PDA

View Full Version : "Tora! Tora! Tora!" How Accurate is it?



Pirschjaeger
11-21-2005, 08:27 PM
I just watched "Tora! Tora! Tora!". Ihad previously seen another thread where many recommended it. Normally I don't go out of my way to watch war movies due to the lack of accuracy and propaganda. I prefer documentaries.

But this was, IMHO, a good movie. The Americans were not saved by one man and the Japanese were not made to look like crazed lunitics. I can appreciate this.

I'm curious though, about it's accuracy. If this movie was accurate then I can easily say the leaders on the American side failed the people and the navy in a big way.

Everything pointed to a possible attack. That was foresight. The navy had their ships concentrated in a less than perfect harbour. What I can't understand is how so many could be so stupid as to leave the ships in such a concentration.

Some might use the excuse of "We now have hindsight" but that wouldn't be a valid argument, even now since simple common sense would have been to seperate the fleet. At least scatter anchor them offshore.

If this movie accurately portrayed the events leading up to the attack, then I'd have to say it was more of a blunder on the side of the American commanders than it was a successful attack on the side of the Japanese.

Fritz

Pirschjaeger
11-21-2005, 08:27 PM
I just watched "Tora! Tora! Tora!". Ihad previously seen another thread where many recommended it. Normally I don't go out of my way to watch war movies due to the lack of accuracy and propaganda. I prefer documentaries.

But this was, IMHO, a good movie. The Americans were not saved by one man and the Japanese were not made to look like crazed lunitics. I can appreciate this.

I'm curious though, about it's accuracy. If this movie was accurate then I can easily say the leaders on the American side failed the people and the navy in a big way.

Everything pointed to a possible attack. That was foresight. The navy had their ships concentrated in a less than perfect harbour. What I can't understand is how so many could be so stupid as to leave the ships in such a concentration.

Some might use the excuse of "We now have hindsight" but that wouldn't be a valid argument, even now since simple common sense would have been to seperate the fleet. At least scatter anchor them offshore.

If this movie accurately portrayed the events leading up to the attack, then I'd have to say it was more of a blunder on the side of the American commanders than it was a successful attack on the side of the Japanese.

Fritz

bird_brain
11-21-2005, 08:34 PM
The Americans did firmly believe at the time that it was impossible to launch an airborne torpedo attack in such shallow water. They didn't know about the new Japanese torpedos.

In addition, the signs were there and they had their heads in the sand. The movie is fairly accurate, but does not describe all the details. Some say the US was looking for an excuse and allowed it to happen, but that is not likely. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

blakduk
11-21-2005, 08:35 PM
Wow, how old is that film now? I remember seeing it when i was a kid.
The American thinking at the time was that Hawaii was a long way from anywhere and the potential of the carrier as a major strike weapon hadnt been fully realised.
The other thinking was that torpedo strikes werent possible in the harbour believing it to be too shallow.
At that time the battleship was considered the ultimate naval weapon and considered impregnable with its armour plating and AAA weapons. Our vision has changed markedly since December 7 1941.
Add to this fact that the US navy was not in a state of war at that time- it is understandable that they were sloppy. They very soon got serious however.

berg417448
11-21-2005, 08:36 PM
This question is inevitably going to lead to the whole "FDR conspiracy" issue. Some contend that FDR knew an attack was coming and since he wanted the US to enter the war, he let it happen. Others differ and say it was errors and poor planning as you stated.

I think that there was also a certain disrespect for Japanese capabilities and the people in charge of the Navy simply refused to believe that Pearl Harbor could successfully be attacked with torpedos. Traditonal Navy men didn't yet respect the capability of the aircraft carrier either.

ronison
11-21-2005, 08:59 PM
The sad fact about the US Navy not taking Aircraft Carriers serriously is very true but should not have been. The modle that the Japaneese used for the planing was actully an excersize that the US Navy conducted in Panama in the late 30's, I believe 39.

The Excersize utilized an Aircraft attack from carriers on the main land and was concidered a success. But the brass, mostly surface Admrials, at the time tore into the reports and said in a real situation the Aircraft would never have been allowed to get close to the coast because the surface navy would take out the carriers, how wrong they were.

If the Navy at the time had not had as many pridful surface Admrials then maybe the deffenses on Hawaii would have been stronger or at least less lax at the time. Of course at this point whole books can be written about the subject so at this point I will leave it to thoes that want to speculate.

As for the movie it is fairly accurate as to what happened and is propbably one of the most accurate ones that I have ever seen. It was produced in the early 70's if I remember.

VW-IceFire
11-21-2005, 09:26 PM
I've seen it...it and Battle of Britain are the most accurate (not perfect but very well researched) war movies I've seen.

Tora! Tora! Tora! went completely out of its way to be accurate...they even had the right P-40 models, very close to the right B-17 (as I recall), and did a very good job with what they could do with the Japanese aircraft. Ironically, the Japanese aircraft were more accurate in Tora! Tora! Tora! than in Pearl Harbor which had the huge buget and CGI and could do anything they wanted...someone totally dropped the ball there.

Now the thing is that movies are roughly 2 hours long and that doesn't give you a whole lot of time to tell a complicated historical event like that one. They do their best and I think did a fantastic job.

The thing to appreciate with this one is that there were two teams working on this movie. One from Japan and one from the US so that the movie was as balanced, fair, and accurate from both sides as possible.

The one thing that Tora! Tora! Tora! doesn't do that Pearl Harbor captures better is the tragedy of the whole thing. The one thing that the love story and characters do (I know some of you are shuddering) is present the innocence of the American public to events happening elsewhere...and the inevitability of people like Yamamoto having to come up with the plan to initiate the attack. Tora! Tora! Tora! does that to an extent...and I think you end up appreciating both sides, what they did, why they did it, who screwed up, but some of the emotion is lost.

Its a fascinating piece of history...because in the matter of a few hours and several months leading upto...the whole position of the world changes drastically...what if events and little bits of information count up to a string of events where things could have easily tipped either way.

arcadeace
11-21-2005, 09:28 PM
People were lax and as rightly stated in a false security in far away Hawaii. The Japanese also did redesign work on their torpedoes. And it was assumed by many there would be a declaration of war before any attack. The conspiracy thing IMHO has nowhere to go beyond speculation over Roosevelt wanting a reason.

A Hollywood movie is a Hollywood movie. Some of the acting was a bit macho for me but I enjoyed it when I first saw it - not as much now. I do agree with ronison and think it was the one of the most accurate representations produced. Still there should be no illusions, every portrayal of every character is role acting according to what the director and producer want for an impression whether great, stupid, good, bad etc. Always think in terms of entertainment first and foremost, geared to their idea for a receptive audience, wanting to be entertained. Even with some truth people should never draw serious historical conclusions from movies made to earn money.

DmdSeeker
11-21-2005, 09:36 PM
I think it should also be mentioned that the big worry at the time was not air attack; as has been noted above; but sabotage.

That explains not only the ships being set up in neat rows; the more easy to keep an eye on them; but also the planes parked out in neat rows ready for straffing.

jarink
11-21-2005, 09:47 PM
To me, the most interesting part of Tora! Tora! Tora! was that there were two film crews. While this is not unusual by itself, one of the crews was Japanese with two Japanese directors (Toshio Mausda and Kinji ***asuka. The US production was directed by Richard Fleischer.). The two sides even had their own screenplays! If nothing else, that pretty much ensured fair storytelling.

I think that while some people, like my wife, think it rather dull and boring with so-so special effects (compared to today), I think it's one of the better historical movies ever made. It makes an honest attempt to tell the real story behind the attack from both sides.

My biggest gripe about the movie is that it makes Adm. Kimmel seem to be a victim of circumstance. He could have (and some would say, should have, given the warnings) done a lot more to prevent an attack from crippling the fleet.

Pirschjager, the fleet was sent to Pearl from San Diego to "send a message" to the Japanese and so that it would be in a better position to counterattack once the war started. The US war plan "Orange" assumed a Japanese attack on the Phillipines, Malaya and D.E.I. The fleet would then triumphantly cross the Pacific, fight a decicive battle against the Combined Fleet and releive MacArthur. The war planners in no way anticipated a pre-emptive Japanese strike against Pearl. As others have said, they felt Hawaii was too far away for such a raid.

jarink
11-21-2005, 09:57 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
they even had the right P-40 models, very close to the right B-17 (as I recall), and did a very good job with what they could do with the Japanese aircraft. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

They used P-40E models in the film, but I thought the USAAC had B and C models in use in Hawaii at the time? The B-17 used was actually a B-17G with chin turret removed for the film. The only flyable B-17F around (that I'm aware of) is in Seattle, owned by Boeing ("King Bee"). There are no B-17E models left, I'm afraid.

All the Japanese a/c in the film are reproductions, mainly converted AT-6/SNJ Texans or Vultee BT-17s. Not bad, considering what they had to work with.

Pirschjaeger
11-21-2005, 10:13 PM
I think the whole "FDR Conspiracy" is as silly as it can get. It's totally illogical to sacrifice your best weapons before you get into a fight. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

I guess it just seems totally senseless to me to put all your eggs in one basket. This situation was not the first time in history. There are actually a few cases very similar.

I enjoyed the movie though. I thought the special effects were great for the time the movie was made.

Were any real planes sacrificed for that movie or were all the damage models replicas?

Fritz

Pirschjaeger
11-21-2005, 10:16 PM
Jarink, you posted an answer to my question while I was writing it.

Thx for the answer anyway. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Fritz

Ruy Horta
11-21-2005, 11:52 PM
The FDR conspiracy may be too strong, but there is enough supporting evidence that the US was expecting an aggressive move by Japan. The surprise wasn't the attack itself, but the wide selection of targets and especially Hawaii.

If the initial attack had been anywhere but Hawaii, it might be possible to describe it as welcome.

People should realize that the only way the US and Japan could have avoided war at that stage was through Japan backing down in China and South East Asia, something that would have caused an political crisis in Japan and trrible loss of face.

Arguably, if you agree with Toland, if the US had provided more leeway during the negotiations it might have shifted power in favor of the Japanese moderates and stopped a war. Although we should not forget the role of Japan as aggressor, it must be seen against Western Colonialism, Chinese anarchy and Anglo-French (& Dutch) weakness.

The war in the pacific might have been avoided, but IMHO, and that may be the crux of any "conspiracy", the main goal was a military (naval) confrontation and knocking out Japan as a military (naval) power

Never dug deeper in to the subject of covert military action against Japan, but Dan Ford in his AVG book covers it to some extend.

The similarities between the AVG and Air America like organisations is very obvious. If not the Pacific, there would have been more involvemnt in China. IIRC there were plans for US flown bombers to be operated against Japan under Chinese colors.

The US is not the bad guy, nor is FDR, but I think it is naive to think that that confrontation with Japan was to be avoided (and that's putting it kindly).

The oil emargo was a clear casus belli.

Economic warfare is warfare.

Pirschjaeger
11-21-2005, 11:57 PM
I see your point Ruy. That makes more sense when you break it down and seperate the "conspiracy theory" from the Pearl Harbour attack. I would easily believe that FDR was looking for an excuse. he needed it.

I think that he got more than he wished for.

Fritz

Pirschjaeger
11-22-2005, 12:00 AM
BTW, when thinking of the leaders of WW2, I think FDR was the good guy.

Fritz

Enforcer572005
11-22-2005, 12:20 AM
Yup, tora was vastly superior to the chick movie with aflek, though there were some great scenes in the attack. Modern Spruance class DDs and Knox class FFs had no place there though...looked as out of place as an F15.

In tora, they had a huge fleet of planes. the IJN planes were T-6s, BT13s, and the kates were a combo of T6 adn bt13. These can still be seen in large numbers at the commemorative air force airshows......they do a pearl routine that is amazing.

The p40s in tora were later models wiht fake nose guns and 4 30cal barrels to pass as Tomahawks....did ok. There were no later models at pearl. SEveral b17s were used, but they were all Gs without chin turrets.

The only actual planes destroyed were (unfortunately) the PBYs on the seaplane ramp. they were old hulks that were fixed up and had charges placed in them. very effective, but what a shame.

The machine guns in tora were proper water cooled 50s like we have in the sim, not those twin aircooled jobs in the recent movie.

The essex class CV Yorktown was used as both us and ijn carriers, adn those planes are actually taking off from it. A bunch of war protestors raised all kinds of cr@p about the navy allowing the ship to be used in such an evil militaristic movie......geniuses.

Though Kimmel wasnt totally blameless, he had tried to improve readiness, but washington kept screaming budget nonsense (some things never change). He begged for torpedo nets for battleship row, complained of severe personel shotages, begged for more B17s and PBYs for patrol, and accelerated training manuvers.

Tora was one of the 3 greatest war movies, along with BoB and Patton. All were extremely accurate and well done.

Pirschjaeger
11-22-2005, 12:28 AM
He he he, I noticed the mistakes with the ships. Actually, shouldn't the destroyer just outside the harbour have been a 4 stacker?

Fritz

HotelBushranger
11-22-2005, 03:12 AM
Tora Tora Tora was bloody long, but good. I'm sure the P-40's are the right models- B's. The airfield shots are my favourite, for example a plane chewing through the guy in fronts fuselage almost to the cockpit, and some bloke almost gettin crushed by an airframe, very good looking. I did noticed one thing though, whilst the B-17 model was correct, a B, in the crash landing scene, they've obviously just taken footage taken from real life and stuck it in there. Nonetheless, its still enjoyable, as its real objects, not just CGI.

Capt.LoneRanger
11-22-2005, 03:31 AM
Yes, Tora!Tora!Tora! is very accurate, from the historical point of view. Thankfully it leaves nationalism from any side out and more or less shows the facts as they took place, according to different accurate logs and scripts.

The question why this could have happened is a different one and was allready largely answered. The war had actually a long term of diplomatic 'warfare' going on prior to the attack, that left Japan with little choice then to go to war - it simply couldn't accept being ruined by a foreign country. The US still believed in their political and economical power and never believed Japan was even capable of attacking the USA in whatever military operation.

There were many mistakes made these days, that lead to the US being surprised by this attack - so many, conspiracy fans even think this was done on purpose. I think the US were simply too self-confident. That would also be a good hint, why so many things happened in the US after PearlHarbor, that they'd rather like to forget, like the prison camps in the US. Many Japanese and Asian people were imprisoned, for the pure idea of being spies or saboteurs. Many innocent people died there, just because of the fear the Japanese Empire could even invade the US.

jugent
11-22-2005, 03:32 AM
As most american movies, they make very little effort to make the persons be like real humans with strenght and weakness, and much effort to big explosions and dramatic scens.

The americans suspected that the japaneese attack was coming. They left some old **** in the harbour and left Hawai like a greased lightning with the ships that was worth anything, the carriers.
The navy had been out for exercise the week before the attack.
The carriers only refueled and went to see again.
The WWI battleships stayed in the harbour, most marines left the ships.
I have no idea if F.D.R was informed. Perhaps the knowledge was stopped before it reached him.
The movie gives a shallow picture of the attack.
By the way doesnt the japaneese speak english except when they cry out "Banzai"?

nakamura_kenji
11-22-2005, 03:50 AM
reason for war exceptional complicate can be argue seed war sow back 1853 when Mathew Perry appear tokyo bay with 4 ship and demanded that japan open to foreign trade which result led civil war in country. before this japan be very much isolationist we were medievel country. personel think war was arrogant and idiotic on japanese part it fight simply could never win this very reason yamamoto made famous 6 mounth quote.

it other discussion and long one and no wish take off topic. like flim as say it nice realistic match what read about happen guess.

jds1978
11-22-2005, 03:51 AM
PJ: Look into this title At Dawn We Slept: The Untold Story of Pearl Harbor by Gordon W. Prange.

It's the best written history of the events leading upto, and including, the attack. Prange thoroughly dismantles the conspiracy theorists argument. Easily the best and most informed single volume book on the topic. Prange goes right for the primary sources/documents/survivors. Gives the complete story from both sides.

Tora is one of those rare Hollywood films that (for the most part) tells it like it was. No surprise, it bombed upon it's initial release. (No pun intended)

ploughman
11-22-2005, 04:04 AM
Yeah, it's a good book. Exhaustive.

panther3485
11-22-2005, 05:07 AM
Quote:

[] The movie gives a shallow picture of the attack. [/I]

Are we talking about the same movie? TORA! TORA! TORA! may not be perfect (what movie is?) but it beats the cr@p out of any other movie about Pearl Harbour, before or since!

By the way doesnt the japaneese speak english except when they cry out "Banzai"?

Now I'm sure we can't be talking about the same movie. The TORA! TORA! TORA! that I watched maybe six/seven times (last time about 5 months ago) had the Japanese speaking Japanese , with English subtitles. I don't think the Japanese side of the movie-making team would have had it any other way.

For historical accuracy, easily in the top 3 of all Hollywood movies covering WW2 events. Not perfect, but about as close as we are likely to get unless you want a straight documentary (and even some of those can be a bit sus!)

panther3485

Pirschjaeger
11-22-2005, 05:12 AM
Yes, the Japanese spoke no English, That was one thing I liked about the movie. It made it seem more realistic.

JDS, thx for the book recommendation. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Fritz

nakamura_kenji
11-22-2005, 05:12 AM
think he troll that why ignore comment about japanese i did.

maybe final count down better film fall *off seat giggle^_^*

Capt.LoneRanger
11-22-2005, 05:32 AM
Sounds like jugent is one of the conspiracy fans I mentioned http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif

Japanese speak Japanese in this movie and as this is sort of a documentary-movie about things that happened in RL, I'm quite happy there is no background about lovestories, medical and personal problems. Maybe you should watch PearlHarbor? You'll find much more of you desired explosions and lots of completely stupid love/personal story wrapped around, to attract even a few women to watch it. Ridiculous movie.

SeaFireLIV
11-22-2005, 06:26 AM
I was very surprised by `tora,Tora,Tora!` When I first saw it, far better than I expected. I didn`t know much about both sides of the conflict at the time, but could see how the Japanese were actually fairly portrayed, which was unusual for the enemy of the US in a movie.
Some of the war explosions scenes looked extremely realistic, even down to crew men just avoiding getting themselves toasted!

As for the conspiracy thing, it does seem curiously strange that the US Carriers just happened to be away at the time of the attack. the most important equipemnt moved out of the way...

The Japanese attack was crazy imho. I think they just sort of got swept up in the whole `let`s prove we`re warriors` stuff and didn`t stop to think about it. If they were going to do it, they had to do it right FIRST time. they had to paralyse America`s ***. It`s the equivalent of a small man smacking a giant over the back of the head from the rear, then just watching the giant slowly turm around and smack him down!

Don`t attack if you can`t paralyse his *** first time! (To quote Samuel L Jackson). http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v31/SeaFireLIV/pilotsfire.jpg

Bearcat99
11-22-2005, 06:43 AM
TTT was excellent... Like many said the reasons why Pearl happened have so many variables, arrrogance, ignorance - in that the Americans had no idea about the shallow water torps- and wrong headed thinking. The general consensus was that something was going to happen.. they just didnt know where... sort of like D-Day and the Germans. Then too you had the egos. The competing ideologies between the carrier advocates and the old school battleship advocates. Pearl reminds me a lot of 911..... te signs were there.. they just werent read properly.. and right up to the attack the with hindsight obvious clues were ignored. IMO the best battle sequence of the events at Pearl... with the exception of that whole P-40 through the hangar sequence.. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif (HAMMER down!! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/34.gif) I am talking about the attack itself.... was done in Pearl Harbor.

Dunkelgrun
11-22-2005, 06:47 AM
The US certainly expected an attack by Japan; it seems that maybe they didn't expect it to be on Pearl Harbor itself.
As for the carriers being away from PH, see below for the Enterprise. It was carrying out a legitimate reinforcing mission, but were aware that they were a target for the Japanese.
The Lexington was delivering aircraft too (to Midway), and the Saratoga was refitting in San Diego. A grand conspiracy - nonsense.

From http://www.cv6.org/1941/btlord1/btlord1.htm

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Throughout November 1941, there had been increasingly ominous signs that war with Japan was imminent.

November 3: All Japanese naval encryption codes are changed. U.S. Navy Intelligence considers this an unmistakable portent of war.
November 14: Secretary of State Cordell Hull rejects a Japanese proposal for limited withdrawal of Japanese forces from China in return for normalized relations with the United States.
November 15: Magic (a joint Army-Navy effort to crack and monitor coded Japanese naval and diplomatic codes) intercepts an order to the Japanese consul in Honolulu to report twice a week on the ships in Pearl Harbor.
November 16: Tokyo cables Japanese ambassador Kichisaburo Nomura in Washington: "Fate of the Empire hangs by a sheer thread ... please fight harder!"
November 20: Nomura presents an "absolutely final" Japanese proposal, promising to suspend military activity in China in return for one million gallons of aviation fuel.
November 22: Magic intercepts a notice from Tokyo to Nomura, that he has until November 29 to reach an understanding with the United States. After that, the notice continues, "things are automatically going to happen."
November 24: The Chief of Naval Operations warns of "SURPRISE AND AGGRESSIVE MOVEMENTS" by Japan.
November 26: Allied intelligence reports Japanese transports sailing from Formosa (Taiwan), apparently destined for Indochina. In response, Secretary of State Hull rejects the second Japanese peace proposal.
November 27: Magic issues a warning to all American commands: "NEGOTIATIONS WITH JAPAN APPEAR TERMINATED." In Hawaii, Pacific Fleet Commander in Chief, Admiral Husband Kimmel, receives an additional warning: "THIS DISPATCH IS TO BE CONSIDERED A WAR WARNING ... AGGRESSIVE ACTION EXPECTED BY JAPAN IN THE NEXT FEW DAYS."
The day after this last warning, Task Force 2 - Enterprise's task force - set sail from Oahu, first on an easterly bearing, to throw off any observers on the island. A few hours later, the Task Force turned west. Enterprise prepared to receive two air groups, including her own Fighting Six consisting of eighteen F4F "Wildcat" fighters, and Marine Fighter Squadron 211: twelve Wildcats, to be delivered to Wake Island.

Task Force 2's commander, Vice Admiral William Halsey, knew of the most recent warnings, and to a degree shared by few other officers of his stature, understood them as an immediate threat to the forces under his command. Aboard Enterprise, steaming towards an island 500 miles closer to Japan than Oahu, he was determined his force would not be found unprepared.

The pilots and airmen who came aboard Enterprise the afternoon of 28 November 1941 were under the impression they were on a weekend training mission. Some had brought little more than one might take on an overnight trip: a toothbrush, razor perhaps, and an extra change of clothes. They were surprised, then, to be ordered immediately to the ready rooms, where each man was handed a single sheet of paper.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

U.S.S. ENTERPRISE
At SeaNovember 28, 1941
BATTLE ORDER NUMBER ONE
1. The ENTERPRISE is now operating under war conditions.
2. At any time, day or night, we must be ready for instant action.
3. Hostile submarines may be encountered.
4. The importance of every officer and man being specially alert and vigilant while on watch at his battle station must be fully realized by all hands.
5. The failure of one man to carry out his assigned task promptly, particularly the lookouts, those manning the batteries, and all those on watch on the deck, might result in great loss of life and even loss of the ship.
6. The Captain is confident all hands will prove equal to any emergency that may develop.
7. It is part of the tradition of our Navy that, when put to the test, all hands keep cool, keep their heads, and FIGHT.
8. Steady nerves and stout hearts are needed now.
G. D. MURRAY,Captain, U.S. Navy Commanding
Approved: November 28, 1941.W. F. HALSEY,Vice Admiral, U.S. Navy, Commander Aircraft, Battle Force

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Furthermore, the briefing officers announced, the Marine pilots would not be returning to Hawaii that night, as many had expected. Instead, they were being transported to Wake Island, their new station.

The consternation of the men and officers was considerable. Commander William Buckner, Halsey's Operations Officer, confronted Halsey immediately after the briefing: "Goddammit, Admiral, you can't start a private war of your own!" "I'll take [responsibility]. If anything gets in the way, we'll shoot first and argue afterwards," replied Halsey.

Halsey's instructions were to get the Marine pilots and their planes to Wake Island in complete secrecy, and he was determined to take whatever steps were necessary to accomplish the mission. This included destroying any snoopers detected by the force, before they could raise alarm. Having verified that no Allied shipping was expected on his course, Halsey assumed that if any vessels were encountered, they'd probably be Japanese, and they'd probably have hostile intentions. (Though none of the American commanders were aware of this, by 28 November, a powerful Japanese striking force had been at sea for two days, steaming east towards a point well north of Pearl Harbor.) The only chance his small force would have of defending itself, or alerting Pacific Fleet headquarters, would be to seize the initiative and attack before being attacked.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Cheers!

Bearcat99
11-22-2005, 06:48 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:
I was very surprised by `tora,Tora,Tora!` When I first saw it, far better than I expected. I didn`t know much about both sides of the conflict at the time, but could see how the Japanese were actually fairly portrayed, which was unusual for the enemy of the US in a movie. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif LOL.... no comment...

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">As for the conspiracy thing, it does seem curiously strange that the US Carriers just happened to be away at the time of the attack. the most important equipemnt moved out of the way...
The Japanese attack was crazy imho. I think they just sort of got swept up in the whole `let`s prove we`re warriors` stuff and didn`t stop to think about it. If they were going to do it, they had to do it right FIRST time. they had to paralyse America`s ***. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actually the powers that be in Japan just were guilty of the same arrogance of many military planners in the U.S. They thought the Americans were weak and would roll over if smacked hard.... you see they didnt realize how big the guy was because he was sitting down at the time. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Dunkelgrun
11-22-2005, 06:59 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Bearcat99:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:
I was very surprised by `tora,Tora,Tora!` When I first saw it, far better than I expected. I didn`t know much about both sides of the conflict at the time, but could see how the Japanese were actually fairly portrayed, which was unusual for the enemy of the US in a movie. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif LOL.... no comment...

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Name me another film of that time (1970) that portrayed the Japanese military in a realistic vein, and not simply as targets for John Wayne.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Actually the powers that be in Japan just were guilty of the same arrogance of many military planners in the U.S. They thought the Americans were weak and would roll over if smacked hard.... you see they didnt realize how big the guy was because he was sitting down at the time. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not everybody. Yamamoto knew that the war was going to be lost as soon as they attacked the USA.

Cheers!

Tater-SW-
11-22-2005, 07:04 AM
TTT was a decent enough movie and got the basic gist of events right. I won't even talk about that "other" movie" which was so awful it should not be spoken of.

As for the attack itself. December 7, 1941 was the day WW2 was lost by the Empire of Japan. The IGHQ had no desire to wage a protracted war since they all knew that such a war would lead to their losing---in fact, they described the likelyhood of "national death" as quite high in the event of a long war.

This is where I think Yamamoto is grossly overrated. He had travelled in the US while stationed here. He knew Americans and counciled the IGHQ against the war (so far so good). When it was clear he had to follow his orders he came up with a war plan guaranteed to enrage the American public. Even if the declaration of war had been delivered on time the US public would have been outraged since the 1/2 hour difference wouldn't have been apparent to the public, they'd have heard of the attack before the declaration anyway. Since the Japanese goal was a negotiated peace within a year or so, they shot themselves in the foot that first day of the way.

I think that had they followed the more expected plan of stiking the Philipines, etc, then the US fleet came out to fight them, it would have had more traction in their desire for a negotiated peace... Americans back home wondering why we need to fight for soem crappy islands in the middle of nowhere instead of "Remember Pearl Harbor!"

tater

Low_Flyer_MkII
11-22-2005, 07:13 AM
"They didn't realise how big the guy was..." I'll be using that one, be sure! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Anyhow, as far as the flying sequences go, you've got a choice of two movies. TTT or BoB.
I could recommend 'Sky Captain And The World Of Tomorrow', but I'm not that cruel.

I could however mention that I'm amazed we British didn't make a movie based upon the attack on Taranto. Apparently a Japanese delegation went to survey the damage and were impressed at what a few torpedo planes could do to a fleet at anchor. Would be interested to see what people here think of other options Japan had for an attack on the U.S.A. If purely British territories were attacked (Singapore, Hong Kong) would FDR have stayed out of it?

BaldieJr
11-22-2005, 07:21 AM
Tora Tora Tora is Garbage Garbage Garbage is proven by these facts facts facts:

<pre class="ip-ubbcode-code-pre">
Title Gross:
=====================================
Tora, Tora, Tora $29,548,291

Pearl Harbor $450,500,000
</pre>

I think this sends a clear message: Real life is boring enough without bringing up ancient history.

edited because i suck at copy/paste

arjisme
11-22-2005, 07:41 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Tater-SW-:
I think that had they followed the more expected plan of stiking the Philipines, etc, then the US fleet came out to fight them, it would have had more traction in their desire for a negotiated peace... Americans back home wondering why we need to fight for soem crappy islands in the middle of nowhere instead of "Remember Pearl Harbor!" </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Were the Phillipines a US territory at the time? Remember Hawaii was not yet a state, so I am wondering how much nationalistic pride Americans would have had over an attack at Hawaii vs. the Phillipines. Their reaction, I think, was more to the fact our own armed forces were attacked.

Bearcat99
11-22-2005, 07:54 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Dunkelgrun:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Bearcat99:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:
I was very surprised by `tora,Tora,Tora!` When I first saw it, far better than I expected. I didn`t know much about both sides of the conflict at the time, but could see how the Japanese were actually fairly portrayed, which was unusual for the enemy of the US in a movie. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif LOL.... no comment...

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Name me another film of that time (1970) that portrayed the Japanese military in a realistic vein, and not simply as targets for John Wayne.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Actually the powers that be in Japan just were guilty of the same arrogance of many military planners in the U.S. They thought the Americans were weak and would roll over if smacked hard.... you see they didnt realize how big the guy was because he was sitting down at the time. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not everybody. Yamamoto knew that the war was going to be lost as soon as they attacked the USA.

Cheers! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Who said anything about timeframe? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

Yeah Yamamoto knew... wasnt he educated in America? I think there were a few other prominent Japanese miltary planners who felt the same way but they were ignored as well. Yammamoto kind of reminds me of Robert E. Lee in a way.

SeaFireLIV
11-22-2005, 08:09 AM
Hmm, I did look over my text and thought, "someone could get over-sensitive since I`ve made a reference aginst America a couple of times, but i`m sure they`ll realise that I meant of the time..."

But no. Guess I`m going to have to write everything out in ultra-detail so that I don`t get accused of being anti-American.

Actually, I won`t, you`ll just have to be less sensitive. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

panther3485
11-22-2005, 08:24 AM
Hmmm, I've been thinking about this, trying to remember other Hollywood movies where the 'enemy' were shown in as fair and balanced a light as were the Japanese in TTT. Very few, but....

IMHO:
'The Longest Day' made a fairly good effort of it in (1962?)
'Patton' sort of got there in (1970?)

I'm sure you guys could think of perhaps a few more that made some kind of reasonable effort?

None of the above are what I'd think of as 'typical' Hollywood, but the fact that it has been done at all seems to indicate to me that it still can be.

Best regards to all,
panther3485

Low_Flyer_MkII
11-22-2005, 08:38 AM
*Ahem*

(Wikipedia}
Hell in the Pacific is a 1968 World War II film starring Lee Marvin and Toshiro Mifune. It was directed by John Boorman.

Spoiler warning: Plot and/or ending details follow.
Two antagonists, one American and one Japanese, are marooned on an uninhabited Pacific island. Can they put their mutual hostility to one side in the fight for suvival ?

What little dialogue this film has is not dubbed or sub-titled, authentically portraying the frustration of restricted communication between the two characters.

[edit]
Trivia
Lee Marvin served with the US Marines in the Pacific in World War II. He was wounded and received the Purple Heart.

panther3485
11-22-2005, 08:44 AM
Remember the movie now you mention it. Not bad and a little out of the ordinary for a 'war' movie!

Didn't know about Lee Marvin's war service.

panther3485

Low_Flyer_MkII
11-22-2005, 08:47 AM
Yeah, he kept it fairly quiet. He's buried in Arlington Cemetary with just his name and USMC serial number on the headstone, I believe.

Good idea for a thread - war movie actors who did it for real, or has it been done?

jds1978
11-22-2005, 08:56 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">think he troll that why ignore comment about japanese i did.

maybe final count down better film fall *off seat giggle^_^* </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">U.S.S. ENTERPRISE
At SeaNovember 28, 1941
BATTLE ORDER NUMBER ONE
1. The ENTERPRISE is now operating under war conditions.
2. At any time, day or night, we must be ready for instant action.
3. Hostile submarines may be encountered.
4. The importance of every officer and man being specially alert and vigilant while on watch at his battle station must be fully realized by all hands.
5. The failure of one man to carry out his assigned task promptly, particularly the lookouts, those manning the batteries, and all those on watch on the deck, might result in great loss of life and even loss of the ship.
6. The Captain is confident all hands will prove equal to any emergency that may develop.
7. It is part of the tradition of our Navy that, when put to the test, all hands keep cool, keep their heads, and FIGHT.
8. Steady nerves and stout hearts are needed now.
G. D. MURRAY,Captain, U.S. Navy Commanding
Approved: November 28, 1941.W. F. HALSEY,Vice Admiral, U.S. Navy, Commander Aircraft, Battle Force

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Furthermore, the briefing officers announced, the Marine pilots would not be returning to Hawaii that night, as many had expected. Instead, they were being transported to Wake Island, their new station.

The consternation of the men and officers was considerable. Commander William Buckner, Halsey's Operations Officer, confronted Halsey immediately after the briefing: "Goddammit, Admiral, you can't start a private war of your own!" "I'll take [responsibility]. If anything gets in the way, we'll shoot first and argue afterwards," replied Halsey.

Halsey's instructions were to get the Marine pilots and their planes to Wake Island in complete secrecy, and he was determined to take whatever steps were necessary to accomplish the mission. This included destroying any snoopers detected by the force, before they could raise alarm. Having verified that no Allied shipping was expected on his course, Halsey assumed that if any vessels were encountered, they'd probably be Japanese, and they'd probably have hostile intentions. (Though none of the American commanders were aware of this, by 28 November, a powerful Japanese striking force had been at sea for two days, steaming east towards a point well north of Pearl Harbor.) The only chance his small force would have of defending itself, or alerting Pacific Fleet headquarters, would be to seize the initiative and attack before being attacked.



</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

exactly, many don't realize that the USN already considered itself at war w/ Japan.
Halsey's TF was searching for IJN warships in the Central Pacific after they delivered the USMC fliers to Wake. We thought the hammer would drop on Singapore, the Phillipines, Hong Kong...anywhere but Pearl Harbor.

panther3485
11-22-2005, 08:57 AM
Yeah, could be a good one, mate.

I've heard Jimmy Stewart flew in US bombers?

panther3485

jds1978
11-22-2005, 09:01 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Good idea for a thread - war movie actors who did it for real, or has it been done? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ed McMahon (Publishers Clearing House, Johnny Carson) flew Corsairs in the Pacific.

Jimmy Stewart flew in 8th AF (Correct?)

Ditto for one of the Rooney boys (Mickey? Andy?)

Glen Miller (Jazz musician) died on a USO flight. I believe he was Army

airjunkie
11-22-2005, 09:16 AM
A scene in Tora Tora Tora show's a zero come within
inches of a truck this scene alone makes it
watchin this classic. the stunt came so close that it appears to go through the truck canopy.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Low_Flyer_MkII
11-22-2005, 09:20 AM
I've started another thread for movie heroes who walked the walk. Wouldn't want to be thought of of as a common hi-jacker http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

eiffel68
11-22-2005, 10:05 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Pirschjaeger:

I'm curious though, about it's accuracy. If this movie was accurate then I can easily say the leaders on the American side failed the people and the navy in a big way.

Everything pointed to a possible attack. That was foresight. The navy had their ships concentrated in a less than perfect harbour. What I can't understand is how so many could be so stupid as to leave the ships in such a concentration.

Some might use the excuse of "We now have hindsight" but that wouldn't be a valid argument, even now since simple common sense would have been to seperate the fleet. At least scatter anchor them offshore.

Fritz </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, it's amazing that the Americans didn't put much more effort in the defenses of Pearl Harbor prior to Dec. 7th knowing what a handful of British Swordfish had done to the Italian battle fleet at Tarento in Nov. 1940. On the other hand if the US Pacific Fleet had been caught at sea around Hawaii by the Japaneses that Sunday, it would have been sunk for good.

Of the eight battleships only the USS Arizona has never been raised from the bottom.

USS Oklahoma capsized, been refloated but never repaired.

USS Nevada beached, been repaired and served through the war.

USS Pennsylvania slightly damaged in drydock, quickly repaired and served through the war.

USS California and USS West Virginia both torpedoed and sunk upright, refloated and reconstructed on par with the new fast battleships except for speed.

USS Tennessee and USS Maryland severely damaged but kept afloat, both repaired and ,for the former, later reconstructed, served through the war.

In fact, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, California, West Virginia and Maryland have taken part in the last big gun battle of history (Surigao Strait, 1944).

VonKlugermon
11-22-2005, 10:49 AM
Some information on the movie I found. I don't know if all of it is true, especially the part about the B-17 crash.

The B-17 "Flying Fortress" that lands with one wheel up is no film-trick. The plane got problems with its landing-gear and the pilot was asked to circle until the film-crew got cameras in position to film the crash-landing. The B-17 was not badly damaged, it flew again but was lost in a fatal crash while water-bombing a forest-fire some years later.

The P-40 that crashes into the parked planes was not a planned scene either. All the P-40:s in that scene, Except for two to the extreme right in the background, were full-scale mock-ups and some of them were fitted with real Allison engines and controlled by wires. It was meant that the plane should run down the runway and be blown up as the "Zeros" attacked, but the special-effects crew lost control of it, and it crashed into the parked mock-ups. Some of the extras standing around suffered injuries, but reportedly only minor.

More accidents related to the movie: Jack Canary, who traveled around all United States to collect the AT-6 and BT-13-trainers that were converted to Japanese planes, was killed when the BT-13 he was ferrying caught fire in the air. One "Val" (dive-bomber) stalled and crashed in a field during filming. The pilot was killed. One "Kate" (torpedo-plane) crashed in the water and sank. The pilot was rescued.

Reportedly the film-crew had not only planned to launch the "Japanese" planes from the US carrier "Yorktown" as seen in the movie, but they also had planned to film real landings aboard the ship. That was terminated after an accident. The few landings seen in the finished movie are faked in the editing-room.

The Japanese battleship where Admiral Yamamoto meets his officers in the beginning of the movie was a full size mockup and complete from bow to stern with every gun and even a mockup seaplane on a catapult. It was built on a beach in Japan, next to the full size mockup of the aircraft-carrier "Akagi" where the pre-launch scenes of the Japanese airfleet were filmed. About half the carrier-deck and the "island"-structure were built.

In Pearl Harbor the aft half of a battleship was built in full size. It floated on barges and doubled for several of the battleships that came under attack in 1941.

Only two of the aircraft (a Zero and a Kate) that are seen on the "Akagi"-set are modified to the same degree as the flyable planes in the movie. The rest are standard North American T6-trainers with three-bladed propellers, drop tanks and undercarriage-doors added. Furthermore, for some reason, as hardly any scene shows planes with folded wings, their wings were cut and hinges installed, thereby making the planes unflyable.

Here is a little more information about the aircraft in the movie:

The twelve Zeros (fighters) were North American AT-6 or SNJ trainers with cockpits, fins, wingtips and some other parts modified.
The nine Vals (dive bombers) were Vultee BT-13 or BT-15 trainers with lengthened fuselages, new engines, undercarriage-fairings and reshaped fins and wingtips.

The nine Kates (torpedo- and level bombers) were a composite of AT-6/SNJ front end and wings, and BT-13/15tails. Plus lengthened fuselages and new cockpits with an extra seat added.

For most scenes, dummies, dressed in Japanese flying uniforms, occupied the seats behind the pilots.

The cost for the conversions was about $ 30,000 each. After the movie was finished, the planes were sold for around $ 1,500 each.

The above-mentioned aircraft were the airworthy Japanese planes filmed on the USS Yorktown and Hawaii (the planes on the set in Japan consisted of about 20 planes, and I have discussed them earlier in this column).

Several of the planes still fly in the hands of collectors. Three Vals and three Kates were loaned for use in Disneys Pearl Harbor. One of the Vals hit a palm-tree during the filming and was destroyed. The pilot survived.

Five B-17 bombers were flown to Hawaii for use in Tora. They were fire-fighting tankers, but the water-tanks and related equipment was removed, and fake gun-turrets installed. One plane got damaged in the unintentional crash-landing seen in the movie.

Five PBY Catalinas were transported to Hawaii. One was airworthy and used in some flying scenes; the other four were destroyed in the Ford Island bombing scenes.

One A-24 (Dauntless) was made flyable (barely), but the scenes involving that plane never made it to the finished movie. They were later used in Midway.

In a scene a Zero crashes into a hangar. Inside the hangar are a P-40 mock-up and an unidentifiable aircraft. Both are seen a very short time before they are destroyed. The later plane is actually a derelict B-25 that the movie-company found in Hawaii. For some unknown reason they modified its tail from two- to one-fin configuration, so it doesn't look like a B-25.

The two real Curtiss P-40 fighters were leased from private owners. They were of E-models, a model that didn't exist in 1941, but no flyable P-40 B or C existed when the movie was made. One of the aircraft (c/n 18723) had been converted to a two-seater by removing the fuselage tank and completely rebuilding the cockpit. The movie-company altered it back to the original look, but in close-ups and stills from the movie, one can see that part of its canopy-area looks curious. For the owner the leasing of this aircraft was not a happy experience. When the movie-company returned the plane, the original paint-scheme was ruined, it had a different canopy, the filmcrew had ground-looped the aircraft and sheared off a landing-gear leg, and the engine and propeller were not the original ones. The other P-40 (c/n 18796) had been owned by legendary stuntflier Frank Tallman, and was a movie veteran. Apart from flying for the cameras, it was also used as a pattern to create moulds for the fabrication of the fuselages for the fibreglass mock-ups. The mock-up P-40:s had C-45 (Beech 18) outer wing panels as wings, and T-6 landing gears. The tailwheels were genuine P-40 items. When found, they were still brand new in their original boxes. As mentioned before, a few of them had real Allison engines and Curtis-Electric propellers, and could taxi very fast, controlled by wires.
The OS2U Kingfisher that sat on a catapult on the battleship-set built in Pearl Harbor, was a fibreglass mock-up. It was only seen in a few short scenes before it was destroyed, but had a real engine (not working) installed as well as a detailed interior.

The American aircraft practising dive-bombing on a target towed by a ship prior to the attack, were actually Japanese Kates, but they were filmed from so long a distance that they are hard to identify. They were probably meant to represent Douglas SBD Dauntlesses, but from a distance they very much resembled Vought Sikorsky SB2U Vindicators, of which the Navy and Marines still used a number in December 1941.

The American battleships, and some other ships in the movie, were of course large models. For some reason no aircraft models were used. It would undoubtedly have added to the realism if at least some aircraft had been seen flying over Battleship Row when seen at a distance.

The real Japanese €Kates€ torpedoes did not have a nose down position when they hung under the planes as they have in the movie. The reason why they are mounted like that in the movie is that it was the only way the modified T-6 planes could retract their landing gear when they were loaded with the (dummy) torpedoes.

Tora means tiger in Japanese. That was the attack call for the Japanese fighter planes.
Actually, it was the coded message from lt Fuchida, the leader of the attack, to the Japanese fleet, that meant that the Japanese had succeeded in totally surprising the Americans.

The B-25 that was destroyed in the hangar with the P-40 in the "kamikaze" scene was meant to look like a Douglas A-20 Havoc, of which an even dozen were stationed at Hickam Field during the attack. Also the B-25 had originally starred in the movie "In Harm's Way" (Goodbye Edington/Kirk Douglas!).


Willy

Adlerangriff
11-22-2005, 11:28 AM
The attack on Pearl Harbor avoided the biggest disaster in US History.

If our WW1 battlewagons had been sent out to the high seas to square off against the Jap<span class="ev_code_RED">anese</span> modern Navy, it would have been the worst day in American history.

We would have gotten so smoked by them on the high seas based on their grasp of new maritime conflict concepts, equipment and daring planning. It's possible China would have surrendered right after that decisive naval conflict, 80% of the IJA forces tied up in mainland china would have been stationed on islands like Betio, and the war would have been a complete bloodbath for both sides.

Instead of a bloodbath for just them.

<span class="ev_code_yellow">MANY JAPANESE PEOPLE ON THESE BOARDS FIND THE TERM J** EXTREMELY OFFENSIVE, PLEASE REFRAIN FROM USING IT.</span>

Professor_06
11-22-2005, 12:01 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Adlerangriff:
The attack on Pearl Harbor avoided the biggest disaster in US History.

If our WW1 battlewagons had been sent out to the high seas to square off against the Japs modern Navy, it would have been the worst day in American history.

We would have gotten so smoked by them on the high seas based on their grasp of new maritime conflict concepts, equipment and daring planning. It's possible China would have surrendered right after that decisive naval conflict, 80% of the IJA forces tied up in mainland china would have been stationed on islands like Betio, and the war would have been a complete bloodbath for both sides.

Instead of a bloodbath for just them. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ya think? LOL,

You get a gold star for having a colorful imagination. But no more reading comic books.

Ruy Horta
11-22-2005, 12:44 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Adlerangriff:
The attack on Pearl Harbor avoided the biggest disaster in US History.

If our WW1 battlewagons had been sent out to the high seas to square off against the Japs modern Navy, it would have been the worst day in American history. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

This will remain hypothetical, but I am not sure it is the only outcome, certainly not based on the average outcome between the start of hostilities and the end of Guadalcanal.

If the Japanese managed to get surprise and numbers on their side they tend to win big, but if they do not they either come out more or less even or worse.

A fully allerted US Battle fleet with supporting vessels, able to keep its own initiative, might have been quite effective.

That's why the Japanese opted for the Pearl Harbor attack in the first place. They could not afford a full strength US Pacific Fleet messing up their very delicate planning.

The US Navy was one of the best in the world, arguably even the best, in terms of training and materiel. There were some exeptions, but that goes for the Japanese as well, so they more or less even out (with the US having the advantage of training and replacements).

Although many ships had been modernized the Japanese Battle Fleet wasn't modern either.

No, I would't be so sure about that certain victory. Although I agree that a victory at sea in a proper naval battle would have been far more devastating (or effective) than a surprise attack against ships at harbor.

Ruy Horta
11-22-2005, 12:57 PM
As for Tora Tora Tora (T3), although it is one of my favorite movies it almost doesn't deserve the title movie, it is more like a docu drama.

Personally I prefer the Japanese part because it carries more refined "style", thus maintaining some sense of being a movie. The Japanese bit was originally to be directed by Kurosawa, but he was too artistic and sacked after a few scenes (which were destroyed).

Too be honest, my favorite bit of the movie is everything around the Nagato replica!

joeap
11-22-2005, 02:07 PM
Well I really think if the US forces had been alert they would have mucked it up Ruy, don't forget later on when the US started meeting the Japanese on even terms they had some experience. No one knew at first how to deal with the Zero, it was thanks to the poor tactics as well as planes that Allied pilots were wiped out, they didn't know the adage "don't turn with a Zero"

Later even with mediocre planes liek the Widlcat, but with proper tactics and team coordination they were able to hold their own. Plus better planes ships etc. and more of them.

Hate to bring up the conspiracy thing but I have an excellent article I got (pdf) from an academic university journal that dismantles them. Anyone who wants it can PM me for it. Prange is an excellent author. Think of this, Hitler did not actually have to declare war against the US, thank goodness he did.

joeap
11-22-2005, 02:16 PM
BTW, Tora! Tora! Tora! is in my top ranking of WWII films. Interesting stroy, the library at my university got "Pearl Harbour" (they have a collection of dvds and cassettes to rent on classic or current films and documentaries especially with a historical or poltical subject ... so I talked to the librarian and persuaded him to order Tora! Tora! Tora! which he did ... he thanked me for it. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

SkyChimp
11-22-2005, 04:46 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by joeap:
Well I really think if the US forces had been alert they would have mucked it up Ruy, don't forget later on when the US started meeting the Japanese on even terms they had some experience. No one knew at first how to deal with the Zero, it was thanks to the poor tactics as well as planes that Allied pilots were wiped out, they didn't know the adage "don't turn with a Zero"

Later even with mediocre planes liek the Widlcat, but with proper tactics and team coordination they were able to hold their own. Plus better planes ships etc. and more of them.

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't think they would have "mucked it up." There's nothing in history that suggests the US would have "mucked it up."

The US was surprised at Pearl Harbor. Nevertheless, the meager number of planes they did get in the air did bring down some Japanese attackers. An organized defense may have irrevocably hurt the Japanese. They would have met swarms of Army, Navy and Marine aircraft, not to mention ships and subs. Maybe the greatest "conspiracy" surrounding Pearl Harbor is the notion that the Japanese intended to warn the Americans of the attack before it occurred. My personal feeling is that they had no such intention, and that the late warning delivered in Washington was intended to be late.

At the Philippines and Wake (as well as other outlying islands) the US suffered tactical defeats to numerically superior and experienced Japanese. Of course the US exhibited poor tactics in the air, but the extent of the Japanese numerical superiority cannot be understated. Proper tactics would not have held off the Japanese blitzkrieg.

Once the US got back on its feet, they more or less held their own for the first few months of the war. "Mediocre planes," particularly the Wildcat with Navy VFs held their own against the Japanese from day one.

jarink
11-22-2005, 06:32 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jds1978:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Good idea for a thread - war movie actors who did it for real, or has it been done? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ed McMahon (Publishers Clearing House, Johnny Carson) flew Corsairs in the Pacific.

Jimmy Stewart flew in 8th AF (Correct?)

Ditto for one of the Rooney boys (Mickey? Andy?)

Glen Miller (Jazz musician) died on a USO flight. I believe he was Army </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Good idea.

Clark Gable
Walter Matthau
Jack Palance
Tyrone Power
Robert Stack
Eddie Albert
Charlton Heston
Ernie Borgnine
Charles Bronson
George C. Scott
David Niven
Sir Alec Guiness
Audie Murphy (OK, so he was a soldier first) http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

A rather exhaustive list of actors who served in WWII is here:

http://www.jodavidsmeyer.com/combat/military/actors_in_wwii.html

Jimmy Stewart is the most fascinating to me. Here is a quote from http://www.b24bestweb.com:
"Joined USAAC in 1940, was initially refused entry because he was 5 pounds under the required 148 pounds, but he talked the recruitment officer into ignoring the test. Eventually became a Colonel, 8th AF Sqn Cmdr 703 BS 445 BG, and Ops Officer 453 BG (&rt;456 BG), awarded the Air Medal, the Distinguished Flying Cross, the Croix de Guerre, and 7 battle stars. Flew B-52 and B-58 in Vietnam. In 1959, while in the USAFR, he was promoted to BrigGenl, the highest ranking actor in military history (but would not allow his war record to be used in movies or as publicity)."

Pirschjaeger
11-22-2005, 06:53 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Low_Flyer_MkII:
I've started another thread for movie heroes who walked the walk. Wouldn't want to be thought of of as a common hi-jacker http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Don't worry, you're not common. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Fritz

Enforcer572005
11-22-2005, 09:39 PM
regarding the inacurate ships comment i made, this was toward the recent movie using modern ships in the harbor. Tora made use of ships that at least could pass for ww2 vessels.

there were no 4 stackers left, so a Haverson class frigate filled in for the Ward. all 4 of those ships were transferred to indonesia in the 80s.

A friend of mine went to elementary school in Del Ray bEach florida in the late 60s, and one of his teachers was Capt Outerbridge of the WArd. He had all sorts of stories of his service in the war afterward.

Anything with Ben AFleck in it is a pretty lousy movie from what ive seen so far. The attack scene was pretty good in some areas, Aflecks character and his friend obviously beign based on Taylor and Welch taking out 7 IJN planes in P40s.

Some of the ship models used in tora were very large and are on display in assorted museums.

Low_Flyer_MkII
11-23-2005, 05:22 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Pirschjaeger:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Low_Flyer_MkII:
I've started another thread for movie heroes who walked the walk. Wouldn't want to be thought of of as a common hi-jacker http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Don't worry, you're not common. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Fritz </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif