[Historical Inspirations] 2017/06/04 – Questions for Midway

Sune here. 😀 I think before we start on this topic I should clarify some basic concepts. It seems to me that many readers use words without truly understanding what they mean.

To begin, the idea of “decisive battle.” Midway was supposed to be a Decisive Battle. However many of you seem to have the mistaken idea that the Japanese fleet simply sat around and waited for a big battle to come. This is not true. As early as 1934 Japan was already planning on a war and a victory with the United States.

No. The “decisive battle” doctrine calls for a systematic approach of attrition against the Americans. Japanese submarine doctrine plays into this, where they were supposed to pick off major American warships one by one. Land-based aircraft were supposed to do the same. Attacks carried out by destroyers lead by cruisers were another facet. The plan calls for the detachment of lighter fleet elements to attack the enemy at night preferably via surprise.

After all of this then. the capital ships would move in and deliver a strike of decapitation. Here was where the Spirit of Japan would bring the edge. The idea is that the martial spirit of Japan would triumph over her enemies just as it has countless other times in recent Japanese history.

On June 4th, Japan had every advantage. The Americans had no other capital ships in the Pacific. Nimitz had only three carrier groups. The Essex would not come for another year. Furthermore Hitler was giving the Allies a sound thrashing in Europe. America had a Germany First policy that would limit the resources possible to fight Japan with.

From the Japanese side we have known for a long time that we cannot hope to get into a war with America and make the war long. Critical action was necessary. It was imperative that we get America into a separate peace deal so we can resolve the incidents in China.

But, in June of 1942, the Japanese Empire was in an excellent position. We have Malaya, Singapore, Borneo, Java, Sumatra. We took the Philippines from the Americans. We have Thailand. We are advancing towards India. Throughout all this we only lost a few destroyers and submarines.

With such overwhelming advantage it is not hard to see why the Midway operation went through. Yamamoto needed to deliver the blow and remove the threat of the US carrier forces. Doolittle was something that the Empire remembers well and will not permit a second time. Furthermore if the American carriers were destroyed then Japanese army operations can proceed unhindered in the Pacific. A victory would buy Japan time. It was necessary.

The situation was good. The British fled the East Indian Ocean. We knew for certain that we had destroyed at least one if not two carriers at Coral Sea. The Americans had at most maybe two carriers left possibly three. Even without Zuikaku and Shokaku we had four veteran carriers. The odds were very good.

How in the world then did Japan lose this battle? Well let us consider the following.

Why did Yamamoto choose to split his fleet into four separate task forces and order such an insanely complicated battle plan?

Why did Yamamoto go to sea where he could not communicate by radio? Why did he not choose to stay on shore?

Why did no one at Headquarters contend Yamamoto’s unrealistic plan?

Who was going to take care of logistics for the invasion force?

Why were we attacking a place incapable of being supported by our land-based air forces?

Why would we intentionally place ourselves under threat of enemy land-based air forces?

Why not attack the South Pacific such as Fiji or Samoa?

Given the damage suffered at the hands of SBDs at Coral Sea, why not add more fighters and improve anti-air capabilities?

Why was Operation K (a plan to recon Pearl Harbor to confirm the presence of US carriers) cancelled?

Many analysis of the Battle of Midway focuses on the tactics of the battle. I know this post sound like NAGUMO DID NOTHING WRONG: THE POST. However it is necessary to consider many of the perspectives propagated and popularized by KanColle and ask yourself if it is true.

Tamon-maru (Yamaguchi) is often heralded as the greatest naval commander of Midway. “If only they had listened to Tamon-maru, then Midway would have been won.”

Really?

Why did Tamon-maru suggest to Nagumo to immediately launch an attack while Nagumo was deliberating over whether or not CAP and Tomonaga’s squadron needs to be recovered? Does he not know what happens to unprotected dive bombers? Did he not see how badly we annihilated the incoming American bombers and torpedo planes just moments prior to this?

Why would it be wrong for Nagumo to not want to throw away the lives his pilots on what might be a purposeless attack?

Why was the Hiryu careening towards TF 16 after the Fateful Five Minutes? Was it really a smart thing to do if you don’t know how many enemy carriers are there in the first place?

(These are carriers. Getting closer to the enemy doesn’t make an attack stronger. It increases risks of the Hiryu being found. As a matter of fact if you look up any map of the Midway battle you will find that the Hiryu took a pretty funny trip.

See that squiggle? That was when Hiryu finally turned around. )

Why did Tamon-maru consider the Hiryu too badly damaged by fire to salvage when Yamamoto found her the next day still afloat?

As it stands, Hiryu propulsion was largely undamaged after the Enterprise attack, and her crewmen fought to save the ship all night. The US picked up 39 additional crewmen from the Hiryu days later who never received the order to abandon ship.

The Hiryu was torpedoed at 5:10. She didn’t sink until 9:10, nearly four hours later. Even planes from Hoshou saw survivors aboard the ship. Where was Tamon-maru?

Why did he not choose to live on and pass his expertise? Japan could use veteran commanders, couldn’t she?

It’s easy to try to distill these historical events down to IF ONLY WE DID X, WE WOULD WIN. The truth is hardly so simple. If you examine deeply enough everyone can be attributed blame. Some are perhaps more deserving of blame than others.

Some say Midway was lost at a strategic level. That perhaps it was something we never should have gone in at. I do not disagree. But.

To me Midway was lost for a simple reason.

We might not have thought the Americans were a superior force prior to Midway but they were the better force and they proved it at Midway. The Americans fought better than the Japanese, made less mistakes, and made more correct decisions.

If they did not the Pacific War would have turned out very differently.

The men did their best.

Nagumo did his best.

The best did not deliver a victory. It was as simple as that.

[Historical Inspirations] 2017/06/03 – Prelude to Midway

Seventy-five years ago, on this day, the war was still looking bleak for the Allies. U-boats rampaged through the Atlantic. The Red Army was being ground down by Hitler’s assault on the Soviet Union. Rommel was trying to break into Egypt.

And, because Pacific focuses on, well, the Pacific, let’s not forget how the IJN rampaged through the Asia-Pacific over the last six months. We know – though the public might not – that Coral Sea was something of a draw. Tensions are high. This next battle would prove to be critical.

From the Japanese perspective, if they can draw out the US fleet in a good engagement and destroy it, they’ve then got the war in the bag. If they can decapitate the US naval forces here, then American would surely sue for peace and in the process, pay off Japan’s magnificent gamble back in ’41.

From the American perspective? The stakes were high. Midway’s strategic position cannot be understated. Coral Sea threw the Japanese slightly off balance, but if Midway is lost – along with its carrier defenders – then Japan will have another six months of free reign in the Pacific. US carriers were under production, but no new carriers could be brought in until at least the end of 1942.

Plenty of people’s written on Midway before. Many prominent historians and well-learned scholars all gave their own opinions on what this battle is. I can give you a good reading list if you’d like. Popping over on the Midway Round Table for an excellent review of books.

However, as we gear up vol. 3 for print, here’s my perspective on Midway.

  • The “Fateful Five Minutes” as told by Fuchida is not quite myth despite how hard people have tried to debunk him. The Japanese strike groups were very close to being able to launch an attack, and an additional twenty minutes may have been all that’s necessary. If one or two other things went less than optimal for the U.S. forces – e.g. the IJN backing off on Nautilus or one of the SBD groups changing course earlier or later – the Japanese should have been able to at least get an attack wave off before being attacked.
  • For that matter, three of the four Japanese carriers were on fire within the span of about three to eight minutes. At that point even if Hiryu could have scored 2 for 2 it wouldn’t have been enough to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat. In that sense I’d say the “five minutes” is very accurate. Whether or not Fuchida saw planes on the flight deck (there probably were fighters, just saying), the results showed for themselves.
  • Walter Lord’s quote on Midway, ““They had no right to win, and yet they did, and in doing so they changed the course of the war,” is not inaccurate. Miracle might be a bit too strong, but I think it was certainly an incredible victory. A few examples:
    • The IJN were hardened veterans. Nagumo’s been directing combined carrier operations for months. In contrast, Hornet was completely green. I’m not trying to discount the bravery or the competence of the American forces, but the Japanese navy were good and we acknowledged that.
    • The US had no way of knowing whether or not the IJN would bring in 4, 5, or 6 carriers. Zuikaku and Shokaku may have been heavily damaged/suffered heavy air group losses, but it wasn’t certain that they would be out of the battle.
    • Counting the air field at Midway, the US still barely had air parity. The numbers of planes in the air might be similar, but the US were operating a smattering of old aircraft. The F4F was barely a match for the A6M, let alone the F2As.
    • Many great books – ranging from Dr. Symond’s Battle of Midway to Parshall & Tully’s Shattered Sword – point out various flaws in Japanese tactics of the day. Many errors and mistakes – such as inadequate scouting or poor fighter discipline – costed Japan the battle, but I think it’s worth mentioning that one should never assume that the enemy’ll be making these mistakes. I don’t think for a second that Gallagher and Best and McClusky and co. went into that battle thinking, “man, the Japanese’s surely going to get arrogant and make dumb mistakes.”
    • The scope of the US victory – the destruction of all of Japan’s carriers – is extraordinary. McClusky and Leslie could not have coordinated that attack together. They could not have known ahead of time that the Japanese were in complete disarray. The attacks could have all gone into Kaga (and it did look like that was the case if it weren’t for a stroke of fortune on Best’s part) and Soryu. And so on and so forth.

You get the idea. As I said, miracle might – can, depending on your inclination – be too strong of a word. These were brave men who did their best to do the jobs they were given. Each went into the battle determined to perform the best he could offer. The rest is really left to the nebulous thing we call fate.

They could have missed. The others could have hit. They could have been shot down before they’d even get to the targets. They could have flew on and on and never even found the Japanese.

But, that is what real life is. Before 10 AM if we were watching the Pacific War we’d say that the Axis still held all the cards. By 11 AM? The tides have definitely changed.

It’s why Sima and I decided to caption our image for the third book the following way.

(We’ll talk lore in the next post)

A turn of fate; an unanticipated change in a sequence of events. I think Midway qualifies. After all, no one enters a battle with the assumption that they’d go in to lose. But I don’t think the US forces went into Midway thinking that they’d be able to score such an incredible victory.

In vol. 3, we’ll be discussing in much greater detail some of the conclusions that the team and I have reached. Until then, I’ll leave you with this quote – found scrawled on one of the US carriers in the day.

“Fortune Favors the Bold.”

Silent Service XI: Early U.S. Sub Designs (5) – the Argonaut

Hi everyone! Tautog here. I’m back with the next installment of the sub corners.

Honestly sometimes I don’t know if anyone other than me reads them… People seem to be way more interested in bikini-clad shipgirls…

Oh. You read them?

Well. Then. Yay.

Anyways. By now we’ve gotten into the “modern” submarines. Okay, well, not so modern, but the type of submarines developed are beginning to approach how we’d actually use submarines.

At this time, we were still largely running around like headless chickens in terms of designs. But, scared into action by hearing Japan building a lot – up to forty-six large submarines – they went to Congress and asked for more subs. As you know, Congress only authorized the one big sub – that’s Argonaut, which we started to talk about last time.

Now. The Argonaut was big. It was 4,160 tons submerged and 116 meters long. Imagine the length of a football field. That’s pretty close to how long it was. It’s got most of the things that the Navy wanted. Good range – 18,000 nm. Good – okay, okay speed at 10 knots. A big armament load with four bow tubes and sixteen torpedoes in total and two mine tubes (shown in that picture up above). It’s also got two nice big 6’/53 guns to shoot stuff on the surface if it would want.

Now, mines. This particular type of sea mine was very similar to the German designs. If you look up the UE II type submarine, it’s the same idea. The mines were stowed inside the pressure hull in place of a set of after torpedo tubes. They were placed on racks that were kept water tight –  and the racks themselves were complicated pieces of machinery involving worm gears and a lot of moving parts. Though, I’m not sure if I’d like the idea of sleeping right next to mines since the crew compartment was quite literally one section after that!

Yeah… That’s a blueprint of the Argonaut. I’m sorry I’m not quite explaining the rack-mine thing very clearly, so you’re gonna have to squint at the picture to get a better idea of what I’m talking about.

Anyways, the mines that were supposed to be carried by the Argonaut were unique. The Mk. 11 mines had more explosive power than the conventional Mk. 10s, carrying nearly 500 lb of TNT as its explosive charge.

Funny, since the Argonaut never actually laid any of these mines during wartime. 

Wah, you scared me! Hey Argo. Okay. Well. Why don’t you explain this then.

Okay. Sure. So, a couple of issues ended up hampering actual minelaying operations. Logistics is the first one. At the start of the Pacific War, the Navy only had something like 200 Mk. 11 mines on hand. They were, as you can imagine, all for the Argonaut. 

But that’s not really the issue. First of all, nobody really liked the mines. It squeezed a lot of space out of the sub which could be used towards fuel or better living conditions. Secondly, you know how submarines normally laid mines?

Through the torpedo tube?

Yeah. So if you can do that, why bother installing special dedicated mining equipment that gave everyone else trouble? Why make an entirely separate type of mine that only this one submarine could use? Can you imagine how hard it’d be to train submariners given how unique the equipment was? Prototype, one of a kind, special snowflake things belong in the realm of cartoons or video games. They’re absolutely horrid for an actual war. 

Then there was the matter of age. Designed in the 20s, the Argonaut was an old ship by the time we got to the Pacific War. The Navy still harbored ideas that she might perform her original task, but by then, submarine doctrine has evolved considerably and she was needed on other tasks. The Mk 11 were powerful mines, to be sure, but if you look at the Argonaut’s war patrols, she never had “time” to perform a mining operation. What ended up happening was that her huge size found use in other tasks that only submarines of her size could do, and that was the Makin Raid in 1942. 

…Look at it this way. The records say the mining gear wasn’t stripped out of the Argonaut until right before the raid. Not even her refits resulted in the removal of that equipment. I think it’s fairly good to say that the Navy at least still had ideas to have her lay mines.

Yup. The Navy thought that if we mixed up Mk. 11s with the regular Mk. 10s it would be harder to sweep. What ended up happening was that no Mk. 11 mines were actually laid (to my knowledge) during the war. To that I say, what a waste of perfectly good explosives…

Heh. Anyways. Should I?

Oh yeah. I’m done. I just popped in to check on ya is all.

Okay. So. Back to the earlier comment. Again, going back to the mines, the mines made it so that she had very poor surface speed. Remember she should have made 14-15 knots, and could only do 2/3rds of that. This was eventually partially addressed in a refit, but this was one of our slowest submarines that serviced during WW2.

Though, even for her time, there were other strengths that compensated for this particular design weakness. For starters, this was the first time American submarines used that horizontal cylindrical conning tower design, which would eventually become standard. There were plenty of attempts to improve habitability – bigger crew messes with better refrigerator storage, even room for air conditioning later on. It had a periscope with a retractable fairing on it, which reduces vibrations from the wave it forms. It had twice the battery volume of the earlier submarines (240 cells rather than 120), and all in all, she was adequately serviceable.

Oh. It also had a very big gun. The six incher’s shell had twice the destructive potential compared to the 5 inch and also shot straighter. So, definitely something to consider!

But, at the end of the day, these large submarines were not very well received. The submariners hated them because they were awkward and very uncomfortable to work in. The engineering was tough to get right and a lot of equipment complexities and design flaws surfaced which had to be corrected. Congress didn’t like them either because they were very expensive.

To top things off, we weren’t sure if they’d actually do what we’d like them to do during war either. The underpowered engine was a real killer, and again, the low speed…

I know you like to think that all of our submarine designs were complete winners, Tautau. But, you know, some were more winner than others. This one, well. I’m just gonna say. It was a lot less of a winner than the other ones. 

Aw…

She was a good boat. Did what she was supposed to do. Couldn’t ask for more than that. Right?

Right!

Well. See you next time, everyone!