A Question.................

LOL.

I know what you mean sir.  My late father only remembered how his skipper "allowed" him to steal an apparently "unattended" LCVP for them to use as a dinghy for SC-699 and how he would laugh over how he could get a Philippine Navy sailor sick,  when they were at sea in a storm as they were training them on the boat before they turned over to them, by eating a bologna sandwich loaded with mayo.

He also would tell us how, at times, he would meet up with his brother's ship (my uncle was 3rd officer on a Merchant Marine cargo ship) and have a beer party and a steak on the ship's poop deck.

But .... he NEVER spoke of action in the war.

I always LOVED  the 77-footers as gunboats; they just looked cool in that configuration ......

Lol.

Have to admit to being fascinated by antiquity in general.  That, and most of my kin were PacFlt or WesPac, some going back to China service days.  But, too many were snipes, and recollected more about the machinery than the hull designations.  So, even if I could dial in the wayback machine to go ask now-cogent questions, they'd only really remember things like the ships were grey, the primer red, and torpedo juice white like lightnin'

Looking at the Motor Torpedo Boat listing from www.navsource.org/.../05idx.htm gives a partial answer.

PT-59 (ex PTC-27) was converted to a PT Gunboat.

PT-60 (ex PTC-28)  was converted to a Gunboat in 1943

PT-61 (ex PTC-29)  was converted to a Gunboat in 1943.

No mention of PT-282, PT-283, PT-284, or PT-285 being converted to gunboats.  PT-284 did have the nickname "Gunboat Annie".

The PTC designation was for Patrol Torpedo subChaser.

True fact!

Also, and I'm guessing ... it denotes both roles of the boats................. right?

PT(G) is a reasonable designation. It leaves the means of propulsion out of it. Unless it is a galley propelled by oars.

OK ... What would you guys think of this?  PT(G) ... Sort of like LCI(R) .....................

PTC  please dont throw in the towel on this disscussion. I am not up to date on my WWII designators and I find this thread  Very Interesting! Please continue! I might actually learn somthing!

Well, APPARENTLY subfixer .... you and CapnMac are the only ones who think it was fascinating ....

I think that the key word is "motor" as opposed to an engine. Now I see how the M comes into play. Sorry if I didn't catch that before. The Panay gunboats were steam powered whereas the PGMs had internal combustion engines.  PGM would make sense.

Daggone, Garth, you said at the top of the post that this was "Just for fun". I was having fun with the discussion as it was going. I was just speculating and I did think that your question was thought provoking.

I would probably lump them in that category .After all , once converted they would NOT be as originally designated, Right ? PGM sounds right .

CapnMac?

Thank you for saying it was fascinating ... at least one person thought so.  It was said that it was attempting to rewrite history and was confusing to people.  How can asking ONE nonsensical question because I wanted to get people engaged out of boredom be a rewrite of history.

Again, I am sorry if I offended anyone's intelligence by asking one simple and unimportant question.

Mr. Ross,

I realize you consider yourself as a serious researcher and a scholarly history and every word must be used in its defined definition, but when I said 'back then' I was referring to WW2 ... I believe that the man to whom I was replying to understood that.

You know what everyone?  I am sorry I started this nice, innocent and nonsensical discussion ...

Chalk it up as what not to do when you're bored.

I am sorry Guys.

Hmm, a fascinating question.  I have a '39 Bluejacket's Manual, and a '40 Knight's--but, both are in deep storage and not something I can bring to hand.

Now, if memory serves, PG referred to the Panay-type gunboats.  If a distinction were needed for a  topedoless Peter Tare, it might (only might) be PGB for Patrol Gun Boat.

It's good to remember that may have been one Navy Department, that there were two Navies--LantFlt and PacFlt.  Atlantic Fleet personnel were very much influenced by the Royal Navy.  Enough that LantFlt types would refer to the PTs as MTB, even though that was not the by-the-book designation.  But, it probably simplified chin-wags over Singapore Slings.

If it is PT for a patrol torpedo boat (that obviously has a motor but no M in the designation) why would the same boat with guns instead of torpedoes have to be designated PGM? It seems to be inconsistant to me. Why not PTM for the PT?

 Maybe because no one wanted to be on a "Pig Boat"?  The submariners already had claim to that title. PG still sounds like the apt designation to me.

<<Back then, it was PGM........ PATROL, GUN, MOTOR ...>

No, the PG designator dates back to at least 1920.

Al Ross

Back then, it was PGM........ PATROL, GUN, MOTOR ...................

there for PG. Patrol Gunboat (PG)/Gunboat Index

www.navsource.org/.../09idx.htm

Is there already something designated PG? If not, that is what I would pick.