of war in the face of such generous
>> German sentiments????????????????????????
>
>     I has always heard and assumed that he wouldn't.   As I
>remember, even the dim Von Ribbentrop begged Hitler not to act rashly,
>but he decided, in an attack of Wagnerian Apocalypse Syndrome, no
>doubt, to declare war.  As I understood it, this was just a welcome
>bonus for FDR and Churchill.  Of course, the US navy was already
>essentially carrying out escort duty for Europe-bound convoys by
>then; and as I recall, FDR had made a lot of propaganda out of some
>engagements between American destroyers and U-boats.  So I wonder how
>long it would have taken for an excuse to have been found for war?
>     On the other hand, if we're going to be counter-factual; the
>disasters pre-Coral Sea might have had an interesting effect on the
>structure of the European alliance that emerged to 'unify' the Big
>Three (or Four) over Europe.  Without the explicit commitment to
>Europe, might the Japanese have been able to write off the war after
>six months of victory, leaving everyone in a very precarious
>position?
>                                                      Ian Lindley
>                                                      Edinburgh University
>

 FWIW, in the recently released "Thirty-Five Years of Newspaper Work" by H.L. Mencken,
the author goes on in great lengths maintaining that FDR was drumming for war -- despite
what Mencken says were FDR's token assurances to the contrary. He cites the favored
relations with Britain, an American government and state department strongly influenced
by "Anglophiles" and support in most of the press agitating against the Nazis. Boiled down,
 Mencken insisted Hitler simply saved FDR the formality and cleared the nominal political
obstacles.

-- Jim Brady

------------------------------

Date:    Sat, 8 Apr 1995 08:48:12 -0700
From:    Ed Kettler <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: WEAP: Naval Gunfire Support Useful?

You wrote:

>
>Some people here at Purdue have become enraptured over O'Connell's
>"Sacred Vessels..." and have bought his drivel without giving it any
>serious thought.  One item they've been harping on is the supposed
>comletely lack of usefulness of naval gunfire support.  Now, I know
>that at least two gentlemen that were in positions to observe the
>results of 14" shells ariving at supersonic speeds on a target had
>very pronounced opinions about the effectiveness of naval guns.
>Both men, von Rundstedt and Rommel, thought that naval gunfire was
>a major factor in the German defeat in Normandy. *However* the
>gentlemen here at Purdue think that an Army intelligence officer
>knows more about the subject than either feldmarschal. Apparently
>O'Connel's in-depth (I'm joking) analysis of WWI gun-direction gear
>has made him an expert on WWII gun-laying ("So wouldn't the coal-
>smoke from the stacks make it damn hard to see the target, Adm.
Halsey?)
>
>So, if you've got some citations handy that would help me refute
>a ground-pounders wise analysis of naval gunnery, I'd appreciate it
>you'd send them to me.  I don't have the energy to plow through
>stacks of books (and Purdue's libraries have exactly as much helpful
>information on the Navy as you'd expect to find in the middle of
>a cornfield in Indiana.)  I don't ask any great efforts from anyone,
>but if you have what I need handy, I'd appreciate your help (you
>guys at Annapolis got anything?)
>
>TIA,
>Larry J
>
>
>[email-masked]; Co-Mod.: BYRD.MU.WVNET.EDU (Historical
docs)
>"Sunday's horoscope is note worthy because of its strange, sudden and
wholly
>unpredictable and inexplicable occurrences, affecting all phases of
life."
>Your Horoscope" L.A. Evening Herald Express, Sat, 12/06/41
>
>
Some selected quotes from _Naval Gunfire Support of Amphibious
Operations:  Past, Present and Future_, Donald M. Weller, MGen, USMC,
Retd.

Sicily:  "The most dramatic illustration of the effectiveness of naval
guns against armored formations occurred during D day and D plus 1 in
support of the 1st US Infantry Division in one of three landings on the
beaches of Sicily.  The division was the target of armored
counterattacks by an Italian tank group of 60 light tanks and the German
Goering Panzer Division equipped with 100 Mark III and IV tanks with
76mm guns, reinforced with 17 Tiger tanks with 88mm guns.  Both
divisions had supporting infantry and artillery, and their combined
attacks against the 1st Division were the most powerful launched against
any single US division in any theater, including Normandy.  Furthermore,
during the attack on D day, the 1st Division was particularly vulnerable
because there were no antitank weapons, tanks, or artillery ashore when
the attacks began.  The division did have the support of cruisers BOISE
and SAVANNAH, armed with 6-inch guns, and sever5al destroyers with
5-inch guns.  These ships made the difference, even though the 126 knot
floatplanes of the cruisers could only function intermittently in the
face of German air domination over the beachhead.  In addition, unlike
subsequent operations where a variety of firepower could be brought to
bear against armor, which made it difficult to determine the precise
role of naval guns, here on Sicily it was simple:  there was no other
firepower."

The first attack by the Italians was stopped by 100 rounds from the
destroyer jEFFERS, which stripped the tanks of supporting arms and left
several tanks burning.  The US Army History says "Without infantry
support, its artillery under heavy counter-battery fire from American
warships, the Italian tankers broke off the fight and retired".  A
second prong of the attack was stalled by 125 rounds from destroyer
SHUBRICK, although 10 tanks did penetrate US lines.

The second armor attack by 90 Mark III and IV was taken under fire by
one of the cruisers and a destroyer.  The US Army history says:  "The
tanks slowed, sputtered and eventually stopped.  The tankers could not
go because they had nothing to cope with the five and six inch naval
shells which whistled in from the sea."

At Salerno:  General Vietinghoff (German commander) wrote: "The attack
this morning pushed into stiffened resistance but above all the
advancing troops had to endure the most severe heavy fire that had
hitherto been experienced; the naval gunfire from at least 16 to 18
battleships, cruisers and large detroyers lying in the roadstead.  With
astonishing precision and freedom of maneuver, these ships shot at every
recognizable target with very overwhelming effect."

Later Vietinghoff wrote FM Kesslering to request withdrawal to the north
because: "The fact that the attacks which have been prepared fully and
carried out with spirit, especially by XIV Panzer corps, were unable to
reach their objective owing to the fire fire from naval guns and low
flying aircraft makes withdrawal imperative."

The fact that the Japanese changed their defensive strategies at Iwo
Jima and Okinawa to move the defenses inland to avoid direct naval
gunfire is also an indication of the effectiveness.  However, there was
never enough to make everybody happy.

Sorry for the long post, but I think that it helps with the debate.

Regards,
Ed Kettler
[email-masked]

------------------------------

Date:    Sat, 8 Apr 1995 08:50:08 -0700
From:    Ed Kettler <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: THUNDERBOLT

May 24-29, Little Rock, AR - P-47 Pilot Reunion, 602/943-5684.  Info
from April 1995 Sport Aviation magazine.

Regards,
Ed Kettler
[email-masked]

------------------------------

Date:    Sat, 8 Apr 1995 12:09:29 EDT
From:    "L. E. Lee" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Spam

The dairy industry was responsible for requiring that margarine be mixed with a
 yellow food coloring in the plastic bag after the buy brought it home.  Finall
y, the states permitted margarine manufacturers to put the coloring in at the f
actory.

------------------------------

Date:    Sat, 8 Apr 1995 09:20:18 -0800
From:    Allan_Wotherspoon <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: USN Ship Designations

In message Sat, 8 Apr 1995 18:40:29 +0700,
  "Peter E. Beal" <[email-masked]>  writes:

>
> I believe the U.S. had two battle cruisers in WWII, the Alaska and one
> other, possibly named the Hawaii.  I recall (from Morrison's works) that
> their designations were "CB".  Is my memory failing?
>

The Alaska and Guam were classified as Large Cruisers (CB) not Battlecrusers
(CC).  They had cruiser type armour and machinery arrangments and were not
meant to form part of the battle line in a battleship surface engagement.

Allan

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Allan J. Wotherspoon (e-mail: [email-masked])
Burnaby, B.C. Canada

------------------------------

Date:    Sat, 8 Apr 1995 11:31:19 -0500
From:    "Robert J. Granvin" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Books On The Pacific War

In message <[email-masked]> World War II Discussion
List writes:
> Please pardon me if this book has already been mentioned, but an
> excellent book about the Pacific war is Warpath Across the Pacific
> by Lawrence J. Hickey.  It is the illustrated history of the 345th
> Bombardment Group.  Published by International Research and Publishing
> Corporati
> on, Boulder, 1989.

This is NOT a cheap book -- When I found it, the cover price (and asking
price) was about $60.

However, all you have to do is open it up and it's clearly worth it.  Not
even paying attention to excellent paper stock and production qualities, the
book is literally exploding with photographs... The best collection of photos
that I've ever seen published on a single topic.

If you like B-25s and can afford one expensive book, you'll want this one.

--
Robert J. Granvin
Southern Minnesota Wing Confederate Air Force

------------------------------

Date:    Sat, 8 Apr 1995 12:39:34 -0400
From:    Frederick J Milford <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: USN Ship Designations

The ultimate answer to the question of the letter designators of USN ships can
be found in Dictionary of American Fighting Ships, Vol.IV, pp.607-731,
Washingtom: GPO, 1969.  The book is still in print, and most public libraries
seem to have copies.

On pp.622-623 General Order No.641, signed by R.E.Coontz, Acting Secretary of
the Navy, date July 17, 1920 is quoted in full.  This order establishe nine
official Type Designations (Single letter: B, C, D, S, P, A, Z, V and Y.  Z
refers to lighter than air craft; Vrefers to heavier than air craft.  The
others refer to naval vessels.  The types are subdivided into Classes BB, OBB
(Battleship, second line), BM (Monitor, first line) and OBM (Monitor, second
line) for example, for Type B.

Some interesting points:

1) The cruiser type (C) includes CVs and OCVs thus accounting for the C used in
carrier designations.

2) The cruiser type also include Minelayers CM and OCM

3) Type P, Patrol vessels Included PE, PC, PG and PY.  The WW II SCs don't fit
this division.

4) Type A, Auxiliaries, included fifteen classes.

5) Type Y, District craft, included essentially all of the yard craft, not
suitable for off shore steaming.

The corresponding order for 1968, SecNavInst 5030.E; OP-30 Ser 1595P30 is
quoted in full on pp.623-625.  Many more classifications.

If you want the answers to all those questions you were afraid to ask, this is
the place to look.

Fred Milford

------------------------------

Date:    Sat, 8 Apr 1995 07:26:11 -1000
From:    Jim Adams <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: USN Ship Designations

Fred, Want to thank you for pointing out this great reference.  Amazing,
I use this book often, but had only noticed the "List of Ship
Classificatons" at the end.  Now I just saw all the other information and
descriptions and explinations in the beginning of this section, wow, lots
of answers to stuff I was looking for in all sorts of other places.  A
nice neat compilation.

Mahalo nui loa (thanks so very much)

****************************************************************************
Jim Adams                       [email-masked]
Cultural Resource Manager
USS Arizona Memorial, NPS       (808) 422-2771  extension 130
1 Arizona Memorial Place
Honolulu, Hawaii 96818
****************************************************************************

On Sat, 8 Apr 1995, Frederick J Milford wrote:

> The ultimate answer to the question of the letter designators of USN ships can
> be found in Dictionary of American Fighting Ships, Vol.IV, pp.607-731,
> Washingtom: GPO, 1969.  The book is still in print, and most public libraries
> seem to have copies.
>

------------------------------

Date:    Sat, 8 Apr 1995 14:07:26 -0400
From:    Ron Charlton <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Rudolph Hess

There was a book that came out about a year ago that I believe was titled
CHURCHILL'S DECEPTION that had the premise that a peace party in Britain was
manipulated by Churchill to sort of put out peace feelers to Germany via Hess
to delay German actions against Britain. Also, somehow the British learned of
the plans to invade the Soviet Union but did not pass the information along
to Stalin. This was supposedly the reason the Soviets always voted against
parole for Hess.

The whole thing seemed a bit farfetched, but the book did mention the report
by the British doctor who examined the prisoner in Spandau and found him to
be lacking the scar from the chest wound Hess was known to have.

Maybe someone else read the book and can add to or correct my memories.

Ron Charlton
RebelRon @aol.com

------------------------------

Date:    Sat, 8 Apr 1995 14:12:59 EDT
From:    William Lippert <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Rudolph Hess

On Sat, 8 Apr 1995 14:07:26 -0400 Ron Charlton said:
>to delay German actions against Britain. Also, somehow the British learned of
>the plans to invade the Soviet Union but did not pass the information along
>to Stalin. This was supposedly the reason the Soviets always voted against
>parole for Hess.
>
>Ron Charlton
>RebelRon @aol.com

    I have a vague recollection of the scar on Hess's chest debate.  Also,
on a slightly different note, the Brits were well informed about German
plans in the West and the East - they even knew the exact dates!  These
were all provided by Colonel Oster of the Abwehr, an adamant anti-Nazi.
However, no one really believed him - they thought it was either a plant
by Nazi intelligence or a maneuver to provoke a major war.  Additionally,
Stalin was well informed of Barbarossa by the West, but he would not accept
that Hitler would turn on him before defeating the West.  He believed it
a Western plot to get him to go to war with Germany.  I believe the Soviets
always voted against Hess for parole because 1: he was an adament anti-Soviet;
2: he tried  to turn the West against the Soviet Union; 3: he was the last
Nazi in captivity - it would not be very just if they were all let go.  One
of them should remain a symbol of the horrors of the Nazi regime and a
symbol of Allied cooperation.

William Lippert
The American University

------------------------------

Date:    Sat, 8 Apr 1995 15:17:17 -0500
From:    Terrence Lindell <[email-masked]>
Subject: INF:  USS NEVADA at Pearl Harbor

Brad Coon recently asked about personal narratives from members
of the crew of USS NEVADA that recount the ship's run for the sea
during the attack on Pearl Harbor.

I checked in Mryon J. Smith, Jr.'s bibliography _Pearl Harbor, 1941_
(New York and Westport, CT:  Greenwood, 1991) [Oops, Smith's first
name is Myron] and was surprised at how little has been written for
personal narratives of the event.

Of the various entries, the most promising seemed to be in Paul Stillwell, ed.,
_Air Raid, Pearl Harbor!:  Recollections of a Day of Infamy (Annapolis:
Naval Institute Press, 1981).  Of the three reminiscences with NEVADA ties,
however, only one came from the attack itself and that was by a junior
officer stationed below deck.  A second came from an officer who had been
assisting the NEVADA change shell and powder stores in December 1941 and
who came aboard the vessel after she had grounded.  (The same fellow,
Lorenzo S. Sabin, also wrote an article entitled "Rising Suns over
Pearl," _Shipmate_ 29 (Dec. 1966): 10+, that is indexed under the NEVADA
entry in Smith's bibliography, but I don't have access to it and do
not know exactly what it covers).  The third reminiscence is from a fellow
who joined the crew after the NEVADA returned to the West Coast for repains
--oops--repairs in the spring of 1942.

The other item Smith lists that might have personal narratives is a ship's
history/cruise book:  NEVADA, USS.  _U.S.S. Nevada, BB-36, 1916-1946_.  San
Francisco:  James H. Barry, 1946.

Smith listed a number of other items, but none seemed to come from men
aboard the NEVADA at Pearl Harbor.  Given the dramatic nature of the
episode, I am surprised that others haven't written about their memories
of the event.

Terry Lindell
Department of History
Wartburg College
Waverly, Iowa  50677
[email-masked]

------------------------------

Date:    Sat, 8 Apr 1995 18:03:51 -0500
From:    "Louis R. Coatney" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: U.S. Navy Ship photos?

My thanks to Edward Miller for the info on U.S. Navy
  Archives.

Does anyone know what the contact point is for photos
  of WWII ships--U.S. Navy and otherwise?

Thanks for any help.

Lou Coatney, [email-masked]

------------------------------

Date:    Sat, 8 Apr 1995 11:01:08 EDT
From:    Gudmundur Helgason <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Whitmann vs Pool

On Fri, 7 Apr 1995 17:34:58 -0400 you wrote:

>Poole was no pilot. he was a Sherman TC from the 3AD. In the space of a
>little over three months he was able to bring down 258 vehicles in combat. I
>don not know what the kill rate of tanks was in this figure but 258 kills of
>anything in that amount of time is amazing. For the article  about Poole
>seethe magazine _Museum Ordnance_September, 1993 and the book _The 3rd
>Armored Division 1941-45_ Battery Press, 1980.
>Matthew Burchette
>(still votin' for a Yank as TC of the year!)
>
>
Yeah, but he could have been wiping out German milktrucks, nun-transports,
bicycles,
automobiles, gas trucks or almost anything that moved :) Say, he ran into
little transport
group, then he could have scored 40 kills in one afternoon, but that would
have been like
shooting eggs in a nest compared a duel against the T-34 85 (Wittman was
also most
likely outnumbered more than not).
Wittman's "other kills" are hardly ever mentioned as they arent that
important compared
to tank kills IHMO.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Gudmundur Helgason                         [email-masked]    [email-masked]
Olduslod 41                                phone: (354)-565-5270  and (354)-565-2270
220 Hafnarfjordur                                 Editor and maintainer of:
Iceland                                       http://www.netters.is/~lestat/Islandia.html
                               http://www.primenet.com/~peetah/iceland/Islandia.html

------------------------------

Date:    Sat, 8 Apr 1995 19:09:57 -0400
From:    "Matthew R. Burchette" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Rommel

How 'bout the new book by  David Fraser: _Knight's Cross: A Life of Field
Marshal Erwin Rommel_? ISBN 0-06-018222-9.
Looks like it has lots o' good refs in it though I must admit I haven't read
it yet.
Matthew Burchette

------------------------------

Date:    Sat, 8 Apr 1995 20:09:50 EDT
From:    John Davis <[email-masked]>
Subject: INF: 50 Years Ago - 08-APR-1945

On 08-APR-1945, the following occurred -

World War II - The Battlefronts
-------------------------------
Western Front - The Canadian II Corps is advancing towards Oldenburg and
cross the Ems near the area of Meppen-Lathen. The British III Corps
advances towards Bremen. The VIII Corps reaches the Leine. In the U.S. 1st
Army sector, the XVIII Airborne expands its bridgehead across the Sieg. The
VII Corps establishes a bridgehead over the Weser. Further south, the V
Corps is advancing east of the Weser. In the 7th Army sector, the XV Corps
is advancing towards the Hohe Rhone hills. The XXI Corps advances near
Schweinfurt. The French 1st Division captures Pforzheim.

Eastern Front - The 3rd White Russian Front continues its attack against
Konigsberg and breaks through from the northwest. The 2nd Ukraine Front is
advancing in Czechoslovakia and esblishes bridgeheads over the Danube and
Morava. Heavy fighting is occurring in Vienna.

Philippines - In the I Corps area, the Army is deployed between Rosario and
Baguio. Fighting continues for the Salacsac Pass. In the XI Corps area,
Mount Mataba is heavily bombarded in preparation for another attack.
Fighting continues on Cebu and Negros.

Okinawa - The III Amphibious Corps begins an offensive to capture the
Motobu peninsula. The XXIV Corps attacks the Kakzu Ridge with no success.

=============================================================================

Sources: "United States Army in World War II, Chronology 1941-1945" compiled
by Mary H. Williams, Office of the Chief of Military History, Department of
the Army, "2194 Days of War" by Cesare Salmaggi and Alfredo Pallavisimi,
"Facts On File Yearbook 1945, Person's Index Of World Events" edited by R.L.
Lapica.

Copyright 1995 by John B Davis, ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

Previous articles are archived at ftp.webcom.com in directory /pub/jbd/www
and can be accessed via the WWW by URL: http://www.webcom.com/~jbd/ww2.html.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
John Davis                           |                      [email-masked]
Cary, North Carolina                 |            http://www.webcom.com/~jbd/
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date:    Sat, 8 Apr 1995 20:20:22 EDT
From:    William Lippert <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Rudolph Hess

On Sat, 8 Apr 1995 09:58:52 EDT Ken Martin said:
>
>  Thanks for responding William. I find all the Nazi hierarchy interesting
>not just Hess.  As you said Hess wasn't there for much of the Final
>Soloution so I assumed he was left in Spandau for his beliefs.  Agreed, he
>was nuts but why would he kill himself when he was over 90 years old?  There
>seems to be enough evidence for questions on Hess's jailing. Then again I
>love a good conspiracy theory :-).  None of the top Nazis deserve respect
>except for maybe Rommel.  Don't mistake my interest in Hess for somrthing
>more then it actually is.  Another question is Hess believed he was doing
>something good flying to Scotland.  Did Hitler send him to hold out an olive
>branch to England and when it failed claimed no knowlege of the flight.
>Just wondering.  Thanks again.
>
>                             Ken  [email-masked]

      First, several of the Nazis deserve some respect - if anything because
of the immensity of their jobs.  Me? I'm just a poor college student who
has yet to be faced with the magnitude, importance, or the moral ambiguity
of their jobs.  Second, I do not consider Rommel to be a Nazi worthy of
respect because I don't think he is a Nazi.  Along this line of thought, there
are several military persons who are worthy of respect - from Rudel on
account of his performance both during and after the war (hiking mountains
with his artificial leg) to von Paulus who had to fight it out in Stalingrad.
Indeed, the average German soldier himself commands my highest respect,
atrocities aside, for having fought despite the improbablity of victory
or even survival.  For that matter, most soldiers in World War II must command
the highest respect when people of my generation (in general) have become
materialistic, ambiguous to our nation, and grossly self-centered.
    I didn't mean to criticize your interest in Reich leaders - just wondering
why Hess was your particular interest.  Did Hitler send him?  That's been
a debate ever since he first landed in England.  It hasn't been quite resolved
as, if Hitler gave him oral instructions, no one would ever have known.
Yet it is important to remember that before the flight Hess was largely out
of favor.  He rarely showed up at Obersalzberg (having been booted for bringing
his own weird food), Bormann had taken over most of his responsibilities, and
most everyone thought he was just totally cracked.  Why would Hitler have
sent him on such an important mission?  Why would he have not simply used
the normal diplomatic channels through Switzerland and the other neutral
countries?  Hess's flight seems more to be a last ditch attempt by Hess to
return to the fold of his Fuehrer.

William Lippert
The American University

------------------------------

Date:    Sat, 8 Apr 1995 21:11:19 -5
From:    "Carl D. Fago" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Panzer IV & Galland

> 1. Panzer IV AusfD - was this tank used by the Afrika Korps

Don't know for sure yet whether DAK had the Ausf D but it was used in
North Africa.  I have seen a plate showing an Ausf E with the DAK.

> 2. Could anyone fax or post me a photo of the interior of the Panzer IV or
> suggest a book which deals with this vehicle internally. (Fax: 614/797-2827).

The only interior shots I could find are of an Ausf G and A.

The books I have (and checked) are:

OSPREY-VANGUARD 18 The Panzerkampwagon IV by Bryan Perrett
Squadron/Signal Publications Armor Number 12 PzKpfw IV In Action
German Tanks in World War Two by George Forty

The first two are excellent modeller sources.  The last is the one
with the interior shots I mentioned.

> 3. Is Adolf Galland still alive. He does not appear on many programs now.

As far as I know.  One of my artist prints is signed by him.

Hope this helps some.

 +---------------------------------+----------------------------+
 | *-=Carl=-*  [email-masked]        | One man's theology is      |
 |             GEnie - C.FAGO1     | another man's belly laugh. |
 | Carl Fago   State College, PA   |                            |
 +---------------------------------+----------------------------+

------------------------------

Date:    Sat, 8 Apr 1995 20:34:16 -0500
From:    "Roddy R. Rupert" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: U.S. Navy Ship photos?

On Sat, 8 Apr 1995, Louis R. Coatney wrote:

> Does anyone know what the contact point is for photos
>   of WWII ships--U.S. Navy and otherwise?
>

Photos are available from:

        U.S. Naval Institute
        2062 Generals Hwy.
        Annapolis, MD 21401
        (800) 233-UNSI

-------------------------------------------
Rod Rupert    [email-masked]
Springfield, MO

------------------------------

Date:    Sat, 8 Apr 1995 18:30:24 -0700
From:    James Wilson <[email-masked]>
Subject: Raid on Cabanatuan Resumed #'s 13, 14 & 15

Sorry, technical difficulties have caused a two day delay in the
transmission
of episodes of "Raid."

Transmission resumes with Installments 13, 14, and 15, sent collectively
herewith to 'catch-up' and avoid mailbox clutter - Jim Wilson.

INSTALLMENT THIRTEEN IN A SERIES
Raid on Cabanatuan
a scenario of the published book
"Raid on Cabanatuan"
by Forrest Bryant Johnson
(C) 1988 A Thousand Autumns Press
all rights reserved
REPRODUCED ELECTRONICALLY WITH PERMISSION
4/6/95

January 30. (Morning)
-----------------------

Captain Fisher, the Battalion Surgeon, with the assistance of his Combat
Medics and a Filipino doctor, prepare a "Field Hospital" by converting
the Platero school house.

Guerrilla Captain Joson is advised that he and his men will establish a
road block along the main road to the south of the POW camp. They will
delay any Japanese troops moving towards the camp from Cabanatuan City.
They will be assisted by a few Rangers.

Guerrilla captain Pajota is ordered to attack Oyabu's men at Cabu Bridge
at the North on the road once the raid begins. He is told to hold the
enemy from crossing the river bed and attacking the Americans. It is
imperative that he hold until all Americans and POW's are safely out of
the area. He swears to Lt. Col. Mucci that if any Japanese pass his
position it will mean only that he and his men are "all dead." Pajota is
given a Bazooka and a number of rockets.

Civilians in all nearby villages are told to prepare caribou (water
buffalo) carts for the evacuation of the POW's to Allied lines.

Pajota and Joson's men are given the assignment of cutting telephone
lines from the POW camp, thus isolating those Japanese from the large
force at Cabanatuan City.

Once again, Captain Fisher, M.D., requests permission to stay with his
men in the action. Somehow he convinces Lt. Col. Mucci that he should
go on the raid.

INSTALLMENT FOURTEEN IN A SERIES
Raid on Cabanatuan
a scenario of the published book
"Raid on Cabanatuan"
by Forrest Bryant Johnson
(C) 1988 A Thousand Autumns Press
all rights reserved
REPRODUCED ELECTRONICALLY WITH PERMISSION
4/7/95

January 30. 5 P.M.
-------------------
Filipino guerrillas, Rangers and Scouts move out of Platero for a
one-half mile march to the shallow Pampanga River which must be crossed
before they can reach the POW camp. As they begin to wade across,
Captain Joson's men split off and head south to form the road block.
Captain Pajota's men head towards the junction of the Cabu River and the
Pampanga - at that point they will follow the Cabu River until they
reach the Bridge and Oyabu's men. The Rangers enter flat rice fields for
a two-mile *crawl* to the road and the POW camp. Everyone must be
in position by 7:30 P.M.

INSTALLMENT FIFTEEN IN A SERIES
Raid on Cabanatuan
a scenario of the published book
"Raid on Cabanatuan"
by Forrest Bryant Johnson
(C) 1988 A Thousand Autumns Press
all rights reserved
REPRODUCED ELECTRONICALLY WITH PERMISSION
4/8/95

January 30. 6:45 P.M.
---------------------
By a prearranged plan, a lone U.S. "Black Widow" aircraft piloted by a
short, handsome lieutenant -- Ken Schrieber -- of the 547th Night
Squadron flies over the POW camp at 200 feet. The plane makes two "tree
top" level passes, holding the Japanese troops' attention while the
Rangers move closer and darkness  falls.

--- TO BE CONTINUED ---
(For info on obtaining a copy of the Book and/or scenario,  and or
missed List episodes, E-Mail:  Jim Wilson :  [email-masked])

------------------------------

Date:    Sat, 8 Apr 1995 20:45:36 -0500
From:    "Roddy R. Rupert" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Rommel

You might also try 'Rommel- In His Own Words'. I found a copy in a used
book store a few months back. However, it is a new book, copyright 1994.

-------------------------------------------
Rod Rupert    [email-masked]
Springfield, MO

------------------------------

Date:    Sat, 8 Apr 1995 22:00:17 EDT
From:    Ken Martin <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Rudolph Hess

>
>      First, several of the Nazis deserve some respect - if anything because
>of the immensity of their jobs.  Me? I'm just a poor college student who
>has yet to be faced with the magnitude, importance, or the moral ambiguity
>of their jobs.  Second, I do not consider Rommel to be a Nazi worthy of
>respect because I don't think he is a Nazi.  Along this line of thought, there
>are several military persons who are worthy of respect - from Rudel on
>account of his performance both during and after the war (hiking mountains
>with his artificial leg) to von Paulus who had to fight it out in Stalingrad.
>Indeed, the average German soldier himself commands my highest respect,
>atrocities aside, for having fought despite the improbablity of victory
>or even survival.  For that matter, most soldiers in World War II must command
>the highest respect when people of my generation (in general) have become
>materialistic, ambiguous to our nation, and grossly self-centered.
>    I didn't mean to criticize your interest in Reich leaders - just wondering
>why Hess was your particular interest.  Did Hitler send him?  That's been
>a debate ever since he first landed in England.  It hasn't been quite resolved
>as, if Hitler gave him oral instructions, no one would ever have known.
>Yet it is important to remember that before the flight Hess was largely out
>of favor.  He rarely showed up at Obersalzberg (having been booted for bringing
>his own weird food), Bormann had taken over most of his responsibilities, and
>most everyone thought he was just totally cracked.  Why would Hitler have
>sent him on such an important mission?  Why would he have not simply used
>the normal diplomatic channels through Switzerland and the other neutral
>countries?  Hess's flight seems more to be a last ditch attempt by Hess to
>return to the fold of his Fuehrer.
>
>William Lippert
>The American University
>
>
     OK I was trying to be politically correct in saying "none of the nazi
leaders deserved respect except for maybe Rommel".  The foot soldiers and
some of the leaders do deserve respect.  Another who you didn't mention was
Von Stauffenberg.  It took great courage to try to assasinate Hitler and he
came quite close to succedeing.
     If my memory serves me everyone felt Hess was nuts at Nuremberg.  So we
could say 4 years of isolation could be the cause.  Hess stated is loyalty
to Hitler until his death. His loyalty and dedication to Hitler would be
great reason to be sent out on this type of mission.  He would keep his
mouth shut if England refused to cooperate.  It's all a lot of speculation.
Hess was there from the begining for Hitler so he might have been the only
one he trusted.  Who knows.  I'm still very interested in his murder/suicide
so if you find any info let me know.  Thanks.

                            Ken Martin    [email-masked]

------------------------------

Date:    Sat, 8 Apr 1995 21:03:03 -0500
From:    "Roddy R. Rupert" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: WEAP: Attack Transports -- MODEL reissued!

On Thu, 6 Apr 1995, Louis R. Coatney wrote:

>      Revell/Monogram has reissued its Attack Transport RANDALL kit
> for about $12.00 US -- also the Seaplane Tender kit for about the
> same.
>

Why did they choose the RANDALL instead of the lead ship in the class?

-------------------------------------------
Rod Rupert    [email-masked]
Springfield, MO

------------------------------

Date:    Sat, 8 Apr 1995 21:46:07 -0500
From:    "Roddy R. Rupert" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Photo Service, Naval Institute

Here is the address of the Naval Institute photo service. The address in
my previous post would probably work, but this should be quicker.

U.S. Naval Institute
Photo Service
118 Maryland Ave.
Annapolis, MD 21402-5035
FAX: 410-269-7940

quote from their ad:

        "Our photo collection dates from the late 1800s to the present,
and includes U.S. Navy ships, Coast Guard, Marines, maritime and military
images, extensive aircraft shots, all of the wars, and much more."

The claim to have over 35,000 images.

-------------------------------------------
Rod Rupert    [email-masked]
Springfield, MO

------------------------------

Date:    Sat, 8 Apr 1995 22:40:38 EDT
From:    William Lippert <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Rudolph Hess

On Sat, 8 Apr 1995 22:00:17 EDT Ken Martin said:
>>
>     OK I was trying to be politically correct in saying "none of the nazi
>leaders deserved respect except for maybe Rommel".  The foot soldiers and
>some of the leaders do deserve respect.  Another who you didn't mention was
>Von Stauffenberg.  It took great courage to try to assasinate Hitler and he
>came quite close to succedeing.
>     If my memory serves me everyone felt Hess was nuts at Nuremberg.  So we
>could say 4 years of isolation could be the cause.  Hess stated is loyalty
>to Hitler until his death. His loyalty and dedication to Hitler would be
>great reason to be sent out on this type of mission.  He would keep his
>mouth shut if England refused to cooperate.  It's all a lot of speculation.
>Hess was there from the begining for Hitler so he might have been the only
>one he trusted.  Who knows.  I'm still very interested in his murder/suicide
>so if you find any info let me know.  Thanks.
>
>                            Ken Martin    [email-masked]

    I think that even the highest Nazis thought Hess was mostly cracked,
before he went on his funny flight.  I'm not sure, though, if he was
clinically insane - slightly off his rocker, as you say from imprisonment.
But there are some ideas that part of his seeming insanity was an act for
the Allies to let him go because of mental health reasons.  For the most
part, his letters to his wife are lucid.  Sorry, but I don't think that
Hitler sent Hess to restore peace bewteen Germany and Britain.  The
evidence is largely against it and it really doesn't make sense (in light
of other possibilities).  As I said before, normal diplomatic maneuvers
would have been no less effective.
    I don't know anything about his death, though I've heard about that
suicide thing in Spandau.  I think I saw it, too, on Unsolved Mysteries.
As for Stauffenberg and the plotters, I do respect them, too, but I have
mixed feelings.  While their attempt and ideals were very commendable,
I am inclined to find their plan and the actual events rather pathetic.
With a little better planning and decisiveness, it could have succeeded.
It seems that everyone except Hitler and Bormann were aware of the plot:
Goering, Himmler, Goebbels; they were merely trying to see which direction
events would play out.
   Thanks for the feedback.

William Lippert
The American University

------------------------------

End of WWII-L Digest - 7 Apr 1995 to 8 Apr 1995
***********************************************