Rare photograph of Dreadnaught Row from Flying Fortress

muddyboots · **Posted:** Mon Mar 07, 2011 8:07 pm

whistlingdeathcorsairs wrote:

muddyboots wrote:

if it was 30 years ago, around 1979 or 1980, it wasn't a pt boat. The mahagony hull would have been very rotted like all the boats would have been. Plus the hull would have been 40 plus years old, not something many people wanted anything to do with.

All I can say is that gus swore it was a pt boat. He was known to tell a tall tale, but why would he bother about something like that? It certainly wasn't a pleasure craft, and it was a woooden hull make of that what you will.

RickH · **Posted:** Mon Mar 07, 2011 10:07 pm

Sorry to hear of your loss, Spanner. I'll bet your brother is getting his history first hand from all the folks in that neighborhood !

It has been an interesting thread, but in a strange way, all relevant to TEXAS !

LadyO2Pilot · **Posted:** Mon Mar 07, 2011 10:30 pm

Sorry for your loss, Don. My prayers are with you !!

airnutz · **Posted:** Tue Mar 08, 2011 5:16 pm

whistlingdeathcorsairs wrote:

if it was 30 years ago, around 1979 or 1980, it wasn't a pt boat. The mahagony hull would have been very rotted like all the boats would have been. Plus the hull would have been 40 plus years old, not something many people wanted anything to do with.

That would really depend on how well it was cared for in it's post war life. Using that logic, there are no mahogany PT boats, or 30's Gar Woods, or Chris Crafts etc. left. As for affordability, that depends on the owners pockets or dexterity in improvising alternate paths...I'm assuming your referring in part to the maintenance and feeding of 3 Packards back then. Are we reading the same thread?

airnutz · **Posted:** Tue Mar 08, 2011 5:19 pm

Condolences for your loss Spanner...sounds like Bill's planted in good company.

whistlingdeath77 · **Posted:** Tue Mar 08, 2011 8:11 pm

airnutz wrote:

whistlingdeathcorsairs wrote:

if it was 30 years ago, around 1979 or 1980, it wasn't a pt boat. The mahagony hull would have been very rotted like all the boats would have been. Plus the hull would have been 40 plus years old, not something many people wanted anything to do with.

That would really depend on how well it was cared for in it's post war life. Using that logic, there are no mahogany PT boats, or 30's Gar Woods, or Chris Crafts etc. left. As for affordability, that depends on the owners pockets or dexterity in improvising alternate paths...I'm assuming your referring in part to the maintenance and feeding of 3 Packards back then. Are we reading the same thread?

with my logic, the mahogany on a pt boat would have been rotted away,( or at least most of the hull.) Making a massive restoration project. After the war, the navy took the packards out, although sometimes they would keep one in there and sell the boat surplus. They still retained their fuel tanks of 3,000 gallons of gas. Not something i want to pay for! Thus many people put in deisel engines. As far as the Pt boat community is aware, there is no Pt boat that was taken care of from the 40's till now. Any boat still in exsistince has had major restoration to all of their hulls and decking.

whistlingdeath77 · **Posted:** Tue Mar 08, 2011 8:14 pm

muddyboots wrote:

whistlingdeathcorsairs wrote:

muddyboots wrote:

if it was 30 years ago, around 1979 or 1980, it wasn't a pt boat. The mahagony hull would have been very rotted like all the boats would have been. Plus the hull would have been 40 plus years old, not something many people wanted anything to do with.

All I can say is that gus swore it was a pt boat. He was known to tell a tall tale, but why would he bother about something like that? It certainly wasn't a pleasure craft, and it was a woooden hull make of that what you will.

i'm not calling you a liar in anyway. i'm assuming the boat could have been a crash boat or a chris craft

muddyboots · **Posted:** Tue Mar 08, 2011 10:02 pm

I didn't think you were. I don't know enough about the subject to lie about it lol! At was a large boat, we had a chris craft and if memory serves it dwarfed us. I dunno. Wish old Gus was still around, I'd ask him.

RickH · **Posted:** Wed Mar 09, 2011 8:24 am

PT 309 did require a fair amount of replanking, but most of the hull is original. All of the frames are original. The deck was replaced. There is a lot of aluminum in the Higgins. Aluminum gussets are installed at the shear line and the chines. All were rotted away. There are aluminum angles bolted in at every substructure intersection, all of those were either gone or exfoliated. The engine room has an aluminum bulkhead stiffener that has 2 hard rolled steel angles riveted on either side of the aluminum. The steel was OK but the aluminum had exfoliated between the angle. All of the aluminum was recreated per the plans and reinstalled. The boat was supposed to be run, and without the strengthening aluminum pieces, she probably would have come apart out in the bay.

whistlingdeath77 · **Posted:** Wed Mar 09, 2011 5:38 pm

RickH wrote:

PT 309 did require a fair amount of replanking, but most of the hull is original. All of the frames are original. The deck was replaced. There is a lot of aluminum in the Higgins. Aluminum gussets are installed at the shear line and the chines. All were rotted away. There are aluminum angles bolted in at every substructure intersection, all of those were either gone or exfoliated. The engine room has an aluminum bulkhead stiffener that has 2 hard rolled steel angles riveted on either side of the aluminum. The steel was OK but the aluminum had exfoliated between the angle. All of the aluminum was recreated per the plans and reinstalled. The boat was supposed to be run, and without the strengthening aluminum pieces, she probably would have come apart out in the bay.

very true and you know your boats. however, i never knew that steel was used inside the engine room. This possibly was made after the war was done and a civilian did that. i never heard of steel being used on the boats.

airnutz · **Posted:** Wed Mar 09, 2011 6:53 pm

whistlingdeathcorsairs wrote:

with my logic, the mahogany on a pt boat would have been rotted away,( or at least most of the hull.) Making a massive restoration project.

Not necessarily true, it depends on how well it was maintained over the years. The PT boat officianados don't know how many modified PT hulls are out there as something else. Most(all) of the PT survivors were severely neglected and run down...that is not proper maintenance. As Rick alluded to, PT-309 required some planking replacement..IIRC about 30% or so, and made it to 2002 before that began to happen. Not bad, by your rule of thumb it shouldn't have been possible since before 1980. There are plenty of vintage mahogany boats out there which have led charmed lives and are very original...because they were cared for.

Quote:

As far as the Pt boat community is aware, there is no Pt boat that was taken care of from the 40's till now. Any boat still in exsistince has had major restoration to all of their hulls and decking.

'Boots' original statement was, the fella had a pleasure boat made from a PT "HULL", Nothing was said about "original boat". It was already a given that most have been powerplanted with something more effficient and most have been shortened or modified to other purpose. For the most part your preaching to the choir here.

RickH · **Posted:** Wed Mar 09, 2011 7:00 pm

Almost all of the surviving boats of both types were cut down to 65 ft to meet a less stringent Coast Guard reg than they would have had if they stayed their original length. Most had the lazarette chopped of and a new transom reconstructed. 309 was one of the few to retain her original length, 305 was not so lucky.

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=351182357657#!/photo.php?fbid=1657606559212&set=o.351182357657&theater

The link is to the 309 facebook picture page. Quite a few 309 and some 305 rebuild pictures. The iron angle that I spoke of is visible in the 309 engine room picture of the center engine. The diesels look lost compared to installed Packards !

SPANNERmkV · **Posted:** Wed Mar 09, 2011 7:07 pm

What I wouldn't give for that Zero Wing from McHale's Navy...

Sigh

eze240 · **Joined:** Tue Jun 29, 2010 2:32 pm **Posts:** 117

so....not to get too far off topic, but, has anyone seen the PT8 on epay? Its been up for auction several times, they claim it is one of the "prototypes" built in '39-'40, the only one built of all aluminum. They've been asking around $500K.
Theres also been a crash boat on there, they're asking $250K or so......

RickH · **Posted:** Thu Mar 10, 2011 8:12 am

I've seen PT8 live and in person. When I was a kid in 1974 I saw it parked on blocks next to a guys house in Baytown,Texas. He was redoing it. He worked on that boat for 30 years, never got it in the water. I owned a Mercury Marine dealership and somehow an insurance appraiser wandered in and told me the man had died and he was trying to establish a value. I hadn't thought about that boat for many years. It is the real PT8, all welded aluminum construction, post war it was fitted with early turbines for test purposes. I believe it was the first boat built with all welded aluminum.

That rescue boat was listed at 85,000.00, it could be dressed up to pass for an Elco.

Warbird Information Exchange

Rare photograph of Dreadnaught Row from Flying Fortress

Who is online