Article 32 hearing of LCDR Eugene D. Williams

Red October1984 · 04-07-13, 03:38 PM

Yes it is true that I said that, but...

At the time, the only convoys I had encountered were close to the Japanese Home Island. When I said that the crew wasn't ready for a convoy, I meant that they weren't ready to take on the escorts and I felt that they need more experience firing at faster-moving targets and there is always room for improvement no matter what you are doing.

When we were ordered to intercept the Task Force, we were told to go to Truk Harbor. This crew has Harbor-Raided before. The ships we were to attack were at anchor and the shallow water was too shallow for depth charges in such a close proximity. The depth charges would've damaged other IJN ships. This was my thinking when I moved into the 65 foot water. I felt that my crew was ready to take this challenge, but, we need more experience before we take on a convoy in deep water where the danger of Depth Charges is real.

Armistead · 04-07-13, 03:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Red October1984

Yes it is true that I said that, but...

At the time, the only convoys I had encountered were close to the Japanese Home Island. When I said that the crew wasn't ready for a convoy, I meant that they weren't ready to take on the escorts and I felt that they need more experience firing at faster-moving targets and there is always room for improvement no matter what you are doing.

When we were ordered to intercept the Task Force, we were told to go to Truk Harbor. This crew has Harbor-Raided before. The ships we were to attack were at anchor and the shallow water was too shallow for depth charges in such a close proximity. The depth charges would've damaged other IJN ships. This was my thinking when I moved into the 65 foot water. I felt that my crew was ready to take this challenge, but, we need more experience before we take on a convoy in deep water where the danger of Depth Charges is real.

So you feel your crew isn't ready for fighting convoys with escort in deep water because of depth charges, but that they were ready to fight escorts with depth charges in 65 ft of water..?

Do you honestly believe that escorts can't or won't drop depth charges on you while in shallow water? Is that what you're really saying Cmdr..?

Armistead · 04-07-13, 04:25 PM

Cmdr Williams,

Regarding your attack on the Hiryu, how did you ID this ship? You say you sunk it, do you have any SS of this claimed sinking?

Let's review your patrol report, it is your report, isn't it?

"Fine. I guess I'll just take some screenshots to prove that my periscopes are destroyed and there's a moving glitchy wreck.
I'm not that bad. I just don't want to lose this career so early and it's just hard to attack a large group of warships in 65 feet of water.
The game is girthing with the Hiryu. It's been burning for almost a whole day and the wreck moves....It sets the water on fire wherever
it goes and it just creeps around the harbor. Seeing this in my periscope actually broke both periscopes and hurt my watch crew. WTF IS GOING ON?!"

You claim you sunk the Hiryu. Notice, you say both your periscopes are DESTROYED and you have SS's to prove it, where are these SS Cmdr?

You say after you sunk the Hiryu, it caught fire, then wandered slowly around the harbor. You say periscopes are destroyed, but the Hiryu is already on fire, moving or glitching as you say. You claim that just viewing this actually broke both periscopes and hurt your watch crew. How could this happen if both periscopes are already destroyed? Sir, isn't it possible the Hiryu did not sink and in fact was escaping or could it be you were confused and not even sure what was happening? Sir, did you not admit in your log "WTF if goin on?!" Isn't it true, that in this stage of claimed battle, you actually had no clue what was happening, even wrote it down in your log?

Red October1984 · 04-07-13, 04:33 PM

There are spelling errors in this quote from me that suggest that this has been tampered with and this evidence is therefore, not credible.

Armistead · 04-07-13, 04:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Red October1984

There are spelling errors in this quote from me that suggest that this has been tampered with and this evidence is therefore, not credible.

Overruled...

You will answer the questions regardless of spelling errors or be held in contempt. You may point out claimed spelling error for correction.

Are you calling the Admiral.......stupid........are you NIMWIT? The Admiral has the right to eat, watch TV, etc., during this hearing, any error resulting from such will be later corrected if I so choose.

It's time for a nap. I want you to answer honestly, for your benefit and the benefit of all players.

Did you use the free cam duing this battle? I use it at times, I just want the truth?

Red October1984 · 04-07-13, 04:59 PM

I will neither confirm nor deny my using the free camera during the attack since I enjoy naval cinema.

I will make you an offer.

I will agree to relinquish command of USS Grenadier if you let me stay in the Navy. I will agree to take a pay dock and a new assignment.

Armistead · 04-07-13, 06:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Red October1984

I will neither confirm nor deny my using the free camera during the attack since I enjoy naval cinema.

I will make you an offer.

I will agree to relinquish command of USS Grenadier if you let me stay in the Navy. I will agree to take a pay dock and a new assignment.

You were offered a plea bargain, but refused.

Overruled!

However, you can end this hearing by request, knowing that you'll be subject to the findings of this court. This hearing was to give you a chance to explain your actions. If you're done explaining, this court will conclude and render a verdict.

Cybermat47 · 04-08-13, 07:11 PM

LCDR Williams isn't guilty. He was under the influence of Barack Obama's inter-dimensional shapeshifting lizard men allies at the time.

Armistead · 04-08-13, 07:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cybermat47

LCDR Williams isn't guilty. He was under the influence of Barack Obama's inter-dimensional shapeshifting lizard men allies at the time.

LCDR Williams refused counsel, so butt out. This is a WWII hearing, Obama wasn't born.

I order you back to the GT forum.

Cybermat47 · 04-08-13, 07:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Armistead

LCDR Williams refused counsel, so butt out. This is a WWII hearing, Obama wasn't born.

What part of 'inter-dimensional' don't you understand!?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Armistead

I order you back to the GT forum.

I'll only go because I don't have a good PC. Once I do, it'll be the SH5 forum for me! WOO-HOO!

Armistead · 04-07-13, 04:45 PM

Cmdr Williams, you clearly said in your opening statement a subchaser shot up your attack periscope, now you're saying it shot up both scopes.
Cmdr, which is it?

Cmdr, You clearly state that both your scopes were destroyed, yet you could somehow knew all that was going on. Cmdr, did you use that free cam...DID YOU USE THE FREE CAM during this attack?

Cmdr, it is a fact, that in this game, fire on the water can do no harm to your sub or crew, yet you continue to blame the damage on this effect? Do you have any proof that fire on the water can destroy periscopes or cause injury to your crew....any, any at all? Isn't it a fact, that this isn't what happened at all and you're lying to this court?

You state
"Not everything I put in the reports was written down officially"

Did you not know patrol logs are official reports, not a diary?

Cmdr, are you having memory problems?

Cmdr, isn't it possible you're not ready for TMO or Trav mod?

04-07-13, 03:38 PM	#1
Red October1984 Airplane Nerd Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: Texas Posts: 6,243 Downloads: 115 Uploads: 0	Yes it is true that I said that, but... At the time, the only convoys I had encountered were close to the Japanese Home Island. When I said that the crew wasn't ready for a convoy, I meant that they weren't ready to take on the escorts and I felt that they need more experience firing at faster-moving targets and there is always room for improvement no matter what you are doing. When we were ordered to intercept the Task Force, we were told to go to Truk Harbor. This crew has Harbor-Raided before. The ships we were to attack were at anchor and the shallow water was too shallow for depth charges in such a close proximity. The depth charges would've damaged other IJN ships. This was my thinking when I moved into the 65 foot water. I felt that my crew was ready to take this challenge, but, we need more experience before we take on a convoy in deep water where the danger of Depth Charges is real. __________________

04-07-13, 04:25 PM	#3
Armistead Rear Admiral Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: on the Dan Posts: 10,880 Downloads: 364 Uploads: 0	Cmdr Williams, Regarding your attack on the Hiryu, how did you ID this ship? You say you sunk it, do you have any SS of this claimed sinking? Let's review your patrol report, it is your report, isn't it? "Fine. I guess I'll just take some screenshots to prove that my periscopes are destroyed and there's a moving glitchy wreck. I'm not that bad. I just don't want to lose this career so early and it's just hard to attack a large group of warships in 65 feet of water. The game is girthing with the Hiryu. It's been burning for almost a whole day and the wreck moves....It sets the water on fire wherever it goes and it just creeps around the harbor. Seeing this in my periscope actually broke both periscopes and hurt my watch crew. WTF IS GOING ON?!" You claim you sunk the Hiryu. Notice, you say both your periscopes are DESTROYED and you have SS's to prove it, where are these SS Cmdr? You say after you sunk the Hiryu, it caught fire, then wandered slowly around the harbor. You say periscopes are destroyed, but the Hiryu is already on fire, moving or glitching as you say. You claim that just viewing this actually broke both periscopes and hurt your watch crew. How could this happen if both periscopes are already destroyed? Sir, isn't it possible the Hiryu did not sink and in fact was escaping or could it be you were confused and not even sure what was happening? Sir, did you not admit in your log "WTF if goin on?!" Isn't it true, that in this stage of claimed battle, you actually had no clue what was happening, even wrote it down in your log? __________________ You see my dog don't like people laughing. He gets the crazy idea you're laughing at him. Now if you apologize like I know you're going to, I might convince him that you really didn't mean it.

04-07-13, 04:33 PM	#4
Red October1984 Airplane Nerd Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: Texas Posts: 6,243 Downloads: 115 Uploads: 0	There are spelling errors in this quote from me that suggest that this has been tampered with and this evidence is therefore, not credible. __________________

04-07-13, 04:59 PM	#6
Red October1984 Airplane Nerd Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: Texas Posts: 6,243 Downloads: 115 Uploads: 0	I will neither confirm nor deny my using the free camera during the attack since I enjoy naval cinema. I will make you an offer. I will agree to relinquish command of USS Grenadier if you let me stay in the Navy. I will agree to take a pay dock and a new assignment. __________________

04-08-13, 07:11 PM	#8
Cybermat47 Willing Webfooted Beast Join Date: Aug 2012 Location: Australia Posts: 5,408 Downloads: 300 Uploads: 23	LCDR Williams isn't guilty. He was under the influence of Barack Obama's inter-dimensional shapeshifting lizard men allies at the time. __________________ Historical TWoS Gameplay Guide: http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?p=2572620 Historical FotRSU Gameplay Guide: https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/sho....php?p=2713394

04-07-13, 04:45 PM	#11
Armistead Rear Admiral Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: on the Dan Posts: 10,880 Downloads: 364 Uploads: 0	Cmdr Williams, you clearly said in your opening statement a subchaser shot up your attack periscope, now you're saying it shot up both scopes. Cmdr, which is it? Cmdr, You clearly state that both your scopes were destroyed, yet you could somehow knew all that was going on. Cmdr, did you use that free cam...DID YOU USE THE FREE CAM during this attack? Cmdr, it is a fact, that in this game, fire on the water can do no harm to your sub or crew, yet you continue to blame the damage on this effect? Do you have any proof that fire on the water can destroy periscopes or cause injury to your crew....any, any at all? Isn't it a fact, that this isn't what happened at all and you're lying to this court? You state "Not everything I put in the reports was written down officially" Did you not know patrol logs are official reports, not a diary? Cmdr, are you having memory problems? Cmdr, isn't it possible you're not ready for TMO or Trav mod? __________________ You see my dog don't like people laughing. He gets the crazy idea you're laughing at him. Now if you apologize like I know you're going to, I might convince him that you really didn't mean it.