 |
SwiftVets.com
Service to Country
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
jalexson
PO3
Joined: 11 May 2004
Posts: 272
Location: Hutchinson, Kansas
|
 Posted: Mon Sep 06, 2004 3:22 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Robert McDaniel wrote: | | Navy Chief, I still believe that you are on to something, although their appears to be some legitimate questions. Dont worry about the legal ramifications. They cannot stop the truth. We will provide the finances for the SBVFT to tackle any and all of the problems that may arise. |
Although Kerry might threaten legal action for criticizing him. There is very little chance of a presidential candidate winning a libel suit because the Supreme Court has essentially stated that anything goes even if a story is ultimately shown to be false. As long as statements are a possible interpretation of the facts, there wouldn't be a basis for a lawsuit.
_________________
"That awful power, the public opinion of a nation, is created in America by a horde of ignorant, self-complacent simpletons who failed at ditching and shoe making and fetched up in journalism on their way to the poor house."
-- Mark Twain |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
NavyChief
Rear Admiral
Joined: 12 Aug 2004
Posts: 627
Location: Boise, Idaho
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 06, 2004 5:49 am Post subject: Re: Quick Analysis of Kerry's Reports |
|
|
deleted
Last edited by NavyChief on Tue Sep 21, 2004 5:42 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sevry
Commander
Joined: 13 Aug 2004
Posts: 326
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 06, 2004 7:46 am Post subject: Re: Quick Analysis of Kerry's Reports |
|
|
| NavyChief wrote: | {{EDITED due to errors.
110011Z JUN 68 DTG - Date, Time Group (Day of month, Zulu Time) Month, Year
|
Yes. This is mentioned in various documents. Zulu time is UTC, or GMT (Greenwich mean). If followed by H (Hotel), then it's local time.
The messages began with a sort of jumble line, which looks like transmission noise, instructing on what sort of method was being used, and much else.
I found a list of Z-codes and various of the admin codes (115.4, etc) in unit citations posted to the mrfa site.
I also downloaded an older (but still 1993, unfortunately) instruction on sending these messages, along with a few others on the same subject. One can google to download. They're all pdf. JANAP128J, ACP 128 (A), ACP 131, and 127, 124 as seen in sites that come up on those searches.
Accordingly the 2nd line is supposed to be the message header. The second block of letters is the sender's RI followed immediately by its serial number. But you'd need a book from that era to know precisely what those are. The RI's were probably in an ACP 117, or similar, from 1969, hopefully. The SN I don't know. But again, unfortunately this is probably Naval Archives, or some military archives, and not online. Someone would have to go, in person, to find out what are likely very easy questions to answer. This isn't something Kerry would have known either. This was all the teletype operators and codes used by them and to make use of AUTODIN routing.
And so the numbers before the single dash are described in these later manuals as consisting of a Julian date followed by the sender's filing time, again GMT. The double-dash indicates the recipient's RI. But in the 13 MAR spot report, the Julian is 071, which is 13 MAR. But it's followed by 9559. That's no sort of time. What the heck is it?
Plus, all these messages seem to be addressed to Saigon. It just seems pro forma. But the manuals say this is the receiving station. It seems more likely, as you suggest, that the TO line was used to indicate the receiver. Or maybe it was all sent to Saigon, and routed to the TO and INFO addresses regardless?
And I agree that the TOR and Page 2 of 2 and etc. were all separately typed in at the receiver, by someone. It wasn't part of the message. It's a different typeface, for one, than the bulk of the message.
| Quote: |
FM: CTE 194.5.4.4 Authority releasing message (CTE 194.5.4.4 - this is Boat Group 4 under CDR Lonsdale)
|
Under the older Squadron 1/Market Time organization, 115.4 would have been An Thoi, and 115.4.7 was COSDIV11. Under TF 194 organization, 194.5 was Coastal Raiding and Blocking Group. Presumeably 194.5.4 was the unit, An Thoi. The element .4 would have been COSDIV11, with 16 Swift boats? It's a guess. But you're saying it's pretty certain the fourth slot referred to 'flotillas' or boat groups? And is it certain that 194.5.4 was An Thoi?
| Quote: |
TO: CTU 194.5.4 Authority message sent to (CTU 194.5.4 - this is CDR Lonsdale)
|
He was base commander, An Thoi.
| Quote: |
MTSR 1/12/CTE 194.5.4.4/1 Market Time Spot Report (one up serial for day)/day of month/Boat unit within Boat Group reporting
|
It says CTE, which presumeably as 194.5.4.4 as COSDIV11 would be Elliot? assuming that's the reference. But it has that "/1". Is that definitely the OTC of the day's mission?
| Quote: |
132000Z FEB 69
FM: CTE 194.5.4.5
TO: CTU 194.5.4
MTSR 1/13/CTE 194.5.4.5/2
(1) CTE 194.5.4.5
(4) PCF 94 **PARTIAL SOLO MISSION***
**PSYOPS/PAO MISSION**
TOR .../HB/KJW
|
Where can you download all this stuff prior to MAR? Anything from JAN, DEC?
| Quote: |
280615Z FEB 69
FM: NSA DET AN THOI
TO: SECNAV
PERSONNEL CASUALTY REPORT
BM2 LANGHOFER "suffered a bullet wound in his forearm when PCF 43 came under intense hostile A/W and rocket grenade fire. ...treated by MD onboard USCGC SPENCER..." (CTE 194.5.4.2 is the USCGC SPENCER)
|
Is that certain, under TF 194 that 194.5.4.2 is the Spencer?
| Quote: |
MESSAGE ROUTING SHEET used by Vice Admiral Zumwalt for BRAVO ZULU message for 28 FEB 69 action. Note the lined out passages; this is an obvious rewrite by the Admiral before it was sent out in message traffic. Note the chops on the right hand side of those people in the chain seeing the message: 00 at the top is Zumwalt with an X indicating he approves of the message. The others are indistinguishable office codes. The message will be sent out ROUTINE to CTF 115 (Hoffman - Cam Rahn Bay) with info to CTE 194.5.4.4 (Elliot - An Thoi)
|
Okay. So we're saying the task element 194.5.4.4 is in fact COSDIV11?
| Quote: |
131620Z MAR 69
FM: CTE 194.5.4.4
TO: CTG 115.4
MTSR 13/1/CTE 194.5.4.4/1
(1) CTE 194.5.4.4
(4) PCF 94, 51, 23, 43, 3, MSF A404 DET, UDT DET 12, RF/PF CAI NUOC
S/L 358
TOR ..../RD/KJW
|
It's not important that the boats are not listed in order, correct? The DET is detachment, A-team 404 detachment? Seal team "DET 12"? So from is Elliott, and addressed to under the older organization, 115.4 being An Thoi, or Lonsdale?
Again, is it certain that 194.5.4 is An Thoi, and that 194.5.4.4 is COSDIV11? But I'm just repeating myself, here.
| Quote: |
NOTES: Kerry receives 3rd Purple Heart and Bronze Star for action this day. According to Kerry, he was OTC for this mission and should have been the one to write this report.
|
In fact, OTC was Thurlow, correct? It seems likely, however, that Kerry is the source of the report, clearly not Thurlow!
| Quote: |
141355Z MAR 69
FM: COMCOSDIV 11
TO: CTF 115
CASREP
ETR 181200Z MAR 69
BATTLE DAMAGE to PCF 94.
TOR .../NS/KJW
NOTES: This report on the damage of PCF-94 is NOT mistaken. PCF-3 damage report was not posted on Kerry's website. A good portion of the damage mentioned here was from the previous day when Kerry's boat was in action. The COS DIV 11 Command History Report was cut off and you cannot see the entry for 12 Mar 69.
|
Yes, it's the damage report for the 94, however it actually got damaged (running over a pole in haste, perhaps the 3 was ambushed while 94 was still approaching the right end of the weir?).
Again, the comand history would surely be avail. in an archives. There's got to some - body. Anybody. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NavyChief
Rear Admiral
Joined: 12 Aug 2004
Posts: 627
Location: Boise, Idaho
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 06, 2004 8:49 am Post subject: Re: Quick Analysis of Kerry's Reports |
|
|
deleted
Last edited by NavyChief on Tue Sep 21, 2004 5:43 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sevry
Commander
Joined: 13 Aug 2004
Posts: 326
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 06, 2004 4:20 pm Post subject: Re: Quick Analysis of Kerry's Reports |
|
|
| NavyChief wrote: | The 9559, I believe is message serials or numbers of messages off that roll -- a counter.
|
Okay. I would then assume they broke that out to a separate field, in later years, then, as required. And so in later years the four digits following the Julian date referred to filing time, either released by the officer, or the time actually sent by the operator.
| Quote: |
Saigon was likely the circuit used after messages were sent, routed to NCS GUAM for AUTODIN input and then shot back out again. |
So Saigon saw everything, and TO was treated no differently than the 'CC' INFO addresses.
| Quote: |
COMNAVFORV - VADM Zumwalt (Saigon - Admin/Ops)
CTF 115 - CAPT Hoffman (Cam Rahn Bay - Admin/Ops)
COMCOSRON 1 - CDR Horne (Cam Rahn Bay - Admin)
COMCOSDIV 11 - LCDR Elliot (APL-21/USS KRISHNA/An Thoi - Admin)
NSA DET AN THOI - Naval Support Activity, An Thoi (support base)
CTG 194.5 - CAPT Hoffman (Operations/Admin)
CTG 115.4 - CDR Lonsdale (An Thoi - Operations)
CTU 194.5.4 - CDR Lonsdale
CTU 194.5.7 - LCDR Elliot
CTU 115.4.7 - LCDR Elliot
CTU 115.4.2 - USCGC SPENCER
CTE 194 - VADM Zumwalt (COMNAVFORV)
.5 - CAPT Hoffman (CTF 115)
.4 - CDR Lonsdale (COASTAL ZONE SURVEILLANCE 4th Zone)
.4 - Boat Group (Swift Boats)
/1 - Boat Unit (PCF-94)
CTE 194.5.4.2 - USCGC SPENCER
|
I did kind of repeat myself, there. It is nice to know what the codes mean.
| Quote: |
Of course, I would know this for sure if I had more documents from that timeframe.
|
The RI and these administrative codes would be easy to find if anyone lived near an archives. I don't. There's nothing even close, here, as far as I know, unless some local bases have the old instructions and books stuffed down behind a shelf in some dusty filing room. Might be too much of a wasted errand, anyway. So, I'll take it these are pretty sure, with the caveat you offer. The only other question, though, was how could Kerry have been OTC, even during any part of the S/L mission on the 13th? He was junior to every other officer that day.
I really look forward to your review of the assorted reports of the 13th. It seems to me what Kerry is describing, because I think clearly Kerry is the source of that account, is a flight down river, from assailants unknown, through a gauntlet of fire from both riverbanks. The 3 boat is grazed, but not stopped, trailing heavy smoke, but still keeping up. Only when they are clear does 94 realize 'MSF adv' is overboard and returns back into this shooting gallery to save Rassman's life, as it were. Then they remove themselves, and in more safety downstream, proceed to repair and tow the 3. That seems to be the scenario described there. If others see it that way, then clearly it's describing events in a way contrary to the reality of that day. It would simply be - a false report, and filing a false report. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GoophyDog
PO1
Joined: 10 Jun 2004
Posts: 480
Location: Washington - The Evergreen State
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 06, 2004 7:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
NavyChief; Just curious but what are the precedences of the messages? That may help you in determining or thinning out the "hot" traffic from regular admin stuff.
In '76 we were using R, P, O, and Z. Single letter before the DTG. It was also the first letter of the autodin route ie; RTTY or PTTY etc.
edit: should have mentioned this. R = routine, P=priority, O=immediate, Z=flash.
Like I said, just curious and scrolling back I don't see it mentioned.
_________________
Why ask? Because it needs asking. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sevry
Commander
Joined: 13 Aug 2004
Posts: 326
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 06, 2004 8:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| GoophyDog wrote: | NavyChief; Just curious but what are the precedences of the messages? That may help you in determining or thinning out the "hot" traffic from regular admin stuff.
In '76 we were using R, P, O, and Z. Single letter before the DTG. It was also the first letter of the autodin route ie; RTTY or PTTY etc.
edit: should have mentioned this. R = routine, P=priority, O=immediate, Z=flash.
Like I said, just curious and scrolling back I don't see it mentioned. |
It would seem they are being used in 1969, wouldn't it? The message HDR leads with PTTC etc with the first letter being priority and the fourth classification (in this case the P literally being Priority, and the C literally being, Confidential - with classification redundancy at the end of the line). But my confusion is by those rules, the HDR also should include the filing time after the Julian date, and optionally a record count as a separate field. But that wasn't done in the 13 MAR spot report, for ex., where you have 0719559. But 9559 isn't a time. It was suggested it was a record count. And that's how they did things in 1969. You'd need the equivalent instruction manuals, but from that era, to see. Furthermore, the first RI is supposed to be the originating station and the last in the line before spaces and a special character is supposed to be the RI of the receiving station. But it doesn't match the TO line in those messages, and suggested that Saigon was routinely the address for every message, and from there it was routed back to both TO and INFO/CC addresses. But maybe a) I don't understand the meaning of that last RI in the HDR or b) they did it differently in 1969. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NavyChief
Rear Admiral
Joined: 12 Aug 2004
Posts: 627
Location: Boise, Idaho
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 07, 2004 12:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
deleted
Last edited by NavyChief on Tue Sep 21, 2004 5:43 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GoophyDog
PO1
Joined: 10 Jun 2004
Posts: 480
Location: Washington - The Evergreen State
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 07, 2004 7:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
The four digits are simply a serial number from the originating station. Used not only for a broadcast circuit but the sender as well. It is mainly intended to be a quick check to make sure messages are not dropped or lost.
Saigon could have been the prodel drop (protect deliver ie; ensure delivery). Used a lot to keep traffic loads where they needed to be rather than clog to unintended circuits.
If memory serves a Priority message is one for a 6 hour delivery target. Routine was 12 hours, (O)immediate was 10 minutes. My bet it was SOP and a directive of the commander to have those spot reports in his hand within 6 hours. I could see where immediate traffic would be utilized to report damage to resources, either manpower or material, and perhaps where there was knowledge of follow-on missions that might be effected. Just conjecture as I have not done the in-depth scrutiny that NavyChief has.
_________________
Why ask? Because it needs asking. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sevry
Commander
Joined: 13 Aug 2004
Posts: 326
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 07, 2004 8:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
| GoophyDog wrote: | The four digits are simply a serial number from the originating station.
|
Without separator following the origination RI, is the station's SN. Again, do you know why in these HDRs that the four numbers following the Julian date are NOT the filing time? Was this something implemented in years following 1969? NC seems pretty sure it's a record count, which in the later manuals is broken into a separate field. Perhaps the preamble line was considered a reliable filing time?
| Quote: |
If memory serves a Priority message is one for a 6 hour delivery target. Routine was 12 hours, (O)immediate was 10 minutes.
|
I read Routine as being 24 hours. And O and Z were pretty much that minute. Priority was 6 hours. Might they not always have adhered to that?
That is, did they ever use, R? Perhaps, P, had come to replace R, in everyday use? I recall working for a defense shop where priority were at one point given systematic preference. Suddenly, within weeks, everything was getting marked, priority, or special handling. Perhaps R had become a two-three day delay, absolute bottom of the pile, and P had become Routine.
This is the best I could come up with - so far. It's the 13 MAR Spot Report. And I spent way too much time trying to figures codes and such, and neglected posting anything else, unfortunately. Sometimes you just gotta know. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
