Not another book about Midway!!!!

[dcunning30]

But, this book is different, and I'm anxious to read it.  This book isauthored  by the owner of www.combinedfleet.com website.  And he purposes to dispell concepts we commonly accept about the battle that he calls myths.  Such as, Nagumo being double-minded about how to arm the planes on the carrier decks and the American dive bombers catching the Japanese carriers in that process.  And the Tone scout plane's significance about not finding the US fleet earlier enough. Parshall says these aren't true.

He even contradicts Mitsuo Fuchida in Fuchida's book "Midway - the battle that doomed Japan".  And he sets out to prove how Fuchida was wrong.  And Fuchida was there!  But,  I've read some of Parshall's discussion on this and he's quite compelling.  In fact, VERY compelling!  He REALLY knows his stuff and discusses details that I've never seen in any book on Midway that I've read.

http://www.shatteredswordbook.com/purchase.htm

[Hagar]

[quote]he purposes to dispell concepts we commonly accept about the battle that he calls myths.

[dcunning30]

I've read Fuchida's book, and I've also read his autobiography, and he never mentioned some of the details Parshall discusses in the following article.  It's compelling.


http://www.nwc.navy.mil/press/Review/20 ... d1-su1.htm

[Hagar]

Thanks. Looks interesting. I'll read it later when I have more time.

[Flt.Lt.Andrew]

The problem with the Japanese account, is that while it may be historically accurate, it cannot be said tha the author can make an accurate primary source acocunt as he only saw HIS part of the battle from HIS perpective. Although he may be realiable on certain facts and the nature of the fighting, it cannot be said that by his account alone a proper analytical study of Midway can be formed.
However, it can be seen that the tome written by Parshall is more open and complete as he has drawn on more than one eyewitness account and is not basing his conclusions and knowledge from his experience but rather, from what he has found out and discovered to be true.
Therefore it can be stated that Parshall's book is more likely to give a better overall picture than Fuchida's as Fuchida only knows/knew what he saw and what he percieved, even when this was wrong.


A.

[Hagar]

I read Jonathan B. Parshall's account from dcunning's link & this should be an interesting book. It's very well presented & explains Japanese Navy operating procedures I was unaware of until now. However, most of it is pure supposition & based on hypothesis. Mitsuo Fuchida was there & being the leader of the strike force that attacked Pearl Harbor, a senior officer in the Japanese Navy & experienced pilot he would obviously be familiar with these procedures which he perhaps assumed the reader would also know when writing his accounts. Knowing these facts could well give a new perspective on this & it might be worth reading his accounts again. Unfortunately, I haven't read these accounts & only have a basic overall knowledge of the Battle of Midway & haven't studied it in detail. This was also many years ago so I would have to bone up on the subject to discuss it properly.

I also read Professor Dallas Isom's response to what is basically a criticism of his own theories. http://www.nwc.navy.mil/press/Review/2001/Summer/imv-su1.htm
This is an intelligent & detailed argument between academics & Isom concedes some points. The whole thing is very interesting indeed but, as always, you have to read everything you can find on the subject & come to your own conclusion. Knowing these facts can only help. I'm no academic & purely an amateur historian, a very poor one at that.

PS. I don't know what it's all about but found the response to Stanley Weintraub's letter at the bottom of the above page highly amusing.

[Flt.Lt.Andrew]

Now that I know Fuchida's involvment I can form a better opinion. I had previously presumed that he was an able seaman or a (singdow-wa...no I'm just being slack there) cleaner or something. I didnt realise he was a commander.
Perhaps, however it can be seen that neither account is perfect....


A.

[dcunning30]

As a point of further illustration,

[Hagar]

dcunning. Thanks for the review of the situation. It's a great help & refreshes my memory. I know very little about carrier procedure &, apart from watchiing Tora, Tora, Tora & reading several books on Midway some years ago, even less about the Japanese & US carrier procedures at the time.

From reading the accounts from your link it seems to me the whole problem from the Japanese point of view was in operating an effective CAP against repeated US raids. In this case I wonder if it would have been wiser to operate the CAP fighters from one carrier, leaving the others free to launch the strike force as necessary - without the inevitable interruptions caused by retrieving the fighters for refuelling/rearming. This seems the obvious solution to a landlubber like me so there must have been good reasons for this not being done. I realise that this could cause problems if the CAP carrier had been put out of action but these would not have been insurmountable.

[dcunning30]

Also, the Combined Fleet tasked Fuchida to do the official post mortem of the Midway debacle, so I think his involvement and knowlege on the subject goes beyond just being there.

[Flt.Lt.Andrew]

AH, now I see...amazing that Fuchida didnt Hari-Kari on us all....although his ideas seem profoundly progressive and "new school"...what rank did he hold at Midway?


A.

[dcunning30]

After the Pearl Harbor mission, he was promoted to Captain.