Marvin Dowdy Norton (USNA'39)

[keith A]

Sorry Roland, can't access the article you cite. Can you tell me if it mentions possible reasons for his removal from flight duty?

best regards

Keith

[keith A]

Cheers George, we cross posted

[RSwank]

Keith, not sure why you can't get to the obit. Here is a paragraph from it about his service:

"Doc, from Marietta, Ga., graduated from the U.S. Naval Academy in 1939. In 1941 he married his high school sweetheart Dal and earned his wings as a naval aviator. In 1942 he and his squadron mates in Torpedo Squadron Ten embarked aboard USS Enterprise, from which they fought in the crucial, early carrier battles of the pacific theater. Doc and his two crewmen were shot down in the Battle of Santa Cruz, but were picked up and back in Torpedo Ten within days to continue the fight. They also flew from Henderson Field on the island of Guadalcanal, supporting the Marines in that first American island victory in the darkest days of the war. After World War II, Doc served at sea and ashore, in ships and units in San Diego and elsewhere. He commanded the Naval Magazine Guam, the destroyer USS Gurke, the amphibious ship USS Epping Forest, the Nuclear Weapons Training Center Pacific at NAS North Island, and the fleet oiler USS Mattaponi."

I have seen other references, for example in 1950 he was assigned to the naval air ordnance testing station Chincoteague (Wallops Island).

[RSwank]

Kieth,

If you scroll down on the "together we served" link you gave in post 4, the full obit is at the bottom of the post.

[keith A]

Roland you are right! Dunno how I missed it.

Rich, I am still a bit confused by the statement that he served with VT-10 1942-45. The bio confuses VT-10 of the Enterprise with the later Traron VT-10 "Cosmic Cats". With just one air medal surely it argues his active service as a flyer ended in 1942-43. His battle stars might indeed have been awarded for non-flying service on a warship during 1943-45.

K

[R Leonard]

All TWS has served to do is sow confusion. Just because someone at TWS throws up a patch for the VT-10 designated training squadron does not mean Norton was actually in that squadron. The VT-10 training squadron was not even established until 1960!

Looks more like to me that some enthusiast said to himself "Oh, here's a VT-10 patch, he must have been in that one," and so they even go on to list it for the period he was in the torpedo squadron. Google "VT-10' and you get a bunch of training squadron stuff, nothing whatsoever to do with VT-10 the torpedo squadron.

Instead, google "Torpedo Squadron 10" and you get hits for "The Buzzard Brigade" such as
https://www.daveswarbirds.com/cactus/vt-10.htm which lists Norton as a pilot in the squadron
or
a book on the subject: https://www.amazon.com/Buzzard-Briga.../dp/1575100118

VT-10 had multiple deployments, at least five on Enterprise or Intrepid as well as ashore on Guadalcanal, from 1942 up to the bitter end. The moniker "Buzzard Brigade" with the diving buzzard carrying a mop as an insignia comes from where as VF-10, the Grim Reapers, motto was "Mow them down," VT-10 picked up on that and their motto was "Mop 'em up."
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/F...gnia,_1943.png

The VT-10 in which Norton served was the torpedo squadron, not the training squadron. You have to ask yourself, why do they not show the insignia for the torpedo squadron? I can tell you why, because someone has no idea what they're doing and grabs the first thing they find.

There is nothing in the obit itself that would indicate that assignment to the training squadron is true. Just like the NAS Pensacola patch they show . . . well, he went through flight training there, duh.

Beware of people who really don't have a clue on what they're looking at or what they're talking about. As for the single star on the air medal, my bet is that they screwed the pooch on that, too. Probably should be a silver star device indicating six awards. And the campaign stars? Who knows, that's another TSW thing. Could be right, might not be, but there's no evidence to prove either way.

Really don't recommend TWS as a point of definitive research source.