Wreck of WWII German U-boat found off North Carolina

Started by a2capt, October 21, 2014, 07:50:44 PM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

THRAWN

Please stop injecting fact into the discussion of this mythology. Now it's time to feed my sasquatch....
Strup-"Belligerent....at times...."
AFRCC SMC 10-97
NSS ISC 05-00
USAF SOS 2000
USAF ACSC 2011
US NWC 2016
USMC CSCDEP 2023

AirAux

MisterCD, it sounds like you have infallible belief in Navy history.  Try this from the Naval History and Heritage Command: "The most famous US Navy losses which have occurred in the area popularly known as the Bermuda Triangle are USS Cyclops in March 1918 and the aircraft of Flight 19 in December 1945. The ship probably sank in an unexpected storm, and the aircraft ran out of fuel and crashed into the ocean -- no physical traces of them have ever been found. Another well known disappearance is the civilian tanker SS Marine Sulphur Queen carrying bulk molten sulfur which sank in February 1963. Although the wreck of Marine Sulphur Queen has not been located, a life preserver and other floating artifacts were recovered. These disappearances have been used to provide credence to the popular belief in the mystery and purported supernatural qualities of the "Bermuda Triangle."



Since the days of early civilization many thousands of ships have sunk and/or disappeared in waters around the world due to navigational and other human errors, storms, piracy, fires, and structural/mechanical failures. Aircraft are subject to the same problems, and many of them have crashed at sea around the globe. Often, there were no living witnesses to the sinking or crash, and hence the exact cause of the loss and the location of the lost ship or aircraft are unknown. A large number of pleasure boats travel the waters between Florida and the Bahamas. All too often, crossings are attempted with too small a boat, insufficient knowledge of the area's hazards, and a lack of good seamanship."

Ergo, there are many times when there are no known facts involving sinking of ships or disappearance of aircraft.  Quit wasting your time trying to disprove an accepted and beloved theory from 75 years ago.   Why not work with more recent disasters of CAP and study and report on the rise and fall of HWSRN.  At least that endeavor might assist CAP in not repeating the same thing again, which is actually the only reason for history in the first place.


MisterCD

Quote from: AirAux on October 26, 2014, 11:26:05 PM
MisterCD, it sounds like you have infallible belief in Navy history.  Try this from the Naval History and Heritage Command: "The most famous US Navy losses which have occurred in the area popularly known as the Bermuda Triangle are USS Cyclops in March 1918 and the aircraft of Flight 19 in December 1945. The ship probably sank in an unexpected storm, and the aircraft ran out of fuel and crashed into the ocean -- no physical traces of them have ever been found. Another well known disappearance is the civilian tanker SS Marine Sulphur Queen carrying bulk molten sulfur which sank in February 1963. Although the wreck of Marine Sulphur Queen has not been located, a life preserver and other floating artifacts were recovered. These disappearances have been used to provide credence to the popular belief in the mystery and purported supernatural qualities of the "Bermuda Triangle."



Since the days of early civilization many thousands of ships have sunk and/or disappeared in waters around the world due to navigational and other human errors, storms, piracy, fires, and structural/mechanical failures. Aircraft are subject to the same problems, and many of them have crashed at sea around the globe. Often, there were no living witnesses to the sinking or crash, and hence the exact cause of the loss and the location of the lost ship or aircraft are unknown. A large number of pleasure boats travel the waters between Florida and the Bahamas. All too often, crossings are attempted with too small a boat, insufficient knowledge of the area's hazards, and a lack of good seamanship."

Ergo, there are many times when there are no known facts involving sinking of ships or disappearance of aircraft.  Quit wasting your time trying to disprove an accepted and beloved theory from 75 years ago.   Why not work with more recent disasters of CAP and study and report on the rise and fall of HWSRN.  At least that endeavor might assist CAP in not repeating the same thing again, which is actually the only reason for history in the first place.

You missed this element I believe:

Ultimately, I'm not here to change opinions or bring decades of CAP history indoctrination crashing down. If asked about information on particular aspect of the organization's heritage, I'm obligated to provide the best possible product with the best information available. If this information does not parallel past claims, then further research has to be conducted to get to the bottom of the situation. When you exhaust all available material and sources, perhaps it is best to realize that the previous assertions are incorrect, and then to determine why.

The only party claiming CAP sank or damaged U-boats is CAP. If going to make a claim, you best have support for it, particularly if going to make sure of heritage for either the Congressional Gold Medal or the 75th anniversary. As for more recent adventures, work is underway on those. Perhaps you might wish to work on a subject yourself. As for the former national commanders, there too are areas being addressed. One person cannot research them all, so if volunteering for the work then join it. It would certainly be more beneficial than throwing stones on CAPtalk.

AirAux

I am not throwing stones, you are the one taking pot shots at CAP heritage.  You have no more factual proof that CAP didn't sink submarines than I have that they did, but my theory does no harm to CAP where yours attacks the honor, integrity, courage, heritage, pride, and esprit de corps of CAP.  If only all history was factual, but you know it is not.  If this is your crowning contribution to CAP history, may I suggest you direct your quest elsewhere, such as why we switched to maroon epaulets.  That could certainly squelch some ugly rumors.   You start pulling on threads of our history and the whole [darn] thing could become unwoven.  We don't do this for pay or because we have to.  You remove our heritage and it weakens us severely.  Govern yourself accordingly.

MisterCD

Watch your words when you accuse someone of denigrating an organization and its history. Nothing more I say will reach someone such as yourself, so I consider the matter closed.

PHall

Quote from: MisterCD on October 27, 2014, 01:32:04 AM
Watch your words when you accuse someone of denigrating an organization and its history. Nothing more I say will reach someone such as yourself, so I consider the matter closed.

Are you threatening him?  Yeah, that really makes you look good.  Such a professional, NOT!!!

Fubar

Quote from: PHall on October 26, 2014, 07:21:32 PM

But how do YOU know that there were no sinkings?

Cite please or drop it, your call.

Well, I only go by what the experts publish. The United States Navy says we didn't sink any subs. There's a IG report (that I can't find again, dangit) from either the AAF or USAF, I don't recall, that basically says CAP says it sunk some subs but provides no actual evidence and a review of CAP records couldn't find any proof. We were basically called out for making up our own history (the guy who wrote the report was later assigned to head CAP if that helps someone find the report).

But then I suppose you think all the government facts are made up. To each his own.

abdsp51


PHall

Quote from: Fubar on October 27, 2014, 01:42:25 AM
Quote from: PHall on October 26, 2014, 07:21:32 PM

But how do YOU know that there were no sinkings?

Cite please or drop it, your call.

Well, I only go by what the experts publish. The United States Navy says we didn't sink any subs. There's a IG report (that I can't find again, dangit) from either the AAF or USAF, I don't recall, that basically says CAP says it sunk some subs but provides no actual evidence and a review of CAP records couldn't find any proof. We were basically called out for making up our own history (the guy who wrote the report was later assigned to head CAP if that helps someone find the report).

But then I suppose you think all the government facts are made up. To each his own.

Somewhere outthere there is a report showing the munitions used in these attacks were expended or were lost.
Because the one thing that the US military demands 100% accountability on is ammunition and munitions.

LSThiker

#29
Quote from: AirAux on October 26, 2014, 11:26:05 PM
Quit wasting your time trying to disprove an accepted and beloved theory from 75 years ago.

So we should just believe a story without evidence?  Not even a theory at that as a theory has strong evidence to support it.  The fact of the matter is, if you make a claim, you must support said claim with evidence.  It does not matter how much wishing, how many people believe it, or how long it is told.  That without evidence can be rejected without evidence.  Otherwise, we would still be stuck in the stone age. 

It is possible that CAP did sink two submarines.  After all, absence of evidence does not equal evidence.  However, until said evidence is found, we cannot make the claim that CAP sunk two submarines.

Quote from: AirAux on October 27, 2014, 01:20:07 AM
my theory does no harm to CAP where yours attacks the honor, integrity, courage, heritage, pride, and esprit de corps of CAP.  If only all history was factual, but you know it is not.

Yes it does harm the organization.  Publishing unsupported or even false information calls into the question the honor, integrity, and heritage of CAP.  So if we keep saying "CAP sunk two submarines", when in fact we did not, then how is that for integrity? 

Not all history is correct.  That is why historians, scientists, philosophers, and others look for the truth.  We know there is false information out there, it is our job to correct said false information instead of continuing to spread it. 

Майор Хаткевич

Quote from: PHall on October 27, 2014, 02:00:15 AM
Quote from: Fubar on October 27, 2014, 01:42:25 AM
Quote from: PHall on October 26, 2014, 07:21:32 PM

But how do YOU know that there were no sinkings?

Cite please or drop it, your call.

Well, I only go by what the experts publish. The United States Navy says we didn't sink any subs. There's a IG report (that I can't find again, dangit) from either the AAF or USAF, I don't recall, that basically says CAP says it sunk some subs but provides no actual evidence and a review of CAP records couldn't find any proof. We were basically called out for making up our own history (the guy who wrote the report was later assigned to head CAP if that helps someone find the report).

But then I suppose you think all the government facts are made up. To each his own.

Somewhere outthere there is a report showing the munitions used in these attacks were expended or were lost.
Because the one thing that the US military demands 100% accountability on is ammunition and munitions.


What I was thinking as well. I was under the impression this was a supported, factual , CAP accomplishment.

Now it sounds like someone was afraid to land with a bomb underneath (understandable), or was a glory hound (less so), and released the payload, and claimed a kill. Didn't one of the shots claim seeing an oil slick?

LSThiker

Quote from: Capt Hatkevich on October 27, 2014, 03:04:11 AM
What I was thinking as well. I was under the impression this was a supported, factual , CAP accomplishment.

Now it sounds like someone was afraid to land with a bomb underneath (understandable), or was a glory hound (less so), and released the payload, and claimed a kill. Didn't one of the shots claim seeing an oil slick?

Or dropped it on a whale (happened a few times) and did not want to admit it to his drinking buddies.  Come to think of it, but I think more whales died by CAP than Nazis.

Майор Хаткевич

Quote from: LSThiker on October 27, 2014, 03:07:05 AM
Quote from: Capt Hatkevich on October 27, 2014, 03:04:11 AM
What I was thinking as well. I was under the impression this was a supported, factual , CAP accomplishment.

Now it sounds like someone was afraid to land with a bomb underneath (understandable), or was a glory hound (less so), and released the payload, and claimed a kill. Didn't one of the shots claim seeing an oil slick?

Or dropped it on a whale (happened a few times) and did not want to admit it to his drinking buddies.  Come to think of it, but I think more whales died by CAP than Nazis.

There's whales in the atlantic/ gulf?

Edit: there are....learn something new each day...but sub's...don't they look bigger?

Майор Хаткевич

So...this is all a farce:

QuoteThe CAP's first kill was claimed by one of the larger aircraft. The Grumman G-44 Widgeon, armed with two depth charges and crewed by Captain Johnny Haggins and Major Wynant Farr, was scrambled when another CAP patrol radioed that they had encountered an enemy submarine but were returning to base due to low fuel. After scanning the area, Farr spotted the U-boat cruising beneath the surface of the waves. Unable to accurately determine the depth of the vessel, Haggins and Ferr radioed the situation back to base and followed the enemy in hopes that it would rise to periscope depth. For three hours, the crew shadowed the submarine. Just as Haggins was about to return to base, the U-boat rose to periscope depth, and Haggins swung the aircraft around, aligned with the submarine and dove to 100 feet (30 m). Farr released one of the two depth charges, blowing the submarine's front out of the water. As it left an oil slick, Farr made and second pass and released the other charge. Debris appeared on the ocean's surface, confirming the U-boat's demise and the Civil Air Patrol's first kill.[6]

The sinking was perhaps the crowning achievement for CAP's Coastal Patrol, which continued to operate for about 18 months (from 5 March 1942 to 31 August 1943) before being officially retired. During this time, the Coastal Patrol reported 173 U-boats and attacked 57 of them with 83 ordnance pieces, resulting in two confirmed kills.[7] Overall, the Coastal Patrol flew 86,865 missions, logging over 244,600 hours. Coastal Patrol aircraft reported 91 ships in distress and played a key role in rescuing 363 survivors of U-boat attacks. 17 floating mines were reported and 5,684 convoy missions were flown for the Navy.[8]

LSThiker

Quote from: Capt Hatkevich on October 27, 2014, 03:18:46 AM
So...this is all a farce:

QuoteThe CAP's first kill was claimed by one of the larger aircraft. The Grumman G-44 Widgeon, armed with two depth charges and crewed by Captain Johnny Haggins and Major Wynant Farr, was scrambled when another CAP patrol radioed that they had encountered an enemy submarine but were returning to base due to low fuel. After scanning the area, Farr spotted the U-boat cruising beneath the surface of the waves. Unable to accurately determine the depth of the vessel, Haggins and Ferr radioed the situation back to base and followed the enemy in hopes that it would rise to periscope depth. For three hours, the crew shadowed the submarine. Just as Haggins was about to return to base, the U-boat rose to periscope depth, and Haggins swung the aircraft around, aligned with the submarine and dove to 100 feet (30 m). Farr released one of the two depth charges, blowing the submarine's front out of the water. As it left an oil slick, Farr made and second pass and released the other charge. Debris appeared on the ocean's surface, confirming the U-boat's demise and the Civil Air Patrol's first kill.[6]

The sinking was perhaps the crowning achievement for CAP's Coastal Patrol, which continued to operate for about 18 months (from 5 March 1942 to 31 August 1943) before being officially retired. During this time, the Coastal Patrol reported 173 U-boats and attacked 57 of them with 83 ordnance pieces, resulting in two confirmed kills.[7] Overall, the Coastal Patrol flew 86,865 missions, logging over 244,600 hours. Coastal Patrol aircraft reported 91 ships in distress and played a key role in rescuing 363 survivors of U-boat attacks. 17 floating mines were reported and 5,684 convoy missions were flown for the Navy.[8]

Not all a farce.  Just the account of Capt Haggins and Maj Farr is not supported by evidence unless that [7] reference has some new evidence.

Quote from: Capt Hatkevich on October 27, 2014, 03:11:00 AM
There's whales in the atlantic/ gulf?

Edit: there are....learn something new each day...but sub's...don't they look bigger?

Yup.  New England whaling was a massive business in the 1800s. 

a2capt

The subs may not look that much bigger than some whales, but I'm sure they don't bend like whales do .. :)

RiverAux

I would bet good money that if were to add up all the claimed uboat kills made by all US forces during this period that they would probably exceed to the total number of German subs ever built. 

Just because evidence that wasn't available for decades sheds doubt on many of these claims doesn't mean that they were made by a glory hound or liar.  Honest mistakes can and were made at the time. 

Our guys were out there.  They did attack dozens of U-boats and I'm not surprised that these were all unsuccessful given the tiny bombs that they using.  We did spot submarines, report them, and then have them sunk by better armed forces.  Perhaps more detailed digs into the records may reveal that some of those incidents weren't quite what we thought as well, but so what? 

THRAWN

Quote from: RiverAux on October 27, 2014, 01:17:15 PM
Perhaps more detailed digs into the records may reveal that some of those incidents weren't quite what we thought as well, but so what?

Exactly. Why let facts get in the way of a good story?
Strup-"Belligerent....at times...."
AFRCC SMC 10-97
NSS ISC 05-00
USAF SOS 2000
USAF ACSC 2011
US NWC 2016
USMC CSCDEP 2023

RiverAux

Quote from: THRAWN on October 27, 2014, 01:40:59 PM
Quote from: RiverAux on October 27, 2014, 01:17:15 PM
Perhaps more detailed digs into the records may reveal that some of those incidents weren't quite what we thought as well, but so what?

Exactly. Why let facts get in the way of a good story?

If you want to know all the facts, don't get into military history.  We will never know exactly what happened at every moment during an entire war, or even a particular campaign or battle.  Thats just the way it is. 

What we have for the most part is the reports of CAP members who said they did such and such at some place and time.  I would be surprised if there ever was any actual physical evidence or reports from others (US or German) to corroborate these CAP reports.  Thats the way things work in war. 

Eclipse

Quote from: RiverAux on October 27, 2014, 01:17:15 PMOur guys were out there.  They did attack dozens of U-boats and I'm not surprised that these were all unsuccessful given the tiny bombs that they using.  We did spot submarines, report them, and then have them sunk by better armed forces.  Perhaps more detailed digs into the records may reveal that some of those incidents weren't quite what we thought as well, but so what?

Well, WWII isn't really a popular subject for historians or documentarians, I mean it's not like there are entire cable channels and sections of libraries dedicated
to the subject, right?  Plus, it's only been like 69 some years since things cooled off, so let's get some time and space between us for perspective.

The trouble is that CAP has pinned the majority of its identity on "those little yellow airplanes", including the apocryphal comment by AH himself. So
any intimation that the story presented isn't true, or has been "enhanced" over the years, kicks out a leg right out from under the entire organization.

If you do the math on a lot of events of this type, especially during wartime , there tend to be details that are blurred, characters "combined for dramatic
effect", and generally the lens of time skewing the interpretation, but military organizations have plenty of cool points to shed because they
haven't basically sat on the same from front porch for 70 years and told the same story to whomever will listen.

CAP doesn't, and needs to understand that when current ops are stagnant, and you pin your identity on something that some people
call into question, that costs it cool points it can't afford, and will never earn back.

"That Others May Zoom"