Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 1 battles to post in this section.
The_EURL_Guy

Armchair Admirals: the Battle of Savo Island

11 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[ICLAN]
Players
16 posts
8,272 battles

So, we'll have a lesson in naval history with a "marketing and sales manager"...

 

Nevertheless I'm glad you give attention to the major naval battles, discussing strategies and considering even alternate history. Ambitious objective!

I'm sincerely looking forward to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[GN0ME]
Players
3 posts
3,149 battles

Is it still possible to enter questions?
The page says submissions close by 20/7 *which is last month*

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[VL-NL]
[VL-NL]
Alpha Tester, Players, In AlfaTesters
100 posts
20,153 battles

The worst defeat the Us had. Briljant Jananese tactics. End ofc the long lance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[G-R-N]
Players
92 posts
33,133 battles

A Japanese victory only on paper; in reality it was a reflection of what happens when you have expertly trained seamen to fight a tactical battle for which your strategy is inept. The real story of the Savo island is the familiar one, of chance and training aiding the attacking Japanese offering them a superior tactical position which is then blown away by an inept strategy or commander on the spot. The story is the same, whether it is Pearl Harbour, Savo Island, Konandorski islands, Off Samar etc; in each case the otherwise suicidal Japanese simply placed so much value at preserving the Emperor's ships and avoiding any kind of material risk of the Emperor's portrait going down with the ship (the only thing they ever considered worth saving from a sinking ship) that they never pushed for strategic victory the moment a minor tactical one was achieved. That is why Savo is a minor tactical victory that truly reflects why the Japanese Navy was so inept that it would never win a war. A similar emphasis on minor tactical achievements at the expense of the strategic picture can be seen on so many fronts as far as the IJN is concerned: the inept use of submarines as battleship hunters, the failure to build a proper training regime out of their veteran pilots, the waste of their two large battleships waiting in a totally passive role till they became irrelevant and on and on and on. Savo is a reflection of naval incompetence like no other: to destroy totally the enemy force and to then fail to achieve your strategic objective takes some beating as far as military ineptness is concerned. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[VL-NL]
[VL-NL]
Alpha Tester, Players, In AlfaTesters
100 posts
20,153 battles

 

3 hours ago, _Mad_Thom_ said:

Can't stomach Drachinifel. I won't be watching.

If i want to know something  about WW2 i look  it up  in a "neutral" book or vidio and not the americanized versions of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ADML]
Beta Tester
85 posts
21,253 battles

I am sure it would be a superb night-time operation Tier VII or VIII  to build on WORLD OF WARSHIPS, with "axis" (this time) DDs and CAs, a kind of Cherry Blossom inverted (especially with NO CVs involved).
Oh, wait...
 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[G-R-N]
Players
92 posts
33,133 battles
9 hours ago, Van_Bazel said:

The worst defeat the Us had. Briljant Jananese tactics. End ofc the long lance.

AT the same time a totally inept Japanese operation, typical of just about every IJN action: focus on tactics  and inept on strategy( eg Pearl Harbour, Savo Island, Konandorski islands, Off Samar etc). To destroy totally the enemy force and to then fail to achieve your strategic objective takes some beating as far as military ineptness is concerned. Nothing brilliant about it at all. And a few weeks later the smart US tactics and strategy will totally obliterate the Japanese forces in the area and spell the beginning of the end of the Japanese Navy. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
392 posts
On 8/22/2020 at 10:39 AM, ATH67 said:

 Japanese simply placed so much value at preserving the Emperor's ships and avoiding any kind of material risk of the Emperor's portrait going down with the ship (the only thing they ever considered worth saving from a sinking ship) that they never pushed for strategic victory the moment a minor tactical one was achieved.

This is because of the Kantai Kessen, Japan doctrine was to achieve another Battle of Tsushima against the US fleet that made then incredible timid and unwilling to risk their surface ships even when it was entirely obvious there was no longer any point (Leyte Gulf) to preserved their strength for a battle that would never come.

 

Also in respects to Pearl Harbour, its obvious that a 3rd wave or even focusing on fuel depots and repair yards would had dealt a far heavier blow to the US Navy but the IJN was also pressed for time as well fuel considerations and did not had the entire picture as we have, such decisions are debatable and the decision was simply incorrect in hindsight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×