DOCSLIB.ORG

Appendix 1 Amphibious Ships and Craft

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Appendix 1 Amphibious Ships and Craft Appendix 1 Amphibious Ships and Craft Ships ADCS Air Defence Control Ship AKA Attack Cargo Ship APA Attack Transport ATD Amphibious Transport Dock CVHA Assault Helicopter Carrier (later LPH) LPD Amphibious Transport Dock LPH Assault Helicopter Carrier LSC Landing Ship, Carrier LSD Landing Ship, Dock LSE(LC) Landing Ship, Emergency Repair (Landing Craft) LSE(LS) Landing Ship, Emergency Repair (Landing Ship) LSF Landing Ship, Fighter Direction LSG Landing Ship, Gantry LSH Landing Ship, Headquarters LSH(C) Landing Ship, Headquarters (Command) LSI Landing Ship, Infantry LSL Landing Ship, Logistic LSM Landing Ship, Medium LSM(R) Landing Ship, Medium (Rocket) LSP Landing Ship, Personnel LSS Landing Ship, Stern Chute LSS(R) Landing Ship, Support (Rocket) LST Landing Ship, Tank LST(A) Landing Ship, Tank (Assault) LST(C) Landing Ship, Tank (Carrier) LST(D) Landing Ship, Tank (Dock) LST(Q) administrative support ship LSU Landing Ship, Utility LSV Landing Ship, Vehicle MS (LC) Maintenance Ship (Landing Craft) MS (LS) Maintenance Ship (Landing Ship) M/T Ship Motor Transport Ship W/T Ship Wireless Tender 212 Appendix 1 213 Barges, craft and amphibians DD Duplex Drive (amphibious tank) DUKW amphibious truck LBE Landing Barge, Emergency repair LBK Landing Barge, Kitchen LBO Landing Barge, Oiler LBV Landing Barge, Vehicle LBW Landing Barge, Water LCA Landing Craft, Assault LCA(HR) Landing Craft, Assault (Hedgerow) LCA(OC) Landing Craft, Assault (Obstacle Clearance) LCC Landing Craft, Control LCE Landing Craft, Emergency Repair LCF Landing Craft, Flak LCG Landing Craft, Gun LCH Landing Craft, Headquarters LCI Landing Craft, Infantry LCI(G) Landing Craft, Infantry (Gunboat) LCM Landing Craft, Mechanized LCN Landing Craft, Navigation LCP Landing Craft, Personnel LCP(R) Landing Craft, Personnel (Ramped) LCP(SY) Landing Craft, Personnel (Survey) LCP(U) Landing Craft, Personnel (Utility) LCQ administrative support craft LCR Landing Craft, Raiding LCS Landing Craft, Support LCS(R) Landing Craft, Support (Rocket) LCT Landing Craft, Tank LCT(R) Landing Craft, Tank (Rocket) LCU Landing Craft, Utility LCV Landing Craft, Vehicle LCVP Landing Craft, Vehicle and Personnel LVT Landing Vehicle, Tracked LVT(A) Landing Vehicle, Tracked (Armoured) ML Motor Launch MLC Motor Landing Craft NLVT(X) Naval Landing Vehicle Tracked (Experimental) The designation (L), (M) and (S) following the name of a ship or craft means large, medium and small respectively. For example, LSI(M) is a Landing Ship, Infantry (Medium) while LCG(L) is a Landing Craft, Gun (Large). The 214 Appendix 1 number following the name of a ship or craft indicates the particular model. For example, LCT(8) is a Landing Craft, Tank, Mark 8. For ease of reference standard American nomenclature for landing craft has been used throughout this book. This system was not adopted by the British until 1942. Prior to this LCTs were known as Tank Landing Craft, LCMs were known as Mechanized Landing Craft and LCAs were known as Assault Landing Craft. In the Mediterranean theatre they were known as A Lighters, B Lighters and C Lighters respectively. Appendix 2 Abbreviations 1SL First Sea Lord ACO Adviser on Combined Operations AEW Airborne Early Warning AOTC Amphibious Operations Training Centre ASW Anti-Submarine Warfare ATF Assault Training Force AW Amphibious Warfare AWHQ Amphibious Warfare Headquarters AWSS Amphibious Warfare Signal School AWXE Amphibious Warfare Experimental Establishment BJSM British Joint Services Mission CAS Chief of the Air Staff CAW Chief of Amphibious Warfare CCO Commodore, Combined Operations (December 1941 – March 1942) CCO Chief of Combined Operations (from March 1942) CCOR Chief of Combined Operations Representative (at the BJSM) CGRM Commandant General, Royal Marines CIGS Chief of the Imperial General Staff COCOS Chief of Combined Operations Staff CODC Combined Operations Development Centre COHQ Combined Operations Headquarters COJP Combined Operations Joint Planner COLO Combined Operations Liaison Officer COS Chiefs of Staff COSSAC Chief of Staff, Supreme Allied Commander COXE Combined Operations Experimental Establishment CTC Combined Training Centre CTE Combined Training Establishment DCAS Deputy Chief of the Air Staff DCIGS Deputy Chief of the Imperial General Staff DCO Director of Combined Operations DCOM Director of Combined Operations Material DCOS(IT) Deputy Chiefs of Staff, Inter-Services Training Sub-Committee DNC Director of Naval Construction DXSR Director of Experiments and Staff Requirements 215 216 Appendix 2 GOC General Officer Commanding ISTDC Inter-Services Training and Development Centre JFSC Joint Fire Support Committee JOC Joint Operations Centre NATO North Atlantic Treaty Organization RAC Royal Armoured Corps RAF Royal Air Force RAW Responsibility for Amphibious Warfare RNVR Royal Navy Volunteer Reserve RTR Royal Tank Regiment USMC United States Marine Corps USN United States Navy VACTC Vice Admiral, Combined Training Centre VCAS Vice Chief of the Air Staff VCIGS Vice Chief of the Imperial General Staff VCNS Vice Chief of the Naval Staff Appendix 3 Principal Characters Military figures 1945–1956 First Sea lord 1943–46 Sir Andrew Cunningham (Viscount Cunningham of Hyndhope) 1946–48 Sir John Cunningham 1948–51 Bruce, Lord Fraser of North Cape 1951–55 Sir Rhoderick McGrigor 1955–59 Louis, Earl Mountbatten of Burma Chief of the Air Staff 1940–46 Sir Charles Portal 1946–50 Sir Arthur Tedder 1950–53 Sir John Slessor 1953–56 Sir William Dickson 1956–60 Sir Dermot Boyle Chief of the Imperial General Staff 1946–48 Viscount Montgomery 1948–52 Sir William Slim 1952–55 Sir John Harding 1955–58 Sir Gerald Templer Chief of Combined Operations/Amphibious Warfare 1940 Lieutenant-General A. G. B. Bourne (Royal Marines)1 1940–41 Admiral of the Fleet, Lord Keyes (Royal Navy)2 1941–43 Lord Louis Mountbatten (Royal Navy) 1943–47 Major-General R. E. Laycock (Army) 1947–50 Major-General G. E. Wildman-Lushington (Royal Marines) 1950–54 Major-General V. D. Thomas (Royal Marines) 1954–57 Major-General C. F. Phillips (Royal Marines) 217 218 Appendix 3 Political figures 1945–56 Prime Minister 1945–51 Clement Attlee (Labour) 1951–55 Winston Churchill (Conservative) 1955–57 Anthony Eden (Conservative) Minister of Defence 1945–46 Clement Attlee 1946–50 A. V. Alexander 1950–51 Emanuel Shinwell 1951–52 Winston Churchill 1952–54 Earl Alexander of Tunis 1954–55 Harold Macmillan 1955 Selwyn Lloyd 1955–56 Walter Monckton 1956–57 Anthony Head First Lord of the Admiralty 1945–46 A. V. Alexander 1946–51 George, Viscount Hall 1951 Francis, Lord Pakenham 1951–56 James P. L. Thomas, Viscount Cilcennin 1956–57 Quentin, Viscount Hailsham Notes Introduction 1. BR1806, The Fundamentals of British Maritime Doctrine (London: HMSO, 1995) 2. Public Records Office, Kew (henceforth, PRO): DEFE 2/1760, Amphibious Warfare Handbook No. 4. 3. R. Gardiner, Steam, Steel, and Shellfire. The Steam Warship 1815–1905 (London: Conway Maritime Press, 1992), Introduction and chapters 1 and 2. Andrew Lambert, The Crimean War, British Grand Strategy, 1853–1856 (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1990). 4. Lambert, The Crimean War, passim. 5. Paul Halpern, A Naval History of World War One (London: UCL Press, 1994), p. 3. Andrew Lambert, ‘The Royal Navy, 1856–1914: Deterrence and the Strategy of World Power’, in Keith Neilson and Elizabeth Errington (eds), Navies and Global Defence: Theories and Strategy (Westport, CT: Praeger, 1995), p. 86. 6. Lambert, ‘The Royal Navy, 1856–1914’, pp. 69–92. 7. Alfred Thayer Mahan, The Influence of Sea Power Upon History 1660–1783 (Boston: Little, Brown, 1890), p. 315. 8. PRO:DEFE 2/1900, A Short Review of the History and Development of British Amphibious Warfare. 9. Julian Corbett, Some Principles of Maritime Strategy (London: Longmans, 1911), p. 14. 10. C. E. Callwell, The Effect of Maritime Command on Land Campaigns Since Waterloo (London: William Blackwell & Sons, 1987). 11. C. E. Callwell, Military Operations and Maritime Preponderance: Their Relations and Interdependence (London: William Blackwell & Sons, 1905). 12. C. E. Callwell, Military Operations and Maritime Preponderance: Their Relations and Interdependence (Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute Press, 1996). 13. Paul Kennedy, The Rise and Fall of British Naval Mastery (London: Fontana Press, 1991), p. 238. 14. Arthur J. Marder, From Dreadnought to Scapa Flow. The Royal Navy in the Fisher Era, 1904–1919. Volume 1 (London: Oxford University Press, 1961), pp. 383–94 and Volume 2, pp. 176–91. Barry M. Gough, ‘Admiral Sir John Arbuthnot Fisher’, and Nicholas A. Lambert, ‘Admiral Sir Arthur Knyvett Wilson’, in Malcolm Murfett (ed.), The First Sea Lords from Fisher to Mountbatten (Westport, CT: Praeger, 1995). 219 220 Notes 15. John Gooch, The Plans of War. The General Staff and British Military Strategy 1900–1916 (London: Routledge & Keegan Paul, 1974), chapter 9. 16. David Massam, British Maritime Strategy and Amphibious Capability 1900–1940 (PhD dissertation, Oxford University, 1995), chapter one. 17. Major-General Sir George Aston, Letters on Amphibious Wars (London: John Murray, 1920), p. 117. 18. Marder, From Dreadnought to Scapa Flow, Volume 1, p. 383. 19. Phillip Darby, British Defence Policy East of Suez, 1947–1968 (London: Oxford University Press, 1973). Chapter 1 Amphibious Renaissance 1. Sir Julian Corbett, Naval Operations – Volume 1 (London: Longmans, Green & Co., 1920), p. 374. 2. For example, see A. J. Marder, From the Dardanelles to Oran, Studies of the Royal Navy in War and Peace 1915–40 (London: Oxford University Press,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • THE FEASIBLITY of the OVER-THE-HORIZON AMPHIBIOUS ASSAULT for U.S. NAVY and MARINE CORPS FORCES a Thesis Presented To
    THE FEASIBLITY OF THE OVER-THE-HORIZON AMPHIBIOUS ASSAULT FOR U.S. NAVY AND MARINE CORPS FORCES A thesis presented to the Faculty of the U.S. Army Command and General Staff Colege in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree MASTER OF MILITARY ART AND SCIENCE STEPHEN L. GOERTZEN, LCDR, USN B.S., U.S. Naval Academy, Annapolis, Maryland, 1982 Fort Leavenworth, Kansas 1993 Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. MASTER OF MILITARY ART AND SCIENCE THESIS APPROVAL PAGE Name of Candidate: LCDR Stephen L. Goertzen, USN Thesis Title: The Feasibility of the Over-the-Horizon Amphibious Assault for the U.S. Navy and Marine Corps Forces Approved by: u , Thesis Committee Chaiman LTCOL W. A. Sp , Member Accepted this 4th day of June 1993 by: , Director, Graduate Degree Philip J. Brookes, Ph.D. Programs The opinions and conclusions expressed herein are those of the student author and do not necessarily represent the views of the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College or any other governmental agency. (References to this study should include the foregoing statement.) ABSTRACT THE FEASIBILITY OF THE OVER-THE-HORIZON AMPHIBIOUS ASSAULT FOR U.S. NAVY AND MARINE CORPS FORCES: An analysis of the doctrine, equipment, and technology contributing to the feasibility of the over-the-horizon amphibious assault. By Lieutenant Commander Stephen L. Goertzen, USN, 128 pages. This study is an analysis of the tactics,techniques, procedures, doctrine, equipment, and technology utilized in over-the-horizon amphibious assaults. The study examines the issues surrounding current feasibility of the assault, as well as future feasibility of the assault.
    [Show full text]
  • A New Carrier Race? Yoji Koda
    Naval War College Review Volume 64 Article 4 Number 3 Summer 2011 A New Carrier Race? Yoji Koda Follow this and additional works at: https://digital-commons.usnwc.edu/nwc-review Recommended Citation Koda, Yoji (2011) "A New Carrier Race?," Naval War College Review: Vol. 64 : No. 3 , Article 4. Available at: https://digital-commons.usnwc.edu/nwc-review/vol64/iss3/4 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at U.S. Naval War College Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Naval War College Review by an authorized editor of U.S. Naval War College Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Color profile: Generic CMYK printer profile Composite Default screen Koda: A New Carrier Race? A NEW CARRIER RACE? Strategy, Force Planning, and JS Hyuga Vice Admiral Yoji Koda, Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force (Retired) n 18 March 2009 JS Hyuga (DDH 181) was commissioned and delivered to Othe Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force (JMSDF). The unique characteris- tic of this ship is its aircraft-carrier-like design, with a “through” flight deck and an island on the starboard side. Hyuga was planned in the five-year Midterm De- fense Buildup Plan (MTDBP) of 2001 and funded in Japanese fiscal year (JFY) 2004 as the replacement for the aging first-generation helicopter-carrying de- stroyer (DDH), JS Haruna (DDH 141), which was to reach the end of its service life of thirty-five years in 2009. The second ship of the new class, JS Ise (DDH 182), of the JFY 2006 program, was commissioned 16 March 2011.
    [Show full text]
  • Design Type: VC2-S-AP5 Official Number: APA-168
    USSGage Design Type: VC2-S-AP5 Official Number: APA-168 1- w u.. ~ 0 IJ) <( z t!) 0::: > GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS DURING THE CLOSING YEARS OF WORLD z~ WAR II, MILl T ARY PLANNERS REQUESTED ~ Q ~ w BUILDER: OREGON SHIPBUILDING CORP. THAT THE MARITIME COMMISSION <~ Q 0 "'~ <w BUlL T: 1944 CONSTRUCT A NEW CLASS OF ATTACK z w~ 11 Q ~ 0 LOA: 455'-0 TRANSPORTS. DESIGNERS UTILIZED THE w ~ 11 z BEAM: 62'-0 NEW VICTORY CLASS AND CONVERTED IT CX) "'u "~ 11 "'I- ~ -w ~ DRAFT: 24'-0 INTO A TROOP TRANSPORT FOR THE U.S. IW ~ ~ z <I~ 0 SPEED: 18 KNOTS NAVY CALLED THE HASKELL CLASS, ~ a._w z< ~ 0 <tffi u PROPULSION: OIL FIRED STEAM DESIGNATED AS VC2-S-AP5. THE w ~ w ~ z w~ iii TURBINE, MARITIME COMMISSION CONSTRUCTED 117 ~ zw ~ z t!)~ w SINGLE SHAFT ATTACK TRANSPORTS DURING THE WAR, <t~ 5 ~ t!)[fl w ~ DISPLACEMENT: 7,190 TONS (LIGHTSHIP) THE USS GAGE AT ANCHOR IN SAN FRANCISCO BAY, CIRCA 1946 PHOTO# NH98721 AND THE GAGE IS THE SOLE REMAINING l: u ~ 0 (/)~ ~ ~ (/) w 10,680 TONS (FULL) SHIP AFLOAT IN ITS ORIGINAL X ~ ::J ~ w • ~ CONFIGURATION. "u COMPLEMENT: 56 OFFICERS w ~ 9 ~ ~ ~ 480 ENLISTED Q w u ~ 11 .. 0 <:::. or;.·• ..,..""' 0 THIS RECORDING PROJECT WAS ~ ARMAMENT: I 5 /38 GUN w ' ~ ' Seattle, WA COSPONSORED BY THE HISTORIC AMERICAN ~ I 40MM QUAD MOUNT .. >- ' I- 4 40MM TWIN MOUNTS -~!',? _. -::.: -::; -:..: ~: :- /" Portland, OR ENGINEERING RECORD (HAER) AND THE 8 .~~ - -·- ----- --.. - It N z 10 20MM SINGLE -·- .- .-··-· -··- ·-. -· -::;;:::::-"···;:;=····- .. - .. _ .. ____ .. ____\_ U.S. MARITIME ADMINISTRATION (MARAD). ffi u - ...-··- ...~ .. -··- .. =·.-.=·... - .... - ·-·-····-.. ~ · an Francisco, CA :.:: > 1 MOUNTS 9 aJ!,.
    [Show full text]
  • China Naval Modernization: Implications for US Navy Capabilities
    China Naval Modernization: Implications for U.S. Navy Capabilities—Background and Issues for Congress Updated May 21, 2020 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov RL33153 China Naval Modernization: Implications for U.S. Navy Capabilities Summary In an era of renewed great power competition, China’s military modernization effort, including its naval modernization effort, has become the top focus of U.S. defense planning and budgeting. China’s navy, which China has been steadily modernizing for more than 25 years, since the early to mid-1990s, has become a formidable military force within China’s near-seas region, and it is conducting a growing number of operations in more-distant waters, including the broader waters of the Western Pacific, the Indian Ocean, and waters around Europe. China’s navy is viewed as posing a major challenge to the U.S. Navy’s ability to achieve and maintain wartime control of blue-water ocean areas in the Western Pacific—the first such challenge the U.S. Navy has faced since the end of the Cold War—and forms a key element of a Chinese challenge to the long- standing status of the United States as the leading military power in the Western Pacific. China’s naval modernization effort encompasses a wide array of platform and weapon acquisition programs, including anti-ship ballistic missiles (ASBMs), anti-ship cruise missiles (ASCMs), submarines, surface ships, aircraft, unmanned vehicles (UVs), and supporting C4ISR (command and control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance) systems. China’s naval modernization effort also includes improvements in maintenance and logistics, doctrine, personnel quality, education and training, and exercises.
    [Show full text]
  • Esps Canarias
    European Union Naval Force - Mediterranean ESPS CANARIAS Frigate Santa Maria class Frigate Santa Maria class Length / Beam / Draft 138 m / 14,3 m / 7,5 m Displacement 3,900 t Speed 29 knots (maximum turbine) Source: Spanish Defense website http://www.armada.mde.es The Ship ESPS CANARIAS is the sixth frigate of the 41st Escorts Squadron; she was built by Navantia in Ferrol, and delivered to the Navy in December 1994. ESPS CANARIAS home port is Rota Naval Base in the south of Spain. ESPS CANARIAS is fitted with a helicopter SH-60 and Marine Boarding Team that completes her capabilities and ensures she is capable of conducting the missions and tasks assigned by EUNAVFOR MED. The Santa Maria Class is a multirole warship able to carry out missions ranging from high intensity warfare integrated into a battle group and conducting offensive and defensive operations, to low intensity scenarios against non-conventional threats. Designed primarily to act in the interests of the State in the maritime areas overseas and participate in the settlement crises outside Europe, this leading warship can also be integrated into a naval air force. It may operate in support of an intervention force or protection of commercial traffic and perform special operations or humanitarian missions. The Santa Maria class frigates, like destroyers and corvettes, are given the generic name of escorts with the main task of protecting other units and maintaining sea lines of communications. However, their versatility allows the F-80 frigates to carry out a wide range of missions, which can be grouped into two broad categories: • Maritime Interdiction Operations: known as 'MIO operations', these consist of shipping control in a given area to ensure the maintenance of safe passage within any given restrictions or regulations as ruled by International Organisations.
    [Show full text]
  • Cvf) Programme
    CHILD POLICY This PDF document was made available CIVIL JUSTICE from www.rand.org as a public service of EDUCATION the RAND Corporation. ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT HEALTH AND HEALTH CARE Jump down to document6 INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS NATIONAL SECURITY The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit POPULATION AND AGING research organization providing PUBLIC SAFETY SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY objective analysis and effective SUBSTANCE ABUSE solutions that address the challenges TERRORISM AND facing the public and private sectors HOMELAND SECURITY TRANSPORTATION AND around the world. INFRASTRUCTURE Support RAND Purchase this document Browse Books & Publications Make a charitable contribution For More Information Visit RAND at www.rand.org Explore RAND Europe View document details Limited Electronic Distribution Rights This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law as indicated in a notice appearing later in this work. This electronic representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for non- commercial use only. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of our research documents. This product is part of the RAND Corporation monograph series. RAND monographs present major research findings that address the challenges facing the public and private sectors. All RAND mono- graphs undergo rigorous peer review to ensure high standards for research quality and objectivity. Options for Reducing Costs in the United Kingdom’s Future Aircraft Carrier (cvf) Programme John F. Schank | Roland Yardley Jessie Riposo | Harry Thie | Edward Keating Mark V. Arena | Hans Pung John Birkler | James R. Chiesa Prepared for the UK Ministry of Defence Approved for public release; distribution unlimited The research described in this report was sponsored by the United King- dom’s Ministry of Defence.
    [Show full text]
  • South-West Pacific: Amphibious Operations, 1942–45
    Issue 30, 2021 South-West Pacific: amphibious operations, 1942–45 By Dr. Karl James Dr. James is the Head of Military History, Australian War Memorial. Issue 30, 2021 © Commonwealth of Australia 2021 This work is copyright. You may download, display, print, and reproduce this material in unaltered form only (retaining this notice and imagery metadata) for your personal, non- commercial use, or use within your organisation. This material cannot be used to imply an endorsement from, or an association with, the Department of Defence. Apart from any use as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, all other rights are reserved. Issue 30, 2021 On morning of 1 July 1945 hundreds of warships and vessels from the United States Navy, the Royal Australian Navy (RAN), and the Royal Netherlands Navy lay off the coast of Balikpapan, an oil refining centre on Borneo’s south-east coast. An Australian soldier described the scene: Landing craft are in formation and swing towards the shore. The naval gunfire is gaining momentum, the noise from the guns and bombs exploding is terrific … waves of Liberators [heavy bombers] are pounding the area.1 This offensive to land the veteran 7th Australian Infantry Division at Balikpapan was the last of a series amphibious operations conducted by the Allies to liberate areas of Dutch and British territory on Borneo. It was the largest amphibious operation conducted by Australian forces during the Second World War. Within an hour some 16,500 troops were ashore and pushing inland, along with nearly 1,000 vehicles.2 Ultimately more than 33,000 personnel from the 7th Division and Allied forces were landed in the amphibious assault.3 Balikpapan is often cited as an example of the expertise achieved by Australian forces in amphibious operations during the war.4 It was a remarkable development.
    [Show full text]
  • Neptune's Might: Amphibious Forces in Normandy
    Neptune’s Might: Amphibious Forces in Normandy A Coast Guard LCVP landing craft crew prepares to take soldiers to Omaha Beach, June 6, 1944 Photo 26-G-2349. U.S. Coast Guard Photo, Courtesy Naval History and Heritage Command By Michael Kern Program Assistant, National History Day 1 “The point was that we on the scene knew for sure that we could substitute machines for lives and that if we could plague and smother the enemy with an unbearable weight of machinery in the months to follow, hundreds of thousands of our young men whose expectancy of survival would otherwise have been small could someday walk again through their own front doors.” - Ernie Pyle, Brave Men 2 What is National History Day? National History Day is a non-profit organization which promotes history education for secondary and elementary education students. The program has grown into a national program since its humble beginnings in Cleveland, Ohio in 1974. Today over half a million students participate in National History Day each year, encouraged by thousands of dedicated teachers. Students select a historical topic related to a theme chosen each year. They conduct primary and secondary research on their chosen topic through libraries, archives, museums, historic sites, and interviews. Students analyze and interpret their sources before presenting their work in original papers, exhibits, documentaries, websites, or performances. Students enter their projects in contests held each spring at the local, state, and national level where they are evaluated by professional historians and educators. The program culminates in the Kenneth E. Behring National Contest, held on the campus of the University of Maryland at College Park each June.
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. Navy Ships-Of-The-Line
    U.S. Navy – Ships-of-the-line A Frigate vs A Ship-of-the-Line: What’s the difference? FRIGATE: A vessel of war which is: 1) “ship” rigged, i.e. – with at least three masts (fore, main, & mizzen) & each mast carries the horizontal yards from which the principle sails are set; 2) this “ship-rigged vessel of war” is a FRIGATE because it has one covered, principle gun deck – USS Constitution is therefore a FRIGATE by class (illus. left) SHIP-OF-THE-LINE: A vessel of war which is: 1) “ship” rigged (see above); 2) this “ship-rigged vessel of war” is a SHIP-OF-THE-LINE because it has two or more covered gun decks – HMS Victory is therefore a SHIP-OF-THE-LINE by class (illus. right) HMS Victory (1765); 100+ guns; 820 officers Constitution preparing to battle Guerriere, & crew; oldest commissioned warship in the M.F. Corne, 1812 – PEM Coll. world, permanently dry docked in England Pg. 1 NMM Coll. An Act, 2 January 1813 – for the construction of the U.S. Navy’s first Ships-of-the-line USS Independence was the first ship-of-the-line launched for the USN from the Boston (Charlestown) Navy Yard on 22 June 1814: While rated for 74-guns, Independence was armed with 87 guns when she was launched. USS Washington was launched at the Portsmouth Navy Yard, 1 October 1814 USS Pennsylvania – largest sailing warship built for the USN USS Pennsylvania – rated for 136 guns on three covered gun decks + guns on her upper (spar) deck – the largest sailing warship ever built.
    [Show full text]
  • Naval Postgraduate School Thesis
    NAVAL POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA THESIS A STUDY OF THE RUSSIAN ACQUISITION OF THE FRENCH MISTRAL AMPHIBIOUS ASSAULT WARSHIPS by Patrick Thomas Baker June 2011 Thesis Advisor: Mikhail Tsypkin Second Reader: Douglas Porch Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved OMB No. 0704-0188 Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instruction, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302, and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (0704-0188) Washington DC 20503. 1. AGENCY USE ONLY (Leave blank) 2. REPORT DATE 3. REPORT TYPE AND DATES COVERED June 2011 Master‘s Thesis 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5. FUNDING NUMBERS A Study of the Russian Acquisition of the French Mistral Amphibious Assault Warships 6. AUTHOR(S) Patrick Thomas Baker 7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION Naval Postgraduate School REPORT NUMBER Monterey, CA 93943-5000 9. SPONSORING /MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSORING/MONITORING N/A AGENCY REPORT NUMBER 11. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES The views expressed in this thesis are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of the Department of Defense or the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • One More Time to See Your Old Friends!
    OFFICIAL NEWSLETTER OF THE USS LANDING CRAFT, INFANTRY, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, INC. • Established May 14–18, 1991, Norfolk, VA • issue 76 July 2011 One mOre time tO see yOur Old friends! don’t miss nashville! full details and registration forms in this issue “tHe elsie item” numBer 76, July 2011 Official publication of the USS LCI National Association, a non-profit veteran’s organization. Membership in the USS LCI National Association is open to any U. S. Navy or U.S. Coast Guard veteran who served aboard a Landing Craft Infantry, to anyone related to an LCI veteran, or to anyone just interested in the history of LCIs. Published quarterly by the USS LCI National Association. John P. Cummer, Editor. Any material for possible publication should be sent to the Editor, preferably by email ([email protected]) or by regular mail to 302 Pinewood Cottage Lane, Blythewood, SC, 29016. in this issue Lots of information and a good supply of stories which we are certain you will enjoy! To begin, it is most encouraging to see that long list of new members on page 9! Check it out to see if any of your old shipmates have found their way to the Association. Then, modern technology rises up! On page 10 we tell you about finding that this new social media Facebook has a site called “Remembering LCI Veterans” which came as quite a surprise. For obvious reasons, most of those making comments are sons, daughters, grandkids of LCI Vets and it’s really great! One entry is significant enough for us to reprint it, the story of Coast Guard LCI 89 at D-Day starts on page 12.
    [Show full text]
  • Marblehead in World War II, D-Day by Sean Casey
    Draft Text © Sean M. Casey, not to be used without author’s consent Chapter 19: Overlord June 5-6, 1944 in Europe Yankees of the 116th In late 1940 President Roosevelt had activated all of the National Guard units in the country and brouGht them into the United States Army. These units served as the foundation upon which the war-size army would be built. Many of the units – of various sizes and shapes -- had a linaGe, and could trace their oriGins to state militia units from earlier wars. As units were brouGht into the army, and as the army Grew and orGanized itself in 1941 and 1942, the once-National Guard units were auGmented by draftees to brinG the units to full strenGth. Thus did William Haley find himself a member of the “Essex Troop” of the former New Jersey National Guard; and Daniel Lord found himself training alongside midwesterners as a member of the 84th Infantry Division, made up from parts of the Indiana and Illinois National Guard. But perhaps the quirkiest example of this phenomena is how five Marbleheaders – Yankees all – found themselves assiGned to the 116th Infantry ReGiment1 of the 29th Infantry Division.2 The 116th had been part of the Virginia National Guard, and 82 years before had been Stonewall Jackson’s BriGade in the Confederate Army. The five were: Ralph Messervey, Bill Hawkes, the Boggis Brothers, Porter and Clifford, and their cousin, Willard Fader. Ralph Messervey was 27 when he was drafted in early 1942. Stocky, with red hair, and an outgoing personality, he was known as “Freckles” to his friends and family.
    [Show full text]