|
Post by fots2 on Oct 4, 2012 0:00:34 GMT 8
I remember exactly where it was located. It was not very far east of the remaining water tank and quite near the remnants of some gun positions. I’m impressed, you may have found out what this chunk of metal used to be part of. Good job.
|
|
|
Post by chadhill on Oct 4, 2012 2:38:23 GMT 8
(photo courtesy fots2) Fots, if it is part of the tail piece of a Model 1917 75mm gun from the 1942 battle, what a find on the part of you and Phantom! (with a little bit of, er... help from the scavenger ;D) You said the part was near remnants of gun positions just east of the remaining water tank (the "short" or fresh water tank). As you know, that tank was east of the "tall" or salt water tank. This map from the Belotes' 1967 book Corregidor, Saga of a Fortress shows a mobile 75mm battery just east of the fresh water tank, in the lower left insert: Being a "mobile" battery, I am guessing that these 75mm guns did not have the long, circular rails attached to the tail piece like we have seen pictures of. Those would seem to be meant for guns in a stationary position. I would SWAG that the mobile battery on Denver Hill had the smaller weights seen in the second pic above, attached to the tail piece with a spade anchor.
|
|
|
Post by The Phantom on Oct 4, 2012 5:26:20 GMT 8
I don't think you can get a better feel for the pivotal battles fought on Corregidor than going atop Denver Hill. Trenches lined with powder cans, earthen bunkers that were probably covered by rail ties and dirt. Some lined with cans,--- full of rock debris.
The unusual tunnel that goes straight down and then out to the north road to Kindley Field. Dug through old lahar from an ancient volcanic eruption.
The area is a hard walk though, a thicket of thorny vines, thick spreading palms of some sort, etc. Thick with jungle debris from 75 years.
The top of Denver Hill appears to have been bypassed by all bulldozers over the years.
Once again Fots, your great photo work pays off for all involved. Amazing Chad, you can put the history to that singular chuck of metal after all these years. You really can feel the history all around you on Denver, seldom visited, as it's a tough climb in.
There were several other metal, gun parts? that the authorities brought back to the office that day.
They stacked them behind their office.
I'm hoping they made it into their artifacts storeroom in the old Engineering building in Engineer's ravine.
That heavy metal tail piece from the Model 1917 75 MM gun pictured would be worth a lot of money, Bethlehem steel and all.............
|
|
|
Post by chadhill on Oct 6, 2012 10:26:01 GMT 8
Thanks, Phantom. When I first saw fots' photo and noticed its resemblance to a RR rail, your earlier comment about about finding gun parts caused me to think of the circular rails I'd seen attached to some 75mm guns on Corregidor. It eventually brought me around to noticing the standard M1917 75mm tail piece. This US gun was a near copy of the British QF (quick firing) 18 pounder. Here is a cropped/enlarged photo of the tail piece of a museum QF 18: After posting the map in Reply #21 from Saga, I started wondering why I could not remember any accounts of US 75mm guns in action on Denver Hill during the night of 5-6 May, and began digging around some. The 2003 Osprey book American Defenses of Corregidor and Manila Bay 1898-1945 publishes a very similar map on page 34, which shows four 75mm batteries just east of the fresh water "short" tank, like the Belotes' book does. I wondered if the Saga map may have been more or less reproduced in the newer book. Anyways, I came across a sketch in Captain Paul Cornwall's history of Battery D, 60th CA which was interesting: corregidor.org/ca/btty_denver/denver_2.htm Fots reposted the sketch and greatly clarified it in another thread (which I cannot recall!). Here it is, with fots' annotations in blue and red: The interesting thing I see is that the four 3 inch AA guns shown on this sketch, numbered 1-4 in the red boxes east of the fresh water tank, seem to be placed in the same locations as the 75mm batteries shown on the maps in the Saga and American Defenses books. For the record, the Denver AA weapons were US 3 inch M3 guns on M2A2 carriages. Those carriages do not appear to have any components that resemble the tail piece parts on US M1917 75mm guns. This leaves me questioning whether the maps in Saga and American Defenses of Corregidor and Manila Bay 1898-1945 are in error showing 75mm positions east of the fresh water tank. Or, were four US 75mm batteries co-located with the four 3 inch AA guns on 5-6 May? If the later is true, why are the written histories (admittedly incomplete for that night) lacking mention of such weapons on Denver Hill? I suppose that 75mm gun parts from other locations could have somehow come to be buried at Denver Hill. Does anyone have a manual for the M1917 75mm or QF 18 pounder with photos and descriptions of the tail piece components? Here are links to more reading: corregidor.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=talk&action=display&thread=400corregidor.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=threads&action=display&thread=410
|
|
|
Post by fots2 on Oct 6, 2012 19:24:45 GMT 8
Hi chadhill,
You bring up some good points. I have seen the insert in the Belotes’ map and always wondered how the 75mm guns and the 3-inch AA guns sat in the same positions. If correct, logically this would be at different times.
I read that at some point some of the Battery Denver AA guns were to be removed from direct Japanese view on top of the hill to positions south of there. This would be hidden from Bataan. Perhaps 75mm guns were put up there into the prepared AA gun positions to assist beach defenses during the expected Japanese landing. Unfortunately the Battery “D” history written by its commander Capt. Paul R. Cornwall does not support this idea. (http://corregidor.org/ca/btty_denver/denver_2.htm)
“On May 1, 1942 1 took over command of Battery D-6Oth CA (AA), relieving Capt. Guyton. My orders from the Battalion Commander, Col. Breitung was to prepare a new position of the side of Kindley Field ridge away from the Bataan artillery fire of the Japanese. Authority had been granted for the removal of only two guns from the ridge--the plan as I understood it was to leave two guns on the ridge for beach defense and remove two guns in order to place them in a battery protected position for AA defense.
The period May 1-5 was one of continual enemy shelling from Bataan. Battery D's position was hardly ever free from shelling during the entire period, however, work on the new position progressed. The two guns positions (also new director and height finder positions) were completed and the guns were to be emplaced on the night of the May 5.
On the night of May 5, a severe bombardment of the battery's position started about 7:00 PM. The members of the battery were ordered to take cover. The battery remained under cover until shelling lifted around 10:30PM. In the meantime all communications had been shelled out”. Shortly thereafter a truck passed by on its way to Malinta Tunnel. The occupants notified us that a landing had been made by the Japanese”.
This above text tells me that all four 3-inch AA guns of Battery Denver were still emplaced in their positions on top of the hill up until the moment that the Japanese attacked. How the 75mm guns fit into this picture I do not know. The battery commander does not mention them.
I wonder where the Belotes’ got their map showing 75mm guns up there at invasion time. From what Cornwall says, this is unlikely. Wouldn’t the Battery Denver commander have the most accurate story?
On page 136 of the Belote’s book, they state that there were only two 75mm guns operational on the tail by May 5, the rest placed along the north shore had been knocked out. Strange even the Belotes do not mention 75mm guns on Denver Hill even though their map shows them to be there.
This little piece of Denver Hill history is more than a bit fuzzy to me. Sorry, I have no detailed info on these guns.
|
|
|
Post by chadhill on Oct 7, 2012 12:04:54 GMT 8
Fots, thanks for posting this info. I checked several other sources, too, and agree that it would seem all four 3 inch AA guns of Battery Denver were still emplaced in their positions east of the fresh water tank the night of 5-6 May. So far I can find no information that confirms there were any US 75mm guns there that night. Since the Belotes' map also strangely omits the 3 inch guns, I am thinking there must be an error in weapon ID. What's even more curious is that this discrepancy appears to have escaped challenge all these years, and was even republished in other works.
However, as we know there are gaps in the records of what happened that evening, and maybe I'm jumping to wrong conclusions here. What if that part you and Phantom found really is from a M1917 75mm tail piece?
|
|
|
Post by fots2 on Oct 7, 2012 18:41:04 GMT 8
You should hire yourself out to proofread new books Chad, good catch. An error in the weapon ID of that map is a likely explanation since no other account of the fighting we have read so far mentions 75mm guns on Denver Hill.
I must admit that I do not read anywhere near the quantity of books that you and many others on this forum do but I have read enough to be skeptical of many author’s claims. Some errors are so obvious that it makes me wonder how much actual research and editing takes place. One glaring example is numerous books mentioning the Navy Radio Intercept Tunnel (including one specifically about Station CAST). They all show a map of the tunnel location but all are incorrect. Even a recent article written in 2011 by an employee of the NSA at Fort Meade got it wrong. Copy and quote someone else seems to be a common practice by authors.
|
|
|
Post by 52blussier on Feb 11, 2013 4:44:37 GMT 8
Thank you dmether for the information under the heading "Missing in Action on Corregidor." I am the niece of PVT Robert D. Turner #13030357, declared as non-recoverable with 7 others as of March 1950 on Corregidor. Robert was my father's younger brother, and I was named after him (along with another uncle.) I have been searching for information about Robert, who was a member of the Army Air Corps.He served with 91st Bombardment Sqd., 27th Bombardment Group (light). It has been a puzzle to my family how and when Robert arrived on Corregidor and what he was doing there, as his unit members were mostly on Bataan. According to Robert's "Individual Deceased Personnel File" the source of information for Robert's "Casualty Report (Battle Death)" was Charles F. O'Bryant. I learned from Mr. David Topping, a member of Robert's unit, who went through training with Robert, that Mr. O'Bryant was the radio operator for their unit. (BTW, Robert was trained as a tail gunner.)
I really appreciated the information about what happened to the men, who died of their wounds, after the surrender and occupation by the Japanese. I doubt that any of Robert's remains will ever be recovered, but just in case, I had Robert's older sister (before she passed away) do a DNA swab which is on file with JPAC.
Again, thanks for the info. I'll continue to monitor this message board.
Bobbye
I have just (1/20/2018) attended the DPAA Family Update meeting in San Diego. I have now been requested to provide a Y DNA sample.
|
|
|
Post by JohnEakin on Feb 11, 2013 21:21:55 GMT 8
Hi, Bobbye, and welcome to the forum.
The information on the missing and the unknowns is slowly becoming available and being compared, so don't give up. And, as you know, the technology is also improving to the point that matches in the records can be confirmed.
You're probably aware, too, that JPAC is scared to death to open the Pandora's Box that is the unknowns, but they are being forced in that direction. If left to their own devices, they should have the job done in no more than 90 years (from now). And that is only because as Viet Nam and Korea MIAs become more difficult to recover, they have to work WWII unknowns to stay in business. Sad, isn't it.
It sounds like you've done everything you can for now, but if you can, I'd suggest you also secure a DNA sample from your Uncle's paternal line. Eventually, they will have to start using nuc or y DNA.
|
|