Question about discharge papers

Good afternoon! First time poster, so I’m hoping this is the right pace for this.

I’ve been requesting records for my family members from the national archives, and I can’t make sense of my uncle’s discharge papers. He was in the USAAF, and his MOS on his discharge papers is 809 - decontaminating equipment operator. However, under the "Battles and Campaigns" box, the term "air combat" is listed, and I've seen photographs where he appeared to be a gunner on a B-24. Does anyone know what "air combat" means? To me, it would seem self-explanatory, but if he was a decontaminating equipment operator, I don't see how he could have been in air combat. Is it possible that his MOS changed during the course of his service and that he was originally a gunner?

Thanks for any help you might have!

 

Assuming he had the EAME medal (Europe, Africa, Middle East), the Air Combat campaign star to the EAME was for service with an USAAF in theater between 7 Dec 41 and 11 May 45. Ground crewmen were also eligible for the campaign star.

 

He did not have the EAME. He was in the pacific theater.

 

The Air Combat star also applies to the Asiatic-Pacific Campaign Medal with the effective dates 7DEC41 to 2SEP45.

 

Interesting. Under “battles and campaigns,” it says “Air Offensive Japan; Bismarck Archipelago; China; New Guinea; Sou Phillipines (Liberation - illegible due to fire damage); Western Pacific Ryukyus; Air Combat.”

Then under “decorations and citations,” it says “Asiatic-Pacific Theater Ribbon with 9 bronze stars; Philippine Liberation Ribbon with 1 Bronze Star; Good Conduct Medal: Victory Medal World War II.”

I don’t see the “Air Combat Star.”

 

Speculation - in the interwar years, there was considerable expectation that gas would be used in future wars as it was in WWI. This included gas delivered by aircraft - bombs or underwing canisters - on strategic or tactical targets. I imagine unit TOEs included decontamination personnel and equipment. When the gas threat did not materialize, decon personnel were likely reassigned to other duties.

 

The problem is that SSN 809 Decontaminating Equipment Operator was not a USAAF MOS, it was a Chemical Warfare Service MOS. So his Service Branch should reflect CWS rather than USAAF. I suspect it is a clerical error.

 

The Jul 44 edition of T/O&E 1-117, AAF Bombardment Squadron, Heavy, shows 2 SSN809, a sgt and a corp. Among a list of chemical warfare equipment, the section authorizes 2 ea. "Kit, chemical agent detector, M9."

With gas warfare never being initiated, these guys were like the Maytag repairman, available for other duty.

 

I'd agree on that. Very easy for a clerk to mistype stuff on mass paperwork. That is, the clerk has to type up say 20 of these forms on a particular day. That's what the clerk has been doing for weeks. He misreads something and types it in. Unless the person receiving that paperwork checks it carefully--and most enlisted don't--errors slip through.

When I was discharged from active duty, I made them retype my DD 214 three times before I'd sign it. The clerk (a Personnelman / PN) tiring of my pickiness, tried to tell me the errors really didn't matter. Well, they did to me, but often they don't to others.

 

T

This too is very true. You are a warm body and don't have anything to do, the unit quickly gives you all the $h!+ jobs they have so you now have something to do. If you have a bit of rank, you are instead given odd jobs and such to keep you busy.

 

I don’t think it was a typo, unless they mistyped 1. the MOS, 2. the title of the MOS, and 3. the base where the decontamination equipment operators were trained. It seems unlikely that three mistakes, which are all consistent with each other, would be made. However, I asked my aunt, his wife, and she said he was a waist gunner, so I don’t know.

 

Each of the items under Battles and Campaigns is one of the bronze start on the Asiatic-Pacific medal, although only 8 are listed - Air Combat represents one of the bronze stars.

A waist gunner would have an MOS of 611, 612, 737 or 757.

 

So what does “air combat” mean? Did every member of the ground crew have that?

 

I am not surprised but again the problem is he would have been Chemical Warfare Service rather than Army Air Corps as a branch of service. Same for all the other personnel that were assigned to the USAAF and required by its T/O&E but were not AAC - Signals, JAG, Ordnance, Corps of Engineers, and so on. They served with the USAAF but their branch of service was different. If he was SSN 809 then his branch of service should have been CWS.

 

Once again, the only possible way to avoid idle speculation is to get the morning reports or the service record. How could anyone here know if he held more than one MOS? No way to interpret facts until facts are established.

 

Yes. 33rd Bomb Squadron, 22nd Bomb Group. He was definitely overseas. His ASR score was 71 as of September 2, 1945, and he entered active service on April 21, 1943. He was overseas for 1 year, 9 months, and 27 days. Continental service was 10 months and 27 days.

 

Any idea how to get those? I requested everything from the archives in St. Louis, but the discharge paper is fire damaged, although 95% is there, and the only other documents were his report of physical examination and induction.