If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Pearl Harbor Defense
I have always wondered how the attack would have played out if the Americans
had correctly interpreted the reading from the Army radar site on the north tip of Oahu. The attacking Japanese planes were picked up at a range of 132 miles at 7 o'clock Sunday morning. The radar operators phoned the duty office, Lt. Kermit Tyler and told him (paraphrase) that ".... a large formation of planes is approaching from the north." Tyler knew that eleven B-17s were due to arrive and assumed that the radar operators were seeing the B-17s and told them "Well, don't worry about it." The operators had interpreted the signal that they were seeing as representing over fifty planes. They did not know about the B-17 flight. If they had told Tyler that there were over fifty planes approaching instead of saying a 'large number', Tyler might have sounded the alarm. If he had sounded the alarm the Americans would have had about thirty minutes to get ready for the attack. I don't know how long it would take the sailors to get to their battle stations but I assume that 30 minutes would give them enough time to get to their AA guns and get them loaded. At least they would all be out of their bunks and all water tight doors and hatches could have been closed. The AA defenses on the ships were nothing like the late WWII batteries but there were dozens if not hundreds of 1.1" quad mounts on ships in the harbor when one considers the number of destroyers and auxiliaries present. The 1.1" had a lot of long term reliability problems but put out a lot of firepower when they were working. There were probably even more .50 caliber machine guns in addition to the sixty or seventy 5'' dual purpose mounts. The Army also had substantial AA batteries and the infantry and marines had .30 LMGs and BARs. On the other hand, many soldiers and sailors might have been off base or ashore. Could the Army have gotten their P-40s and P-36s up in time? The P-40s were more than a match for the Zeros (contrary to popular myth) and would have been going after the Kates and Vals anyway. I don't know how many P-40s were in Hawaii that morning of if there were any Navy or Marine fighters on Ford Island or at Ewa air station. I think the American carries were about 200 miles west of Pearl Harbor on the morning of the attack. Could they have sent approximately 80 Wildcats into the battle? They probably could not have gotten there by 7:55 but they could have been there by the time the second wave arrived. The second wave would probably have been canceled by the Japanese if surprise had not been achieved. Another twist I have wondered about is what would have happened it anti-torpedo nets had been deployed at Pearl Harbor. I think more than half the Kates in the first wave were armed with torpedoes. The Navy had not completely discounted the possibility of torpedo attacks due to the relatively shallow depth of the harbor. I also don't know how well the nets would have worked but the possibility of neutralizing a large portion of the first wave would surly have affected the battle. Admiral Furlong, the day's Senior Officer Present Afloat ordered all ship to sortie as soon as the attack began. If he had been given a 30 minute warning would he have ordered the sortie if nets had been present? They probably couldn't get steam up in 30 minutes anyway. I looking forward to hearing the group's thoughts. Thanks, Dave Kennedy Atlanta |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
"Dave" wrote in message ... I have always wondered how the attack would have played out if the Americans had correctly interpreted the reading from the Army radar site on the north tip of Oahu. The attacking Japanese planes were picked up at a range of 132 miles at 7 o'clock Sunday morning. The radar operators phoned the duty office, Lt. Kermit Tyler and told him (paraphrase) that ".... a large formation of planes is approaching from the north." Tyler knew that eleven B-17s were due to arrive and assumed that the radar operators were seeing the B-17s and told them "Well, don't worry about it." The operators had interpreted the signal that they were seeing as representing over fifty planes. They did not know about the B-17 flight. If they had told Tyler that there were over fifty planes approaching instead of saying a 'large number', Tyler might have sounded the alarm. If he had sounded the alarm the Americans would have had about thirty minutes to get ready for the attack. I don't know how long it would take the sailors to get to their battle stations but I assume that 30 minutes would give them enough time to get to their AA guns and get them loaded. At least they would all be out of their bunks and all water tight doors and hatches could have been closed. The AA defenses on the ships were nothing like the late WWII batteries but there were dozens if not hundreds of 1.1" quad mounts on ships in the harbor when one considers the number of destroyers and auxiliaries present. The 1.1" had a lot of long term reliability problems but put out a lot of firepower when they were working. There were probably even more .50 caliber machine guns in addition to the sixty or seventy 5'' dual purpose mounts. The Army also had substantial AA batteries and the infantry and marines had .30 LMGs and BARs. On the other hand, many soldiers and sailors might have been off base or ashore. Could the Army have gotten their P-40s and P-36s up in time? The P-40s were more than a match for the Zeros (contrary to popular myth) and would have been going after the Kates and Vals anyway. I don't know how many P-40s were in Hawaii that morning of if there were any Navy or Marine fighters on Ford Island or at Ewa air station. There's a wealth of information on this at the Pear harbor hearings website, the congressional hearing is rather useful http://www.ibiblio.org/pha/pha/congress/part_0.html In short there around 94 pursuit aircraft, including 30 obsolete types available for combat. However its likely that not all of those could have been got airborne since the units were not on standby and the probablity is it would not have been possible to get the aircraft armed and fuelled let alone find the pilots and get them ready in the time available. The situation with regard to the army Anti-aircraft batteries was little short of appalling and alone justifies the sacking of General Short IMHO. Of the 31 army antiaircraft batteries, 27 were not in position and ready to fire until after the attack and in several instances not for a considerable period of time after the attack. None managed to engage the first wave. The mobile units were not in field position and had no ammunition. It was only through the intervention of General Burgin who collared Short in person that the fixed sites had any munitions and even these were boxed and with ready use provision. It seemed the quartermaster was unhappy about shells geting dirty ! I think the American carries were about 200 miles west of Pearl Harbor on the morning of the attack. Could they have sent approximately 80 Wildcats into the battle? They probably could not have gotten there by 7:55 but they could have been there by the time the second wave arrived. The second wave would probably have been canceled by the Japanese if surprise had not been achieved. Not a good idea IMHO The carriers were not operating together and their aircraft would have arrived short on fuel and heaviliy outnumbered. Moreover this would have left the only surviving naval assets in the pacific wide open to air attack Another twist I have wondered about is what would have happened it anti-torpedo nets had been deployed at Pearl Harbor. I think more than half the Kates in the first wave were armed with torpedoes. The Navy had not completely discounted the possibility of torpedo attacks due to the relatively shallow depth of the harbor. I also don't know how well the nets would have worked but the possibility of neutralizing a large portion of the first wave would surly have affected the battle. It wouldnt have affected the bomb attacks anyway Admiral Furlong, the day's Senior Officer Present Afloat ordered all ship to sortie as soon as the attack began. If he had been given a 30 minute warning would he have ordered the sortie if nets had been present? They probably couldn't get steam up in 30 minutes anyway. A sortie would have been disastrous. The ships would have been lost irretrievably at sea instead of being salvageable in harbour and the number of lives lost much higher. Keith ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
I think the single biggest undone defense would have been torpedo nets, but
the reality was no one thought torpedoes could be used effectively in Pearl Harbor's shallow waters. Buttoning up the ships and manning battle stations would probably have helped to some degree. A combination of some opposing fire and some aerial opposition would have had an impact on the success of the strike ... probably more in line with Japanese expectations in terms of impact on the fleet. I don't think the returning CV's could have accomplished anything of significance. Worst case would be have been to find the Japanese ... because they in turn would have been found and likely destroyed. I think 30 minutes lead time would be insufficient to sortie the fleet ... a good thing considering the likely outcome had they been caught just clearing Pearl and entering deeper water. R / John |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
"John Carrier" wrote in message
... I think the single biggest undone defense would have been torpedo nets, but the reality was no one thought torpedoes could be used effectively in Pearl Harbor's shallow waters. So news of Taranto had not reached the US then? Because it had obviously reached Japan ok.... John |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
John Mullen wrote:
"John Carrier" wrote in message ... I think the single biggest undone defense would have been torpedo nets, but the reality was no one thought torpedoes could be used effectively in Pearl Harbor's shallow waters. So news of Taranto had not reached the US then? Because it had obviously reached Japan ok.... The US commanders were such bigots that they couldn't imagine the slanty-eyed nips daring to attack. A good example of hubris. --mike John |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
So news of Taranto had not reached the US then? Because it had obviously
reached Japan ok.... John, is the harbor at Taranto as shallow as the one at Pearl? vince norris |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
In article i%42d.200183$Fg5.134891@attbi_s53,
Mike Dargan wrote: John Mullen wrote: "John Carrier" wrote in message ... I think the single biggest undone defense would have been torpedo nets, but the reality was no one thought torpedoes could be used effectively in Pearl Harbor's shallow waters. So news of Taranto had not reached the US then? Because it had obviously reached Japan ok.... The US commanders were such bigots that they couldn't imagine the slanty-eyed nips daring to attack. The Brits were similarly surprised when the lost the Prince of Wales and Repulse, not to mention Singapore. A good example of hubris. More than enough of that going around. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
"John Carrier" wrote in message ...
I think the single biggest undone defense would have been torpedo nets, but the reality was no one thought torpedoes could be used effectively in Pearl Harbor's shallow waters. The US Navy had fallen well behined in torpedo technology. For instance the IJNs Japanese Navy Long Lance Torpedo could manage 46 knots for about 22 knautical miles and 35 Knots for about 36 nautical miles. It had 50% more speed and 10 times more range. It used pure oxygen not air and didn't usually leave a trail. When under attack by Japanese subs the Americans sometimes thought they were being attacked from multiple directions when in fact a single Japanese sub had fired through their fleet to the other side! The problem was eventualy traced to the USN rotating its staff through its torpedo division every 2 years or so thus it never developed any expertise in developing torpedoes or envisaging what the enemies might be capable of. It must have been the same for aircraft lauched torpedoes. The Japanese ones presumably being better in every aspect such as launch height, speed, range and minimum depth. Buttoning up the ships and manning battle stations would probably have helped to some degree. A combination of some opposing fire and some aerial opposition would have had an impact on the success of the strike ... probably more in line with Japanese expectations in terms of impact on the fleet. I don't think the returning CV's could have accomplished anything of significance. Worst case would be have been to find the Japanese ... because they in turn would have been found and likely destroyed. I think 30 minutes lead time would be insufficient to sortie the fleet ... a good thing considering the likely outcome had they been caught just clearing Pearl and entering deeper water. R / John |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Steve Hix wrote:
In article i%42d.200183$Fg5.134891@attbi_s53, Mike Dargan wrote: John Mullen wrote: "John Carrier" wrote in message ... I think the single biggest undone defense would have been torpedo nets, but the reality was no one thought torpedoes could be used effectively in Pearl Harbor's shallow waters. So news of Taranto had not reached the US then? Because it had obviously reached Japan ok.... The US commanders were such bigots that they couldn't imagine the slanty-eyed nips daring to attack. The Brits were similarly surprised when the lost the Prince of Wales and Repulse, not to mention Singapore. A good example of hubris. More than enough of that going around. The Pearl Harbor debacle is often blamed on lack of resources caused by inadequate support from the politicians. Wrong. Short and Kimmel had both quantitative and qualitative superiority but were hopelessly inept. cheers --mike |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
..... the IJNs Japanese Navy Long Lance Torpedo could manage 46
knots for about 22 knautical miles and 35 Knots for about 36 nautical miles. Impressive but is there even the slightest chance of hitting a ship 22 nm away? vince norris |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Remember Pearl Harbor: Special Program Tonight at EAA | Fitzair4 | Home Built | 0 | December 7th 04 07:40 PM |
For Keith Willshaw... | robert arndt | Military Aviation | 253 | July 6th 04 05:18 AM |