Armed Merchantmen

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Armed Merchantmen

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> Armed Merchantmen

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Armed Merchantmen - 7/15/2007 2:06:22 PM

highblooded

Posts: 67
Joined: 5/27/2004
Status: offline

Hello,
Something I have been wondering about for awhile, when did the major powers arm their merchant fleets?
I can understand that the UK and Commonwealth would have armed there APs and AKs or at least most of them (ships going between Australia and the US should not have needed it). How about the Dutch?
Japan had recalled all/most of its shipping prior to the Pacific War and the IJN requisitioned much of it, but did they really arm all of them before the war?
The US was not prepared yet, did they really arm so many of them before the war?
In stock scenarios it appears that all are armed, in RHS maybe 75% of US seem to be armed.
Thanks for any comments.

Post #: 1

RE: Armed Merchantmen - 7/15/2007 3:44:10 PM

rtrapasso

Posts: 22653
Joined: 9/3/2002
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: highblooded

Hello,
Something I have been wondering about for awhile, when did the major powers arm their merchant fleets?
I can understand that the UK and Commonwealth would have armed there APs and AKs or at least most of them (ships going between Australia and the US should not have needed it). How about the Dutch?
Japan had recalled all/most of its shipping prior to the Pacific War and the IJN requisitioned much of it, but did they really arm all of them before the war?
The US was not prepared yet, did they really arm so many of them before the war?
In stock scenarios it appears that all are armed, in RHS maybe 75% of US seem to be armed.
Thanks for any comments.

The war had been going on since 1939, and the U-boat menace was real. Most of the US ships were armed well before Dec 1941 due to this, not the IJN threat.

(in reply to highblooded)

Post #: 2

RE: Armed Merchantmen - 7/15/2007 7:45:47 PM

JWE

Posts: 6580
Joined: 7/19/2005
Status: offline

Hello rt,
Due to the Neutrality Laws, US merchant ships were required to be unarmed. Congress finally passed the the authorization to arm merchant vessels in October 1941. Most US merchies remained unarmed for a long time, even after December 1941. What guns there were went to newer construction & to merchant ships acquired as naval auxiliaries.

(in reply to rtrapasso)

Post #: 3

RE: Armed Merchantmen - 7/15/2007 9:45:37 PM

rtrapasso

Posts: 22653
Joined: 9/3/2002
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JWE

Hello rt,
Due to the Neutrality Laws, US merchant ships were required to be unarmed. Congress finally passed the the authorization to arm merchant vessels in October 1941. Most US merchies remained unarmed for a long time, even after December 1941. What guns there were went to newer construction & to merchant ships acquired as naval auxiliaries.

Despite the Neutrality Act, the US started in motion plans to arm merchant ships as early as April 1941. Some ships got around the restriction by re-flagging (i.e. Lend-Lease to Great Britain).

It is true they never had enough resources to go around (at least in crews for the guns) until very late in the war.

See "Adminstrative History of Arming of Merchant Ships/Arming of Merchant Ships and Naval Armed Guard Service" (scanned copy available at
http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USN/Admin-Hist/172-ArmedGuards/index.html#index

(in reply to JWE)

Post #: 4

RE: Armed Merchantmen - 7/15/2007 9:54:15 PM

witpqs

Posts: 26087
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: highblooded
In stock scenarios it appears that all are armed, in RHS maybe 75% of US seem to be armed.
Thanks for any comments.

I'm unsure about the percentages but in both CHS and RHS you will see lots of upgrades to weapons on merchant ships and tankers as they get better AA weapons. Some of those (especially 3, 4, 5 inch can be used against subs on the surface). It seems to me that a good number start unarmed or with virtually nothing.

(in reply to highblooded)

Post #: 5

RE: Armed Merchantmen - 7/15/2007 11:48:51 PM

m10bob

Posts: 8622
Joined: 11/3/2002
From: Dismal Seepage Indiana
Status: offline

On Sept 19,1941 the Danish ship Pink Star (with new Panamanian registry to contravene the Neutrality act) was torpedoed and sunk whilst being escorted by RCN escort warships.
On Sept 30th, FDR in a press conference mentioned the sinking and pointed out that the ships first intended destination was Iceland, to supply American troops already there.
He further pointed out most of the cargo was foodstuffs, and FDR down-played the fact that a small portion of the cargo was indeed munitions bound for the U.K.
It is now believed FDR used this speech to soften the public and congess to his speech 9 days later to revise the Neutrality act to allow for armed merchantmen.
The clincher came on September 27,1941 when the American tanker I.C.White was torpedoed,(again, Panamanian registry, same reason), with 3 lives lost.
The ship had been lit at night, flying the Panamanian flag,which itself was illuminated with a searchlight.
All but 3 of the 37 crew were American citizens and since these incidents happened after FDR's "shoot-on-sight" speech, Americans had become aware and sensative to sinkins of "their" ships and injury to fellow Americans.
On Oct 9th, FDR went to congress and asked for certain restrictions of the Neutrality act be repealed, amongst them the (till then) inability of merchantment to be armed in self-defense.
Even the New York Times felt not arming the ships was as valuable as giving Hitler 1000 submarines.

Source:HITLER vs. ROOSEVELT, Thos Bailey and Paul Ryan, the Free Press,1979

_____________________________

(in reply to witpqs)

Post #: 6

RE: Armed Merchantmen - 7/16/2007 12:43:20 AM

wild_Willie2

Posts: 2934
Joined: 10/8/2004
From: Arnhem (holland) yes a bridge to far...
Status: offline

Oops, wrong tab...

< Message edited by wild_Willie2 -- 7/16/2007 12:46:55 AM >

_____________________________

In vinum illic est sapientia , in matera illic est vires , in aqua illic es bacteria.

In wine there is wisdom, in beer there is strength, in water there are bacteria.

(in reply to m10bob)

Post #: 7

RE: Armed Merchantmen - 7/16/2007 8:16:00 AM

JWE

Posts: 6580
Joined: 7/19/2005
Status: offline

Most merchant ships started the war with virtually nothing. FDR convinced the WPB and Maritime Commission to add reinforcement stringers to current construction in April 1940, but this just defined placement options. Over 75% of the US merchant fleet (>1000 tons) was built between 1919 and 1927 and had to have shipyard downtime for weapon station reinforcement (about 8 days); that is if the ship could be spared from service and if weapons were available. Most US merchant ships did not receive armament till about June/July 1942, except for new construction or high value vessels that could stand the yard downtime.

In October, 1942, the Japanese high-speed reinforcement convoy to the 'Canal was made up of several of Japan's largest, most modern, and fastest merchant vessels. These were virtually unarmed except for machine guns. They were also still in house colors; black hulls, red cove stripe, white topsides, Yamashita Lines funnel colors. Our pilots noted and reported this and you can still see this on a wreck dive. i.e., even Japan's most highly valued vessels were substantially unarmed and painted black, white and bright red as late as October 1942.

Dutch KPM ships were unarmed until those KPM vessels acquired by the Australians for the New Guinea run received machine guns on the bridge wings.

Most merchies should start with nothing, although I see nothing wrong with giving them a few Brownings or Lewis guns.

(in reply to witpqs)

Post #: 8

RE: Armed Merchantmen - 7/16/2007 7:28:18 PM

m10bob

Posts: 8622
Joined: 11/3/2002
From: Dismal Seepage Indiana
Status: offline

Don't remember stock WITP much, since I've played CHS once thru to approx 10/44 and many (many) versions of RHS in testing, I can assure you RHS starts (correctly) with most merchant ships unarmed or under-armed.
Love the game, love all the mods.

_____________________________

(in reply to JWE)

Post #: 9

RE: Armed Merchantmen - 7/16/2007 8:07:53 PM

rtrapasso

Posts: 22653
Joined: 9/3/2002
Status: offline

i play CHS - and i think it is similarly modded to give correct armaments...

(in reply to m10bob)

Post #: 10

RE: Armed Merchantmen - 7/16/2007 8:10:21 PM

m10bob

Posts: 8622
Joined: 11/3/2002
From: Dismal Seepage Indiana
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: rtrapasso

i play CHS - and i think it is similarly modded to give correct armaments...

Oh...I have no doubt..

_____________________________

(in reply to rtrapasso)

Post #: 11

RE: Armed Merchantmen - 7/16/2007 8:23:01 PM

rtrapasso

Posts: 22653
Joined: 9/3/2002
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: m10bob

quote:

ORIGINAL: rtrapasso

i play CHS - and i think it is similarly modded to give correct armaments...

Oh...I have no doubt..

Ah, well, sometimes i forget that Vanilla WITP is not similarly set up, and so when people question why such and such is happening, i am puzzled until brought back to remember the reality of Vanilla WITP (usually with a loud bump).