Jump to content
Wednesday, July 12, 2017

Recommended Posts

On 11/8/2017 at 10:16 PM, Lyle Zerla said:

The Japanese had reason to believe that a surprise attack on Pearl Harbor would destroy the American fleet.   They had destroyed the Russian fleet at Port Arthur while it was in harbor.  The British destroyed the Italian fleet at Torento while it was in the harbor.  The American fleet was all lined up to make an easy target.   The only thing that helped was that they were in a double row.  The USS West Virginia saved the USS Tennessee and other front row ships protected those behind them.  The Japanese did not hit the dry docks enabling speedy repair to the damaged ships.  The aircraft were lined up in straight rows making easy targets.  Three commanding officers should have been court martialed  Kimmel, Short, and McArthur. 

The Brits claim to have invented RADAR, but it seems to have been stumbled upon at about the same time by the Brits, the French the Germans and the Americans.The French used it as a meteorological tool, The Brits incorporated it into a force-multiplying command and control system for organising fighter/interceptors. The Americans HAD a RADAR set sat on a hilltop, overlooking Pearl Harbour. And if the system operator detected incoming aircraft,  it was his job to.....run down the hill to the gas station, and phone the nearest airbase from there. The whole POINT of RADAR is that it allows you to direct your assets to where they're needed. (So you DON'T waste effort sending defenders to the wrong place.) Which means that you can do more,,,, with less. But to DO that, you need to be a great deal MORE "integrated" than the USA was at Pearl.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh...im not saying I don't respect Germans....im married to a German 😊 I've been to Germany several times and have German relatives.

But...my relatives lived through it and I've heard accounts first hand from Veterans. Soldiers who were really on the ground. I'd take their word on what they experienced over War historians.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ron Walker said:

The Brits claim to have invented RADAR, but it seems to have been stumbled upon at about the same time by the Brits, the French the Germans and the Americans.The French used it as a meteorological tool, The Brits incorporated it into a force-multiplying command and control system for organising fighter/interceptors. The Americans HAD a RADAR set sat on a hilltop, overlooking Pearl Harbour. And if the system operator detected incoming aircraft,  it was his job to.....run down the hill to the gas station, and phone the nearest airbase from there. The whole POINT of RADAR is that it allows you to direct your assets to where they're needed. (So you DON'T waste effort sending defenders to the wrong place.) Which means that you can do more,,,, with less. But to DO that, you need to be a great deal MORE "integrated" than the USA was at Pearl.

I don't think that poor bloke had a lot of time to run down a hill and make calls! A bit like 9/11 really...they probably saw? But didn't truly believe it. Wouldn't have believed such a massive attack was coming. 

It's always very well in hindsight to ponder these things and make our conclusions...but we're talking humans with human failties & often, it simply boils down to people making incorrect calls at the time. 

Very interesting indeed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, T.A.T said:

I don't think that poor bloke had a lot of time to run down a hill and make calls! A bit like 9/11 really...they probably saw? But didn't truly believe it. Wouldn't have believed such a massive attack was coming. 

It's always very well in hindsight to ponder these things and make our conclusions...but we're talking humans with human failties & often, it simply boils down to people making incorrect calls at the time. 

Very interesting indeed.

It does however beg the question "WHY?" Why place a VERY expensive piece of equipment on the top of a hill, but FAIL to provide an adequate means to utilise the information it can provide? It's like mounting a dozen batteries of anti-aircraft guns on the hill.... but not supplying them with any ammunition to shoot.Totally illogical.
In Libya, Col Ghadaffi had the bright idea that roundabouts (as we call them in the UK; "Interchanges" perhaps in the USA?) might help to solve some of the traffic chaos that beset Tripoli, So he ordered that some be created. And lo! within a year, in the desert, outside of town, a half dozen roundabouts HAD been constructed...Not connected to the road network, but the boss had never actually SAID that they had to be....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Robert Naumann said:

True, but Yamamoto was the chief strategist who who planned the attack on Pearl Harbor. Think what would have happened if the Japanese had seized or blockaded the Hawaiian Islands at the outset of the war in the Pacific, which I think they could have accomplished.

yamamoto was in fact the chief strategist. however the japanese were not thinking of logstics. they wanted to get the US navy out f the way. their fatal error.

read prange's book pearl harbour. very informative.  that is where i get my argument from. he is the dean of pearl harbour writers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Carl Grimm said:

 

ESPECIALLY MACARTHUR. THE IDIOT DID NOT PUT HIS  DEFENSEIVE PLAN INTO ACTION, HE WAS SUPPOSED TO STOCKPILE FOOD AND AMMO AND MEDS BUT DID NOT DO IT. HE TRIED TO STOP THE JAPS ON THE BEACH WITH UNTRAINED TROOPS.  THE AIR FORCE FOR VARIOUS REASONS WAS ON THE AIRFIELD REFUELING WHEN THE FIRST JAP RAID CAME IN. HE COULD HAVE SENT THE B-17S OFF AND HIT FORMOSA BUT HIS AIR GENERAL WOULD NOT DO IT. THEY SHOULD HAVE DISPERSED THE AIRCRAFT. FORTUNATELY HE WAS TO REDEEM HIMSELF LATER N THE WAR. HE WAS MASTERFUL WITH LIMITED RESOURCES. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Ron Walker said:

The Brits claim to have invented RADAR, but it seems to have been stumbled upon at about the same time by the Brits, the French the Germans and the Americans.The French used it as a meteorological tool, The Brits incorporated it into a force-multiplying command and control system for organising fighter/interceptors. The Americans HAD a RADAR set sat on a hilltop, overlooking Pearl Harbour. And if the system operator detected incoming aircraft,  it was his job to.....run down the hill to the gas station, and phone the nearest airbase from there. The whole POINT of RADAR is that it allows you to direct your assets to where they're needed. (So you DON'T waste effort sending defenders to the wrong place.) Which means that you can do more,,,, with less. But to DO that, you need to be a great deal MORE "integrated" than the USA was at Pearl.

IN FACT THE OPERATOR SAW THE PLANES AND DID REPORT THE BANDITS. HE WAS TOLD THEY WERE AMERICAN PLANES. HE WAS AN ENLISTED MAN AND THE OFFICER WHO TOOK THE CALL COULD NOT HAVE CARED LESS. THE EM WAS NOT BELIEVED WHEN HE IDENTIFIED THEM AS JAPS. HE WAS TOLD TO PACK UP AND COME DOWN TO BASE. SO THE POTENTIAL FOR AN EARLY WARNING WAS THERE BUT NOT ACTED ON. I HAVE OFTEN WONDERED WHAT BECAME OF THAT OFFICER. A POSTING TO ALASKA PERHAPS.?

THE JAPS CAME IN HIGH, THEY DID NOT KNOW ABOUT RADAR OR THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN LOW. IT WAS EASIER TO LINE UP THE ATTACK FROM HIGHER ALTITUDE. HOW THINGS COULD HAVE CHANGED IF THE AIR RAID HAD BEEN ATTACKED BY AN ALERT AMERICAN AIR FORCE.  THE JAPS WERE MUCH BETTER TRAINED PILOTS AND THEIR TACTICS WERE SUPERIOR. BUT THEY WOULD HAVE LOST MANY MORE PLANES AND PILOTS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, T.A.T said:

I don't think that poor bloke had a lot of time to run down a hill and make calls! A bit like 9/11 really...they probably saw? But didn't truly believe it. Wouldn't have believed such a massive attack was coming. 

It's always very well in hindsight to ponder these things and make our conclusions...but we're talking humans with human failties & often, it simply boils down to people making incorrect calls at the time. 

Very interesting indeed.

But it IS possible to study history, and learn things from it. For example, the Romans decided, when hunting for a new, comparatively easy target for plunder would be.... Scotland, North of Hadrian's Wall. The plan was totally formulaic. Invade, bring the national chieftain to battle, defeat him and take over the country.. It went wrong from Day one, because.... the tribes of Scotland didn't HAVE a national leader. Nonetheless, the Romans mached back and forth trying to tempt this non existent leader into battle, without success. When you're arrogant enough to think that you already HAVE all the answers.... you just don't bother to ask the questions that might have saved you. Which kind of brings "Gulf War 2" to mind. Iraq was above all a TRIBAL society.But their American conquerors assumed that they REALLY wanted to be a democracy. Transforming tribal peoples into believers in democracy is NOT something that can be easily done. (Each tribe puts up its own candidate. The tribe votes for that candidate, and the biggest tribe's candidate WINS. Wins EVERY TIME. And appoints members of HIS tribe to all the important positions in government..Members of all the OTHER tribes conclude that "democracy" was a really BAD idea.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, SCOTT said:

IN FACT THE OPERATOR SAW THE PLANES AND DID REPORT THE BANDITS. HE WAS TOLD THEY WERE AMERICAN PLANES. HE WAS AN ENLISTED MAN AND THE OFFICER WHO TOOK THE CALL COULD NOT HAVE CARED LESS. THE EM WAS NOT BELIEVED WHEN HE IDENTIFIED THEM AS JAPS. HE WAS TOLD TO PACK UP AND COME DOWN TO BASE. SO THE POTENTIAL FOR AN EARLY WARNING WAS THERE BUT NOT ACTED ON. I HAVE OFTEN WONDERED WHAT BECAME OF THAT OFFICER. A POSTING TO ALASKA PERHAPS.?

THE JAPS CAME IN HIGH, THEY DID NOT KNOW ABOUT RADAR OR THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN LOW. IT WAS EASIER TO LINE UP THE ATTACK FROM HIGHER ALTITUDE. HOW THINGS COULD HAVE CHANGED IF THE AIR RAID HAD BEEN ATTACKED BY AN ALERT AMERICAN AIR FORCE.  THE JAPS WERE MUCH BETTER TRAINED PILOTS AND THEIR TACTICS WERE SUPERIOR. BUT THEY WOULD HAVE LOST MANY MORE PLANES AND PILOTS.

The radar operators had no way of knowing these were Japanese planes they saw on radar. And they did not know about the American B-17s coming in that morning, so I think they were satisfied with the officers explanation at the time, even though they were coming from farther west than the B-17s would have been.  The B-17s in turn actually came in during the attack, one even landing on a golf course.  Someone mentioned in an earlier post, the radar being close to Pearl Harbor. It was on the north end of Oahu, so communications were not direct and it is a fair drive from there to Pearl... I've been there and the roads are no doubt better today than in 1941. Also the site was new and the enlisted men were there for training, so the officer or anyone else for that matter, did not have a lot of confidence in radar at that point.  Same probably goes for the destroyer attacking the miniature sub near the entrance to PH.  The sub commander was new to the ship and a reserve officer which did not instill much confidence in his sighting.

Edited by Carl Grimm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/11/2017 at 5:24 PM, Carl Grimm said:

The radar operators had no way of knowing these were Japanese planes they saw on radar. And they did not know about the American B-17s coming in that morning, so I think they were satisfied with the officers explanation at the time, even though they were coming from farther west than the B-17s would have been.  The B-17s in turn actually came in during the attack, one even landing on a golf course.  Someone mentioned in an earlier post, the radar being close to Pearl Harbor. It was on the north end of Oahu, so communications were not direct and it is a fair drive from there to Pearl... I've been there and the roads are no doubt better today than in 1941. Also the site was new and the enlisted men were there for training, so the officer or anyone else for that matter, did not have a lot of confidence in radar at that point.  Same probably goes for the destroyer attacking the miniature sub near the entrance to PH.  The sub commander was new to the ship and a reserve officer which did not instill much confidence in his sighting.

Of course. RADAR. My admiration for von Clausewitch, and his understanding of the political situation, blocked for simpler technical details. According to Wikipedia, I have no access to original sources, a flight of aircraft at 7:02 was detected at a range of 136 miles (219 km) due north. The aircraft warning center misidentified it as a flight of U.S. bombers known to be approaching from the mainland. The alarm went unheeded, and at 7:48, the Japanese aircraft first struck at Pearl Harbor.

In theory a 46-minute warning. Don’t know about communications. It is understandable if new technology wasn’t fully trusted, but, from an European perspective it happened well into the war, and Britain had used Radar to great success in the Battle for Britain. They shared their information. And shouldn’t there at some point be two groups on the screen? It seems that they totally disregarded it, no benefit of the doubt and not just a little bit of extra attention. I wasn’t there and will not judge, but it seems very strange. It’s when you are completely sure, you do your greatest mistakes. Always being in doubt can be stressful, but sometimes it gives you an invaluable second chance.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/11/2017 at 6:04 PM, Robert Naumann said:

Yamamoto just didn't think big enough. He failed to send a third wave to attack the dry-docks,the sub base, and the fuel storage tanks at Pearl. Even though he didn't get our four carriers, taking out these assets at Pearl and using his subs to cut off supplies to Pear Harbor would have set our actions in the Pacific by months if not years. 

Also he could have sent an invasion fleet with his carrier strike force to invade the smaller Hawaiian islands around Oahu, which were   practically undefended rather than wasting his efforts at Wake, Guam, and Midway.which posed no threat to Japanese operations in the Pacific if the Japanese neutralized our base at Perl Harbor.

Apparently, Yamamoto was incoherent in his perception of the situation and in his decisions. He planned the attack. He put his career on stake for it to become reality. Then he hesitates, he doesn’t finish it.

The famous quote: "I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant and fill him with a terrible resolve" probably is a Hollywood thing. On the other hand, although he might still be disrespectful of the leadership, he could have sensed something in the way these totally surprised people fought back with everything they had.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/11/2017 at 2:39 AM, T.A.T said:

Oh...im not saying I don't respect Germans....im married to a German 😊 I've been to Germany several times and have German relatives.

But...my relatives lived through it and I've heard accounts first hand from Veterans. Soldiers who were really on the ground. I'd take their word on what they experienced over War historians.


I see no reason to try to correct the view from veterans. That would be disrespectful, and I am very grateful for what they did.

Historians? The winner writes the history and then it is re-written some generations later.

The personal experience is of great value. It is, however subjective and prone to be influenced by propaganda. In this matter there’s at least two things to be considered. (1) A well-known way for leaders to increase the morale of an army is to make the enemy seem weaker, also at the individual level. (2) A meeting with a beaten, tired and hungry, surrendered enemy, who has been pounded by artillery and aircraft strafing for days, probably won't give the true picture of who he once was.

Goebbels made propaganda into an artform, but it was, and is, used by both sides, in any conflict. Always has been. Truth is the war's first victim. Even in democracies leaders speak contrary to better knowing. For the “benefit of the nation” or whatever excuse they may choose.  Often they may themselves believe what they say, but it is their personal interpretation of filtered, incomplete intelligence. It’s not a total contradiction when I say I try to trust my leaders, but I almost never believe what they say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/11/2017 at 11:24 AM, Ron Walker said:

The Brits claim to have invented RADAR, but it seems to have been stumbled upon at about the same time by the Brits, the French the Germans and the Americans.The French used it as a meteorological tool, The Brits incorporated it into a force-multiplying command and control system for organising fighter/interceptors. The Americans HAD a RADAR set sat on a hilltop, overlooking Pearl Harbour. And if the system operator detected incoming aircraft,  it was his job to.....run down the hill to the gas station, and phone the nearest airbase from there. The whole POINT of RADAR is that it allows you to direct your assets to where they're needed. (So you DON'T waste effort sending defenders to the wrong place.) Which means that you can do more,,,, with less. But to DO that, you need to be a great deal MORE "integrated" than the USA was at Pearl.

"Claim "?

Certainly the Cavity Magnetron was a British invention.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He

4 hours ago, Philip Whitehouse said:

"Claim "?

Certainly the Cavity Magnetron was a British invention.

Incorrect... and anyway not really relevant. Heinrich Herz discovered that radio waves "bounced off" of things as far back as 1888. Huismeyer developed a decide to prevent ships colliding in fog (called a "Telemobiloscope") which he patented in 1903. Which makes my assertion that we Brits merely CLAIMED to have invented RADAR 100% accurate.
 

Quote

The development of systems able to produce short pulses of radio energy was the key advance that allowed modern radar systems to come into existence. By timing the pulses on an oscilloscope, the range could be determined and the direction of the antenna revealed the angular location of the targets. The two, combined, produced a "fix", locating the target relative to the antenna. In the 1934–1939 period, eight nations developed independently, and in great secrecy, systems of this type: the United Kingdom, Germany, the United States, the USSR, Japan, the Netherlands, France, and Italy. In addition, Britain shared their information with the United States and four Commonwealth countries: Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and South Africa, and these countries also developed their own radar systems. During the war, Hungary was added to this list.[1] The term RADAR was coined in 1939 by the United States Signal Corps as it worked on these systems for the Navy.[2]

 Hans Erich Hollmann patented a magnetron in 1935 (in Germany) The Gizmo you're referirng to was developed at the University of Birmingham in 1940 by Randall and Boot, capable (unlike Hollmanns Gizmo) of MULTI KILOWATT pulses with a mere 10cm wavelength. The Germans hadn't realised that was possible, so gave up.

My mother remembers hearing the night fighter ace "Cats Eyes" Cunningham give an interview on the wireless, in which he let slip that the Night Fighter crews were being provided with heaps of carrots to improve their night vision. Carotene does affect night vision, but rather more in reverse (If you've little or no carotene in your diet, then your night vision will be impaired. Adding carrots to a normal balanced diet won't make a shred of difference.) The myth was picked up by a complete generation, and as a kid I was told "eat up your carrots, they'll help you see in the dark". Typical British planting of duff information: The RAF is suddenly shooting down more planes at night, using a technology that the Germans don't realise exists... how do we explain that away? Simple. We leak a completely SPURIOUS (but plausible) explanation for what's happening. The REAL reason was the incorporation of Centimetric RADAR into Beaufighters (and later other nightfighters as well, like the Defiant and later the Mosquito)

Edited by Ron Walker
Multiple typo's!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Nazis lost because they were racist. Imagine the difference if they were not. The Jews can be formed into a fighting division as tough as the Israelis of today. Einstein and other Jewish scientists would not leave for the USA, the atomic bomb could have been made in Germany. The Ukrainians & Belarusians initially welcomed the Wehrmacht as liberators, but the SS turned them into partisans. They treated Russian POWs as subhuman and starved them, forcing the Russians to fight to the death rather than surrender. Apart from the waste of resources diverted to their holocaust camps.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/10/2017 at 1:39 AM, T.A.T said:

Oh...im not saying I don't respect Germans....im married to a German 😊 I've been to Germany several times and have German relatives.

But...my relatives lived through it and I've heard accounts first hand from Veterans. Soldiers who were really on the ground. I'd take their word on what they experienced over War historians.

Soldiers who were "really on the ground" for the most part have very little idea of what the hell is going on around them.There is no requirement that they "understand the big picture"; their job is to follow orders and FIGHT. In fact, generally speaking you don't WANT your troops to know what's going on: suppose they get captured?They can't leak information that they don't have! (There have been recent suggestions that disgruntled Irish Guards after being captured leaked the existence of tanks to the Germans.) A German friend surprised me by revealing that she was a BIG fan of Marius Goring, the Actor. He starred in "The Red Shoes", a famous post war film about a ballerina. But he had also, during WW2, been the Voice of the BBC's German language broadcasts. Listening to them was regarded as "Defeatism" and could be punished as the war headed to an end b being hanged from the nearest lamp post. But people DID listen, because compared to the wall-to-wall propaganda put out by German radio, it was actually informative and accurate. Bear in mind that German radio was still reporting that the situation in Stalingrad was "stable and improving" several weeks AFTER von Paulus's VI Army had surrendered.Troops were being flown out almost right up to the end... and knew damned well what was going on in Stalingrad. But HOW would they have known about disasters in the West? Certainly not from their own media. And spreading defeatist rumours could get you sent to a camp - or worse. They knew that the USAF and RAF were bombing the shot out of their homes, and things were going disasterously wrong right where they happened to be. But "The Big Picture"? Generally clueless. Possibly particularly so in the UK, where so much was classified until 1976. The example that springs most readily to mind is that of the film critic Barry Norman (Presenter of the BBC's "Film Night" for many years.) In his autobiography, he reveals that he was never able to discover quite what it was that his father had done during the war. Which is a pity, because he gave up trying to find out shortly before the release of so much information in 1976. As far as I can make out his Dad was recruited into a (secret) unit that specialised in "military sound effects" At night, when your vision is limited, you rely heavily on what you can hear. And what Mr Norman's unit specialised in was providing you with the opportunity to hear what they wanted you to hear. Like a regiment of tanks moving under cover of darkness. On D-Day, German forces in Bordeaux reported that they too were expecting imminent landings- because despite the fog, they could HEAR dozens of capital ships, and they could SEE them on RADAR. When the fog cleared, the "Invasion force" turned out to be a couple of destroyers heavily laden with loudspeakers,and a lot of barrage balloons. They'd been successfully humbugged.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Robert Elbrønd said:

 

 

 

In theory a 46-minute warning. Don’t know about communications. It is understandable if new technology wasn’t fully trusted, but, from an European perspective it happened well into the war, and Britain had used Radar to great success in the Battle for Britain. They shared their information. And shouldn’t there at some point be two groups on the screen? It seems that they totally disregarded it, no benefit of the doubt and not just a little bit of extra attention. I wasn’t there and will not judge, but it seems very strange. It’s when you are completely sure, you do your greatest mistakes. Always being in doubt can be stressful, but sometimes it gives you an invaluable second chance.

 

As I recall, they had to drive down the hill to a pay or public phone to call it in.. Then due to being simply a "training exercise", they closed up shop and returned to their base.  They were probably not even there when the B-17s came in range..

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing about the development of radar during the war.  the Brits were at least somewhat advanced in what they had.  The US Navy had radar to send in with landings on the Pacific Islands for control of ground support aircraft and, watch for enemy planes.  I know this because one of my Navy uncles went to radar school in Utah early in the war and was with one of the units. Sometime in '44 this operation was turned over to the New Zealanders because they had British radar which was more dependable. He was then transferred to a Cruiser for the rest of the war. Although he was Navy, from the way they dressed, you would think they were Marines and they also carried M-I rifles. I've been wracking my brain trying to recall what his units were called.  They trained for an individual island landing, landed there and after they were through, they rotated back to a island off California to train for the next landing. There were several of these units rotating through.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Carl Grimm said:

One thing about the development of radar during the war.  the Brits were at least somewhat advanced in what they had.  The US Navy had radar to send in with landings on the Pacific Islands for control of ground support aircraft and, watch for enemy planes.  I know this because one of my Navy uncles went to radar school in Utah early in the war and was with one of the units. Sometime in '44 this operation was turned over to the New Zealanders because they had British radar which was more dependable. He was then transferred to a Cruiser for the rest of the war. Although he was Navy, from the way they dressed, you would think they were Marines and they also carried M-I rifles. I've been wracking my brain trying to recall what his units were called.  They trained for an individual island landing, landed there and after they were through, they rotated back to a island off California to train for the next landing. There were several of these units rotating through.

 

Just remembered, they were ARGUS units.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Ron Walker said:

He

Incorrect... and anyway not really relevant. Heinrich Herz discovered that radio waves "bounced off" of things as far back as 1888. Huismeyer developed a decide to prevent ships colliding in fog (called a "Telemobiloscope") which he patented in 1903. Which makes my assertion that we Brits merely CLAIMED to have invented RADAR 100% accurate.
 

 Hans Erich Hollmann patented a magnetron in 1935 (in Germany) The Gizmo you're referirng to was developed at the University of Birmingham in 1940 by Randall and Boot, capable (unlike Hollmanns Gizmo) of MULTI KILOWATT pulses with a mere 10cm wavelength. The Germans hadn't realised that was possible, so gave up.

My mother remembers hearing the night fighter ace "Cats Eyes" Cunningham give an interview on the wireless, in which he let slip that the Night Fighter crews were being provided with heaps of carrots to improve their night vision. Carotene does affect night vision, but rather more in reverse (If you've little or no carotene in your diet, then your night vision will be impaired. Adding carrots to a normal balanced diet won't make a shred of difference.) The myth was picked up by a complete generation, and as a kid I was told "eat up your carrots, they'll help you see in the dark". Typical British planting of duff information: The RAF is suddenly shooting down more planes at night, using a technology that the Germans don't realise exists... how do we explain that away? Simple. We leak a completely SPURIOUS (but plausible) explanation for what's happening. The REAL reason was the incorporation of Centimetric RADAR into Beaufighters (and later other nightfighters as well, like the Defiant and later the Mosquito)

Surely "giving up" has the same result as not trying in the first place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Philip Whitehouse said:

Surely "giving up" has the same result as not trying in the first place.

How would that compare to - for example - Alexander Fleming and Penicillin? The process he developed to isolate it produced just about enough to test it, but nowhere near enough to give a sample big enough to be of any serious medical use, even for one patient. (They wound up recycling their guinea pig's own urine to recover more of the stuff - and even then, didn't have quite enough to save his life) Mass production of penicillin in time to be used to treat war casualties only happened after the stuff had been passed on to American pharmaceutical companies, who discovered that the process required growth in a "fizzy" liquid (they borrowed technology from the soft drinks industry.) You're telling us that the Nobel committee got it wrong, and Fleming ought NOT to have got his prize, because he gave up trying to produce Penicillin long before producing it in even remotely useful quantities? And "giving up is the same as not trying in the first place?" The Germans produced a Magnetron FIRST, just not a very powerful one. What Randall and Boot achieved was merely an improved version of something that already existed.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/11/2017 at 6:07 AM, Carl Grimm said:

As I recall, they had to drive down the hill to a pay or public phone to call it in.. Then due to being simply a "training exercise", they closed up shop and returned to their base.  They were probably not even there when the B-17s came in range..

 

 

Then again. One of the first CXAM systems was placed aboard the USS California (sunk on December 7th) Maybe as early as May 1940. I have not seen any mention of this radar. It probably had lesser range, maybe 100 nautical miles, but in this case a public phone can’t excuse any delay and a few minutes is much more of a warning than zero. All in all it’s a mystery to me why it came as such a surprise. What really happened may never surface.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In fact, the radar site was not even "officially" in operation. It had only been on location a short time and the enlisted men had only gone up early to get in some training. The officer at the control center had knowledge of the B-17s expected in early that morning and I doubt he had experience with radar either. It was "witchcraft" to most at that point... hell, I was USAF radar maintenance from 1961 to 1965 and it was still almost witchcraft to me that 20 years later.

Included a picture of where my uncle, H.J. Haynes' ship was located in PH that morning. He's one reason I have read everything I can get my hands on about PH. Picture taken with a telephoto lens from the fantail of the Missouri.

IMG_1177.JPG

Edited by Carl Grimm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Robert Elbrønd said:

Then again. One of the first CXAM systems was placed aboard the USS California (sunk on December 7th) Maybe as early as May 1940. I have not seen any mention of this radar. It probably had lesser range, maybe 100 nautical miles, but in this case a public phone can’t excuse any delay and a few minutes is much more of a warning than zero. All in all it’s a mystery to me why it came as such a surprise. What really happened may never surface.

 

 

 

The declaration of war sent by Tokyo to their Washington Embassy took the embassy so long to decrypt that the Pearl Harbour attack had taken place before they were ready.But, no matter, both the Brits AND the US had independently  decoded and read the communique before the Ambassador had seen it. But the important thing was to be able to ACT surprised and outraged. When Japan unilaterally attacked the Russians in Port Arthur (without a declaration of war) the US government had pretty much applauded the attack, as "daring". But when the target was the USA it became a "Day of Infamy".

FDR wanted to go to war, the American public, for the most part, didn't.Tokyo was about to hand him a total game changer. The day AFTER the attack, the anti-war US public would be howling for revenge and queuing around the block at recruiting offices. But ONLY if he got the theatre right. He NEEDED that "Day of Infamy"..

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, they knew and attack was coming, and yes, FDR and Churchill really wanted a reason to get the US into the war, and yes, they knew when they would be attacked. The problem, or problems, were that that they did not expect it to be pearl Harbor and even the Japanese communique did not tell the ambassador and the other Japanese rep, exactly WHERE. They expected it to be on the British in the far east or the Philippines, but not Hawaii.  In case it WAS Hawaii, Kimmel and Short had been warned to be prepared, but they were not made fully aware of the situation, so they thought the most likely scenario would be sabotage by Japanese friendly to their home country. They should have been better prepared, and given better information, they might have been.  Both the Army and Navy intelligence had figured out there would be an attack somewhere, just not exactly where, even after that last message from Japan. The Japanese really wanted the president to get that we would be attacked just before it happened, but really too late to get word of it to the Army and Navy. The Japanese code of honor required the enemy be warned, but it didn't have to be far enough in advance to really be prepared. the Brits would like in retrospect for everyone to think they had it 100% figured out, but they didn't.  Otherwise, they would have had guns pointed north instead of out to sea at Hong Kong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×