Calling all PT Boat (all types) fans!

[kurt]

No. Too me it looks like the platform has an area beyond its circ. painted in a similar shade as the platform. Its much wider than usual and I've never noticed anything similar in my meager resources. We can change the subject, no big woop.

[PTConsultingNHR]

No, there's no lip.

[kurt]

hey I looked at one the pics Garth sent me, too big to upload and I don't know how to change it. Its a view looking forward under the airfoil to the bow and beyond. The 20 has skid pads like destroyers used around it's platform. I guess anything goes. Things like that could change from moment to moment and given how PTs were, I guess moreso than on other craft. I'm satisfied, I'm really not a rivet counter just want some thing that could have been.

[davidwaples]

I became interested in the PT's used in the English Channel when I did my PT-505 project. Did you notice on that last photo the port gun is a 37mm Oldsmobile canon mounted on a 20mm mount? I saw this in some recent photos on a different boat.

Al, I thought there were rests for that crazy airfoil on the day cabin. Are you sure that's not what we're seeing in the 513 photo?

Dave

[PTConsultingNHR]

The mount which David is referencing is called a Mark XIV, it is a Mark X mount with shortened legs. Alex Johnson told me about that. Until he did, I just thought they were Mark Xs, I never noticed the shortened legs until he pointed them out to me.

[alross2]

Al, I thought there were rests for that crazy airfoil on the day cabin. Are you sure that's not what we're seeing in the 513 photo?Dave

It's the charthouse roof, but, after looking at the ELCO drawings for this series, I think you're correct. They appear to be in the same position. Some of the earlier shots show the raft on the foredeck, later ones like that of the boat with the two 37mm show the raft on the charthouse roof.

Al

[Russ2146]

Re: 20mm gun mount Mk 10

cat-0013.jpg (31.29 KiB) Viewed 1331 times

This catalog does not list the 37mm nor any mount for it, possibly because the 37mm did not have widespread use in the Navy.
The short leg tripod gave you a trunnion height 47". The longer legs gave you 52.5".

[davidwaples]

Thanks for correcting me Al. Exchanging information with PT skippers it sounds like they pretty much just put those life boats wherever they were out of the way. I'm still trying to understand the purpose of the airfoil over the cockpit. Was it just to block the sun or was there some greater purpose for these things?
Dave

[PTConsultingNHR]

David,

Not that you'll believe me, or take my word for it, BUT ............

That air foil was meant to deflect the wind from over the cockpit and the men in the cockpit. I believe that Alex Johnson told me that.

[alross2]

]This catalog does not list the 37mm nor any mount for it, possibly because the 37mm did not have widespread use in the Navy.
The short leg tripod gave you a trunnion height 47". The longer legs gave you 52.5".

This issue of the Gun & Turret catalog doesn't list a number of the 20mm mounts in service, nor does it list the MK1 mount for the 37mm M9. Apparently, the MK1 was the only WW2 37mm mount to receive a designation, the others apparently being either locally designed and produced mounts or field mods of existing mounts. I have a copy of the Ordnance Equipment List for Motor Torpedo Boats - PT (OD 5226) dated 21OCT44 that lists the MK1 mount as authorized equipment. While it does not list a BUORD OP number, it does list the general arrangement drawing numbers (140354 & 140355), as well as those for the hand grips, trunnion adapter, and magazines.

Al Ross

[Russ2146]

Right, it only lists Mount Mks 2, 4, 5, 6, 10 & 24

[davidwaples]

David

That air foil was meant to deflect the wind from over the cockpit and the men in the cockpit. I believe that Alex Johnson told me that.

Did it work?

[PTConsultingNHR]

David,

I am not confident in answering that. Because it'd be only an educated opinion. Since it was not on later Elcos, one could, logically, that the air foil was not a success or that the crews found them to be one more thing that could become schrapnel.

[kurt]

I'm with Garth on that. It had too work to some degree to be placed on there. They would of went through some trials. Probably works like the moon roof on a car can. You can have it open in the pouring rain and stay dry until you slow down to a certain speed and then blam, bath time. I would think it would obstruct vision more than keep you dry, hate to not see those planes comin at you! Like Garth an edumacaited ges.

Kurt

[PTConsultingNHR]

David,

On the way home from Cape Cod, back to Connecticut; as I listened to Don Henley, Journey, and REO Speedwagon on my MP3 player, I thought about this; and do you know who might have an answer? Wayne Traxel or Chip Marshall.

[alross2]

The wind deflecter was a simple airfoil. Airflow was controlled by altering the angle of attack of the airfoil.

The ELCO drawings indicate that they intended to fit the deflecter to the following boats: 314-367, 372-383, 486-545, 547, 552-563. Flipping through Vic Chun's volume 2, you'll find boats within these series both with and without the deflecter. RON 27 boats were placed in service with them; RON 33 boats in the Philippines did not have them. RON 29 and RON 34 boats operated with them attached. 557 had one in the Med, but not back in the States. The deflectors were discontinued on the 565 series boats.

Al Ross

[PTConsultingNHR]

Hello Al,

How are you doing?

Hey, may I ask you a dumb question? You said that the ELCO drawings include the foils on later boats too: The ELCO drawings indicate that they intended to fit the deflecter to the following boats: 314-367, 372-383, 486-545, 547, 552-563. Flipping through Vic Chun's volume 2, you'll find boats within these series both with and without the deflecter. RON 27 boats were placed in service with them; RON 33 boats in the Philippines did not have them. RON 29 and RON 34 boats operated with them attached. 557 had one in the Med, but not back in the States. The deflectors were discontinued on the 565 series boats.

But, I've seen photos of the boats you list and they didn't have them ...

Would that point to that either ELCO or the Navy didn't see the foils as useful or as a success and then, decided to not put them on the boats?

I would tend to think that the crews would have seen these foils as one more thing that the enemy could hit and therefore make schrapnel out of, especially seeing that they were mounted over the cockpit ...

Or, am I overthinking it?

[kurt]

Just received Bridgeman Carney's PT-157 build book. This book is fantastic, I love these type of books, they remind me of my father's model railroad magazines from the late 40's and 50's when guys would build masterpieces from a shovel handle. This is real scale modeling. Now I don't know what I would like to build first, the late 80 footers or the 103 brand. The Italeri PT109 should come out in a few weeks (I hope). I have always been partial to the simpler versions of things before the get cluttered up with all the mods. The lines just seem nicer. Decisions!! In the end I hope to build both, but which first. Now if Italeri would come up with a Higgens!!!!!!

Kurt

[PTConsultingNHR]

Yes, he did a good book and I've been told by Victor Chun that he has written a second book.

[alross2]

But, I've seen photos of the boats you list and they didn't have them ...

.
My statement points that out.

Would that point to that either ELCO or the Navy didn't see the foils as useful or as a success and then, decided to not put them on the boats?

This is speculation which, in my mind, has no value unless it fosters research which results in the discovery of the actual reason. Speculation on its own only serves to confuse an issue. I try to avoid the latter as much as possible, so I have no response.

I would tend to think that the crews would have seen these foils as one more thing that the enemy could hit and therefore make schrapnel out of, especially seeing that they were mounted over the cockpit ...

The airfoils comprised a light wooden frame covered with aircraft fabric (ELCO dwg 3539) - not much of a shrapnel hazard.

Al Ross