Battleship Film Revives Japan's Pride In Wartime Generation

The telegraph (UK) ^ | 11-28-2005

[75thOVI]

The Japanese Flattop that was sunk by a single torpedo was the Taiho. I believe it was the Albacore, (I'm at work and don't have access to my reference materials.) The fish would not have sunk the Taiho by itself but she was brand new, and had no damage control training. The torpedo ruptured a avgas tank. Somebody turned the ships fans back on to disperse the fumes. The real effect was to turn the Taiho into a ginormous FAE. When the inevitable spark set it off, it made a MOAB look like an M-80.

[Centurion2000]

Star Blazers ROCKED.

[Sam Cree]

Yes, I think it was the very early 60's. I would have been 12 in 1960. Agreed that the Iowa class were much prettier. And faster, according to what I've read today.

[IGOTMINE]

I just finished reading "Last Stand of the Tin Can Sailors". What a great book!

[IGOTMINE]

Excellent point about the impact those ships could have had off Guadalcanal. They could have engaged in shore bombardment and REALLY plastered Henderson field, but then again Henderson was shelled repeatedly by Kongo class BB's and still kept in the fight.

No tellin', but I'm glad those ships stayed in home waters.

[75thOVI]

I must respectfully disagree. The Iowa's armor was not quite as heavy, but better arranged. The 16" heavy shell the Iowas fired was very nearly as good as the Yamato's 18.1" Where the Iowa shines is in speed, (sets the range of battle) and fire control. Outside of 20kyds the Iowa basically disassembles the Yamato. The Yamato never demonstrated the ability to hit anything smaller than the Pacific. Most if not all of the damage to the "Taffys" off Samar was from the heavy cruisers. Luck and the "fog of war" would always be a factor, but I'd put my money on Iowa.

"There is no battleship but Iowa, and South Dakota is her prophet."

[colorado tanker]

IMHO the attack of the DD's and DE's of Taffy 3 is one of the greatest acts of heroism in the history of the Navy.

[The Iguana]

In the end, all the Japanese effort and expense of building the Yamato was for naught. American Airpower sunk it as another payment for Pearl Harbor.

But the IJN couldn't know that until it was too late.

Planning for the Yamato class battleships began as far back as the 1920's - even though they knew it would bust the limits imposed on Japan by the Washington Naval Treaty. Yamato and Musashi were both laid down well before Pearl Harbor. Yamato, in fact, was offficially commissioned just a couple weeks after Pearl.

At the time they were laid down, they seemed to make sense as the solution to the problem of Japanese naval inferiority: They could not build as many ships as Britain or America. But they could build them bigger, and make up in quality what they lacked in quantity. And in the 1930's, advocates for naval air power hadn't won the argument in any naval service of note. Yet.

After Taranto, Pearl Harbor and the sinking of the Repulse and Prince of Wales, it had become obvious to many in the IJN that carriers, not battleships were the way to go - and after Midway, the need became urgent. Yamato and Musashi were already built, so nothing could be done about that. But Shinano was still early enough along that it could be converted to a carrier.

Even so I grant that IJN thinking on naval airpower, ironically (in view of their enormous success with carrier power in the first six months of WWII), was still a little behind the US Navy, which made virtue of necessity after losing all its battlewagons. But if Japan gets nicked for finishing off its obsolete superbattleships, you have to also wonder why the US Navy insisted on building so many new battleships of the South Dakota and Iowa classes - rather than more carriers.

Of course, we DID have the industrial capacity and to spare such that it probably didn't make much difference...

[blam]

"'Sides as a former submariner, I think all that "Going on top of water", is unnatcheral anyway."

Ditto. USS Jallao, SS-368

[blam]

"you have to also wonder why the US Navy insisted on building so many new battleships of the South Dakota and Iowa classes - rather than more carriers."

The US had over 100 carriers in the Pacific at the end of WW2, albeit, most were the 'baby' or escort carrier class.

[BigCinBigD]

I thought the Yamato was destroyed by a warp core breach when a computer defect shut down the containment fields?

Oh. Wrong Yamato.

[Natural Law]

Politics aside, the greatest heroism is most often displayed in defeat. The Japanese were great individual soldiers and sailors. To denigrate them because of the bad policies by their leaders only diminishes the sacrifices and accomplishments of those who fought, suffered and died defeating them.

[jpsb]

It almost looks like a small nuke wnt off, great picture.

[tcrlaf]

**I think the Yamato took 19 torpedoes if my memory is right plus a lot of bombs.**

It took 20 torpedos, and seventeen Direct Bomb Hits to sink her, and that's only because of a magazine explosion...

Unlike Musashi, she had a Captain and Officers that did not believe that Damage Control Training was an admission of failure. USS Tunny put 3 torpedos in her in April 44, and taught the crew a valuable lesson about surviving hits...

[bmwcyle]

[tcrlaf]

***Do not forget to give some credit to the suicidally brave task force of destroyer escorts and escort carriers that put up so much of a fight***

TAFFY3 Destroyers were identified as Cruisers when they were first seen, which led to a lot of confusion for the Japanese. Again, the lack of Air Intelligence hurt the Japanese just when they needed it most.

Halsey was "Carrier Nuts" and the Japanese plan to draw the heavy units North had worked PERFECTLY. It was only Toyoda's timidity (uncharacteristicly for him) that saved the day for the Americans...

[jpsb]

I think an Iowa class would do fine in a battle with a Yamato class. Yamato was just heavier not better.

[SES1066]

Ah, but the US did cancel the "USS Montana" class before the first keel was laid down. As designed and proposed in 1940, it would have had 12 instead of 9 16" rifles as on the "USS Iowa" class BBs. Thus even the Battleship Navy realized that Billy Mitchell was right after all (1943).

[HolgerDansk]

They probably had a good time raping Korean "Comfort Girls" before getting nailed by the United States Navy.

Unlikely. Keep in mind that the Japanese Army and the IJN were two very different organizations. The Navy opposed the war, while the Army was having a horrific good old time of it in Manchuko at the time. The IJN was a much more professional organization.

[Bender2]

Re: "...you have to also wonder why the US Navy insisted on building so many new battleships of the South Dakota and Iowa classes - rather than more carriers. "

The fast battleships of the Iowa Class offered large AA platforms that could keep up with and protect our carriers. Plus they and their older cousins provided fire support for the many beachheads we stormed against the Japanese and the future North Koreans and Iraqis.

True, the IJN building of super battleships like the Yamato were correct in their 1920ish treaty eyes until events showed them how the carrier was the wave of the future. However, it was the lack of well trained pilots that doomed Japan rather than lack of planes or carriers... Or more super battleships.

Remember, it was Admiral Ozawa's near pilot-less carriers that were the decoys to pull Halsey and his Third Fleet away from San Bernardino and guarding the Leyte Gulf beachhead that allowed the Yamato lead force to come into the gulf to attack...

BTW we Armchair Admirals could win any war given enough beer, chips, dip and cigarettes, eh?