RE: HBO and WWII (Full Version)

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



Message


TOMLABEL -> RE: HBO and WWII (6/13/2014 1:39:42 AM)

Wow! I've seen pictures of the bridge wing section as displayed and seeing the shell penetration points brings out the incredible violence of the engagement. However, I did not know until you mentioned it that it is aligned directly at Iron Bottom Sound. Fantastic!!!

TOMLABEL




Big B -> RE: HBO and WWII (6/13/2014 2:16:18 AM)

One point of note that has bearing on this game regarding the 1st Naval Battle of Guadalcanal (11/13/42), is that many historians have written for years that it was a confused action that led to a blundering of forces becoming unintentionally entangled in opposing formations.
This is not true at all.

Admiral Callaghan is well documented as regarding his orders (prior to engagement) as a suicide mission, and subsequently deliberately corrected course twice during the early stages of the engagement to ensure knifing through the known Japanese formation at point blank range.

His reasoning was that his two Heavy Cruisers stood no chance against two known Japanese Battleships - unless they closed to 0 range - to assure damage on the Japanese battleships.

Unfortunately, this has been taken as a clue by many that night actions were always confused uncoordinated affairs that could go down unintentionally to ramming range.
This is historically untrue - and a bit of a dis-service to the men that participated in that particular surface action.

Equally untrue, but has acquired the status of "urban knowledge" is the fact that the San Francisco confused the Atlanta for an enemy ship and fired into her.

The truth is that upon a second course correction ordered by Callaghan, the Atlanta with a smaller turning radius than the San Francisco, and the next ship in line and ahead of the San Francisco, turned sharper and drifted into the San Francisco's field of fire while she was engaging the Japanese Battleship Hei...with the result of her rounds drifting into the Atlanta. That was unfortunate friendly fire - but not confusion of targets per-say...

My point being - that unlike WitP/AE, surface actions were not confused point blank affairs. Confusing - as all battles are - yes. Unintentionally drifting to ramming range - you won't find one in the Pacific.




geofflambert -> RE: HBO and WWII (6/13/2014 3:43:11 AM)

That sort of thing is typical. There's an extent to which strategy and tactics are best designed if they take into account these sort of things but prevail anyway. Also in the CW ships that had minimal firepower (cannonwise) were sometimes the most deadly, namely rams. I'm thinking the lore from those CW battles still infuse the Navy College. You would want your DD commanders especially and your cruiser commanders to be aware of this "option" when the circumstances warrant. Guadalcanal was a close run thing, and also a wake-up call.




joey -> RE: HBO and WWII (6/13/2014 5:18:55 PM)

Why does such a HBO series have to based on a surface ship?
I wonder how a miniseries about a submarine would play out?
Perhaps a series based on Dick O'Kane in the Wahoo and later in the Tang.
The events concerning the non functioning torpedoes as a backdrop would certainly add to the suspense.






pmelheck1 -> RE: HBO and WWII (6/14/2014 7:22:53 PM)

I think Dick O'Kane would be great with a bit of info on Dudley Morton to show some of the folks who didn't see the end of the war similar to what was done with John Basilone in the Pacific. Another idea would have been interesting to me would have been to follow a sub sailor, a Naval aviator and a cruiser or battleship sailor with skips between them especially with gaps in combat between the folks being followed.




joey -> RE: HBO and WWII (6/15/2014 1:06:51 AM)

I think following three individuals could cover the entire Pacific theater and be quite interesting.
Too bad no one will ask us. j




Lecivius -> RE: HBO and WWII (6/16/2014 2:45:40 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Big B

One point of note that has bearing on this game regarding the 1st Naval Battle of Guadalcanal (11/13/42), is that many historians have written for years that it was a confused action that led to a blundering of forces becoming unintentionally entangled in opposing formations.
This is not true at all.

Admiral Callaghan is well documented as regarding his orders (prior to engagement) as a suicide mission, and subsequently deliberately corrected course twice during the early stages of the engagement to ensure knifing through the known Japanese formation at point blank range.

His reasoning was that his two Heavy Cruisers stood no chance against two known Japanese Battleships - unless they closed to 0 range - to assure damage on the Japanese battleships.

Unfortunately, this has been taken as a clue by many that night actions were always confused uncoordinated affairs that could go down unintentionally to ramming range.
This is historically untrue - and a bit of a dis-service to the men that participated in that particular surface action.

Equally untrue, but has acquired the status of "urban knowledge" is the fact that the San Francisco confused the Atlanta for an enemy ship and fired into her.

The truth is that upon a second course correction ordered by Callaghan, the Atlanta with a smaller turning radius than the San Francisco, and the next ship in line and ahead of the San Francisco, turned sharper and drifted into the San Francisco's field of fire while she was engaging the Japanese Battleship Hei...with the result of her rounds drifting into the Atlanta. That was unfortunate friendly fire - but not confusion of targets per-say...

My point being - that unlike WitP/AE, surface actions were not confused point blank affairs. Confusing - as all battles are - yes. Unintentionally drifting to ramming range - you won't find one in the Pacific.



I never knew any of this, but I find it eminently plausible. I always wondered why this action was so 'confused'. Thanks for the education [;)]




HansBolter -> RE: HBO and WWII (6/16/2014 4:26:21 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Apollo11


One bit of promising news is that HBO have green-lit Steven Spielberg and Tom Hanks to make their third epic mini-series, this one called ‘Masters of the Sky’ which will be about the 8th Air-Force over Western Europe in WW2.



So it's going to be a combination of 12 O'clock High and Memphis Belle?




witpqs -> RE: HBO and WWII (6/16/2014 5:00:27 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lecivius


quote:

ORIGINAL: Big B

One point of note that has bearing on this game regarding the 1st Naval Battle of Guadalcanal (11/13/42), is that many historians have written for years that it was a confused action that led to a blundering of forces becoming unintentionally entangled in opposing formations.
This is not true at all.

Admiral Callaghan is well documented as regarding his orders (prior to engagement) as a suicide mission, and subsequently deliberately corrected course twice during the early stages of the engagement to ensure knifing through the known Japanese formation at point blank range.

His reasoning was that his two Heavy Cruisers stood no chance against two known Japanese Battleships - unless they closed to 0 range - to assure damage on the Japanese battleships.

Unfortunately, this has been taken as a clue by many that night actions were always confused uncoordinated affairs that could go down unintentionally to ramming range.
This is historically untrue - and a bit of a dis-service to the men that participated in that particular surface action.

Equally untrue, but has acquired the status of "urban knowledge" is the fact that the San Francisco confused the Atlanta for an enemy ship and fired into her.

The truth is that upon a second course correction ordered by Callaghan, the Atlanta with a smaller turning radius than the San Francisco, and the next ship in line and ahead of the San Francisco, turned sharper and drifted into the San Francisco's field of fire while she was engaging the Japanese Battleship Hei...with the result of her rounds drifting into the Atlanta. That was unfortunate friendly fire - but not confusion of targets per-say...

My point being - that unlike WitP/AE, surface actions were not confused point blank affairs. Confusing - as all battles are - yes. Unintentionally drifting to ramming range - you won't find one in the Pacific.



I never knew any of this, but I find it eminently plausible. I always wondered why this action was so 'confused'. Thanks for the education [;)]


I think it was covered well in Hornfischer's Neptune's Inferno. I also read Frank's Guadalcanal around the same time and I forget if it had some mention there as well. Recommend both, by the way.




Apollo11 -> RE: HBO and WWII (6/18/2014 11:21:59 AM)

Hi all,

Semi Off-Topic on this Off-Topic thread... [:D]


Yesterday I watched "The Monuments Men" with wife at home (she wanted to watch it in the cinema but we couldn't make it them)...

Oh my... my wife constantly asked me why I was swearing... [:@]

I simply can't watch Hollywood fantasy historic movies... when I see wrong uniforms with wrong ranks and cars with wrong registration plates and wrong weapons I simply can't be stay silent... [8D]

It is beyond me that big budget movies can't get proper advisors for their movies - it should be so simple... ahh... [8|]


Leo "Apollo11"




blueatoll -> RE: HBO and WWII (6/18/2014 8:31:44 PM)

I'm voting for the USS Patterson. 13 Battle Stars, at Pearl, 1st days of Guadalcanal, at Savo Island (strange ships entering harbor call was from Patterson), convoy duty, the Marianas, Iwo Jima, Okinawa, Leyte Gulf, Saipan, Palua, Yap.

It might be interesting to see the war from the perspective of a small fry who did a heavy lifting job.




Big B -> RE: HBO and WWII (6/19/2014 12:04:02 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: blueatoll

I'm voting for the USS Patterson. 13 Battle Stars, at Pearl, 1st days of Guadalcanal, at Savo Island (strange ships entering harbor call was from Patterson), convoy duty, the Marianas, Iwo Jima, Okinawa, Leyte Gulf, Saipan, Palua, Yap.

It might be interesting to see the war from the perspective of a small fry who did a heavy lifting job.


Here is the list of USN Warships with 15 or more Battle Stars:

WWII Service Awards

USS Enterprise (CV-6)
20 Battle Stars
Presidential Unit Citation
Navy Unit Commendation

USS San Diego (CL-53)
18 Battle Stars

USS San Francisco (CA-38)
17 Battle Stars
Presidential Unit Citation

USS O'Bannon (DD-450)
17 Battle Stars
Presidential Unit Citation

USS New Orleans (CA-32)
17 Battle Stars

USS Minneapolis (CA-36)
17 Battle Stars

USS Maury (DD-401)
16 Battle Stars
Presidential Unit Citation

USS Nicholas (DD-449)
16 Battle Stars
Presidential Unit Citation

USS Buchanan (DD-484)
16 Battle Stars
Presidential Unit Citation

USS Portland (CA-33)
16 Battle Stars
Navy Unit Commendation

USS Russell (DD-414)
16 Battle Stars

USS Saufley (DD-465)
16 Battle Stars

USS Taylor (DD-468)
15 Battle Stars
Navy Unit Commendation

USS Thresher (SS-200)
15 Battle Stars
Navy Unit Commendation

USS North Carolina (BB-55)
15 Battle Stars

USS Morris (DD-417)
15 Battle Stars

USS Fletcher (DD-445)
15 Battle Stars

USS Narwhal (SS-167)
15 Battle Stars




Buckrock -> RE: HBO and WWII (6/19/2014 6:16:43 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Big B
Admiral Callaghan is well documented as regarding his orders (prior to engagement) as a suicide mission, and subsequently deliberately corrected course twice during the early stages of the engagement to ensure knifing through the known Japanese formation at point blank range.

His reasoning was that his two Heavy Cruisers stood no chance against two known Japanese Battleships - unless they closed to 0 range - to assure damage on the Japanese battleships.


Out of curiousity, do you have a source that confirms Callaghan's own reasoning for how he intended to fight the battle? I didn't think there were any.

And I'm not sure his only option to deal with any expected Japanese BB's lay with the guns of his two CAs used at point-blank range. Callaghan also had search radar and some 81 torpedoes on his lighter ships to try his hand at setting up a surprise strike that didn't require point-blank range. And if you threw in FC/FD directed supporting fire from Callaghan's 3 main cruisers, you'd have a light force night attack almost straight out of the USN doctrine playbook for the time.




Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.765625