Talk:VPB-197

Inaccuracies in the Operational History section

The "Operational History" section was lifted whole from a U.S. Government document, the Dictionary of American Naval Aviation Squadrons, Vol. 2, ch. 4, p. 583 (source), which pertains to VPB-197. The source section is entitled "Chronology of Significant Events". The problem is that this narrative section does not quite agree with the concise list given later in the section (pp. 585-586), which lists the following:

Home Port Assignments

1 Sep 1938	FAB Pearl Harbor, Hawaii
1 Dec 1940	NAS San Diego, Calif.
15 Apr 1941	NAS Kaneohe, Hawaii
Oct 1944	NAS San Diego, Calif.
2 Dec 1944	NAAS Camp Kearney, Calif.

Wing Assignments

1 Sep 1938	PatWing-2
1 Jul 1939	PatWing-4
1 Dec 1940	PatWing-1
14 Apr 1941	PatWing-2/FAW-2
1 Sep 1943	FAW-1
Jun 1944	FAW-2
Oct 1944	FAW-14

The discrepancy is where the narrative says: "1 December 1939: VP-45 was redesignated VP-14." (and another table later in the document -- Appendix 7, p. 779 -- also gives the 1939 date).

Of critical significance is that, at that time, standard nomenclature was to number squadrons according to the Patrol Wing to which they were assigned. To wit, squadrons assigned to PatWing-1 have numbers starting with 1, squadrons assigned to PatWing-4 have numbers starting with 4, and so on. So the redesignation from VP-45 to VP-14 would have coincided with the reassignment to PatWing-1. These events would not have been a whole year apart. So which date is correct?

I have in my hands my father's service record; he was in this squadron from December 1938 to October 1941. This primary source document shows that this event, the reassignment to PatWing-1 and the redesignation to VP-14, occurred on 1 January 1940, a different date entirely. I do not know where the authors of the publication got their information; presumably it was somehow more authoritative than the document I have. I know of at least one other date problem in his service record, caused by delays in communication from HQ to ships at sea. So it seems possible that an event officially dated 1 Dec 1939 may have been entered in my father's service record one month later. There's no way the official date could follow the entry in my dad's service record by eleven months.

Therefore I propose amending the text of the "Operational History" section to move the narrative currently associated with 1 December 1940 to 1 December 1939.

It amazes to me that this USG publication could contain such a gross error, but there it is. 68.100.27.173 (talk) 17:56, 3 January 2021 (UTC)