Pearl Harbor, New Program

With the anniversary of the attack on Pearl Harbor, Ive seen a couple of programs with new info on tv.
Hitler has no advance notice of the attack but was delighted when he heard, he thought that would guarantee German victory over the U S. He really underestimated our industrial capacity as well as will once the nation was united. In the aftermath of WWI there was a strong peace movement in the U S, but that vanished with Japans attack. Lindbergh was cautious about the war, but was a vaueable aid once it began, and flew some combat in the Pacific.
Churchill had said that if Japan attacked the U S he would declare war immediately and he kept his word. He thought this would bring the US fully into the war as happened.
There was fear of Japanese action before Pearl, but no real intel to give a defintive place and time to any general warning. The day after the attack Gen MacArthur was not prepared to defend either.
The Japanese carriers sent two waves of planes to attack Pearl and had a lot of sucess, but made a mistake in not sending a 3rd wave that could have destroyed even more ships and airport and army bases. They had already negated most of fighter opposition on the ground, but would have faced some antiaircraft fire the 3rd time.
Ive been to the aviation museum on Ford Island, right where it happened, small but worth a visit.
It think many in the U S have an extra animosity toward Japan since the attack was done before war was declared by Japan, they had a message but it was delivered in Wash too late. Japan did not attack civilian areas on Oahu, the few civilian casualties were from "friendly" fire. The program said this attack was one of our two biggest intel failures, along with 9-11. U S losses were similar in both, 2400 and 2900, and both attacks were by aircraft, no ground or naval forces as for as is known.
Prime Minister Abe, will be the first to attend services in Hawaii, perhaps he will offer a sincere apology for starting the war.
Japan was our enemy then, is a close ally now and China has gone from an ally then, to an enemy in the 50s to some mddle role now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bill Greenwood

The program said this attack was one of our two biggest intel failures, along with 9-11. U S losses were similar in both, 2400 and 2900, and both attacks were by aircraft, no ground or naval forces.

---

Actually, this is not quite the case. Japan deployed five midget submarines to coordinate with the air attack. One was sunk off the coast a few hours before the air attack, leading to a heightened alert level in some quarters, at least. It was beached and the US captured it.

The crews of the submarines were quite famous, in Japan:

http://www.combinedfleet.com/midgetoff.jpg

In addition, after the war, an aerial photo taken by one the Japanese pilots became available:

http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question...leship-row.jpg

There is a dark block in the mid-harbor area at the start of one of the torpedo tracks. Some believe it's the conning tower of one of the subs. USS Oklahoma was hit by several torpedoes, and one appeared to be much larger (more explosive force) than the aerial torpedoes.

Ron "Climb Mount Niitaka" Wanttaja

The leader of Japan is coming here to visit Pearl. They say they will not apologize for this attack and that the American soldier should get over it. I just heard this on the news not 5 mins ago. Made me sick to my stomach.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 1600vw

The leader of Japan is coming here to visit Pearl. They say they will not apologize for this attack and that the American soldier should get over it. I just heard this on the news not 5 mins ago. Made me sick to my stomach.

---

Been 75 years, dude. Few of the current Japanese politicians or military were even alive when it happened. Honor the dead, remember the lessons, and move on.

Ron Wanttaja

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rwanttaja

Been 75 years, dude. Few of the current Japanese politicians or military were even alive when it happened. Honor the dead, remember the lessons, and move on.

Ron Wanttaja

---

Sure it's been 75 years. But no one should ever tell the American Soldier to get over something like this or the American Public. We can move on but don't ask anyone to not expect an apology. Spit in my face then want me to be your friend because you say so. Not without an apology, and maybe then, just maybe. People forget what a true friend is. Today people believe a friend is a fren-e-my.
IMHO honoring those who did this is not honoring the dead. If they want to come here it should come with an apology, plain and simple or stay away from this area. To do anything else is rubbing our nose in it...IMHO

If they are not going to apologize why come here? To say...look what we did to you? Or to say we could do this again? What is the point of the visit if not to mend fences. The only way to do that is to apologize for attacking us. IMHO don't attack me or my family then a few years later expect me to befriend you, not without some apology. I don't have to fight you but don't come to my home and expect me to welcome you with open arms. People have forgotten the art of being a friend. Japan is acting like our friend, they need to talk the talk not just walk the walk.

According to Wikipedia, Japan's emperor attempted to apologize for Pearl Harbor. The US rejected it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...ssued_by_Japan

Ron Wanttaja

I've always felt that soundly beating the living snot out of someone obviates the need for an apology for whatever it was that they did. They don't apologize for Pearl harbor, we don't apologize for Hiroshima, Nagasaki and the odd firebombing raid on Tokyo. Some people will hold grudges forever, the rest move on. Call it even.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DaleB

I've always felt that soundly beating the living snot out of someone obviates the need for an apology for whatever it was that they did. They don't apologize for Pearl harbor, we don't apologize for Hiroshima, Nagasaki and the odd firebombing raid on Tokyo. Some people will hold grudges forever, the rest move on. Call it even.

---

Someone attacks me and I beat the snot out of them, don't ever expect an apology from me. I myself was taught after your beating you apologize for the reason you got beat.

Last night I watched a new documentary about the PH attack and aftermath that marks the 75th anniversary. Called "Pearl Harbor: The Accused", it tells the fascinating story of the how and why of the failure to stop the Japanese surprise attack and who was unfairly blamed.

The doc plays like a political thriller with many new insights into who was actually to blame. Admiral Husband Kimmel, Commander in Chief of the Pacific Fleet soon became the very handy scapegoat to blame by an angry country, it's public and especially it's military and politicians. In a rush to judgement Kimmel was found guilty of dereliction of duty which destroyed his career and most of his personal life. A few years later he was afforded a non-public military hearing based on new evidence and was found to be totally not guilty of the serious offence. It was not made public though so Kimmel fought unsuccessfully for public exoneration up until his death in the 1960's. His grandson till this very day still fights for his grandfather's exoneration and honour. Every president since the end of WW2 has, despite the not guilty 2nd hearing, refused to exonerate him. The film try's to answer "why?".

Much of the film is based on a new book, " A Matter Of Honor" which is an in depth journalistic investigation of the PH attack based on newly released and uncovered documents and events of the time. We discover that there are startling similarities between PH and 9/11 in the days and weeks prior to these events in terms who knew what when and who kept precious Intel from those who should have been advised. The surprise part of the PH attack could have easily been avoided and as such would have changed the course of history.

Hundreds of thousands of lives over the next 4 years would soon be sacrificed in the name of political expediency and desire and all the evidence shows it reached the highest levels of the presidency, navy and army. So what else is knew?

It's kind of funny, really. When I remodel my Fly Baby, I'd like to paint it like a Mitsubishi Claude, a pre-war Japanese fighter. But I know there's still considerable anti-Japanese feeling from the war, and don't want to offend anyone.
http://www.bowersflybaby.com/stories/claudefb.jpg

Rudyard Kipling, the British author ("The Jungle Book," "Captains Courageous," etc.) lived in Vermont for several years in the 1890s. He later commented how many people still had anti-British sentiment left over from the Revolutionary War... 110 years earlier.

Mind you, the American Civil War (aka, "The War Between the States," "The Late Unpleasantness," or "The War of Northern Aggression") still generates some ill feelings, too......

Ron "Fifty-Four Forty or Fight!" Wanttaja

Interesting graphic in the paper today, the anniversary of the attack. It showed warship profiles, and the number of casualties on each. Also showed casualties at Hickam, Wheeler, Ford Island, and other airports around Oahu.

The curious thing, it showed six fatalities from USS Enterprise. Now, one of the things that saved our bacon on December 7th was the fact that the carriers didn't get in until the evening of the 7th and thus didn't come under attack. So I'm a bit curious about the fatalities listed for the Big E.

Anyone got any insight? I was thinking maybe they'd left a small detachment behind when they'd sortied earlier. I know the Big E's CAP was shot at when it entered harbor, but don't see any actual shoot-downs due to friendly fire listed.

Ron Wanttaja

I found this on Wikipedia:

Quote:

---

Friendly fire brought down some U.S. planes on top of that, including five from an inbound flight from Enterprise. Japanese attacks on barracks killed additional personnel.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DaleB

I found this on Wikipedia:

---

Thanks...don't know how I missed it. Think I searched for "Enterprise" but only looked at the first result.

Ron Wanttaja

If Wikipedia ever goes away, I'm going to get a lot dumber.

Ron, I dont think there is firm evidence that one of the mini subs ever got inside Pearl Harbor, through the anti sub nets, or fired a torpedo there.
The Ward sighted, fired on and sank a mini sub just outside the harbor entrance, 6:30 am BEFORE the air attack, began.. A few years back that sub was found, but I dont recall if it had a torpedo still on board or not, same as one which ran aground elsewhere.
I saw a program on the search for this mini sub about 2000, I think. One of the surviving Ward crewmen said then that the search was too far out to sea, should be a few miles and that they had shelled and hit the conning tower. Experts doubted him, but when found the sub was where he said with a hole right through the tower. I think a arial torpedo can be pretty large too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bill Greenwood

Ron, I dont think there is firm evidence that one of the mini subs ever got inside Pearl Harbor, through the anti sub nets, or fired a torpedo there.
The Ward sighted, fired on and sank a mini sub just outside the harbor entrance, 6:30 am BEFORE the air attack, began.. A few years back that sub was found, but I dont recall if it had a torpedo still on board or not, same as one which ran aground elsewhere.
I saw a program on the search for this mini sub about 2000, I think. One of the surviving Ward crewmen said then that the search was too far out to sea, should be a few miles and that they had shelled and hit the conning tower. Experts doubted him, but when found the sub was where he said with a hole right through the tower. I think a arial torpedo can be pretty large too.

---

Certainly, there's no hard evidence that any of the subs made it into the harbor. Even the perceived "bigger" hit could have been an aerial torpedo with a secondary explosion from munitions on Oklahoma.

I had thought the midget subs carried the famous Long Lance torpedo, but they had reduced-size version that was 18 inches in diameter vs. the 24 inches of the Long Lance. Found a cool site that presents the differences between Japanese submarine, ship, and aircraft torpedoes:

http://www.combinedfleet.com/torps.htm

The type 97 used on the midget subs had about ~75% more explosive than the Type 91 Mod 2s carried by the Kates at Pearl. Same diameter, though, so there were probably a lot of similarities beyond the extra explosive in the midget-sub torpedo. Total weight of the mini-sub torpedoes wasn't that much more than the aircraft ones.

One of the aspects of the Pearl Harbor attack is that there were many "Experts" who claimed an aerial torpedo attack would be impossible....that the floor of the bay was too shallow, and the torpedoes would hit the bottom before they could level out and find their running depth. However, a year earlier, the British Royal Navy had attacked the Italian Navy anchorage in Taranto Bay with good results. One thing I'd read is that the Japanese had installed breakaway fins on their torpedoes to reduce their post-impact dives.

Ron Wanttaja

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rwanttaja

One thing I'd read is that the Japanese had installed breakaway fins on their torpedoes to reduce their post-impact dives.

Ron Wanttaja

---

Yep. The US basically did the same thing and more with its air dropped torpedoes during the war, expanding the launch envelope from low and slow to as high as 2400' and 410 knots.

Several planes that may have been at Pearl Harbor, like the Collings P-40 are in the latest Warbird magazine.

Up front...I am not saying that deliberately withholding information the might have saved some thousands of lives is ever morally justified. Pearl Harbor -- if so, and Coventry (more definitely known) are just two cases.

That said, it has been remarked that the anger felt by the American people to that attack carried us through final victory in the war. Without that anger, we might have made a political calculation that unconditional surrender just wasn't worth it. Certainly if Pearl Harbor had not been successful we would not have executed the Doolittle Raid. We might not have gone to make lots of escort carriers and tried the battleship based strategy - fighting the war with what we had.

Many years ago there was an interesting alternate history short story on what would have happened if the B-17's had caught the IJN and disrupted it before it got within range of Pearl. The Philippines still fall, but without bloody minded vindictiveness the American people eventually begin to ask about the cost and a peace is negotiated. The author ends it at that but it could go on from there. The atomic bomb is never completed or tested in the war. This either means that a conventional WW3 breaks out in 1950 or so, with all of the carnage from that (no nuclear threshold to keep things from going all out) or the bomb does get finished about 1948 or so. No one really knows the kind of destruction it can cause (no example of Hiroshima and Nagasaki) and we have nuclear war in the 1950's. Probably not immediately world ending then (the US, the USSR, France, the UK and eventually China did explode over 1000 bombs and more than 100 of these above ground in the 50's and 60's and we are still around) but the effects would have significantly set back civilization.

All speculation of course. In the end there was a surprise attack. The American people were incensed, and bloody minded vengeance ended the war with an example that kept the world from intercontinental warfare since then.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bill Greenwood

Several planes that may have been at Pearl Harbor, like the Collings P-40 are in the latest Warbird magazine.

---

Speaking of planes that were on the ground during the attack, the National Museum Of Naval Aviation over at P"cola has an SBD on display that was lightly damaged in the attack. One of three or four on display. ( I heard that they posses as many as 16 total) It was repaired and took part in the battle of Midway when it was shot down. Made a forced landing on an island. Sent stateside, repaired again and assigned as trainer. Ditched in Lake Michigan while training on one of those "carriers". Recovered and restored and part of the museums's Carrier deck display. Maybe my imagination, but I can detect a new car smell standing next to it.
Bob

I just read the Dec/2016 issue of Sea Classics mag. There is an extensive article about the 5 midget subs. Without definite USN documents, the researchers who found a PH sub sunk offshore had a mystery to unfold!

In 1944, there was a massive explosion in the West Loch area of PH that sank many LSTs and LVTs that were being loaded. It was so massive that it was held secret for over 15 years.

Having seen many photos of a midget sub sunk offshore, they wondered why it was sunk in the middle of so many tanks and assault vehicles. It was in three pieces and they could see the cables that had been used to lift the wreck off a barge to be dumped into the water. Was it simply a 'war prize' that was brought back to PH and the later dumped in the sea?

During the attack, there were some indications of sub activity inside the harbor and in the West Loch area. Could the sub have been scuttled in an area where a few years later there was a disaster in the same area? Was the sub then 'found' in the wreckage of the LSTs and all those tanks? In cleaning up the wreckage in 1944, was the sub found and then just hauled out to sea to be dumped with all the tanks and assault vehicles that were found all around the sub's remains on the ocean floor?

What happened to the 2-man crew if they had scuttled their sub? Did they swim ashore and then blend in with the Japanese population in Hawaii at the time?

That Sea Classics mag is a PH 'special' edition and well worth picking up if you are interested!

Here's more of the West Loch disaster and a note about the midget sub.........

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Loch_disaster

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gary737

Here's more of the West Loch disaster and a note about the midget sub.........

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Loch_disaster

---

Interesting...I hadn't heard of the event. Thanks!

Ron Wanttaja

The article in Sea Classics goes into great detail about the Researchers that were involved, photos of the sub on the bottom offshore, etc. Their assumption 'fits' but there was no documentation of it all by the USN. You gotta figure that they were digging out of a disaster, trying to keep it a secret, they come across what may be a sub, it's years after the attack and like all the tanks and vehicles, it's quietly disposed of.

They mention one of the subs (I-22) that was captured. They show a photo of it about to be used as land fill to expand the land in the harbor and that it may now be laying under a parking lot!

I havent seen the article but on this particular midget sub, but just reading the above sounds lime not much mystery. The Ward reported sighting and firing on a sub 645 am Dec 7 just before the air attacks. A few years back a midget sub was found a few miles off entrance to Pearl Harbor, WITH A SHELL HOLE THROUGH THE CONNING TOWER, JUST LIKE WARD CREWMAN REPORTED. IF this is that sub, not much mystery, and the photo I saw showed torpedos still on the sub. Evidence? of supposed cable marks doeent change the Ward report and action. THe tanks and trucks may have been dumped after the war.
If this is another sub,then maybe there is more to the story.Wikipedia says 3 pieces of a midget sub was found 3 miles off Pearl and dumped at sea after the explosiion in 1944, with the landging craft. It does seem strange that they would not want to preserve such a sub if intact for display, but maybe too busy during the war or too strong anti Japanese sentiment to preserve such an aritifact.

The West Loch (PH) sub was found to not have torpedos in the tubes and the center section had evidence of an 'outward' explosion from inside the sub....... such as from a scuttling charge. That would lead to a conclusion that the torpedoes were fired and the sub scuttled in the West Loch area......

An interesting and long article about all the subs if you can get a copy of the magazine.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bill Greenwood

I havent seen the article but on this particular midget sub, but just reading the above sounds lime not much mystery. The Ward reported sighting and firing on a sub 645 am Dec 7 just before the air attacks. A few years back a midget sub was found a few miles off entrance to Pearl Harbor, WITH A SHELL HOLE THROUGH THE CONNING TOWER, JUST LIKE WARD CREWMAN REPORTED. IF this is that sub, not much mystery, and the photo I saw showed torpedos still on the sub. Evidence? of supposed cable marks doeent change the Ward report and action. THe tanks and trucks may have been dumped after the war.
If this is another sub,then maybe there is more to the story.Wikipedia says 3 pieces of a midget sub was found 3 miles off Pearl and dumped at sea after the explosiion in 1944, with the landging craft. It does seem strange that they would not want to preserve such a sub if intact for display, but maybe too busy during the war or too strong anti Japanese sentiment to preserve such an aritifact.

---

The historical record is strong that there were multiple midget submarines present during the Pearl Harbor attack. Japanese records show five were towed to Pearl, Japanese wartime propaganda identified the ten crewmen involved, and there's been physical evidence of at least two. The Ward got one of them, and the second was found in the West Loch.

The remaining mysteries focus on where are the other three subs, and what successes did the five achieve? Gary's post said the one in the West Loch didn't have torpedoes left...which begs the question as to where those torpedoes ended up! One would expect that a sailor who accepts a suicide mission wouldn't fling his only two torps at the first fishing boat encountered.

*Was* the Oklahoma hit by a submarine torpedo? Reports at the time included the impression that one of the torpedoes had a larger explosion, and the torps carried by the midgets had almost twice the explosive as those carried by the aircraft. The picture I posted a few pages back shows what could be a torpedo trail starting with a small conning tower...but, of course, it could be a piece of debris coincident to where a Kate dropped a fish.

Irrespective of the politics involved, those were brave sailors in those boats; men who had known the dates of their deaths for weeks. With the perspective of 75 years, it would be nice to know if they had been able to look the ferryman in the eye.

Then again...no human remains in the West Loch sub, and scuttled close enough for the crew to swim ashore. SOME amount of fifth-column activity ashore, though not at the levels panicked government officials believed. Did the West Loch crew have civilian clothes, the ability speak English, and a couple of addresses memorized? Did they blend into the local Japanese population, not revealing themselves after the end of the war to protect their benefactors from treason charges?

Or were they caught by a patrol and summarily executed and buried by outraged American servicemen? Did they have a rubber raft, and did they paddle out to sea that night to try to meet up with their mother sub?

Ron Wanttaja

ONe sub ran aground on a reef off Bellows Point, one crewmember, Lt Sakamaki swam to shore, survived and was captured. The other was not found.
If crew wanted to scutttle a sub, probably just open a valve, dont need an explosive charge.
Seems improbable that two crew would have been able to swim to shore, elude all the soldiers who were all over after the attack began, and survive to hide for years. It is possible but unlikely that they spoke English or were able to blend in with civilians for years.
Two of the midget subs were brought to the the deck of a normal sub, not towed, and released the night of Dec 6 with the lights of Honolulu seen on the horizon.
There are movies and books, etc about Allied POWs in Japanese camps. I have never seen one of a Japanese POW, wonder how this captured crew was held by Americans and if he survived the war.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bill Greenwood

ONe sub ran aground on a reef off Bellows Point, one crewmember, Lt Sakamaki swam to shore, survived and was captured. The other was not found.
If crew wanted to scutttle a sub, probably just open a valve, dont need an explosive charge.
Seems improbable that two crew would have been able to swim to shore, elude all the soldiers who were all over after the attack began, and survive to hide for years. It is possible but unlikely that they spoke English or were able to blend in with civilians for years.
Two of the midget subs were brought to the the deck of a normal sub, not towed, and released the night of Dec 6 with the lights of Honolulu seen on the horizon.
There are movies and books, etc about Allied POWs in Japanese camps. I have never seen one of a Japanese POW, wonder how this captured crew was held by Americans and if he survived the war.

---

You need to read the article that I mentioned above. Many of your questions are answered there.....

If any of you are ever in the Twin Cities, the deck gun from the USS Ward that fired the first shot is on display on the grounds of the capitol in St Paul. Definitely worth taking a look and a true piece of history!

https://laststandonzombieisland.file...-from-ward.jpg

Very cool, thanks for posting, it looks like it could still fire. That's a real great piece of history given the context. This is exactly where a scuttled Japanese midget submarine should be displayed, right next to the deck gun.