Page 15 of 15

Re: Greatest admiral of all time

Posted: Mon Sep 21, 2015 5:05 pm
by RF
Like all good commanders he had a fair share of luck, in catching the Japanese out when he did. Unlike Spruance the IJN had no radar, which would have given Nagumo more time to react.

Re: Greatest admiral of all time

Posted: Wed Dec 30, 2015 5:41 pm
by yellowtail3
I think that Frank Jack Fletcher did a pretty good job in the year-plus he was in combat - won at Coral Sea, won at Midway, won at Santa Cruz.

Of course, the Marines bitch about him and Morrison was left peeved that Fletcher had better things to do than help him write his books, but his record is there. Good man, Frank Jack Fletcher.

Re: Greatest admiral of all time

Posted: Tue Feb 23, 2016 5:06 am
by yoyoyoyo
Why is Yi Sun Sin not on there. :x :x :x :x

Re: Greatest admiral of all time

Posted: Sat Feb 27, 2016 9:53 pm
by VoidSamukai
yoyoyoyo wrote:Why is Yi Sun Sin not on there. :x :x :x :x
Maybe because it would be a "sin" to include him XD

Re: Greatest admiral of all time

Posted: Mon Feb 29, 2016 10:19 am
by Francis Marliere
yellowtail3 wrote:I think that Frank Jack Fletcher did a pretty good job in the year-plus he was in combat - won at Coral Sea, won at Midway, won at Santa Cruz.
Admiral Fletcher indeed did a very good job. However, he was not in command at Santa Cruz (which was a US defeat). FJF last battle as CTF commander was Eastern Solomons.

Re: Greatest admiral of all time

Posted: Thu Mar 03, 2016 3:36 pm
by Dave Saxton
Morison's criticism of Fletcher was based mainly on the views of Adm Lee and Lee's staff from when Morison served aboard the Washington and became a member of the Gun Club.

By the way, I voted for Nimitz. The more I have learned about Nimitz during the war the more and more impressed I become.

Re: Greatest admiral of all time

Posted: Thu Mar 03, 2016 9:24 pm
by Steve Crandell
I have great admiration for Nimitz; he was a wonderful leader and his abilities were well suited to his position commanding the Pacfic Fleet. However, he wasn't in command of any ships employed tactically, and most of the others were. He has to be measured by a different yardstick; one which would include other officers in similar positions like Raeder and Yamamoto. He was arguably better than either of them, but I don't think he fits well compared to people like Nelson, who was in tactical command of several bloody fleet engagements. That doesn't mean he wasn't as "good"; just different. That is why a comparison like "Greatest Admiral of All Time" is, IMO kind of meaningless because of the huge difference in setting.

I keep thinking what a horrible tragedy it was when Halsey replaced Norman Scott with Callaghan just before the bloody engagement of 13 November, 1941. Scott might have been the leader the USN desperately needed then, and he was robbed of the opportunity. Time and again our sailors were robbed of good opportunities by poor leadership. In the event we prevailed by feeding lots of ships into the meat grinder, enabling the Cactus Air Force to do it's job. We lost three times as many sailors as Marines during that period.

Re: Greatest admiral of all time

Posted: Sat Nov 05, 2016 6:29 pm
by Dave Saxton
Steve Crandell wrote:
I keep thinking what a horrible tragedy it was when Halsey replaced Norman Scott with Callaghan just before the bloody engagement of 13 November, 1941. Scott might have been the leader the USN desperately needed then, and he was robbed of the opportunity. Time and again our sailors were robbed of good opportunities by poor leadership.
It turns out that it was Admiral Turner that made that decision, although Halsey didn't countermand it even though Halsey preferred Scott personally. The rationale was that Callaghan was promoted 15 days before Scott was. This was standard USN protocol in such cases I understand.

Callaghan was operating the general battle plan that Scott wrote up and recommended following Cape Esperance. Where Callaghan made a mistake was picking his old ship that he had been skipper of, the San Francisco, as his flag ship. SF didn't have an SG radar. He had to rely on the narrative of the Fletcher's SG operator over the TBS system. The TBS system was quickly overwhelmed with information overload and became useless. He didn't really know what was going on and hesitated.

Scott's flagship before he was sent to Savo Sound independently on a separate escort mission was also the San Francisco. That's how he ended up on Atlanta, another cruiser with out an SG. But would Scott have been on SF if it was him anyway, and in the same predicament that Callaghan found himself in?

Scott would probably have not wanted Juneau and Atlanta along if it was up to him. He had already submitted reports that the 5"/38 was virtually useless in a surface battle. He wanted bigger guns for surface battle. However sending in the AA cruisers was ordered by Turner.

What is sad and tragic is that Scott was probably killed by friendly fire from the San Francisco, just before Callaghan was cut down by fire from the Hiei. They both deserve our greatest respect and honor.

Re: Greatest admiral of all time

Posted: Mon Mar 21, 2022 4:57 pm
by SteveSmith
A top admiral's list and neither Themistocles nor Agrippa are on it?????????

Re: Greatest admiral of all time

Posted: Tue Mar 22, 2022 1:46 am
by Byron Angel
SteveSmith wrote: Mon Mar 21, 2022 4:57 pm A top admiral's list and neither Themistocles nor Agrippa are on it?????????
Absolutely fair comment ... especially if Don Juan of Austria is among the candidates.

Byron