Trains.com

Big boy

37551 views
190 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    July 2016
  • 2,631 posts
Posted by Backshop on Tuesday, July 17, 2018 12:24 PM

About 12 years ago, I was working in a sporting goods store and a much older gentleman came in wearing a BB43 USS Tennessee ballcap.  I had just reread my copy of the Battle of Surigao Strait so everything was fresh in my mind.  I asked him if that was "his" ship.  He said yes and we talked for around 10 minutes.  He had a huge smile because he was talking to someone who actually knew about his war.  I asked him about Surigao Strait and he said "When our first salvo hit, I knew it was going to be a good night".

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,669 posts
Posted by Overmod on Tuesday, July 17, 2018 11:59 AM

jtrain1
PS. I've never read anyplace that they were called "McArthur".

But if you were to spell the name correctly, you might read in all sorts of places that they were called "MacArthur" (after General Douglas MacArthur), as even a cursory Google search of "MacArthur locomotive" will quickly document.

  • Member since
    July 2010
  • From: Louisiana
  • 2,310 posts
Posted by Paul of Covington on Tuesday, July 17, 2018 10:36 AM

LehighVic

Oh, my goodness! Don't get off track; derailments are most unpleasant!

 

   I get a kick out of seeing how conversations evolve.Smile

_____________ 

  "A stranger's just a friend you ain't met yet." --- Dave Gardner

  • Member since
    November 2002
  • From: Detroit, Michigan
  • 20 posts
Posted by LehighVic on Tuesday, July 17, 2018 9:37 AM

Oh, my goodness! Don't get off track; derailments are most unpleasant!

  • Member since
    March 2016
  • From: Burbank IL (near Clearing)
  • 13,540 posts
Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Tuesday, July 17, 2018 7:30 AM

The staff of the Imperial Japanese Navy was wedded to the doctrine of "The Great All-Out Battle" which was to be fought somewhere in the western Pacific.  The object was to lure the Pacific Fleet westward where it would be weakened along the way by hit-and-run skirmishes to face the Combined Fleet at full strength in said battle.

They were also tied to Mahan's various doctrines.  Prange believed that the IJN could have taken Midway by sheer weight of steel (very heavy bombardment by their battleships) except that Mahan stated that ships should avoid engagement with land fortifications.

The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul
  • Member since
    October 2010
  • 51 posts
Posted by jtrain1 on Monday, July 16, 2018 11:31 PM
It may have had the name "McArthur". But as far as I can tell, They're more popularly known as Mikado. PS. I've never read anyplace that they were called "McArthur".
  • Member since
    August 2010
  • From: Henrico, VA
  • 8,955 posts
Posted by Firelock76 on Monday, July 16, 2018 5:20 PM

You nailed it "Shadow," Suragao Strait, the ships called "The Pearl Harbor Ghosts" got their revenge, in spades.

I remember reading Admiral Yamamoto saying concerning a Pacific war with the United States, "I can run wild for six months, maybe a year, but after that, no promises."   From what I know the Japanese strategy was to inflict a series of crushing, humiliating defeats on the United States, removing our presense from the western Pacific and wrecking our self-confidence, and then send out peace feelers leading to a negotiated settlement.  Of course, it didn't work out that way.

The best strategy for the Japanese warlords would have been to ignore the United States entirely.  The American people certainly didn't like what was going on in Asia, but they weren't going to go to war over it.  Pearl Harbor changed all that.

  • Member since
    April 2016
  • 1,447 posts
Posted by Shadow the Cats owner on Monday, July 16, 2018 4:44 PM

Admiral Yammaoto knew just how badly the war was going to end for Japan even before he ordered the attack. He had extensively toured the USA as Naval attache to the Japanese Embassy in Washington. He knew just how much production capacity we could bring to bear.  He knew that for about the first year we would be going from a peace time economy to a war time one. His only hope was to destroy our fleet at Pearl including our carriers that we had in the Pacific fleet at that time.  However the carriers were out Saratoga was delivering planes to Midway Enterprise was coming home from Wake Lexington was at Diego getting a refit done. The Hornet was being finished up being built Yorktown was in the Atlantic.  Yeah we got our butt handed to us at Pearl badly however it also was the best thing honestly that could have happened. Why the ships were easy to salvage refloat get into drydock repair upgraded and back into the fight. While the battleships were slow max speed of around 21 knots they could escort transports convoys and be used for landing preparations. 

 

Even slow they still got their licks in against the enemy.  Suragato strait 5 Pearl Harbor victim battleships crossed the T of the Southern Japanese Fleet.  They proceeded to sink the entire Japanese Battle line of Battleships.  

  • Member since
    December 2008
  • From: Toronto, Canada
  • 2,560 posts
Posted by 54light15 on Monday, July 16, 2018 3:29 PM

It has always amused me to hear for many, many years, "They sunk our battleships, but they were obsolete." Oh, then why were they all except the two that were total losses repaired, modernized and upgraded and used until the end of the war? Yeah, they were old but still needed just like the 50 four-pipers given to the Brits. 

Firelock, I think you're spot-on about Admiral Yamamoto. He was a pro and did what he had to do. 

 

  • Member since
    August 2010
  • From: Henrico, VA
  • 8,955 posts
Posted by Firelock76 on Sunday, July 15, 2018 2:31 PM

Well, there's one thing the loss of the battleships at Pearl Harbor did that worked out well in the long run.  It FORCED the US Navy to use the capital ships that were left, that is, the aircraft carriers, and the Navy learned just what the carriers could do and what a war-winning weapon they could be. 

  • Member since
    September 2013
  • 6,199 posts
Posted by Miningman on Sunday, July 15, 2018 2:23 PM

Speculating and arm chair tweaking of military history is endless. But it is fun, considering it involves no actual misery and horror. Many events turned on a dime, unforeseen, that changing the outcomes could easily have occured. 

For all its actual misery and horror, I'm glad the way it turned out. 

  • Member since
    August 2010
  • From: Henrico, VA
  • 8,955 posts
Posted by Firelock76 on Sunday, July 15, 2018 2:05 PM

Miningman

Yep, the kamikaze joke!  An old standard, heard it from my father years ago, long before Cheech and Chong, although Dad left out the "#%**-$@..." part.

Well, I was only ten years old at the time!

Although thanks to C&C I got to hear it the way Dad heard it back in the 40's!

Of course, the whole point of Japanese military operations in 1941 wasn't to die for their country, it was to make everyone else die for their country.

That crazy kamikaze stuff would come later.

  • Member since
    September 2013
  • 6,199 posts
Posted by Miningman on Sunday, July 15, 2018 1:46 PM

Cheech and Chong skit reply:

 Nakimoro raises his arm..." Honorable Admiral sir"

Admiral..." Yes, Nakimoro in the back"  

Nakimoro.... " You out of your #%**~€&@ mind?!!

  • Member since
    August 2010
  • From: Henrico, VA
  • 8,955 posts
Posted by Firelock76 on Sunday, July 15, 2018 1:23 PM

Erikem, it's interesting to speculate on just what the Japanese task force commander, Admiral Nagumo, would have done if he'd realized he'd been spotted.  He'd already received the "Climb Mount Niitaka" order on December 2d giving the go-ahead for the attack unless specifically being ordered not to.  Nagumo was a competant commander, but not one for showing much initiative, and he certainly couldn't break radio silence to ask Tokyo "What do I do now?"

I'd imagine if Admiral Yamamoto was on-site and in personal command he'd have said the following to the staff...

"Gentlemen, remember the Prussian Field Marshal von Moltke's dictum, 'No plan survives five minutes contact with the enemy...'?  Well, we've been spotted, we've come too far to turn back, and the High Command in Tokyo is determined to have a war with the United States.  So, this is what we're going to do."

"We increase the speed of the task force to get to the attack point as quickly as possible.  The Americans will have to overcome the inertia of a peacetime military not expecting trouble and that will take time, so we do have a bit of a window of opportunity.  Instead of three attack waves we launch all aircraft at once, everyone goes in.  If the American fleet is still in harbor we try to hurt them as much as we can.  If they've left, we demolish ALL the shore installations we can, especially the fuel storage areas, we have the intelligence, we know where everything is.  Without shore support facilities in Hawaii the American fleet will have to withdraw to the West Coast, and it will be months before they can return to the Pacific for any offensive operations against us."

"We may have lost the element of surprise, but we've trained for this for months, the men are ready, the weapons are ready, and the spirit of the men may just give us the edge to make this attack a success."

"Remember, the purpose of this attack is to neutralise the American Pacific Fleet, so tell your pilots and aircrews to be agressive, push the attacks home as hard as they can, damage and destroy as much as they can, our national survival is at stake here.  And good luck to them all!"

Any thoughts, anyone?

 

  • Member since
    December 2005
  • From: Cardiff, CA
  • 2,930 posts
Posted by erikem on Saturday, July 14, 2018 10:03 PM

Firelock76

Of course CSS. However, to shoot down the Sparrowhawks, which a Zero could have done with ease, we'd have to assume the Japanese were running flight ops during the approach to Hawaii, which I'm not sure they were doing.  Probably not, why exhaust the pilots when you need them fresh for the "Main Event?"  We'd also have to assume they had radar so they could see the Macon out there, or it's aircraft, and I'm not sure just how good Japanese radar was at the time, or if the fleet even had it to begin with, somehow I think not, they way they let themselves get "bounced" by the Dauntlesses at Midway.

Had the Macon been patrolling the ocean around Oahu, the IJN may have called off the Pearl harbor attack as they would not have been able to approach undetected.

As for radar, my understanding that the Japanese fleet had much in the way of radar at the beginning of the war. The fleet was also under strict radio silence and the use of radar would have been forbidden. OTOH, the IJN had very good optics on their ships, so...

Assuming the Macon had survived the 1930's, I wonder if the USN would have installed radar on it - at 10,000' the radar range against sihps would hae been on the order of 150 miles.

Again, just postulation, of course it didn't happen.  But by it's "sacrifice," if we want to use that term, the Macon would have more than covered it's cost by saving the rest of the Pacific Fleet.

Anything that would have given 12 hours of warning would have made a huge difference and the sacrifice of the Macon would indeed been worth the cost. Keep in mind that the IJN was counting on total surpise.

  • Member since
    August 2010
  • From: Henrico, VA
  • 8,955 posts
Posted by Firelock76 on Saturday, July 14, 2018 8:04 PM

Not as wacky as you might think Becky, check this out...

http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/6149/meet-the-biggest-and-baddest-ships-in-the-us-army

By the way, I remember "The Wackiest Ship In The Army,"  both the movie and the short-lived TV show!  Yeah, I'm approaching geezerdom, or something.

Wayne

  • Member since
    September 2010
  • From: Parma Heights Ohio
  • 3,442 posts
Posted by Penny Trains on Saturday, July 14, 2018 7:13 PM

"Wackiest Ship In The Army".  That's what that sounds like Wayne.  Wink

Trains, trains, wonderful trains.  The more you get, the more you toot!  Big Smile

  • Member since
    August 2010
  • From: Henrico, VA
  • 8,955 posts
Posted by Firelock76 on Saturday, July 14, 2018 4:08 PM

Thanks Paul!  The old square-riggers, "Wooden ships and iron men."

Back in 1997 I watched a History Channel show on the USS Constitution, "Old Ironsides," 200th anniversary.  The Navy took it out of Boston for a sail, and actually had an on-board crew trained to sail it.  The folks going up the masts had safety vests, safety harnesses, and hard hats. It made perfect sense in this day and age, but I wondered what old-time top-men would have thought of that.  Would they have laughed, or would they have said "Gorramity!  I wish WE had rigs like that!"  We'll never know.

Reminds me of another "Old Ironsides" story I heard from a Coast Guard Reserve Lieutenant Commander.  Remember OpSail '76, the parade of "Tall Ships" up the Hudson River for the Bicentennial?  The Navy heard about it and said "Hey!  Wouldn't it be something if we got 'Old Ironsides' out of Boston, sailed it down to New York, and led the parade?"

There was just one problem, no-one in the Navy in 1976 was sail qualified, and certainly not on square-riggers.  Then the Coast Guard heard about it and said "No problem boys, WE'LL sail it for you!"  The Coasties DO have the "Eagle" sail training ship after all.

"Uh, hm, uh, no thanks!"  said the Navy.  And that was the end of that!

Inter-service rivalry, don't you know.

And a little musical selection from those days of "Wooden ships and iron men."  This goes back as far as the 17th Century, as far as anyone knows.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HKFxb3SSEa0

I've heard other versions, I like this one the best!

  • Member since
    July 2010
  • From: Louisiana
  • 2,310 posts
Posted by Paul of Covington on Saturday, July 14, 2018 2:20 PM

   Thanks, SD70Dude.   I had been skimming through the discussion without paying too much attention and didn't realize the carriers we were talking about were dirigibles.

   And thanks, Firelock76, for those links.   Sometimes the things men do make circus acts look like child's play.  What sailors were able to do on the old square riggers never ceases to amaze me.

_____________ 

  "A stranger's just a friend you ain't met yet." --- Dave Gardner

  • Member since
    August 2010
  • From: Henrico, VA
  • 8,955 posts
Posted by Firelock76 on Saturday, July 14, 2018 10:29 AM

Of course CSS. However, to shoot down the Sparrowhawks, which a Zero could have done with ease, we'd have to assume the Japanese were running flight ops during the approach to Hawaii, which I'm not sure they were doing.  Probably not, why exhaust the pilots when you need them fresh for the "Main Event?"  We'd also have to assume they had radar so they could see the Macon out there, or it's aircraft, and I'm not sure just how good Japanese radar was at the time, or if the fleet even had it to begin with, somehow I think not, they way they let themselves get "bounced" by the Dauntlesses at Midway.  And remember one of the Sparrowhawks wouldn't have to be right on top of the Japanese to report their presence, assuming good visability the fleet could have been seen a long ways off.  And IF a Sparrowhawk was sighted the Japanese would have had to scramble fighters to intercept it and that would have taken time, probably enough time for that 'Hawk to make itself scarce. 

The Macon itself could have been brought down, but it would have taken some doing to do so considering it's size and gas volume.  There would have been plenty of time for Macon to radio Pearl Harbor  "Hey!  There's something out here, and it ain't American!"

Again, just postulation, of course it didn't happen.  But by it's "sacrifice," if we want to use that term, the Macon would have more than covered it's cost by saving the rest of the Pacific Fleet.

  • Member since
    December 2005
  • From: Cardiff, CA
  • 2,930 posts
Posted by erikem on Saturday, July 14, 2018 10:24 AM

In his book "And I was There", Eddie Layton had expressed his concern about not having enough PBY's to do a 360 degree patrol of the ocean around Pearl Harbor, leavig the area to the northeast unpatrolled.

As for the Macon and Sparrohawks being shot down, the whole point of the attack was to acheive complete surprise - Pearl Harbor would have turned out differently with a couple of hours warning. NB, the sinking of the midget submarine should have raised the alarm...

  • Member since
    March 2016
  • From: Burbank IL (near Clearing)
  • 13,540 posts
Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Saturday, July 14, 2018 10:12 AM

That is course assuming that the airship happens to be patrolling in that sector at that moment.  Realistically, the USS Macon and its aircraft would have been shot down in minutes.

The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul
  • Member since
    August 2010
  • From: Henrico, VA
  • 8,955 posts
Posted by Firelock76 on Saturday, July 14, 2018 9:26 AM

OK folks, I found some good stuff!

First, some film of the Sparrowhawks during flight operations with one of the no landing gear aircraft.  A good head-on shot where you can see the extended range fuel tank installed.  Since the planes were meant to operate from the airships it made sense to dispence with the landing gear in favor of extended range.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IWoEQRl8dCs

Second, some neat footage of the USS Akron with Sparrowhawk flight ops.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DTGBFY82Gik

And last, just for fun, a ten-minute clip from "Here Comes The Navy" with the immortal James Cagney and Pat O'Brian

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zhN5qRJO6fY

Man, they had some great gear back in those days, didn't they?

Now, here's something to postulate on, just for fun.

Let's suppose the USS Macon hadn't been lost.  It's December 6th, 1941, and in response to the "War Warning" that had gone out on November 30th the USS Macon is patrolling the waters around Hawaii with it's full complement of extended range Sparrowhawks (obsolete by this time, but still in use because, after all, they're still serviceable) and one of those Sparrowhawks just happens to spot a massive naval task force where one shouldn't be and flying "Rising Sun" flags.

Makes you wonder how history might have been changed just a little bit.

  • Member since
    December 2017
  • From: I've been everywhere, man
  • 4,269 posts
Posted by SD70Dude on Saturday, July 14, 2018 1:01 AM

Paul of Covington
Firelock76
had the landing gear removed

    Wait a minute--"...had the landing gear removed..."   What on earth were they planning?

They were to be based on a rather unconventional aircraft carrier:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Macon_(ZRS-5)

Greetings from Alberta

-an Articulate Malcontent

  • Member since
    July 2010
  • From: Louisiana
  • 2,310 posts
Posted by Paul of Covington on Friday, July 13, 2018 11:40 PM

Firelock76
had the landing gear removed

    Wait a minute--"...had the landing gear removed..."   What on earth were they planning?

_____________ 

  "A stranger's just a friend you ain't met yet." --- Dave Gardner

  • Member since
    August 2010
  • From: Henrico, VA
  • 8,955 posts
Posted by Firelock76 on Friday, July 13, 2018 6:06 PM

Of course I've seen "Here Comes The Navy," numerous times!  If they still had all that cool stuff they had in the Thirties I might have joined the Navy instead of the Marines!

I do shudder a bit during "Here Comes..." when Cagney reports on board the USS Arizona.  If they only knew...

Yes, some of the Sparrowhawks had the landing gear removed and had extra fuel tanks installed to extend the range.  I saw a brief video on You Tube of the same, I'll try and find it later.

  • Member since
    August 2010
  • From: Henrico, VA
  • 8,955 posts
Posted by Firelock76 on Friday, July 13, 2018 6:02 PM

CSSHEGEWISCH

Looking at the photo, it appears that forward visibility isn't all that great.  Landings on a terrestrial runway or a flight deck would not have been too easy, not unlike the earliest version of the F4U.

 

You may be on to something there.  According to the expanded story on the A&S website, the Navy did try the Sparrowhawk as a carrier-based aircraft but rejected it.  Anyway, forward visibility was always problematic in tail-draggers, although some were better than others.

  • Member since
    December 2008
  • From: Toronto, Canada
  • 2,560 posts
Posted by 54light15 on Friday, July 13, 2018 2:55 PM

Thanks so much for posting that, Firelock! I may have said it before but I think the last military biplanes (of anyone's air force) are the most beautiful aircraft ever! Didn't they later remove the landing gear from the Sparrowhawk? I recall something about that. 

I can only assume you've seen "Here Comes the Navy" with Cagney and O'Brien? I need to see it again! 

 

  • Member since
    March 2016
  • From: Burbank IL (near Clearing)
  • 13,540 posts
Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Friday, July 13, 2018 7:25 AM

Looking at the photo, it appears that forward visibility isn't all that great.  Landings on a terrestrial runway or a flight deck would not have been too easy, not unlike the earliest version of the F4U.

The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul
  • Member since
    August 2010
  • From: Henrico, VA
  • 8,955 posts
Posted by Firelock76 on Thursday, July 12, 2018 7:52 PM

Hey, remember we were talking about the old Curtiss Sparrowhawk?

Well, looky what I found!

https://airandspace.si.edu/collection-objects/curtiss-f9c-2-sparrowhawk

Isn't it gorgeous?  Like something out of a Thirties movie!  You half-expect to see James Cagney or Pat O'Brian in the cockpit!

The article attached says pilots didn't care for it all that much, but not why?  Squirrelly handling characteristics?  Cockpit too tight?  Who knows?

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

Search the Community

Newsletter Sign-Up

By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy