 |
| Imperial Japanese Navy Patrol Boat No. 102 ex-USS Stewart (DD-224) (Source) |
 |
| USS Stewart as part of the Asiatic Fleet (pre-WWII) (Source) |
There is a long tradition in naval warfare of taking captured enemy ships into one's own service after a battle, if, that is, the ship is in a good enough condition to be repaired and re-flagged. Often the original name is kept as it is considered, by some, to be bad luck to rename a ship.
For instance, in September of 1779, John Paul Jones, commanding Bonhomme Richard, and a squadron consisting of USS Alliance, Pallas, Vengeance, and Cerf, encountered a British convoy escorted by HMS Serapis and HM hired armed vessel Countess of Scarborough. In the ensuing fight Bonhomme Richard was reduced to a floating wreck, so after she struck her colors to Bonhomme Richard's much larger crew, Jones transferred to Serapis. Jones promptly renamed her USS Serapis.
 |
| Battle of Flamborough Head (Source) |
At any rate, it's not an unusual thing to happen in des affaires navales. What is odd though is to see that happen in later periods of warfare, like World War II.
In the early days of the Pacific War, the U.S. Navy was severely overmatched in the Western Pacific by the Imperial Japanese Navy. So much so that they banded together with surviving elements of the Royal Navy, the Dutch Navy, and the Royal Australian Navy to form the naval component of the American-British-Dutch-Australian Command, or ABDACOM. Which brings me to the ship juvat mentioned yesterday, USS Stewart (DD-224).
USS Stewart joined with an ABDACOM force to seek out and engage Japanese forces advancing along the coast of Sumatra. Over the course of a few days, the Japanese demonstrated their superiority in surface warfare, USS Stewart, engaged by multiple Japanese destroyers, was severely damaged but managed to limp to Surabaya.
While in floating drydock, USS Stewart came off of the keel blocks onto her side causing even more damage to the already battered warship. To add insult to injury she also took a bomb hit from a Japanese aircraft.
As the Japanese army was threatening the port, the Allies had to evacuate so they scuttled the floating drydock containing USS Stewart. However, they didn't really destroy the ship. The Japanese managed to raise her, repair and refit her (note how USS Stewart's two forward masts have been combined into a single "trunked" funnel, which is a classic feature in Japanese warships, the why of that is explained here), and rename her Patrol Boat No. 102. Not a very good name I thought.
In the months and years which followed, American pilots would report what appeared to be a Clemson-class destroyer deep in enemy waters. She was attacked by American aircraft at Mokpo, Korea, and eventually found her way back to Japan where American forces recovered her at the end of the war.
She was recommissioned into the U.S. Navy for a short while but was eventually expended as a target off the coast of San Francisco. A sad end for a proud ship.
 |
| USS Stewart sinking off California, May 25 1946. Note that she still bears the rising sun of Japan on her port side. (Source) |
Big shout out to juvat for finding this story!
Hmmm..... photo from October 29, 1945 during her recommissioning ceremony at Hiro Wan, Japan shows no Japanese flag on the portside midships superstructure. The second to last photo at the website about her career shows the Japanese flag portside midships superstructure, photo taken late 1945 or early 1946. Wonder how that came to be? Nice post Sarge with down-the-rabbit-hole links and an assist to juvat.
ReplyDeleteThanks Nylon12, I thought it was a good story. USS Stewart wasn't the only US ship captured, and used, by the Japanese.
DeleteMany of the Destroyers in the Gearing Class, just like the JPK (see Monday), found fates similar to the Stewart.
ReplyDeleteI mean they’re o longer afloat after years and years of service.
As the fleet was modernized they were decommissioned and sold to “allies” such as Turkey and Pakistan.
They were renamed, served a little longer, and eventually abused to the point of sinking.
Those still afloat are maintained by volunteers and donations from the public.
The folks a the JPK have been able to restore her by scavenging parts from other Gearing class destroyers that have been scrapped.
Speaking of scavenging parts...
DeleteWhen The Naviguesser was assigned to a Spru-Can out of Norfolk, he and a group of his shipmates went up to the Philadelphia Navy Yard to appropriate parts from a Spru-Can no longer in service. Apparently the folks in Philly weren't happy about that, but those parts kept USS Briscoe (DDG-977) going for another year or two.
You do what you gotta do.
My shipmates on the Battleship Iowa make a pilgrimage up to the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard in Bremerton every year to bring back goodies used to help restore the Iowa. The ships we're allowed to pick over are those going to scrap, a SINKEX, or being turned over to an allied Navy for use.
DeleteSo far, we've managed to obtain/procure/scrounge quite a bit of the gear that had been removed when the Iowa was in storage up in Suisun Bay.
That's pretty cool.
DeleteHey AFSarge;
ReplyDeleteExcellent post and that was one of the old "4 stackers" that the U.S. Navy had a bunch of after WWI and gave a few to Great Britain including the one that did the deed on the tirpitz docks. A quibble if you don't mind...I was reading this... "Just why would France build a ship named Northumberland? Said area borders Scotland in northern Britain. Fittingly she was captured by the Royal Navy and joined said navy, keeping her original name." Doesnt that mean captured by the French Navy? It kinda caught my attention.
Confusing innit? According to my sources, the French ship Northumberland was of the Annibal class:
DeleteThe Annibal class was a class of two 74-gun ships of the French Navy. The type was one of the first achievements of Jacques-Noël Sané. His first design - on 24 November 1777 - was for a ship of 166 pieds (176 feet 11 inches) length, but he produced an amended design on 10 January 1779 for the Annibal, and a further amended design on 3 March 1780 for her near-sister Northumberland. Both ships were captured during the Third Battle of Ushant ("Bataille du 13 prairial an II" or "Glorious First of June") on 1 June 1794 off Ushant, and were added to but never commissioned into the British Navy. (Source)
There have also been eight ships built as HMS Northumberland in the Royal Navy.
Well, that's where history gets... confusing.
DeleteFor those that remember, Scotsmen are actually Irish, who left Ireland to raid eastwardly. Similarly, Irish are actually Scots who raided westwardly, including the most famous name of Ulster, who is, yes, originally Scottish (tales says the Scots made a pact that the first to Ireland would be high king. Ulster was almost first, but someone was marginally faster, so he cut his hand off and threw it ahead, thus becoming the 'first' in Ireland, thus the 'Bloody Hand of Ulster.' Silly people...)
So what does this have to do about France?
Well, back in 1066, a bunch of Frenchified Norsemen conquered England, then Scotland, Wales and Ireland. Then later English kings went to re-acquire 'their' French lands (think Henry II, Henry V). In the same way, many French kings and people saw that England, which spoke court French basically until after the Tudors, and especially Scotland, which had many dynastic ties directly to French nobles and royalty, was potentially part of France.
Remember Richard III? He lost to a French army being led by a Tudor. Mary, Queen of Scots? Supported by the French. Bonnie (but stupid) Prince Charlie? Supported by the French. Oh, yeah, Charles II, who escaped from the English Civil War and hid out in France until his restoration, was supported by... the French.
So, of course, when England ran out of English monarchs, they went to Germany to some Sax-Coburn-Gotha people for their next monarch...
So... France becomes England and Scotland. England tries to become France and loses. France retaliates by supporting pretenders to England with French troops and supplies. England (the monarchy) dies off and becomes Germany. Then in WWI the German monarch of England renames the family to Windsor.
Confused?
Well, this is how you get a new-built French Royal ship named Northumberland. Simple, isn't it? France still wanted Scotland to be France, and many lowland Scottish nobles considered they had more ties to France than England, so... well... yeah...
Don't even get me started on the dynastic ins-and-outs of the Hapsburgs...
Not all Scots are Irish, not all Irish are Scots. Though all are Gaels.
DeleteNorthumberland ain't Scotland.
Don't forget the Picts! Also Gaelic, but different.
DeleteIndeed, the blue people.
DeleteHey AFSarge;
DeleteI appreciate the clarification, I honestly thought you had goofed, because your post have always been historically accurate. I know I do a lot of research on mine and I still occasionally screw up and to my knowledge you never have.
Oh I have MrG, you just didn't notice. 😉
DeleteNice post. I had no idea that the Japanese ever captured and recommissioned one of our ships.
ReplyDeleteAs usual I learned something new from your post!
Thanks Russ!
DeleteThe Japanese did much like the Germans, reissued all the weapons, ships, vehicles, ammo, food, supplies they could find. First to rear units to free up Japanese-Japanese equipment to the front line, and then in desperation.
DeleteWhich, well considering our urine-poor preparations for WWI we did the same with the M1917, a gun originally built in the US for the Brits in .303 caliber and then re-built for America in .30-06. More M1917s were issued than Springfields.
Really, until the Spanish-American War, captured weapons were always re-issued in American forces, maybe not to front-line troops but to rear-guard. And, heck, a cannon is a cannon, well, until the cartridge-firing cannon came out.
And there were, in WWII, some Americans who used captured German 81mm mortars because they (German) and us (American) were basically French Brandt mortars, which the Germans also issued... Gaaahhhhhh!!!!!
The re-issuing of enemy equipment wasn't quite as prevalent as you think. Recognition problems always occur, an MP-40 always sounds like an MP-40 and a PPSh sounds like a PPSh, using enemy equipment near the front lines is a good way to get killed. You can't change the silhouette of a tank.
DeleteRear echelon units did get issued enemy equipment, think French tanks. Also cannon were likely to be re-used, provided you had a supply of ammo.
Prior to the Spanish-American War, what "enemy" equipment was being re-issued?
Cannon, muskets, musket-rifles, all that black-powder stuff. Especially when 'issued' equipment quality relied on the pockets of the sponsors or officers of the units.
DeleteWay back when.
You remember...
Back when you were 10 or so...
Civil War was especially guilty of appriopriating captured equipment. Spme rebel blockade runners (not Tantive IV...) ended up as hunters of own kind in USN service, and any rifle captured by CSA was promptly reissued due to gun hunger. CSS Virginia was peak of captured and reused, though, with whole new life put into hull by armor.
DeleteAt the very least, some Soviet and Free French units used captured Panthers (as did Polish resistance in 1944 Warsaw uprising). French even continued use well into late 1940s after the war until their tank industry restarted with AMX-13.
DeleteGermans made wide use of soviet captured 76mm antitank guns, often pairing them up with chassis of captured or obsolete tank, Marder being general name for such hybrid tank destroyers.
Beans - Good point, that stuff was pretty standard.
DeletePaweł the 1st - Kind of goes to Beans' point, back in the sail/black powder days one country's stuff didn't vary that much from another's. The CSA would use anything functional they could get their hands on, logistics was their biggest problem throughout the war. Pretty much why they lost.
DeletePaweł the 2nd - Using captured Panthers in a very small scale, the maintenance on those is a mother bear!
DeleteUsing individual cannon works as long as you capture a lot of them and their ammo. Which the Germans did.
Regrettably the NORKS captured a lot of our artillery and tons of ammo in the early months of the war and used them against UN forces for a long time. On the subject of battlefield weapons I shared a dorm floor with a former Marine who advised us ROTC guys to never ever pick up an enemy machine gun and use it when you run out of bullets for your own when battling at night. He opened fire with an AK47 he picked up when he ran out and all his buds instantly started shooting at the source of the green tracers in close even though his were all aimed at the enemy positions. He said it was a basic no no.
DeleteGreat post Sarge!
Thanks Cap'n!
DeleteFriendly fire isn't.
Well, the Germans captured a lot of those Russkie guns, and liked them so much they dedicated purpose-built munitions lines to build rounds for the guns.
DeleteOther places, like in France and Belgium, they (the Germans) captured whole armament complexes. Thus, Browning Hi-Powers being still manufactured, except for the Nazis, along with all the captured Hi-Powers.
Czech tanks especially were loved by Germans, due to being technically easier to maintain, faster, as well or better armed than Germany's own tanks at the time. Plus the -38t chassis made for some fine SP guns.
Different situation when the country who's stuff you're using is already out of the fight, (Czechs and French). Cannon are (again) different, the Soviet 76 mm was a very good gun.
DeleteI didn't know the story of the Stewart.
ReplyDeleteI am thinking that it would be fairly easy to put a captured wooden hull, sail powered warship back into commission.
I am also thinking that putting a captured steam powered, steel hull warship back into commission would be a nightmare.
Dealing with parts, supplies, armaments and ammunition, signage, and even the simple (by today's standards) electronics would present huge challenges. And I don't know if the Japanese Navy of the '40s used the metric system or the english system.
On the subject of scavenging parts, the folks at Battleship Cove were very good to us when I was a crewmember on the Willy R.
The water end piston from one of the Joe Kennedy's fire and bilge pumps replaced the failed piston in the forward engineroom and after she was transferred to the ROK Navy, the Willy R. served in the ROK Navy as the "Kang Won (DD-922) from 1978 until 1999.
The ship was then a museum ship until she was scrapped in 2016.
The water end piston from the Joe Kennedy went on quite the travel.
Very good post.
Good point on getting a wooden, sail driven ship back into commission versus a modern ship. Apparently when USS Stewart was taken back into US service the state of her maintenance was pretty poor, she had to be towed most of the way to San Francisco.
DeleteGood to know that part of the Joey P lived on in the ROK Navy!
The ROK crew came on board sometime before the transfer, and I got a chance to work with the ROK crew that was taking over "my" engineroom.
DeleteThey were all really good people.
I do remember trying to explain to non english speakers, "You cannot open the bulkhead stop valve to the bilge suction piping going to the after fire room because the pipe is so rotted that every attempt to put a soft patch on it has failed."
We achieved a degree of understanding after some time.
Even though the nationality wasn't correct, I may have murmured, "Main stem stop walve" once or twice during the turnover period.
A longer discussion of the transfer process would need to involve adult beverages.
My dad commented positively as to the ability and wish of the ROKs to 'grok' US military hardware. Good people whom history has shafted far too often. I am glad that they are now producing some of the worlds premier mil-hardware.
DeleteJohn - Yes, I can see a language barrier there, Though recently many Koreans learn English in school, and actually have to practice speaking it.
DeleteBeans - South Koreans tend to be very well educated, their parents don't give them much of a choice. They also tend to be very motivated.
DeleteThe Royal Navy was quite fond of its captured French ships. They were generally better ships than what the British built.
DeleteIndeed they were, and the British knew how to use them!
DeleteSuppose the United States is in possession of four destroyers that another country had built in a shipyard within the US, and the country that owns the four destroyers then becomes an enemy of the US before the four ships are delivered?
ReplyDeleteThat would be the four "Khomeini Class" destroyers, sometimes known as the, "Ayatollah Class."
http://destroyerhistory.org/coldwar/kiddclass/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kidd-class_destroyer
True, but weren't we building them for the Iranians? They simply paid for them. IIRC.
DeleteYep, and I'm guessing we didn't give Iran a refund.
Delete"Possession is 9/10's of the law".
DeleteJohn - Nope.
Deletejuvat - Aye!
DeleteMy son had nothing but good things to say about the KATUSA he worked with in Korea. Their feats of strength were incredible, if half of what he says is true.
ReplyDeleteNeat post about the USS Stewart. I worked with a bosun's mate from the Blue Ridge. He said the DD sailors would have to go in and dog the doors with water at the rail while his ship was barely rolling. I imagine life on a destroyer had it's ups and downs....
The Wickes and Clemson class destroyers were particularly wet.
DeleteI spent a considerable amount on Blue Ridge while assigned to USCINCPAC. I've also sailed on a few cruise ships that pitched and rolled a lot more than her. Wouldn't want to be on board a DD or smaller ship.
DeleteYes, The Naviguesser was in a big storm down in the Caribbean aboard "his" destroyer, things got pretty dicey with the ship rolling, pitching, and yawing like Neptune himself wanted to drag her under. He was on the bridge and was having a grand old time, until the first sailor began to barf. Most of the bridge crew followed suit, my boy managed to keep his dinner down but he remembers the smell very well.
DeleteGood times.