[Mail Call] 2017/05/28 – Memorial Day & Silent Service Commentary

No special art this time because we’ve got our hands full. This is what we did for last year.


An excerpt from an ancient book on U.S. Submarines, written by a former officer in the submarine service describing the challenges the U.S. navy faced. In this day, 1942, victory was far from certain.

Before he left Washington for Pearl Harbor, Admiral Nimitz realized he was facing an unparalleled defense problem.

Months would pass before the Pacific Fleet could be strongly reinforced. With its surface arm broken and its air arm badly wounded, it could only retreat before the Japanese juggernaut.

Retreat how far? The Japanese must not be permitted to break through the central Pacific or the island chains flanking Australia. Nor could they be allowed to gain a foothold in the Aleutians. A line drawn from Dutch Harbor to Midway, to Samoa, to New Caledonia, to Australia marked the frontier to be held by American and Allied forces.

This is an axiom of warfare. Where concealment is equally available to both sides, it favors the inferior force.

The Philippines invasion supplied naval strategies with notable demonstrations of the axiom. It gave American submarines a narrow margin which enabled them to operate in enemy-infested seas and carry out their primary mission – the destruction of Japanese shipping.

The Imperial Navy did not lose a single major unit during the Philippines invasion. But as the Japanese moved down the Malay barrier they began to lose merchant ships here and there. And with the advent of the New Year, ships started going down the Coasts of Japan. American submarines were beginning the war of attrition.

Submarine forces in the Pacific “got in there” and fought. The Manila boats diverted the enemy’s naval vanguard and impeded the drive on the Netherlands East Indies. Pearl Harbor submarines joined battle in the Central Pacific, patrolled the line extending from Australia to the Aleutians, drove over to the East China Sea and cut the shipping lanes to Japan.

With Mid-Pacific bases lost – with Asiatic bases lost – with air cover lost – the Pacific Fleet immobilized – supplies cut off – spare parts lost – Manila torpedoes captured – with all these disadvantages, the submarines entered the conflict and kept on going.

They kept on going, despite the fact that the enemy had the initiative. The fact that the S-boats were old and the enemy destroyers new – that Japanese bombs were known to contain an explosive charge greater than any at the time developed by the Allies. Loss of forward bases, fleet support, repair facilities, stores – these never imperiled the submarines as did torpedo failure. For almost two years American submarines went into action handicapped by a defective torpedo.

In spite of all this and all other handicaps, the submariners led the United States offensive. They aided in the defense of Midway and battled the foe in the Aleutians. They helped to parry the enemy’s thrust at Guadalcanal. They blocked the ports of the Jap home Empire. Laid mines. Reconnoitered for air strikes. Rescued refugees. Served as lifeguard. Struck the Imperial navy some of the hardest blows it ever received. Swept the merchant fleets of the Rising Sun from the Central and Southwest Pacific. Penetrated the Sea of Japan. And finally halted at the beachheads of Kyushu, Shikoku, Hokkaido, and Honshu.

Above all, the US submarines accomplished the No. 1 purpose of the submarine force. They sank ships.

Composed of no more than 1.6% of the navy’s personnel, this comparable service arm accounted for 73% of Japanese ship losses from all causes during the first two years of the Pacific war. The final score, verified by post-war inquest, credits the US submarine fleet with sinking 54.7% of the Japanese merchantmen and 29% of Japanese naval vessels in World War II.

【1941年美国海军食谱】色拉酱

【1941年美国海军食谱】色拉酱

还记得本系列第一篇中的菜单吗?在海上所有的船,尤其是有条件的大船,会尽量多储存一些绿叶菜。我介绍炸粥时说过,不少水手不喜欢绿叶菜,对吧?不过,我忘了一个细节:“有条件”这样抱怨的水兵大多是待在大船上的。如果你在小船上服役,那么很抱歉,就算想打牙祭,可能也只能吃罐头了。 Continue Reading

[Mail Call] 2017/05/25 – Morgane’s Fireside Chat #2

This should be titled “Consistency and shipgirl design with Edsall as an example” but I think it’d have been too long for the title.

Alright. Today’s Mail Call is less Mail Call and more directed at a particular type of question that I often get. That, and I just felt like writing on this particular topic today.

“How sister-like are sister ships?”

This question, while broad, is going be answered in my typical wishy-washy fashion. That’s to say, it depends.

Let’s go with the abstract first. The personality stuff. In general, what I’ve noticed is that only KanColle (out of all the shipgirl works – it’s been three to four years, after all) really emphasizes (consistently) the sisterly bond between pairs of characters. Good examples that I can think of are the Kongous, the Fusous, Ise-Hyuuga (remodel when?), Shokaku-Zuikaku, and basically most of the DDs. This makes sense from KC’s design, since we see from official 4komas and assorted “official” works that most authors choose to emphasize the familial nature in their particular anthro-moe designs. KC’s shipgirls are still ships on a fundamental level. The wacky hi-jinks like approximate mass and height are meant (in my reading, at least) to be subtle reminders of this particular nature.

Pacific goes about this in a very different direction. In general, I would say that we have thematic consistency across categories of characters. The fundamental basis of which is, well, a 50-50 balance between personal (i.e. how well we think the shipgirls would get along with each other due to their designed personalities) and historical (i.e. how much connection would there be between the historical ships) inspirations.

Part of this is because we currently have no plans to illustrate out all thousand-something U.S. destroyers. Would make Pacific a very interesting work, I think.

Let me give you some examples of the types of relationships you can see already embedded in the Pacific character books. Edsall and Langley talk to each other. STEC remarks that the two get along well.

Superficially, it’s because the historical counterparts were both sank in the opening moves of the Pacific war.

If you dig a little deeper, you may have found that the Edsall picked up men from the Langley after she was sunk.

You may have also come across references – some of the last known letters from the Edsall – wishing that they could see their own boys “up in the sky and giving the Japs a bloody one on the nose.”

But the more you read about the two ships, the more you realized that they had something in common. Both trained countless sailors and pushed them onto greater things. Both were pretty much outdated for the war. Both did far beyond than what they were expected to accomplish given their limitations.

Survivors (there are a few from the Edsall that did not go on that fateful journey, and some of Langley’s men were picked up by other friendlies) both note a particularly powerful desire of wishing to do more. Whether it’s wishing that they can take to the skies to meet the enemy or that they had another salvo of torpedoes on board.

You consider this and then you read the designs for their character backgrounds. Langley quietly mentions that if she needs to take to the fields, she will. Edsall says that she’s going to do what she can. That “while I haven’t got a whole lot of anything, I’ve got my friends and that’s who I’m gonna fight for.”

“Ask not what your country can do for you. Ask instead what you can do for your country.”

That, more so than anything else, went into Edsall’s design. Her entire physical appearance is brimming with patriotism of a very quiet and dignified sort. November calls the design “Alice”-like (Alice in Wonderland). We wanted to show that she’s comparatively young by Pacific’s standards, but at the same time, we wanted to use the proper physical “cues” to give the reader an idea of what she’s like even before reading her profile.

The sword you’ve already seen. It’s got the motto of her division written on it. The reference image is a famous wartime poster. We gave her a sword like that because, well, November. That’s another tale for another time. x)

Anyways. There were other Clemson-class destroyers that were just as heroic as Edsall. But, if we are to draw another girl of her class, I really don’t think we’d have done the same thing. We tend to give unique designs to the girls in question – even the most uniform of our girls such as Chester or Northampton has enough distinctive elements in their outfits (also, what’s UNDER their outfits count as differences too) to really make each individual shipgirl, well, individual.

[Insert Morgane’s humanity speech here.]

It’s not to say that we don’t have common motifs between the girls. But, as you can see, those tend to be more the exception rather than the norm. The subtwins Sculpin and Sailfish are very similar to each other because of how intertwined and interconnected the fates of those two ships are. I think honestly you can’t get more “twin” than that.

In other cases, such as this one here… Don’t assume that all Brooklyns are armed with flame weapons. But I’m sure you can see why, I dunno, a ship named after a volcanic island (city) and had a tendency to actually set things on fire (in battle and otherwise) might work well with a flame-based weapon?

*wink*

Yeah. We save the rigging details and other “ship”-based things for the fairies or for stuff like what we do in Tautog’s sub corner. Trust me, it’s been two years and I’ve yet to figure out a good balance between the two types of contents. I do want to say, though, that based on reader feedback we’re getting a lot of interchange between the two. The miliotaku that pop in here once in a while gets softer, and our regulars (especially some of the ones that hang out in the Discord) are basically becoming amateur historians of the Pacific War.

So just as planned?

Yeah. I’ll start talking about vol. 3’s girls in a bit. Geez. Now it’s seriously running into the issue of what to post.