My Dad's ship-LST-118

[strangms]

Here is a picture of the ship that my dad served on during WW2. LST-118.

He joined when he turned 17, so he didn't make it aboard the ship till around June of 45.

They made 2 landing in Japan and then they were sent to China and French Indo China till sometime in 46.

 

Here is a picture of the ship underway off the coast of Japan in November 1945.

 

I have the ship history and the deck logs from the time he was aboard and some pictures.

 

strangms

 

 

[m1ashooter]

I love the beard.

[MWalsh]

Is that bridging equipment hanging off the sides, or something else? Aft?

 

MW

[strangms]

MW, I not sure.

The picture is only like 5X7 that a lady who Father was also on the ship sent me.

 

Here is what the Action reports says,

 

1 November 1945.

Landing elements Three Hundred Sixty-Seventh Field Artillery Battalion at Wakayama,

Southern Hinshu, for occupation of Osaka-Kobe, Japan.

They also unloaded gasoline, ammunition, rations and other cargo.

Transportation of two warping tugs, warping tug gear and Seabee personnel and disembarking them at Wakayama.

 

 

7 November 1945.

 

Landing elements Fifth Fighter Command, USA, at Sasebo, Western Kyushu, Japan.

Transportation of elements of the Fifth Fighter Command consisting of Detachment 116, 780th AAF Base Unit (150th AACSSquadron) and disembarking them at Sasebo, Kyushu, Japan.

 

Transportation of vehicles and other cargo for use by Occupation forces.

 

 

strangms

[keithhufnagel]

My Dad also enlisted at 17 and got to the Pacific in late 44'. He served on LST-587 as gunnersmate (on 20MM) He left me a ton of info on his combat travels through Peleliu, the Phillipines, Iwo, and Okinawa. He also brought back the ships warship ONI ID books that started me on a lifetime journey of the study of the US Navy and the Pacific War. BTW those are portable sponsons or pontoons lashed to the side. They are for shallow water landings were the LST can't get all the way up to the beach. I would be interested to what camouflage pattern your Dad's ship wore. Did he ever talk about it?

[kfields]

Those are wonderful pictures!

 

Thanks for sharing them with us!

 

Kim

[strangms]

Thanks for the kind comments guys,

 

keithhufnagel, I'm not sure what camouflage pattern the ship wore, as this is the only picture I have of the ship.

 

He never talked much about his time in the Navy, and I was not smart enough to ask.

 

He did talk about the typhoon in 1945 and how bad it was.

 

Here is another picture with my Dad on the right.

 

 

strangms

[sigsaye]

The things lashed to the side of the ship are called "Causways". And they are used as has been stated to create a sort of bridge from the front of the ship to the beach when beaching conditions warrent. They may also be lashed along side to act as a sort of pier. As far as what "Cammoflage pattern" the ship is painted in, you probebly could not find any one other that could actually tell you. The Bo's'un would be told by the 1st LT, who was told by the XO, who read it in an Admin Message, to paint the ship in "Measure XX". The Bo's;un would go check the pub to see what paint he needed, making a list and never again refering to "Measure XX" again. He would get together with the Chief Boatswains Mate or BM1 and lay it out. The CBM & BM1 would get together with the other top side Chiefs and PO1s so every body knwe what their responsibilities for painting what where (every on who has exterior spaces paints) and then they would get it done, again, never refering to a "Measure XX". I know the ships were painted in some "Measure", and I painted them for 26 years, never knowing what that measure was, just adjusting to the changing scheams, whic changed at least twice that I remember.

 

Steve Hesson

[keithhufnagel]

Hello SIGSAYE, I agree the patterns were obscure. Even when I presented my Dad with the latest Camouflage books and pictures on US Landing craft WWII he said 'no,no it was more of a patch work pattern of varios shades of green', nothing like those. I have however read the Naval 'official' Camouflage directives for amphibious landing craft, and it was equally vague ship to ship. In War things move faster than paperwork.

[sigsaye]

Hello SIGSAYE, I agree the patterns were obscure. Even when I presented my Dad with the latest Camouflage books and pictures on US Landing craft WWII he said 'no,no it was more of a patch work pattern of varios shades of green', nothing like those. I have however read the Naval 'official' Camouflage directives for amphibious landing craft, and it was equally vague ship to ship. In War things move faster than paperwork.

Things like that have always been vague in the Navy. One reason is that even though ships may be of the same class, even built in the same yard next to each other, eventually, they develope variations. Some ships pick up alterations sooner, some get reconfiguered for specific missions, some get damage repaired . This means that you really can't set a specific pattern. Additionally, there may only be so much paint to go around, so every body gets a share and do the best you can with the vague instructions you have. I was taught by guys who learned their trade durring WW 2 that regulations, instructions and policies were just loose guide lines to fall back on if you got totally confused and lost.

 

Steve Hesson