Pearl Harbor

Pearl Harbor (Full Version)

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

Message

jedwardpita -> Pearl Harbor (12/7/2021 4:03:20 PM)
In honor of Pearl Harbor day. I wanted to share an interesting article. "The Second Wave Attack on Battleship Row" by Alan Zimm December 2021 Naval History magazine. The second wave was 78 D3A Val dive bombers. The targets of the second wave was first hit the carriers even if they were sunk to make them unsalvageable. Second the cruisers. "Their type 99 Number 25 Model 1 554-pound bomb could penetrate only 2 inches of armor, insufficient to inflict more than superficial damage to the behemoths [battle ships]." Only 15 hits were obtained and only one on a cruiser, (and only 10% hit rate at the ship aimed at). In practice they had obtained a 60% hit rate (for stationary targets). The author gave three causes. First, a low hanging cloud cover appeared, and forced them out of their trained technique. Second, the radio quality was so low many pilots tore them out as useless. This prevented a systematic adjustment.. The flak was very heavy by this time 14 planes were shot down and 14 were written off after return to the carrier. "After the battle, Fuchida collated the hits for a report to Emperor Hirohito. The commander had been orbiting the harbor and observing the attack. The number of hits reported exactly matched the number of hits expected in his pre-battle calculations."

mind_messing -> RE: Pearl Harbor (12/8/2021 1:37:22 AM)
quote: "After the battle, Fuchida collated the hits for a report to Emperor Hirohito. The commander had been orbiting the harbor and observing the attack. The number of hits reported exactly matched the number of hits expected in his pre-battle calculations." The same Fuchida, who's notorious misstatements have required significant reconstruction of the historical understanding of the Pacific War? Quell surprise. Hadn't heard that one.

RangerJoe -> RE: Pearl Harbor (12/8/2021 2:50:39 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mind_messing quote: "After the battle, Fuchida collated the hits for a report to Emperor Hirohito. The commander had been orbiting the harbor and observing the attack. The number of hits reported exactly matched the number of hits expected in his pre-battle calculations." The same Fuchida, who's notorious misstatements have required significant reconstruction of the historical understanding of the Pacific War? Quell surprise. Hadn't heard that one. This was about the Vals in the second wave - however only one hit the secondary targets which were the cruisers in port. The primary targets were the carriers even if they had been sunk so they could not be easily salvaged if at all.

Ian R -> RE: Pearl Harbor (12/8/2021 5:32:08 AM)
If you hit a carrier, that is already "bottomed" in harbour, and only has a (relatively easily repairable) largely wooden structure above the strength deck, how much more damage is a 500 odd pound bomb going to do? It's obviously going to have some blast/skockwave effect going off under water, but short of fracturing the hull, if the carrier is already burned out, everything above (and lot of stuff below) the armour deck is going to most likely be replaced anyway. Incidentally, the USN even salvaged the Oklahoma (in 1943??), but determined that it wasn't worth repairing it - only because they had more than enough old BBs without it. If, say, the Lexington had been bottomed, you can see it coming back with the permanent list corrected, the 8" swapped for more 5"/38 in EBR mounts, the elevators re-built in more useful deck edge spots, etc. They would probably even re-boiler it and sort out the fuel consumption. I suppose that if your exit plan is to do enough damage to make it all too hard for your opponent to rebuild and come back at you, a little more incremental damage might help, but the exit plan was flawed ab initio.

mind_messing -> RE: Pearl Harbor (12/8/2021 3:34:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RangerJoe quote: ORIGINAL: mind_messing quote: "After the battle, Fuchida collated the hits for a report to Emperor Hirohito. The commander had been orbiting the harbor and observing the attack. The number of hits reported exactly matched the number of hits expected in his pre-battle calculations." The same Fuchida, who's notorious misstatements have required significant reconstruction of the historical understanding of the Pacific War? Quell surprise. Hadn't heard that one. This was about the Vals in the second wave - however only one hit the secondary targets which were the cruisers in port. The primary targets were the carriers even if they had been sunk so they could not be easily salvaged if at all. My point was that anything claimed by Fuchida needs to be taken with a 250kg bomb-load of salt. Many of his post-war claims have been the subject of substantial challenge by the actual evidence.

RangerJoe -> RE: Pearl Harbor (12/8/2021 3:40:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Ian R If you hit a carrier, that is already "bottomed" in harbour, and only has a (relatively easily repairable) largely wooden structure above the strength deck, how much more damage is a 500 odd pound bomb going to do? It's obviously going to have some blast/skockwave effect going off under water, but short of fracturing the hull, if the carrier is already burned out, everything above (and lot of stuff below) the armour deck is going to most likely be replaced anyway. Incidentally, the USN even salvaged the Oklahoma (in 1943??), but determined that it wasn't worth repairing it - only because they had more than enough old BBs without it. If, say, the Lexington had been bottomed, you can see it coming back with the permanent list corrected, the 8" swapped for more 5"/38 in EBR mounts, the elevators re-built in more useful deck edge spots, etc. They would probably even re-boiler it and sort out the fuel consumption. I suppose that if your exit plan is to do enough damage to make it all too hard for your opponent to rebuild and come back at you, a little more incremental damage might help, but the exit plan was flawed ab initio. I was referring to what I read as far as the plan was. Either make the aircraft carriers unsalvageable or that much more damage to repair.

Page: [1]

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.765625