When The Cherry Blossoms First Fell
Ensign Jimmy Green stared at the horizon... nothing. There'd been
nothing there for nearly ninety minutes, and he finally began to feel
like he could relax, just a bit. Below him, in one of the gun tubs, he
could hear shell humpers joking about how the Jap fleet had gotten away,
but Green knew in his bones that he and his ship were alive only by the
Providence of fortune, a confusing decision by the Japanese to break
off, and the White Plains' position towards the front of Taffy 3's formation. At least, he thought ruefully, it became the front when the collection of Kaiser Coffins turned away from the Japs.
Yet that was the difference between him being there on the tiny island
of an Escort Carrier... and being in the Pacific with his ship sitting
on the bottom. Like the Gambier Bay,
he thought glumly. He was pretty sure he'd seen her roll over and go
down, with a Jap cruiser standing a few miles off throwing shells at her
the whole time. Now, though? Nothing at all. It was like the Japs
had never been there, except for the smoke coming from Kalinin Bay, that is.
He'd overheard one of the pilots saying that her flight deck looked
like swiss cheese from all the holes in it. Green didn't like the sound
of that very much at all. Why in the world had the Japs turned around,
anyway? It didn't make sense. When I saw that big bastard come over the horizon, I was sure I was dead, he thought to himself, and it sure ain't that they were scared off by a handful of destroyers and some Wildcats. Then those big battleship shells started to splash around him, and Cap'n Weller kept the White Plains dancing between the salvos. Well, lumbering at least;
nobody ever accused a CVE of being nimble. Well, some coffee might be
nice. It was only after he got the cup that he realized his hands were
shaking.
Why MilHist Weeps
Today was laundry day, and I took my dual bags of dirty stuff to the laundromat near Pond Central instead of doing them here in the provided laundry room. See, there's currently only one working dryer, and I had a week's worth of clothes and about a dozen towels and various assorted things to wash. When I go to this particular laundromat, I always take a dense book with me. Today's selection was the newly acquired US Aircraft Carriers: An Illustrated Design History by Norman Friedman.
If Japanese Cruisers of the Pacific War is the ultimate book on that particular topic, Friedman's work is arguably the ultimate on the planning, design, use and upgrading of American carriers. I've learned a lot from it, and I've only read a couple of chapters disjointedly. So this was my entertainment whilst the laundry spun and tossed.
Even better, when I got there there was only one other person in the place, and they were carrying their laundry out the other door! I had a peaceful hour-and-some-minutes ahead of me!
The laundry was in the rinse cycle when a guy, probably in his fifties, came in. He got his laundry going, then started jabbering at the attendant. Seemed to be a nice enough guy, just refused to shut up. Still, he wasn't bothering me so I continued to read, and you probably know where this is going by now.
Yep, after a few minutes, he walked up to me and said "I'm going to be nosy, what are you reading?" I've had this happen once or twice before at the laundromat, and the usual result when I've showed them whatever book I'm reading has been a bemused "oh," followed by quickly finding some other place to be. To be fair, it's hard to blame them; mine is an esoteric hobby these days, and it's not like there's much interest in the British Pacific Fleet in WWII anymore.
Not this guy, though. He immediately began talking about how he visited the USS Lexington a few years ago. This was interesting, until he said it was originally built as a battleship in 1924. Ah, they must tell the visitors about the history of the name, because that's really the first carrier named Lexington (CV-2) he's talking about. I pointed this out to him, and he disagreed; he visited the first one. I quickly flipped through Friedman's book and found a picture of a post-war upgraded Essex-class carrier and asked him if that's what his ship looked like? He replied in the affirmative, angled deck and everything. I told him he was looking at a picture of CV-16 taken in 1962. Still he refused to believe it; he went so far as to say it was the book that was wrong.
I smiled at that. I did a bit of flipping through the book, found a picture of CV-2, and pointed out that that was the ship he was saying he'd visited, and that it was totally impossible that he had walked upon its decks. He was actually beginning to get angry when he asked why that was. "Because the first Lexington was sunk during the Battle of the Coral Sea. It's under about 10000 feet of water to the northeast of Australia."
"Are you sure?"
"Pretty darn."
"Oh." He then kind of walked away and began talking to the attendant again.
1
What carrier is that on the cover of the book? The bow looks very odd.
Posted by: Steven Den Beste at October 13, 2012 10:57 PM (+rSRq)
2
That's because it's actually the stern of a Casablanca-class escort carrier... I think. The book doesn't say what the cover illo is. It IS the stern of an CVE, though.
Posted by: Wonderduck at October 13, 2012 11:45 PM (O7Ufu)
Heh, so a mention of The British Pacific Fleet made it into a post? I would note to anyone interested in getting the book that the cover for the book you get is different from what Amazon pictures.
Second the notion about US Aircraft Carriers. Actually, anything by Norman Friedman is well worth the time.
C.T.
Posted by: cxt217 at October 14, 2012 03:59 PM (Pr3/z)
Name This Mystery Ship XX
My internet connection has been gone for most of the past two days, so now that I'm back, it's time for a Mystery Ship in celebration... and it may be a doozy.
FDM and CXT, don't sprain your hands diving for the keyboard... you two can't play for 24 hours (or 1130pm Central Pond Time on Saturday). Everybody else, no image searching or the like, one guess per person, have at it! Winner gets a post of your choice. Good luck!
Posted by: Brickmuppet at September 15, 2012 12:35 PM (e9h6K)
8
Muppet's the winner! The ship is the Regia Marina's Aquila, a mostly-finished-but-never-completed aircraft carrier, converted from a passenger liner. Near as anybody could tell, it would have been a decent enough carrier with 40-50 fighter/bombers that were actually considered better than the Bf109T the Germans were planning for the Graf Zeppelin.
Posted by: Wonderduck at September 15, 2012 01:11 PM (OS+Cr)
Looking over all the passenger-liner-conversion-to-carrier proposed or started (I do not think any Navy other than IJN ever finished a conversion.), I amazed at how slow the Junyo and Hiyo were, even in the original civilian incarnation. I guess that is a result of not having any ships involved in the North Atlantic passenger trade, with a shot at the Blue Riband.
C.T.
Posted by: cxt217 at September 15, 2012 02:05 PM (juwHe)
10
I did notice how narrow the flight deck was. I guess that should have cued me to the fact that it was a mutant.
Posted by: Steven Den Beste at September 15, 2012 04:34 PM (+rSRq)
11
Funny, Mauser... BUT USE THE FERSHLUGGNER LINK BUTTON.
Posted by: Wonderduck at September 15, 2012 11:44 PM (yqnY1)
I did notice how narrow the flight deck was. I guess that should have cued me to the fact that it was a mutant.
I think that is more a matter of perspective from where the photo was taken.Most Japanese fleet carriers had narrow flight decks on par with what the Aquila was converted with. Quite a few carriers in other navies of roughly the same displacement had flight decks of fairly similar width - heck, there were carriers with significantly larger displacements that had decks only slightly wider.
C.T/
Posted by: cxt217 at September 16, 2012 11:41 AM (juwHe)
13
It's the nose that confused me with the CV-4 Ranger.
Posted by: Tom Tjarks at September 16, 2012 11:46 AM (6+fmF)
Posted by: Mauser at September 16, 2012 01:01 PM (cZPoz)
15
Master Duck, just do your stuff. Any researched artictle from you is excellent. (Yes, I'm still sort of searching for my old man's LST number....) My bad. But you go, bro!
Posted by: The Old Man at September 17, 2012 01:28 PM (dBz2M)
I Have Joined An Elite Group.
Every hobby has a "holy grail." For us American rubber duck collectors, it's usually the Tolo Duck. For those who collect baseball cards, it's the American Tobacco Company's T206 Honus Wagner. Car collectors have different tastes... for one, it'll be a cherry '68 Mustang fastback, but another will only look at Dinos... for whatever reason. But when you're an amateur military historian of the Pacific War like I claim to be, what's the goal? Kaigun, Sunburst, Shattered Sword, The First Team, A Glorious Page In Our History... all of these are on The Shelf. In the comments of that post, CXT mentioned a title I wasn't familiar with. I looked into it and immediately began salivating: it seemed like it pushed every activation button in my brain at once. Full of histories and detailed to the extreme, it was exactly what I look for in a mil-hist book. That it's also considered one of the best references of all time helped a lot, too... until I took a look at the prices.
Holy jumpin' guacamole on a stick, $300??? Yeah, not so much. However, I kept an eye on the Amazon price listing... every now and again, it'd drop to $200, and I vowed to myself that if I had the cash on hand if the price fell to $150, I'd go for it. It still felt ridiculous spending that much on a book, but then I realized that college students spend twice that much and more on books all the time. Eh, whatever, it's only money. Last Friday, I clicked the link to Amazon, and...
Holy jumpin' frijoles in a hot tub, $150. I couldn't click on the purchasing link fast enough. Today, this Holy Grail that has been out of print for at least 10 years and had a list price of $75 in 1997... was delivered unto my hands.
And just what is this paragon of the mil-hist world?
You will probably want to kill me, but when I got Japanese Cruisers of the Pacific War, I paid less than $80 for it new. Falling asleep while reading it is not recommended, since it will probably hamper blood flow in whatever extremity it lands on after you doze off.
It does look great lined up next to my copy of Norman Friedman's US Cruisers.
C.T.
Posted by: cxt217 at August 15, 2012 10:54 PM (sNcHF)
3
...which is going for more than double this one. Used. I would enjoy having the whole series, but owning the US Carrier one is probably my next goal.
David, it is awesome indeed. It's dark in Pond Central right now, except for a golden light being cast by my copy. Also, a decent sized cut I had on my left wing (occupational hazard when one works with boxcutters on a regular basis) spontaneously healed when I turned to the first page. My voice dropped an octave, too.
Posted by: Wonderduck at August 15, 2012 11:08 PM (djyNz)
4
Please use the link button instead of the raw URL. Raw URLs make Wonderduck cry.
Posted by: Wonderduck at August 16, 2012 10:27 AM (OS+Cr)
Speaking of 'wonder'...I was curious enough about exactly how much it cost me, to locate the invoice for my copy of Japanese Cruisers of the Pacific War and...I paid an amount below $60 for a new copy. Granted that was a better part of a decade ago...
Related to Steve's post about his purchase - the best secondhand mil-hist book I ever purchased was a copy of Martin Middlebrook's Convoy, which I had been looking for everywhere before I got my copy.
C.T.
Posted by: cxt217 at August 18, 2012 12:18 PM (eUibq)
10
I was able to resist the siren call of the "buy" button on that one for about...4 hours. It arrived today, and I've just spent a happy four hours in my reading chair putting a dent in my lap. Thanks for the heads up! Now my copies of Cruisers and Battleships of the U.S. Navy in World War II look like children's books. Are there any references even close to this one that you'd recommend for the U.S. or British fleets?
Posted by: David at August 23, 2012 07:25 PM (vyRm+)
11
Actually, yes... Norman Friedman "US (ship type): An Illustrated Design History" series is in the same vein, though nowhere near as good. This is not a knock on Friedman's books; when you're being compared to Japanese Cruisers of the Pacific War, you're expected to come up short. Here's the link to the Carriers entry, but there's also Destroyers, Cruisers, Battleships, Submarines and Amphibious Ships. I've never read these books, but I've read other Friedmans, and they've been uniformly excellent.
Another series of books that I've not read but have heard good things about is the "Battleships" books by Dulin and Garzke. There are three: Axis & Neutrals, Allied, and United States. Here's the link to the Allied book.
So there's a ton of 'em... perhaps literally... out there! I lust after them all.
Posted by: Wonderduck at August 23, 2012 07:45 PM (LdbNL)
I have been working backwards in collecting Norman Friedman's references. As Wonderduck said, while each of his books are not as detailed as Japanese Cruisers, they are among the definitive sources on their subject (Friedman is a consultant to the Defense Department, so whatever is in his book is as close to Gospel as you can get unclassified.). He also has written books about the Royal Navy too, as well as a wide range of other subjects (His book on Operation Desert Storm, Desert Victory, has some rather amazing info not generally known even now.)
Friedman also has gone back and revised some of his books - the current version of US Destroyers is the 2003 edition, with extra info. I had to wait until Amazon started carrying the book again before I got it.
Garzke and Dulin's three books about US, Axis, and Allied battleships are, like Friedman's works, the definitive source on those topics short of a narrow subject reference. They have revised the volume about US battleships, but the Axis and Allied volumes have not been updated IIRC. Oddly enough, while it is possible to easily acquire a new copy of the volumes on US and Axis battleships, the Allied Battleships is out of print with no new printing run in sight. That is a pity since it had the most interesting and varied subject matter of the three (The proposed Dutch battlecruisers was my favorite part of the book, which also covered the Sovetsky Soyuz class.).
C.T.
Posted by: cxt217 at August 24, 2012 12:57 PM (sVB41)
All Along The Watchtower
The weather the previous few days had frankly been lousy. The ships had been pitching and rolling in a way destined to make everybody who wasn't either a natural sailor or possessing good sea legs rather uncomfortable. Alas, most of the men on board the fleet were neither. Still, nobody begrudged the weather; it kept them hidden from eyes that would be very interested indeed at their presence.
As the sun broke over the horizon that morning, the fleet broke into two task groups. TG Yoke headed to the north, while TG X-Ray steered south, towards the larger of the cluster of islands. Simultaneously, escorting ships raced ahead to deliver a short, sharp bombardment. Overhead, planes wheeled around the sky, swooping down to deliver their payloads, then return to their carriers. Below, the transport vessels began disgorging men and machines into landing craft for the run to the beach.
In the landing craft, the men were tense and prepared for everything. Everything, that is, except for what they got. While to the north resistance was remarkably heavy, to the south the landing craft and amtracks were pretty much unopposed. By the end of the first day, somewhere around 10000 men were well on their way to having landed on that island to the south. The main enemy being reported was a nigh-on impassable jungle. Still, nearly 1000 yards worth of progress had been made and the major objective was near at hand.
In the coming days and months the battle for this island would become a meatgrinder for both sides, chewing up men and machines and spitting them out with total disregard. On that first day, however, the landing on the southern island gave no indication of what was to come.
The day was August 7th, 1942. The island was Guadalcanal. 70 years ago, the War in the Pacific entered a new phase: the Allies went on the offensive. That phase would continue until the end of the War.
For some reason, I did not register what your post was about, despite the glaring 'Watchtower' in the subject title, until you mentioned 'Yoke' and 'X-Ray'.
Nicely played.
C.T.
Posted by: cxt217 at August 07, 2012 09:07 PM (MrRpw)
2
I have an M1 Garand that was born this month, in 1942. It always makes me think of Guadalcanal, although the Marines going ashore at this point were still carrying the M1903.
Posted by: flatdarkmars at August 08, 2012 07:41 PM (I55Es)
One of the veterans that I had the honor of meeting over the years had served with The Old Breed on Guadalcanal, and survived, among other things, The Bombardment. I still consider that one of the greatest experiences I had.
On less amusing topics, I also remember getting into an online argument with someone from New Zealand over the actions of the local longshoremen in the preparations for Watchtower (Something that was reported in firsthand accounts as well histories and official narratives.), culminating in the accusation against me that I was somehow prejudiced against working people. I found that strange then and even more so today.
Posted by: cxt217 at August 08, 2012 10:08 PM (MrRpw)
Stay To Port!!!
Like many monitors, the HMS Lord Clive and her sister ship HMS General Wolfe were armed in a ridiculous manner. Of course, that's pretty much the very definition of a monitor: heavy weaponry on a smallish hull. In the case of these ships, they weighed in at just under 6000 tons... bigger than a destroyer, smaller than a light cruiser. They were just over 330 feet long, had "meh" armor, and like most monitors, they were slower than molasses. Indeed, they could make a whopping seven knots at full power. A lot of that came down to her beam: 87 feet from side to side if you count the torpedo bulges. You could drop the engines from an Iowa-class into one of these ships and they still wouldn't be fast with a length:beam ratio of 4:1. Of course, speed isn't what a monitor is for... big ol' guns, that's what monitors are for.
The Lord Clive and General Wolfe looked like they were pretty heavily armed, what with that big honkin' turret up front, carrying two 12" rifles. That's pretty impressive on a 6000 ton hull, but that's not why they always said to stay to the port side of these ships, no no. No, there was a very good reason for that!
RUN AWAY!!! RUN AWAY!!!
That, my friends, is an 18" gun. Let me say that again: an EIGHTEEN INCH GUN. The gun on the General Wolfe came from the HMS Furious when she was converted to a seaplane carrier/aircraft carrier. The 18" gun on the Lord Clive was a spare built for the Furious in case of malfunction. On both monitors, the big'un was fixed to fire to starboard, and one can only imagine what it felt like onboard when it fired. In fact, when the General Wolfe fired her behemoth, the ship moved sideways, like people always claim the Iowas do when they fire a broadside. This was because she had a shallow draft of eight feet at the bow, 13 feet at the stern. They two monitors would roll like the dickens as well, lowering their rate of fire from one round/minute to one round every four minutes or so.
What appears to be a turret on the stern is really just a big blast shield with an open back. It couldn't rotate at all, though the gun could swivel within a 20° arc. It really wasn't intended for use against enemy shipping, but for shore bombardment. To be fair, the two ships weren't particularly good at their job, as their guns could outrange any sighting equipment on hand, save aircraft of course... which didn't carry any radio to speak of at the time. Still, there must be an incredible horror when you realize that someone is throwing 3000+ pound shells at you from well over the horizon.
After WWI ground to a halt, the General Wolfe was paid off and broken up in 1921, while the Lord Clive lasted until 1927 as a gunnery trials ship.
2
There were only three built, all for the Furious as designed, one spare and two in single turrets. One of those was done away with during building, so she could have a rudimentary hangar/flightdeck installed.
The Yamato's guns were actually 18.1" guns, larger bore than these, but the Furious guns fired a heavier shell. Of course, the Yamato-guns could fire twice a minute, had a longer range and better armor penetration. But the Furious did it first.
Posted by: Wonderduck at August 03, 2012 12:02 AM (bqvkh)
3
It's like someone stuck a Railroad Gun on a Barge.
Posted by: Mauser at August 03, 2012 04:15 AM (cZPoz)
It's like someone stuck a Railroad Gun on a Barge.
It is not like the original source of the 18" guns was much better (In concept, design, or appearance.). HMS Furious was one of Fisher's Follies, the three 'light' battlecruisers Jackie Fisher had designed and built for operations in the Baltic Sea, among other missions.
Her two half sisters, Courageous and Glorious, also had their main batteries reused to arm a new ship - HMS Vanguard got her 15" with their archaic-looking turrets from them.
C.T.
Posted by: cxt217 at August 03, 2012 08:24 AM (Loovc)
You BASTARD! I sure as hell did not need another time sink with great photos of armament or armored ships or naval history - but I do thank you muchly.
Have a good'un....
Posted by: The Old Man at August 03, 2012 01:12 PM (dBz2M)
Midway: The Speech
Want to hear a lot of great stuff about the Battle of Midway, from the mouth of one of the authors of the book Shattered Sword? Clear an hour, bunkie, because here's Jonathan Parshall discussing it in the General Raymond E. Mason, Jr. Distinguished Lecture Series speech at the National World War II Museum on the 70th anniversary of Midway.
A lot of good stuff there. I'll admit that none of it was new to me, but it's safe to say that I know more about Midway than average... in part because of Parshall's work in Shattered Sword. I'd love to have heard his thoughts on The Flight To Nowhere, though as he points in the Q&A session afterwards, there's so much to discuss regarding Midway that there's no way to get to it all in an hour. Still a darn fine job.
Very interesting. I can not say that Shattered Sword is without faults (Namely a bit of the analysis at the end.), but it is a very good book. Very readable, although not nearly as much as Incredible Victory but that is a case of praising with faint damns.
C.T.
Posted by: cxt217 at July 13, 2012 02:31 PM (0+FdH)
Name This Mystery Ship XIX
This mystery ship just stumbled into my lap today. I had absolutely no plans to do one of these today, but it's too good to pass up... particularly because I don't think anybody will get it!
Take your best shot. No image searching, no cheating, no soliciting. Winner will get a post on a topic of their choice... g'wan, impress me.
4
CXT wins, it is indeed a Showa L2D; the particular plane shown in the picture was captured in the Philippines, which explains the US national symbol.
However, I'm very curious as to how CXT knew the difference, as the only visible alteration that I could see between the C-47 and the L2D is in the tail... and you can't see that in this picture.
Posted by: Wonderduck at June 30, 2012 11:35 PM (C7o1W)
5
Actually it's an L2D - Japanese-made licensed derivative of DC-3. Look at the extra glazing behind the cockpit and the engine cowls. It must be a trophy or something that ended in U.S. inventory somehow. The question is not to determine the type, it's to guess what this unit was. Note the nose art that possibly says "æ±äº¬ç¥", that may be a clue about the history of the unit.
Posted by: Pete at June 30, 2012 11:42 PM (5OBKC)
6
Pete, that answer was already given: see my comment directly above yours. The nose-art translates to "Tokyo Express."
Posted by: Wonderduck at June 30, 2012 11:54 PM (C7o1W)
7
Wonderduck, I suspect that CXT applied logic to you. "It sure looks like a C-47, but Wonderduck wouldn't use that for a 'mystery plane', so what looks like a C-47 that isn't one?"
My 'logic' went as follows - the plane looked like a C-47, but something felt off about it AND the characters at the nose gave me a general location. It did not have the insignia of the Nationalists/KMT/ROC. The only other nation that operated C-47/DC-3 and variants in Asia that would be of interest was the Japanese, who had their own license to build their own version.
However, as Wonderduck noted, the most telling feature to determine whether it was a C-47/DC-3 or L2D is hidden by the angle of the photo. That would have been an immediate give-away.
C.T.
Posted by: cxt217 at July 01, 2012 11:35 AM (8l8IK)
Also is Pete is correct about the extra windows in the cockpit. In retrospect, that was the first thing about the plane that made it look 'off' to me, though it took me a while to realize exactly what.
C.T.
Posted by: cxt217 at July 01, 2012 11:38 AM (8l8IK)
11
Oh god, Pete, you just made my mind go there... There's not enough brain bleach in the world to wipe out the image of the first C-47 Cargo Strike Witch....
Posted by: Mauser at July 01, 2012 03:59 PM (cZPoz)
12
OK, then how about a C46 Strike Witch? From the front, she'd have a nice hour-glass figure...
Posted by: Siergen at July 01, 2012 04:05 PM (PuIGa)
Name This Mystery Ship XVII
The final episode writeup for HSotD is coming along nicely, but it won't be done in time to get posted tonight... so instead, here's a mystery ship!
You know the rules. No image lookup, one guess per person, my judgement is final, winner gets a post on a topic of their choice (no pr0n, religion or politics). Take your best shot in the comments! CXT and FDM don't get to play after the two of them basically won everything. Post no bills.
only lists that ship under "oilers", not "airship tenders".
Small wonder, since PATOKA kept her hull designation as a fleet oiler even after she was converted to dock and support the ZRs. She only changed her designation later when she was assigned as a seaplane tender for a short while.
I have been watching Accel World when the photo was posted so Andy had already answered the question before I could read who could participate.
C.T.
Posted by: cxt217 at June 27, 2012 05:59 PM (NAjFD)
5
Hmm. Can you do a "Mystery Airplane" post? That might be a different sort of challenge. If not, another ship would be fine.
(I found it via the Wikipedia page for "Mooring mast" -- it has a pic of USS Shenandoah moored to the ship.)
Thoughts On What Didn't Happen: Midway 70 Years Later
Today is the 70th anniversary of US Navy's "Incredible Victory," that
"glorious page in our history," the Battle of Midway. In that conflict,
the three carriers of the Americans (and the planes off Midway itself)
engaged and sank the four carriers of the Imperial Japanese Navy.
I've gone into many, many elements of the Battle of Midway in other posts here at The Pond, such as "Timing Is Everything", "Tone #4," "Beginning The Miracle" "Midway Myths Debunked," "The Reason For Midway," "The Flight to Nowhere,"
and a bunch of others. Instead of rehashing that information, or go
into the level of detail one can find in the plethora of good books on
the subject, I'm going to deal with some lesser issues, ones that
probably aren't deserving of posts in their own right.
If we are going to be speculating...If the battle had been delayed by a few days, PACFLEET would have had 4 carrier decks in the area of operation, though the boost airpower might not have been as significant.
I wonder if Newport was asked to wargame the battle again, like they did for the 40th anniversary. That always make for an amusing piece of trivia.
C.T.
Posted by: cxt217 at June 04, 2012 09:12 PM (N+/w4)
They had no right to win. Yet they did, and in doing so they changed the course of a war... Even against the greatest of odds, there is something in the human spirit - A magic blend of skill, faith and valor - That can lift men from certain defeat to incredible victory. -Walter Lord
Today is the 70th Anniversary of the
Battle of Midway, the greatest of all US Naval victories. While I
intend to have a larger post on this subject later this evening, until
then I leave you with the two classic movies from John Ford on the
topic. The Battle of Midway
Much of The Battle of Midway was filmed on Midway Atoll as the attack occurred. Ford himself was
wounded during the fighting. The movie won an Academy Award for best
documentary in 1942. Torpedo Squadron 8
After the Battle and most of VT-8 was dead, Ford and his crew
put together this tribute movie to them. Most of the footage was shot
shortly before Midway. Only 30 copies were distributed, all to the
family members of those squadron members flying from Hornet that day. It was never intended for public viewing.
I remember reading Walter Lord's Incredible Victory and being moved from reading the introduction/forward where that passage comes from. It was very fitting, in my view.
C.T.
Posted by: cxt217 at June 04, 2012 01:12 PM (N+/w4)
GOTCHA!
The USS Phoenix (CL-46) was a Brooklyn-class light cruiser built for the US Navy in 1938. She was considered a light cruiser because her main armament consisted of 6" guns; 8" rifles were the hallmark of the heavy cruiser. However, there weren't many ships of any fleet that would want to get within range of a Brooklyn: she carried fifteen Mark 16/47 guns in five triple turrets. While that armament wouldn't sink a battlewagon, it'd chew the upperworks to pieces.
The Phoenix had an adventuresome war from the get-go. She spent nearly the entire time in the Pacific (other than a quick run to Casablanca in 1943, to deliver SecState Cordell Hull to a meeting), and was at Pearl Harbor on December 7th, 1941. She herself suffered barely any damage throughout the conflict, losing only one man to enemy action (near as I can tell, that is). When the Surrender was announced, she was heading to the US for a refit. She then officially joined the Atlantic Fleet just long enough to be transferred to the Reserve Fleet (Philadelphia) in 1946. Where she sat until 1951, which is when she was sold.
To Argentina, who renamed her ARA 17 de Octubre. Shortly after the coup that overthrew Juan Peron, the Argentinian Navy gave her the name under which she became famous:
The General Belgrano. During the Falklands War, on May 2nd, 1982, she was involved in maneuvers against the oncoming fleet of Royal Navy ships. Thought to be part of a pincer operation with the 25 de Mayo, an ex-RN CVL carrying A-4 Skyhawks, if the Belgrano could close with the thin-skinned RN vessels, there'd be serious butchery at sea. Modern vessels aren't armored the way they used to be; the Belgrano was built like a bank vault in comparison to the Type 42 destroyers and the various frigates she'd be facing. She was a serious threat. And the Brits had a serious way of dealing with her: the nuclear-powered submarine HMS Conqueror, which had been shadowing the Belgrano for 36 hours. Once given the go-ahead, she fired three WWII era torpedoes at the cruiser.
The second hit her forward of "A" turret, carrying away 40 feet or so of her bow. The third missed altogether, though it carried on and dented an Argentinian frigate (no explosion) some distance away. The first torpedo hit just behind the side armor plating, penetrated into the hull of the ship, then detonated. The explosion vented the boiler room to the sea, which began flooding immediately. It also blew out vertically, destroying two mess halls and a recreational area before taking out a 60 foot chunk of the main deck.
After her remaining crew had abandoned ship, the General Belgrano rolled on her ends, then sunk stern first. 770 crew were later rescued, a nigh-on miraculous feat, considering that her escorts never knew she was in trouble and sailed away.
1
Max Weber is less kind to the captains of the escorts with regards to not hanging around to pick up survivors in his history of the Falklands War.
The sinking was a little controversial back when it happened. Britain had declared a "total exclusion zone" that was, IIRC, 200 miles from the Falklands and announced that it would attack any vessels in that zone; the Belgrano was outside that zone by a good bit when it was sunk. The usual suspects got the vapors at the idea, while the military thought it was daft to go to the trouble of declaring an exclusion zone and then proceed to ignore it.
Funny little war, really. Can't imagine why they seem to want another go - it's not like we have the Soviets to worry about these days, hm?
Posted by: Avatar_exADV at May 02, 2012 10:33 PM (pWQz4)
2
What was particularly weird about the reaction to the sinking was that the Brit government sent the Argentine government a letter making it clear that the war zone was NOT the exclusion zone. The exclusion zone (200 mile radius from the Islands) was there to prevent neutral shipping from wandering into the free-fire area; both sides knew that their own military vessels were targeted anywhere.
In theory, if a RN DD stumbled across an ARA frigate near, say, southern Japan, the two could immediately start shooting at each other.
There's no way the skippers of the Belgrano's escorts should be given a free pass. Not sinking (or even detecting) the Conqueror is one thing... the SSN's job is to be unheard, after all... but it's a completely OTHER thing for that WWII-era cruiser, that's ON YOUR SIDE, to be unheard while it's sinking. Bloody miracle any survivors were found, let alone 700+.
Posted by: Wonderduck at May 02, 2012 10:45 PM (6CHh4)
What is really funny is that usual suspects who claim the sinking of the General Belgrano to be illegal have largely based their case on the fact that she was heading west (i.e. Away from the ships of Operation Corporate.) when HMS Conqueror torpedoed the cruiser. But the Argentine Navy has admitted that the Belgrano and her group were simply on the westward leg of her patrol circuit, not heading back to port, and was ready to attack the British if the opportunity arose. Thus the British sinking her should not have come as a surprise to anyone.
A footnote to the story is that the Argentine operation which was suppose to have aircrafts from 25 de Mayo and the Belgrano hit the British task force was postponed before the cruiser's sinking, supposedly because the wind was too light for carrier operations. However, it appears the actual reason is that the Argentines had lost track of where the British ships were, and thus were marking time until they could be located again.
Then we have the story of the RN Sea King which ended up ditching in Chile, but that is a story for another day.
C.T.
Posted by: cxt217 at May 02, 2012 10:59 PM (YFCvg)
Avatar - it seems like the Argentines always press on the Falklands whenever the government of the time has domestic problems. That was why the Junta went for invasion in 1982.
There was also the attitudes of the British over the Falklands (There are the usual voices in Britain who call for handing the islands over to the Argentines now, as then.), and attitudes of other nations vis a vis the issue.
Mind you, the correlation of forces today would indicate the British that was less capable in some ways (The Royal Navy has one carrier.) and more in others (Tornado fighters based in the Falklands, and cruise missiles from SSNs.). But correlation of forces did not matter to the Junta in 1982 and it might not matter to an Argentine president now, both trying to save their position from internal opposition by whatever means possible. I sincerely hope President Kirchner remembers the fate of the Junta when she grandstands over the Falklands but there are strong reasons to doubt it.
C.T.
Posted by: cxt217 at May 02, 2012 11:07 PM (YFCvg)
5
At one point I thought this was the last time a submarine fired on an enemy warship and sank it.
But a couple of years ago a North Korean submarine sank a South Korean surface warship. Which damned near restarted the Korean War.
Argentine is weaker now than it was in 1982, too, so correlation of forces is probably not going to be more of a consideration now than it was in 1982.
Posted by: cxt217 at May 03, 2012 12:00 AM (YFCvg)
8
According to this chap, the British had sigint indicating that the Belgrano was headed to a rendezvous point inside the exclusion zone. They chose not to reveal this at the time in order to avoid revealing their sigint capabilities.
Personally, I roll my eyes at the thought that sinking an enemy warship in a time of war could ever be considered controversial.
Posted by: flatdarkmars at May 03, 2012 12:06 AM (I55Es)
9
They probably are encouraged to make another go at it because the president of the US tried (but failed) to refer to the Falklands by the Argentinian name. A strange choice that ranks up there with the administration official who referred to Jerusalem by the Arab name for it.
Posted by: Mauser at May 03, 2012 02:21 AM (cZPoz)
Personally, I roll my eyes at the thought that sinking an enemy warship in a time of war could ever be considered controversial.
Common sense would dictate that, but the familes of some of the Argentine crewmembers lost with the General Belgrano did try to sue the British government on the basis that the Belgrano was heading west towards Argentine, thus was not a threat to the British and therefore the British had no right to attack and sink her, which was why they demanded recompense from the British government. The number of failures in their reasoning - undermined by, among others, the Argentine navy - says volumes.
C.T.
Posted by: cxt217 at May 03, 2012 04:26 PM (YFCvg)
Name This Mystery Ship XVI
Sometimes the Mystery Ship I trot out for these contests are found long in advance, carefully stored away until the time comes to spring them on my unsuspecting readers. Other times, it's serendipitous. They fall in my lap completely by accident as I'm doing something else altogether.
FDM, CXT, you two have been moved to to "master-level," so you can't play on this one. Everybody else, take your best shot! The winner gets a post on a topic of their choice... but no cheating. If you cheat, you make little duckies cry, and big duckies angry.
Posted by: brickmuppet at May 02, 2012 06:00 PM (EJaOX)
2
Yeah, it sure looks like the Savannah to me. I was looking at French, Italian, and British cruisers, but nothing matched the 3-gun turrets, two funnels,and main deck line.
Posted by: Siergen at May 02, 2012 07:14 PM (3/gGt)
Posted by: Wonderduck at May 02, 2012 07:20 PM (6CHh4)
4
That's funny, the other night I was half-watching TV and there was a program that briefly mentioned this ship. In a context rather far-removed from the above photo, though.
Posted by: flatdarkmars at May 02, 2012 07:47 PM (I55Es)
Speaking of oddities, certain events over the last couple years had me re-reading some of the books in my collection, which fits in amazingly well with this particular ship. And it probably cover the same circumstance, or at least the period of time, FDM mentioned.
Interesting ship, that.
Posted by: cxt217 at May 02, 2012 07:56 PM (YFCvg)
6
OK, then how about the USS Philadelphia? I could've sworn that is was right over there...
Posted by: Siergen at May 02, 2012 08:00 PM (3/gGt)
9
Using Wonderduck's last hint, finding the matching photograph is trivial. The only difference that I see is that the original has a noticeable U.S. Flag, which is shopped away in this picture for some reason.
Posted by: Pete at May 02, 2012 08:51 PM (5OBKC)
10
If I get two guesses, then my last one is the USS Phoenix. I'm pretty sure that Brickmuppet got the class right, and I think I found the matching photo just before logging for bed.
Why do you have to run these on work night?
Posted by: Siergen at May 02, 2012 09:01 PM (3/gGt)
11
The flag was shooped out, Pete, to make it marginally more difficult to identify.
Siergen, I'm afraid you don't get two guesses. I declare this one to be a no-winner.
Posted by: Wonderduck at May 02, 2012 09:55 PM (6CHh4)
12
I made a few attempts to figure it out, but came up empty. The white paint led me correctly to South America, but I didn't investigate thoroughly enough, mostly because I was at work. If it was still open, I'd probably be figuring it out about now.
The white-ish paint was used quite a bit on US Navy ships deployed in the tropics during peacetime - USS AUGUSTA had a white-ish hull color scheme when she was assigned to the Asiatic Fleet, for example. The PHOENIX spent some time visiting South American ports prior to the outbreak of the war, so the photo is probably from that time.
C.T.
Posted by: cxt217 at May 02, 2012 10:42 PM (YFCvg)
Name This Mystery Ship XV
Got a toughie for you today, with an extra bonus: flatdarkmars can't play!
He can't play because he's the one that brought it to my attention... and I had never heard of it. So take your best shot, folks! Winner gets a post on a topic of their choice, with the usual limitations. Good luck!
Didn't the Japanese capture or refloat an old four piper in the early days of the war? Wasn't she the Stewart? Heard the story long time ago, but I looked her story up in DANFS and she fits the verbal (no pictures).
I could be very wrong, as usual....
Posted by: The Old Man at April 24, 2012 12:40 PM (dBz2M)
You are absolutely correct - that is IJN patrol boat PB-102, formerly the CLEMSON class destroyer USS STEWART (DD-224). One of two former Allied destroyers to be repaired and taken into IJN service during WW2, and which says a lot about the IJN's priorities and lack of resources. Depending on which source you read, she was named 'ex-STEWART' or simply 'DD-224' following her repossession by US forces at the end.
Given the different appearance of the other Allied destroyer to be captured by the Japanese during WW2, it is easy to deduce PB-102's identity.
Posted by: cxt217 at April 24, 2012 02:05 PM (buVNw)
3
Oops, my mistake. There was three Allied destroyers captured by the Japanese during the Pacific War which were put into service for the IJN. The comment about appearances still applies, though.
Posted by: cxt217 at April 24, 2012 04:16 PM (buVNw)
4
The Old Man becomes a first time winner! Let me know what topic you want! I'll admit that I thought it'd be harder...
Posted by: Wonderduck at April 24, 2012 06:39 PM (PVVuW)
1
As a dish served cold, it certainly provides fiber, but I imagine it falls short in taste.
Posted by: brickmuppet at April 06, 2012 09:41 PM (EJaOX)
2
Hmm, I had not heard of that aircraft before, but according to Wikipedia, over 1500 of them were built and they saw service in the "back corners" of the WW II. As our resident expert on the Pacific theater, perhaps you could use your new found Vengence! as a starting point for one of your excellent articles?
Posted by: Siergen at April 06, 2012 10:36 PM (3/gGt)
My Lexington Story
A couple of weeks ago, I'm walking up the hill from the main parking lot to the Duck U Bookstore trying to avoid the worst of the slippery spots, when a late-model Chrysler sedan pulled into one of the handicapped spots by the door. The driver, an elderly woman, began to get out of the car as I changed course to help her if need be. I glanced at the license plate, noticed the car's color, and began to laugh long and hard.
The woman shot me a nasty look, and I realized she probably thought I was laughing at her, not what I had just noticed. Unable to speak from laughing so hard, I did what I could: I pointed at the license plate, then waved my hand vaguely towards the rest of the car. Then she realized that I got the joke... and smiled, saying "Most people don't understand."
Chuckling, I offered her my arm, which she took gratefully. Walking into the school building the Bookstore is located in, I inquired when her husband had been in the Navy. "1944; I didn't meet him until 1950, when I was 20." Her husband passed away a couple of years ago, but she still kept the license plate the way he wanted it. After we got into the building, I bid her good day... and she thanked me for both my help and for remembering my history. "He would have talked your ear off, you know. He could do that," she said with a gleam in her eye. I replied with "I've got two," which made her laugh.
What made me laugh so much to begin with? The license plate read "CV 16 USN". The car was painted dark blue.
CV-16 was better known as USS Lexington, one of the multitude of Essex-class carriers that joined the fleet in the second half of the Pacific War. She was the only fleet carrier never to have pattern-disrupting camouflage applied to it, wearing instead Measure 21 ("Navy Blue" hull and deck overall) for the entire war. This paint scheme led the Japanese to give her the nickname "The Blue Ghost."
They also claimed to have sunk her four times. While she did take some damage during the war, it was never particularly serious. Post-war, she continued to serve until 1991, the last of the Essex-class carriers to be retired. She's now a museum ship in Corpus Christie, Texas.
CXT figured out the mystery ship, so he gets another post...
Name This Mystery Ship XIII
Here we go again! One neat thing about this ship is that I've got a personal story to tell about it...
As usual, no imagesearch or anything like that. I may not be able to prevent you from doing it, but you're less of a human being for doing so. As is usual, the first to accurately name the ship will get a post on a topic of their choice, as long as it doesn't involve religion, politics or pr0n.
I'll tell the story when an accurate ID is made. Good luck!
1
I'm guessing Intrepid. My reasoning is behind spoiler tag
Wonderduck has a personal story about this. Only 2 Essexes have been not in mothballs since he was likely able to have sea stories. I don't believe WD is a naval aviator so it would not be Lexington...thus the intrepid museum.
Posted by: brickmuppet at February 26, 2012 08:51 PM (EJaOX)
2
Your reasoning is perfectly sound, except that
the Lexington is also a museum ship. In any case, it's not the Intrepid.
Posted by: Wonderduck at February 26, 2012 09:41 PM (O9XO8)
Since it is a short-hull Essex and you got a personal story, you make it pretty much LEXINGTON as the only possible choice - unless I am completely off on your age.
C.T.
Posted by: cxt217 at February 27, 2012 04:43 PM (47Cgj)
4
OK, I like this site, but why does it keep cutting me off at the end of pages? Nearly every page does this; I can clearly see that there's more material, but it won't let me scroll the rest of the way. What the hell?
Posted by: Chris Spider at February 27, 2012 06:42 PM (EG0UP)
5
Chris - I see the same thing quite often, and have to refresh the page to see it all. I am using Firefox. Are you also using Firefox as well, or something else?
Posted by: Siergen at February 27, 2012 07:04 PM (3/gGt)
This has been an issue here for a long time. Sometimes if you reload the page it gets relaxed and lets you scroll down further.
I've found that there's less of a problem in this regard using Firefox than when using IE. But it doesn't happen at all with any other mee.nu or mu.nu blog I visit, so I can only conclude that there's something custom and strange in the site CSS here.
Posted by: Steven Den Beste at February 27, 2012 07:20 PM (+rSRq)
7
If there is, I sure didn't put it there! Chris, it even happens to me, usually on the longer posts with many pictures. I'm sorry, I wish I knew what was going on, but it's been occurring pretty much since Day Two.
Posted by: Wonderduck at February 27, 2012 07:37 PM (O9XO8)
8
We discuss this from time to time. I add explicit height to every picture tag (img), without exception, and that seems to help.
Posted by: Pete at February 27, 2012 07:44 PM (5OBKC)
9
Perhaps the browsers can't handle this much duck content in one page fetch?
Posted by: Siergen at February 27, 2012 08:01 PM (3/gGt)
10
Pixy knows about the bug, it has something to do with the dynamic footers. When I asked about it he fixed it for my site by disabling something, but I never asked exactly what, and if it was under my control or not.
Posted by: David at February 27, 2012 09:19 PM (Kn54v)
11
I was testing it on my site on the weekend, and just turning it off doesn't always work if you have a long sidebar, so I need to re-do the CSS. What I was trying to do in 2008 with this fiddly Javascript is a lot easier today, so long as I throw IE6 to the wolves.
Posted by: Pixy Misa at February 27, 2012 11:12 PM (PiXy!)
2/23/45
The single most famous picture from WWII was taken some 67 years ago today. The sad thing is that most people today don't realize that this wasn't the end of the fighting... oh no. Two of the men in the picture were dead a week later. A third was killed a few weeks after the first two. The island of Iwo Jima was declared secure over a month after Joe Rosenthal took the picture.
27 Medals of Honor were earned at Iwo Jima, 13 posthumously. 22 of the Medals were issued to US Marines, nearly 30% of all Medals of Honor earned by Marines in WWII.