Dec 1942... Pacific Japan still winning and attacking Hawaii

Historical what if discussions, hypothetical operations, battleship vs. battleship engagements, design your own warship, etc.
lwd
Senior Member
Posts: 3822
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 2:15 am
Location: Southfield, USA

Re: Dec 1942... Pacific Japan still winning and attacking Hawaii

Post by lwd »

BlackBirdZGTR wrote:
So basically their strategy was to hit the US hard and hope they'll just throw in the towel? They would not even attempt to get themselfs in a position where they could attempt to fight off a counter attack?
Oh they wanted a strong defensive position. That would be part of what would discourage the US.
(taking Midway, Guam, Hawaii, isolating Australia)
Midway was a stretch for them even Isoating Australia was beyond thier means although they planned to.
I have read of the logistic problems of Japan even being able to invade Hawaii but could they not of eliminated whatever ship remains at Pearl Harbor along with Isolating Hawaii by naval blockade as well as carpet bombing Hawaii with Neils and Betty's from Johnstons atoll and Midway? I would assume after an extensive period of being isolated, shelled and bombed Hawaii should be easily capable for the Japanese to take?
Well number 1 PH is just barely in range of Midway for a Betty accourding to wiki
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitsubishi_G4M
I'm not sure how much of a bomb load it's carrying at that point. Same question about the Neil. Consider also that unescorted bombers are going to get shot to ribbons over PH.

Midway on the other hand is can be hit by US ships out of PH as well as being interdicted by subs. Trying to shell PH would also be a rather risky undertaking as in addition to aircraft Hawaii had some decent shore batteries.
JtD
Member
Posts: 216
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2009 11:37 pm

Re: Dec 1942... Pacific Japan still winning and attacking Hawaii

Post by JtD »

The G4M would not have had a better success against Hawaii than it historically had against Guadalcanal. The Japanese bombers were not nearly as good at high altitude bombing as the British or US bombers were. And even their success remained very limited against military targets until very late in the war. Maintaining a siege against PH would be very, very difficult for the Japanese, and not fit into their doctrine anyway.

If the Japanese were targeting Hawaii, they'd go for the invasion in a quick and powerful attack with either a quick success or a slow defeat.
BlackBirdZGTR
Member
Posts: 45
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2009 1:25 am

Re: Dec 1942... Pacific Japan still winning and attacking Hawaii

Post by BlackBirdZGTR »

Well number 1 PH is just barely in range of Midway for a Betty accourding to wiki
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitsubishi_G4M
I'm not sure how much of a bomb load it's carrying at that point. Same question about the Neil. Consider also that unescorted bombers are going to get shot to ribbons over PH.
The range of the Neils were over 2000 miles so odds are they would of deployed Neils to midway and lets not also forget Johnstons atoll right? As well what were the range of the Gekko fighters if they would be necesary to defend the bombers? :think:
Midway on the other hand is can be hit by US ships out of PH as well as being interdicted by subs. Trying to shell PH would also be a rather risky undertaking as in addition to aircraft Hawaii had some decent shore batteries.
But at that point what surface ship would attempt to attack midway if in this scenario all the USN pre war carriers have been sunk, both North Carolina battleships are gone and the first Essex carrier has just been recently commissioned?

If things are too bleak and the Japanese are continously pounding Hawaii with bases near it wouldent any important ships that were station at PH that have not been sunk retreat to San Diego so they would not get sunk and would be able to participate in the counter attack?
User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7760
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: Dec 1942... Pacific Japan still winning and attacking Hawaii

Post by RF »

JtD wrote:
RF wrote:
...This nightmare scenario could have happened if the Axis leaders were strategically savvy, had brains and were prepared to work together and trust each other...
Germany was interested in their Lebensraum im Osten, Eastern Europe. They were not interested in a war against the UK, let alone the US. So there would not be a strategic plan to attack or let alone invade the US.

Japan was interested in their Asian Prosperty Zone. They were not interested in a war against the US extending beyond a fight for the US territories/protectorates in Asia. So they wouldn't develop a strategic plan against the US mainland.

The German - Japanese cooparation was, at least from the German perpective, mostly aimed against the Socialist Soviet Union, to force it into a two front war. Again at least from a German perpective, it was hoped that other nations, like the UK, would join the Germans in their war against the Communists.

So your proposed nightmare scenario could not have happened because the US were no target. It simply does not fit into the picture of the world at that time.
But this is still looking at this from a tactical angle. Savvy leaders would recognise that the UK, Soviet Union and USA would have to be defeated, so their picture of the world would reflect that. Further they would realise their best chances would be to defeat each one separately, not fight all of them together.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.
User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7760
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: Dec 1942... Pacific Japan still winning and attacking Hawaii

Post by RF »

lwd wrote:
BlackBirdZGTR wrote:
So basically their strategy was to hit the US hard and hope they'll just throw in the towel? They would not even attempt to get themselfs in a position where they could attempt to fight off a counter attack?
Oh they wanted a strong defensive position. That would be part of what would discourage the US.
But no real planning was given to this, or to what would happen if the US didn't give up. That was the critical mistake.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.
lwd
Senior Member
Posts: 3822
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 2:15 am
Location: Southfield, USA

Re: Dec 1942... Pacific Japan still winning and attacking Hawaii

Post by lwd »

BlackBirdZGTR wrote: The range of the Neils were over 2000 miles so odds are they would of deployed Neils to midway and lets not also forget Johnstons atoll right? As well what were the range of the Gekko fighters if they would be necesary to defend the bombers? :think:
I believe that's the ferry range not combat radius. PH is what somewhere between 1200 and 1400 miles from Midway. Also long range for bombers is often with a very reduced or no bomb load. So the question is what sort of bomb load could they carry to PH from Midway? Certainly they aren't going to have much in the way of an escort and any damage they accumulate is likely to result in the loss of the plane. PH had much stronger air defences than the "canal" and the bombing proved ineffective there.
Midway on the other hand is can be hit by US ships out of PH as well as being interdicted by subs. Trying to shell PH would also be a rather risky undertaking as in addition to aircraft Hawaii had some decent shore batteries.
But at that point what surface ship would attempt to attack midway if in this scenario all the USN pre war carriers have been sunk, both North Carolina battleships are gone and the first Essex carrier has just been recently commissioned?
[/quote]
DD's and or cruisers could make occasional runs in at night. Even subs could surface and fire a few rounds on to the air strip.
If things are too bleak and the Japanese are continously pounding Hawaii with bases near it wouldent any important ships that were station at PH that have not been sunk retreat to San Diego so they would not get sunk and would be able to participate in the counter attack?
But the Japanese don't have the planes to do this. If you send a bunch of bombers to Midway and Johnston Atol they are going to suffer very high attrition from US fighters and AA defences and the US is likely to follow up with raids by surface ships. Just keeping them supplied is going to be a problem as the US will probably keep subs nearby all most continuously.

Oh and about Johnston Atoll. It isn't going to be a very good base for launching major bombing raids from. Look at the satelight map at:
http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&tab=wl
one pretty short runway is all you got and not much room for hangers or defences. A sub could potentially surface at night and take out the entire place not to mention a DD. It's also in range of bombing missions from PH.
JtD
Member
Posts: 216
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2009 11:37 pm

Re: Dec 1942... Pacific Japan still winning and attacking Hawaii

Post by JtD »

RF wrote: But this is still looking at this from a tactical angle. Savvy leaders would recognise that the UK, Soviet Union and USA would have to be defeated, so their picture of the world would reflect that. Further they would realise their best chances would be to defeat each one separately, not fight all of them together.
No. Germany had one enemy, the Soviet Union. It tried to fight it with support by the UK. As it turned out, however, the UK declared war on Germany and later sided with the Soviet Union. That wasn't to be expected from the German point of view and you'd need to be more than savvy to predict it. The way the war went, Germany should have taken the UK out of the war before going on to attack the largest country on the planet. That would have been enough to make things a lot worse.
lwd
Senior Member
Posts: 3822
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 2:15 am
Location: Southfield, USA

Re: Dec 1942... Pacific Japan still winning and attacking Hawaii

Post by lwd »

RF wrote:
lwd wrote: Oh they wanted a strong defensive position. That would be part of what would discourage the US.
But no real planning was given to this, or to what would happen if the US didn't give up. That was the critical mistake.
But if the US had the determination to stay in the game then they would loose. If they thought that there was a good chance that the US would do so the only really viable option they had was not to go to war. The best thing they could have done was not get involved in China which wasn't really planed by the central government anyway from what I've read.
lwd
Senior Member
Posts: 3822
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 2:15 am
Location: Southfield, USA

Re: Dec 1942... Pacific Japan still winning and attacking Hawaii

Post by lwd »

I give up. It's eaten my post twice.
User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7760
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: Dec 1942... Pacific Japan still winning and attacking Hawaii

Post by RF »

JtD wrote:
No. Germany had one enemy, the Soviet Union. It tried to fight it with support by the UK. As it turned out, however, the UK declared war on Germany and later sided with the Soviet Union. That wasn't to be expected from the German point of view and you'd need to be more than savvy to predict it.
This is the sort of tunnel vision Hitler was in.

As a gangster style of politician Hitler should have gauged the true situation far more accurately than he did. For starters the NSDAP co-operated with the KPD in the early 1930's when it mutually suited them. Hitler signed a non-aggression Pact with Stalin. So why shouldn't Churchill co-operate with Stalin against a common enemy? Hitler even acknowledged this without realising the full import of what he was saying when he justified Barbaroossa to his doubting generals by saying that ''Russia was England's last hope'' of avoiding losing the war in Europe.

More than savvy to predict it? On the contrary it shouldn't require much brainpower to anticipate a situation like that.
Last edited by RF on Wed Mar 25, 2009 3:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.
User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7760
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: Dec 1942... Pacific Japan still winning and attacking Hawaii

Post by RF »

[quote="JtD'']The way the war went, Germany should have taken the UK out of the war before going on to attack the largest country on the planet.[/quote]

Agreed.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.
User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7760
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: Dec 1942... Pacific Japan still winning and attacking Hawaii

Post by RF »

lwd wrote:
But if the US had the determination to stay in the game then they would loose. If they thought that there was a good chance that the US would do so the only really viable option they had was not to go to war. The best thing they could have done was not get involved in China which wasn't really planed by the central government anyway from what I've read.
Agreed.

What the IJA should have done was disengage from China back to the 1933 borders. Except that the IJA couldn't do that without losing face.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.
JtD
Member
Posts: 216
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2009 11:37 pm

Re: Dec 1942... Pacific Japan still winning and attacking Hawaii

Post by JtD »

RF wrote:
JtD wrote:
No. Germany had one enemy, the Soviet Union. It tried to fight it with support by the UK. As it turned out, however, the UK declared war on Germany and later sided with the Soviet Union. That wasn't to be expected from the German point of view and you'd need to be more than savvy to predict it.
This is the sort of tunnel vision Hitler was in.

As a gangster style of politician Hitler should have gauged the true situation far more accurately than he did. For starters the NSDAP co-operated with the KPD in the early 1930's when it mutually suited them. Hitler signed a non-aggression Pact with Stalin. So why shouldn't Churchill co-operate with Stalin against a common enemy? Hitler even acknowledged this without realising the full import of what he was saying when he justified Barbaroossa to his doubting generals by saying that ''Russia was England's last hope'' of avoiding losing the war in Europe.

More than savvy to predict it? On the contrary it shouldn't require much brainpower to anticipate a situation like that.
This might be from a 1940 point of view, and at that time it is much too late for strategic plans a proposed by you. Also in you scenario the US does nothing but sit and wait...

I still don't get why Hitler should stop Barbarossa, an operation aimed at his main target, to attack the US instead, a country more difficult to attack let alone defeat while being totally uninteresting from a German point of view. And then, while heavily engaged in fighting the US, the Soviet troops invade central Europe...
User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7760
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: Dec 1942... Pacific Japan still winning and attacking Hawaii

Post by RF »

This as I say is the tunnel vision Hitler and yourself are in.

The USSR was not Hitler's main enemy. He (and you) imagine it to be. But the USA posed the biggest threat. And while Britain was still in the war the US could strike directly at Germany, while Germany could not reach the US.

My schematic for an Axis win does not actually require much of the Heer, basically the two panzer divisions which in reality were deployed in North Africa. So the number of panzer divisions on the border with the USSR wouldn't be any the less than on 21 June 1941, in fact with Germany fully mobilised for total war there would or should be substantially more. As for a Soviet attack, this is already discussed in another thread started by me, and my conclusion is that by operating Soviet forces further westward Stalin gives Barbarossa has a better chance of succeeding.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.
User avatar
Legend
Senior Member
Posts: 325
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2008 12:46 am
Location: Tomahawk, Wisconsin

Re: Dec 1942... Pacific Japan still winning and attacking Hawaii

Post by Legend »

A victory for the Axis would have been for Hitler to keep the Russians on his side until the US was out of the way, as in defeated (Which I see as nearly impossible due to the percentage of armed people here). If they did manage to maybe take over Canada or Mexico, then bomb us from there, destroying all of our faucilities and Washington DC, then maybe they could have sped armored divisions through... Maybe. Only after we were out of the way would Hitler have wanted to get rid of another ally.
AND THE SEA SHALL GRANT EACH MAN NEW HOPE, AS SLEEP BRINGS DREAMS.
Post Reply