Battle of Savo Island

[rkr1958]

So, I did a little research today on the Battle of Savo Island and ran across this: http://www.ww2pacific.com/savo.html

I found the article fascinating, as well as the entire site. I was familiar with this battle but wasn't familiar with the myth, "One of the oft repeated stories of military ineptitude may be wrong. The legend has it ... an Australian long range patrol aircraft saw the Japanese 8th fleet heading down the Slot. The pilot maintained radio silence and continued on his patrol. On landing, he went to afternoon tea before making his report. This story was repeated on this web page and "this slur upon an Australian aircrew from 1942" was challenged by LCDR Mackenzie J Gregory, R.A.N. (retired) who was watch officer on Canberra that night when the guns blazed."

Of extreme interest with the correspondence between the referenced site and LCdr Mackenzie J Gregory, R.A.N. (retired) on this myth: http://www.ww2pacific.com/savoupdt.html

[rkr1958]

I also did some reading up on the sinking of the Prince of Wales and Repulse and ran across these:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/ww2peoples ... 7979.shtml

http://www.far-eastern-heroes.org.uk/jo ... _wales.htm

http://www.winstonchurchill.org/support?catid=0&id=840


I've known the story of their sinking for 40-years but not really the details. What I was struck by was that Force Z, comprised of the two battleships Prince of Wales and Repulse and four destroyers. That was the entire RN Far East fleet in December 1941. And the thinking of the day was that this fleet was powerful enough to deter the Japanese fleet operating around Malaya and the Dutch East Indies.

[Cataphract88]

ORIGINAL: rkr1958

I also did some reading up on the sinking of the Prince of Wales and Repulse and ran across these:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/ww2peoples ... 7979.shtml

http://www.far-eastern-heroes.org.uk/jo ... _wales.htm

http://www.winstonchurchill.org/support?catid=0&id=840


I've known the story of their sinking for 40-years but not really the details. What I was struck by was that Force Z, comprised of the two battleships Prince of Wales and Repulse and four destroyers. That was the entire RN Far East fleet in December 1941. And the thinking of the day was that this fleet was powerful enough to deter the Japanese fleet operating around Malaya and the Dutch East Indies.

Wishful thinking of the day. [:)]

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: rkr1958

So, I did a little research today on the Battle of Savo Island and ran across this: http://www.ww2pacific.com/savo.html

I found the article fascinating, as well as the entire site. I was familiar with this battle but wasn't familiar with the myth, "One of the oft repeated stories of military ineptitude may be wrong. The legend has it ... an Australian long range patrol aircraft saw the Japanese 8th fleet heading down the Slot. The pilot maintained radio silence and continued on his patrol. On landing, he went to afternoon tea before making his report. This story was repeated on this web page and "this slur upon an Australian aircrew from 1942" was challenged by LCDR Mackenzie J Gregory, R.A.N. (retired) who was watch officer on Canberra that night when the guns blazed."

Of extreme interest with the correspondence between the referenced site and LCdr Mackenzie J Gregory, R.A.N. (retired) on this myth: http://www.ww2pacific.com/savoupdt.html

warspite1

No there is no may be about it. It's another example of one of those stories that becomes fact through being repeated (my MWIF write-ups may well repeat this myth).

For those interested read The Shame of Savo - Anatomy of a naval disaster (Bruce Loxton)

I am sure there was an apology issued recently but I can't find the article [&:]

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: rkr1958

I also did some reading up on the sinking of the Prince of Wales and Repulse and ran across these:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/ww2peoples ... 7979.shtml

http://www.far-eastern-heroes.org.uk/jo ... _wales.htm

http://www.winstonchurchill.org/support?catid=0&id=840


I've known the story of their sinking for 40-years but not really the details. What I was struck by was that Force Z, comprised of the two battleships Prince of Wales and Repulse and four destroyers. That was the entire RN Far East fleet in December 1941. And the thinking of the day was that this fleet was powerful enough to deter the Japanese fleet operating around Malaya and the Dutch East Indies.

warspite1

There is much that Churchill gets blamed for unfairly. Sadly the sinking of Force Z is not one of them. I suspect he was in a minority of one amongst his former Admiralty colleagues in thinking that one battleship, an unmodernised WWI-era battlecruiser and a lone fleet carrier with a few, obsolete fighters aboard, would deter the Japanese [:(]

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: rkr1958

So, I did a little research today on the Battle of Savo Island and ran across this: http://www.ww2pacific.com/savo.html

I found the article fascinating, as well as the entire site. I was familiar with this battle but wasn't familiar with the myth, "One of the oft repeated stories of military ineptitude may be wrong. The legend has it ... an Australian long range patrol aircraft saw the Japanese 8th fleet heading down the Slot. The pilot maintained radio silence and continued on his patrol. On landing, he went to afternoon tea before making his report. This story was repeated on this web page and "this slur upon an Australian aircrew from 1942" was challenged by LCDR Mackenzie J Gregory, R.A.N. (retired) who was watch officer on Canberra that night when the guns blazed."

Of extreme interest with the correspondence between the referenced site and LCdr Mackenzie J Gregory, R.A.N. (retired) on this myth: http://www.ww2pacific.com/savoupdt.html

warspite1

No there is no may be about it. It's another example of one of those stories that becomes fact through being repeated (my MWIF write-ups may well repeat this myth).

For those interested read The Shame of Savo - Anatomy of a naval disaster (Bruce Loxton)

I am sure there was an apology issued recently but I can't find the article [&:]

warspite1

Eh voila

http://ahoy.tk-jk.net/macslog/ATaleofTw ... recti.html

Still need to find the apology article. I'm sure there was one in the last couple of years.

[Neilster]

ORIGINAL: rkr1958

I also did some reading up on the sinking of the Prince of Wales and Repulse and ran across these:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/ww2peoples ... 7979.shtml

http://www.far-eastern-heroes.org.uk/jo ... _wales.htm

http://www.winstonchurchill.org/support?catid=0&id=840


I've known the story of their sinking for 40-years but not really the details. What I was struck by was that Force Z, comprised of the two battleships Prince of Wales and Repulse and four destroyers. That was the entire RN Far East fleet in December 1941. And the thinking of the day was that this fleet was powerful enough to deter the Japanese fleet operating around Malaya and the Dutch East Indies.

It would have been better if the carrier HMS Indomitable had been with them and hadn't run aground in the Caribbean. There was also an assumption that much of the Japanese fleet would be kept busy by the USN: something that wasn't going to happen after Pearl Harbor but Force Z was already in the Far East by then.

Cheers, Neilster

[paulderynck]

It would have been even better... for the Japanese! if the Indomitable had been there.

And yes the US Fleet being assumed "hors-de-combat" at that time would have been a beyond the pale assumption.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: Neilster

ORIGINAL: rkr1958

I also did some reading up on the sinking of the Prince of Wales and Repulse and ran across these:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/ww2peoples ... 7979.shtml

http://www.far-eastern-heroes.org.uk/jo ... _wales.htm

http://www.winstonchurchill.org/support?catid=0&id=840


I've known the story of their sinking for 40-years but not really the details. What I was struck by was that Force Z, comprised of the two battleships Prince of Wales and Repulse and four destroyers. That was the entire RN Far East fleet in December 1941. And the thinking of the day was that this fleet was powerful enough to deter the Japanese fleet operating around Malaya and the Dutch East Indies.

It would have been better if the carrier HMS Indomitable had been with them and hadn't run aground in the Caribbean. There was also an assumption that much of the Japanese fleet would be kept busy by the USN: something that wasn't going to happen after Pearl Harbor but Force Z was already in the Far East by then.

Cheers, Neilster

warspite1

Assuming all were operational (big assumption) and that all could get into the air (even bigger assumption) there would have been nine short ranged Sea Hurricanes and twelve Fulmar fighters (not my specialist subject but I believe the Fulmar I was actually slower than the ‘Betty’ and around the same speed as the ‘Nell’). 21 fighters vs 88 bombers.

It is pretty certain that the Indomitable would have been the focus of the attack. We know from what happened to Illustrious and Indomitable herself in the Mediterranean (not to mention the Kamikaze in the Pacific later in the war) what she could have withstood from bombs. The potential problems would have been the torpedo bombers that could sink her and to what extent bombs and torpedoes would stop further flight-deck usage (the attack took place over a period of more than an hour).

Who knows with the vagaries of war? If Indomitable was taken out early with few aircraft aloft (she wouldn’t even have needed to be sunk initially) then the likely outcome would have been the loss of three capital ships not just two.

But if enough fighters could have got in the air they could have got in amongst the vulnerable torpedo bombers, and it is possible that any outcome – from no ship loss to all three – could have occurred.

On balance, given what we know of RN carrier operations at that phase of the war, I would have to say I am not confident of a better outcome.....

[brian brian]

that's why we roll the dice.

What I've always wondered is - did Japan send any Zeroes to Indo China? Or, when?

What if Churchill announced the deployment of the Prince of Wales but didn't mention Force Z would include a carrier? If the Japanese knew the Indomitable was there maybe they would have transferred some Zeroes to Viet Nam as well. But if the Japanese didn't know that...

Or maybe Japanese recon planes from land or Cruisers would have encountered CAP, or the land-based Brewster Buffaloes or other minimal RAF assets in Malaya and perhaps the Japanese air commander might not have wished to send in un-escorted bombers, particularly if Zeroes would have been available to him a day or two later. And their troop convoys (now empty) were already safe. The Japanese were extremely brave but also sometimes prudent.

One can ponder how many bombers a flight of X amount of Hurricanes/Fulmars/Buffaloes might be able to shoot down but they would also lower the overall effectiveness of the bombers at least a little bit, I would think.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: brian brian

that's why we roll the dice.

What I've always wondered is - did Japan send any Zeroes to Indo China? Or, when?

What if Churchill announced the deployment of the Prince of Wales but didn't mention Force Z would include a carrier? If the Japanese knew the Indomitable was there maybe they would have transferred some Zeroes to Viet Nam as well. But if the Japanese didn't know that...

Or maybe Japanese recon planes from land or Cruisers would have encountered CAP, or the land-based Brewster Buffaloes or other minimal RAF assets in Malaya and perhaps the Japanese air commander might not have wished to send in un-escorted bombers, particularly if Zeroes would have been available to him a day or two later. And their troop convoys (now empty) were already safe. The Japanese were extremely brave but also sometimes prudent.

One can ponder how many bombers a flight of X amount of Hurricanes/Fulmars/Buffaloes might be able to shoot down but they would also lower the overall effectiveness of the bombers at least a little bit, I would think.

warspite1

What CAP? There were no Buffaloes - that was a big part of Philips' problem.

Also, as said, air warfare is not something I know that much about, but surely even the Zero, with its great range, isn't going to be deployed from Indo-China? Apart from getting to the target (no mean feat over that stretch of water and of course assuming they know where the target is and there is no time and fuel expended in searching) they have to fight and then get home.

[michaelbaldur]

The `what ifs` of the war is always fun to play with.

But i personal think that the big ship sinking helped Cw to keep fighting

The sinking of force z was the british day of infamy.

[rkr1958]

Here's a link to (another) very excellent article on the sinking of the Prince and Wales and Repulse, http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/UN/UK/R ... ulse/#sec1

I quote from the conclusions section, "Once again the lesson of Norway and Crete had received tragic confirmation; fighter support for surface forces operating where there is a possibility of strong enemy air attack is a prime necessity."

[brian brian]

RAF land-basd CAP almost happened, it is one of the intriguing what-ifs. Buffaloes were designated in Malaya to do it...they reached the scene on-time to see the Repulse sink. Phillips moved aggressively to attempt an attack on a second transport convoy, throwing a bit of confusion into the plans for the day of the sinking. But I don't think he had CAP overhead the day before either, when he was first detected by Japanese cruiser based scout planes (iirc).

I have always been curious if the same airfields the Bettys used would have been in range of the attack site for Zeroes? I don't know. I don't think the Japanese were able to just nimbly create airfields on the closest patch of dry ground the way we might in WiF (to keep the game simple to play). I think I read some of the attack flights came from Saigon, a fair bit farther away than a flight from the closest shore of Viet Nam to the Malaya landing sites.

[Neilster]

Zeroes flew from Taiwan to attack Clark Field near Manila. A quick range check on Google Earth indicates that they'd have the range to fly from near Saigon to the Malay landing sites with a decent reserve for a sea search.

If they managed to navigate the long over-water flight to and from Taiwan, it doesn't seem unreasonable that they could do something similar to and from Saigon.

Cheers, Neilster

[brian brian]

The Bettys managed the feat, fighter escorts would just ... escort them.

But I think the Zeroes were all busy in the Phillipines.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: Neilster

Zeroes flew from Taiwan to attack Clark Field near Manila. A quick range check on Google Earth indicates that they'd have the range to fly from near Saigon to the Malay landing sites with a decent reserve for a sea search.

If they managed to navigate the long over-water flight to and from Taiwan, it doesn't seem unreasonable that they could do something similar to and from Saigon.

Cheers, Neilster

warspite1

I think the subtle difference is the target. Clark Field is fixed. The Japanese could calculate fuel expenditure and time over the target area.

In the case of two ships hundreds of miles away, that is far from the case. As it happened the long range bombers needed to spread out to try and find the two capital ships.

I just don't see that as being a practical use of the fighters.

[Neilster]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Neilster

Zeroes flew from Taiwan to attack Clark Field near Manila. A quick range check on Google Earth indicates that they'd have the range to fly from near Saigon to the Malay landing sites with a decent reserve for a sea search.

If they managed to navigate the long over-water flight to and from Taiwan, it doesn't seem unreasonable that they could do something similar to and from Saigon.

Cheers, Neilster

warspite1

I think the subtle difference is the target. Clark Field is fixed. The Japanese could calculate fuel expenditure and time over the target area.

In the case of two ships hundreds of miles away, that is far from the case. As it happened the long range bombers needed to spread out to try and find the two capital ships.

I just don't see that as being a practical use of the fighters.

Probably but the range is about 100km less than that to Clark Field, so I factored that in to my "decent reserve for a sea search".

It sounds like they were all busy anyway.

Cheers, Neilster

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: Neilster

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Neilster

Zeroes flew from Taiwan to attack Clark Field near Manila. A quick range check on Google Earth indicates that they'd have the range to fly from near Saigon to the Malay landing sites with a decent reserve for a sea search.

If they managed to navigate the long over-water flight to and from Taiwan, it doesn't seem unreasonable that they could do something similar to and from Saigon.

Cheers, Neilster

warspite1

I think the subtle difference is the target. Clark Field is fixed. The Japanese could calculate fuel expenditure and time over the target area.

In the case of two ships hundreds of miles away, that is far from the case. As it happened the long range bombers needed to spread out to try and find the two capital ships.

I just don't see that as being a practical use of the fighters.

Probably but the range is about 100km less than that to Clark Field, so I factored that in to my "decent reserve for a sea search".

It sounds like they were all busy anyway.

Cheers, Neilster

warspite1

Yes, its astonishing to read of just how stretched the Japanese were. I never really gave it that much thought before (having read mostly about Guadalcanal). Then read the Fast Carriers and......

[Jagdtiger14]

Here is an interesting documentary that some of you may have seen, if not enjoy:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8icQgHsBGzg