Japan Happy Times 1942- Why Not?

[predavolk]

This is better suited to SH4, but I don't play that sim (where's the challenge in playing a US sub against the Japanese?). Why didn't Japan try to tie down US naval resources by at least making token efforts against their West coast when Germany was clearly having such a fun time on their East coast? I don't think it would have done much in terms of the war, but it might have given them a little more breathing room if they could've sunk a bunch of shipping and tied up the US West Coast navy.

I understand that Japan didn't generally believe in subs, but the opportunity to use the few subs they had, cheaply, for large effect, seems rather obvious in hindsight.

[rifleman13]

The Japs didn't use their subs to the extent like Nazi Germany because of their adoption of The Influence of Sea Power upon History by Alfred Mahan which advocates the use of subs against surface combatants instead of merchant shipping.

This led the Japs, because of their traditions and the strategic position in the war, to look for a "decisive battle" with the US Navy. Meaning the US Navy must be defeated by all costs so the Japs can negotiate for peace and badly needed resources. They tried it in Pearl Harbor, Midway, the Coral Sea, and Leyte Gulf and look how it all turned out!

And besides the Japs have the most advanced sub technology out there. They have the largest, fastest and longest range subs in the war. For example the I-400 "Sen Toku" class, considered a descendant of the SSBNs, was a submarine aircraft carrier designed to attack the Panama Canal to force the US Navy to go around Latin America.

The Japs have the tachnology but they didn't use it to the fullest extent! Even after Pearl Harbor...

[BulSoldier]

Indeed by the begging of the war the japanesse sub fleet was the most advanced.But their role was different than their german conterparts.They used them for reconisance and attacking military targets rather than sinking cargo vessels.

[joegrundman]

But it is interesting, isn't it. The US sub doctrine before war start was also influenced by the belief that submarines belonged as part of big fleets, but dropped it once war started, heavily influenced by what the Germans were doing

Strange then that the Japanese should be so much more resistant to adaptation given the successes of their own allies.

In my only book of submarine stuff there is in it a Japanese sub captain who apparently got into hot water for demanding permission to conduct guerre de course. Permission was denied.

Out of curiosity, what sort of TDC did the Japanese have?

[predavolk]

I also strongly believe that Japan should have made a suicidal raid on a US coastal town or village. That kind of mainland attack would've tied up HUGE amounts of resources even if it was a militarily pointless victory that would never be repeated.

But yes, it is interesting how Britain and the US learned from the Germans, but the Japanese, with some of the best potential boats, did not. Attacking the Panama Canal would've been another fantastic idea, especially if they could have sunk a boat IN the canal! Maybe send in a dummy boat loaded with explosives and blow it up? IIRC, Japan was basically just trying to buy enough time to solidify its hold on the West Pacific. It never believed, or intended, to beat the US out of the Pacific forever. Slowing down their enemy, making them waste resources, scaring them away from big fleet actions, etc. all seem like the perfect jobs for subs.

[Jimbuna]

An interesting idea :up:

A Japanese type HMS Campbeltown/St Nazaire :hmm:

[Mush Martin]

Capture a Radar set and take it home, A Japanese Johnny Frost:hmm:

[rifleman13]

Attacking the Panama Canal would've been another fantastic idea, especially if they could have sunk a boat IN the canal! No, sinking boats is just too unlikely for the Japanese! They are more daring and want to put a show!

A scuttled ship infront of the locks is easy to remove, BTW!

They must do maximum damage to the Canal Locks in order to, at least, slow down the American advance through the Pacific. The I-400 is the perfect sub for this job. Actually, it was designed to attack the Panama Canal

Yamamoto planned to use these babies against the Canal. They were carrying 3 A6M Seaplanes. Since the end of the war was nearing, obviously, they would use kamikaze tactics.

I also was amazed when they planned to use these boats to attack the East Coast of the US, with bio-weapons!
http://bink77.com/View/link14.php

'Tis a shame really, these boats were really very large! They even dwarfed the Type XXI or the Tench class subs!

[bookworm_020]

One of the big reasons the Japanese didn't have a happy time with America was the fact that sinking merchants was considered to be of lesser importance than sinking larger warships. Japanese captains were told they could only fire a single torpedo at a merchant or destroyer, no more! (doubt they would need more than one of there torpedos, as they worked better than the U.S. ones!)

If they had been let loose on merchants and told to concentrate on convoys it would have cost America far more than it did and may have extended them war for a year or two more.

[Hartmann]

Also with the I-400 japan could launch a commando mission to blow up some locks of the canal. :hmm: The huge payload of the I-400 can allow this type of special ops.

The irony of destiny was that japan have to use submarines to carry supplies and other resources because the U.S submarines break havok in IJN merchant traffic.:roll:
The japanese doctrine and bushido played a very negative role in the tactics of the japanese navy.

it´s like the hangar of the I-400...
http://img209.imageshack.us/img209/2294/hires060918n0780f006ajp5.jpg

[BasilY]

Japan have plenty of Admirals like Raeder, but none like Doenitz. Come to think of it, there just ain't that many Doenitz arround.:|\\

[Erich dem Roten]

As Hartman said, the Japanese code of battle didn't lend itself to submarine warfare very well. That said, they did try numerous missions against the mainland United States and her territories with submarines (like the I-400). There were several mini-subs in the initial attack on Pearl Harbor as well, though they proved very unwieldy and were lost or sunk. I also seem to recall several attempts by the Japanese to release incendiaries over the woodlands in the Pacific Northwest, in an attempt to cause massive fires. On top of all that were missions that were still on paper at the end of the war, many of which included submarines.

Unfortunately, they seemed to see submarines as stealthy means of transport (like getting planes close to the U.S. coast) and less an offensive weapon like the other member countries of WWII.

[Piggy]

I also seem to recall several attempts by the Japanese to release incendiaries over the woodlands in the Pacific Northwest, in an attempt to cause massive fires

Those were fire Balloons, according to wiki they launched over 9000 of them, some apparently reaching as far as Saskatchewan! Wow.

There was some deaths (5 kids and a women) caused by them, when a young child tampered with one of the bombs in oregon. What a crazy idea. They only took 3 days to cross the pacific in the jet stream!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attacks_on_North_America_during_World_War_II

http://www.faqs.org/docs/air/avfusen.html

I didnt realize a Japanese sub actually shelled a lighthouse on vancouver Island (interesting to me because I live in Vancouver) but never managed to hit it. How can you not even hit a stationary target with a big bright light on top! :roll:

Although they blacked out the lighthouses after that, which did, in the end cause some ships to sink. Maybe that was the plan all along! ;)

[Task Force]

Looks as if the japs didnt notice how victorious the US subs were, If they didnt, they were blind.:yep:

[bookworm_020]

It seems the axis powers were busy in getting to the US

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attacks_on_North_America_during_World_War_II

[nirwana]

Looks as if the japs didnt notice how victorious the US subs were, If they didnt, they were blind.:yep:
Hmm victorious in what way ? Cant remember any story, any historic report of it during WW2.

[BasilY]

Come to think of think of it, Japan never learned the convoy tactics used some well by the Brits.

[predavolk]

It has been said that perhaps the most shocking oversight in all of WW2 was how Japan, an empire built on naval shipping, failed to develop an effective counter to the most potent threat to naval shipping- subs. Japanese ASW was anemic. True, the sub service was the most dangerous job in the USN, but it was hardly anything compared to what the Germans faced against the allied ASW. Without arguing about who's subs were better, I think the entire American sub fleet could've been quickly wiped out by a determined ASW effort.

Japan's failure to understand the danger of subs, and its failure to use them offensively against US shipping, was quite possibly the biggest reason why they lost the war. Or at least failed to achieve the necessary time to solidify their situation. Had they stopped US subs and kept up their shipping, their production would've been much greater. Had they attacked US West Coast shipping, they would have slightly reduced US production and more importantly, diverted much of the naval production away from carriers and big ships towards ASW ships (perhaps jeep carriers).

A raid on the American homeland, perhaps against Alaska in some force, would have made a great suicide mission that surely would have tied up plenty of other resources. Essentially, Japan was best on the attack, but they lost that advantage almost immediately after Pearl Harbor (due to code breaking and the survival of American carriers). By switching to the defensive, they allowed the Americans to build up the momentum they needed to roll over Japan.

Don't get me wrong, I'm sure glad they did, but as an armchair admiral, this one still has me scratching my head. It would be offensive, attacking, and less shameful than using subs as transports.:-?

[U-46 Commander]

I am continually amazed at how stupid the Japaneze destroyers are in SH4. I can sail through an entire convoy (underwater) and they won't detect me!

[GerritJ9]

The IJN did run a few anti-merchant campaigns in 1941-42, nost notably against shipping in the NEI and later in the Indian Ocean, but they were limited affairs. One gets the impression that Allied naval vessels were the intended targets and merchants attacked "only because there is nothing else". Even against the shipping in the NEI which was, largely, unescorted and unarmed due to lack of escorts and guns to arm merchants, their lack of success was spectacular; at the same time, a few U-Boote were wreaking havoc on the US East Coast. In all, IJN subs sank only some 180 Allied merchants during WW2. Certainly they could have done much more damage in the first half of 1942 at the very least; that they did not is something to be thankful for.