This one is a bit more complex.
I have been reading a few books on the last days of the Pacific War.
The BPF is also described, but not exactly in any good way: Tired, in-capable of looking after itself, wrong equipment, and so on.
OK:
1) re-fueling at sea: Not good. USN had perfected it, BPF took too long to do it, hoses got ruptured, etc et
2) Refrigeration: Not good, 1/3 of the US cpacity, which meant that they had to be replenished way too often
3) Fleet train a collection of whatever was at hand
Some comments (picked from Wiki)
"American officers told Rear Admiral
Douglas Fisher, commander of the British Fleet Train, that he could have anything and everything
“that could be given without Admiral King’s knowledge."
" William Halsey, excluded British forces from
a raid on Kure naval base on political grounds.
[17] Halsey later wrote, in his memoirs: "
it was imperative that we forestall a possible postwar claim by Britain that she had delivered even a part of the final blow that demolished the Japanese fleet.... an exclusively American attack was therefore in American interests."
So not exactly a warm welcome.
" In April 1945, Fraser publicly criticised the Australian government's handling of waterside industrial disputes that were holding up British ships. The government was shocked and angered but agreed to allocate £6,562,500 for BPF naval works. Fraser was not satisfied. "
So, all in all, It was imnportant to "show the flag" and get some ships off to also partake in the defeat of Japan, but was it even worth it?
On top of: was the BPF even needed
and
How well did they do in the light of the cost of it all?
I do sort of feel sorry for Britain in this instance. It showed how far behind they were in 1945.
Ivan