|
Post by chadhill on May 11, 2012 12:57:31 GMT 8
Fots and okla, I'm typing this post on an airport computer but called home and had the wife check my reference about which side the ship hit the mine on. She managed to find it, on page 74-75 of Gordon's book "Fighting for MacArthur". According to him the ship hit a mine on the starboard stern side. That seems to make it a bit harder to explain the ship in a right turn. But if it did impact on the starboard stern, those compartments would flood first and I tend to think the extra water weight would drag it down stern first... Ok, everybody take a deep breath. My wife just called me. She was browsing the posts on this thread and realized there was a 'slight' communication problem between us on the phone that day. She had read Gordon's passage to me, but I misunderstood her. Gordon's exact words are: "...there was a huge explosion on the starboard side TOWARDS the stern". (capitals are mine) My poor choice of words in the quote at the top were "starboard stern side" and then "starboard stern". I now realize this may have wrongly caused some to believe Gordon meant the very rear of the ship, when he meant NEAR the rear. Sorry guys. I apologize for the time some of you spent trying to understand my misunderstanding. Will try not to let it happen again- Chad
|
|
|
Post by fots2 on May 11, 2012 17:07:52 GMT 8
Hi Chad, No problem there, I often confuse myself so I fully understand anyone else doing the same. However, your message brings to light one important issue. It is understood that many of us on these forums are beyond hope but now your wife may be infected too. If any of this results in you BOTH buying tickets for the Philippines someday then congratulations, it was worth it. See you two on The Rock. P.S. Which one of you will be going diving with John?
|
|
|
Post by sherwino on May 12, 2012 16:29:58 GMT 8
hello, everyone. I have really missed this topic since being hospitalized for 2 days coz of diarrhea. Can't comment that much. I don't think I'm already fit to work my brains that much. Two days of lying down, medicines and IVs, little food and TV. Still have the hangover of them. But I say that this topic is a very good candidate for NGC's Seconds From Disaster.
|
|
|
Post by chadhill on May 13, 2012 0:53:56 GMT 8
Fots, I wasn't confused, Dallas Forth-Worth is a very noisy airport. But no more excuses. P.S.-I did notice the wife has bookmarked this forum on her computer ;D
Sherwino, hope you feel better soon. Look forward to your posts.
|
|
|
Post by chadhill on May 13, 2012 22:12:02 GMT 8
I came across an interesting statement in the Moore Report, REPORT AS TO WAR DAMAGE TO THE HARBOR DEFENSES OF MANILA AND SUBIC BAY, 6 OCT 1945. APPENDIX E, EYEWITNESS STATEMENTS. Sergeant Major Marcelino P. Serra, HQ 91st CA (PS), served in the same unit as Colonel Bunker and as three officers already quoted about the SS Corregidor/minefields in this thread. They were COL Joseph P. Kohn (mine command), LT COL Carl E. Engelhart (minefield casemate), and LT Frank Jonelis (M ' West). SGT MAJ Serra, who prepared minefield reports sent to Washington, made an interesting statement about the PT boats. Curiously, as far as I can determine he is also the only one at the time who had accurate information on the number of passengers aboard the ship. Although he misstated the date, Serra got the time right: "1. I was acting regimental Sergeant Major stationed at Middleside. There was little paperwork. I prepared reports to be sent to Washington on the mines laid. "2. At 0100, 15 December the SS Corregidor, despite efforts of the PT boats to stop it, sailed through the minefields and was struck. There were about 200 survivors from 1200 on board. The mines were set on contact". www.corregidor.org/chs_moorerpt/war_damage.htm(the alphabetically listed statements of COL Kohn and LT COL Engelhart are on this link, too) The article written by A.V.H. Hartendorp, "The Sinking of the SS Corregidor, December 17, 1941" and published in the September 1953 issue of The American Chamber of Commerce Journal, is on hand at the American Historical Collection, 3/F Rizal Library Special Collections Building, Ateneo de Manila University. Perhaps one of our Manila residents...? ;D rizal.lib.admu.edu.ph/ahc/gd_holdings.htmSee listings under Principal Holdings-American Chamber of Commerce Journal (1921-1993) P.S. (late update): I think the article may also be found in Volume 29 (1953) of Journal-American Chamber of Commerce of the Philippines, although that series is not specifically listed on the link.
|
|
|
Post by JohnEakin on May 14, 2012 8:57:10 GMT 8
Ok, everybody take a deep breath. My wife just called me. She was browsing the posts on this thread and realized there was a 'slight' communication problem between us on the phone that day. She had read Gordon's passage to me, but I misunderstood her. Gordon's exact words are: "...there was a huge explosion on the starboard side TOWARDS the stern". (capitals are mine) My poor choice of words in the quote at the top were "starboard stern side" and then "starboard stern". I now realize this may have wrongly caused some to believe Gordon meant the very rear of the ship, when he meant NEAR the rear. Sorry guys. I apologize for the time some of you spent trying to understand my misunderstanding. Will try not to let it happen again- Chad Not a problem, Chad. Again, I would have to defer to someone who knows something about ships and mines, but it seems to me that it would be difficult to hit head on a 15 foot deep mine with a 16 foot deep ship. Not impossible, by any means, but I would think the odds would be tremendously higher that it would be easier to strike that mine if the ship were moving laterally. The lateral motion could either come from the movement of the stern in the opposite direction of a turn. Or, even more likely, lateral motion from wind or current. Head on, there might only be an area of the ship a few feet wide in the area of the keel that was deep enough to strike the mine. But if that ship is moving to the side the entire length of the keel - a couple of hundred feet? - could have struck the mine. So there's another question for the Manila library - what was the weather and the state of the tide that night? Finding that the wind or current were pushing the SS Corregidor to the West would add another dimension - navigational error - to this tragedy.
|
|
|
Post by chadhill on May 15, 2012 0:29:17 GMT 8
John, I think your points are very plausible, even likely. I'm continuing to dig into this. Fots has found that there was no moon that night and I'm wondering where the wind and other weather might be recorded. I also wonder if the current changes its direction seasonally, recalling that the Japanese invasion force landed much further down "the tail" on the night of 5-6 May due to an unexpectedly strong current from the west.
|
|
|
Post by sherwino on May 15, 2012 7:47:17 GMT 8
Everyone....I had a conversation with a local this morning, someone who from time to time goes out for fishing. He told me of the "scrapping" by some fishermen of a sunken ship near Sisiman(USS Canopus) and another between Corregidor and Monja(SS Corregidor). The ship between Corregidor and Monja is nearer to the latter. He told me how he saw those thieves do their crime. He even saw the Canopus as already half of itself(maybe most of the features topside have been dismembered).
I find this very very alarming for us. These shipwrecks need our attention ASAP. The only diving experience I have was "helmet-diving" or reef walking in Boracay. Not a skill for me to do the job. I hope a dive would materialize sooner by one of the forum members.
|
|
|
Post by chadhill on May 15, 2012 10:36:45 GMT 8
Sherwino, that is shocking news if true. Both ships are historical wrecks which should be protected. The SS Corregidor is a war grave!
|
|
|
Post by chadhill on May 15, 2012 11:41:39 GMT 8
After sherwino's disturbing news, it is difficult for me to even post the following. This is an excerpt from Charles Bogart's "Controlled Mines: A History of Their Use by the United States" (p.29). Mr. Bogart is referring to US sea minefields typical of the 1940s. He is speaking below of electrically controlled minefields such as the Army had in the North Channel and La Monja fields, not the Navy contact minefields. "The mines had to be planted in an area that was visible to the observation posts. Visual sighting was the primary method of determining if an enemy ship was in the minefield and what mines should be fired (my italics). In the casemate was located a chart showing the mines locations and the positions of the observation posts. "The mine casemate, upon being notified that a hostile ship was approaching the minefield, would order the observation post to track the ship. A timer would then be started in the casemate which would cause a bell to ring simultaneously at each observation post every twenty seconds. Upon the ringing of the bell the observers would report the bearing of the target from their stations. This information would then be plotted on the war chart at the casemate and by trianglization the ship's course and speed could be predicted. Based upon the target's predicted course through the minefield, the correct mine or mines would be fired when the ship was near it (my italics). "The mines could also be set to self-activating for use in dark or foul weather. The arming switch of the mine was so constructed that if the mine moved 25 degrees from the vertical a firing switch would close, firing the mine" (my italics). If Corregidor's two Army minefields operated in this manner, I draw two conclusions: 1. The mines could be manually detonated from the casemate. In the SUPERVISORY position our chart says "Mines on 110 volts do not detonate on contact but warn the casemate". Although the chart does not go on to say manual detonation is possible, why does it state "Effective distance or danger area 75 feet" if this is not so? 2. The mines, when set to CONTACT, do not detonate immediately upon impact with a ship but only after the mine is displaced from the vertical by 25 degrees, in other words 25 degrees from upright. That explains how a ship's bow could brush by a mine without having it explode until the mine slid around the wider part of the hull and became displaced 25 degrees. (late entry, added chart, US Army)
|
|