Midway: Was a Japanese Invasion Possible?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 8 лют 2025
- Assuming that the Japanese would have won the Battle of Midway (1942), would the invasion force have been able to capture the Midway island?
»» GET OUR BOOKS ««
» Stukabook - Doctrine of the German Dive-Bomber - stukabook.com
» The Assault Platoon of the Grenadier-Company November 1944 (StG 44) - sturmzug.com
» Army Regulation Medium Panzer Company 1941 - www.hdv470-7.com
»» SUPPORT MHV ««
» patreon - see videos early (adfree) - / mhv
» subscribe star - www.subscribes...
» paypal donation - paypal.me/mhvis
» UA-cam Membership - / @militaryhistoryvisual...
»» MERCHANDISE ««
» teespring - teespring.com/...
» SOURCES «
Parshall, Janathan; Tully, Anthony: Shattered Sword. The Untold Story of the Battle of Midway
#Midway,#WW2,#Warinthepacific
My grandfather was a draftee in the Army 27th Infantry division during the Battle of Saipan and Tarawa. He was a heavy machine gunner and I have 2 stories to pass on from his experience.
The first was my Grandfather yelled at his superior "Sir get down there are Snipers in those trees!". The officer stood up and exclaimed, "No god damn sniper is going to stop the United States Army". Immediately after doing so the officer was shot in the head and killed.
2nd Story: My grandfather during the invasion was shot in the leg. He had to lay on the beach and play dead for 2 hours before he could be evacuated. They had to cut his leg off and had to use a wooden leg for the rest of his long life. I remember as kids when we visited our grandparents the first thing we would always do is run up to him and grab his legs and ask him, "Is this the real one or the fake one?". He would always knock on our heads and say, "Is this the real one or the fake one!".
My grandfather said as bad as Saipan was the worst thing he was ever part of was the Battle of Tarawa. Tarawa was unspeakably bad. Could you imagine having to take part in both Saipan and Tarawa?
He almost never talked about the war and sadly this is all I can recall him saying about the war. It must have been hell.
RIP Grandpa McIntyre.
Good stories thanks for sharing.
Yeah - 2 great storys :) Our grandfathers were horoes no matter which side they fought.
Great way of thinking you got there. More people need to understand that heroes dont come from winners only.
Reading a book now... "Howlin' Mad" vs THE ARMY. About how H.M. Smith relieved the Commander (General) of the 27th Division during the battle of Saipan. Long story short all bloody hell broke loose between the Army and the Marines.
The officer may be dead, but I guess he turned out to be right.
The japanese had Katanas that couldve cut the concrete easily.
Everyone knows that they didn't bring katanas onto ships. If they accidentally dropped them they would cut right through the hull.
The Japanese were reckless, but not that reckless.
No Capes or Katanas ... lost to many ninjas that way..
Those Katanas showed enemy sniper who the officers were.
Katanas are shitty just use a gun
And they had a secret weapon... the "sakabato" reverse-blade katana. 10x more deadly than a normal katana! (I reference the "Rurouni Kenshin" anime and manga.)
You make me proud to support you through this past year!! This video is probably my new favorite since Ive been asking for it forever! I knew you'd make it eventually. Cheers!
Please please please can you ask Justin to go through a late war American amphibious landing in detail?
mate, the fact you call in someone more knowledgeable then you on a subject you don't know a ton on is a real credit to you. looking forward to seeing more stuff next year.
Tss. It whould have definitly been possible if they just borrowed a Tiger from the germans
Heinz Guderian
That's if it doesn't break down.
Not if the US had borrowed a BREN GUN from the UK
Maybe they could have made it amphibious and put torpedoes on it.
so,......all they needed was a amphibious, torpedo equipped tiger permanently attached to a armored recovery vehicle, with a Bren gun mounted over the Spandau for both offence and defence, both having katana's made on mount Fuji by general Tojo himself for bayonets, both firing pommels, from they're pommels, while both the Bren and Spandau both shoot fire arrows. Am I missing something?
+InsanoBinLooney You forget... this design MUST be able to dive bomb! XD
It would have been a logistical disaster for the IJN if they HAD taken Midway. Even worse than the Aleutians.
You're telling me its harder to supply a Pacific island than an Alaskan island right next to a state?. Okay buddy.
@@allmightywhale considering the aleutians were in the not so hospitable alaska compared to midway which was next to hawaii and could be constantly bombarded by strategic bombers based there and would essentially be gunnery practice for any usn ship so inclined to take a small detour. I do think that supplying midway and keeping it would have been impossible
Ok? I'm not saying it would have been easy supplying midway. I'm saying that it would've been easier than supplying a base in Alaska. Implying that in an alternate universe the Japanese do take midway that also implies that they destroyed or damaged the Pacific Fleet in the Battle of Midway. There-forth the Japanese don't really have to worry about a naval invasion or significant bombardment for months until the fleets repaired. Strategic bombers would be a big problem to deal with but it doesn't pose a threat big enough to destroy the base altogether. On the other hand though keeping a base in pretty much the arctic would be impossible due to the weather, logistics and raids by the USN.
NO picnic for the Americans there. Did they have the resources there to withstand a siege? And if the US Navy had been defeated at that time, how long before they could be reinforced from the West Coast? How much was immediately available in Hawaii, especially American warplanes? Further, how would this have affected the amount of war material that would have been sent to the Pacific and what could have been done to keep the Japanese from cutting off Australia?
@@allmightywhale They could do it with help from the fuel fairy. I mean look how far away it is from Truk (I guess) it would be a huge waste of fuel.
Absolutely agree with this conclusion.
If the Japanese had won the naval battle of Midway - which they might have done if the carrier Yorktown had not been present in the battle - then historians would have written countless books about the glorious American victory in the LAND Battle of Midway, which would have been regarded as the turning point of the Pacific War.
(Just to explain why the Japanese would likely have won the naval battle if Yorktown and her task force had not been present -
1. It was the attack on the Japanese carriers by the Yorktown’s TBD torpedo bomber squadron that was the last event which drew the attention of the Japanese CAP fighters away from the approaching US dive bomber squadrons. Without Yorktown’s TBD’s, the US SBD dive bombers would have been attacked by Zeros before they could begin their dives.
2. It was the Yorktown’s SBD dive bombers which crippled the Japanese carrier Soryu. Without them, the Soryu would have survived the attack.
3. The carrier Akagi was attacked by only 3 SBD’s from USS Enterprise, after a foul-up resulted in both SBD squadrons from Enterprise attacking the Kaga, instead of only one squadron. Lt. George Best realised this and aborted his attack on Kaga, pulling out of his dive. His two wingmen followed him. Together the 3 of them changed their target to Akagi. Best scored a direct hit on her and his wingmen got 2 near misses. However, this target switch to Akagi was made much easier by the fact that there were no Zeros attacking the SBD’s at the time. If there had been, even if only about 9 Zeros, Best and his wingmen might never have reached Akagi, or Best might have considered it too risky to change target and bombed the Kaga instead. If so, then Akagi too would have survived the attack without damage.
4. Assuming the event of item 3, there would be 3 operational Japanese carriers to carry out the 2 separate counterattacks on the US carriers, instead of only one (Hiryu). That’s enough Japanese planes to cripple Hornet and damage Enterprise, in their first attack, and finish off Enterprise in the second.
5. Final outcome of the naval battle - the Japanese lose Kaga, the Americans lose both Enterprise and Hornet. The US fleet withdraws.)
Tim Smith American naval intelligence & a little luck won the day, not Yorktown. Even with Yorktown, the Japanese still had a superior naval force. A Japanese victory means the American carriers were destroyed. With complete air & naval superiority, there's no way in hell the marines hold the island. I think it's the height of delusion to suggest otherwise.
Tim Smith, Not a bad analysis but one must consider the size and scope of the battlefield in question. Lt. Best most likely could and would have broken off his attack on Kaga to target the Akagi. Just because the Japanese might have had more fighters at altitude doesn't mean they would have been in position to intercept.
Charles McCarron: Yes, the Kate was a better torpedo bomber than the TBD, but the SBD was a better dive bomber than the Val - more rugged and carried a bomb of twice the weight. The F4F Wildcat was equal to the Zero as a fighter, because although it was less maneuverable, it was far more resistant to battle damage. Finally, the Catalinas based on Midway were much better reconnaissance aircraft than the catapult launched seaplanes available to the Japanese.
Also I would not agree that Japanese pilots were that much better than American ones. The American pilots trained pre-war were mostly experienced fliers with years of service, the only advantage the Japanese had was that some of them had combat experience in China.
Tim Smith pretty good but this wouldn’t be considered a “total” victory by the IJN. If we think about it just like the Battle of Coral Sea the IJN would have lost many aircraft trying to cripple the Hornet and finish off the Enterprise.
Here is what the IJN needed to do:
1. They had 11 battleships at their disposal. 4 fast battleships along with 5 cruisers and 12 destroyers head east (north of Midway) on a possible collision course with the US force. The whole IJN plan is to commit to vessel vs vessel fighting. This “Main” Force leads the attack. Akagi and Kaga are loaded with fighters and provide CAP.
2. Western Midway Force - 4 battleships including the Musashi surround Midway and they shell both islands from west, north, and south. 4 small carriers Ryujo, Junyo, Zuiho, and Hosho are with this force along with 8 destroyers. Their 130 planes consist of fighters and bombers to hit Midway first.
3. Southern Force - 2 fast battleships, 4 cruisers, and 8 destroyers leading the way. Carriers Hiryu and Soryu with Zuikaku trailing and providing more initial air support to address Midway. They land and re-arm. This force cuts off any escape route for the US force and surrounds them.
There is now no longer any one big IJN carrier force that the US planes can attack. In addition the IJN has now created two additional major “non-carrier” targets.
The US carrier planes must address the Main Force first. They cannot allow them to get in range of the US vessels.
The battleships shelling Midway have to be addressed by the Midway planes. The battleships are not stationary. The zeros from the Zuikaku and the other small carriers wipe out the obsolete planes at Midway. The IJN battleships go back and shell Midway more. Two small carriers and 3 destroyers which are west of Midway head north then east.
The US Force realizes they are in trouble. They make a run for it and head south east. The Yorktown is struggling to move. Zeros and bombers catch the Yorktown and score hits to further wound her and slow her down. The IJN battleships from the Main Force catch up from behind and start to shell the Yorktown and IJN cruisers launch their torpedos and the Yorktown starts to sink. Other US vessels try to hold off the Main Force but are outnumbered.
The Hornet and Enterprise along with various escort ships are making a run and they are met with IJN planes from the Hiryu and Soryu. The Yorktown and Hornet planes are mainly engaged with the Akagi and Kaga fighters and dealing with the Main Force.
Only the Enterprise has the majority of its planes and the US has a total of 100 planes to deal with the initial wave of Hiryu and Soryu 130 planes. The 2 small carriers along with 50 planes and its 3 destroyers plus the two battleships from Midway arrive. Dive bombers hit the Hornet and Enterprise.
The IJN battleships begin to shell the the US escort vessels. All are burning. The Zuikaku 60 planes arrive and all US planes taken care of.
And here is now an interesting twist that could have perhaps gotten the US to agree to terms and a Peace Treaty and most never even thought of. The IJN stops shelling and bombing. Only fighters shoot their guns hitting the carriers and remaining vessels. The IJN orders the US Fleet to surrender.
The IJN captures both the Hornet and Enterprise and hold many as hostages.
Total loss for IJN. 1 battleship sunk. Several escort vessels hit and damaged. Kaga slightly damaged. That’s it.
Is this really too far fetched? The IJN had the total arsenal to do so. Even in this scenario the Yamato is not even used along with probably 10 additional destroyers.
Very few IJN pilots and planes are lost in this scenario.
Never really thought about this. Always assumed it would be a cakewalk for the Japanese.
Look at all the trouble the Japanese had a Wake Island....
Sshooter444 It was a given, the defenses are being wildly exaggerated. The Japanese would've had total air & naval superiority. Support fire from naval ships & air units would've neutralized any heavy weaponry the Americans had on the island.
I have heavily studied naval warfare in the Pacific, but have not read "Shattered Sword." As usual for the Japanese, I think logistics would have been their undoing at Midway Island. The Imperial fleet was very far from any resupply points and they lacked supply ships and oilers. This means their ability to bombard and to stick around for long-running amphibious operations were quite limited. Additionally, the Marines were dug in, heavily armed, and fairly well protected from bombardment. The US ships with plenty of shells and fuel oil bombarded islands quite heavily later (Saipan, Tarawa, Peleilu, Iwo Jima) and the invaders still suffered heavily. Blockading Midway would have been limited to Japanese submarines. Of course the US Marines had problems with the fresh water supply on Midway. ;)
Samuel Thompson You're ignoring the fact that, the Japanese bombardment after neutralizing the American naval force would be far more effective.
tyro apache - Note that there was essentially no Japanese naval opposition impeding the US Navy's naval and air bombardments of Saipan, Tarawa, Peleilu, and Iwo Jima. The US Navy pounded all these places with 5 inch, 6 inch, 8 inch, 14 inch, and 16 inch naval gunfire plus the rocket launching ships of the later campaigns, similar to the Soviet Katyusha. There was also ample aerial bombardment from the land and sea-based aircraft flying in support of these amphibious operations. Future President George H.W. Bush was shot down in an Avenger as part of the impending Iwo Jima invasion in 1945. Similarly, the Germans had little to impede the Anglo-American bombardment of the Normandy beaches. However, in all these cases, the amphibious soldiers/marines suffered high casualties from the vast majority of the defenders who survive such bombardments. Add in the Japanese forces considerably smaller supplies of fuel oil and shells, the necessity of troops to wade hundreds of yards across coral reefs, plus being outnumbered by the defenders, and I think there was very little possibility of the Japanese taking Midway in June of 1942. Like the Philippines before, the Japanese would have been able to eventually overwhelm Midway if it could not be resupplied by the US Navy after the food supply ran out.
As a Desert Storm veteran, I saw plenty of Iraqi soldiers and tanks survive unbelievable aerial bombardments just by using dispersal and entrenchment. The serious casualties occurred when our mechanized and armored forces swept over those entrenchments, forcing the Iraqis to expose themselves in order to fight (Republican Guard) or surrender in place (everybody else). In my sector, the main opposition was the Iraqi 25th and 26th divisions, plus the Tawalkana Republican Guard division. The shovel is the outgunned defender's best friend.
This was great content! Fun and informative conversation. Keep up the good work.
I agree, also because the first time the Japanese tried to take Wake Island with an amphibious assault on 11 Dec 1941, they were repulsed by a small contingent of US Marines a handful of coastal guns and a handful of fighters.
Exciting to hear a different take on Midway. Even now, 70 years later, there is still fresh approaches to WW2 history. Thanks!
I just recently read about this subject from Andrew Robert's "The Storm of War" and I noticed there was not much mentioned about the Japan's ability to support the invasion force even if the initial landing would have somehow been succesfull. This is good stuff, keep up the work!
You missed Tanks and Gel mines for under water. 15 7 inch and 20 5 in guns
interesting.
I would have assumed that, if the US navy fleet is destroy the japanese fleet would have enough fire or blockading power, to get the Inland one way or another.
But then again I assumed that the japanese would bring superior numbers to the fight...
Si Wi When you have an enemy cut off from reinforcement, supply & retreat. It's pretty much an open shut case. This video is complete nonsense. A Japanese naval victory at Midway guarantees they take the island. I have 3 key facts to support this. 1. It means the American carriers were destroyed. 2. The Japanese would have total dominance of the air & sea. 3. Without their carriers, the Americans couldn't even consider a relief effort. It's like a 96% certainty the Japanese take Midway, with 2% chance of the Americans holding it & a 2% margin of error.
But you need to fuel and supply that fleet.
Jiří Šusta The issue of fuel & supply only become an issue if the marine garrison can somehow drag the Japanese into a protracted siege. Which given the circumstances is practically impossible. As my previous comment stated, without carriers, relief is all but impossible.
With the US Navy absent, the Japanese may well have eventually taken Midway. The video's conclusion is that the force on hand was insufficient to the task. As the Americans would learn later in the war, even a victorious amphibious battle is a costly affair.
SirBob42 The conclusions of this video are based on flawed logic. I'd go even further & call them outright stupid. The comparing later amphibious assaults isn't a credible argument. For starters, many of the later assaults were conducted against islands which had adjusted tactics based on previous battles & had years to improve their defenses. By comparison, Midway had weeks to really beef up their defenses. The marines would've been slaughtered.
I'm curious about an issue regarding amphibious assaults in WWII. Is there a reason why smoke wasn't deployed to cover the advance of troops unloading unto beaches during battles like the d-day assault on the beaches of Normandy?
Of course, maybe smoke was used but popular depictions of it in movies and games show masses of soldies storming headlong into the jaws of bunkers and pillboxes firing back at them with machine guns and such.
I'm thinking: what if the battleships fired massive smoke shells designed to blanket the beaches in thick billowing clouds of smoke to cover the advancing troops? Wouldn't that have reduced the effectiveness of german machine gun emplacements due to not being able to pick out any individual targets until allied infantry got close enough to throw grenades into the bunkers and neutralize their occupants?
I suspect that the problem would be that smoke is a double edged sword. Sure, it would work against the defenders and obscure their visibility, but the same would hold true for the attackers. If the defenders can't see the attackers neither can the attackers see the defenders and know where to go. Furthermore, it would cause a lot more confusion on the beaches since, with enough smoke, no one can see where everybody else is and everybody would be fighting in platoon sized units at largest without any coordination. It would also wreak havoc on the attackers C&C capability since they wouldn't be able to see what's going very well and direct units to where they needed to be. Then there's the matter of air and/or naval gunfire support, how are you supposed to hit what you can't see because the entire battlefield is covered in smoke?
Riceball01: Well, looking at the terrain and the advantage of the defenders, it's arguable that clear visibility along the beaches favours the defenders more than it favors the attackers.
The infantry storming the beaches were sitting ducks out in the open and had little chance at actually shooting back at the machine gunners in their concrete bunkers and pillboxes.
It was only really when the attackers got close enough to employ explosives, grenades, sub-machine guns and flamethrowers behind the wall of defenses that they actually managed to neutralize their targets.
As for visibility regarding naval artillery, this isn"t really an issue. Most allied forces were knowledgeable in night time operations, even with artillery and airforce (meaning: they don't use naked eyes while firing but maps, clocks and radio communication). It stands to reason they could've employed similar tactics as they would've used if the attack took place at night.
I would also argue that the advance up the beaches would've gone a lot quicker and the mg-emplacements would've been neutralized sooner if smoke screens had been used, which would've reduced the necessity for sustained naval artillery barrages during the assault.
Seven Proxies I can’t say for sure, but I would assume that many smoke rounds back then used white phosphorus which was rather dangerous to be around.
I am wondering why didn’t they shoot the smoke directly at the German Bunkers? It won’t be breaking any War Rules on poison gas but still only disable the Germans from doing anything in their bunkers. If I am wrong please correct me
PixelEnderman Kartoffeln Probably because there was no way to get that kind of pinpoint accuracy back then. Remember, the most accurate bomb sight the US had, the Norden sight would pretty much only allow you to hit a large city with any kind of accuracy and even then it require hundreds of bombers and tons of bombs just knock a couple of factories. Naval gunfire wasn't much more accurate, they might get a lucky shot and hit the bunker but there was no way to actually lob a smoke round into the bunker itself.
Tactically, smoke is generally used to cover a withdrawl or retreat and not used in an offensive since it obscures the vision of both sides equally, this is was espcially true prior to the invention of night vision equipment and even then it will still obscure IR devices, only thermal works through smoke. As I said previously, smoke on the Normandy beaches would only have made things more difficult for the Allies since heavy enough smoke to obscure the landing force from the Germans would have meant that the troops landing on the beach couldn't see squat either. They wouldn't be able to see their objectives and would've gotten lost easily not knowing where to go.
Compare and contrast Wake Island and Midway Island. Without starving the Marines, I concur that the Island would've held out.
According to Wiki
Local Defenses - Colonel Harold D. Shannon, Fleet Marine Force commander
"C" and "D" Companies, 2nd Raider Battalion, USMC
6th Defense Battalion (Reinforced) USMC Colonel Harold D. Shannon
Defense battalions - "Most varied greatly in size and equipment. The battalions often had several coastal gun batteries, several anti-aircraft batteries, a detection battery (searchlights and radar), and machine gun units. While a few had composite infantry companies attached, most defense battalions were responsible for providing their own riflemen."
Japanese
Transport Group carrying about 5000 troops under Capt. Minoru Ota IJN and Colonel Kiyonao Ichiki IJA
Ground units
2nd Combined SNLF Capt. Ota Minoru, IJN
Sand Island.
"Ichiki" Detachment Col. Ichiki Kiyonao, IJA (according to a wargame magazine this was an elite unit)
Eastern Island.
I think the Japanese could have made a successful though bloody landing and taken the atoll (assuming that the remaining US aircraft could have been destroyed or driven from area) but it's a heck of a long way from Japan. Seems easier to take than to hold.
The US Marines outnumbered the Japanese invasion force by a factor of 2 to 3. And the Marines on Midway were better armed than those at Wake and those guys sank a destroyer.
And even if the Japanese Navy had conquered Midway, it wouldn't have helped them to turn the tide of the war. The island was very small, the US Navy could have easily cut the supply lines of Midway.
With what? There were two wars going on.
@@JRobbySh US subs were thrashing Japanese supply lines all over the Pacific. Japanese troops in remote islands weew aleeady driven to starvation from relentless American submarine blockades. This would be no different.
@@CheemsofRegret US subs were doing very little at this point in the war. This is still when the Mark 14 torpedo was was reliably problematic
Why are there so many comments on how easy it would have been to take the island and how biased the video is.
Have all these weeaboos actually seen the video? Great video btw
The British had annual landing exercises in the 1920's and 30"s in Ceylon and had developed many tactics and landing craft.
Don't forget the first Japanese amphib landing on Wake Island failed in 41.
look what happened at Wake island against a defences that hasn't reenforced and not really prepared for the war
Midway was well prepared and different terrain.
During WW II, there was only one significant amphibious invasion which failed to get off the beach: The Japanese first invasion of Wake Island. (The Canadians got off the beach at Dieppe in some places). Tarawa almost flopped, had the Japanese CO not been killed early in the battle things probably would have been even worse.
Why weren't "float charges" for submarines ever developed by any nation? I figured that would be a logical step. Destroyers had to chase subs down, get ahead of them to drop depth charges. Subs could have hit a tanker with a torpedo, attracting the escorting destroyers and then sinking the destroyers when they give chase. Suddenly your destroyers don't want to chase subs anymore. Missed opportunity?
I've wondered the same thing. A sub releasing small mines seems like a good idea.
Challenges: 1) Movie cameras focus on the action in the cat-and-mouse sub versus destroyer games. In reality, it's a really big ocean (Highly recommended: "The Enemy Below"). The sub normally is trying very hard to hide its actual whereabouts in three dimensions - where is it North, South, East, West? and at what depth? If the sub releases something, it creates a much smaller circle of possible locations for a destroyer to hit. 2) A destroyer's hull is a small, moving target that the sub is trying to locate by listening only, NOT by active pinging as that makes the sub too easy to locate. Assume a destroyer will have fellow destroyers nearby. 3) The sub normally hides near the limit of its diving capabilities (e.g. 400 feet for Balao class, around 900 feet for a Type VIIC U-Boat), so a near miss from a depth charge can rupture its seams due to hydrostatic pressure. If the sub's "float charge" detonates at the ocean's surface, it would have to be in nearly direct contact with that small, moving destroyer hull to cause much damage. The force of the explosion degrades as a cube root function since the blast is moving in three dimensions - just like sound waves. It's the same reason a 10 megaton nuclear weapon is not "twice as powerful" as a 5 megaton one. If the smaller bomb wipes out 6 square miles, the larger bomb does not wipe out 12 square miles because so much of the blast is also moving up and down. To try and win at that game, the "float charge" would have to be quite large and would take up precious space on the sub. It would also need to detonate before reaching the ocean's surface for maximum effect. 4) Don't forget the vital role of aircraft in antisubmarine warfare. The sub was nearly helpless against the flying eyes of a Catalina, Sunderland, or Avenger. The sub captain would minimize anything that would make his vessel easier to find, such as a "float charge." The Allied hunter-killer ASW teams combined escort carriers with destroyers in tracking down U-boats. As their numbers built up, they could skip convoy escort duty and just focus on keeping the U-boats underwater where they could do little harm to convoys.
Also, destroyers did not have to "get ahead of them to drop depth charges" once the "hedgehog" mortars were developed. That weapon allowed the destroyer to launch contact-fused bombs over its bow and hit the sub it was chasing before the sub could get much deeper after a crash dive. Hedgehogs had a huge impact on the Battle of the Atlantic. Here is an unexpected twist in naval warfare: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hedy_Lamarr
they tag teamed the sub one listens the other attacks
@@demonprinces17 And then add in side flung depth charges and hedgehogs that only exploded on contact made it a much more 3-D games.
This is an interesting topic as I had not given it a lot of thought before. A bit of a critic is that your "visualization" part of this video was not of your normal caliber. It did not provide any support or helpful graphics. It was more of a wrap session than a good analysis.
Things that would have helped would have been a breakdown of the actual attacking and defending forces. Saying they are roughly equal is not indicative of their combat effectiveness.
You did highlight that amphibious operations are not easy and need coordination which take time to develop. I'd say the same is true of the defense. Early doctrine said defend the beeches which put troops in a vulnerable position which were usually disrupted and overrun. So inexperience cuts both ways.
I only looked for a couple hours but as near as I can tell the use basically had a reinforced Marine battalion. 3rd defense battalion, reinforced with 2 raider companies and an artillery battalion and a platoon of light takes. In looking for a comparison, Wake Island had a defense battalion.
I could only find references to concrete bomb shelters. These are good for weathering a bombardment but not hardened fighting positions. From what I read it seemed the fighting positions were sandbag positions. It would be great to find more information about this. This the US had mutually supporting pill boxes in-depth, the Japanese are toast. If they only have concreate bomb shelters and defense is mainly from sandbag slit trenches, the US is in trouble.
To me this looks more like a slightly tougher Wake Island scenario with the Japanese coming with more support. I think it comes down to the fighting spirit. In Wake Island there was hope of relief being sent. The US commitment and loss of the naval battle removes any hope of relief. Japan will take many more losses than the US (probable twice the losses of Wake Island, a large portion of the attacking force which will be very painful). I think Japan takes the Island as the US moral would collapse due to the lack the chance of relief. Despite all the operational problems Japan would face.
I'd love to have you change my mind. I think more visualization would be helpful. Including:
1) relevant composition of forces
2) number, type of defensive positions
3) What Japan can bring in following up forces.
I met a guy, trained as a marine interpreter, the youngest officer of wwII possibly. His role was to be part of the initial japanese mainland beach invasion(s), without any knowledge of the manhattan project, they were prepared for huge loses, he didn't think he'd be alive that day, had it not been for it. from the experience, japan became very much a part of his life. I'm so glad to have known the him...
he said it was a waste of lives taking 'every' island...
Thank you for this very interesting video. Enjoyed it
Another excellent video......damn.......you guys are good.
I think the Japanesse staff neclected planning of amphibious operation because of "the victory disease". From books I could read it seems that they simply did not consider it as a difficult task and rather focused their effort on the naval part of the battle.
Depends. I mean seriously. Japan expected the Midway battle to be a trap of their own. Split the US forces and destroy their carriers. Landing was unimportant to them. They really had better objectives, like getting a bigger oil supply from Philipines and Oceania.
Well, the shore bombardment doctrines might be absent, but most of the IJN Battleline will be present! The defenders cannot replace their lost to bombarment have little hope of being relieved if navy lost the fight.
I find it unlikely that Marine could hold out with that much firepower, especially because the atoll is so small that all enplaced position can be observed directly
I'm surprised that Battleships of all navies had not honed their bombardment skills after the failures in WW1 (French navy at Gallipoli, etc.).
great channel. I'll add something on this topic that I love a lot. Japanese amphibious forces at that time had both little experience (the previous landings against opposing forces, like at Wake Island were not exactly successful, and while it was efficient on unopposed landings, on Midway it would have been very hard - the landing forces were mostly the 28th Infantry Regiment, from the 7th Division with no amphibious experience, and the mixed 2nd Combined Special Naval Landing Force with some experience but little heavy equipment). As you mention, the naval bombardment would have been severely insufficient - yes, in theory, the Japanese main force - with the tree large battle ships - Nagato, Mutsu and Yamato could have been used, but they were not planned for that. And the air support (we suppose that the main carrier force would still be at least 50% operational) was not great. I also think the invasion of midway would probably have not succeeded. and if it would, at very high losses.
Piero you’re not being logical from the aspect that battleships were not planned for shelling.
There is no way the IJN would have an overwhelming victory at Midway unless their battleships were indeed used.
The Battle of Coral Sea or even subsequent battles of 1942 easily shows us that trying to sink US carriers with just planes was going to cost a lot of planes and pilots.
It’s truly astonishing the IJN could never figure out how to use their battleships. Had they used them they would have won. There is no ifs or buts about this.
All the IJN needed to do was send their battleships up front with escort vessels.
The fast battleships look for the US task force on both sides of Midway north south.
The other battleships surround Midway and shell the island. This substitutes the need for so many bombers. Instead of 100 planes bombing the island only 40-50 are needed and as that initial aerial bombing run is complete then the battleships are already moving into position and they are shelling it.
The US carrier planes have 3 additional major bodies of vessels to deal with. 3 different battleships groups.
How the IJN should have loaded their carriers also is with more fighters and less bombers. Had they brought Zuikaku plus Junyo and Ryujo this would have added around 160 more planes.
Even within the 4 main carriers had they change the mixture of planes they could have added a total of 40 more planes since fighters are much lighter than heavy bombers and bombs.
So the IJN would have had more like 180 fighter planes vs only 85. They would have had 290 total planes or so vs only the 248.
So now we’re are talking 450 planes where 300 are fighters and 150 are bombers.
The 300 IJN zero fighters would have slaughtered the US planes. The 127 Midway planes were obsolete. Even only 85 zero fighters took care of them.
So many of the US planes would have been shot down while they went after the IJN battleships. The US planes could barely even get to the IJN carriers since they were further west.
Parshall and this other guy don’t even want to disclose this type of strategic attack because they know themselves the US stood no chance.
Now back to Midway. The IJN had more than enough vessels to lay out an all out attack.
The transport troop ships could and should have been behind the carrier force. After the US task force was wiped out then the battleships continue to shell Midway especially at night.
More aerial bombings during the day. The IJN should have learned their lesson at Wake. They starve the Us troops of sleep.
The IJN invaded other islands including the Phillipines and Wake and other islands. Have no idea what these two are talking about. They are just delusional and just continually try to present the US biased nonsense approach.
@@f430ferrari5 You need to go back to the plans the Japanese actually had and their doctrines not what ifs. The IJN disdained shore bombardment. They were planning on a naval engagement and had little capability for land bombardment. They were expecting a wave or two of bombing runs and the island would be ready for assault. The marines were dug in and ready to decimate any landing force. Armour piercing rounds are not good for shore bombardment.
@@PeteOtton the IJN disdained shore bombardment? Funny how that’s exactly what they did when Kongo battleships shelled Henderson Field at Guadalcanal.
Make some sense please. You just live in denial.
Doctrine or not you are basically admitting my point. The IJN blew it. They had assets and abilities to win easily at Midway. They failed to take advantage of what they had in their arsenal.
Most of the US personnel on Midway were connected to aviation units. The defense forces amounted to a reinforced battalion (approx 1000). The US had no fighters able to match up with the Japanese Zeros. The Japanese occupation force was approx 5000. If necessary, if the US Navy threat was neutralized the Japanese could have starved out the Americans , if necessary.
The images and animation are from a different video... Amazing video though, I agree with your POV
Hyperkid7 it detracted a great deal from the audio, I thought.
S3N7RY That’s why I mentioned it. The actual video confused me with what they were saying. I actually had to go back a few times and check to make sure I was watching the right thing.
Hyperkid7 I should have begun with a "Yeah," to make clear that I was agreeing with you.
They had a invasion force along with them at the time of the Midway battle, they'd 1st had to reduce it's defensive properties before invasion. Of course after winning the navel engagement to 'control' the sea area.
Good points you are raising in this video. But my research shows that the japanese would have easily taken Midway by sending in their ninjas first and then simply following up with regular troops to mop up. My research shows that a single ninja is more than capable of taking out platoon sized element of marines in under 3 minutes with his bare hands and without breaking a sweat.
The inverse ninja law would drastically limit the utility of ninjas.
Have you not heard of the Law of Conservation of Ninjatude?
Ninjas? Are you talking about a computer game or World War II? Where were the ninjas at Guadalcanal?
The ninjas were too busy fighting aliens
@@johnberger2851 The Ninjas were busy dueling American Cowboys to make a difference.
This was a great topic. Thanks for the question, whoever you are. :-)
Hope you get well soon man :)
I think the Japanese would've been better without attacking the U.S. It's unlikely that Roosevelt would have the support for war at that point. Eventually, America would have got involved but the Japanese would have a stronghold over that region. It'd be hard for the U.S. to make offensive progress and they have to come to a diplomatic agreement.
Yea but the Japanese didn´t have much Oil left, much of the Oil coming from the US, with the US cutting the shipments the Japanese had their hand forced, they either stopped the China and Southeast Asia advances, or they attacked the US.
"at that point"
thats the key and time wasnt in favor of japanese so waiting the US wasnt an option. Every year you spend trying to prepare againts the US they just double the fleet size.
War with the US was inevitable. Japan required oil and resources to support its growing military and expand and protect its empire (just like all empires). The only serious obstacle to the Japanese in the pacific was the US. Also research "Hull Note" which was nothing short of declaration of war.
D3C3n50r And FDR approved joint board plan 355 with his own signature; a surprise firebombing strike on Japanese cities months before PH.
So yes, war between the Empire and the United States was indeed inevitable.
Edit: this attack would have come AFTER Dec 7th but it was approved months before. They had all the fuel in China they needed, the bombers just never arrived after the Japanese attack of course.
Pfsif Where the proof that the Americans would ever concieve of such a stupid idea?
Here's the US militaries approved, real and declassified plan to start a war with a Japan:
ua-cam.com/video/9pCnJR0gLP4/v-deo.html
thank me later
Damn you guys cost me a lot of money. Now I am going to have to buy Shattered Sword. Great video, great information. I had always believed that the if the USN had lost the Naval part of the Battle of Midway that Midway would have been lost like Wake Island. Then most of what I have read has concentrated solely on the Naval battle.
An interesting situational analysis.
However, the Japanese bombardment of Henderson Field on the night of 12 Oct 1942 suggests a specific level of Naval competence in Shore Support and Land Bombardment/Interdiction that in turn implies that Battleship Bombardment was not out of Kido Butai's comfort zone.
From everyone's favorite argument mill, Wikipedia: "Kongō and her sisters engaged American naval forces in the Battle of Guadalcanal. During this engagement Kongō and Haruna bombarded Henderson Field with 430 14-inch and 33 6-inch shells on 13 October 1942." Now, from what I've read, the damage was extensive and, had the IJN been able to do it again, it might've spelt the end of Henderson field as a strategic resource.
Further, I respect your intelligence and willingness to research and I understand that WW2 saw the conversion of the Capital Ship into a Carrier Escort and Amphibious Support Platform, but it seems to have been "for want of a nail" that lost Japan its naval war in the Pacific. That nail was AntiAircraft Artillery and Coordination. IJN Rifles made lousy AA guns, the heavier calibers being slow to fire, despite adequate or even superior ballistic performance when compared to USN rifles. In Addition, the IJN also vastly underestimated the strength of AA defense needed to protect carrier battlegroups and individual cruisers or destroyers on detached missions. For close AA Defense they had an old Hotchkiss Autocannon (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/25_mm_Hotchkiss_anti-aircraft_gun) with terrible elevating and traverse mechanisms, especially in the multiple gun mounts. Since this weapon was roughly comparable to our 20mm Oerlikon (and 1.1" Chicago Pianos), it is safe to say that it is a point defense weapon, not a true AA Gun. We didn't even bother to use fire directors on ours; they were just point and shoot. The place where the IJN suffered was the medium AA Category (37mm-55mm) and that is the weapon that shoots down enemy planes. You guys already know this, because of the Bofors 4cm M29 and the frenzied struggle to produce a similar weapon for the Luftwaffe and Heeres (even though the Bofors was being produced for the Kriegsmarine), leading to the DoppelFlaK43 (3.7cmFlaK(z)43/L65), 5cm mFlaK41 (which might've served well as a directed fire naval weapon, where flash and vibration on the mount mean a lot less), and 5cmFlaK weapons based on the PaK, through the many iterations of the 5.5cmFlaK45 & etc.
I admit to a small comprehension of the doctrinal failings of the "Great Battle" mindset (primary among them the blindered concept that the enemy must behave as you plan him to, despite his free will, or the whole plan turns into a "Death Ride to Compensate for Small Planning Penis at the Command Level". Which is exactly what occurred, by the way*.
*If there is one lesson that the combination of events making up World Wars One and Two can teach us it is the following: Always ally yourself with South Africa. Naturally, this means after the British mucked up the free states, but some of the heroes of the old Boer resistance were still in the Chain of Command in WW1, and in the command structure in WW2. Plus we should keep in mind South Africa's extremely profitable trade with Israel, one that elevated both nations to the rank of Nuclear Cabal Member without permission from the big boys. Always ally yourself with those tricky Boers . . .
Shattered Sword from the 90s is REALLY one of the best books on WW2 ever. Suddenly the whole thinking of one of the most famous battles was turned upside down. It shows the real risk of trusting a single source from a with a hidden agenda. Witnesses write books for a reason and that reason might not be unbiased history! A great warning from anyone who reads history books!
Interesting! My impression from documentaries and movies is midway was just a beach defended with some aa guns and an old runway. An easy target. I suppose it might have been easy on Dec 7th 1941 though?
Except the Japanese didn't have the troops, transport, or landing craft available. They were all elsewhere.
It would have been a hell of a fight. If the Americans hadn't gotten the intel on the attack then they really would have gotten caught with their pants down but as it was the battle was pretty much decided before it started. If the landing troops had run into trouble then they could have easily tasked more ships with bombardment. Even if aircraft didn't work well with landing troops they definitely knew how to hit ground targets and if they had air superiority then it really would have been hell on the ground. With the Normandy invasion when U.S. troops were in trouble a destroyer came in close and put out a curtain of fire that some guys who were interviewed said really helped. The Japanese could have done the same thing if the American fleet hadn't been there. It all hinged on that one bit of code being broken. Without it I think that the Japanese would have taken the island even if they suffered high casualties.
That was a destroyer? Damn I've always thought that was one of the Nelsons.
It would be useless they could not supply it its simply too far from Japan they had a hard time with islands much closer to home.
Why would the Japanese make a plan so dependant on the enemys behavior doing what they hoped.
Personally I think the US Navy had a serious grudge against Palm trees and the Japanese just happened to get in the way.
In supposing that the US fleet loses and withdraws, what was the supply situation at Midway?
How much water and foodstuffs were available on the Midway Atoll? The US intelligence campaign gave the Japanese false information about the water supply problems which spurned on the attack, but I just wonder how long the US troops could hold out without external supply?
Singapore fell when the water ran out.
Can you please do a similar video on the Japanese abandoned plan for the invasion of Australia as there's a lot of misconceptions about this topic.
On that note, why don't you do a video on US amphibious landing doctrine (and its improvement) in a future video?
How many soldiers were stationed at Midway and how many weapons did they have?
I'd say the British were very good at amphibious operations. Don't forget they had been in the war since September '39, so by the time the American were fighting their "early war" in the summer of 1942 the British had been fighting for three whole years, half the entire war. If you look at their studies for amphibious operations as well as actual landings on places like Madagascar you can see how the Americans were a long, long way off and not "the leaders" in amphibious operations at all-the British were, specifically the Royal Navy and the Royal Marines.
They did not have any experience trying to invade defended positions just like everybody else they may have had doctrine for it but I can not recall them invading contested territory other than the probe in France and even that was a covert action.
Hello MHV! I have just heard of the collaborative project for world war 2 that is being put together by The Great War, if you aren't already a part of it is there any chance you could become part of it? i think your style of content would be perfect for the project. Thanks
I am personally not convinced the Americans would've necessarily won. losing aerial and naval supremacy on the island would be a big blow to the moral of the defending troops, and I don't know how well these bunkers would protect against armour piercing bombs and shells that could be fired from the Japanese battleships.
The Japanese were aware of the defenses of Midway as they did two attempts at shelling the island, once by the use of two destroyers and once with a submarine, and Yamamoto was one of the most competent Admirals the Japanese had.
Also I think when it comes to amphibious invasions, the terrain is a very heavy factor. as you stated, the approach for a amphibious invasion is not at all in the favour of the Japanese due to the longer time required to actually reach the beach, however the terrain can in my opinion not be compared to islands like Saipan or Okinawa, especially since Midway is mainly just an atoll, it lacks things like hills and forests which can be used in favour of the defender.
I personally never knew that the Japanese would be outnumbered during the landings, but I guess with Japanese air and naval superiority the chance of Japanese victory would be somewhere in between 50/50 and 70/50 in favor of the Japanese, depending on how well the moral of the US troops could be kept.
I'm engaged in a rather interesting discussion and many things have been brought up that have made me curious about the potential for information that's solely presented in German and beyond my ability to access.
One of the chief issues involved lesser quality forces in the Second World War, particularly on the German side, though perhaps others are just as relevant for cross referencing to determine combat efficacy of such varying grades of troops. Ranging from the Wehrmacht's own divisions in various states of sub-optimal conditions and to what extent their supplies, operational vehicles and heavy equipment, etc, played a part in such classifications; to German-allied divisions such as the Italians, Romanians, Hungarians, etc; to progressively less capable forces such as the Einsatzgruppen, Ordnungspolizei, or even Ostlegionen, who as far as I am aware historically never possessed so much as a truck nor a howitzer. Ok maybe that's going too far, but you get the point, they lacked the kind of equipment which made regular fighting forces effective and enough that they could go toe to toe with their equivalents in other armies, precisely the kind of equipment which made the 1st and 2nd SS Panzer divisions, as well as the Grossdeutschland division, extremely effective divisions.
The premise behind this is to envision how potentially tremendous numbers of poorly armed troops could meaningfully contribute to the fighting. I'm convinced it would not be a war-winning difference if such forces numbered a million or so at most, but besides conjecture drawn from tangential topics there's very little to directly reference in terms of how such forces fared in engagements, specifically in detail. I can suggest that they would lack the means to stop armoured offensives, deal with enemy aircraft, suppress large concentrations of advancing enemies, etc, but I cannot point to a case where such troops actually fought and were simply overwhelmed precisely due to the means mentioned above, and more generally as a result of the lack of heavy/proper equipment. Light infantry forces armed exclusively with rifles and only a light complement of machine guns are not sufficient to constitute real divisions, of that I'm absolutely certain, but the argument still remains that such forces can be "useful" in some fashion that makes them relevant to Germany's possible victory in the Second World War. I'm still not convinced as I don't see how such troops could bring about the capitulation of the USSR, UK, and USA, from a Germany largely quarantined to Europe.
Other issues include the value of the Ukrainian territories and how much the could realistically be expected to support Germany quickly enough to make her win the war. Would love a response of some sort or, god forbid, a video.
im actually wondering about how skilled the UK was at this sort of thing, they have been a maritime power throughout their history and ww2 would have seen the biggest landings in history, and the bigger the landing the more complex it becomes, so how would their previous experience help or hinder?
when the doctrine of amphibious landing was discussed the real masters of this became forgotten. it was the royal navy by far. strange that it was not mentioned even if they did talk about the pacific where the present of the royal navy was lacking. the knowhow existed though.
the japanese were not focus in their aim...at first they wanted to invade midway....then later focus on the carriers...than midway...after the carriers attacked them...the pursue for the carriers...they should have divided their task force....one for midway one for carrier hunting....in the end they lost both.
the midway operation should have happened on 7th December 1941 as part of the pearl harbour attack, the carrier and support ships were right there after pearl those four carriers could have easily provided air cover for such an operation, they only needed to add landing craft.
The Japanese lacked the ground forces and transports to take the island, garrison it, and supply them.
Yes they could have but to supply it would be a waste of fuel they did not have.
They had to detach two carriers to support the invasion of Wake Island. The troops and land craft weren't available. The relief troops were redirected from Wake to Midway.
I thought that Yamamoto, in the Yamato was trailing the fleet ? If they'd won the sea battle they could have used the planes and the big guns on the ships to level the place before trying to land troops ?
They had a limited amount of fuel and no tankers with the fleet.
With the performance of the Japanese ground forces against the US ground forces, throughout the whole war, on top of all the other specific considerations for a Midway landing; I think it would have been a 1:100 casualty rate.
When the Marines were bombarded by Japanese battleships at Guadalcanal they were devastated as opposed to when they were bombarded by 8 inch guns of heavy cruisers.
Of course it would have been possible. First, the island was only reinforced because the code was broken and we knew of the attack. If the code had not been broken, there would not have even been a navel battle preceding the invasion. That was the whole idea, take the island to draw out the American carriers, then destroy them as they came by submarines and their own carriers. But, let's just say the Japanese had won the navel battle despite the code being broken, as is the premise of the video. For instance, their scout planes found our ships first and they sent everything they had to sink our three aircraft carriers. Even though Midway would have been reinforced, it was a very tiny place. The four Japanese aircraft carriers could have just launched wave after wave until nothing was left. In addition, the main landing force had seven to nine battleships depending on what you read. That many battleships could have encircled that tiny atoll and just killed every living thing on it before the invasion even began. The Japanese , after taking Midway, could have bombed Pearl Harbor whenever they wanted. They would still have eventually lost the war because American industrial might would have eventually produced enough ships to retake Midway and then proceed with the war as it actually played out.
I think you've ruled out a direct attack. But siege warfar has other strategies. Like blockading and starving the defenders out.
They didn't have the time. They were burning fuel they couldn't replace in a hurry.
i had been fighting near Midway in Gary Grigsby's War in The Pacific when this video came, wow
Socket How Is WitP? Does it feel a bit dated? I know it's considered far more complex as a result of naval and air over ground.
Socket man that game is older than i am....
Gary Grigsby makes the most detailed and probably the best (if we consider the complexity as a rating factor) wargames ever.
WiTP AE could be dated only in case of interface and work ability. Gameplay detalization still wonders, you can play all 1941-45 pacific campaign in resolution of 1day/turn.
there are a lot of featrues and community is still alive, yes.
oh, i forgot to say that the game recived a reincarnation in 2009 - War In the Pacific Admiral Edition.
I've got WitW, I'm just too scared to dive into it
Yamamato was leading the operation from the Yamato? They would of had battleships available for bombardment
Japanese doctrine wasn't to use battleships for bombardment. I don't know if they would have had the HE shells for bombardment.
As far as the order of battle was it would have been impossible. The purpose was never really to take midway though so the question is kinda moot. I think the japanese commanders knew they werent really experienced in contested amphibious assaults.
I have read it that After the battle of Stalingrad, eastern front was threaten to collapsed but the soviets didn't had the full lessons of manoeuvre warfare. So, my question is that what happen if soviets managed to collapsed the eastern front. BTW love your videos..
First of all did the loss of the 6th Army and 4th panzer corps cause a huge gap in the southern part of the Russian front, and the Germans were lucky that they didn't lose the other half of the Army Group. But if that would have happened the South would have collapsed, and Germany would be forced to try to plug the hole with what they had - and they didn't have anything suffiecent to compensate such a huge loss. And moving troops from Army Group North and Middle, would just strech those army groups thin as well.... and then the Russians could just smash those army groups as well, and the entire Eastern front would be left unprotected for the steamrolling red army.
And not trying to plug the southern hole was not an option either. Germany needed rare earth metals, it needed the Ukrainian coal mines, and losing the airbases on Crimea would threaten the Turkish shipments of chrome to Germany........And worst of all, having a million men on the southern flank of Army group mittel would be a disaster for the Germans. And of top of all those things - I guess a political crisis would be ensured. Stalingrad was bad enough, and many countries were starting to make diplomatical moves towards peace and leaving the Axis. And had the Southern front totally collapsed and Ukraine quickly fallen to the Russians, and Romania and Hungary had become next to fall.... then I guess that the Axis-alliance would fall to pieces pretty fast.
And the only thing stopping the red army then, would be bad weather and logistical constraints rather than fierce enemy opposition.
Japanese have seven battleships including the Yamato don't know where you got the mainly cruiser idea. And they have a ton of destroyers and two light carriers.
Hard to find out Japanese land forces. I recall from long ago war game it was adequate but not a slam dunk for a win mainly because of all the positive support modifiers the Japanese got. That of course the designers opinion based on in depth research.
Midway a compressed target. I have seen articles on massive damage to defenses done by Battleship fire in part because that is the only fire that can go thur the defenses of bunkers. This effectiveness did vary depending on terrain in example Omaha beach on D-Day the bluffs made hitting German defenses with Battleship fire difficult as far as beach defenses but the Battleships did in part with air forces the rest take out the larger guns that could be used vs US ships. But very correct once on the beach up close DD more effective often.
With a defeat of defending US Navy the despair combine with the compressed defense being torn apart by the BB guns and constant air support would have made it tough on defending ground forces. I would expect typical foolish Surender by commander.
You many have answered by question of why not try the ground invasion even with the Carrier defeat. Still it should have been tried by Japanese. It does seam the surface navy did not realize how fast Carriers ran out of supply and have to with draw with this battle plus later ones where the Japanese did not follow thur on surface wins. But this whole thing fallows the Japanese navy caution even cowardliness throughout the war and treating battleships as to important to put in front.
Over and over Japanese Naval forces passed up chances to win by withdrawing after the first action. And with Midway the BB should have lead and the CV follow maybe able to get US to attack BB and with BB showing up in the morning off midway the CV not be distracted with need to shell the airfield.
US remaining carrier would probably be able to kill one more HC or damage a BB then have to withdraw. Then there would be the massive fire power of Japan's surface fleet. I could see a Japanese win here still.
Ground attackers tended to underestimate the effect of prep bombardment because what was left after it still nasty but research normally showed original defenses a good deal weakened from what was there before a lot of the time. With exceptions in example a volcanic hill turned into giant bunker for example in one battle where the volcanic rock too tough even for BB shells without points to aim at(once it started firing it's guns got taken out over the day, Marine pilots flying flat and level as that the only way to shoot thur gun ports extreme bravery that got may shot down). I'll let you figure that one it was called a mountain even though not one if I recall right.
Well, Midway's not exactly a strategic jewel of an island. Maybe bombard it with your carriers, but other than that, just sever It's supply lines and send your fleet to engage the US Navy in the East Pacific.
Okay but it wouldn't really change the outcome of the war either way at that point. A more interesting question is if a successful invasion of Hawaii was possible as a follow on to the attack at the start of the war. I think it might have been but they would have had to pull every vessel and man available to do so - certainly more than they brought. Doing so right at the start and capturing fuel, equipment, and prisoners might have been used as a bargaining chip as well as helping significantly in operations. While they had little skill in amphibious operations the US also had little defenses to resist such an invasion at that time. An unopposed landing was certainly possible.
By the time they accomplished that massive feat (I suppose all the landing craft to handle an invasion where 40,000 troops are defending just appears like magic) the US would be more than ready,
How much of a difference would it have made if the US hadn't cracked the code and saw the attack coming? Midway was probably still fortified, but there would surely be some impact, right?
Bad, It would have been bad
I end up spending half of the Pacific theater videos laughing in disbelief. I've seen the casualty numbers for both sides for all the different islands and battles, and when TV documentaries say "the US suffered heavy casualties..." I think 'well then the Japanese suffered catastrophically high casualties.' TV docs are garbage.
What a fantastic book.... If this subject interest's you ? there is no better resource.
The big factor you neglect is that the morale of the American troops would have been rubbish by the time of the Japanese landing. Hearing that all your big carriers in the Pacific had just been sunk, and with nearly every battle ending in a US defeat up until that time, I believe the marines commanders would have felt doomed. They had next to no airforce, bleak options to be resupplied...remember all those marines that had been crammed onto the Atoll need to eat and drink and you see a long bleak siege as your best option, all the while facing air bombardment. Google the atoll it is a naked looking place from the air with no place to hide. The Pacific Commander Nimitz no doubt believed that they could full well lose the battle at the time it happened.
well, considering that quite many other troops fought pretty hard under similar or worse conditions. And these were Marines, so not conscripted but volunteers.
The supply problem was the same for the Japanese, they couldn't lay siege to the island.
Maybe :-) I live in what was once Malaya. It should never have been a rout, Professional troops (and local conscripts) as well as difficult and impenetrable terrain, but it was what it was once morale flew out the window. I do enjoy your channel...this is a good subject for discussion over beers. Let me know if you are ever down in KL.
Best you watch the first 5 seconds of the video again. The assumption of the video is that the US navy lost the naval engagement which is where the code breaking was an important factor. Could you explain how code breaking , a highly top secret technology known only to the top brass, would have influenced the morale of the defending troops in the ensuing landings? They would have no idea, only the knowledge that their navy had been soundly defeated and they were now cut off. Pretty bleak I think. The knew about Corregidor, so that would influence their mindset as well. Please note we are talking about troops on the ground. Not the commanders back at Pearl
And regarding Nimitz...I was just going from the top of my head however Googling seems to indicate he was CINCPAC from March 1942 so was in the position for both the Coral Sea and Midway.
Just out of curiosity I was speculating on whether Midway was of strategic importance to the Japanese. Don't get me wrong, I am glad the Pacific theatre did a turnaround there, but it is interesting to note that Midway was within supply range of Tokyo by air (easily in the range of a one way trip from Tokyo in a Betty, or return once refuelled) and Betty's could bomb Hawaii from Midway due to their incredible range. It was well worth the effort in stopping them from invading. Of course they would have suffered severe losses to fighters and AAA over Hawaii due to their lack of self sealing tanks and lack of armour, but just like what happened in Darwin, the effect on the civilian population would have been quite severe even if militarily an overextension.
Air bombardment from where they barely had the fuel to spare for a battle that was supposed to force us to sue for peace. There is no way they could do any sort of blockade they simply did not have the fuel and they had barely any tankers the logistics were horrid for them.
Hey! Could you maybe tell if it would've been possible for Japan to avoid early conflict with the western powers, by exploiting more german victories in Europe (as french indochina) by demanding the oil-ritch dutch indies? I know they were a government in exile, but as an occupying force, maybe it was something for germans to give?
Most of these visuals are related to the navy and we're assuming that the Japanese completely destroyed the American naval forces in the 1942 Battle of Midway and wondering if they invasion force could do anything afterwards (answer: no, especially since they were outnumbered by the defenders and for a lot of other reasons)
well done !!
This is good but you leave some points open because the video is rather short you would ve mentioned this in longer warfare:
Assuming the american passific fleet is in total dissaray or in no position to directly combat japanese navy,
What if japan prepared long sieges on islands with constant bombardment and possible air strikes from carrier groups?
Sure they dont have a doctrine but they would learn over time just the same as the americans.
What if japan devoloped air superiority and improved precision targetting or bunker buster bombs?
What if the japanese imperial army and navy co operated more and the army used their exprience gained from fighting in muds of china and french indo china and a joint amphibious assault operations?
Yes with the fuel fairy on their side they can not lose.
I think looking a photos and maps of the island show that other then the reefs there is no natural cover. The Island is only 2 sq miles in area much of that is runway. This is an observation and transit point no a fortess rising out of the see like most of the Island the us had to take later in the war. Also there is no jungle/forest here to hide in just open ground.
What should the Japanese has done to win the Battle of midway exactly?
Concentration of force would have aided them greatly. Ultimately however, they were very unlikely to achieve their objective of defeating the Americans in a decisive battle. The Americans knew that the Japanese were coming and had no intention of being drawn into such a battle.
@@manilajohn0182 Stay in harbor on Dec. 7, 1941. U.S. vs. Japan was unsinkable in 1940's.
Only worse decision in the 20th Century was Hitler's declaration of war on the U.S. on Dec. 10, 1941.
Even if Japan had taken Midway they had little to no way to re-supply it, they didn't have the merchant vessels needed and the US would have kept submarines all around it to sink any attempts.
I don't know if you covered it, but how about a video on the attempt to re-take Wake Island and if they had tried, the possible result(s)? See the Book "Pacific Alamo - The Battle for Wake Island" by John Wukovits
Yup. Shoot, if politics weren't an issue it may have been a great move to just abandon the island and let them try to hold it.
The Japanese didn't have Zakus yet, would probably be impossible.
Well done.
This seems like yet another close minded analysis of what possibly could have occurred at Midway. Nobody is thinking outside of the box and truly realistic situations here.
In a different video, I layed out a very realistic battle plan where if the IJN decided to engage in vessel vs vessel combat and truly utilize their large size advantage then the US Pacific fleet would have been doomed.
If the strategy was limited bombers “wounding” the US carriers and then the IJN fast battleships getting in range and shelling what few vessels the US fleet had then it certainly would have been possible for the US to capture the Hornet and Enterprise and its crew and hold them hostages.
People talk of the US industrial might but the true numbers wouldn’t show up until mid to late 1943. We are talking mid 1942 here and this is what it looked like.
IJN vs US capable / actual
Carriers - 9 vs 3 / 4 vs 3
Planes - Over 500 vs 360 / 248 vs 360
Battleships 11 vs 0 / 2 vs 0 or more like 0 vs 0 since the IJN just used 2 as screening vessels.
Cruisers - 21 vs 8 / 16 vs 8
Destroyers - 63 vs 30 / 49 vs 14
The capable for the IJN assumes Aleutians campaign is canceled. 2 extra carriers Junyo and Ryujo with 85 or so extra planes. 4 cruisers and 13 destroyers.
Many of the other IJN vessels were either with Yamamoto’s Main Force which was 300 miles out and the Occupation Force south of Midway. The positioning and purpose of these vessels are just horrible and clearly show to anybody how flawed the IJN battle plan was.
All these historians talking about the battle as it played out but yet nobody truly analyzing and asking the right questions as to why the IJN didn’t take different approaches.
Two battles also took place previous to Midway that should have taught the IJN some lessons.
Coral Sea - This battle clearly should have showed the IJN that Carrier vs Carrier fighting was not the way to go. Damaging or sinking enemy carriers at the trade off of 1 of mine and me losing many planes and pilots doesn’t work. So now I know that vessel vs vessel combat must come into play.
Wake Island - this should have taught the IJN that taking an island was not easy. It took many many bombing runs over several days to a week to soften up the island. In addition, the IJN tried to bring in destroyers but got too close where the US island weapons could be used against them. This cost the IJN a couple of destroyers and a cruiser I believe.
So now with the above and I also plan to utilize night fighting if necessary. The irony is that the IJN after losing their 4 main carriers started to engage in more vessel to vessel combat and actually scored one is their more decisive tactical wins at the Battle of Savo Island which was fought at night.
Let’s all remember too that the IJN was battle tested in many areas since fighting China for several years. IJN had the better planes and pilots and tactics and trained personnel in mid 1942. The US didn’t know how to night fight.
So now as explained in other videos. All the IJN had to do was spread their forces out far enough but close enough where the IJN could deliver a major strike against the US.
The carriers are loaded with zero fighters. 350 fighters vs 150 bombers. 60 bombers or so are simply dedicated for Midway. There is no re-arming or switch out of bombs here. With so few bombers then less heavy aerial bombs are needed. This lightens up the carriers to load more fighters. We can now see how bringing the smaller carriers Ryujo and Junyo from the Aleutians and better utilizing the Zuiho and Hosho could have made a huge difference at Midway. In addition the IJN bringing the Zuikaku with planes from the Shokaku is just simply added extra insurance.
The key for the IJN was to have plenty of CAP for their carriers plus have some CAP for their attacking vessels which are leading the way.
The IJN non carrier vessels should have been in front and the IJN should have shelled a Midway with their battleships.
The IJN carriers force would have split into forces. Example Akagi ad Kaga north of Midway. The 4 small carriers positioned west of Midway and carriers Hiryu and Soryu south of Midway and the Zuikaku further back south west.
And each of the forces are leading with subs and destroyers and cruisers and battleships.
So it doesn’t matter where the US Force is positioned. The IJN Northern Force is leading the way. They would be the first spotted. The Akagi and Kaga are trailing with their escort vessels 50-100 miles back.
The US scout planes would spot the non carrier vessels first. Would the Midway planes or US carrier planes launch and go after them? If not the Northern Force just keeps heading east and will potential run into US Task Force 17 first.
Western Force now approaching. Has 4 battleships. 4 small carriers trailing. 50-100 miles back.
Planes catch up to battleships and pass over and 40 fighters and 60 bombers approach Midway. Midway planes have to launch. 127 Midway planes start to launch but planes are obsolete. Where do these Midway planes attack. If they go out to try and find the carriers then they let the battleship get within firing range.
The Midway planes are obsolete and no match for the IJN zero fighters. The IJN bombers get through and bombing begins. There is no need for a 2nd aerial bombing.
IJN Battleships moving into firing range and the US island forces don’t have anything that can reach far enough to hit the IJN battleships. Shelling of the islands begin.
As this is happening what are the US carrier planes going to do. Akagi and Kaga are behind the Western Force and further north. Did the US carrier planes launch to see what is lurking out west. Planes came from there so their must be carriers. There are but only 4 small ones.
In the meantime the Southern Force is coming from near Wake Island. They are heading north east. This large force of 4 battleships, 4 cruisers and 10 destroyers leading the way with the Carriers Hiryu and Soryu trailing with their own escort force was meant to take on the US Force head on if the US was positioned south of Midway or they serve as a blockade force and cut off any escape route for the US if they are north of Midway.
The Zuikaku is following Hiryu and Soryu but it’s role is to back up Western Force and Southern Force with CAP.
So the plan is to take care of the US Task Force first. Midway can wait.
With all the IJN approaching forces, the US carrier planes would have committed somewhere or split up their planes. Some had to head west. But the 4 small carriers are now heading back west and trying to get out of range of any US planes.
The Akagi and Kaga are finally spotted. But what do the US carrier planes do. If they allow the 2 leading fast battleships through then they will be able to get in range. The majority of US planes have to go after the Akagi and Kaga. The IJN simply has too much CAP this time and the IJN fighters are all spread out ahead of the carriers and over the carriers at different altitudes.
Very few if any bombers can get though and they can’t hit the Akagi and Kaga with such few attempts.
With all the noise the IJN Southern Force knows the US Task Force is north of Midway. They launch their planes. The goal isn’t to sink the US carriers just wound them. The IJN southern vessels move into position to cut off any escape route.
Two battleships hitting Midway’s east island leave the area and head east now to help hit the US Force from the west.
The US Force is surrounded. Only 8 cruisers and 14 destroyers and they are all sunk and heavily damaged. The already wounded Yorktown is sunk and the Hornet and Enterprise along with crew are captured. They head back west.
Now finally back to Midway. With no supporting US naval forces the IJN takes their time this time around. The perform more precise aerial bombing runs now during the day. Also shell the island day and night. No sleep at all for the US on the island.
It’s not even determined yet if the island will be taken at this time. The IJN decided to pass and sue for peace since they have the Hornet and Enterprise and crew. If the US doesn’t sign a Peace Treaty then the next step will be Midway again followed by Pearl Harbor 2.
The IJN now has 13 carriers:
1 Akagi 2 Kaga 3 Hiryu 4 Soryu 5 Zuikaku 6 Shokaku repaired 7 Hiyo completed shortly after Midway. 53 plane capacity. 8 Hornet 9 Enterprise
10 Junyo 11 Ryujo 12 Zuiho 13 Hosho.
After studying the Hornet and Enterprise the IJN could have made improvement to their own carriers.
This was all very realistic. During war 6 months to a year is a long time. Aug 1945 is a long ways away too.
Invasion of any place by the IJN is again close minded thinking.
How about IJN giving the island back to the locals and force all military personnel to leave.
If we think about it this isn’t talked about much either. Everybody complains about Japan an Asian country occupying other Asian counties but it’s okay for European countries like France/Vietnam and British/Hong Kong and India etc and US or Spain / Phillipines okay?
Where the IJA messed up is where they could not get the locals to free themselves from European countries. They were too harsh and brutal to locals.
So in the end the US certainly did capitalize on many many Japan errors.
More credit needs to be given to the US Midway pilots despite not scoring any hits. It was a team effort which opened things up for the US dive bombers.
The scenario I provided should simply be a learning lesson. The US will most likely have the 3-1 to advantage in many encounters.
Later in WW2 the US themselves seems to have used a more effective strategy of combining their carrier and non carrier vessels in their attacks.
Surface engagements weren't going to happen. Fletcher and Spruance would have cut and run before letting their small force engage with the Japanese. Thankfully Halsey was beached and couldn't blunder into the Japanese force at night.
@@PeteOtton what do you mean surface engagements weren’t going to happen.
This is what the US Naval War College recommended what the IJN should have done at Midway.
Also, in August 1942 Battle of Savo Island took place which was a surface ship battle.
Also, try to envision a smaller IJN Force approaching Midway from the north. Basically the same route the Kido Butai took but it’s just different vessels:
1 Kongo class battleship
6 cruisers
12 destroyers
Carrier Ryujo.
So you’re saying the USN is going to run away from this? Please make some sense.
@@f430ferrari5 Of coarse they were. Neither Fletcher nor Spruance were stupid and had orders to preserve the carriers if it went belly up. Halsey was thankfully beached, he was aggressive enough to run right into Nagumo's arms and be thoroughly trounced by a night action. Do you even know what you are talking about? Do you realize that if Nimitz wasn't at least a bit of a gambler that once he learned only 4 carriers were coming he would have left the carriers further to the east so that contact wouldn't happen until at least the afternoon if at all?
@@PeteOtton you sure about that. Fletcher was in command related to the failed Battle of Wake Island engagement.
Due to slow refueling or at least this is what we are told the US failed to intercept the IJN forces and Wake Island was lost and quite a few American prisoners captured.
Spruance was Halsey’s replacement.
There is no guarantee as to what they may have done. You think they would run like cowards and abandon the troops on Midway just like Wake Island. Is this what you ate saying.
And what are you talking about. Stick to 1942 Midway.
The IJN had a massive vessel advantage which you cannot deny.
The IJN also had more than 4 carriers. They had 8 out there including 2 which went to the Aleutians and 2 small carriers where 1 was with the Occupation Force and 1 with the Main Force.
Read what I wrote above in detail. You had to have read it at least partially since you responded.
Nice of you to ignore what the US Naval War College stated too related to the IJN using their surface ships. 😂🤣
@@f430ferrari5 Son you are pretty damn arrogant for someone who know little of the tactical situation. IF there was any chance of losing the carriers they were going to leave Midway to the Marines to bleed the Japanese landing force. They were not going to tangle with Japanese surface forces when they were outgunned. The Japanese outnumbered the escorts Spruance and Fletcher had at their disposal. Spruance sailed east overnight to ensure he stayed out of gun range. Nimitz would have ordered the retaking of Midway if it fell. He also understood that it was a logistical nightmare for the Japanese and likely would have set many submarines in ambush of supply ships. This would have probably made the deficiencies of the mark 14 and other torpedoes apparent sooner and resulted in their being addressed sooner. Instead of Guadalcanal, Midway would have been a meat grinder for the the Japanese. I suggest you actually read some books on the history of the Pacific war because you only have counterfactual BS.
The Japanese had no realistic plans after Midway. They thought to use it as a jumping off point for an invasion of Hawaii, but by May of 1942 Hawaii had been reinforced with ships, planes, and thousands of troops and Marines. Midway is at the end of the Hawaiian Archipelago. While it's geographically "midway" between the west coast of the U.S. and Japan it's much closer to Hawaii then it is to the Japanese main islands. If they had taken Midway the U.S. would have simply taken it back. Once the U.S. cracked the Japanese naval code and knew their plans the Japanese invasion of Midway was doomed to failure. The Battle of Midway became for the Japanese what they had hoped would have been the fate of the U.S. fleet at Pearl Harbor. With the U.S. aircraft carriers at sea on December 7 the attack succeeded only in sinking the obsolete battleship fleet.
With over 3,000 dead, 4 carriers sunk and 250 planes and experienced pilots lost the Japanese suffered a far worse defeat than the U.S. had at Pearl Harbor.
What if the Japanese encircled the island and blocked all supplies entering it, so the defenders starve? Was this an option?
ships need fuel and food for the crew too, who you think will have more "staying power".
the only way could be if they could cut off water totally, but I guess they had some kind of reservoir.
I just have one simple Question to you MilitaryHistoryVisulised do you think that there was any Chance that Japan could have won atleast a partial Sucess (taking some islands and get the americans to lift the embargo) ?! Also hello from Niederösterreich
(Lower Austria)
Private Captain The answer to your question is yes. But only if the Americans weren't resolved to win the war outright. American manpower & industrial might would always win out.
tyro apache
First of all thanks for answering My Question i recently talked to a friend of mine and we also came to this conclusion. I also believe that the Japanese had a better chance at actually gaining some territories (not like the Germans) since the American warmachine was actually focused on Germany. I wonder what your opinion is ?!
Private Captain Well the historical evidence seems clear on the inevitable outcome of the war. Japan never truly had a chance of winning an all out war against the US. The best hope they had was to fight the Americans to a stalemate. But as I stated before, if the Americans were determined to win. The eventual Japanese defeat would always be inevitable. However the conclusions of this video are insanely stupid. A Japanese naval victory at Midway, means the US carriers were destroyed. Midways remaining land based aircraft would be easy pickings for the Japanese fighters & dive bombers. Having air, naval & ground superiority would guarantee Midway falls in a few days at the most.
No. Once the attack on Pearl Harbor happened, the war's ultimate outcome was decided. It was just a matter of how long--and at what cost--it would take to get there, and what path the United States would take.
Erm, that was the whole point of Japanes attack on Midway: destroy US fleet carriers, target other ships with planes, use battleships and cruisers for support and blocade of ports. The US industrial might could have been solved by targeting the harbors, like Pearl Harbor style attacks or by using submarines. There was actually a plan to use the I-400 and I-401 submarine carriers to disrupt panama channel and launch surprise raids on San Fransisco. So, yes. If Midway would have ended in a victory as the japanese expected, the US would be doomed. Even partial, Japan would keep an advantage in big carriers. Perhaps US could have countered with the use of small escort carriers, but that would limit their abilities to strike.
Huh... Sounds like battleships were kind of obsolete even during WWII.
They were obsolete even in World war 1 started. They never even became a thing in war before those damn uboats, planes and missiles destroyed everything good and fair about naval warfare :(
Those ships were too expensive to lose, so the Germans never wanted to sail and make a big battle with the Royal navy - because the RN was about 50% stronger than the huge German navy. So the German ships was sitting anchored next to the coast for almost the entire war.
And then came World War II, and we know what happened to the Royal Oak, Prince of Wales, Repulse, Bismarck, Tirpitz, Musashi, and all the battleships at Pearl Harbour.
nattygsbord: Well, at least they learned that if you're gonna build large warships, you better build them as aircraft carriers instead of giant gunboats.
@@nattygsbord this.
These days I had a discussion with a comrade about battleships. In my opinion there were a bad invention. He thinks they had a small use.
What would you say?
Battleships reigned for about 30-50 years depending on how you define a battleship. They and the preceding ironclads were outgrowths of ships of the line. Once air craft carriers could carry aircraft that could launch and land at sea with payloads that were capable of damaging ships underway they became mostly obsolete.
The biggest down side would be that Japan would never even want to do that
The invasion of the Aleutians was a mistake, right? Would not invading Alaska have made a difference at Midway?
Could u play Graviteam tactics mius front please its a great game.
i think in 1942 the japanese would have been quite adept at invading an island held by japanese, just as the americans, in almost all categories, would have excelled at fighting americans. by this point the euro theater allies had learned the folly of that state of affairs the hard way, and the germans were just being introduced to that realization.
between the wars most nations became like those "taught myself kung fu" guys of the 70s, that bought the books that showed the stances, and the basic 2 man fighting form as flip book choreography, kinda. the guy who had the hung gar book was great against a hung gar guy, but not so adept against any other form by virtue of his "training". doctrine favorable to adaptation seems to be the "make or break" factor.
I disagree [but agree if Yamamoto's plan is not altered drastically]:
1; Yamamoto's strategy of using his 4 Carriers to attack an island was a huge waste of their capabilities. This is why I often consider Yamamoto overrated. The Carrier Strike Force SHOULD have been used to prepare for the destruction of the USN Carriers or battleships [though US carrier threats would be their first priority] - once at least 2 of the USN Carriers had been sunk then the IJN's CSF aircraft could seek out ANY USN Battleships and sink them, leaving Midway at the Japanese mercy;
2; The Aleutian 'diversion' was a waste of escort Carriers, etc. The IJN's Main Strike Force battleships, cruisers, destroyers, escort Carriers that carried the flagship should have been used to bombard everything of consequence after an escort Carrier reconned Midway. Once bunkers were spotted then Destroyers and Battleships could have turned them into rubble. 5-14 inch guns would have either wounded or killed at least 50% [if not more] of the US troops on Midway. Bunkers or not, where would they hide from the devastating concussion of a 10inch HE shell? Should the USN Carriers have attempted to attack the bombarding IJN ships then the Carrier Strike Force could have determined the locality of the USN Carriers and that could have been their downfall. With Escort Carriers defending the bombarding IJN ships, I doubt those dive bombers/torpedo bombers would have survived and those that did? would have been followed back to their Carriers where the IJN's Carrier Force would have made a determined strike against them;
3; After the heavy bombardment of Midway by IJN battleships [Yamamoto's decision to waste the power of his CSF on lobbing crappy light bombs against Midway was the worst decision he ever made], the IJN Marines would surely have faced light opposition and Midway's USM mortar or MG nests would have been kept pinned by the presence of the Escort Carriers' small number of fighter-bombers.
Let me say again - ANY sign of the presence of USN Carrier borne aircraft would have exposed their Carriers' positions, been triangulated by the IJN's CSF and, with 4 powerful Carriers? the USN Carriers would have had to accept battle and almost certainly lose an attritional battle, sinking maybe 2 IJN Carriers but losing their own if they didn't manage to escape. I seriously doubt once they had made their presence known by using their aircraft they could not have avoided repeated IJN attacks with inevitable losses of at least one Carrier, thus, reducing their Carrier borne airforce by one third.
Note: the greatest mistake of Yamamoto was in dividing the responsibilities of his CSF and wasting resources on the Aleutians. His CSF SHOULD have been the utter destruction of the USN's Carriers and THAT should have been its total purpose as soon as USN Carrier aircraft were used.
SO, following Yamamoto's very flawed original plan? I agree with you...
BUT
his absurd waste of priorities in using his CSF to attack Midway when he should have bombarded the island - WITH BATTLESHIPS AND DESTROYERS - prior to sending in landing troops, handed the entire initiative to the USN's Carriers and they took great advantage of Yamamoto's arrogance.
I suppose Yamamoto lacked the benefit of my hindsight but still, this reminds me of the strike upon Pearl. Nagumo should have risked everything is ensuring that every Oil Farm on Pearl, every crane, every Repair yard for ships and aircraft were utterly smashed beyond repair. The USN would have then been force to try to use Australia as a place to store large amounts of POL and Midway would also be in serious trouble as that would be the most remote and vulnerable airbase without the support from Pearl.
ps, I'm not pro-IJ Forces. I've just gone over the Midway and Pearl Harbour attacks and found that the USA was almost forced back to its shores as IJN subs sank a heavy percentage of US tankers trying to create an oil supply for USN ships to strike deeper into Japanese holdings. Of course, Japan couldn't hold on forever but it would force the war to drag on in the Pacific for at least a further 2 or more years.
Just a theory.
Good point. There was a 5th carrier in Japan that could have been re-deployed had they broke the red tape. So a smaller force to invade/bomb the island while a larger carrier group be the predator. Bear in mind that Yamamoto's original ambush idea was rejected by Tokyo, it was only after the Doolittle raid Tokyo considered Midway a threat and sanction an invasion. It was Yamamoto who highjacked the Plan and modify it to Invasion + Ambush. There is nothing wrong with this little cleverness, but you better make sure you have someone you can trust to implement your idea, or you better sit on top of Nagumo to run the show. Yamamoto sat in his Yamoto miles behind to allow Nagumo a free hand instead.
Lastly, I don't think the Pacific war could have drag on say for another 2 more years. Nothing happened in the Pacific after US Midway victory, with much of the action in Solomons and Guadalcanal for another 12 months, before Operation Cartwheel in Jun 43. Had the Jap won an attriction victory say 2 carriers sunk each, it would not change the picture of Solomons or Guadalcanal. Had the Jap won an outright victory say 1 carriers Vs 3 carriers sunk, it would still be a Submarine warfare throughout 1942, unless Jap organised another attack at Pearl Harbour to finish the job. You were right in your beginning, the only material and significant damage to US Pacific fleet, was to destroy all harbour facility (plus Submarine fleet), such that closest harbour was either Australia or West coast.
It was not Yamamotos fault the army would not support the Midway plan unless they also did the Aleutian attack and he needed army support for the invasion the navy wanted no part of the Alaskan actions.
If the Japanese sent the extra wave of planes and nailed the fuel storage in Hawaii... anything was ripe for the taking.
can anyone please recomend any good military books, featuring tactics/equipment of old or modern military units?
If the Japanese had taken midway they would have an Island a long way from the nearest Japanese base and impossible to re-supply. Unable to play an active role in the war Japanese units on the Island would basically have been POW's guarding themselves
Question. Was Patton feared by the German? Because many books i read tell me it was the case, but that wargaming dude (i forgot his channel) presented in one of his video that it was total bs and the german didn't really care that much about him.
Patton was a useless twat made famous by after-war media.
He had no sucsess solely relying on his strategic genius.
On the other hand, all allied generals are. Defeating the germans at glorious battles of africa and omaha beach? yeah you outhnumber than 2-3 to 1, have equipment 5 times more and better quality.
It would be a miracle to lose.
U mean this dude? ua-cam.com/users/TheChieftainWoT
nattygsbord yeah, that one
"Patton was a real alpha male leader."
This is definitely how historians and intellectuals make an argument
No get out.
"Eisenhower, both seeing the wisdom of the plan around Caen and the liability Patton was, "...
Unlike patton i can actualy defendd eisenhower on political awereness and solution to social issues between generals.
Patton, like MacArthur were just blowhards whose egos made sure their names were always mentioned in press releases to the public back home. This is what made them seem like brilliant leaders. If a lie gets repeated enough it becomes truth, example; Trump is a politician who knows how to manage an entire country. Im not anti- trump, but I do know BS when I see it.
That's like saying capturing Moscow in 1941 would have won the war against the USSR
The capture Of Moscow MIGHT have caused the collapse of Staltin;s regime. Without his strong hand, the war effort probably would have fallen apart. He had made himself that essential. Of course, if he had decided to leave by train to take command elsewhere, the might have been 1812 all over again.
@@JRobbySh I think that while capturing Moscow was necessary for victory against the soviet union, it didn't guarantee it. I think the only way victory against the USSR can be achieved was if Germany was able to capture Leningrad and Moscow in 1941 and then capture and successfully hold onto both stalingrad and the caucus oil fields in 1942. Then after repelling all soviet counter attacks, have japan open up a second front from eastern Siberia. Under those circumstances, it is very possible that the USSR would fall and even if they didn't, they would have no easy way to take back the captured territory
capturing a capitol was no longer the end of the battle just ask the Continental Congress in 1777