Remember Pearl Harbor
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But he couldn't could he, despite trying
Insufficient resource
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Could not other reasons be superior intelligence (the breaking of the German Naval Enigma Code), technical developments (HF/DF, Radar, both air and ship borne), hunter killer AS groups, and of course airpower!
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia - South of where I'd like to be !
Age: 59
Posts: 4,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
glojo
Nice to see a reasoned, well read debater on here, unlike some. I won't be betting against you any time soon
A couple of things that stand out which I totally agree with
"this event happened just three days after Pearl harbour."
"This Admiral underestimated the capabilities of modern war planes" - as did many
"all very loath to consider new tactics." - always sems to happen
"invincibility of his ships when put against air power"
HMS Sydney was lost to "new" tactics in some ways as well, plus a bit of the Captain getting a bit close without good reason ????
Remember it was not that long after this that air power was again used in Long Range destruction of Darwin (Australia), another event that totally and utterly shocked a Government.
That poster, Loose Lips Sinks ships reminds me of my grand mother who used to say it when telling me about the war. She was one of the British (Scottish) women of indomitable spirit who raised a family while living through the war in London, ducking Bombs, V1's, V2 and Stuka's shooting her up. May she RIP.
Anyway, very good and interesting discussion.
.
Nice to see a reasoned, well read debater on here, unlike some. I won't be betting against you any time soon
A couple of things that stand out which I totally agree with
"this event happened just three days after Pearl harbour."
"This Admiral underestimated the capabilities of modern war planes" - as did many
"all very loath to consider new tactics." - always sems to happen
"invincibility of his ships when put against air power"
HMS Sydney was lost to "new" tactics in some ways as well, plus a bit of the Captain getting a bit close without good reason ????
Remember it was not that long after this that air power was again used in Long Range destruction of Darwin (Australia), another event that totally and utterly shocked a Government.
That poster, Loose Lips Sinks ships reminds me of my grand mother who used to say it when telling me about the war. She was one of the British (Scottish) women of indomitable spirit who raised a family while living through the war in London, ducking Bombs, V1's, V2 and Stuka's shooting her up. May she RIP.
Anyway, very good and interesting discussion.
.
Chugalug,
The points you raise are valid - but at the time of Pearl Harbor, the U-boat menace was still a huge threat, and senior figures at the time would have agreed with Mike that the U-boats "could starve us into submission". It was another 18 months before the various countermeasures you describe managed to neuter the U-boats (more or less). The Battle of the Atlantic was the last front where the Germans scored any potentially significant victories over any of their enemies, and it must have been a nasty shock to them when the tables were turned within two months. For all the proud talk of the Battle of Britain, many people seem to forget that Coastal Command saved this country more recently than Fighter Command! Which is largely why the death throes of the Nimrod caused such consternation...
TOTD
The points you raise are valid - but at the time of Pearl Harbor, the U-boat menace was still a huge threat, and senior figures at the time would have agreed with Mike that the U-boats "could starve us into submission". It was another 18 months before the various countermeasures you describe managed to neuter the U-boats (more or less). The Battle of the Atlantic was the last front where the Germans scored any potentially significant victories over any of their enemies, and it must have been a nasty shock to them when the tables were turned within two months. For all the proud talk of the Battle of Britain, many people seem to forget that Coastal Command saved this country more recently than Fighter Command! Which is largely why the death throes of the Nimrod caused such consternation...
TOTD
Back to the original point of the thread, my Dad has no problem remembering Pearl Harbour. It was the day he joined the RAF, on his way to pilot training and eventually a career of just under 26 years (RAFTC Examiner, Russian interpreter...) before being made compulsorily redundant.
After his first night at the recruit centre, his tent-mates and he noticed an empty bedspace. Turns out their missing fellow-wannabe had finally been caught in the act, what would've been the next in a string of night-time murders. Nice - not!
After his first night at the recruit centre, his tent-mates and he noticed an empty bedspace. Turns out their missing fellow-wannabe had finally been caught in the act, what would've been the next in a string of night-time murders. Nice - not!
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 665
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ref the comments in earlier threads about the serviceability (or otherwise) of the PoW's and Repulse's radars, I read somewhere some time ago that the Japanese had divers down onto both whecks within 24 hours of the sinkings recovering the radars.
The wrecksites are apparently quite close to the coast and in relatively shallow water - a Cathay friend told me quite some years ago that on a calm day, both could be quite clearly seen, one upright, the other on its side, almost on one of the airways from Hong Kong.
The Royal navy attempted to provide air cover for the capital ships going out to Singapore, but the carrier tasked with the job (forgotten the name) ran aground, I think in the West Indies, on its way to the Far East. Given the difference in the performance of the RN carrier aircraft of 1941 and the Zero, it was probably a rather fortuitous grounding for the aircrew and the carrier's crew.
Skuas and Swordfish against Val's and Zeros would have been even more "asymmetric" than it was for the poor buggers flying the RAF/RAAF 'front line' Buffaloes based in Malaya at the time.
The wrecksites are apparently quite close to the coast and in relatively shallow water - a Cathay friend told me quite some years ago that on a calm day, both could be quite clearly seen, one upright, the other on its side, almost on one of the airways from Hong Kong.
The Royal navy attempted to provide air cover for the capital ships going out to Singapore, but the carrier tasked with the job (forgotten the name) ran aground, I think in the West Indies, on its way to the Far East. Given the difference in the performance of the RN carrier aircraft of 1941 and the Zero, it was probably a rather fortuitous grounding for the aircrew and the carrier's crew.
Skuas and Swordfish against Val's and Zeros would have been even more "asymmetric" than it was for the poor buggers flying the RAF/RAAF 'front line' Buffaloes based in Malaya at the time.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia - South of where I'd like to be !
Age: 59
Posts: 4,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They are in surprisingly shallow water, from memory 60 - 80 feet so within diving range.
Not sure if you can dive on them now, does anyone know ? I thought they might be designated war graves or war wrecks.
Disreagard the above, you can dive on them.
Not sure if you can dive on them now, does anyone know ? I thought they might be designated war graves or war wrecks.
Disreagard the above, you can dive on them.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 665
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They are certainly designated as war graves - and I understand that the positions shown in most history books are deliberately wrong, because the real positions are far too easy to reach for 'recreational' divers.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: london
Posts: 285
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
... There are several graves of survivors of HMS PoW and Repulse at
Kranji war cemetary on Singapore island - Other survivors were to suffer
years as pow's of the Japanese.
Other aspects related to the two sinkings are said to be that Admiral Tom Phillips had been promoted above his experience and ability for leading such a major force and had imposed radio silence - that was adhered to
even after they had been under air attack for about one hour
(so it is said) eventually breaking radio silence and calling for assistance from nearby RAF Malayan airfields - although whether or not the numbers and aircraft types available would have made any significant difference to the eventual outcome remains debatable.
Kranji war cemetary on Singapore island - Other survivors were to suffer
years as pow's of the Japanese.
Other aspects related to the two sinkings are said to be that Admiral Tom Phillips had been promoted above his experience and ability for leading such a major force and had imposed radio silence - that was adhered to
even after they had been under air attack for about one hour
(so it is said) eventually breaking radio silence and calling for assistance from nearby RAF Malayan airfields - although whether or not the numbers and aircraft types available would have made any significant difference to the eventual outcome remains debatable.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia - South of where I'd like to be !
Age: 59
Posts: 4,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Andu
I think you'll find that MOST rec divers are pretty responsible when it comes to things like this, especially since human bones / skulls etc are sitting around.
I read somewhere that Rec Divers also maintain the White Ensign on the ships and replace it at appropriate times.
I think you'll find that MOST rec divers are pretty responsible when it comes to things like this, especially since human bones / skulls etc are sitting around.
I read somewhere that Rec Divers also maintain the White Ensign on the ships and replace it at appropriate times.
Mike and ToD, I see now where you are both coming from, and concede the point that before winning the Battle of the Atlantic, we almost lost it. That seems to be par for the course for most of our campaigns in WW2; BoB, Desert, Bombing, Far East, etc. I believe Churchill said that of them all, it was the Atlantic that kept him awake at nights and it shared with the Bomber Offensive the dubious honour of having lasted from September 1939 through to May1945. I think we should give credit where it is due though not only to the gallant seamen, both Naval and Merchant Marine, who kept that vital lifeline open but also to the blinkered incompetence of the Reich Leadership. If Doenitz had been given more resource pre-war, at the expense say of the surface fleet, he could have prevailed and we would indeed have been forced to submit. But if's and but's are not as important as what actually happens. The Japanese missed the Carriers, and even the Battleships could be salvaged in some part. A mighty power was moved to wrath, and at last Churchill began to get back his beauty sleep.
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Torquay, England
Posts: 838
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Pasir,
I take on-board your comments about Admiral Phillips and I have an open mind regarding his conduct.My thoughts are that folks that have to make decisions, will always hopefully be acting in the best possible interests of their masters\country and if at the end of the day things do not work out, then as long as they have done their best we can surely ask no more of them? My thoughts are that this Admiral was on a complete hiding to nothing, he was in a no win situation. The Royal Navy is a cruel master and had that admiral survived then at the minimum he would have faced a Board of Inquiry and possible even a Court Martial.
When he did finally request air cover do we seriously believe that the ten Buffalo that eventually arrived would have made any difference? I accept this is mainly an RAF forum and we all think we are James Bigglesworth but the reality was the Buffalo was no match for the far superior Zero and Oscar fighter aircraft that the Japanese had deployed. Would those ten aircraft had even got through to the bombers??
I say that with the greatest of respect to all who flew them but to put ten aircraft up against a far superior force would have been a one way mission.
I had never researched the contribution made by the RAF in Malaysia\Singapore during that disastrous month of December but now that I have had a quick peek it would suggest that this field may not be as green as we would like it to be and during this period our aircraft were totally out gunned and outnumbered. They were possibly flying targets waiting to be shot down
Was maintaining radio silence good practice, what was the other option? There was no surface support that could come sailing over the horizon, the RAF were overstretched, and lacked the numbers that would have been needed to stop those attacks.
Would it have been right to loose valuable aircraft attempting to prevent the inevitable sinking of that battle group? I am Navy through and through but to me the battle was lost before it even started.
It was rightly suggested that the buck stopped with Admiral Phillips but on reading further reports we can see the pressure that the Prime Minister put onto the First Sea Lord regarding the deployment of this small battle group and we know the First Sea Lord was not happy about it:
Admiral Phillips fought the fight the only way he knew how, but what else could he have done other than stand up to Winston Churchill and refuse to deploy without the appropriate air cover! I say Winston Churchill just because it was his orders that required the presence of that Battle Group in those waters.
Cowardice is not a word in the Naval dictionary and I guess that would have been the allegation if this officer had refused to deploy.
Sadly for both the Captain and the crew of the Prince of Wales a Board of Inquiry found it necessary to blame them rather than the defective radar, or the lack of any aircraft carriers. It would appear that failing to request RAF air support was not considered a factor into this loss:
Although the admiral has been criticised over the decades regarding his decision to operate out of Singapore, to ignore the invasion of Malaya would have created a serious rift between the navy and the army and disgraced the tradition of the Fleet.
One of Admiral Phillipss critics over the Force Z affair was Admiral A.B. Cunningham of the Mediterranean Fleet. Although Cunningham believed Admiral Phillips erred in his handling of Force Z, he respected his commitment to duty in the face of great odds.
When the Royal Navy had faced terrible losses in the evacuation of Crete Cunningham is reported to have said: It takes the navy three years to build a ship. It would take 300 to rebuild a tradition.
Although the events in the South China Sea helped to destroy the old-fashioned symbolism of the British battleship, the sacrifice of the Prince of Wales and the Repulse might have preserved the traditions and reputation of the Royal Navy.
Admiral Phillips was the senior Naval officer whose duty it was to go into hostile waters and show the flag. Would that Battle Group have deployed after hearing about Pearl Harbour?
Never has the saying....
Their's not to reason why,
Their's but to do and die
been more apt.
History has blamed that Admiral but has history been fair? December 1941 was not a good month for our armed services and I guess the Singapore saga was not our finest hour. Pearl Harbour is perhaps also an event that with the aid of hind sight we might have seen a different outcome.
Informative Dive Link
I doubt very much the folk lore regarding diving to recover radar equipment is correct as the ship is practically upside down and in quite deep water, not too deep though
This flag flies from Prince of Wales
I take on-board your comments about Admiral Phillips and I have an open mind regarding his conduct.My thoughts are that folks that have to make decisions, will always hopefully be acting in the best possible interests of their masters\country and if at the end of the day things do not work out, then as long as they have done their best we can surely ask no more of them? My thoughts are that this Admiral was on a complete hiding to nothing, he was in a no win situation. The Royal Navy is a cruel master and had that admiral survived then at the minimum he would have faced a Board of Inquiry and possible even a Court Martial.
When he did finally request air cover do we seriously believe that the ten Buffalo that eventually arrived would have made any difference? I accept this is mainly an RAF forum and we all think we are James Bigglesworth but the reality was the Buffalo was no match for the far superior Zero and Oscar fighter aircraft that the Japanese had deployed. Would those ten aircraft had even got through to the bombers??
I say that with the greatest of respect to all who flew them but to put ten aircraft up against a far superior force would have been a one way mission.
I had never researched the contribution made by the RAF in Malaysia\Singapore during that disastrous month of December but now that I have had a quick peek it would suggest that this field may not be as green as we would like it to be and during this period our aircraft were totally out gunned and outnumbered. They were possibly flying targets waiting to be shot down
Was maintaining radio silence good practice, what was the other option? There was no surface support that could come sailing over the horizon, the RAF were overstretched, and lacked the numbers that would have been needed to stop those attacks.
Would it have been right to loose valuable aircraft attempting to prevent the inevitable sinking of that battle group? I am Navy through and through but to me the battle was lost before it even started.
It was rightly suggested that the buck stopped with Admiral Phillips but on reading further reports we can see the pressure that the Prime Minister put onto the First Sea Lord regarding the deployment of this small battle group and we know the First Sea Lord was not happy about it:
In late August 1941 the Prime Minister wrote to the First Sea Lord proposing a fleet of the smallest number of the best ships to create a very powerful and fast force in Eastern waters. In subsequent memos Churchill emphasised the political and propaganda value of sending one of the navys best ships a modern King George V class battleship.
He believed powerful and fast capital ships in the Pacific could deter a superior Japanese fleet much like the ability of the German battleship Tirpitz to tie down British forces in the North Atlantic. A warship operating in this elusive manner, Churchill explained to Pound, exercises a vague, general fear and menaces all points at once. It appears and disappears, causing immediate reactions and perturbations on the other side.
The use of British battleships as raiders was original, but Churchills plan contained flawed reasoning and unrealistic expectations about Japan. The Prime Minister was criticised for comparing the narrow waters of the North Sea to the wide Pacific Ocean, noting the two theatres were of course very different. In addition, the protection of convoys and trade from enemy raiders, the major tasks of Home Fleet battleships in the Atlantic theatre, did not correspond to the probable offensive intentions of the Japanese fleet in the Far East.
He believed powerful and fast capital ships in the Pacific could deter a superior Japanese fleet much like the ability of the German battleship Tirpitz to tie down British forces in the North Atlantic. A warship operating in this elusive manner, Churchill explained to Pound, exercises a vague, general fear and menaces all points at once. It appears and disappears, causing immediate reactions and perturbations on the other side.
The use of British battleships as raiders was original, but Churchills plan contained flawed reasoning and unrealistic expectations about Japan. The Prime Minister was criticised for comparing the narrow waters of the North Sea to the wide Pacific Ocean, noting the two theatres were of course very different. In addition, the protection of convoys and trade from enemy raiders, the major tasks of Home Fleet battleships in the Atlantic theatre, did not correspond to the probable offensive intentions of the Japanese fleet in the Far East.
Cowardice is not a word in the Naval dictionary and I guess that would have been the allegation if this officer had refused to deploy.
Sadly for both the Captain and the crew of the Prince of Wales a Board of Inquiry found it necessary to blame them rather than the defective radar, or the lack of any aircraft carriers. It would appear that failing to request RAF air support was not considered a factor into this loss:
Much to the embarrassment of the Admiralty the Technical Reports comparison of the Bismarck to the King George V class battleships proved critical of British warship design. The DNC report questioned the effectiveness of the Prince of Wales side-protection system, the inadequate training and preparation of the ships crew, and the effectiveness of the high angle/low angle (HA/LA) anti-aircraft guns during the battle. The expansive third part of the Technical Report included a summary of these main deficiencies [in the King George V class] together with action taken or proposed to rectify or guard against them in existing or future construction of ships.
In reviewing the failure of the battleships anti-aircraft protection the report concluded, the anti-aircraft fire of the Prince of Wales did not prevent the attack upon her from being pressed home.
However, the DNC did not blame the poor defence on inadequate or faulty guns, but rather on the lack of considerable training and practice for the crew to reach proper proficiency. The DNC staff maintained that the battleships anti-aircraft armament could have inflicted heavy casualties before torpedoes were dropped, if not prevented the successful conclusion of attack given proper training for the gun crews.
This point criticised the several Admiralty decisions to curtail the Prince of Waless working up period for special missions. The navys resolve to deploy capital ships before they were fully worked up demonstrated their great need for modern ships in 1941
In reviewing the failure of the battleships anti-aircraft protection the report concluded, the anti-aircraft fire of the Prince of Wales did not prevent the attack upon her from being pressed home.
However, the DNC did not blame the poor defence on inadequate or faulty guns, but rather on the lack of considerable training and practice for the crew to reach proper proficiency. The DNC staff maintained that the battleships anti-aircraft armament could have inflicted heavy casualties before torpedoes were dropped, if not prevented the successful conclusion of attack given proper training for the gun crews.
This point criticised the several Admiralty decisions to curtail the Prince of Waless working up period for special missions. The navys resolve to deploy capital ships before they were fully worked up demonstrated their great need for modern ships in 1941
One of Admiral Phillipss critics over the Force Z affair was Admiral A.B. Cunningham of the Mediterranean Fleet. Although Cunningham believed Admiral Phillips erred in his handling of Force Z, he respected his commitment to duty in the face of great odds.
When the Royal Navy had faced terrible losses in the evacuation of Crete Cunningham is reported to have said: It takes the navy three years to build a ship. It would take 300 to rebuild a tradition.
Although the events in the South China Sea helped to destroy the old-fashioned symbolism of the British battleship, the sacrifice of the Prince of Wales and the Repulse might have preserved the traditions and reputation of the Royal Navy.
Admiral Phillips was the senior Naval officer whose duty it was to go into hostile waters and show the flag. Would that Battle Group have deployed after hearing about Pearl Harbour?
Never has the saying....
Their's not to reason why,
Their's but to do and die
been more apt.
History has blamed that Admiral but has history been fair? December 1941 was not a good month for our armed services and I guess the Singapore saga was not our finest hour. Pearl Harbour is perhaps also an event that with the aid of hind sight we might have seen a different outcome.
Informative Dive Link
I doubt very much the folk lore regarding diving to recover radar equipment is correct as the ship is practically upside down and in quite deep water, not too deep though
This flag flies from Prince of Wales
Let's ignore the patently obivious.....If the Enemy is dropping bombs and torpedoes on your dumbass....they already know where you are! Gettiing on the Radio and calling for help in plain ordinary English at that point is not exactly giving the bad guys any more advantage than they already have.
For crying out loud folks....deal with reality!
The only help he could have expected was of no darn good to him. At that time and place the Royal Navy and RAF were both outclassed, outgunned, and outmaneuvered.
The RN had its share of Donkey's too!
The early part of the Pacific War for the Allies was just that....the Japanese were ready for War and we were not. Some very brave Men and Women had to pay a terrible price for that unpreparedness.
Think about being in the Philippines....being told help is on the way....and **** all was. Then with lots of luck and divine intervention...surviving the Japanese POW Camps...to discover all those years late how you had been lied to by your National Leaders.
Gallant sacrifice is not all it is cracked up to be....unless it is exactly one's own choosing to do so and is done with some sort of hope of success even if a desperate gamble.
For crying out loud folks....deal with reality!
The only help he could have expected was of no darn good to him. At that time and place the Royal Navy and RAF were both outclassed, outgunned, and outmaneuvered.
The RN had its share of Donkey's too!
The early part of the Pacific War for the Allies was just that....the Japanese were ready for War and we were not. Some very brave Men and Women had to pay a terrible price for that unpreparedness.
Think about being in the Philippines....being told help is on the way....and **** all was. Then with lots of luck and divine intervention...surviving the Japanese POW Camps...to discover all those years late how you had been lied to by your National Leaders.
Gallant sacrifice is not all it is cracked up to be....unless it is exactly one's own choosing to do so and is done with some sort of hope of success even if a desperate gamble.
Gentleman Aviator
The object of war is not to die for your country but to make the other guy die for his.
― George S. Patton Jr.
― George S. Patton Jr.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: london
Posts: 285
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SS Automedon
Thanks to Glojo and Chugalug2 for their most descriptive views on the disaster of Singapore and Force Z.
The reasons for the eventual fall of Malaya and Singapore are complex
and are traced back to the late 20's when the building of the great naval base was first suggested - with years of inactivity where arrangeing inter services cricket matches were given greater priority over any consideration for jungle warfare training.
There was a particular incident in late 1940 when the German surface raider Atlantis sunk the SS Automedan that unfortuneatly was carrying
Top Secret papers in its safe addressed to Singapores RAF Air Chief Brook-Popham - showing the latest details on Malaya and Singapores strength and its defences (lack of !) including the RAFs strength of some 335 a/c - together with information that in effect gave out information along the
lines that the defence of Malaya and Singapore were not necessarily considered to be of the highest priority - (a detailed assessment is given under - "SS Autmedon - The fate of a Colony") - These highly secret and sensative documents were retrieved by a German boarding party shortly
before the Automedan finally sunk - and were passed on to Tokyo. All swept under the carpet and never investigated in common with most of the other events and reasons that led to Singapores surrender - described as Britains Greatest military defeat and disaster.
...
The reasons for the eventual fall of Malaya and Singapore are complex
and are traced back to the late 20's when the building of the great naval base was first suggested - with years of inactivity where arrangeing inter services cricket matches were given greater priority over any consideration for jungle warfare training.
There was a particular incident in late 1940 when the German surface raider Atlantis sunk the SS Automedan that unfortuneatly was carrying
Top Secret papers in its safe addressed to Singapores RAF Air Chief Brook-Popham - showing the latest details on Malaya and Singapores strength and its defences (lack of !) including the RAFs strength of some 335 a/c - together with information that in effect gave out information along the
lines that the defence of Malaya and Singapore were not necessarily considered to be of the highest priority - (a detailed assessment is given under - "SS Autmedon - The fate of a Colony") - These highly secret and sensative documents were retrieved by a German boarding party shortly
before the Automedan finally sunk - and were passed on to Tokyo. All swept under the carpet and never investigated in common with most of the other events and reasons that led to Singapores surrender - described as Britains Greatest military defeat and disaster.
...
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Torquay, England
Posts: 838
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Let's ignore the patently obivious.....If the Enemy is dropping bombs and torpedoes on your dumbass....they already know where you are! Gettiing on the Radio and calling for help in plain ordinary English at that point is not exactly giving the bad guys any more advantage than they already have.
Singapore could put up TEN antiquated Brewster Buffalo but sadly they were only good for collecting lead that was being distributed by the Japanese. If the RAF had sent out every single aircraft and lost all of them then what? Think back to the start of World War II and how the RAF quite understandably pulled back from France to preserve their aircraft in readiness for air attacks on Great Britain. War in the Far East had only just begun and on the first day 60% of the RAF aircraft had been destroyed. I guess though the admiral could have put an advert in the Ipplepen Financial Times asking for help from the nearest aircraft carriers?? It is so easy to sit back and be critical but that battle group had been placed in a no win situation. Admiral Phillips had stated that if they were to have a battle group in those waters then he would need several battleships with their supporting destroyer screens but that is an old school capital ship man speaking, but he was fully aware that his battle group was way, way to small and would never be able to survive in that location. Even the Americans with their carriers at that period of the war could not steam merrily into those waters.
It was a CRAZY, ill thought out 'plan' that was typical of Winston Churchill and please accept that this great leader got us through the Second World War. I hate being critical of this iconic figure but putting those ships in that area just to play at being 'pirates' was a criminal waste of sailors lives. He had seen what a deterrent the Tirpitz was and in his mind he thought the Prince of Wales could do the same thing....... The snag was Tirpitz was located in what she believed was a relatively safe haven. He was putting the Prince of Wales into the Lion's lair where the vessel had no where to hide and no where to run. It was quite literally a dead man walking
On 12 March 1941, Squadron No.243 reformed at Kallang as a fighter squadron for the defence of Singapore. The shortcomings of its Buffaloes were soon apparent and when Japanese fighters came within range, the squadron suffered heavy loses and by the end of January 1942 was operating its surviving aircraft as part of a mixed force
This is the aircraft we are expecting to fly out, locate the battle group and then take on the fighter screen that was protecting the Japanese bombers??
The only help he could have expected was of no darn good to him. At that time and place the Royal Navy and RAF were both outclassed, outgunned, and outmaneuvered.
The RN had its share of Donkey's too!
The early part of the Pacific War for the Allies was just that....the Japanese were ready for War and we were not. Some very brave Men and Women had to pay a terrible price for that unpreparedness.
Think about being in the Philippines....being told help is on the way....and **** all was. Then with lots of luck and divine intervention...surviving the Japanese POW Camps...to discover all those years late how you had been lied to by your National Leaders.
Gallant sacrifice is not all it is cracked up to be....unless it is exactly one's own choosing to do so and is done with some sort of hope of success even if a desperate gamble.
The early part of the Pacific War for the Allies was just that....the Japanese were ready for War and we were not. Some very brave Men and Women had to pay a terrible price for that unpreparedness.
Think about being in the Philippines....being told help is on the way....and **** all was. Then with lots of luck and divine intervention...surviving the Japanese POW Camps...to discover all those years late how you had been lied to by your National Leaders.
Gallant sacrifice is not all it is cracked up to be....unless it is exactly one's own choosing to do so and is done with some sort of hope of success even if a desperate gamble.
I agree to a certain degree with the above points but Prince of Wales and the Repulse had been in a few conflicts. Prince of Wales had only just come out of dry dock following her brief encounter with the Bismark:
SECRET MESSAGE IN
IMPORTANT 0530/27
Received:-
From H.M.S. PRINCE OF WALES Date 27.5.41.
Time 1610
IMPORTANT 0530/27
Received:-
From H.M.S. PRINCE OF WALES Date 27.5.41.
Time 1610
Addressed Admiralty C. in C. Home Fleet
Summary of damage. Armament and controls Both forward H.A. directors disabled. Port circuit cut and pedestal canted and strained. Starboard director possibly repairable by ship's staff. After (corrupt group) office destroyed. One "Walrus" aircraft damaged and jettisoned. Both port S.L. sights destroyed. After half of compass platform severely damaged.
Hull. Following extensively damaged. Forward H.A. director supports. After funnel punctured approximately 10 new plates required. Starboard crane xxxxxxxx wrecked. Air intake to X Boiler Room severely damaged. One Boiler Room Fan Impeller and Oil Cooler damaged. M and Q coils damaged. Underwater damage follows after examination.
Hull. Following extensively damaged. Forward H.A. director supports. After funnel punctured approximately 10 new plates required. Starboard crane xxxxxxxx wrecked. Air intake to X Boiler Room severely damaged. One Boiler Room Fan Impeller and Oil Cooler damaged. M and Q coils damaged. Underwater damage follows after examination.
The damage sustained in PRINCE OF WALES in her recent action has now been examined by D.N.C's representative.
SECRET
Subject.. Unexploded Enemy Shell
From .. The Commanding Officer, H.M.S. PRINCE OF WALES
Date .. 8th June, 1941 No. 001.A/1
To .. THE COMMANDER IN CHIEF, HOME FLEET.
(Copies to The Secretary of the Admiralty.
The Commander-in-Chief, Rosyth
During the early morning action on May 24th a heavy hit was felt abreast the Starboard Diesel Room. It was found that the outer air space 184-196, the outer oil fuel tank 184-206, the inner air space 184-194, the starboard diesel tank 184-206 were fill to the crown with oil and water.
2. On Friday 6th June, on pumping out the dry dock a clean hole in the side about 15" diameter was found, a foot above the bilge keel at 187 starboard.
Holes were also found in the light plating forming the sides of the outer oil fuel tank 184-206.
Heavy marking was found on the protective bulkhead but there were no signs of explosion.
3. When the ship's bottom was visible it became apparent that there was no exit hole and a search was made for the shell.
The inner air space 184-194 was pumped out and the shell was found to be lying on the bottom between two frames 190-192 nose forward.
The shell was in good condition with the fuse in place, but without a ballistic cap.
The angle of entry was 10° from forward and the angle of descent (measured from the ship's perpendicular) was from 2° to 4°.
4. Without rough treatment the removal of the shell either upwards or downwards presented difficulty. Finally it was decided to lower it through the bottom.
The shell was lifted, by [..] chain purchases, one inch clear, slung by a quick action grab. Special lifting bands supplied by the Bomb Disposal Officer from H.M.S. COCHRANE were then fitted and screwed firmly round the shell. It was then lowered, slung by the lifting bands and hoisted 5 ft. clear.
Seven sets of supporting blocks were removed from under the protective bulkhead in the dock, and a hole 4 ft. by 2 ft., was burnt under the shell. This necessitated cutting into two bottom plates.
The shell was lowered through this hole on to a rubber tyred ammunition trolley and wheeled aft, where a dockyard crane picked it up and it was then placed in a 'Bomb Disposal Boat' and removed.
5. The diameter of the shell measured just above the driving band was 14.875 inches.
SECRET
Subject.. Unexploded Enemy Shell
From .. The Commanding Officer, H.M.S. PRINCE OF WALES
Date .. 8th June, 1941 No. 001.A/1
To .. THE COMMANDER IN CHIEF, HOME FLEET.
(Copies to The Secretary of the Admiralty.
The Commander-in-Chief, Rosyth
During the early morning action on May 24th a heavy hit was felt abreast the Starboard Diesel Room. It was found that the outer air space 184-196, the outer oil fuel tank 184-206, the inner air space 184-194, the starboard diesel tank 184-206 were fill to the crown with oil and water.
2. On Friday 6th June, on pumping out the dry dock a clean hole in the side about 15" diameter was found, a foot above the bilge keel at 187 starboard.
Holes were also found in the light plating forming the sides of the outer oil fuel tank 184-206.
Heavy marking was found on the protective bulkhead but there were no signs of explosion.
3. When the ship's bottom was visible it became apparent that there was no exit hole and a search was made for the shell.
The inner air space 184-194 was pumped out and the shell was found to be lying on the bottom between two frames 190-192 nose forward.
The shell was in good condition with the fuse in place, but without a ballistic cap.
The angle of entry was 10° from forward and the angle of descent (measured from the ship's perpendicular) was from 2° to 4°.
4. Without rough treatment the removal of the shell either upwards or downwards presented difficulty. Finally it was decided to lower it through the bottom.
The shell was lifted, by [..] chain purchases, one inch clear, slung by a quick action grab. Special lifting bands supplied by the Bomb Disposal Officer from H.M.S. COCHRANE were then fitted and screwed firmly round the shell. It was then lowered, slung by the lifting bands and hoisted 5 ft. clear.
Seven sets of supporting blocks were removed from under the protective bulkhead in the dock, and a hole 4 ft. by 2 ft., was burnt under the shell. This necessitated cutting into two bottom plates.
The shell was lowered through this hole on to a rubber tyred ammunition trolley and wheeled aft, where a dockyard crane picked it up and it was then placed in a 'Bomb Disposal Boat' and removed.
5. The diameter of the shell measured just above the driving band was 14.875 inches.
This ship was in dry-dock at Rosyth in June 1941 having been involved in a sea battle with Bismark, but just six months later she was fighting for her life in the Far East. It is so easy to be critical of the lack of training for the crew but when were they supposed to have this much needed training?
The object of war is not to die for your country but to make the other guy die for his.
― George S. Patton Jr.
― George S. Patton Jr.
The object of war is not to die for your country but to make the other guy die for his.
― George S. Patton Jr.
― George S. Patton Jr.
I could not agree more but war at sea is a bitch..... It is all about sinking ships and running away is considered bad form!!
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia - South of where I'd like to be !
Age: 59
Posts: 4,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"I could not agree more but war at sea is a bitch..... It is all about sinking ships and running away is considered bad form!!"
And getting your main capital ships sunk leaving the whole of your empire open for invasion is not worse ?
Would it not be better in some instances to tactically withdraw and consolidate your defenses where best used ?
And getting your main capital ships sunk leaving the whole of your empire open for invasion is not worse ?
Would it not be better in some instances to tactically withdraw and consolidate your defenses where best used ?
As I read accounts of combat during WWII....I am always amazed at the gallantry of the ordinary Man....and how once caught up in the action...how ordinary Men do such Extraordinary feats.
The battle fought against the Japanese Main Fleet by US Navy Task group Taffy 3 in the Philippines is one that just cannot be beat for such an account.
The idea thata handful of DE's and one or two DD's would take on Battleships, Cruisers, and lots of Destroyers....and persevere is simply amazing. It matters not which Navy they were in....Men like that are the backbone of our military forces.
My comment about gallant sacrifices....which should only be done at the decision of the folks making the sacrifice....is directed at that exact kind of situation.
The majority of the sailors involved would have qualified as citizen soldiers/sailors....war tiime service only. One can only wonder where we find such Men when we need them so.
The battle fought against the Japanese Main Fleet by US Navy Task group Taffy 3 in the Philippines is one that just cannot be beat for such an account.
The idea thata handful of DE's and one or two DD's would take on Battleships, Cruisers, and lots of Destroyers....and persevere is simply amazing. It matters not which Navy they were in....Men like that are the backbone of our military forces.
My comment about gallant sacrifices....which should only be done at the decision of the folks making the sacrifice....is directed at that exact kind of situation.
The majority of the sailors involved would have qualified as citizen soldiers/sailors....war tiime service only. One can only wonder where we find such Men when we need them so.