Archive for the ‘1997’ Category

CONSTITUTION Update

Friday, January 2nd, 2009

From Tue Jul 08 22:02:30 1997
>Date: Wed, 09 Jul 1997 00:02:55 -0500
>From: Brooks A Rowlett
>Reply-To: brooksar@indy.net
>Organization: nonexistent
>X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01Gold (Macintosh; I; PPC)
>To: Mahan Naval History Mailing List
>Subject: CONSTITUTION Update
>Precendence: bulk
>Sender: mahan-owner@microworks.net
>
> > Subject:
> > USS Constitution Sails Again.
> > Date:
> > Tue, 8 Jul 1997 21:49:27 -0400 (EDT)
> > From:
> > Andrew Toppan
> > To:
> > Sandy McClearn , Brooks Rowlett > ,
> > Chris Cavas , Rick Giguere ,
> > Larry Jewell
> >
> >
> >
> > History was made today — USS Constitution sailed for the first time since
> > 1881. She was towed out into Massachusetts Bay for “sea trials”, all 6
> > sails (3 tops’ls, spanker, 2 jibs) were set, and all but one of the tugs
> > were released. For a bit more than 4 miles she sailed under her own
> > power, with the towlines hanging slack. Her top speed was 6.5 knots with
> > about 12 knots of wind. Total underway time was 8.5 hours, total distance
> > covered under tow and sail was 35 miles.
> >
> > Officially this is not considered her “first sail since 1881” because the
> > tug’s lines were not released, but she clearly was under her own power, so
> > everybody is ignoring the Navy’s semantics over the “tow vs. sail”. The
> > local newsmedia was aboard, but they did an excellent job of not leaking
> > the story beforehand — we heard absolutely nothing in the local news
> > before the event took place.
> >
> > All results from the trials were excellent — absolutely no problems were
> > found; everything worked perfectly. Her official “first sail” will be
> > July 21st, with a guided missile destroyer, guided missile frigate and the
> > Blue Angels in attendance.
> >
> > —
> > Andrew Toppan — elmer@wpi.edu
> > Rail, Sea and Air InfoPages and FAQ Archive (Military & TC FAQs)
> > [http://www.membrane.com/~elmer/] mirror [http://www.announce.com/~elmer/]
> > “Change is inevitable, except from a vending machine”
> >

Posted via email from mahan’s posterous

[Fwd: Book on WWII in Caribbean]

Friday, January 2nd, 2009

From Tue Jul 01 21:21:10 1997
>Date: Tue, 01 Jul 1997 23:15:50 -0500
>From: Brooks A Rowlett
>Reply-To: brooksar@indy.net
>Organization: Apparently Not.
>X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01Gold (Macintosh; I; PPC)
>To: “C. Patrick Hreachmack” ,
> Larry Bond ,
> Mahan Naval History Mailing List ,
> “Man O’War list” ,
> Marine History Information Exchange Group > ,
> NavalWarR ,
> World War II Discussion List
>Subject: [Fwd: Book on WWII in Caribbean]
>Precendence: bulk
>Sender: mahan-owner@microworks.net
>
>This appeared on the sub-war mailing list; Turner Publishing seems to be
>not a vanity press, but rather a small press that carries specialized
>military reminiscences and obscure topics; e.g. I have a book on US
>infantry landing craft (large) [LCI(L)] from them….
>
>-Brooks
>Return-Path:
>Received: from e55.webcom.com (e55.webcom.com [209.1.28.85])
> by green.indy.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id XAA23591
> for ; Tue, 1 Jul 1997 23:05:25 -0500 (EST)
>Received: from localhost (ultra2.webcom.com) by e55.webcom.com with SMTP
> (1.37.109.15/16.2) id AA029426543; Tue, 1 Jul 1997 21:09:03 -0700
>Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 21:09:03 -0700
>From: HARRY1435@aol.com
>Message-Id: <970702000338_>
>To: sub-list@webcom.com
>Subject: Book on WWII in Caribbean
>
>There is a new book out that may be of interest to anyone seeking information
>on the military units that fought the sub war in the Caribbean. It covers
>the Sixth Air Force and the Antilles Air Command. If you are interested:
> ALAE SUPRA CANALEM
> Wings over the Canal
> by Dan Hagedorn
>
>Turner Publishing Company
>412 Broadway, P.O. Box 3101
>Paducah, Kentucky 42002-3101
>
>Harry Halberstadt

Posted via email from mahan’s posterous

[Fwd: Constellation/Subscribe info.]

Friday, January 2nd, 2009

From Sun Jul 06 22:06:57 1997
>Date: Sun, 06 Jul 1997 13:06:30 -0400
>From: Patrick McSherry >Reply-To: pmm@redrose.net
>X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01C-KIT (Win95; U)
>To: mahan@microwrks.com
>Subject: [Fwd: Constellation/Subscribe info.]
>Precendence: bulk
>Sender: mahan-owner@microworks.net
>
>Message-ID: <33bfcfb9>
>Date: Sun, 06 Jul 1997 13:02:49 -0400
>From: Patrick McSherry >Reply-To: pmm@redrose.net
>X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01C-KIT (Win95; U)
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>To: Mahan@Microworks.com
>CC: 33dny@bdsnet.com
>Subject: Constellation/Subscribe info.
>References: <009b6dc9>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
>Hello Folks!
>
>On a recent cruise out of Baltimore, we passed the present restoration
>site of the CONSTELLATION. Yikes! From what I saw, I would term it a
>complete reconstruction. I saw the major frames, like a sad skeleton
>washed ashore, all new, with some new planking. I haven’t had the chance
>to dig up the vessel’s website, but it would appear we will basically
>end up with an all-new replica!
>
>For those who may be interested, the restoration site can be visited for
>tours on July 20, and Aug. 3, 17 and 24. A $2.00 fee is required. If
>anyone wants directions, please contact me and I will pass the info.
>along.
>
>Secondly, due to software problems, I cannot access my old files, and
>therefore need the subscribing procedure to pass along to an interested
>new member (Spanish American War/Civil War/Great White Fleet interests).
>Can someone please pass that along?
>
>Patrick
>Conestoga, PA

Posted via email from mahan’s posterous

Vietnam: A “war between the classes (and races) in America”??

Friday, January 2nd, 2009

From Fri Jul 04 12:12:38 1997
>X-Authentication-Warning: ecom6.ecn.bgu.edu: mslrc owned process doing -bs
>Date: Fri, 4 Jul 1997 14:11:52 -0500 (CDT)
>From: “Louis R. Coatney”
>X-Sender: mslrc@ecom6.ecn.bgu.edu
>To: milhst-l@ukanvm.cc.ukans.edu, mahan@microwrks.com
>cc: “Louis R. Coatney”
>Subject: Vietnam: A “war between the classes (and races) in America”??
>Precendence: bulk
>Sender: mahan-owner@microworks.net
>
>
>Our local Congressman –loyal to Clinton … and his VN “record”–
> gave a speech to the Western Illinois U. pol sci and history students
> (and faculty) wherein he described Vietnam as “a war between the
> classes in America, and it was fought mostly by poor blacks, Hispanics,
> and working class whites.” I suppose he thought he was “preaching to
> the choir” on a campus. Unfortunately for him, I saw the article in
> the student paper. (The reporter got his speech on tape, incidentally.)
>
>(He *may* have also tried to pass himself off as a Vietnam vet …
> again, according to friends up in the Quad Cities … but that is yet
> to be determined.)
>
>Since the 3 kids in my (fully integrated) Rock Island High School Class
> of 1964 were all white middle class, I was more than a little upset by
> this and did some research.
>
>As it turns out, an article in OPERATIONS RESEARCH Sep-Oct92 was the first
> to challenge this myth, finding Vietnam deaths represented all the
> economic 10%s well enough that the “class war” accusation was false and
> cruelly unjust. Moreover, the MIT researchers found that the black
> death percentage was actually less than the percentage of those of
> military age at the time who were black.
>
>This was attacked by ATLANTIC MONTHLY Washington editor James Fallows in
> April 1993, and an exchange followed in August 1993.
>
>In the Spring 1995 issue of ARMED FORCES & SOCIETY, however, two
> separate articles confirmed that variance was not so great that VN
> could be termed a class war. (Mazur used CDC Agent Orange survey
> data of Army veterans. He found no racial bias, either.) What they
> did find was serious service/draft-dodging by a very small
> *intellectual elite* … and Fallows made his early writing reputation
> as a student gloating about the strategms he and his Ivy League
> buddies used to escape service. (Fallows took editorial control of
> U.S. NEWS in Dec96 and immediately purged its staff … which explains
> the sudden decline in its objectivity and content.)
>
>In other words … and “the beauty of this,” if you can call it that
> … the intellectual Left in this country is using its *own*
> draft-dodging to claim that VN was a “class war”! :-)))) (Why
> am I laughing?)
>
>Does anyone else know of any more recent research on this?
>
>Anyway, if you hear your local politicians or “pseudo-intellectuals”
> spouting off about VN being a class or race war, you now are
> fore-warned and fore-armed.
>
>If you want a copy of my article, let me know, and I’ll e-mail it to
> you. I’m calling for my Cngrsmn to make a public retraction … and it
> is really hard-hitting … ethically. Among other things, I point
> out that one of my classmates killed in VN would undoubtedly be in
> his Congressional seat, if he hadn’t been killed in VN.
>
>Lou Coatney, mslrc@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu

Posted via email from mahan’s posterous

USS CABOT – forwarded

Friday, January 2nd, 2009

From Tue Jul 08 12:32:48 1997
>Date: Tue, 8 Jul 97 21:17 +0100
>From: BWV_WIESBADEN@t-online.de (Tim Lanzendoerfer)
>X-Sender: 0611603955-0001@t-online.de (Silvia Lanzendoerfer)
>Subject: RE: Re: USS CABOT – forwarded
>To: mahan@microwrks.com
>Precendence: bulk
>Sender: mahan-owner@microworks.net
>
> >Yep, CABOT is indeed that above-described ship, the last of her class. The
> >CVLs (light aircraft carriers) were very successful, having the speed of the
> >fast fleet carriers, and a much larger air group than the CVEs, which were
> >built on merchant hulls. I’ll give you an answer as to how many built later
> >today, if no one else comes up with that info first.
>
>I hope I’m sending this to the right list…is there a digest?
>Anyway, CABOT was part of the Independence class of Light Fleet >Carriers, build
> 1943-1944 on the hulls of ex-Cleveland class light cruisers. Seven > were build:
>
>CVL 22 Independence
>CVL 23 Princeton
>CVL 24 Belleau Wood
>CVL 25 Cowpens
>CVL 26 Monterey
>CVL 27 Langley
>CVL 28 Cabot
>CVL 29 Bataan
>
>PRINCETON was lost to enemy (Japanese) action 10/24/44 in the area >of Leyte Gulf
>due to a bomb hit and internal explosion, which forced the escorts to torpedo
>the ship.

Posted via email from mahan’s posterous

[Fwd: An interesting story]

Friday, January 2nd, 2009

From Wed Jul 09 15:52:07 1997
>Date: Wed, 09 Jul 1997 06:52:18 -0400
>From: Patrick McSherry >Reply-To: pmm@redrose.net
>X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01C-KIT (Win95; U)
>To: mahan@microwrks.com
>Subject: [Fwd: An interesting story]
>Precendence: bulk
>Sender: mahan-owner@microworks.net
>
>Hello,
>
>I thought some list members may find this intetesting.
>
>Patick
>Conestoga. PA
>Return-Path:
>Delivered-To: pmm@redrose.net
>Received: (qmail 18755 invoked from network); 9 Jul 1997 19:20:08 -0000
>Received: from mail.omegaweb.co.uk (HELO pentioum90.silverquick.com) >(194.205.38.2)
> by mail.redrose.net with SMTP; 9 Jul 1997 19:20:08 -0000
>Received: from [192.156.196.5] by pentioum90.silverquick.com (NTList >3.02.12) id ya154152; Wed, 9 Jul 1997 20:19:03 +0100
>Received: from [38.27.27.42] (ip42.denver4.co.pub-ip.psi.net >[38.27.27.42]) by postoffice.usa.net (8.8.5/8.7.5) with SMTP id >NAA25803 for ; Wed, 9 Jul 1997 >13:14:04 -0600 (MDT)
>Date: Wed, 9 Jul 1997 13:14:04 -0600 (MDT)
>X-Sender: dngart@mail.usa.net
>Message-Id:
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=”us-ascii”
>To: titanic-discuss@silverquick.com
>From: dngart@aurora.k12.co.us (Deborah Gilbert)
>Subject: An interesting story
>Reply-To: titanic-discuss@silverquick.com
>X-ListMember: pmm@redrose.net [titanic-discuss@silverquick.com]
>
>*** Champagne still sweet after 80 years under water
>
>Divers have sampled a bottle of 90-year-old champagne brought up from
>the wreckage of a ship carrying luxury goods to pre-revolutionary
>Russia and pronounced it thoroughly drinkable. Thousands of bottles of
>champagne, cognac and fine wine have been found in the wreckage of the
>Swedish ketch Jonkoping, which was torpedoed in the Baltic Sea south
>of Finland in 1916 by a submarine. The sensation of drinking the
>90-year-old French champagne — the label was lost but the cork
>revealed a 1907 vintage — was described as as “dizzying.” See
>http://www.merc.com/stories/cgi/story.cgi?id=3830947-d7a
>
>
>Deborah
>Colorado USA
>
>
>
> ========================
>Titanic Discuss list is owned by Mark Taylor:
>All list matters can be referred to him : themet@mindspring.com
>You may subscribe/unsubscribe at:http://www.silverquick.com
> ==========================
>

Posted via email from mahan’s posterous

Re[2]: USS CABOT – forwarded

Friday, January 2nd, 2009

From Tue Jul 08 18:34:32 1997
>From: John Snyder
>Date: Tue, 8 Jul 1997 18:30:24 -0700
>To: mahan@microwrks.com
>Subject: Re[2]: USS CABOT – forwarded
>Organization: MacNexus, the Sacramento Macintosh User Group
>X-Mailer: TeleFinder BBS v5.5
>Precendence: bulk
>Sender: mahan-owner@microworks.net
>
>Bill Riddle wrote:
> Wright.>>
>SNIP
>
>WRIGHT was a SAIPAN-class CVL, not completed in time for WW2; she didn’t
>commission until 1951.
>
>John Snyder
>John_Snyder@bbs.macnexus.org

Posted via email from mahan’s posterous

CABOT etc.

Friday, January 2nd, 2009

From Wed Jul 09 20:15:57 1997
>Date: Wed, 09 Jul 1997 16:35:23 +0000
>From: “David L. Riley” >X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Macintosh; I; 68K)
>To: brooksar@indy.net
>CC: Tim Lanzendoerfer , mahan@microwrks.com
>Subject: Re: CABOT etc.
>Precendence: bulk
>Sender: mahan-owner@microworks.net
>
>Brooks A Rowlett wrote:
> >
> > Tim Lanzendoerfer wrote:
> > >
> > >. Wasn’t San Jacinto the
> > > vessel from which former President Bush flew when he was shot down?
> >
> > I think that’s correct. Former President Gerald Ford served as
> > a surface Navy officer on another of these vessels, but I can’t
> > remember which….
> >
> > -BR
>
> According to “Presidents of WWII,” one of the Pentagon’s 50th
>Anniversary of WWII handouts, here’s who served on what vessels:
>
>Kennedy: PT-109
>Ford: USS Monterey
>Carter: USS Wyoming, USS Mississippi, USS Pomfret
>Bush: USS San Jacinto, USS Finback (sort of: shot down, rescued by
>Finback, spent remainer of sub’s patrol aboard)
>
>LBJ and RMN served in the US Navy in the Pacific but not at sea.
>
> You can see more on President Bush’s naval career on the USS San
>Jacinto at: http://www.history.navy.mil/faqs/faq10-1.htm
>
> – David Riley

Posted via email from mahan’s posterous

N Korea targeting US CV/CVN?

Friday, January 2nd, 2009

From Thu Jul 10 09:35:17 1997
>Date: Thu, 10 Jul 1997 09:35:04 -0700
>From: Mike Potter
>Reply-To: mike.potter@artecon.com
>Organization: Artecon, Inc.
>X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01Gold (WinNT; I)
>To: mahan@microworks.net
>Subject: N Korea targeting US CV/CVN?
>Precendence: bulk
>Sender: mahan-owner@microworks.net
>
>[Following is apparently from the Yonhap News Agency, a South Korean
>enterprise. It arrived from a reliable source but without information
>about the article’s author, its copyright status, or its credibility.]
>
>Defector Hwang says N. Korea sees war as way to unity
>_____________________________________________________
>
>SEOUL, May 9, 1997 — North Korean defector Hwang Jang Yop has told
>South Korean intelligence officials that North Korea’s leadership
>believes a war is the only way to unify the Korean Peninsula, Yonhap
>News Agency reported Friday.
>
>Kwon Young Hae, head of South Korea’s intelligence organization, told a
>parliament intelligence committee that Hwang said in a debriefing that
>the Pyongyang leadership puts the highest priority on the country’s
>military power, Yonhap said.
>
>Hwang was a secretary of Pyongyang’s ruling Workers Party of Korea when
>he defected to the South Korean Embassy in Beijing in February after his
>visit to Japan. He arrived in Seoul on April 20 after spending a month
>in the Philippines.
>
>Hwang also told South Korean intelligence officials that he believes
>North Korea has developed nuclear weapons, in view of its refusal to
>accept international inspection of its nuclear facilities and its
>declaration of withdrawal from the International Atomic Energy Agency in
>March 1993.
>
>Kim Chong Ho, chairman of the parliament intelligence committee, quoted
>Kwon, head of the Agency for National Security Planning, as saying,
>”Hwang said Kim Jong Il has ordered all-out and full support for the
>military after the death of his father Kim Il Sung.”
>
>Kim Jong Il has become the de facto North Korean leader since Kim Il
>Sung died in July 1994, even though he has not assumed his father’s
>posts as state president and head of the ruling Workers Party of Korea.
>
>Hwang also reportedly said Kim Jong Il repeatedly stressed the
>importance of the armed forces, saying the “military is the major pillar
>of national unification.”
>
>Hwang told South Korean intelligence officials that Kim Jong Il has
>ordered all government agencies to step up war preparedness and an
>atmosphere of preparing for war has become overwhelming since he became
>supreme commander of the armed forces in December 1991.
>
>Hwang reportedly said the North Korean leadership is 100% confident of
>winning a war and even ordinary citizens are sure of their victory in a
>war.
>
>North Korea had plans to send a suicide squad to sink a U.S. aircraft
>carrier so as to stoke up antiwar sentiment in the United States, Hwang
>reportedly told South Korean intelligence officials.
>
>North Korea is capable of manufacturing all the weapons and equipment
>needed to carry out a war and is ready for mass production of missiles,
>artillery and military helicopters, Hwang reportedly said.
>
>Pyongyang has simplified the chain of command in the armed forces to
>make it easy to start a war quickly, according to the intelligence
>chief.
>
>Kwon cited Hwang as saying that Kim Jong Il can start a war by directly
>giving the order to an officer in charge of military operations at the
>general staff of the army without going through the minister of the
>People’s Armed Forces.
>
>Kim also extended the period of mandatory military service to 13 years
>from seven, Kwon said.
>
>Touching upon the decision-making process in North Korea, Hwang said Kim
>Jong Il alone makes the final decision and senior officials are just
>like “puppets” and dare not present their own ideas.
>
>Hwang also reportedly said about 10 people from the party,
>administration and the military are at the center of Kim Jong Il’s
>”closed-door government.”
>
>Among them are Chang Song Taek, Kim’s brother-in-law and deputy bureau
>director at the Workers Party of Korea, Kim Gi Nam and Kim Guk Tae,
>secretaries of the party, Cho Myong Rok, vice marshal and chief of the
>General Political Bureau of the army, and acting Premier Hong Song Nam.
>
>–

Posted via email from mahan’s posterous

The CHESAPEAKE-LEOPARD Affair

Friday, January 2nd, 2009

From Fri Jul 11 05:07:51 1997
>Date: Fri, 11 Jul 97 07:07:12 CDT
>X-Sender: ncms1@navtap-emh.navtap.navy.mil
>X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (16)
>To: mahan@microwrks.com
>From: “Mark Hayes (Navy Historical Center)”
>Subject: The CHESAPEAKE-LEOPARD Affair
>Precendence: bulk
>Sender: mahan-owner@microworks.net
>
>Regarding the Chesapeake-Leopard Affair:
>
>First, a minor correction:
>
>ships, then LEOPARD upped-anchor and preceded her to sea.>>
>
>According to the account in THE NAVAL WAR OF 1812, A DOCUMENTARY HISTORY,
>edited by William S. Dudley, LEOPARD was not one of the British frigates
>anchored in Lynnhaven Bay as CHESAPEAKE headed out to sea. She was already
>cruising off the Virginia Capes.
>
>On a more substantive note:
>
>15 miles off Cape Henry and sent over an officer with his admiral’s
>order and requested permission to search for deserters. The American
>Commodore BARRON rejected the request and Capt. HUMPHREYS, after
>repeated hailing, first directed that a shot be fired across her bows
>and then that several shots should be fired into her.>>
>
>The log of CHESAPEAKE indicates, and Dudley states, that NO warning shot was
>ever fired. Dudley’s account (based on the original documents) of these
>crucial minutes is as follows:
>
>>his ship. Within minutes and without specific warning, LEOPARD ranged
>alongside CHESAPEAKE and fired a broadside. The astonished BARRON [emphasis
>added] attempted to hail and sent his men to quarters silently, without the
>usual drumbeat. . . .LEOPARD continued to fire for ten minutes, until Barron
>struck his colors.>>
>
>Putting aside for the moment the question of the legitimacy of Humphrey’s
>demand to search CHESAPEAKE: if the officer sent over by Captain Humphreys
>verbally warned Barron that LEOPARD would open fire if the British demand
>was not honored, then Barron was guilty of gross negligence for not
>preparing for action immediately (as difficult as that may have been). If
>the British officer gave no such warning, then the openning broadside was
>truly shameful.
>
>Mark Hayes
>Naval Historical Center
>ncms1@navtap.navy.mil

Posted via email from mahan’s posterous

Purpose
The Mahan Naval Discussion List hosted here at NavalStrategy.org is to foster discussion and debate on the relevance of Admiral Alfred Thayer Mahan's ideas on the importance of sea power influenced navies around the world.
Links