Pearl Harbor: Possible third wave

[jazsa80]

But but but...

These are big heavy doors, I would have thought that even if you knocked them out of alignment it would be a big task to fix them.

Do they run/guided on rails or are the doors themselves boyant so they 'float' open and shut?

And those tank farms, they would cop a bashing even from a few bombs. Rupture them and with a bit of luck ignite them and you would have a hard time putting them out. It my impression that water dont do the job. You need C02 or powder.

[lwd]

...
I think the doors are the key to the whole thing. I'm under the impression the Germans were not able to repair the Normandie dock.

I'm pretty sure they didn't. I'm not sure if they couldn't or just didn't see the utility given the situation. A ship full of explosives can also do a bit more damage than a few bombs. It would be interesting to know if they are kept flooded or not. It would seam to make sense if it's not in use to have them flooded. Less pressure on the sytem but I'm not very knowledgable about such things and what makes sence to me in this regard may not stand up to how things really work.

[Bgile]

When I was stationed at Pearl around 1970, they were almost always dry, and there were usually ships of some kind in them.

A little OT trivia: When I visited Japan on a nuclear submarine, they put us in the drydock used by Yamato/Musashi. It wasn't flooded, but the gates were closed ... they just wanted to make sure we didn't radiate the whole city. They had a guy at the brow 24/7 checking everything that came off the boat with a Geiger Counter, and they sampled the water in the drydock periodically. It was rather amusing to us, but they took it quite seriously.

[lwd]

When I was stationed at Pearl around 1970, they were almost always dry, and there were usually ships of some kind in them.
....

That makes sense. A litle air time will kill off some of the oranisms that foul hulls. So even if the ship doesn't "need" to be put into dry dock if the repairs will take a while and it's not otherwise needed you might as well. It does mean that bombs that land in the dry dock aren't going to transmit much force to the sides and a bit of fresh concrete can patch the bottom if needed.

[jazsa80]

Bgile,

Just out of interest, did many of your crew realise the historical significance of the drydock (having Yamato/Musashi them)?

[Bgile]

Bgile,

Just out of interest, did many of your crew realise the historical significance of the drydock (having Yamato/Musashi them)?

Oh, yes. It was announced over the ship's loudspeakers. Also, the organization I worked for was located in one of the old Japanese bomb shelters. They had tunneled out a hill.

[irving1941]

Hi!

I´m new to the forum since a couple of weeks now and want to say hello. So... hello!

Is anyone of you familiar to the alternative novels from Newt Gingrich and William Forstchen?

On the second novel, Days of Infamy, this same scenario is potrayed which incredible results. And it has to be because such important issues, more than less, owed it´s development and outcome to much important and relevant criteria elements than just technology or, in cases, tactical or doctrinal thought. At the begining of this novel the authors put aside a lot of such considerations that has been taken place in this forum because of a higher purpose is at work: the political and moral level. I have seen some posts around here where both these issues has been mentioned but sadly not been followed to the greater discussion potential. The fact that a third wave of Japanese attackers takes place is because the Japanese commander is willing to do so. And the American response depends not so much in the technological or inmediate tactical disposition but of what orders are given to the field commanders. If the President order his commanders to fight then they will fight. If you allow your commanders to hide behind their fears then they will certainily do. Only a few exceptions will fight, as Halsey. But not even him will fight if the President orders him not to do so.

Please, take that reading before further discussions on this subjet... in the worst case it could not harm...

[Bgile]

Welcome to the forum!

I haven't read those alternate histories. I have a reading list of real histories I haven't completed. The times I have tried to read alternate histories, I put it down after a short time. The author seems to invariably assume his hero of the moment doesn't make any mistakes, and I have yet to read a real history where that is true. They also tend to ignore aspects of the real situation that don't fit their story very well. They tend to ignore logistics. They tend to ignore communications difficulty, which is sometimes a huge problem particularly with respect to on-scene commanders getting timely and/or accurate intelligence reports.

What is the worst? The worst is the opportunity cost of reading that instead of Friedman's Amphibious ship volume, etc. which probably won't make me as angry.

[Bgile]

I will try at least to go to the library and look at the latest book. One thing that bothers me about the prospect of reading something where the Japanese win is the horrible things they did to subjugated populations. It's just not a very pleasant thought to contemplate our people being controlled by these terrible regimes. If I want to feel uncomfortable and stressed I can just go to work.

[Tiornu]

Friedman's Amphibious ship volume, etc. which probably won't make me as angry.

Why, those dirty LSTs...!

[irving1941]

Well, I do agree with Bgile in what regards to his objections on how the genre has been handled... as almost all fictional genres are handled anyway. And agrees with Tiornu about the LST
I do found myself amusing this because at the end we would not get a very much modified post war scenario. The Japanese would have lost the war, anyway, they were simply unprepared to fight it. It´s obvious that the way the US would have conducted the war could have changed in a significant way. Let´s see.
The Japanese succeded destroying the tank farms whilst Halsey is around. Yamamoto sent two fast BB to bombard Pearl. Halsey attacks them and got nailed. No Enterprise nor Lexington for Midway. So, no Midway. The Japanese rules the seas for 1942. The the US must do a Pacific First strategy in order to protect Australia from invasion and save, somehow, MacArthur´s ass from the frying pan. With all US effort concentrated here then the help to the Soviet Union and England is not as great as it really was. Montgomery´s Alamein could take place or not, it doens´t matter because Patton didn´t land at Casablanca and there is no allied invasion of Sicily and Italy in the 43, maybe not at all. Stalin didn´t get much help neither and maybe von Paulus escapes from his siege at Stalingrad, it doesn´t matter because the soviets are not as well prepared to face Citadel. Even if the north part of Citadel didn´t work then the SS could have succeded at Prockorova (I can spell that dam name). And with certainity Hitler would not call off the offensive because the US is not invading Italy at all in the summer of 43. And by the summer of 43 the US is just begining it´s offensive, where? Retaking Hawai? Not likely the Japanese would have the resources to go there. Maybe Midway or the Solomons? For sure 1945 would have been a serious fighting year because the Marianas and Philipines would have still been under Japanese rule. Hitler would have been fighting Stalin without so many resources deployed in France. Maybe Rommel is in Russia. And he is alive because no serious man would have ever attempt to kill Hilter while fighting only the soviets. No D-Day in 1944, not in 1945 neither. At the end Hitler forces Stalin to the negotiation table and I don´t know what the British could have done. Ideas? Germany wins in Europe. But to no avail. In July 1945 the US lights the candle and the first A bomb explodes. In August the bombs are used against military targets in the Pacific Theatre in order to "clear" islands instead of landing on them with marines. The nazis, that are the other ones with physics take note and go all the way to produce their bomb whilst the US is busy fighting Japan. Then the US must use the bomb against Berlin and force a surrender. Will the US ever do such thing? I doubt it. But if the US did then we will have the same 1946 scenario: Germany defeated, Japan defeated, US a victor and the soviets deceiving everybody, including US President and becoming the new threat. So, at the end, nothing changes. Being that the case then let Japanese send a third wave or win at Midway, nothing changes. In the measure that the US seized the central european and jewish german scientists there is no wild card here. The real wartime asset were those scientists. Almost everything else would have been irrelevant.
Am I crazy?

[Legend]

No, not crazy at all. I agree and admit that I didn't even think about our little uranium cretins... They almost gaurantee the sucess of the Pacific, although I doubt we would use them to clear islands, from what I recall we didn't have very many A-Bombs at the time. I don't think we would bomb Berlin, one whiff of the bomb from Japan and the Germans would maybe go to the negotiation tables... their not like the Japanese, they know when their beaten. In the end all of Hitler's aides were ready to throw in the towel when Hitler was hiding in his bunker.

[lwd]

... I don't think we would bomb Berlin, one whiff of the bomb from Japan and the Germans would maybe go to the negotiation tables... ..

The Germans were first on the list as far as the bomb was concerned. There has been considerable debate as to whether or not Berlin would have been the first target or not.

[Bgile]

I also agree with irving's thoughts about what might have happened in the Pacific. Lack of carriers would have ruled out any US offensive there.

Beyond that though, I'm not sure it would have effected the war in Euope very much. The convoys to Russia would have taken place as well. US carriers weren't used much in the European theatre until the "jeep" carriers in the North Atlantic, and those would have been there anyway in this scenario. I don't see any reason why all the historical amphib invasions in Europe couldn't have gone forward as they did historically.

[RF]

... I don't think we would bomb Berlin, one whiff of the bomb from Japan and the Germans would maybe go to the negotiation tables... ..

The Germans were first on the list as far as the bomb was concerned. There has been considerable debate as to whether or not Berlin would have been the first target or not.

My understanding was that any bombing of Germany with atomic weapons would be in a ''safe area''' away from the immediate borders of western allied countries. This consideration led to Munich being identified as the first possible target, taking into account that it was regarded as the birthplace of nazism.
Berlin was ruled out as a first target in order not to wipe out a nazi leadership which was expected to make the unconditional surrender; the western allies were concerned that a German government be in place from to obtain to obtain formal surrender.