rascal1225
Banned
Yes, my long suffering wife has pointed out that possibility several times over the years, usually quickly followed by "You have to sleep sometime, you bastard !"
Or send you to the bar forever...
The odds of destroying enough tanks you need to strip 50 tankers out to supplement Pearl storage are incredibly low, you might as well start talking about the odds and effects of a every tank in Pearl simultaneously exploding, setting off every volcano in the Hawai'ian islands, and then setting off a sympathetic eruption of the Yellowstone megavolcano.stripping out 50 or so MORE US tankers to store replacement fuel within PH could only advance that schedule GREATLY. Which quickly results in catastrophic U-boat Atlantic kill numbers against Allied Lend/Lease convoys bound for Britian, Russia and the Mediterranean area ... Malta falls ? ... the Suez Canal falls ? ... Britain falls ? Russia drops out of the war ?
Its a staggering list of potential failures.
No, all I can see would be a USN Pacific Fleet retirement back to the US West Coast ...
I believe the Pembroke dock tanks were not separated by the distances at PH. and did not have the berms around them capable of holding each tank's full capacity.Actually, the majority of the PH fuel storage tanks were built as cheaply as possible for the 1923/4 era by oil companies involved in the "Great Teapot Dome Scandal" so they had NO such expensive and hard to maintain floating inner roofs ... while most modern fuel storage tanks certainly do ... thought they still burn out on occasion too ... Zimm claims that they had floating roofs but his widely read PH Myths book also claims (assumes) that those PH fuel storage tanks had steel wall thicknesses of between 1.5" and 3" when a bit of www research would have provided him with the only 1/2" mild rolled steel plate truth ... as a result of his faulty assumptions wrt the PH fuel storage tanks, his computer modelling included storage tanks many times more difficult to puncture / ignite than would have been the actual case at Pearl Harbor.
Possibly but my understanding of Japanese divebombing tactics of the time was that the 2 "wingmen" were supposed to watch the fall of their shotaI leaders's bomb before adjusting their own aim ... with the PH fuel storage tanks clustered so closely together, I think it reasonable that those "wingmen" could aim at 2 adjacent tanks after their leader's bomb actually hit a storage tank ...
I suspect that the more difficult problem would have been the smoke screens produced by burning fuel storage tanks obscuring the aim of follow on IJN Val divebombers ... a problem solved easily enough by starting with bombing downwind fuel storage tanks ... with the huge smoke pyres generated by the IJN's first wave air attacks on the USN warships within PH providing hard to miss seeing wind direction indicators ...
in any case, the 18 day Pembroke Docks fuel oil fire certainly points out the ability of adjacent oil storage tank fires to radiantly heat up other fuel storage tanks close to them, to the point of those venting highly combustible fumes into an area full of active fires ...
Ha, Sleep is for the dead, History researchers don't need no sleep!Yes, my long suffering wife has pointed out that possibility several times over the years, usually quickly followed by "You have to sleep sometime, you bastard !"
As I said the IJN was prepared to tow or scuttle, not planned to do that. tow or scuttle was a last chance resort.The oilers rendezvouzed with the strike force on December 9th and performed refuelling tasks at that time. KB then hit bad weather and refueling became impossible for several days.
Here is a link to an Official USN document about the facilities.http://lcweb2.loc.gov/master/pnp/habshaer/hi/hi0600/hi0642/data/hi0642data.pdf
It depends, if the fumes are too ri ch, you many not get the right fuel vapor oxygen mix. Those fumes will be confined to each tank on the Nesho. There are many variables based on fuel air mix, air temp and explosion. A powerful enough explosion can snuff itself out.If Neosho was full of avgas fumes, I would think even the sparks caused by being hit by an AP bomb would set everything off.
Looking up these ships on Combined Fleet, they are faster than this list says. All were in the 18.5-19.5 knot range.OK folks; Here are the Japanese Oilers assigned to 1st Air Fleet(AKA Kido Butai)
Research IJN Oilers of 1st Air Fleet
Tonnage Speed Cargo
Nippon Maru 9.9k 18-20kts 14590m3
Toho Maru 9.9k “ “
Kyokuto Maru 10k “ 16100m3
Toei Maru 10k “ “
Kokuyo Maru 10k “ “
Ken’yo Maru 10k “ “
Shinkoku Maru10k “ 16100m3
This link will take you to a specific Oiler, but scroll down the page you get all the IJN Oilers and Fleet assignments. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_fleet_oiler_Kazahaya
This is the list I'd compiled of available tankers and oilers - type, oil carried, name, displacement, assignment.Looking up these ships on Combined Fleet, they are faster than this list says. All were in the 18.5-19.5 knot range.
| oiler | 12500 | Kiroshio | 10519 | |
| Oiler | 12687 | Kyokuto | 10051 | 1st air fleet |
| Oiler | 12031 | Toei | 10022 | 1st air fleet |
| Oiler | 12031 | Kokuyo | 10027 | 1st air fleet |
| Oiler. Refuelled Akagi with 435 and 607 tons | 12031 | Kenyo | 10024 | 1st air fleet |
| Oiler | 13324 | Nippon | 10009 | 1st air fleet |
| Oiler | 12687 | Toho | 9997 | 1st air fleet |
| Oiler | 12728 | Shinkoko | 10020 | 1st air fleet |
| did not participate in mission due to wrong hoses. Oiler from 7 Jan. 42 | 15007 | Akebono | 10182 | 1st air fleet |
| Oiler | 12687 | Toa | 10051 | 4th Fleet |
| converted to oiler. Did port refueling | 12960 | Hoyo | 8691 | 4th Fleet |
| tanker, conversion completed Dec 20th | 12960 | Kaijo no2 | 8632 | 4th Fleet |
| oiler | 8000 | Shiretoko | 15450 | 4th fleet |
| oiler | 8000 | Iro | 15540 | 4th fleet |
| oiler | 8000 | Naruto | 15540 | 4th fleet and southern drive |
| German. Tanker 1942 | 6341.25 | Teikon | 5073 | German |
| tanker | 11905 | Fujisan | 9527 | Hawaii, sub support |
| tanker | 12000 | San Ramon | 7309 | home |
| tanker | 12000 | San Pedro | 7268 | Home |
| tanker | 12000 | San Luis | 7268 | Home |
| tanker | 9139 | Ogura 2 | 7311 | Home |
| tanker | 9188 | Ogura 3 | 7350 | home |
| tanker | 11506 | Nissho | 10526 | home |
| tanker in nov 41 | 21000 | Kyokuyo | 17549 | home |
| tanker as of nov 41 | 21001 | Nisshin | 16764 | home |
| tanker | 397.5 | Moji | 318 | home |
| tanker | 758.75 | Kyoei | 607 | home |
| tanker | 1486.25 | Kyoei 2 | 1189 | home |
| tanker | 1486.25 | Kyoei 3 | 1189 | home |
| tanker | 1083.75 | Kinrei | 867 | home |
| tanker | 598 | Juko | 478 | home |
| tanker | 9550 | Kiyo | 7251 | home |
| tanker | 10843 | Eiyo | 8673 | home |
| oiler | 8000 | Sata | 15540 | home |
| oiler | 8000 | Ondo | 15540 | home |
| tanker | 11839 | Tonan | 9866 | Home |
| Oiler | 12031 | Itsukushima | 10018 | Home Islands |
| tanker | 12687 | Takekawa | 10009 | Home Islands |
| oiler | 15007 | Akatsuki | 10216 | Home Islands |
| oiler | 8000 | Tsurumi | 15540 | home then java |
| tanker | 9741 | manju | 6515 | home, 4th fleet |
| Oiler | 12312 | Teiyo | 9849 | home, then Java |
| tanker | 11506 | Owatasan | 9204 | IJA |
| tanker | 9741 | Tachibana | 6515 | IJA |
| tanker | 11506 | Omurosan | 9204 | IJA |
| tanker | 1407.5 | Kaisoku | 1126 | IJA |
| tanker | 9000 | Ogura 1 | 7270 | IJA |
| tanker | 11476.25 | Rikko | 9181 | IJA |
| tanker | 7001 | Hokki | 5601 | ija |
| tanker | 1362.5 | Kyodo | 1090 | ija |
| oiler | 8000 | Shiriya | 15540 | midway then home. 8kt |
| Double counted tanker/seaplane tender | 10000 | Kamoi | 17000 | seaplane tender |
| Oiler | 12031 | Genyo | 10018 | Southern Drive |
| Oiler | 12031 | Nichiei | 10018 | Southern Drive |
| oiler | 12000 | San Clemente | 7309 | Southern Drive |
| tanker | 12000 | San Diego | 7268 | Southern Drive |
| oiler as of 6 December | 6540 | Toen | 5125 | Southern Drive |
| tanker, supply oil dec 41 | 23114 | tonan 2 | 19262 | Southern Drive |
| oiler | 1070 | Hishi 2 | 856 | Southern Drive |
| tanker | 1486.25 | Hishi | 856 | southern drive |
| oiler | 8000 | Notoro | 14050 | Southern drive |
| oiler | 8000 | Erimo | 15540 | Southern drive |
| oiler | 8000 | Hayatomo | 15540 | Southern drive |
| tanker | 10300 | Shoyo | 7499 | Southern Drive, 4th fleet |
| tanker as of March 42 | 23114 | tonan 3 | 19209 | tranport, southern drive |
| tanker, fresh water and oil | 1486.25 | Koryu | 974 | |
| Kuroshio | is Kiroshio |
Looking up these ships on Combined Fleet, they are faster than this list says. All were in the 18.5-19.5 knot range.
Etc. These were all civilian tankers requisitioned by the IJN just before the war.
The Actual IJN Fleet Oilers at the start of the war were all slower at 14 knots.
My sense is fleet oiler designation is about the origins of the ships, not their function. They were purpose built as navy ships. The ship names do not contain Maru, signifying they are military ships, not merchants. The IJN noticed they had a shortage of tankers, and made that up by requisitioning civilian tankers, and converting civilian merchants to tankers, and building new, but the naval fleet oilers are the only ones on the list that do not have Maru in their names.Just a quick terminology clarification quest if I might ?
I have long understood "fleet oiler" to mean a modified tanker capable of carrying and pumping via underway refueling, a wide variety of fuels to include naval fuel oil, diesel, avgas and possibly gasoline etc.
Since the Kido Butai first trained itself in underway refueling techniques while on its way to Hawaiian waters, how can the Japanese Combined Fleet also have had some 14 slow fleet oilers prior to that secret mission ?
Or are my definitions just wrong ?