The Development of Night Fighting in the USN and IJN - The Interwar Period
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 18 июл 2023
- Today we take a look at the development of night fighting doctrine with returning guests Trent Hone and Jon Parshall
Get the book here!
www.usni.org/press/books/figh...
Naval History books, use code 'DRACH' for 25% off - www.usni.org/press/books?f%5B...
Free naval photos and channel posters - www.drachinifel.co.uk
Want to support the channel? - / drachinifel
Want to talk about ships? / discord
Pinned post for Q&A :)
Germany and other countries had developed rudimentary night vision systems by around 1942 was any consideration given to using them for naval applications? Or was this technology to new
Has any navy tried to use hydrophones instead of optics or radar to calculate firing solutions for surface ships?
In large locomotives such as the Big Boy, it would be impossible for a single stocker to feed the engine by hand, so they actually installed an automatic feeder that the stocker just managed more like an oil-fed firebox. How common was this technology on ships in general and within the various Navies of this channel's time perriod.
Hms Carolina ww1 light Cruiser
Inkerman and Cerisoles, French WWI minesweepers.
Drach, can you do a video on Japanese naval radar development during WW2? It tends to be ignored / not known.
2nded
Indeed, sounds interesting.
Agree
I agree.
How many countries do you think had Radar...just curious.
I was just reading about night 2 of the Naval Battle of Guadalcanal. Both destroyer screens did their jobs perfectly: the Japanese screen fired their torpedoes, and the American screen received them all before they could hit a battleship. Unfortunately for the Japanese, they lost track of the best-shooting battleship in the Pacific Ocean until she was on top of them.
OOOPS! Admiral Ching Lee was someone you do not want to lose track of.
Wasn't the first night of the Naval Battle of Guadalcanal described as "a bar room brawl after the lights had been shot out." ?
There's major, major reasons why the Japanese didn't expect a Battleship for Second Naval Battle of Guadalcanal.
1. The old Standard Battleships like New Mexico, Colorado-classes were not being deployed for combat in the Pacific after Pearl Harbor. They did not come out to play until 1943 when the situation was well in hand, in favor of the Allies.
2. So that meant the Fast Battleships were left for the US Navy operating for combat duty in the Pacific. North Carolina and South Dakota-classes. The new stuff. The fast stuff. However, throughout the entire war in the Pacific, the US Navy had done one consistent thing with their Fast Battleships: They were busy escorting the Carriers. They had never, ever formed a core of a surface action group in WWII so far.
Considering the nasty fighting on First Naval Battle of Gaudalcanal that both sides suffered from, the IJN knew they had inflicted heavy losses in the Allied Cruiser force: Savo Island, Cape Esperance, First Guadalcanal. In these 3 prior battles, the Allies lost 4 Heavy Cruisers sunk, 3 Heavy Cruisers heavily damaged, 1 Light Cruiser sunk, 3 Light Cruisers severely damaged. That is a lot. Not to mention the scores of Destroyers lost.
So when the Japanese counted the results of First Naval Battle of Guadalcanal, it made good sense to them that the Allies were on their last legs. The Allied Cruisers which typically led surface action groups were wrecked. They expected maybe some Destroyers at most. The Fast Battleships were last known escorting the Carriers.
What the IJN didn't consider was that the US was desperate in making sure Guadalcanal and Henderson Field was capably defended, to the point that they now brought in 2 of their precious, brand new Fast Battleships to finally lead a surface action group for the first time in the war in the Pacific. When they saw the silhouette of South Dakota from the fires behind it, they were quite likely in shock as they moved to immediate action. The Americans finally departed from their own normal practice in the war. Then they got the additional surprise of Washington lurking in the dark, completely undetected.
USS Washington doesn't get enough credit for one of the most important Allied successes in the critical year of 1942 for the Pacific. She saved Henderson Field from bombardment and this let the Allies continue to influence the area with air power. Washington stopped the last serious attempt by the Japanese navy to destroy Henderson Field.
@@Warmaker01 Great point. I think that mentality of "we are going to make use of each and every resource at our disposal to ensure we hold this island" was the crucial thing Halsey brought with his assuming command at SoPac. He recognized that he needed to be all-in on holding Guadalcanal, and had the tenacity to see it through, whereas Ghormley didn't really have the mindset to do that.
@@Warmaker01part if the reason that Washington didn't get credit is because her crew was completely made up of assholes, that very often started fights, especially with SoDak's crew.
Saw the video pop up and thought: Ah, Drach has chosen a great subject for todays video.
Then I went: Wait a minute this is a video about US and Japanese night fighting and Fighting in the Dark was published recently. This could be a collab with Trent Hone and Jon Parshall.
Low and behold, it is a collab with Trent Hone and Jon Parshall and I'm sitting at the table trying not to loudly scream in joy.
After 48 years I finally got around to re-reading Hara's "Japanese Destroyer Captain". A couple of things impressed me - the unexplained navy wide crew shake up in early 1942, and that he seems to always get his torpedoes reloaded in ~10 minutes even while maneuvering under fire.
I need to add that book to my library. Thanks for mentioning the title. 👍
@@covertops19Z Available for Kindle, that's how I purchased it.
I've never heard of that. Is it written in the same way that Fuchida describes how Midway happened in his book? (sorta self-serving with many inaccuracies) I ask that because of the quick reloads comment. (was 10 minutes IJN SOP for their '93s?)
Hara seems to be a large part solely responsible for teh reputation Japan got for "long range torpedo attacks". It always seemed to be His torpedoes that scored those hits.
A book that I need to buy one day
47:23 - That’s a classic for King thinking like a Destroyer Captain (in analysing an after action report) vs Fletcher being the responsible carrier fleet Admiral in trying not lose the US position in the Pacific by 1942! Fletcher’s actions in the early war, preserved enough fleet to deliver a full punch at Midway. I’m sure that’s why King reconsidered this point. The real lesson that King could take was “we need even more ships” with most of the bolder US Admirals of early 1942 making that case with some pretty hard defeats.
It is good to hear that you are also wondering and researching why it took so long for the Americans to recognize the power and range of the Type 93 torpedo. One would think, given the number of American ships going boom at a good distance from their Japanese counterparts during the Guadalcanal campaign, that someone would have wondered what was going on here.
"It was submarines. After all, the japanese couldn't POSSIBLY build a torpedo superior to any western country, so they must be sneaking submarines into the battle, and that's why they keep hitting us with torpedoes." -- The USN in the pacific theatre during WW2
It was racism. "The Japanese couldn't possibly build anything better than the Western powers. Orientals are, by nature, followers. They can copy Western designs, but there's no way they can innovate anything better."
That type of delusion is a powerful drug so it's easy to dismiss obvious things that counter that idea. It creates a baseline feeling of superiority and pride in oneself and one's group without having to do anything worthy of being proud. The Japanese felt the same way about the lazy and decadent west.
It's a common human failing to see your tribe as the pinnacle of civilization and to see all other tribes, especially your adversary, as backwards and primitive whose only motivation is to tear down your tribe because they are envious, threatened, or just plain evil.
Yes, racism played a big part. One aspect of the racism was just underestimating what the Japanese were willing to do technologically to achieve their doctrinal philosophy. The other was that the Japanese were very good at keeping the secrecy around their weapons development. The US was fortunate to be able to recover and study intact examples of the long lance and zero fighter. The zero lightly crashed during the Aleutians operation.
If i'm not mistaken, in several early battles, the Allied commanders simply assumed that there was submerged IJN submarines that participated in the battle.
I am sure that racism played a part, but also the fact that it had been investigated in the west and nobody thought they would deliberately put a compressed oxygen generator and storage on a warship. Literally playing with fire.
In the battle of Cape Mattipan, the officer controlling the searchlights which began the battle, immediatly illuminated the greatest off the Italian ships, which was immediately put out of action. That officer later married Princess Elizabeth. He, being prince Phillip.
We know. Drach covered that in his video on the battle.
That’s cool mate, I didn’t know that. Not really concerned with Brits or thier monarchy in general but that’s a neat little bit of trivia.
@@AndrewTBPI didn't know it. Not everyone has every second of drach's vast anthology memorized.
Two days of Jon Parshall? AWESOME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
What a fantastic episode, both Trent and John are fantastic guests and they compliment each other so well as does your style of Q&A
I agree. A very enjoyable episode. 👍
You always host the most interesting discussions, really appreciate this
I remember speaking with Grandpa who was in the battle of Leyte Gulf against IJN. I asked them how they fought at night, he said they relied on Dd's planes and submarine contact. He said when the kamakazie pilots came in at night on a strike the BOFOR tracers acted like a Lazer sight basically. He said they were more effective if you could see them. He was aboard the USS Birmingham.
Also, good to see Trent back.
Mr. Hone's comment about the USN's destroyer doctrine, tactics, and innovation at the time of the First World War is spot on! Captain William Sims, as Commander, Atlantic Destroyer Flotilla, planned, drilled, experimented, and learned to the point of making the Atlantic destroyer force much better prepared for a major surface engagement than was the US battle fleet. However, this is also an example where innovation in one area can crowd out the need for attention elsewhere. Specifically, the doctrines and tactics the Atlantic Destroyer Flotilla should have been exploring (in 1915 and after) was countering the submarine threat. There was already ample evidence for the need. The result was that when the USN went to war in April 1917, they ventured into unknown territory. This story, in other times and places, repeats.
What a treat, heard jon yesterday on unauthorized history of the pacific war, cool.
I always love watching Drach but the last couple of weeks have been a bonus. I thoroughly enjoyed Drach last week discussing the naval battle during the invasion of Bougainville on Unauthorized History of the Pacific War. This week on Unauthorized History I was pleased to watch Jon spill his incredible knowledge of WWII and the raid on Rabaul. Now we have em all here on Drach. Awesome!
Yes it is just getting better and better.
Very professional and informative, kudos.
USN: We'd rather *not* thanks.
IJN: Yes, Please!
Royal Navy: Now now children. Let me show you how.
@@bryant7201Italian: *pizza memes intensifies*
Well this serves up my personal query. Specifically, night fighting, radar development, and Second Savo. As the trustee for my family I am dispersing belongings, including a painting that always hung in our house, entitled Night Action Off Savo Island November 14-15, 1942. My dad just said that was his ship, the Washington, and no more. Occasionally I would see him huddle near it, with another vet. I never had any idea that related to Guadalcanal, which everybody had heard of. Recently I have learned more. I present it to Jon Parshall as the exception to his rule with respect to the myth of the Great Man, as expressed in his UHoWWII video on Midway. I have learned Lee could not see very well, yet he shared the Olympic record for the most medals, (Marksmanship), until 1980, 35 years after he passed. He could see, with his Coke Bottle glasses. After the Academy, for some reason he was on a shore party sent into Vera Cruz, (1924?), where the marines got pinned down by snipers. He had the marines create a distraction exposing the snipers and took all three of them out, from a distance. He seriously studied SG radar and was described as understanding it better than his operators. He had new Coke Bottle glasses, that worked at night. As nearly all of the crew, my dad had only been aboard for a handful of months, because he had worked on ferries out of New Jersey that operated at night, but in well-marked waters. Dad had good night vision, but I put it to the panel that their was only one person that could "see" at Second Savo. I am certain that my dad could only steer based upon instructions from Lee. The guns were trained by him, but I gather he was uncertain about which return was South Dakota's, (already patched up). Once she took fire and retired, Lee knew and that is the painting. I think Lee was a great man in a battle and he saved the Guadalcanal campaign from bombardment and reinforcement. IMHO. Second Savo and Vera Cruz: South Dakota and the four destroyers were the distraction and that allowed Lee to see where the enemy was. The painting is him taking them out.
Unfortunately many, (most) WWII veterans never talked much about their experiences, I know may Dad didn't, nor my Uncles.
Lee also didn't over estimate how many hits he got. Later evidence showed that a couple of the shots that fell short hit turned torpedo and hit below the water line, causing even more deadly damage.
Interesting, you guys are great together, and fun to listen to.
A great book that has a few chapters that cover this is 'Kaigun: Strategy, Tactics, and Technology in the Imperial Japanese Navy, 1887-1941', by David C. Evans and David Peattie!
Also available for Kindle. I love my Kindle, although photos suck, instant gratification at it's finest.
I just finished Trent Hone's exceptional 'Mastering The Art of Command' and it gave me a whole new perspective on Admiral Nimitz, as well as the Pacific war as a whole. Thank you Trent Hone!
21:00 This seems to be a general trend as warfare gets progressively more technologically sophisticated. The more technology gets brought to bear in a battle, the quicker and more violent the engagement with the side that identifies the target and fires first usually winning.
I remember a story where a Japanese sailor was being interrogated and the Americans asked him if they had any problems with their torpedoes. The sailor said, "We don't have any problems, but you do!" We were pretty ignorant about not only the Type 93, but our own Mark 14.
I'm impressed that you and others are able to keep making new content on discussing events in the World War's and Age of Sail without having to scrape the bottom of the Barrel.
Bravo.
Some fantastic information and great learning points. The book on night fighting is now on my "must read list"!
Sir Drach, please do a video on the best naval dogs! Thanks for finally getting your pup on camera!
"Able Seaman Just Nuisance - A Great Doggo" should get you drooling.
I'm not completely sure if Drach realises how enormous a Deerhound can get, they are huge, bigger than Rhodesian Ridgebacks think Wolf rather than Huskie. Hope he and the Sea Mine live close to several acres of Park:)
@@gth042 oh yes, I have that on my watch list! Thanks for reminding me!
Japan: intense training. Night crew doesn't get to see sunlight. Usa:....targeting radar
I bet you think you are clever....
The reality is all the major powers had radar. Germany, US, UK, Australia, Canada, France, Italy, Japan, New Zealand, South Africa, the Soviet Union, and Sweden.
So your "joke" is pretty trash.
You should read more.
US put a lot more in R&D and fire directors so the technology could be useful.
Japan could not afford to.
Only after the officers who didn't keep up with new tech were either dead or beached.
Great, great, great. Thanks gentlemen, looking forward to be continued part 2.
I really love these deep dive videos into such niche topics like naval night fighting. Keep up the amazing work!
Outstanding, thanks to all three of you!
Great video! Thanks Drach!
John Parshall is my spirit animal. Every time I see he’s on this channel or the Unauthorized History of the Pacific War, it makes my dad even better.
Cliffhanger. Damn you, Drach. Can't wait for the next episode.
Thank you for your excellent presentations.
Just eat carrots to see in the dark. Some nifty little propaganda poster said so.
😂😂 so truth perhaps one of the most successful pieces of modern propaganda in the last 100 years 😂😂
My great aunt was stationed as a "lookout" in London.
She was nearly blind, and just cover for the radar operators who were in the basement of the same building.
My first wife had a lazy eye. As a child she ate carrots constantly in hopes of correcting the problem. At least carrots are good for you in general.
It was only misinformation not propaganda. The RAF wanted a cover story for the high number of nightime kills of German bombers using novel , secret airborne radar. The showed RAF pilots eating lots of carrots in the newspapers to let the Germans know.
Thanks to everyone for this Video. Interesting discussion.
Great video with two superb naval historians. Well done!
Great guests. Interesting topic. Thank you.
Shattered Sword was amazing, I'll have to check this out.
Such an impressive lineup of distinguished speakers. You are in rare company when you can summon these experts to your channel. Well done.
"That of course brings us to Guadalcanal"
"That's it for this video"
NOOOOOO!!!!
An hour with Trent and Jon, good stuff.
Besides their obvious expert knowledge and ability to communicate, I have always found something incredibly familier when Trent Hone or Jon Parshall appear on military-centric RUclips channels... then I find out they both matriculated from Carlton College, Minnesota's Oxford/Harvard equivalent, studying safely in the town whose citizens defeated Jesse James' bank raid a century earlier.
Nice visual-stills to go along with this (awesome) discussion.
Very interesting - thanks!
I love these discussions, Drach, but please caption the photographs you're displaying- preferably with a source where they can be viewed and studied.
Awesome as always
I’m looking forward to the part two of this
Great topic !!!
Thank you all for this.
Suddenly I find Admiral Callahan's actions at The First Naval Battle of Guadalcanal to a lot more comprehensible. That discussion you shared about the development of USN destroyer night tactics during the 1920s illuminates the whole decision process for his refusal to allow the destroyers to fire their torpedoes until after the destroyer commanders felt they'd lost the opportunity. It doesn't change my overall opinions about the action, but It's a vital bit of context I had been missing.
Something we tend to forget is the fog of war! We look at what happened with the benefit of hindsight, not what the commanders knew at the time! Not that mistakes aren't made, but they weren't stupid people!
Fantastic group here, and I've thoroughly enjoyed books by both of your guests here, although I have yet to read Fighting in the Dark. (It's on my "To Be Read" shelf at this moment.)
Thanks Drach
I can't get enough of John Parschall.
Nice work fellas
I just finished Neptune's Inferno and Shattered Sword is next on my reading list. Thanks, guys. Great Stuff!
Just ordered the book!
Great interview. Please do an audio book...
What a cliff hanger to end on
Awesome content
Drach, your content is on par with college professors. We could sit for hours listening to you, wait we do😎.
Just ordered this book from Amazon! BTW, LOVE Shattered Sword.
Yes, YESSS, the mysteries of Naval night fighting revealed!
Great talk, but when is part 2? You can't just leave us hanging on a cliff with Jon Parshall saying "And that brings us to Guadalcanal"
Great vydeo
Yesssssssss more wednesday specials feels like too long since we got this style of video ! MOARRRRRRRRR (screams in kylo renn)
Excellent
That 50 minutes sure went quick. 😊
2 views, that's the earliest I think I've ever been to one of these.
This sounds like there will be a part 2 or 3 involved :)
Just bought the book from USNI, so , well sold Gentlemen!
Night fighting the old army way. trying to find dark figures in a dark wood. then aiming with black sights.
One aspect of the Japanese Type 93 was while it had nutty long range, the easy counter was to change ship speed (a miner change would make for a clear miss) or turn to or away from the Japanese for a short time. Until you had homing torpedoes, once fired, it was not going to adjust and even an odd current at longer ranges would affect where it went. And if you fired off all your torpedoes and you then would have zero for a closer in fight (and the hit rates were low for longer range shots regardless). So early on it worked but once figured out, far less effective. A shorter range torpedo was far more effective hit wise (or fired at shorter range) though getting into range ran the gauntlet. In the end, Radar made the super long range no effective though it took the US time to figure it out and sadly early losses were incurred.
One of our Biggest issues involving Japanize Torpedoes was we didn't believe it was possible for torpedoes to have the range that the Long Lance had resulting in US ships staying at a steady course and speed to get a good firing solution. Essentially undoing the main issue with the Long Lance lol.
You cannot counter what you don't know (or don't believe to be true), and the oxygen reduced some of the bubbling wake of the torpedo so they were harder to see coming. Again how prewar doctrine dominated, they were designed to be fired at the battleship line, not destroyers and cruisers, so long range and big warheads were key. Many IJN destroyers and cruisers had one reload for each tube, and trained hard on fast reloads. It was not designed for the close-in, sudden night encounters in the constricted waters of Solomons, but it did work. What it also did was lead to massive use of them in 42, depleting their stocks.
In order to make these course changes you have to know the torpedoes are en route. Night launched torpedoes at long range may not be realized until they have arrived.
Great as usual. Can't say anymore than that.
Samuel Morrison book gave a good assessment of IJN capalities at night. Excellent optics, great look outs, and those damn Long Lance torpedoes. USN came into its own with radar used in Surigoa straits. USN used older battle ships sunk at Pearl Harbor that were modified after the Dec 7th attack. But Savo island was a harsh lesson for the USN. Also it a stretch but in 1942 didnt a Japanese sub fired a long lance at the Golden Gate bridge attempting to damage it. It was later recovered on the beach in SF.
Also the torpedo fired from the IJN sub at the Golden Bridge was confirmed.
In 1946 a Long Lance was found on the shore line by the Golden Gate. It may have been fired from the IJN sub I 15, in December several weeks after the Pearl Harbor attack, but there no record due to the I 15 was sunk in 1942 with all hands. While reading this the Long Lance had a range of 44000 yards. That's incredible for WW2 Standards.
The History Guy recently covered the Battle of Shimonoseki straights, USS Wyoming. I would really like to see a more in depth technical read of the battle by you.
Jon talking about Kongo's at 16:00 was really eye opening for me. Amateurs like me commonly criticize the Japanese for conserving their proper battleships until it was too late. But this entire discussion puts everything into a more proper perspective, with the Japanese doctrine being centered around trying to secure an advantage in a night battle first. Since they never really secured that, bringing their battle line was just too much of a gamble for them.
One issue I hope is covered in Part 2: IJN developed night air support tactics for surface actions interwar, relying on the cruiser float planes dropping flares and markers. I would like pointers to more sources about those tactics.
It is interesting that the US expected to have destroyers launching torpedoes but did never bother to verify their torpedoes actually WORKED!
Procurement at its "finest"
Is there a chart that is available online that compares the specifications of WWII torpedoes?
Just seeing the title of this video got my heart racing pleasantly, like after gulping a cup of Earl Grey with milk. Anything related to Guadalcanal is a campfire story to me.
Nice
Please review the history of the USS Helena (including the nuclear submarine).
Would love to see a what if operation Rheinübung was put on hold Video where Bismarck joins up with a finished Tirpiz aswell as Scharnhorst and Gneisenau
For one thing, a lot more convoys get through without worrying about big raiders...
Long lance torpedoes and US ultra-heavy 16" shells, at night. In constricted waters, between islands, with periodic rain squalls. With both sides convinced the other side was taking heavier losses than they actually did, and going at it night after night. What could possibly go right?
The loser was whoever bled out first...
The lock bar loves to snag on things and if it unscrews your sight falls apart, likely contributing to why it was replaced
Hey, Picard and Reiker. Picard looks good.
at 8:50 what was the purpose for the canvas awnings on a warship???
It all boils down to the skill and tenacity of the one who commands.........
Drach is designed to engage more than one guest on his channel.
Talk about a cliffhanger!
Talk about a cliffhanger ending!
Was the most effective WW1 vintage US DD "torpedo" night attack, the St Nazaire raid by HMS Campbeltown?
Nothing to do with torpedoes, or any such doctrine...
Have not read the book but will. Gave me idea on Callaghan’s formation on 11/13. If doctrine was to smash in, and Atlanta had the massive 5” battery, was her placement designed to facilitate entry of the three heavier ships behind her? Callaghan left no battle plan. He has been criticized by many for his formation particularly putting Scott in Atlanta in a vulnerable place. But if doctrine was to smash entry what better ship to put up front? Curious if Jon and Trent are going to discuss this.
One reasoning behind the Atlanta's was as "destroyer leaders"...
Regarding 5"/38s, when I played 1:2400 naval miniatures in college, we used Atlanta class cruisers as "destroyer eaters"--have one or two shoot at a Japanese destroyer and make it go away, shoot at another on the next turn, and so on.
There's something to be said for smaller caliber, high volume spamming. You won't punch through heavy armor but you can turn a capitol ship's topside into a combination forest fire/July 4th celebration, wreck his radar and rangefinders and other bits, and make him easier for the heavies to deal with.
Anecdotally, this video furthers my thesis that Drach has far too much hair on his head to be a credible naval historian.... 😛
The Japanese had a definite advantage in night and all surface warfare for the first two years but unfortunately failed to press home their successes at several key battles.
Just seeing the title I’m preparing for organizational errors at near MK14 levels.
Is there going to be a part 2? Kinda felt like it ended rather abruptly there... maybe a technical glitch with the rest of the three-way telecon?
Part 2 is now up, just in case you missed it.
@@cameronnewton7053 Yeah, saw that late yesterday. 🙂
USN showed up for a poker game, IJN showed up for a chess game