I never got past the first two sentences. It's crude and acerbic, looks to be self effacing, long winded and boring and once again (from your numerous post's over the last twenty years), it is evident from those who do not know you personally that you seem to be a very nasty and angry man.
If you hold certain or if not all posters at SteelNavy with disdain and/or open contempt, why do you even bother taking the time to put your offensive thoughts to words and contribute here, in a very non-contributory way? How long did it take you to compose, type and edit the above treatise that was short on spacing and long on "dick"? Your time is sacredly valuable but you don't mind wasting it here.
Is there anyway at all for you to post anything on a public forum that doesn't disgrace yourself by crudely insulting anyone personally. Who exactley are you?
When you put thoughts to words you are obviously confused between the profound difference between coarseness and wit, i.e., pick up something from say, Oscar Wilde, once and again!
As I said earlier, I only know you from here and it has never been a pleasant experience. I have never seen any thing attributed to you personally and have certainly never used anything with your name on it, and I will/would never pay you for anything (you're not a good businessman)! You recently commented on an archive film posted by another member that it was not a true ref because the color had been "dicked" with (what is it with you and dicks?) and therefore could not be relied upon for accuracy, or an inference of such. Your tone was that this opinion could not be argued with because you have seen the original film, the holy grail, therefore this viewing was a waste of time (more inference but to anyone, go back and re-read).
I posted "show us the original then, don't tell us about it, why should we believe you?".
Re-read your response. Are you in pain? Even if you wanted to tell me to go jump in the lake why couldn't you have just put it that way?
Please don't respond to this, you'll only embarrass yourself further because you are unable NOT to do that.
I suggest if ypuíre going to comment you read and digest the entire thing.
I am not even going to pretend to be nice here, deal with it or piss off, I don't care if I offend you, as you have seriously offended me for over a decade. In fact I care more about what my cats leave in the litterbox than what you think. I will not name names negatively, only positively with the exception of YOU in all capitals so you know it is addressed directly to Mr. Sharp's current false claims, You/you is otherwise the general you. I got sick of the demands, "requirements", false assumptions, false accusations, outright lies and extreme ignorance over 15 years ago. Some of you clowns continue to this day to invent and spew bullshit. The fact almost none of you have never done any original source research at NARA or NHHC just makes it even worse. You literally have no idea what the #### you're talking about.
1- Too many of you now and 15 years ago assume you know what my business was and how it operated. You know dick all. I did research for hire at $50/hour, over 80% of paying jobs for lawyers and vets (vets needing muster roll and decklog info for VA claims). I did paid research for plans and photos for a few model companies and hobby publishers. That said over 90% of what I found for WWI and WWII US naval subjects was on my own time between paying research. That means that no one was going to get the results of me spending my time and money for hard copies of some things for free.
2- NARA does not work like most of you think it does. It doesnít work like google and while they do have some search ability online it is very minimal and it is archaic and arcane more often than not. Back when I was researching it was much worse and about as intuitive as Linux running on ancient desktops as terminals that were at best 386 processors. First you go to the paper finding guides to find if they have what you're looking for and then you fill out a pull slip or slips; you have just spent anywhere from 1-3 hours basically looking through an often badly organized index and filling out forms. Now you wait 2-6 hours for it to get pulled. That's a lot of dead time so smart researchers that also have personal interests will set up pulls to fill those dead times and since one is waiting on the paying stuff to be pulled one keeps detailed time logs because lawyers tend to want strict accounting when you bill them for $1000-$5000. Oh yeah, when you're doing paid work for model company X and you stumble across a nugget that interests you but is unrelated to the job you make a note and come back to it later on your personal time, IF you have time.
3- NARA finding guides often suck and their policies are often not quite true in practice. They claimed they only had one working copy of films yet several times I ended up with 2-4 copies on the cart. Keep in mind these films at the time were 30 or so years old as well as the flatbed projectors not being all that well maintained so breaks happened a lot. Each of those copies were basically what they were supposed to be but with minor differences due to breaks and splices. Some frames get lost and other frames might get spliced onto a different but related reel. This is why it is so hard to find the film that clearly showed Arizona's stern as blue, there are at least 5 copies of that reel number and trying to get Federal employees to actually pull all 5 at once is impossible as "there is only one copy of each film" despite the fact youíve shown them four reels of a given number.
4- Finding guides are created based on what the submitting agency says is in a given FRC (Federal Records Container which is the same today as it was during WWII). This is approximately a 2-foot square box approximately 15 inches high. When an FRC came into Archives they cursorily checked the inventory sheet against what the folder tabs said then sent the box to the stacks and the inventory sheet to whoever makes finding guides; all that assuming the contents of the box are declassified. Most of the WWII USN records and photos were not declassified until November, 1978 and a certain person's research is mostly based on someone else's research prior to that date; talk about riding coattails.
5- You need to know about the Navy Filing System and Navy Filing Manual, you aren't going to know it by heart because the complexity is akin to trying to learn cuneiform, Sanskrit, ancient Greek and Roman Latin all at the same time. Even knowing how to use that system is no guarantee. You want document B-54397 you'll have to know what general section it should be in, say General Correspondence so you then get that finding guide and pull at the very least the box that goes from B-54000 to B-54999 and if you're smart you pull the boxes on either side of that one because humans #### up and stuff often ends up in the wrong box. No, they donít check to make sure you put stuff back in the correct box. And of course B-54397 may or may not have been sent to Archives in 1942. Even if you find it it may refer to a number of other documents, which actually have the information you're looking for....lather, rinse, repeat ad nauseam. Information on paints and camouflage could be in over a dozen different sections of records based on what type of document it was mentioned in- budget, coatings, general correspondence (CNO, CincPAC, CincLANT, etc.), BuAer, departure reports, etc. and some of those records may be at branch Archives spread across the country. Needle meet field of haystacks. Hereís the link to the Navy Filing Manual, all 573 pages of it, I suggest you poke around a bit to learn just how complex it is. https://www.archives.gov/files/research/military/navy/navy-filing-manual-1941.pdf
6- Of course you're assuming that correspondence to a given ship will be in its records. HA! A letter to California and West Virginia was not in either of those boxes, it was in Tennessee's box because the header was To: Tennessee Class Battleship California CC: Colorado Class Battleship West Virginia so whoever put it into an FRC put it with Tennessee's records. This is more common than you might think.
7- Nuggets. You find a lot of nuggets that are not in the finding guides and sometimes they're good nuggets. I found actual paint samples of 251N Flight Deck Marking paint and Pearl Harbor Blue paint in the same folder that had absolutely nothing to do with anything in that FRC. I found the sample of 5-D from Enterprise the same way as well as the big C size format spreadsheets of the King Board upgrades. None of that was in the finding guides. I also found a number of bad nuggets, bad as in hazardous such as boxes of nitrate negatives, reels of nitrate film, two dud 40mm projectiles from a friendly fire incident, etc. Don't assume the floor workers are smart, whenever I found nitrate film or when I found those two duds and reported it to the worker in charge of Textual Records he was more concerned that maybe I folded a piece of paper than the fact the unstable film or the duds could do one of those instability things they're prone to do and spontaneously ignite or explode from being disturbed, "If it hasn't blown up since 1942 it isn't going to now", ignorance beyond belief there just ask the dead people that have ####ed around with Civil War cannon balls they find.
8- Most of the textual FRCs I went through had never been pulled before.
9- For text records there is a split as to what is in College Park and what is in DC. That split was IIRC July 1, 1941. What decided what got sent to College Park or stayed in DC was based on the preponderance of what was in the box. Don't assume this was any kind of detailed check either, it was cursory at best. Depending on the time of day for the Metro rate and what parking lot had open spaces a trip to DC ran anywhere from $24 to almost $60 per day. Not something you do just for giggles.
10- Oh, you want that box? So sorry, another researcher currently has it reserved. The wait may be a day or it may be a couple of weeks before it's available again. They also donít keep track and will not tell you when it becomes available again, thatís on you to keep requesting until you get it. Also possible it has been reclassified or has been pulled back for classification review. 9/11/2001 you could get all the original documents for the V-1 and V-2, less than a week later they were all reclassified.
11- As they have time and budget NARA does try to break FRCs down into Hollinger boxes, an FRC can easily fill 6 Hollingers. As they do this they usually try to update finding guides but the delay between reboxing and new finding guides can be up to a year.
12- Copy costs if you wanted hardcopy back then were $.50/page, plans were IIRC $1.50/linear foot. You also might have to wait up to an hour to use one of the machines after getting permission to copy those documents. Fragile ones you're just shit out of luck if you didn't bring a camera. Digital cameras were just becoming common then and a decent one with a decent lens was close to a grand.
13- So, you finally got the box or boxes, now you get to spend hours visually scanning thousands of documents to find the one you're looking for.
There, now your extreme ignorance of how NARA worked has had the surface scratched. You don't just walk in and say you want to see all the information on subject X, you work your ass off to even find it most times. NHHC for me was better in that I knew the curator and could pretty much roam the stacks at will and pull what I wanted as long as it got put back correctly. NHHC has little text and is mostly photos.
14- You could fill Lake Michigan with the false assumptions, lies and bullshit spewed about the work I did for Mr. Preul. YOU Mr. Sharp have intimated he was charged a fee and that some shenanigans went on. Bullshit buddy, you know less than dick about it. My friend Don knew I had been doing personal research into camouflage and when the time came to paint his model he asked if I could spare a little time to do some research. I happened to have a lull in paid research so I DONATED 2 weeks of research time to THE ARIZONA MEMORIAL. After all was said and done Don did give me a thank you gift of a 1/96 4 stacker hull. No money changed hands. So YOU can #### off with those outright lies.
15- YOU claim Don was "got". Don was not "got" and YOU have no ####ing idea what I was asked to look into. I was in fact asked to DISPROVE the sea blue theory. When I finished the two weeks I donated, which included us viewing a film NARA later lost in the stacks (see multiple reels of number X all slightly different), I gave Don what I found in electronic and hardcopy as appropriate along with my previous findings and walked away from the process. Don Montgomery tipped us off to the films. Don and Daniel Martinez made the call on the model. The only involvement I had after that was my opinion on which of the Snyder & Short sea blue chips I thought best.
16- I happen to agree with their conclusion. I also saw the film in question and even took photos of it with NC-120 film, sadly the lab ####ed up the entire roll of film. See also, once again, multiple reels and lost in stacks because NARA is ####ed up. You don't have to agree with me or believe me, I don't ####ing care and never did, but do not go lying and bad mouthing, especially if you yourself have never even bothered to do this kind of work.
17- YOU have intimated I charged Mr. Herne for information. Here's a newsflash just for YOU- Mr. Herne, Mr. White, Mr. Snyder and Mr. Wiper all have copies of my electronic data. Mr. Herne has also been going to NARA since the early 90s. When I got separated over 10 years ago all the pre-WWII hardcopy went to Mr. Snyder, some of the WWII hardcopy went to Mr. Wiper and the bulk of WWII went to Mr. White and the only "charge" was three magic little words that your momma should have taught you. Please and thank you. We have all shared information among ourselves and other researchers. Sadly one of the two boxes sent to Mr. White fell into the great black hole of the USPS and it was the one full of most of the hardcopy and pull slips with copious notes. YOU Mr. Sharp owe all of us an abject apology for your lies and false accusations/assumptions. I don't give a flying #### in a rolling donut if you apologize to me but those other gentlemen deserve your apology.
19- YOU make claims of riding coattails. Hate to tell you but almost all if not all of one revered researcher's data on USN camouflage is all from data given to him by a previous researcher and he has never, to my knowledge, darkened the door of Archives. He isn't the only detractor that hasn't either.
20- YOU keep harping on an article I wrote 15 years ago. Yep, I wrote it. No I do not recall it word for word nor do I have a copy any longer as that hard drive died of tin whiskering in 2012. That, my old detailed research time logs and a ton of hate mail that hit my inbox all went with it. YOU also fail to realize it was written in under 4 hours between working on paying jobs and that later, better information became available. Gee imagine that.
21- Yep, I have an attitude. Engendered by very specific persons on this board. Let's go over some of that shall we.
22- Unless you are paying me or ####ing me the time span between someone making a demand, requiring me to do something or setting my schedule and go #### yourself makes a photon traveling a yoctometer look like glacial time.
23- Just prior to the article of years ago the previously mentioned revered researcher was told something in confidence, to which he agreed, then 5 minutes later popped on here DEMANDING I publish it IMMEDIATELY. Guess how fast that got a go #### yourself.
24- That generated a whole shit ton of demands and requirements. Again if you ain't paying me or ####ing me you do NOT get to require or demand a single ####ing thing.
25- Over 90% of what was on this board, that continues today, was demands, insults and lies. Back then you had to put your email address to post here, my inbox was full of hate mail and demands. See above re: go #### yourself.
26- YOU keep harping that I promised a full article with all the info. I was going to do it but within two weeks several walking, talking urethral infections, imcluded the revered one, had the gall to set a time limit. See again photon, yoctometer, go #### yourself. Guess what killed the full article. I announced at that time those several persons and their gall killed that idea. Either YOU have selective memory, are lying by omission or YOU weren't here yet, I don't care which it is.
27- Two of the most vocal detractors, one the previously mentioned revered researcher, were offered a chance to put their money where their mouth is, both declined. I don't work for free and this was work product, regardless of whether it was personal interest research or paid research. Note the research donated to the Arizona Memorial I did not and do not consider paid research. Previously mentioned revered researcher was shocked, offended and appalled that he might actually have to pay for the work of someone else....yeah, #### him. The other person wanted me to cherry pick out only the relevant hardcopy and electronic information. I gave him a choice, all of the hardcopy and all of the electronic stuff for my logged total time, 450 hours, of researching USN camouflage at that time at my rate of $50/hour for $22,500 or $50/hour for me to cherry pick for him plus estimated time to do the initial research at $50/hour. The stack of hardcopy was over 12Ē thick. Yep, his money never got to replace his mouth.
28- One detractor was always cordial, we might have vehemently disagreed but it was cordial. That person was Mr. Corley and I appreciate his cordiality and agree to politely disagree with him.
29- I did not and do not use third party photo hosting sites. Deal with it. I would now and then upload photos to Facebook or MeWe and link them here but I guarantee you a passel of little bitchlets would bitch and complain they can't see the photos because they don't have an account and it's not fair and blah, blah, blah and then they'll demand I setup a Flickr account or something just to please them. Pot-kettle, demand, photon, yoctometer, go #### yourself.
PS- yoctometer is 10 to the minus 24 of a meter. There, now you learned something.
Tracy, you know I have a ton of respect for you! We have shared some wonderful exchanges over very many years! Unfortunately you are making it very tough for me to step away for a couple of days like you asked.
Do you realize you are now the fourth person with his name listed in Jeffís article to come at me?
Jeff Herne - called me a Douchebag among other things.
Ron Smith - called me a dumbass among other things.
Don Andrews - told me to calm down among other things.
Tracy White - told me to go away for a couple of days.
When is the illustrator of the article going to tell me what to do or where to go?
You can thank all of the previous flame warriors (I admit I participated in some of the early ones) who just spoke stupidly about things they knew nothing about. It made me mad enough that it became worth my time to post the stuff I had found so people could read and argue from a position of knowledge instead of opinion.
As we see here, it isn't always better, but I guess we at least can have informed juvenile bickering instead of infantile pissing contests? I dunno.
P.S. Jeff Sharp - I wrote out and then closed out of a reply last night but it's bothered me enough that I'm going to say it here. You had a post where you had 4-5 sentences in a row about Ron that were wrong in one way or another. I know you don't like him, but you are letting your dislike lead you to make assumptions that are untrue. I was in the original group of people that helped Don Pruel with research and I'm sorry if I don't remember your contributions there, but from what I recall you weren't and have no first hand knowledge of who "got to" whom and what actually happened in that group. I would thank you to stop with that line of accusation in future flame fests.
I just wanted to write a quick note to thank you two for your contributions to our community and sharing your knowledge freely and without any extra baggage. I have a lot to learn, and I like knowing there are people I can learn from without having to filter our a lot of noise.
Thank you both.
Lots of information out there WRT CALIFORNIA hull coating. Looking for guidance for her color in DEC 1941.