World War I & II topic

0fe1adb6-48d2-45af-8c5e-e2dbc483a58a-5-inch-gun-1-768x432.jpg



Wreck of long-lost WWII aircraft carrier USS Hornet found after 76 years, nearly 17,500 feet under water

For 76 years, the aircraft carrier lay on the ocean floor, a quiet tomb for 140 sailors who died the day it sank.

Now, for the first time since then, humans have laid eyes on the USS Hornet, which was sunk in October 1943 during World War II's Battle of the Santa Cruz Islands.

A research vessel discovered wreckage of the aircraft carrier in late January 2019, nearly 17,500 feet below the surface, resting on the floor of the South Pacific Ocean.

“We had the Hornet on our list of WWII warships that we wanted to locate because of its place in history ... that saw many pivotal moments in naval battles,” said Robert Kraft, director of subsea operations for Vulcan, the company that discovered the World War II warship.

Vulcan was founded by the late Paul Allen, co-founder of Microsoft, and has found many other shipwrecks of that era.

The Hornet was involved in many key events of the war, including launching the famed Doolittle Raid on Tokyo. It was also a major part of the Battle of Midway.
 
The Hornet was found by research vessel Petrel and her crew, as usual :)
 
In other sunken ship news .....


One of the first Japanese battleship to be sunk by U.S. forces during World War II has been discovered in the Solomon Islands by a research organization set up by the late billionaire Paul Allen.

Imperial Japanese Navy ship Hiei, which sank on Nov. 14, 1942, was spotted on the seabed by experts from the research vessel RV Petrel.


“HIEI was crippled by a shell from the USS San Francisco on the 13th which disabled the steering gear,” explained RV Petrel, in a Facebook post. “For the next 24 hours it was attacked by multiple sorties of torpedo, dive and B-17 bombers. Hiei sank sometime in the evening with a loss of 188 of her crew.”


vlcsnap-5.jpg
 
One of the four Kongou class battlecruisers of WW1 vintage. The whole class went through refits that made them fast battleships with AA gunnery. Together with a multitude of ships from the same era that had similar interwar upgrades, this were the main surface combatants of the battle fleet of IJN. Japan has managed to deploy only two battleships that were constructed newly for WW2 - and that were Musashi and Yamato. Both of those Yamato-class super battleships had significantly inferior targeting and situation awareness technology than newly built USN fast battleships, so imagine what happened to the old WW1 upgraded junk fleet when they ran into carriers, submarines and the rest of the USN party entourage.
 
Surprise, speed, experience, and operational theory were where the IJN had advantages - and working torpedoes.

Once the USA figured that stuff out, it was game over for the IJN.
 
LooseCannon said:
Surprise, speed, experience, and operational theory were where the IJN had advantages - and working torpedoes.

Once the USA figured that stuff out, it was game over for the IJN.
Click to expand...


That and we could replace a sunken ship (not to mention planes and train people, using actual gasoline) so much faster and add new ships much faster and at such a great volume that from a strategic point of view, we could overcome the loss of a ship and crew where Japan really could not.
 
Well, Japan launched a handful of carriers during the war, most of them quick conversions. Only two proper carriers (Taiho and Shinano) were launched, and neither were effective.

The USA launched 24 Essex-class carries, 9 Independence class light carriers, and uncountable escort carriers.
 
Japan had issues equipping carriers with planes and skilled crew. What bearfan said is what Yamamoto knew as he was against Pearl Harbor for the same reasons. Even with a 100% success which it wasn't, it would give Japan two years of pacific dominance tops until they get overwhelmed by newly built ships on the Pacific. Their military industrial complex and energy sector cannot match the US one. They profited off Washington Naval Treaty while it was active because they were the smallest and the youngest of the great naval powers, plus they cheated.
 
LooseCannon said:
Well, Japan launched a handful of carriers during the war, most of them quick conversions. Only two proper carriers (Taiho and Shinano) were launched, and neither were effective.

The USA launched 24 Essex-class carries, 9 Independence class light carriers, and uncountable escort carriers.
Click to expand...


True, but as you mentioned they were less effective, they did not really advance their planes (zeros) and lost so much of their experienced pilots between Coral Sea and Midway, they could not recover from that. For us, it would be a matter of time to recover not if. We could train new pilots, build new planes, improve on the design of planes, and a general improvement in quality .... and had plenty of gas to do all that. Japan, could not make those leaps and even if they did, they really did not have the capability to train people to operate it.
 
Zare said:
Japan had issues equipping carriers with planes and skilled crew. What bearfan said is what Yamamoto knew as he was against Pearl Harbor for the same reasons. Even with a 100% success which it wasn't, it would give Japan two years of pacific dominance tops until they get overwhelmed by newly built ships on the Pacific. Their military industrial complex and energy sector cannot match the US one. They profited off Washington Naval Treaty while it was active because they were the smallest and the youngest of the great naval powers, plus they cheated.
Click to expand...


Yeah, they had not chance to win the war in a traditional way (occupy the enemy), their best shot was to drive us back to the west coast, hope for a favorable (for the Axis) outcome in Europe and get a favorable treaty ... even that would be slim to none, after Pearl Harbor, I could not see us essentially surrendering.
 
That was the problem, with the first incident you crossed the point of no return. Had IJN tried something classic ala naval blockade it might've forced USN to open fire first and then a cease fire would be a valid possibility.

By the way, I think I've commented this with LC sometime, I fail to see the logic of IJN developments - they make success by investing in air power that manages to cripple the entire US navy base, and then they still invest like huge fraction of GDP for Yamato class development, big ass ships from the previous non-aerial doctrine. USN sees what carriers do, invests accordingly and shits all over Yamato sisters. I don't get this.
 
Well, if we're talking the political plan, the Japanese underestimated the United States. They very much assumed the USA would be like their war against Russia in 1905 - overwhelming and embarrassing naval victories would lead to a quick treaty giving them most of what they wanted. Literally everyone who had spent time in America, from Yamamoto on down, knew that was a huge freaking mistake.

One does not sucker punch the USA in the eye and then shake their hand after.
 
Zare said:
That was the problem, with the first incident you crossed the point of no return. Had IJN tried something classic ala naval blockade it might've forced USN to open fire first and then a cease fire would be a valid possibility.
Click to expand...

Yup between "Remember Pearl Harbor" and "I shall Return" ... there was no chance. Even if they found and sunk the US carriers at Pearl Harbor, it would have only delayed the inevitable. It was over at Midway, it was just a matter of how long and the cost (money and people). They would have been better off attacking Russia from the east, there they could have won and gotten the natural resources they needed
 
Slightly off topic, but if you have not read it, this was an excellent book on post-war Japan (starting with the decision/attempted palace coups around the surrender). One of the better history books I have read, a ton of information, but it reads like a good novel .. if it were fiction, it would be a great book,

https://www.amazon.com/Embracing-Defeat-Japan-Wake-World/dp/0393320278


Winner of the Pulitzer Prize, the 1999 National Book Award for Nonfiction, finalist for the Lionel Gelber Prize and the Kiriyama Pacific Rim Book Prize, Embracing Defeat is John W. Dower's brilliant examination of Japan in the immediate, shattering aftermath of World War II.

Drawing on a vast range of Japanese sources and illustrated with dozens of astonishing documentary photographs, Embracing Defeat is the fullest and most important history of the more than six years of American occupation, which affected every level of Japanese society, often in ways neither side could anticipate. Dower, whom Stephen E. Ambrose has called "America's foremost historian of the Second World War in the Pacific," gives us the rich and turbulent interplay between West and East, the victor and the vanquished, in a way never before attempted, from top-level manipulations concerning the fate of Emperor Hirohito to the hopes and fears of men and women in every walk of life. Already regarded as the benchmark in its field, Embracing Defeat is a work of colossal scholarship and history of the very first order. John W. Dower is the Elting E. Morison Professor of History at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. He is a winner of the National Book Critics Circle Award for War Without Mercy.
 
bearfan said:
Yup between "Remember Pearl Harbor" and "I shall Return" ... there was no chance. Even if they found and sunk the US carriers at Pearl Harbor, it would have only delayed the inevitable. It was over at Midway, it was just a matter of how long and the cost (money and people). They would have been better off attacking Russia from the east, there they could have won and gotten the natural resources they needed
Click to expand...
I don't know they could have won against Russia, but they certainly would have taken some land. They were afraid of Russia, though, after the spanking they got at Khalkhin Gol.
 
LooseCannon said:
I don't know they could have won against Russia, but they certainly would have taken some land. They were afraid of Russia, though, after the spanking they got at Khalkhin Gol.
Click to expand...

Maybe, maybe not. But that was more winnable compared to the US given Russia sending everything west.

Guess I should have said possibly winnable
 
bearfan said:
Maybe, maybe not. But that was more winnable compared to the US given Russia sending everything west.

Guess I should have said possibly winnable
Click to expand...
It probably was their best chance at gaining some land and resources. But I don't know if Siberia had the oil they desperately needed, certainly didn't have the rubber. Honestly, if they had pulled out of China it'd probably still be the Empire of Japan today.
 
It was the Japanese defense of Attu Island that caused a large and elite unit to be deployed to Kiska: the First Special Service Force, a unit of mixed Canadians and Americans that became North America's first special operations unit and would pave the way for the Deltas, US Army Rangers, Marine Force Recon, the US Navy Seals, and Canada's Joint Task Force II.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top