Jap Signal intelligence

This new stand alone release based on the legendary War in the Pacific from 2 by 3 Games adds significant improvements and changes to enhance game play, improve realism, and increase historical accuracy. With dozens of new features, new art, and engine improvements, War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition brings you the most realistic and immersive WWII Pacific Theater wargame ever!

Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition

User avatar
Kull
Posts: 2744
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2007 3:43 am
Location: El Paso, TX

RE: Jap Signal intelligence

Post by Kull »

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

I'd say just the opposite of GB68.  The Japanese had some incredibly dumb practices like every merchant ship reporting it's noon position each day back to Tokyo.  The only thing that kept Allied subs from sinking them all was that the navigation was so poor that the reported position was often wrong by a dozen miles or more (leaving the sub to watch smoke on the horizon).

Overall, while Allied intel shouldn't be anything like 100%, it should far outstrip Japanese capabilities in every respect.  I think it's under-rated. 

Really? But doesn't this "lock in" a paradigm from the war? Why shouldn't the Japanese player have the option of being smarter in the area of code usage and signals practices? If "real life US torpedoes" is an optional switch (based on absolutely nothing but hindsight), why not something similar for Japanese intel practices? I'm not advocating that, but you have a habit of decrying forced Allied ineptitudes. This situation is no different, except now the Japanese player is locked into an extremely detrimental RL behaviour with no ability to change it.
User avatar
Shark7
Posts: 7936
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 4:11 pm
Location: The Big Nowhere

RE: Jap Signal intelligence

Post by Shark7 »

ORIGINAL: Kull
ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

I'd say just the opposite of GB68.  The Japanese had some incredibly dumb practices like every merchant ship reporting it's noon position each day back to Tokyo.  The only thing that kept Allied subs from sinking them all was that the navigation was so poor that the reported position was often wrong by a dozen miles or more (leaving the sub to watch smoke on the horizon).

Overall, while Allied intel shouldn't be anything like 100%, it should far outstrip Japanese capabilities in every respect.  I think it's under-rated. 

Really? But doesn't this "lock in" a paradigm from the war? Why shouldn't the Japanese player have the option of being smarter in the area of code usage and signals practices? If "real life US torpedoes" is an optional switch (based on absolutely nothing but hindsight), why not something similar for Japanese intel practices? I'm not advocating that, but you have a habit of decrying forced Allied ineptitudes. This situation is no different, except now the Japanese player is locked into an extremely detrimental RL behaviour with no ability to change it.

Good point. I've been seeing this a lot myself. 'My side shouldn't be locked into historical facts but the other guy should!'

What's good for the goose...
Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'
User avatar
Brady
Posts: 6084
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2002 12:48 pm
Location: Oregon,USA

RE: Jap Signal intelligence

Post by Brady »


What Follows are some exceprts from posts I have made in the past on this subject:

...........

Intelligence and Cryptanalytic Activities of the Japanese During WW 2 (Agean Park Press).

This book describes in detail many aspects of Japanese Code breaking and intel gathering during the war some of the things it cover are:

The Japanese Could read Chinese code throught the war.

The Japanese Could read Allied (US) Aircode trafic.

The Japanese Could read Weather Code.

The Japanese Could determine TF movements through intercepts.

The Japanese Had an extensive Spy network in China and the USSR/Manchuko area, that provided intell on Soviet Army disposations, and extensive intill on Chinease Army disposations.

British Air Code was partialy read.

Their is more as well, but it shows that the Intell aspect was not as one sided as one might think.


Summery of the Book:

During the perioud of Japanese expanshion:

Priour to the war, the Japanese put a lot of effort into gathering intel on the areas they intened to move into, or to atack, well know is the Consolate spy in Hawai, less well known are the operatives that worked all over the Japanese sphear of concern to pave the way for the Ocupations. These operatives would later become key figures in the Ocupation forces for their respective ares of expertise.

Types of Intel gathered Included, OOB, Geographic infermation like landing spots, water depth, roads, airfileds exc.. A working knowledge of the local populios was also key and helped the Japanese maintane controle in the ocupied areas.

Pre War and during the war, the Japanese were also, to varying degreas, suxcesfull at the art of disinfermation.

After the perioud of expanshion:

Japanese Intel provided actionable infermation on a number of isues, Thier assesment of the Situation in Siberia through Intel and other sources, alowed them to Move forces from the Kawantung Army to other theaters, that is they felt confortable doing so, because they were in the know...

Intel provided a very clear picture of the situation in China and Burma which greatly help planing.

Intel provided ample warning of the Invashion of Iwo Jima, the Ryikos(Okinawa), and the Philipines.

Intel also provided a fairly clear picture of the situation in the Northern area of operations (Alutions/Kuriles).

Intel also provided them with a general understanding of the forces araid aganst them gloabaly.

Intel also gave them- warning of impending Carrier strikes later in the war.

These acheavements are not as glamiours as the Noted Allied acheavements and in game terms are hard to efect. Also it should be noted that given the defensive nature of the situation for Japan past late 42/early 43 the opertunity to gather infermation from capruted sources was very limited or non existant. Some of the Bigest allied suxcess from Intel were:

MIdway- Eschenialy a result of Monitoring Japanese signals trafic, and getting lucky, their code was not openly broken, they simply were able to point to it as a likley invashion target, the rest as we know was just dumb luck. We also had a lot of lead time on this, this was not a real time scenario.

Yamamoto- This was some good work, and again was something that was know to be in the offing for some time.

Bismark Sea- This stemed in part from infermation that came to pass from a captured set of documents, and had a lot of lead time, but we never knew exactly when they were comming, in fact two convoys had deleavrd troops to New Gunie suxcesfully priour to the noted convoy being intercepted, that were part of the same intel scoop, namely the transfer of Men from the Kawantung Army to the New Gunie area.

Operations in New Gunie after the Bismark sea, Another captured set of code books helped Marcauther to advance up the coast of New gunie since he was able to see whear the Japnese were along the coast through signals intercepts.

The later points above were not a result of code breaking but from dumb luck, these were on the whole isolated suxcess, and not for the most part linked in any way. The Japanese at this stage of the war simply had no way to make similar use of their intell. except to put forces in the way of the advancing allies, like they did with considerable efect at Okinawa and Iwo Jima, and to a lesser degree in the Philipines.

CBI:

In this theater as noted above the Japanese enjoyed considerable suxcess across the board, they could see the map so to speak for the whole war.

In game terms:

Japanese Intel reports should show:

Radio Transmitions from TF's at sea, more or less as it does now.

List the locations of US Air units in the reports as well.

List the locations of Allied HQ units in the reports.(randomanly and with a degree of eror)

Show randomanly and with some degee of eror whear HQ units are preparing for atack.

List Soviet Ground unit locations randomanly and witrh some degree of eror.

List Soviet Naval assests in port.

List British units in Burma with a degree of eror and randomanly.

List Chinese Units(all including air) and note their movements.



................

From: MHQ Autom 2002, in the Article: Secret Key To MacArthur's Success p.18


" Australian, British, and American Cryptanalysts at the central Beuro had attacked the Japanese main administrative army code for nearly two years, but were still unable to penatrate it's intermost secerats. They shared their finindgs and cooperated closly with US Army Counterparts working at signals Intelegance services, located at Arlington Hall Station, Virgina, just across the potamic River from Washington. With Assistance from the Austrailians and British signals units and analyis centers in India, the Centrail Beureau and Artlington Hall had enjoyed magor successes aganst certain Japanese army code syatems,notably the japanese army airforces air-ground code in 1943 and the Japnese army's shiping cypher in Aprial of 1943"

"By Early January 1944, howeaver, no one except the imperial Japanese Army was reading it's most secerate military radio messages."

"Magor Gewneral George V. Strong, US cheif of military intelegance, tesified to the security of Japanese army communications, Strong declaired in January 1944 the imperial armys ciphers were the most difficult of any enemy systems the allies had to solve to that point in the war. In his opinion Japanese army ciphers presented much greater dificulity than originoaly anticapated, and work by the allied cryptanalysts was much more ardious and time consuming than in "any other cryptographic material with which there ha been experance"


Of course in January of 44 the Austrailians found a code book in New Gunie that would change all this, by Spring 44 we were able to read partial messages of this code.

This window of being able to read the Japanese Army code greatly aided macauther in his Campagine in New Gunie and espichaly in the effort at Holliandia.

Howeaver..."On Aprial 8th,1944, the IGHQ changed the encipherment book for all Japanese high leval cryptologic systems."


Later of course they uncoverd yet another code book from the Yoshimo Maru.


Clearly untill well into 43 not much was being read by the Allies about the Japanese army via intel intercepts, and after it that it was Spoty at times.

........................................................................................................

p.424 At DAwn We Slept:

"So Rochefort and his devoted workers in Combat Intelegance strained every nerve to keep track of japanese ship movements. On Novemebr 27th his summery indicated: " No further information on the presence of Carier Divishion Five in the Mandates." The same report advised: "Cariers are still located in home water's,,,," so Japanese deception tactics continued to work effectively. The next day Rochfort had a disturbing development to note: "As has been previously reported the suspected {Japanese} Radio Intelegance net is very active and is becoming more so.... This activaty is interputed to indacate the the R.I. net is operating at full strength upon US Naval comunacations and IS GETTING RESULTS [Rochefort's capital's].
Roheforts report was entirely accurate. From many interceptorstattions the fourth Department of the naval General Staff monitored American Naval radio trafic. It could tell, for instance, when Pearl Harbor Signaled a Battleship, or When Kimmels ships Flashed Pearl Harbor. Somtimes it could estimate aproxamate loacations, but not often. Japanese Radio intelegance was in much the same situation a sRochefort: that it could not decipher the contents of the message it monitored and had to work from call signals alone. The two radio interception nets were like wariours playing a game of blind mans bluff.....The Japanese divided American Naval messages into three catagories, Urgent,Ordinary and meterological. The naval Genearl staff kept a statiscial record of all the messages, grouping them acording to their imporatnace and number. In this way it attempted to judge the scope of American fleat activity. The US changed the call signs from time to time. For several days afterword the Japanese would be confused, but by hard work they solved the new paterns. Howeaver, after Pearl Harbor the US Navy devised systems which made it extreamly dificult for the Japanese even to break the call signals."

JN-25:

"..."We read the occasional small message in JN-25 before the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor," he says. "But never did we read JN-25 on a general basis, because we didn't have the staff to do this. Later, during the war, when we were concentrating on JN-25 full blast, we were able to read only five or six percent of the total JN-25 intercepts.".."

From this sight:http://www.corregidor.org/chs_crypto1/jn25_2.htm

This was the more read of the Japanese code syatems, and only half of all Japanese Navel signal trafic actualy used this system, as we can see from other posts and referances above, the rest of the Japanese code's for the various brancehs and organasations were largely unread or spoty at best, particularly dificult to read were the Japanese army codes which were unread for almost half the war, yet we see examples above whear Army Ground units are labled in the intell report...this I find suspect. Also Misderection was a part of all this by both sides, I wounder if this is in anyway represented in the intel report's.

Autom 2002 MHQ, Marcaurthers Greatest Secret, p.16:


"To bypass the 162th Infantry, Hidemitsu took his men into the Jungle-cladd foothills of the rugged Finisterre Range. Faced with a long, tough march, the troops quikly rid themselfs of all but the most essential survivial items that they could carry on their backs.....unnessary supplys and equipment were left behind at sio. Among items deamed unnesential were spare coppys of all the code books belonging to the twentieth Infentry Divishion.The Japanese Army prided itself on its security consciousness, and regulations stipulated taht code clerks had to burn their code parapheralia to enshure that none of the sensitive documents fell into enemy hands..Therin lies one of the most interesting storys of WW2."
The handfullof Japnese army signalmen ordered to destroy the 20th divishions code books had a practile problem. How were they going to burn the dozen or so books outdoors during the monsoon seasion? The code books themselves were compact and practicle documents, not much larger or thicker than a present day quality papper back book. But as anyone who has tried knows buring a bound volume is dificult. The pages have to be torn out a few at a time abd then tosed individualy into the fire to inshure compleate distruction. The Japnese squad had to destroy eight volums of code paraphernalia, including the red bound main Army Adminstrative Code Book, two cipher books, a geographic code book, and a chinese telegrapic code book. They could start a fire, but it would take time to burn all those documents, and during that time the telltale white smoke rising through the green jungle canopy would serve as a homming becone for any Allied fighters passing overhead. Wet Hungry and anxious to get out of Sio ahead of the Australians, the Japanese put all the code books into a small steall trunk. They then tossed in into a deep watter filled pit, expecting that the box would sink to the bottom of it's own weight. That was their first mistake a worse one followed...."


Acording to regulation the Japnese Cypher section tore off the covers of the code books and submited them along with the officer of the sections writen report stating that the books had been destroyed acording to the proper procedure, in fat that had not been destroyed, the Japanese beelaved they were and thought their code still intact.


During the first weeks in January of 44 the Austrailians entered the area of the former Japanese coumpound at Sio, previously home to some 40,000 Japanese troops, it was festooed with booby traps and the Pioners went to work to make it safe, they discovered the Metal box (err ox) and............



Image


SCW Beta Support Team

Beta Team Member for:

WPO
PC
CF
AE
WiTE

Obi-wan Kenobi said it best: A lot of the reality we perceive depend on our point of view
User avatar
Shark7
Posts: 7936
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 4:11 pm
Location: The Big Nowhere

RE: Jap Signal intelligence

Post by Shark7 »

Brady, good work on that...in fact, that is much like the intel gathering we are arguing about. [:D] Put in some effort and you find things out.

Intel, since it is an abstract in the game, should probably reflect what you have posted a bit more. It's not just radio transmissions, its an entire network working like gears in an engine...all the gears have to operate at peak performance for the machine to be truly efficient.
Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'
Mike Scholl
Posts: 6187
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 1:17 am
Location: Kansas City, MO

RE: Jap Signal intelligence

Post by Mike Scholl »

ORIGINAL: Kull
ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

I'd say just the opposite of GB68.  The Japanese had some incredibly dumb practices like every merchant ship reporting it's noon position each day back to Tokyo.  The only thing that kept Allied subs from sinking them all was that the navigation was so poor that the reported position was often wrong by a dozen miles or more (leaving the sub to watch smoke on the horizon).

Overall, while Allied intel shouldn't be anything like 100%, it should far outstrip Japanese capabilities in every respect.  I think it's under-rated. 

Really? But doesn't this "lock in" a paradigm from the war? Why shouldn't the Japanese player have the option of being smarter in the area of code usage and signals practices? If "real life US torpedoes" is an optional switch (based on absolutely nothing but hindsight), why not something similar for Japanese intel practices? I'm not advocating that, but you have a habit of decrying forced Allied ineptitudes. This situation is no different, except now the Japanese player is locked into an extremely detrimental RL behaviour with no ability to change it.


So you want to throw the Japanese starting superiority in pilot quality into the mix? I don't have any problem with it..., but the Japanese player sure will. The only reason to decry "forced ineptitudes" is if they are undeserved. But I wouldn't have a problem with a similar "toggle" to that provided for Allied torpedoes.

Your Japanese opponent wants his ASW to be better than awful? Or his "intel" to be better than useless? Fine, let him offer working US torpedoes as a swap... Problem is that the game has already given him far better ASW than he deserves, and a far better officer pool than he deserves---and his opponent has received nothing in return. Toggles would be much better..., and fairer.

User avatar
Bradley7735
Posts: 2073
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2004 8:51 pm

RE: Jap Signal intelligence

Post by Bradley7735 »

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

ORIGINAL: Kull
ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

I'd say just the opposite of GB68.  The Japanese had some incredibly dumb practices like every merchant ship reporting it's noon position each day back to Tokyo.  The only thing that kept Allied subs from sinking them all was that the navigation was so poor that the reported position was often wrong by a dozen miles or more (leaving the sub to watch smoke on the horizon).

Overall, while Allied intel shouldn't be anything like 100%, it should far outstrip Japanese capabilities in every respect.  I think it's under-rated. 

Really? But doesn't this "lock in" a paradigm from the war? Why shouldn't the Japanese player have the option of being smarter in the area of code usage and signals practices? If "real life US torpedoes" is an optional switch (based on absolutely nothing but hindsight), why not something similar for Japanese intel practices? I'm not advocating that, but you have a habit of decrying forced Allied ineptitudes. This situation is no different, except now the Japanese player is locked into an extremely detrimental RL behaviour with no ability to change it.


So you want to throw the Japanese starting superiority in pilot quality into the mix? I don't have any problem with it..., but the Japanese player sure will. The only reason to decry "forced ineptitudes" is if they are undeserved. But I wouldn't have a problem with a similar "toggle" to that provided for Allied torpedoes.

Your Japanese opponent wants his ASW to be better than awful? Or his "intel" to be better than useless? Fine, let him offer working US torpedoes as a swap... Problem is that the game has already given him far better ASW than he deserves, and a far better officer pool than he deserves---and his opponent has received nothing in return. Toggles would be much better..., and fairer.


Toggles for a lot of things would be better. Did anyone notice that somewhere between UV, WITP and AE, the historical Japanese Sub Doctrine toggle dissapeared? Historically, Japanese submarines were very limited in firing torpedoes at merchant ships, and even when they could do so, could only fire 1 torpedo. You can see all sorts of AAR's where merchie after merchie go down to IJN subs off the WC and OZ. This is not a historical representation.

In some ways, the game might be better to just eliminate (ie: toggle) any advantage/disadvantage each side has. Bad torps, good damage control, Kamikazes, A-bomb, Intelligence, sub doctrines, landing bonuses, surprise, coordinated CV attacks, construction, long lance attacks, great exp for starting ships, bad exp for starting ships, pilot experience, etc.

Ok, I have some sarcasm in my post above. [;)]

I think the Japanese had around 6-8 codes they used throughout the war. From Merchant communication to High Imperial Command communication. At any given time, the US could read, fluently, about half of them. That doesn't mean the Allied player should be able to see all details of the Japanese side. But, it does mean that the game doesn't (and can't) give enough information to the Allied player. Sure, the US never did break the highest level code of the Japanese, something Brady pointed out. But, you can't say that the Japanese were just as good at code breaking as the US because they could read the Weather Code and the US couldn't read the High Command code. [8|]
The older I get, the better I was.
User avatar
Kull
Posts: 2744
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2007 3:43 am
Location: El Paso, TX

RE: Jap Signal intelligence

Post by Kull »

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl
So you want to throw the Japanese starting superiority in pilot quality into the mix? I don't have any problem with it..., but the Japanese player sure will. The only reason to decry "forced ineptitudes" is if they are undeserved. But I wouldn't have a problem with a similar "toggle" to that provided for Allied torpedoes.

Your Japanese opponent wants his ASW to be better than awful? Or his "intel" to be better than useless? Fine, let him offer working US torpedoes as a swap... Problem is that the game has already given him far better ASW than he deserves, and a far better officer pool than he deserves---and his opponent has received nothing in return. Toggles would be much better..., and fairer.

The point is that forced ineptitudes and their counterpart, overdone superiorities, are endemic to the game, and apply to BOTH sides. Because it is a game, and the devs have made some design decisions that can be torn apart in singularity, but which in toto create an enjoyable experience. One that doesn't wander too far from history and all the while preserves the the strategic production and resource realities which - 99 times out of 100 - will produce a real life historical result in roughly the real life time frame.

Does allegedly superior Japanese ASW change that? Superior early war Japanese pilots? Better Japanese officers? Not one of them, alone or in combination.
Mike Scholl
Posts: 6187
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 1:17 am
Location: Kansas City, MO

RE: Jap Signal intelligence

Post by Mike Scholl »

ORIGINAL: Bradley7735

Toggles for a lot of things would be better. Did anyone notice that somewhere between UV, WITP and AE, the historical Japanese Sub Doctrine toggle dissapeared? Historically, Japanese submarines were very limited in firing torpedoes at merchant ships, and even when they could do so, could only fire 1 torpedo.


Actually I don't have any problem with doing away with "Japanese Submarine Doctrine". The Japanese player is the one who should and will decide what his "doctrine" will be. Same with concentrating more effort on ASW measures when the war starts.

My objection is to giving him abilities and skills the Japanese didn't have when the war started. Their submarine crews and captains had no more experience than anyone else in the Pacific! The China Incident was NOT a naval war, so who were they to gain experience against? And Japanese ASW equipment, doctrine, and training were woefully inadequate on December 7th.

Most US submarines are handicapped by their historically lousy Mark XIV's..., and it is up to the US Player to figure out how to get whatever use he can out of them. All the Allies (except the Brits) are handicapped by poor sub CO's..., fact of life, and a balancing act for the player to try and correct.

But the game has solved the Japanese ASW weaknesses for the player by eliminating them..., and given him a huge pool of over-rated officers to man his subs and PB's with. This is what I object to.
User avatar
Mynok
Posts: 12108
Joined: Sat Nov 30, 2002 12:12 am
Contact:

RE: Jap Signal intelligence

Post by Mynok »


Here's a thought for consideration: since the torpedo problem was as much as political issue as anything else, why not make a trade off with the grossly underrepresented political issue of IJA/IJN cooperation? Don't know how that would be implemented, but it does seem strange that the two are so easily intermixed in the game.

As for Japanese ASW, the issue seems to be leaders more than anything else. The individual ship capabilities seem adequately limited. But if the leaders are truly boosting the effects too much, then give leaders an ASW rating. And make it low for pretty much all leaders early in the war.

On intelligence, I simply don't find it a game-changing aspect. Both sides have way more intelligence than they did historically just from hindsight. I don't see how this could be radically changed without running into the pitfalls discussed in the thread about that very matter. There is really not a whole lot that either side doesn't know about the early objectives of the Japanese or the abilities of the Allies. This truly changes the equation, and leaves us in the position of having to accept an ahistorical intelligence situation, no matter what. Better to leave it where it is, IMO, as a system that gives the Allies a bit more info down the road, and the Japanese little more than what is already known from history. Keep a sidelight in my book, and keep giving the Allies enough to ensure they have more.

"Measure civilization by the ability of citizens to mock government with impunity" -- Unknown
spence
Posts: 5421
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2003 6:56 am
Location: Vancouver, Washington

RE: Jap Signal intelligence

Post by spence »

underrepresented political issue of IJA/IJN cooperation? Don't know how that would be implemented, but it does seem strange that the two are so easily intermixed in the game.

The AI might need all the help it can get but a real player should be unable to assign IJN fighters to escort IJA bombers and vice versa. I've observed IJA bombers escorted by Zero's flying from carriers. That's over the top fantasy.

One thought though would be to have the Japanese Player pay Political Points to change his industry. The IJA and IJN were not the only powerhouses in Japanese Politics. The industrial families likewise wielded enormous power and had hundreds of years of heritage as the employers of the warrior class. Closing somebodies factory or telling the owner to produce somebody else's design would involve a loss of face for these families and would cost somebody a heck of alot more political capital than changing the skipper of 120 ft subchaser (especially one outranked by the prospective captain).

User avatar
Brady
Posts: 6084
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2002 12:48 pm
Location: Oregon,USA

RE: Jap Signal intelligence

Post by Brady »


How were Torpedoes political?

.......

IJA/IJN cooperation, or their precaved lack theirof is a myth, at least to the extent it seams to be comomly preceaved. Their are many many examples of the two services working very well together on many diferent levals, and very few examples of them not getting along well, and those tend to be at very high levals.

Operationaly their is realy no more reasion to place any restrictions on them in game then their is for US army and Marines or any of the Comenwealth forces.

Practialy speaking their are legitamely many more reasions that the Allies should not work as well together as they do on many levals,non the least of which are aircraft suport units or ports providing all maner of suply and ammo for forgine ships.

In fact it is such a huge can of worms that it was just left alone and even if one wanted to be anal enough to bring such distinctions into efect it would be almsot imposable to model corectly.
Image


SCW Beta Support Team

Beta Team Member for:

WPO
PC
CF
AE
WiTE

Obi-wan Kenobi said it best: A lot of the reality we perceive depend on our point of view
User avatar
jeffs
Posts: 644
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2004 4:43 am
Location: Tokyo

RE: Jap Signal intelligence

Post by jeffs »

While I tend to agree IJN ASW is overrated....Whining about IJA/IJN cooperation also seems whiny....IRL, the Chinese (Nationalists) did nothing against Japan and only had
interest in fighting the communists...Here you can have them work together. Chiang Kai Shek can actually have a brain (but with some mediocre ratings).....

But back to the main story.....Japanese sig int was mediocre. And the US (in real life) got better info than they get here...No reason to give the Japanese help when they do not deserve it.
To quote from Evans/Peattie`s {Kaigun}
"Mistakes in operations and tactics can be corrected, but
political and strategic mistakes live forever". The authors were refering to Japan but the same could be said of the US misadventure in Iraq
Mike Scholl
Posts: 6187
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 1:17 am
Location: Kansas City, MO

RE: Jap Signal intelligence

Post by Mike Scholl »

ORIGINAL: Brady

IJA/IJN cooperation, or their perceived lack thereof is a myth, at least to the extent it seams to be commonly perceived. Their are many many examples of the two services working very well together on many different levels, and very few examples of them not getting along well, and those tend to be at very high levels.

It might be many things Brady, but it isn't a Myth. Japanese War production was continually hampered by the squabbles of the IJN/IJA. Both had many similarities in their needs, yet each produced it's own version of everything. They couldn't agree on a common voltage for A/C electrical systems, or a common version of the 7.7mm mg used in those aircraft. Each took over and operated it's own merchant marine..., and refused to carry cargoes for the other. The IJA even launched it's own A/C carriers.

Gen. Yamashita ended up being executed after the war for the actions of Naval troops who refused his orders to abandon Manila and instead fought it out in the city while committing endless atrocities against the populace. The IJN refused to tell the IJA about Midway for over a year after the Battle. Much of what little radar the Japanese had in the Home Islands at war's end was wasted with suitable positions being occupied by TWO installations..., one Army and one Navy.

At the lowest levels, the Army's privates and the Navy's ratings may have gotten along OK, but above that it was a constant struggle, and given Japan's other weaknesses not one she could afford.
User avatar
Brady
Posts: 6084
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2002 12:48 pm
Location: Oregon,USA

RE: Jap Signal intelligence

Post by Brady »

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl



1It might be many things Brady, but it isn't a Myth. Japanese War production was continually hampered by the squabbles of the IJN/IJA. Both had many similarities in their needs, yet each produced it's own version of everything. They couldn't agree on a common voltage for A/C electrical systems, or a common version of the 7.7mm mg used in those aircraft. Each took over and operated it's own merchant marine..., and refused to carry cargoes for the other. The IJA even launched it's own A/C carriers.

2Gen. Yamashita ended up being executed after the war for the actions of Naval troops who refused his orders to abandon Manila and instead fought it out in the city while committing endless atrocities against the populace. The IJN refused to tell the IJA about Midway for over a year after the Battle. Much of what little radar the Japanese had in the Home Islands at war's end was wasted with suitable positions being occupied by TWO installations..., one Army and one Navy.

At the lowest levels, the Army's privates and the Navy's ratings may have gotten along OK, but above that it was a constant struggle, and given Japan's other weaknesses not one she could afford.

1- Realy this is not any diferent than the US Navy or the US Army, The IJA and IJN used the same engines in many of their planes. IJA and IJN Shiping neads differed do largely to the fact that the IJA was the Primary Land Fighting force and operated the Main Amphibious assests, IJA Aircraft carriers were actualy Amphibious warfare Ships.

2- Both the IJA and the IJN had radar sets, from mid 42 on in increasing numbers, just like the US Army and Navy did for their respective bases.

Thier were as I mentioned above Examples (Notable ones) whear the two servies did not get along. But for the most part operationaly they worked well together.

The Myth is the extent that this riverly went, all one nead do is read through somejoint operations reports to see how well they did often work together.

I posted this before, and if you read through this you can get a feal for how well the two services did work together during a magor operation, and did so on numiours ocashions:

http://ajrp.awm.gov.au/ajrp/AJRP2.nsf/T ... enDocument

Image


SCW Beta Support Team

Beta Team Member for:

WPO
PC
CF
AE
WiTE

Obi-wan Kenobi said it best: A lot of the reality we perceive depend on our point of view
Mike Scholl
Posts: 6187
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 1:17 am
Location: Kansas City, MO

RE: Jap Signal intelligence

Post by Mike Scholl »

ORIGINAL: Brady

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl



1It might be many things Brady, but it isn't a Myth. Japanese War production was continually hampered by the squabbles of the IJN/IJA. Both had many similarities in their needs, yet each produced it's own version of everything. They couldn't agree on a common voltage for A/C electrical systems, or a common version of the 7.7mm mg used in those aircraft. Each took over and operated it's own merchant marine..., and refused to carry cargoes for the other. The IJA even launched it's own A/C carriers.

2Gen. Yamashita ended up being executed after the war for the actions of Naval troops who refused his orders to abandon Manila and instead fought it out in the city while committing endless atrocities against the populace. The IJN refused to tell the IJA about Midway for over a year after the Battle. Much of what little radar the Japanese had in the Home Islands at war's end was wasted with suitable positions being occupied by TWO installations..., one Army and one Navy.

At the lowest levels, the Army's privates and the Navy's ratings may have gotten along OK, but above that it was a constant struggle, and given Japan's other weaknesses not one she could afford.

1- Realy this is not any diferent than the US Navy or the US Army, The IJA and IJN used the same engines in many of their planes. IJA and IJN Shiping neads differed do largely to the fact that the IJA was the Primary Land Fighting force and operated the Main Amphibious assests, IJA Aircraft carriers were actualy Amphibious warfare Ships.

2- Both the IJA and the IJN had radar sets, from mid 42 on in increasing numbers, just like the US Army and Navy did for their respective bases.

Thier were as I mentioned above Examples (Notable ones) whear the two servies did not get along. But for the most part operationaly they worked well together.

The Myth is the extent that this riverly went, all one nead do is read through somejoint operations reports to see how well they did often work together.

I posted this before, and if you read through this you can get a feal for how well the two services did work together during a magor operation, and did so on numiours ocashions:


Yeah Brady..., I remember reading somewhere how MacArthur was executed for the horrible atrocities committed by Hart's Naval Forces in Manila..[:D] Forget it, Ol' Buddy..., I'm not going to correct your spelling again. [8|]
spence
Posts: 5421
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2003 6:56 am
Location: Vancouver, Washington

RE: Jap Signal intelligence

Post by spence »

What...you're not impressed with his unsupported assertions that all was really peaches and cream in the Imperial House.

You probably forgot that only the mass attacks of uncounted ships, planes, and men straight into the muzzles of the Japanese guns that caused Imperial Japan to finally accede to something less than total victory too. But then again all the records of the great Japanese victories after early 1942 were mysteriously destroyed. I heard it happened at the Annual Imperial Japanese Army Navy Friendship Fish Fry when the barbeque pit fire got out of control while the respective leaders were toasting each other's strategic brilliance and good health.
mdiehl
Posts: 3969
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2000 8:00 am

RE: Jap Signal intelligence

Post by mdiehl »

IJA/IJN cooperation, or their precaved lack theirof is a myth, at least to the extent it seams to be comomly preceaved. Their are many many examples of the two services working very well together on many diferent levals, and very few examples of them not getting along well, and those tend to be at very high levals.


Riiight. [8|]

For example, they worked so well that the Army scuttled three IJN operational plans for carrying the war into the eastern Pacific only conceding to the fourth plan (for which they released 1500 combatants to attempt to invade Midway) after the Doolittle raid. They worked so well together that the Japanese Army commander of Japanese forces in the Philippines declared Manila an Open City in 1944, only to have the IJN garrison commander there ignore the order and put the citizens to the sword. They worked so well together that the Imperial Japanese Army operated its own suite of aircraft carriers (which were ferries for IJAAF planes but launched them from the deck after the fashion of real navies) and it's own suite of supply vessels that the IJN in particular refused to provide escorts in 1943 and 1944.

The Japanese army and navy cooperated like male pea-cocks with fighting spurs on their feet. Any semblance of coordinated action between the two was nonexistent most of the time, and purely accidental on the rare occasions that it actually occurred.
Show me a fellow who rejects statistical analysis a priori and I'll show you a fellow who has no knowledge of statistics.

Didn't we have this conversation already?
User avatar
Mynok
Posts: 12108
Joined: Sat Nov 30, 2002 12:12 am
Contact:

RE: Jap Signal intelligence

Post by Mynok »

ORIGINAL: Brady


How were Torpedoes political?

Easy. The reports from the front by the captains that the torpedoes didn't work were ignored. That's nothing more than bigwigs saving their asses after they had approved the weapon. Politics. It ain't just a civilian thing.

The IJA/IJN issue was different from the US situation because in the latter there was a supreme commander-in-chief who could arbitrate the issues if needed. Japan had nothing of the sort. Tojo was in charge and he was Army.
"Measure civilization by the ability of citizens to mock government with impunity" -- Unknown
User avatar
Bradley7735
Posts: 2073
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2004 8:51 pm

RE: Jap Signal intelligence

Post by Bradley7735 »

ORIGINAL: Mynok

ORIGINAL: Brady


How were Torpedoes political?

Easy. The reports from the front by the captains that the torpedoes didn't work were ignored. That's nothing more than bigwigs saving their asses after they had approved the weapon. Politics. It ain't just a civilian thing.

The IJA/IJN issue was different from the US situation because in the latter there was a supreme commander-in-chief who could arbitrate the issues if needed. Japan had nothing of the sort. Tojo was in charge and he was Army.

Ralph Christie did more to help the Japanese than any other allied person. He considered the magnetic exploder his pet project and would not allow commanders to deactivate it. He tried to block any testing of the torpedoes.

He was one of the top 3 US Sub commanders in the Pacific. Lockwood should have canned him from the start. Instead, he was in charge of all subs based out of Perth and/or Brisbane.

He is the only reason that it took about 18 months to fix the torpedos, instead of 6 months.

You don't get much more 'political' than that.
The older I get, the better I was.
Post Reply

Return to “War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition”