warspite1
Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline
|
I finished The Shame of Savo this morning. What a thoroughly engrossing book! Thanks for the recommendation Reg. Well written and clear (although some of the complexities around communications flew right over my head!).
I too would recommend this to anyone interested in the Pacific War – and the Solomon’s Campaign in particular.
I mentioned before that the book seemed to be singling out Fletcher, and indeed this was a consistent theme. However, the more I read, the more his actions do appear to have been wrong; indeed Admiral King decided that for himself. However, Fletcher was not the only one to have been considered at fault; Ghormley, Noyes, McCain (although he got away with it) Riefkohl and Greenman chief amongst them – and King ensured they would never command at sea again. The poor - in some cases inexplicable - performance of some of the US destroyers (Jarvis, Blue, Helm and Wilson) and of course, as is well known, the cruiser Chicago, was highlighted.
In contrast the roles of Admirals Turner and Crutchley came out positively, as did the conduct of the US destroyers Patterson and Ralph Talbot.
It appears from all the evidence that HMAS Canberra – the only Allied cruiser seemingly in readiness to take the battle to the Japanese was denied from doing so by her inadvertent torpedoing by USS Bagley right at the start of the battle. The idea that she could be crippled, so completely, by gunfire alone has been effectively dismissed.
The only case in the book for any sort of “cover-up” over the whole episode was in trying to get to the truth of Canberra’s almost immediate disabling. The Australians were denied access to a 1954 report and the suggestion is that this would likely have led to an investigation into Bagley’s torpedo attack.
The book ended on a highly positive note though:
a) there was acceptance - and a degree of admiration - that the enemy were bold in their plan of attack and used their night-fighting prowess to their advantage.
b) the way the US used the experience of Savo to the positive - both in terms of their own shortcomings and the skill of the enemy; that the American turnaround was not simply the result of the overwhelming superiority in resources and technology, but the ability of the USN to learn lessons from defeat and put those lessons into practice was key.
< Message edited by warspite1 -- 11/16/2014 1:21:22 PM >
_____________________________
England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805  |
Printable Version
RE: Correcting a mistake in S E Morison's Histories - 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread