Does anybody know why reader mode on Safari shows only two divs towards the end of the article? For all the cool features the iPhone brings, I wish they focused more on getting this right.
The USS William D. Porter: The Unluckiest Ship in WWII
11–20 of 46 posts
Re: The USS William D. Porter: The Unluckiest Ship in WWII
#12Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, that one's much better! Also more historically accurate it seems, as many of the claims in the article seem to be of a rather dubious origin and may be little more than yarn. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IceFeFsS_GY
And even more skepticism regarding the original article: https://uncommonsenseok.blogspot.com/2020/02/uss-william-d-p...
This should be on the front page, not the other one.
Re: The USS William D. Porter: The Unluckiest Ship in WWII
#13Awesome. Anyone finding this entertaining, may I recommend Drachinifel’s The Russian 2nd Pacific squadron - voyage of the Damned. “The Kamchatka announced it was sinking, which lead to much rejoicing amongst the fleet.” https://youtu.be/9Mdi_Fh9_Ag
Drachinifel's content is amazing. In particular, I love his video on the sinking of HMS Hood [0], his videos on Jutland [1], and his way of working some humor into what he does as with the Kamchatka and the title on his video about surviving the sinking of a ship [2]. Have learned a ton from his channel and had a great time doing it!
[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CLPeC7LRqIY [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TkR2HpkrJ2c [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rbX8rJMI9GM
Re: The USS William D. Porter: The Unluckiest Ship in WWII
#14the wikipedia article on this boat is throws a fair amount of cold water on the narrative presented here
Re: The USS William D. Porter: The Unluckiest Ship in WWII
#15"I accidentally shot at the President, how unlucky of me."
Re: The USS William D. Porter: The Unluckiest Ship in WWII
#16the wikipedia article on this boat is throws a fair amount of cold water on the narrative presented here
It may be more accurate in this particular case, but please don’t assume Wikipedia is always correct.
Re: The USS William D. Porter: The Unluckiest Ship in WWII
#17It's lacking in comedy, but another unlucky WWII vessel was the USS Sturtevant. It succumbed to an unfortunate sort of friendly fire.
> USS Sturtevant (DD-240) was escorting a convoy off Key West, Florida on 26 April 1942, when the ship unknowingly sailed into an American minefield. The ship struck several mines within minutes and broke into three sections.
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_US_Navy_ships_sunk_or_...
Re: The USS William D. Porter: The Unluckiest Ship in WWII
#18This ship's story isn't unusual. Every ship during WWII was a safety nightmare. Fratricide was common. So too were dangerous navigation errors. Every weapon system was one checklist item away from a deadly mistake (ie torpedo primers being the only safety mechanism during a drill). We wax nostalgic for all the heroes of WWII, but by today's standards a WWII crew was a bunch of under-trained kids manning extremely dangerous equipment. Such are the needs of war.
Re: The USS William D. Porter: The Unluckiest Ship in WWII
#19the wikipedia article on this boat is throws a fair amount of cold water on the narrative presented here
It may be more accurate in this particular case, but please don’t assume Wikipedia is always correct.
I think we can now safely say that Wikipedia is highly likely to be more accurate than almost any other internet source. We shouldn’t feel uncomfortable citing it, nor should it be necessary to include a disclaimer every time we do.
Re: The USS William D. Porter: The Unluckiest Ship in WWII
#20Earlier quoted context omitted.
It may be more accurate in this particular case, but please don’t assume Wikipedia is always correct.
I think we can now safely say that Wikipedia is highly likely to be more accurate than almost any other internet source. We shouldn’t feel uncomfortable citing it, nor should it be necessary to include a disclaimer every time we do.
[deleted]