Logical story. "The effect of total bad luck": From Midway to sudden Russian frosts

69
Logical story. "The effect of total bad luck": From Midway to sudden Russian frosts

When people become interested in history, especially the military, but they do not take it seriously - they have an alternative syndrome.

What it is? This is when a person, having read something new for himself, independently or with the “help” of the author, finds a key point, having changed which, he can change the story. And after that, the finder will be filled with the feeling of a known sacred truth about luck and bad luck and an understanding of how the destinies of the world could be changed.

Superficially knowledgeable people find this effect in so many events and battles. And begin the stories of the "enlightened" about the possibility of "Varyag" to break through in full swing, if you throw the canolet "Korean". About the bad luck of the Germans under Prokhorovka, which allegedly led to the loss of the Kursk Arc, already “won” by the Germans. On the fatal mistake of Stalin, who did not believe Sorge / who believed Hitler. And even about the "bad luck" of the Germans in the form of "terrible frost."

Especially in order not to unwind the fan - I will try to show everything on the most neutral for us, a clearly expressed and, one can say, refined example.

So - the battle of Midway.

Midway - the first major defeat of the Japanese fleet in the Pacific War. It is he who is perceived as the collapse of Japanese plans for victory in the war.

We read the most common reasoning:

“Theoretically, they could not win. But they won and, having won, changed the whole course of the war in the Pacific Ocean ... Midway with all its brightness showed how in the fight against the considerably superior enemy forces in the human soul a certain magic mixture is accumulated, consisting of valor, skill and faith in the correctness of their cause, which leads from seemingly sure defeat to an incredible victory. " (Walter Lord)

"Considering that even the limited Japanese attack response of the aircraft carrier Yorktown brought the Japanese success, it can be assumed that the outcome of the battle could have been completely different if it were not for a set of coincidences and a happy coincidence for the Americans." (Wikipedia article)

Which translate into:

“- PURELY RANDOMLY McCluskey found the Japanese compound at the very moment when the Japanese fighters, working at low altitude, finely chopped the torpedoes Messi. And missed the dive bombers to the goal.

- PURE RANDOM BOMB hit the Akagi, Kaga and Soryu precisely at the moment when their decks were filled with fully loaded and armed aircraft. Only two bombs hit the Akagi, plus a third one exploded nearby. It is clear that under normal conditions they will not sink an aircraft carrier. And here - quite enough.

But even with such a hell of luck, the fourth aircraft carrier, Hiryu, remained unharmed - the distribution of targets was spontaneous, it was simply no one who attacked. Only one of the four remained - but even that was enough for the Americans to lose Yorktown. Then, with terrible efforts, they drowned "Hiryu" ...

Here, actually. If I state everything correctly, then the Japanese had ALL the chances of winning. They, in fact, have already won. "

And even there is such a fierce nonsense:

“Summing up, we note that the main mistake of both Yamamoto and Nagumo was unwillingness to listen to the language of coincidence and premonition, the sixth, neurogenetic contour of the psyche, the initiation of which in the framework of the“ Miracle Strategy ”is inevitable. The Americans could afford such inattention - their intelligence had already reached the level of technology. The Japanese side professed reliance on Chaos, as an alternative to the general Western order. But within the framework of this strategy, the signs of Fate were to be read and taken into account. ” (Sergey Pereslegin)

Now consider the question of luck in this battle, let's say, humanly.

The Japanese expect to conduct a landing operation. They are not aware of the presence in the area of ​​the target of the American aircraft carriers.

Americans know where the Japanese will strike, and suggest what forces. Suddenness on the side of the Americans.

The battle of Midway is a battle of the sea aviation, without fire contact of the ships. So we will compare forces in airplanes so that the rest of the numbers do not cloud the brain.

Japanese - 4 aircraft carrier with 261 carrier-mounted aircraft + several reconnaissance aircraft on cruisers.

Americans - 3 aircraft carrier with 230 carrier-mounted aircraft + 125 aircraft on Midway Atoll.

That is - Americans have an advantage in airplanes, as well as in the surprise and secrecy of deployment.

And here begins the battle. The Americans are the first to detect the enemy. 3 June is followed by 2 attacks by American aircraft, but not on aircraft carriers, but on the detected landing party. How terribly lucky Americans!

4 June, the Japanese strike at Midway, but ineffective, because the Americans raised the air in advance in the air. In response, the Americans, having discovered the aircraft carriers of the Japanese, are beginning to strike at them.

First strike - 10 torpedo bombs, 7 lost, no result.

The second is the attack of dive bombers, 16 aircraft. Bombed by aircraft carriers. There are no hits, almost all the divers are shot down.

The third is the unsuccessful attack of the “Flying Fortresses”.

The fourth is the attack of the base dive bombers. No results.

Fifth - successive attacks 41 torpedo. Zero attack result, 35 planes shot down.

The sixth is a dive bombing attack, during which 3 from 4 of Japanese aircraft carriers were hit.

That's all the luck of Americans. The secret of amazing luck is incredibly simple: constant attacks from different heights, until one of them was crowned with success. The superiority of the Americans in the air force and the Japanese ignorance of the fact that the American aircraft carriers were located nearby worked.

And what is especially unique in the battle of Midway? To be honest, nothing.

The Japanese won victory after victory in the first months of the war. But the superiority of the United States and its allies over Japan in human resources has been multiple, and in the military-industrial potential, even by several times - an order of magnitude.

“Lucky” or “unlucky” in this war to both parties. Tactics, team skills, resilience of individual units and so on changed the results of many seemingly predictable battles. But the Americans successfully experienced all the "luck" of the Japanese, becoming stronger for each subsequent battle. But the Japanese had enough of the "luck" of the Americans to immediately lose all perspectives in a further war.

So "lucky" only to those who "lucky himself." If a country has more powerful than the enemy’s military potential, is ready for war and its population is ready to fight - sooner or later “amazing luck” will be on its side.
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

69 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. borisst64
    +3
    23 January 2013 09: 35
    I read the analysis of the battle, but I didn't understand what the "alternative syndrome" has to do with it.
    1. +4
      23 January 2013 09: 46
      With this analysis of the battle, the author is trying to destroy the theory of the possibility of a different outcome of certain events.
      1. +1
        23 January 2013 10: 48
        Quote: borisst64
        what does the "alternative syndrome" have to do with it.

        I also did not understand, it was possible to simply describe the battle as an excursion into history, although article +.
    2. +1
      23 January 2013 19: 55
      borisst64

      Quote: borisst64
      but what does the "alternative syndrome" have to do with it?


      read the comment below Andrei from Chelyabinsk he had already developed a scheme of how the battle would have happened if, if what if everything was a little different from what it was, well, quite a bit by alternative wassat .
      1. +1
        23 January 2013 20: 55
        Quote: Karlsonn
        read the comment below Andrey from Chelyabinsk, he has already developed a scheme of how the battle would have happened if, if

        You see, if you take an apple, lift it up in your hand and then release it, the apple will fall down. You did not pick up the apple, and I did not pick it up, but what I have described is not an alternative.
        In reality, the Americans spotted the Yapov aircraft carriers and LIFTED AVIATION TO THE AIR from Midway airfield. If they had communication and coordination at the level, they would also raise aircraft carrier aircraft and send it to attack the discovered Japanese AVs. That's the whole alternative laughing
        1. -5
          23 January 2013 22: 30
          Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
          You see, if you take an apple, lift it up in your hand and then release it, the apple will fall down. You did not pick up the apple, and I did not pick it up, but what I have described is not an alternative.



          Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
          If the Americans had adequate aviation, like the one that the Japanese had or the one that appeared among the Americans themselves


          Respected Andrei from Chelyabinsk

          if my grandmother had .ui, she would be a grandfather! bully , then what you described here below, over there negative there is a banal alternative in style - if yes, if mushrooms were growing in the mouth.
          It was as it was, and your delights are just what the author of the article under discussion writes about.
          1. +4
            23 January 2013 23: 05
            Quote: Karlsonn
            if my grandmother had .ui, she would be a grandfather! bully, what you described here below, over there negative is a banal alternative in style - if it were, if only mushrooms were growing in your mouth.

            In essence, the article raised only one question. The author did not like that most sources describing the battle of Midway say that banal LUCK helped the Americans defeat.
            Now - to a story that does not know the subjunctive mood laughing The fact that the Americans won at Midway is a historical fact. But what this victory was achieved through - concentration of forces, luck, Nagumo's mistakes or the Sea Serpent there - is NOT FACT. This is the INTERPRETATION OF THE FACT of the American victory by gentlemen historians :)))) To the question "what?" history answers with the fact - the Americans won. To the question "how?" history also answers with the fact - in the course of successive attacks, US aviation tore apart the defenses of aircraft carriers and then the US dive bombers still forced the Yap to get theirs. This is also a FACT and no one argues with him.
            But this is not enough for historians - they ask the question WHY. So, the answer to this question is not a historical fact. Because of the LOT of facts, gentlemen, historians choose the MOST SIGNIFICANT, but naturally - subjectively, at their discretion
            for example, those who speak of luck know that the Americans attacked with scattered squadrons. It is a fact? Fact. And they also know that NOBODY coordinated the attacks of these same squadrons. Those. nobody tried to SPECIALLY organize sequential attacks, nobody controlled them. This is a historical fact. laughing laughing laughing
            And if the process is not controlled by anyone, His Majesty Chance starts to rule it, relying on Probability Theory. Under Midway, it so happened that the Americans attacked sequentially, at short intervals
            And this is also a fact.
            But what exactly had a DECISIVE influence on the victory of the Americans at Midway - hacking codes, the concentration of three aircraft carriers, the randomness according to which the Americans attacked sequentially, McCluskey’s accidental exit to the right point at the right time, mistakes completely - this, my dear opponent, is NOT a FACT, it is only a JUDGMENT. Your judgment. Which, in general, has nothing to do with alternative, neither with facts, nor with history - this is just your subjective assessment of historical facts :))))
            But you were not even able to understand the difference between the objectivity of history and the subjectivity of your perception.
            And after confusing history with your interpretation of the historical process, you came to the conclusion that your JUDGMENT does not have a subjunctive mood laughing laughing laughing
            deserved minus
            1. +1
              23 January 2013 23: 15
              Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
              describing the battle of Midway, they say that banal LUCK helped to defeat the Americans.

              In principle, one can add to the banal luck that the Japanese at Pearl Harbor did not destroy the repair facilities and Yorktown after the Coral Sea was able to repair it there, and not cap it to the US coast.
              1. 0
                24 January 2013 16: 13
                Quote: Kars
                You can add that the Japanese at Pearl Harbor did not destroy the repair facilities
                oh well, three thousand welders from all over america brought there, and the welding transformer is not so heavy that it could not be crammed into the same plane with the welder.

                But the organization of repair work in Yorktown - yes, labor and organizational feat.
            2. -1
              24 January 2013 15: 45
              Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
              The author did not like that most sources describing the battle of Midway say that banal LUCK helped the Americans defeat.

              re-read the article.


              Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
              But this is not enough for historians - they ask the question WHY.


              there is no answer to the question "why" in principle, and historians do not ask such a question, historians are looking for reasons. and these are different things.


              Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
              And they also know that NOBODY coordinated the attacks of these same squadrons. Those. nobody tried to SPECIALLY organize sequential attacks, nobody controlled them. This is a historical fact.


              this is not a fact, but yours, a subjective opinion, and erroneous.


              Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
              Under Midway, it so happened that the Americans attacked sequentially, at short intervals


              yeah, quite by accident laughing


              Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
              this, my dear opponent, is NOT a FACT, it is only a JUDGMENT. Your judgment.


              You yourself are confused in your conflicting arguments.


              Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
              But you were not even able to understand the difference between the objectivity of history and the subjectivity of your perception.


              please, please:
              - Do not ascribe to me what you yourself have come up with.


              Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
              And after confusing history with your interpretation of the historical process, you came to the conclusion that your JUDGMENT does not have a subjunctive mood

              laughing and you’re funny, don’t get it wrong, I don’t want to offend you, I just read all this and the mood rises.



              Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
              deserved minus


              I don’t chase the pros, the minuses do not touch at all.

              Thanks for the conversation drinks .
              1. 0
                24 January 2013 21: 21
                Quote: Karlsonn
                Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                And they also know that NOBODY coordinated the attacks of these same squadrons. Those. nobody tried to SPECIALLY organize sequential attacks, nobody controlled them. This is a historical fact.
                this is not a fact, but yours, a subjective opinion, and erroneous.
                uh uh the kindest ghost with a motorall the same it is a fact

                Quote: Karlsonn
                Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                Under Midway, it so happened that the Americans attacked sequentially, at short intervals
                yeah, quite by accident
                and again - really by accident.

                The correct decision (and the intent of the American command was in fact) to attack the carrier group simultaneously from different directions. In reality, this not only did not work out, but full Pe came out. The Amserikos not only could not coordinate carrier aircraft with atoll aircraft, they even managed to split into pieces in terms of strike groups. Result: Japanese fighters fired them sequentially.

                There are normal analyzes of the battle, and both sides recognize this.

                for example Sherman F. "War in the Pacific. Aircraft carriers in battle" - with one and
                Fuchida and Okumiya "The Battle of Miduei Atoll" is on the other side.
  2. Skavron
    -1
    23 January 2013 10: 43
    In general, all this alternative story is such nonsense. It’s just sometimes surprising that people read it all.
  3. +10
    23 January 2013 10: 55
    What the author wanted to say is not to understand me, alas. And did the author himself understand what he was going to say?
    In any case, the fact that the author did not understand the question is obvious.
    If the Americans had adequate aviation, like the one that the Japanese had, or the one that appeared in the Americans themselves even in the 1943-44 years, then the carriers of Nagumo would have been easily destroyed at Midway after the Japanese launched their first strike - somewhere- then at 7-8 in the morning. And it would be so - the Americans discovered Japanese aircraft carriers - they would take their land and aircraft carrier aircraft into the air - at this time, the Japanese strike Midway (to no avail - the strike aircraft of the Americans are already in the air) American strike groups enter the Japanese aircraft carriers exactly when they take airplanes bombed along Midway - a curtain, the Japanese are attacked by a Siberian beast with blue fur. Those. with adequate US aviation, the question of chances did not arise at all - the Japanese simply did not have them.
    But the training of American pilots was ... disgusting, they were trained well individually, but they did not know how to fight in a group. The result - the Yankees could not coordinate the actions of different squadrons from the same aircraft carrier, not to mention coordinating the strikes of aircraft carrier aviation as a whole - and even about coordination with the coastal aviation of Midway and the bast shoes did not ring - each American squadron waged its own, and only its own war ... And because of this, the Americans had practically no chance. They had everything - the advantage in numbers, the "unsinkable Midway airfield", the factor of surprise - but in spite of all this, with such an organization and preparation, they had practically no chances - only a miracle.
    only a miracle can explain the fact that most of the squadrons nevertheless went to the Japanese ships, and did not get lost on the way. Only a miracle can explain the fact that the American pilots succeeded in constant attacks, that they did not fall out in a crowd over any "Haruna" and were not destroyed by Japanese fighters. etc. etc. In general, with all the advantages of the Americans, they could not benefit from superiority in forces and advantages in position.
    Therefore, everyone who writes about the miracle of Midway is absolutely right. To win with such pilots who were then with the United States can only be a miracle. It happened
    But Nagumo himself greatly contributed to this miracle, having made a number of gross errors in this battle.
    1. +1
      23 January 2013 12: 15
      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
      But Nagumo himself greatly contributed to this miracle, having made a number of gross errors in this battle.

      The successful operation in Pearl Harbor relaxed the Japanese. And when you underestimate the enemy, he is doubly dangerous, and I agree with the 8th company, the one who is lucky is lucky.
      1. +3
        23 January 2013 12: 23
        Quote: saturn.mmm
        Successful Pearl Harbor Operation Relaxes Japanese

        I do not think so. Here, rather, the factor of fatigue - Nagumo's compound was waved like a samurai sword, chasing them across the ocean. And when you are constantly thrown out of the fire and into the fire - it’s hard not to lose clarity of thinking
        1. 0
          23 January 2013 15: 01
          Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
          Here, rather, the fatigue factor is the combination of Nagumo

          It is possible, but insufficient intelligence activity before the operation leads to the idea of ​​underestimating the enemy, and in my opinion a somewhat belated operation.
    2. +2
      23 January 2013 19: 48
      Andrei from Chelyabinsk

      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
      In any case, the fact that the author did not understand the question is obvious.


      Excuse me, where can I read your professional works (books, articles, etc.) as a military historian?


      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
      If the Americans had adequate aviation, like the one the Japanese had or


      started laughing - if only then, if everyone would be attracted to the alternative?
      History does not know the subjunctive mood!


      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
      And it would be so - the Americans discovered Japanese aircraft carriers - they would take their land and aircraft carrier aircraft into the air - at this time, the Japanese strike Midway (to no avail - the strike aircraft of the Americans is already in the air) American strike groups go to the Japanese aircraft carriers exactly when they take bombs that have been bombed along Midway - a curtain, the Japanese are attacked by a Siberian beast with blue fur.


      not a fig !!! at the last moment Godzil would save the Japanese !!!


      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
      But the training of American pilots was ... disgusting, individually they were prepared well, but in the group they did not know how to fight.


      yeah they didn’t
      On the evening of February 13, the 796 Avro Lancaster and 9 De Havilland Mosquito aircraft flew in two waves and dropped 1478 tons of high-explosive and 1182 tons of incendiary bombs.
      1. +1
        23 January 2013 19: 49
        On June 11, 1944, the Americans began the battle. Large groups of US fighters attacked Japanese airfields located on the islands of Guam, Saipan and Tinian. The Japanese early warning system did not work on time, and their planes were taken by surprise by the enemy - the interceptors did not manage to gain altitude in a timely manner. According to American data, Japan lost 81 aircraft on the ground and another 29 were damaged. It was a promising start.

        The weak resistance of the Japanese Air Force was broken over the next few days, and on June 14, the Americans occupied Saipan. The day before, the imperial fleet approached the scene, but his arrival was not a surprise to the enemy. Realizing that time now works for them, two operational groups of the US Navy dealt another blow, this time north, at the airfields of the islands of Iwo Jima and Titijima. As a result, the plans of the Japanese again were frustrated. Most of the Japanese land air bases were disabled before the start of the main hostilities. Reinforcements sent there were also defeated.





        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        It is only a miracle that one can explain the fact that most of the squadrons nevertheless went to the Japanese ships, and did not get lost along the way. Only a miracle can explain the fact that the American pilots succeeded in constant attacks, that they did not fall out in a crowd over any "Haruna" and were not destroyed by Japanese fighters. etc. etc. In general, with all the advantages of the Americans, they could not benefit from superiority in forces and advantages in position.
        Therefore, everyone who writes about the miracle of Midway is absolutely right

        laughing laughing laughing

        MEGAEXPERT on the wire good
        1. +1
          23 January 2013 21: 10
          Quote: Karlsonn
          MEGAEXPERT on the wire

          no, MEGAEXPERT in the hall :)))) Can't you read?
          I wrote
          If the Americans had adequate aviation, like the Japanese had or the one that appeared among the Americans themselves at least to 1943-44 years - then the carriers of Nagumo would have been easily destroyed

          You quote
          Quote: Karlsonn
          11 June 1944 year, the Americans began the battle.
          - i.e. just the peak of the combat ability of the Americans, which I pointed out
          And here are my words
          only a miracle can explain the fact that most of the squadrons nevertheless reached the Japanese ships,

          refer to US Aviation of the 42 model of the year - like the Battle of Midway
          or you are not in KRS, how great is the progress of American aviation in 1944 compared to 1942 laughing In fact, your example with Mosquito about the skill of the Americans - wassat
          Yes you are a connoisseur .... laughing laughing laughing
          1. -1
            23 January 2013 22: 34
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            I wrote



            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            If the Americans had adequate aviation

            wassat

            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            only a miracle can explain the fact that most of the squadrons nevertheless reached the Japanese ships, and did not get lost along the way

            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            Only a miracle can explain the fact that the American pilots succeeded in constant attacks, that they did not fall out in a crowd over any "Haruna" and were not destroyed by Japanese fighters. etc. and so on

            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            To win with such pilots who were then with the United States can only be a miracle.



            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            Can't you read?


            and you? read the article under discussion again, there about people like you.
            1. +1
              23 January 2013 22: 47
              Quote: Karlsonn
              and you? read the article under discussion again, there about people like you.

              No, not about people like me :))) There are about such "historians" who, grabbing on top of some literature and confusing Lancaster with the B-17, run to inform us, mere mortals, of their next "truth"
              And the stories of the "enlightened ones" begin about the possibility of the "Varangian" breaking through at full speed if you drop the korelok "Korean". About the bad luck of the Germans near Prokhorovka, which supposedly led to the loss of the Kursk arc already “won” by the Germans. About the fatal mistake of Stalin, who did not believe Sorge / believed Hitler. And even about the "bad luck" of the Germans in the form of "terrible frosts"

              or for example - about the mystical predetermination of the victory of the Americans at Midway :))))
      2. +3
        23 January 2013 21: 04
        Quote: Karlsonn
        Excuse me, where can I read your professional works (books, articles, etc.) as a military historian?

        But what, works now is a guarantee of knowledge on all issues? :)))) If there is nothing to answer on the merits of what I said - no need to answer at all.
        Quote: Karlsonn
        Laughing began - if only if everyone had pulled to the alternative?
        History does not know the subjunctive mood!

        Yes, I generally like to alternate. And I think it’s stupid to say that history supposedly does not know the subjunctive mood :)))))) History may not know. But gentlemen, historians who interpret this very story who is what they are, have already sent all our disparate history in all poses.
        The author of the article writes
        The secret of amazing luck is insanely simple: constant attacks from different heights, until one of them was successful.

        not realizing that these constant attacks from various heights themselves are an amazing luck for the Americans :))))
        Quote: Karlsonn
        yeah they didn’t
        On the evening of February 13, the 796 Avro Lancaster and 9 De Havilland Mosquito aircraft flew in two waves and dropped 1478 tons of high-explosive and 1182 tons of incendiary bombs.

        Honorable Historian, you see, as one of my opponents said, History Does Not Know Subjunctive Inclination So - Lancaster and de Haviland Mosquito - these are BRITISH planes :)))))
        How many works on the history of aviation have you written, huh? laughing
        1. 0
          23 January 2013 22: 59
          Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
          And what, works is now a guarantee of knowledge on all issues? :))))


          the author of the article is Boris Yulin, a professional military historian, whom I highly respect, but who you write this time:

          Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
          What the author wanted to say is not to understand me, alas. And did the author himself understand what he was going to say?
          In any case, the fact that the author did not understand the question is obvious


          trying to figure it out. what

          Boris Yulin is full of wonderful works: articles, books, reviews, etc. etc., and you?


          Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
          If there is nothing to answer on the merits of what I said - no need to answer at all.


          in fact, from my first post you stubbornly do not answer me, but I don’t rush for spears because of this.


          Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
          not realizing that these constant attacks from various heights themselves are an amazing luck for the Americans :))))


          yes, of course - they flew purely into the blind, almost got lost, purely by chance they saw the Japanese and simply miraculously attacked from different heights.

          hug and cry ...


          Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
          So - Lancaster and de Haviland Mosquito - these are BRITISH planes :)))))


          Oh really? wassat but I didn’t know that in my example (bombing of Dresden) the Americans participated along with the British No. thanks, opened my eyes.
          an example was stupidity stating:

          Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
          But the training of American pilots was ... disgusting, individually they were prepared well, but in the group they did not know how to fight


          On April 18 1942, the 16 American B-25 bombers from the Enterprise and Hornet aircraft carriers launched a "retaliation raid" on the cities of Tokyo, Yokohama and Nagoya.

          the reasons for the "quiet glory" of American pilots from December 1941 to mid-1942 in the defeat of the ground forces and the Allied navy, and not in disgusting training.

          Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
          How many works on the history of aviation have you written, huh?


          on aviation history?
          - not a single one, but please note that I don’t snort in the back of eminent and respected professional historians:

          Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
          the fact that the author did not understand the question is obvious.
          1. +1
            23 January 2013 23: 52
            Quote: Karlsonn
            the author of the article is Boris Yulin, a professional military historian, whom I highly respect, but who you write this time:

            And I am a person for whom the history of WWII and the history of the Navy is a long-standing hobby and who, to satisfy his thirst for knowledge in this matter, has read a couple of hundred kilograms of various sources, not counting those laid out in electronic form.
            But this hardly makes any difference in the issue under discussion. "And who are you?!" - this is appropriate for pique vests.
            Quote: Karlsonn
            in fact, from my first post you stubbornly do not answer me, but I don’t rush for spears because of this.

            I answer SIGNIFICANT questions. The question about my work is irrelevant.
            Quote: Karlsonn
            yes, of course - they flew purely into the blind, almost got lost, purely by chance they saw the Japanese and simply miraculously attacked from different heights.
            hug and cry ...

            And you did not know? :))))) Apparently Yulin did not write about this :))))
            For a start - read, for example, Dalla, "The Combat Path of the Imperial Navy" I understand, this is not Yulin. But also a famous historian laughing laughing laughing You will learn a lot for yourself. For example, as during the battle in the Coral Sea (yes, the same 1942 g), only 43 flew from the 21 planes lifted from Lexington to the Japanese. The rest got lost, and after unsuccessful searches they returned to the aircraft carrier. Maybe sarcasm will become less, but more knowledge ...
            Quote: Karlsonn
            Oh really? wassat and I didn’t know that in the example I gave (bombing Dresden) the Americans participated together with the British no, thanks, they opened my eyes.

            But nothing that you are trying to confirm American professionalism quoting the success of British pilots? :)))))
            This is the time. And the second - you just need to know NOTHING about aviation in general and about the features of the use of naval aviation in order to cite the results of carpet bombing as an example in the discussion of naval pilots. You see, what you write is ... well, how to say it, so that it would not be very offensive ... You do not know the basics, but you’re climbing to argue :)))
            1. +3
              23 January 2013 23: 53
              Quote: Karlsonn
              On April 18 1942, the 16 American B-25 bombers from the Enterprise and Hornet aircraft carriers launched a "retaliation raid" on the cities of Tokyo, Yokohama and Nagoya.

              Yeah. Well done what - in the city laughing laughing laughing
              Is this not evidence of the ability to drown everyone who still walks there? :))))
              If they managed to get into the CITY, then what did it cost them to hit the deck of a ship as much as 250 by 30 meters, and even moving at a speed of 55 km per hour? tell us about the tactics of "star raids" of fortresses, about how they broke through at a distance of 500 m to warships under fire from dozens or even hundreds of anti-aircraft guns .... About the ability to navigate over the sea, etc., etc.
              Quote: Karlsonn
              on aviation history?
              - not a single one, but please note that I don’t snort in the back of eminent and respected professional historians:

              And I snort, and even in the back? In my opinion, I quite openly and frankly wrote everything that I think about both the historian and his article.
              1. 0
                24 January 2013 16: 05
                Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                crying if you do not understand the question, comparison, argument - ask again.
                stop attributing to me what you yourself have come up with.


                Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                In my opinion, I quite openly and frankly wrote everything that I think about both the historian and his article.

                bully
            2. +1
              24 January 2013 16: 03
              Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
              And I am a person for whom the history of WWII and the history of the Navy is a long-standing hobby


              I'm happy for you good really glad, but for you it hobby , and for Yulina profession , I hope the difference between an amateur and a professional is not necessary to explain wink .


              Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
              I answer SIGNIFICANT questions. The question about my work is irrelevant.


              you think so, I think differently.


              Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
              First, read, for example, Dalla, "The Combat Path of the Imperial Navy"


              thanks for the tip drinks .


              Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
              You will learn a lot for yourself.


              Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
              Maybe sarcasm will become less, but more knowledge ...


              You don’t worry about my knowledge, if I don’t know something and am mistaken in something, let’s say you correct me or indicate where to read --- this is actually the purpose of my presence here, communication with people who are more knowledgeable in matters of which I swim.


              Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
              But nothing that you are trying to confirm American professionalism quoting the success of British pilots? :)))))
              It is time.


              Americans bombed Dresden - they bombed, flew a huge number of boards - flew, showed coherence in a group flight - showed what

              either you distort my words, or you don’t understand what I wanted to say --- apparently the second. THIS TIME.




              Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
              And the second - you just need to know NOTHING about aviation in general and about the features of the use of naval aviation in order to cite the results of carpet bombing as an example in the discussion of naval pilots.

              Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
              You do not know the basics, but climb to argue :)))


              yeah wassat I immediately called you - MEGAEXPERT on the podium, where to us to you.
  4. 8 company
    +5
    23 January 2013 11: 31
    Luck is normal. But lucky for those who are lucky, figuratively speaking. Under Midway, the best intelligence organization was on the side of the Amers, they made wider use of reconnaissance aircraft and had the opportunity to read the secret codes of the Japanese.
    1. +6
      23 January 2013 12: 25
      The Japanese also had cheesy sake, and the Americans had excellent whiskey. This decided the outcome of the "Battle of Midway".
  5. SIT
    +5
    23 January 2013 12: 08
    God is always on the side of the large battalions (C) Napoleon Bonaparte.
    With an advantage of 90 airplanes and 125 land-based airplanes, which do not have to grumble on the tight decks of aircraft carriers, the Americans could lose the battle of Midway only with an extraordinary mess. The mess certainly was, but not to that extent.
    1. +4
      23 January 2013 16: 05
      Quote: SIT
      God is always on the side of the large battalions (C) Napoleon Bonaparte.

      When Napoleon invaded Russia, he had more battalions - I do not argue, but God was not on his side!
  6. +3
    23 January 2013 12: 21
    Any general exaggerates the size of the enemy and understates his losses. In case of victory, this brings additional gingerbread, and in case of defeat, you can be generously forgiven.
    In addition, you can always use the "war elephants" that the enemy had, but the commander did not have, or were, but small, or smaller, or in general - the elephant fell ill before the battle due to poor feeding.
    Regardless, return to the first paragraph.
    My alternative story is - what would the brave American warriors say now if they lost three aircraft carriers under Midway?
    I agree with the last paragraph of the author. The Americans would have built six aircraft carriers instead, and the Japanese would have remained with their four, but that would have been another "great battle".
    1. Avenger711
      -1
      23 January 2013 13: 41
      Their losses do not diminish, otherwise there will be no replenishment.
    2. +1
      23 January 2013 13: 46
      Quote: shurup
      My alternative story is - what would the brave American warriors say now if they lost three aircraft carriers under Midway?
      I agree with the last paragraph of the author. The Americans would have built six aircraft carriers instead, and the Japanese would have remained with their four, but that would have been another "great battle".

      If the Americans lost Hornet, Yorktown and Enterprise, they would have completely lost their strategic initiative and this would lead to the following:
      1. Japanese capture of Port Moresby - to strengthen the southern flank of the line of New Guinea - Bismarck Island;
      2. The seizure of the central bridgehead of the Pacific Ocean - Midway Island, followed by the imposition of a general battle (the outcome, I think, is clear to everyone - the Americans lost all aircraft carriers tongue );
      3. The invasion of the western Aleuts to strengthen the defensive line;
      Iiiiiiiiii - fanfare! - the most important thing:
      4. Capture of the islands of Fiji, Samoa, New Caledonia with the aim of cutting communications between the west coast of the United States and Australia.

      Everything, finita la comedy! Australia surrenders, New Zealand is occupied. The western coast of the United States is far away, their best aircraft carriers are at the bottom. And yes - Japan also built new aircraft carriers and the pace of construction exceeded the American one. Even after Midway, most of the comrades from the Joint Staff Committee continued to stubbornly believe in the power of battleships and even wanted to build AntiYamato - battleships of the Montana class! fool
      1. +1
        23 January 2013 14: 50
        Comment absurd minus weak? The Japanese had plenty of forces on the eve of the Battle of Midway and for the occupation of the Aleuts - 7 aircraft carriers, 11 battleships, 24 cruisers, 66 destroyers and 17 transports. Against this, the Americans in the region had: 3 aircraft carrier, 8 cruisers and 14 destroyers. All battleships in San Francisco. After the loss of aircraft carriers by the Americans, there was nothing stopping the transfer of as many occupying forces from the metropolis as required and the seizure of all the territories I listed was only a matter of a short period of time.
        1. 0
          23 January 2013 20: 42
          the story is indeed "ALTERNATIVE" on the shelves: the Americans did not have a strategic initiative at that moment, then they knock out three aircraft carriers from the Americans, so what? How many Essexes and Independes sailed to the shores of Japan at the end of the war, not counting the small escorts ??? And what were the rates of the Japanese? how much did they enter before the end of the war? it is even easier to deal with the occupation troops, given that the Japanese soldiers did not have a shortage of equipment except for samurai swords. and the fact that the Americans did not start an assault without cold Coke and a hairdresser, well, regarding the battleships, the Americans already "North Caroline" plugged the Japanese in this category, and ahead were the "South Dakota" and "Iowa"
          1. 0
            23 January 2013 21: 01
            Yes Yes. It is an alternative. Yes There are no Essexes and Independents off the coast of Japan. Even the Hawaiians do not. Fearfully cling to their ports. At the end of the war, Japan introduced fewer aircraft carriers, but this is understandable why - all sources of resources have already been cut off from the mother country. Does it surprise you?
            But we are talking about a different scenario. wink
            1. 0
              23 January 2013 22: 18
              no, it's not about the resources and something was cut off there, it's about the industry and the capacity of the shipyards, besides, by 1945 the monster of that time "Midue" was ready, and the further the more and more sad for Japan, even if America it would be too lazy to sail on aircraft carriers to Japan, then again soon the B-36 flew, and even then Japan would be a complete tryndets
              1. +1
                23 January 2013 22: 45
                I was always wary of cap-hatred moods.
                Why are you clinging to the end of the real war, if we are talking about the development of events after the possible defeat of the Yankees at Midway? B-36 "Peacemaker" also flew after the war, in fact. A slow-moving machine would not have lived long without cover fighters. despite the 20mm defensive turrets. And what kind of fighters could make a transoceanic flight with them? wink
                The Japanese from Shinano could also gash that same monster. tongue
      2. +2
        23 January 2013 15: 00
        I don’t know who zaminusil, but I - plus :)))
        1. +1
          23 January 2013 15: 07
          Thank you, namesake! hi I also put a plus for yours - the comment is written clearly and to the point. good
      3. Avenger711
        -1
        24 January 2013 09: 09
        So, what is next? A couple of extra years of war with the same sad ending for Japan? The war could be ended only after the occupation of a large part of the United States, without this the loss of Hawaii and Alaska yields nothing. Australia and New Zealand even now have a combined 20 million people. It would be more logical not to capture them, but to Panama, but all the same, the accumulation of a fleet in the Gulf of Mexico, the return of control over the canal (not the fact that they could be permanently out of action) and that’s all.

        Japan also built new aircraft carriers and the pace of construction exceeded the American.


        Yesterday I clearly showed you that the United States built about 4 times more aircraft carrier forces during the war, the difference is even greater for other types of ships. As for the battleships, it is actually very difficult to drown them, which the Yamato and Musashi showed, and they tormented the Bismarck for a very long time. You can see you just can't imagine what a battleship is and how a ship of 50000 tons fundamentally differs from a ship of 5000 tons.Well, I'll tell you, a tub of 5000 tons from one tropeda or a half-ton bomb will gurgle and go to the bottom, 50000 tons allow you to have not only an armored hull 300 mm thick, anti-torpedo protection and weapons of all classes on board, but also a hospital, and even a cinema with a brothel on board. Most of the dead battleships of World War II are either old troughs of the beginning of the century, or they were hollowed out with an overwhelming numerical superiority.
        1. BruderV
          0
          24 January 2013 15: 05
          Quote: Avenger711
          As for the battleships, it is actually very difficult to drown them, which the Yamato and Musashi showed, and they tormented the Bismarck for a very long time.

          And why is it necessary to sink? Enough radar, command posts and part of the guns to bomb and repair at the docks for many months is guaranteed, and well to miss the battleship is very difficult. Even the Britons on the plywood Gladiators in Taranto did not succeed. Destroyers, however, are much smaller and more maneuverable, they still have to manage to get involved, they always act as a group, and not alone, so the power of anti-aircraft artillery is comparable to a battleship. The United States even had special anti-aircraft destroyers as part of squadrons. What is there to argue about? Battleships have long become obsolete, now only two countries in the world even have cruisers, and even the United States has a large part of the fleet - destroyers, although their modern displacement has grown significantly. The loss of one destroyer does not mean anything in the balance of power, but a little damage linocore already makes you think what to do with it and how to replace it.
          1. Avenger711
            -1
            24 January 2013 19: 04
            The gun was smashed by the "Marat". It was so critical that the entire bow of the khan. There is only one but. You probably have no idea what a battleship is. During normal air defense operation, it can quite successfully repel aircraft attacks, and will simply not allow any waterfowl at a distance of even 20 cables. Therefore, even getting into a battleship with the technology of those years when guided weapons were just incipient was very difficult, although the Italian battleships got it from guided bombs. That is, the question is to get in at all, and then how will it arrive, but in general, single bombs and torpedoes from which the destroyer will break in half and to the bottom, the battleship often cannot even be sent for repairs. The success of the attack on the same "Marat" is essentially the result of a swarm of planes pecking at it, until someone (not the fact that it was Rudel, there are ambiguities) did not hit, and hit successfully.

            Whether battleships have outlived their usefulness is still a question, to have 200-400 mm of armor is always good, a missile like "Exocet" will simply crash on it.
            1. BruderV
              +1
              24 January 2013 21: 36
              Well, depending on what battleships to consider. If the American Iowa with more than a hundred anti-aircraft guns with radar guidance was installed, then a successful reflection of the aircraft attacks of those times is possible, and all other types of battleships collided with aircraft rarely survived. But the Iowa class was already a meaningful response to the challenge of the time, when it finally became clear what kind of threat the sea poses to the aircraft, it was simply completely riddled with anti-aircraft guns. Prior to this, anti-aircraft artillery did not pay so much attention. But in any case, the strength of the squadron cannot be determined by even one mega-uniform. Without cover from aircraft carriers and destroyers, such a lonely floating target will sooner or later get its bomb or torpedo wherever it is needed. Well, in our time there are simply no battleships and there is no need to create missiles to combat them. Believe me, if necessary, they will be made very quickly. What can I say if there are already anti-bunker bombs that crumble concrete at 70 meters underground.
  7. toguns
    0
    23 January 2013 12: 52
    wassat Something always hurts the dancer, Luck favors the brave - Virgil (Aeneid)
  8. +1
    23 January 2013 13: 08
    Quote: shurup
    Americans have great whiskey

    Doubtful fact, corn does not color whiskey. Although the taste and color ...
  9. +5
    23 January 2013 13: 31
    The author of the article forgot the most important thing - after the battle in the Coral Sea - the first duel of aircraft carriers - the Americans managed to crack the Purple code of the Japanese and read all their radio talks without problems, which the Japanese conducted quite openly, confident in their impunity. The reports of their submarines on American activity on the island were not taken into account.
    Secondly, the Japanese initially did not plan to expand the empire beyond the defensive line of the Kuril Islands, the Marshalls, Bismarck, Timor, Java, Sumatra, Malaya and Burma. Subsequent plans to capture Midway and Port Moresby were hastily drawn up and underdeveloped.
    Further, the airfield-based planes on Midway, Americans stupidly lost almost completely before the naval battle and they did not have no influence on its results. Please note that these aircraft were not detected by the enemy’s aircraft carriers, not even the small escort Zuicho. In addition, the 8 air group from Yorkatoon and Enterprise was also completely destroyed (only one pilot survived - Lieutenant Goy, who caught on the seat of his plane and watched subsequent events from the water), without having achieved a single hit in Japanese aircraft carriers. Following it, the 6 and 3 I squadrons were also destroyed. In this case, a numerical superiority towards the Americans? How so? feel And here the most interesting part begins - the Japanese land on their aircraft carriers, refueling and reloading begins, on the flight decks there are a lot of barrels of gasoline and bombs. Cover fighters that repelled the attacks of torpedo bombers did not manage to occupy the echelon, the sun shines directly into the nose of aircraft carriers. And here he is - Mr. Case - dive-flyers from Yorktown and Enterprise fly up, and they do not know about each other's presence! The outcome is known - Akagi, Kaga, Soryu were destroyed, and with them the color of the most trained Japanese pilots, the lack of which could not be filled. And this is one of the main reasons for the defeat in the war of the Japanese Empire.
    1. +1
      23 January 2013 19: 39
      "Air Group 8 from Yorktown and Enterprise was also completely destroyed" .. and a little later .. "dive bombers from Yorktown and Enterprise are arriving" - are the "destroyed" ones arriving?
      1. +1
        23 January 2013 19: 56
        Quote: Mairos
        "Air Group 8 from Yorktown and Enterprise was also completely destroyed" .. and a little later .. "dive bombers from Yorktown and Enterprise are arriving" - are the "destroyed" ones arriving?

        Not. Squadrons of torpedo bombers were destroyed. Dive-bombers were issued separately. wink I forgot to indicate the composition of the squadrons - mea culpa. Yes Thank you for noticing and correcting.
    2. +1
      23 January 2013 23: 08
      Quote: Iraclius
      Americans managed to crack the purple code

      I just wanted to write about it. (although, in my opinion, somewhere flashed infa that it was our cipher that was broken and handed over to the allies by order of "above")
      The most correct ending in this article is: "and its population is ready to fight - sooner or later, “amazing luck” will be on its side."Here to the point. Neither military potential, nor readiness for war are worth anything if there is no SPIRIT OF THE PEOPLE. IMHO
    3. +1
      23 January 2013 23: 40
      Quote: Iraclius
      The reports of their submarines on American activity on the island were not taken into account. Secondly, the Japanese did not initially plan to expand the empire beyond the defensive line of the Kuril Islands, the Marshalls, Bismarck, Timor, Java, Sumatra, Malaya and Burma. Subsequent plans to capture Midway and Port Moresby were hastily drawn up and underdeveloped.

      Exactly. Awareness came.
  10. Avenger711
    0
    23 January 2013 14: 18
    But the meaning is simple, whether the Americans were lucky or not is not so important, the only thing that matters is that after the first significant defeat the Japs were blown away and only fought back until the 45th year. That is, the entire Japanese expanse turned out to be zilch, not under Midway, so somewhere in another place, sooner or later, the Americans would have laid shreds for them, the strength breaks the straw. In the same way, the existing aircraft carriers with battleships, bul-bul, and even if the Americans lost even more, they would still have built, and to the Japanese, a kirdyk.

    Regarding the interaction between US planes, the same pedivic writes:

    After analyzing the radio messages received by 07.00 about the course of the air attack on Midway, the American sailors calculated that the Japanese planes would return to their aircraft carriers at around 09.00. To attack the Japanese aircraft carriers when they receive and refuel aircraft, Springs ordered the immediate take-off of all available aircraft from the aircraft carriers. From the Hornet and Enterprise, 117 aircraft took off: 68 dive bombers, 29 torpedo bombers, 20 fighters. But having completed the reception of the first wave aircraft, the Japanese fleet changed course and headed to the northeast. As a result, when 35 dive bombers and 10 fighters from the Hornet aircraft carrier flew to the area where, according to the Americans, the Japanese fleet was supposed to be, he was not there and these planes went on the opposite course.


    And everything is logical, the intelligence breaks off all the time, they assumed that it would be so, but in the end the nifiga spun on and on. American awareness of Japanese plans should not be overestimated.
    1. +2
      23 January 2013 14: 25
      Quote: Avenger711
      the Japs were blown away and until the 45 year they only fought back. That is, the entire Japanese expanse turned out to be zilch, not under Midway, so somewhere in another place, sooner or later, the Americans would have laid shreds for them, the strength breaks the straw.

      C'mon - the Japanese conquered a huge empire in the cheapest way possible - they lost only three destroyers after the battle in the Java Sea (one was blown up by a mine, two sank submarines), 4 cruisers, two minzags and 6 destroyers were damaged - everyone entered again after repair in order!
      Well, and about exhausted - tell this to the veterans of Guadalcanal and Hiroo Onada personally (he is still alive), who surrendered on Lubang only in 1974. soldier
  11. Avenger711
    +1
    23 January 2013 15: 57
    The Japanese conquered a vast territory for one simple reason, they had more strength and a strategic initiative. Any operation must be considered starting from the balance of power. Naturally relatively small, poorly equipped and cut off from their bases, the Japanese, with the initiative, were able to easily grind. And the warriors from the allies, judging by the number of prisoners, were still those.

    Well, they took the US out of the game for the time being. What's next? Continental America remained invulnerable. The technical capabilities of Japan then, like China in the 1980s, only without a billion people. And the war of the 20th century is a conveyor belt, it is not enough to assemble an army, it must be constantly replenished with people and weapons. The heroism or luck of individual fighters does not decide here. Well, several battleships drowned in Pearl Harbor, the Americans built new ones. The Japanese lost 4 aircraft carriers, somewhere around 300-400 pilots, and that’s all, they couldn’t take any active actions.

    http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Военное_производство_во_время_Второй_мировой_войны

    Japan built 16 aircraft carriers, the United States 22 and another 141 escort. Well, even if 1 escort is equal to 4 ordinary ones, then we get another 38 estimated aircraft carriers., And the whole US produced 60 estimated aircraft carriers. That is, the advantage in aircraft carriers is almost 4-fold. The end, as they say, is a little predictable.

    The whole subsequent war, this tedious breakdown of the islands one after another.

    Actually, the entire Second World War is nothing more than an attempt by the weakest to move the then masters of the world, in the process having seized the resources of the USSR.
  12. 0
    23 January 2013 16: 15
    And what has continental America to do with it? Nobody was going to occupy it. Technological power - yes, that's cool. Human potential is wonderful. Then why did Russia lose the Russian-Japanese war with its population and resources? Let's take a purely technical side - remote bridgeheads and unreliable supply routes with low throughput. The Japanese captured the main thing - resources and profitable bridgeheads. To cut the long communications with the western coast of the United States, it was enough to use the tactics of "wolf packs" of submarines. Would have ruined a couple of convoys with American soldiers and the people of the democratic United States would have cried out in horror! Like, why do we need this war and all that. Perhaps the hippie trip to the White House could have taken place before! laughing The number of aircraft carriers has nothing to do with it. About the fighting qualities of the allies you yourself have already painted everything. good

    Quote: Avenger711
    Naturally relatively small, poorly equipped and cut off from their bases, the Japanese, with the initiative, were able to easily grind.

    It is now easy for us to reason. At that time, the fortress of Correchidor was considered impregnable. And Repals with the Prince of Wales were considered unsinkable. The Japanese also took risks and did not know about the fighting qualities of the allies.
    1. 8 company
      +3
      23 January 2013 16: 31
      Quote: Iraclius
      It’s easy for us to argue now. At that time, the Korrechidor fortress was considered impregnable. And Repals with the Prince of Wales were considered unsinkable. The Japanese also took risks and did not know about the fighting qualities of the allies.


      No one bothered the Japanese to realize that at least to maintain a position against the United States it was necessary to capture Hawaii. They didn’t even try to do it, instead they left the USA alone and began to march around the islands and Southeast Asia. It’s like poking a bear in a den and then starting next to the den to drive the squirrel out of the slingshot. So it was a pure gamble. Even dumber than the German attack on the USSR.
      1. +2
        23 January 2013 18: 34
        Quote: Company 8
        at least to maintain a position against the United States you need to capture Hawaii. They didn’t even try to do it, instead they left the USA alone and began to march around the islands and Southeast Asia.

        8 company, I was taught at school that Midway belongs to the western group of islands in the Hawaiian archipelago. As geography was explained to you, I don’t know. We consider the situation that under Midway, the Japanese Empire won and all 3 American aircraft carriers are lost. Now we take a compass, a card and consider - from Honolulu to San Francisco - 3870 km. From Midway Island to California - 5200 km, to Japan about 4100 km. From about. Midway to Honolulu - well, count yourself - you will be surprised. Do you think the Americans will have time to transfer reinforcements to Hawaii from the metropolis if Midway has fallen? wink

        ***
        Comrades! I am neutral towards the alternative story - I like to read with a pencil in my hands and lose the battle for one side or another. But when the booth begins with politics, ideologies, then I wash my hands. One can argue to the loss of pulse that America would crush small Japan by number. They would bomb all islands to the state of the lunar surface. But - if the Japanese had strengthened themselves on the entire defensive line of their empire, then, given the fact that the United States was forced to wage a war on two fronts and taking into account the presence of strategic initiative in the hands of Japan, this war would turn into a positional tyagomotin. Do not forget the ratio of attacking and defending sides - for the success of the first! Do not forget the huge distances to the United States and the absence (already) of its island bases. Strategic aviation will not fly! request
        Meanwhile, samurai shouting "Banzai!" launch thousands of balls with spores of anthrax, brucellosis and other nasty things - get, Yankees, goodies! And aircraft carrier submarines are already diving near San Francisco ...
        1. 8 company
          0
          23 January 2013 19: 05
          Quote: Iraclius
          And at this time samurai shouting "Banzai!


          You cannot deny a certain knowledge of military history, but you have serious problems with the ability to draw the right conclusions.
          The United States stamped aircraft carriers like sausages, in 1945 they had about 200 aircraft-carrying ships in service, the Japanese never dreamed of such economic power. The only oil supplier for Japan is Malaysia; it was not difficult to cut off supplies by sabotage and submarines. What nafig positional tyagomotin - after gaining superiority in the air, amers took offsets behind the island. The B-17 could be based in China and Southeast Asia, which was done. Japanese launched balloons, but achieved nothing. Avenger711 correctly explained everything to you, in principle.
        2. +1
          23 January 2013 20: 47
          But what kind of bog is it? The Lord is with you! they would have rolled out everything and everything that we saw
        3. Avenger711
          -1
          24 January 2013 00: 15
          You can transfer if the islands themselves hold on, although the Yankees were preparing for the loss of the islands, even on dollars they put special stamps on them so that if they seize these money supply, they would not be used to rob the United States.
      2. +1
        23 January 2013 20: 46
        they just started to bite and grab everything that was bad from the abundance of lacoma pieces
    2. Avenger711
      -1
      24 January 2013 00: 12
      If you destroyed 5% of the forces of the enemy, then why do you expect that you will not have to destroy the remaining 95%? I’m not very interested in the history of that war, but it turns out that the Japanese either hoped to conclude an honorable peace with the USA and sit on their islands. But the Yankees' FSW is much higher than 9000, and the United States would not have suffered such humiliation as the British had not suffered defeat. In the US, revenge for Pearl Harbor was enough. They had no accounts with the Germans. Or underestimated the enemy, although how I could do this I do not know.

      To cut the long communications with the western coast of the United States, it was enough to use the tactics of "wolf packs" of submarines. Would have ruined a couple of convoys with American soldiers and the people of the democratic United States would have cried out in horror!


      And they did not try to do this? Although it’s nonsense, because the United States is self-sufficient, it’ll save on extreme rubber, military transport is not as difficult to guard as thousands of ships with a variety of goods for small island but very great Britain.
      The losses of troops in vehicles and in battles during the great war are always hidden and in general ) came across on a tube.

      It is now easy for us to reason. At that time, the fortress of Correchidor was considered impregnable. And Repals with the Prince of Wales were considered unsinkable. The Japanese also took risks and did not know about the fighting qualities of the allies.


      Practice shows that the attacker, as a rule, wins. He plays according to his own rules, and the attacked one is imposed.
  13. +1
    23 January 2013 19: 28
    Simple arithmetic does not work here. They wouldn’t have stamped them in a day or a month, right? B-17 has a combat radius of 3200 km. It will not reach the metropolis. B-29 - 3400 km. China? Let them occasionally fly out of China and try to fly to the Islands. Let it go. Yes So how will the Americans attack the fortified, while the Americans are building their 200 aircraft carriers, bases? I recommend reading before the answer about the struggle of the Americans with the Rabaul fortress.
    in short, not convinced. No.

    PS Yes, you probably forgot that I already wrote in one of my first posts - item No. 3 in the plans of the Japanese said that after the capture of Father Midway a general battle will be imposed on US forces and they will, I repeat, forced to accept it with a predictable sad result for the USA. That's it, the US does not have a Navy in the Pacific! What, nafig, 200 aircraft carriers? In America, the panic would begin as soon as they found out that the strike force of Nagumo was moving towards San Francisco and they would all have fled to Canada right away! laughing
    1. 8 company
      -1
      23 January 2013 19: 37
      Quote: Iraclius
      the struggle of the Americans with the fortress of Rabaul.


      Better not to mention fortresses at all; the era of fortresses passed a couple of hundred years ago with the advent of powerful artillery. And as for the United States, I can say: in principle, in 1945 they could have rolled everything in bulk into the Stone Age. It's just that their economy is not built on a string of slaves, but on the development of markets, so they simply drove off with bombing Dresden and Hiroshima so that everyone remembered and did not rock the boat.
      1. 0
        23 January 2013 19: 49
        Quote: Company 8
        Better not to mention fortresses at all; the era of fortresses passed a couple of hundred years ago with the advent of powerful artillery.

        Uh ... You didn’t hear about Osovets, apparently. The third assault was 1915. They used heavy siege artillery and even chemical warfare agents. The Germans could not take the fortress. request If anything, the fortress was bombarded with artillery caliber in 305-mm. wink Well, that’s true, by the way.

        Quote: Company 8
        And as for the United States, I can say: in principle, in the 1945 year, they could have rolled everything in bulk into the Stone Age.

        Well, where did you get such a holy conviction in this? Share the source, finally! The practical application of the Douai doctrine by the Americans has confirmed that the country cannot be defeated by bombing alone. And even the massive bombardments of the doomed Tokyo, which simulated the consequences of future nuclear, showed that the city lives, fights, and factories continue to function. I do not understand your position!
        1. 8 company
          +1
          23 January 2013 21: 01
          Quote: Iraclius
          The Germans could not take the fortress


          That's right, they bypassed it, so you convincingly proved with this example the advantage of maneuverable tactics over the "fortress seat". Tell me more about the Maginot Line - to laugh cleanly.
          The Doe Doctrine has fully justified itself - what do you worry about it? - in any serious war air superiority is won, then massive airstrikes on strategic targets are applied, and then the brave guys appear on tanks and jeeps, and begin stripping and shmon wink
          1. +1
            23 January 2013 21: 23
            I, or rather, the Japanese, have proved the effectiveness of heavily fortified bases even in the conditions of World War II. They simply did not have time to complete the fortified perimeter. If they had time, then the Yankees would have pulled them from there. Are you still sure that Japan surrendered due to fear of atomic bombing? what

            Quote: Company 8
            You tell me more about the Maginot line - purely neighing.

            Let's laugh together. I also love humor. laughing
            for the most part, the Maginot line, as it was conceived by the creators in the 1920's, completed its main task, which consisted in limiting the scale of attacks on positions protected by the line. The main and high-quality part of the line was built before the 1936 year, when Belgium refused an allied pact with France, declaring neutrality, which forced the latter to hastily finish building the line along the Belgian border to the Atlantic Ocean. This new part of the line was built in a hurry and was not brought back to the previous level of protection. Therefore, when it comes to the breakthrough of the Maginot line, it refers to the breakthrough of new sections of the line built in the marshland, where the construction of underground structures was very difficult.

            What place to start laughing at?
            1. Avenger711
              -2
              24 January 2013 01: 24
              Japan capitulated thanks to them much faster, so even before November-December, according to Japanese estimates, it would twitch.

              You are not friends with strategy at all. Any fortified area, even such a perfect one as the Maginot line breaks through without any problems, which prevents it from being destroyed, they put a bolt on other objects and then they can carry them for months, like the same Brest Fortress, but individual points no longer play any role.

              The meaning of strengthening is exclusively in limiting the capabilities of the enemy and the expenditure by the enemy of time to overcome.
              1. +2
                21 October 2013 16: 10
                Quote: Avenger711
                You are not friends with strategy at all.

                But you, as you can see, are pros ...

                so even before November-December, according to Japanese estimates, it was twitching.

                Exactly, in Japanese.

                The meaning of strengthening is exclusively in limiting the capabilities of the enemy and the expenditure by the enemy of time to overcome.

                Which is its main task. As well as any other defense. You, as a strategist, should be aware of the following lines from the BUSV: "The task of defense is reduced to slowing down and stopping the offensive of the enemy's troops, wearing them out in defensive battles and creating favorable conditions for the offensive of our troops. Defense is a forced and temporary form of warfare. It is being actively pursued ... "and further in the text.
          2. +2
            21 October 2013 15: 56
            Quote: 8 company
            You tell me more about the Maginot line - purely neighing.

            So there were just no attacks on her. And the fact that the dull-headed French generals, who thought in terms of PMP, could not use the advantage of covering their immediate Franco-German border, this is their problem. As well as their complete military impotence, both strategically and tactically. Sometimes it seems to me that they would have lost the war with atomic weapons ...
            The Doe Doctrine has fully justified itself - what do you worry about it? - in any serious war air superiority is won, then massive airstrikes on strategic targets are applied, and then the brave guys appear on tanks and jeeps, and begin stripping and shmon

            Dear wiseacre, have you read Douai yourself? Well, at least his famous "Air Superiority"? This is where he writes about the brave guys in jeeps and tanks? So before you write any heresy, study the materiel. And do not attribute the works of the teretics of the General Staff of the Red Army and the Wehrmacht to the Italian artillery general: he was raving like Tukhachevsky in his fantasies.
      2. +2
        21 October 2013 15: 50
        Quote: 8 company
        And as for the United States, I can say: in principle, in the 1945 year, they could have rolled everything in bulk into the Stone Age.

        Crap one's pants. Loose stools.

        Many have tried. No one came out. Everybody died.
    2. Avenger711
      -1
      24 January 2013 01: 19
      In theory, the United States and so the fleet in 42 was not strong. The Japanese could not impose anything on the Americans, at a distance of 300-400 km from the American coast, any Japanese squadron would simply be destroyed by aircraft.

      The fortress can only delay and make the guns roll harder. As for Rabaul, he is only a small part of the global operation to capture New Guinea, then they simply put it on the base itself in fact. Who needs it there apart from communications. The technology of taking fortified areas in itself implies, first of all, their isolation, a typical example, the Battle of Berlin, where German divisions simply surrounded and bombarded with shells, and a city with a bunch of folk bridges was easily taken.
  14. 0
    23 January 2013 20: 04
    Since you are too lazy to read about the Rabaul fortress, then here's a copy-paste from the magazine:
    During the war in the Pacific Ocean between the Americans and the Japanese, who turned this paradise into an impregnable fortress of Rabaul and their largest base in the Pacific Ocean, fierce battles took place. Underground tunnels (almost 600 km), numerous bunkers, catacombs, artillery positions - are still preserved here in excellent condition. It was clear that the Japanese had been building for centuries.

    We visited one of the tunnels to shelter Japanese barges from air raids. It was an ingenious idea: on the shore there was a large crane that lifted barges from the water onto railway platforms that drove into a deep tunnel cut into the rock. Such a shelter housed up to five medium-sized barges. I must say that these barges are now in the tunnel, however, the bottom and part of the hull have decayed in a humid marine climate, but the entire “filling” has remained in place.

    Here you have the economic power of the USA! good
    1. Avenger711
      0
      24 January 2013 09: 12
      And all this didn’t help the Japanese at all. You could not even spend time on earthworks. Because the strategy is much more complicated than just taking out more cubic meters of soil and pouring more concrete.
  15. 0
    23 January 2013 20: 55
    about the fortress, you can remember how Rommel took Tobruk, and that the marshal's baton came to him literally on the wings of "pieces", so it's not an argument
    1. +1
      23 January 2013 21: 37
      Quote: tomket
      about the fortress you can remember how Rommel took Tobruk

      What is it for? Do you compare Tobruk with the Maginot and Rabaul line? belay
      1. +1
        23 January 2013 22: 21
        I give an example of how a fortress was bombed by aircraft, in addition, the Americans simply simply isolated such centers of resistance, and somehow they immediately became absolutely useless.
      2. Avenger711
        -1
        24 January 2013 01: 25
        Maginot Line, by the way, quickly and efficiently broke through.
  16. Edgar
    0
    23 January 2013 21: 11
    I agree with the author. especially at the expense of "fierce delirium" Pereselegin. When I read his book (with great difficulty, sometimes dying of laughter), the first thing I did was to see if he was the author of the script for the movie "Two Captains 2." very similar
  17. 0
    23 January 2013 21: 12
    The Japonians knew very well that for a long war, even with strong luck (and they were lucky as an adult), they simply did not have enough resources.
    1. +1
      23 January 2013 21: 30
      Iiiiii? Finish, finish the thought! wink

      ***
      What surprises me once again is how emotionally Russian people discuss a war that is alien to us, in general, in which our former and future enemies fought. Where is it from? Sympathy for the Japanese who were unlucky and admiration for their fighting spirit? Or the technology of the Americans? Or a latent desire to avenge the humiliation of our country after the collapse of the USSR, even in the alternative past? I do not know... what
  18. Kvr
    Kvr
    0
    23 January 2013 23: 24
    My question arises in connection with the alternative: why no one takes into account the USSR?
  19. -1
    24 January 2013 10: 07
    Andrei from Chelyabinsk
    Boris Yulin, this is most likely Sha-Ylin. He used to be in the Tsushima forums. Now I don’t know, I myself am very, very rarely there. But actually this is really a very strong historian. I had to argue with him in his youth. Although, of course, I do not consider it the ultimate truth, but for many moments he opened my eyes.
    In this case, I also disagree with him. There, also, a reconnaissance aircraft, in my opinion with Tone, did not fly out due to a breakdown just in the sector in which the Americans were. So the Japanese were really unlucky. True, this did not affect the outcome of the war much. The amers of the samurai would have crushed even without our help.
  20. +3
    24 January 2013 14: 24
    Although, in general, I agree with the author of the material that "lucky is the one" who is "lucky", in fairness I will note that without any kind of accidents (both large and small) no one can do, even meticulously planned mission ...
    As for the alternative history itself, as such ... Although I am a historian by education, and like any historian I do not accept the subjunctive moods and any kind of "if", I do not see anything wrong with the fact that it is possible to calculate the possible options for the development of this or another separate (!!!) event based on real and documented data. This is normal. And in essence, this is a kind of analysis of the event. Often this helps to a large extent to restore the picture of what happened in a more complete and voluminous way ...
    And now to build a model of global development of events based on calculations of local events, then this is already real fantasy. To say the department of white science ...
  21. +1
    25 January 2013 08: 11
    article plus, very interesting and informative

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar people (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned), Kirill Budanov (included to the Rosfinmonitoring list of terrorists and extremists)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev Lev; Ponomarev Ilya; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; Mikhail Kasyanov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"