History of the Tolling of the Boats?
Printed From: Rontini Submarine BBS
Category: General
Forum Name: U.S. Submarine Related
Forum Description: Submarine Related Topics
URL: http://RontiniSubmarineBBS.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=2222
Printed Date: 22 Oct 2024 at 12:34pm
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.04 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: History of the Tolling of the Boats?
Posted By: crystal
Subject: History of the Tolling of the Boats?
Date Posted: 05 Apr 2016 at 7:00am
The PAO of Gru 9 out here has contacted us to "participate" in their Tolling ceremony on May 26th. My question is: did this ceremony start with the WWII vets, USSVI or the active duty Navy??? It's almost like the ceremony has been hijacked by the wrong crowd albeit with the best of intentions... ------------- SS-349, SSN-580, SSBN-640, CVA-59, SS-410, LPSS-315, CVA-61, Subase Pearl Harbor |
Replies:
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 06 Apr 2016 at 5:16am
|
From the USSVI Memorials and Ceremonies Manual: The "Tolling the Boats" ceremony was originally established by the U.S. Submarine Veterans of World War II. It is a unique and time-honored memorial service and is in keeping with the finest traditions of the Navy. Custom has established that this ceremony be formal, and it honors the memory of those submariners who lost their lives n the line of duty, and especially those who perished during World War II. In the heart of the ceremony the names of each of the U.S. submarines lost, along with the fate of its crew, are read aloud as a bell is tolled for each in turn. |
Posted By: crystal
Date Posted: 22 Apr 2016 at 7:06pm
|
Thanks Tom. I knew all this so I guess I was just looking for confirmation. It seems ComSubLant and probably ComSubPac have their own script for which boats count and it differs from what we use as to criteria. USSVI now counts 65 boats for before, during and after WWII. Our WWII shipmates counted at 52 for those boats that were lost DURING WWII. There are just two criteria to meet the requirements of being counted... Number one, the BOAT had to have been lost even if there was NO loss of life involved. Number two, the boat had to have been IN COMMISSION at the time of it's loss. Anything that doesn't meet these two requirements, means the boat (crew etc.) should not be listed... ------------- SS-349, SSN-580, SSBN-640, CVA-59, SS-410, LPSS-315, CVA-61, Subase Pearl Harbor |
Posted By: stoops
Date Posted: 26 Apr 2016 at 3:14pm
|
Chief, that picture you took of the sailor in whites is a classic. Thanks. |
Posted By: crystal
Date Posted: 29 Apr 2016 at 1:07pm
|
Thanks Dave! Right time, right place... Dedication ceremonies of Deterrent Park, Bangor, WA - the Woodrow Wilson sail and the most recently qualified gent to ring the bell... ------------- SS-349, SSN-580, SSBN-640, CVA-59, SS-410, LPSS-315, CVA-61, Subase Pearl Harbor |
Posted By: Rontini
Date Posted: 02 May 2016 at 10:15am
|
Not to start a controversy but Tolling of the Boats without loss of life indicates the "Boats" have a soul. I have never likes the ceremony for that reason. I have a large case full of small wooden boats and a votive candle is lit behind each one. As the boat number is read, the candle is extinguished and the bell tolled. Very moving except (IMHO) for the boats without any loss of life. ------------- Every increase in government authority is a decrease of the liberty of each citizen. |
Posted By: SaltiDawg
Date Posted: 02 May 2016 at 10:21am
|
I deleted post. |
Posted By: Dr. Stan
Date Posted: 02 May 2016 at 11:13am
Dave's right. That's a great photo . . .  ------------- It has been my experience that folks who have no vices have very few virtues.~Abe Lincoln SS-393, SSBN-610(B), SSBN-624(G), SSN-591 USSVI Life Member; Holland Club; Plank Owner, Smoky Mtn. Base |
Posted By: Rontini
Date Posted: 02 May 2016 at 5:15pm
|
IMHO, any commissioned U.S. submarine with lost of life would be included. ------------- Every increase in government authority is a decrease of the liberty of each citizen. |
Posted By: SaltiDawg
Date Posted: 02 May 2016 at 7:03pm
|
I deleted post. |
Posted By: Rontini
Date Posted: 03 May 2016 at 5:37pm
|
The T-1 and NR-1 would be included!!! Where are you coming from? The 593 and 589 were not in combat. What has combat have to do with it? ------------- Every increase in government authority is a decrease of the liberty of each citizen. |
Posted By: SaltiDawg
Date Posted: 04 May 2016 at 7:29am
|
I deleted post. |
Posted By: oldsubs
Date Posted: 04 May 2016 at 7:32am
|
A number of years ago I wrote an essay in which I expanded the list of 52 submarines 'lost' during the period our involvement in WWII, 7 December 1945 to 2 September 1945, into our entire history starting in 1900. I used the same criteria used by USSVI WWII in devising their list. This essay was an exercise at a time where there was heated and vocal argument by some members of USSVI WWII that inclusion of Thresher and Scorpion would somehow 'dilute' the memory of those WWII boats lost in 'combat'. The core criteria used by the list of 52 was that the boat was forcefully and unexpectedly removed from the fleet while it was 'in commission' and later decommissioned as an administrative task without formal ceremony. The expansion made the list number 65 boats by my count. During declared wars were 53 and at other periods 12. Is the list complete? Well that depends on how you want to count. Is the list fair? No, it is not. Some boats were lost without loss of life and with other criteria might be removed from the list. An example of this is the WWII Darter. However to remove this boat would be hurtful and totally unnecessary. Another example is the A-7 in which the entire crew died but the boat was not 'lost'. How do you treat this incident? The bottom line is this. The list used for a 'Tolling of the Boats" ceremony is OUR list. Those setting up the ceremony decide what is on it and what might not be. Some places include the Nathaniel Greene which was decommissioned, in a ceremony, after a grounding and Bonefish which suffered a catastrophic fire with loss of life but was not 'lost' as such. The same tolling does not include the WWII submarine Salmon which upon return to port was declared a 'constructive total loss' and decommissioned (with ceremony). It is in my estimation just fine because it is OUR list and we, separately and as a group, can decide what to include. Not to include the traditional 52 core list would not be good. Not to include boats such as Scorpion, O-9, S-51 and others would not be a good idea either. To debate whether to include boats such as S-4 would be only serve to cause 'hate and discontent' and be of no purpose. In answer to the question of NR-1 and T-1. Of course they would be included in a "Tolling of the Boats" if lost with all hands. To do otherwise would serve not good purpose. The above is my opinion as is the essay of long ago. Will we ever get it right? Not as long as we are all boat sailors and given to argue over the most minor points. Should we make the list 'carved in stone' and make it the only and correct list? No, not in my opinion. We should leave it to the group holding the ceremony to decide how to it should be. ------------- Be Well Oldsubs |
Posted By: SaltiDawg
Date Posted: 04 May 2016 at 7:57am
|
Enjoyed your thoughtful post. However, "In answer to the question of NR-1 and T-1. Of course they would be included in a "Tolling of the Boats" if lost with all hands. To do otherwise would serve not good purpose." Not according to the posts above, The NR-1 and T-1 were not commissioned boats. (The T-1 had one torpedo tube, the NR-1 none.) Also the tragic loss of a new construction boat would not involve a commissioned boat. |
Posted By: oldsubs
Date Posted: 04 May 2016 at 8:04am
|
Like I said---it is our list and we are free to include what we wish. So if T-1 had gone down with loss of life and I were running a Tolling of The Boats event--it would be included. Besides the meaning of 'commissioned' in terms of US Naval Ships has changed over the years --- so we can also!! Nuff said---logging off ------------- Be Well Oldsubs |
Posted By: SaltiDawg
Date Posted: 04 May 2016 at 8:13am
Incredible! I went to the USSVI site to see what the criterion actually is. (As opposed to what has been posted above.) https://www.ussvi.org/Documents/Online_Manuals_M-C_Manual.pdf" rel="nofollow - https://www.ussvi.org/Documents/Online_Manuals_M-C_Manual.pdf I see nowhere that being commissioned is a requirement. I do see: " The list only accounts submarines that were lost while under US flag during the stated period. At the time of this writing, using the criteria above and expanding the time to cover the entire history of our submarine force, a corrected total for our submarine losses may be obtained." |
oldsubs wrote:Posted By: GaryKC
Date Posted: 04 May 2016 at 8:35am
 ------------- SS484 SS426 SSBN618 Joined this BBS: May 25 2007 Website http://www.usstusk.com" rel="nofollow - USS Tusk SS 426 |
Posted By: gerry
Date Posted: 04 May 2016 at 11:41am
|
Thanks for lightening it up, Gary. Maybe we needed that . This *is* a serious subject though, one that many of us are obviously passionate about. In the end, it seems that different groups do the ceremony in different ways. I don't think any group who has the honor of doing a ceremony would intentionally disrespect any boats or crews - if they don't use the same list as another group, I'd guess it would be more out of misinterpretation or misunderstanding. While that is unfortunate and ideally it would be uniform across all groups doing the ceremony, I think (my opinion) the important thing is that they are doing SOMETHING to honor, acknowledge and remember those men and their boats. Had they been lost with loss of life, should T1 and NR-1 be included? I say, yes, absolutely. Regardless of actual commissioning status. Even if the instruction said "Commissioned" and not "under US Flag", still yes! Because... the INTENTION of the ceremony is much more significant than the literal interpretation of the "policy". Mostly because I don't need a "policy" that tells me who I can render honors to or who I can mourn. I think we all have pretty strong beliefs and opinions on this, and it's healthy to discuss or opinions, but I don't think we're so far apart that we need to argue about them. ------------- MT2/SS USS Simon Bolivar - SSBN 641 (B) USS Henry M. Jackson - SSBN 730 (B) USSVI - Wyoming Base |