Leatherneck Magazines - Page 6 of 7 - Marine Corps Association

Modern Day Marine

Expo Features Display of Latest Innovations In Gear, Technology

By Sam Lichtman

From May 10-12, representatives from more than 400 defense contractors, government agencies, and nonprofit organizations descended on the Walter E. Washington Convention Center in Washington, D.C., for Modern Day Marine (MDM) 2022, hosted by the Marine Corps Association (MCA) and the Marine Corps League (MCL).

In addition to the exhibitors, the MCA and MCL hosted a slate of guest speakers including the Secretary of the Navy, Carlos Del Toro; General David H. Berger, Commandant of the Marine Corps; and several other senior leaders of the Corps. Throughout the three-day expo, they delivered informative presentations on a wide variety of topics ranging from acquisitions to littoral combat. Of note were several briefings covering various aspects of Force Design 2030, Gen Berger’s plan to make the Marine Corps more flexible and adaptable. The briefings and guest speakers, a key component of MDM, provided an opportunity for professional development for the many Marines who attended the expo from throughout the National Capital Region.

Leatherneck sent representatives to the event to learn about the latest in military technology and offer our readers a sampling of what’s new in the industry. Future issues of Leatherneck and marinemilitaryexpos.com will have information about next year’s event, scheduled for June 27-29, 2023.

MCA offers more professional development resources at:
mca-marines.org/professional-development.

HDT Global Hunter WOLF

Unmanned vehicles seem to be a popular technology among some of the larger companies in the defense industry. Among others, HDT Global had two examples of their Hunter WOLF (Wheeled Offload Logistics Follower) unmanned ground vehicle on display. The Hunter WOLF is a small six-wheeled ground vehicle with a hybrid powertrain running on electricity with a diesel generator for charging the battery; it is designed to support an infantry squad in any terrain or climate. The vehicle’s compact dimensions allow it to be airlifted to combat zones; a V-22 Osprey is able to carry two of them and the Army’s CH-47 is able to carry six. Its modular design and 1-ton payload capacity allow Marines to convert the Hunter WOLF between a wide variety of configurations. HDT had one set up as a logistics vehicle and another with a remote weapons system at Modern Day Marine; other payload packages are designed for reconnaissance, engineering, and even anti-tank missions. The vehicle is controlled using a small wireless remote or can even be set to autonomously follow dismounted infantry.

The Hunter WOLF has seen use in the Australian Outback as a sort of robotic farmhand, allowing one remote operator to safely and comfortably perform the work of many people in less time. The Marine Corps is currently testing tethered quadcopters powered by the Hunter WOLF’s onboard generator. More information is available at hdtglobal.com/series/hunter-wolf/.

Oshkosh Defense/Pratt miller EMAV

Oshkosh Defense also brought an unmanned ground vehicle to the show. In development for six years by their subsidiary Pratt Miller Defense in conjunction with QinetiQ, the EMAV (Expeditionary Modular Autonomous Vehicle) is much larger and more than twice as heavy as the Hunter WOLF but retains a similar low profile. It travels on rubber tracks at more than 50 miles per hour over flat ground and can be carried internally aboard the V-22 Osprey and other military transport aircraft. The EMAV can be rapidly reconfigured in the field with more than 40 different mission packages and can carry up to 3 tons. Its software allows it to operate with many types of remote controllers or drive itself with varying levels of autonomy.

Like the Hunter WOLF, the EMAV is designed to support dismounted infantry by carrying supplies and providing electrical power even when no mission package is installed. While moving, its onboard generator can produce up to 3.4 kW of power on a low-voltage rail to charge batteries for optics, night vision devices, laser aiming modules, and other electronics Marines carry. While stationary, the EMAV can output up to 30 kW on its high-voltage rail to help power a small forward operating base.

Oshkosh has delivered four EMAVs to the Army and six to the Marine Corps, which are currently undergoing testing at the Marine Corps Warfighting Laboratory. The Army has been running the EMAV through its Robotic Combat Vehicle–Light (RCV-L) trials program. More information is available at https://www.qinetiq.com/.

Maztech Industries X4-FCS

Irvine, Calif.,-based engineering company Maztech Industries made a big splash this year with their X4-FCS device, a weapon-mounted ballistic computer. They brought two units to Modern Day Marine to show off their capabilities.

Developed in collaboration with Magpul, the X4-FCS consists of a ballistic computer integrated into a conventional 30 mm or 34 mm scope mount, designed for use with a low-power variable optic (LPVO) such as the Marine Corps’ new Squad Day Optic (SDO). Powered by two CR123 or four 18650 batteries, it projects a digital overlay into the objective lens of whatever scope is mounted to it to provide more information to the shooter at a glance. The X4-FCS can be programmed in the field with profiles for up to 25 different ammunition types; using atmospheric sensors, it can update its reticle in real time based on the exact ballistic characteristics of each round to show how far it will drop at a given distance. The unit can also sense its own pitch and roll to allow it to compensate for the angle at which the rifle is held. With an optional laser rangefinder attached, the X4-FCS can even display a marker to show exactly where to aim to hit the target—all without the shooter taking his or her eye off the target.

The modular design of the X4-FCS makes it compatible with any rifle scope of the correct size and allows different electronics packages to be added on if newer optical devices, such as better sensors and rangefinders, are ever developed. Maztech is currently working with Magpul on a “smart” magazine which will count the number of rounds inside and tell the X4-FCS what type of ammunition is loaded so it can automatically adjust the reticle for different ballistic properties. To learn more, check maztechindustries.com/x4-fcs.

Magpul Industries

Magpul had a large display this year with many of their new and popular civilian products. Since 2016, a variant of its PMAG GEN M3 has been approved by the Marine Corps as a replacement for old Colt-pattern aluminum “G.I.” magazines to feed the M16A4, M4, and M27. In fact, the updates made between the second generation and current third generation of PMAG included a change to the shape of the magazine body to allow compatibility with platforms such as the M27 IAR. Additionally, the PMAG GEN M3 was designed with different feed geometry to present the rounds at a higher angle, allowing use of the M855A1 EPR (Enhanced Performance Round) without damaging rifles’ feed ramps.

Magpul has been producing the PMAG for decades and the Marine Corps has been issuing it as standard equipment for several years; given its excellent track record for reliability in harsh conditions, it appears that the PMAG is here to stay. For more information on Magpul’s new products for this year, check magpul.com/what-s-new.html.

Blue Force Gear

A longtime favorite among military riflemen and civilian shooting enthusiasts across the country, Blue Force Gear had some excellent products to show off at their booth at Modern Day Marine this year. The company already supplies two products to the U.S. military: their famous Vickers sling and a holster for the M320 grenade launcher. Blue Force Gear doesn’t just cut fabric and run sewing machines; they actively work to develop some of the most technologically advanced load-bearing equipment on the market. Their CHLK two-belt system, for example, is advertised to weigh 50 percent less than competing battle belts and is angled and contoured to fit around the wearer’s waist more comfortably with no break-in period.

To manufacture their load-bearing equipment, Blue Force Gear laser-cuts MOLLE-compatible attachment slots out of the material. This design has been gaining popularity in the industry because it allows manufacturers to use fewer pieces of material, making the finished product stronger and lighter.

Blue Force Gear’s website is packed with information on their products as well as the technology that makes them possible. You can learn more at blueforcegear.com/about_us.html.

Trijicon SCO

Trijicon has supplied riflescopes to the U.S. military since 1987 and shows no sign of slowing down. Hundreds of thousands of Marines have used the RCO [Rifle Combat Optics], a variant of the Trijicon ACOG [Advanced Combat Optical Gunsight] TA31F, since its adoption in 2005. Beginning two years ago, however, the Marine Corps has been replacing the RCO on its rifles and MGO [Machine Gun Optic] (another ACOG variant) on machine guns with Trijicon’s new Squad Common Optic (SCO). Whereas the RCO is a prismatic scope with a fixed 4x magnification, the SCO is a low-power variable optic with a magnification range from 1 to 8 power. While its smaller 28 mm objective lens gathers about 25 percent less light, the variable magnification and user-adjustable brightness make it more useful in both close-quarters and long-range engagements in a wider variety of environmental conditions. Trijicon’s representatives say the VCOG [Variable Combat Optical Gunsight] family, of which the SCO is a member, has the same rugged construction as the RCO and is guaranteed completely waterproof to 66 feet. It is also compatible with the same mounts as legacy Trijicon optics, making it a true drop-in solution for any weapons system already equipped with an RCO or MGO.

Trijicon also manufactures a wide range of sighting systems for the law enforcement and civilian markets, ranging from tritium-illuminated iron sights for pistols to long-range precision scopes for hunting and competition. For more information, visit trijicon.com.

Office of Naval Research H-TaRP

Without a doubt, the Office of Naval Research (ONR) had one of the most exciting displays on the show floor. They were demonstrating their hydrogen tactical refueling point (H-TaRP), a version of what they call an expeditionary hydrogen generator, developed with MIT’s Lincoln Laboratories. This device is designed to be used at the company level to produce hydrogen pressurized to 5,000 psi to fuel unmanned aircraft, drive fuel cells to generate electrical power, or inflate balloons to loft radio antennae or reconnaissance payloads. Waste heat from the chemical reaction can be used to cook food, dry wet clothing and perform other useful work.

ONR’s engineers describe the H-TaRP as functioning like a giant gumball machine: a hopper at the top dispenses pellets of specially treated aluminum, which fall down and react with water in the reaction chamber to produce hydrogen, heat and aluminum hydroxide. This is the same chemical reaction which takes place inside the flameless ration heater included in MREs. The aluminum can come from any source, even empty beverage cans, and is first “activated” by heating it to 200°F with a small amount of indium and gallium. Any water will work, even unfiltered seawater, and the leftover aluminum hydroxide is non-toxic.

Three variants of expeditionary hydrogen generator are currently in development: the company-level H-TaRP unit displayed at Modern Day Marine, a smaller version for use at the squad level, and an individual unit for charging batteries and other relatively low-power applications. H-TaRP is currently in testing with II MEF at Camp Lejeune, N.C., and can be carried and set up by two Marines in as little as 13 minutes after just an hour of training. For information on ONR and their programs, check their website at onr.navy.mil.

ONR’s TechSolutions program allows Marines and Sailors to submit requests to develop new technologies to solve specific problems encountered in the field. If the technology can be developed within 12 months and for less than $1 million, the TechSolutions office will work with a network of R&D centers to bring it to fruition. To learn more about the TechSolutions program, go to onr.navy.mil/techsolutions/about.html.
Author’s bio: Sam Lichtman is a college student and licensed pilot. He works part-time as a manager and armorer at a Virginia gun store and occasionally contributes content to Leatherneck. He also has a weekly segment on Gun Owners Radio.

Carolina Museum of the Marine

Building a Firm Foundation for the Future

By Ashley Danielson

The mission of Carolina Museum of the Marine | Al Gray Civic Institute is to honor the legacy of Carolina Marines and Sailors, sustain the ideals that are the foundation of our nation, and inspire principle-committed citizens.

Originally named Marine Corps Museum of the Carolinas, the organization was founded by Major General Ray Smith, USMC (Ret) who was the commanding general for Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune from 1997 to 1999. Smith and his wife, Colleen, wanted to preserve the storied legacy of Carolina Marines and Sailors so they contacted Sergeant Major Joe Houle just before his own retirement. “We wanted someone who understands the Carolina MAGTF,” MajGen Smith said. “And someone who would work tirelessly to make the vision of an enduring tribute a reality,” he added.

Houle joined the organization in 2000, wearing a number of hats over the years, all with the focus of building the museum. Now as Director of Operations and Artifacts, Houle works with Ashley Danielson, the Executive Director and Vice President of Development, and Richard Koeckert, the Finance Manager, overseeing the organization while a search for a chief executive officer is underway.

“Over the years we have been collecting artifacts for the museum’s exhibits,” Houle said. “Board members CWO-5 Lisa Potts, USMC (Ret) and SgtMaj Ray Mackey, USMC (Ret) have worked tirelessly with the organization’s historian, LtCol Lynn “Kim” Kimball, USMC (Ret), and museum archivist and volunteer Frances Hayden to ensure best practices in the accession and care of the artifacts,” he added.

Late in 2021, the state of North Carolina awarded $26 million to the organization for construction of the 40,000-square-foot facility. Local government entities are joining private donors to ensure that the organization has operating capital to oversee and run the project during construction and after its doors open. “We are excited to see this organization moving from grassroots to the national stage,” said Danielson. “We have numerous faithful supporters to which we owe a debt of gratitude.”

The Museum

The museum will include displays featuring Expeditionary Warfare and Amphibious Operations, Carolina MAGTF (Marine air-ground task force) Development of Maneuver Warfare Philosophy, Women Marines, Montford Point Marines, MARSOC (Marine Forces, Special Operations Command), Military Working Dogs, and Wounded Warrior Barracks among other firsts and innovations of the Carolinas. “We are honoring Marines and Sailors, and their families, whose service to the nation exemplifies civic commitment in action,” said Chairman of the Board, Brigadier General Richard F. Vercauteren, USMC (Ret).

The museum will highlight the many ac-complishments and innovations of Carolina Marines and Sailors and the enduring contributions of their host communities. It will also provide a unique and inspiring new venue for public and private events including military balls, reunions, promotion and retirement ceremonies, weddings and civic events.

The museum’s plans have stayed the course since 2000 with award-winning architectural and engineering plans already in place. “We are building in two phases,” Vercauteren said. “Phase One, Reflection and Celebration Park, was opened to the public in May 2016 and gifted to the Department of the Navy in 2018.” According to Onslow County Assistant Manager Glenn Hargett, Reflection and Celebration Park is the most “Instagrammed” site in the community. Hundreds of people—military personnel and civilians—use the park and its world’s largest eagle, globe and anchor statue as the site of promotion and retirement ceremonies, weddings and photo opportunities. Recently, thanks to gifts from Byrd Family Foundation, Patriots Walkway was dedicated at the site.

“Plans for Phase 2, the construction of the 40,000-square-foot Museum and Institute, are now underway,” Vercauteren said, adding that a Marine veteran legislator was instrumental in backing the project. “Thanks to dedicated North Carolina Senator Mike Lazzara and his success in obtaining a $26 million construction grant this year.” Lazzara was joined in his efforts by North Carolina state representatives George Cleveland, Pat McElfraft and Phil Shepard.

“We are excited to move forward with this project,” said SgtMaj Houle. “We will show quite clearly, with our immersive exhibits, the honor, courage and commitment of Carolina Marines and Sailors.” The museum will be located near Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune and is anticipated to be a major attraction for the 138,000 Marines, Sailors and Coast Guardsmen serving in the area as well as their families and friends. Houle also expects numerous military and history aficionados as well as tourists to the state’s coastline to visit the museum.

Headwinds

As with any project, the group has encountered headwinds and obstacles along the way, including very real questions about the efficacy of museums in the current milieu. “We knew we needed to look at our business model,” said Danielson. To do that, the group began talking to other museum leaders about what does and does not work. Danielson said that one of the most compelling conversations early in her tenure with the organization was with General Alfred M. Gray, USMC (Ret), the 29th Commandant of the Marine Corps.

“We spoke about the need to increase or even restore civics education in our nation,” she recalled. “General Gray has had in mind for a number of years an institute at which individuals of all ages can learn about the foundation of our nation, the core values of our founding fathers, and the principles of creative, critical, and strategic thinking that will lead to effective civic engagement.” The synergy between the core values of the Marine Corps and the characteristics of a good citizen made sense to the group, and plans began to create and launch the civic institute, now named for its founder, General Gray. The Al Gray Civic Institute will offer courses on site, online and on location.

The Institute

Since 1775, the United States Marine Corps has been integral to the security of our country, and integral to its mission are honor, courage and commitment. Marines are inculcated with an understanding of honor and the qualities that define not just a well-formed Marine but a well-formed person and citizen. “Marines demonstrate civic commitment in action as they defend and protect our Constitution,” said General Gray. “We want to showcase their many innovations and accomplishments while teaching to students young and old a basic knowledge and understanding of our government and our individual responsibilities in preserving our democracy for future generations,” he continued.

With Gen Gray’s leadership, Board of Directors Vice Chair Mark Cramer, and ethics professor James Danielson, are overseeing development of the curriculum for the Al Gray Civic Institute. “Critical Thinking for Civic Engagement,” the Institute’s first offering, has been delivered at Swansboro High School in Swansboro, N.C. and at Camp Johnson to active-duty Marines awaiting MOS training. The 15-hour course is being adapted for online presentation as well. Other classes under development include, “The Founding Principles of the United States,” “Understanding the American Constitution,” “Critical Thinking for Civic Engagement,” “Leading Self, Leading Others,” “History of Political and Economic Thought” and “Ethics at Home, School and Work.” “The Houle School” is a summer fitness, civics and leadership program for middle and high school students. The Institute also produces essays in the organization’s monthly newsletter, “Front and Center.”

Gen Gray is especially interested in teaching critical thinking which he defines as the study and analysis of problems, issues and facts to develop and form a sound judgement. “It is self-directed, self-disciplined, self-motivated, and self-corrected thinking,” he said. “This course was already conducted at Swansboro High School in 2019 with excellent results. We want to be prepared to defend our convictions and interests as well as our institutions.” Gen Gray continued, “We don’t have to take sides concerning political or religious questions which may be in dispute in America. We can endeavor to state as simply as possible those great convictions upon which nearly all Americans agree. These are the simple principles as rules of life, beliefs that secure our order, our justice and our freedom.”

For more information and to follow the organization’s progress, visit Carolina Museum of the Marine | Al Gray Civic Institute’s website at MuseumoftheMarine.org.

Author’s bio: Ashley Danielson is the executive director and vice president of development at Carolina Museum of the Marine | Al Gray Civic Institute in Jacksonville, N.C. She has worked in nonprofit management and philanthropy for more than 30 years and is married to a Marine veteran.

Pocket-Sized Storyboards

Zippos Carried into Combat Were More than Just Cigarette Lighters

By Sara W. Bock

When he found himself on a second tour in the heavy jungles of Vietnam in 1969, Kenneth Moulton wasn’t sure that this time he’d be lucky enough to make it home alive. The young radio operator and forward observer, soon to pin on the rank of sergeant, decided to mark the promotion by purchasing a memento, which in those days could be found in the pocket of nearly every Marine serving in a combat zone: a Zippo lighter.

A seemingly utilitarian buy—Moulton chose a standard brass-cased lighter from a post exchange in Da Nang—became something more consequential when, while on R&R in Bangkok, Thailand, Moulton had both sides of the lighter engraved with custom text that told the story of his service and, upon closer examination, reflected his sentiments about the grim realities of war.

In addition to basic information such as his name, service number, and years in the Marine Corps, Moulton included a quote by Julius Caesar, “Vidi, Vici, Veni,” modified to take on a subtly more vulgar meaning, and most notably, a list of locations around the world with asterisks to mark the number of times he had visited each. Vietnam. Okinawa. Bangkok. Singapore. Wake Island. Mexico. At the bottom of the list was “CONUS,” a commonly used acronym for the continental U.S., but instead of an asterisk, it was followed by a question mark. Would he ever be stateside again?

In 2015, along with other items of significance from his service in Vietnam, Moulton donated the lighter to the National Museum of the Marine Corps, where it joined an extensive collection of lighters under the care of Cultural and Material History Curator Jennifer Castro, whose other collections range from sweetheart jewelry and movie posters to toys, watches and more. And while several of the lighters she’s accepted from donors were made by other brands, Zippos, known for their incomparable windproof design, have long been favored by Marines and other U.S. servicemembers.

Castro compares personalized Zippos of the Vietnam era to the challenge coins that are commonly purchased and exchanged by Marines today: a small token by which to document service with a unit, celebrate promotions and occasions or say “thank you” for a job well done. But beyond the challenge coin comparison, Castro considers them to be statement pieces, or as she likes to refer to them, “personal storyboards.”

“They document a distinct period of time in an individual Marine’s service,” Castro said. “And the common tradition among Marines, and I feel like most servicemembers, to buy something inexpensive, using it to tell their own story, their specific service during the war. […] They’re very unique and they’re representative of the individual Marine who obtained it and had it customized to talk about their service.”

When she accepted Moulton’s donation, Castro recalls him telling her that he had purchased lighters to document his promotions in rank and to help with his “pack a day” smoking habit. And while the engraving on his 1969 Zippo is one-of-a-kind, it is just one of countless personalized lighters carried by Marines and other American servicemembers during that era.

There’s another Vietnam-era Zippo lighter in the museum’s collection that appears completely unremarkable. There isn’t anything “personalized” about it at all, but in her collection file, Castro notes: “the silver tone Zippo flip-top lighter has a tiny knob of broken metal on one side where an emblem or insignia has fallen off.”

The lighter, owned by Marine veteran Harold Ligon, once bore a brass Marine Corps emblem—the iconic eagle, globe and anchor—on its case. While serving with Company A, 1st Battalion, 26th Marine Regiment in Vietnam in 1967, Ligon developed a nervous habit. He would reach into his pocket and rub the insignia in an attempt to ease his stress and anxiety. Eventually, the eagle, globe and anchor was completely worn away, leaving behind only a very small bump and a faint outline of where it once had been adhered.

“It was his worry stone,” Castro said of the Zippo, which Ligon carried with him during periods of intense combat, including at Hill 881 South. She found his story to be particularly profound. “The best ones that come in are the ones that come with the history of the Marine who served,” she said.

Among the museum’s most interest-ing Zippo lighters, most of which are not currently on display but rather are stored in a nearby auxiliary facility, a broad range of attitudes and narratives are conveyed.

Once owned by Private First Class Gary Morrison, one Zippo portrays Snoopy as a flying ace, sitting on his shrapnel-ridden dog house under a speech bubble that reads “F— It” on one side, and an image of Snoopy with his head hung low, with a thought bubble that says “Sex” on the other. Charles Schulz’s “Peanuts” cartoons had been a regular feature in Stars and Stripes, Castro says, and were popular among the troops, many of whom identified with the fictional beagle’s various woes. Yet another lighter, donated by retired Marine Lieutenant Colonel Larry Britton, a CH-46 pilot who served with HMM-364, “the Purple Foxes” in Vietnam, was a gift from his brother that displayed the crest of Britton’s college fraternity, Delta Sigma Phi. On the other side, Britton had the following quote inscribed while still in Vietnam: “For those who fight for it, freedom has a flavor the protected will never know.”

Yet another was discovered by museum employees during the restoration of an Ontos vehicle in 2004, lodged in the front engine compartment. It was traced back to PFC Ralph Ronald Cummings, a Marine rifleman who was killed in action in Quang Nam Province, Vietnam, in 1970.

“Interestingly, PFC Cummings was not a crew member or related in any way to work with Ontos vehicles,” said Castro. “In discussions with veterans and curatorial researchers, it is believed that the piece fell inside the vehicle engine from Cummings’ uniform pocket. Interviews with Ontos veterans revealed that Marine casualties were often evacuated from the battlefield by being thrown across the sloped front of the vehicle. It is possible that PFC Cummings was wounded or killed and placed on the sloped front of the Ontos vehicle, and the lighter slipped from his pocket and into the engine compartment.”

The engraving on the lighter reads “Cummings,” and in Vietnamese, “LINDA Nguoi yeu ly tuong cua RON,” which Castro says roughly translates to “Linda, Ron’s lover.” To date, Castro has been unable to track down his next of kin or anyone connected to him by the name of Linda.

“From a cultural perspective, the lighters demonstrate sort of the pride, the flair, the esprit de corps of U.S. Marines serving overseas,” said Castro. “During the Vietnam War, engravings found on lighters documented the experiences of men at a certain place and time, capturing both a wide range of sentiments and opinions about the war and individual experiences.”

But the tradition of Marines carrying Zippos into combat began long before the U.S. entered the war in Vietnam. The lighter was first envisioned by George G. Blaisdell in Bradford, Pa., in the early 1930s when, while sitting with a friend at the Bradford Country Club, Blaisdell watched him fumble with an Austrian lighter that required him to use two hands to light. He began to reimagine the lighter, which worked well in windy conditions, working to craft a new and improved version that was both attractive and could be operated with ease using only one hand. The first Zippo was produced in 1933, and Blaisdell’s patent application was approved in 1936. They sold for $1.95 and came backed by a lifetime guarantee, which the company—now owned by Blaisdell’s grandson, George B. Duke—continues to issue today for its products, which are still crafted in Pennsylvania. Remarkably, despite a steep decline in cigarette smoking in recent decades, 2021 marked the best sales year in the company’s history, proof of the enduring longevity of the brand.

During World War II, the lighters were so popular among servicemembers that from 1943 to the end of the war, Zippo allocated its entire production to the armed forces, making them available for purchase only by members of the U.S. military, said Katie Zapel, Ph.D., the archives manager for the Zippo Manufacturing Company.
During WW II, said Zapel, Blaisdell “sent lighters to top military officials and the famous war correspondent, Ernie Pyle, who corresponded with Blaisdell. Blaisdell would send Pyle small shipments of lighters to give out to soldiers he met at the front. Pyle wrote back to Blaisdell, calling Zippo lighters ‘the most coveted item on the battlefield.’ ”

“Amid the uncertainty of war, there was one thing a [servicemember] could rely on—his Zippo lighter. In rain, wind or snow, it worked every time,” said Zapel. “The company archives are filled with letters detailing the services a Zippo lighter was called to perform: heating rations in a helmet, lighting campfires, sparking fuses for explosives, hammering nails and even signaling […] with the famous Zippo ‘click.’ On several occasions, a Zippo lighter in a shirt or pants pocket even saved a life by deflecting bullets.”

Zapel references a 1946 newspaper article in which Marine Colonel Bob Churley said that a Zippo lighter likely saved his life.

“Churley, a U.S. Marine serving in North China/Manchuria, was helping to hold back [Mao Tse-tung’s] Chinese communist army from overtaking the region until Chiang Kai-shek’s Nationalist Chinese forces could arrive,” said Zapel. “Churley’s plane experienced a frozen carburetor and landed in communist territory. The pilot, a second lieutenant, pulled out his Zippo lighter, lit it and held it against the carburetor. It worked and they were able to fly off.”

Because of a brass shortage during WW II and subsequent rationing, Zippo began making its cases from steel instead of the standard brass. To prevent corrosion, the steel cases were dipped in black paint and then baked, producing what became known as the Black Crackle® finish. According to “Warman’s Field Guide: Zippo Lighters” by Dana and Robin Baumgartner, a similar shortage during the Korean War necessitated another temporary return to steel cases. In the mid-1950s, the company began stamping date codes on the bottom of each lighter, which now help collectors and historians like Castro date and identify them.

“They became big during World War II, but in a different way, they became such a cultural item by the Vietnam War. They were used to heat food, signal helos at night during rescue missions, and more,” said Castro. “It was reported during the time that Marines used them to set Vietnamese village huts afire while on search and destroy missions. Zippos were reportedly used so often in the country on search and destroy missions that the GIs nicknamed them ‘Zippo Missions’ or ‘Zippo Raids.’ Zippo became synonymous with flame-thrower and was used as a verb in the phrase, ‘Zippo that hut,’” she added.

For Castro, small items like Zippo lighters that might seem trivial often carry a great deal of significance and might be exactly the kind of donation the museum may be looking for to fill gaps in its collections.

“The museum collects all the things that people think we do,” Castro said. “They’ll call us up and say, ‘Hey, I have uniforms, I have weapons […] but they don’t always necessarily think of the things that might tell the Marine’s individual story. There are so many more things that the museum accepts than what people normally come to us with.’ ”

To Castro, it’s significant that Zippos were an item that nearly every Marine chose to carry in their packs, their pockets or their helmet straps—and it’s a testament not only to the multitude of uses for the lighter, but also to the sentimental and personal value attached to them.

“How much stuff can they actually carry with them during combat? This was something they felt was worth carrying,” Castro said.

Author’s note: Special thanks to Jennifer Castro, the cultural and material history curator at the National Museum of the Marine Corps, for significant contributions to this article.

Editor’s note: All lighters from the collection of the National Museum of the Marine Corps were photographed by Jason Monroe.

Honoring Our Promise

Toxic Exposure Victims Would Benefit From Bill Expanding VA Coverage

By Beth Brown

On March 3, House Resolution 3967 advanced through the U.S. House of Representatives with a vote of 256-174. This bill encompasses several major provisions including areas of burn pits exposure in Iraq, Agent Orange exposure in Vietnam, and contaminated water at Camp Lejeune, N.C., that would potentially allow veterans, civilians and family members who have experienced health effects from toxic exposure to file for relief from harm.

As part of the overall PACT Act, the provisions of the “Camp Lejeune Justice Act of 2021” are of particular interest to Marines and their family members who “resided, worked, or otherwise exposed (including in utero exposure) to water aboard Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune, N.C., from August 1, 1953, to December 31, 1987, for not less than 30 days.” Until now, laws particular to the state of North Carolina have prevented such motions.

All legal action undertaken by the bill’s proposed provisions must be qualified not only by the time period stated above, but with evidence that the individual is currently diagnosed with a health condition that was caused by exposure to the water; was associated with the exposure to the water; was linked to the exposure to the water; or the exposure to the water increased the likelihood of such harm.

The bill goes further into detail, stating that while the burden of proof for all claims is the responsibility of the petitioner, “studies conducted on humans or animals, or from an epidemiological study, which ruled out chance and bias with reasonable confidence and which concluded, with sufficient evidence, that exposure to the water described in subsection A is one possible cause of the harm, shall be sufficient to satisfy the burden of proof described.” The full text of the bill is available at https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/117/hr2192/text.

For the thousands of veterans and their loved ones who have been locked in a decades-long battle with the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) regarding Camp Lejeune water contamination, the bill’s passage marks an important step in the fight for recognition of the suffering they and their family members have endured. Currently, veterans or dependents who may have water contamination-related claims are required to submit them through the VA Office for Health Care and Disability Benefits, depending on the severity of their illness.

According to the VA, since 2011, just 17.3 percent of disability claims submitted in response to water contamination at Camp Lejeune have been approved.

For Tara Craver, the bill means more than an opportunity for financial restitution. Her husband, Karle Craver, was a Marine veteran who had been stationed at Camp Lejeune. When he was diagnosed with esophageal cancer in 2014, it was the first time either of them became aware that he was potentially exposed to toxic chemicals while serving his country.

“It’s not about me,” said Tara Craver. “We didn’t know. Karle didn’t know. He brushed his symptoms off as heartburn.”

Tara and Karle found out about Camp Lejeune contamination concerns when they went into a VA office to apply for benefit assistance for his healthcare shortly after diagnosis.

“There was a little sign on the desk that said something about Camp Lejeune. So, I asked, ‘What’s this about Camp Lejeune?’ Someone came out of the office to talk to us. That’s how we found out,” Tara Craver recalled.

Esophageal cancer is one of the conditions considered eligible for care by the VA in regard to claims associated with Camp Lejeune. Due to this, Tara and Karle were told that his claim would be expedited for treatment. A month after registering, they received a letter stating he had been scheduled for a doctor’s appointment a month away.

Sadly, Karle Craver lost his battle with cancer on the very day he was scheduled to attend that appointment. Tara, despite having no income, has dedicated her life to raising awareness of Camp Lejeune contamination. She has participated in dozens of interviews, founded the Facebook Group “Camp Lejeune Victims ‘The Faces,’ ” which now has more than 2,800 members, and embarked on a 10-state awareness campaign, standing outside VA hospitals with signs and information regarding the contamination.

After Karle’s passing, Tara also found herself struggling to qualify for survivor benefits. After multiple denials, she was awarded benefits in 2017, deemed retroactive to 2014. While she very nearly lost everything, including her home, the money was of less importance to her than raising awareness to others. “If we didn’t know,” she says, “how many others didn’t know? Money can’t bring back what we lost.”

For others, it’s difficult to remember how their loved ones struggled with illness-related financial difficulty and not feel some measure of relief that compensation beyond medical care or disability might finally be available. Jill Dilgard, whose father, Larry Lee Steen, was a Marine veteran once stationed at Camp Lejeune, remembers her father’s struggle to remain financially independent while battling multiple cancers and cardiovascular ailments. She was still a freshman in high school when her father had his first heart attack at the age of 45.

His three children all worked together to help their father despite his protests. Dilgard describes him as a proud and loving man, who, after winning his fight with prostate cancer, had a chemotherapy pump implanted so that he could continue to work through treatment for prostate cancer, following treatment for aggressive bladder cancer. She describes him as a man who still embodied everything the Marine Corps stands for: loyalty, strength and determination. Despite his multiple diagnoses, he maintained a positive and capable mindset, making the decision to receive hospice care when it became clear his cancer had metastasized and was incurable.

Much like Tara and Karle Craver, Dilgard’s father was unaware of his potential exposure until 2017, when a family friend brought it up in conversation. While he did apply for VA assistance, his application had not been approved before he died seven months later.

Dilgard supports financial recognition for affected veterans or their families beyond healthcare and disability if their claims are accepted. “They don’t cover the devastating and catastrophic effects on the finances. You pay co-pays, medication; you’re too sick to work. You have to go to specialized units for care. The cost of radiation and chemotherapy are extreme.” She is currently a Facebook group administrator for “The Faces” and shared Tara’s sentiments on awareness. “If we had known, he could have gotten preventative screenings. Maybe it would have been caught earlier.”

Larry Lee Steen

Still others are living the reality of illnesses they believe are related to their time at Camp Lejeune. Sam Maynard, a Marine veteran who was stationed there for four months in 1986, is one such veteran. He volunteered for service at 19, he says, out of high school. He attended a seven-week school at Camp Lejeune, with an additional two months before and after his training began, before being stationed in Hawaii. He remembers that while in training to become an electrician, he became so dizzy he fell off a 30-foot training pole. He noticed a physical decline while there.

“I was in such good shape coming from boot, you couldn’t stop me. By the time I left, I was a wreck,” Maynard said, adding that while there, he developed skin boils and his 3-mile run time increased from 18 minutes to 24 minutes.

It wasn’t until about 16 years later that Sam suffered a stroke that changed his life. He’s hazy on the details, but his surgeon told him that he had a stroke during an operation, which led to partial paralysis. Today, he’s lost one foot and is in a battle to keep his other while also experiencing neurological effects and recurring infections. While he does receive VA healthcare, his disability application has been rejected 10 times as his medical concerns do not meet any of the currently recognized Camp Lejeune water contamination-related conditions.

His only income is Social Security, which he says has affected his life profoundly. “I don’t want to be disabled,” he says. “Believe me, I would rather work. Before I got sick, I was making six figures. I’ve lost everything; I’ve sold everything. I didn’t even go to my daughter’s wedding because I feel like if I can’t even give her a gift, I shouldn’t go.” He said that he’s in danger of foreclosure on his home and can’t understand the situation he’s in today. “I signed on the dotted line that said they’d take care of me if anything happened to me. Not from what I’ve seen.”

The VA lists the following conditions as presumptive for healthcare eligibility in relation to the Camp Lejeune water contamination: bladder cancer, breast cancer, esophageal cancer, female infertility, hepatic steatosis, kidney cancer, leukemia, lung cancer, miscarriage, multiple myeloma, myelodysplastic syndromes, neurobehavioral effects, non-Hodgkin lymphoma, renal toxicity, and scleroderma.

The following conditions are also potentially eligible for disability for active duty, reserve and National Guard members who were potentially exposed: adult leukemia, aplastic anemia and other myelodysplastic syndrome, bladder cancer, kidney cancer, liver cancer, multiple myeloma, non-Hodgkin lymphoma and Parkinson’s disease.

The subject of the Camp Lejeune water contamination has been a focus for the VA since the mid-1980s, when it became apparent that wells supplying water to the installation were polluted. After investigation, it was concluded that there were two main sources for the pollution: an off-base dry cleaner which disposed of chemicals in a septic tank very near one of the well reservoirs, and a broken fuel tank.

Following an investigation, Camp Lejeune was listed as an Environmental Protection Agency Superfund site and has since undergone decades of remediation efforts.

In 1999, questionnaires were sent to former Camp Lejeune residents by the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR), but it’s unknown how many of the estimated 1 million individuals who had potentially been exposed received this letter.
In 2018, the VA expanded its review of chemical exposure in relation to Camp Lejeune in an attempt to amend regulations and establish presumptions of service connection for certain conditions in addition to the 15 conditions already deemed eligible in connection with the ATSDR. At the time of press release, veterans with potential exposure were encouraged to contact their local VA healthcare facility or visit https://publichealth.va.gov/exposures/camp-lejeune/ to learn more about the Camp Lejeune water issue and to sign up for email notifications of updates as they occur.
ATSDR has also established a community assistance panel (CAP) for Camp Lejeune. Affected community members are encouraged to contact CAP with concerns regarding exposure. More information can be found at https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/sites/lejeune/capmeetings.html.

Also known as the “Honoring Our Promise to Address Comprehensive Toxics (PACT) Act,” H.R. 3967 carries significant importance to all who have served or currently are serving.

Also included in the bill are revised considerations for exposure to Agent Orange and burn pits, which would require the expansion of presumptive related illness from exposure to various toxins to 23 conditions. The bill would further require the VA to provide training and outreach operations to affected veterans, as well as DOD-based training to active-duty personnel on the dangers of exposure to per- and polyfluoroalkyl chemicals (PFAS) and increasing registration eligibility for PFAS-exposed veterans.

Another change proposed is an extension of VA medical care eligibility for post-9/11 veterans from the current five years to 10 years post-military separation, as well as a requirement for the VA to create a provision allowing presumption of exposure to radiation for veterans who participated in cleaning operations in Palomares, Spain, and Enewetak Atoll following nuclear accidents.

Author’s bio: Beth Brown is a writer who has worked both as a staff reporter and independently. She is the daughter of a Marine, a veteran of the USCG and the spouse of an active-duty Coast Guardsman.

FedEx Founder Frederick W. Smith

“I Owe a Debt of Gratitude to the Marine Corps”

By Joel Searls

Frederick W. Smith has spent the majority of his lifetime in leadership, first in the Marine Corps during Vietnam, and then later as an entrepreneur in the founding and operating of Federal Express. After graduating from Yale in 1966, he served four years in the Corps, which included two tours of duty in Vietnam. He then launched the original air-ground Federal Express network which began operations in 1973 to serve the rapidly growing high-tech, high-value-added sectors of the economy Smith had predicted. The company has since grown into an $84 billion global enterprise that serves more than 220 countries and territories.

Smith is responsible for providing strategic direction for all FedEx operating companies: FedEx Express, FedEx Ground, FedEx Freight, and FedEx Services, which includes FedEx Office, FedEx Logistics, and FedEx Dataworks. FedEx operations include 684 aircraft, more than 200,000 vehicles, and more than 5,000 operating facilities. Approximately 570,000 team members worldwide handle more than 19 million shipments each business day.

FedEx has been widely acknowledged for its commitment to total quality service. FedEx Express was the first service company to win the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award, the nation’s highest award for performance excellence, in 1990. FedEx has been recognized by Time magazine as one of the “Time 100 Most Influential Companies” and has consistently been ranked on Fortune magazine’s industry lists, including “100 Best Companies to Work For” and “World’s Most Admired Companies.”

Smith is a Trustee for the Center for Strategic and International Studies and a member of both the Business Council and Business Roundtable. He served as chairman of the U.S.-China Business Council and co-chair of the French-American Business Council. He has served on the boards of several large public companies— Malone and Hyde (AutoZone), First Tennessee, Holiday Inns, EW Scripps, and General Mills—and charitable organizations including St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital and the Mayo Foundation. He was formerly chairman of the Board of Governors for the International Air Transport Association and chaired the executive committee of the U.S. Air Transport Association. Smith served as co-chairman of the U.S. World War II Memorial project alongside Senator and World War II veteran Bob Dole, and then as the co-chairman of the campaign for the National Museum of the Marine Corps. He has received several honorary degrees and numerous civic, academic, and business awards including the Global Leadership Award from the U.S.-India Business Council; the George C. Marshall Foundation Award; the Atlantic Council’s Distinguished Business Leadership Award; the Wright Brothers Memorial Trophy; and the Circle of Honor Award from the Congressional Medal of Honor Foundation. In addition, Smith is a member of the Aviation Hall of Fame and the Business Hall of Fame. He appeared on Forbes’ “100 Greatest Living Business Minds” and has been named a top chief executive officer by both Barron’s and Chief Executive magazines.

As a highly decorated Marine Corps infantry officer and forward air controller (FAC) in the jungles of Southeast Asia, he learned critical leadership lessons and had lifechanging experiences. Smith was awarded the Silver Star and Bronze Star. After leaving the Corps, he then pursued his entrepreneurial dream, which started as an urgent package delivery service.
Editor’s note: The author recently conducted a virtual interview with Fred Smith, discussing everything from his service in the Corps to the future of FedEx.

What are the most important leadership traits you have utilized in the founding and operating of FedEx?Well, I think if you were to go to a FedEx Leadership Institute class, and I would emphasize that our management school is called The Leadership Institute, so that should be a dead giveaway that the Marine Corps had a big emphasis in my life because you have to be a great leader to be able to withdraw the discretionary effort out of people in the service industries. … It’s similar to athletics and the military where the leader’s job is to get that discretionary effort, which in the military can be up to and including risking or losing one’s life in furtherance of the mission. So, if you were to read the FedEx Manager’s guide … which I wrote the original version of it, or you read the FedEx Operating Manual you would find as an NCO or company grade officer in the Marine Corps the doctrine and basic tenets of leadership and management are straight out of what the Marine Corps teaches and had a very big influence on me. In 2008, I wrote a brief article in the Naval Institute Proceedings at the request of its editor Bob Timberg, also a Vietnam Marine veteran, where I talked about how important my Marine Corps service was in all of the principles I used to found … then continue to use to this day at FedEx even though it is a company approaching 750,000 people. Our philosophy, People Service Profit (PSP) goes right back to that core tenet that the Marine Corps teaches its young officers and NCOs, and that’s take care of the troops. … If you take care of the troops, they’ll take care of, in our case, the customers or the mission and you’ll achieve success. So, I cannot overemphasize how important the Marine Corps was in my business career, more important than my formal education I might add. How to manage an organization and achieve goals and results really, mostly was from my Marine Corps experience and of course sports was important to me too … my Marine Corps experience was the bedrock on which FedEx was formed.

We select, we just don’t let anybody into our management ranks, and we have to evaluate you to see if you have the ability to lead people. … The traits that a leader has, which are taught by the Marine Corps: keep your men informed, make clear the mission, look after your troops, all of those core bedrock principles of leadership are taught in our Leadership Institute. Now we also teach them … the formal aspects of management which we call Quality Driven Management (QDM) which is usually with statistics and all kinds of what other companies would call Six Sigma … quality management techniques to manage the enterprise. But since our product is a service, we don’t make automobiles or food where you can just repeat the processes.

It’s a new day every day when we put all of those tens and tens of thousands of vehicles on the street or fly all those planes, so you have to have great leadership at the first level of management to be able to accommodate all of the vagaries and vicissitudes … the weather … traffic and all the things we deal with every day. That’s why we have leader managers and not just managers. … The principles of the Marine Corps are as true today as they were when I learned them some 50 some odd years ago and they’re probably exactly the same thing as the Athenians and Spartans were teaching their troops 2,000 years ago.

How does your Marine training in troop welfare influence the culture of FedEx and how do you take care of your employees?We do it in a lot of different ways. Praise in public and counsel in private. We have BZs, which everybody in the naval service knows which are the two the flags that the admiral puts up on the yard arm to mean “well done.” … So, I adopted that. If you’ve done an outstanding job, a manager can give someone a BZ voucher, dinner for two, an unexpected reward sticker … on a memo, or a BZ lapel pin, it’s straight out of Marine Corps leadership and the naval services.

I think probably the most important thing is we made a commitment to our folks that if they do well, they will have an opportunity to advance. … If the company does well, we’ll share the rewards with them so that is the bedrock of that PSP philosophy. … In the military it’s quite the norm that you go from lieutenant to captain to major and so forth. So, you promote from within by definition. In the business world that’s a bit of an unknown thing in many organizations. You mean you started off as a package handler and now you’re a vice president at FedEx. We have platoons of them. That’s why veterans find it such a familiar and friendly place to work because they’re used to that extraction of discretionary effort, setting the example, keeping your troops informed. So, if they do a good job they can go as high in the organization as they want based on their abilities. … it’s very familiar to anybody that has been in the military service, particularly in the Marine Corps.

I invite anybody who has spent 35 years at FedEx to come by and see me when they retire. … There’s not a week that goes by that I don’t have several people that are informing me [they] are retiring after 35 or 40 years. I don’t know this for a fact, but I would bet that we have more long service employees at FedEx than any major company in America because that loyalty needs to go both ways and so that’s the most important part of the PSP philosophy.

Our folks had really worked hard on the front lines of keeping the at-home, industrial and healthcare supply chains operating. Most people were doing remote work. Our people were out there delivering and flying planes, so we gave all of our front-line employees a very significant bonus in January 2021. It wasn’t part of their regular pay package, but that reinforcement of focus on commitment to the mission and taking care of the customer in our particular case. It’s worked very well for us for many years.

Yes, I think people relate to these principles because they’re universal truths and they also relate to them in other parts of the world. You may have to modify it … to the culture, but the golden rule is as true in the Middle East as it is Latin America or Micronesia. Again, you have to make sure you modify it for the local culture. So, our PSP philosophy has worked for us every place, and we serve 220 countries and territories.

Now some of them are agents who are licensed to be FedEx there, but those that are actually FedEx, which is the vast majority of our operations overseas, if you went to them and asked them about PSP or Quality Driven Management, they would know exactly what you’re talking about. It’s a lingua franca that goes throughout the FedEx organization around the globe and again it all comes back from those basic leadership and managerial principles.

I mean I still use the Marine Corps method of laying out a strategic issue for our strategic management committee, Situation, Mission, Execution, Administration, Coordination and Communication; SMEAC. That’s what I learned in The Basic School. It’s pretty solid stuff.

What key components did you take from your service in the Corps and how has that evolved over time?I think people are a bit more questioning today than they were in my era and would be even more so if you went back to the Korean and World War II generations. So, you probably have to put more effort into communication in the “why” rather than the “what,” but that is a good thing, that’s not a bad thing. I think communication is more intensive, particularly today with social media. You can have some incredible firestorm that erupts over some post or mistake. You see it every day in the business press. So, those communication skills are even more important, and we’ve had to get better and better at that. Biannually, I put out a letter to the entire organization to sort of set the stage as to what our board of directors is trying to do and the things we need to focus on.

For instance, two years ago I did a very extensive one on the changed world of cyber security. Your phone now is a way into your life and a potential weapon against you. Those communications as to what’s going on and why we are putting restrictions on use of your phone and clicking on this or that in your [personal computer]. It’s a more complex world and it’s a world in which the average team member is much more informed, perhaps erroneously, but they have all kinds of information coming at them.

So, you have to put a lot of time and effort into the communication in an organization this size to make sure everybody understands what we are doing and not only what we are doing, but why we’re doing it, and when something goes wrong, you know what we’re doing to fix it. So, those are modifications I think brought by modern technology like we are using today doing an interview 1,500 miles apart and it’s like we are sitting here in the same room.

Outside of “Devotion,” what are your favorite films to have produced (financed) and why?Well, there have been a lot of them. I guess one of them that comes to mind is “The Blind Side.” That was a famous story about left tackle Michael Oher who was written about by Michael Lewis, one of our great authors of the day. He [Oher] was adopted by a family in Memphis. He came from a rough situation and went on to be a great football player. So, my daughter Molly found that script and we knew the family and in fact my youngest son is married to the Collins, the real Collins, who is in the movie. “The Blind Side,” I believe is the highest-grossing sports movie of all time, so obviously that’s a favorite for a lot of reasons.

The initial movie that I financed for Alcon Entertainment is still one of my favorites. It’s called “My Dog Skip” and it has Diane Lane and Kevin Bacon in it. If you watch “My Dog Skip” and you don’t have a tear in your eye in the last frame of that movie, you’re not human. … It’s based on a Willie Morris novel. Willie Morris was a great Southern writer … of the Faulkner tradition … he was the editor of Harper’s. “My Dog Skip” remains a favorite, but there’s so many of them.
Then my daughter Molly, who was an NYU film school graduate, and then worked for Alcon, the original film company I backed with these two young men that went to Princeton together, she started her own company called Black Label Media. She’s done a number of them that are favorites of mine. “Sicario,” about the drug trade and “Soldado” [“Sicario: Day of the Soldado”]. If you watch those two movies, they were several years in advance of exactly what you’re seeing on the border. They were very prescient. Benicio Del Toro, Josh Brolin, Emily Blunt. Those were great films.

“Only the Brave,” Josh Brolin was also in that one and Miles Teller and Jennifer Connelly . . . about the hotshot firefighters that saved Prescott, Ariz., and unfortunately lost their lives. It didn’t do great financially, but it’s a wonderful movie. In the military genre, “12 Strong” which was about ODA 595, the first Special Forces Group that went into Afghanistan after 9/11, it’s a remarkable story, very well received commercially. Molly was an executive producer, she’s a working producer, but she was an executive producer and helped to fund “La La Land,” which was a huge success. Of course, more recently they’ve just finished in Black Label Media two films, one of them for Netflix called “Reptile,” which is a detective story with Benicio Del Toro and Justin Timberlake.

Geoff Stults, who acted in both 12 Strong and Only the Brave, was a guest on MCA’s podcast Scuttlebutt. You can listen on iTunes or Spotify or watch it off of YouTube here.

“Devotion” is a story that is close to your heart, and you have produced (financed) the film which is due out in theaters next year. Why did you choose to back the film, what do you like most about it, and what do you want audiences to take away from their experience?Then close to my heart and to anybody that has been in the naval service and the Marine Corps is the movie adaptation of the New York Times best seller by Adam Makos called “Devotion.” It’s about Jesse Brown, the first African-American naval aviator and his wingman Tom Hudner flying Corsairs in support of the Marines surrounded at the Chosin Reservoir in North Korea in late fall 1950. The film tells the incredible set of circumstances which led to Brown being shot down and Hudner deliberately crash landing his plane in 15 degree below zero weather to try to save Jesse Brown, which unfortunately was unsuccessful.

That movie comes out this summer and it’s shot with real airplanes. They’re not CGI airplanes, they’re real Corsairs, and Sky Raiders and Bearcats which they were flying up at Quonset before they transitioned to the Corsairs on the USS Leyte. … It’s a fantastic film and it’ll be out in late summer so I can guarantee you that is going to be a favorite of mine, and I think its [going to] be a favorite of any Marine or Sailor that watches it too.

Well, I funded “Devotion” because the story of these two men deserves to be told. It’s incredible to me that it never was told before now and again it’s because Adam Makos wrote this wonderful book about these two men largely unknown. People in the Navy know about Brown and Hudner, and Hudner thought he was going to be court martialed when he deliberately crash landed his plane, but he wasn’t; he received the Medal of Honor. So, he’s quite well-known in naval aviation circles, but among the general public these two men are not known. Jesse Brown was to naval aviation what Jackie Robinson was to baseball or the Tuskegee Airmen were to Air Force aviation.

In fact, President Reagan gave the commencement address at Tuskegee in 1987 and he talks at the end of his commencement address for about ten minutes about Jesse Brown and says just what I said. Everybody knows about the Tuskegee Airmen, but nobody knows about Jesse Brown who broke the color barrier in naval aviation. There wasn’t a single (African-American) naval aviator during World War II. Then in 1948, he went to Ohio State and went through all kinds of prejudice and got his wings and then ended up giving his life getting the Marines out of the Chosin Reservoir cauldron and for the United States.

It’s just a message I think getting to what I hope people will take away from the film about two men. They couldn’t be from anymore disparate backgrounds, one a sharecropper’s son from Mississippi and one from a well-to-do family in Boston who broke ranks from going to Harvard and went to the Naval Academy, and they come together. They become devoted to one another, hence the name of the movie. It’s a great example of what Dr. King said about judging somebody by the content of their character than by the color of their skin. That’s the message I think that is so needed today. I hope “Devotion” gets that message across and I think people are going to like the film.

The majority of the film’s proceeds go to the Brown-Hudner Scholarship Fund managed by the Marine Corps Scholarship Foundation so there is a double benefit of seeing the film because it’s going to educate a lot of legacy Navy and Marine Corps children.

What are your thoughts regarding nostalgia and what are your future projects and plans?I’m so interested in everything that is going on today. That’s just been the way I choose to live life. So, it’s not that I don’t think about the past. I think about Vietnam and a lot of my friends almost every day. I certainly think about my oldest daughter who we lost. So, I think about the past, but I’m fascinated with the future, you know drone airplanes and autonomous vehicles, robots, and these incredible genetic medicines that are coming online.

We’re very proud at FedEx for instance. We distributed hundreds of millions of doses of the Pfizer, Moderna, and Johnson and Johnson vaccines not just in the United States, but around the world. So, think about that this pandemic happens and these incredible scientists been working on it for 20 years come out with this miracle vaccine and then because of FedEx and UPS and others, but we certainly were either the biggest or we and UPS were the biggest in distributing these things.

It’s not that I don’t take great pride in the past and don’t think about the past, but I’m still actively interested in the future. I think as you get older, and I’m 77, if you don’t do that, you tend to maybe concentrate a bit too much on the rear-view mirror and not enough on things to be active and involved.

I think that FedEx which is now an enormous operation as I told you, almost 700 planes, 200,000 vehicles, 5,000 facilities, and 700,000 people in our system around the world. It’s a lot of fun for me to come to work every day and still be active in the management of the company. Now, make sure you and everybody … understands, just like any great organization it’s run by a team. And we have a fabulous president and great executives in marketing and sales.

The CEOs of our operating companies of which we have three major operating companies and three smaller ones, so, [we’ve got to] come together every month as a team and I enjoy the synthesis of ideas, strategies and programs with my business partners. It’s very stimulating and it’s a lot of fun because we are in the center of everything. Everything. Medicine, we’re in the middle of that, computers, production of almost anything that you can think of that is manufactured, we’re right in the middle of that. If you want talk about European politics, Chinese politics, Australian politics, Brazilian politics, we’re in the midst of all of it because we serve all of those countries.

It’s something that I enjoy and this team that’s running this place when I go over the side, as we say in the naval service, it won’t miss a beat because the people that make up that strategic management team are just terrific. I can promise you I learned a long time ago as a very young man as a platoon leader that you want to make sure you have a good succession plan because in those days people often had to call on them. So, we have great management depth and great management training, so I think your readers need to understand … I’m just a representative of that managerial team.

One of my roommates at language school when they sent us out to learn Vietnamese in a compressed curricula in 1967 was General Carl Fulford, and I always tell Carl that he drove me out of the Marine Corps because you could tell he was going to be a general and I was not. … All kidding aside, I have maintained many friends in the Marine Corps throughout the years with Carl, Sen. Jim Webb, LtGen Ron Christmas, I could keep going on and on about all my buddies from the Marine Corps. I’ve always been extremely grateful for what the Marine Corps taught me. A lot of my service was not pleasant, but it shaped who I am, and I owe a debt of gratitude to the Marine Corps, and I was glad to come to this interview and tell you that.

Editor’s note: Effective June 1, Smith will step down as chairman and CEO of FedEx and will assume the duties of executive chairman.
Author’s bio: Joel Searls is a creative and business professional in the entertainment industry. He writes for We Are The Mighty. He serves in the USMCR and enjoys time with his family and friends.

Winsome Earle-Sears: “Leadership is Not What You Say: It’s What You Do”

Exclusive Interview

Virginia’s Lieutenant Governor, Marine Veteran

By Sara W. Bock

In the 1980s, while serving as an electrician at Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton, Calif., Corporal Winsome Earle observed a display of leadership that left a distinct and lasting impression. Assigned to their unit’s quality control section, Earle and her fellow Marines were working around the clock in preparation for a routine Inspector General inspection and were quickly growing exhausted.

“Our warrant officer came out to our platoon formation after we had come back for the evening and we still had another four or five hours to go after we had worked a long day, and he encouraged us,” she recalls during an exclusive interview with Leatherneck, Feb. 18. “I don’t remember the words because all I remember is … He was moving equipment with us, he was inspecting equipment, he was doing all kinds of things. He got more out of us that day than the days before. And I learned that leadership is not what you say: it’s what you do.”

It’s a memory that the first female lieutenant governor of Virginia, Winsome Earle-Sears, continues to call to mind today and strives to emulate as she finds her footing in the Commonwealth’s second-highest office. The affable Republican, who also is the first Black woman to hold statewide office in Virginia, was sworn in Jan. 15, alongside newly elected Governor Glenn Youngkin. Together, they’ve taken the helm of a state with a strong military presence, home to nearly 700,000 veterans and 27 military bases, including the Defense Department’s headquarters, the Pentagon.

Sears served just one enlistment in the Corps, but her identity as a Marine is ingrained in her, and she believes her experiences on active duty prepared her for the responsibilities of her office, which include presiding over the Senate of Virginia where she is responsible for casting tie-breaking votes.

Born in Jamaica in 1964, Sears traveled to New York City as a child to live with her father in the Bronx. She describes an upbringing in which politics and government were frequently discussed—particularly by her grandmother, who was heavily involved in Jamaican politics and with whom she had a cherished bond.

“We just always talked politics. We read two different newspapers every day so that we could be able to have discussions about things,” Sears said, describing family debates about hot button issues, to which she adds, “Jamaicans are very political.”

Sears attributes this in part to the period of democratic socialist rule in Jamaica during her childhood years. “It just destroyed us,” she says. “We understood that you’ve got to get involved in government … Sometimes it takes you growing up and having a family that you start seeing things and you think, ‘No, this is not the future I want for my children.’ So, you get involved, and you can either light a candle or you can curse the darkness. To light the candle is to find the solution. To curse the darkness is to be a victim. And you know in the Marine Corps we always say there are no problems, only solutions and other options.”

Her grandmother’s influence not only sparked an interest in politics and a responsibility to get involved, but also set her on the path to becoming a Marine. Sears was 18 years old when her grandmother died, and although she was enrolled in college and set to begin classes that coming fall, she found herself flailing.

“It just so happened that my mother in Jamaica happened to have a Jet magazine open to the ad with, ‘The Few, the Proud, the Marines.’ And I thought, ‘Yes, this is what I need. I need some discipline. I need a reason to live. And the Marines can sure do that for me,’ ” Sears recalls. “So that’s what happened. I joined the Marine Corps, and I got several reasons to live and a lot of discipline. It was one of the best times of my life for sure.”

After stepping on the yellow footprints at Marine Corps Recruit Depot Parris Island, S.C., in January 1983, Sears quickly learned that she would have to lose what her drill instructors referred to as her “New York attitude.”

“One time the drill instructor said to me, ‘Private Earle, you’re not going to make it, you understand me?’ And I thought, “Wait a minute. I can’t go home a failure!’” she recalls, referring to the DIs as “masters of psychology,” and adding, “You know, the Marine Corps, they see things in you that you don’t even see in yourself.”

The newly minted Marine, who was raised with the mentality that it’s important to acquire a trade or skill, found her niche as an electrician, attending the Marine Corps Engineer School at Courthouse Bay on Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune, N.C.

“Man, was it out there in the boondocks!” Sears says with a laugh, recalling that she was the only female Marine in her class. “Being a woman Marine is one thing, and then being a woman Marine in such a field just really makes you one of the very few.”

After completing her military occupational specialty (MOS) training, Sears was assigned to Camp Pendleton, where she was one of just a few women in her unit. She describes how she quickly realized that she had to prove herself capable of meeting the same standards as the male Marines around her, who she says were more than willing to help her out. The gesture was nice, she said, but she knew she had to rely on her own merit in order to make it.

“You have to dig your own ditch, you have to pull your own weight and you will get the respect that’s deserving of you,” said Sears.

She recalls another instance in which she learned to take responsibility for herself: a formation for which she thought she was well-prepared but soon found out otherwise.

“My boots were spit shined, my cammies were excellently pressed, everything was good,” Sears said. But it turned out that her glasses had a few fingerprints on the lenses that she had missed. “And because of that, I didn’t get the day off like all of the others did. I remember thinking, ‘But they’re glasses!’ Details matter … If you’re going to do something right, do it right the first time. No excuses.”

It’s lessons like these that became part of Sears’ leadership philosophy, one that’s to this day heavily influenced by her service in the Marine Corps. She’s also driven by a deep sense of duty to the country that once welcomed her as a young immigrant. Soon after taking the oath of enlistment, she took another oath to become a U.S. citizen.

After leaving active duty in 1986, Sears went on to pursue a wide array of endeavors, including earning a master’s degree; running a homeless shelter; serving as a vice president of the Virginia State Board of Education; starting a small appliance, electric and plumbing business alongside her husband, Terence, who also is a veteran Marine; and receiving presidential appointments to the U.S. Census Bureau and the Advisory Committee on Women Veterans, which reported to the U.S. Secretary of Veterans Affairs. Elected to the Virginia House of Delegates in 2001, she served one term as a state legislator. Her varied experiences have afforded her a unique perspective of government, of service and of what it means to be an American.

“I think sometimes we as Americans take our liberties for granted, and we don’t understand that you have to fight for your liberties. That you are the government,” Sears said. “Government depends on you being involved. Government depends on you demanding that your leaders represent you and represent you well. That they take your phone calls. That they look out for your best interests, that they’re not there for themselves. That the political leaders understand that they represent you.”

When she ran for the office of lieutenant governor of Virginia in 2021, a significant plank of her campaign was veterans’ issues, including a push to eliminate all state taxes on the first $40,000 of military retirement pay and expand Virginia’s veterans care centers and workforce transition programs. She’s looking forward to tackling issues that are unique to female veterans, adding that while you don’t have to be a veteran to understand how veterans are affected by policy, it makes a difference when you “speak the same language.” She has increasingly been hearing from veterans across Virginia who are seeking help in various capacities.

Sears believes that it’s essential that veterans hold offices at all levels of government—not only to advocate for issues that affect military-connected populations, but also because of the unique skillsets and attributes that veterans bring to the table. Most importantly, perhaps, is an understanding of what really matters, and a shared identity not as Republicans or Democrats but as Americans. She encourages veterans who are interested in running for office to understand the sacrifice and work involved. To them she says, “Give it your all.”

“As veterans, we don’t care if you’re Republican, Democrat, Green Party, whatever party you are,” said Sears. “When we raise our hands to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States, we understand that we’re going to die for everybody. Not a political party. We are willing to give our lives for our country and those in it. So, we have a totally different perspective. We’re not so vitriolic sometimes. We understand that you can disagree without being disagreeable … not that veterans are without fault, but I think there is something special about a veteran being in office, having already once raised our hand to uphold the Constitution—it’s not something foreign to us. We’ve done it before.”

Revisiting America’s First Marines

By Edward T. Nevgloski, Ph.D.

Background

It wasn’t until 1921 that the Marine Corps acknowledged Nov. 10, 1775, as the date of its official formation. Previously, it recognized July 11, 1798, as its founding date. Why the change? Part of the answer lay in Lieutenant Colonel Hamilton M. Hoyler’s November 1950 Marine Corps Gazette article “The Legal Status of the Marine Corps” in which he discusses the legal distinction between the Continental Marines and the U.S. Marine Corps. The other part can be found in a memorandum to Major General Commandant John A. Lejeune from the officer in charge of the Historical Section at Headquarters Marine Corps.

In his memorandum dated Oct. 21, 1921, Major Edwin N. McClellan suggested that Lejeune declare Nov. 10, 1775, as the Marine Corps’ official anniversary. One can only speculate why McClellan suggested this date. It perhaps had to do with the country’s demobilization following World War I and Lejeune’s annual budget testimony before Congress in 1921. It is possible Lejeune rationalized using the Marine Corps’ role in America’s fight for independence some 146 years earlier as patriotic leverage to secure funding for the Marine Corps and its expanding mission and, quite possibly, to save it from extinction. Regardless of the reason, Lejeune issued Marine Corps Order No. 47 on Nov. 1, 1921, summarizing the service’s history, mission and traditions. More importantly, the proclamation was to be read aloud to Marines each subsequent year on Nov. 10 as a means for renewing their faith and pride in the Marine Corps.

Why 1775? If Lejeune intended to associate the Marine Corps’ reason for existence with America’s victory in its quest for freedom and independence, then 1775 certainly makes good sense. If he intended to capture the Marine Corps’ most complete record of service, however, a better appreciation for the historiography of Marine Corps history suggests Lejeune could have— and probably should have—gone beyond 1775. Had he done so, he would have found that William Gooch and his American Regiment (in service from 1740 to 1742), or “Gooch’s Marines” as they came to be known, are arguably the nation’s first leathernecks.

Counting Gooch’s Marines in the chronicles of official U.S. Marine Corps history is neither a new nor an original idea. In fact, several of the Marine Corps’ most respected historians, including Edwin McClellan, recognize Gooch’s Marines. In 1903, Marine Corps historian Major Richard S. Collum offered in “History of the United States Marine Corps” that “the first authentic record of Marines in America bears the date of 1740.” John W. Leonard and Marine Major Fred F. Chitty emphasized in their 1919 “The Story of the United States Marines, 1740–1919” that “if one could go back to Colonial times, it would be found that three regiments of American Marines were organized for service with the British Navy on this side of the Atlantic.” More recently, Colonel Robert D. Heinl contends in his 1962 “Soldiers of the Sea: The U.S. Marine Corps, 1775-1962” that the “first American Marines were four battalions raised in 1740 to fight in the War of the Austrian Succession.” In 1974, the Director of the Marine Corps History and Museums Division, Brigadier General Edwin H. Simmons, when describing England’s use of Marines during the colonial period recalled how “several regiments of American Marines” helped Britain fight its wars in North America, and that George Washington’s own half-brother Lawrence “served in Gooch’s Regiment of Marines at Cartagena in 1740.” In 1975, Charles R. Smith acknowledged Gooch’s Marines in the Marine Corps’ official bicentennial definitive history “Marines in the Revolution: A History of the Continental Marines in the American Revolution, 1775-1783.” Finally, academic instructors at recruit training on Parris Island and at San Diego as well as at the Officer Candidates School in Quantico acknowledged Gooch’s Marines in their Marine Corps history curriculums until the early 1990s. Upon recent inspection, Gooch’s Marines are no longer included in any entry-level instruction. This is likely the reason the Marine Corps today does not recognize Gooch’s Marines but leaves the question of the preceding two centuries unanswered. Why the Marine Corps’ lack of recognition of Gooch’s Marines? Before attempting to answer this question, it is necessary to first assess what we know about Gooch’s Marines.

Colonel William Gooch and the 43rd Regiment of Foot

Who were Gooch’s Marines? What we know from British and early American archival holdings is that they came into existence during Britain’s decade-long feud with Spain over access to trade markets in the West Indies and Caribbean. After the purported severing of British Navy Captain Robert Jenkins’ ear by Spanish sailors searching his ship for trade contraband in 1731, unenforced trade treaties and minor retaliatory acts between the two great sea powers forced Britain’s King George II to order military action against Spain’s Caribbean and northern Latin American possessions. One target of interest was the prized Spanish coastal fort at Cartagena in present-day Columbia. According to Marine Corps historian Joel D. Thacker, among the reasons for attacking Cartagena was to “make good use of the American colonies in the conflict” and for the British Navy to rejuvenate “its Marine regiments which had been allowed to fall into disuse.”

On April 25, 1740, the British Parliament dispatched King George II’s signed orders “for Alexander Spottswood, Esqr., to be a Colonel of a Regt. of Foot to be raised in America for His Majesty’s service, to consist of 30 Companys.” Virginia’s royal governor at the time, King George II, advanced Spotswood to major general and made him responsible for coordinating with fellow colonial governors in organizing, recruiting, and training three colonial regiments for service alongside six British Marine regiments assigned to Admiral Edward Vernon’s fleet. Given the primary military objectives of his expedition against Spain and potential other European adversaries, Admiral Vernon wrote to the Duke of New Castle that he wanted more than just three colonial regiments of infantry. In his letter, Vernon pondered “If we should come to a general war with France as well as Spain, I believe Your Grace will have already perceived the necessity there may be of converting most of our marching regiments into Marines.”

Before raising his regiment, Spotswood suffered a heart attack and died on June 7, 1740. Command of the colonial effort shifted to Spotswood’s lieutenant governor, Colonel Gooch, who inherited mostly debtors, criminals, and vagrants in his Virginia ranks. His fellow governors provided much the same in way of soldiers and seaman. According to McClellan, aside from his four Virginia companies, Gooch raised five companies from Massachusetts; two companies from Rhode Island; two companies from Connecticut; five New York companies; three companies from New Jersey; eight companies from Pennsylvania; three Maryland companies; and from North Carolina, four companies of colonists serve in the role of Marines.

After forming the regiment and providing it very modest training, British Parliament recognized the regiment officially as the 61st Regiment of Foot. Wearing their signature “camlet coats, brown linen waistcoats, and canvas trousers” Gooch’s Marines of “probably from three to four thousand strong” departed from ports in New York, Pennsylvania, and Virginia on board eight transports for staging off Kingston, Jamaica, in the fall of 1740. Admiral Vernon sailed for the West Indies piecemeal with elements of his fleet departing from various locations in Britain and North American and at staggered times. After two months of limited training, Gooch’s Marines arrived off Jamaica sometime in December and joined Vernon off Hispaniola on Feb. 25, 1741, but in nowhere near the strength and capacity expected. British Marine historian Colonel Cyril Field in his “Britain’s Sea-Soldiers: History of the Royal Marines” lists unsanitary conditions, the poor quality of food and water, scurvy and heat for much of this. Reduced to half its original strength and distributed across 16 of Vernon’s ships as he sailed south for Cartagena were 1,381 American Marines (officers and enlisted), of which many were now replacement for the ships’ sick and dead crews.

Cartagena and Cuba

Aside from the scant details provided in both British and early American archives, much of what we know about the assault on Cartagena comes from the journal of Scottish poet and author Tobias Smollett, who at the time was a surgeon’s assistant in Vernon’s fleet. Smollett’s journal entries became popular short-stories later and proved to be one of a very few existing firsthand accounts of the expedition.

Arriving off Cartagena on March 4, 1741, Admiral Vernon’s council of war recommended he proceed with the assault. To get to Cartagena, the fleet had to first pass through the small passage at Boca Chica, which the Spanish defended from three sides. Shelling of the fort’s surrounding outer defenses at St. Jago, St. Philip, and Chamba began on the morning of March 9. After besieging the fort for more than a week, Colonel Gooch landed with a company of Marines (roughly 200) under Captain Washington in the early morning of March 19 at Barradera and “spiked the Spanish guns of the fascine battery” there. Once complete, Washington’s Marines “stormed and carried on the 25th of March Boca Chica Castle (Fort St. Louis).” During the raid, Gooch sustained wounds to both legs from Spanish cannon and musket fire. Washington’s company remained ashore the next two weeks. On April 5, Vernon sent British Marines ashore to seize the castle controlling Cartagena’s inner harbor. Gooch’s Marines “covered the flank of the main attacking column deployed as skirmishers in the jungle” according to historian Lee Offen. Upon taking control of the castle, both British and American Marines returned to their ships late in the same day. Vernon’s fleet entered the harbor without issue. The main portion of the fortress and town at Fort St. Lazar was now vulnerable to British naval bombardment.

After meeting with his war council, Vernon set April 16 as the date to land the British and American Marines in preparation for an assault at Fort St. Lazar and the main side of its defenses on April 20. Vernon and his land commander, British General Thomas Wentworth, debated the fleet’s exposure to Spanish cannon fire during a pre-landing naval bombardment. Unfortunately, Wentworth could not lessen Vernon’s apprehensions and executed the assault without a pre-landing bombardment.

The attack failed. Gooch’s Marines, many of whom carried grenades and ladders for the British Marines to scale the forts’ heavily manned walls, took the brunt of the Spanish cannon and musket fire. Helpless to return fire, many dropped the ladders to find cover or to pick up muskets to return fire on the defenders. Smollett credits the American Marines for their heroism throughout. “Nor could the scaling ladders, wool-packs, or hand-granades, be of any service in this emergency; for the Americans, who carried them in the rear, seeing the troops falling by whole platoons, refused to advance with their burdens; but though they would not advance as pioneers, many of them took up the firelocks which they found on the field, and, mixing among the troops, behaved very bravely.”

With no hope in overtaking the Spanish defenses and with losses mounting due to casualties and from lingering sickness, the war council recommended Vernon abandon the plan to take Cartagena. Vernon agreed and sailed for Jamaica on April 25. The costs were 39 of Gooch’s Marines killed in action and another 67 wounded. Combined with those overcome by disease and fatigue, Gooch commanded considerably less than half the number of Marines than when he departed North America.

In late June, Vernon’s fleet reassembled off Jamaica where the war council discussed and recommended a follow-on action to seize the Spanish territory on Santiago de Cuba, present-day Cuba. Colonel Gooch, still recovering from the wounds he received at Cartagena, departed Jamaica for Virginia. His executive officer, Lieutenant Colonel Henry Cope, took command of the remaining four understrength American Marine battalions. In mid-August, Vernon landed his remaining Marines on the east end of the island opposite Port Santiago, known today as Guantanamo Bay. From there they established a base of operations before pushing west to gain control of as much of the island as possible. The same heat, humidity, and tropical illnesses plaguing the expedition from the start, however, brought the operation to a stand-still. The only action on record was minor fighting at Catalina Village between Spanish forces and two American Marine companies. In late November, Vernon back-loaded his disheveled force and sailed for Jamaica, where he sent some 50 American Marines ashore to help build two hasty forts: Frederick and George.

In March 1742, Vernon left Jamaica to attack Spanish forces in Panama, but sickness and fatigue forced the fleet back to Jamaica in May. While transiting to Jamaica, Lieutenant Colonel Cope grew ill and died on July 12. The remaining American Marines garrisoned at their Jamaican forts until General Wentworth disbanded the regiment on Oct. 24, 1742. The Marines quietly returned to their American colonies over the next several months, bringing an end to Gooch’s Marines.

Questions Remain

Two questions worthy of further investigation and debate are whether Gooch’s Marines were American, as opposed to British, and whether the regiment was a Marine organization in both function and name, as opposed to soldiers serving as Marines. As to the 61st Regiment of Foot being by function, task, and name Marine, Richard Collum does not make any particular distinctions. Edwin McClellan, however, offers in “The American Marines of 1740 to 1742” published by Marine Corps Gazette in December 1929, that whether one is a soldier or a Marine “depends upon the character of duty such soldier performs and not upon whether he is actually called Marine.” To that end, McClellan suggests historians “accept the statements of all the British Marines’ historians that they were real Marines.”

As for whether the Marine Corps today should consider the 61st Regiment of Foot as being British Marines or a distinctly autonomous American Marine regiment, this is more a philosophical argument, if nothing else. Historically, the colonies were British, and the colonists therefore were British subjects. The colonists viewed themselves as British initially. In fact, many remained loyal to King George III and the British Parliament during and after the War of Independence. The growing ethnic dissimilarities between colonists and the average British citizen due in part to the tyranny of distance, environmental challenges, and experiences contributed to the development of a separate colonial identity, independence, and life free of British rule. By 1740, an increasing number of Irish, Scottish, Dutch and French immigrants reduced Britain cultural monopoly and gave rise to authentic American ideals. Within the historiography of Marine Corps history, McClellan’s position that “Gooch’s Marines were part of the British Marines’ organization” does little to support the claim that 61st Regiment of Foot was distinctly American. Nor does Leonard and Chitty’s declaration that Gooch’s Marines existed “before the Colonies had acquired any desire to be separated from British citizenship or allegiance.” In 1775, however, the 13 American colonies and the hundreds of colonists who fought as Continental Marines during the American War of Independence were as well, yet Commandant Lejeune chose to identify them as Americans in Marine Corps Order No. 47. Perhaps the best litmus test might come from the British themselves and the justification for raising an American-specific regiment for the expedition against Spain was, as Leonard and Chitty recalled, because “native Americans were better calculated in the service for this climate than the Europeans.” Add that the British Parliament did not require Admiral Vernon and General Wentworth to furnish Gooch’s Marines with water, food, uniforms, and weapons and ammunition because they were American and this was a colonial responsibility suggests even King George II did not consider them British.

Two questions worthy of further investigation and debate are whether Gooch’s Marines were American, as opposed to British, and whether the regiment was a Marine organization in both function and name, as opposed to soldiers serving as Marines. As to the 61st Regiment of Foot being by function, task, and name Marine, Richard Collum does not make any particular distinctions. Edwin McClellan, however, offers in “The American Marines of 1740 to 1742” published by Marine Corps Gazette in December 1929, that whether one is a soldier or a Marine “depends upon the character of duty such soldier performs and not upon whether he is actually called Marine.” To that end, McClellan suggests historians “accept the statements of all the British Marines’ historians that they were real Marines.”

Conclusion

Marine Corps historian Allan R. Millet wrote in his 1980 “Semper Fidelis: The History of the United States Marine Corps” that the quality and caliber of colonist making up Gooch’s Marines “could hardly have given the name “marine” much distinction…” The expeditions to Cartagena, Cuba and Panama would likely not have given Commandant Lejeune much to be proud of in 1921 either. Regardless of their quality and performance, Gooch’s Marines were distinctly American. They were American by more than their name and identity; they were American by purpose. They were Marines in every sense of the word. Like the Continental Marines, they too were sailors in the absence of qualified seamen and soldiers of the sea. Perhaps it’s time to revisit the discussion on Gooch’s Marines and their place in the chronicles of U.S. Marine Corps history.
Author’s bio: Dr. Nevgloski is the former director of the Marine Corps History Division. Before becoming the Marine Corps’ history chief in 2019, he was the History Division’s Edwin N. McClellan Research Fellow from 2017 to 2019, and a U.S. Marine from 1989 to 2017.

This is My Rifle: M1 Garand

By Sam Lichtman

The year was 1932, and then-Major (later Major General) Julian S. Hatcher at the U.S. Army Ordnance Office had a problem. The Army had already decided that it wanted to replace the venerable bolt-action M1903 Springfield with a self-loading rifle to provide its riflemen with rapid-fire capability. Although there were no shortage of talented designers looking to sign a contract, Hatcher had no way to tell who was serious about building a suitable rifle and who was just a hobbyist looking for an easy cash grant. Furthermore, the workable designs that already existed had significant problems—after all, self-loading infantry rifles had been produced in small numbers since before the First World War, but no design had been good enough for a major military to adopt it as standard. A round of trials in 1924 had failed to find a rifle that was entirely suitable, but those trials set the stage for what was soon to come.

Self-loading, or semi-automatic, rifles had been modestly popular among hunters and sport shooters for decades. The ability to fire multiple shots in rapid succession without having to manually cycle the action was highly valuable in the field, but the designs weren’t nearly adequate for military use. Engineers had tried to scale up civilian designs like the Remington Model 8 and Winchester Model 1907 rifles, but they encountered serious problems: the rifles were usually some combination of heavy, inaccurate, fragile, unreliable, or expensive to produce. It quickly became clear that the standard .30 M1906 cartridge was much too powerful and the military’s requirements too stringent for an existing design to simply be adapted for soldiers and Marines to use in combat.

Enter two men named John—John Pedersen and John Garand. Pedersen was a seasoned, experienced firearm designer who had developed several commercially successful firearms while working for Remington. During WW I, Pedersen designed a conversion device which allowed the M1903 Springfield to be quickly adapted into a semi-automatic pistol-caliber carbine; it was adopted by the U.S. military and saw limited use by war’s end. John Moses Browning once called John Pedersen “the greatest gun designer in the world;” high praise from anyone, let alone Browning. Throughout the 1920s, Pedersen had been working on prototype designs for a reliable, accurate self-loading infantry rifle. When the Army started looking for one, he saw this as the perfect opportunity to have his design adopted.

Compared to heavyweights like Pedersen, John C. Garand was a relative unknown in the firearms world. Hailing from Canada, he was a mechanical engineer by training and trade. Much of his career had been spent designing industrial machinery for factories, a skillset which would later come to serve him well. Garand’s experimentation in arms design began in the early 1920s, culminating in his submission of a self-loading rifle to the unsuccessful 1924 Army trials. Changes to the way military ammunition was manufactured rendered the basic operating mechanism unworkable, but by the early 1930s, John Garand had again produced a design worthy of proper military trials.

In 1932, the Army ran another trials program to select and adopt a self-loading infantry rifle to replace the Springfield. This time, the playing field was dominated by only two serious contenders: John Pedersen with his T1E3 rifle and John Garand with his new and improved T3E2, both in caliber .276. Pedersen’s design used a toggle-delayed blowback mechanism with the breech locked by a sort of knee joint during firing. Garand’s design used a more conventional rotating bolt driven by a gas piston, which tapped expanding powder gases from the muzzle to operate the action. In the trials, John Garand’s rifle was found to be more robust and reliable than Pedersen’s and had one crucial advantage—it didn’t need lubricated ammunition. By virtue of its delayed-blowback operating mechanism, John Pedersen’s rifle would seize up and stop functioning unless the cartridges were lubricated, but its internal lubrication system increased complexity and allowed dust and grit to accumulate in the receiver, eventually causing malfunctions without careful cleaning.

The Army also had been testing the prototype rifles not in the standard chambering of .30-’06, but in an experimental .276. Military analysts had already determined that the new cartridge had a number of advantages suiting it well for use in a self-loading infantry rifle. Somewhat smaller and less powerful, the cartridge placed less strain on a rifle’s operating components and produced significantly less felt recoil, allowing soldiers and Marines to fire more rapidly and accurately. Furthermore, the lighter weight and lower production cost of each round allowed men to carry more ammunition into the field and stay in the fight longer.

During the late stages of testing, General Douglas MacArthur personally intervened to throw a proverbial wrench in the whole program. Wary of the additional complications a new infantry cartridge would pose for the U.S. military’s logistical network, MacArthur ordered that the .276 be abandoned immediately and all rifle development focus on the standard .30-’06. John Pedersen had designed his rifles around the .276 cartridge, but Garand had an ace up his sleeve—he had been working with the .30-’06 for longer. One of his crucial advantages was that he could readily redesign his T3E2 in .30-caliber, whereas Pedersen could not as easily scale his own designs up to fire the more powerful round.

This Garand prototype, designated T3E2, competed in U.S. Army trials beginning in 1932. It features a primitive “gas trap” system which taps expanding gases from the muzzle rather than the simpler and more efficient gas port arrangement found in most production M1 rifles.

Although Pedersen was known across the developed world for his design expertise, Garand’s rifle proved more effective and easier to manufacture. It was officially adopted as “U.S. Rifle, Caliber .30, M1” by the Army on Jan. 9, 1936.

The Marine Corps has traditionally been a little more conservative than the Army with adopting new rifles. Marine Corps brass in the late 1930s saw the rapid-fire capability of the Army’s new rifle as nothing more than a great way to waste ammunition and impede precision marksmanship. Despite their initial skepticism, the Corps ran a trials program of its own in 1940 to determine whether a semi-automatic rifle could be better than the venerable Springfield. They tested Pedersen’s and Garand’s designs along with a recoil-operated rifle designed by Marine reserve officer Melvin M. Johnson.

The Corps eventually decided to send some Johnson and Garand rifles to the Pacific theater to see how viable they were in combat. Both rifles, especially the Garand, quickly proved their worth against the Japanese in battles like Guadalcanal. The Japanese had long used the banzai charge as a way to dislodge enemy forces, and this tactic worked very well against Chinese conscripts armed with slow-firing Mausers. But against highly trained U.S. Marines with semi-automatic M1 rifles, a bayonet charge never stood a chance. Far from wasting ammunition, the sheer volume of fire provided by the new rifle allowed Marines to suppress enemy defenders and make rapid follow-up shots at moving targets.

Hearing positive feedback from Marines who had used the M1 in combat, the Marine Corps formally adopted the rifle to completely replace the M1903 and began mass issuing the new rifle to Marines in the field in early 1942.

Recall that John Garand was a production engineer with a great deal of experience designing factory equipment. This background allowed him to design the rifle for ease of production as well as the machines that would perform each operation. This proved to be a key factor in giving the United States an edge during World War II. They could manufacture and field in the mass quantities needed, something that tripped up the likes of the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany with their own self-loading rifle programs.

With America’s industrial might at their backs, riflemen of the United States Marine Corps used the M1’s fire superiority to fight their way all the way across the Pacific. Marines carrying M1s raised the American flag over numerous islands, and when war broke out on the Korean peninsula in 1950, soldiers and Marines picked their M1 rifles back up and went to go fight.

Warfare in the bitter Korean winter is very different from fighting on the hot, humid islands of the South Pacific, but John Garand had designed his rifle to function in extreme cold as well as heat. During the Battle of the Chosin Reservoir in 1950, Marines found that their M1s still functioned perfectly fine, except for one thing—lubrication. All firearms require proper lubrication in order to function reliably, and the M1 is no exception, but the natural oil in service at the time had an unfortunate tendency to thicken and gum up in the extreme cold temperatures. Undeterred, Marines simply stripped all the lubricant out of their M1s and ran them bone-dry—and the rifles kept on working.

Even after serving in two wars, the M1 kept soldiering on. Years of work on modifying and improving the rifle’s base design culminated in the adoption of the M14 in 1957. Despite the external differences, every M14 and variant thereof can trace its lineage directly back to the M1. Despite its official replacement, the M1 itself endured in frontline service. It dutifully guarded the inner German border and other hotspots around the world until 1961 when the last examples were finally phased out and sent back to Springfield for refurbishment and storage.

During the 1950s and beyond, militaries on six of the seven continents fielded M1 rifles received from the United States as military aid. Even after they were taken out of American service, M1 rifles gained a new life among civilian marksmen—many of them soldiers and Marines who had carried them in combat. Through the Office of the Director of Civilian Marksmanship (DCM), managed by the War Department, members of shooting clubs across the country could purchase refurbished military surplus rifles that were no longer needed by the U.S. military. To this very day, the DCM—now known as the Civilian Marksmanship Program—sells original 1940s and 1950s production M1 rifles for match shooting.

Few historic military arms have garnered such enduring popularity as the M1. This rifle, revolutionary for its time, is still held in high regard; its influence on tactical doctrine, marksmanship, and later firearm designs is felt in the modern day. Marines at Tarawa, Saipan, Iwo Jima, Inchon, Outpost Vegas and hundreds of other battlefields didn’t know how famous the rifle would become, of course. All they cared about was whether it worked, and as the record reflects, it did indeed.

Editor’s note: Special thanks to Jonathan Bernstein at the National Museum of the Marine Corps and Geoffrey Roecker of MissingMarines.com for technical research and assistance with photos.

Author’s bio: Sam Lichtman is a college student and licensed pilot. He works part-time as a manager at a gun store and occasionally contributes content to Leatherneck. He also has a weekly segment on Gun Owners Radio.

Hugh Purvis

Patriot Led a Life of Military Service, Culminating in Medal of Honor

By Mike Miller

Students of Marine Corps history may know about the bravery of Hugh Purvis, who received a Medal of Honor for his actions in the 1871 Korea expedition. But what is not well-known about Purvis is that he was a veteran of the Civil War. Purvis became a Marine in 1869, the first of many years of a long and distinguished career wearing the eagle, globe and anchor. Before that, however, he was a soldier who fought in the Battle of Gettysburg.

With the outbreak of the Civil War in 1861, Hugh Purvis was struck with patriotic fervor and joined the 23rd Pennsylvania Infantry, a three-month regiment, serving in Maryland in order to secure Washington, D.C., from Confederate incursions. At the end of his enlistment, Purvis decided that military life suited him well and joined the 28th Pennsylvania Infantry for three years. After a quiet winter on the Potomac River near Harper’s Ferry, Purvis faced sustained battle for the first time at Antietam on Sept. 17, 1862. More combat awaited at Chancellorsville in 1863, which began the road to Gettysburg. The 28th Pennsylvania was fragmented, with Purvis now belonging to the newly formed 147th Pennsylvania.

On July 1, 1863, Private Hugh Purvis and the other 297 officers and men of the 147th Pennsylvania Infantry marched hurriedly toward Gettysburg, drawn by the sounds of cannons and the knowledge that they must face General Robert E. Lee’s Army of Northern Virginia on their native soil. As dawn broke on July 3, 1863, Private Purvis and the 147th Pennsylvania were ready to meet the expected Confederate advance at the base of Culp’s Hill. Across a cleared field and stone wall, the 1st Maryland Infantry (Confederate), the 3rd North Carolina and two Virginia regiments made ready to charge directly into the Union regiment’s line. Lieutenant Colonel Ario Pardee moved his men down a slight slope to the low ground to a better firing position where they would not be on the skyline. Hugh Purvis and the 147th Pennsylvania readied for battle.

At 8 a.m., the Confederates charged down the slope with the “rebel yell,” led by the Maryland regimental mascot Gracie, a black Labrador retriever. Pardee allowed the Confederates to approach to 100 yards and then opened fire. The volley tore through the enemy ranks, breaking the charge into fragments that continued to attack until they could go no further. Within minutes, the surviving Confederates drew back up the hill to safety, leaving the field littered with the bodies of the dead and wounded southerners.

The sight before the 147th Pennsylvania was horrendous. One wounded Maryland soldier pulled up to load his rifle, which caused many nervous Federals to sight in on the injured man. Major John Craig ordered the men to hold fire as it was obvious that the warrior could do little damage. The intent of the wounded man soon became clear. All watched carefully as he slowly loaded his weapon, pulled the hammer back and then placed the muzzle of the rifle under his chin. As the Federals watched in horror, the soldier placed his ramrod on the trigger and fired the weapon, ending his suffering. No one who witnessed the incident could ever forget the Maryland soldier. The field at Gettysburg would forever be known as Pardee Field, after the commander of the 147th Pennsylvania.

Purvis next saw action in the Western theater in the 1863 battle of Lookout Mountain and the 1864 Atlanta Campaign at Dug Gap, Resaca, New Hope Church and Kennesaw Mountain. On Sept. 26, 1864, he returned home at the end of his enlistment. Civilian life seemed not to suit Purvis, and he joined the Veterans Volunteer Corps in 1865, serving in the defense of Washington, D.C., until the end of the war. Purvis remained in this service until July 20, 1866, when he again rejected civilian life for the duty of a soldier, enlisting for three years initially with the 26th Infantry Regiment. As the Army reduced in size, Purvis’ regiment was consolidated with other units.

Purvis made a fateful decision on Oct. 27, 1869, leaving the Army for an enlistment in the Marine Corps with his first station fittingly the Marine Barracks at the Philadelphia Navy Yard. He left the City of Brotherly Love for Boston the following month, followed by a quick assignment to the Marine detachment on USS Alaska on Dec. 29, a new wooden hulled screw sloop of war. Purvis had little time to learn the ways of the Marine Corps before going to sea. On April 8, 1870, Purvis found himself on his way to join the Asiatic Squadron commanded by Rear Admiral John Rodgers.

Private Purvis arrived on station just as tensions between the United States and Korea escalated over the 1866 disappearance of an American flagged ship, S.S. General Sherman, and the American Sailors who were supposedly shipwrecked on Korean territory. There existed no formal diplomatic relations between the two countries, so when the ship vanished, no method existed to investigate the incident. American warships visited Korea over the next two years, but no information was gained.

Rear Admiral John Rodgers was tasked to visit Korea and assist American diplomats in establishing some form of diplomatic relations. He assembled his squadron in Nagasaki, Japan, and sailed for Korea on May 16, 1871, aboard the screw frigate USS Colorado, accompanied by USS Alaska with Pvt Purvis aboard, the screw sloop of war USS Benicia, side wheel gunboat USS Monocacy and the gunboat USS Palos. The expedition reached Korean waters three days later but was immobilized by thick fog that prevented any further movement. When the weather cleared, RADM Rodgers anchored his squadron near Eugenie Island on May 23. Rodgers sent out the gunboat USS Palos with steam launches to survey the area.

At noon on June 1, USS Monocacy began the sounding mission with Commander Homer C. Blake on USS Palos steaming up the river behind three steam launches and a steam cutter performing the actual soundings. As the Americans neared the Korean forts at a bend of the river, the Sailors “observed the flags, an indication of the forts being occupied by soldiers.” As the Americans came closer, they saw the cannons in the fort were fully manned, and “the face of the hill occupied by lines of men, perhaps a thousand in number.”

The sound of a rifle shot echoed across the river, signaling the guns to open a blistering fire upon the American craft. Blake’s Sailors replied with a fusillade of cannon fire which quickly caused the gun crews to abandon their cannons. The American ships passed the fort at full speed and anchored, still firing at any sign of Korean resistance; however, USS Monocacy struck a rock and was leaking water at a rapid rate. The small boats reported little ammunition remaining from the fight. The Americans withdrew to rejoin the rest of the squadron, firing on the forts as they passed with no response from the Koreans. The Americans lost only two Sailors wounded during the engagement.

RADM Rodgers regarded the fire from the Korean forts as an insult to the American flag and informed the Korean government he would give them 10 days to make an apology before taking further action against the forts. Ambassador Low concurred with RADM Rodgers’ arrangements. The 10 days allowed him time to plan for battle and to take advantage of the neap tide, which would provide optimum conditions for a landing. There would be no more dueling with the cannon from the river. This time, RADM Rodgers planned an amphibious landing that would capture each fort as necessary. He pulled together a landing force of Sailors and Marines from Colorado, Alaska, and Benicia, totaling 759 men, including 105 Marines, commanded by Captain McLain Tilton. As each day passed, there remained no response from the Korean government.

On June 10, at 10 a.m., Rodgers ordered his landing force into motion with the mission to punish the forts which fired on the American vessels. USS Monocacy bombarded the first offending fort, identified as the “Marine Fort,” while the Palos towed 22 small boats loaded with Sailors and Marines, including Pvt Purvis and the landing party from Alaska. The Koreans returned fire but were driven from their guns by Monocacy’s cannon. Benicia made for a landing in an inlet below the fort, flanking the Korean defenders, who scattered as the boats neared shore, leaving their stronghold vacant.

Each boat grounded on the beach, allowing the ready Marines and Sailors to jump ashore to an unopposed landing, at least in theory. No one performed a reconnaissance of the ground itself, which proved to be the major opponent of the day. The inlet possessed a seemingly bottomless mudflat, which grasped the Marines by their legs and refused to let go. “The men, stepping from the boats, sunk to their knees, and so tenacious was the clay,” Rodgers reported, “that in many cases they lost gaiters and shoes, and even trouser legs.” Even worse were the gun crews of the nine howitzers, which quickly disappeared in the mud up the axles of their gun carriages. Dry land was a distant quarter mile to half a mile, depending on the landing site.

The lack of Korean resistance, even with obsolete weapons, allowed the Americans to avoid a disaster as the hill above the fort completely dominated the mud flat. Time was also necessary to plow through the mud and cross cavernous tidal channels in the sludge to reach dry land. Purvis and the Marines took a direct route to the fort, pulling themselves from out of the mud into the abandoned fort; however, the landing guns took a deeper route out of the swamp, avoiding the steep banks of the hill at the fort. Each cannon was pulled out by 75 to 80 Sailors and Marines manning drag lines with raw force to overcome the morass and requiring more than two hours of labor.

Once out of the mud, the sodden Marines and Sailors immediately began the destruction of the abandoned fort, tossing the smaller cannons into the river while spiking the larger cannons to prevent any further use. Other working parties pulled down the walls of the fort while powder, uniforms, rations and anything else burnable were put to the torch, sending blank clouds of smoke into the air. The destruction went on into the later afternoon when the Americans went into camp on the heights above the smoldering fort. The Marines took position in advance of the main encampment, armed with one of the boat howitzers, placing a strong picket line to detect any counterattack by Korean forces from the additional forts upriver. A force of Korean soldiers harassed Pvt Purvis and the Marines at midnight with desultory rifle fire but was soon driven away by several howitzer shells.

Daylight of June 11 allowed complete destruction of Fort Marine, and a request was sent to Admiral Rodgers for further instructions. Rodgers signaled back, “Go ahead and take the forts.” Commander Lewis A. Kimberly ordered the landing party into motion, marching toward the principal Korean forts 3 miles upriver. Pvt Purvis and the rest of the Marines led the advance, approaching a second fort on a high ridge overlooking the river. Once again, the Korean forces evacuated their fort, allowing the Americans to destroy the large number of cannons remaining behind. When the walls were pulled down, the American column began to march the final 2 miles to the heart of the Korean defense. If there would be a battle, it would be in the final fort complex ahead, the headquarters of the Korean commanding general.

The final 2 miles to the Korea citadel proved exhausting, and Admiral Rodgers described it as “a succession of steep hills, with deep ravines between, over which foot soldiers passed with great fatigue.” Entire companies deployed on the drag ropes of the artillery, hauling every cannon up each vertical ravine and then lowering the gun down into the next gulley in a never-ending struggle, yard after yard. As the American column moved wearily forward, columns of Korean infantry appeared on their left flank, threatening the advance. Commander Blake ordered three companies of Sailors and five of the howitzers to keep the Korean advance at bay until the main column reached their target.

At 11 a.m., Blake’s men reached the base of the peninsula holding the main Korean position well sited once again on a commanding hill overlooking the river. The approach from the land side proved most formidable with the only way to attack the position constricted by the peninsula into a narrow kill zone, commanded by the fort. The Sailors and Marines wasted little time getting into position, eager to complete their relentless attack. Purvis and the rest of the Marines moved in defilade to within 150 yards of the fort and then paused to recover their strength for the decisive attack.

The final charge would have to be made up yet another steep hill and then face the walls of the fort itself without scaling ladders. “Our men kept up a fire from their resting place upon the fort whenever an enemy exposed himself,” Rodgers noted, “and this they did constantly with the most reckless courage, discharging their pieces as fast as they could load.” The Koreans desperately defended their position, returning the fire with a vengeance. A bullet struck Marine Private Denis Hanrahan of the Benicia, killing him in the exchange of fire.

At last, the order to charge was given. Purvis sprinted ahead down a slope into an 80-foot ravine and then up the final yards to the walls of the enemy fort. The Korean defenders fired quickly on the charge until the Americans reached the wall, and then instead of pausing to reload, threw stones and boulders down the attackers. Luckily for the Americans, several gaps were blown into the wall before them, allowing them to enter the wall without a fatal climb.

Navy Lieutenant McKee was the first American in the fort and immediately engaged in hand-to-hand combat with the Koreans, falling with two mortal wounds, a spear in the side and musket ball in the groin. The Koreans fought hard against the Marines and Sailors. “The fighting inside the fort was desperate,” Rodgers related, “they apparently expected no quarter, and probably would have given none.” Private McNamara, of Benicia, took on a Korean soldier on the parapet, wrenching the matchlock weapon from the grip of his opponent and then killing him in a hand-to-hand fight. Navy Landsman Seth Allen of Colorado was killed while climbing the parapet as the Korean soldiers struggled with the Marines and Sailors. “Our men fought, some with cutlasses, others with their muskets and carbines, using them as clubs,” Commander Silas Casey of Colorado related, “the Koreans with spears, swords, stones and even threw dust to blind us.”

Rodgers related the Koreans “fought to the death, and only when the last man fell did the conflict cease.” The American flag flew from the parapet of the fort at 11:15 a.m. The Korean soldiers fought bravely but could not survive the American modern firepower in the close confines of the fort. At least 108 bodies of the Korean garrison were counted inside the citadel, and another estimated 20 prisoners were captured, many of whom were wounded. The garrison bravely gave their lives to defend their fort. Two Marines—Private Hanrahan and Private Michael Owens of Colorado—were killed in the fight.

Private Purvis was among the first to enter the fort and charged with Captain Tilton and Corporal Charles Brown on the large yellow 12-foot square flag of the Korean general. “The Alaska Marine [Purvis] was then a second or two before me and my corporal [Brown], but while he was unknotting the halliards, my Corporal and I tore the flag down.” Tilton noted in his report that Purvis rightly deserved credit for the capture. Both Purvis and Brown were recommended for Medals of Honor, but Cpl Brown deserted before he was awarded his medal. Pvt Purvis received his medal in 1872. He left the Marine Corps with the memories of his round the world cruise fresh in his mind. Yet, Purivis would not remain a civilian for long. On May 18, 1874, he found a new home and a new start by reenlisting in the Marine Corps at the Marine Barracks Annapolis, Md. Interestingly, Purvis rejoined his comrade of the Korean forts, Capt McLane Tilton, who was in command of the station.

Here, Purvis found his niche, remaining at the barracks for the next 10 years until 1884, when he was discharged from the Marine Corps as a corporal. He continued to serve as armorer and mechanic at the Naval Academy for many years. Purvis also met Mary Alice Jackson of Annapolis, and they were married by 1880. The two had three children. After a long and certainly interesting life, Purvis died on Feb. 12, 1922, in Annapolis and is buried in Saint Anne’s Cemetery beside Alice, who lived long enough to have the honor of sponsoring the USS Hugh Purvis (DD-709), commissioned in 1945.

Author’s bio: Mike Miller has written five books and many articles about Marine Corps and Civil War history. A longtime Leatherneck contributor, he retired in 2016 after a 34-year career in the Marine Corps archival, museum and history programs. His latest book is “The 4th Marine Brigade at Belleau Wood and Soissons: History and Battlefield Guide.”

Atomic Leathernecks

Nuclear Rocket Artillery in the Cold War

By Jonathan Bernstein

When atomic bombs were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945, they effectively ended World War II and ushered in a new era of warfare, but while the United States stood alone as a nuclear power for the first four years after the war, the Soviets detonated their own atomic bomb in 1949. From that point onward, the use of and defense against atomic weapons stood front and center of all U.S. military strategic planning.

For the Marine Corps, the ominous shadow of atomic warfare meant a reimagining of amphibious warfare. How were Marines supposed to come ashore and fight when a single atomic weapon had the potential to destroy an entire assault force before it even reached the beach? How would they counter potential nuclear-armed adversaries once ashore?

In a time of shrinking budgets and shrinking forces, the coming of the Atomic Age potentially threatened the very existence of the Marine Corps. The Marines lost 85 percent of total end strength between 1945 and 1950, dropping from a zenith of 474,680 Marines in 1946, to 155,679 the following year and ultimately down to a mere 74,279 by 1950. Ever living up to the adage of “adapt, improvise and overcome,” the Marine Corps had to reimagine how amphibious operations would be conducted in the Atomic Age in order to remain relevant. The National Defense Act of 1947 codified the Marine Corps’ role in protecting the nation into law and ensured its continued existence. From that point, the mission was no longer survival, but achieving and maintaining the cutting edge of American combat power in the postwar era.

The next war came sooner than many expected, and by the end of June 1950, U.S. forces were engaged in combat operations against North Korea. After setbacks and retreats through July and August 1950, the first amphibious assault to incorporate the lessons learned from the Bikini Atoll atomic tests landed the 1st Marine Division at Inchon on Sept. 15. Speed, dispersal, timing and surprise were key in getting the Marines ashore, with the 3rd Battalion, 5th Marines landing at 6:30 a.m. and securing the approaches to Inchon, enabling the rest of the Division to land later that afternoon.

The Inchon landings showed that while the primary atomic threat to a landing force was still from an air delivered weapon and that air superiority was critical for the ground force to maintain freedom of movement, the potential of tactical nuclear weapons employment lay just over the horizon. By December of that year, the Army’s missile research and development programs kicked into overdrive with one of several goals being the production of a surface-to-surface tactical nuclear weapon to enable American ground forces to attack and destroy potential origin points of an enemy tactical atomic attack.

Development of tactical nuclear weapons took a two-pronged approach, focusing on rocket and gun systems as the delivery method. War in Korea had increased the potential for nuclear conflict, and if there was a chance of a third world war, the Department of Defense wanted to be prepared to fight on the atomic battlefield. As a result, both the gun and rocket systems were given emergency priority with prototypes planned for delivery by mid-1951.

Nearly from its inception, the rocket program was intended to result in a mobile, flexible system that would allow for a quick “shoot and scoot” capability; a weapon that would fit in well with an amphibious assault force. Coming ashore via LCU or LST, the launcher and support equipment could quickly be landed, driven to a feasible launch site, and emplaced. The launcher was based on the M139C 5-ton truck, which had the load carrying and off-road capability needed to properly employ the rocket. It was standardized in 1953 as the M289 transporter/launcher.

The Douglas Aircraft Company completed the first five XM31 prototype rockets, nicknamed “Honest John,” by May 1951 and the test program began at the end of June, with the first launch on May 29. The program progressed steadily with modifications and improvements to the rocket and launcher over the subsequent two years. In addition to rocket modifications, the program also developed blast and fragmentation high explosive (HE) warheads, and a chemical/biological capable warhead as well.

While the atomic tests at Bikini Atoll in 1946 made it clear that a nuclear weapon employed against an amphibious assault force had catastrophic potential, the Corps quickly began looking at how to change its doctrine in order to adapt to the new status quo. Its first doctrinal push to acknowledge nuclear weapons was Landing Forces Bulletin (LFB) 2, issued on Feb. 20, 1953, titled “Interim Doctrine for the Conduct of Tactical Atomic Warfare.”

However, it was the 1955 revision of LFB-2 that laid out the framework for Marine Corps atomic doctrine by stating that the Marine Corps would be “tailored to conduct operations against an enemy employing atomic munitions” and would furthermore be “organized, trained and equipped to employ atomic munitions in amphibious or other operations,” with “control of the employment of atomic munitions … decentralized at the lowest echelon possible.”

This doctrinal update coincided with the arrival of the Marine Corps’ six M289 launchers and associated equipment and the standing up of the 1st Heavy Artillery Rocket Battery (HARB), FMF at Camp Lejeune. The six launchers had been appropriated for in October 1954 as part of the Army’s first follow-up purchase after the initial production run. The first Marine M289 launcher arrived in June 1955, with the balance of launchers, rockets and equipment arriving in August. The Fleet Marine Force was almost nuclear capable.

From LFB-2, it was clear that the Marine Corps intended to conduct amphibious landings and fight within a battlefield that had already been heavily prepped by atomic munitions. “An intensive atomic preparation of the objective area will be conducted immediately prior to the assault” pulls no punches as to the environment that the Marines were supposed to fight and survive within. Coming ashore with additional atomic weapons would ensure that enemy forces outside the prepared area and several miles inland could not serve as rally points for enemy reinforcements or survivors from the initial atomic preparation.

The Heavy Artillery Rocket Battery was designed to maximize its effectiveness under this doctrine. The battery was further subdivided into two platoons of two launchers and the requisite support equipment to maintain both as mission capable. The 1st HARB moved to Coronado, Calif., later in the year, and by mid-May had conducted a series of tests to identify minimum operational loads for both LCU and LST-class landing craft. They also determined the proper dispersal to ensure the survivability of at least one firing unit within an assault force. The dispersal between those firing units effectively relegated the final decision for the use of atomic weapons to the section chief, an E-6, per guidance from LFB-2.

The intent of the May loading exercise was to determine whether a complete firing unit could be brought ashore by a single landing craft. Loading plans were quickly worked out and a configuration for a complete firing unit was standardized for each type of craft to rapidly facilitate combat offloading. Although there were some issues with the overhead in pre-LST-1156 class that required support from higher echelon ordnance teams, the 1st HARB determined that both the LCU and the LST would allow for a complete firing unit aboard.

Once declared operational, the 1st HARB was assigned to the Field Artillery Group, under Colonel M.J. Hooper at Twentynine Palms, Calif., conducting their first field exercise as part of the Group in February 1958, using the XM4 flash/smoke practice rocket for live fire training.

The battery deployed to Okinawa in 1960 for an 18-month tour of duty, joining U.S. Army Honest John units already there. Okinawa was and continues to be critical to the U.S. presence in Asia and served as a significant “special weapons” logistics center for all of the services through 1972. Were tensions to boil over in South Vietnam or with China, the 1st HARB was prepared to jump off from Okinawa to wherever necessary.

The 1st HARB was finally disbanded in 1965 after the decision was made not to upgrade to the M50 improved Honest John rocket. While the principles behind the doctrine of medium range, medium yield atomic weapons were sound in theory, the practical survivability concerns became all too apparent. As the Cold War dragged on, newer, more efficient methods of nuclear weapons delivery ensured that the Marines would be able to continue with their historic mission of assault from the sea, while no longer needing to maintain an atomic force to hold the door open once they were secure on land.

The Honest John rocket and launcher failed to reach initial operational capability during the Korean War, but the concerns of a wider war spurred its development and gave the Marine Corps a tactical nuclear platform with which to defend an amphibious landing force from atomic attack. This nuclear amphibious landing capability, however small within the Corps, allowed for a far more capable Fleet Marine Force in the decade between 1955 and 1965. Aerial and artillery tube-delivered nuclear weapons outpaced the Marines’ need for a surface-to-surface rocket propelled nuclear deterrent, but allowed the Marine Corps to remain a relevant and significant nuclear deterrent force in its own right throughout the remainder of the Cold War.
Author’s bio: Jonathan Bernstein is the Arms and Armor Curator for the National Museum of the Marine Corps. Previously he was the Director/Curator of the Air Defense Artillery Museum. Bernstein began his museum career in 1991 at the USS Intrepid Sea Air & Space Museum and has served in a number of museum roles since then. He was an Army aviation officer, flying AH-64A and D Apache attack helicopters with the 1-104th Attack Reconnaissance Battalion, PA NG from 2006-2012. He has also published a number of books and articles on military and aviation history.

“Scuttlebutt” Podcast

Is Newest Addition To MCA’s Library of
Audio Content

By Sara W. Bock
When Vic Ruble joined the staff of the Marine Corps Association last year as creative content coordinator and deputy editor of Marine Corps Gazette, he knew he’d be involved in the behind-the-scenes development of the organization’s first-ever podcast. What he didn’t count on was that he would, by default, end up as its host. Initially out of his comfort zone perhaps, but to anyone listening, the role seems a natural fit for the former amtrac officer, a prior enlisted Marine with numerous deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan under his belt. Ruble retired from the Corps as a major in 2018 and then went on to earn a master’s degree in creative writing from American University in Washington, D.C.

Check out Scuttlebutt Here

With a heavy emphasis on the art of storytelling, “Scuttlebutt: An MCA Podcast” launched its first episodes in September 2021, taking its place among the professional association’s wide array of multimedia resources, which includes audio articles from its flagship publications Leatherneck and Marine Corps Gazette; an impressive “Corps Voices” collection featuring interviews with some of the most revered Marines in history, including Lieutenant General Lewis B. “Chesty” Puller; and recordings of guest speakers from MCA’s professional awards ceremonies and events.

The “by Marines, for Marines” podcast, which releases new installments weekly and is recorded on-site at the MCA headquarters aboard Marine Corps Base Quantico, Va., has quickly gained subscribers, with more listeners tuning in to each subsequent episode. Ruble and the rest of the “Scuttlebutt” production team, which includes MCA Digital Projects Manager Nick Wilson, who had already set up a recording room and procured the necessary equipment before Ruble came on board; Marine Corps Gazette associate editor William Treuting, who recently earned a master’s degree in history; and seasoned journalist and Leatherneck deputy editor Nancy Lichtman, hope that the informal, conversational format they’ve created will invite listeners to learn from the personal stories of others as well as think critically about current events that impact today’s Marines. The podcast comprises a mix of interviews with high-profile guests and conversations amongst the “Scuttlebutt” team as they discuss the interviews, relevant issues and various aspects of Marine Corps history.

From hot topics like COVID-19 vaccination rates among the ranks and the arrival of Afghan refugees in the U.S., to the implementation of the Commandant’s Force Design 2030 and the Corps’ newly announced talent management initiative, “Scuttlebutt” covers it all. But its primary objective is to showcase the stories and experiences of its diverse range of guests who have agreed to spend an hour or two of their time to join in the discussion.

“The conversations we will have will explore some of the themes and lessons our guests have taken with them to write their stories, so that you, the listener, will have more tools in your kit when it comes time to write yours,” Ruble said in the promotional “teaser” episode of “Scuttlebutt,” adding that his interviews with podcast guests would be akin to “coffeehouse” chats with friends.

Aptly named in a nod to the Marine Corps’ naval roots—the term “scuttlebutt” can be traced back to an early 1800s term for the cask containing a ship’s daily supply of drinking water, inviting conversation among those gathered around it, and later evolved into a slang term for rumor, gossip or “water cooler talk”—the podcast is informal, engaging and often brings out the witty side of its producers.

Ruble is adept at facilitating relaxed, congenial conversations with podcast guests, who have thus far included names like Marine veteran Miles Vining, who authored the 2020 book “Into Helmand With the Walking Dead”; actor Geoff Stults, who spoke about portraying military servicemembers in film and his work with the Merging Vets and Players organization; and retired Marine Sergeant Major and Navy Cross recipient Justin LeHew, who serves as the chief operating officer for History Flight.

“My goal for the podcast is for it to be a place where stories and narratives outside of the mainstream military mediums are featured and heard,” said Ruble. “Just because someone isn’t a Medal of Honor winner or wasn’t part of some badass special forces task force—which we have some of those folks too—doesn’t mean that what they did and how they contributed was insignificant. I would like it if our listeners got the feeling that ‘Scuttlebutt’ features stories that highlight the many nuances of the Marine Corps and that everyone’s story matters. Oftentimes, it’s the stories that we don’t know about that matter the most.”

The burgeoning podcast and the rest of MCA’s audio offerings are part of an ongoing effort to expand the association’s reach and provide content that goes beyond traditional print media. This is not to diminish the role of the iconic Leatherneck and Gazette, which have been telling the Marine Corps story and inviting professional discourse for more than a century, but rather to enhance and support those efforts.

Not only does audio content provide the consumer with tone of voice, inflection and emotion, which are often difficult to adequately capture in the written word, but its format also allows for multi-tasking, such as listening while driving, exercising or doing household chores. This is particularly desirable among those whose busy schedules don’t necessarily allow them time to sit and read a magazine or book but who want to absorb new information, perspectives and stories.

“We want to be both an entertaining storytelling destination and a somewhat professional resource peering behind the scenes at different aspects of the Marine Corps,” said Wilson. “We were looking to reach an audience that the MCA has struggled to keep in contact with over the years, that being the younger ‘25 to 45’ crowd. Which, as it just so happens, is the crowd that listens to podcasts.”

Podcasts like “Scuttlebutt” have soared in popularity in recent years across a broad range of demographics. According to Edison Research, approximately 80 million Americans, or 28 percent of the U.S. population over the age of 12, listen to podcasts each week, which is a 17 percent increase from those who listened in 2020—and this group also is more diverse than ever before. Additionally, the research company’s 2021 Infinite Dial study found that 62 percent of the population are weekly online audio listeners. It seems safe to conclude that these numbers will only continue to rise.

“The younger generation of Marines is less inclined to read a magazine than their predecessors, so with this format, we can reach those young men and women,” said Lichtman, who says she views the podcast as an audio magazine of sorts, employing some of the same concepts she’s used during her career in print media as she assists in its development. “Ideally, the podcast discussions will lead people to pick up a magazine, either the physical copy or the digital format, to take a deeper dive into Marine Corps history.”

She believes that the podcast format, which allows for a free flow of ideas between guests and hosts, fills a different need than either Gazette or Leatherneck, and helps further the association’s mission to develop leaders and to expand awareness of the traditions, history and spirit of the Marine Corps.

Lieutenant General Charles G. Chiarotti, the association’s CEO, agrees with this sentiment, stating that the “Scuttlebutt” team’s efforts contribute directly to the “rich discussion” that the association seeks to encourage among Marines and friends of the Corps.

“Through the research that they do to prepare for each podcast, to their casual on-air demeanor, they are able to uncover the more humanistic aspects of a story or personal account,” said LtGen Chiarotti, who was the featured guest on the “Scuttlebutt” Episode 6, which was released in conjunction with the 246th birthday of the Corps. “They reach a different level of understanding of an experience or a story than most are willing or able to provide through the written form,” he added.

During his appearance on the podcast, LtGen Chiarotti, who was born and raised in Italy, discussed his unconventional path to becoming a Marine, as well as the importance of professional development and what his priorities are as he takes the helm of MCA.

Prior to the recording of each episode, Ruble writes up a pre-interview show setup with discussion points and questions, and the podcast team meets to give suggestions and feedback. The result is a well thought-out, meaningful conversation that explores what it means to serve and to claim the title “Marine.”

“All of our guests have brought their own unique perspectives and personalities to this project,” said Ruble. “Some have been fun because the guest was charismatic, or I already had a relationship with them, so it really was just two friends hanging out. Others have been super informative, and I’ve just been in ‘receive mode’ the whole time as if I were a listener.”

Treuting, whose historical focus is on American military history, hopes to see “Scuttlebutt” attract both military-affiliated and civilian listeners alike and to serve as a springboard for additional audio and visual content produced by the MCA in the future.

“I want our podcast to be an entryway for civilians to become interested and invested in the Marine Corps and to help diminish the cultural/social gap between civilians and the military,” Treuting said.

There’s something for everyone among the audio resources available on the MCA website, whether it’s an oral history interview of General Frank E. Petersen, the Marine Corps’ first Black aviator, in which he describes a racial incident that occurred at Marine Corps Air Station El Toro, Calif., in 1953, part of the “Corps Voices” collection, or a speech given by Gen James N. Mattis, USMC (Ret), during an October 2019 MCA professional event. Popular Leatherneck articles, many of which are read by the authors themselves, also are easily accessible. And of course, “Scuttlebutt” is sure to attract an audience both young and old, from a variety of backgrounds.

“If someone has any passing interest in the Marines, I think they’ll find a lot to like in Scuttlebutt,” Wilson said. “I only see growth in the future, and it’ll be fun to be a part of it.”