|
Post by chadhill on Dec 6, 2010 11:47:21 GMT 8
This Japanese photo, according to most references I've found, was taken during the assault on Corregidor, May 6, 1942. One source claimed the photo was taken on Bataan. John Whitman, in "Bataan, Our Last Ditch", briefly mentions the Japanese used flamethrowers a few times in that campaign. That was news to me. I don't recall reading about Japanese flamethrowers in any other histories or personal accounts about Bataan or Corregidor. If this photo was taken on Corregidor, the concrete structure that the Japanese troops are assaulting looks similar to the "short" water tank on Denver Hill, which was the scene of fierce fighting May 5-6. Here is a Japanese post-battle photo of the water tank on Denver Hill. In both photos, note the rectangular part on the top. What may be a wrecked ladder or stand leans against the tank. Here is a 1986 photo I took of the water tank on Denver Hill. Note the damage to the top, partially covered by the leaves. The first photo above also seems to show damage, to the right of the flame. Here's a 1926 photo of a similar tank (BLDG 601 TANK 6. Could it be the same one?). Note the overflow slot near the top (photo from corregidor.org). Here's an interior view I took of the Denver Hill tank in 1986. Note the concrete "ceiling" that is above the overflow slot. The sergeants must have stood on this during the 1942 battle (see narrative at end). Here are 2007 photos of the tank. Note the damage to the top. (courtesy fots photos). According to Senior Archivist J. Micheal Miller of the Marine Corps Research Center at Quantico, Virginia, on the night of 5-6 May USMC Sergeant Major John Sweeney and Sergeant John Haskin destroyed a Japanese machine gun nest at the base of this water tank using grenades. They then climbed to the top where they hurled more grenades at the Japanese infantry below. Haskin was killed while re-climbing the tank with additional grenades, and Sweeney was killed on the top. I've read that Sweeney's remains were not found and recovered until 1946. According to the Belote brothers in "Corregidor, Saga of a Fortress", the colorful Army First Sergeant Dewey Brady of Battery Denver was also KIA on top of this tank, on 24 April by schrapnel from a 240mm shell (page 120 and 166). Dewey did not know that he had earned a battlefield commission and been promoted to Second Lieutenant that morning. If anybody has information on the flamethrower photo, please post. Or any info on Water Tank Hill...
|
|
|
Post by okla on Dec 7, 2010 1:18:09 GMT 8
Hey Chad....That structure in the flame thrower photo certainly could be one of the water tanks (or a Maginot Line pillbox, but we can eliminate that possibility). Seems that I have read (again, I can't remember where) that a few flame throwers(not used) were present when the first Japanese troops cautiously entered Malinta. Have you ever heard that story?? The trouble with so many of these purported enemy combat film/photos is that they were re-enactments. There is just something about this pic that seems kinda "stilted" or staged. Maybe its because these troops are so evenly spaced and their heads seem to be sticking up a bit higher than you would think with Amer/Fil lead flying about. Flamthrower personnel, of any Army, always drew extra fire. Just my humble. This lastest presentation of yours is, as usual, thought provoking and up to "snuff". Keep the pipe line full. Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by fots2 on Dec 7, 2010 15:46:00 GMT 8
Hi Chad, BLDG 601, Tank 6 is the fresh water tank on Denver Hill. It is the shorter one you think it is, good photo. (The taller tank that was slightly west of 601 held Salt water and was designated as BLDG 642). Here are two photos of it taken in August this year. (I was wandering around looking for “grenade rings” but it started to rain so I left. I’ll try again in the dry season when the grasses have died down a bit more).
|
|
|
Post by batteryboy on Dec 7, 2010 21:41:17 GMT 8
One of the water tanks (Salt Water) is now long gone. Thanks to the construction of the park beside it. I remember the late Bill Delich, a Corregidor survivor telling me that builders of the park have no idea of the significance of the water tower and it was where a real fight was happening between troops from both sides. The distinction of the two tanks is the top cover. Salt water tanks usually look like reversed "tall hats" (concrete lip extended) while the fresh water tank was more cylindrical (like the photo above). Here is the photo of the salt water tank in 1921 (bldg. 642 -- as mentioned by fots) The Japanese flamethrower photo is a staged shot for the propaganda. It was taken after the island has surrendered. FWIW,
|
|
|
Post by chadhill on Dec 8, 2010 2:06:01 GMT 8
Batteryboy, those are great photos. Is that the eastern slope of Malinta Hill in the background of the 1922 picture of the "tall" tank? I'm not surprised that the flamethrower photo would have been staged, like others were. As Okla pointed out, those Japanese troops are posed very conveniently for a photo shot. That is too bad the tall water tank was destroyed. I'm very surprised it was allowed to happen. Here is a 1986 photo of it. I apologize for the quality, but there was so much growth it was the best I could do. Only because the tank is gone would I post it: Here's a 1986 view inside the tall tank: A February 1945 view of Water Tank Hill: From the pictures you and Fots posted on top of the short tank, it looks like the "roof" has gone since I was there in 1986. Some of the roof was still there then, as was the metal ladder seen in the 1926 photo. You mentioned looking for grenade rings, and I have a story about that. At that time (1986), I mistakenly thought that Sergeants Sweeney and Haskin had thrown grenades from the top of the "tall" water tank. I tried to climb it, but it became dangerous and I was unable to get to the top. So I climbed up on the "short" tank instead. While I was on top of the short tank I saw several small roundish pieces of wire that were mixed in with some rubbish. I remember wondering if they could possibly be pull-rings from Sweeney and Haskin's grenades but decided that could not be, because I was on top of the "wrong" tank. Years later I learned that the sergeants had been on the short water tank instead, and ever since then I have wondered if those pieces of wire were the pull-rings from their grenades. I left them there, so even if the roof has totally caved in they may still be inside the bottom of the tank.
|
|
|
Post by batteryboy on Dec 8, 2010 6:18:38 GMT 8
Hi Chad,
Great shot of the salt water tank. You are very lucky to have explored it and to be honest, it is the only modern day photo that I have seen of it.
The Japanese also did a propadanda movie about it but this time it was them on top of the water tower and they threw the grenades against the defenders.
I dont have a clear account of the last fights between the troops from both sides just before the surrender. There were conflicting stories that I have come across about the battle of water tank hill. Nevertheless, Haskins and Sweeney deserve to be in the hall of heroes if you ask me.
|
|
|
Post by chadhill on Dec 8, 2010 9:31:39 GMT 8
That is very interesting, Batteryboy. If the Japanese made a propaganda movie using the salt water (tall) tank with their troops throwing grenades, then that makes me wonder if the tall tank was actually the one the USMC sergeants threw grenades from, notwithstanding my find of possible pull rings on top of the short tank. Wouldn't the Japanese have known which one it happened on? But then maybe the taller tank was more impressive for the camera, or the top of the short tank was damaged too much for stage acting.
I wonder if the body recovery reports stated which tower Sweeny's remains were found on. Miller, in a photo caption for his 1997 USMC monograph "From Shanghai to Corregidor: Marines in the Defense of the Philippines", said that the short tank was where Sweeney and Haskin were killed. That photo (the second one at the top, which, BTW, I have also seen elsewhere) was supplied by the Japanese 61st Infantry Association, and I suspect that his conclusion may have been based on information they might have provided. His monograph has by far the best US account I have read of the Water Tank Hill fight. Unfortunately, I have not seen any Japanese or Filipino accounts.
|
|
|
Post by chadhill on Dec 8, 2010 11:13:15 GMT 8
P.S.- A close look at the February 1945 photo of Water Tank Hill reveals a shell hole in the top right of the tall tank, which is shown on the 1986 photo taken from inside.
|
|
|
Post by batteryboy on Dec 8, 2010 22:54:13 GMT 8
Hi Chad, I am not certain what water tower did they use in the propaganda film but they were inspired by the actions of Haskins and Sweeney. When Lt Lawrence and his men surrendered, they were treated fairly well as the Japanese respected them for their fighting abilities and for inflicting so much casualties during their landing. Some of the oddities of war...
|
|
|
Post by chadhill on Dec 14, 2010 13:22:46 GMT 8
Fots, thank you for verifying that the B&W photo I posted of the fresh water ("short") tank was indeed the one on Denver Hill. I'm sorry I overlooked that the last two color posts were yours- one of my "senior moments", I guess (alright Okla, nothing meant there ;D).
Is it possible you might know approximately how far the fresh water tank was from the salt water tank? Would they be, say, a grenade's throw distance apart?
Here's why I ask. I've just finished reading the late USMC Sergeant Otis King's account of the Water Tank Hill battle in his privately published 1999 book, "Alamo of the Pacific". Generous with text and maps, it rivals Miller's account in detail. Although King manned a machine gun at Battery Point with the 3rd Batallion, 4th Marines and apparently did not participate directly in the WTH fight, he of course had many personal contacts and references at his disposal.
According to King, at about 0345 on May 6 Sweeney and Haskin began their grenade assault on the Japanese machine gun, which was inside the dried out water TANK firing through a hole in the concrete wall, "below the water TOWER". (Capitaization is mine).
The two men climbed to the top of the tower "and lobbed hand grenades down into the water tank below, silencing the machine gun". He then recounts their deaths in the same way as others, except that they perished on the "tower".
So, that makes me wonder about how far apart the fresh and salt water tanks were. It seems they were a fair distance from each other, if I remember right.
Most accounts, including Miller's, seem to loosely exchange the words "tank" and "tower", creating some confusion. Miller, for example, says that the "Japanese machine gun was placed in a hole in the base of one of the water tanks", says S & H climbed up the "water tower", and captions his photo with "these two water tanks" while identifying the short one as the tank they died on. Maybe the darkness caused confusion in the minds of the few survivors historians relied on, men who certainly had many other serious things happening around them, and to them.
So, another question comes to mind, Fots. Did you happen to notice a hole in the wall near the bottom of the fresh water tank that a machine gun could have fired through?
Thanks,
Chad
|
|