Funny story from WWII

@barnee said in Wrecks of WWII Carriers Kaga and Akagi Located:

@CWO-Marc
yea Spruance steaming away at night was a smart move. I wonder if Halsey was in the same situation if he would have. I kinda doubt it

Agreed. Ray Spruance was an excellent combat officer – he and Halsey spent the last few years of WWII alternating command of the 5th Fleet / 3rd Fleet, which was actually the same force whose name got switched every time the two admirals rotated, much to the confusion of Japanese naval intelligence – but he was very different from Bill Halsey in terms of style and personality. Spruance was precise and analytical; he certainly didn’t lack aggressiveness (when he made a decision to attack, he sent in “everything that wasn’t bolted to the flight deck”), but before making his decision to attack he would carefully weigh all the factors of the situation, which sometimes translated into over-cautiousness. Halsey was a hell-for-leather type – sort of the naval counterpart of George Patton – whose fighting spirit greatly inspired his men (the enlisted sailors loved him, not least for the fact that he could drink and swear as well as any of them), but this sometimes translated into recklessness. After the war, someone – I think it was Spruance himself – said that it would have been better if Halsey has been in command at the Battle of the Philippine Sea (where the IJN lost hundred of planes and pilots, but managed to save the bulk of its fleet) and if Spruance had been in command at the Battle of Leyte Gulf (where Halsey fell for a Japanese decoy operation, and compounded his error by leaving no covering force to guard the San Bernardino Straight).

Well as I said before, Italy shot Germany in the foot that lead to Axis defeats years later and Hitler already knew this, that is why he began to reject Italian help whenever it was sent.

Look at it like this, Italy invaded Greece because Muso wanted to restore the Roman Empire hence his attack on Greece plus he just defeated two nations prior without help so in his mind, he thought Greece would be cake. Attacking Greece and being counter attacked by Greek/UK forces lead to the Wehrmacht being sent in to help the Italians which leads to Greek defeat. That lead to the pyrrhic victory that became Crete. Axis looked at paratroopers as being cancer and that lead to the Allies learning why paratroopers are useful which that bit the Axis in the A$$ in the end.

Of course as for Africa, I am sure Germany didn’t mind helping Italy because I figured Germany taking Egypt would cut of the UK navy from India as well as link Axis forces in the Middle East gaining oil reserves and possibly a secondary front against USSR. I don’t know if Germany would have the balls to attack India in this situation.

Obviously Germany had virtually no respect for the Italians. I think Rommel was the only one who spoke favorably about the Italian soldiers, hated their officers. After Italy surrendered and about half of the Italian military joined the Allies, Germany had no problem going from defending their allies to suddenly occupying a nation as well as engaging their former allies.

Germany had essentially two options here. 1) Capture the city quickly, before the defenses could be built up. 2) Capture it via siege.

I don’t think that creating an urban combat situation, in which Germany attempted to capture the city street by street, would have been viable. In typical combat situations German soldiers had a 3:1 or 4:1 advantage in combat effectiveness over their Soviet counterparts. But in urban, street-to-street fighting the ratio was about 1:1. Germany could not afford anything even remotely approaching that 1:1 ratio, which is why something other than street-to-street fighting was necessary.

Von Manstein wrote that during the Barbarossa operation of '41 there had been a perfectly good opportunity to take Leningrad. But that this was wasted, allowing the Soviets to fortify it.

The other option would have been to do a better job of putting it under siege. This would have entailed tightening the cordon around the city, preventing just about anything from making it through. I think there was a case when Germany attempted exactly that. However, at the same time the Soviets were attempting to break the siege, so each side’s offensive encountered the other’s. From a tactical view there may have been more Germany could have done. But I think the real problem was strategic: the Soviet Union had too much military strength. A discussion on how to address that problem is probably outside the scope of this thread.

Your Grandfather did good ABWorsham, thanks for sharing.

Thank you Marc.
I only wish we had been told which unit he had fought with and where it was found.

@barnee

Well, the battle takes place during daytime, the most favourable conditions. I read the article in my research, and the battle really was tough to decide. Many people point to Leyte Gulf as proof of how bad Japanese battleships are. But one of the reasons for the Japanese failure off Samar was because of the Japanese using armour piercing shells, which often flew right through the unarmored American ships without exploding. Mistakes in commanding the Japanese ships was another reason for why the American fleet was not destroyed. As I said, it was really hard to decide, and it was very close. As you noted though, the Japanese has inferior radar and sighting, the Japanese had superior armour and had just so many guns that it would have eventually have hit several times, especially if the Missouri went to point blank range, like how I thought the battle would have worked out. It honestly could have gone either way.

In Canada, we call them “First Nations”.

Some people ask why - I tell them, “They were here first, that’s why they have reservations”. ;)

of course i forgot about Ray Spruance…the true hero of Midway and one of the best Admirals of the war