slightly OT - question re Kaigun (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition



Message

iaidoka2 -> slightly OT - question re Kaigun (1/21/2010 1:35:48 AM)

Hi all

I am currently reading Kaigun by Evans and Peattie and what an amazing book it is!

On page 242, in the discussion of the IJN development of torpedo boats, they have two line drawings of the Tomozuru. However, I am not quite sure of the relevance of the two drawings because they are different. I assume one is an earlier version and the other a more later development.

Can any of you knowledgeable grognards help?

Thanks



Q-Ball -> RE: slightly OT - question re Kaigun (1/21/2010 4:01:00 AM)

The top drawing is the original weapon layout of Tomozuru, with 4 torpedo tubes and armamant in enclosed turrets, with the aft being a double. The lower drawing is after she capsized in 1934; 2 of the torpedo tubes are removed, the turret hoods are removed (as well as the turret machinery) and replaced by hand-operated shields, and overall she is less top-heavy. She also had some ballast added, and lost 2 kts of speed. That was the end of trying to cram destroyer armament on 600 tons displacement.

The importance of her capsizing to the IJN is on the page. And everyone else who does not have this EXCELLENT book will have to go get it and read the rest of the story!!!!!!



Bradley7735 -> RE: slightly OT - question re Kaigun (1/21/2010 5:15:27 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

The top drawing is the original weapon layout of Tomozuru, with 4 torpedo tubes and armamant in enclosed turrets, with the aft being a double. The lower drawing is after she capsized in 1934; 2 of the torpedo tubes are removed, the turret hoods are removed (as well as the turret machinery) and replaced by hand-operated shields, and overall she is less top-heavy. She also had some ballast added, and lost 2 kts of speed. That was the end of trying to cram destroyer armament on 600 tons displacement.

The importance of her capsizing to the IJN is on the page. And everyone else who does not have this EXCELLENT book will have to go get it and read the rest of the story!!!!!!


Thanks Paul Harvey!

[;)]



iaidoka2 -> RE: slightly OT - question re Kaigun (1/21/2010 7:26:55 AM)

Thanks mate.

And yes, if you don't have it, get it - it is a wonderfully written, engaging account of the history of the IJN.



bush -> RE: slightly OT - question re Kaigun (1/21/2010 2:36:15 PM)

It is very good and inspired to ask Santa for SUNBURST (about the development of IJN air doctrine), also by Peattie. Since Santa realized I was such a good boy this year he saw fit to bring me 8 great military reads and I haven't gotten to Sunburst yet. I have leafed through it several times though, and it looks super. I am leaning towards that being my next read.



Q-Ball -> RE: slightly OT - question re Kaigun (1/21/2010 2:47:17 PM)


SUNBURST is kind of a letdown after KAIGUN. It isn't near as good IMO. It's interesting enough anyway, but just not near as good. It just doesn't go into the depth that KAIGUN does, and in some respects covers the same ground.

The best books out there from the Japanese Side IMO are Kaigun and Shattered Sword. Everyone here has Shattered Sword, but it seems fewer have Kaigun.



John 3rd -> RE: slightly OT - question re Kaigun (1/21/2010 3:14:33 PM)

Kaigun is more of a must-read then Shattered Sword in my view.  Shattered is simply magnificent but Kaigun lays out the entire development, tactical advancements, and doctine of the Imperial Fleet.  The large number of illustrations and consise writing is a MUST HAVE!  The book is expensive but well worth it.

Sunburst was a let down.  Still interesting but not near so groundbreaking.

Does anyone know of any new Imperial Navy perspective histories coming out?



Iridium -> RE: slightly OT - question re Kaigun (1/21/2010 8:51:11 PM)

Nothing new on the IJN side of things but I did buy and currently reading Japan's Imperial Army by Drea. It covers the same build up and modernization etc. that Kaigun does for the Navy. It starts with the army's beginning and describes how their doctrine, outlook on the world and philosophies were developed. I've been fairly impressed by it so far.



Nikademus -> RE: slightly OT - question re Kaigun (1/21/2010 9:46:43 PM)

hmmmmm.......added to wish list. [:D]

Japanese army was an interesting subject in books on Russo Japanese War and Nomanhan.






Q-Ball -> RE: slightly OT - question re Kaigun (1/21/2010 10:18:24 PM)

quote:

Japan's Imperial Army by Drea


+1, have to look into that! Kaigun for the grunts in the IJA! Probably talks about why their tanks were so terrible.....



Iridium -> RE: slightly OT - question re Kaigun (1/21/2010 10:21:41 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

quote:

Japan's Imperial Army by Drea


+1, have to look into that! Kaigun for the grunts in the IJA! Probably talks about why their tanks were so terrible.....


Off hand I'd say the tank issue was due to a logical weight restriction due to the poor road qualities and lack of modern bridges in China and other parts of Asia. Japan conciously limited their tank designs to 10 and 15 ton models at first.



Nikademus -> RE: slightly OT - question re Kaigun (1/21/2010 10:29:00 PM)

yup. biggest requirement for Japanese during the mid/late 30's was for a reliable AFV, not piles of armor or big guns. In China and Manchuria they worked well and were not all that different from other nation's early tank design types. When Nomanhan gave a glimpse of the more mechanized future the more insightful of the Japanese army were not blind to it, but by then priority was firmly behind the airforce and navy, and the Army was left to make up for it with "spirit"




Iridium -> RE: slightly OT - question re Kaigun (1/22/2010 12:11:44 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Nikademus
and the Army was left to make up for it with "spirit"


Interesting that you would mention that, Japan's Imperial Army states that since the Boshin War the newly made army saw inferior traditional samurai armies inflict fairly large casualties on the armies with rifles. Because of this the new army heads decided it was "spirit" which allowed said forces to accomplish what they had and they eventually made it one of the founding principles of the army.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.09375