Naval History Forums

The 74th anniversary of what is collectively known as the Naval Battle of Guadalcanal passed a few days ago. Next year will be the 75th anniversary and it should probably be better to make mention of it then. However, I want to make mention of it now. This was the decisive battle of the decisive campaign of the Pacific War. In retrospect it ultimately determined the outcome of that war.

The battle consisted of several battles over a three day period:

1)First there was an air battle over Savo Sound when the Japanese mustered up a large air raid against Admiral Turner's transports. The Japanese airmen came out the worst of it in combat with American fighter aircraft and AA from USN warships commanded by Rear Admirals Scott and Callaghan . This was during the afternoon of Nov 12th.

2)The Battle of Friday the Thirteen was fought after midnight. It was a bloody knife fight fought at point blank range. The USN cruisers and destroyers suffered badly. Both Admirals Scott and Callaghan lost their lives. The Long Lance torpedo proved deadly indeed. Although it was a tactical defeat for the USN, the IJN force was stopped from reaching its objective of bombarding Henderson Field.

3) The following morning American airpower from Henderson Field and the carrier Enterprise ruled the day. Japanese transports and barges suffered badly and the battleship Hiei, which was crippled during the battle of the night before, was eventually sunk.

4) That night Henderson Field was bombarded by two Japanese heavy cruisers Maya and Suzuya unopposed.

5)Henderson Field was not neutralized. Once again the IJN paid the price. Their cruisers were attacked as they retired after day light. The cruiser Kinugasa, which the Maya and Suzuya had joined up with was sunk. Once again Japanese transports suffered badly.

6)Admiral Kondo was ordered back that night to finish the job using the battleship Kirishima supported by a large force of cruisers and destroyers. However, Admiral Halsey had ordered Rear Admiral Willis Lee with the battleships Washington and South Dakota to Savo Sound to halt this attempt. The American vanguard destroyers suffered badly to Long Lance torpedoes, but the battleships remained untouched by the deadly fish. The South Dakota was badly damaged by shellfire, but the Washington sank the Kirishima. By dawn the Americans had won the decisive battle.

Good synopsis. :)

This was a very big battle for the very young American forces in the Pacific! Good write up

The battleship dual was intense for both sides. Extreme pummeling.

SOUTH DAKOTA sustained at least 26 projectile hits. It is estimated that one hit was 5-inch, six were 6-inch, eighteen were 8-inch and one was 14-inch. The calibre of these hits was estimated from the damage produced and fragments recovered of one projectile. In many cases the size of the entry hole of the projectile almost gave a direct measure of its calibre. Although structural damage was extensive, it was considerably less than would be generally expected from this number and calibre of hits.

aurora

aurora wrote:SOUTH DAKOTA sustained at least 26 projectile hits. It is estimated that one hit was 5-inch, six were 6-inch, eighteen were 8-inch and one was 14-inch. The calibre of these hits was estimated from the damage produced and fragments recovered of one projectile. In many cases the size of the entry hole of the projectile almost gave a direct measure of its calibre. Although structural damage was extensive, it was considerably less than would be generally expected from this number and calibre of hits.

aurora

At the risk of upsetting some people, it should be pointed out that South Dakota's damages, while never in danger of causing it to sink, were significant. The fighting abilities were significantly impaired. The first salvo from Kirishima scored a 6" hit on the foretop's main fire control directer disabling it. Steam from broken steam lines to the funnel forced the abandonment from battle 2 position. The communications cabling to and from the forward secondary director were cut to pieces by splinters. Indeed all the cut up cabling and resulting short circuits throughout were tripping breakers and caused second general power failure. I recall Karl Heidenreich pointing out the surprising vulnerabilities of the cabling when he was presented with the original reports several years ago. Well did Admiral Lee comment:

...our battleships are neither designed nor armed for close range night actions with enemy light forces. A few minutes intense fire, at short range, from secondary battery guns, can and did, render one of our battleships deaf, dumb, blind, and impotent, through destruction of radar, radio, and fire control circuits.

Some design features such as the armoured weather deck -or whatever semantics one chooses to use for it- and the outer shell's use of armoured grade material did probably limit the damage from splinters, save some personal, and in the one case of the 14" hit on the after barbett, de-capped the incoming round.

Nonetheless, the water plane was riddled enough that SD was leaving behind a significant trail of oil in her wake.

Years ago I read that South Dakota's sailors, at least some of them, blamed Washington for one hit. This blue-on-blue hasn't been confirmed that I know of so I'm just wondering if the legend carried on?

OpanaPointer wrote:Years ago I read that South Dakota's sailors, at least some of them, blamed Washington for one hit. This blue-on-blue hasn't been confirmed that I know of so I'm just wondering if the legend carried on?

While I have never heard of a friendly fire incident between BB56 and BB57 during this battle, friendly fire incidents were common during all of the chaotic Guadalcanal night battles by both sides. Admiral Scott on the Atlanta was killed by fire from the San Francisco, for example. However, knowing the relative positions of South Dakota and Washington to each other during the battle, I rather doubt that there were friendly fire between those two warships.

Dave Saxton wrote:

OpanaPointer wrote:Years ago I read that South Dakota's sailors, at least some of them, blamed Washington for one hit. This blue-on-blue hasn't been confirmed that I know of so I'm just wondering if the legend carried on?

While I have never heard of a friendly fire incident between BB56 and BB57 during this battle, friendly fire incidents were common during all of the chaotic Guadalcanal night battles by both sides. Admiral Scott on the Atlanta was killed by fire from the San Francisco, for example. However, knowing the relative positions of South Dakota and Washington to each other during the battle, I rather doubt that there were friendly fire between those two warships.

I haven't heard much about this, but "buried history nuggets" are interesting to trace out.

Lee comment:

...our battleships are neither designed nor armed for close range night actions with enemy light forces. A few minutes intense fire, at short range, from secondary battery guns, can and did, render one of our battleships deaf, dumb, blind, and impotent, through destruction of radar, radio, and fire control circuits.

Dave did you possess a copy of the whole comment ?

Thorsten Wahl wrote:

Lee comment:

...our battleships are neither designed nor armed for close range night actions with enemy light forces. A few minutes intense fire, at short range, from secondary battery guns, can and did, render one of our battleships deaf, dumb, blind, and impotent, through destruction of radar, radio, and fire control circuits.

Dave did you possess a copy of the whole comment ?

Hi Thorsten,

I probably do have the whole comment on copy but it is not handy, as most of that stuff is currently boxed up in storage. Hornfischer's Neptune's Inferno includes the comment as well if you need a handy source. Hornfischer cites Combat Division 6 report. However, Lee also makes those comments and expands on it in his Task Force 64 Action Report filed in Feb 1943 as I recall. All these documents along with the reports by Gatch and Davis are part of the Group 38 collection of documents at the US National Archives in Maryland.

It is the 75th anniversary now.

Just checked several versions of this battle. The short version is the SD was leading and perhaps 500-1000 meters to the Washintons starboard - closer to the enemy. When the SD was hit its speed fell off rapidly, causing it to mask the enemy from the accelerating Washington as it pass on the SD portside. The Washington was firing as the SD blocked the line of fire, and the SD was hit again at that moment.

Since the enemy was on the SD starboard and the Washington port side odds are a fratricide hit would be port side

Carl Schwamberger wrote: ↑Thu Oct 04, 2018 1:40 am Just checked several versions of this battle. The short version is the SD was leading and perhaps 500-1000 meters to the Washintons starboard - closer to the enemy. When the SD was hit its speed fell off rapidly, causing it to mask the enemy from the accelerating Washington as it pass on the SD portside. The Washington was firing as the SD blocked the line of fire, and the SD was hit again at that moment.

Since the enemy was on the SD starboard and the Washington port side odds are a fratricide hit would be port side

The 4 USN destroyers were leading, then Washington (flag) then SD. The destroyers were hit and set ablaze with Washington passing to port and SD to starboard where she was silhouetted by the fires.

dunmunro wrote: ↑Sat Oct 06, 2018 5:09 pm The 4 USN destroyers were leading, then Washington (flag) then SD. The destroyers were hit and set ablaze with Washington passing to port and SD to starboard where she was silhouetted by the fires.

South Dakota's trailing position was a problem for Washington because the latter's surface search radar was not installed high enough on the forward superstructure to allow an unobstructed view aft. Thus she had a large radar blind-zone to the rear, and did not have a good idea of where SoDak was for much of the engagement.