Matrix Games Forums

I've just posted my interview with Mark R. Peattie, author of "Sunburst: The Rise of Japanese Naval Air Power, 1909-41"

For those who don't know, Peattie is regarded as one of the top experts on the Japanese Navy (he is co-author of "Kaigun", considered to be one of the classic texts on the IJN).

As a UV player, I couldn't resist asking how the Japanese could have won Guadalcanal. His answers are very interesting. The interview is at http://www.themilitarybookreview.com/html/Peattie.shtml

Michael Peck
Editor
The Military Book Review
http://www.themilitarybookreview.com/
editor@themilitarybookreview.com

Great interview.

Thanks for posting!

Hi

I bought "Sunburst" a month ago and its a great book. Fantastic info on the rise of Japanese naval airpower. Unfortunately its only available on hardcover right now but at the price of 25$ at Amazon.com

I have many books by Mark R. Peattie and they are all great.

Dan

thanx for the link

Peattie's book is a bit dry. But I like his analytical method of isolating the strengths and weaknesses of Japanese naval aviation. It's interesting to note that the IJN had its share of airpower extremists who believed that the entire surface should be scrapped, and replaced by aircraft.

Michael

Great interview

I just post a link to this interview on the UV Fansite.

Spooky

The actual interview text on the site posted by Peck is not up there correctly. Part of it is duplicated.

Originally posted by dgaad
The actual interview text on the site posted by Peck is not up there correctly. Part of it is duplicated.

What is duplicated and where?

Nice web site. My latest addition to my bookmarks is now themilitarybookreview.com. Based on a quick read of another review posted there, I might pick up a copy of
Jutland 1916: The Clash of the Dreadnoughts by Charles London

Originally posted by Michael Peck
What is duplicated and where?

The following question was duplicated (along with the answer):

TMBR: Today's American military relies on a small (by Second World War standards) fleet of high-tech aircraft that are theoretically so advanced, and their pilots so well trained, that few of them are needed. Japan took a similar approach, and was overwhelmed by simple attrition. Does the Pacific War hold any lessons for the quality versus quantity debate?

Originally posted by Rowlf

The following question was duplicated (along with the answer):

Very strange. On my browser, I don't see that question duplicated. Are you using Netscape?

I see the same question duplicate here.

IE 6.0.2600

For completeness sake, the text is also duplicated with Konqueror 3.0.0-12.

The source for the page has the relevant paragraph in there twice.

Blaming the browser... for shame!

Originally posted by XPav
I see the same question duplicate here.

IE 6.0.2600

For completeness sake, the text is also duplicated with Konqueror 3.0.0-12.

The source for the page has the relevant paragraph in there twice.

Blaming the browser... for shame!

Aaah! This proves the rule that a writer should never proof his own work.

Thanks, everyone.

Michael

Quote from the interview:
"In the hands of outstanding pilots these aircraft were formidable. But they had inadequate protection for the most valuable assets of the navy's air service: its aircrews. Attrition of experienced aircrews and the vulnerability of the navy's aircraft thus had a fatally symbiotic relationship in an ever-increasing spiral of destruction for both. "

So, why are my Zero pilots not racking up those kills by the dozens in Summer of 1942 before the attrition takes its toll....?

--Mikko