Jump to content

13 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

485
[WOLFB]
Members
2,597 posts
4,973 battles

Not really an carrier but it is an interesting story. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
253
[REVY]
Members
941 posts
7,312 battles
12 minutes ago, Spooooooooooooooooooooon said:

ww2 escort carrier repurposed obviously, but it's one of those fascinating stories that have gone under the radar

USS_Card_(CVE-11).jpg

those interesting stories that we never heard of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,303
[PVE]
[PVE]
Members
4,112 posts
8,676 battles

Yeah this is one of those things that the USN does not like to talk about, as I found out when I brought this up in Damage Control Training.:Smile_facepalm:

Let just say the Sr. Chief that was giving the lessons used a few not safe for the Forum words.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
365
[HELLS]
Members
1,692 posts
15,309 battles
18 minutes ago, Chaos_EN2 said:

Yeah this is one of those things that the USN does not like to talk about, as I found out when I brought this up in Damage Control Training.:Smile_facepalm:

Let just say the Sr. Chief that was giving the lessons used a few not safe for the Forum words.

The USN has refused to face reality since 1975. Its' a cultural thing, not admitting mistakes, and it is seen in almost all militaries regardless of nation. I never hesitated to call out my RSM or CSM as a soldier if they screwed up. They didn't like it either. TS!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
821 posts
3,891 battles
2 hours ago, Chaos_EN2 said:

Yeah this is one of those things that the USN does not like to talk about, as I found out when I brought this up in Damage Control Training.:Smile_facepalm:

Let just say the Sr. Chief that was giving the lessons used a few not safe for the Forum words.

Hmm, I would  not know why. USNS Card being a former escort carrier based on a merchant ship, and then reconfigured to an aircraft transport cargo ship., would still have the large space/void of a CV (the hanger deck) turned in to one or several large holds, creating a  extreme catastrophic flooding potential as well as having not much in the way of sub- compartmentalization  to keep/maintain enough reserve buoyancy given much damage. Compounded by her not having the huge crew of Navy sailors that even a small  escort carrier had, rather the small crew of merchant marine sailors and attached civilian mechanics typical to a Sea-lift command vessel. This smaller civilian crew also surely  had far less watch stand numbers and  ship security (marines/port guards).

As said , I don't know why someone on the inside would be reticent to discus the Card's "sinking". As I understand it the small civilian crew and some port agents quickly reacted and minimized the flooding and damage , even though the 2 bombs were exploded with no warning in the dead of night at anchor.  In the Card's sinking, the damage control /crew reaction was excellent . Port security seems to have been lacking. Not knocking the success of the VC attack, but in the aspect of the "sinking" seems sorta overwrought as her being a "carrier", when she was a USNS AKV(civ cargo ship) rather than a USS-CVE(commissioned carrier/warship). Granted her bow did touch bottom, but her  main deck and looks like even hanger deck stayed  dry.

I guess if she was a "carrier" then might as well say she "grounded at anchor " rather than "sunk" LOL . Here are pictures , (google search) might find better in Nav Doc (?) I forget the name . 

"sunk" and "not sunk"

 

 

This-photograph-showed-the-USNS-Card-in-Saigon.jpg

download uss card.jpg

Edited by Strachwitz666

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,303
[PVE]
[PVE]
Members
4,112 posts
8,676 battles
15 minutes ago, Strachwitz666 said:

As said , I don't know why someone on the inside would be reticent to discus the Card's "sinking".

I think it was not so much the "sinking" as in was the fact of a EN Fireman Apprentice questioning a Sr. Chief and the ENFA thinking it was debate club and not the USN's DC Training. If you get my drift?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
282
[JFSOC]
Members
914 posts
2,624 battles

The Card didn't "sink."  The damage done in this attack resulted in a 12 x 5 foot hole in the ship's hull and a 7 degree list.  Flooding was contained and progressive flooding stopped fairly rapidly by the ship's crew.  The crew's response was prompt and very effective.  While the ship settled on the bottom of the harbor, it was hardly "sunk."  The damage was insufficient to cause the ship to actually lose all buoyancy and sink.  So, saying the Card "sank" is an exaggeration.

Here's a photo taken shortly after the attack.  You can see the list.

s4.reutersmedia.net.jpg

 

Salvage consisted of installing a cofferdam on the outside of the ship over the hole.  Once this was installed, pumping of the flooded spaces commenced.  The ship was towed to Subic Bay for drydocking and repair.  Under tow, some leakage of the cofferdam occurred due to the hull working in a seaway so continuous pumping was required to minimize the amount of water in the effected spaces.

So, the Chief is right again (EMC (SW) ret.) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
821 posts
3,891 battles
On 6/20/2018 at 10:43 AM, Chaos_EN2 said:

I think it was not so much the "sinking" as in was the fact of a EN Fireman Apprentice questioning a Sr. Chief and the ENFA thinking it was debate club and not the USN's DC Training. If you get my drift?

Sure I do. You got to have iron underwear(thick skin), that way , [edited]-chewings don't matter. Actually I found most of them a learning experience if wrong, , and  entertaining if I was right (or even wrong sometimes).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×