SS 166/67/68 deck guns

[Drebbel]

I Assume the un-readable text is about some deck gun action ?

BTW: It took 2 torpedoes and 16 5 inch shells to sink the O 19 not to mention the placed charges. Of course, that might have been because the Dutch sub was lodged on a reef. There is a film somerwhere around documenting the incident. Anyone know where I could find that?

Actually just the transfer of the crew is filmed mainly. Also the submarine was never sunk, I have a 1952 movie that shows her still sitting on the reef with minimal visible damage !

[NEON DEON]

Originally Posted by Drebbel

I Assume the un-readable text is about some deck gun action ?

Actually just the transfer of the crew is filmed mainly. Also the submarine was never sunk, I have a 1952 movie that shows her still sitting on the reef with minimal visible damage !

Low tide? I am guessing here. charges blew holes toward the bottom. cant see em. Torpedoes hit the reef close into sub but not sub. as for the 16 5 inch shells, theres got be some holes somewhere. High tide when action took place and the sub settled down a bit. Low tide you can see it. Unless of course the skipper of the COD filed an erroneous after action report.

PS. You cant see the letters of my last post from a grey a backround?

Addendum:

The dutch have almost the same story but more detail on what happened to the sub.

10 July 1945: The attempt to pull O 19 free is repeated but without success once more, so the USS Cod takes O 19's crew on board and demolition charges are set on board the disabled submarine. The extremely secret radar and sonar is also destroyed. Two torpedoes are fired and destroy the aft, 16 shells of the 5-inch deck gun finishing off the job of denying her usefulness to the enemy. The USS Cod takes the crew to Subic Bay in the Philippines.

Link to web dutch web site:

http://www.dutchsubmarines.com/boats/boat_o19.htm

[Drebbel]

Originally Posted by NEON DEON

Addendum:

The dutch have almost the same story but more detail on what happened to the sub.

10 July 1945: The attempt to pull O 19 free is repeated but without success once more, so the USS Cod takes O 19's crew on board and demolition charges are set on board the disabled submarine. The extremely secret radar and sonar is also destroyed. Two torpedoes are fired and destroy the aft, 16 shells of the 5-inch deck gun finishing off the job of denying her usefulness to the enemy. The USS Cod takes the crew to Subic Bay in the Philippines.

You see, it was never sunk, it was stuck on a reef. They tried pulling it off, no go. They they destroyed the sub. Trying to sink something that is stuck on the bottom is simply impossible

PS. You cant see the letters of my last post from a grey a backround?

Just select a different skin the the bottom-left corner of this page. That way you can see it yourself. I simply very annoying to read :-(

[NEON DEON]

Originally Posted by Drebbel

You see, it was never sunk, it was stuck on a reef. They tried pulling it off, no go. They they destroyed the sub. Trying to sink something that is stuck on the bottom is simply impossible

Just select a different skin the the bottom-left corner of this page. That way you can see it yourself. I simply very annoying to read :-(

OH &^%(*& THAT IS UGLY!

I changed it to white. (even tho the Blue or Yellow is much purdier with a gray background selected) Hurry up and read it becuse an hour from now I am going to change it to Yellow

The U S Navy says it is sunk. The dutch qualify it as sunk/scuttled.

But then again, the Navy does not recognize that Japanase merchantmen were sunk when they ran themselves into the beach, never to be used again, in the Solomons. Of course then we could go further and say the Arizona was not sunk because part of the ship was sticking out of the water.

The O 19 was just a BTW. My post was mainly about the 23 junks/sampans the USS COD boarded then sunk with gun fire in less than 2 weeks!

[Drebbel]

The U S Navy says it is sunk. The dutch qualify it as sunk/scuttled.

I doubt that very much. Even the original logs from the USS Cod do not say it was sunk. It is scientifically impossible to sink something that is on the bottom but still sticking out of the water

Of course then we could go further and say the Arizona was not sunk because part of the ship was sticking out of the water.

The Arizona was floating, lost het buoyancy, and then moved towards the bottom where she stopped moving. I call that sinking.

The Dutch sub was sailing and then ran onto the "land" (a reef) where she stopped moving. Like driving your boat onto the beach after a day of sailing. She was just stuck, never lost her buoyancy, so she did not sink.

Now tell me which navy calls that sunk ? Maybe the Swiss navy, but definately not the US or Dutch navy :-)

Then they tried to pull her off the reef, they even fired fish to loose weight and use the recoil forces, no go. So then finally they demolisched all important equipment, shelled her, and torpedoed her in order to deny her usefulness to the enemy.

[NEON DEON]

If the O 19 was still floating after the COD left, then sure she was just grounded. But that wasnt the case. The COD fired two fish into her and she settled by the stern. THAT BOAT DONT FLOAT!


Now, as for it is impossible to sink something that rests on the bottom:


If you ground your boat in the Bay of Fundy during low tide, when the tide comes back in, it is still possible for you to sail off because your boat can float. However, if at low tide, I come along and blow your stern off your boat cant float and when the tide comes in, water covers the boat. IE: I sunk it! :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

[Drebbel]

Blowing stern of on purpose in this case is scutling mate. You better get your terminology right ! :p

Why is this so hard for you. You not willing to admit that the USN could not even sink a target that is sitting still ?

Also: In WWII it was common practise (if possible) for merchants to beach their boat when they had a hole in the hull. This would make it much more easier to repair the vessel and safe it. According to you those should be listed as sinkings too. But dang, they never sunk, ah, who cares, we still call it sinkings

But I guess you are right about the O 19, she sunk, that is why 10 years later she was still on the reef sticking out of the water during high and low tide.

[NEON DEON]

Originally Posted by Drebbel

Blowing stern of on purpose in this case is scutling mate. You better get your terminology right ! :p

Why is this so hard for you. You not willing to admit that the USN could not even sink a target that is sitting still ?

Also: In WWII it was common practise (if possible) for merchants to beach their boat when they had a hole in the hull. This would make it much more easier to repair the vessel and safe it. According to you those should be listed as sinkings too. But dang, they never sunk, ah, who cares, we still call it sinkings

But I guess you are right about the O 19, she sunk, that is why 10 years later she was still on the reef sticking out of the water during high and low tide.

The stern is not out of the water and scutling a boat sinks it. Thats the whole point of scutling it in the first place.

Whether you call the O19 grounded, scuttled, sunk, beached, or destroyed. The bottom line remains the same for the O 19. It was put of action.

[Drebbel]

Whether you call the O19 grounded, scuttled, sunk, beached, or destroyed. The bottom line remains the same for the O 19. It was put of action.

Ah, I can do that too

Whether you call the O19 put of action or not. The bottom line remains the same for the O 19. She did not sink.

[NEON DEON]

Originally Posted by Drebbel

Ah, I can do that too

Whether you call the O19 put of action or not. The bottom line remains the same for the O 19. She did not sink.

:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

Sure she did. She can't float. She sits on the bottom. Part of her is submerged.

She sunk.

[Drebbel]

I suggest you contact all the hsrory writers AND the United States Navy and ask them to change all the history books.

[NEON DEON]

Originally Posted by Drebbel

I suggest you contact all the hsrory writers AND the United States Navy and ask them to change all the history books.

Good idea!

I wonder if you could be so kind as to give me a list of the ones that need changing?

DRAT!

I think I hijacked my own thread!

[Drebbel]

I wonder if you could be so kind as to give me a list of the ones that need changing?

Yes, NONE. They are all correct !

[NEON DEON]

Originally Posted by Drebbel

Yes, NONE. They are all correct !

I was wondering if you know who runs dutchsubmarines.com

Maybee you could get them to change the wording on this part of their site.

22 Oct 1952: The U.S. Navy has taken some aerial photos / film footage showing the O 19 still on the Ladd Reef with only minimal visible changes noticeable.

http://www.dutchsubmarines.com/boats/boat_o19.htm

[Drebbel]

22 Oct 1952: The U.S. Navy has taken some aerial photos / film footage showing the O 19 still on the Ladd Reef with only minimal visible changes noticeable.

That is what I meant, they are all correct. And no, I am not gonna change it :p