Impact of much stronger Taranto raid, Nov 1940?

Thumpalumpacus · May 24, 2021

The Basket said:
If you read Destroyer Captain by Captain Hara then yes the IJN did have ASW capability and did attack and sink submarines.

I've read that. Perhaps you can quote the passages wherein he describes the missions he spent on ASW?

The Basket said:
Whether it was good or bad is neither here nor there. That's a IJN problem and not a me problem.

None of this is a "me" problem. But the short-shrift the IJN gave to ASW was certainly a "them" problem. It affected supply into home-island factories. Hell, IJN kept a good proportion of its fleet south not because it was strategically sound, but because it kept major fleet units closer to their fuel sources. That's quite the admission that getting the oil back to Japan was more difficult than expected, don't you agree?

The Basket said:
The Regia Marina was still sailing convoys to North Africa into the early months of 1943. So again...yes with heavy losses but it was still functional. Good or bad is again a RM problem.

I'm struggling to think of one RM intervention that made any sort of difference after Pedestal. Can you help a brotha out, perhaps by citing a source?

Admiral Beez · May 24, 2021

The Basket said:
I see what you did there.
Bravo.

Just bringing us back on track.

The Basket · May 24, 2021

I see.
But that's a crane.

Is that a lucky crane? Or a happy crane?

I just don't know.

special ed · May 24, 2021

Cessna Crane ?

The Basket · May 24, 2021

Are they changing the bogies on the train?
This is in Australia if that helps.

Probably a lot of killer spiders in this picture.

Admiral Beez · May 25, 2021

The Basket said:
Are they changing the bogies on the train?
This is in Australia if that helps.

Probably a lot of killer spiders in this picture.

Derailment, bogies either the cause or subsequently damaged.

Freebird · Jun 14, 2021

Peter Gunn said:
RE: Japan

And even then, other than the oil fields, what did they gain from all that territory on the Asian mainland? Were there that many resources to be garnered from the conquered areas?

There certainly weren't any shipyards worth the name bigger than handling a destroyer if I'm not mistaken.
..

Singapore was one of the largest, most modern drydocks in Asia, capable of handling the largest battleships.

Freebird · Jun 14, 2021

Admiral Beez said:
Was there anyone senior in the interwar RN that advocated for a combined carrier strike force, akin to Japan's Kido Butai. Instead of RN carriers operating as single units and in ASW work; prewar strategy and preparations are to use the RN carriers to attack the enemy bases in multiship CBGs.

History shows us that the RAF was ineffective in attacking the German fleet in its bases.

Incorrect.
Gneisnau was crippled while in drydock.
Sharnhorst was struck while on trials after leaving the shipyard, and crippled again
Konigsburg was destroyed at base (dockside)

Tirpitz was destroyed at its base
Yes, it was based in a Norwegian fjord, but the fjord was protected by numerous flak emplacements, smoke generators and fighter defence
]

Freebird · Jun 14, 2021

Admiral Beez said:
.What if the RN and FAA has trained for this very event with a mass carrier strike on Wilhelmshaven day one of the European war? Then it's repeated against the French and then Italians at Taranto. That should free up some flattops for the Pacific in 1941.

It makes very little difference into the availability of carriers in the Autumn of 1941.

Ark Royal is at Gibraltar until Nov 41, then torpedoed.
Victorious is with the Home fleet, and distant cover for Murmansk convoys.

Indomitable is still working up
Illustrious and Formidable are repairing battle damage..

Eagle and Furious are launching Hurricanes for Malta on Club Runs, then going in for overdue refits near the end of 1941, when Illustrious & Indomitable enter service.

Even if you had an extra carrier in the second half of 1941 (Formidble for example) it wouldn't be sent to the Far East, no need for it as the Americans have the Pacific taken care of (or so they thought)

Reluctant Poster · May 28, 2022

Thumpalumpacus said:
That's quite the narrow and limited metric you have there.

Yes or no:

1) Did the Japanese have more or fewer fleet carriers at the end of 42?

2) Did the Japanese have more or fewer trained aviators for those fleet carriers?

3) Did the Japanese have more or fewer battlecruisers by the end of 42?

4) Did the Japanese have any successful campaign in the Pacific after June of 1942 when they captured the Aleutians?

After Stalingrad, the Germans had more territory than at the start of Fall Blau ... but no one would claim that for that reason they were "winning." You metric is narrowly carved -- cherry-picking deployed to rescue a weak point.

If it was a draw the US should have negotiated a peace treaty and saved a lot of lives. A draw is when the result is the same as it was at the beginning. Just because you score 2 goals at the end of the first period doesn't change the fact that you are still losing 6-2.

Impact of much stronger Taranto raid, Nov 1940?

More options

Thumpalumpacus

Major

Admiral Beez

Major

The Basket

Senior Master Sergeant

special ed

2nd Lieutenant

The Basket

Senior Master Sergeant

Admiral Beez

Major

Freebird

Master Sergeant

Freebird

Master Sergeant

Freebird

Master Sergeant

Reluctant Poster

Tech Sergeant

Users who are viewing this thread

Similar threads