I personally feel that the website favours Iowa a bit too much but Im no expert.
any experts care to share their views?
| Author | Comment | ||
|---|---|---|---|
FreeloaderUK |
combinedfleet.com good or bad? |
Lead | |
|
Posts: 71 (12-Mar-2008 14:39:34) |
opinions on this website.
I personally feel that the website favours Iowa a bit too much but Im no expert. any experts care to share their views? |
||
Admiral Beez |
|||
|
Posts: 4418 (12-Mar-2008 16:24:12) |
I've always thought that the site never tells us how the Imperial Japanese Navy was a near complete failure of a military force. Their only real successes
were a peacetime surprise attack on Pearl Harbour in Dec 1941, followed by a win over inferior forces at Java Sea in Feb 1942. To be fair, IIRC, they were
land-based naval pilots that sank PoW and Repulse, so perhaps we'll give that score to the IJN too. Next in March and April 1942, the IJN completely fails
to engage the main British fleet off Ceylon, where success in this mission could have brought down Churchill's government. Then in May 1942, we have
essentially a draw between the now battle experienced IJN and the arguably less inexperienced USN at Coral Sea. Then it's all over for the Japanese Navy at
Midway in June 1942, where the IJN loses four out of their six fleet carriers, plus a large number of their highly trained aircrews, leaving only Zuikaku and
Shōkaku, plus the slow and small light carriers Ryūjō, Junyo, and Hiyo, plus a fleet of obsolete and/or non-relevant battleships, most to be lost shortly
through suicidal missions.
So, within seven months of starting the Pacific War, Japan's IJN lost it's entire offensive capability, while leaving both the USN and (less importantly) the RN intact to continue the battle on their terms. Meanwhile the remaining rump of the IJN was entirely unable to defend its territories, nor come up with any credible ASW tactics to stop the USN and RN submarines was sinking their transports and warships. Lastly, the IJN's aircraft and pilot procurement was woefully inadequate and unprepared for the coming war. If I was writing for the Combined Fleet website, the home page would have a note on the home page giving tribute to the brave Japanese men who got sent to die in war via a poorly led fleet that shone brightly in Dec 1941, and was at the bottom of the sea seven months later. Compare this to the RN, with the exception of Ark Royal, every one of their large fleet carriers in active service in 1941/2 survived the war, including the four Illustrious class, which saw major combat on all fronts.
Last Edited By: Admiral Beez
12-Mar-2008 16:29:55.
Edited 1 times.
|
||
Red Admiral |
|||
|
Posts: 1829 (12-Mar-2008 17:47:18) |
I personally feel that the website favours Iowa a bit too much but Im no expert.I'm guessing you're referring to the battleship comparison, which is extremely flawed and massively biased in favour of the USN ships. Theres some good provision of factual data, but the analysis is wrong. |
||
Nathan45 |
|||
|
Posts: 229 (12-Mar-2008 17:47:29) |
I think I can hear CreepingDeath typing a response to the Admiral...
The Combinedfleet.com's ratings were based (partly) on Nathan Okun's analysis of the ships under discussion. You can read it here. http://www.combinedfleet.com/okun_biz.htm Since that time, Nathan Okun has amended his analysis of decaping, amoung other things, you can read the updates here. http://www.navweaps.com/index_tech/tech-085.htm Since Okun has revised his findings, ideally the ratings/analysis on combinedfleet would be revised as well, if only everyone had unlimited time. But given the information at the time, combinedfleets ratings are entirely justifiable. Doesnt mean you have to agree with them of course. |
||
Joshua Kintner |
|||
|
Registered Member
Posts: 360 (12-Mar-2008 19:06:45) |
If I was writing for the Combined Fleet website, the home page would have a note on the home page giving tribute to the brave Japanese men who got sent to die in war via a poorly led fleet that shone brightly in Dec 1941, and was at the bottom of the sea seven months later. Compare this to the RN, with the exception of Ark Royal, every one of their large fleet carriers in active service in 1941/2 survived the war, including the four Illustrious class, which saw major combat on all fronts. I would put a note giving tribute to the brave Japanese men and women who took on the most powerful nation(s) in the world and lasted four years against them, even with their own shortcomings present. Japanese only comissioned one new fleet carrier in the war, with the rest of their carriers being in service before the war started (for Japan). I guess you could include Shokaku and Zuikaku if we talk overall about WW2. The rest of the Japanese carriers were pre-war comissions. The RN had five pre-war CV and one pre-war CVL in comission, of which only Furious survived, versus the Japanese four/six pre-war CV and two CVL, of which CVL Hosho survived. Note: I know the RN had more CV and CVL in comission pre-war, like Argus, I'm just counting the known ones off the top of my head. |
||
FreeloaderUK |
|||
|
Posts: 72 (12-Mar-2008 21:02:58) |
the Royal navy kinda sucked in the war too.
their carriers were small & had obsolete aircraft. half the fleet was crippled by treaty limits that the British rigidly stuck to- Rodney BB was actually UNDER the 35k limit. they actually stuck to 14" guns with the KGV. they sent Hood- an ageing battlecruiser & the not-even-fully operational PoW up against the Bismarck. an almost lost both ships. despite plenty of practise during ww1 of convoy duties- shipping losses were huge- & only started to reduce when the air-gap was bridged. in 1939 they let a german u-boat sneak into scapa flow & sink the Royal Oak. in 1941 the Ark Royal which was hampered by treaty limits was sunk by a single torpedo because of a design flaw & incompetent damage control. in 1942 they sent the PoW & repulse (which incidently the TDS had not been modernised) to the far east without air support to scare the japanese off!!! the swordfish- crusing speed of 88mph!! they stopped building heavy cruisers! they let the scharnhorst & gneisenau escape thru the english channel. they left a carrier hms glorious with just a destroyer or two escorting = easy pickings for scharnhorst. |
||
Warspite1805 |
|||
|
Posts: 646 (12-Mar-2008 21:52:11) |
Considering the many short comings the Royal Navy suffered from they did rather well for themselves where there was numerous times of victories being pulled
off when their equipment was clearly second rate, such as the battle of Barents Sea, Battle of Cape Matapan, the sinking of the Bismark, the Battle of Taranto,
protecting the convoys to the Soviet Union, keeping the Eighth Army supplied, the Battle of the Atlantic, the Battle of North Cape, Battle of the River Plate.
|
||
ickysdad |
|||
|
Posts: 3062 (12-Mar-2008 21:57:11) |
Red Admiral wrote:Well as well they should be!!!!!! |
||
Joshua Kintner |
|||
|
Registered Member
Posts: 362 (12-Mar-2008 22:06:11) |
All of the WW2 Navies made mistakes when they first entered into the conflicts though. RN is not alone, although they did make many mistakes. Right off the
bat, Graf Spee was sunk in River Plate. The Italians lost two battleships in the Taranto air raid. The IJN lost two destroyers when their first Wake Island
assault force was repulsed. The Germans also lost one heavy cruiser, two light cruisers, and ten destroyers in an invasion of Norway.
|
||
Admiral Beez |
|||
|
Posts: 4419 (12-Mar-2008 23:42:23) |
While no navy was perfect, I think the IJN remains the only major fleet to have its entire offensive capability wiped out within seven months of joining the
war, along with no plans or ability to replace lost ships. Imagine if the RN acted the same as the IJN? Throughout the war the RN continued to keep its
offensive capability, even with the loss of five carriers, five battleships, and countless cruisers and destroyers. However, it's not the IJN's fault
that Japan couldn't build ships, planes and pilots to keep up with loses. But their failues at Ceylon, Coral Sea and Midway are truely their own, as they
should have smashed Sommerville entirely, and then used their supposed expertise to kill the USN at Coral Sea.
|
||
FreeloaderUK |
|||
|
Posts: 73 (13-Mar-2008 02:07:06) |
the Japanese did rebuild by the battle of the marianas turkey shoot they had upto 9 carriers but the americans outnumbered them with 13 carriers, jap pilots
were mostly rookies & IJN aircraft were out of date.
|
||