Worse Pearl Harbor Attack

Ariosto

Ariosto

Japanese Get More Results During Pearl Harbor Attack

No, this is not a third wave scenario or what have you, but simply trying to take what was already dealt at Pearl Harbor, and making the possible damage possible. I'll do it by ship, since that will allow an easier picture to be drawn.

  • USS Arizona (BB-39)
    • As in OTL it explodes when the magazine is hit.
  • USS Oklahoma (BB-37)
    • Capsized following multiple torpedo hits as in OTL.
  • USS West Virginia (BB-48)
    • Suffers a fate similar to the Oklahoma (capsized) due to uncontrolled flooding.
  • USS California (BB-44)
    • Sunk as in OTL.
  • USS Nevada (BB-36)
    • Explodes when the magazine is hit; ammo was carried on the previous day unlike in OTL.
  • USS Tennessee (BB-43)
    • Suffers more serious damage than OTL, with the two armor-piercing bombs that hit it successfully going off. Need a second opinion though on how serious this might be however in comparison.
  • USS Maryland (BB-46)
    • Struck by two bombs that caused some serious flooding, before causing the vessel to capsize.
  • USS Pennsylvania (BB-38)
    • The caisson of the drydock is successfully torpedoed; need another person to determine what kind of effects this might have. Sustained damage from the explosions of the Cassin and the Downes. Took additional severe damage from multiple airborne strikes.
  • USS Utah (AG-16)
    • Capsized as in OTL

  • USS New Orleans (CA-32)
    • A fragmentation bomb detonated on the main deck. Can't really determine the results, but assume damage would be minor; can't say the same of the crew.
  • USS St. Louis (CL-49)
    • Striken by several torpedoes and sunk by a midget submarine while sailing through the channel entrance.
  • USS Helena (CL-50)
    • Sunk due to Torpedo strike, unlike in OTL when damage control work was sufficient to keep the ship afloat.
  • USS Raleigh (CL-7)
    • The combination of two torpedo strikes causes the Raleigh to capsize, unlike in OTL where she barely managed to stay afloat.
  • USS Honolulu (CL-47)
    • Takes a direct hit and requires some repairs.
  • USS Monaghan (DD-354)
    • Takes a direct hit from a torpedo from a midget submarine; sinks some time later (or capsizes)
  • USS Aylwin (DD-355)
    • Takes a direct hit from an armor-piercing bomb to the starboard bow; sunk
  • USS Cassin (DD-372)
    • Completely destroyed by munitions explosions due to burning oil.
  • USS Downes (DD-375)
    • Completely destroyed by munitions explosions due to burning oil.
  • USS Cummings (DD-365)
    • Took two direct hits from airborne bombs to the bow and stern; sunk

  • USS Shaw (DD-373)
    • Flooding following the magazine explosion in the bow, with the ship settling upon the harbor bed.
  • USS Bagley (DD-386)
    • Took a torpedo strike just near the tip of the bow; not sure how to determine this.
  • USS Helm (DD-388)
    • Took two bombs to the starboard side; capsized.
  • USS Henley (DD-391)
    • Took a bomb strike to the Port-Bow; undetermined
  • USS Oglala (CM-4)
    • Took a torpedo strike and later a bomb strike; sunk
  • USS Perry (DMS-17)
    • Severely damaged from a bomb strike
  • USS Dobbin (AD-3)
    • Took several bomb strikes; sunk
  • USS Avocet (AVP-4)
    • Struck by as many as three bombs; sunk
  • USS Neosho (AO-23)
    • Struck by two torpedoes to the port side; capsized
  • USS Pelias (AS-14)
    • Took damage when a downed aircraft crashed into the port side of the vessel.
  • USS Sacremento (PG-19)
    • Severely damaged when a downed aircraft crashed into her.
  • USS Curtis (AV-4)
    • Struck by multiple bomb, torpedo, and aircraft strikes; sunk
  • USS Vestal (AR-4)
    • Took multiple bomb and torpedo strikes and sunk
  • USS Antares (AG-10)
    • Took multiple bomb strikes and sunk
  • USS Keosanqua (AT-38
    • Was struck by an airborne bomb and capsized

So, considering these factors, what exactly would the effects be in the short-term and the long-term?​
 
Last edited:

Hoist40

Banned
Not much

The biggest loss would be that more experienced crew would be dead or wounded.

The battleships were not vital to the war effort. Any BB’s that survived were sent to the West Coast and had no real effect on the war until later in the war.

That is why the Japanese attack while spectacular did not actually accomplish much toward the professed goal of giving the Japanese six months of freedom from US interference. The old US battleships would have not really been used much until the US started its advance across the Pacific and that could not happen for at least six months and probably a year due to a shortage of supply, transport, repair, etc shipping.
 

heyou

I think the difference would be surprisingly slight. The battleships who did worse in this scenario than OTL came back into service OTL at different times from 1942 to 1944. Their main role was fire support for various amphibious landings. The fire support was obviously helpful, but even w/o these battleships those landings would have succeeded.

The one surface action these battleships saw against IJN was at Suriago Strait. Five of the 6 US battleships present there had been at Pearl Harbor on Dec 7. The modern radar fire control on three of those ships allowed them to quickly finish off the battleship Yamashiro, that had survived the ambush by USN torpedo boats and destroyers (PT boats supposedly scored no hits, but destroyers sank 4 out of 7 of Nishimura's ships as they exited the strait).

If we assume that Missisippi was the only USN battleship at Suriago Strait, and that it had not been upgraded, that battle becomes much less one sided, but still ends in a US victory. Yamashiro had alreadt taken 4
torpedo hits from destroyers, but steamed forward to be sunk OTL by dozens of 14 and 16 inch shells from the radar equipped USN battleships. Missippi, OTL, had almost no opportunity to fire. But there were also 8 Allied cruisers in the force OTL, who would presumably also have been there in the proposed scenario. Cruiser Mogami got through the PT boats and destroyers unscathed," but after entering the Surigao Strait, Mogami was struck by four 8-inch (200 mm) shells, which destroyed both the bridge and the air defense center. Both the captain and executive officer were killed on the bridge, and the chief gunnery officer assumed command." (Wikipedia). The 8 Allied cruisers could have been expected to sink the limping Yamashiro as well as cripple Mogami. It might have taken longer to finish off Yamashiro than OTL, and IJN ships might have scored a few hits in return, but this would not have been a Japanese victory any way I can imagine. Admiral Shima's force would presumably have retreated rather quickly after finding Nishimura's force sunk or sinking, as it did OTL.

Helena and Honolulu had more eventual wars after Pearl Harbor, each sinking or helping to sink a Japanese ship or 2. But it is difficult to identify a battle at which the absence of 1 or the other of those cruisers would have changed the outcome.
 

lionhead

So just the Nevada, Tennessee and Pennsylvania are unsalvagable, the West Virginia will still be raised and used at leyte gulf i would think. Well, those 3 in OTL where modernised and overhauled after they where lifted. That won't happen so instead of OTL in 1943 and 1944 the US will be 3 overhauled battleships short... Hm, not a big loss i would think.:D
 

Hyperion

Banned
Well if one or both of the bombs that hit the USS Tennessee are in or near a main magazine similar to the Arizona, you could well have a similar result, with our without as many casualties as the Arizona. Not a crippling loss of the ship, but the loss of trained personnel would be significant.

Likewise, damage to the Pennsylvania may not be a long term concern, but having a drydock out of action could be a problem.

Long term the biggest loss I see would be the three cruisers.

I'd say overall, you could add anywhere from 500 to 2000 casualties more than OTL.
 
Ariosto

Ariosto

I'm going to be going more in-depth in just a second, adding additional ships to the rooster; near-misses and so forth that are not readily-identifiable. However, yes, the outcome regardless may well be marginal.
​
 
Ariosto

Ariosto

Alright, I added a bunch of additional ships, but the outcome I assume would be much the same; the only one I am really curious about is the Light Cruiser that would have sunk in the Channel.
​
 
BBadolato

BBadolato

No matter what gets destroyed isn't Japanese defeat in the Pacific an almost certainty, not saying it will be a cakewalk but still.
 
Ariosto

Ariosto

ModernKiwi said:
Two midget submarine victories??? One would practically be ASB. Those things were crap.
Click to expand...
It's supposed to be a worst case scenario, and the only one where it really extends plausibility is the one regarding the Monoghan; with the St. Louis, the only reason why both torpedos hadn't hit was because they managed to hit a shoal about 600 feet from the ship. Slightly change the circumstances and they both would have struck.
​
BBadolato said:
No matter what gets destroyed isn't Japanese defeat in the Pacific an almost certainty, not saying it will be a cakewalk but still.
Click to expand...
I don't expect much of an advantage for the Japanese to come out of this, let alone a victory (in fact a victory scenario is almost impossible even in the most generous of circumstances), but it is more to explore the effects of such a result, both in the near and in the long term.
​
 

Hyperion

Banned
BBadolato said:
No matter what gets destroyed isn't Japanese defeat in the Pacific an almost certainty, not saying it will be a cakewalk but still.
Click to expand...

Knowing what we do now, yes. Back in the day, even Yamamoto and several of the more rational Japanese senior officers(at least in the Navy) knew and told their bosses before the war that they could guarantee a good run for six months to a year at most. Japan never stood a chance in a long term fight, their best bet in OTL was to hit the allies, and the US in particular hard enough that they could get into a position(at least temporarily) that they might have been able to force the US to sue for peace.

Japan could delay the inevitable somewhat, but most TLs that I've read where they do so buy them at most three to six months at the extreme maximum, and a lot of those scenarios involve them not surrendering at the time they did. End result of most of those scenarios is one or more additional nukes being dropped, a few dozen more heavy B-29 raids, burning even more urban areas in Japan to ash, and several million more Japanese dying than OTL.

At the time, from the POV of people at Pearl Harbor, or the man on the street, heavier losses, a thousand or two thousand more dead than OTL losses could have a great impact.

Even with a lot of the ships and planes destroyed in OTL, crews survived, pilots didn't even have planes to get into, they lived, got new planes, got assigned to new ships.

Really, the biggest casualty event I could see from this POD is the USS Tennessee possibly going up similar to the Arizona, and the USS Raleigh capsizing would probably be the worst issues as they'd each take hundreds of lives.

If you want more long term damage from a single loss mentioned in the OP, the USS St. Louis sinking might cause the most long term headaches, especially if she blocks the channel enough that aircraft carriers and battleships can't safely get into or out of the harbor.
 
Last edited:
Ariosto

Ariosto

Hyperion said:
At the time, from the POV of people at Pearl Harbor, or the man on the street, heavier losses, a thousand or two thousand more dead than OTL losses could have a great impact.
Click to expand...
If the USS Nevada, when it exploded, were to have the same casualty rate as the USS Arizona, that would be ~1260 more men dead, compared to the 2,402 dead of OTL; that isn't even getting into the other ships. I would expect casualties would number at least around ~5 - 6 thousand.
​
 

asupackman

"What would have happened if the island were bombed so much during the attack it sank?" - GA Congressman Hank Johnson
 

WSoxfan

Would this have affected the United States ship construction? For example, would would we see all six Iowas completed, or possibly more ships transferred from the Atlantic Fleet?
 

Hyperion

Banned
Ariosto said:
If the USS Nevada, when it exploded, were to have the same casualty rate as the USS Arizona, that would be ~1260 more men dead, compared to the 2,402 dead of OTL; that isn't even getting into the other ships. I would expect casualties would number at least around ~5 - 6 thousand.
​
Click to expand...

I never considered that. This in itself would be a huge butterfly from OTL.

With the death toll of this being possibly twice as high as OTL if not more so, are there any key figures that went on to play big parts in the war that ITTL might well be dead or too badly injured to continue serving? Really the additional body count would be a worse blow than the loss of ships.
 
Ariosto

Ariosto

Hyperion said:
I never considered that. This in itself would be a huge butterfly from OTL.

With the death toll of this being possibly twice as high as OTL if not more so, are there any key figures that went on to play big parts in the war that ITTL might well be dead or too badly injured to continue serving? Really the additional body count would be a worse blow than the loss of ships.
Click to expand...

  • Admiral Husband Edward Kimmel - Killed by a stray spent .50 caliber shell that crashed through the window of his office (okay, it doesn't have much to do with the Japanese, but it came darn close to happening as is).
  • Vice Admiral Stratton Anderson - Killed during the attack on the USS Maryland (adding in a POD where he decided not to go home that weekend).
  • Rear Admiral Isaac C Kidd - Killed as in OTL
  • Captain (later Rear Admiral) Charles M. Cooke - Killed aboard the USS Pennsylvania due to additional strikes.
  • Rear Admiral William R Furlong - Killed aboard the USS Oglala.
Other than that however, I am not certain which other major figures might have been at Pearl Harbor, and Kimmel himself didn't have much of an effect on the war other than serving as something of a scape-goat for the failures at Pearl.

EDIT: Updated the ship log again, notably the Maryland.

EDIT2: Updated leader list. I am not sure of anyone else notable.
​
 
Last edited:

JRScott

Banned
Ultimately it will not change the course of the war.

Will it mean more casaulties, yes, however the loss of the Battleships largely led to a change in US policy towards Carriers.

Japan's problem was that they believed they could cripple the US fleet, and end the war in 6 months by suing for peace. The problem is the nature of the attack being surprise, and the fervor FDR stirred up makes it impossible for Japan to ever make the peace it wanted. It simply can't beat the manpower or industrial might of the United States.

The flaw in Japan's attack wasn't what they destroyed or lacked to destroy, it was the fact that the attack occurred before the declaration of war was delivered.
 
GarethC

GarethC

Many of the light units which have been more severely damaged were used in the "pinprick" carrier raids in early 42, and then in the Guadalcanal campaign (where several were lost).

With this greater damage, are there sufficient escorts for the carriers to carry out those raids?

Replenishment was an issue a couple of times in 42 as well, IIRC - if Neosho is lost here, are there sufficient other oilers to support all the OTL operations?

Will the Guadalcanal landings have to be delayed?
 

HMS Warspite

About USS Pennsyslvania, she was in a graved drydock, not a floating dock, meaning: not possibility to get damage from torpedoes. You can destroy the locks of the dock, but that would only lead to flooding of the drydock, which actually happened in the OTL, after USN personel oppened the locks to use seawater to fight the fires on the burning USS Cashin and Downes, which were in the same dock as the flagship.

Therefore, USS Pennsylvania was only to be threatened by bombs, if targeted at all by the Strikegroup. It should be noted theat the instrcutions for the torpedo carrying B5N's were to engage the battleship Row only, although a few actually struck at other targets, such as USS Ralleigh and Utah, as well as USS Helena. Level Bombing B5N's also targeted Battleship Row only, while the D3Y's divebombers of the second wave were to strike all shipping left. (First wave Val's struck at the airfields only, as did the fighters.) B5N levelbombing Kate's of the second strike were instructed to bomb the airfields and especially the runway's, not the ships, as these were carrying HE bombs only.

This can lead to the conclussion that the destroyers and cruisers would be affected less, since these wee not anchored at Battleship Row. A number of Val's of the 2nd wave might strike them, but likely the majority would concentrate on the bigger ships.

From Wiki:
First wave composition


The Japanese attacked in two waves. The first wave was detected by U.S. Army radar at 136 nautical miles (252 km), but was misidentified as USAAF bombers arriving from the American mainland
Top:
A. Ford Island NAS B. Hickam Field C. Bellows Field D. Wheeler Field
E. Kaneohe NAS F. Ewa MCAS R-1. Opana Radar Station R-2. Kawailoa RS R-3. Kaaawa RS
G. Haleiwa H. Kahuku I. Wahiawa J. Kaneohe K. Honolulu
0. B-17s from mainland 1. First strike group 1-1. Level bombers 1-2. Torpedo bombers 1-3. Dive bombers 2. Second strike group 2-1. Level bombers 2-1F. Fighters 2-2. Dive bombers
Bottom:
A. Wake Island B. Midway Islands C. Johnston Island D. Hawaii
D-1. Oahu 1. USS Lexington 2. USS Enterprise 3. First Air Fleet



​
<21 feet (6.4 m)
​
22–23 feet (6.7–7.0 m)
​
29 feet (8.8 m)
​
30–32 feet (9.1–9.8 m)
​
33–34 feet (10.1–10.4 m)
​
34–35 feet (10.4–10.7 m)
​
36–37 feet (11.0–11.3 m)
​
38–39 feet (11.6–11.9 m)
​
40–41 feet (12.2–12.5 m)
​
42–48 feet (12.8–14.6 m)
​
>49 feet (14.9 m)
​
City
​
Army base
​
Navy base
Attacked targets:
1: USS California
2: USS Maryland
3: USS Oklahoma
4: USS Tennessee
5: USS West Virginia
6: USS Arizona
7: USS Nevada
8: USS Pennsylvania
9: Ford Island NAS
10: Hickam field
Ignored infrastructure targets:
A: Oil storage tanks
B:CINCPAC headquarters building
C: Submarine base
D: Navy Yard


The first attack wave of 183 planes was launched north of Oahu, led by Commander Mitsuo Fuchida.[59] It included:[nb 11]
Second wave composition

The second wave consisted of 171 planes: 54 B5Ns, 81 D3As, and 36 A6Ms, commanded by Lieutenant-Commander Shigekazu Shimazaki.[60] Four planes failed to launch because of technical difficulties.[38] This wave and its targets comprised:[60]
  • 1st Group – 54 B5Ns armed with 550 lb (249 kg) and 132 lb (60 kg) general purpose bombs[61]
    • 27 B5Ns – aircraft and hangars on Kaneohe, Ford Island, and Barbers Point
    • 27 B5Ns – hangars and aircraft on Hickam Field
  • 2nd Group (targets: aircraft carriers and cruisers)
    • 81 D3As armed with 550 lb (249 kg) general purpose bombs, in four sections
  • 3rd Group – (targets: aircraft at Ford Island, Hickam Field, Wheeler Field, Barber’s Point, Kaneohe)
    • 36 A6Ms for defense and strafing
 

JRScott

Banned
GarethC said:
Many of the light units which have been more severely damaged were used in the "pinprick" carrier raids in early 42, and then in the Guadalcanal campaign (where several were lost).

With this greater damage, are there sufficient escorts for the carriers to carry out those raids?

Replenishment was an issue a couple of times in 42 as well, IIRC - if Neosho is lost here, are there sufficient other oilers to support all the OTL operations?

Will the Guadalcanal landings have to be delayed?
Click to expand...

It would hurt material support for the allies more than operations for the Navy. It means less US presence in Atlantic and more units transferred to the Pacific early on.

It wouldn't take long to replace an oiler or two.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top