Best Or Most Competent WWII Admiral - By Nationality

[Readie]

Hi Michael,
I didn't think it was fair to separate allied commonwealth Admirals just as you cannot separate the RN and RCN ships and men in the BoA.
One without the other was diminished.
Why not have a 'joint vote' for say Horton and Murray?
Just a thought.
Regards
John

 

[parsifal]

Hi John

I would include the CW as part of the RN , but people are free to vote for any nationality. The reason I didnt provide lists for the CW is because I dont have a substantial list for them. Same for the Italians, French and Soviets.

I would very much like to hear about the admirals of the minor navies and their achievements. They may not have been able to as much, but that should not be seen as a measure of their competency

regards


Michael

 

[Readie]

Hi John

I would very much like to hear about the admirals of the minor navies and their achievements. They may not have been able to as much, but that should not be seen as a measure of their competency

regards


Michael

That is a good idea Michael. I'll do a bit of digging around.
Regards
John

 

[Wavelength]

USN: Halsey
RN: Vian
IJN: Tanaka
KM: Marschall
RM: Kesselring (LOL)

 

[cherry blossom]

I am going to suggest a new Japanese candidate.

In August 1941, Onishi Takijiro argued "...we should avoid anything like the Hawaiian operation that would put America's back up too badly" ("The Reluctant Admiral: Yamamoto and the Imperial Navy" by Agawa Hiroyuki, page 229).

He was reassigned as chief of staff of 11th Air Fleet just prior to the outbreak of the Pacific war and thus he may perhaps have been partly responsible for their performance which was recognised by Dave Bender's recommendation of Vice Admiral Tsukahara. I think that he was involved in the decision to fly the escort missions against the Philippines from Taiwan and give up the idea of using small carriers (but I have forgotten the reference if this is true).

In 1944, he was the main advocate of the Kamikaze method which we have been discussing in the anti-shipping weapon thread.

Lastly, he made a full apology for his failure.

The Pacific War Online Encyclopedia: Onishi Takijiro and Father of the Kamikaze

 

[parsifal]

USN: Halsey
RN: Vian
IJN: Tanaka
KM: Marschall
RM: Kesselring (LOL)

Thanks wavelength. I assume your primary vote will be for a previously mentioned admiral (which means you maximumize the numbers in your list getting into the shortliIve assumed Tanaka is your primary vote,that way Halsey gets in andd Tanaka gets a vote. If you want to allocate your primary vote another way, please advise. The way ive interpreted your vote, Marschall and Vian are not given another vote. Ive decided not to allow Kesselring, though I concede there is argument to support him being here....

USN: Nimitz (3), Scott, Mitscher, Turner, Spruance, Lee, Barbey, Halsey
IJN: Tanaka(2), Ozawa(2) Yamaguchi , Tsukuhara
RN Cunningham (2), Horton (3), Somerville, Vian, Ramsay(2), Fraser, Noble
KM Donitz (2), Raeder, Marschall

Poll leaders are now tied for equal first place....Horton and Nimitz. Its gettingt intersting I think

 

[parsifal]

I am going to suggest a new Japanese candidate.

In August 1941, Onishi Takijiro argued "...we should avoid anything like the Hawaiian operation that would put America's back up too badly" ("The Reluctant Admiral: Yamamoto and the Imperial Navy" by Agawa Hiroyuki, page 229).

He was reassigned as chief of staff of 11th Air Fleet just prior to the outbreak of the Pacific war and thus he may perhaps have been partly responsible for their performance which was recognised by Dave Bender's recommendation of Vice Admiral Tsukahara. I think that he was involved in the decision to fly the escort missions against the Philippines from Taiwan and give up the idea of using small carriers (but I have forgotten the reference if this is true).

In 1944, he was the main advocate of the Kamikaze method which we have been discussing in the anti-shipping weapon thread.

Lastly, he made a full apology for his failure.

The Pacific War Online Encyclopedia: Onishi Takijiro and Father of the Kamikaze

Thanks Cherry Blossom , and good choice (though including his second name stumped me for a minute...Ive always just known him a Admiral Onishi)

The list is now as follows

USN: Nimitz (3), Scott, Mitscher, Turner, Spruance, Lee, Barbey, Halsey
IJN: Tanaka(2), Ozawa(2) Yamaguchi , Tsukuhar, Onishi
RN Cunningham (2), Horton (3), Somerville, Vian, Ramsay(2), Fraser, Noble
KM Donitz (2), Raeder, Marschall

 

[Wavelength]

Thanks wavelength. I assume your primary vote will be for a previously mentioned admiral (which means you maximumize the numbers in your list getting into the shortliIve assumed Tanaka is your primary vote,that way Halsey gets in andd Tanaka gets a vote. If you want to allocate your primary vote another way, please advise. The way ive interpreted your vote, Marschall and Vian are not given another vote. Ive decided not to allow Kesselring, though I concede there is argument to support him being here....

Score it how you think best. To explain my votes a little; I wanted to place more emphasis on the fighting admirals, rather than admistrative admirals. So it elimanates some good candidates such as Paul Weneker, but you get the likes of Vian thrown in.

I voted for Tanaka over Mikawa simply because I felt that Mikawa didn't finish the job at Savo, loosing sight of the primary objective, which set a pattern for the Japanese admirals. Tanaka had a way of making something out of nothing, and he dealt the USN one of its most humilating defeats.

I know a lot of people don't like Halsey, but he made tough decisions and that was his job. In my opinion Guadalcanal was the decisive campaign of the Pacific war and he saved that campaign.

Marschall was the best at sea admiral the Germans had, but they fired him because he didn't follow through with a plan that had been run over by real world events. Young guns like Johannessen did not really make Admiral before the fighting was already decided. Some captains like Krancke and Meisel showed inititive but then they got promoted to desk admiral jobs, so their combat experience and sea time was wasted.

 

[oldcrowcv63]

Score it how you think best. To explain my votes a little; I wanted to place more emphasis on the fighting admirals, rather than admistrative admirals. So it elimanates some good candidates such as Paul Weneker, but you get the likes of Vian thrown in.

I voted for Tanaka over Mikawa simply because I felt that Mikawa didn't finish the job at Savo, loosing sight of the primary objective, which set a pattern for the Japanese admirals. Tanaka had a way of making something out of nothing, and he dealt the USN one of its most humilating defeats.

I know a lot of people don't like Halsey, but he made tough decisions and that was his job. In my opinion Guadalcanal was the decisive campaign of the Pacific war and he saved that campaign.

Marschall was the best at sea admiral the Germans had, but they fired him because he didn't follow through with a plan that had been run over by real world events. Young guns like Johannessen did not really make Admiral before the fighting was already decided. Some captains like Krancke and Meisel showed inititive but then they got promoted to desk admiral jobs, so their combat experience and sea time was wasted.

I agree with your assessment of Tanaka. He was brilliant. However, Mikawa deserves some slack for his decision at Savo, as he rightly considered the survival of his force as an important if unstated objective. He had every right to believe that had he tarried for the hours required to move south and finish off the transports his small force would have suffered grievously at the hands of USN aircraft during their retirement when the sun rose. He could not have known that the carriers were preparing to retire but unaware of what happened during the night due to poor radio comm with Turner.

as to Halsey, I have to agree that his fighting spirit energized his troops during the critical phase of the campaign. He did make some hard decisions but these included some absolute failures in judgement during that same period. Some because of his (IMO) reliance on the opinion of his chief of staff Miles Browning:

1. Putting inexperienced and untested Callahan over Scott in charge of the cruiser force that confronted the Hiei and Krishima. Halsey's decision cost the life of Adm. Norman Scott, the USN's most experienced and successful battle commander, who was killed by friendly fire from Callahan's flagship San Francisco. F.J. Fletcher and Brown before him, faced with similar choices, chose experience over a small difference in time in grade.
2. Relieving Gil Hoover, skipper of the Helena, probably one of the finest ship captains in the USN and on track for flag rank. Hoover was relieved for making one of the toughest decisions of the entire war, which Browning and Halsey arm-chaired and monday-morning quarterbacked with the worst example of second guessing of which I am aware.
3. Halsey's use of his carrier forces was over aggressive against superior enemy forces and resulted in the loss of the Hornet and significant damage to the Enterprise.
4. Halsey and staff remained unaware of how his orders were being interpreted by his surface action group which resulted in the Washington and SoDac being out of position on November 13-14 when IJN cruisers bombarded Henderson Island.

yes, I admire Halsey for many qualities but his performance is IMO quite blemished. In his memoirs, he admits he made a mistake in the Hoover affair.

 

[oldcrowcv63]

I should have mentioned that at Savo, a lucky (for the USN) hit by the Quincy I think, took out the flagship's chartroom and so movement south through the narrow and poorly charted waters between Savo Island and of Sealark channel would have to have been done by a surrogate flagship, leaving Mikawa somewhat out of the direct control of the action.

From wikipedia: Battle of Savo Island - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"At 02:16 Mikawa conferred with his staff about whether they should turn to continue the battle with the surviving Allied warships and try to sink the Allied transports in the two anchorages. Several factors influenced his ultimate decision. His ships were scattered and would take some time to regroup.[1]:115 His ships would need to reload their torpedo tubes, a labor-intensive task that would take some time. Mikawa also did not know the number and locations of any remaining Allied warships and his ships had expended much of their ammunition.[10]:201
More importantly, Mikawa had no air cover and believed that U.S. aircraft carriers were in the area. Mikawa was probably aware that the Japanese Navy had no more heavy cruisers in production, and thus would be unable to replace any he might lose to air attack the next day if he remained near Guadalcanal.[14]:362 He was unaware that the U.S. carriers had withdrawn from the battle area and would not be a threat the next day. Although several of Mikawa's staff urged an attack on the Allied transports, the consensus was to withdraw from the battle area.[6]:237–9 Therefore, at 02:20, Mikawa ordered his ships to retire.[5]:53"

My understanding is that Fletcher was preparing to leave in the morning but had not yet left. he received no clear word of the Savo disaster due to comm failures that day and departed ignorant of what had transpired during the early morning hours.