Pearl Harbor attack

syscom3 · 01-09-2008, 02:24 PM

The problem was both Short and Kimmel were still in peace time mode of thinking.

Why didnt Kimmel have the PBY's searching all points of the compass?

Why didnt Short have a squadron or two on ready alert from a couple of dispersal fields?

renrich · 01-09-2008, 02:30 PM

According to Gannon reports by gunnery officers indicated that West Virginia returned fire immediately with mgs and all batteries within 5 minutes. No log is availble for Arizona. California ready mgs immediately, her mgs in the foretop and maintop in 3 to 4 minutes and the 5 inchers in about two minutes. Other BBs similar times. Here is the fly in the ointment. The 50 cal mgs have somewhat limited knockdown power and range. The 1.1 quads heated up jammed and had feed problems. My uncles were CGMs on CAs and at that stage of the war they had to estimate the range of the AC and it's bearing and course, set the fuse on the shell, slam it into the breech, fire it and the projectile either had to hit the target directly or else the fuse would set off the charge when the estimated range was reached. Duh, have you ever tried to shoot doves with a 22 rifle? There were no 20 mm Oerlikons or 40 mm Bofors until later in the war.

renrich · 01-09-2008, 02:47 PM

According to quotes from Richmond Kelly Turner and Nimitz there were only enough planes with the range to conduct a full compass sweep for a period of time of only several days in November and December. Prior to that time there were not enough planes period. Kimmel had been promised an additional 100 PBYs but they were allocated to Britain instead.

renrich · 01-09-2008, 03:23 PM

Couple of other interesting facts. Prior to and during December 1941, Kimmel was not receiving "Magic" intercepts. Of course when Nimitz relieved Kimmel he began receiving "Magic" which enabled him to plan for Midway. On Dec. 7, 1941, Hickam Field had only six B17s in operating condition while Clark Field in the PI had 35, the largest concentration in the world. This was a result of a belief in the US High Command that a strengthening of our forces in the PI could keep Japan from striking south to Malaysia.

freebird · 01-09-2008, 04:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by renrich

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. 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.

Probably just as well not to have been in port that day anyways....

I don't trust Wiki that much either, but if the give specific numbers & cite references I would take that as more valuable than "opinions" (the Navy could have done this, the Army should have done that...)

It seems that very few of the 29 destroyers or CL were hit, are they docked some distance from Ford Island?

renrich · 01-09-2008, 05:03 PM

Yes, most of the cruisers and DDs were moored in different locations from the BBs. The CL Helena(torpedoed) was moored where a BB had been before moved to a drydock. The CL Raleigh(torpedoed) was moored in front of BB Utah which was torpedoed. The only DDs destroyed were in a drydock with a BB, Pennsylvania.

renrich · 01-13-2008, 09:14 AM

Since the US had broken the Japanese diplomatic code(Magic) they were reading all messages to and from Jap consulates. A short time before 7 Dec the Japanese Consulate was asked to report if the US had in place barrage balloons over PH and whether they were using torpedo nets on the BBs. The answer was negative on both questions. The US decoded those messages but since Kimmel was not in on the secret of "Magic" he was not informed about those messages. Of couse they were prime indicators of a bombing and or torpedo attack on the fleet.

d_bader · 01-16-2008, 04:13 PM

Didn't the British inform the U.S about a future attack on Pearl Harbour by the Japanese?

Agent Tricycle was sent to discover information on torpedo netting etc by the Germans to give to a Japanese diplomat.

If this is corect, surely ignoring a trade partner was a stupid thing to do and possibly the American mentality that they would not be attacked?

syscom3 · 01-16-2008, 04:28 PM

The British were as clueless about the attack on Pearl Harbor as the US was.

The mentality at that time was an attack on pearl was possible. But it made more sense for the main thrust of a potential attack to be made on the Philipines.

Two things the RN and USN intel personell were sure of:
a) The Japanese carriers were "missing".
b) There was a Japanese invasion fleet that had departed from Vietnam and was enroute "somewhere".

Everything pointed to an attack on the PI.

freebird · 01-16-2008, 04:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by syscom3

The British were as clueless about the attack on Pearl Harbor as the US was.

The mentality at that time was an attack on pearl was possible. But it made more sense for the main thrust of a potential attack to be made on the Philipines.

Two things the RN and USN intel personell were sure of:
a) The Japanese carriers were "missing".
b) There was a Japanese invasion fleet that had departed from Vietnam and was enroute "somewhere".

Everything pointed to an attack on the PI.

Agreed, it was quite a surprise that pearl was attacked. Am I correct that the "Magic" intercepts indicated that Japan was planning for war, but not specific targets? In any event, the warnings that Short got earlier shold have prompted better preparation.

d_bader · 01-17-2008, 02:55 AM

I shall hunt around for the facts, but agent tricycle had to do a questionnaire many pages long about the defences at Pearl Harbor. These however were dismissed by the Americans and ignored.......