|
Post by oldpop2000 on Dec 7, 2022 9:21:45 GMT -6
Well, it's been 81 years since the Kido Butai, struck the US Naval Base at Pearl Harbor. I just wanted to remind everyone of it. We lost about 2400 men and had only two ships permanently lost after the attack. Anyway, hats off to the men lost and those who survived to continue the fight.
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Dec 7, 2022 10:13:23 GMT -6
Just some figures to interest everyone. The IJN lost 29 aircraft which does not include the planes that crashed on landing from the attack. Those were shoved over the side. The US lost 402 aircraft of which 188 destroyed and 159 were damaged. Based on the current 1941 aircraft production in the US, we replaced all of those planes in fifteen days. In 1943, we replaced them in fifteen minutes. My dad's carrier, the Saratoga sailed into Pearl Harbor on December 15th. He wanted to tell me a lot but it was at night and the ship had to leave by daylight. When they sailed into the harbor at night, they passed the Arizona and there was still fire down below in the inside. Japanese pilots stated that the US ships manned their AA guns within five minutes of the first bomb attack. They had never seen ships man their guns so fast. www.census.gov/history/pdf/pearl-harbor-fact-sheet-1.pdfNever attack a sleeping giant, when he wakes up, you are really in for it.
|
|
|
Post by vonfriedman on Dec 7, 2022 12:12:24 GMT -6
Napoleon's warning about awakening China, another "sleeping giant" brought no advice, however.
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Dec 7, 2022 12:45:11 GMT -6
Napoleon's warning about awakening China, another "sleeping giant" brought no advice, however. “Let China Sleep, for when she wakes, she will shake the world
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Dec 7, 2022 13:51:29 GMT -6
Just some interesting figures:
In 1941, the US produced 18,466 aircraft
8,395 combat aircraft - This figure equals about 699.5 aircraft in one month. Do some math and it means that we built about 350 aircraft in 15 days. That almost all the aircraft lost at Pearl Harbor.
10,071 support aircraft.
Estimates are that this was five times more than the Japanese produced.
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Dec 7, 2022 16:49:14 GMT -6
There are conspiracy theories about whether we knew they were coming. They are false. Station Hypo on Oahu was monitoring the Japanese purple code, which was a diplomatic code, not JN-25B operational naval code. We suspected that they would attack the Philippines. Which of course they did, but we had no thoughts about Pearl Harbor.
Another reason we would not have detected them, is that the telegraph keys to the radios had been locked up so no one could accidentally tap on them. The IJN radio silence during the Pearl Harbor operation was the best for the whole war. After the war started, we began to read their mail on a regular basis.
|
|
|
Post by vonfriedman on Dec 8, 2022 3:57:03 GMT -6
It could be said that the Japanese - from a military point of view - started well, taking care of both the maximum secrecy and the maximum concentration of forces, but they were not consistent with this approach later on, above all as regards the principle of concentration of forces.
Returning to the counterfactual story, let us therefore make the following assumption. The Japanese make no mistake: at Pearl Harbour, they destroy fuel depots. In the following battles, corresponding to those of Coral Sea and Midway, the Japanese deploy all available aircraft carriers, quickly repairing even those damaged, as happened with the USS Yorktown, and are not taken by surprise by American dive bombers, maintaining an adequate CAP at high altitudes.
It can therefore be assumed that the US Navy would have initially lost more aircraft carriers than those that were historically sunk and would have found itself in very serious difficulties for a relatively long period, even if the large shipbuilding program already underway (the giant actually was not sleeping at all) and more generally the power of their industry would have finally determined Japan's defeat, even without the atomic bomb, provided that US public opinion was able to withstand this "stress test" for the necessary time.
Under these more favorable circumstances, what would Japan have done? I limit myself to some trivial deductions. Japan would have built Shinano as a super-battleship, would have had more time to train pilots and strengthen defenses in the islands of the Pacific, making each one an Iwo Jima, would have had enough time to develop their Me 262-derived jet fighter. Also: with such a growing threat in the Pacific, could the US have continued with the "Germany first" strategy? The questions are many.
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Dec 8, 2022 7:33:24 GMT -6
It could be said that the Japanese - from a military point of view - started well, taking care of both the maximum secrecy and the maximum concentration of forces, but they were not consistent with this approach later on, above all as regards the principle of concentration of forces. Returning to the counterfactual story, let us therefore make the following assumption. The Japanese make no mistake: at Pearl Harbour, they destroy fuel depots. In the following battles, corresponding to those of Coral Sea and Midway, the Japanese deploy all available aircraft carriers, quickly repairing even those damaged, as happened with the USS Yorktown, and are not taken by surprise by American dive bombers, maintaining an adequate CAP at high altitudes. It can therefore be assumed that the US Navy would have initially lost more aircraft carriers than those that were historically sunk and would have found itself in very serious difficulties for a relatively long period, even if the large shipbuilding program already underway (the giant actually was not sleeping at all) and more generally the power of their industry would have finally determined Japan's defeat, even without the atomic bomb, provided that US public opinion was able to withstand this "stress test" for the necessary time. Under these more favorable circumstances, what would Japan have done? I limit myself to some trivial deductions. Japan would have built Shinano as a super-battleship, would have had more time to train pilots and strengthen defenses in the islands of the Pacific, making each one an Iwo Jima, would have had enough time to develop their Me 262-derived jet fighter. Also: with such a growing threat in the Pacific, could the US have continued with the "Germany first" strategy? The questions are many. The fuel depots had berms around them to contain the oil. The tanks with deliveries of replacement tanks could have been replaced in less than a month plus the Red Hill Underground Fuel Storage Facility already had one tank available. The project was completed in 1943. I suspect if the IJN had attempted to destroy the tanks, this project could have been expedited and completed earlier. The Japanese could only have destroyed those tanks with bombs, since they only had 7.7 mm machine guns and the tanks were .75 to 1.5 inches in thickness. So, machine gunning them, most likely would have had no effect. Add to this that the attacks would have had to be conducted by a third wave and the Army would have been on full alert by this time. I doubt they would have had much success and would have taken heavy losses. Estimates are that with the winds blowing and 250 KG bombs being used, only about half the storage tanks would have been hit. The US could have sent tankers from the Atlantic with oil to replace the fuel depot damaged tanks until they were replaced. There are alternatives. The Japanese Navy in the pre-war years had prepared for a decisive battle in its home waters, nothing else. This strategy meant that they did not care about fuel endurance, habitability or stability of the ships. It was firepower and speed. Logistical ships, tenders, repair ships or anything else that was considered support, meant nothing. This means that the Naval docks, fuel tanks etc. meant nothing to them. Counterfactual attempts to replay the event must take this into account. You cannot change how the Japanese navy built its fleet and strategical thinking unless you go back to the early 1900's. All they cared about was sinking four battleships to improve the force ratios necessary to defeat the US Navy in the Bonin's during the decisive battle.
|
|
|
Post by vonfriedman on Dec 8, 2022 9:40:28 GMT -6
The Zero fighters had also two 20 mm cannons.
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Dec 8, 2022 10:42:26 GMT -6
The Zero fighters had also two 20 mm cannons. Yes, but with only 60 rnds available. That's about 15 seconds and the guns were not that accurate.
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Dec 8, 2022 10:58:56 GMT -6
So here are a couple of counterfactual ideas.
1. What if the USN had put torpedo nets around the battleships?
2. What if the US Army AA guns had been deployed instead of sitting in the crater.
3. What if Lt. Tyler had activated the fighters after the report from the Opana Point Radar?
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Dec 8, 2022 11:19:54 GMT -6
Here are some other considerations about a third attack. The second wave did not arrive back at the carriers until 1PM. This means that the first wave must stay below until the second wave has been recovered. Darkness comes at 4:28 PM on December seventh. It would have taken until 2 pm to get the third wave launched and one hour to get them all together to fly to Pearl. That means that they would have arrived over the target after a flight of one hour and 30 minutes or about 4:30 pm. If we assume at least one hour of attacks and then fly to the point of assembly, Then returning to the point of assembly would have been 5 pm then a one hour and 30-minute flight back. This means that the third wave would have to land in pure darkness at around 6 to 6:30 pm. Now add to this problem, the fact that the Army AA guns would have been removed and deployed for the third wave and the fact that every ship still capable of firing it AA guns would be ready, I believe the third wave would have been a disaster.
So, the question becomes, would you risk your six carriers, remaining aircraft in the waning hours of daylight for a target that was sixth on the list? Especially if you don't know where our two carriers are, I wouldn't. I would go after 1. Carriers 2. Battleships 3. Heavy cruisers and other combatants. The Japanese would have only had about 265 fully serviceable aircraft with about 30 of those for combat air patrols over the fleet. Since they did not know where our carriers were, they would have had to send out patrols over 360 degrees and maintain an attack group for the US carriers when found. This does not leave many aircraft available for the third wave which would have needed land bombs, not armor piercing bombs to damage the naval facilities and fuel farms.
|
|
|
Post by vonfriedman on Dec 8, 2022 15:14:04 GMT -6
Interesting considerations. However, if the fuel depots had been included in the main objectives, and not only in the 6th place on the list, perhaps the whole plan of attack would have been revised accordingly.
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Dec 8, 2022 15:25:30 GMT -6
Interesting considerations. However, if the fuel depots had been included in the main objectives, and not only in the 6th place on the list, perhaps the whole plan of attack would have been revised accordingly. I doubt it, the target list was based on the ratio of US/GB battleships to the IJN. To be able to win the decisive battle, they had to destroy at least four. If you destroy the enemy fleet, you don't have to worry about Naval facilities, fuel depot etc. This was the Japanese thought pattern. Another issue I did not mention is that the Naval Repair Facilities at Pearl Harbor was over 498 acres or 21,692,880 square feet. It would have taken heavy bombers with many 500 and 1000 lbs. bombs to do real damage to it. Kate and Val dive bombers would have been almost useless. BTW, one 250 KG can destroy about 4900 square feet. That is about 4,427 250 KG bombs. I don't think those six carriers had anything near that quantity of 250 KG bombs, which are 500 LBS. bombs.
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Dec 9, 2022 16:24:21 GMT -6
I've been researching and considering a counterfactual third wave attack on Pearl Harbor and briefly here is my conops. The back-story is that they plan the third wave from the beginning. The carriers would sail to a point of 150 miles from PH instead of 250 miles. This will shorten their flight time to approx. 1 hr. flight time to PH. The first wave leaves at 0600, the second wave at 0700 and the third wave at 0800. This third wave will have 100 aircraft drawn from the original first and second waves. So, first wave will have 133 aircraft, second wave will have 121 aircraft and the third will have 100 aircraft. The mission of the third wave is to attack the Naval repair facilities, and the fuel tanks. It will used 250kg high explosive bombs. I am figuring that the first wave will be back to the carriers by 0900, the second wave by 1100 and the third by 1300 hrs. The aircraft left on the carriers would be 30 fighters to run CAP over the carriers. The third wave will have a combination of Kates and Vals but no fighters. The first two waves should have eliminated most of the US fighters and some of the second wave fighters could stay around and be available. I am still working on the actual timing.
Update: In the real event, the first wave departed for PH at 0620 after a 15-minute weather delay. The attack by the first wave occurred at 0753 am. As you can see, this was 2.21 hrs. The return trip would be about the same, so the first wave probably did arrive after 10 am in the morning.
If the second wave left at 0700 and had a 2.21 hr. flight, they would arrive at about 0920 hrs. one hour of attacking and leaving around 1020, 2 hrs. to get back, puts them at the carriers at about 1220.
I would use the air wings on the Shokaku and Zuikaku for the third wave attack. These air wings are the least trained since the ships were not commissioned until November 1941. All they have to do is drop the bombs on the fuel tanks which would be the priority target, the Naval Facilities would be the secondary targets. Docks would be the best targets. In the docks would be destroyers and they would be easier to do extensive damage to. A third target, maybe the submarine base but I have my doubts.
|
|