Re: HISTORY vs. RAY HADDAD, the Lying, Malicious VALOR THIEF: Part II - USS Ranger History: "We were *where* in 1974?"


"Ray Haddad" <rhaddad@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:a66me31k5e3ug7hlbc02misvgpvvg8f8eo@xxxxxxxxxx
On Fri, 14 Sep 2007 23:41:17 +0100, I said, "Pick a card, any card"
and "John Ashby" <j.v.ashby@xxxxxxxx> instead replied:

John,

At your request, I am adding comments for you. Basically, Sylvia is
yet again pretending to have knowledge she doesn't. Also, I
respectfully request that you leave the magic groups from any
further replies. They're getting sick and tired of Sylvia's
invasions. Not funny to them.


Apologies for not trimming the newsgroups line. I shall do better with the
contents of the post.

"Sylvia" <sylvia@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:sylvia-1FA03B.15461114092007@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

See, Haddad, as I mentioned a couple of times before, the Western
Pacific Ocean encompasses a huge area, and it turns out that I was
correct that the USS Ranger *was* busy movin' about it during that time
period, not parked in one spot at war as you and yer enablers claimed:

"USS RANGER Command History Report for 1974: Port Visits "

There is absolutely no reply to this quoted search term in Google.
Note that Sylvia gives no cite for this.

She provided a link which I followed to verify her quotation. Her link was:

[1] Carrier Port Visits during Deployments to Vietnam, 1964-1975
Naval Aviation History Office, Naval Warfare Division
http://www.history.navy.mil/branches/org4-6.htm

The document from which she quotes is reached directly from that page as
http://www.history.navy.mil/a-record/vietnam/car-dpv.pdf.

Probably because that was a
scheduled list of port calls rather than an accomplished list. When
something comes up. the first thing to change is a port call.


"Deployment Dates: 7 May 1974- 18 October 1974
"[...]
In-port, Subic Bay 23 Jul 1974 - 5 Aug 1974

If these dates are correct, we were underway from 5 August to 12
August.

In-port, Hong Kong 12 Aug 1974 - 18 Aug 1974

I'm fairly certain that this one was actually cancelled. I need to
find out it this schedule is a historical one or what was scheduled.


The document gives as its source for the dates: Ranger Command History for
1974. One would hope that is an historical record of what actually happened.


Distance from Manila to Hanoi: 1,751 kilometers/1,088 miles
Distance from Hong Kong to Hanoi: 865 kilometers/538 miles


[ John Ashby to pointedly ignore what Miz Sylvia actually wrote
and back up Sal towse's cowardly little straw man weasel lie aimed at
Miz Sylvia--while expounding his self-perceived fairness and logic. ]

This document does prima facie contradict the events stated by and
insisted
upon by Ray. One has to ask what the operational range for bombing raids
from a carrier would be, and the steaming speed of a carrier to reach a
point from which such raids could be launched - I don't know the answers,
but my guess based on carrier deployments in recent conflicts would have
been that there would not be sufficient time in the one or two week
sea-time
sessions. However looking at the distance from Pearl Harbor to Manila that
was covered in two weeks in May/June, I could be underestimating. Why keep
popping back into port? Was it so they could drop down the shops? - 2000
loaves of bread, 6000 pints of milk and 8000 HE bombs please, Mr
Arkwright.
Oh, and before you start accusing me of accusing you of lying, that's
flippancy.

As I say, prima facie it looks bad. Any comments, Ray?

The operational range of any raid from a carrier is around 600 miles
even today. Full fighter support (less fuel efficient because they
are "go faster" planes) and the range of the other support airplanes
limits the ability to sting. One way missions, where the planes land
and refuel at a friendly base for later return are much greater in
range.

Sounds reasonable.


Popping back into port was indeed to allow for resupply. Since
things at that time weren't as planned as during the actual
prosecution of the Vietnam War, supplies were not kept on board.
Feeding 5000+ men required lots of fresh food. Gone were the days of
chipped beef and powdered eggs. We did have a requirement to stop
and resupply often at that time.


No bumboats? Perhaps the next design of carrier should have an angled
allotment.

john


.

Relevant Pages