The Roundtable Forum

Official Newsletter of the Battle of Midway Roundtable

 

25 April 2011

Issue Number:  2011-10

Our 14th Year

 

 

 

~ AROUND THE TABLE ~

 

MEMBERS’ TOPICS IN THIS ISSUE:

 

1.  Why Didn’t Nagumo “Get It?”

2.  Midway: Japan’s “Bridge Too Far?”

 

 

<> <> <> <> <>

 

 

1.  WHY DIDN’T NAGUMO “GET IT?”   ( see issue #09 )

 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

18 April 2011

From:  Lu Yu

Iowa

 

First of all, I agree that "blunders" (perhaps better call them mistakes) at BOM are mostly in hindsight.  Despite their early successes, BOM was the first carrier battle for Nagumo and his staff.  This is a new type of warfare.  No one at that time knew how it should be fought.  Many concepts and ideas of carrier battle were just forming up on operational, doctrinal, tactical and technological level.  The U.S. forces also made mistakes and also had many shortcomings.  (Many of these are well discussed in Lundstrom's Black Shoe Carrier Admiral).  Fortunately (for U.S.), it turns out that IJN's mistakes and weaknesses had more effect and led to far worse consequences, partly because of U.S. intelligence advantage and Japanese problems in strategic planning, and partly by luck.
 
That being said, Nagumo's choice [was] not very sound, even if we consider his situation at that time, for the following reasons.
 
(1)  It is true that Tone #4 plane only reported "what appears to be a carrier."  But Nagumo and his staff should have suspected more carriers.  Notice that the Japanese had never spotted U.S. carriers operating singly before BOM.  At Coral Sea, two U.S. carriers were operating close to each other when they were attacked.  For the Doolittle Raid, Nittō Maru actually reported three carriers before being sunk.  In Nagumo Report, the estimation of U.S. carrier strength is 2 to 3 (fleet) carriers and 2 to 3 "special" (meaning converted) carriers.  It is not very likely that U.S. would have used only one carrier against an invasion of Midway.
 
(2)  The turn at 0917 has the effect of increasing the distance from Midway.  However this didn't make much sense at that time.  In Nagumo Report, it is estimated that Midway has "2 squadrons of patrol flying boats, 1 squadron of Army bombers and 1 squadron of fighters" and this estimation "can be doubled in an emergency."  Based on these figures, almost all these forces (even in the doubled-up version) had attacked by 0900 and many (perhaps most of, in Nagumo's eyes) planes had been shot down.  Not a single hit was scored.  Thus, Midway was no longer a big threat to Kidō Butai, even though its airfield was still functioning.
 
(3)  The turn at 0917 decreases the distance from U.S. carrier's reported position.  Kidō Butai was on the defensive side at this time of the battle.  They were nowhere near launching strike forces and were about 200 nm away from Tone #4 plane's reported position.  As I mentioned in the last newsletter issue, Nagumo failed to use his technological advantages as a defensive tool (see note below), i.e. to keep Kidō Butai  at a safe distance while he was still preparing for a strike.  In short, the turn at 0917 is an unnecessary risk.  It has not much to gain and exposes Kidō Butai under greater danger.
 
In my humble opinion, Nagumo's choice of course might have been based on three considerations.  First, Nagumo and his staff underestimated the combat performance of U.S. forces, largely based on attacks made prior to 0900.  These Midway-based forces had many inexperienced aviators, some flew obsolete planes and there was no fighter escort.  They did not know the real power of U.S. carrier-based forces, especially the dive bombers.  Second, they did not realize the various weaknesses in their defense, especially the CAP system.  Third, they failed to fully consider the disastrous consequences of being hit with strike planes [with] fuel and ordnance in the hangar.  The last two have been well discussed in Shattered Sword.
 
All of the above three considerations are clearly wrong in retrospect, but not so clearly in the heat of the battle.
 
Note:  Besides the advantage in aircraft's range, IJN also has better guidance for strike forces.  Their scout floatplanes and some kanko/kanbaku planes were equipped with "long-wavelength guidance" transmitters and receivers.  This was how Chikuma #5 plane and Kobayashi's force found the U.S. fleet with relative ease, even though Tone #4 plane's reported position was way off.  Some of these uses were recorded in Nagumo Report.  This advantage means Nagumo's strike planes have a good chance to find U.S. forces and do not need to spend extra fuel looking around for them, provided that there is an available scout plane shadowing near U.S. TF.  Making good contact and guidance is one notable better performance of IJN than U.S. forces.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Ed. note:  Lu is from China and is a student at the University of Iowa.

 

 

<> <> <> <> <>

 

 

2.  MIDWAY: JAPAN’S “BRIDGE TOO FAR?”   ( see issue #09 )

 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

21 April 2011

From:  Ronald Martell

Florida

 

Chuck Wohlrab’s cogent post in the 2011-09 issue of the Forum criticizing Japan’s plan to invade Midway presents a well-reasoned argument from the Western perspective; but not from the Japanese point of view.  Admiral Yamamoto knew Japan could never defeat the United States.  Japan’s only hope lay in a negotiated peace allowing Japan to keep its territorial gains and resume purchasing oil and scrap iron from America.

 

In November 1941 Japan had laid out its Second Stage strategy, either to sever the American-Australian lines of communications by attacking and invading New Guinea, New Caledonia, Fiji and Samoa or to invade Midway and the Aleutians.  While others may argue Japan should have adopted a completely different strategy, the Japanese Navy ultimately focused on only those two alternatives.  The IJN Staff favored the former, while Yamamoto insisted upon an invasion of Midway to draw out the American fleet and destroy it before America gained naval supremacy.

 

Those authors who criticize the Japanese attack on Midway never argue how the alternative plan could possibly have favored Japan.  An attack on Midway would draw the Americans to a known location during a reasonably fixed time frame.  The alternative line of attack would also draw the American fleet like iron filings to a magnet but without any guarantee as to when or where.

 

Some Japanese viewed the Midway invasion as a prelude to attacks on Johnston and Palmyra Islands and then Oahu, hopefully forcing America into a negotiated peace.  After the Doolittle Raid exposed Japan’s vulnerability to attack across the Central Pacific, thereby threatening the Emperor’s safety, the Midway operation would have taken place without regard to any difficulties.  Certainly events showed Japan could not have supplied Midway.  Japan could not supply Guadalcanal either, but that did not stop them from sending 23,000 troops there.  Supplying troops on New Guinea, New Caledonia and Fiji would have been impossible; nonetheless that was the attack of choice for the Japanese Naval General Staff.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Ed. note:  Ron is the son-in-law of Yorktown veteran TM3/c Ed Adkins.

 

 

 

 

 

~ NOW HEAR THIS! ~

 

NEWS & INFO IN THIS ISSUE:

 

-  All Back Issues Now On Line

-  Featured Link

-  Editor’s Notes

 

 

<> <> <> <> <>

 

 

ALL BACK ISSUES NOW ON LINE

 

I’m pleased to announce our second significant upgrade to the web site this month, and this is the one that many of you have wanted for quite a long time.  In fact, this has been one of our members’ most frequent requests: convenient access to all past issues of The Roundtable Forum newsletter, and in a manner that allows for easy searching.

 

In the past, I’ve tried to satisfy that need by providing CDs or Zip files to everyone who asked, but those methods didn’t reach everyone, they didn’t facilitate searching, and they were obsolete as soon as a new issue was posted.  All of that is now resolved:  all issues, from the newsletter’s inception in May 2004, are posted on-line.  As a bonus, I’ve also converted all of them to a consistent format, with the same font and background color you’re accustomed to seeing (like you’re seeing now).   The end result is a newsletter archive that’s easy to search, and with pages that are very easy to read.

 

To find any back issue, go to the “Back Issues” link under “Newsletter” on our home page, or click here for an advance look.

 

To help you search the newsletter archives or even the entire web site, I’ve posted another new file with specific search hints using common search engines like Google.  You can find it on our home page under “References,” or check it out now: click here.

 

Note that on-line search engines may not be able to find a page that was very recently posted for the first time, or which was moved to a different location on the web site.  If a link doesn’t show up that obviously should be there, give it time.

 

In a related move, that earlier search tool announced on a trial basis in issue 7 has been taken down after a month of testing.  It worked rather well, but certain technical factors made it unsuitable for permanent use.  However, that system was the inspiration for the new method announced above, and for that reason Roundtable member John Rasor, its developer, deserves our sincere thanks and praise.  It’s the active participation of members like John that help make the Roundtable the success that it is.

 

For the future, I will be working to add the Roundtable’s pre-newsletter archives (the e-mail circular initiated by Bill Price in the 1990s) to the web site.  That will be a lengthy process, but I’ll keep you updated as I go along.

 

Comments and questions regarding the new on-line newsletter files are welcome.  —RR

 

 

<> <> <> <> <>

 

 

FEATURED LINK

 

Here’s an interesting You-Tube video of interviews with four BOM B-26 aircrewmen:  pilots James Collins and James Muri, Muri’s copilot Prem Moore, and Collins’ navigator Thomas Weems.  It runs about 10 minutes, and provides interesting details, both familiar and less-known, about their fateful flight on the morning of 4 June ’42.  (With thanks to Pat Doyle.)

 

Click here for the featured link..

 

 

<> <> <> <> <>

 

 

EDITOR’S NOTES

 

~  In connection with the new on-line newsletters described above, I’ve revised the Index page to include links that will quickly take you to any issue cited in the index.  That makes the index far more useful than it’s ever been, and in fact, resolves a justified criticism that I’ve heard more than once.  Comments are welcome.

 

~  I’ve added another entry to the new “Book Review” section of our web site, announced in the last issue.  This one is for Donald Sanford’s novel, Midway, the book version of the 1976 movie.  Since the film has collected such widespread criticism on the Roundtable, does the book, which directly tracks the screenplay, deserve the same harsh review?  You might be surprised.  Click here.

 

~  Here’s another You-Tube video that’s not “featured link” quality, but some will find it interesting.  It’s a computer graphics rendition of the BOM, presented without narration.  Its best quality is the stereo sound track, so turn up your speakers.  The images are good, but rather cartoon-like, and the producers weren’t very careful with regard to historical accuracy—you’ll see Marine F4F-4s flying from Midway, USN aircraft with the prewar markings, and Japanese CVs that look more like Essex class carriers, complete with 5-inch/.38 turrets.  Just enjoy the audio.  Click here.