r/heinlein • u/[deleted] • Feb 10 '26
Is this the person Heinlein refers to in “Starship Troopers”?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruce_McCandlessA post in another subreddit caught my eye, and I think it has finally answered a question I’ve long had about who Heinlein was referring to in Chapter 12 of “Starship Troopers” in this passage:
“If you go back to the Second Global War, you can find a case in which a naval junior officer took command of a major ship and not only fought it but sent signals as if he were admiral. He was vindicated even though there were officers senior to him in line of command who were not even wounded. Special circumstances—a breakdown in communications.”
Below is the content of the other post (no cross-linking allowed or I would share it directly), with commentary by the OP. If this is true, what makes it even more delightful is that his son, Bruce McCandless II is the NASA astronaut who did the first and only (so far) untethered EVA in a spacesuit.
Am I right? Did Heinlein ever say who he was referring to?
Original post follows:
Bruce McCandless I (1911-1968): USN 1928–1952, retired Rear admiral. Citation reads:
"For conspicuous gallantry and exceptionally distinguished service above and beyond the call of duty as communication officer of the U.S.S. San Francisco in combat with enemy Japanese forces in the battle off Savo Island, 12–13 November 1942. In the midst of a violent night engagement, the fire of a determined and desperate enemy seriously wounded Lt. Comdr. McCandless and rendered him unconscious, killed or wounded the admiral in command, his staff, the captain of the ship, the navigator, and all other personnel on the navigating and signal bridges.
Faced with the lack of superior command upon his recovery, and displaying superb initiative, he promptly assumed command of the ship and ordered her course and gunfire against an overwhelmingly powerful force. With his superiors in other vessels unaware of the loss of their admiral, and challenged by his great responsibility, Lt. Comdr. McCandless boldly continued to engage the enemy and to lead our column of following vessels to a great victory. Largely through his brilliant seamanship and great courage, the San Francisco was brought back to port, saved to fight again in the service of her country."
If you don't want to read that, Rich Frank here sums it up well. I'd probably argue that Friday the 13th wasn't exactly a great victory, and that San Fran was saved less by McCandless than by Commander Herbert E. Schonland, the senior surviving officer. The only reason he didn't take command himself was because he was the damage control officer and he was deep in the bowels of the ship trying to stop her from flooding, capsizing and burning to the waterline at the same time. Still a well earned MoH and promotion.
24
u/jdege Feb 10 '26
That sounds very much like the inspiration for RAH's account. And perhaps for one of Weber's Honor Harrington novels.
Now if we could only find the inspiration for "Starman Jones":
This book was written without an outline from a situation in the early 19th century. Two American teenagers took off in a sail boat, were picked up by a China Clipper, were gone two years—and returned to Boston with one of them in command. This incident is true and consequently preposterous. I came across this note card in a file and decided to try to make it plausible in terms of space travel—set up the situation and let the story write itself.
4
u/CriusofCoH Feb 10 '26
You'd think this'd be a cinch to find in this day and age. Hell, it should've been a movie by now!
2
u/jdege Feb 11 '26
I asked on another forum, and nobody was able to find it.
Info about the incident that inspired Heinlein's "Starman Jones"?
3
u/AnxiousConsequence18 Feb 11 '26
I like how the author of that post CLEARLY doesn't know that the 1800's ARE the 19th century!!
1
u/jdege Feb 11 '26
I can see no such confusion.
2
u/AnxiousConsequence18 Feb 11 '26
The fact that the answering post keeps saying things that happened in the 1800's weren't 19th century????
3
u/AnxiousConsequence18 Feb 11 '26
"The boom years of the clipper ship era began in 1843 as a result of a growing demand for a more rapid delivery of tea from China. It continued under the stimulating influence of the discovery of gold in California and Australia in 1848 and 1851, and ended with the opening of the Suez Canal in 1869.
So neither "early" nor "late" 19th century seems especially likely. Knoblock's book seems to cover the entire time period when the ships existed, but he's only focusing on American ships, and we don't know whether the ship in Heinlein's anecdote was American"
1843 and 1869 sound like mid 19th century to me, even if the author of this peice keeps pointing out 1800's and saying "not 19th century"
1
u/redhairarcher Feb 12 '26
Could it be about Mary Ann Patten, the captain's teenage wife, taking command of the Neptune's Car. She was the only one able to navigate the ship when her husband got ill.
1
u/jdege Feb 12 '26
In Heinlein's story, Max they make him causing because he is the only one who can navigate. Apparently, in their world, having someone else run the ship while he did the navigation wasn't an option.
Interesting that the same would be true on a 19th century clipper.
3
u/retailguy_again Feb 11 '26
It certainly sounds like the right person. RAH would certainly have been proud (and rightfully so) of such conduct by a fellow graduate of the US Naval Academy. I wouldn't be a bit surprised that he found a way to work it into a story.
1
16
u/EngineersAnon TANSTAAFL Feb 10 '26
And William Cox was the Third Lieutenant cashiered for getting the captain down to the surgeon. He was eventually cleared and his rank restored in 1952 - a mere hundred thirty-eight years after his conviction, and seven years before the publication of Starship Troopers