Dec 7th, Pearl Harbour - Page 3 - Aircraft of World War II

Hunter368 · 12-20-2005, 09:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by syscom3

Japan had the capacity to hold us off till late 1943. After that time, the Allied forces would have had the quantatative and qualitative edge and Japan would be on borrowed time.

Once the B29's were available in quantity in summer of 1944, then we had the ways of striking any Japanese force/base in the PTO with impunity.

Totally agree. The writing was on the wall for the Japanese.

DerAdlerIstGelandet · 12-21-2005, 04:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wmaxt

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hunter368

The Japanese had great battles early and then bad later. They were very hot and cold, lol.

Like I pointed out earlier even at Pearl they cut and ran. Had the third strike been launched we would have been so limited we would have lost Coral Sea (no fuel/support for the early missions), Midway (no Yorktown minimum support from Pearl) The possible loss of Austrailia too.

They did the perfect job at Pearl to make sure they lost - they riled us up and left us operational.

wmaxt

Isnt the reason for them pulling off bad intelligence though? At Pearl they did not know where the Carriers were so they had get out before they could theoretically strike back.

syscom3 · 12-21-2005, 04:47 PM

Given the state of the art recon abilities for both the US and the IJN at the time, it would have been impossible for them to keep track of the carriers without giving up their planned element of surprise.

wmaxt · 12-21-2005, 05:58 PM

I don't think it mattered we only had 3 carriers in the Pacific, and only one that was closely based at Pearl, so at the worst its 1 or two to 6. Our main fleet was sunk at Pearl it was criminal (from the Japanese POV) on Nagumo's part to leave with the job only partialy complete and little real chance of a US counter attack.

My point is that the Japanese could have made it Much Much more difficult if not barely possible for us to retake the Pacific if only, they had just completed their planed operations. We didn't win many/most of the major critical battles the Japanese just quit and gave them to us.

wmaxt

Hunter368 · 12-22-2005, 12:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wmaxt

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hunter368

The Japanese had great battles early and then bad later. They were very hot and cold, lol.

Like I pointed out earlier even at Pearl they cut and ran. Had the third strike been launched we would have been so limited we would have lost Coral Sea (no fuel/support for the early missions), Midway (no Yorktown minimum support from Pearl) The possible loss of Austrailia too.

They did the perfect job at Pearl to make sure they lost - they riled us up and left us operational.

wmaxt

One thing we have to all keep in mind also is that still the world was still thinking (for the most part anyway) that the battleship ruled the sea, it did not. The Japanese although were very disappointed that they missed the carriers (and would of made it a clean sweep), they were very very happy with the heavily damage to the surface fleet. They heavily damaged it at almost no cost, big win they were thinking. Now if they had to do it again with say another 6-12 month carrier experence under their belts, they would of realized that the real prizes were the carriers. The surface fleet was very much the secondary target.

syscom3 · 12-22-2005, 03:37 PM

For the record, here are the locations of all six of the US carriers.

Lexington At sea enroute to Midway Island

Enterprise At sea near Oahu

Saratoga In port at San Diego

Wasp In Atlantic

Hornet In Atlantic

Yorktown In Atlantic

DerAdlerIstGelandet · 12-26-2005, 11:34 AM

I still stand by the firm belief that I have stated before that even if they had gotten the Carriers and all the Oil stocks at Pearl it would not have mattered one bit when it comes to the outcome of the war. The US soon showed the world what its production capabilities were (All laid down or completed after Pearl Harbor:

Battleships: 8
Battlecruisers: 3
Aircraft Carriers: 27
Light Fleet Carriers: 56
Heavy Cruisers: 17
Light Cruisers: 40
Destroyers: 319
Destroyers Escort Type: 332
Submarines: 193
Mine Sweepers: 378
Frigates: 112

Not included are the Fleet Auxillaries, Patrol Boats, Transports, etc...

All of this info taken from Janes Fighting ships 1946 edition.

Basically what I am getting at is, no matter what the outcome of Pearl Harbor the US was only slightly hurt and would recover faster and quicker than anyone. Even if the Carriers and the Oil Reserves there had been hit, it would not have changed the outcome.

Gnomey · 12-26-2005, 01:43 PM

Agreed Alder, once the US war machine got started there was very little that could stop it.

syscom3 · 12-26-2005, 02:27 PM

The only difference in the course of events is what would have happened in 1942 and 1943.

Strategy would be way different. If anything, the three Atlantic carriers would have been sent to the Pacific immediatly early in 1942 rather than soread out over several months.

DerAdlerIstGelandet · 12-26-2005, 02:31 PM

I agree. The Carriers would have been sent over sooner. The British allready had Carriers in the Atlantic so that would free up the US Carriers to go to the PTO.

Hunter368 · 12-28-2005, 02:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DerAdlerIstGelandet

I still stand by the firm belief that I have stated before that even if they had gotten the Carriers and all the Oil stocks at Pearl it would not have mattered one bit when it comes to the outcome of the war. The US soon showed the world what its production capabilities were (All laid down or completed after Pearl Harbor:

Battleships: 8
Battlecruisers: 3
Aircraft Carriers: 27
Light Fleet Carriers: 56
Heavy Cruisers: 17
Light Cruisers: 40
Destroyers: 319
Destroyers Escort Type: 332
Submarines: 193
Mine Sweepers: 378
Frigates: 112

Not included are the Fleet Auxillaries, Patrol Boats, Transports, etc...

All of this info taken from Janes Fighting ships 1946 edition.

Basically what I am getting at is, no matter what the outcome of Pearl Harbor the US was only slightly hurt and would recover faster and quicker than anyone. Even if the Carriers and the Oil Reserves there had been hit, it would not have changed the outcome.

100% agree

syscom3 · 12-28-2005, 12:08 PM

Just trivia..... One of the reasons the Japanese attacked in late 1941 through early 1942 was that the IJN knew that in 1943, the USN would be receiving the new warships that were begun to have been built in 1940/41.

The IJN knew that they had to have all possible gains consolidated by then.

DerAdlerIstGelandet · 12-29-2005, 10:32 AM

Yeap but I still beleive that they would have rather attacked at a time more of there choosing.

12-21-2005, 04:47 PM	#33
syscom3 Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Orange County, CA Posts: 10,280	Given the state of the art recon abilities for both the US and the IJN at the time, it would have been impossible for them to keep track of the carriers without giving up their planned element of surprise. __________________ "Pilot to copilot..... what are those mountain goats doing up here in the clouds?"

12-22-2005, 03:37 PM	#36
syscom3 Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Orange County, CA Posts: 10,280	For the record, here are the locations of all six of the US carriers. Lexington At sea enroute to Midway Island Enterprise At sea near Oahu Saratoga In port at San Diego Wasp In Atlantic Hornet In Atlantic Yorktown In Atlantic __________________ "Pilot to copilot..... what are those mountain goats doing up here in the clouds?"

12-26-2005, 11:34 AM	#37
DerAdlerIstGelandet Der Crewchief Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Ansbach, Germany Posts: 33,152	I still stand by the firm belief that I have stated before that even if they had gotten the Carriers and all the Oil stocks at Pearl it would not have mattered one bit when it comes to the outcome of the war. The US soon showed the world what its production capabilities were (All laid down or completed after Pearl Harbor: Battleships: 8 Battlecruisers: 3 Aircraft Carriers: 27 Light Fleet Carriers: 56 Heavy Cruisers: 17 Light Cruisers: 40 Destroyers: 319 Destroyers Escort Type: 332 Submarines: 193 Mine Sweepers: 378 Frigates: 112 Not included are the Fleet Auxillaries, Patrol Boats, Transports, etc... All of this info taken from Janes Fighting ships 1946 edition. Basically what I am getting at is, no matter what the outcome of Pearl Harbor the US was only slightly hurt and would recover faster and quicker than anyone. Even if the Carriers and the Oil Reserves there had been hit, it would not have changed the outcome. __________________ fly boy:"isnt that the first jet bomber becasue i have flown one in a flight sim before and i know how it handles"[/I]

12-26-2005, 01:43 PM	#38
Gnomey "World Traveller" Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Royal Deeside/St Andrews, Scotland, UK Posts: 15,220	Agreed Alder, once the US war machine got started there was very little that could stop it. __________________ "Success is not Final, Failure is not Fatal, it is the Courage to Continue that Counts" Sir Winston Churchill "To him the People of the World Largely owe the Freedom and Liberties they Enjoy Today" Enscription on Hugh Dowding's (AOC Fighter Command 1936-40) statue in London WW2 Talk: A WW2 Discussion Forum My Photo Collections on Flickr

12-26-2005, 02:27 PM	#39
syscom3 Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Orange County, CA Posts: 10,280	The only difference in the course of events is what would have happened in 1942 and 1943. Strategy would be way different. If anything, the three Atlantic carriers would have been sent to the Pacific immediatly early in 1942 rather than soread out over several months. __________________ "Pilot to copilot..... what are those mountain goats doing up here in the clouds?"

12-21-2005, 05:58 PM	#34
wmaxt Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Boise, Idaho Posts: 1,175	I don't think it mattered we only had 3 carriers in the Pacific, and only one that was closely based at Pearl, so at the worst its 1 or two to 6. Our main fleet was sunk at Pearl it was criminal (from the Japanese POV) on Nagumo's part to leave with the job only partialy complete and little real chance of a US counter attack. My point is that the Japanese could have made it Much Much more difficult if not barely possible for us to retake the Pacific if only, they had just completed their planed operations. We didn't win many/most of the major critical battles the Japanese just quit and gave them to us. wmaxt

12-26-2005, 02:31 PM	#40
DerAdlerIstGelandet Der Crewchief Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Ansbach, Germany Posts: 33,152	I agree. The Carriers would have been sent over sooner. The British allready had Carriers in the Atlantic so that would free up the US Carriers to go to the PTO. __________________ fly boy:"isnt that the first jet bomber becasue i have flown one in a flight sim before and i know how it handles"[/I]

12-28-2005, 12:08 PM	#42
syscom3 Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Orange County, CA Posts: 10,280	Just trivia..... One of the reasons the Japanese attacked in late 1941 through early 1942 was that the IJN knew that in 1943, the USN would be receiving the new warships that were begun to have been built in 1940/41. The IJN knew that they had to have all possible gains consolidated by then. __________________ "Pilot to copilot..... what are those mountain goats doing up here in the clouds?"

12-29-2005, 10:32 AM	#43
DerAdlerIstGelandet Der Crewchief Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Ansbach, Germany Posts: 33,152	Yeap but I still beleive that they would have rather attacked at a time more of there choosing. __________________ fly boy:"isnt that the first jet bomber becasue i have flown one in a flight sim before and i know how it handles"[/I]

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode