CLICK TO SUPPORT
PEARL HARBOR ATTACKED

 


Search Members Help

» Welcome Guest
[ Log In :: Register ]

1 members are viewing this topic
>Guest

 

[ Track This Topic :: Email This Topic :: Print this topic ]

reply to topic new topic new poll
Topic: General questions about the PH midgets< Next Oldest | Next Newest >
 Post Number: 1
Angie Search for posts by this member.

1

TeamIcon

Group: Super Administrators
Posts: 378
Joined: Jan. 2001

Member Rating: None
PostIcon Posted on: Mar. 03 2001,8:40  Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

(FROM THE ARCHIVES OF THE USS ARIZONA & PEARL HARBOR REMEMBERED MESSAGE BOARD-2/9/01)

I've received several direct e-mails re the mini-sub controversy or issue asking for additional information. The "Battleship Row" mini (Attack From Below) is discounted out of hand by many apparently, but it is only a small part of a larger question, and whether the article is "fictional" based on poor "facts" or valid the discussion is good because it focuses attention on what happended at PH.   Any debate has some value in helping us remember.

There remain some questions about the five A-type minis launched on Dec. 6-7.  HA-19 was recovered on the east shore of Oahu on 12-08 and is at the Nimitz Museum.  The mini sunk by ramming by the Monaghan inside the harbor was raised c. 12-08 and placed in land fill.  The Type-A found just outside the channel in July 1960 is on display at Eta Jima Japan.  The mini fired on by the Ward has not been definitely located although it is possible the 1960 sub is it.  The whereabouts of the sub fired on by the Helm at Tripod Reef (and at Bouy #1) is unknown.  The time frames allow the possibility that the subs sighted could have actually been one sub fired on by both the Ward and Helm.  

At c. 0830 the USS Breese reported seeing TWO subs in the N. channel one of which fired a torpedo surfaced was fired on by the Curtiss and Ward and possibly the Perry depth charged and rammed by the Ward.  

Was there one or two mini-subs?  Zane reported sub sighting near Medusa at c. 0830. Curtiss reported c. 0835 periscope; sub surfaced c. 0840 and fired torpedo and Monaghan depth charged and rammed it c. 0843.

Sightings and reports and re-reports continued until approx. 1200 including reported sightings in the channel or entry area by Bobolink 0900 Breese 0930 near Coal Docks Blue 0950 had sound contact depth charged and reported definately sank and a second sound of sub believed setting up on outward bound cruiser St. Louis and depth charged.  Between 1040 and 1135 Breese and other ships had sound on sub multiple depth charges and oil slick and debris.  Gamble had sound c. 1204 and depth charged. Gamble also fired on sub c. 1632 which turned out to be US.  The 0830 Breese report of two subs sighted in N. channel is interesting. Zane Ward Curtiss and others reported c. 0830 sighting one sub.

Hopefully someone has better information on the Breese report which will clarify and make me feel stupid.

Also I am unclear why the 1960 raised sub is discounted as being either the Ward or Helm subs.  Helm reported a torpedo sighted the 1960 sub had both torpedos on board.  There isn't much doubt that the 12-08 raised sub was the Monaghan sinking.  Could there have been a mini off Battleship Row at 0755?  Yes.  Does the photo show or prove it?  Probably not, but it does not seem to be as certainly discounted as some maintain.  Some of the criticisms of Attack From Below seem to use arguments as faulty as they claim those in the article are. The criticisms of the "cavitation" theory re the sub being struck by shock waves don't mention that the Ward "cavitated" after a near bomb hit and it was a destroyer.  Also there is some interest in a Type-97 (?) torpedo being found by the National Geographic search for the "Ward" sub.

There are a lot of questions and many theories all part of a small part of Dec. 7, but the whole is made up of the parts and the discussion is very good if for nothing more than keeping it in our minds. Any debate turns us back to Dec. 7 and those who gave their lives that morning. I hope to learn more.

Ben
benefox@usa.net

(If anyone knows Danny Martinez NPS Historian tell him hello and Garreyowen.)

Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info WEB 
 Post Number: 2
Angie Search for posts by this member.

1

TeamIcon

Group: Super Administrators
Posts: 378
Joined: Jan. 2001

Member Rating: None
PostIcon Posted on: Mar. 03 2001,8:41 Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

(FROM THE ARCHIVES OF THE USS ARIZONA & PEARL HARBOR REMEMBERED MESSAGE BOARD - 2/10/01)


Aloha Ben,

Your questions are all addressed in a forthcoming article in WORLD WAR II magazine which is on the news stand on 22 April 2001.

Cheers,
David Aiken
a Director
Pearl Harbor History Associates Inc.
David_Aiken@hotmail.com

Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info WEB 
 Post Number: 3
Angie Search for posts by this member.

1

TeamIcon

Group: Super Administrators
Posts: 378
Joined: Jan. 2001

Member Rating: None
PostIcon Posted on: Mar. 03 2001,8:44 Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

(FROM THE ARCHIVES OF THE USS ARIZONA & PEARL HARBOR REMEMBERED MESSAGE BOARD 2/10/01)

Looking forward to the upcoming article re miniature submarines in WW II magazine if I can locate one.

A brief clarification re my earlier questions: I am aware that the mini sub fired on was the Ha-19, but the Helm reported multiple sightings and a fired torpedo...the HA-19 still had both type 97 torpedos on board when salvaged on the East shore of Oahu.

I would like to see the Navy/NPS look into recovering what is left of the Monoghan sub placed in land fill.  

Won't take more space here; thanks to David Aiken and others who have corresponded -- I will send all the results of my compilation of reports and facts.

Final questions for now: does anyone know anything about the Type 97 (?) torpedo seen by the National Geographic survey or the photo on the article "Problems with the Mini-Submarine...." which is described as recovery of the Ward sub in 1961?  I have no record of a sub recovery in 1961.

Thanks aloha
Ben
benefox@usa.net


Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info WEB 
 Post Number: 4
Angie Search for posts by this member.

1

TeamIcon

Group: Super Administrators
Posts: 378
Joined: Jan. 2001

Member Rating: None
PostIcon Posted on: Mar. 03 2001,8:47 Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

(FROM THE ARCHIVES OF THE USS ARIZONA & PEARL HARBOR REMEMBERED MESSAGE BOARD 2/11/01)


Ben,

In answer to your questions, I'll breifly explain here.  You can certainly e-mail me if you would like to discuss this further.

The National Geographic search for Midget A in November 2000 did turn up two torpedoes. They were not torpedoes from any of the submarines used in the attack on Pearl Harbor in December 1941. These two torpedoes were recovered by the U.S. Navy later in the war and dumped there. You can tell they were dumped because (1) they were found in the known dump site used by the Navy for that purpose and (2) The warheads were removed mechanically leaving the mounting flange clearly visible. They had not exploded nor had the warheads been knocked off in an attack on one of the midget submarines. Had that been the case the mounting flange without the attaching screws would not be so clearly visible and the break would not be so clean.

The same applies to the portion of the midget submarine they found (previously located by the way). That midget submarine was captured / recovered by the U.S. Navy later in the war and taken back to Pearl Harbor for inspection.  It was then dumped. Note that the aft hull section was mechanically disassembled, not violently torn apart from the rest of the boat, and there is still a lifting sling lying on the hull from when they dumped it.

The 1960 midget submarine you refer to is known as Midget D, for lack of a better designation. It came from either the I-18, I-20 or I-22, although there is no way to know from which despite frequent and unfounded speculation. She was found in shallow water with both torpedoes intact. The conning tower hatch had been opened from the inside and no crew remains were found onboard. This led to much speculation in the media concerning the fate of the crew.

At least one hoax article (December 1967 "Our Navy" magazine) was written about this boat and it was recently cited as possible "proof" of the submarine's identity by the same people who brought us the fantasy about another midget submarine being in Pearl Harbor on December 7 1941. Their abysmal record for accuracy that began with their December 1999 Naval History magazine article was continued in their December 2000 Proceedings magazine article.

You cannot take anything they say at face value without seriously questioning all of it.  

As far as the Breese sighting of two submarine conning towers on the morning of December 7 1941- Yes, one man on Breese did report seeing a second conning tower. However no one else on Breese saw it nor did anyone on any of the other eight ships who sighted the one actual submarine.

As a matter of fact, the Executive Officer on Breese reported seeing only one submarine in his report. This was Midget B (also known as the Monaghan midget). The second conning tower sighting was a combination of excitement, nerves, floating debris, or the same black cage buoy that Monaghan fired on moments later.

Hope this helps!

Ken

KBHackler@aol.com



--------------
"You just go home, Mrs. Edgers, we'll get back to this piece on Monday."[br]-- Commander Alwin Kramer, after receiving crucial intelligence data from the only woman in the Navy's Cryptographic Section on Dec. 6, 1941.

Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info WEB 
 Post Number: 5
Angie Search for posts by this member.

1

TeamIcon

Group: Super Administrators
Posts: 378
Joined: Jan. 2001

Member Rating: None
PostIcon Posted on: Mar. 03 2001,8:49 Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

(FROM THE ARCHIVES OF THE USS ARIZONA & PEARL HARBOR REMEMBERED MESSAGE BOARD - 2/12/01)

Again thanks to Mr. Aiken, Mr. Hackler and others who have either responded or sent e-mails.

I would like to request and encourage anyone interested in the mini-sub saga or the first six months of WWII to send e-mails at benefox@usa.net so that I do not take up too much space or time here, but I will respond to all.

While my questions may appear basic I have studied aspects of PH for many years; the mini-sub story is relatively new to me and therefore my interest.

Unknowns or controversies in history are a great deal more interesting to me than established "facts."

I recently lost a 5,000 book personal library which included nearly everything written on PH, but the Internet has a great deal of data much admittedly weak.  If anyone has any sites with valid information I would appreciate receiving them by e-mail.  

I am also very interested in learning of any sites such as restaurants bars or other non-military sites that were there on 12/7 and which are still in business and have some 12/7 character.

Keep the memory alive.

Thanks to all.

Ben
benefox@usa.net

Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info WEB 
 Post Number: 6
Angie Search for posts by this member.

1

TeamIcon

Group: Super Administrators
Posts: 378
Joined: Jan. 2001

Member Rating: None
PostIcon Posted on: Mar. 03 2001,8:51 Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

(FROM THE ARCHIVES OF THE USS ARIZONA & PEARL HARBOR REMEMBERED MESSAGE BOARD - 2/8/01)

This is an excellent and very important site.  I appreciate the many contributions.

Is there any list of post topics or any way to search for specifics?  I am interested in any articles or posts regarding the hypothesis that a miniature submarine fired on Battleship Row and may be shown in an attack photo.  I have found an article questioning the opinion but would like to find any others or discuss with others interested in the subject or who have information on subsequent recovery of miniature submarines sunk during the attack.

Any information will be appreciated.

Ben
(benefox@usa.net)

Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info WEB 
 Post Number: 7
eastwindrain Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 6
Joined: Sep. 2001

Member Rating: None
PostIcon Posted on: Sep. 09 2001,7:34 Skip to the previous post in this topic.  Ignore posts   QUOTE

June 2001 National Geographic has interesting PH story plus photos including mini-sub.
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
6 replies since Mar. 03 2001,8:40 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >

[ Track This Topic :: Email This Topic :: Print this topic ]


 
reply to topic new topic new poll

» Quick Reply General questions about the PH midgets
iB Code Buttons
You are posting as:

Do you wish to enable your signature for this post?
Do you wish to enable emoticons for this post?
Track this topic
View All Emoticons
View iB Code




Spring into Action Banner