Jump to content
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
iDuckman

The salvage of Pearl Harbor

122 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

4,887
[WOLF9]
Wiki Lead
15,502 posts
4,771 battles

The main body of the US Pacific fleet -- wiped out in a single morning.  Eight battleships, plus old Utah, three cruisers, several smaller ships, plus a major drydock, all sunk or seriously damaged. Yet the heavy ship losses were only two: Arizona and ultimately Oklahoma.  Within months, all but those two were floating and rejoined the war.  HOW??

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by iDuckman
Add Pt III
  • Cool 11
  • Thanks 3
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
481
[FOXY]
Members
1,211 posts
5,765 battles
6 minutes ago, Balon_Greyjoy said:

Navy engineers ftw.

Oh the things you can do with a pissed off country at your beck and call.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
720
[NUWES]
Members
3,346 posts
12,056 battles
25 minutes ago, iDuckman said:

The main body of the US Pacific fleet -- wiped out in a single morning.  Eight battleships, plus old Utah, three cruisers, several smaller ships, plus a major drydock, all sunk or seriously damaged. Yet the heavy ship losses were only two: Arizona and ultimately Oklahoma.  Within months, all but those two were floating and rejoined the war.  HOW??

 

Part III arriving soon!

 

 

I definitely watched the videos and was eagerly awaiting #3. Truthfully Maryland, Tennessee and Pennsylvania weren't that badly damaged. They were more stuck by their sunk fellows or in Pennsylvania's case stuck in a damaged drydock. The really cool part will be #3. He should be covering the parbuckle work to salvage Oklahoma, which was just amazing work since she had fully capsized and rolled over. They tried it on Utah too but it wasn't successful. As I recall the consistency of the mud under Utah was different. They couldn't get her to roll over and ended up just dragging her. 

Spoiler

See the source image

Here's a picture of the parbuckle. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,887
[WOLF9]
Wiki Lead
15,502 posts
4,771 battles

There's a shot of it from water level in Part II.  Yours is more interesting. 

 


Now what kind of forum troll would vote this 'Boring'?

Edited by iDuckman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
720
[NUWES]
Members
3,346 posts
12,056 battles
5 minutes ago, iDuckman said:

There's a shot of it from water level in Part II.  Yours is more interesting. 

 


Now what kind of forum troll would vote this 'Boring'?

Honestly the engineering that goes into parbuckling a ship is amazing. If not for the terrific number of torpedo hits she took (and of course her later sinking on the way to the yard and the sheer age of the ship, plus her obsolete engines) they might have even put Oklahoma back in service too. The whole work that was done salvaging so much was just incredible. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,611
[HINON]
Members
8,621 posts
12,535 battles
58 minutes ago, iDuckman said:

The main body of the US Pacific fleet -- wiped out in a single morning.  Eight battleships, plus old Utah, three cruisers, several smaller ships, plus a major drydock, all sunk or seriously damaged. Yet the heavy ship losses were only two: Arizona and ultimately Oklahoma.  Within months, all but those two were floating and rejoined the war.  HOW??

the how is easy, because America was a whole different kind of beast back then, whats even better is that those ships got to give what they got from Japan that day back to them during Surigao Strait, i can only imagine what the Japanese thought when it was found out that some of the ships that trashed their fleet there were the BBs they had sunk at Pearl

Edited by tcbaker777

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,899
[WPORT]
Members
7,754 posts
12,809 battles

I saw part 2, the other day.  Saw the part 1 shortly after it was released by Drachinifel.
Very potent history.  Worth learning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
569
[VVV]
Members
2,788 posts
5,065 battles
18 minutes ago, Tzarevitch said:

Honestly the engineering that goes into parbuckling a ship is amazing. If not for the terrific number of torpedo hits she took (and of course her later sinking on the way to the yard and the sheer age of the ship, plus her obsolete engines) they might have even put Oklahoma back in service too. The whole work that was done salvaging so much was just incredible. 

Her sister Nevada got put back into service and they even built entirely new hulls around salvaged material to "repair" a pair of Mahan class DDs that were damaged beyond repair in the Pearl Harbor drydock (from a purely logical standpoint a waste of resources, since just building a pair of brand new Fletchers to inherit the names Cassin and Downes would've provided better ships at barely less cost). Had Oklahoma's hull been in slightly better shape I have no doubt she would've been repaired as well despite her obsolescence, just as a middle finger to Japan by erasing one more Pearl Harbor loss.

And as for those engines, potentially those could've been replaced with steam turbines during the repair. Perhaps it would've even been possible to swap her VTEs out for Utah's turbines. Oddly enough, the USN had briefly switched back to VTEs after using steam turbines in a few battleships, in an effort to increase fuel economy.

Edited by Lord_Magus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
283 posts
10,065 battles
20 minutes ago, Tzarevitch said:

sheer age of the ship, plus her obsolete engines) they might have even put Oklahoma back in service too.

Actually they decided with the Oklahoma 21 knot speed and 40 second reload, to sell her to a gaming company instead of scrapping her.☺

  • Funny 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,772
[WOLF5]
Supertester
4,730 posts
4,263 battles
4 minutes ago, tcbaker777 said:

the how is easy, because America was a whole different kind of beast back then

We still have the capacity to do that kind of thing, we were just a bit more focused back then.

But still hella impressive. Japs came in and wiped out most of our Pacific battle line, we still had the ships to stall their advance (if just). In 6 months 6 of the BBs were raised and in major refit, 7 months later the US stopped the advance (Midway), and 9 months later the US was counter-attacking. Not to mention also fighting a second front on almost the same scale. Not even a year later the old BBs were coming back into action (as second line unit to the fast BBs that were also coming into service). And as final insult to injury some of those BBs that were sunk at Pearl Harbor were part of the battle line at Surigao Strait that wiped out the IJN southern force. That's just scary.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
283 posts
10,065 battles

Good post iDuckman with 12/7 coming up. The Costa Concordia was also righted using a parbuckling technique, fewer cables but the same principal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,492
[REVY]
Members
8,236 posts
6,118 battles
1 hour ago, iDuckman said:

Within months, all but those two were floating and rejoined the war.  HOW??

Because the Japanese had this great idea of sinking ships in the place they could most quickly be repaired.  It's like shooting someone in the intensive care unit in a hospital.

Edited by Sventex
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,006
[O_O]
[O_O]
Members
5,202 posts
22,715 battles

Yeah, the Japanese "pulled the teeth of the fleet" by sinking a few ships but they would have been better served by "putting a tourniquet around the neck" of the fleet by destroying the fuel and ammo stores in the depot itself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
481
[FOXY]
Members
1,211 posts
5,765 battles
42 minutes ago, tcbaker777 said:

the how is easy, because America was a whole different kind of beast back then, whats even better is that those ships got to give what they got from Japan that day back to them during Surigao Strait, i can only imagine what the Japanese thought when it was found out that some of the ships that trashed their fleet there were the BBs they had sunk at Pearl

I dont doubt that if someone were to attack Pearl Harbor or Norfolk and sink a chunk of our DDGs and CGs we would be able to do the exact same thing again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,995
Alpha Tester
6,622 posts
3,331 battles
1 hour ago, iDuckman said:

The main body of the US Pacific fleet

Not even close. The main body of the U.S. Pacific Fleet, even in 1941, were the carriers, and thankfully they were all deployed when Pearl Harbour happened.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,887
[WOLF9]
Wiki Lead
15,502 posts
4,771 battles
25 minutes ago, AJTP89 said:

as second line unit to the fast BBs that were also coming into service

In Neptune's Inferno, Hornfischer makes clear that although there were refit PH BBs available, they weren't sent to the South Pacific simply because they were too fuel hungry and the logistics train half way around the world was struggling as it was.  They sure would have been useful at Guadalcanal etc. though the admirals would have had to overcome the same reluctance to use them in restricted waters that kept Washington and South Dakota out until mid-November.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,492
[REVY]
Members
8,236 posts
6,118 battles
3 minutes ago, 1Sherman said:

Not even close. The main body of the U.S. Pacific Fleet, even in 1941, were the carriers, and thankfully they were all deployed when Pearl Harbour happened.

That's a bit dumb to say the main body of the US Pacific Fleet was only 3 ships.  9 Battleships were absolutely a threat, imagine a Germany had 9 Battleships and the Royal Navy only 3 CVs to combat them.  That would be a rough match up.

Edited by Sventex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,887
[WOLF9]
Wiki Lead
15,502 posts
4,771 battles
24 minutes ago, Sventex said:

Because the Japanese had this great idea of sinking ships in the place they could most quickly be repaired.  It's like shooting someone in the intensive care unit in a hospital.

In naval warfare, as Capt Hughes (R.I.P.) pointed out, the main problem is finding targets.  It was a trade-off.  Reportedly, the cancelled third wave was to attack the port facilities.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,887
[WOLF9]
Wiki Lead
15,502 posts
4,771 battles
13 minutes ago, Princess_Daystar said:

I dont doubt that if someone were to attack Pearl Harbor or Norfolk and sink a chunk of our DDGs and CGs we would be able to do the exact same thing again.

I sure do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,772
[WOLF5]
Supertester
4,730 posts
4,263 battles
4 minutes ago, iDuckman said:

In Neptune's Inferno, Hornfischer makes clear that although there were refit PH BBs available, they weren't sent to the South Pacific simply because they were too fuel hungry and the logistics train half way around the world was struggling as it was.  They sure would have been useful at Guadalcanal etc. though the admirals would have had to overcome the same reluctance to use them in restricted waters that kept Washington and South Dakota out until mid-November.

That's true. But I think by the end of 1942 some of them were being sent to other theaters, I believe some of were up in the north pacific and in the Med for Torch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,995
Alpha Tester
6,622 posts
3,331 battles
11 minutes ago, Sventex said:

That's a bit dumb to say the main body of the US Pacific Fleet was only 3 ships.  9 Battleships were absolutely a threat, imagine a Germany had 9 Battleships and the Royal Navy only 3 CVs to combat them.  That would be a rough match up.

Double the number of CVs and you've got it right. By the time December 7, 1941 rolled around, the U.S. Pacific carrier arsenal consisted of the YorktownEnterpriseLexingtonSaratogaWasp, and Hornet. Besides, even if there were only three carriers against nine BBs, I'd still put my money on the CVs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,492
[REVY]
Members
8,236 posts
6,118 battles
16 minutes ago, 1Sherman said:

Double the number of CVs and you've got it right. By the time December 7, 1941 rolled around, the U.S. Pacific carrier arsenal consisted of the YorktownEnterpriseLexingtonSaratogaWasp, and Hornet. Besides, even if there were only three carriers against nine BBs, I'd still put my money on the CVs.

I don't think that's true, because I know USS Hornet was in Virginia at the time.  Wikipedia shows the US Pacific Fleet on Dec 7th as:

Composition of the Pacific Fleet in December 1941

 

On 7 December, the Fleet consisted of the Battle Force, Scouting Force, Base Force, Amphibious Force (ComPhibPac),[1] Cruiser Force (COMCRUPAC), Destroyer Force (COMDESPAC), and the Submarine Force (COMSUBPAC).[note 1] Also in Hawaii was the Fourteenth Naval District, commanded by Rear Admiral Claude C. Bloch.

The Battle Force consisted of Battleships, Battle Force, made up of three Battleship Divisions:

These nine battleships were intended to counterbalance the ten battleships of the Imperial Japanese Navy. At the time of the attack on Pearl Harbor, Pennsylvania was in dry dock undergoing maintenance, and Colorado was in the midst of a refit at Bremerton Navy Yard, Washington. Arizona was mated with Nevada and Oklahoma at that time.

Other components of the Battle Force included Aircraft, Battle Force, with Carrier Division One and Carrier Division Two, plus Cruiser Divisions 4, 5, and 6, as well as Destroyers, Battle Force.:[3]

When the attack took place, all three carriers were absent - Saratoga was in San Diego collecting her air group following a major refit, Enterprise was en route back to Hawaii following a mission to deliver aircraft to Wake Island, while Lexington had just departed on a similar mission to Midway.

The Scouting Force included Cruiser Division Three, Cruiser Division Nine and Submarines, Scouting Force.[4]

 

Just now, Sventex said:

Besides, even if there were only three carriers against nine BBs, I'd still put my money on the CVs.

And I wouldn't.  Carriers were extremely fragile and cannot operate in tempermental weather.  Once war were declared, the US never lost a Battleship but it lost many Carriers.

Edited by Sventex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×