Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: BlueLancer

Having to hunt for scattered moving ships would have chewed up fuel and reduced accuracy significantly. Given the loss of life from theArizona alone, I think scattering would have been better.


29 posted on 12/06/2015 4:40:46 PM PST by Hieronymus ( (It is terrible to contemplate how few politicians are hanged. --G. K. Chesterton))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]


To: Hieronymus
True to the extent that you described it, but these wouldn't have been very much scattered. With no fleet air cover, they wouldn't have been able to venture very far beyond their air-based aircraft coverage, which, for the time-period was not too large at all.

Additionally, realizing that the battleship commanders and fleet commander were black-shoe Navy .. line-of-battle believers .. they would have kept the fleet tightly together, figuring that they were going to have a reprise of Jutland.

Finally, these old battleships were not very light on their feet, plodding old behemoths that would have had less of a chance than Prince of Wales or Repulse had off Singapore. With the number of planes that had been sent out by the Japanese, the slow speed of the battleships, and the existing line-of-battle beliefs of the commanders at Pearl Harbor, it would have been a slaughter.

40 posted on 12/06/2015 5:44:20 PM PST by BlueLancer (Once is happenstance. Twice is circumstance. Three times is enemy action.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson