A Japanese invasion of Hawaii

[warspite1]

The only data point we have so far for a carrier sailing into Pearl was the one for the Enterprise on 12/7. They sailed in with 2/3rds of her aircraft onboard.

warspite1

...in time of war. Not what is happening in your scenario. So you can't use that as a data point. You must use SOP as the data point.

[Curtis Lemay]

The navy / army in-fighting was my opinion?

That's not even close to what you claimed.

warspite1

The navy / army in-fighting was my opinion?

Knowing what the army would agree to under the right circumstances doesn't apply here. You have no plan. There is nothing for them to look at or agree to (not that they would in any case).

Please quote my full comment. Selective quoting is not right. You did it a lot in the Spain/Turkey thread.

The above is what I claimed.

This is what you said exactly: "The army would never have allowed its troops to be used for this navy operation."

That is not a "data point". It is an opinion!!!!!!!

[Curtis Lemay]

The only data point we have so far for a carrier sailing into Pearl was the one for the Enterprise on 12/7. They sailed in with 2/3rds of her aircraft onboard.

warspite1

...in time of war. Not what is happening in your scenario. So you can't use that as a data point. You must use SOP as the data point.

It's the only data point we have so far. And the "SOP" is not a data point. I'm still waiting on a reason why war changes the "SOP".

[warspite1]

It doesn't create any problems. It releases assets that can then be used elsewhere - even in the NEI. Luzon was not a launching platform for invading anything further south.

warspite1

It potentially creates massive issues for the Japanese and the move on the NEI. The naval and air bases on Luzon (out of army reach) can be used to condunct operations elsewhere, both in the South China Sea and also the Southern PI - both of which the Japanese need secured for the NEI.

Not without naval and air assets - which don't require an invasion to destroy.

warspite1

Who hasn't got naval assets? Who won't have air assets thanks to your postponement of Luzon. I repeat, it was the IJNAF that had the range to inflict a lot of the loss on the USAAF. You've removed this weapon. You can't use it twice.

[warspite1]

That's not even close to what you claimed.

warspite1

The navy / army in-fighting was my opinion?

Knowing what the army would agree to under the right circumstances doesn't apply here. You have no plan. There is nothing for them to look at or agree to (not that they would in any case).

Please quote my full comment. Selective quoting is not right. You did it a lot in the Spain/Turkey thread.

The above is what I claimed.

This is what you said exactly: "The army would never have allowed its troops to be used for this navy operation."

That is not a "data point". It is an opinion!!!!!!!

warspite1

Selective. You didn't include the second comment which was part of the answer. I have simply stated a fact. As things stand Yamamoto has nothing to offer the army. There is no plan, there is no detail, just a lot of blue sky thinking, so there is nothing for them to agree to (not that they would anyway).

[warspite1]

The only data point we have so far for a carrier sailing into Pearl was the one for the Enterprise on 12/7. They sailed in with 2/3rds of her aircraft onboard.

warspite1

...in time of war. Not what is happening in your scenario. So you can't use that as a data point. You must use SOP as the data point.

It's the only data point we have so far. And the "SOP" is not a data point. I'm still waiting on a reason why war changes the "SOP".

warspite1

Yes, its a data point. Sure, you can argue (without cause) that the Enterprise would have ripped up SOP (which would be convenient wouldn't it?) but you would need to make a really convincing argument.

As to why war changes SOP, I would have thought that was mind-bendingly obvious - particularly in relation to what is being discussed here.

[Curtis Lemay]

warspite1

It potentially creates massive issues for the Japanese and the move on the NEI. The naval and air bases on Luzon (out of army reach) can be used to condunct operations elsewhere, both in the South China Sea and also the Southern PI - both of which the Japanese need secured for the NEI.

Not without naval and air assets - which don't require an invasion to destroy.

warspite1

Who hasn't got naval assets? Who won't have air assets thanks to your postponement of Luzon. I repeat, it was the IJNAF that had the range to inflict a lot of the loss on the USAAF. You've removed this weapon. You can't use it twice.

I removed a small part of it. Plenty of it left. Then I took Mindoro - putting the army fighters in range.

[Curtis Lemay]

warspite1

The navy / army in-fighting was my opinion?

Knowing what the army would agree to under the right circumstances doesn't apply here. You have no plan. There is nothing for them to look at or agree to (not that they would in any case).

Please quote my full comment. Selective quoting is not right. You did it a lot in the Spain/Turkey thread.

The above is what I claimed.

This is what you said exactly: "The army would never have allowed its troops to be used for this navy operation."

That is not a "data point". It is an opinion!!!!!!!

warspite1

Selective. You didn't include the second comment which was part of the answer. I have simply stated a fact. As things stand Yamamoto has nothing to offer the army. There is no plan, there is no detail, just a lot of blue sky thinking, so there is nothing for them to agree to (not that they would anyway).

You apparently don't know the difference between a fact and an opinion.

[sPzAbt653]

Hi Shellshock -

The awesome scope of Overlord seems an odd comparison to the stealthy operation being discussed here.

That is because it wasn't a comparison, it was an example.

But to follow that thought along the lines of the discussion, Overlord was by far a more stealthy operation than the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. We can agree on that, correct?

[warspite1]

Not without naval and air assets - which don't require an invasion to destroy.

warspite1

Who hasn't got naval assets? Who won't have air assets thanks to your postponement of Luzon. I repeat, it was the IJNAF that had the range to inflict a lot of the loss on the USAAF. You've removed this weapon. You can't use it twice.

I removed a small part of it. Plenty of it left. Then I took Mindoro - putting the army fighters in range.

warspite1

You don't know that because suddenly Mindoro becomes a tougher nut to crack. So may be the army fighters are in range, or may be they aren't. The point is, you've given the Japanese a headache that Luzon removed in real life.

[Curtis Lemay]

warspite1

...in time of war. Not what is happening in your scenario. So you can't use that as a data point. You must use SOP as the data point.

It's the only data point we have so far. And the "SOP" is not a data point. I'm still waiting on a reason why war changes the "SOP".

warspite1

Yes, its a data point. Sure, you can argue (without cause) that the Enterprise would have ripped up SOP (which would be convenient wouldn't it?) but you would need to make a really convincing argument.

As to why war changes SOP, I would have thought that was mind-bendingly obvious - particularly in relation to what is being discussed here.

No. It is not a data point. That would be a carrier sailing into Pearl with whatever fraction of its aircraft onboard.

Still waiting for a reason why war changes the SOP.

[Curtis Lemay]

warspite1

Who hasn't got naval assets? Who won't have air assets thanks to your postponement of Luzon. I repeat, it was the IJNAF that had the range to inflict a lot of the loss on the USAAF. You've removed this weapon. You can't use it twice.

I removed a small part of it. Plenty of it left. Then I took Mindoro - putting the army fighters in range.

warspite1

You don't know that because suddenly Mindoro becomes a tougher nut to crack. So may be the army fighters are in range, or may be they aren't. The point is, you've given the Japanese a headache that Luzon removed in real life.

I said that it would take longer to reduce the air assets on Luzon. A 15% reduction in the number of Jap planes will do that. But that's all it is. They still get destroyed. Mindoro won't be any more difficult to take than it was historically. Perhaps easier due to getting invaded during the initial surprise phase.

[warspite1]

This is what you said exactly: "The army would never have allowed its troops to be used for this navy operation."

That is not a "data point". It is an opinion!!!!!!!

warspite1

Selective. You didn't include the second comment which was part of the answer. I have simply stated a fact. As things stand Yamamoto has nothing to offer the army. There is no plan, there is no detail, just a lot of blue sky thinking, so there is nothing for them to agree to (not that they would anyway).

You apparently don't know the difference between a fact and an opinion.

warspite1

Not really. The army can't approve a plan that hasn't been submitted. The army refuses to co-operate with the navy even if its sold a well thought out, sensible plan. It has received nothing. There is nothing by way of a plan. All it has is a vague idea that the conquest of the oil that Japan needs is being compromised because the navy wants to expand a plan for an attack on Pearl Harbor that will mean landing army troops on Maui (if they are incredibly lucky) to gain an airfield for the navy. This is an island the Japanese can't hold or reinforce or supply. There is also a sub operation to take Midway - again using the army's assets for a navy operation. Like Maui, Midway is an island that the Japanese can't supply. Six army battalions gone for...... nothing. And the army's conquest of the PI is suddenly harder - as is taking the NEI.

Nothing for the army to approve.

[warspite1]

It's the only data point we have so far. And the "SOP" is not a data point. I'm still waiting on a reason why war changes the "SOP".

warspite1

Yes, its a data point. Sure, you can argue (without cause) that the Enterprise would have ripped up SOP (which would be convenient wouldn't it?) but you would need to make a really convincing argument.

As to why war changes SOP, I would have thought that was mind-bendingly obvious - particularly in relation to what is being discussed here.

No. It is not a data point. That would be a carrier sailing into Pearl with whatever fraction of its aircraft onboard.

Still waiting for a reason why war changes the SOP.

warspite1

What exactly is the issue here? Perhaps if you can enlighten me on what has caused your confusion I can do my best to help?

[warspite1]

I removed a small part of it. Plenty of it left. Then I took Mindoro - putting the army fighters in range.

warspite1

You don't know that because suddenly Mindoro becomes a tougher nut to crack. So may be the army fighters are in range, or may be they aren't. The point is, you've given the Japanese a headache that Luzon removed in real life.

I said that it would take longer to reduce the air assets on Luzon. A 15% reduction in the number of Jap planes will do that. But that's all it is. They still get destroyed. Mindoro won't be any more difficult to take than it was historically. Perhaps easier due to getting invaded during the initial surprise phase.

warspite1

You appear to be quoting an opinion as fact. By removing the aircraft that delivered the coup-de-grace to the air units on Luzon, you are giving Mac options. With Luzon quiet, the Southern PI now becomes a possibility for counter attack.

You have given the Americans options they never had in real life thanks to the aircraft you have just removed.

[Curtis Lemay]

warspite1

Selective. You didn't include the second comment which was part of the answer. I have simply stated a fact. As things stand Yamamoto has nothing to offer the army. There is no plan, there is no detail, just a lot of blue sky thinking, so there is nothing for them to agree to (not that they would anyway).

You apparently don't know the difference between a fact and an opinion.

warspite1

Not really. The army can't approve a plan that hasn't been submitted. The army refuses to co-operate with the navy even if its sold a well thought out, sensible plan. It has received nothing. There is nothing by way of a plan. All it has is a vague idea that the conquest of the oil that Japan needs is being compromised because the navy wants to expand a plan for an attack on Pearl Harbor that will mean landing army troops on Maui (if they are incredibly lucky) to gain an airfield for the navy. This is an island the Japanese can't hold or reinforce or supply. There is also a sub operation to take Midway - again using the army's assets for a navy operation. Like Maui, Midway is an island that the Japanese can't supply. Six army battalions gone for...... nothing. And the army's conquest of the PI is suddenly harder - as is taking the NEI.

Nothing for the army to approve.

Every word of this is opinion. You don't seem to know the difference.

Let's see....I must submit a formal, typed, proposal, in triplicate, detailing every detail of an operation or you can claim the army wouldn't approve. No. I am not actually carrying out a real operation. We are discussing it on a history website - that's all. In the event, of course the Japanese would provide a nice detailed report to the army. That doesn't mean that I need to do so here.

The navy wants to degrade the US's response capability. That's actually much more important than even the oil in the DEI. They have a stockpile. The oil can wait if it has too (it doesn't, of course - it won't be affected at all, but it just isn't as important as torching Pearl.)

We disagree about the doability of the Maui operation. I believe it is very doable. The US is a nation at peace and they slack off on the weekends. The Pearl Harbor raid showed how vulnerable they were at that time. The Clark Field raid showed how unprepared for war they were. And then there are the benefits of taking Maui: Pearl gets torched with all that oil!

The Midway operation - with the addition of huge ground forces and the naval assets of the raid fleet will be about as easy as it gets.

[Curtis Lemay]

warspite1

Yes, its a data point. Sure, you can argue (without cause) that the Enterprise would have ripped up SOP (which would be convenient wouldn't it?) but you would need to make a really convincing argument.

As to why war changes SOP, I would have thought that was mind-bendingly obvious - particularly in relation to what is being discussed here.

No. It is not a data point. That would be a carrier sailing into Pearl with whatever fraction of its aircraft onboard.

Still waiting for a reason why war changes the SOP.

warspite1

What exactly is the issue here? Perhaps if you can enlighten me on what has caused your confusion I can do my best to help?

Still waiting for the above.

[Curtis Lemay]

warspite1

You don't know that because suddenly Mindoro becomes a tougher nut to crack. So may be the army fighters are in range, or may be they aren't. The point is, you've given the Japanese a headache that Luzon removed in real life.

I said that it would take longer to reduce the air assets on Luzon. A 15% reduction in the number of Jap planes will do that. But that's all it is. They still get destroyed. Mindoro won't be any more difficult to take than it was historically. Perhaps easier due to getting invaded during the initial surprise phase.

warspite1

You appear to be quoting an opinion as fact. By removing the aircraft that delivered the coup-de-grace to the air units on Luzon, you are giving Mac options. With Luzon quiet, the Southern PI now becomes a possibility for counter attack.

You have given the Americans options they never had in real life thanks to the aircraft you have just removed.

It is a fact that I'm only removing 15% of the historical air assets used. The Clark Field raid used 108 Bettys and Nells, and 84 Zeros. I'm leaving 108 Bettys and Nells and 75 Zeros. So...only 9 Zeros less and the same number of bombers. Things don't sound too good for the Clark Field forces.

[Aurelian]

The only data point we have so far for a carrier sailing into Pearl was the one for the Enterprise on 12/7. They sailed in with 2/3rds of her aircraft onboard.

warspite1

...in time of war. Not what is happening in your scenario. So you can't use that as a data point. You must use SOP as the data point.

And SOP, even today, is to land them before entering harbor. Now, Enterprise left 2/3rds of her aircraft onboard. But once she anchored, how was she going to launch them. Even with catapults, she had to steam into the wind.

As an aside, Japanese carriers didn't use them as it slowed down air ops. Enterprise's CO wanted them removed for the same reason. https://www.amazon.com/Flat-Tops-Fledgl ... 0498076415 has a page devoted to that.

[Aurelian]

This might be of interest: http://www.niehorster.org/014_japan/_ops.html

Imperial Japanese Armed Forces Initial Operations 12/41-7/42