[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Search] [Home]
Board
Settings Home
/his/ - History & Humanities


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.



File: phily1961igloos.jpg (95 KB, 644x378)
95 KB
95 KB JPG
How did the US Navy BTFO the famed IJN so fucking badly?
>>
oil
>>
in that order:
1)Oil
2)Unstoppable (and safe) industry
3)access to a wealth of raw materials
This sums up how the allies won the war in general
>>
>>5769676
Superior technology and naval doctrine. Other than that, the japs were simply outproduced by the USN.
>>
>>5769676
zerg
>>
>>5769676
IJN couldn't replace its losses. Even when Japan developed new tech that was on par with newer US equipment, it couldn't afford to build any.
>>
>>5769717
More detail on the naval doctrine please. It's hard for me to grasp just logistical reasons for the utter annihilation of one of the most powerful navies in the world at the time
>>
>>5769676
>>5769695

I'd like to add a point

4) Willingness to learn from, accept and prepare for defeat
5) Realization that supplies are necessary for the war effort

The IJN did not give any serious consideration to rescuing downed pilots, which means that a downed plane was also a dead pilot. For the US navy; A downed plane often did not mean a dead pilot.

The IJN did not give any serious consideration to fire containment procedures on board their ships. If a fire started, it often spread until the ship sank.

Furthermore the IJN didn't protect it's convoys. They just didn't care too. Japanese captains did not want what was considered second tier duty. The result: A lot of sunken convoys.
>>
>>5769764
Think about it in terms of stocks vs flows. The IJN may have been one of the largest navies in tonnage at the beginning of the Pacific War, but their ability to replace losses and add new tonnage was completely outmatched by American industry.
>>
The IJN lost several carriers at Midway which were irreplaceable losses for them, meanwhile America was nowhere near its maximum naval capacity. After that they no longer had any initiative in the Pacific and were slowly bled out by the USN.

Here's a very interesting lecture about Midway and its implications for the war in the Pacific
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y9rkKtK1b44

the whole lecture is interesting, though the first half is really just a discussion of some specifics of the battle itself. Start at 26 minutes where the lecturer begins to discuss what an incredible advantage america had in terms of capacity to build up its naval forces that Japan simply had no ability at all to match, and how victory at Midway put them in a position to press that advantage to a degree that they would have needed to wait 1-2 years for otherwise. He shows a chart comparing new ships built by America and new ships built by Japan after the battle that really shows just how impossible a task the IJN faced.
>>
>>5769676
>How did the US Navy BTFO the famed IJN so fucking badly?
It all boils down to Midway and Leyte Gulf, but mostly Midway. The Japanese took a big fucking loss when they lost their carriers which were basically irreplaceable.

This post has some good reasons on how/why the US Navy won Midway.

https://www.quora.com/How-did-the-Americans-win-the-Battle-of-Midway-Was-it-because-of-technological-superiority-or-intelligence-superiority
>>
>>5769676
Japan didn't have the resources to replace as well as a smaller industry than America. Always makes me wonder how things might've went had Japan just fought Britain and its dominions and the Netherlands and not foolishly attacked America, because I couldn't see the British pacific fleet being able to fully hold off the IJN nor the relatively small Dutch fleet.
>>
>>5769764
What >>5769782 said, plus a few things. Americans were quicker on the uptake when it came to the importance of naval aviation, most military tonnage sunk in the Pacific was from carrier planes IIRC. Americans also rotated their pilots, so more experienced veterans could train rookies which brought an improvement to the average pilot's skill.
Japs were still high off their victory over the Russians, which led them to rely on a doctrine which advocated the use of a strong battleship-reliant fleet (look up 'kantai kessen' for details). But you have to realize BBs were expensive as fuck to build and maintain, and were quickly becoming obsolete because a few dozen planes could easily nuke your billion-yen bathtub. Plus there were other priorities, like building smaller ships and submarines to protect your merchant and supply ship routes. This was fucking important, because the japs were spread out over a bunch of islands and had to be supplied primarily by sea.
Technology was another factor. American radar, fire control, anti-subamrine and anti-aircraft were all much better than their Japanese counterparts. Torpedoes were the only thing I can recall off the top of my mind that Americans had trouble developing, and Japanese were better at for a while.
Last and most fucking importantly, they got outproduced. The Japanese are a tiny island nation and it's impressive what their navy achieved, but consider what they were up against (>>5769695). Even disregarding the disadvantages mentioned, the IJN were just vastly outnumbered and had no hope of ever winning against the USN.

I'm no expert but I think that's the gist of it, and someone please CMIIW. Read up on the subject if you're interested. The IJN may seem like they were a formidable force and they were, but once you start really getting into the naval bit of the Pacific you begin to realize how much of a disparity of power there was between those two navies and how powerful the USN really was.
>>
>>5769863

An impossible scenario, since that would mean the Philippines would be right in the middle of the Japanese Greater East Co-Prosperity Sphere.

Either that would mean the Japanese would have to give up their Imperial ambitions south of the Philippines, or simply put a war with the US.

In either case the Japanese would still suffer in the long run because they still did not have enough resources to maintain a war effort.
>>
>>5769863
The limited amount of combat Britain did with Japan tells us it probably wouldn't have gone too great for Her Majesty's Navy. UK military pretty much got btfo'd early on, leaving the US to do 95% of the muscle work with some ground help from Phillipines and Australia.
>>
It took Japan 3 years to pump out one fleet carrier to replace all the one it lost
America pumped out 15 fleet carrier
>>
>>5769676
You have to keep in mind that even before starting war with America it was already well out of its depth. As early as 1938 it had become apparent that Japan had bit off more than it could chew by invading China, and by late 1941 they were already pretty desperate. It's like if a guy in the middle of getting his ass handed to him in a bar fight tried to start a fight with Mike Tyson as well. Utterly baffling.
>>
>>5769953
It's perfectly rational when you realise the Japanese thought - in fact they were sure - that their circumstances would lead inevitably to a war with the US and their only chance to preserve their independence in their region was to optimise the timing of this war as much as possible.

I'm not saying they did the right thing. They caused a lot of death for no good reason. But from their government's POV it was rational.
>>
File: 1544018147888[1].jpg (561 KB, 1920x1080)
561 KB
561 KB JPG
>>5769934
List of ships commissioned in the US and Japanese navies during the period of the war. Leased ships are not included.
>>
File: How!!.jpg (569 KB, 915x958)
569 KB
569 KB JPG
>>5770027
Source? The disparity here is mind-boggling.
>>
>>5770034
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l9ag2x3CS9M

Sources are in the video description, and every ship appears by name on the date it was commissioned. They were added one by one, so you can check individually which ones you disagree with.
Again, this doesn't include ships the USA built for Britain, for example. Only US navy. The actual output was greater.
>>
>>5770048
Thanks!
>>
>>5769676
It was bigger and had better stuff.
>>
The focus on US production capabilities is the prime example of forum-based pseudo/amateur history that turns everything into alt-history at some point. It looks at some impressive fact and tries to extrapolate history from it despite that history actually happening and no extrapolation being necessary. The fact is Japan actually, literally, historically lost more material than the US and would have lost the war even if the two sides had equal production capabilities.
>>
>>5770165
>complains about false and misleading metrics
>says Japan lost "more material" without saying what it is, how much they had and how much they lost over a given period
>then says this metric is what lost Japan the war

Citations please.
>>
The US did lie about their defeats in order to save face, thus they could prepare better
>>
>>5770517
didn't*
>>
So related, but what do people have such a myopic view of Pearl Harbor when saying Roosevelt let it happen? Yeah maybe it would hold water if PH was the only place attacked that day, but it wasn't. On December 7th, Japan attacked Pearl Harbor, the Philippinnes, Guam, Wake Island, Malaya, Singapore, and Hong Kong all almost simultaneously. Hell ships that were heading from Pearl Harbor to Wake Island actually took part in defense of the Wake Island attack. People say "we moved the carriers out before the attack" but that's looking at history entirely with the power of hindsight. We had no idea the carriers would be so pivotal to the war, the pride of the US Navy at the time were our battleships, many of which were crippled or sunk in the PH attack.
>>
File: Oil.png (47 KB, 751x567)
47 KB
47 KB PNG
>>5769676
This is the power of oil, son.
>>
>>5770537
>the pride of the US Navy at the time were our battleships

>"The modern development of aircraft has demonstrated conclusively that the backbone of the Navy today is the aircraft carrier. The carrier, with destroyers, cruisers and submarines grouped around; it is the spearhead of all modern naval task forces." - Rep. Carl Vinson, 1940
>>
>>5770564
*googles the saudi fleet*
not sure m8
>>
>>5769867
There is also the fact that IJN was competing against the IJA and the IJA literally had to build its own Army Navy.
>>
>>5770582
>The US Navy's General Board was similarly lukewarm about the potential of carriers and in 1939 envisaged only four more being built for the whole of the 1940s, two of these merely to replace the ageing Saratoga and Lexington. On the whole 'the Board was satisfied if the number of US flat-tops should roughly equal Japan's in tonnage... [and] was much more interested in battleships, which it still regarded as the backbone of the fleet.'
Titans of the Seas: The Development and Operations of Japanese and American Carrier Task Forces During World War II, pp. 23-24
>>
>>5770844
Good book? Sounds like something i shoulld get a copy of
>>
Reminder that the only three meaningful IJN victories in all of 1942 were: Savo Island, Tassafaronga, and Santa Cruz. In all three cases, they either failed to exploit their successes, or the victory allowed for such a meaningless momentary advantage that it ended up not mattering in the end.

Every victory achieved by the USN in that period contributed directly to improving the overall strategic position of the United States in the Pacific.
>>
>>5771835
>meaningful
For something to be meaningful or unmeaningful the IJN/IJA actually need to have a decided plan to move forward the war to conclusion.

*NO* Japanese victory could be meaningful in 1942, because the IJN/IJA had no such programme nor *could* they have had one.
>>
I think most of the important points have been brought up in this thread, but I'll add one more: institutional experience. The US was a preeminent naval power and possessed a kind of institutional knowledge and culture that emphasized naval matters, both in combat and out of combat. The US had a flourishing merchant marine that knew they could rely on protection from the US navy. The US had world-class schools where officers could be churned out at an unimaginable rate. The knowledge-gap was so severe that many of the top officials of the IJN actually received training at US military academies.

Japanese culture, on the other hand, was not found of the impersonal nature of naval warfare. Your average Japanese citizen would much prefer to carry a bayonet and fight Chinese hand-to-hand in Manchuria rather than run numbers on an artillery table.

In fact, if you go back to accounts from the period, you'll find that many of the top officers in the IJN were not keen on fighting the US.
>>
>>5772259
not fond of the impersonal nature of naval warfare*

Sorry, was eating lunch while typing
>>
>>5772266
Anything good?
>>
>>5772277
Just a meatball sandwich. I kept dropping sauce onto my shirt and breaking my train of thought. Luckily I wore a black shirt today.
>>
File: Expanding-Brain.jpg (191 KB, 857x1202)
191 KB
191 KB JPG
>>5769676
Does anyone have this meme for Japan?
>>
>>5770165
This guy kinda gets it. It is implied that Japanese had an edge in quality...they didn't. Far from it. Americans outsmarted them and outperformed them at so many instances. It was anything but a battle of attrition.
>>
>>5772286
Nice. Considering some Subway myself
>>
>>5772340
Oh, I made this at home. I work from home so I prefer to prepare all my meals myself.
>>
>>5770034
>>5770048
Also keep in mind that the Japs knew they couldn't match the industrial output of the US in the long haul. They were hoping to make enough gains in the meantime of their reconstruction of the Pacific fleet to have the upper hand in any negotiations of peace. The lackluster results of Pearl Harbor and the speed of US in replacing those ships is what killed them. Otherwise, the Japs might have succeeded in subduing the US without ever really fighting.
>>
>>5772363
Unlikely. The Japs underestimated the US's will to fight, which couldn't be helped since the US underestimated its own will to fight. The second a US military installation was hit and US citizens were killed, the US wouldn't rest until it General Sherman'd every Japanese city.
>>
>>5772384
Didn't see that when Germans were sinking US ships.
>>
>>5772384
The "will to fight" is an unquestionable factor in warfare, but it's hard to fight back with no weapons. The Japanese themselves are a good example of this. Imagine those carriers were caught in harbor and many more capital ships were sunk, as intended by the Japanese. Midway and Coral Sea would have never happened. The Japanese would have full reign over the Pacific for almost half a year. I don't doubt they would have found a way to start bombing mainland US by late 42.
>>
>>5772458
At the absolute best, they have reign over deep seas away from U.S. bases; but the U.S. would stuff all their island garrisons with land based planes.

It wasn't until Tarawa, late in 1943, that the U.S. felt it had enough carrier power to take on Japanese island based airpower, and they threw 6 CVs and 5 CVLs and some CVEs in at the battle to take on one tiny isolated island. The U.S. islands would have been better protected and the Japanese ability to strike correspondingly less. And that's assuming the Japanese go after places like Midway island, or Pago Pago, or try again for Hawaii.

To actually attack the U.S. mainland in 1942 is complete lunacy. Instead of "only" a few hundred planes that are a challenge to the biggest carrier fleets, you can literally have thousands of planes waiting for them.

tl;dr Don't be stupid.
>>
File: 1538199738712.jpg (50 KB, 484x1024)
50 KB
50 KB JPG
>>5772486
>tl;dr Don't be stupid
no u
>>
But what about Japanese honor?
>>
>>5770191
Not him but in the two most important categories of materiel in the Pacific, ships and planes, the Japanese lost far more than the Americans did.
>>
>>5772528
This. Where's the real history?
Tired of reading all these Marxist tallies of steel factories and barrels of crude oil.
Tell me about the god damned heroes.
>>
>>5772513
Oh no, after the Japanese manage to invade Hawaii it'll be at least 1943 before they start strategic airbombing of the West Coast.

I don't see the Japanese being able to nuke Chicago until 1946 at the earliest.

planet of the jap
>>
>>5772528
NO YOUR OTHER HONOR
>>
File: Extremist Buddhism.jpg (159 KB, 675x1200)
159 KB
159 KB JPG
The United States was superior to Japan in every way that could possibly matter in a war except preparation. Imagine if the Netherlands invaded Germany, that's the level of chance Japan had.
>>
>>5770844
Meanwhile the USN asked for and got the funds to buy 18 carriers vs 6 battleships in 1940.
>>
>>5770660
>the IJA literally had to build its own Army Navy.
The US Army literally had its own ships as well. There's nothing unusual or significant about that. It's the norm.
>>
>>5770034
Actually the disparity is lesser than I would have imagined.

>Doesn't include leased ships
Ah, there we go

You don't realise just how much more industry the US had.
>>
>>5769676
>the famed IJN
they were "famed" for a single battle
in all respects Japan was a 2nd to 3rd rate power fighting against 1st rate powers and only held out due to distance from the foes they were fighting
>>
>>5769695
This plus

Japan was already stretched out, while the US was just ramping up.
>>
File: Montana_Class.png (804 KB, 1200x623)
804 KB
804 KB PNG
>>5773191
Those six battleships were monsters, though. 70,000+ tons at full load with 12 x 16-inch guns spread across 4 triple-turrets. Armor thickness on par with the Yamato and a top speed of 28 knots.
>>
>>5769676
it's like a 250 pound heavyweight against a 80 pound scrawny midschooler
sure, the midschooler might get some good kicks in but there's no way in hell he's going to win
>>
>>5769676
How good were Japanese submarines compared to others nations in ww2?
>>
>>5774010
The Japanese didn't believe in submarines.
>>
>>5769796
Yamamoto supposedly told his superiors that a successful strike at Pearl Harbor would only buy Japan a year or two of naval hegemony in the Pacific. He had gone to college in the US and was painfully aware of the disparity in population and industrial capacity.
>>
>>5774086
>In the first six to twelve months of a war with the United States and Great Britain I will run wild and win victory upon victory. But then, if the war continues after that, I have no expectation of success.
>>
>>5774010
They were used entirely to attack enemy warships, and as a result, were quite ineffective.
>>
>>5774132
>entirely
Not entirely

http://www.usmm.org/shipsunkdamaged.html
>>
>>5774010
Technologically they were among the best on the planet but as >>5774132 said they were largely wasted by going after warships. That being said Japanese subs were responsible for the losses of Yorktown and Wasp (i.e. half of the fleet carriers the USN lost in the war) so they weren't entirely worthless.
>>
>>5774072
incorrect

>>5774010
Not terribly good or useful. They did not have a commerce raiding doctrine, Japanese submarines were used primarily as fleet boats, meant to serve as pickets or to pick off enemy warships. Though I-19 does have the distinction of causing the most damage in a single torpedo salvo of any ship in history. One aircraft carrier sunk, one destroyer sunk, and one battleship lightly damaged. They believed that everything would depend on submarines getting shots off like that, and did not see supply ships as high value targets.

>>5769676
A mix of a couple things:
1. Sheer ability of the US to outproduce Japan in both trained officers and pilots, and in ships and war materiel

2. The Japanese proved to be very bad at planning their operations, to the point of being incredibly negligent, on top of typically making their plans unnecessarily complicated and without a clear goal. Case in point, during planning for Midway there were several occasions during the wargaming sessions where Japanese carriers were sunk by US carrier aircraft. Each time, they were declared not sunk and the exercise continued, with nobody stopping to examine why it happened and how they could avoid it. The overall battle plan's objectives of capturing the island and luring out the US carrier fleet to destruction conflicted, with neither having clear precedence over the other.

3. The US in general pulled some very astonishing feats that the Japanese though impossible. For example, moving heaven and Earth to repair Yorktown enough for Midway after she was hit at Coral Sea. By comparison, Shokaku was considered impossible to be ready in time and no efforts were even made to bolster Zuikaku's air group with Shokaku's for Midway. In the end, they left for the battle leaving a perfectly useable modern fleet carrier home.
>>
>>5774152
Well in that case then the sub rating thread is wrong, because we can count US torpedos.
>>
>>5774010
Behind the American ones in almost everything
>>
>>5772363
The original idea behind the multiple december 7th attacks listed here >>5770537 was that so many simultaneous attacks would cripple the enemy's attacking potential long enough for Japan to reinforce their defensive positions when the enemy was ready to attack. Which did work...for a while anyway.
>>
File: 1528966739998.jpg (64 KB, 482x654)
64 KB
64 KB JPG
>>5774132
In close competition with the Soviets for the most underwhelming performance of the war. The Soviets had an obvious excuse, though.
>>
>>5774161
I'm fairly certain that thread is basing its ranks of the tonnage of ships sunk instead of anything else. They did have issues (lack of radar being the largest) but they still had innovations like being able to carry and launch aircraft, their late war designs were the fastest of their time and the Type 95 was the greatest submarine torpedo design of the war, better than both the G7e and Mark 14.
>>
>>5774197
I'm guessing because most of the Red Navy was based in the Baltic sea, which for a good part of the war could be considered a German mare internum?
>>
>>5774393
That too, but more generally the Soviets invested far less into sea power than the other belligerents.
>>
>>5774393
The Soviets were never a naval power. In contrast to the UK, their geopolitical grand strategy was entirely based on land power - trains, armored divisions, and Poland.
>>
>>5769771
>The IJN did not give any serious consideration to rescuing downed pilots, which means that a downed plane was also a dead pilot. For the US navy; A downed plane often did not mean a dead pilot.
>The IJN did not give any serious consideration to fire containment procedures on board their ships. If a fire started, it often spread until the ship sank.

No, it was just that the Japanese were just not as good as the Americans in these regards.

>Furthermore the IJN didn't protect it's convoys. They just didn't care too. Japanese captains did not want what was considered second tier duty. The result: A lot of sunken convoys.

True and this was the war loser for them.
>>
File: 1999.060.007-1024x826.jpg (175 KB, 1024x826)
175 KB
175 KB JPG
>>5769676
>How did the US Navy BTFO the famed IJN so fucking badly?

There was no conceivable way the Japanese could keep up with the U.S.
>>
File: wc21_japempirem.jpg (120 KB, 865x640)
120 KB
120 KB JPG
>>5769890
>Either that would mean the Japanese would have to give up their Imperial ambitions south of the Philippines, or simply put a war with the US.

Nonsense, if the American people weren't willing to go to war to save France and the UK, they sure as shit weren't going to do for the Dutch East Indies.

Japan could have bypassed the Philippines and other U.S. holdings and there was nothing Roosevelt could have done about it.
>>
>>5774197

The U.S. stat for ships sunk per submarine lost has to factor in that for American submariners, it was a turkey shoot with effectively defenseless Japanese merchant ships waddling right into American torpedoes, (particularly late in the war) whereas the German subs were up against the British and American navies, who put a shit load of effort into protecting their merchant fleets.
>>
File: Japan 1933.jpg (133 KB, 587x614)
133 KB
133 KB JPG
Japan invading China was a huge waste of manpower and resources for zero return on the investment and had they not done so, they might have been able to convince China to join them in an anti-European war.
>>
>>5774590
True, but even though the American subs had it the easiest, they still had the highest mortality rate out of any service in the US military (1 in 5), which is nothing compared to the U-boat mortality rate of 3 in 4, again the highest rate in the Wehrmacht. I think that says a lot about how dangerous it was to be on a submarine during the war.
>>
File: U352.jpg (109 KB, 1600x1200)
109 KB
109 KB JPG
>>5774610
>I think that says a lot about how dangerous it was to be on a submarine during the war.

Indeed, I'd NEVER serve on a sub, (or the navy in general) I'd have gone AWOL or punched an officer or whatever not to be stuck in an underwater coffin!
>>
File: 2.jpg (325 KB, 804x743)
325 KB
325 KB JPG
>The entire continental USA + Colonies vs Japan, a country smaller than fucking California
TRULY THIS WAS AMERICA'S GREAT STRUGGLE AGAINST A FEARSOME ENEMY

You literally don't even need to go into any tactics or strategy at all. The US had more shit at every point of the war and easily wiped them, what a joke of a war.
>>
>>5769676
Out produced them
>>
>>5775918
If we use video game logic and only look at occupied territory on the map, at the time of the declaration of war the empires of Japan and USA were comparable in land area and population. I can see why people get fooled, thinking that the Chinese coast for example is useful territory to manufacture ship and draft soldiers, and not underdeveloped jungle full of rebellious peasants.
>>
>>5769676
>famed IJN
Most of the IJN's fame was borne out of a battle they fought 35 years earlier
>>
>>5769863

RN was getting wrecked by the IJN and could barely contain the KM.
>>
>>5776969
>RN was getting wrecked by the IJN and could barely contain the KM.
wow what a delusional post. the meme about /his/ being brainlets is true.
>>
>>5776276
>Chinese coast
>jungle
Jesus christ /his/, please tell me you are just pretending to be retarded.
>>
>>5776969
Jesus Christ.



Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.