And if the roles were reversed and a single Val hit a USN carrier it wouldn't have been lost, if it hit a RN carrier the bomb would likely have bounced off. The problem was deeper than Nagumo's decision.
Midway with expanded Kido Butai?
- Thread starter Admiral Beez
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
IJN Taiho was an armored carrier and was lost not to bombs, but a torpedo.
33k in the air
Staff Sergeant
- 1,354
- Jan 31, 2021
Jonathan Parshall maintains that, while those at the time couldn't be certain, based on what we know now, the U.S. was in a decisive position because it could get in the first punch. And had Hornet's air group not gone on its "flight to nowhere", it's likely all four Japanese carriers would have been sunk in the initial dive bombing strike.
That doesn't really help the Japanese, because its Midway strike lifted off at 4:30 am, effectively cutting its onboard air strength in half. Even if a sighting report had been received, it doesn't help since the Japanese fleet came under repeated attack from American aircraft from Midway which would have delayed any strike launch, since the flight decks would be needed to keep the CAP in operation. By the time those are over, now you have your Midway strike aircraft returning, already having been told a second strike on Midway would be needed to neutralize it.
Thumpalumpacus
Major
Shokaku took a beating not once, but twice in 1942. Mogami survived a collision and multiple bomb hits that same year. Japanese DC could be very good. The losses at Midway reflect the fact that the carriers were hit while fuel lines were filled and ammo was strewn everywhere. I can't see an American carrier in 1942 surviving under the same circumstances. Indeed, we lost Lexington due to avgas vapors turning it into a giant FAE.
Both Franklin and Bunker Hill survived similar conditions, but only because we had 2+ years of learning DC on the fly.
Moral of the story: some fires cain't be fought, and avgas is not your friend, especially with ammo laying around.
Last edited:
Thumpalumpacus
Major
Now that I'm thinking about it, I want one of the Ford-class carriers named Lexington. It's high time for another.
SaparotRob
Unter Gemeine Geschwader Murmeltier XIII
YORKTOWN
I want to see Kaga, Mogami, Enterprise and Yorktown steaming (nuclearficatin'?) together. Does Japan have an Akagi planned?
I want to see Kaga, Mogami, Enterprise and Yorktown steaming (nuclearficatin'?) together. Does Japan have an Akagi planned?
Thumpalumpacus
Major
Yorktown, yes! But this is starting to read like Spaceship Yamato or whatever that comic was.
I love and respect that Japan is using revered names of ships which fought like hell, and glad they're on our side this time around.
Wish we'd do that rather than naming them after this or that politician.
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
The current Japanese carriers are named after prefectures just as the IJN cruiser Izumo and IJN carrier Kaga were.
Currently, the USN is naming their submarines after states and the next one is to be the Arizona.
Call me nostalgic, but I'd rather see capital ships (or actually their equivellent) named after famous battlewagons.
Currently, the USN is naming their submarines after states and the next one is to be the Arizona.
Call me nostalgic, but I'd rather see capital ships (or actually their equivellent) named after famous battlewagons.
SaparotRob
Unter Gemeine Geschwader Murmeltier XIII
American aircraft carriers had been named for famous battles or ships. Battleships had been named for states. As a ballistic missile submarine can eradicate several cities or fleets, naming them after states is appropriate. Carriers though, they should be named for ships or battles. Seeing as how Enterprise is in the works, I'd really like the follow on to be Yorktown. It is better than naming ships after politicians. No matter who is to be honored, there's gonna' be a bunch of folk that hate the guy. I am glad TR got a carrier, though.
After CVN-80 Enterprise we will have CVN-81 Doris Miller named for a black Navy Cross winner from WW2. First steel was cut in Aug 2021.
VA.gov | Veterans Affairs
Apply for and manage the VA benefits and services you’ve earned as a Veteran, Servicemember, or family member—like health care, disability, education, and more.
Exactly, without being caught will all their planes on board, most fully armed and fuelled, it's highly likely imo that NONE of the japanese carriers would have been sunk, or rather scuttled. At any rate, imo while Kaga and Soryu were beyond hope, probably scuttling Akagi and Hiryu was a rushed decision, but that's another subject.
I always found hypocritical that people keep comparing US 1944 DC with japanese 1942 DC, apart from Lexington probably Wasp can be given as an example too, torpedoes caused fuel fires which doomed the ship. And i recall reading how Parshall was mocking the japanese for trying to fight the fires on Kaga with bucket brigades from the latrines, well Hornet ended up pretty much the same, the vaunted US damage control was at some point reduced to bucket brigades too.
Conversely, if they would have scuttled Franklin in 1945 i don't think anyone could have faulted such a decision give how badly it was burning, the massive fires and explosions and the 800 dead it pretty much duplicated what happened to Kaga.
If there should be a fitting name for a new american CV, it's Frank Jack Fletcher. Their best 1942 admiral which literally saved the day for USN at Coral Sea, Midway and Guadalcanal. And apart from admirals, yeah they had so many proper names to chose for their carriers rather than some anonymus (to history at least) and unimportant politician. Just take a list of the Essex class and go from there for instance.
I am familiar with Parshall's book and i'll just say that i'm far from considering the last or the most accurate word on the matter, imo it's filled with biased takes on events rather a balanced historical view (which you know, a proper historian should take?), and even downright disingenous information. I find John Lundstroms take on various 1942 events much more balanced.
I think it's very unrealistic to assume that if the japanese make contact at 6.30 they are not going to launch a strike against the US carriees and just sit there. There will be no rearmament fiasco, they just need to find a window to launch, which imo is either between 7.30 and 8.00 or between 8.30 and 9.00 AM. The more likely scenario is the japanese will launch a strike too, and Midway then will transform into a carrier brawl like Coral Sea or Santa Cruz. And the fewer armed and fuelled planes are on IJN CVs the bigger the chances they will survive the US attacks.
As to Hornet, that may well be true, but imo that's another ATL in itself, besides Ring was sent on 265 because he was told so due to the US admirals expectation of how the japanese would be organized (carriers in two separate groups, one 50-100 miles behind the other), which of course was flawed, but Nimitz took the gamble on that particular part and lost. Luckily for him Enterprise (and most of all Best) and Yorktown carried the day, otherwise the US CVs would have been in the proverbial deep.
All nations, including the Japanese, improved their damage control as the war went on. But their is a limit on what can be done with existing designs.
What is also often overlooked is how the experiences of the USN in 1942 with the losses of Lexington and Wasp particularly, led to changes in carrier design to increase protection for vulnerable avgas tanks. Enterprise had hers rebuilt 1943/44 to a saddletank design. Later Essex class carriers saw the forward avgas tanks moved aft to where the torpedo defence system was wider (there was an extra layer between the tanks and the ships sides). They were also built to a saddletank design. But the sacrifice was a reduction in overall avgas capacity of about 20,000 gals (c10%) IIRC.
What I always find interesting, is that while the British Armoured carrier designs come in for much criticism, both the IJN and the USN moved towards that concept, but not completely copying it, in their new carrier designs from c1940 onwards in the Taiho and Midway designs. Both navies however, free from Treaty restrictions, were able to build much bigger.
9 of the 24 Essex class were commemorated with Ticonderoga class missile cruisers as well as a couple of the Independence class CVL. Another 6 & 2 respectively have LHA/LHD named after them including the Essex herself. A process that has been going on since the early 1970s.
Thumpalumpacus
Major
I don't agree , but that's the Internet for you.
SaparotRob
Unter Gemeine Geschwader Murmeltier XIII
Destroyers are named for famous Americans. I like that tradition.
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
Fletcher did have a Spruance class destroyer named after him.
Not to be confused with the Fletcher class destroyers, named after his uncle.
Not to be confused with the Fletcher class destroyers, named after his uncle.
