combinedfleet.com good or bad? http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/topic/5710/t/combinedfleet-com-good-or-bad-.html en-us Copyright 2006, Yuku feeds@yuku.com (FeedMaster) webmaster@yuku.com (WebMaster) Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:39:34 GMT Sun, 20 Apr 2008 17:21:18 GMT Yuku Feeds 1.0 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss 60 Yuku http://static.yuku.com//feed/bypass/images/button-yuku.png http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/topic/5710/t/combinedfleet-com-good-or-bad-.html Yuku - free hosted forums and profiles 88 31 {pics-1.1 "http://www.icra.org/ratingsv02.html" l gen true for "http://yuku.com" r (nz 1 vz 1 lz 1 oz 1 cz 1 ) "http://www.rsac.org/ratingsv01.html" l gen true for "http://yuku.com" r (n 0 s 0 v 0 l 0 )) Search Search Domain q http://yuku.com/search/direct/ <![CDATA[ Re: combinedfleet.com good or bad? ]]> http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/77051/t/combinedfleet-com-good-or-bad-.html#reply-77051 feeds@yuku.com (Tiornu) http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/sreply/77051 Sun, 20 Apr 2008 17:21:18 GMT <![CDATA[ Re: combinedfleet.com good or bad? ]]> http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/77040/t/combinedfleet-com-good-or-bad-.html#reply-77040 StewartG wrote:
FreeloaderUK wrote:
they left a carrier hms glorious with just a destroyer or two escorting = easy pickings for scharnhorst.

Decision taken by a certifiably lunatic CO.
So can we agree that if Lyster had still been in command of the Glorious - it wouldn't have been surprised and sunk by the... ]]> feeds@yuku.com (No1catman) http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/sreply/77040 Sun, 20 Apr 2008 12:56:12 GMT <![CDATA[ Re: combinedfleet.com good or bad? ]]> http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/76989/t/combinedfleet-com-good-or-bad-.html#reply-76989
In what land actions did the presence of "Kido Butai" directly "shift the outcome" of battle?

Allied air power had a decisive impact on the outcome at Milne Bay:

http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/sreply/76989 Sat, 19 Apr 2008 19:32:03 GMT <![CDATA[ Re: combinedfleet.com good or bad? ]]> http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/76971/t/combinedfleet-com-good-or-bad-.html#reply-76971 Glenn239,

A few factors to keep in mind (& not to argue overmuch, because I don't have the time or energy for that)--and as these are points which number-crunching cannot really address, it seems to me--but the answer is that in no land battle was the presence of Nagumo's KdB a decisive factor. And comparing their ability to influence the ground conflict with Allied air ops is (again) giving them too much credit, I'm afraid.... ]]> feeds@yuku.com (CA30ist) http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/sreply/76971 Sat, 19 Apr 2008 17:57:56 GMT <![CDATA[ Re: combinedfleet.com good or bad? ]]> http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/76962/t/combinedfleet-com-good-or-bad-.html#reply-76962 In what land actions did the presence of "Kido Butai" directly "shift the outcome" of battle?

Allied air power had a decisive impact on the outcome at Milne Bay:

http://www.defence.gov.au/army/AHU/HISTORY/Battles/Milne_Bay.htm

But perhaps the most important, and most obvious, advantage enjoyed by the Australians was local air superiority over the battlefield during the day. This provided the ground troops with immediate... ]]> feeds@yuku.com (Glenn239) http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/sreply/76962 Sat, 19 Apr 2008 16:16:23 GMT <![CDATA[ Re: combinedfleet.com good or bad? ]]> http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/74959/t/combinedfleet-com-good-or-bad-.html#reply-74959 This was pure speculation when stated in Shattered Sword, and it remained pure speculation when you typed it some time ago. You, nor anyone, knows whether or not the outcome of a Midway with both Lexington and 5th Carrier present.

There is absolutely nothing speculative about it. The loss of Lexington, Shoho, damaging of Shokaku, and mauling of CarDiv 5's airgroup, changed the OOB for both sides at Midway. The Japanese... ]]> feeds@yuku.com (Dolphinstriker) http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/sreply/74959 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 18:51:12 GMT <![CDATA[ Re: combinedfleet.com good or bad? ]]> http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/74956/t/combinedfleet-com-good-or-bad-.html#reply-74956
In what land actions did the presence of "Kido Butai" directly "shift the outcome" of battle? ]]> feeds@yuku.com (CA30ist) http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/sreply/74956 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 18:42:55 GMT <![CDATA[ Re: combinedfleet.com good or bad? ]]> http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/74947/t/combinedfleet-com-good-or-bad-.html#reply-74947 Your arguments all rely on speculation; speculation about the effects a changed OOB…

You stated,

"By any accounting, the loss of the Lexington was far less consequential to the USN than the loss of the Shoho, damage to Shokaku, destruction of CarDiv 5's airgroups."

This was pure speculation when stated in Shattered Sword, and it remained pure speculation when you typed it some time ago. You, nor anyone, knows whether or... ]]> feeds@yuku.com (Glenn239) http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/sreply/74947 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 15:46:30 GMT <![CDATA[ Re: combinedfleet.com good or bad? ]]> http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/74923/t/combinedfleet-com-good-or-bad-.html#reply-74923 it's clear from Japanese accounts, and not disputed AFAIK, that they retreated along Kokoda Trail as a result of a strategic decision heavily influenced by Guadalcanal. The last Japanese move forward on the trail Sept 17 at Ioribawa was almost within sight of Port Moresby, they were never militarily stopped, though their supply situation was dire. But the forces recieved orders to retreat back to Buna on the north coast Sept 20, based... ]]> feeds@yuku.com (Dolphinstriker) http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/sreply/74923 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 07:02:15 GMT <![CDATA[ Re: combinedfleet.com good or bad? ]]> http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/74919/t/combinedfleet-com-good-or-bad-.html#reply-74919 Dolphinstriker wrote:
I have already argued that Port Moresby was not saved by any one battle, that it was necessary to fight and win a series of battles; Coral Sea, Midway, Milne Bay, Kokoda Trail, and Bismarck Sea before the Japanese gave up on capturing southern New Guinea and Port Moresby.

I agree in general, neither Coral Sea nor Midway insured the Japanese couldn't take Port Moresby, and... ]]> feeds@yuku.com (JBren1) http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/sreply/74919 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 05:38:30 GMT <![CDATA[ Re: combinedfleet.com good or bad? ]]> http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/74886/t/combinedfleet-com-good-or-bad-.html#reply-74886 jlyons97 wrote:

ickysdad wrote:
If I'm not wrong King didn't have the authority to order convoying till April?? May??? of 1942. I remember Brad Smith & Electric Joe bringing that up at one time but maybe others can fill the blanks in.

As I recall, King was in charge of the entire bloody... ]]> feeds@yuku.com (ickysdad) http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/sreply/74886 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 21:20:45 GMT <![CDATA[ Re: combinedfleet.com good or bad? ]]> http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/74880/t/combinedfleet-com-good-or-bad-.html#reply-74880 Your contention appears to be that the loss of 4 Japanese fleet carriers at Midway was somehow unrelated to, or of little importance, with respect to Japan's subsequent inability to capture Port Moresby.
And your contention that the loss of four carriers at Midway made it impossible for the Japanese to capture Port Moresby completely ignores the necessity of the valiant Australian defense of that objective long... ]]> feeds@yuku.com (Dolphinstriker) http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/sreply/74880 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 19:42:25 GMT <![CDATA[ Re: combinedfleet.com good or bad? ]]> http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/74872/t/combinedfleet-com-good-or-bad-.html#reply-74872 Good luck! When Glenn239, as in the present case, is shown to be wrong, he tries to change the subject. When that doesn't work he interjects sarcastic remarks."

"Lighthearted". The basic opinions had been exchanged. The rest is filler.

Your contention appears to be that the loss of 4 Japanese fleet carriers at Midway was somehow unrelated to, or of little importance, with respect to Japan's subsequent inability to capture Port... ]]> feeds@yuku.com (Glenn239) http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/sreply/74872 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 18:33:03 GMT <![CDATA[ Re: combinedfleet.com good or bad? ]]> http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/74842/t/combinedfleet-com-good-or-bad-.html#reply-74842 "Good luck! When Glenn239, as in the present case, is shown to be wrong, he tries to change the subject. When that doesn't work he interjects sarcastic remarks."
Let's work on a strategy. I haven't followed the thread closely enough to know who said what, and it doesn't really matter. We're all aware of folks who find alternatives to intellectually sound responses, and we've all vented frustration at... ]]> feeds@yuku.com (Tiornu) http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/sreply/74842 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 09:44:00 GMT <![CDATA[ Re: combinedfleet.com good or bad? ]]> http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/74827/t/combinedfleet-com-good-or-bad-.html#reply-74827 He became commander in chief of the fleet in late December,1941 BUT didn't become Chief of Naval Operations till about April,1942. The latter is the one needed to get convoys started but even that position wasn't enough to get cities to submit to blackouts.
Basically correct. King was named Commander in Chief, US Fleet on December 20, 1941, and was responsible for the... ]]> feeds@yuku.com (Dolphinstriker) http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/sreply/74827 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 05:56:44 GMT <![CDATA[ Re: combinedfleet.com good or bad? ]]> http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/74826/t/combinedfleet-com-good-or-bad-.html#reply-74826 jlyons97 wrote:

Agreed, 'Dad. And he could not turn out the lights in Asbury Park. But, IIRC, there was an actual world war in progress, even when, poor guy that he was, only in charge of the fleet and not CNO. I do not buy your arguments on why escorts were not available. They could have been had he exercised the judgment required of his office. Convoying without escorts did not start until April.

My god.... ]]> feeds@yuku.com (ickysdad) http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/sreply/74826 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 05:51:21 GMT <![CDATA[ Re: combinedfleet.com good or bad? ]]> http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/74825/t/combinedfleet-com-good-or-bad-.html#reply-74825
My god.
]]> feeds@yuku.com (jlyons97) http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/sreply/74825 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 05:41:39 GMT <![CDATA[ Re: combinedfleet.com good or bad? ]]> http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/74822/t/combinedfleet-com-good-or-bad-.html#reply-74822 jlyons97 wrote:
ickysdad wrote:
If I'm not wrong King didn't have the authority to order convoying till April?? May??? of 1942. I remember Brad Smith & Electric Joe bringing that up at one time but maybe others can fill the blanks in.

As I recall, King was in charge of the entire bloody... ]]> feeds@yuku.com (ickysdad) http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/sreply/74822 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 05:12:42 GMT <![CDATA[ Re: combinedfleet.com good or bad? ]]> http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/74802/t/combinedfleet-com-good-or-bad-.html#reply-74802 ickysdad wrote:

If I'm not wrong King didn't have the authority to order convoying till April?? May??? of 1942. I remember Brad Smith & Electric Joe bringing that up at one time but maybe others can fill the blanks in.

As I recall, King was in charge of the entire bloody navy. He actually knew war was coming and did nothing positive. Who was going to give the... ]]> feeds@yuku.com (jlyons97) http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/sreply/74802 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 03:31:57 GMT <![CDATA[ Re: combinedfleet.com good or bad? ]]> http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/74793/t/combinedfleet-com-good-or-bad-.html#reply-74793 jlyons97 wrote:

I would add to US incompetence, if that's what we're talking about, the following:

Macarthur's action (or inaction) in defense the Philippines

The US Army in North Africa (yes they learned, but they were deplorable)

Mark Clark and the others who snatched defeat from the jaws of victory at Anzio

Eisenhower's refusal (in part because he was badly briefed) to use the... ]]> feeds@yuku.com (SMS12) http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/sreply/74793 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 02:50:20 GMT <![CDATA[ combinedfleet.com good or bad? ]]> http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/topic/5710/t/combinedfleet-com-good-or-bad-.html
I personally feel that the website favours Iowa a bit too much but Im no expert.

any experts care to share their views? ]]> feeds@yuku.com (FreeloaderUK) http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/topic/5710 Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:39:34 GMT