 |
September 20th, 2010, 07:25 PM
|
#81 | | Historian
Joined: Oct 2009 From: From the Boomtown Shenzhen Posts: 1,945 | Re: Greatest Admiral In History?
Yes quite so, Doenitz was one of the greats, but had no answer to the anti-sub tech being feverishly developed because of his immense success. The allies even developed radar that could see the U-boats in rough weather, so even that afforded them no stealth. As they surfaced they were detected and a veritable nightmare for sub commanders would arrive in the form of depth charges that could be thrown 300 yards ahead of the destroyers/frigates or if there was air support in the form of depth bombs from ship launched sea planes. It is difficult to think what Doenitz could have done under the circumstances to protect his submariners except retreat from the big convoys.
Nimitz was the real aggressor in the Pacific and Spruance was a really cautious and calculating admiral. But he has the "runs on the board" as they say and probably became the most successful war sailor ever after Truk, at least in terms of tonnage sunk.
The aviators who criticized him for not going after the IJN at the Battle of the Philippines Sea did not have the intel Spruance had. Philipino commandos who had captured documents, told him that the Japanese were waiting for him to chase the decoy ships out to sea during the landings. A second force would then arrive behind Spruance to attack the landings. Spruance knew he was there to protect the landing craft and support the landings and was not moved by the sight of decoy ships heading out to sea. King himself lauded Spruance for his discipline and courage under the circumstances. But the damage was already done in the media.
The colorful Bull Halsey on the other hand, was later completely caught following decoys during the landings at Leyte, which allowed the Japanese surface force to slip in behind him and wreak havoc. With Bull Halsey galloping after empty carriers, only some staunch defense saved the landings that day. Nimitz in Hawaii intercepted appeals from the landing ships, that Halsey had been ignoring for some hours and asked him for his location, the final words of his message were "...the world wonders?" (a very interesting yarn if anyone would like to google it). An open humiliation to Halsey who waited some time, pretending to refuel, before finally turning around with his fastest battleships and cruisers and heading back to see the damage.
Yet Halsey (the only admiral with a Hollywood producer and scriptwriter on his staff) weathered the storm of criticism because he was a crusty old flier whose men loved him and who loved to get his fliers kills, of course no fliers criticized him. He was most famous for his Hollywood movie style statements, Quote: |
"...when I get through with them, the only place Japanese will be spoken is in hell".
| Of course Halsey got the last of the fifth stars handed out to Pacific admirals over Spruance. His aggressive nature and public popularity beat out Spruance's cautious, calculating nature, in the eventual battle that means the most to admirals. But Spruance went on to become the President of the Naval War College and Ambassador to the Philippines. In the end the US congress enacted a special law allowing Spruance to retire on a full admiral's pay for life. Something that he did for another 24 years after the war ended. Below top: Admiral Raymond Spruance. Below bottom: One of the 31 Cold War Spruance Class Destroyers, USS Deyo. | |
Last edited by rehabnonono; September 20th, 2010 at 08:06 PM.
|
| |
September 20th, 2010, 07:39 PM
|
#82 | | Suspended indefinitely
Joined: Dec 2009 Posts: 19,934 | Re: Greatest Admiral In History?
A nice summary; thanks.
If your info is right, Spruance's critics may have been right after all; he should have known better.
AFAIK, the Japs simply had no more trained pilots for any "second force".
Armchair's remarks aside, Spruance would still be my first choice among the US naval commanders mentioned above.
| | |
| |
September 20th, 2010, 09:56 PM
|
#83 | | Historian
Joined: Oct 2009 From: From the Boomtown Shenzhen Posts: 1,945 | Re: Greatest Admiral In History?
Sylla, don't you mean Bull Halsey's critics were right? After all he almost cost the US the war. Spruance had actually done the right thing. He knew the Japanese loved to utilize decoys.
King (Nimitz's boss) supported Spruance, telling him that... Quote: |
"...Spruance, you did a damn fine job there. No matter what other people tell you, your decision was correct" (Tuohy 2007).
| Both Nimitz and Fletcher recommended Spruance for the Navy Distinguished Service Medal for his role in the battle. While later Bull Halsey was admonished by many (even Roosevelt's Chief of Staff, Fleet Admiral Leahy) who thought Halsey's reckless actions almost cost the US a reversal of fortunes. Quote: |
This succession of actions on Halsey's part during 24 and October 25 was thought by some observers to have damaged his reputation. Professor Samuel Morison of Harvard University, cited as the country's most prolific naval historian, called the Third Fleet run to the north "Halsey's Blunder". Fleet Admiral William Leahy remarked afterwards "We didn't lose the war for that but I don't know why we didn't". The operation has derisively been called "The Battle of Bull's Run".
| The real reason Halsey was never retired for his blunder were a handfull of very brave destroyer and patrol boat commanders who sprayed the attacking Japanese battle fleet with torpedoes and scared them into withdrawing after sinking only a few ships. Halsey also made immense blunders with weather (twice) losing 800 men in cyclonic seas and much equipment. Even though he was to be reassigned, only intervention after the inquest by Nimitz saved him. Ironic considering he kept his heading for an hour (thus costing two hours more to turn around) after Nimitz's "the world wonders?" message.
How did this man get five stars? Amazing what a good spin doctor can do for you is it not?
| | |
| |
September 20th, 2010, 10:24 PM
|
#84 | | Suspended indefinitely
Joined: Dec 2009 Posts: 19,934 | Re: Greatest Admiral In History? Quote:
Originally Posted by rehabnonono Sylla, don't you mean Bull Halsey's critics were right? After all he almost cost the US the war. Spruance had actually done the right thing. He knew the Japanese loved to utilize decoys.
King (Nimitz's boss) supported Spruance, telling him that...
Both Nimitz and Fletcher recommended Spruance for the Navy Distinguished Service Medal for his role in the battle. While later Bull Halsey was admonished by many (even Roosevelt's Chief of Staff, Fleet Admiral Leahy) who thought Halsey's reckless actions almost cost the US a reversal of fortunes.
The real reason Halsey was never retired for his blunder were a handfull of very brave destroyer and patrol boat commanders who sprayed the attacking Japanese battle fleet with torpedoes and scared them into withdrawing after sinking only a few ships. Halsey also made immense blunders with weather (twice) losing 800 men in cyclonic seas and much equipment. Even though he was to be reassigned, only intervention after the inquest by Nimitz saved him. Ironic considering he kept his heading for an hour (thus costing two hours more to turn around) after Nimitz's "the world wonders?" message.
How did this man get five stars? Amazing what a good spin doctor can do for you is it not? | I still think Spruance should have pursued the defeated Japs at Philippines Sea; that said, his performance was still nevertheless paramount and we shouldn't be surprised that Nimitz might have supported his brilliant subordinate.
Please remember that regarding Spruance, you're preaching to an already enthusiastic fan ...
Regarding Halsey at Leyte, I honestly wouldn't be too harsh; after all, Ozawa's decoy carrier fleet was a quite cleaver plan (even if utterly desperate) from the evidently defeated-in-advance Japs.
Last but not least, thanks for another informative post  .
| | |
| |
September 21st, 2010, 02:24 AM
|
#85 | | Suspended indefinitely
Joined: Aug 2010 From: Central Macedonia Posts: 17,763 | Re: Greatest Admiral In History?
Defeated over 1000 Japanese ships despite losing none?
Is that accurate? It sounds too unreal.
| | |
| |
September 21st, 2010, 08:27 AM
|
#86 | | Historian
Joined: Jan 2010 Posts: 1,270 | Re: Greatest Admiral In History?
The German U boats were undoubtedly one of the great weapons of war but I'm less persuaded that they would have been any less effective had someone other than Doenitz been at the helm. He had some notable limitations including excessively radio contacting his boats, which greatly facilitated cracking their codes and tracking them down, and an aversion to the development of advanced technology such as the Schnorchel which consequently appeared too late in the war to make a difference.
| | |
| |
September 21st, 2010, 08:29 AM
|
#87 | | Historian
Joined: Jan 2010 Posts: 1,270 | Re: Greatest Admiral In History? Quote:
Originally Posted by Thessalonian Defeated over 1000 Japanese ships despite losing none?
Is that accurate? It sounds too unreal. | Agreed - it sounds like hyperbole. Do the Japanese sources support any of these claims?
| | |
| |
September 21st, 2010, 09:00 AM
|
#88 | | Forum Curmudgeon
Joined: May 2009 From: A tiny hamlet in the Carolina Sandhills Posts: 11,244 | Re: Greatest Admiral In History?
One minor correction, Rehabnono....The ships that drove off Kurita's central force were DEs.
As to whether Halsey or Spruance were right, we've actually already had a thread on that. Who was right?
My view is simple. Both Halsey and Spruance faced basically the same tactical situation, and both had the same primary responsibility-the beach. The aviators argue that Spruance squandered his greatest tactical advantage (mobility) by allowing himself to be tied to the beachead at Saipan. But Spruance understood what the aviators never did; troopships and invasion support craft were potentially vulnerable. If he chased the IJN then he opened the door for an end-around by the Japanese.
When Halsey took Ozawa's bait, he made two mistakes. Firstly, he chased the northern force while knowing that the Taffys had a potential problem on their right flank. Spruance didn't even have specific knowlege of a threat, yet stayed put. And secondly, Halsey knew that there were potentially gunnery-type ships coming from the Sibuyan Sea, but was swayed by his aviators wild kill claims. Halsey should have known better; if there is any one consistent truth about the aviators, regardless of navy, it was their overstating the damage they had inflicted. Even so, Halsey could have gone after Ozawa with relative confidence in the tactical situation. All he had to do was to leave the 6 BBs ( Iowa, New Jersey, Washington, Massachussetts, South Dakota, and Alabama) to deal with Kurita's 4 BBs and supporting vessels. While Yamato was somewhat superior to the American Battleships, the other 3 were markedly inferior and all the Japanese ships were damaged from the Sibuyan Sea. This is precisely what Kinkade, Nimitz, and King thought Halsey had done. Even without McCain's Task Group, Halsey would have had 600-700 aircraft to deal with whatever Ozawa could throw at him.
Just my opinion.... http://www.navweaps.com/index_oob/OO...ape_Engano.htm http://www.navweaps.com/index_oob/OO...ibuyan_Sea.htm | | |
| |
September 21st, 2010, 11:05 PM
|
#89 | | Historian
Joined: Oct 2009 From: From the Boomtown Shenzhen Posts: 1,945 | Re: Greatest Admiral In History?
Oops let me check my paper work! Hell! Maybe we should nominate Ziggy Sprague. (Yep, quite right Destroyer Escorts and Destroyers (in that order) drove off the Kurita attack... but the PT boats sounded heroic right? Turns out this story was even more so. Apparently after losing three cruisers Kurita thought he was being fired upon by Halsey's fleet and withdrew. Here is the story of what's been called...
"The Last Stand of the Tin Can Sailors". Quote: |
Kurita's battleships were driven away from the engagement by torpedo attacks from American destroyers; they were unable to regroup in the chaos, while three cruisers were lost after attacks from US destroyers and aircraft, with several other cruisers damaged. Due to the ferocity of the defense, Kurita was convinced that he was facing a far superior force and withdrew from the battle, ending the threat to the troop transports and supply ships.
| I was so very impressed with the narrative on the Destroyer Escort USS Samuel B. Roberts. Known as "the destroyer escort that fought like a battleship." I don't think there has ever been a battle that was so lopsided against the USN, nor one where their sailors fought with such distinction, against such overwhelming (or what should have been overwhelming) odds. The Japanese had 4 battleships including the Yamoto, 8 cruisers and 11 destroyers. On the other side was the 3 destroyers and 4 destroyer escorts left to protect Ziggy Sprauge's 8 ("jeep carriers") carrier escorts with their poorly or lightly armed aircraft (who also managed to throw everything, including depth charges and the kitchen sink at them).
Following Sprague's order "...small Boys attack", the 1,300 ton Roberts maneuvered so close to the 16,000 ton Cruiser Chokai, that it became impossible for the Japanese gunners to depress their big guns low enough to fire on her . The USS Roberts then struck the larger cruiser with at least one torpedo, blowing off her bow and then raked her bridge and superstructure with 5 inch cannon and one and two inch antiaircraft fire. Eventually one of the Chokai's deck mounted torpedoes detonated and a fire spread through the ship knocking out her engines and steering. Dead in the water she became a "sitting duck" for the first bomber from Sprague's now retreating carrier escorts. Struck by a five hundred pounder, Chokai (a veteran of the First Savo Island battle) was later scuttled and although being transferred, all her company was eventually lost in a later attack.
Surrounded, and despite having her rear gun turret blown off, Roberts continued to do battle for another hour... Quote: |
...with her remaining 5 in (127 mm) gun, Roberts set the bridge of the cruiser Chikuma afire and destroyed the No. 3 gun turret, before being pierced again by three 14 in (356 mm) shells from Kongō. With a 40 ft (12 m) hole in her side, Roberts took on water, and at 0935, the order was given to abandon ship. The ship sank in 30 minutes, with 89 of her crew. She would go down in history as "the destroyer escort that fought like a battleship".
|
What amazing stories these blunders throw up...
What men do when they have nothing left. | | |
| |
September 22nd, 2010, 05:45 AM
|
#90 | | Suspended indefinitely
Joined: Dec 2009 Posts: 19,934 | Re: Greatest Admiral In History? Quote:
Originally Posted by diddyriddick | A superbly documented one for that matter; point taken.
Thanks for sharing these links and pointing out your previous thread; must admit I have missed the excellent posts by you & Greyter.
Plainly, must entirely agree with you on both counts.
| | |
| | | Thread Tools | | | | Display Modes | Linear Mode |
Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.
|  |