OT: Another What If? (Full Version)

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



Message

Footslogger -> OT: Another What If? (12/18/2017 1:13:13 AM)

Merry Christmas guys.

So in this one forum. There was a discussion that the Japanese Invasion of Midway was fool hardy, even if the Japanese
had won the carrier battle. What say Ye?

[sm=sign0006.gif]



geofflambert -> RE: OT: Another What If? (12/18/2017 1:36:23 AM)

What would they do with Midway? Terrorize French Frigate shoals? Waylay crab boats headed for the Bering Sea? For the US, Midway is a jumping off point to nowhere. The US bypassed Truk and Kwajalein. Would you think as the Japanese that if you took Midway you would be forcing the US to take it back? Guess again.



geofflambert -> RE: OT: Another What If? (12/18/2017 2:00:09 AM)

The "Midway Invasion" is halfway an example of Napoleon's dictum from Austerlitz. "Do not interrupt your enemy when they are destroying themselves." Napoleon was observing the Austro-Russian army in parade doing the opposite of what they should have been doing and was calming his staff. 'Just watch, then strike'. I say 'halfway' because Nimitz et al weren't watching a parade. They were still trying to figure out exactly what the Japanese were doing. They didn't know the KB would make pointless airstrikes on a target not worth the bother and by that action itself exposing themselves to destruction. Cannae, Alesia, Agincourt, Austerlitz and Midway. Attacking a land target (Midway) that isn't worth attacking at all cedes any advantage you might have thought you had. Your enemy has no land targets to attack, even if they were worth attacking. If you know or suppose you might be headed into a carrier battle, do what is appropriate for a carrier battle, and nothing else.



Mundy -> RE: OT: Another What If? (12/18/2017 2:32:35 AM)

They didn't bring enough troops. Even had their carriers won, they probably wouldn't have beaten the defenses. The appendix in Shattered Sword discusses this pretty thoroughly.



crsutton -> RE: OT: Another What If? (12/18/2017 4:48:58 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Footslogger

Merry Christmas guys.

So in this one forum. There was a discussion that the Japanese Invasion of Midway was fool hardy, even if the Japanese
had won the carrier battle. What say Ye?

[sm=sign0006.gif]


There were actually more defenders on Midway Island than they had in their invasion force. And the Japanese did not really have the ability or landing craft to make a landing on a well defended beach. I don't think they would have made it ashore.



BBfanboy -> RE: OT: Another What If? (12/18/2017 6:43:42 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

The "Midway Invasion" is halfway an example of Napoleon's dictum from Austerlitz. "Do not interrupt your enemy when they are destroying themselves." Napoleon was observing the Austro-Russian army in parade doing the opposite of what they should have been doing and was calming his staff. 'Just watch, then strike'. I say 'halfway' because Nimitz et al weren't watching a parade. They were still trying to figure out exactly what the Japanese were doing. They didn't know the KB would make pointless airstrikes on a target not worth the bother and by that action itself exposing themselves to destruction. Cannae, Alesia, Agincourt, Austerlitz and Midway. Attacking a land target (Midway) that isn't worth attacking at all cedes any advantage you might have thought you had. Your enemy has no land targets to attack, even if they were worth attacking. If you know or suppose you might be headed into a carrier battle, do what is appropriate for a carrier battle, and nothing else.

Be fair now. The Japanese wanted Midway so they could extend their naval search to prevent another Doolittle raid on their home islands. Yamamoto did not want this operation but it was forced on him. He wanted to wait for Shokaku and Zuikaku before striking anywhere.
And the Japanese thought that Yorktown had been sunk at Coral Sea so they thought the chances of US carriers opposing them were slim.

It seems clear from the other posts here that the Japanese had poor intel on what they would be facing at Midway. But they did have a lot of battleship power trailing their carriers which could have been brought up to bombard.



crsutton -> RE: OT: Another What If? (12/18/2017 2:33:59 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

The "Midway Invasion" is halfway an example of Napoleon's dictum from Austerlitz. "Do not interrupt your enemy when they are destroying themselves." Napoleon was observing the Austro-Russian army in parade doing the opposite of what they should have been doing and was calming his staff. 'Just watch, then strike'. I say 'halfway' because Nimitz et al weren't watching a parade. They were still trying to figure out exactly what the Japanese were doing. They didn't know the KB would make pointless airstrikes on a target not worth the bother and by that action itself exposing themselves to destruction. Cannae, Alesia, Agincourt, Austerlitz and Midway. Attacking a land target (Midway) that isn't worth attacking at all cedes any advantage you might have thought you had. Your enemy has no land targets to attack, even if they were worth attacking. If you know or suppose you might be headed into a carrier battle, do what is appropriate for a carrier battle, and nothing else.

Be fair now. The Japanese wanted Midway so they could extend their naval search to prevent another Doolittle raid on their home islands. Yamamoto did not want this operation but it was forced on him. He wanted to wait for Shokaku and Zuikaku before striking anywhere.
And the Japanese thought that Yorktown had been sunk at Coral Sea so they thought the chances of US carriers opposing them were slim.

It seems clear from the other posts here that the Japanese had poor intel on what they would be facing at Midway. But they did have a lot of battleship power trailing their carriers which could have been brought up to bombard.


Well, I think later events in the pacific showed how bombardment was not going to root out dug in defenders and by mid 42 Midway was very well fortified. Japanese ship to shore fire control was not the best either. The Allies were much better in 44 but still having trouble softening up before landing. Not to mention the tons of bombs that they were dropping at the same time. Personally, I don't think Yamamoto cared about the landings at all and was fully prepared to halt it. He was looking for the American fleet.



Lecivius -> RE: OT: Another What If? (12/18/2017 3:38:27 PM)

This seems to be an annual conversation [8D]

1) They did not bring enough troops.
2) They did not bring enough support.
3) KB was already running low on airframes due to constant use. They did not bring enough planes.
4) They did not bring enough decks.
5) They did not train for this operation. Troops assigned had very little idea what they were being asked to do.
6) They had no intelligence on the target.
7) They had no intelligence on the forces supporting the target.


The entire operation was doomed before they ever weighed anchor. The 'miracle' was the lopsided carrier loses.



Zorch -> RE: OT: Another What If? (12/18/2017 4:20:06 PM)

Yamamoto saw Midway as a way to force a decisive battle on the US fleet. Only in that context does it make sense.
The Japanese obsession with decisive battles did a lot to lose them the war.

How much oil/fuel did the Midway operation use, not counting the Aleutian part?



Lecivius -> RE: OT: Another What If? (12/18/2017 4:44:13 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorch

Yamamoto saw Midway as a way to force a decisive battle on the US fleet. Only in that context does it make sense.
The Japanese obsession with decisive battles did a lot to lose them the war.

How much oil/fuel did the Midway operation use, not counting the Aleutian part?



As I recall, according to Shattered Sword about a years operational supply. Totally from memory, though, and it was a hard weekend (Christmas party Friday)



rustysi -> RE: OT: Another What If? (12/18/2017 8:11:53 PM)

quote:

The US bypassed Truk and Kwajalein.


IIRC the latter was invaded and conquered.

quote:

What would they do with Midway?


It was intended to launch further operations against the Hawaiian Islands from Midway.

quote:

1) They did not bring enough troops.


Yup.

quote:

4) They did not bring enough decks.


If you're talking about cards, maybe.[:D] They did in fact bring almost the whole Japanese Imperial Fleet, whether or not that was enough is up for question.

quote:

As I recall, according to Shattered Sword about a years operational supply.


That's what I remember too.

quote:

they probably wouldn't have beaten the defenses.


Probably not.

The whole operation was not very well conceived.



Lecivius -> RE: OT: Another What If? (12/18/2017 8:28:15 PM)

By decks, I mean flight decks. They did not have the ability to project enough power to close the base, or defend all of the fleets involved, and/or seriously damage the infrastructure, of Midway.



rustysi -> RE: OT: Another What If? (12/18/2017 8:44:44 PM)

They could have brought more. Combine the Zuikaku/Shokaku deck/aircrew. Canceled the Aleutian operation and bring Ryuho and any other carriers (don't recall the others right now) into the MI operation. Etc. They had the power, they just didn't concentrate it.



Lecivius -> RE: OT: Another What If? (12/18/2017 9:00:47 PM)

To invade Tarawa, the US compiled 17 aircraft carriers 6 CVs, 5 CVLs, and 6 CVEs. And that was AFTER naval superiority had been achieved.



spence -> RE: OT: Another What If? (12/18/2017 10:41:18 PM)

quote:

Japanese ship to shore fire control was not the best either.


Actually it didn't exist at all. There was no one assigned to actually call in fire on particular targets.



Big B -> RE: OT: Another What If? (12/18/2017 11:36:39 PM)

quote:

So in this one forum. There was a discussion that the Japanese Invasion of Midway was fool hardy, even if the Japanese had won the carrier battle.
What say Ye?


Well, all of the above responses are valid....but to be fair to the original question - which I take to be "what if the Japanese won the carrier battle?"

...To give the Japanese credit... IF things had gone their way (which for a myriad of reasons previously stated about the success of a landing) suppose they had taken Midway while maintaining sea-air superiority locally - what would it gain them?

HAD the battle gone the way the planners envisioned, the IJN should have dispatched Enterprise and Hornet (sunk or damaged) - leaving only Saratoga and Ranger to contend with (because they thought Yorktown and Lexington were already sunk, and must have assumed Ranger and Saratoga would be in theater somewhere)...

That would have left the IJN with a whopping 3:1 superiority in CV's after the operation, and Midway Island in their possession. Even Yamamoto would have liked that scenario to put a quick end to the Pacific War....it would have looked like a typical AE game...without foreknowledge that the US would overwhelm them quicker than they thought possible in 1942. Not a bad gamble - BUT.

But - it just didn't happen that way, and really was never likely to go that way.

I don't condemn the Japanese for trying the Midway gambit... but we have 20/20 hindsight, or at least more knowledge of what Japan was facing than the historical Japanese really did.

Given what they assumed - I don't think Midway was a poor decision on their part... they just didn't have the entire picture, I just don't blame them for trying.... not that it changes anything.


B




Lokasenna -> RE: OT: Another What If? (12/19/2017 5:09:04 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: rustysi

They could have brought more. Combine the Zuikaku/Shokaku deck/aircrew. Canceled the Aleutian operation and bring Ryuho and any other carriers (don't recall the others right now) into the MI operation. Etc. They had the power, they just didn't concentrate it.


A fatal flaw in lots of Japanese plans from the war. Far too complicated in most cases.



spence -> RE: OT: Another What If? (12/19/2017 8:23:23 PM)

"what if the Japanese won the carrier battle?"

Seems to me that there is an analysis of this question on the Combined Fleet website. IIRC while delaying the USN for a bit by mid-44 it shows the IJN outnumbered in CV/CVLs and naval a/c anyways.

www.combinedfleet.com or search Nihon Kaigun



Mike Dubost -> RE: OT: Another What If? (12/21/2017 4:03:14 AM)

Even if the Japanese won the battle, I don't think they could have supplied Midway in the face of a concerted US sub campaign. I forget if I've mentioned the story of my mother's aunt before.

She was in Hawaii in 1942, and many years ago was telling me some stories about her experiences. She said that the man she eventually married was so sweet, he brought her a can opener on the first date. I kind of went Huh? She explained that certain goods were in short supply due to shipping limitations, and among these were can openers. You can see a hint of this in a John Wayne movie The Sands of Iwo Jima. The John Wayne character at one point uses an attachment on his knife to open a can since the civilian he's with has a completely worn out can opener.

Now, granted, Japanese troops needed fewer tons of supply per man than US troops, but there was not a concerted effort to sink US merchantmen. I think the most likely result of an occupation of Midway would be the decimation of the Japanese merchant marine in an effort to supply them, or maybe Starvation Island would have been Midway instead of Guadalcanal.





Shark7 -> RE: OT: Another What If? (12/22/2017 1:44:56 AM)

My question is, even if they had won the carrier battle and conquered Midway, exactly how were they planning to resupply it? By the time of Midway, they were already having major logistics issues and it was only going to get worse as time went on. Even if the US sub fleet wasn't an issue, they simply did not have the gross tonnage needed to keep the economy running and all their island outposts supplied.



tonybot -> RE: OT: Another What If? (4/14/2018 6:26:44 PM)

The Japanese were outnumbered in all the initial invasions when they conquered the Pacific...you guys that are saying the Japanese couldn't take Midway need to read some history books. When taking Singapore and the Phillipines, they were out numbered at least 2 to 1. Also, I'm sure the Japanese would have used their battleships and cruisers to obliterate the Midway defenses before they tried a landing.



tonybot -> RE: OT: Another What If? (4/14/2018 6:34:33 PM)

Like in the Aleutians, the actual island was inconsequential, the objective was the destruction of the US carriers.



tonybot -> RE: OT: Another What If? (4/14/2018 6:44:46 PM)

The Japanese lost the battle because they violated basic principle of concentration of force. If they had included the CVLs Zuihō & Ryūjō and the CV Jun'yō, they would have had another 100 aircraft.



warspite1 -> RE: OT: Another What If? (4/14/2018 9:06:41 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: tonybot

The Japanese were outnumbered in all the initial invasions when they conquered the Pacific...you guys that are saying the Japanese couldn't take Midway need to read some history books. When taking Singapore and the Phillipines, they were out numbered at least 2 to 1. Also, I'm sure the Japanese would have used their battleships and cruisers to obliterate the Midway defenses before they tried a landing.
warspite1

I think the suggestion that anyone who does not believe the Japanese could have taken Midway is automatically guilty of not reading WWII history is a little unfair. What the Japanese achieved in the first six months of the war is not itself proof of what the force they brought to Midway might or might not have achieved.

quote:

The Japanese lost the battle because they violated basic principle of concentration of force. If they had included the CVLs Zuihō & Ryūjō and the CV Jun'yō, they would have had another 100 aircraft.


The Japanese lost the battle for a variety of reasons - lack of concentration of force could certainly be counted as one of these - but is by no means the sole reason for what happened.



rustysi -> RE: OT: Another What If? (4/25/2018 5:57:51 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1


quote:

ORIGINAL: tonybot

The Japanese were outnumbered in all the initial invasions when they conquered the Pacific...you guys that are saying the Japanese couldn't take Midway need to read some history books. When taking Singapore and the Phillipines, they were out numbered at least 2 to 1. Also, I'm sure the Japanese would have used their battleships and cruisers to obliterate the Midway defenses before they tried a landing.
warspite1

I think the suggestion that anyone who does not believe the Japanese could have taken Midway is automatically guilty of not reading WWII history is a little unfair. What the Japanese achieved in the first six months of the war is not itself proof of what the force they brought to Midway might or might not have achieved.

quote:

The Japanese lost the battle because they violated basic principle of concentration of force. If they had included the CVLs Zuihō & Ryūjō and the CV Jun'yō, they would have had another 100 aircraft.


The Japanese lost the battle for a variety of reasons - lack of concentration of force could certainly be counted as one of these - but is by no means the sole reason for what happened.


+1



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.6875