Friday, December 31, 2021

In which this Author admits he is wrong... and an almost Earth Shattering Kaboom!

 So, well, some of you may know that I spent some time on Kwajalein Island, in Kwajalein Atoll, in the Marshall Islands, in the early 70s, as a kid, while my father was the Air Force liaison to the Army Base that the Navy supplied and the Air Force routinely bombed (or warheaded.)

Said island, and atoll, and region being relatively easily wrested from the grips of the Imperial Japanese in the first half of 1944, after a rather bitter struggle taking the Gilbert Islands away from said Imperial Japanese, re: Tarawa, Bloody Tarawa.

Having read the whole of the US Army History 'Green Book' on the seizure of the Gilberts and Marshalls, maybe 5-6 times (get the pdf here: Seizure of the Gilberts and Marshalls - U.S. Army Center of Military History or the whole entire catalog available here:  U.S. Army in World War II Series - U.S. Army Center of Military History Seriously, if you are serious about the US involvement in WWII, the US Army realized that they needed to get stuff down on paper before they started losing too many people, so the Army assigned historians to collect data and interviews and assemble one of the most awesomely expansive and complete history of military operations ever, though the writing can be somewhat academic and there are a lot of 'useless data' if you're only interested in actual shoot-shoot history) 

Where was I?  Oh, yeah. Having read the book on the Gilberts and Marshalls many times, I thought I got the part about Naval Gunfire as it pertained to the Gilberts (woefully ineffective) and the Marshalls (completely effective, no problems, worked like a charm) correct when I have commented upon Naval Gunfire as it was used in other places, like during Operation Overlord and other places.

The specific issue was the range of the firing used by the US Navy in the Gilberts vs the Marshalls.  And the issue came up with after-action review of the failures of said gunfire in the Gilberts and how to do it right in the Marshalls (and everywhere else, of course.)

So what went wrong in the Gilberts that they had to change to be successful in the Marshalls?

Well, here comes the point where I was woefully wrong, and I fully admit it. Time for ritual flogging and wearing of sack-cloth.

What I've assumed since the last time I read the Green Book (so called by historians because the hard copy versions were issued in, yes, green cloth covers (trivia, I know, but what's history without trivia?) was that in the Gilberts the US Navy stood way out of range and badly lobbed rounds upon the various islands and that is what made the gunfire ineffective while in the Marshalls the Navy sailed point blank up to the islands in the atolls and opened fired, point blank, and that was what made the Marshalls gunfire so effective.

Which, sadly to my ego, is woefully wrong.

Firstly, a discussion of what an atoll is.  And how it is possible to sail a ship almost right up to an atoll and perform point-blank gunnery.  This is possible because of the way atolls are formed.  Take a glass, top upwards, submerge in a full sink until the rim is barely above water.  That's basically what an atoll is. The rim of an extinct volcano that is poking mostly or partially out of water.  Said rim can be either actual volcanic material as is found in Truk lagoon, where the jagged caldera still mostly pokes above the ocean, leaving a deep harbor with many entrances available for ships and fish and water and sea monsters and aliens to go in and out if they can get over whatever lip still remains under water. Or it could be mostly submerged with basically coral encrustations poking out from when the sea level was 10' or more higher than it is now (so take that, globull warming conspiracy freakazoids, the sea levels have risen and fallen longtime before Man ever stood up and scratched his privates in public) and thus leaving low coral islands surrounded by coral reefs with the occasional pass worn into said rim by the actions of water or space aliens or maybe those ancient flying DC-8 space ships the Scientologists talk about that nuked all of Earth's volcanoes... no, not kidding, that's one of the beliefs of theirs.  In these style atolls the lagoon can be anywhere from barely passable for ships to really deep, and the passages can be anywhere from feet deep at high tide to deep enough to take battleships and carriers and other forms of naval ships.

Truk Lagoon, or Chuuk Lagoon as it's been renamed.
Notice tall portions.  That's the extinct volcano walls poking out.
While the outer ring is more like most other atolls, a build up of reef material poking out of water

Vs...

Tarawa, Bloody Tarawa...
This is more what is normally found, the caldera ring.
Coral islands exposed due to lowering sea levels.
Center lagoon, deep enough to be used as a harbor
Passage to the deep ocean from the lagoon.
That outer rim?  Goes from sea level to way deep real quick.


In the Gilberts campaigns, such as Tarawa, Bloody Tarawa, the US Navy sailed right up to the islands and plastered them at point-blank range.  Possible because the outer reef rim goes from median sea level (almost exposed in low tide, covered completely during high tide, exposed during the neap tide and you can go walking on the reef that is normally underwater, done it, it's fun, great way to collect all sorts of sea creatures.) And because they were point blank, firing point blank, the rounds were bouncing off the coral and flying into the inner lagoon or beyond, which, when you think about it, is rather more dangerous to ships and people in and on the water on the other side of the island, rather than being dangerous to people on the island (unless your luck sucks so bad you happen to be the grease spot where some 14" shell went skipping across the island.)

So, between the Gilberts campaign and the Marshalls campaign, the various US Forces (US Navy, US Army, US Marine Corps, US Army Air Force (possibly even the US Coast Guard)) sat down and reviewed what worked and why, what didn't work and why, and how to make what worked better, and how to fix what didn't work so it did work.

The result?  Use more tracked amphibians, more amphibious trucks, get tanks on right away, get supplies landed ASAP even if that means landing bulldozers under fire in order to clear lanes and landing zones.  Capture secondary islands and turn them into artillery platforms for the support of the attack on the primary island. AND (getting to naval gunfire) move the ships back so they can do plunging fire and have the ability to move close to take on individual targets with point blank AP fire (like a particularly nasty bunker that just won't give up) but mostly lob and use the extremely accurate naval fire control to do its job of lobbing death and destruction.

So, well, in the Marshalls, starting with Kwajalein Atoll and the attacks at the twin islands of Roi-Namur on the northeast corner of the atoll and the attack at Kwajalein Island on the southeast corner of the atoll, the US Navy did what bitter lessons in the Gilberts and especially at Tarawa, Bloody Tarawa, taught.  Hanging back and blazing away with as much fire as possible and just flattening anything that sticks above the ground.  

Post battle analysis of the attack on Kwajalein Island came up with artillery killed probably 75% of the enemy, and shocked the rest of them into very broke resistance, while destroying most of the enemy's equipment and fortifications.

So, well, Mea Culpa.  My bad.

What made me change my story?  I watched a youtube video.  The "From the Battlefields" channel.  Channel here:  From the Battlefields - YouTube

And the video itself? Battle of Kwajalein 1944 - Applying Lessons Learned - YouTube

Sorry, our  wonderful hosting site won't let me bring up the video directly so you'll have to click on it.

Good history.  There's something for everyone on it.  

And the part about the Japanese torpedo magazine on Namur Island, well, subtle hint.  DON'T THROW SATCHEL CHARGES INTO A TORPEDO MAGAZINE!!!!  Seriously, watch the video and see for yourself.  Big kaboom, almost-Earth Shattering Kaboom.


Other than that, hope you all are enjoying the 6th Day of Christmas and the last of this year.  Let's hope the remaining 6 days are as good or better than the last 6 and the two previous to it and that the new year is better, safer, less stupid filled.


As to the font, I've been trying to find one that is readable.  "Normal" size is too small, "Medium" is barely any better, gonna try "Large" and may have to fix it 


28 comments:

  1. Interestingly Germans found same difficulties with pointblank NGFS at Westerplatte...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Now there were some specific point-blank attacks that were effective in the Gilberts, but that's because whatever they were shooting at was big enough and stood tall enough to actually get hit. Which most of the buildings on the Japanese-controlled islands were either low one-story buildings built of flimsy wood (not enough to set off a fuse) or concrete 2 story buildings that got the tops blown away while the Japanese were downstairs or in bomb shelters. Or like the aforementioned torpedo magazine at Namur that basically got vaporized once the insides exploded outwards. Curiously, on Roi, on the northwest side of the island was one of the defenses that was attacked point blank by a battleship, obviously with a 14" round of AP as the hole in the front is about 15-16" and the hole in the back is about the same, and lots of evidence of concrete spalling. Must have been 'fun' to be in there.

      Delete
    2. In the case of Westerplatte, what few bunkers were constructed by Polish crew were well concealed with light woods covering the peninsula, and then camouflaged some more.

      Delete
    3. Pretty much the same situation on the Japanese-held islands. Extremely well-constructed bunkers and pill-boxes well concealed and bermed with sand. Very hard targets to hit even though their locations were known thanks to the rather excellent surveillance.

      Delete
  2. Very interesting Beans. The initial assumption "sounds" correct: Get as close as possible and open fire, although for the geographical reasons you explained, this is not the best way to accomplish the goal in this situation.

    I find it fascinating that the Army took the time to interview people at the time, before the knowledge and memories were lost. Do you know if this is a common practice? Do they still do it? Seems like a lot of useful intelligence and history could be gained.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I know, counterintuitive until you really think of how Naval gunfire works.

      And I doubt that the modern military is doing what the Army did extremely well, the Marines did okay, and the Navy has done on their website and some books.

      One thing I learned... Logistics. Those that study supply yada yada. I mean, some brilliant dude thought up the idea of making wooden sleds about the size of modern pallets, load said sleds with all sorts of war-goodies, cover and protect said supplies, all so they could be yanked out of a landing craft at the edge of a reef or in the lagoon and dragged to shore and above the water by whatever vehicle could do the dragging, like a DUKW, or an LVT, or a bulldozer or tank or truck or even a shore party with a powered winch or block and tackle. All because in the Gilberts, resupply was woefully lacking. Nowadays we airdrop pallets of supply, but before airdrops were a viable thing, some dude scratching his head though "We'll just drag all of this expensive stuff across coral reefs, so how to do it without destroying it all too much? Hmmm... Wish I was sledding... Sledding... SLEDS!!!"

      Delete
    2. Logistics is the great understudied item of our time (I say that as one who finds it incredibly non-interesting but should care more). The current Supply Chain fiasco is merely a reflection of that fact that we, at best, confined it to military options only.

      Delete
    3. As to the current Supply Chain fiasco, it's almost as if someone consulted a logistics expert to find out how to bottle-neck the whole chain. But that's crazy talk, right? Right?

      Delete
  3. Interesting post, Beans, and a nice tidbit of historical trivia, but I do not use that term in a detrimental fashion. Obviously an important lesson that was learned in blood in the Gilberts and applied in later campaigns. I assume that both types of fire were applied on Iwo, since Mt. Suribachi and various point targets would require direct fire.
    I just had the opportunity to listen to a discussion two retired SF guys were having. One was a forward observer in Desert Storm, and he had the opportunity to call in the first rounds fired from the New Jersey in that war. He said he radioed in the 13 digit target coordinate, which was located on a distant ridge. The ship's fire control officer came back and requested just the four digit grid number, since that's what they planned to take out. He gave them that info and then watched the target through his binos as the ridge was entirely vaporized by the 16-in shells. He said that was the most impressive thing he had ever called in, and he had coordinated fire from a lot of different sources, including Spectre gunships..

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Too bad we weren't all equipped with cell phones back then- that would be impressive to watch. NGFS is all but gone these days as an amphibious landing is unlikely due to ASMs with a long reach probably taking out our thin-armored (or no armor) CRU-DES.

      Delete
    2. In John Ringo's "Gust Front," where alien barbarians attack the Earth, some poor Lieutenant in the Army is about to be overrun, and finds on the fire net an available resource that he assumes is an army tube artillery battery or two. Turns out to be one of the battleships brought back. And much the same conversation occurred, not needing the exact precise coordinate of the exact spec of dirt, just the general area as it's all going to be airborne in 3.. 2... 1... So the LT goes hoarse and deaf adjusting fire over the host of aliens.

      Delete
    3. Tuna, I seem to remember that not a few fire missions were requested via cell phone calls back to the States and then routed back to the appropriate in-country source. And it, if I remember correctly, was because the US military had never really tested their comm systems in such a theater-wide situation where everything is going sideways rapidly.

      Delete
    4. Beans- I think this incident with the phone calls was during the Grenada expedition.
      John Blackshoe

      Delete
    5. True, but not smart phones, which is probably what I should have wrote. Everybody has a video camera in their hands these days, that put our 90's Hi-8 Camcorders to shame.

      Delete
  4. Beans,

    It is possible to embed a YouTube video in a Blogger blog post. However it needs to be done in the HTML view. Access that by clicking on the pen in the top left corner of the screen where you're writing the post. I typically add something along the lines of "INSERT VIDEO HERE" in my post as reading HTML is not for the faint hearted. In any case, find where you want the video to go and then copy this code and paste it there.
    Unfortunately, Blogger will not allow me to include that code in a comment. Email me at juvat1980 gmail and I'll send it to you

    As to font, the webmastering teacher side of me says "Use Sans Serif fonts! Period, Dot, End of Discussion!" But my Retired WHOGAS side says, "Let it Go, juvat, Let it go." I like, and use, Helvetica. YMMV

    Great post and videos, got something to do while waiting for the ball to fall tonight.

    Thanks

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. True-dat. I've also found that when Blogger doesn't find the video for you, you can force it to find what you want by using the link at the top of the video address bar pasted into the blogger video search area.

      Delete
    2. Two things. I tried for half an hour to force Blogger to imbed the video, which normally I have had absolutely no problems at all in doing. So, well, in frustration I gave up. I will copy and paste the instructions into an instruction sheet so I can be instructed next time I wish to do what Blogger says it can do but Blogger won't do.

      As to font, my graphic arts and publishing teachers always said "Sans Serif for headings, Serif for text." Of course, that was also back in the days of typewriters and having to learn how to justify across a column or page by knowing the letter count and fudging the word spacing. (Learned typing on a manual typewriter with size 12 type because that's what I had at home, a Royal manual typewriter, you know, one of those with the glass windows on the side and the heavy japanning and gold filagree (japanning is the treatment used instead of paint, the black finish on Model Ts and Singer treadle sewing machines and many tools before the 1930s. Made from lamp or carbon black (carbon powder) and mineral oil and some other stuff. Smooth out the casting, do repeated layers, sand between layers and you'll get a thick impervious and beautiful glossy semi-gloss or totally glossy finish. Great when manpower is cheap and materials are expensive, not so great when manpower is expensive and materials are cheap.)(called japanning because it created a finish much like the Japanese black finish on Japanese cabinetry and things.)

      Delete
    3. And I learned how to include HTML code in comments, Thanks to Sarge. Win/Win!

      Delete
  5. Beans--I like the font you are currently using in this post. I find it easy to read.

    So, the reason you want to flog and wear sackcloth is because for years you thought the ships just hung out in the distance and lobbed shells where-ever and found out instead, that the ships pulled up to the docks and just pounded anything that moved?
    I would think that logically, either method would work depending on the place needing to be flattened. Of course, we all know how little logic is used in many instances. So I don't think that you should go to sackcloth over assuming a logical assumption. Especially since you are familiar with the locals involved, and my guess is the folks making the plans had never heard of, never mind seen, an atoll in their life as they were probably hanging out in Washington DC.

    But I do think it is very cool that someone was smart enough to gather the information, and then write it all down, the good, the bad, as well as the ugly, so that going forward mistakes wouldn't be repeated...hopefully. That is something I don't mind my tax dollars paying for. Especially since these days there seems to be a concerted effort to only save one point of view, to push one side of an agenda, and to hell with the "rest of the story".

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Flog and wear sackcloth because I've been shouting and yelling on various blogs and boards for years that the effective way to use naval gunfire was to pull up next door, so to speak, level guns and shoot until nothing stops the shells instead of standing back and lobbing the shells so they actually hit something even if they miss the exact target. Thinking that's what they did in the Marshalls (point blank) so well and what they did in the Gilberts (lobbing) so poorly.

      But, sadly for my ego, it's the other way around. Point blank fire, as in what actually happened in the Gilberts, was found to be woefully ineffective, while standing back and lobbing a metric poopload of explosives and armor piercing and armor piercing explosives (because coral and cement made from coral is HARD) as used in the Marshalls was found to be quite satisfying and saved lots of lives on our side while killing lots of lives on their side, which was totally acceptable.

      And, yes, totally cool that the warrior generals who were still in charge realized that the time to get all the data collected and written down was NOW before memories got shakier or disappeared outright. And the history is just awesomely even-handed. Someone screws up, in supply or administration or commanding or on the front line, it's there in black and white. Someone shines in supply or administration or on the front line, it's there in black and white. Definitely not the Ministry of Propaganda version of history we see today.

      Delete
  6. Great post. Be careful with the font, lots of readers use different ways to view the blog, some better than others. I've found that the font you use (same as the one I use) works well enough on computers, tablets, laptops, and smart phones. You want nightmares? Play with the fonts, DAMHIK.

    Yes, videos are generally embeddable here (is that even a word?) but ya gotta do it in the html, juvat's hint is spot on.

    As to the actual code:

    [div style="text-align: center;"]
    [iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="712" src="//www.youtube
    .com/embed/INSERT YOUTUBE TAG HERE" width="1100"][/iframe][br /][/div]

    Replace the square brackets with angle brackets for the actual html. The YouTube tag being the bit after the watch?v= in the URL of the video one wishes to post, in your Kwajalein example it's "pbRtHt3VfVs" juvat's suggestion on how to mark where you want it to go is a good one.

    Again, nice post. Guess who used the green books as primary source material for his novel? (Yup, me.)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I find that the bog-standard font is very good, just the bog-standard size is a tad too small for my eyes, which, so far, aren't that bad.

      And I discovered this by, yes, playing with the fonts.

      As mentioned above in the comments, I will make a cheat sheet of instructions and a 'style sheet' section on what font and what size, for future use.

      The green books are great. I believe I forwarded you the link to the photo history book (for those out there in Chant land, the European Theater has lots of well-documented and illustrated books on said Theater, but there is also a book of just photos with blurbs because the US used lots and lots and lots of combat photographers, both on the front lines to take pictures of what was going on, and behind the lines to document what happened. So you can get photos of our people shooting up their tanks, and then photos of what their tanks looked like afterwards, and then photos of what their tanks looked like after our guys experimented (with live ammo) on how and where to shoot said enemy in order to be effective.)

      Good books all.

      Delete
  7. I don't know how many remember the movie Heartbreak Ridge. In the movie a Marine calls back to Camp LeJune to get help because their radio was broke. That's based off a true incident. They didn't get a Huey like in the movie, they got an A-7.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Our radio system was good for war games, fell apart in Grenada and Panama and was found to be way lacking in capabilities during Gulf War I.

      Just like the first real test of the communications systems on Air Force 1 in a real crisis, that being 9-11-01, found that what the planners thought was good was actually not good. Most of the time the people on AF1 were getting real time info from the tv broadcasts and actual communication relays between AF1 and the rest of the nation, didn't work well at all. Which is why Bush had to land to get access to functioning communications systems.

      And, of course, supposedly fixed after the fact. But the only way to find out would be to enter into another panicked crisis situation and we really don't want that.

      Delete
    2. I love the A-7. Used to see the AirNatGuard fly them out of Patrick AFB back in the day to go do bombing runs on various bombing ranges. Lovely aircraft, in that they worked, and worked quite well. Lovely in the same way the A-10 is lovely.

      Delete
  8. Beans- Having spent a couple of years doing NGFS training spotting, and some years on the shipboard delivery end as well, it was a great resource, but our NGFS capability is all but gone now, with few guns on ships, and few ships. As for the epitome of the craft, the 16" battle ships, they will never again fire a round in anger, even if the ships were to be recalled from museum status and reactivated. All of the 16" ammunition has been scrapped. All the spare barrels have been scrapped.

    NGFS (like most artillery fire) can be either "direct" which is basically like shooting a rifle- aiming directly at the target using sights on the gun, or "indirect" where you try to hit a point on a map, usually with the help of a spotter on the ground or in the air, or even a drone camera as a spotter, to adjust the fall of shot onto the target. For indirect fire, you need to know where the target is, where you are, and elevation of the sender and recipient to compute the range and direction. Add the usual ballistic data- winds, temperature, gun wear, ammunition type, etc, which is all pretty simple to get an elevation and azimuth to lay the gun. NGFS gets a bit more complicated as the ship is moving, as well as rolling and pitching, but by WW2 the Mark I Able electro-mechanical analog fire control computer took care of all of that. (A big metal box about 4' x 6' x 8' filled with a million gears, shafts, cams, dials, servos, synchros, and motors filling every cubic inch- weighing 3,000 pounds, and cost for a refurbished one in 1969 was $125,000 when a new car was under $2K.)

    Direct fire may be more accurate, but you need to be able to see the target, absent smoke, darkness, camouflage.

    With any NGFS, remember Murphy's law, "if the enemy is in range, so are you." The Japs had relatively few big guns to inconvenience NGFS, but at Normandy, the Krauts had significant assets. How much risk will you accept to get up close and pound them?

    Indirect fire is very useful, as you can assign specific targets to individual ships to bang away at from dispersed locations without interfering with each other, for a simultaneous bombardment of the entire island, to lift at the exact moment the first wave of landing craft hit the beach. This can be done from a greater range, and the ballistic trajectory will give better accuracy against an area, especially where there is little terrain difference.

    Ah, fun days with a radio- "Thunder, this is Dixieland Two Six Charlie- report when on station ready for call for fire, over."
    John Blackshoe

    ReplyDelete
  9. Beans, when you obtained new information, you processed that information and drew a better conclusion that you were able to do with more limited data. This is called being open minded and is NOT something for which you should apologize. We all do the best we can with what we have to work with. Instead of stonewalling and protecting your ego, you learned from your shortcomings and gained knowledge and wisdom. Do not flog yourself.

    I respect anyone who is willing to stand up and admit they were mistaken and then learn from it. It is a shame that many in the current military leadership fall far short of this. It will be a fatal error in battle, and unfortunately the vast majority of the casualties will not be those who screwed up.

    ReplyDelete
  10. My Marine DI long ago disliked NGFS support from the battleships off the coast of Vietnam. He sound the rounds would skip across the ground and not detonate on impact with the rice paddies. He said the Marines much preferred the smaller stuff.

    ReplyDelete

Just be polite... that's all I ask. (For Buck)
Can't be nice, go somewhere else...

NOTE: Comments on posts over 5 days old go into moderation, automatically.