US Navy return/replacement policy

[Rich Rostrom]

One criticism often leveled at the US Army in WW II
was against the Army's system for returning wounded
men to combat duty.

When a wounded man recovered, he was sent to a
"replacement depot" ("reppo-deppo"). and from
there to any unit which the Army saw fit.

This practice was bitterly resented by soldiers,
who wanted to be returned to their old units.

Bill Mauldin wrote of men who literally escaped
from a reppo-deppo to get back to their outfits.


My question is whether there was any similar
situation in the Navy.

First - did wounded sailors feel a similar bond
to their ships?

Second - what did the Navy do with wounded
sailors when they recovered?

[David Wilma]

If anything, sailors generally had a stronger bond with
shipmates. The problem with leaving a hospital
or repple depple was finding the ship which might
still be at sea or on some distant station.

I have a family friend who deserted from a hospital
with a buddy to rejoin the 82nd Airborne. They
hopped over to France on an airplane by just explaining
that they were trying to rejoin their unit. That got
them across France and back "home."

[GFH]

Post by David Wilma
If anything, sailors generally had a stronger bond with
shipmates.

True. And strongest in submarines, sometimes crews
who had undergone serious depth charge attack were
broken up because they would not accept new crew
members.

GFH

[Padraigh ProAmerica]

Re: US Navy return/replacement policy

Group: soc.history.war.world-war-ii Date: Fri, Feb 8, 2013, 11:13am
From: ***@ankerstein.org (GFH)
On Sunday, January 20, 2013 4:04:27 PM UTC-5, David Wilma wrote:
If anything, sailors generally had a stronger bond with
shipmates.
True. And strongest in submarines, sometimes crews who had undergone
serious depth charge attack were broken up because they would not accept
new crew members.

=================REPLY=====

About the only time this was officially done was after the ordeal of the
USS PUFFER (kept down over 36 hours). About half the crew was dispersed
throughout the force (average rotation loss was 20%).

It was such an unusual event a special study/ report was ordered to try
to understand the dynamics of the ordeal opn the crew of the ship.
------------------------
GFH

--
"A man who can own a gun is a citizen. A man who cannot own a gun is a
subject."--

LTC Allen West, USA, (Ret.)

[w***@aol.com]

Post by Rich Rostrom
One criticism often leveled at the US
Army in WW II was against the Army's
system for returning wounded
men to combat duty?
First - did wounded sailors feel a similar
bond to their ships?

As with the Army, I'm sure, it depended on
the individual. Most probably felt a bond
because of friendships formed and familiarity
with the surroundings, but others liked variety
so didn't mind going somewhere else.

Post by Rich Rostrom
Second - what did the Navy do with
wounded sailors when they recovered?

That was handled somewhat differently
because of the operational differences
between between the two services.

As far as I can recall, the Navy system
worked more on an individual basis.
Combat ships of the size of DEs and up
were equipped with "Sick Bays," the larger
ships having such facilities fairly large, well
equipped, and staffed with sufficient qualified
medical personnel to tend to anticipated
medical emergencies which might be expected
to occur during operations in which that ship
might become engaged.
Wounded, injured, and sick personnel
would normally be tended in the particular ship's
Sick Bay and returned to duty on the same ship
depending on the extent of treatment needed
and length of time for recovery. Sailors requiring
long and/or complicated treatment could either
be transferred on a space available basis to a ship
in the same task force having more adequate
medical facilities, or to the nearest shore based
Navy hospital.
If sent to a hospital ashore and after he was
again ready for duty, an individual sailor might or
might not be returned to his former duty station if
his billet had not been filled by a replacement. If it
had been filled the sailor would be assigned to a
holding facility to await an assignment to duty
elsewhere by Navy Personnel.

WJH

[Alan Meyer]

Post by w***@aol.com

Post by Rich Rostrom
One criticism often leveled at the US
Army in WW II was against the Army's
system for returning wounded
men to combat duty?
First - did wounded sailors feel a similar
bond to their ships?

As with the Army, I'm sure, it depended on
the individual. Most probably felt a bond
because of friendships formed and familiarity
with the surroundings, but others liked variety
so didn't mind going somewhere else.

In the army I think that a lot more than individual preference was at
stake. It is my understanding that survival in combat had much to do
with how well integrated you were into your unit. You knew what your
buddies would do in combat, they knew what you would do, and you would
all risk your lives for each other.

Strangers coming up from the "repple depple" weren't part of that tight
knit group. Not only were other unit members less likely to risk their
lives for the strangers, they were also more likely to put the strangers
lives at risk than their own or the lives of their buddies.

Irwin Shaw's novel _The Young Lions_, based on his own WWII experience,
has a scene where three souvenir hunters from the rear area arrive at
the front and the frontline troops mislead them into exposing themselves
in order to reveal the German firing positions. One of the front line
troops objects but the others silence him. Somebody had to die to find
out where the Germans were, better them than us.

There are other scenes illustrating the nature of the bond between the
front line troops and the lack of same with replacements in Dick
Winters' _Band of Brothers_.

So getting back to your unit as opposed to being sent to a random unit
could easily become a matter of life and death.

Alan

[Rich Rostrom]

Post by Alan Meyer
Irwin Shaw's novel _The Young Lions_, based on his own WWII experience,
has a scene where three souvenir hunters from the rear area arrive at
the front and the frontline troops mislead them into exposing themselves

In William Manchester's memoir, _Goodbye, Darkness_,
he recounts an incident from the fighting on Okinawa:
"the Execution of the Two Pricks". Two supercilious
Army lieutenants showed up in the sector held by
Manchester's Marine company, and announced they were
there "to see the war". A gunny mutely directed them
toward the firing line, and they were both shot down
as they left cover.

Post by Alan Meyer
So getting back to your unit as opposed to being sent to a random unit
could easily become a matter of life and death.

It wasn't just about being safer _when_ you got back
to the front. It was also about getting back to your
unit _as soon as possible_.

Manchester was wounded on Okinawa - a "million-dollar
wound", just serious enough to get him out of combat.
While he was in the hospital, he heard that his unit
was going back into action, and he left the hospital -
where he was safe - to be with them.

[Joe Osman]

Any Marine will tell you that the sailors hate to leave their best friends behind.

Joe