Support on Patreon to help keep the videos coming / historigraph
Videos on WW2 in the pacific: • War in the Pacific
Come join the historigraph discord: / discord
Buy Historigraph Posters here! historigraph.creator-spring.com
Follow me on Twitch for upcoming livestreams! / historigraph
► Twitch: / historigraph
► Second Channel: / @historigraphextra5461
► Twitter: / historigraph
►Facebook: / historigraph
►Instagram: / historigraph
►Patreon: / historigraph
Sources:
Clay Blair, Silent Victory: The US Submarine War against Japan
Evan Mawdsley, The War For the Sea: A Maritime history of World War 2
Gyln Prysor, Citizen Sailors
Corelli Barnett, Engage the Enemy More Closely
Edwyn Gray, Operation Pacific
Phillips Payson O’Brien, How the War was Won
Joint Army-Navy Assessment Committe report, 1947 - www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/Japan...
Music Credits:
"Rynos Theme" Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 4.0 License
creativecommons.org/licenses/b...
"Crypto" Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 4.0 License
creativecommons.org/licenses/b...
"C" Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 4.0 License
creativecommons.org/licenses/b...
Support on Patreon to help keep the videos coming www.patreon.com/historigraph Videos on WW2 in the pacific: kzhead.info?list...
😊❤p
How to win the Pacific War: Step 1: develop torpedoes that actually work
@@TitaniumEye Alright, I hope they don't mind if we bring Admiral King along for this conversation. ^^
Step 0: Raid Shadow Legends
Meanwhile the Japanese: develop a torpedo that worked so well it starts sinking your own ships
Failure is like onions
@@Paludion That was the one commanding the eastern seaboard, right? Who refused to listen to english expertise for half a year, leading to a quarter of all allied merchant tonnage lost during the war, was lost in 6 months, in his area of responsibility?
To top it all off, American submariners had to deal with their own dumb politicians back home, even in wartime. In the early war years, Japanese depth charges tended to explode at too shallow a depth to be most effective. Then Kentucky Representative Andrew J. May went on a war tour, and during a press conference, blabbed to the media at large about the fault. Later historians credit May's loose lips to the loss of 10 submarines and 800 sailors. He was also later convicted for bribery. What a guy.
The root of all our problems. Politicians.
@@gerrieduplessis1392 Goodness knows what Trump told the fat boy in North Korea.
@@alphalunamare Still on about Trump? I bet you were shouting "no blood for oil, Bush!" back in 2015
@@oldmandoinghighkicksonlyin1368 Saying that Bush' wars were bad is still a relevant statement as their consequences still cause a lot of problems in the Middle East and beyond. Terrible comparison.
@@oldmandoinghighkicksonlyin1368 Trump is still an existential problem for democracy.
I highly recommend Drachinifel’s video on the mk14 torpedo. The torpedo was never live fire tested throughout its entire development! The conduct of the Bureau of Ordinance was nothing short of criminal
Beat me too it!
It was less deliberate and more a sequence of predictable compromises for cost and other peacetime considerations.
@@thehistoricalgamer that still doesn’t get them off the hook for lying to USN command about issues raised by the sailors during the war.
It required multiple interventions by Pacific Fleet commander Nimitz and his boss Fleet Admiral King to finally force the Navy Bureau of Ordinance to admit torpedoes were defective. It was kept quiet but it was a major scandal. Problems that should have been admitted by BuOrd by the end of the first six months of the Pacific war
@@thehistoricalgamer …. Except that the Bureau refused to believe the many reports of failure to detonate. Along with the torpedoes were running deeper than their settings. Then there’s the issue of torpedoes making a circular run and attacking the submarine that shot them.
It should also be mentioned that even at it's peak during the war our submarine force was only 2.5% of all registered naval personnel. Pound for pound the US taxpayers got their return many times over. Such a small, elite force made such a huge impact. BZ.
Economically US subs are much more efficient than the surface warships in destroying merchant shipping in WWII, surface ships are much more costly than subs.
@@ramal5708 efficient as they may be you really cannot rely on submarines to be the bulk of your naval force, just ask the third reich.
@@ramal5708 Well, not quite. It depends on who controls the seas where that merchant shipping is active. Surface forces could (and did) annihilate entire convoys far faster and more efficiently than subs. The British repeatedly pulled this off in the Med with destroyers and cruisers, and the Italians achieved some success too. The issue was that the German use of large warships (Bismarck, Scharnhorst, Graf Spee) for this mission simply didn't work while the British had naval superiority and utilised large heavily-defended convoys. The Atlantic was too big and the Royal Navy far too large, able to defend convoys with powerful ships (usually slow R-class battleships, but some of the Med convoys were protected by entire battle fleets and fleet carriers). Whenever the Germans deployed a large warship, the British simply concentrated overwhelming forces and destroyed it. Aircraft, though, were far and away the most devastating weapon against merchant shipping. Swordfish devastated Italian merchant shipping in the Med, and PQ-17 was also horrendously mauled by the Luftwaffe. This simply didn't apply to the Pacific. American cruisers couldn't safely reach Japanese merchant shipping for most of the war, for instance, never mind find the things. Aircraft suffered from similar issues. That left subs. After they were given actual working torpedoes rather than the broken paperweights that was the Mark 14, the precarious state of Japanese logistics crashed and burned.
@@owarida6241 idk mate but if a small task force can singlehandedly win you the war I'd say increase their budget
@@owarida6241 what is even crazier is the fact that the gains would have been massive if it wasn't for the mk 14 having absolutely catastrophic defects. A submarine almost took out a carrier on 3 different occasions but the torpedoes failed to actually detonate.
By the end of the war 75% of all Japanese ships sunk during the war were sunk by submarines. That's both warships and transports. A truly astonishing achievement.
The Breaking of the code was the reason and we broke the Nazis code too
@@josephdovi1565 It was in part that for sure.
@@josephdovi1565 There were *a lot* of reasons why the US Navy's submarine force succeeded. The Imperial Japanese Navy's doctrine and pre-war strategy was on a short war. Fight a single "decisive battle" that would make Mahan proud to decide the war. In that frame of thought, escorting convoys, patrolling the seas for submarines was not a priority. Another major, extremely critical factor is that as powerful as the Imperial Japanese Navy was, compared to the United States, her ship building capability was limited. When the surface fighting started happening in high numbers in the South Pacific, Japanese destroyer losses mounted. The US Navy, knowing Japan would struggle to replace their ship losses, passed orders for their submarines to also specifically sink destroyers. The destroyer losses mounted leaving the Japanese navy with fewer destroyers to escort their major ships, never mind cargo ships. The United States early on began a massive program to build slower, weaker, but cheaper and faster to build destroyer escorts for convoy escorting and anti-submarine warfare. Duties that didn't need the larger, more powerful, faster fleet destroyers. Japan tried to do something similar but it was too late in the war. The Kriegsmarine's U-Boat arm were literally on their own for the Battle of the Atlantic. There were no major Axis surface fleets prowling the seas, not after Bismarck was sunk. The Italians having the strongest of the European Axis navies, were bottled up in the Mediterranean dealing with the very powerful Royal Navy. There was no serious surface threat to keep the US Navy and Royal Navy in check in the Atlantic. Ships and planes were free to roam and hunt submarines. The Allies also had a fancy secret weapon to help kill submarines, the Mark 24 FIDO homing mine. It could be deployed by aircraft as well as from ships. The Germans had no idea FIDO existed, killing their U-Boats. It goes to show what the Allies were doing against the submarine threat. It cost a lot of time, money, resources. Things Japan could not do, not at that scale, to combat the US Navy's submarine threat.
@@josephdovi1565 breaking of codes, new torpedoes, better training, and radar advancements all came together to achieve such devastating results
My Pop Randle Sr was a WWII crew member on the Raton SS-270 Gato class boat. He did 3 battle patrols, the boat earned 6 Battle Stars in 8 battle cruises. His rate was Quarter Master, his topside battle station was M2 50 cal gunner. The Raton carried on to 1968 in many roles, doing many Westpac cruises. I went with pop to a few Raton reunions up to 2015. There were lots of crew from the later years, the few WWII survivors were rock stars. Pop was a fighter, and he went down swinging in 2019, age 97.
Your dad was quite the man. Mine too was in WWII, as a medic in Europe. He live until 2003, age 85. They were, as Tom Brokaw wrote, the greatest generation. Both Japan's and Germany's cumpulsive war efforts lack any future planning, so they ended up doomed, almost from the beginning. Luffwaffe's crazy boss Herman Goering talked Aldoph into the Battle of Britian. Hitler had said that he didn't want to attack Britain. Goering used the notion that Germany's was a just cause, because it was a people's campaign to creat a perfect world, of genetically pure people (blonds, especially Germans, Dutch and Scandanavians). But those two and others ended up attacking, and occupying Poland and Norway, and either taking or bullying the other Baltic sea nations.
Absolute legend. Thank you for sharing
Raton was one of the boats built in Manitowoc, Wisconsin. They were great submarines. My father served on the Redfin SS-272. It also served for many years after the war and I know exactly what you mean talking about the submarine reunions. I went to a couple of those as well.
@@majormattmason8408 I had no idea the Raton was built there - thanks for bringing that up.
Admiral Erly is a relative of mine on my mother's side, survived Pearl as a teenage sailor and lived to 100. And he wasn't even the most decorated of the Erly family!! They don't make people like this anymore, you are so right.
The American subs did to Japan what the Germans could only dream of. Though credit where it is due, the Japanese Army refusing to tell the Japanese Navy that the USA had broken their codes basically from the start was certainly very helpful in knowing where to place those subs.
@NWE it was more a failure on Japan's part than a display of US naval superiority. Not to downplay US servicemen but you're being jingoist lol.
@NWE The USN was successful because they were essentially fighting a half blind schizophrenic. The Kreigsmarine was fighting on a bit more equal terms, and although they lost, still gave the RN a run for its money. Not really the same thing
@NWE The Kriegsmarine in the North Atlantic, however, found itself faced with RN & RCN Escort Groups which were able to provide a degree of professionalism and technical resources far beyond the capabilities of the Japanese.
@@constantinexi6489 Actually, based on Admiral von Holtzendorff's WW1 calculation that it would be necessary to sink 600,000 tons of Allied shipping each month in order to starve Britain into submission, a calculation followed by Doenitz in WW2, the Kreigsmarine never came anywhere near that target.
I have no doubts that had our subs faced a more organized enemy(like the British for example) losses would've been much higher. But, I still suspect the end result would've still been a successful submarine campaign. Germany gets a lot of attention and admiration for LOSING two submarine campaigns. UbOaTs ArE tHe BeSt EvEr. They dove faster(by about 4-5 seconds). They dove deeper. Buuuuuut that's about it. Two traits that are directly tied to a submarines size(they were tiny). Perfect boats to have when operating in not the world's largest ocean and close to forward bases. Our boats didn't have much success in the Atlantic when we put SUBRON 50 in Scotland.
Dad was a submarine sailor on two Gato Class boats (USS Cod & Mingo) and one Balao Class boat (USS Bergall). He did three war patrols mostly in the South China Sea based out of Perth Australia. By the time he went to sea he said the "steam fish" (MK-14) fusing problem was fixed and they were just getting the new "acoustic fish" (an electrically powered sound seeking weapon, don't know what the official designation was). They sank so many ships that the Japanese started using Junk's to try and get in shallow water to avoid our submarines. At that point we just blew them apart with the deck guns.
I think that you will find that your Dad was based out of Fremantle, Western Australia, which is close to Perth, Western Australia. At the very least you got the right country and the correct side of the country.
@@markfryer9880 sounds right actually. I heard these stories over 50 years ago.
@HobbitJack thanks! Dad said they could get 2 acoustic fish in the rack for 1 steam fish. He said they sank three ships while submerged while sailing into the Indian Ocean out of Australia 🇦🇺 with those weapons on their first patrol with them.
If I’m remembering the story correctly the ocean currents were against them as they were trying to get to their patrol area. They were only making about 8 knts submerged. The area was patrolled by a smaller class of Japanese anti-sub ship. Dad said they got 3 of them in three consecutive days.
@@donparker1823 Fremantle was the 2nd largest submarine base in the world during the war. Fremantle hosted over 170 Allied submarines of the USN, Royal Navy and Royal Netherlands Navy making a total of 416 war patrols out of the port between March 1942 and August 1945. Today the Royal Australian Navy submarine force is based at Rockingham, just south of Fremantle. Under the AUKUS agreement Australian, British and American SSNs will be based at Rockingham to counter the Chinese PLA-N.
If you take away the flawed Mk.14 Torpedoes the USN subs used, the Sub classes like Balao, Tench and Gato were the best fleet subs in that era, the superior range, radar, very capable Torpedo fire controls (makes targeting solution much easier compared to British, German, Japanese Torpedo fire controls), very good crew comfort and also numerous torpedo tubes.
The only nation to prioritize crew comfort and habitation in submarine design. A happy, well rested and fed crew is a more effective combat submarine. When giving my tours people give me funny looks when I consider the galley, indirectly, a weapons system lol. Because indirectly the better food and experience had off watch made for a more efficient time on watch. Four hours on, eight hours off.
@@Subpac_ww2 "an army marches on its stomach"
There's a British Oberon Class Sub on display near where I live in Australia. That thing is not remotely close to comfortable at dry dock, (unless you're less than 4 foot tall). God only knows how claustrophobic it must be underwater, & that's without a war going on around you. We used those into the 80's, & I think the poor Taiwanese are still forced to use them. I've worked a lot alone in our deserts, not something everyone wants to do, but Submariners are a breed all their own... Thanks for Aukus guys. Hopefully our Lads might get to experience some American comforts.
@@tsubadaikhan6332 O-boats were good but the British put things like the head in very uncomfortable places. Like between the main engines lol. The British called our fleet boats "Battleship subs" cause they were large inside and out, had multiple showers and heads, ice cream makers, etc. We put no size restrictions for crewmen, some were skinny as bean polls while others were defensive linemen from the Annapolis Football program. Even the big guys seemed to do ok inside in regards to maneuverability. The watertight doors through the seven main bulkheads are only 4'2" tall. The knees take a beating at first but I have been working aboard the USS COD Museum Submarine for five years now and have learned. Rarely do I bump a knee or my head anymore. I can actually fly through thr boat pretty quick. The attention to crew comfort is everywhere and once we get beyond the forward torpedo room(beginning of tour) I spend 90% of the remaining tour talking about the crew comforts and their habitat. The kids just wanna hear about torpedoes and ships exploding, but the fact is submarining is weeks of boredom punctuated by moments of sheer terror. We need to talk about the weeks if boredom too haha.
@@tsubadaikhan6332 oh, as as for AUKUS, I too am happy for you guys. Fingers crossed things move faster than they say, China may not wait for you guys to get new boats.
"It is to the everlasting honor and glory of our submarine personnel that they never failed us in our days of peril." Chester Nimitz.
Unfortunately the Torpedoes did
The new quality and speed are outstanding mate!
Speed that simplifies down most information, or presents it in a misleading way
@@derrickstorm6976 do you have any examples from this video or are you talking out your arse
The coast of modern China is similar to that of WW2 Japan.
@@buzzpedrotti5401 well they do share the sea
@@YaMomsOyster Both coasts are small and readily blockaded by subsurface and airborne drone assets. Both nations require imports from South Asia thru narrow bottlenecks . But the mainland communist state has abundant supplies of some resources. A naval & air blockade of coastal China would look like the successful US blockade of Japan or the British blockades of American rebellion colonials, France, Germany, Spain & Dutch over 400 years. CCP planners know this and must adapt to it as a contingency in their thoughts on military intervention in Taiwan affairs.
Compare Japan to the UK. The UK, like Japan dealt with a steadily improving submarine threat, but dealt with it very differently The UK was well aware how vulnerable it was to submarine attack from WW1. Right from the start it had air patrols and minefields set up. When Norway and France fell the happy times saw shipping devastated. The UK during this time crash built cheap corvettes in civilian yards, commissioned new merchants in the USA constantly evolved its tactics By ‘43, when uboat numbers were finally at a level Dönitz saw as sufficient to starve Britain out the UK had advanced A/S gear, top end code breaking, unparalleled war gaming and tactical development, hedgehogs, mass deployment of radar on aircraft, searchlights so a sub could be bombed underwater with no warning, hunter killer groups given permission to engage submarines till they lost contact or the sub was sunk, unconnected to any convoy. Under these conditions the uboats were butchered Japan STARTS the process of developing ASW techniques and command after they’re already being crippled by the submarines, they start building Noah’s Ark while the rain is already pouring down The key difference in philosophy is Japan basing their entire doctrine over winning fast and suing for peace while the UK knew it was in for a long haul, be that a repeat of the first war or what actually happened
Well put. I would also add to that though that the reason for these differing doctrines was based on the geopolitical reality they found themselves in. Britain could more afford to play the long game while Japan was forced to act fast
The UK could afford to focus on submarines because the gemran navy was never a big threat to the existing giant royal navy as a surface fleet. Japan had to build its surface navy entirely to fight far superior enemy surface fleets so they had to cut corners in some degrees.
@@noobster4779 It's not as if the Royal Navy stopped building their conventional fleet; as mentioned above, they got their escorts by building them in civilian yards and there were many and more compromises made in those ships to get them built at all. The Imperial Japanese Navy commissioned something like three capital ships between Pearl Harbor and Tokyo Bay, so it's not like they got a lot done on the surface combatant front, either. This goes back to the 'cannot sustain a long war' thing... and the Japanese obsession with _kantai kessen._
this reaction from the UK was even from WW1 when the German used similar U-boat strategies. Meanwhile, Japan was never under this kind of threat before.
As mentioned, the reason Japan didn't focus on ASW was because they had bigger priorities. It doesn't matter whether you can protect your merchant fleet from US subs if your surface fleet gets sunk, so they prioritized the surface fleet. Japan has drastically smaller resources than US, UK or any great power except Italy. IF Japan got into a long war, they were going to lose anyways, so for them, it was better to go all-in on the short war bet than half ass their surface combat units and half ass their ASW.
Step 1: Get rid of the Mk14 Step 2: Find everyone involved in the Mk14's failure, and lock them in a cage Step 3: Convoy Raid an enemy with no real defensive plan, minimal ASW technology, and few actual destroyers Step 4: Lay down and wonder why that was so difficult
Drach? Is that you?
The mk14 torpedo works fine after all its kinks has been fixed. Problem is the Bureau of Ordnance after multiple reports ignores the problems. I would be against getting rid of the torpedo but i would support locking those who refuse to fix the issues in a cage
They didn't get rid of it though, it became of best submarine weapon by winter of '43, better than the new Mk18. The Mk23(Mk14 without the slow speed setting no one ever used) was a beastly weapon with a 750lb Torpex warhead.
Step 0.5: Invent the best and easiest torpedo fire control/computer for submarines. Step 0.75: fire Mk-14 torpedoes at target Step 0.85: Find out your torpedoes doesn't do anything to the target even with perfect targeting solution.
Step 5: Stop sending your marines to die in their thousands to take remote islands that end up having zero strategic worth.
Thanks for this video. I’m a US Navy Submariner, and we are immensely proud of our history. It is a major part of our qualifications as submariners, and we make sure that the new sailors reporting to the service are aware and proud of our history. If you get a chance the book “Submarine Operations in WWII has the stories of all major and minor engagements, and well as maps, charts, and firsthand accounts from the skippers and sailors of those boats.
Thank you for your service. There’s a reason the submarine service has always been voluteer!
@Sp8kyMuhG8ky sonar
Nuke MM here. Thanks for the book title.
@Sp8kyMuhG8ky Lol, that's so polite! In the RN I was a 'back-aftie'; the others were 'front c*nts'!!
i did read "Patrol Area 14" by Lutz about the Marianas. great men, may they rest in Peace
Does make you wonder if the Japanese expansion could have been stopped sooner if the US had more effective torpedos from the beginning.
The general consensus is that if the bloody Mk 14 Torpedo had actually worked, it would have shortened the war by 6-8 months.
Absolutely, the invasion of the Philippines would've been quite costly to them if the 29 Asiatic boats had a weapon worth a damn. They had the Mk10...but not enough and only the S-boats could fire it.
@@Rocketsong I and others say even more, by at least a year.
I had exactly the same thought
Especially if you consider how big an impact it would have had if the Japanese had been short any one carrier at any of the island invasions.
My Dad did 8 patrols in the submarine Bluefish SS222. I got the logs for these patrols and plotted them out for him and that was the first time he had a good picture of where he had actually been on all those patrols. Heard lots of his stories before he passed in 2015. Great video and thanks for highlighting this lesser known story of WWII.
4:32. That read triangle were fittingly called "convoy college", since almost every Japanese ship had to pass through on route to and from Japan.
Didn't the Japanese not even adopt a convoy system until late in the war?
@@colobossable Yes, they also neglected anti submarine warfare, until it was too late. By the time they started, american submarines had sent about half of their tanker fleet to the bottom.
@@wolfu597 I suppose if they had so few escorts available a convoy system would have actually been counter-productive anyway.
@@colobossable the classic Japanese interservice rivalry also affected the escort service since the Army wanted air escort for their ships but the Imperial Navy said pound salt. So the Army had to decelope it's own escort carriers which all ended up being quite poor at their tasks, and the majority(3 of the 4 Army escort carriers) were sunk by US submarines anyways.
One greatly ignored factor in the defeat of Japan was the impact of air and submarine laid mines. The thing about a minefield is that when one works best, no one dies because no one will risk crossing it.
Only if they can see it, ofc Either the mines themselves or the amount of burning ships smoking on the horizon
@@lorenzooliveira1157 Well, that and the fact the Japanese could literally SEE B-29's dropping magnetic naval mines into the mouths of their harbours and ports.
Very true!! While the B-29s were known for firebombing and of course the atomic bomb deliveries, in reality, their use in deploying mines probably had a bigger effect on the Japanese war machine and military industry!!
Operation Starvation was well named
That's why the US needs one on the southern border
At Nuremburg, the Allies were looking to try Grand Admiral Doenitz for his part in the Atlantic Campaign. Several US Admirals authored a letter to the judges insisting that if they tried Doenitz as intended, they'd have to try them too for the exact same offence. As result, Doenitz was only sentenced to 10 years of incarceration .
Yeah, the holier-than-though attitude empires always adopt toward the defeated side after winning a war has always irked me. Not that it's ever likely to change.
It's not@@Xezlec
@@Xezlecexcept there is a difference in terms of who started the war. Japan launched an unprovoked attack.
yeah it was the french and british who did that and remember the us admirals owned up to it on there end @@Xezlec
My dad served aboard the Steelhead, a Gato class sub. It's interesting to talk to current day naval submariners. When they hear that he was in the old "electric diesel" boat service, they are completely amazed by how anyone could serve in one of those vessels!
Your dad was in the Headhunters' wolfpack, the leader of which went on a rampage and sank 4 ships iirc. What a man.
He didn't talk a lot about his service (like many of his generation), but did tell about the time the sub hit a Japanese tanker with one torpedo and watched it sink in 19 seconds...
@@pepawg2281Modern heavyweight torpedoes like the Mk 48 are absolutely devastating anti-surface weapons due to their mechanism of inflating a bubble under the keel and letting the unsupported weight of the target break it in half. There's a SINKEX video out there of a somewhat modern destroyer falling victim to one. I imagine those old merchantmen presented a similar strength target for older torpedoes.
I love the focus on the Pacific War lately it is never talked about as much or in as great detail as the European War. I’m so glad to see this content change that. Keep it up this is amazing work
The Europe First policy goes to documentaries and medias too, you know.
I actually find that part of the war more interesting because of the vast distances and how different it was from all the other theatres.
I agree. My Father served on the USS Agawam, AOG-6, from '43-'46, a shallow-draft fuel tanker delivering to the Pacific islands as they were taken from the Japanese. Dad died young and I wasn't really interested in the war until I got older. Fortunately, my Mom had saved the many letters he sent her and I have learned much from them about his service. Very glad to see videos such as this one.
@@ramal5708 why tho
As a retired USN submariner, thank you for this video. One of the sub skippers you show is "Mush" Morton (@8:17) who commanded the USS Wahoo. I had the privilege of meeting some of the WWII submariners in the 80s. Their courage and daring should be recognized. Again, thank you for this video.
One of the biggest problems the subs had was general MacArthur who felt that the subs were just an extension of His army and were to be used on tasks to help with him keeping his promise of returning to the Philippines. As a result subs were sent on pointless resupply missions and other tasks they were not suited to instead of going out and sinking ships.
Thank you for showing this side of the war, it isn't covered nearly enough! Great video and narrator is perfect for this style! Cheers!
@@Veldtian1 Invasion of the Japanese home islands was intensely studied. But it was as unpopular on Main Street as it was at the Pentagon. So how to get unconditional surrender from a nation that has no such policy? If only Veldtian the Great had been there...he could have saved the day. Instead it was left to lesser mortals to solve the problem.
Bletchley Park had very little contribution to breaking or interception of Imperial Japanese codes. This was all done out of Pearl Harbor. It was Captain Joseph Rochefort and his team responsible for breaking the JN-25 code with their machine code named MAGIC.
It was only done out of Pearl Harbor after the allies had cracked the code, which was done at Bletchley Park by Brits to begin with. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_naval_codes
As a 1st class midshipman at the Naval Academy in the summer 0f 1964, I chose to do my summer cruise on submarines out of Pearl Harbor. On our second day there, we were given a welcome aboard meeting with the admiral in charge of Submarines Pacific (SUBPAC) in the same building that Charlie Lockwood used in WW2. SUBPAC was Vice Adm. Eugene “Red” Fluckey. He came in from a ceremony and was still wearing his Medal of Honor. He spoke to us for 45 minutes and gave us a great perspective of subs in Ww2 and how special a service submarines were. He finished off by saying “ it’s getting close to lunch. Let’s go over to the patio and get a beer and a burger.” Eating lunch with him was a great thrill for all of us. I knew then where I was headed in the Navy. And two years later …..after graduation, post graduate nuclear training, and sub school…I reported to my ship USS Flasher (SSN 613) at Pearl Harbor. Six years later I retired, but I’ve always been proud to have been a Pacific submariner. A great branch of the Navy with a great tradition.
The two Admirals you mention are EXCELLENT writers and I recommend their books highly. Lockwood gives an excellent account of top management of the Sub service from Australia to the China coast, the South Pacific, Honolulu and all the way to Washington, DC. Adm. Fluckey writes in a marvelous personal tone of adventure and bravery in the undersea battlefield. Wonderful reading with Fluckey especially, hard to put his book down. How fortunate you could spend time with him.
read Patrol Area 14 by Lutz about the Marianas thanks for your service
Outstanding video, Thank you very much. You mentioned early in the video the USN submarines’ Mk. 14 torpedoes had never been tested in combat. That is very true. What also is true the U.S. Navy’s Bureau of Ordnance had not run, even one, genuine live test on a Mk. 14 torpedo prior to equipping the submarine service with the seriously flawed weapon. Not one. The only live tests they ran involved a torpedo different than the Mk. 14 issued to the fleet. This test torpedo had been temporarily modified plus given a lighter non-explosive dummy warhead. This resulted in false base settings in all the sealed depth controls of issued torpedoes. (Torpedoman mates out in the fleet were threatened with court martial if they attempted to unseal and/or adjust any “factory” closed mechanisms on the issued weapons.) After that “test,” the Mk. 14 was certified as proper and functioning. The Bureau of Ordnance also refused to distribute the technical manuals for the firing mechanisms of the Mk. 14 to the fleet because they claimed the mechanism were too Top Secret and the Japanese would learn of our “wonder weapon.” Which is a bitter joke because the Japanese had a whole family of torpedoes that actually worked; More powerful, faster, less wake, and much more range. All the while the U.S. Navy’s Bureau of Ordnance’s Mk. 14 torpedo was about as efficient as a wooden wristwatch.
Thanks for your input, Gary. One interesting sidenote, would be the story that The History Guy tells of the Gato class sub USS Barb, and it's go-get-'em Captain Gene Flucky (yep, that was the guy's name, I just can't make this stuff up--true stories of bravery). While at sea, he and his crew engineers altered the Mark 14 topedoes that they had. They just went ahead and altered them so that they would work, and they did! The Barb is credited with sinking, from Japanese sources, more Japanese shipping tonnage than any other of the US subs. The naval commander even allowed Barb to use rocket launch atttacks on coastal factory towns. In the most sucessful attack, the Japanese military report wrote that the town was under attack from 8 surface boats and a submarine. There were no other boasts involved, just the Barb. Kool, huh? 🤨
@@phillipmel Very cool!
@@phillipmel Very cool I would love to read about that or a video would be great.
Yes, BuOrd, the same dummies who brought us (during 8 years of Democratic Party leadership, from 1960 to 1968) torpedo batteries, that failed and caught fire, under vibration-resulting in the loss of one of our subs-with all hands on board-in 1968, in the Atlantic. Then they lied about it, for decades, afterwards-even though all the evidence CLEARLY pointed to that, as the cause of that sinking, as documented in the great book: Blind Man's Bluff, about subs during the Cold War/Soviet era.
when i was in elementary school, we had a small book on medal of honor recipients. the stories were brief and it only included about 5 entries, including Ramage's convoy rampage. it was my favorite story in that book and i read it multiple times. cant wait for the video! (Canadian school too lol)
Funny enough I had to message Arlington National Cemetery about a gross error they had on the WW2 MOH recipients list. I knew "Red" was buried there but his name wasn't on the list. They responded and seemed quite embarrassed, thanked me, and 24 hours later there was Reds name right where it should be.
I’ve got the same book, and you’re the first person I’ve ever seen reference it.
I've read a lot on this campaign and seen lots of documentaries. Considering the 16 minute length, I've never run into any better coverage. Outstanding!
It reached a point that American Submarines would hide in lagoons, harbors, and river mouths, torpedo the merchant ships then follow the destroyers out to sea. A Japanese carrier based off the Yamato class battle ship was even sunk in Tokyo harbor a fre days after it hit the water.
The Shinano was a Yamato class battleship converted during construction into an aircraft carrier. It was sunk by USS Archerfish before it was fully completed, but it was some 50 miles offshore and more than 100 miles from Tokyo. Yamato and Musashi, the other two ships of the class, were the largest battleships every built. Both were sunk by American aircraft, one in the lead up to Leyte Gulf (that was Musashi) and one on a one-way suicide mission to reinforce Japanese force during the US invasion of Okinawa.
Bonus: There was a Balao submarine with an inexperienced/new captain that didnt like to take risks. He sank a single ship during the war. It was the biggest military vessel ever sunk by a submarine; The carrier Shinano. In fact; Shinano was so freaking massive that this Balao captain won the "Tonnage" competition by sinking a SINGLE ship despite his fellow submariners had sunk dozens.
That boat was the USS Archerfish
And IIRC the Archerfish didn't get credit for sinking Shinano until after the war was over, before that it got credited for sinking a light carrier
The Mark 14 Torpedo; Failure is like onions -Drachinifel
German Subs in the Atlantic: Oh god, that convoy is chewing us up! US Subs in the Pacific: _It's free real estate_
I am so happy you have lain this documentation for for the masses. A massively crucial part to the war that has largely been forgotten. Thank you for your efforts and your professionalism.
Germany: Its either a large surface fleet or submarine warfare USA: Lets go with BOTH a large surface fleet and submarine warfare
Not that it would have been decisive or even significant given allied anti-sub tactics, but the resources put into the Bismarck would have built 100 subs.
Japanese merchant convoys had a bad habit of reporting ships, cargoes, and the noon position of the convoy for each day during their voyage. The Americans had broken the Maru codes in early 1943, and these were being read in real time by FRUPac giving Lockwood a gold mine of information to direct his subs to where they could best intercept merchant vessels.
And not Bletchley Park, despite what the narrator says.
@@glypnir a Polish worker gave the British the core secret of enigma
In both the German and American militaries, the submariners had the highest mortality rates. My friend's father was a German immigrant in years before WW2. After the war had ended, when he was working at Mare Island in Vallejo, he translated German U-boat manuals for the American Navy. After his father passed away in 1988, my friend got the bell from the USS Wahoo, and today it is on display at the submarine museum in Hawaii.
Excellent work. Well produced. Writing. Editing. Graphics. In regards to the Mk-14 torpedo. Clay Blair's "Silent Victory Vol-1" is the place to start reading. The USN's Bureau of Ordnance, BUORD, was responsible for the weapon. Historical apologists have clamied that BUORD was underfunded in the interwar period. That argurment does not stand. Everything was underfunded. But, to me, the worst sin of BUORD wasn't their lack of testing. It was how they constantly blamed the command/crew of the submarine fleet.
Word
yeah, I agree, totally! just like they kept denying that their battery failure under vibration had caused an uncontrolled torpedo explosion that blew open the hatches of the torpedo room-and sank one of our subs, in the Atlantic, in 1968-with all hands! And yet ALL the evidence CLEARLY points to that-beyond the shadow of a doubt.
US Training for submarine captains was based on keeping the sub alive and observing, reporting and basically being nocturnal animals, staying underwater during the day to avoid aircraft and only really attacking ships that blundered into them. They weren't trained to be aggressive - they were trained to support and keep up with the battlefleet. Wahoo, Tang, Barb and friends changed all that. Thunder Below is a hell of a book - written in an almost adventurous tone that belies its reality.
Glad you covered this topic which not a lot people hear about. Looking forward to your next video on the battle!
[Regarding the infamous MK14 Torpedo] Random Observer: How could the United States Navy's top brass take 22 months to acknowledge and correct a crucial flaw in one of the fleet's most important weapon systems during wartime? Anyone who's ever served in the USN: I'm surprised those khaki SOB's dealt with the problem THAT quickly.
My immediate thought on it is that the supplier had connections.
Consistently some of the best, most engaging history content on the platform. Love it, man!
Thanks, I appreciate it!
Really excellent video! Only 6 minutes into it but feel compelled to say how much I am enjoying the quality of information and great visual content, easy to understand narration and above all, no stupid, distracting and unnecessary music! What a relief!
Outstanding historical report on the "Silent Service."
The commander of BuOrd in 1941-1943, "Waffle Nose" Blandy, should had been court-martialed for giving aid and comfort to the enemy.
Same goes to Ralph Christie. He played just as much a roll in keeping the MkVI activated as anyone else. It was his baby.
the navy "trade school" protected their own. it was more important that these incompetent people were sheltered from criticism than the lives of the sailors and officers in the fleet. Nimitz was also guilty of protecting the reputation of the Navy over the truth and justice of the criminal negligent.
The irony is, Japan is wrecked from about five different angles all at the same time, all in different, entirely indefensible areas. Carriers/pilots/planes are gone from midway/marianas turkey shoot, so they literally cannot stop any american advances anywhere. And even if they dealt with the US surface fleet, Submarines are wrecking literally their entire merchant fleet and a good portion of their warfleet too, so they can't build or sail or fly anything. And even if they could take care of the submarines annihilating anything in the corridor between taiwan, china and the phillipines, the Philippines were taken by the americans, so nothing was getting through there anyway. And even if the american invasion of the Philippines was stopped, the American island hopping campaign was getting closer and closer to the Japanese mainland, an effort *entirely separate* from the Philippines campaign. And even if *that* was stopped, the US was developing nukes, which made literally almost every other point on this list moot. TLDR: Japan was fucked literally five or six ways to sunday. Moral of the story: Don't piss off the United States.
I mean, yeah, it's obvious in 20/20 hindsight when we have the full facts available to us today. But remember what the situation if you're Japan. in the late 1930s. You just gone from a medieval feudal state to world power in less than 30 years. You've defeated a major European imperial empire in a war, took their territory, got yourself a seat at the imperial powers table and your armies are no match for anyone else in the region. You'd probably be thinking you were top dog and able to out-muscle rivals. Winning a war against the US was based entirely around the believe of destroying the US Navy in the Kantai Kessen, or Decisive Battle. This worked out well for Japan against Russia, it's not hard to see why the Imperial High Command would think it would work against America. Too bad for Japan that the US had the ability to continuously rebuild its military even after massive defeat, like at Pearl Harbor and Coral Sea.
@@mlc4495 Well, that and using a sneak attack to start the entire war kinda blew up the option of winning the American Public over. If they declared war first and only attacked after the message was fully sent, they'd lose the element of surprise, but they'd have a chance to win by a morale victory after wrecking the Asiatic Fleet.
If the U.S. had built-up its forces in the Philippines before 1941 the Japanese would have never attacked the U.S. Japan needed to control the eastern routes to critical oil fields and the Philippines was blocking the way.
Well, we can be pissed off now! And when that’s done, we’ll scream and make videos of not being able to figure out what restrooms to use…….
@@timothykeith1367 too bad mc Authur did not get it
The quality keeps going up, Great video!
Nice video, guy. It's hard to find new topics to talk about in this crowded genre, but this was one.
My grandfather served in submarines throughout most of the Pacific campaign during WW2 as an electrician's mate. I know he served on the USS Chub, he mentioned three others but I can't remember the names of the other boats right now. I know he participated in seven combat patrols and he did mention most of their attacks focused on Japanese fuel, ammunition and supply vessels. They were pretty busy in 1943 and '44 but he said by '45 targets were few at that point.
I was so impressed by your video that I recommended that the Pacific Fleet Submarine Museum (aka USS Bowfin museum) get permission to show it at the museum. What a nicely done summary of the impact of US subs on the Japanese economy and military. Excellent stuff!
Love the channel, your topics, and of course the intro music!!! Don't really hear about Pacific Submarine warfare awesome nugget to share !
Thanks for this video.. I have read bits and pieces about the US Navy submarine warfare in the Pacific but this is the most concise and well put together video I have seen on the subject.
As an environmental scientist, the idea of making petrol from pine needles makes me cry
Why? It's more sustainable than dinosaur juice which is a finite resource.
On the one hand.... yes. On the other hand, its still simply a net negative in just about every way.
And nothing ran good on it. So desperate.
I had the same thought. Even if it could be done in quantity... shows how wiped out the Japan economy was and that they would sacrifice everything for a few more moments of ego.
@@wisconsinfarmer4742 people had lathes and mills in their homes running war production. The flammable oils and lubricants added to the flammability of their buildings and homes. It also, technically, made someone's home a factory of war and technically fair game for air raids. Victors justice would say such anyways.
“Excecute unrestricted air and submarine warfare against japan” Sent chills down my spine! 🇺🇸
They asked for it.
@@clydeblair9622 did the Brits also ask for it
@@americanmapper2445 The Japanese used their merchant ships the same as military ships. There wasn't a distinction in their minds.
my grandfather was a TM1 during the war and I am thrilled you have put out this video on the topic as not many people talk about the sub war in the pacific.
I watched this several months ago and now watching it again. Excellent work. thank you. highly recommended
Loving all the uploads over the last few months top stuff👍
Lol that is quite the profile avatar
Silent Victory is a brilliant book, great title also.
It is, and certainly worth buying and reading. But being 1970s research it has many errors in it and tons of blank spots where information since gas been learned.
Great vid!! My father spent the last two years of the war in subs. After losing his first ship, California, on Dec 7th, he served aboard Phelps (of "I sank the Lexington" fame) until late '43 or early '44. He stayed in subs until retiring in '64.
One of the better videos of any aspect of war, WWII or otherwise. Nicely done (I've watched it twice)....
The US really was ballin out of control in WW2. It’s insane just the numbers the put out of planes tanks, warships etc, and the quality of those machines. Devastating
For those who don't know it, I hope you detail the story of the US submarine that "sank" a train...and undertook an invasion of mainland Japan. It was the only US warship to have a train stitched on its battle flag.
This sounds mad where I can find more information
@@historigraph "On her twelfth and final patrol of the war, she landed a party of carefully selected crew members who blew up a train, the only ground combat operation in the Japanese home islands." en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Barb_(SS-220)
“Fluck around and find out”!
@@historigraphCaptain of the Barb wrote a book called “thunder Below” by ADM Eugen fluckey
This is Awesome, the information you provide is invaluable. Thanks'
Fascinating stuff. Thanks!
Another important role played by US Navy submarines in the Pacific was to rescue downed airmen. US subs were stationed along air routes between bases on Saipan and Tinian and targets in Japan. When American B-29's and their escort fighters went down due to battle damage or mechanical problems the submarines would be there waiting to pick up the aircrews. Future President George H. W. Bush was a naval aviator who was shot down in the Pacific and he was rescued by a US Navy submarine.
To be honest, this was in large part because submarines and submarine/antisubmarine doctrine was the single biggest weak point of the IJN. The other issues the IJN had were more due to a lack of suitable equipment than a lack of concern about the issue (as with AA), or a result of an inherent physical inability to train a large number of personnel (pilot training, where pilot rotation and building a large pilot corps wasn’t possible due to lack of fuel for training, or for DamCon where the IJN was again dependent on a small cadre of well-trained personnel). But submarines and ASW were topics where the IJN never even bothered to put in an effort and failed to recognize the issue in the first place, with their submarine doctrine being the worst out of any of the major powers and enemy subs not being treated nearly as seriously as aerial or surface-borne threats.
Damage control was the weakest part of the IJN. Almost all of their lost capitals would’ve survived for several additional hours had they had American or British damage control systems in place.
@@Jaxck77 DamCon was a weak point of the IJN but nowhere near as bad as their submarine doctrine or ASW. You seem to be under the impression the poor DamCon on Japanese vessels was because their ships were designed without DamCon systems, when DamCon is actually far more to do with crew training-both in terms of quality (how good are the crew at DamCon) and quantity (what proportion of the crew know DamCon). The issue with Japanese DamCon was that DamCon skills were taught to an elite cadre of specialized personnel rather than something every sailor was taught (as in the USN), rather than the actual competency of IJN DamCon workers or ship design. Do note that Japanese damage control teams were actually quite competent despite lacking access to equipment such as motorized pumps; indeed, there were cases where good DamCon saved IJN vessels that would have otherwise sunk (Shokaku at Coral Sea, Eastern Solomons and Santa Cruz; Mogami at Midway), or significantly slowed down their sinking (both of the Yamatos when they were sunk, though the sheer size and all-or-nothing armour layouts of the vessels also played a role here and Musashi also had the benefit of being attacked from both sides). The cases where “this ship wouldn’t have sunk/sunk much more slowly if the Japanese actually knew how to do DamCon” were cases where either the DamCon crew were killed in the initial attack and thus weren’t around to do their work (the carriers lost at Midway, Kirishima at Guadalcanal), or occurred after the IJN had already run out of trained DamCon personnel (Taiho, Shinano, and in the latter case the vessel wasn’t even complete). Edit: Turns out Kirishima was a case where the guys in charge of her DamCon wasn't provided all the information about the damage she took, so made decisions based on what they knew, which was to counterflood the side of the vessel that wasn't riddled with holes to get the ship balanced before retreating; the DamCon team was never informed that the other side was also heavily damaged, so their counterflooding resulted in that side actually getting more water in the hull, causing the ship to capsize the other way. Again, a crew quality issue (caused by poor communication rather than actual competency), not a design issue.
This is both a yes and no answer. The US was able to build new ships to replace the sunk ships. And new escorts to replace the sunk escorts and increase the coverage of convoys to limit sub damage. The US was able to shift the balance in the Atlantic by building more and implementing new vessels in ASW roles. By March 1943, just 14 months after pearl harbor the US forces were in control of the Atlantic. Japan could not do this. Every ship lost was a hole that did not get filled. As time went on the attrition reduced Japans ability to move cargo and protect them. Japan could never have implemented the hunter killer groups, large ASW teams with convoys, and convoy experts as their strength was being eroded. And the US built new submarines and deployed them aggressively so that they could over come the limited ASW. There were a lot of US subs sunk. But the impact they had was a cumulative damage Japan could not tolerate. And eventually the Japanese ASW was unable to cope with the large number of subs and the miles they had to protect. PS If the US had a reliable torpedo at the start of the war.....it might have shortened the war by months.
OTOH, if we look at the total number of Japanese ships sunk by year, the submarines' contribution actually went down in the year that they recorded the most kill (down from 66% in both 42 and 43 to 55% in 44). So I wonder if the US submarine force actually became more effective and played a decisive role in winning the Pacific War, or they just rode the turning tide of the war brought about by the US surface fleet (and marines).
@@Kriophoros The actual reason is that the submarines were running out of cargo ships to sink.
Another fantastic video bringing to light something that is often overlooked.
Thank you for another amazing video Historigraph, your videos always make for a great watch. Hope your having a good Christmas.
Well, the new meta is to build 1000 Tactical Bombers to destroy navies.
"Not aggressive enough" - I wouldn't be either if I had to use faulty equipment.
Well done, LOVE the comparison charts showing data for vital materials, manpower, etc.
Great true life stories told by a master narrator. Thank you for remembering and sharing those walk the wall for us all.
7:00 Untested in combat, untested in general is more like it.
You should do a video on the submarine that sunk a train. Not just that story, but the sub and crew as a whole
Another great video! Keep up the good work. It’s an area of the war I wasn’t that familiar with, outside the mark 14 torpedo issues.
Considering how influential and vital the Pacific submarine war was, its always strange how this is omitted from historical retellings.
Propably because it was partly a war crime and its not really glorious. Also the fact the german navy successfully argued that they were just doing the same as the americans in the pacific during the nuremberg trials also pointed out some of the allies hypocracy when it came to war crimes. Additionally "unrestricted warfare" was used during WW1 in entente propaganda to slander the germans (and during WW2 by the allies) so pointing out that the american navy did the exact same thing isnt really good for the USAs self image (only bad guys do that stuff) so they just pointed at the surface navy for the glory and propaganda part.
*omitted from cheap, lazy, generalized retellings* Any CREDIBLE source on the Pacific conflict will spend much time on it. Key word, credible. Unfortunately the "History" channel is anything but. Lol.
@@noobster4779 not as glorious? Glad I don't read the books you do. The submarine war in the Pacific was so action packed and crazy that it's a wonder there aren't more movies on the subject. How the subs stayed afloat while carrying so many sets of brass balls is beyond me. Also, as for war crimes, war is a crime. Once in it you need to be in it to win it and once you win it you have won the right, and privilege, to say who was right and who was wrong. One major downside to losing is you will be blamed and shamed. Bottom line, don't lose.
16:22 That’s why the US submarine service is called the “Silent Service”.
This really is a outstanding channel. Great content, well done . 💛👊👍
Was never aware of this. Thank you!
I know Nimitz provided Doenitz an affidavit during the Nuremberg Trails stating the Silent Service was doing exactly the same thing the Germans were doing in the Pacific. I'm just wondered whould he have actually have attended the trails to get Doenitz off. Nimitz was born in Texaxs but his ancestory is German and he could speak German to.
Different situations...one is defensive and the other offensive. Never heard that Nimitz did what you say...if he did indeed do that....shame.... almost giving comfort to an enemy i don't care about ancestry...that's all crap anyway....btw....My last name is german. real last name that is.
@@MarcStjames-rq1dm Both were offensive, they were trying to do the exact same thing - cripple the supply lines of an island nation.
6:30 I remember one historian writing that the US Admiral responsible for ordering/permitting merchant ships to run armed (mounting machine guns to the decks) refused to issue the order for months in 1942. The historian essentially blamed that dawdling for nearly destroying the entire US merchant fleet in the Atlantic. Not sure if the US had enough (or any) machine guns to mount on merchant vessels, so grain of sand (don't swallow this whole). There was one story (I've seen in other places a few times) of a u-boat surfacing between a vacation beach (in the Carolinas?) and a freighter and sinking the freighter with its deck gun while the vacationers watched on stunned.
It would have helped if the towns and cities along the US east coast would have been blacked out at night. Lots of good men died because of that.
Machine guns wouldn't work because submarines attacked from under water and thousands of yards away mostly at night. What did work was radar equipped destroyer escorts with hedgehogs and escort carriers. It took a few years before we produced enough to make a difference but what a difference it made. By the end of '43 the Atlantic was virtually wiped clean of enemy submarines. After D-Day German submarine pens in France were captured but even before that the British invented the Tallboy bomb that could penetrate the 10 foot thick ceilings of the pens. Eventually the only operating submarine bases the Germans had left were on Germany's Baltic coast.
@@danielebrparish4271 WW2 submarines were designed to hide underwater. Their speed and maneuverability underwater sucked. They were still designed to travel on the surface. A submarine that could operate on the surface was significantly better than one that had to hide under the surface, including the firing of torpedoes. The U boat's deck guns were used to disable and sink freighters when there was no need to hide. Hence the defensive benefit of placing guns on the freighters. There was also the U boat's desire to save torpedos for warships as a submarine could not outgun a warship on the surface.
The video is very good, the historical knowledge about the war is good and easy to absorb. I hope the channel grows more and more🤗🤗🤗🤗
I served aboard USS Threadfin SS-410 (diesel boat/Squadron 12 Key West) back in the 60's-70's. Our COB (Chief of The Boat) was the only service/crew member I ever met at that time, who had been on WWII war patrols. Very quiet man who shared nothing, unfortunately.
I think the most interesting part about historiography about ww2 and it's surrounding mythos to me, is how allies' side (fairly) emphasized that on every point axis were beat at supposedly their game. Which left their opposition utterly toothless and petty if they tried in fair spirit to defend themselves, or brazen hypocrites should they stoop to any lower standard. Good play, intentional or not. I suspect it was, as from what I remember, part of the reason for demanding an unconditional surrender was presisely such outcome, where ww1 revanchism wound not be repeated
You make some good points, particularly your last one concerning revanchism. Arguably, it was the unconditional surrender requirement and the War to the End that finally discouraged countries from seeking to redress grievance by war. Those countries that have not experienced the devastation of war first hand are still the most enthusiastic for it today.
It is by design that this victory is rarely talked about because technically much of it can arguably be considered a war crime. Karl Doenitz, supreme commander of the Kriegsmarine was spared the hangman's noose at Nuremberg because his lawyers successfully argued that the main crime he was accused of, unrestricted submarine warfare (attacking civilian vessels without warning, back then just as today considered a war crime) was extensively used by the Allies as well. In fact, as this clip shows the US Navy took pride in crippling Japan with its extensive use and greatly shortening the Pacific war as a result.
I will go one step forward, Fleet Admiral Nimtiz said that Doenitz wasn't guilty of anything that he wasn't. Also the allies got egg on their face when the whole situation with their aircraft strafing a bunch of U-Boats doing search and rescue for a sunk civilian liner got made public.
Very few documentaries of this topic. Thanks you for the upload, excellently produced. ---
I've been watching World War II documentaries style videos since I was a small child. Never heard this topic covered before, genuinely excited to watch this! I love learning, thank you
well, that's odd: I read my first paperback, on U.S. submarines, in the Pacific, in like, 1967, in junior high school-and have read many books about submarine warfare, since then. is all that you do, is to watch videos?!? don't you read books?!? no wonder you are so uniformed-that you've never heard, or known about this, before! stunning, really!
i like how when you mention US warships sunk by japanese submarines, you slid Juneau in at the end as she faded in, but didn’t mention it. cracked me up a little bit
I had to stop and back it up to catch what it actually was LOL...
Well, that was a bit Anglo centric for something supposedly about the Allies. You didn’t even mention ship-a-day Helfrich, a Dutch naval commander who got famous for sinking about a ship every day in the first few weeks of the war. The small Dutch sub fleet sank more Japanese ships during that period than the entire US and British navies combined Was at least worth a mention, imo
I totaly argree with you, the royal Netherlands navy subs where verry sucsesful, more then the other allies in that time, even fore such a small force
but did they sunk 7 aircraft carriers and almost 600 ships in a single year?
@@navyseal1689 No, but the Dutch and other allied fleets were critical to the operations of the fleet as a whole. Leaving them out is a bit weird imo.
An important topic that has recieved minimal coverage. That is some great content! Ian W. Toll would smile when seeing this.
This a seriously great program, thank you! I am so pleased to have discovered this! Thanks
Just imagine what a huge difference it would've made if the USN had a torpedo as effective as Japan's Long Lance torpedo was.
its believed that if the US had a decent torpedo (let alone a good torpedo) the pacific war would have been ended 6-8 months earlier
The irony is that Germany gets all the accolades for using submarines but the USN succeeded in doing to Japan what Germany had tried and failed to do to Britain in both World Wars.
In fairness to Germany, Japan's industrial sector with regards to shipbuilding was a pale shadow of what the US and UK would crank out in World War II.
German U-boats had predators all around them, US subs had none.
@@krashd, not true. Read any account of US Submariners and you will know that they had to deal with surface ships attacking them all the time. Admiral Eugene B. Fluckey's memoir is even called Thunder Below because that's what the Japanese depth charges sounded like when they exploded underwater.
I had no idea about any of this, thank you!
Dumb good. Nothing compares to this type and quality of content. Please keep up the good work!
Very insightful, indeed I agree that the limited knowledge on the affect of unrestricted submarine warfare against Japan or even the USA is too common, and you have proven that it wrecked a War Economy.👍
It's a popular opinion that if the mark 14 worked the way it should have most of the pacific war's naval battles might not have happened. The silent service was blessed with some truly legendary leaders, skippers, and even boats themselves. Looking forward to "Japanese convoy vs one very pissed off american submarine lol."
Fantastic work. Just fantastic
Ver informative, opens up on a whole new perspective on this battle.