Sunday, August 11, 2013

New Hope Automobile Show 2013

It’s gotten smaller over the years but it’s worth seeing as part of a Lambertville/New Hope fleatiquing trip. Begun as a horse show, it’s been cars since ’57.

My pick for best in show this year is the Christine-like ’58 Studebaker President.

Project car for people who really know what they’re doing.

From the war. Willys’ most famous vehicle.

Related, from the Collingwood Flea Market, Farmingdale, NJ: technician’s and sergeant’s uniforms. Technicians were noncoms paid the same as corporals and sergeants but outranked by them and without command authority outside their fields. Navy specialists during the war, like the Army ones since ’55, weren’t noncoms; their grade was seaman.

The last of the beautiful ’40s cars, a ’48 Chevy Fleetliner. Production was suspended during the war so the first real postwar cars weren’t until the next year.

Meanwhile in GB.

Three years of Skyliners. Hardtop Ford convertibles seemed part of this year’s theme, celebrating the 150th anniversary of Henry Ford’s birth (July 30). The black and yellow ’58 is this year’s poster car. ’59 look familiar?

Time machines.


  1. And yeah going to the new hope car show every yr is fun for us cause we get to see lots of beautiful classic oldies cars, and we get to walk around there wonderful romantic town. And see all the good things they have too offer. Just like there restaurants some are nice some are way $$$ for our taste. And yeah there's Lambertville across the bridge frm there it's a nice town part preppy and Richey four our taste but we got there anyway. and all car pics here were cool hope ur pals enjoy By the way u forgot to add some of me with the cars.

  2. "Navy specialists during the war, like the Army ones since ’55, weren’t noncoms; their grade was seaman."

    Responsio (FWIW):

    Well, not really, but depends on how you look at it. E-1 through E-3 (Seaman Recruit, Seaman Apprentice, Seaman) [WWII it was SR, Seaman 2nd Class (called "Seaman Deuce"), Seaman 1st Class IIRC] were not yet specialists, although when I was in the Navy a Seaman could "strike" for a rating [an occupational specialty somewhat analogous to the MOS of the Army and Marine Corps]. Strikers (or Seaman Striker) wore a little occupational/rating patch above their Seaman Stripes. I don't ever recall seeing a Seaman Apprentice with a striker insignia above his stripes, but it has been too many years.

    During WWII, among the petty officers (the specialists in the Navy) in grades E-4 through E-6 and Chief Petty Officers [E-7 through E-9 and now an E-10 for the CPO of the Navy], there were right arm rates and left arm rates. Today, Petty Officers and Chief Petty Officers where their insignia patches on the left arm only.

    Examples of WWII leadership ratings (right arm ratings): Bosun's Mate (deck force and small boat handlers), Signalmen (when the Navy used flags for comm), Quartermasters (navigators, not supply folks).

    Left arm ratings (also specialists but not leadership ratings wrt ship handling): Electronics Technicians (ET), Radioman (RM), Storekeepers (SK) [these are the counterpart to Army quatermasters], Yeoman [administrator, secretary, typist] euphemistically called "tit-less wave," and the engineering ratings, medical ratings, etc. Of course during WWII, there were Yeomen who wore bras! LOL

    I even met an older lady in the early 1980s at work who was one of the very few female Gunner's Mates GM2 or Petty Officer 2nd Class IIRC) in WWII. She trained the enlisted gunners on the Navy's SDB (dive bomber) and TBM (Torpedo bomber). She told me that there were a lot of trainees who died during training (due to pilots in training and qualification "crashing" the aircraft). Dangerous business even before giving the Japanese a chance to shoot them down!

    A lot has changed in recent years although, the worse of it IMHO are the uniforms. To my horror I saw in the Pensacola, FL airport both officers and enlisted personnel (men and women) wearing navy blue trousers with khaki short sleeve shirts, rank/officer grade insignias on the collars, and navy blue garrison caps. Not spiffy at all! Yuck! It represents for me the Novus Ordo-ization of Navy uniforms. Thankfully, we have the USMC to maintain the spiffy-ness of military uniforms! LOL But how long will this last before the USMC gets "updated?" Ugh.

    1. Thanks for the info. I knew of left-arm and right-arm rates but didn't know how the Navy made the distinction. I knew about strikers and had heard of 'Seaman 1st Class', etc., but when I looked up Army technicians and specialists, Wikipedia said that during the war the Navy equivalent, whom I guess had unique jobs not covered in the ratings at the time, were seamen 1st class, not petty officers (noncoms). They fixed that after the war, it says: those jobs became ratings; meanwhile, in ’48 the Army dropped the technician noncom grades and in ’55 started having specialists, who are not noncoms. Early in the war, the Army’s specialists were 'private (specialist)'; more fairly, in ’42 they became noncoms. Army and Marine E-3s are noncoms; Navy and Coast Guard not; Air Force has gone back and forth, since they created their own grades a few years after independence – I think now they’re not; they're senior airmen, not sergeants, which starts at E-4.

      As you know I agree about the uniforms. The Coast Guard's Novus Ordo-ization was in ’74, dropping the smart WWII Navy uniforms for the awful ones now. The USCG's got the Bender Blues, named after the admiral commandant who did to it what CNO Admiral Zumwalt did to the Navy, allowing longish hair and getting rid of the sailor suits, which President Reagan brought back. The Paul VIes and Bugninis of the U.S. military. What the Navy's done now, turning our sailors into wannabe soldiers or Marines, reminds me of Canada's big mistake during the time of many such, in 1968 merging their armed forces, actually doing what the Navy was afraid of when Truman created the Defense Department. Basically it all became army: the Royal Canadian Navy and Royal Canadian Air Force ceased to be (and like our Navy after DoD's founding, with the Admirals' Revolt, many Canadian naval officers retired in protest). You had 'the Canadian Forces' with colonels and corporals in army green aboard ship. It's taken Canada about 45 years to partly backtrack to correct this. First, navy men and air-force men got something like their old uniforms and ranks back, nice but not quite the smart British uniforms and ranks they had, and very recently they became the RCN and RCAF again.

      Right, the USMC gets it right. Not that I'd last an hour in the Corps, but that's their draw. They dare you to be a man: they mostly haven't dumbed down/politically corrected themselves, certainly compared to the other services, so they have no trouble recruiting; they've always been nearly all volunteers. The only noticeable difference in the uniforms from the ones in the war is they don't wear unit shoulder patches anymore.

      Thing is, as the new policy about homosexuals shows, as part of the U.S. government, the military isn't really conservative, so if the Corps hasn't been watered down yet, it may be a matter of time. I had a friend who is a retired Air Force sergeant and says he learned his egalitarianism on women from the military. Me on homosexuals' rights and the military: if the person does his job and behaves himself, look the other way. That said, the greatest generation didn’t fight and die on Pacific beaches, right or wrong (the war wasn’t our fight), in order to pretend two men or two women can marry. The modern West is mad and dangerous to us now.

      The SBD Dauntless was a beautiful plane.

      This year I visited the Millville, NJ airport, which has a military museum because during the war it was Millville Army Air Field (it was a civilian airport opened right before the war that the Army took over for the duration), training P-47 Thunderbolt fighter pilots. I noticed all the accidental deaths from training.

    2. 2nd part of my reply (original attempt was too long):

      Re: Gays in the military and gay "marriage."

      Frst, people with same sex attractions have served for millennia in the world's military services. You can't get rid of them no matter how rigorous your selection criteria is or how onerous your attempts to purge them from ANY organization. Same with the Catholic priesthood . . . any priesthood, Protestant ministry, etc. So in this sense (military), I am not all that worried. Gay men, after all, have testosterone the same as heterosexual men. I believe that testosterone fuels so much of the inherently violent nature of the male sex (look at bulls!--we are not all that different as mammals). Second, the marriage bit bothers me. You can pass all the laws you want to say this group or the other can marry, are married, are spouses, etc., but two men cannot make a baby; two women cannot make a baby. You can be Protestant, Catholic, Orthodox, Jewish, Muslim, Mormon, Jehovah's Witnesses, religions not related to the Bible, agnostics, atheists, "whatever". . . but you cannot deny that sex is for making babies regardless of its other purpose that the CC recognizes, i.e., to foster the connubial relationship. But even this (the genuine love between husband and wife) still points back to baby-making. One needs a healthy environment to raise up children and to help them save their souls.

      I know there are issues such as personal privacy, rights as persons, etc. I don't pretend to have an good answer to these concerns and I have no intent to join the "blue" police and bust down the doors of gay domiciles and haul off the sexual miscreants to jail or even to take their children from them. This just won't work! I also don't fear that gays will destroy the institution of marriage. THEY ARE NOT MARRIED! Besides, heterosexuals have been wrecking marriage quite ably for thousands of years and we don't really need any help. Heterosexuals are professionals at this; gay folks mere rank amateurs. I don't mean to make light of this, but what can we do apart from open violent warfare? I certainly don't endorse any moves in this direction.

      Re: P-47

      A spiffy ground attack/pursuit plane analog to spiffy WWII Army uniforms! I liked the SBD too; the TBF not so much, but it was a famous design. President Bush flew a variant aircraft, the TBM Avenger, during WWII. I think it was a flying coffin (both models). I didn't agree with Bush Sr. on everything, but I respect him for his service in the "real" Navy. He served in a highly dangerous position and is fortunate to have survived the War.

    3. My guess is torpedo bombing with relatively big, relatively slow planes was already obsolete during the war, which is partly why the TBD Devastator failed in combat (all of Torpedo 8 from the Hornet shot down at Midway; once heard lone survivor pilot George Gay speak) and why torpedo bombing was dropped after the war. It worked for the Japanese at Pearl Harbor but that was a surprise attack on stationary targets. Grumman in Bethpage, NY designed the Avenger; the ones they built were TBFs. TBMs were the same plane subcontracted to General Motors in Detroit. (They also built Grumman-origin Wildcat fighters; not sure about Hellcats.) I knew George H.W. Bush flew one, the Barbara, and was shot down over the water and rescued by a sub, some of which were assigned to that task (lifeguards during the B-29 raids of Japan too). Of course I respect him too. (He went skydiving to celebrate his birthday into his 80s if I remember rightly; I could never do that either.) The lost Flight 19 of Bermuda Triangle legend (happened months after the war; chances are they were lost, ran out of gas, and were lost at sea; RIP) flew TBMs.

    4. Ooops! I mistook the TBF for the TBD. Thanks for the reminder/correction. My "no thanks" in my previous post was supposed to be for the TBD.

      The TBM/TBF also served in a bombing capacity which is how the young George H. W. Bush flew it when he was shot down. Interestingly, had he now been picked up by the sub, he would very likely have ended up as dinner on the nearby island of Chichi-jima. The Japanese there were practicing a ritual cannibalism of sorts, cutting out their enemies' livers and eating them; shades of Dr. Hannibal Lecter. This was the subject of James Bradley's book, Flyboys: A True Story of Courage. He also wrote Flags of our Fathers (about the now iconic flag raising on Iwo Jima). You can check the cannibalism bit out on wikipedia in case you haven't read the book.

      The Brits one an astounding victory against the Italian Navy. Caught them in port at Taranto in late 1940. Supposedly the shallow water torpedo attack technique the Japanese used in Pearl Harbor was influenced by the British attack at Taranto. The Brits used obsolete bi-plane torpedo bombers.

    5. Knew about Taranto (including the biplanes; technology advanced so much – jets, nukes – during and right after the war without destroying our culture; that was the magic of the '50s); didn't know about Chichi-jima. As I wrote on Hiroshima Day, with the picture of the Australian soldier about to be beheaded, while I hold that the war wasn't our fight, I understand why the greatest generation doesn't love the Japanese. (But who should have protected Australia since the British couldn't anymore and the brave Aussies were outgunned? They are our people.)

      At least people remember the Battle of Britain and maybe El Alamein, but the British don't get enough credit for things in the war like Taranto and for capturing a U-boat in combat (as Dan Gallery's destroyers did the U-505 a few years later; I've been aboard it in Chicago), including its Enigma code machine (a huge accomplishment; the British cracked the code), fictionalized in the much later American movie U-571, in which the American heroes violated the Geneva Convention instead of fighting fair like the Royal Navy did.

      By violation I mean wearing the other side's uniform. If you get caught, you can be hanged as a spy. The Germans tried it with us, I think in the Ardennes, and were busted. By the way, I once saw in a war movie a German officer get on the radio and, in perfect American English, give false orders to an American pilot. I wonder how true that was: were there many immigrants and American-talking second-generation people who were good Bundists going home to fight for the other side? People suspected the ethnic Japanese for racist reasons; as far as I know they never betrayed us. (Iva Toguri doesn't count: hostage. And there was no one 'Tokyo Rose'.) Blame the liberals for internment; J. Edgar Hoover opposed violating the rights of the ethnic Japanese. He was sure his FBI could stop any sabotage without violating rights.

      The war in the movies: the Americans won, with the British as our witty sidekicks. Reality: the USSR won; we were saps (and in some cases traitors).

    6. Re: a huge accomplishment; the British cracked the code

      One of the principals involved in British cryptography was the mathematician Alan Turing, the originator of the Turing Machine, a machine that doesn't exist but is essentially a logical computing machine that has led to work in artificial intelligence. His contributions to the development of algorithms and artificial intelligence made him the Father of Computer science. Turing was also a sexually active homosexual who got into trouble with British law for having an affair with a teenager who was legally an adult, BTW. He accepted chemical castration in lieu of a prison sentence and not long thereafter died; some say it was suicide but this has never been demonstrated conclusively. All in all, the British gov't abused a war hero. His accomplishments for "the cause" were considerable! Sad.

      Re: wearing the other side's uniforms

      I suppose you can say it violates the Geneva Conventions, but espionage is a normal practice in war (and in peace which of course is more like a cold war, not just the cold war between East and West . . . IMHO). Yes, those Germans during the Battle of the Ardennes caught in American uniforms were executed after a military trial, and not a long drawn out trial at that! IMHO execution is a just act visited upon combatants caught out of uniform or in the uniform of their enemy. What can I say? War is hell.

      The USSR won, perhaps, but at least they didn't end up with all of Europe, but only half of it! LOL As you can tell, I am not a historical revisionist, but I "grok" your point and I found Pat Buchanan's book on the subject (he may have written two books related to the war and pre-war lead up). I really like Pat alot! I also think he is a decent human being.

      What happened to incarcerated citizens of Japanese descent was outrageous and a very Dark period in American history, as bad or nearly as bad as African Slavery. Re: Japanese nationals, I give Earl Warren and FDR a qualified "free pass." Not saying all of them should have been incarcerated--some were the moms and dads, grandparents, etc., of the Nisei and were absolutely no threat to the country. Others, however, even those not demonstrably dangerous to the nation merit internment according to the Laws of War. Internment, however, doesn't mean concentration camp as in Nazi Germany which our "concentration" camps of the Japanese were not. An injustice to be sure.

      I didn't know that about J. Edgar Hoover. I would have thought he would go for the internment. OK, the liberals (of the time) did this, but frankly, conservatives could just have easily done this had they been in power (in the Presidency). After all, you said it . . . racism was a huge part of this. They didn't intern citizens of German descent, although German-Americans suffered miserably here and there due to anti-German propaganda in the U.S. during the War to End of Wars (hah!).

    7. Part 2 of my comments (worried about the length of my submission!)

      Re: U.S. troops protecting Australia (and NZ). To end the Japanese invasion threat of Australia (and NZ), we would still have to oppose the Japanese in the Solomon Islands and New Guinea. Lots of war fighting here including the pivotal Battle of the Coral Sea! And the Allies never did reduce the robust Japanese garrison, airfields, and ship facilities at Rabaul! Something to think about. Of course this is just IMHO. I am not an expert historian; in fact, I am no historian at all! Just an interested reader (my past reading, i.e.)

      I suspect (and I perceive you so believe) that the USSR could have beaten the Third Reich without U.S. help. It would have taken lot longer with more dead Russians, Germans, Jews (in the work and death camps & other non-Jews therein), etc., unless perhaps German developed the "bomb." AFAIK Germany never even got close to this technically (it was an engineering problem/project and not a scientific effort) and didn't have the economic resources to do it anyway. The German missile program--V1 and V2--worked to German's disadvantage by diverting limited resources to non-military uses that had no effect on the outcome of combat. It would have been better to employ these resources to their jet aircraft programs. Germany could have ended the strategic air war over Germany and perhaps have ended the USSR air war against German forces. Just a thought.

  3. Well I knew I didn't get it all right! I didn't realize there were some non-Navy specialties in the Navy during WWII that were filled by Seaman 1st Class sailors. Good to know.

    Sometimes those technicians in the WWII Army were called "Corporal" or "Sergeant" as the case may be. Also, some of those "technicals" were combat medics, machine gunners, etc. Same with the Spec 4,5,6ths, etc. in the Vn War Army. Correct, they are not leadership ranks.

    I remember the green Canadian military uniforms. A Canadian frigate (basically a destroyer class combatant) hosted my boat (sub) at Esquimalt Naval Base near Victoria, BC. Those guys considered themselves "Navy," not "Armed Forces." Glad they are switching back. I wish they had returned to the U.K. uniforms of the various services.

    In today's USAF, a Sr. Airman is a Corporal equivalent. There used to be two types of Sr. Airman, one a "corporal" and the other called "Sergeant" with some sort of difference in/on the star of the chevron patch. The distinction went out of use some time ago, but I don't recall when. There are no Sergeants in the USAF anymore. E-5 is Staff Sergeant which is confusing because a Staff Sergeant in the USA and the USMC is an E-6, the rank of an infantry squad leader (usually).

    I predict the USMC will fall . . . this time. However, you can take comfort by the fact that my predictions are typically wrong 99.5% of the time on all sorts of subjects (e.g., they will never get rid of the Communion rail! LOL ), but it's that unlucky .5% that is a real doozy!

    1. Once got to tour a Canadian destroyer type (it looked like a secondhand British one) that was visiting Philadelphia and got to see they'd returned to something resembling the Royal Navy/Royal Canadian Navy uniforms.

      I forgot about the USAF equivalent to corporal. So their E-3s are noncoms. Thanks.


Leave comment