Pearl Harbor attack

[Rich46yo]

I believe Tora, Tora, Tora was probably the most impressive WW-ll flight movie ever made. The scenes of the Japanese lifting off their carriers, enterring PH airspace were just awesome. I love the scene of the trainer airplane being surrounded by IJN aviation. It was incredible.

TTT is probably in my top 5 favorite war movies of all time.

[SeaSkua]

Originally Posted by ToughOmbre

Kimmel (and Short) were incompetent. They were warned more than once about a potential Japanese attack and did not take the necessary steps to defend Pearl. Marshall's last "war warning" went out ten days (27 November) prior to 7 December. They are not scapegoats in my mind.

TO

Wasn't the defence of HAWAII supposed to be ARMY responsibility?

[syscom3]

Originally Posted by SeaSkua

Wasn't the defence of HAWAII supposed to be ARMY responsibility?

It was a joint Navy and Army affair, with primary defense going to the Navy due to the naval shipyard.

Neither Kimmel nor Short had unified planning meetings, unified C&C and neither knew what each other was doing.

[evangilder]

An couple of interesting inaccuracies in TTT. When the Japanese are flying near Pearl, there is a large cross on the hill. That was erected after the war. There is another scene where you see nurses running on base. Look closely, there is the Arizona Memorial! Not to nit-pick, the rest of the facts were well done, just some Hollywood ****-ups that happen.

[syscom3]

Originally Posted by evangilder

An couple of interesting inaccuracies in TTT. When the Japanese are flying near Pearl, there is a large cross on the hill. That was erected after the war. There is another scene where you see nurses running on base. Look closely, there is the Arizona Memorial! Not to nit-pick, the rest of the facts were well done, just some Hollywood ****-ups that happen.

That isnt nit picking, its just a fact that untill recently, movies could only be historically accurate to a degree.

Imagine the studio asking the navy if they could remove the memorial for a bit?

Nowadays, computer graphics can be used to edit out structures that arent supposed to be there.

[ToughOmbre]

Originally Posted by evangilder

An couple of interesting inaccuracies in TTT. When the Japanese are flying near Pearl, there is a large cross on the hill. That was erected after the war. There is another scene where you see nurses running on base. Look closely, there is the Arizona Memorial! Not to nit-pick, the rest of the facts were well done, just some Hollywood ****-ups that happen.

Yea, just production goofs, every movie has got them, even the great ones. But the historical stuff about the actual attack is pretty much right on.

TO

[Wildcat]

Love the scenes of the Zeros strafing the P40's that are trying to get airborne. Some of the finest action scenes ever filmed IMO.

[syscom3]

Originally Posted by Wildcat

Love the scenes of the Zeros strafing the P40's that are trying to get airborne. Some of the finest action scenes ever filmed IMO.

I think I read somewhere that the shot of the Zero's flying through an explosion, damaged them and nearly sent them crashing.

[ToughOmbre]

Originally Posted by Wildcat

Love the scenes of the Zeros strafing the P40's that are trying to get airborne. Some of the finest action scenes ever filmed IMO.

Wildcat,

Love that scene as well. The "action" was very real.

The P-40 crashing in the flight line was an unplanned accident - it was a life-sized mockup powered by a gasoline engine turning the propeller and steered by using the wheel brakes, just like real airplanes, but was specifically designed not to fly. The aircraft shown was loaded with explosives which were to be detonated by radio control at a specific point down the runway. Stunt actors were strategically located and rehearsed in which way to run. However shortly after the plane began taxiing down the runway it did begin to lift off the ground and turn to the left. The left turn would have taken it into a group of other mockups which had also been wired with explosives, but weren't scheduled to be destroyed until later. The explosives in the first P-40 were detonated on the spot in order to keep it from destroying the other planes, so the explosion occurred in a location the stunt men weren't prepared for. When it looks like they were running for their lives, they really were. This special effect was filmed with multiple camera so that it could be reused in other shots in the film, as were all the major special effects.

TO

[renrich]

The primary responsibility for the protection of the bases at Pearl Harbor belonged to the US Army.

[renrich]

Pg 13, "Pearl Harbor Betrayed" by Michael Gannon. "The Army, which was officially charged with the defense of the fleet and naval station at Pearl, was, in the Navy's view, woefully unequipped to perform that task." " By joint agreement between the War and Navy departments, and by provision of the Navy's war plan (WPL-46), protection of the fleet was the core reason for the Army's considerable presence on Oahu." From the Chief of Staff George Marshall to Lt Gen Walter Short on 7 Feb, 1941 "The fullest protection for the Fleet is THE rather than A (Marshall emphases) major consideration for us." When one thinks about it, it makes sense since the Navy did not man the coast defense guns, the Navy had no troops except for a few Marines to repel invasion, the Navy had no fighters(except one squadron on each carrier and a few Marine AC) to defend against bombers, No bombers except for the Vts and Vsbs on the carriers to bomb an invasion fleet. It was accepted doctrine in the US military at that time that the heavy bomber(mainly B-17s) would be able to bomb enemy warships and transports and repel an invasion. That was the reason the B-17s were in Hawaii and the Philipines, not for strategic bombing purposes.

[freebird]

Originally Posted by renrich

The primary responsibility for the protection of the bases at Pearl Harbor belonged to the US Army.

Almost all of the 29 japanese aircraft lost were from Flak, was the Navy AA more effective than the land-based?

{from Wikipedia}

The defenders were very unprepared. Ammunition lockers were locked, aircraft parked wingtip to wingtip to deter sabotage, guns unmanned (none of the Navy's 5"/38 AA and only a quarter of its machineguns, and only four of 31 Army batteries got in action).

[renrich]

According to this source, after April 29, 1941, each BB had two 50 cal MGs with two cases of ammo continuously manned with two 5 inch AA guns with 15 rds of ammo each also manned. No guns in destroyers or cruisers were manned but by Kimmels orders ammo was in the ready boxes at the guns and the crews normally lived near the guns. The reason the guns on dds and Cas, Cls werent continuously manned was because the crews were too small versus large crews of BBs.

[freebird]

Originally Posted by renrich

According to this source, after April 29, 1941, each BB had two 50 cal MGs with two cases of ammo continuously manned with two 5 inch AA guns with 15 rds of ammo each also manned. No guns in destroyers or cruisers were manned but by Kimmels orders ammo was in the ready boxes at the guns and the crews normally lived near the guns. The reason the guns on dds and Cas, Cls werent continuously manned was because the crews were too small versus large crews of BBs.

"Wiki" references quoted-

The defenders were very unprepared. Ammunition lockers were locked, aircraft parked...., guns unmanned....

<refrences>Parillo, Mark, "The United States in the Pacific", in Higham, Robin, and Harris

Stephen, ''Why Air Forces Fail: The Anatomy of Defeat'' (Lexington: University Press of Kentucky, 2006),

Do you suppose the references mean "unmanned" as in when the first wave hit, but got into action later?

I know the MG's were used, do you have any specific info on the 4" & 5" guns getting into action on the ships?

If the Navy BB guns were manned and the DD & CL guns had "ammo ready", it doesn't sound like Kimmel was unprepared. Rather it seems like Short would get most of the blame, ie Army AA guns not alert, radar not vigilant, early reports (from US aircraft) not forwarded to the Navy base, etc.

What's your take, was it mostly the Army's failing?

[renrich]

freebird, I don't know how credible this book that I am reading now is. It is footnoted and has references and is relatively new(2001) I feel sure the direct quotes are accurate but some of it's inferences may be off base. The early part of the book(I am only a third of the way finished) indicates that Kimmel and Short communicated often and were close to the extent they played golf many Sundays together. I have quite a number of other books that address Pearl but they are packed. I don't give Wikipedia a lot of credibility because of it's superficiality and because I think it just reflects the current popular opinions and you know about opinions. My personal opinion(for what it is worth) is that the US was unprepared from a material point of view for war. The Pacific fleet had already been weakened by sending a number of ships to the Atlantic to help Britain. One interesting fact this book points out that Adm King on Nov. 5, 1941 sent Task Force 1 comprising 2 old BBs, 2 CAs and 3 DDs to the Denmark Strait to intercept Admiral Scheer or possibly Tirpitz, that British intelligence predicted would sortie(Ultra) As it turned out probably luckily for the US it was Scheer that was supposed to sortie but a mechanical kept her in port.(probably those dratted diesels) If Scheer had sortied the fat would have been in the fire because if the US ships had sunk her, Hitler would almost certainly have declared war on the US and Japan would have done the same and Pearl would have been on full alert Dec 7 if the IJN carried out it's plans. Just think about what would have happened if Tirpitz had come out. Anyway the USN and Army was stretched thin everywhere with not enough men and guns to do a decent job anywhere in the Pacific and I believe that Kimmel and Short were just scapegoats.