Phil--Thanks for the post a few months ago on how to put photos etc here.
Viewers--2nd Wells memo above is blurred one just above should be legible once enlarged a bit.
Tim--Please remove the blurred Wells memo
Where do you begin?
You can start by reading the stream of emails immediately below. Start at the bottom and work up. They are from Rich Nowatzki, sight setter on gun 7, furthest aft starboard, whose name you can see on the Wells memo above. Also above are several sites discussing events at which he has spoken. One of the sites has a photo of the Wells memo to the L and below his ribbons, also posted above. The roster of all Hornet 3rd Division 5" gun crews is in the Wells Memo. My father shows up as first shellman on gun 5, right beside 7. Odd numbered guns were starboard. The point of the exercise is both men saw and experienced the same thing, and reliably it can be assumed spoke in the same manner. Rich is now 94 but still sharp as a tack.
You will note he says the model I built matches his memory of what the ship looked like. By the way Maurice Beckner said exactly the same thing by phone when I snail mailed him photos, he has no computer. So that is a Hornet crewman and a Juneau crewman saying exactly the same thing. As usual I am confident that will mean nothing to you. However I suspect it will mean something to anyone else building a model of the ship. Of more importance to the current topic you will see that he confirms exactly what I said every WWII USN crewman I have spoken with demonstrated in conversation--and I have spoken with at least 10-20 on the camo topic alone over the last 20+ years--they refer only to paint with patterns such as in this instance MS 12 mod as camouflage, not solid patterns. They could absolutely care less what official USN publications called camo. That presumes they were even aware of the pubs, highly unlikely. So I would suggest all the discussion about what the Navy called camo to include solid colors is completely irrelevant.
After that beginning, rather than find your own vets to confirm this fact, I have an even better idea I thought of today. Both the Hancock and Hornet Associations have websites. The Hancock newsletters I get always state the number of WWII vets still alive. My memory is probably off however I seem to recall the last number was at least 200. The Hornet Association does not do that. They may have some I never met but I cannot say anything reliable on that topic. I suspect most of the CV 8 guys are gone. The Mustin Hornet Association is down to only a few Hornet members and they have all been contaminated by my discussions with them about camo, not this issue but camo in general. They do not have a website. So, may I suggest you contact one or both Associations and ask for a mailing list for their WWII vets for the purpose of historical research. Once you have that info, prepare a questionnaire with photos of all pre and during WWII camo schemes including the solid color ones. Below the photos ask them to circle those they would have referred to during conversation with other sailors as being camouflaged. Might also be worthwhile to ask them to put an X thru those they actually saw. I am sure we will all look forward to your report on how this project confirms I am all wrong in what I described as the way USN WWII sailors used the word camouflage. Then again if they are the same as Rich and my father I will not be wrong. But at least we can all be sure beyond a shadow of a doubt who is correct on this topic. Once that process is complete, perhaps the debate about what Mr. Schrier was referring to as camo will be terminated to the satisfaction of all viewers. I do not need anyone other than the multiple vets I have already contacted especially Rich who is still very much with it as demonstrated by his emails, but for the benefit of you and anyone else who doubts what I have put here, go for it.
And pending your report, I think most of us with common sense can agree once they read the email stream below, that when Mr. Schrier made a comment about camo on Juneau shortly before it blew up, he was not referring to a solid color.
From: email of Rich Nowatzki I am not putting it here
To:
FREDB1048@aol.comSent: 12/9/2016 6:13:35 P.M. Eastern Standard Time
Subj: Re: QUICK QUESTION
Fred:
You are correct, any ship's paint job, other than a solid color, was considered as camouflage.
I have been thinking about the quote from the observer on the DD Fletcher. The morning after the Battle of 11/13/42, at Guadalcanal,
Capt. Gilbert Hoover on the Helena was leading the surviving, but damaged, San Francisco, Juneau, and 2 DD's to Espirito Santos
For repairs. This was all that was left of a 13 ship Task Force. The Fletcher was one of the DD's. Around noon, a Jap sub spotted them
and fired a torpedo, striking the Juneau which exploded with a tremendous roar.
This must have been when the observer on the Fletcher was looking at the Juneau.
Hoover did not think anyone could survive that explosion and did not stop for survivors. Assuming that his
crippled fleet would be also torpedoed. He signaled to a passing aircraft to report the sinking and continued onto Esparto Santos.
He was wrong, over 100 sailors survived in the water. The report to the aircraft never was promulgated and, days later, when Adm Halsey
asked Hoover about the Juneau, a search party was sent out. Eventually 10 sailors were rescued, the sharks had taken the rest.
Halsey relieved Hoover of command over the incident.
Rich
From: "FREDB1048" <FREDB1048@aol.com>
To: email of Rich Nowatzki I am not putting it here
Sent: Friday, December 9, 2016 8:58:14 AM
Subject: Re: QUICK QUESTION
Hello Rich
So would I be correct in assuming you guys only referred to something with a pattern and not a solid color as in the heavy cruisers as camouflage?
The book quote is below.
Thanks for your help.
Fred
James Grace's "Naval Battle of Guadalcanal", and on pg 166 this caught my eye,
From: email of Rich Nowatzki I am not putting it here
To:
FREDB1048@aol.comSent: 12/9/2016 3:15:24 A.M. Eastern Standard Time
Subj: Re: QUICK QUESTION
Hi Fred:
I checked your Juneau model web site, it has been 74 years ago, but your model matches my memory of the Juneau. I was used to seeing Heavy Cruisers in our task force, with their
large turrets. I can recall when I first saw the Juneau, at some distance, off our Port side, with her forward and aft 5" gun turrets giving the appearance of steps going up and down. I asked
a shipmate about her and he told me that she was the Juneau, an Anti-Aircraft Light Cruiser.
As far as I can remember, during WW2, we always referred to camouflage as "camouflage".
I would be interested in knowing the name of the book that contained Mr. Schrier's comment, on the Fletcher, about the Juneau when "the explosion took his breath away".
The Fletcher was one of the 13 US ships in the 11/13/42 sea battle off Guadalcanal in which the Juneau was first torpedoed. The Fletcher was one of the few ships not damaged in this battle.
Incidentally, this particular battle is the one I described in my book, where I was an "innocent bystander" sailing aboard the Ocean Tug, "Bobolink".
I have a book, "The Lost Ships of Guadalcanal" by Robert D, Ballard (ISBN 0-446-51636-8) that has a photo of the Juneau on pages 146 & 147, that shows her camouflage
With best regards, Rich Nowatzki
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:
FREDB1048@aol.comTo: email of Rich Nowatzki I am not putting it here
Sent: Thursday, December 8, 2016 4:37:23 PM
Subject: QUICK QUESTION
Hello Rich
I belong to a model website that includes for lack of a better word a discussion group on Atlanta class cruisers. By the way you can see the Juneau model I just completed at
http://www.modelshipgallery.com/gallery ... index.html.
I would be interested to know if the model matches your memory of what the ship looked like.
A recent topic of discussion is whether WWII USN sailors referred to the pre war and late war 1 or 2 tone paint jobs as camouflage, or only the paint schemes with patterns such as the so called MS 12 mod which was on most of the ships at Santa Cruz including Hornet and the later war dazzle schemes?
Below is a quote from a book which relates to the discussion. Would Mr. Schrier have been referring to a pattern such as what was on most ships at Santa Cruz or a single color such as the heavy cruisers had in your opinion?
Meanwhile hope all is well with you. Our usual Xmas message will follow via email in a few weeks.
Fred Branyan
"On the Fletcher, Stanley Shrier was pointing out the Juneau's camouflage scheme to another man when the explosion took his breath away"
Wonder why Mr. Shrier was pointing it out?
Login
Register
FAQ
