Marvin Dowdy Norton (USNA'39)

[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).

[R Leonard]

Originally Posted by keith A

This is weird. 13 campaigns is impossible isn't it?
K

Thirteen is a big number, but I suppose it could be possible. Air Group 10 was one of about 10 air groups that had four or more deployments, any one of which could result in one or more campaign stars depending on when and where they were doing their business and for how long.

The regulation states
Stars authorized for actual combat in operations and engagements, as authorized by the Chief of Naval Operations, will be worn on the ribbon bar and suspension ribbon of the respective Area Campaign medals and will be known as engagement stars. For the purpose of this order the following definitions are applicable:

An "Operation" is a series of connected military actions occupying a specific area and time and may involve many clashes with the enemy.

An "Engagement" is an action with the enemy taking place within a restricted time and area, and of sufficient intensity and significance to justify recognition.

An "Area" is one of the three geographical areas, viz: American Area, European-African-Middle Eastern Area, Asiatic-Pacific Area.

The prerequisite to the wearing of a star on an area service ribbon shall be honorable service in a ship, aircraft unit or shore-based force at the time it participated in actual combat with the enemy. In instances in which the duty performed did not result in actual combat with the enemy but is considered equally hazardous, the Chief of Naval Operations may award an operation or engagement star to the units concerned. Not more that one star will be awarded for a single operation or engagement. Units supporting an engagement or operation, but subject only to the ordinary hazards of war, do not merit an award. (NOTE:--Any ship which has been awarded a Presidential Unit Citation or Navy Unit Commendation for meritorious participation in an action or campaign for which a combat star has been authorized is entitled to that combat start.)

For example, my father had campaign stars, one silver, four bronze, for nine qualifying campaigns, and that was all outside 9 months working up with VF-11 before going back into combat, and then 14 months at ComFAirWest before going back out with the TF-38 staff in November 1944 to the end of the war, so almost two years on the west coast or in Hawaii.

Ultimately, if one were in enough places at the right times . . .

Remember, you don't have to get shot at to get a campaign star device, just being where your presence, right unit/ship, right place, right time, means you get the device.

[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.

[R Leonard]

Originally Posted by keith A

I will spend the day tracking down the VT-10 War diary. I expect I will find the reason Norton returns to surface duty. No Purple Heart among the medals so it may be a non-battle injury.
K

Don't get side tracked into thinking or jump to the conclusion that an aviator commanding or assigned to a surface vessel is no longer an aviator. Carriers, for example, can only, by law, be commanded by naval aviators, in the war years including naval aviation observers, and, now-a-days, naval flight officers - in fact, technically, all aviation commands/activities must have an aviator or NFO as a commander.

In order get command of a carrier, you need some experience with a deep-draft command; by the mid 1950's that usually meant an oiler. My father, for example commanded USS Salamonie (AO-26) as a deep draft command, before a a year later, commanding USS Ranger (CVA-61). There are more than just a few aviators who commanded or simply served in a surface warship with no aviation duties. That doesn't mean they were not designated aviators, it simply means they were assigned somewhere in other than aviation duties, or in the vernacular, "not in duties involving flying" as one's orders might pointed read. Just as when assigned to a aviation related activity, a naval aviator's order would usually specifically read "duty involving flying."

Norton's designator was 1310, 1=line officer, 31=naval aviator, 0=ensign or above. The USN all along insisted that it's aviators be line officers, though if you look hard you can find the occasional medical corps or engineering corps officer and even at least one chaplain who could wear naval aviator's wings.

[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.