Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 25, 2019, 03:43:24 AM
Home Help Login Register
News:

CAP Talk  |  General Discussion  |  Hysterical History  |  Topic: Sub Chasers of the Civil Air Patrol
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Pages: [1] Send this topic Print
Author Topic: Sub Chasers of the Civil Air Patrol  (Read 1119 times)
JeffDG
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 3,179

« on: February 22, 2019, 06:36:35 PM »

Report to moderator   Logged
Spam
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,210
Unit: GA-001

« Reply #1 on: February 22, 2019, 06:54:15 PM »

Thanks for posting this.  It was great up to 7:35, when it abruptly departed from good historical scholarship.


"The first confirmed kill by the CAP was in July..."
Thus the lies and inaccuracies are perpetuated... he offers no proof of the claim, when none has ever been documented, when the "confirmation" was CAP's own boastful statements, and when exhaustive post war analysis reveals no German losses in that area in that date range (at all).
Then again at 10:00 with the (here anonymous) "German naval officers" claims about the feared little yellow planes.


So... we've been over and over this here on CT and elsewhere. Is anyone from CAP going to have the fortitude to contact "the history guy" to set the record straight? Do we have the moral courage to acknowledge that our forbearers in CAP, while valiant and self sacrificing to the end, were also human and thus prone to exaggeration?  This borders on stolen valor, unless we correct the record firmly.  We have too many fallen heroes who gave their lives during that war to tarnish their memory with false/exaggerated claims for which there is no basis.


V/r
Spam




Report to moderator   Logged
etodd
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,558

« Reply #2 on: February 22, 2019, 09:57:52 PM »

Look at it on the youtube page and scroll down to the Comments and you'll see where The History Guy discusses this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=5&v=Nkzkcia-7lc

To quote him here:

Quote
A viewer made the fair point that the claim by the Civil Air Patrol of sinking a U-Boat has never been confirmed by the Navy. It is part of CAP lore, but not a confirmed kill.  Confirming U-Boat "kills" has always been a difficult process.

Col Frank A. Blazich, Jr. of the CAP informed me that new research has concluded that the number of known CAP members killed in service during the war has increased from 65 to 68, and may continue to climb as records are reviewed.  They gave their all for their country, and they deserve to be remembered.
Report to moderator   Logged
MS - MO - AP - MP - FRO

sUAS MP - sUAS Instructor - sUAS Check Pilot
lordmonar
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 10,694

« Reply #3 on: February 22, 2019, 11:03:24 PM »

[darn] it!  You beat me to it!
Report to moderator   Logged
PATRICK M. HARRIS, SMSgt, CAP
OldGuy
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 585
Unit: TBKS

« Reply #4 on: February 23, 2019, 03:13:05 AM »

Thus the lies and inaccuracies are perpetuated...

V/r
Spam
Ya know, I take umbrage at that phrase. Lies? Really? As for "inaccuracies" - even that is pejorative.

The pilots and ground crews of the time reported the kills. That they are unable to be verified is neither a lie nor even an inaccuracy.  The "fog of war" is real, as were the many brave men and women who flew and fought and died as civilian militia in the air in war time. Denigrating that service is really beneath contempt.

Sorry if that sounds harsh, but there it is.
Report to moderator   Logged
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award

Posts: 29,821

« Reply #5 on: February 23, 2019, 03:30:48 AM »

The ongoing issue isn't the original claims, but that in the face of the dispute regarding
accuracy of the reports, CAP has discreetly removed the claims from press release footers
and similar, but has never said anything definitively, and continues to take a considerable
amount of organizational satisfaction from the insinuation that those sinking(s) occurred.

There are still plenty of members who espouse the stories of the sinking(s), and CAP's
(now fairly distant) history generally takes up a significant part of recruiting efforts.

Perhaps if its marketing and daily focus was more on current operations and less on its history
this would not be as much of an issue, or as difficult to accept.

No one should ever downplay or denigrate the risk, service, and sacrifices of those early members,
but when you intertwine something like this so deeply into your organizational DNA, the only way to maintain
credibility is to accept the truth of the matter, whatever that is, and then move on.

Handled properly, this could literally be the best leadership lesson CAP ever offered.
Report to moderator   Logged


etodd
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,558

« Reply #6 on: February 23, 2019, 04:14:48 AM »

So ... who knows what the future may bring? Maybe the next phase will be the drone program. Our grandkids in CAP might one day be patrolling the coastline with sUAS armed little tiny bombs ready to drop on enemy subs!

Sorry. Just couldn't resist.  >:D >:D >:D
Report to moderator   Logged
MS - MO - AP - MP - FRO

sUAS MP - sUAS Instructor - sUAS Check Pilot
Color Guard Rifleman
Forum Regular

Posts: 171
Unit: GLR-MI-265

Grand Rapids Metro Cadet Squadron
« Reply #7 on: February 23, 2019, 02:43:53 PM »

So ... who knows what the future may bring? Maybe the next phase will be the drone program. Our grandkids in CAP might one day be patrolling the coastline with sUAS armed little tiny bombs ready to drop on enemy subs!

Sorry. Just couldn't resist.  >:D >:D >:D

Yessss! Great minds think alike  :clap:
Report to moderator   Logged
C/SMSgt Murphy Killeen, CAP
2019 MIWG Encampment Squadron 2 First Sergeant
Recruiting NCO

See the source image
Spam
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,210
Unit: GA-001

« Reply #8 on: February 23, 2019, 02:58:21 PM »

Thus the lies and inaccuracies are perpetuated...

V/r
Spam
Ya know, I take umbrage at that phrase. Lies? Really? As for "inaccuracies" - even that is pejorative.

The pilots and ground crews of the time reported the kills. That they are unable to be verified is neither a lie nor even an inaccuracy.  The "fog of war" is real, as were the many brave men and women who flew and fought and died as civilian militia in the air in war time. Denigrating that service is really beneath contempt.

Sorry if that sounds harsh, but there it is.


Clarify please. You targeting me with the contempt there?
If so did you read my full post?


Knowingly reporting unconfirmed kills and repeating and needlessly embellishing already sacrificial and honorable service in order to secure funding is, to me, reprehensible. Decades ago we had these lies repeated to us and unless we cleanse this blot on the honor of CAP we dishonor the true sacrifices of many noble volunteers. I feel Eclipse states the problem very well.


No. I was not broad brush insulting our war volunteers. But i wont retract the terms i used. Go read the December report.

Report to moderator   Logged
Spam
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,210
Unit: GA-001

« Reply #9 on: February 23, 2019, 03:15:39 PM »

So ... who knows what the future may bring? Maybe the next phase will be the drone program. Our grandkids in CAP might one day be patrolling the coastline with sUAS armed little tiny bombs ready to drop on enemy subs!

Sorry. Just couldn't resist.  >:D >:D >:D

Yessss! Great minds think alike  :clap:


Well, so do diseased minds unfortunately. Search for the Houthi sUAS attack last month which killed a Yemeni S2 and five others and wounded many. Iranian supplied and in combat use now in theater. There is much that is open source... and there is much testing scheduled in the next few months which will impact the counter uas mission (my shop is involved at work). A real mission support req for CAP is emerging just as in 1942.


Defending against weaponized sUAS efforts is a priority thrust. CAP may have a role here analogous to WW2 tow target work. We shall see. That however is but one of several sUAS missions... And is already controversial since some of our old guard types dont seem to support these missions.


There IS relevancy for CAP today... if we can stick to the core values and stay focused on our customers... And not on our hobby interests or ego inflation. The sub issue is as Eclipse states so well a case where we could take the high road in setting a tone for accepting new customer missions like sUAS defense training support.


Vr
Spam

Report to moderator   Logged
NIN
Administrator

Posts: 5,214
Unit: of issue

« Reply #10 on: February 23, 2019, 03:49:49 PM »

Its nothing even so insidious guys.

Some of it is in the reporting, some of it is in the communication, some of it is in the embellishment at echelons above the air crews and ground crews, and some of it is CAP's own post-war "marketing efforts" to remain relevant in the face of major changes to the US Military.

Following the two main "sinking" reportings, they were listed as "damaged or destroyed." (it was a category, along with things like "sighted," "attacked," etc). Later, the "damaged or" got conveniently left out. Was that because someone at a higher level needed to ensure it looked like we were "doing our part," or was it "convenient editing" on the part of someone trying to sharpen the description of the effort in less column inches? Who knows.

70 years hence, with the lens of post-WWII historical reports, including those of the Kriegsmarine and wreck chasers, its easier to understand that even some of our reporting at the crew level may (*may*) have included a little embellishment.

The problem is that over the last 70 years or so, we've bought the "official" version from many different sources with little understanding of their sources:  Neprud's "Flying Minutemen," Glines' "Minutemen of the Air," etc. The "stories and scuttlebutt" over that time have basically become "oral legends" and are difficult to separate from facts. I don't think its anybody's fault, or anybody attempting to deliberately denigrate the accomplishments of our forebears, I think most of it is just that we like a good story, and that story is that we did our part in the war and sank two subs.

https://sevencircumstances.com/2018/06/15/the-mystery-of-the-misquoted-quote-from-the-man-who-shot-liberty-valance/

"When you had to choose between history and legend, print the legend."

Note: this is not the only instance of this sort of thing in military history, either. The history of the Tuskegee Airmen , for example, is rife with similar "short quote claims" that have built up over the years as legend, such as "They never lost a bomber to enemy fire."  Well, except the 25 they did lose to enemy fire.  Thats not to say that the contributions of the Tuskegee Airmen were anything short of heroic, but you don't have to overstate their record, or rely on amplified legend, to also say that they had a significant contribution to the war.

Same goes for our subchasers. We don't need to tack on two "sinkings" that were not sinkings to make the coastal patrol's overall mission and contribution to the war effort "more significant."
Report to moderator   Logged
Darin Ninness, Lt Col, CAP
Sq Bubba, Wing Dude, National Guy
I like to have Difficult Adult Conversations™
The contents of this post are Copyright © 2007-2019 by NIN. All rights are reserved. Specific permission is given to quote this post here on CAP-Talk only.
Pages: [1] Send this topic Print 
CAP Talk  |  General Discussion  |  Hysterical History  |  Topic: Sub Chasers of the Civil Air Patrol
 


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP SMF 2.0.14 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.472 seconds with 26 queries.
click here to email me