If Yer a ‘Nam Vet… And/Or Know What GQ means?
Yeah, I know… two posts in one day… If Jonn don’t delete this you just might just learn something.
An online pal of mine (TGYC) is mentioned is this story. Simply put… I was unaware of this event until he mentioned it.
“Hannah Ackerman, a Cedar Falls High School graduate now attending Hawkeye Community College in Waterloo, has won history awards for her presentations on two naval disasters. One is the loss of Waterloo’s five Sullivan brothers during World War II. The other is the “missing 74” of the destroyer USS Frank E. Evans during the Vietnam War.”
During that time frame I was doing other stuff, like Woodstock, etc.
This has merit. The lost were deployed.
Category: Geezer Alert!
When I first say Cedar Falls mentioned I thought it might be connected to the operation of the same name to clear the Iron Triangle. That was my first excursion into the brush. Interestingly enough, rubber was still being cultivated and collected at the beginning of the operation. Not so much at the end when the engineers and Rome plows had had their way.
Don’t recall ever hearing about the Evans, but it sounds similar to Operation Tiger just before D Day in WWII.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exercise_Tiger
I’m not sure if the comparison to the unspecified marine action is for the Mayaguez or not, but if so there’s really no comparison since the Mayaguez was a combat operation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mayaguez_incident
I had heard of the USS Evans disaster. It is a classic example of how not to handle a ship.
The Evans was supposed to take a plane guard station on HMS Melbourne. The Evans cut across the bow of the Melbourne due to an error caused by a Junior Officer who was not qualified for the watch station he was standing.
While I do agree that some recognition of the loss of life is deserved I do not agree that those names should be added to the wall.
This was an avoidable accident caused by human error that did not occur in a combat zone.
http://www.historynet.com/uss-frank-e-evans-disaster-in-the-south-china-sea.htm
Great write up on the collision
E4U: I’ll admit to some weak ambivalence, BUT they went down with their ship. Going and coming from a combat zone. The bell that rings for me is all the others that have died since. Somewhere I kinda hope that the relatively loose connections might be acknowledged. This episode is less arguable than some. Like AO?
See edit below in light of further information
It will be interesting to see how this unfolds. I hope this young lady doesn’t get too discouraged if her request is denied.
It’s a simple fact of life that members of the military die in accidents and incidents other than combat. Any Memorial to combat casualties really should be limited to combat casualties. The Evens wasn’t in combat at the time these sailors died. While tragic, and apparently avoidable, so were many other deaths of military members that year and all other years.
Partial Joint USN/RAN Report of Investigation (conclusions) on the Evans/Melbourne collision can be found here:
http://www.jag.navy.mil/library/investigations/HMAS%20EVANS%20AND%20MELBOURNE%203%20JUN%2069.pdf
Damn dude: I’ll admit to some ignorance (kinda already did so), BUT I had not seen this sort of detail. Gonna be reading/re-reading yer link. I simply have no/zero/nil idea to frame the issue, other than my sadness over the loss, and/or fitting that into (for me) broader issues? Oh yeah, thanks.
You’re welcome, amigo. Simply a lucky find on my part, and thought the USN vets here might want to see it.
I was reading that when you posted it.
There were some incredibly heroic actions after the collision.
A seaman apprentice got a door open in the forward section that saved many lives.
Guys on the melborne jumped in the water to help rescue.
But after reading the whole report the take away is that two junior Officers failed in there duties.
The COs of the Evans had a standing order that he was to be awoken for any change of station (The collision was at 0330) He was not.
His Order even included Call me if you even have the thought of should I call the CO.
The collision was over 250 miles from the closest point to the coast of Vietnam. They ships were in no way involved in any war activities.
Training losses happen every day. It is an unfortunate reality of the military. I in no way am implying that the loss of life is no less tragic than a war time loss. however to include those names on the Wall would mandate the inclusion of every man or woman that lost their lives in any branch of the military any place on earth during the Vietnam war.
I would love to be able to Edit my above comment now.
After spending a couple of hours reading the report and then writing the above I did a little more research.
The Evans had been in the declared coastal waters before becoming part of the Joint Training exercise. She would have returned to that same operations area had the training exercise concluded.
Names of others killed in training exercises in Vietnam are listed on the wall. As a point the very first name listed is a death that is the direct result of a training exercise.
President Reagan set a precedent when he ordered the inclusion of names of service personnel who were killed in a R&R Plane crash in Hong Kong.
The Original Criteria for inclusion on the wall was not battle related deaths. It was all deaths. The Battle injury criteria is for names added for those who die as result of battle injuries later in life. It was not intended to excluded deaths during the war itself.
After doing this further research I agree that the names of the lost crew should be added to the wall.
http://thewall-usa.com/information.asp
The sea is indeed a harsh mistress.
Oh, yes.
I love her, but man, she can be a real bitch.
Here is CDR Salamander’s write-up on the disaster from a couple of years with the training videos the Navy created in the ’70s: http://cdrsalamander.blogspot.com/2012/02/retro-wednesday-i-relieve-you-sir.html
Yeah, that movie (before they were videos…) scared the snot out of me when I was in SWO training.
I’m pretty sure that was the desired effect.
Thank you, sir, for posting this. I have been as busy as a one armed paper hanger lately and just now got here. The names do belong on The Wall as they were combat veterans, training to advance the cause in Vietnam, and would have been back on the gun-line, as the rest of the division was after the exercise. Their names deserve to be there as much as others who never saw combat but died from medical issues or even suicide. Yes, there were mistakes made on both sides that nigh. The most egregious, in my opinion, is that the carrier TURNED LEFT, t-boning the Evans. She was recovering from her mistake and would have been missed… just as the USS Larson was missed by the carrier by 10 feet three nights before. Those 74 men need their war time recognition. Again, thank you Zero P.
There are more than 10,000 names on The Wall of servicemen who died from heart attacks, falls, traffic accidents, murder, suicide, disease, snake bites, and 50 more reasons unrelated directly to the war.
So the dead of the Evens are denied the honor because they were on the water?
Put ’em on the damned wall.
Fair Winds and Following Seas, Shipmates…..
My CO in USS DAVIS had been the last Ops Officer in FRANK EVANS. In DAVIS, we were very conscious of the large and the small–large, as in operating near carriers; small, as in the toggle pins that restrain the bottoms of shipboard ladders.