Ringbolt,
You are absolutely correct about Germany having a significant influence in South America. Argentina had a large Germanic population from a 1920's-1930's immigration after WWI. There were several diplomatic "incidents" that occurred during WWII and I found W.E.B. Griffins fictionalized series on this to be fascinating reading.
Byron,
I agree with your synopsis of "what if" India is overrun by the Japanese, I can only offer one "rule" that would keep the US player honest... The US was suffering badly from the depression in 1930's, every dollar spent on War Department should have a penalty on morale/production values, ergo you can build up for war early and still not actually make anything because of the penalty factor (remove penalty factor 1939 or so)
Just a suggestion
Jim
Geopolitical Rules
Moderators: Joel Billings, wdolson, Don Bowen, mogami
Byron,
It wasnt luck that the CV's were not there.
In fact in retrospect it was predictable.
But it wasnt a conspiracy either.
The BB were too slow for the missions needed.
The CV's left w/o them.
I would assert that 'if' the BB's had been
as fast as the CV's ,
The Japanese would have shown up at an empty
harbor and clobbered the sub pens.
(also the oil storage tanks)
It wasnt luck that the CV's were not there.
In fact in retrospect it was predictable.
But it wasnt a conspiracy either.
The BB were too slow for the missions needed.
The CV's left w/o them.
I would assert that 'if' the BB's had been
as fast as the CV's ,
The Japanese would have shown up at an empty
harbor and clobbered the sub pens.
(also the oil storage tanks)
“It is clear that the individual who persecutes a man, his brother, because he is not of the same opinion, is a monster.”
Voltaire
'For those with faith, no proof is needed. For those without faith, no proof is enough'
French Priest
"Statistic
Voltaire
'For those with faith, no proof is needed. For those without faith, no proof is enough'
French Priest
"Statistic
I think it was luck that the carriers weren't there. Or, rather, there was chance that they would be off on a mission or training and, in fact, they were. I'm sure someone will provide more information, but I know one just happened to be delivering planes to Wake (or was it Midway), and the others were training to the south. I'm guessing all three were based in Pearl (I'll be corrected if I'm wrong) and, if they didn't have something better to do on a Sunday morning, would have been there. Didn't one steam in on the 8th? Pick a different day, and they might all have been there.
Skippy: You're right. I suggested earlier that U.S. production was so low until 1940 or 1941 that, if you kept overall production (using production points) at a historic level, the U.S. probably couldn't do much damage by sinking it into carriers. If he did, he would have no air force or army. Despite any cries to the contrary, I would not under any circumstances allow the American to ramp up production beyond historical levels before the war started. I'm thinking with the limited production at hand, he might have been able to poop out one more carrier by sometime around the beginning of the war. I'd be curious when the Hornet and the Wasp hulls were laid down since they were commissioned right around PH. Actually, I'm not so sure I'm right. I guess the Washington, North Carolina, and the other BB's in those classes were already being constructed. Never build those, and you could build a couple of carriers with little increase in production cost - or maybe even a reduction.
Why not let him build whatever he wants within historical production levels except for more carriers than was historical? Then he could start the war with more B-17s and fewer tanks or P-40s. Everyone is convinced that the carrier is the decisive weapon and that the Japanese were only competitive when there was relative carrier parity. Just don't let the American build ahistorically more until the war starts.
If you're going to let the American change production from '37 or '39 or '40, it should be a five second computer calculation based on five minutes worth of input by the American player. Rather than having the American pick his nose for three years of game time, the computer would just say, "Okay, this is what you told me to concentrate on building and, based on that, here's what you start the war with." It would be the slider method at warp speed.
Skippy: You're right. I suggested earlier that U.S. production was so low until 1940 or 1941 that, if you kept overall production (using production points) at a historic level, the U.S. probably couldn't do much damage by sinking it into carriers. If he did, he would have no air force or army. Despite any cries to the contrary, I would not under any circumstances allow the American to ramp up production beyond historical levels before the war started. I'm thinking with the limited production at hand, he might have been able to poop out one more carrier by sometime around the beginning of the war. I'd be curious when the Hornet and the Wasp hulls were laid down since they were commissioned right around PH. Actually, I'm not so sure I'm right. I guess the Washington, North Carolina, and the other BB's in those classes were already being constructed. Never build those, and you could build a couple of carriers with little increase in production cost - or maybe even a reduction.
Why not let him build whatever he wants within historical production levels except for more carriers than was historical? Then he could start the war with more B-17s and fewer tanks or P-40s. Everyone is convinced that the carrier is the decisive weapon and that the Japanese were only competitive when there was relative carrier parity. Just don't let the American build ahistorically more until the war starts.
If you're going to let the American change production from '37 or '39 or '40, it should be a five second computer calculation based on five minutes worth of input by the American player. Rather than having the American pick his nose for three years of game time, the computer would just say, "Okay, this is what you told me to concentrate on building and, based on that, here's what you start the war with." It would be the slider method at warp speed.
Originally posted by Chiteng:
Byron,
It wasnt luck that the CV's were not there.
In fact in retrospect it was predictable.
But it wasnt a conspiracy either.
The BB were too slow for the missions needed.
The CV's left w/o them.
I would assert that 'if' the BB's had been
as fast as the CV's ,
The Japanese would have shown up at an empty
harbor and clobbered the sub pens.
(also the oil storage tanks)
Ah... the CV's missions were to ferry aircraft to Midway and Wake. Hardly a mission suited for BB's
Furthermore, what was predictable? Japanese spies had been monitoring the fleets commings and goings for months and the one thing that never changed was that the Fleet would return to Pearl for the weekend. Thats why the planned the attack to occure on a Sunday. Besides the Enterprise was scheduled to return to pearl on Dec.6, but bad weather delayed refueling at sea. If that isnt lucky I dont know what is.Originally posted by Chiteng:
Byron,
It wasnt luck that the CV's were not there.
In fact in retrospect it was predictable.
But it wasnt a conspiracy either.
The BB were too slow for the missions needed.
The CV's left w/o them.
I would assert that 'if' the BB's had been
as fast as the CV's ,
The Japanese would have shown up at an empty
harbor and clobbered the sub pens.
(also the oil storage tanks)
[ September 04, 2001: Message edited by: TIMJOT ]</p>
Originally posted by byron:
I think it was luck that the carriers weren't there. Or, rather, there was chance that they would be off on a mission or training and, in fact, they were. I'm sure someone will provide more information, but I know one just happened to be delivering planes to Wake (or was it Midway), and the others were training to the south. I'm guessing all three were based in Pearl (I'll be corrected if I'm wrong) and, if they didn't have something better to do on a Sunday morning, would have been there. Didn't one steam in on the 8th? Pick a different day, and they might all have been there.
Skippy: You're right. I suggested earlier that U.S. production was so low until 1940 or 1941 that, if you kept overall production (using production points) at a historic level, the U.S. probably couldn't do much damage by sinking it into carriers. If he did, he would have no air force or army. Despite any cries to the contrary, I would not under any circumstances allow the American to ramp up production beyond historical levels before the war started. I'm thinking with the limited production at hand, he might have been able to poop out one more carrier by sometime around the beginning of the war. I'd be curious when the Hornet and the Wasp hulls were laid down since they were commissioned right around PH. Actually, I'm not so sure I'm right. I guess the Washington, North Carolina, and the other BB's in those classes were already being constructed. Never build those, and you could build a couple of carriers with little increase in production cost - or maybe even a reduction.
Why not let him build whatever he wants within historical production levels except for more carriers than was historical? Then he could start the war with more B-17s and fewer tanks or P-40s. Everyone is convinced that the carrier is the decisive weapon and that the Japanese were only competitive when there was relative carrier parity. Just don't let the American build ahistorically more until the war starts.
If you're going to let the American change production from '37 or '39 or '40, it should be a five second computer calculation based on five minutes worth of input by the American player. Rather than having the American pick his nose for three years of game time, the computer would just say, "Okay, this is what you told me to concentrate on building and, based on that, here's what you start the war with." It would be the slider method at warp speed.
I agree with you Byron it was Luck. FYI the Enterprise was delivering fighters to Wake and was due back on the Dec.6 was delayed and returned on the evening of the 7th. The Lexington left Pearl on the 6th to deliver fighters to Midway. Hows that for cutting it close. The Saratoga was in San Fran to pick up a shipment of Fighters.
Both the Hornet and Wasp were already commisioned at the time of PH. The Hornet already operating with the Atlantic Fleet and I believe the Wasp was finishing up its Shake down cruise.
As far as the new BB's are concerned, both of them were also already commisisioned. The North Carolina was Battle Traing in the Caribean and the Washington was finishing up its shake down Cruise.
The fact of the matter is, that the USN position in the Pacific after Pearl Harbor, was never as dire as historically its been made out to be. In fact within one month of PH the USN could have and probably should have deployed deployed 6 Fleet carriers two Fast Modern BB's and 3 older but somewhat modernized BB's. Add this to the fact that no CA's were lost or even damaged at PH and you have essentally an intact Fleet. All your missing are 7 of the oldest slowest and essentially most useless ships of the Fleet.
Originally posted by Blackhorse:
I disagree with the presumption of a "Free India" if England has to surrender. The Netherlands had been overrun in May, 1940, but a year-and-a-half later the exiled government still ruled Indonesia.
And unlike the British, the Dutch had very few resources after the home country was overrun. The English, on the other hand, could rely on Canada, Australia, and South Africa -- hardly industrial powers capable of fighting a world war, but industrial enough to supply and equip a colonial army in India.
Most importantly, in order to be "Free" of the British, the Indians (who included Pakistanis at this time) would have to agree on who would replace them. The British were masters of the colonial political practice of ruling through local Princes and Potentates. Many of them stood to lose as much or more than the British if a Gandhi or some other "nationalist" Indian came to power.
I'm *not* arguing that a defeated England could maintain its position in India indefinitely. But an England defeated in 1940 might well still control India for 4 or 5 more years.
Possible....but not likely. First regarding the Dutch East Indies. The Dutch were considably more brutal in there subjugation of their colonies. They were even better than the Brits in playing ethnic and tribal rivalries against each other in order to maintain control. Second in the NIE there was no national political organization combarable the Congress Party in India. More importantly there was no national leader that transcended ethnic and religious boundaries as Ghandi did in India. The point being that India was basically in a continual state of revolt since WWI. The fact that India didnt revolt during WWII was mainly due to Ghandi's wishes.
Again the colonial Army in India was almost entirely made up of INDIANS!And unlike the British, the Dutch had very few resources after the home country was overrun. The English, on the other hand, could rely on Canada, Australia, and South Africa -- hardly industrial powers capable of fighting a world war, but industrial enough to supply and equip a colonial army in India.
The one thing that united Hindus and Muslims alike was they wanted independence from Britain. Certainly after they kicked the Brits out things problably would have degenerated into a bloody civil war. I said there would be a "FREE" India not a "UNITED" India. I know there were so called independent kingdoms and a few ethnic minorities that owed there priveleges and hence there loyalty to the Brits. The Sihks and Ghurkas come to mind. I dought however they could withstand a popular uprising of millions.Most importantly, in order to be "Free" of the British, the Indians (who included Pakistanis at this time) would have to agree on who would replace them. The British were masters of the colonial political practice of ruling through local Princes and Potentates. Many of them stood to lose as much or more than the British if a Gandhi or some other "nationalist" Indian came to power.
Yes I am aware that every other Sunday they had been in port. Yes I am aware of the sceduling.
However you look at the events isolated from the rest of the world if you only evaluate on that basis.
The facts are that THAT weekend everything was FAR
from normal. The Japanese invasion fleets had been
spotted and shadowed for days. Everyone KNEW that
war was imminent. That was NOT the case in the previous weekends. I would also argue that Saratoga being in the vicinity would hardly have been usefull since she had already offloaded
her fighters.
If you had been Kimmel, would you have simply
sat still waiting for word of hostilities?
He was an aggressive commander. He sent the fleets out with delibretely vauge orders.
They could be interpeted any way the Task Force
commander wanted.
Sure the CV 'could' have been in the port, but to assume that they WOULD be in the port was simply
defying human behavior. They were fast fleet
assets and the commander used them.
I dont think Yamamoto actually felt he would
catch them in port. He merely 'hoped' that he would.
As for the best target: I would assert they should have destroyed the tank farm and the sub
pens rather than hammer the BB's.
A ship w/o fuel doesnt move.
I used to be a fanatic conspiracy theorist on this
topic, much convinced that everything pointed
to FDR allowing the fleet to be bombed.
I now realize that EVEN if he wanted to do that
King would have never allowed it.
King was a fanatic about navy assets.
No FDR was an unplesant Prez but he wasnt that
callous. It would take a man like Marlbough
or Napoleon to set up that type of causus belli.
However you look at the events isolated from the rest of the world if you only evaluate on that basis.
The facts are that THAT weekend everything was FAR
from normal. The Japanese invasion fleets had been
spotted and shadowed for days. Everyone KNEW that
war was imminent. That was NOT the case in the previous weekends. I would also argue that Saratoga being in the vicinity would hardly have been usefull since she had already offloaded
her fighters.
If you had been Kimmel, would you have simply
sat still waiting for word of hostilities?
He was an aggressive commander. He sent the fleets out with delibretely vauge orders.
They could be interpeted any way the Task Force
commander wanted.
Sure the CV 'could' have been in the port, but to assume that they WOULD be in the port was simply
defying human behavior. They were fast fleet
assets and the commander used them.
I dont think Yamamoto actually felt he would
catch them in port. He merely 'hoped' that he would.
As for the best target: I would assert they should have destroyed the tank farm and the sub
pens rather than hammer the BB's.
A ship w/o fuel doesnt move.
I used to be a fanatic conspiracy theorist on this
topic, much convinced that everything pointed
to FDR allowing the fleet to be bombed.
I now realize that EVEN if he wanted to do that
King would have never allowed it.
King was a fanatic about navy assets.
No FDR was an unplesant Prez but he wasnt that
callous. It would take a man like Marlbough
or Napoleon to set up that type of causus belli.
“It is clear that the individual who persecutes a man, his brother, because he is not of the same opinion, is a monster.”
Voltaire
'For those with faith, no proof is needed. For those without faith, no proof is enough'
French Priest
"Statistic
Voltaire
'For those with faith, no proof is needed. For those without faith, no proof is enough'
French Priest
"Statistic
Jeez, Timjot, don't you have anything else to do? How many was that - eighteen posts in a row? <img src="smile.gif" border="0">
I didn't realize how nuttily lucky we were. Er, I mean, how well we planned the carrier dispositions while waiting for the inevitable strike on Pearl that we knew was coming THAT weekend. In fact, we knew it was coming on Sunday and not Saturday.
Think you got the Hornet and the Wasp mixed up. Just checked a navy site, and the Wasp was operational in 1940 (after taking FOUR years to build!). It was the Hornet that was still working up. Pretty good site at www.chinfo.navy.mil/navpalib/ships/carriers/
You should go to the site and look at the phenomenal numbers of Essex class carriers we pumped out. I count 20 - not to mention the Midway, Ticonderoga, and Saipan classes laid down during the war!
You know, I'd forgotten all about the Ranger. How'd you like to have to be a Ranger fighter pilot sitting in the bar with a bunch of pilots from the Enterprise? What a drag! ("Yeah, I know you've got eight kills, but have you ever seen an iceberg?")
Chiteng, Kimmel was a battleship guy. If he was so raring to go, why was it just the carriers that were out of barn? Why not flush the battleships as well to intercept a potential invasion fleet? Or was he SO tuned in that he knew that it would just be a carrier strike with no surface combatants to speak of? And if he were so perspicacious and prescient as to believe the risks were too high at Pearl because of a potential strike, why were the carriers 1) operating singly and not grouped 2) well away from Pearl (the obvious target) and 3) operating way to the west, closer to Japan and, after delivering aircraft, presumably with a reduced air compliment? Everything I see indicates that the Japanese just didn't happen to catch them in the nest - whether by luck or chance.
Okay, guys, trivia question: what was the name of the one numbered carrier, e.g., CV-5, that was never completed?
I didn't realize how nuttily lucky we were. Er, I mean, how well we planned the carrier dispositions while waiting for the inevitable strike on Pearl that we knew was coming THAT weekend. In fact, we knew it was coming on Sunday and not Saturday.
Think you got the Hornet and the Wasp mixed up. Just checked a navy site, and the Wasp was operational in 1940 (after taking FOUR years to build!). It was the Hornet that was still working up. Pretty good site at www.chinfo.navy.mil/navpalib/ships/carriers/
You should go to the site and look at the phenomenal numbers of Essex class carriers we pumped out. I count 20 - not to mention the Midway, Ticonderoga, and Saipan classes laid down during the war!
You know, I'd forgotten all about the Ranger. How'd you like to have to be a Ranger fighter pilot sitting in the bar with a bunch of pilots from the Enterprise? What a drag! ("Yeah, I know you've got eight kills, but have you ever seen an iceberg?")
Chiteng, Kimmel was a battleship guy. If he was so raring to go, why was it just the carriers that were out of barn? Why not flush the battleships as well to intercept a potential invasion fleet? Or was he SO tuned in that he knew that it would just be a carrier strike with no surface combatants to speak of? And if he were so perspicacious and prescient as to believe the risks were too high at Pearl because of a potential strike, why were the carriers 1) operating singly and not grouped 2) well away from Pearl (the obvious target) and 3) operating way to the west, closer to Japan and, after delivering aircraft, presumably with a reduced air compliment? Everything I see indicates that the Japanese just didn't happen to catch them in the nest - whether by luck or chance.
Okay, guys, trivia question: what was the name of the one numbered carrier, e.g., CV-5, that was never completed?
Byron,
The minutes of the meeting on Thursday 4, 1941?
exist.
Sorry exact dates I am NOT so good at.
In any case:
He asked Halsey if he wanted to use the BB.
Halsey said: 'No, they are too damn slow'
So the BB got left behind.
At a million gallons of oil per ship I can see why.
The minutes of the meeting on Thursday 4, 1941?
exist.
Sorry exact dates I am NOT so good at.
In any case:
He asked Halsey if he wanted to use the BB.
Halsey said: 'No, they are too damn slow'
So the BB got left behind.
At a million gallons of oil per ship I can see why.
“It is clear that the individual who persecutes a man, his brother, because he is not of the same opinion, is a monster.”
Voltaire
'For those with faith, no proof is needed. For those without faith, no proof is enough'
French Priest
"Statistic
Voltaire
'For those with faith, no proof is needed. For those without faith, no proof is enough'
French Priest
"Statistic
Actually things were pretty normal. Weekend leaves were granted to the Fleet. No additional air recon or sea patrols. Contrary to your statement, only one fleet was briefly sited on the 6th off the coast on Indo-china. The contact was quickly lost and the siting was inconclusive to say the least because at the time it was heading west toward Japanese controlled Indo china. Even the Brits, who were the only ones threaten by this fleet took no overt actionsThe facts are that THAT weekend everything was FAR
from normal. The Japanese invasion fleets had been
spotted and shadowed for days. Everyone KNEW that
war was imminent. That was NOT the case in the previous weekends. I would also argue that Saratoga being in the vicinity would hardly have been usefull since she had already offloaded
her fighters.
The Saratoga wasnt in the vacinity the Enterprise was. Either way I dont get your arguement here.
No...but thats exactly what he did. What was so vague about his orders? He sent the Enterprise and Lexington taskforces out to delivery fighters to Wake and Midway with orders to return to the fleets as fast as possible. Sounds like a pretty clear cut mission to me. The cruisers were on practice manuevers off Johnston Island, that had been planned months ahead of time. If he was really worried of an attack he would have increased air recon, sent out picket ships and possitioned subs to cover the the approaches to PH. The Fact is no one expected the Japanese to be foolish enough to attack PH.If you had been Kimmel, would you have simply
sat still waiting for word of hostilities?
He was an aggressive commander. He sent the fleets out with delibretely vauge orders.
They could be interpeted any way the Task Force
commander wanted.
[QUOTE] As for the best target: I would assert they should have destroyed the tank farm and the sub
pens rather than hammer the BB's.
A ship w/o fuel doesnt move.
[/QUOTE/]
I would agree with you here, but in all fairness Yammamoto's planned third strike was to eliminate them. It was Nagumo loseing is nerve that saved them from destruction. In fact had Nagumo allowed the 3rd strike they probably could have caught the returning Enterprise.
pens rather than hammer the BB's.
A ship w/o fuel doesnt move.
[/QUOTE/]
I would agree with you here, but in all fairness Yammamoto's planned third strike was to eliminate them. It was Nagumo loseing is nerve that saved them from destruction. In fact had Nagumo allowed the 3rd strike they probably could have caught the returning Enterprise.
Actually Kimmel was a "BIG GUN" Adm. he saw the Aircraft carriers sole purpose as to providing aircover and scouting for what he called his "BATTLE FORCE" the BB's of his Fleet. He did not see them as a decisive offensive weapon in their own right. Thats why he prefered to keep them close to his BB's as possible and thats why he ordered Halsey to return as fast as possible.Sure the CV 'could' have been in the port, but to assume that they WOULD be in the port was simply
defying human behavior. They were fast fleet
assets and the commander used them.
I dont think Yamamoto actually felt he would
catch them in port. He merely 'hoped' that he would.
[ September 05, 2001: Message edited by: TIMJOT ]</p>
Hey, Skippy, don't come a raw prawn with me! Actually, the CV-5 was just an example. The number of carrier in question was CV-35. Given the number, you can guess that it was an end-of-war throw away. I'll titillate everyone all day and let them squirm until I release the official winning answer. More likely someone will pull out their multi-volume set on naval history and get the right answer.
Chiteng: To be sure, the BB's slowed the CV's down to the point that they probably didn't train much together. But I think you're suggesting that Kimmel (of all people) had the fast carriers out on a war footing almost looking for a fight becuase he saw that war was imminent THIS weekend but not the weekend before. Of course, he had the war warning cable from Washington, but the carriers were clearly out doing aircraft transport duty - not hunting Japanese - and Kimmel had nothing to do with that. Furthermore, any aggressive commander itching for a fight would have flushed the battleships as well. What a dream! The full weight of the Pacific fleet fresh and topped off fighting a sea battle in its own backyard with the Japanese after they've traveled half way around the world. Sorry, you're not going to convince me that Kimmel (especially) or anyone else had a "plan" to keep the carriers out of port that day. And I'm not saying that Yammamoto counted on catching the carriers, but he certainly hoped he would and planned for that contingency.
Okay, one last hint on CV-35. It had a distinctly un-American name and actually sounds very English. Which brings up another point: I wish we'd quit the naming of carriers after people and go back to the traditional names. I wouldn't mind seeing the tenth Wasp or another Ranger, Saratoga, or Lexington in the inventory. The U.S.S. John C. Stennis just doesn't cut it for me.
Chiteng: To be sure, the BB's slowed the CV's down to the point that they probably didn't train much together. But I think you're suggesting that Kimmel (of all people) had the fast carriers out on a war footing almost looking for a fight becuase he saw that war was imminent THIS weekend but not the weekend before. Of course, he had the war warning cable from Washington, but the carriers were clearly out doing aircraft transport duty - not hunting Japanese - and Kimmel had nothing to do with that. Furthermore, any aggressive commander itching for a fight would have flushed the battleships as well. What a dream! The full weight of the Pacific fleet fresh and topped off fighting a sea battle in its own backyard with the Japanese after they've traveled half way around the world. Sorry, you're not going to convince me that Kimmel (especially) or anyone else had a "plan" to keep the carriers out of port that day. And I'm not saying that Yammamoto counted on catching the carriers, but he certainly hoped he would and planned for that contingency.
Okay, one last hint on CV-35. It had a distinctly un-American name and actually sounds very English. Which brings up another point: I wish we'd quit the naming of carriers after people and go back to the traditional names. I wouldn't mind seeing the tenth Wasp or another Ranger, Saratoga, or Lexington in the inventory. The U.S.S. John C. Stennis just doesn't cut it for me.
I agree there was no PH conspiracy. Yes FDR wanted to get into the war and did see Japan as a possible backdoor way into a war with Hitler. He was however thinking more on the lines of an attack on the Philipines. He accordingly refused to allow any large scale naval rienforcement of those Islands. You forget FDR was a former Secretary of the navy and loved the fleet, he would never had deliberately sacrificed it.I used to be a fanatic conspiracy theorist on this
topic, much convinced that everything pointed
to FDR allowing the fleet to be bombed.
I now realize that EVEN if he wanted to do that
King would have never allowed it.
King was a fanatic about navy assets.