Harbor raids - A true story?

[odjig292]

There's a thread below that talks about harbor raids in SH4. In the fall of 1942, a US submarine called at Esquimalt, the Canadian naval base near Victoria and tied up alongside the ship where my father was XO. His ship had been part of the joint US-Canadian task force patrols to Dutch Harbor after the Japanese invaded Attu and Kiska. Canadian ships have a "wet" wardroom and he welcomed the sub captain and officers to Canada. After several rounds, they offered him a tour for me. I was 8 at the time. The crew couldn't have been nicer and gave me a full tour, including a look through the periscope. They invited me for lunch and served ham and pineapple. Meat was rationed during the war and no one saw pineapple. They even gave me seconds so this in itself was a major treat. Over lunch they told me how they had spent the day on the bottom of a Japanese harbor and could see the race course through the periscope, so spent the afternoon betting among themselves on the races. I was sworn to secrecy about this story. By this time my eyes must have been the size of saucers. It is only in later years that I wondered if it was true. I have no recollection as to the name of the submarine but have never seen reference to anything like it in any of the histories of US submarines. Has anyone ever run across a story like this?

[Ducimus]

Harbor raids in the pacifc, in general, are true. Many reported incidents, (and photo's to back them up). In the altantic, other then scapa flow, harbor raids are little more then fiction.

[Mush Martin]

Hi Odjig were you aboard HMCS Prince david

there is a tale of a us submarine that watched the
racetrack through the periscope.

Part of what they told you is true part is not.

According to Adm Charles Lockwood in his book
"Sink em all" the sub did sit there and see the racetrack
however no races were being run at the time.

Ill try to find the name of the sub.

[Lafferty]

Yeah i have heard many stories about Harbor Raids. So i know for sure that they happened.

[AVGWarhawk]

Read up on the USS Wahoo. Going into harbors was not an issue and Mush Morton made many harbor raids.

[nematode]

The story that you heard was a sub legend, documented in Clay Blair's Silent Victory. After what was thought at the time to be a record-setting patrol by Burt Klakring in USS Guardfish, the USN held a press conference, rare for the sub service, to give newspaper reporters some morale building stuff to write about for the folks back home. The reporters were shown a chart, and on the chart was a notation for "race track". A reporter asked about it, and Klakring, having some fun with the press, said that the crew placed bets on the ponies while watching the races. While it's true that Guardfish operated very close to the coast of Honshu, it was just a story, but it made for a great one, and newspapers all over America ran it.

As for harbor raids, there's some sub legend in that too. There were numerous cases of US subs making attacks on Japanese shipping at anchor. Examples of US attacks are Mush at Wewak, Street at Cheju-Do, and the various attacks on Matsuwa in the Kuriles.

But, the places chosen for attacks weren't harbors in the sense that people in the US and Europe think of a harbor as, like New York harbor or San Francisco Bay. Rather, these were anchorages that were open to the sea, where the trick was to avoid uncharted shallows and enemy defenses and deal with in-shore currents to come close enough to achieve a firing position on ships anchored next to shore, then get away alive....but not, like Prien at Scapa Flow, sailing miles up a narrow channel to hit a ship in a harbor.

SH4 gives one the impression that US subs snuck up miles of estuary deep into Japanese harbors to pick off ships at the dock, like in Tokyo Bay or the Inland Sea, and nothing like that ever happened. But, it makes for a great story.

[odjig292]

Mush, how the heck did you know it was HMCS Prince David? You know your history. Yes, it was the PD. My father was XO for the Aleutians Campaign and then took over as CO and took it through the D-Day, Southern France and Greece invasions.

I don't think I have read Lockwood's book. I'll get it from the local naval museum library. The fact that the sub saw the racetrack is close enough. They probably enjoyed having a gullible kid as an audience. but it sure made my day. Thanks for the confirmation that the story had some truth.

[Ducimus]

SH4 gives one the impression that US subs snuck up miles of estuary deep into Japanese harbors to pick off ships at the dock, like in Tokyo Bay or the Inland Sea, and nothing like that ever happened.

My world geography's a little rusty, where was this again? Granted its not sinking ships, but the location of this foto is very telling.
http://www.ducimus.net/sh4/release/fuji.jpg


I particuarlly loved this pictures taken by the Seawolf:
http://www.navsource.org/archives/08/0819705.jpg
http://www.navsource.org/archives/08/0819706.jpg

(navsources doesnt like picture linking, so heres the orginal page)
http://www.navsource.org/archives/08/08197.htm
"Seen by Seawolf (SS-197) at Davao Gulf-Sagami Maru in Talomo Bay. Periscope snapshot shows jungly shoreline; camouflaged ship loading hemp. Then she got a load of - fish from "Fearless Freddie" Warder."

[Mush Martin]

SH4 gives one the impression that US subs snuck up miles of estuary deep into Japanese harbors to pick off ships at the dock, like in Tokyo Bay or the Inland Sea, and nothing like that ever happened.
My world geography's a little rusty, where was this again? Granted its not sinking ships, but the location of this foto is very telling.
http://www.ducimus.net/sh4/release/fuji.jpg


I particuarlly loved this pictures taken by the Seawolf:
http://www.navsource.org/archives/08/0819705.jpg
http://www.navsource.org/archives/08/0819706.jpg

(navsources doesnt like picture linking, so heres the orginal page)
http://www.navsource.org/archives/08/08197.htm
"Seen by Seawolf (SS-197) at Davao Gulf-Sagami Maru in Talomo Bay. Periscope snapshot shows jungly shoreline; camouflaged ship loading hemp. Then she got a load of - fish from "Fearless Freddie" Warder."


:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

[Mush Martin]

The Whole history of Submarine and ASW I am into
but the RCN Role in WWII has been part of my obsession
with the Battle of the atlantic as well as my seeming
all consuming obsession with River Class Frigates.

MM

[Mush Martin]

A shot in the Dark I know this isnt right but im out of time.

JACKSON, Thomas James, Paymaster Lieutenant - Mention in Despatches - RCNVR - Awarded as per London Gazette of 1 January 1945 (no Canada Gazette).
Home: Toronto, Ontario.
JACKSON. Thomas James, 0-36050, Paym/Lt(Temp) [1.3.42]
RCNVR A/LCdr(Temp) [1.1.43]
HMCS PRINCE DAVID (F89) amc, (15.8.43-?) MID~[1.1.45]
Paym/LCdr(Temp) [1.1.44]
HMCS PEREGRINE, Accounts, (1.10.44-?)
A/Cdr(S)(Temp) [1.1.45]
HMCS PEREGRINE, Supply Officer, (26.5.45-?)
Cdr(S) [1.1.46] RCN(R)
HMCS DISCOVERY, Vancouver Naval Division, SupO, (25.3.46-?)
Demobilized [8.7.46]
"For gallantry or outstanding service in the face of the enemy or for zeal, patience and cheerfulness in dangerous waters and for setting an example of wholehearted devotion to duty, upholding the high traditions of the Royal Canadian Navy." New Years List (Admiralty) A.F.O. 239/45.

[odjig292]

I knew Jackson well. Not only was he paymaster of the PD, but he was Manager of the Badminton & Racquet Club in Toronto for many years after the war where I was a member. He was one of the officers that told me about the PD's two years in Europe. Father never talked about the war.

[SteamWake]

SH4 gives one the impression that US subs snuck up miles of estuary deep into Japanese harbors to pick off ships at the dock, like in Tokyo Bay or the Inland Sea, and nothing like that ever happened.

My world geography's a little rusty, where was this again? Granted its not sinking ships, but the location of this foto is very telling.
http://www.ducimus.net/sh4/release/fuji.jpg


I particuarlly loved this pictures taken by the Seawolf:
http://www.navsource.org/archives/08/0819705.jpg
http://www.navsource.org/archives/08/0819706.jpg

(navsources doesnt like picture linking, so heres the orginal page)
http://www.navsource.org/archives/08/08197.htm
"Seen by Seawolf (SS-197) at Davao Gulf-Sagami Maru in Talomo Bay. Periscope snapshot shows jungly shoreline; camouflaged ship loading hemp. Then she got a load of - fish from "Fearless Freddie" Warder."

Are you implying that someone sunk Mount Fuji ? :rock:

[nematode]

SH4 gives one the impression that US subs snuck up miles of estuary deep into Japanese harbors to pick off ships at the dock, like in Tokyo Bay or the Inland Sea, and nothing like that ever happened.

My world geography's a little rusty, where was this again? Granted its not sinking ships, but the location of this foto is very telling.

I don't know where the sub was when that photo of Mt Fuji was taken, and if you do, please post that info. If that info isn't known, it could very easily have been taken from an area of open ocean, since Mt Fuji can be seen from Suruga Bay and Sagami Bay, which are huge, open areas. US subs definitely did enter Sagami Bay, but it's not a harbor.

"Seen by Seawolf (SS-197) at Davao Gulf-Sagami Maru in Talomo Bay. Periscope snapshot shows jungly shoreline; camouflaged ship loading hemp. Then she got a load of - fish from "Fearless Freddie" Warder."

The Gulf of Davao is also huge and it's deep too, 33 miles wide at its entrance, and Talomo Bay is 12 miles wide. Again, these are open areas, Warder didn't penetrate up a narrow channel to get there. Sagami Maru wasn't the only ship US subs sank in the Gulf of Davao, either.

But not for a moment, not for a picosecond, am I suggesting that those guys didn't have balls of steel to do what they did. Part of the history is that the successful US sub skippers combined aggressiveness with calculated risktaking, not rashness, and that can be seen in an examination of the places that they chose to make their attacks.

Ducimus, if you are interested in seeing how US subs operated against anchorages, not harbors, open up Google Earth and visit these coordinates.

Wewak 3-33S, 143-38E
Matsuwa 48-2N, 153-19E
Cheju-Do 33-25N, 126-15E
Talomo Bay 7-1N, 125-33E
Sagami Bay 35-8N, 139-23E

Edit: That wasn't the first time Fearless Freddy Warder shot at something next to the shore. On Apr 1 1942 he put the light cruiser Naka out of action for about six months at Christmas Island at 10-25S, 105-39E. That's at Flying Fish Cove, where merchant ships would come to load phosphates. Again, an anchorage, not a harbor.

[TheSatyr]

Mount Fuji is bugged and takes 12 torps to sink....:rotfl:

[tater]

A certain mod ducimus is familiar with has transient traffic at anchor at Wewak ;) Try there.

tater

[Ducimus]

Photo was taken by the USS trigger.

At this point all i see is someone hyping uboats ( as if they needed more hype) and downplaying the accomplishments of US subs by emphasizing Gunther Priens penetration of Skapa flow, and minimalizing the areas US subs penetrated. You have a picture of a ship, at anchor with the F'ing jungle behind it being torpedod, for christ sakes. For all intents in purposes, its a damn harbor, SHips go their, they lower their anchors, and load or unload freight.

And regardless of how you want to define what a damn harbor is, fact remains, that "harbor raiding" however you want to define it, was predominatly a pacific theater activty if one was to compare sub theaters. I dont recall of hearing stories of german uboats accidently torpedoing piers and sinking busses or cranes.
http://www.bowfin.org/website/bowfin/bowfin_history/patrol_summary/images/BFlag.JPG <-- lower right hand corner

In sum...... whatever.

Yes im pissed off today, for reasons not related to SH4, but im all to eager to vent it seems.

[nematode]

At this point all i see is someone hyping uboats ( as if they needed more hype) and downplaying the accomplishments of US subs

As far as hyping the Uboats and knocking the USA, that didn't come from me, those are your assumptions.

You probably don't know anything about me, which isn't surprising with my approx 40 post count. Maybe you think that means I'm "little people" and am a suitable target for dismissal or something.

A little about me, I know the history very very well. I post seldomly, but when I do, it's information and not hype....or it's data on a bugfix, like the merchant ship slowdown, which was added to patch 1.3. You can find my name in the SH4 credits. I'm someone who, like you, has made a contribution to the SH4 community.

I don't care about politics or opinion about who rocked and who sucked. I don't come in here to flag wave or flag burn. That's not what I do. A sober assessment of my posts should make that crystal clear to anyone who isn't looking to pick a fight.

On the other hand, I don't cuddle up to people. You'll never find me yes-manning one of your posts. But, I continue to be polite and respectful, no matter how much I get dumped on, up to the point where, like you, I simply just go away.

Speaking of which, you're doing the same unfair things to me in that post that you've said in the past were done to you to cause you to leave.

Why not accord me the same respect that you would have wanted when you felt screwed over on this board?

[Rockin Robbins]

SH4 gives one the impression that US subs snuck up miles of estuary deep into Japanese harbors to pick off ships at the dock, like in Tokyo Bay or the Inland Sea, and nothing like that ever happened. But, it makes for a great story.
Not only did it happen, but it happened in the most spectacular fashion with USS Barb (Fluckey) sneaking through miles of narrow, sampan and mine-infested waters, less than 100' and most of the time less than 50' deep, to enter Namkwan Harbor on 23 January, 1945. For this attack, he became the only living sub commander to be awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor. When you make blanket statements about US Sub conduct in WWII, it is almost obligatory to make an exception for Capt Eugene Fluckey! Otherwise you risk being in error most of the time.:lol:

[Mush Martin]

Photo was taken by the USS trigger.

At this point all i see is someone hyping uboats ( as if they needed more hype) and downplaying the accomplishments of US subs by emphasizing Gunther Priens penetration of Skapa flow, and minimalizing the areas US subs penetrated. You have a picture of a ship, at anchor with the F'ing jungle behind it being torpedod, for christ sakes. For all intents in purposes, its a damn harbor, SHips go their, they lower their anchors, and load or unload freight.

And regardless of how you want to define what a damn harbor is, fact remains, that "harbor raiding" however you want to define it, was predominatly a pacific theater activty if one was to compare sub theaters. I dont recall of hearing stories of german uboats accidently torpedoing piers and sinking busses or cranes.
http://www.bowfin.org/website/bowfin/bowfin_history/patrol_summary/images/BFlag.JPG <-- lower right hand corner

In sum...... whatever.

Yes im pissed off today, for reasons not related to SH4, but im all to eager to vent it seems.


I think the predominant reason behind the trend is superior ASW and
harbour defences in the Atlantic vs. the Pacific

[Dude]

Photo was taken by the USS trigger.

At this point all i see is someone hyping uboats ( as if they needed more hype) and downplaying the accomplishments of US subs by emphasizing Gunther Priens penetration of Skapa flow, and minimalizing the areas US subs penetrated. You have a picture of a ship, at anchor with the F'ing jungle behind it being torpedod, for christ sakes. For all intents in purposes, its a damn harbor, SHips go their, they lower their anchors, and load or unload freight.

And regardless of how you want to define what a damn harbor is, fact remains, that "harbor raiding" however you want to define it, was predominatly a pacific theater activty if one was to compare sub theaters. I dont recall of hearing stories of german uboats accidently torpedoing piers and sinking busses or cranes.
http://www.bowfin.org/website/bowfin/bowfin_history/patrol_summary/images/BFlag.JPG <-- lower right hand corner

In sum...... whatever.

Yes im pissed off today, for reasons not related to SH4, but im all to eager to vent it seems.

A huge bay area,outside a port/harbor where vessels stay on anchorage to load/unload goods, is not by any means a harbor.

Harbor is a protected place,from the open sea and waves, with a small number of narrow and controled entries (1,2,3,4 but not a wide open of 33 or even 12 miles),with a green and red light to guide you in and out and also with piers and a swallow depth (usually between 15-20 meters).

Bay entry of 12 miles is approximately 20kms and of course is not considered to be a harbor/port.

I know these because my father is a merchant captain and I have studied a lot of his books.

Such places like the ones you described, with huge openings,deep with anchored ships are not called harbors.

They are called anchorages(rada as we called them here in Greece).

Piraeus is a port (the biggest port in Greece).The huge area outside south east of the port where large vessels go and stay in anchor, is called anchorage (rada).

Harbor raid you would have if the Jap subs/midgets have succeeded in entering the Pearl Harbor. In that sense it is more common to have harbor raids in Europe/Atlantic where you have more traditional ports/harbors.

This also why you had antisubmarine nets.In a harbor you have a narrow entry,thus you can build an antisubmarine net to protect your vessels inside.

In an anchorage,inside a huge bay, with an opening into the ocean of 12miles and a depth of 100meters of more, you can not have antisubmarine nets,you can not protect and control it.

[joea]

Thanks for the explanation Dude. :up:

[Rockin Robbins]

Such places like the ones you described, with huge openings,deep with anchored ships are not called harbors.

They are called anchorages(rada as we called them here in Greece).

Piraeus is a port (the biggest port in Greece).The huge area outside south east of the port where large vessels go and stay in anchor, is called anchorage (rada).

Harbor raid you would have if the Jap subs/midgets have succeeded in entering the Pearl Harbor. In that sense it is more common to have harbor raids in Europe/Atlantic where you have more traditional ports/harbors.

This also why you had antisubmarine nets.In a harbor you have a narrow entry,thus you can build an antisubmarine net to protect your vessels inside.

In an anchorage,inside a huge bay, with an opening into the ocean of 12miles and a depth of 100meters of more, you can not have antisubmarine nets,you can not protect and control it.
You're still ignoring Gene Fluckey's raid that garnered him the medal of honor. The words never and only are completely exclusive and unless you can explain away Fluckey's well-documented raid you cannot say American subs raided only "anchorages" however they are defined. And in the face of that, all definitions of "anchorage" are irrelevant distractions not contributing to resolution of the issue at hand. After all, if we treated Gunther Prein (stupid American keyboard!:x) that way, the U-Boats never raided any harbors. What's good for the goose is good for the gander. Let's play on a level field here.

Do we agree to have one discard for each argument, picked by the opposing side? ;)

[Dude]

Such places like the ones you described, with huge openings,deep with anchored ships are not called harbors.

They are called anchorages(rada as we called them here in Greece).

Piraeus is a port (the biggest port in Greece).The huge area outside south east of the port where large vessels go and stay in anchor, is called anchorage (rada).

Harbor raid you would have if the Jap subs/midgets have succeeded in entering the Pearl Harbor. In that sense it is more common to have harbor raids in Europe/Atlantic where you have more traditional ports/harbors.

This also why you had antisubmarine nets.In a harbor you have a narrow entry,thus you can build an antisubmarine net to protect your vessels inside.

In an anchorage,inside a huge bay, with an opening into the ocean of 12miles and a depth of 100meters of more, you can not have antisubmarine nets,you can not protect and control it.
You're still ignoring Gene Fluckey's raid that garnered him the medal of honor. The words never and only are completely exclusive and unless you can explain away Fluckey's well-documented raid you cannot say American subs raided only "anchorages" however they are defined. And in the face of that, all definitions of "anchorage" are irrelevant distractions not contributing to resolution of the issue at hand. After all, if we treated Gunther Prein (stupid American keyboard!:x) that way, the U-Boats never raided any harbors. What's good for the goose is good for the gander. Let's play on a level field here.

Do we agree to have one discard for each argument, picked by the opposing side? ;)

I have never said that nobody did it.All I tried to do was explain the technical difference between harbor and anchorage and why IMOHO it is easier to attack vessels in anchorage and more difficult inside a port.

I do not know American history since I am not an American so I can not comment about this captain's achievements.

I just believe it is easier to have harbor raids in European-English ports in Atlantic (not that it really happened apart from Scapa Flow) than in Japan-Pacific fleet.

[Sailor Steve]

I think at this point a distinction should be made between harbor raids and raiding a major enemy naval base.

On the U.S. side of the argument, they made more than a few harbor raids, but those could be considered easier than the Scapa Flow raid.

On the German side, the Scapa Flow raid was a major accomplishment, but it was planned by Donitz himself and was only done once. Allied harbors were difficult to get into, and very well protected.

On the U.S. side, while the Japanese were moving ships into and out of relatively unprotected areas, this wasn't always so (just like their convoys) - witness the above-described raid by Fluckey.

Bottom line: SH4 raids should on the whole be easier (but only barely).

Bottom line #2: good submarine skippers, like good fighter pilots, were talented, tough, arrogant and took some extreme chances, and sometimes even made them work.

[nematode]

SH4 gives one the impression that US subs snuck up miles of estuary deep into Japanese harbors to pick off ships at the dock, like in Tokyo Bay or the Inland Sea, and nothing like that ever happened. But, it makes for a great story.

Not only did it happen, but it happened in the most spectacular fashion with USS Barb (Fluckey) sneaking through miles of narrow, sampan and mine-infested waters, less than 100' and most of the time less than 50' deep, to enter Namkwan Harbor on 23 January, 1945.

Thanks for that info RR. What I show for Fluckey on 23-Jan-1945 is Taikyo Maru a 5244GRT freighter sunk at 27-04N, 120-07E which is 5000 yards off the coast of China in the East China Sea, from a group of 30 anchored ships spaced 500 yards apart in 3 columns, making for a mass of shipping some 1500 yards deep and some 5000 yards long.

Please correct my data if it's wrong. If my data is accurate, I'm sorry, but that's an attack on an open water anchorage, and not a harbor. That conclusion does not take away from the valor of Fluckey's actions. It's merely a result from an honest attempt at learning a truth about history.

For this attack, he became the only living sub commander to be awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor. When you make blanket statements about US Sub conduct in WWII, it is almost obligatory to make an exception for Capt Eugene Fluckey! Otherwise you risk being in error most of the time.:lol:

Perhaps you mean Fluckey was the first living sub skipper MoH recipient. O'Kane, Street, and Ramage were also alive at the time they were awarded the MoH.

[Rockin Robbins]

When I get home I'll scan and publish Fluckey's hand-drawn map of the approach and harbor. If it's an open harbor, it's after miles of shallow water with land all around and extensive minefields. It certainly fills the qualification of shallow water, restricted and guarded ingress and egress, minefields, etc. It sure isn't an open deep water anchorage. And he sunk a lot more than one ship there, whether he got official credit or not. One was an ammunition ship that blew shrapnel all over the harbor. Fluckey was a surface craft on this foray, but his way out was thoughtfully lighted by a destroyer, who set the sampan fleet on fire trying to hit Fluckey. You know, if you're part of a robbery in which someone is killed, you're guilty of murder. Then Fluckey should have been given credit for all the sampans destroyed by the destoyer.:up:

Hey, can you find out of the train Fluckey sank landed in the water and whether he got any tonnage from that?:rotfl: I'm sure he tried on a technicality. Fluckey wasn't shy in trying to get credit for his crew.

You're right on the MOH. Typing quicker than the brain can control. lol

Still haven't received word on whether we agree that each side gets to pick a discard for the other. We pick Prein. :down: Gone!:smug:

Actually, though, Donitz would have just picked someone else for the job and they most likely would have pulled it off too. The key to both the Fluckey raid and Prein's was that they were so audacious that the enemy never dreamed they were possible, combined with a careful weighing of the risks involved, and once the risk was managable, not eliminated, they proceeded.

[Rockin Robbins]

Upon further review, the officials have decided that Fluckey's raid, while conducted in water 60' or less in depth, in uncharted waters with rocks all poised to rip the bottom out of the sub, and with three frigates guarding several (Fluckey says 24) anchored ships, and with extensive fleets of junks and sampans making the run quite exciting, this in no way conforms to the Mediterranean definition of a harbor. Granted, Fluckey had to run six or seven miles just to get to the 10 fathom curve, then an additional ten to get to the 20 fathom curve where he could dive, and he was pursued by at least one of the frigates during that egress, this is quite a different position than that found in the Mediterranean or Atlantic theater.

I don't know which is really more difficult, this one with miles of shallow uncharted, rock infested water, or a precisely known but scientifically defended harbor. Obviously both were penetrated successfully by submarines, proving that the submarine was equal to whatever challenges existed in either theater of war.

http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa293/RockinRobbins13/Silent%20Hunter%204/Fluckeymap.jpg

Fluckey's account in "Thunder Below" in the chapter on Barb's 11th war patrol (!) is one of the most exiting accounts by either Americans or Germans in WWII, and surely comes close to Prein's conquest of Scapa Flow, minus the glamor targets and guns from capital ships waiting to vaporize the little U-Boat. Fluckey's battle was much more evenly matched, in spite of his handicap from all the shallow water and sampans. It is also safe to say that the moral effect of Prein's attack on the British was far in excess of the effect of Fluckey's attack on the Japanese.