In the months it's going to take the Japanese to finish securing Hawaii and build replacement lift? Absolutely.
1941 - invading Hawaii, possible?
- Thread starter Hammerbolt
- Start date
In the months it's going to take the Japanese to finish securing Hawaii and build replacement lift? Absolutely.
No
The IJN stretched its logistical train to the Limit to do the carrier strike on Pearl Harbor
To mount an invasion of Hawaii they would have needed a forward logistical base
The IJN stretched its logistical train to the Limit to do the carrier strike on Pearl Harbor
To mount an invasion of Hawaii they would have needed a forward logistical base
Something that's sort of been overlooked in this thread is that the Japanese were actually really bad at amphibious assaults against prepared defenses ... which they only really tried once (Milne Bay was a flanking maneuver), and were embarrassed at (Wake Island). All those landings all across the South Pacific and SEA were either unopposed or very, very lightly opposed. They had no real amphibious doctrine, horrible NGS doctrine, no naval CAS doctrine to brag about, and only very modestly specialized equipment and even more modestly trained forces (very few in number).
Give them all the logistics they want to land a few divisions on a Hawaiian island, and they'll get chopped up on the beaches.
Give them all the logistics they want to land a few divisions on a Hawaiian island, and they'll get chopped up on the beaches.
I didn't really see the need to bring it up given the near insurmountable logistic problems... But don't forget that the two services hated each other and I'm sure the IJN would gladly leave the IJA troops ashore in the lurch if it meant averting a threat to their precious capital ships.
Even if it's handwaved that the Imperial Japanese assault succeeds, they defeat the Americans, and that they get lucky and capture the USN's tank farms intact and full of lovely fuel which can promptly be reused to refuel the Imperial Japanese fleets, Winston Churchill had an American mother, is desperate to curry favour with the United States and may just declare war on Imperial Japan anyway.
And it's inadvisable for Imperial Japan to give the Indian and Australian troops deployed and deploying to Southeast Asia and the Dutch East Indies time to acclimatise.
Edit: Sure Imperial Japan has (somehow) secured one flank by conquering Hawai'i. Imperial Japan has a serious problem if that cost them Sumatra, Malaya, and Singapore. (The former two necessary to cover approaches to the latter with its major naval base and airfields...)
Last edited:
Is it physically possible? Yes.
Is it logistically, politically and strategically possible? Very marginally, yes.
Is it logistically, politically, strategically and tactically plausible? Excluding a "PoD" of the Japanese endlessly roll Nat20s/double sixes (your choice of RPG or board game analogies) , not really.
Is it logistically, politically and strategically possible? Very marginally, yes.
Is it logistically, politically, strategically and tactically plausible? Excluding a "PoD" of the Japanese endlessly roll Nat20s/double sixes (your choice of RPG or board game analogies) , not really.
Speaking of Milne Bay
Came across this youtube channel the other day, its good stuff.
A few observations.
Define invade…. Yes they can invade. If you mean get troops ashore. If you mean take over all of Oahu? Then the answer is NO. The US had to many troops in took good of defensIve positions for the number of troops that Japan could get to Hawaii.
You are going to need a weeks worth of fuel for the Kido Butai to support the invasion force and to fight off the remaining US fleet and the two remaining Carriers that will be on top of them in about 24/72 hours give or take.
As noted elsewhere Japan did not have enough tankers to send a very large invasion fleet as well as the Raiders. In fact they may not have had enough to send both. As noted most of the other invasions that Japan did we’re not using tanker support so you can’t just turn and invade Hawaii with them. Thus the whole point of the thread is impossible as it assumes you can take troops that would have invaded elsewhere and get them to Hawaii when for the most part you cant as they don’t have tankers.
If you don’t take out Hawaii VERY VERY fast you will get reinforcements. I am sure the US could find some ships and subs to send if they have a functioning navy base. And they could pull together a few more bombers to send.
And that Whole Germany first thing goes out the window if Japan is sitting in Hawaii so the US will be sending everything that Floats as fast as they can get it through the Panama Canal. So this brings up the issue that invading and KEEPING are two different animals.
And remember Japan has to invade not once but 4 to 6 times. There are no bridges between the islands in Hawaii. And I am sure the US could find a place to land aircraft and set up a base some where on those other islands if needed. (Still don’t think Japan can take Oahu.)
The thing is on December 6th the US was convinced that Japan could not pull off the raid on Peril Harbor. And they were ALMOST right. The risks Japan took and the steps the took to pull it off were extreme. The modified torpedoes and the route the ships took being the most famous but how close they were to running out of fuel is another obvious one. So to somehow expect them to stretch this paper thin win into an invasion is just not happening.
Japan couldn't really keep the force in place an extra day but now needs to keep it around an extra week while running daily bombing runs and anti ship patrols as well as probably at least two minor naval battles. So where are they getting the fuel and the munition from? Remember the tankers (what few that exist) from the DEI invasion have to be used to support the Hawaii invasion force.
So this actually probably is a true ASB as I just don’t see them having enough tankers in 1941 to keep the Navy in place and to land enough troops to take over Oahu.
And if the did take Oahu then what? You still have a number of other islands that the US will fill with troops, aircraft and such. Can you Image what PT Boats would do to the freighters attempting to keep the Japanese troops supplied? And that brings up the next point Assuming that somehow they do take Oahu in December of 41 how are they supplying it in Feb of 42?
No this would be a VERY VERY fast way for the war to be all but over by the end of 42. As Japan sacrifices its navy trying yo keep one island in Hawaii and in the mean time runs out of fuel (the whole point of the war in the first place)
Define invade…. Yes they can invade. If you mean get troops ashore. If you mean take over all of Oahu? Then the answer is NO. The US had to many troops in took good of defensIve positions for the number of troops that Japan could get to Hawaii.
You are going to need a weeks worth of fuel for the Kido Butai to support the invasion force and to fight off the remaining US fleet and the two remaining Carriers that will be on top of them in about 24/72 hours give or take.
As noted elsewhere Japan did not have enough tankers to send a very large invasion fleet as well as the Raiders. In fact they may not have had enough to send both. As noted most of the other invasions that Japan did we’re not using tanker support so you can’t just turn and invade Hawaii with them. Thus the whole point of the thread is impossible as it assumes you can take troops that would have invaded elsewhere and get them to Hawaii when for the most part you cant as they don’t have tankers.
If you don’t take out Hawaii VERY VERY fast you will get reinforcements. I am sure the US could find some ships and subs to send if they have a functioning navy base. And they could pull together a few more bombers to send.
And that Whole Germany first thing goes out the window if Japan is sitting in Hawaii so the US will be sending everything that Floats as fast as they can get it through the Panama Canal. So this brings up the issue that invading and KEEPING are two different animals.
And remember Japan has to invade not once but 4 to 6 times. There are no bridges between the islands in Hawaii. And I am sure the US could find a place to land aircraft and set up a base some where on those other islands if needed. (Still don’t think Japan can take Oahu.)
The thing is on December 6th the US was convinced that Japan could not pull off the raid on Peril Harbor. And they were ALMOST right. The risks Japan took and the steps the took to pull it off were extreme. The modified torpedoes and the route the ships took being the most famous but how close they were to running out of fuel is another obvious one. So to somehow expect them to stretch this paper thin win into an invasion is just not happening.
Japan couldn't really keep the force in place an extra day but now needs to keep it around an extra week while running daily bombing runs and anti ship patrols as well as probably at least two minor naval battles. So where are they getting the fuel and the munition from? Remember the tankers (what few that exist) from the DEI invasion have to be used to support the Hawaii invasion force.
So this actually probably is a true ASB as I just don’t see them having enough tankers in 1941 to keep the Navy in place and to land enough troops to take over Oahu.
And if the did take Oahu then what? You still have a number of other islands that the US will fill with troops, aircraft and such. Can you Image what PT Boats would do to the freighters attempting to keep the Japanese troops supplied? And that brings up the next point Assuming that somehow they do take Oahu in December of 41 how are they supplying it in Feb of 42?
No this would be a VERY VERY fast way for the war to be all but over by the end of 42. As Japan sacrifices its navy trying yo keep one island in Hawaii and in the mean time runs out of fuel (the whole point of the war in the first place)
Something I'd like to point out is the idea that invading Hawaii makes "sense" in any tactical or strategic way.
It flat out doesn't.
It does not offer you 'control' of the islands, as noted it would be a very hard fought offensive, at the limit of your supply lines and far from support and supply, essentially on the US doorstep and needing constant naval support. It is not 'defendable' given those long supply lines and the US ability to spam ships, submarines and aircraft out of the west coast and if needed through the Panama Canal. Meanwhile YOUR forces even assuming you can take most of the facilities at Pearl Harbor intact, (remember you just bombed the heck out of them yourself and only have whatever you can find locally to repair them unless you dedicate already limited transport capacity to the materials*) have limited ability to repair and resupply and they will be in constant operation to not only 'deter' an attack to retake the island but constant harassments and attrition attacks.
And instead of having a 'lynch pin for an extended defense parameter' you have essentially trapped the majority of your assets in the Pacific at a place where US forces can easily 'go-around' you and attack not only your supply lines but all the bases and areas your now unavailable assets can no longer defend. Hawaii is a honey-trap NOT a sensible strategic outpost.
Randy
*= And that all assumes that the US forces don't destroy everything if it looks like they might lose, which they will and which renders the situation even more untenable.
It flat out doesn't.
It does not offer you 'control' of the islands, as noted it would be a very hard fought offensive, at the limit of your supply lines and far from support and supply, essentially on the US doorstep and needing constant naval support. It is not 'defendable' given those long supply lines and the US ability to spam ships, submarines and aircraft out of the west coast and if needed through the Panama Canal. Meanwhile YOUR forces even assuming you can take most of the facilities at Pearl Harbor intact, (remember you just bombed the heck out of them yourself and only have whatever you can find locally to repair them unless you dedicate already limited transport capacity to the materials*) have limited ability to repair and resupply and they will be in constant operation to not only 'deter' an attack to retake the island but constant harassments and attrition attacks.
And instead of having a 'lynch pin for an extended defense parameter' you have essentially trapped the majority of your assets in the Pacific at a place where US forces can easily 'go-around' you and attack not only your supply lines but all the bases and areas your now unavailable assets can no longer defend. Hawaii is a honey-trap NOT a sensible strategic outpost.
Randy
*= And that all assumes that the US forces don't destroy everything if it looks like they might lose, which they will and which renders the situation even more untenable.
If I was writing an alternate history timeline on an invasion of Oahu, I would be sure to include the sunken battleships in Pearl Harbour providing gunfire support to the defenders. Just to add to the woe of the Special Landing Force infantrymen.
I would have to look up the condition of each of the US battleships in afternoon of December 7th, but for example the 14"/45 could hit much of the island with a range of 19 km, and the 16"/45 could hit almost all of it, with a range of 31 km, with the 14"/50 having an even longer reach with a range of 32 km.
I would have to look up the condition of each of the US battleships in afternoon of December 7th, but for example the 14"/45 could hit much of the island with a range of 19 km, and the 16"/45 could hit almost all of it, with a range of 31 km, with the 14"/50 having an even longer reach with a range of 32 km.
If logistics are not a problem for IJN, I am wondering what kind of surface fleet they would need to assemble for this kind of operation. Japanese understand that the Pacific Fleet contains about 8 standard BBs and 3 CV and when there is a need to operate near a base with considerable number of aircraft they would need to gather pretty much all possible capital ships for this operation. (Remember that Yamato and Musashi have not entered the fleet yet and all IJN BBs available roughly equal USN standards)
Of course in OTL the Pearl Harbor strike was a surprise that crippled the capital ships at the base, but would IJN be 100% sure of such surprise? Kido Butai could outrun everything it could not outgun, but that is not the case for invasion fleet.
Of course in OTL the Pearl Harbor strike was a surprise that crippled the capital ships at the base, but would IJN be 100% sure of such surprise? Kido Butai could outrun everything it could not outgun, but that is not the case for invasion fleet.
Maybe the Japanese could convince themselves that the U.S. would be prepared to negotiate after loosing Oahu (and it's civilian population.) I don't think the U.S. would have asked for or accepted a general cease fire but who knows what the Japanese might have thought in an alternate time line
Last edited:
Come to think of it, that might not be a bad story line. Japan thinks the U.S. would be forced to negotiate if they take Oahu, they put all their eggs in that particular basket, and instead, get a "Screw you, we're coming at you!" response from Washington. Think of the butterflies flapping all over the world, in every theater, from that particular chosen path...and post-war, too.Maybe the Japanese could convince themselves that the U.S. would be prepared to negotiate after loosing Oahu (and it's civilian population.) I don't think the U.S. would have asked for or accepted a general cease fire but who knows what the Japanese might have thought in an alternate time line
Maybe the Japanese could convince themselves that the U.S. would be prepared to negotiate after loosing Oahu (and it's civilian population.) I don't think the U.S. would have asked for or accepted a general cease fire but who knows what the Japanese might have thought in an alternate time line
As a main problem that still means they have to 'choose' to defer every single other operation and goal AND no matter what they've also just put the other colonial powers on notice that they are essentially "next" if the US does seek a cease-fire. And in less than 24 hours (well before they can possibly finish taking Oahu let alone secure it) the US is going to make it VERY clear (that whole 'surprise attack' thing) that they will only stop 'firing' when they run out of bullets or Japanese to shoot...
And really they can't come up with enough "delusion" sake to convince themselves that NOT taking as much as possible in the short window they have is any kind of plan. Keep in mind they really didn't expect to be anywhere NEAR as successful as they were the first couple of years. They got 'victory disease' specifically because they wildly succeeded, (or so they thought) far beyond their best projections. it was all very much a gamble and there's bet you take a calculated risk with and those that are simply too risky.
Hawaii was always going to be pretty much 'just' a raid to knock the US fleet back on it's heals and the Japanese weren't wiling at that point to provoke the 'decisive battle' that far away from their base of power. Wake was the furthest point in the 'official' plan, (and they could easily have not been successful there) BECAUSE of the distance and inability to project significant power. Going for Hawaii is an all or nothing thing and really there's no actual "upside" to doing so.
That's the biggest problem in that if they do that and they 'assume' wrong, (and as crazy as they were they STARTED at least figuring things would not all go their way) then they have nothing but a very upset US and all the other Pacific and colonial powers now alerted to their ambitions. Even if they 'won' they lose.
Randy
Still impossible. The lift didn't exist, even if IJA was willing to provide the manpower (it wasn't, & IJN couldn't). Besides which, you'd have to have Yamamoto abandon his concept of short war to seriously contemplate it. And then persuade IJA to give up the higher-value objectives (especially oil).
This is one of those where even IJA thought it was ASB. I'll let you contemplate how high a bar that is.
Presuming Japan can take Pearl Harbor, which is a long shot that would make Hitler think twice, what makes you think she can hold Oahu?
Short of intervention from the Romulans or somebody?The Pacific Fleet Sub Force will be doing it at shorter range than OTL, too: Hawaii is nearer Mare Island than the Home Islands...
This scheme strikes me as a way to lose the war before the end of 1941.
Last edited:
Might be able to hold it, simply due to the distances from anywhere else involved. As long as they keep it adequately garrisoned, adequately supplied, and adequately protected by a sufficiently large fleet.Still impossible. The lift didn't exist, even if IJA was willing to provide the manpower (it wasn't, & IJN couldn't). Besides which, you'd have to have Yamamoto abandon his concept of short war to seriously contemplate it. And then persuade IJA to give up the higher-value objectives (especially oil).
This is one of those where even IJA thought it was ASB. I'll let you contemplate how high a bar that is.
Presuming Japan can take Pearl Harbor, which is a long shot that would make Hitler think twice, what makes you think she can hold Oahu?
This scheme strikes me as a way to lose the war before the end of 1941.
The problem here though is that all those resources (divisions, ships moving cargo, fleet units) now required to hold and maintain Hawai'i against any possible United States counterattack (and having taken Hawai'i, the Imperial Japanese do now have a series of unsinkable aircraft carriers to park a lot of nasty aircraft on) are now nailed down in place on an island chain in the middle of the Pacific miles from anywhere else, and umm, can't be used anywhere or for anything which isn't in the vicinity of Hawai'i.
Meanwhile, Winston Churchill is probably bouncing up and down in excitement at the prospect of hosting United States surface and/or submarine fleets somewhere such as Singapore...
Nonsense. The further from Japan, the harder it is. Japan can never take Oahu; you're nuts if you think the capacity to take any of the remaining Hawaiian Islands on top of that exists. Those "unsinkable carriers" are pure fantasy.
The lesson of the Pacific War, one the Japanese (& numerous TV writers) didn't learn, is, islands are traps. Keeping Hawaii supplied would tie up so damn much shipping, Japan proper might starve. Her industry would be hamstrung for lack of tonnage to keep running. And the Sub Force would have a field day patrolling in Hawaiian waters, running from Mare Island surfaced with an ease & certainty of freedom from attack (absent occasional AAF B-17s...
). CinCPac & ComSubPac couldn't get a much better deal if they tried.Putting aside the very big problem of distance, there's three ways to try to skin this cat:
1. Commit a modest (1-3 division) landing force immediately after a suprize carrier attack in the hope that the shock and confusion let them get ashore and established. Obvious problems are you've added a slow moving convoy of transports to an already complicated plan, and said slow transports need to close the last 200-300 nautical miles which the carriers don't need to. Both of these dramatically increase the odds of getting spotted, in which case the landing force is stuffed and the carrier force is in an iffy position.
2. Commit a landing force large enough to actually have a reasonable chance of successfully assault entrenched positions. Problem is now you need to bring 6-9 divisions to the game... and you can't get that much sealift without shafting the operations in South East Asia. And as above, you've gotta get a large, slow transport convoy through the last 200-300 nautical miles without bringing the wrath of god down on yourself.
3. Seize outer islands and then try to blockade and bomb Oahu until it's garrison is weakened enough to either surrenders to ya or let ya take it by assault. This is gonna be a months long process (if it even works... if the British could get convoys through the Sicily-North Africa narrows to Malta, then closing off Oahu with much more open sea about it wil be much more difficult) and will tie down large numbers of air, land and sea forces, plus corresponding logistical assets, for the duration.
None of these are exactly safe or easy ways to go about things...
1. Commit a modest (1-3 division) landing force immediately after a suprize carrier attack in the hope that the shock and confusion let them get ashore and established. Obvious problems are you've added a slow moving convoy of transports to an already complicated plan, and said slow transports need to close the last 200-300 nautical miles which the carriers don't need to. Both of these dramatically increase the odds of getting spotted, in which case the landing force is stuffed and the carrier force is in an iffy position.
2. Commit a landing force large enough to actually have a reasonable chance of successfully assault entrenched positions. Problem is now you need to bring 6-9 divisions to the game... and you can't get that much sealift without shafting the operations in South East Asia. And as above, you've gotta get a large, slow transport convoy through the last 200-300 nautical miles without bringing the wrath of god down on yourself.
3. Seize outer islands and then try to blockade and bomb Oahu until it's garrison is weakened enough to either surrenders to ya or let ya take it by assault. This is gonna be a months long process (if it even works... if the British could get convoys through the Sicily-North Africa narrows to Malta, then closing off Oahu with much more open sea about it wil be much more difficult) and will tie down large numbers of air, land and sea forces, plus corresponding logistical assets, for the duration.
None of these are exactly safe or easy ways to go about things...
My 'unsinkable aircraft carriers' comment is in the context of a scenario where Imperial Japan has taken all the islands in the Hawai'i group. Except in a fantasy Clive Cussler novel, with an underwater atomic bomb delivered by a deep sea vehicle (Dragon if I remember the title correctly), the United States is probably unable to sink an island of any size below sea-level with anything resembling WW2 tech.
I agree that islands can become traps in a WW2 context - Imperial Japan was particularly good at taking islands and making them such a bother to invade that the United States simply ignored them and went somewhere else, leaving the garrison in what amounted to a self-imprisoned P.O.W. camp and unable to contribute to fighting anywhere else. Germany did it too with the British Channel Islands, packing them out with so many troops and such defences that even when nearby mainland France had been liberated, the Allies simply let the Germans keep the Channel Islands and concentrated on pushing on towards Germany itself. (Although Germany was able to make occasional nuisance raids against France from the Channel Islands; islands are great as bases for offensive action, and a nightmare if positioned near shipping routes, hence why the British removed Madagascar from Vichy control in 1942, and why Walcheren Island had to be cleared in 1944.)
Churchill would have declared war on Japan even without the attacks on Malaya and Hong Kong. In October he promised to do so within the hour of the outbreak of war between Japan and America.