38 thoughts on “Midway”

  1. Midway was an awesome confluence of limited power and amazing intelligence on the whereabouts of the enemy. The carriers Enterprise, Yorktown, and Hornet will forever be remembered as the tipping point of naval power.

    Watch the movie Midway, it has its hokum in it but it has amazing footage of the battle that day. I watched it when it came out in the summer of 1977 in Sensoround (the subwoofer sound system of the day) and it literally shook the theater that we were in.

    The Starship Enterprise was very aptly named…..

    1. A lot of the footage used in that movie was stock film shot later in the war. For example, many of the fighter plane shots show the F6F Hellcat which wasn’t in action at Midway. I’ve seen those same shots in countless WWII in the Pacific shows. As bad as CGI is, it allows movie directors to use the correct planes in their movies (if they choose to do so).

      Midway was a great victory and the turning point of the Pacific war. Intelligence and code breaking played huge roles. At that point in the war, most of the men in combat were those inducted or drafted before Pearl Harbor. They were inexperienced and still learning the hard lessons of war against an opponent who’d been fighting for 10 years in China. Many of the US weapons were inferior to their Japanese counterparts. One example was how the torpedo, fighter and dive bomber squadrons were separated. The goal was to have a coordinated attack to split the Japanese fighter and AA defenses. The torpedo bombers were the first to find the Japanese and they attacked without fighter cover and no dive bombers. All of the Japanese antiaircraft defenses were concentrated against the slow flying torpedo bombers. Torpedo Squadron 6 went in and only one man (Ensign George Gay*) survived the attack. Their suicidal attack drew off the Japanese fighter cover and allowed the dive bombers to attack unhindered, resulting in the loss of 3 Japanese carriers in a matter of minutes.

      *I met George Gay at Oshhosk in 1981. He was selling his book and I kick myself for not buying a copy. I asked him if any of his squadron’s planes got off a torpedo during the attack. He said some did but they failed to detonate. It turns out that the standard Navy torpedos in service at the time had a problem with the detonators very frequently failing to work. This affected the submarine torpedos most of all but apparently the aerial torpedos as well. The Navy bureaucracy refused to admit there was a problem for the longest time and it wasn’t fixed until early 1942.

        1. Neat pic, Dennis. Never saw that one before.

          It does raise one little-appreciated point about the battles in the Pacific, namely the vast difference in damage control capability between the USN and IJN. In the case of the IJN carriers at Midway, the initial bomb hits didn’t uniformly result in immediate devastating damage. The Japanese carriers, though, had no inert gas purge systems for the avgas lines in their carriers and no system of check and limit valving to compensate for breaks due to battle damage. The U.S. dive bombing hits broke the avgas mains, the fuel spilled out uncontrollably and vaporized into the enclosed spaces of the ships then blew up all at once and gutted them a few minutes after the initial hits. Defensive and damage-palliative engineering was apparently considered contrary to the Bushido ethic of ceaseless attack and suicidal bravado. The lack of pilot protection armor and self-sealing fuel tanks on Japanese aircraft is another better-known example.

          In contrast, the Japanese “sunk” the Yorktown three times, but she only slid beneath the waves the last time. The IJN thought she was deep-sixed at Coral Sea, but the shipwrights at Pearl famously had her ready to head for Midway three days after her bedraggled return. The Japanese “sunk” the Yorktown again at Midway after the initial three IJN carriers were hit, but her damage control parties had her righted, patched, fire-suppressed and operational within an hour. The next wave of Japanese attackers thought she was the Enterprise and “sank” her again. The reports of this third “sinking” might have been greatly exaggerated too except for some decisive assistance rendered by an IJN submarine. The much-abused Yorktown finally went down.

          American warships pretty uniformly required “more killing” than their Japanese peers in every naval engagement of the Pacific war. The Essex-class fleet carrier Franklin had most of her flight deck blown off and nearly 800 of her crew killed off Honshu, but stayed afloat and made it back to port under her own steam.

          1. Yea, that was a pretty amazing image and I think that you are spot on regarding the relative survivability. Just look at what the big E went through and how much it took to take down the Yorktown. I really cannot understand why CV-6 was not preserved for posterity.

          2. The Japanese situation was made worse at Midway because the dive bombers caught them refueling and rearming on the decks. Having fuel and ordance going off on deck is a very bad thing, as experienced on the USS Forresthal in the 1960s. In addition, their fighters had been drawn away to go after the torpedo bombers, giving the dive bombers a relatively safe passage.

            The American carriers back then had wooden flight decks, making them more vulnerable to bombs and later Kamakazis. The steel decks on the British carriers were much more resistant to damage but from what I’ve read, they couldn’t carry as many planes.

          3. Dick,
            I recall as an old sailor, that back when I was a newly about to be minted sailor, they taught us the difference in the USN and IJN was that WE weren’t trained how Glorious it was to DIE for anyone of anything.

            I don’t think the IJN D/C Parties gave up or ever quit trying to save their ships. But it’s a different mind set, fighting to survive and living to fight another day, vs being happy to die for the Emperor and Imperial Nippon!

            Plus, I think the IJN was so sure that no one could ever challenge them on the high seas, that they just didn’t see the need for the level of protection that we use(d).

      2. Speaking of the Hellcat, ALL the carriers shown in that movie were Essex class carriers. Usually, post-50s modernization. Even the Japanese carriers were played by Essex ships.

        The Enterprise (CV-6) does make an uncredited appearance in an old, color Errol Flynn (?) navy movie. At the end of the film Flynn and the rest of the cast are on parade on North Island NAS San Diego when an obviously Yorktown class carrier passes by. Considering when the film was made, it could only have been the Enterprise.

        1. Erroll Flynn, “Dive Bomber”. Came out earlier than I thought but still CV-6 is the featured carrier.

          1. There is a movie from the 1930’s that features the Enterprise. I forget the name but the carrier was ferrying planes from the west coast to Central America.

        2. In every carrier battle we fought in the Pacific, the same Hellcat pilot crashed on landing and ripped his plane in half right behind the cockpit. Every single battle. Did they have a nickname for him? “… and Lieutenant Crash, we need you to run a fighter sweep down the slot and then smack into the bridge again.”

    2. History.com has a documentary called ‘Battle 360’. It’s about the Enterprise and uses CG animation to recreate the battles she endured. The full episodes are out on Netflix on-demand. It was after watching that series that I learned that Enterprise was struck by a Kamikaze during the Okinawa campaign. The explosion launched the forward elevator door 700 feet into the air.

      Many people don’t realize that Pearl Harbor was but one naval strike amongst many by the Japanese. The Japanese true aim was to invade Australia. Their goal was to make South East Asia for the Asians. The Americans suffered defeat after defeat as the Japanese took control of the waters between Northern Australia, Java, and Timor. It doesn’t really get reported much now days. But there was actually a great deal of fear of the Japanese Navy prior to Midway as they were literally an unstoppable force.

  2. “That was back in the olden days, when we were allowed to win wars”

    Who has a good plan for winning any of the wars (however you define them) that we are currently in? Choose a war. Take your pick: wars in name only like the War on Drugs, or shooting wars like the War in Afghanistan and Pakistan, or even nebulous (I’d say bogus) ideas like the War on Radical Islam, etc) and tell me who has a good plan for winning it.

    But the landscape completely devoid of winning. Kosovo was a war we definitively won. Led by a Democrat. Libya was a war we definitively won, led by a Democrat, although the French might say that it was only led in the USA by a Democrat. And of course, on the Republican side of the ledger, back in the 1980s, there were small conflicts in Grenada and Panama. I’m not sure when you think the old days ended. Just before Korea, I suppose.

    2. About those olden days: The Treaty of Ghent shows that the Democratic-Republicans weren’t allowed to win wars 200 years ago.

      Seriously: I think it is silly to talk about political parties, when winning really just comes down to having the right enemies.

      1. Bob,
        that’s got to be THE dumbest thing I ever heard about war. As if WE, or any country can pick and choose who hates them or who attacks them. Are you truly that simple?

        It ain’t our enemies who keep us from winning, it’s our leaders Bob.

        The problem we, as a country have had since August of 1945, is that our leaders, and I use that term very loosely, our leaders do not want anyone, anywhere to think badly of us. Which is THE dumbest thing to worry about when speaking of your enemies or your friends and acquaintances for that matter either.

        When Truman green lit the atom bomb attacks on Japan, I can guarantee you that his least thought was, “…gee I wonder what the survivors will think of us, and what about the Canadians or Mexicans! Maybe I ought to wait a day or two…”.

        The other foolish thing is this idea that there are targets and NON-targets in countries controlled by your enemies Bob, which is another thing we do wrong.

        “…well Mr. President, General Whoshotjohn says we’ve got the leaders of every Radical Muslim group from ALL over the world, sitting down to plot a huge strike as us, maybe 300 or 400 of their top dogs. BUUUUttttt, they’re meeting at the Imam Reza Mosque in Iran. We can kill them all with just one cruise missile. Buuuttt, our lawyers and the State Department thinks that might make a lot of their followers really pissed off! Think of the outrage sir, think of world opinion if we kill that many people in the middle of an Iranian city. Our State Dept lawyers think it’s a bad idea to violate their air space with a military strike. Muslims worldwide would be really angry…”

        Seriously?

        As IF they were on the FENCE on 9/11, while they were dancing in the STREETS of the M.E., while 3 THOUSAND people in NYC died a fiery death!? When you cut the head off of a snake Bob, you don’t just walk away from the tail flopping around! You watch it until it’s dead too! And the tail always dies without a head Bob, it never regrows a head and starts crawling again. It hasn’t that ability.

        And if we kill the thinking, plotting, planning heads, Achmed the goatherd can’t just fill the void, simply because he agreed with bin Laden that You and I suck Bob. Achmed hasn’t the skill set or ability, and given the love many of his totalitarian leaders have for edge-a-muh-cation of their followers, Achmed ain’t likely to become very smart any time soon either.

        So let him be mad. He’s got goats to kick to work it off!

        Bob, as an old Cold Warrior and reader of world history, I think there are only two ‘good’ or ‘right’ enemies. Ones who are too damned scared to START anything in the first place, like the old Soviet Union was for years. And the other, is past enemies, who have seen the error of their ways, and who would rather sell you cars, watches, TVs and cars than try to start another war, like Germany and Japan are to this day.

        Here’s how I get my ‘crazy’ ideas about wars, warriors, and enemies, so you’ll know Bob. I come from 4 generations of men who have worn American military uniforms Bob, my sons make the 5th, hopefully my grandsons will make it a 6th. And it’s not OUR lack of efforts that keeps us from winning wars in places like Viet Nam, Korea, Iraq or Afghanistan. It’s the guys who SET our orders Bob. Guys more worried about re-elections and what the enemy or historians will think of them later.

        What a horrible, wasteful, stupid way to protect US from our enemies.

        I’m guessing Bob that you are yet another American male with not one second of time in a uniform who thinks you don’t have to be on the field to be a great, profound and efficient arm chair quarterback.

        You just have to know there’s a ‘game’ going to be played periodically, right?

    3. Without defining clear objectives how can you say you won or lost a war? FDR after Pearl Harbor basically said the US would accept nothing less than the unconditional surrender of Japan. He said the objective or the war in one sentence. Try getting a modern leader to establish an objective like that.

      There are also other differences. In that case it was obvious to anyone that the war was necessary since it was about protecting US territory and assets from foreign aggression.

      Today’s wars (with the exception of the Afghan war) were much less clear cut. Even the Afghan war has lost interest after Bin Laden was killed (during Obama’s presidency I might add).

      1. Defining the objectives is not only important militarily but politically. Our objectives changed over time in Iraq and Afghanistan and they certainly haven’t been expressed clearly to the American people. But the left has set a standard that is impossible to meet in reality for determining if we win/won either war and any time we get close they move the goal posts further back.

      2. Personally I like the phrase, “Stomp them into a mud hole and walk them dry.”

        But few modern leaders are as quick with words as am I.

    4. I wonder how the people being oppressed by Islamists in Libya view our grand victory. We helped remove a dictator who was moving away from his support of terrorism and quest for nukes, although he treated.his people like shit. The rebels were every bit as bad in terms of the treatment of their fellow humans as moomar.

      Sure we kicked some butt but the aftermath is hardly a victory for American interests, which I guess many on the left view as a good.thing.

    5. Kosovo and Libya are basically examples of:
      “We’ll use air power to kill some people, but we don’t give a shit what kind of hellhole develops afterward.”

      Slave markets protected by US forces aren’t my idea of “winning” anything.

      1. I particularly disagree with your characterization of Kosovo after US involvement (and I don’t agree with you and Wodun about Libya’s post-revolution state of affairs either), but since Rand was talking about winning WWII, I’ll bring it back to WWII: consider what did happen after we won WWII:
        It wasn’t just that half of Europe was conquered by our fomer ally, the USSR. After we won against Japan, te USA propped up and maintained the Japanese colonial government in South Korea, which literally ran slave camps. That probably doesn’t jive with your idea of winning either, but it is just a footnote in history now. There are other such footnotes as well, such as the displacement of Germans from their homes simply because of their nationality, etc. Some of our win was pretty ugly. (But of course I sure am glad it was us who won.)

        1. Please give us your take on the Wikipedia article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morgenthau_Plan and the claim “Conditions in Germany reached their lowest point in 1947. Living conditions were considered worse in 1947 than in 1945 or 1946. At an average ration of 1040 calories a day, malnutrition was at its worst stage in post-war Germany. Herbert Hoover asserted that this amount of rations was hardly more than the amount which caused thousands in the Nazi concentration camps to die from starvation.[55]”

          I am not being snarky here. My father lived in an Allied-run camp in Germany during that period, but as an ethnic-Serb refugee from the wartime Croatian state, he may have held a privileged position relative to the civilian population with regard to American occupiers. Mom, a German-speaking refugee from Serbia spent that time in Austria, until shortly before the end of the war in a German-run camp, after that and after the war among the civilian Austrian population. Many of Mom’s kinsfolk from Serbia migrated to Germany.

          I have not heard “this take” from them although there were many other accounts of privation during the war years proper. A family member, multi-generational American but with relatives in Germany in the 1945-47 time frame did speak of “sending aid” to the relatives in some manner.

          Any insight on this is of great personal interest.

        2. Bob-1: We won in Kosovo and Libya. Unfortunately, we were the Bad Guys in both wars — and we’ll pay for being on the wrong side.

          The last “war” in which were were unequivocally the Good Guys was Gulf War I, which we won. Who was C-In-C then?

          Our family is a military family since ‘way back. I myself am a military veteran (in fact, I was there the last time we bombed Libya, in April of ’86). I have no problem with fighting a just war, provided Congress declares war. I have no problem with honest imperialism, provided we annex the country we invade, exploit it, and indoctrinate its population into our way of thinking.

          But what we do now isn’t war (no Congressional declaration) . It isn’t empire-building (no conquest, exploitation, or indoctrination.) It’s something else, and I say to hell with it.

          I’d die for the America of 1929 or 1939. Hell, I’d even die for the America of 1949 or 1959. But for what we are today? My family is sitting any future wars out. I’m not going to advise my son to put his white ass on the line to defend the whatever-you-call-it we have in place of the America that used to exist.

          I forget — which war did you attend?

          1. Yes, we won the “war” in Libya. We also won the war in Iraq and in Afghanistan.

            Winning the peace in any of those three may be an entirely different thing however.

          2. A big part of the problem is that we’re fighting in hell holes. We should resolve to quit fighting wars in places like Libya and Afghanistan and instead fight in places like Sweden or Germany. We certainly have the airlift capacity to fly our opponents to such locales.

            As part of the airlift arrangment both sides can agree to fight 9 to 5 Monday through Friday and take the weekends off, and after the fighting is over for the day civilians will come out and pick up the trash.

            Instead we’re always stuck in beerless deserts and malaria infested swamps.

          3. As part of the airlift arrangment both sides can agree to fight 9 to 5 Monday through Friday and take the weekends off, and after the fighting is over for the day civilians will come out and pick up the trash.

            “So…it’s agreed that Friday, the 28th, you surrender…that’s three weeks from tomorrow…we can fix the details later…”
            “No, no no…you surrender.”
            “With respect, Sultan, we’ve been through this — you surrender.”
            “But we’re winning!”
            “We surrendered last time.”
            “So?”
            “…so now it’s your turn.”
            “Oh.”

        3. Yeah, yeah, Bob-1, we suck worse that the Japanese and the Nazis, I know…

          Get over it, will you?

          1. ????!!!

            I think you didn’t understand what I was saying. I’m disputing Al’s notion that things are so horrible in Kosovo, but even if they are, it doesn’t negate our win as Al seems to think it does, and similarly our win over Japan and Germany wasn’t negated by any post-conflict bungling. The USA may have managed the post-conflict in Japan and Germany better than any winner in history, but it wasn’t perfect. There is nothing for me to get over.

  3. The Battle of Midway was fought without first having done an Environmental Impact Statement? Outrageous!

    I intend to go to Lisa Jackson (Lisa P. Jackson) first thing tomorrow and register a complaint! I think the Empire of Japan just might be entitled to a rematch…

  4. Ken: If you’re calling me a liar, please do so openly. I detest Facebook-style mincing about.

    If I’m mistaken in apprehending the intent of your reply, you have my apologies.

    1. 99% certain that was not his goal. Were I to riff on where I think he went, I’d invoke Lord Acton’s rule even though AFAICT, American Imperialism > English Imperialism >> all the empires before it…

    2. Sorry for the misunderstanding B. Lewis. My position is that imperialism itself would be an example of honesty. For example, I think it’s ridiculous that Israel gives back territory won by war; especially since they were attacked.

      I think it’s the economic principle. The winner should get the spoils rather than propping up the loser to continue their loser ways.

      B Lewis, I sincerely apologize for be ambiguous.

      Thank you Titus. You are a friend indeed. …and correct that it was not my goal.

      1. So I am not accused of being one sided: If America ultimately loses to the imperialism of others… We deserve it… for allowing ourselves to have lost what we once were (mainly ideologically.)

        Conflicts will always exist. It’s foolish to think the players will remain the same.

        I believe in “We win, they lose” every time or we should just pack up and quit now.

          1. If you knew me personally, you might wish to reconsider your characterization of me as a “good guy”. In real life, I’m afraid I’m pretty much an asshole. Still, I appreciate your kind words. Please consider the compliment returned.

            As for choosing one’s words carefully: Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, among whom I am foremost of all. Thanks for your reply.

Comments are closed.