Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

USS Iowa vs. IJNS Yamato??

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by desertswo View Post
    One need not lecture me about a conflict in which I played an active role.
    Sir, no disrepect nor lecture intended. Merely pointing out that Japanese military experience and expertise did not measure up under close scrutiny. They took on the Chinese and even then were stopped by the Chinese.

    Originally posted by desertswo View Post
    That aside neither US nor British forces in the Far East in 1941 were US VII Corps in the quality of either personnel or equipment. You aren't even talking Granny Smiths and Golden Delicious but true apples and oranges.
    I begged to differ, Sir. The one area the Japanese did excel at was foot infantry but everything else, they came up short, namely armour, artillery, and engineering. That they won their victories were more through guild than any superiority of arms in either technique or technology.
    Chimo

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
      Sir, no disrepect nor lecture intended. Merely pointing out that Japanese military experience and expertise did not measure up under close scrutiny. They took on the Chinese and even then were stopped by the Chinese.

      I begged to differ, Sir. The one area the Japanese did excel at was foot infantry but everything else, they came up short, namely armour, artillery, and engineering. That they won their victories were more through guild than any superiority of arms in either technique or technology.
      So they read Sun Tzu and we didn't. Believe me we do now as well as Clausewitz.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
        I begged to differ, Sir. The one area the Japanese did excel at was foot infantry but everything else, they came up short, namely armour, artillery, and engineering. That they won their victories were more through guild than any superiority of arms in either technique or technology.
        I begged to differ, Sir ;) There are a couple of other areas which come to mind. The first is torpedoes, which i don't think is disputed. The second is less well known I think, but closer to my heart...

        We can safely say that they were well ahead with regards to unconventional sneak attack technology (e.g. midget subs) and training. The only rivals at that point in the war were the Italians who had the famous 'maiale' (pig) human torpedoes. The IJN were launching midget subs from submerged submarines via dry connections which was conceptually ahead of equivalent Cold War capabilities. The subs were well engineered and had very impressive performance, which were not just on paper but real and operationally useful.

        History judges the Italian efforts as successful but at this stage both countries were enjoying similar levels of success (or lack thereof). Not knocking the Italians at all, far from it, but part of their fame comes from the fact that the British recognized the potential and emulated them. Whereas the Japanese midget subs were dismissed as novelties or overlooked, largely due to the racism of the time (although some Australians appreciated their bravery - not how it is remembered today).

        Of course, there is the eternal debate about the merits of such unconventional assets. Tell that to the crew of HMS Ramillies.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Covert_Shores View Post
          I begged to differ, Sir ;) There are a couple of other areas which come to mind. The first is torpedoes, which i don't think is disputed. The second is less well known I think, but closer to my heart...
          I was speaking within context of Japanese military experience which was the 2nd Sino-Japanese War that gave the Japanese their military expertise.
          Chimo

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
            I was speaking within context of Japanese military experience which was the 2nd Sino-Japanese War that gave the Japanese their military expertise.
            That war, along with the air battles over China also taught the Japanese that the future of air power regarding fighters was agility to win the dog fight. Although the Zero was famous for its agility, the Oscar could turn inside the Zero. Both the IJAAF and IJN came to the same conclusions that low level, low speed agility was king. They were doomed because of it. By the time the IJAAF recovered and introduced a decent fighter (Ki-84 army and J2M navy) it was too late and there were not enough pilots or production capacity to stem the tide of defeat.

            Comment


            • THE USAAF & USN one pass and haul ass was a certainty to success.

              Plus the idea to sacrifice agility and range to survivability also doomed many an IJN/IJAAF pilot to P-40s/F4Fs.
              “Loyalty to country ALWAYS. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it.”
              Mark Twain

              Comment


              • Originally posted by zraver View Post
                That war, along with the air battles over China also taught the Japanese that the future of air power regarding fighters was agility to win the dog fight. Although the Zero was famous for its agility, the Oscar could turn inside the Zero. Both the IJAAF and IJN came to the same conclusions that low level, low speed agility was king. They were doomed because of it. By the time the IJAAF recovered and introduced a decent fighter (Ki-84 army and J2M navy) it was too late and there were not enough pilots or production capacity to stem the tide of defeat.
                I just realized something. Culturally speaking, the Japanese could not have done any better. They were measuring themselves against the Chinese, not the best of the best. Japan always had an inferiority complex vis-a-vi China. China was the birth place of civilization (at least that's what East Asia views) and was the Middle Kingdom (as the kingdom between Earth and Heaven) in all the languages around China, including Japanese.

                Even when beaten by superior foes, they cannot culturally force themselves to admit that the barbarians (Russians and Mongolians) were better than they were. Hence, why they hid 60,000 dead. Thinking this more, this would have brought down the entire government if it was well known.

                So, by every measure, if it worked against the Chinese, then it should work against the barbarians.

                Only the Chinese were even more fucked up than they were.
                Chimo

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
                  I just realized something. Culturally speaking, the Japanese could not have done any better. They were measuring themselves against the Chinese, not the best of the best. Japan always had an inferiority complex vis-a-vi China. China was the birth place of civilization (at least that's what East Asia views) and was the Middle Kingdom (as the kingdom between Earth and Heaven) in all the languages around China, including Japanese.

                  Even when beaten by superior foes, they cannot culturally force themselves to admit that the barbarians (Russians and Mongolians) were better than they were. Hence, why they hid 60,000 dead. Thinking this more, this would have brought down the entire government if it was well known.

                  So, by every measure, if it worked against the Chinese, then it should work against the barbarians.

                  Only the Chinese were even more fucked up than they were.
                  Pretty much. Add to this that the Japanese were beating German trained divisions armed with European weapons and they thought they had the measure of Europe and America. In the air they did, their pilots were light years better than anyone. But the emphasis on the dog fight that existed from 1915-late 30's had begun to change with the advent of fighters like the Me109, Hawker Hurricane, Supermarine Spitfire, Macchi C202, Dewoitine 520 and the P-40. The new fighters all were 300mph+ run and gun designs even though some like the D520 and P-40 were very agile by European standards. The Japanese and to an extent the Italians and Soviets didn't get the memo and continued to stress agility over speed and protection.

                  Comment


                  • You could apply Julius Caesar's idiom when he was comparing himself to Pompeii. Veni, vidi, and vici. That could be described of the Americans or the Soviets when they encountered Japan when others had struggled against the Japanese.

                    Comment


                    • What? You lost me.
                      Chimo

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
                        What? You lost me.
                        Sorry.I meant to say that in the beginning the Japanese were looking to be formidable enemies and very hard to beat as other countries have played up the Japanese to hide their failures or shortcomings against the Japanese. Same thing with Pompeii. Pompeii made his military achievements on defeating those enemies that Julius Caesar faced and to prop up his image, painted them as formidable enemies. When Julius Caesar met the Pharnaces of Pontus in battle, his victory was so swift and conclusive that he pooh poohed Pompeii's victory against the same enemy. Same thing with Japan. Japan defeated the Chinese and British but when coming up against the Soviet, the Japanese was defeated swiftly and conclusively. Same thing with the Americans.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Blademaster View Post
                          Sorry.I meant to say that in the beginning the Japanese were looking to be formidable enemies and very hard to beat as other countries have played up the Japanese to hide their failures or shortcomings against the Japanese. Same thing with Pompeii. Pompeii made his military achievements on defeating those enemies that Julius Caesar faced and to prop up his image, painted them as formidable enemies. When Julius Caesar met the Pharnaces of Pontus in battle, his victory was so swift and conclusive that he pooh poohed Pompeii's victory against the same enemy. Same thing with Japan. Japan defeated the Chinese and British but when coming up against the Soviet, the Japanese was defeated swiftly and conclusively. Same thing with the Americans.
                          Pompeii is a place, Gnaeus Pompeius Magnus or Pompey the Great was a Roman general and politician. Just sayin'. ;)

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Blademaster View Post
                            Sorry.I meant to say that in the beginning the Japanese were looking to be formidable enemies and very hard to beat as other countries have played up the Japanese to hide their failures or shortcomings against the Japanese. Same thing with Pompeii. Pompeii made his military achievements on defeating those enemies that Julius Caesar faced and to prop up his image, painted them as formidable enemies. When Julius Caesar met the Pharnaces of Pontus in battle, his victory was so swift and conclusive that he pooh poohed Pompeii's victory against the same enemy. Same thing with Japan. Japan defeated the Chinese and British but when coming up against the Soviet, the Japanese was defeated swiftly and conclusively. Same thing with the Americans.
                            In defense of the British and Indians, once they got to put their first string against the Japanese they won. The Japanese advances occurred when the British and Indian troops were in Egypt.

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X