[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[KOREAN-WAR-L:11381] Re: Partisan Operations and Tan-Do/T'an-Do

Jack,

Went back and checked the maps we were using at that time: AMS Series L551 which were 1946 reproductions of AMS Series L441 printed as of 1944. On these maps maps -- Kanji with both Japanese & Korean Romanization -- the island you refer to as KA-DO is listed as TAN-DO, alternately as SIN-DO for the Japanese Romaji. .Looks to me like a case of WWII mis-translation, or outright error, when the original L441 series was printed in 1944 and not corrected until the L771 Series (1952) was printed.

As a sidebar to this: When using the L551 series maps back in 1950-1951, I've found mountains, roads, villages, rivers and so on, located as much as 5 kilometers from where shown on those maps. Of course, the L441 series (1944) were reprints of maps made from the Japanese Imperial Survey of 1928 and originally printed in 1932.

As for the dates when the Chinese took Ka-do(Sin-do or Tan-do <g>,) & T'an-do, you may well be right since the after-action report for those two islands was written several weeks after the event. The dates for the Chinese taking Sohwa-do and Taehwa-do were confirmed since Hq (and the Brit supporting ships offshore) were in radio contact with Taehwa-do until it fell the night of Nov 30-Dec 1, 1951.

And so it goes......


>>In the chapter "Enemy Strikes Back" in Ed's book (pp. 124-134), Donkey
13 and 15 took Tan-Do and T'an-Do, respectively, on Oct. 8, 1951.  The
same incident was listed in the "Unconventional Warfare Campaign" at
korean-war.com (http://www.korean-war.com/warfarecampaign.html).
However, I could not find Tan-Do on the map at all.  From the maps I
have, the bigger islands at the tip of the Cholsan Peninsula are (from
north to south):

Ka-Do
        T'an-Do (Charcoal Island)
Hoe-Do (Ash Island)
Sohwa-Do
Taehwa-Do

One of the maps are available  here:
http://sunsite.berkeley.edu:8085/korea/250k/NJ51_4.jpg

Your book also mentioned that Chinese took Tan-do back on Nov. 6th and
T'an-do on Nov. 8th.  Chinese records showed differently.  They landed on
Ka-Do on Nov. 6th and did not take T'an-Do till Nov. 24th (the latter
unconfirmed).  However, the USN Korean War  Naval Chronology has an
entry about Chinese took Ka-Do and Tan-Do on Nov. 6th.
http://www.history.navy.mil/wars/korea/chron51b.htm

Since Tan and T'an sound similar, could it be possible that they
actually refer to the same island?  T'an-do is larger than Taehwa-Do.
I suspected that Donkey 13 and 15 hit the different parts of T'an-Do
on the same day, but it became garbled when the report was sent
back up the channels.  BTW, I don't think it is the mix-up between
Ka-Do and Tan-Do.  Ka-Do is about 3 times the size of T'an-Do.
Donkey 13 could not take it and hold it alone.

What do you think?

Jack Hwang