Did Japanese midget submarines sink the Arizona?

[Cybermat47]

There's a program on SBS at 8:30 tonight. The description is as follows:

The discovery of a group of Japanes mini-subs in Pearl Harbour has raised questions about the sinking of the USS Arizona. Could one of the subs have fired a torpedo at the Arizona?

[Karle94]

Judging by the results from the other battleships I highly doubt a torpedo caused the magzine detonation. No other battleship that was torpedoed exploded. And one torpedo would not have been able to sink her. One battleship took about 6-7 torpedoes before slowly sinking.

[Red October1984]

Yeaaaaa....no it was not midget subs.

[TLAM Strike]

I think TV Guide is posting an inaccurate description of the show if it its the show I'm thinking of. In it they suggest the Midget submarine helped to sink the Oklahoma not the Arizona.

[August]

I think TV Guide is posting an inaccurate description of the show if it its the show I'm thinking of. In it they suggest the Midget submarine helped to sink the Oklahoma not the Arizona.


Yeah wasn't the Arizona protected from torpedo attack by that tender parked alongside?

[Nippelspanner]

If it was in TV, it must be true... :hmm2:

But no, I highly doubt that. Not even with a "lucky shot", I mean how would this even work? A single torpedo at this type of BB?
Nah... not in my universe...

[Jimbuna]

Highly unlikely imho :nope:

[Nippelspanner]

That reminds me... what did they actually find in the Churchill river!? They suspected it a type 9 u-boat and anyone here was laughing their butts off because of that... I never heard about it again, I assume they went silent after figuring they found an old trawler or something :D

Anyone have the latest gossip?

(Oh and sorry for hi-jacking)

[Bilge_Rat]

Yeah wasn't the Arizona protected from torpedo attack by that tender parked alongside?

U.S.S. Vestal, but she was a lot shorter than the Arizona, allowing torpedoes to hit the BBs bow or stern.


http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/images/h50000/h50931.jpg

some have suggested that this and similar photos shows the submarine tracks from the midget sub hitting West Virginia which is already listing to port, although I think that is a stretch myself. They are most likely air dropped torpedoes.

Arizona and Vestal are moored just behind West Virginia and Tennessee.

That photo was taken by a Japanese aircraft, more details here:

http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/events/wwii-pac/pearlhbr/ph-bba.htm

[CaptainHaplo]

The History Channel did a major show on this at one time - at least on the mini-subs. There is reason to believe 1 got in and in fact did get a shot off. However, there is no way to tell if it hit or what damage it may have done.

With that said - the Arizona is a known entity. Video footage actually captured not just the final explosion, but the series of events immediately prior. The Arizona blew because of a bomb penetration right next to a turret. "Ready" ammunition went off sympathetically (some theorize that the main forward magazine was not secured and that some powder was in fact stored outside unsecured doors) - causing a chain of events that resulted in the magazine blowing.

Extensive investigation showed that the hull of Arizona blew outward - meaning the explosion originated interally - not fror a torp hit.

[vienna]

The PBS program "Nova" did a rather detailed presentation on just this subject a while back:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/military/killer-subs-pearl-harbor.html

The site offers the opportunity to view the program and has a transcript of the presentation...

<O>

[Bilge_Rat]

The problem with the theory that a midget sub torpedoed the Arizona is the fact that the Vestal partially blocked the shot. They are the last pair on the left. The Vestal was 470 feet long, the Arizona 610 feet, a difference of only 140 feet. Doable, but a tight shot.

It is much more likely that a sub would have targeted either the West Virginia or the Oklahoma, both of which were wide open.


http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/images/h50000/h50472.jpg

[Sailor Steve]

The Arizona blew because of a bomb penetration right next to a turret. "Ready" ammunition went off sympathetically (some theorize that the main forward magazine was not secured and that some powder was in fact stored outside unsecured doors) - causing a chain of events that resulted in the magazine blowing.

Extensive investigation showed that the hull of Arizona blew outward - meaning the explosion originated interally - not fror a torp hit.
The "bombs" dropped on the battleships were modified 41cm (16.1") armor-piercing shells, dropped by level bombers from high altitude by level bombers. As far as I know that was the only one that actually hit anything. I was unaware of the extra powder storage and had assumed that the "bomb" penetrated all the way to the main magazine, which was certainly possible with that shell.
Here is a very good discussion on the subject.
http://www.kbismarck.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=36&t=1839

Note that the final post really is the final word on the subject. Nathun Okun is widely recognized as the world's leading expert on naval armor and the shells designed to defeat it.

[Bilge_Rat]

interesting thread Steve.

The only IJN carrier plane that could carry those special 800 kg bombs were the "Kate" torpedo bombers. I presume they are the same ones that took the above aerial pictures.

[CaptainHaplo]

Steve - your correct that the bombs were in fact modified gun shells. I found a bit more here:

http://www.pearlharborattacked.com/cgi-bin/IKONBOARDNEW312a/ikonboard.cgi?act=ST;f=18;t=89;st=20

The source is also well respected and has dived on the wreck itself.

Regarding powder storage:
Many qualified authorities have blamed powder storage outside of the magazines as the cause, but this is conjectural and probably will always remain so.

http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/events/wwii-pac/pearlhbr/ph-az.htm

[soopaman2]

There is a show that is a few years old on the History and Military channel called "Unsolved History" that went into this in depth.

They made a compelling case that 3 midget subs were deployed that day.

One of them sunk by the USS Ward, which was (un)officially the first shots fired by the USA in WW2.

I wonder if it is the same show?

[Sailor Steve]

Regarding powder storage:
I hope I didn't give the impression I was disagreeing. My only point there was that I had never heard that. Conjecture or not, it's just as plausible as the bomb penetrating to the magazine. So many things we would love to know and never will.

[CaptainHaplo]

Steve - not at all. Since you said you had not heard it, I simply wanted to provide a source where I had so you could consider it more than just me saying so. From what I understand from some of the writings, the divers indicate that there is no sign that the magazine was compromised from outside before the explosion.

I do think we will never know for sure - anyone close enough to tell us perished in the concussion or aftermath.

[Cybermat47]

Blimey. Took me a long time to watch it :doh:

Anyway, it turns out that midget sub No.5 managed to get into Pearl Harbour and fired it's torpedoes at either the Arizona or the Oklahoma and West Virginia. One of its torpedoes was a dud, and was recovered by the US navy not long after (If it discharged both torpedoes at the Arizona, both were duds or one missed). The submarine sent out a signal (it attacked on the surface) to it's mother sub. The signal, Kira, is believed to be a misspelling of Tora, due to the stress of operating a midget sub. The sub quickly escaped to west loch, were it's crew detonated scuttling charges, blowing the sub in two and killing themselves. It remained there until the west loch disaster of 1943, when it was gathered with the sunken US LCTs, cut into three, and dumped outside the harbour.

Here's more information on the west loch disaster: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Loch_disaster

Soon I'll post a photo of what may be midget sub No.5 firing at battleship row, unwittingly taken by a Japanese airman.

[Cybermat47]

Here's the photo:

http://imageshack.us/a/img692/5552/photojan19095058h.jpg

Those plumes behind the sub are 'rooster tails' caused by the destabilization of the sub after the torpedoes were launched.

[Sailor Steve]

Where's your evidence? That's a blowup of the picture Bilge Rat posted, and the plumes are most likely caused by air-dropped torpedoes hitting the water. Also, you don't need the close-up. The plumes are clearly visible in the full picture, and have been for seventy-one years.

[Cybermat47]

Yes, but take a look at what's in front of the plumes. It's faint, but obviously a floating tube with an upward extension in the middle, similar to a conning tower. Also, air dropped torpedoes don't splash in that way. When an airborne torpedo hits, the splash is in the same general direction that the torpedo is heading, while these are going upwards.

[Takeda Shingen]

With that kind of resolution, I think it is hard to say that it is obviously anything. It could be a periscope. It could be nothing at all. It could be Godzilla.

[Cybermat47]

^^^^^

Fair enough. I'll look for a higher-resolution picture.

[Sailor Steve]

Also, air dropped torpedoes don't splash in that way. When an airborne torpedo hits, the splash is in the same general direction that the torpedo is heading, while these are going upwards.

http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a325/SailorSteve/g32242.jpg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4cl69qp5O78
2:48, and again at 2:56, 3:18 and 3:40.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yii8WlUs7y4
0:56 and 1:03. In the second one notice the torpedo strap hitting the water ahead of the fish itself. That may be what you're seeing as a "tube" in the PH photo. In all the videos the splash is vertical.

[Cybermat47]

Here's an article on the find: http://www.latimes.com/news/nation-and-world/la-sci-minisub7-2009dec07,0,6991792.story

And here's the video itself: http://xfinitytv.comcast.net/watch/Nova/8954551503237514112/1736937135/Killer-Subs-in-Pearl-Harbor/videos

[Cybermat47]

Where's your evidence? That's a blowup of the picture Bilge Rat posted, and the plumes are most likely caused by air-dropped torpedoes hitting the water. Also, you don't need the close-up. The plumes are clearly visible in the full picture, and have been for seventy-one years.


Also, did you actually read my post before that photo? Because that's the main proof, not a blown up picture.

And if the plumes were caused by planes, where are the planes?

[Cybermat47]

Here's the official website with information regarding the boat: http://i-16tou.com/

[Sailor Steve]

Also, did you actually read my post before that photo? Because that's the main proof, not a blown up picture.
Your post was edited three hours after my reply. What did it say before? I believe there was something about a submarine broaching after firing its torpedoes, which as far as I know doesn't make a plume of spray similar to that of a torpedo striking the water.

And if the plumes were caused by planes, where are the planes?
Lost against the background clutter of the docks? Climbed up out of the picture? Ultimately irrelevant. What I challenged was your statement that the plumes were vertical and that real torpedo plumes aren't. I showed that they are.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying there wasn't a midget sub inside the harbor. For all I know there was. I'm just saying that picture doesn't show anything like that, or anything at all, really. People who want to believe things put up all kinds of "proof", and it's usually no clearer than that picture is.

[Cybermat47]

^^^^

Just read what's in the last link I put. All my crappy evidence will fade into insignifigance compared to the meticulous studies of the ex-submariner who led the team that discovered the evidence.

[Cybermat47]

Here's a photo of I-16tou's midsection and conning tower: http://imageshack.us/a/img822/3125/photomar22151806.jpg

Here's I-16tou's bow section, clearly showing that both torpedoes have been fired: http://imageshack.us/a/img204/7237/photomar22163736.jpg

All of these photos were found at I-16tou.com.

[Cybermat47]

That may be what you're seeing as a "tube" in the PH photo.

I hope that you're wrong, for the sake of the group of men who have been studying that part of the photo for years an correalating it with computer simulations and scaling it with the distance of the battleships to find it's length.

[Tribesman]

Just read what's in the last link I put. All my crappy evidence will fade into insignifigance compared to the meticulous studies of the ex-submariner who led the team that discovered the evidence.
Is that the one who writes....
Conclusion
In summary, we found no proof that will conclusively settle the long-standing debate

[Bilge_Rat]

its an interesting theory, but there is no conclusive proof. The photo does not really prove anything one way or another. Damage to the West Virginia was too extensive to determine exactly what happened.

We don't even know for sure if any midget sub entered the harbour. I-16tou was found 3 miles south of Oahu. The researchers have an interesting theory that it may have been scooped up with other debris in 1944, but this is all based on very circumstancial evidence. To me it sounds too much like the "magic bullet" theory. :ping:

I don't think we will ever know for sure what happened.

[Sailor Steve]

I hope that you're wrong, for the sake of the group of men who have been studying that part of the photo for years an correalating it with computer simulations and scaling it with the distance of the battleships to find it's length.
Now you're playing internet games. I pointed out that you were wrong about torpedo splashes, so you dropped that like a hot rock and danced over to something else. I looked at the photo and I don't see the tube you're talking about at all. That's okay, and if the people who've studied the photo come to a conclusion then that's fine. I've been wrong before. But the way you phrased that sentence makes it the typical sort of challenge people make when they get excited.

And your photos of the sunken midget sub are great. Were they taken at Pearl Harbor?

You keep trying to prove to me that there might have been a midget sub there. What you're missing is that I've never denied that. I've never denied the possibility. I haven't denied anything. All I've said is that that particular photo doesn't prove anything.

Get it?

[Bilge_Rat]

I have looked at this some more and I see some more holes in the theory:

1. there is no record of a midget sub being scooped up in 1944 and dumped outside of the harbour. Now it is possible that the Navy did not recognize what it was and just dumped it with the LST wrecks from the West Loch disaster, but a midget sub is 80 feet long and this one was in only 3 big pieces. It is improbable that someone would not have recognized that it is not a LST;

2. the wreckage lies in a straight line, bow in front followed by midsection followed by stern section, all within 180 meters of each other, exactly as you would expect if it had been scuttled and sank to the bottom. What are the odds it would land like that if the wreckage had been scooped up in West Loch and just dumped in the open ocean?

more details at I-16tou.com

[Cybermat47]

And your photos of the sunken midget sub are great. Were they taken at Pearl Harbor?

Not quite. Three miles out, and the sub was cut into three with ropes attached. That, and the ex-submariner using his intuition, is how they formed their theory about it being dumped after the West Loch disaster.

Get it?

Finally.

[Cybermat47]

I have looked at this some more and I see some more holes in the theory:

1. there is no record of a midget sub being scooped up in 1944 and dumped outside of the harbour. Now it is possible that the Navy did not recognize what it was and just dumped it with the LST wrecks from the West Loch disaster, but a midget sub is 80 feet long and this one was in only 3 big pieces. It is improbable that someone would not have recognized that it is not a LST;

Your absolutely right. What could have happened is that they recognised that it was the last midget sub, but just dumped it anyway without telling anyone, as the West Loch Disaster wasn't publicised very much, to avoid ruining morale.

2. the wreckage lies in a straight line, bow in front followed by midsection followed by stern section, all within 180 meters of each other, exactly as you would expect if it had been scuttled and sank to the bottom. What are the odds it would land like that if the wreckage had been scooped up in West Loch and just dumped in the open ocean?

more details at I-16tou.com

It's unlikely that it was scuttled outside the Harbour. For one, the midget sub only carried one scuttling charge, and the dumping theory best explains the ropes attached to the submarine.

[TheSatyr]

If a mini sub did indeed get into the harbor and was able to fire off it's torpedoes than it probably hit the Oklahoma. There WAS one torpedo hole on the Oklahoma that was bigger than the others but the assumption was that 2 torpedoes hit near the exact same spot.

It does open up a few questions,since the explosive power on aerial torpedoes was smaller than the explosive power you would find on submarine and surface ship torpedoes.

[Sailor Steve]

Every torpedo hole is different, depending on strike angle and how the charge detonates. One Japanese merchant was actually sunk by a dud torpedo.

[August]

Every torpedo hole is different, depending on strike angle and how the charge detonates. One Japanese merchant was actually sunk by a dud torpedo.

We're not talking about paper thin merchant hulls though. I think all the attack angles were pretty much the same weren't they? Same weapon, same conditions, same angle of attack, maybe a larger than average torpedo hole does point to a larger than average torpedo.

[nikimcbee]

Here's the video:
Killer subs in PH:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=62ssOVE5UBU

[Cybermat47]

Here's the video:
Killer subs in PH:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=62ssOVE5UBU

Thanks.

It's funny, the narrator in that video is different to the one I first saw, and he narrated Convoy: War for the Atlantic.

[Sailor Steve]

We're not talking about paper thin merchant hulls though. I think all the attack angles were pretty much the same weren't they? Same weapon, same conditions, same angle of attack, maybe a larger than average torpedo hole does point to a larger than average torpedo.
Battleship hulls are no thicker than merchant hulls, averaging 1/2" thick. The heavy armor belt is too heavy to extend very far underwater, and torpedoes can easily be set to run below them. Take Nevada, for example. The main armor belt was 14" thick at the waterline, but only 8" thick at its lowest point, which was 8 feet below the waterline, on a ship with a 27-foot draft. This means that 19 feet from the bottom of the armor belt to the keel of the ship was unprotected. On the other hand a good part of that was protected by anti-torpedo bulges, which are lightweight steel bulkheads containing a liquid that is more compressible than water, allowing the gas to be pushed away, thus protecting the inner hull.

Yes, a larger hole does indicate a larger torpedo. I was just pointing out the other possibilities. The fact that the sub's torpedoes had been fired is also indicative. As I said before, I'm not arguing that it didn't happen. I'm more than willing to believe it. What I'm arguing with is certain people jumping to conclusions and trying to prove that they're right.

[Sailor Steve]

What I find interesting from the video is the story of "Midget Sub #2". The narrator says the sub entered Pearl Harbor, fired both of its torpedoes, missed, and went aground on what, according to their map, looks like the north side of Ford Island, and was destroyed by two American warships. The wreck was raised two weeks later and "buried as landfill".

Cybermat, I'm surprised you're so concerned with trying to prove the sub found outside the harbor was actually once inside the harbor, when you already have proof that there was a sub that was sunk inside the harbor. It was fairly easy for me to find a trail leading to that particular sub.

Amidget submarine, thought by some researchers to be Lt Iwasa's M-22, is raised about two weeks after the attack. A No. 1 dress blues sleeve with rank insignia of a full Lieutenant was found floating in the harbor. It may have belonged to Iwasa or one of the downed Japanese pilots. Iwasa was the only officer of that rank in the midget submarine attack force. The sleeve is returned to the Japan by the U.S. Navy in March 1947 and has been on display at the Yasukuni Shrine, Tokyo since 1972. Some Japanese sources theorize that M-22 was the midget submarine that tried to torpedo CURTISS and was rammed and sunk by MONAGHAN, however, this identification is speculative. The hulk of the raised midget was salvaged, but was in such a bad shape that no one entered it. Her screws and net guard/cutters were salvaged and used in the reconstruction of HA-19. The remainder of the wreck was dumped during the S-1 submarine dock reconstuction at Ford Island. It was rediscovered in 1952, but reburied at the same place because chlorine gas had eaten away all its contents. The remains of the crew are still inside.
http://www.combinedfleet.com/Pearl.htm

A fourth submarine, No.22, entered the harbor and fired its torpedoes at Curtiss (AV-4) and Monaghan (DD-354). Both of those torpedoes missed and are believed to have hit a dock at Pearl City and the shore of Ford Island. This submarine was sunk by Monaghan at 8:43 a.m. on 7 December and later recovered and used as fill during construction of a new landside pier at the Pearl Harbor submarine base. The hulk was uncovered again in 1952 but was so badly corroded by chlorine gas from the electrical batteries that it was again reburied at the same location. The crew's remains are still entombed in the submarine.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_A_Ko-hyoteki_class_submarine

There you have absolute proof that at least one of the subs got inside and launched both its torpedoes. That they missed is irrelevant.

Does the photo show a submarine or air-launched torpedoes? Who cares? Was the sub you're concerned with sunk outside the harbor, or inside and then later moved outside? Who cares. Your concern with trying to prove that is meaningless, if all you want to prove is that one of the subs did indeed fire its torpedoes. did one of the torpedoes from that sub make the hole in Oklahoma? Maybe, maybe not. If so, did that torpedo contribute to the sinking of the ship? Since Oklahoma capsized it's pretty much certain that it was torpedoes that did her in, so if that torpedo was indeed from a midget sub then it certainly was a contributing factor.

On the other hand, if all you're trying to do is prove that at least one of those subs got inside the harbor, you don't have to theorize any longer. I've handed you proof that one of the subs was sunk, and raised again just two weeks later, well inside Pearl Harbor. It was quite easy to find.

[nikimcbee]

Different show about the midget subs:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7yupozzfCSY

[nikimcbee]

I have looked at this some more and I see some more holes in the theory:

1. there is no record of a midget sub being scooped up in 1944 and dumped outside of the harbour. Now it is possible that the Navy did not recognize what it was and just dumped it with the LST wrecks from the West Loch disaster, but a midget sub is 80 feet long and this one was in only 3 big pieces. It is improbable that someone would not have recognized that it is not a LST;

2. the wreckage lies in a straight line, bow in front followed by midsection followed by stern section, all within 180 meters of each other, exactly as you would expect if it had been scuttled and sank to the bottom. What are the odds it would land like that if the wreckage had been scooped up in West Loch and just dumped in the open ocean?

more details at I-16tou.com

There must be some naval record of them finding that sub, then dumping it out there with the rest of the garbage. In the video, they coudln't explain the extra cable. The Dive expert, Chatterton, thought it looked like a salvage cable.

I'm thinking, if they found it in West Loch and took it out and dumped it, maybe they shoud raise it and examine it? If the center compartment was blown apart, there couldn't be any bodies in there (making it not a grave anymore).
I'm just embarassed to say, I never knew they found the 5th sub. That was a pretty interesting show they had on it.

[gimpy117]

there is debate over the possibility of midget subs making it into the harbor, but not really over them sinking a ship.

[Popeye the Salior]

Nope she took a 800 kilogram bomb hit to her fore magazine the bomb glanced off turret number two then punched through the belt armor and wound up in that magazine where is exploded killing 1,777 Americans.

[Sailor Steve]

then punched through the belt armor
That would be the deck armor. If it went through the belt armor it would have exited the hull and exploded in the water.

[Jimbuna]

She was hit by several bombs, one of which penetrated her forecastle and detonated her forward ammunition magazines.


http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/sh-usn/usnsh-a/bb39.htm


The Arizona came under attack almost immediately, and at about 8:10 received a hit by a 800-kilogram bomb just forward of turret two on the starboard side. Within a few seconds the forward powder magazines exploded, gutting the forward part of the ship. The foremast and forward superstructure collapsed forward into the void created by the explosion and turrets one and two, deprived of support, dropped more than 20 feet relative to their normal position.


http://www.library.arizona.edu/exhibits/ussarizona/history/history.html

[Aktungbby]

Exactly: The Arizona which had been placed "in ordinary" at her berth went to general quarters at O7:55 and was struck by a converted (wooden fin conversion) 16" shell from a level bomber, at 9800 ft., at 08:10. This penetrated the deck adjacent to main forward magazine which it might well have survived, but unfortunately hitting the small 1000 lb ceremonial BLACK POWDER magazine, which acted as the necessary detonator, penetrating the main magazine, and causing the immediate demise of 1172 crewmen-84% of the ships compliment. After Jutland in 1916, the losses of several British capital ships (5) due to careless powder handling had caused a general reformation of practices of most modern navies and powder would not have been lying about. Navy Cool powder bags just do not usually go off without a proper detonator as in the Iowa turret disaster. The small black powder magazine provided such. Ironically, Americas final shot was the bomb at Hiroshima: both halves of the uranium ball were blown together by BLACK POWDER to create the immediate critical mass to explode over the city. Nothing goes entirely out of service.

[Jimbuna]

I now realise what you meant earlier :yep:

[Sailor Steve]

Exactly.
Interesting amount of precise information. Did someone actually dive into the magazine area and determine this, or is it guesswork on somebody's part?

Is there a source?

Also, the propellant for the shells themselves were stored in bags, even in the Iowa class, so the powder in the main magazine was loose enough to explode on its own.

[Aktungbby]

Interesting amount of precise information. Did someone actually dive into the magazine area and determine this, or is it guesswork on somebody's part?

Is there a source?

Also, the propellant for the shells themselves were stored in bags, even in the Iowa class, so the powder in the main magazine was loose enough to explode on its own.
I was aware of the black powder ignition theory from before this thread and it is fairly substantiated that the black powder-also used to launch aircraft from the catapaults-was hit by the bomb. Both Rear Adm. Kidd and CAPT. VAN Valkenburg and the ships damage officer received medals of honor for attempting to fight the ship. The entire ships band, assigned to ammo handling in turret two, were killed at their action station. Look up "USS Arizona-Black powder magazine" and several sites are there.

[TLAM Strike]

Ironically, Americas final shot was the bomb at Hiroshima: both halves of the uranium ball were blown together by BLACK POWDER to create the immediate critical mass to explode over the city. Nothing goes entirely out of service.
For the record;
The Little Boy bomb used Cordite not Black Powder to set off the physics package.

Fat Man (the 2nd and last A-Bomb used in WWII) used Comp B and Baratol to initiate the implosion of the physics package.

[Aktungbby]

I now realise what you meant earlier :yep:
Adm. Beatty at Jutland engaging Hipper's Squadron:" There's something wrong with our ships today." Uttered as he witnessed the Arizona style (HMS Hood) explosions of his battle cruisers, later found to be from careless powder handling and lack of flash protections. His bad day at Jutland was only superseded by Scheer's own mishandling of his High Seas Fleet. Adm. Jellico, not hearing from Beatty, essentially his scout element, where the enemy was at, made one of the greatest and intuitive battle decisions of naval warfare, completely in the blind, in turning an entire fleet from column into line ahead to the left and crossing Scheer's T in the classic maneuver. Sheer, forced to retire in darkness, never ventured forth again. WWI, essentially for German world dominance, essentially ended in 1916 that day... the war on land continued futilely in the trenches until 1918. All things at sea are strategic, all things on land are tactical...Mahan supersedes Von Clauscewitz.:arrgh!:

[Aktungbby]

For the record;
The Little Boy bomb used Cordite not Black Powder to set off the physics package.

Fat Man (the 2nd and last A-Bomb used in WWII) used Comp B and Baratol to initiate the implosion of the physics package.
THNX I'll reread that!--- Yup, Cordite, invented 1889 to replace black powder IN ENGLAND!!! What it takes to fire 86 lbs of U235 into a target of 57.3 lbs U235 which achieves critical mass when within 9.8 inches of each enough to prevent a nuclear FIZZLE which was a potential problem with the rifle style Little Boy detonator as opposed to the later implosion method. My particular joy in this discussion is that I'm HAVING the discussion. Having once questioned our use of nukes in WWII, my father (A Brooklyn Boy) and ex-B29 superfortress crewman, turned quietly on me and stated emphatically that he had been slated for the invasion of Japan and, but for bomb, I wouldn't be here!!! My lofty principles out the window, I resumed my schoolboy nuclear alert drills and lived out the Cold War quietly and resumed my history studies with an enlightened and more pragmatic perspective: a Kaleun from Rochester may know MORE than a Kaleun from Brooklyn...occasionally.

[Sailor Steve]

it is fairly substantiated that the black powder-also used to launch aircraft from the catapaults-was hit by the bomb.
Substantiated how?

[Aktungbby]

Substantiated how?
Unable to ascertain: but from amount of post-sinking dismantlement and hard hat diving, generally, immediately after Dec 7 to rescue or find trapped crews, and later to create the present monument, some immediate assessment must have been definitive as the conclusion is not challenged anywhere, inasmuch as with the bigger, more devastating bang, the distinction is moot... Current dives to check on oil leaks, environmental impacts, and the structural integrity of the monument have also not altered the analysis.:arrgh!:

[Sailor Steve]

The fact is that there is not enough left of the magazine area to ascertain exactly what happened, so everything is guesswork. The "black powder" theory was proposed in a 1944 BuShips report. The explosion of the shell itself (it wasn't a 'bomb' in the proper sense) could just as easily have ignited the powder in the main magazine.

I only questioned your summation this way because you stated it so emphatically, as though it were a proven fact, when in fact it's not a fact at all.

[Sailor Steve]

...later found to be from careless powder handling and lack of flash protections.
True, but there is so much more to it than that, going back a year to Dogger Bank and forward to 1918. It's a wonderful story and a game designers nightmare.

[Aktungbby]

The fact is that there is not enough left of the magazine area to ascertain exactly what happened, so everything is guesswork. The "black powder" theory was proposed in a 1944 BuShips report. The explosion of the shell itself (it wasn't a 'bomb' in the proper sense) could just as easily have ignited the powder in the main magazine.

I only questioned your summation this way because you stated it so emphatically, as though it were a proven fact, when in fact it's not a fact at all.
I agree with you. So I'm amazed at the google sites stating the matter with emphasis myself. I merely reiterate what they say. May even call guide at monument to check reference...:arrgh!:

[Aktungbby]

True, but there is so much more to it than that, going back a year to Dogger Bank and forward to 1918. It's a wonderful story and a game designers nightmare.
AYE! but Hipper lived up to his 'VON' that day. Polished off 'Dreadnought' and 'Castles of Steel' this year to acquaint myself more with the sordid details: I mean Winston and Jackie Fisher, buggery and the lash, and bigger Elizabeth class battleships just so the poor Huns couldn't use the Kiel canal to keep up( the ships wouldn't fit) and the greatest naval victory of all, the mine at Scapa that polished off Winnie's first employer (Omdurman), Lord Kitchner. Juicy!!!:arrgh!:

[Sailor Steve]

I've read several books on Jutland and the only one I actually own is Jutland: An Analysis of the Fighting, by the great John Campbell. It goes through every phase of the battle, tracking ship movements and gunnery, and describes the path of every shell fired and what damage it did. Of course that doesn't work for the ships that sank, but it's of inestimable value to the fan who likes to count rivets.

It starts with a quick analysis of Dogger Bank and delves into why the British cruiser guys started locking the flash doors open. It also goes into why the Germans started putting flash doors on their ships and why they made sure they were closing properly. It's a reference book, not a reader, but if naval battles interest you it's also a very good read.
http://www.amazon.com/Jutland-Analysis-Fighting-Maritime-Classics/dp/1558217592/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1377053434&sr=1-1&keywords=jutland+an+analysis+of+the+fighting

[Aktungbby]

I've read several books on Jutland and the only one I actually own is Jutland: An Analysis of the Fighting, by the great John Campbell. It goes through every phase of the battle, tracking ship movements and gunnery, and describes the path of every shell fired and what damage it did. Of course that doesn't work for the ships that sank, but it's of inestimable value to the fan who likes to count rivets.

It starts with a quick analysis of Dogger Bank and delves into why the British cruiser guys started locking the flash doors open. It also goes into why the Germans started putting flash doors on their ships and why they made sure they were closing properly. It's a reference book, not a reader, but if naval battles interest you it's also a very good read.
http://www.amazon.com/Jutland-Analysis-Fighting-Maritime-Classics/dp/1558217592/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1377053434&sr=1-1&keywords=jutland+an+analysis+of+the+fighting
I'll get on that asap! THNX:arrgh!:PSS after an exhausting night examining every aspect of the black powder theory vs the type B armor of the gun deck as opposed to another (8) bomb setting off the small fire in the admirals aft galley etc, etc.I was shocked to note that one admiral avatar for subsim admiral is, in fact, Admiral Kidd's formal portrait. He was of course the Admiral killed on the Arizona that day. Its seems there is also some conjecture as to whether the catapults use a black powder charge, if there was any black powder that day, if the black powder door was left open, and if the converted shell, with its seven second delay FUSE could have penetrated deep causing an oil fire-setting off the black powder...It is generally conceded in both theorys that the shell cannot have penetrated the turret and that the main gun 14 inch bagged ammo is VERY stable requiring a detonator which in normal practice was a black powder pad! Right up there with Richthoffen's autopsy!