Posted on 02/06/2009 5:37:11 PM PST by BIGLOOK
Got convicted for it too, didn't he? It was a quarter of a century after the court martial before he received command of a surface combat ship. He saved his career by becoming a subject matter expert in naval diesels.
PT-109 was sunk in August.
JFK got another boat as a matter of course, but as soon as the facts were in he was kicked back to Washington and the whole thing papered over with medals and hagiography by the Kennedy-linked papers.
JFK was never able to explain how his boat was rammed. Even in time of war, that’s a career ender.
In the navy, running your ship aground is a career limiting event. And even if the ship was being run by a junior officer at the time, the captain is going to be held responsible.
“Were you there when the SHIP hit the SAND?”
;^)
Think maybe it was because he was an Ensign with 2 years in when he did it? And he didnt exactly RUN and hide in diesels. WWI had something to do with that. And exactly how fast do you think men became ship captains back then?
25 years isnt that odd. After 1918, the Military was cut to the bone, when he was 9 years in. Then the depession hit after that.
Think about it. That means with 9 years in, with DRASTIC peacetime cuts and a depression, his career was fine. No shortage of competition and it never slowed him.
FWIW, in 1967 I was offered an appointment to the Naval Academy.
I joined the Army instead. At age 60 I am still a chief warrant officer (inc. Vietnam and OEF).
JMHO, but the Naval officer corps is both the most aristocratic and the most cannibalistic of all the services. I cite the tragic examples of Admiral Jeremy Boorda, the skipper of the USS Indianapolis, Admiral Husband Kimmel, among many others.
No Florida trailer parks for me!
;^)
Actually he was kicked back to Rhode Island. And as I said he spent most of the next year in and out of hospitals.
JFK was never able to explain how his boat was rammed. Even in time of war, that’s a career ender.
Hardly. It wasn't that uncommon for captains who lost their ship in action to be given other commands. While I was in the Navy I had the chance to become acquainted with Arnold True. His destroyer, USS Hammann, was torpedoed and sunk during the battle of Midway. He went on to command a destroyer division and retired a Rear Admiral. Carl Sherman, commander of the Lexington when she was lost, ended the war a Vice Admiral and commanded the 5th Fleet in 1946. Howard Bode, commander of the Oklahoma at Pearl Harbor, commanded the USS Chicago at Guadalcanal. Charles Mason, commander of the Wasp when she was sunk, also wound up as a Vice Admiral. Losing your ship in combat was usually not at all career limiting.
All I know is what I've read, which includes some of the documents from the hearing that have been unsealed. These are the facts as I understand them, having read some of the original documentation.
Anything that happens on a naval vehicle is the ultimate responsibility of the skipper of that vessel. Any error by any member of his crew is ultimately his error.
Kennedy's crew was on night patrol. There were several attempts to contact them by radio to warn them of Japanese activity in the area. They were unable to contact the 109. There were no reports of radio malfunction, and they were within contact range. There were questions as to whether or not the radio was being properly manned. Since the boat was lost, these questions were unanswerable. The PT 109 spotted the Japanese cruiser when it was around 200 yards away, but was unable to get out of it's path. There were questions as to why this was the case. The answer was that the boat's engines stalled out when they were gunned. In this area, my memory is hazy, because it's been a few years since I read the papers, but there was supposedly something about the PT Boats that was well known among the crews, and an improper technique of acceleration would cause them to flood and stall out. This was true if the engines had been at full stop, but also on going from low trolling speed to high acceleration.
The questions that were raised in the hearing were about the possibility that the 109 had been lazing, rather than patrolling, and whether or not the crew had been fully attentive, since attempts at radio contact with them were unsuccessful and there was a possibility that the stalling was because the boat was dead in the water. In any event, there were unanswered questions about whether or not there were two mechanical malfunctions on the boat that night, two fairly serious crew errors, or a combination of both.
The hearing on the 109 was unusual, in that there was never a final finding attached to the hearing, which is standard after such inquiries.
I think it's fairly well accepted that Kennedy only received a combat leadership assignment because of the pull of his father, who had been the ambassador to England earlier in the war. He had a bad back and was in generally poor health, due primarily to childhood illnesses.
I think John Kennedy was a brave man, but probably not a very good naval officer. He could easily have avoided combat, but chose to go in harm's way. Even if he was not a good officer, he was there, and that showed courage. I did not mean to imply cowardice, simply that losing a ship by getting it run over by another vessel that didn't know it was there is not a good thing as far as the Navy is concerned, and generally results in the loss of command. I also think there is a possibility that the Navy was less harsh in their dealing with Kennedy because of his father's political power.
As with all things connected with Kennedy, there are myths and false trails, both to glorify and defame. If any of my information is incorrect, or stated unfairly, I'm open to correction.
loud aircraft engines rumbling behind you
One engine on idle. Should have been piped through the muffler.
He had no situational awareness.
Sure. And just what did General Short, commander of the Hawaii Department, do in the army after the Pearl Harbor attack?
Exactly. Too many in the Navy in general have this “martinet” mentality. for example, they can show you some navy regs that clearly show that JFK should have been court martialed.
It took until the modern times for Capt. McVeigh was exonerated, by CONGRESS and by CLINTON. The USN never agreed. They thought it was a fun idea to bring an enemy commander to testify against him.
I don’t see where anything you wrote conflicts with anything I wrote. I’m aware of his history of back problems and that after the wreck they debilitated him for the rest of his life. Are you saying he never requested to go back on the PT boats? I think it’s fairly well documented that he did, several times. If you’re saying the problem was medical clearance, rather than concern about his ability, I understand where you’re going.
Agree with that. Kennedy was far more conservative than most Republicans today.
First rule of leadership. Everything’s your fault.
~snip~
-er?
Doesn't matter. The Good Lord Himself could've plucked the ship outta the water and slammed it into a reef and the skipper is still going to get canned. That's how the navy works and this skipper knows it. He started planning his retirement party as soon as he felt the initial vibrations.
Don't feel too bad for him though. He'll receive a nice pension and retired O-6s do pretty well for themselves out in the civilian world.
No, it didn't. He went from the Philippines to submarines. He then went to Europe in 1913 to study German and Belgian diesels - all before World War I.
He was also involved in the pre-commissioning work on the first diesel powered surface ship in the navy (Maumee)(1914). He later served on that ship as engineering officer and executive officer - prior to US entry into the war.
And given his experience with internal combustion engines, he also served on a board to survey and inspect civilian motor vessels.
He spent WWI back in submarines.
A packard V12, like in a P-51 Mustang, 20 feet away, through a muffler. Bets that REAL quiet. And thats quite a judgement. By your standard, every pilot shot down, every commander who got sunk, had no “situational awareness”.
And go drive a few WWII machines, A Jeep, a flathead 45 HD motorcycle, or ride in a plane. Those Machines werent quite as dependable as your modern lexus.
People today say “could not raise him on the radio so it must not have been manned”. Ask any military radioman about how dependable radio equpiment was even in Vietnam. JFKs had radio TUBES. And “lazing” in the area?? Thats Nice, PTs didnt always blaze around at flank speed for a whole patrol.
And the dependability of WWII aircraft engines is best witnessed by the immense number of flyers who died from all kinds of engine failures. Its truly a miracle that they did what they did with the crude machines they had.
They dont need monday morning quarterbacking from the Nintendo era,,even from nintendo era sailors. Makes about as much sense to pass judgment on the captain of a clipper ship.
I grew up reading about Kennedy and wore this book out, reading it five or six times:
Years later, I realized that every other skipper who accidentally hit something got royally reamed. After that, I read up a lot, and found stuff that went both ways. Either he was great or awful. I think the truth is somewhere in between.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.