The Truth About Force Z?

[MakeeLearn]

He was on HMS INDOMITABLE

http://www.royalnavyresearcharchive.org ... SMOC9xOnb2


Shows a time frame. Would be best not to have a shake down in open seas. The Jamaica incident changed the itinerary.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: crsutton

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

ORIGINAL: Jorge_Stanbury

I read that Phillips was not expecting torpedo bombers so far away from enemy bases. After all, Netties had a range that was double any other nation's torpedo bombers

The Japanese had quite a few secrets about their equipment, like the excellent torpedoes they had for both air and sea.

As for what Force Z was supposed to do when war broke out, I think the idea must have been to threaten Japanese invasion attempts from the west while the US threatened from the east, and the Dutch/Australians from the south. The Japanese made Force Z a priority because it was a major threat. With a carrier providing CAP the PoW and Repulse may have made it to Kota Bharu to challenge the invasion. Whether they could last against the Japanese torpedoes there is another question.

A single British carrier would have only been able to put up perhaps half a dozen fighters or so considering the need to rotate aircraft. Maybe ten at the most. British carrier fighters were not the best at the time. Then you have the inexact science of vectoring and interception with unreliable early war radar. It is conceivable that there would have been no intercept at all. And CAP, even if it could intercept, would have probably been overwhelmed by numbers. Only real impact that a single carrier could have at at this stage would have been one less capital ship on the registry...

I know Indomitable carried up to 34 fighters in 1942 (Sea Hurricanes and Martlets) but don't know if that complement was carried in 1941 at the time of Force Z. I am guessing that the fighter compliment may have been boosted as a result of that action but don't really know. Did the Brits have Martlets before the outset of American involvement?

warspite1

The British began ordering Martlets in 1940.

By the end of 1941 fewer than half were delivered - and importantly - none of these had the folding wings specified (due to the size of the lifts). The first operational Squadron was 804 based at Scapa Flow (in the absence of folding wings they were initially placed on shore establishments although later used on the escort carrier Audacity where they could be parked on deck).

During Indomitable's work up in the West Indies she had:

800 Sqn (Fulmars)
880 Sqn (Sea Hurricanes)
827 Sqn (Albacores)
831 Sqn (Albacores)

[Buckrock]

ORIGINAL: crsutton
A single British carrier would have only been able to put up perhaps half a dozen fighters or so considering the need to rotate aircraft. Maybe ten at the most. British carrier fighters were not the best at the time. Then you have the inexact science of vectoring and interception with unreliable early war radar. It is conceivable that there would have been no intercept at all. And CAP, even if it could intercept, would have probably been overwhelmed by numbers. Only real impact that a single carrier could have at at this stage would have been one less capital ship on the registry...

I know Indomitable carried up to 34 fighters in 1942 (Sea Hurricanes and Martlets) but don't know if that complement was carried in 1941 at the time of Force Z. I am guessing that the fighter compliment may have been boosted as a result of that action but don't really know. Did the Brits have Martlets before the outset of American involvement?

Indomitable would most likely have been still carrying her original fighter complement from her time in the Caribbean, 9 Sea Hurricanes and 12 Fulmars.

But Indomitable would never have been at Singapore in time to be caught up in the opening days of the Japanese offensive. The original (pre-grounding)
plans for her joining POW and Repulse in the Indian Ocean were on a fairly leisurely timetable, leaving Kingston on the 22nd Nov to arrive Gibraltar on
the 29th Nov and then, if given the all clear, to sail for Cape Town and on to Ceylon. The likely earliest date she could have made Singapore would have
been late Dec to early Jan.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: Buckrock

ORIGINAL: crsutton
A single British carrier would have only been able to put up perhaps half a dozen fighters or so considering the need to rotate aircraft. Maybe ten at the most. British carrier fighters were not the best at the time. Then you have the inexact science of vectoring and interception with unreliable early war radar. It is conceivable that there would have been no intercept at all. And CAP, even if it could intercept, would have probably been overwhelmed by numbers. Only real impact that a single carrier could have at at this stage would have been one less capital ship on the registry...

I know Indomitable carried up to 34 fighters in 1942 (Sea Hurricanes and Martlets) but don't know if that complement was carried in 1941 at the time of Force Z. I am guessing that the fighter compliment may have been boosted as a result of that action but don't really know. Did the Brits have Martlets before the outset of American involvement?

But Indomitable would never have been at Singapore in time to be caught up in the opening days of the Japanese offensive. The original (pre-grounding)
plans for her joining POW and Repulse in the Indian Ocean were on a fairly leisurely timetable, leaving Kingston on the 22nd Nov to arrive Gibraltar on
the 29th Nov and then, if given the all clear, to sail for Cape Town and on to Ceylon. The likely earliest date she could have made Singapore would have
been late Dec to early Jan.

warspite1

....which at first glance perhaps supports the notion that "Indomitable was expected to be part of Force Z" as being written with a degree of wise after the event syndrome.

[Buckrock]

Unfortunately the Japanese never consulted with the British on co-ordinating their timetables.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: Buckrock

Unfortunately the Japanese never consulted with the British on co-ordinating their timetables.

warspite1

Well quite [&:] but that has nothing to do with certain people saying, after the sinkings, that if only Indomitable hadn't run aground, she would have been with them. The two don't appear to follow given the timings and the lack of proof (unless Boyd is wrong) that she was meant to be.

Whether Indomitable would have been part of a later Far Eastern Fleet - like the R-Class or the Nelsons - is irrelevant to that question.

Maybe she was, maybe she wasn't - I don't pretend to know the answer -but if Boyd is right, she wasn't anything to do with the initial Force Z because her name was never formally mentioned in that connection - although plenty of people mentioned her afterwards.

[Alfred]

The Flying Squadron "doctrine" whose genesis (early 1920s) dates from almost the beginning of the Singapore base "doctrine" when it became obvious there was no spare capital ship fleet to base at Singapore, did not rely upon carrier support.  It was never intended that the Flying Squadron would be able to defeat the Japanese fleet.
 
The Flying Squadron doctrine was always a political, not a military, decision.  There was no military value in having so many troops in Malaya except for protecting the airbases.  The airbases were there only to (a) protect the Singapore naval base and (b) destroy the enemy fleet before it could make contact with the RN based out of Singapore.  The Singapore base was there to reassure Australia and New Zealand that they could send off their military to fight elsewhere and they would be "protected" by Singapore.  To provide a justification for all this, some level of RN presence at Singapore was required.  Hence the Flying Squadron.
 
Alfred

[warspite1]

I am surprised that you say the Flying Squadron "doctrine" dates from the twenties. No doubt different names are given for various plans and studies but as far as I was aware the term 'Flying Squadron' in this form was first used in an official planning document only as late as 1939.

In addition, the global situation in the twenties - no German Navy and no Italian Navy to speak of - meant that only the Japanese Navy (of those countries reasonably likely to be hostile) was a threat, and of course whilst the treasury would not want a large battlefleet overseas for any length of time, the deployment of such a fleet (with maybe an advance force in the vanguard) in the event of war would not prove difficult given the lack of other threats closer to home. The very real, some would say insurmountable, problems of overstretch came later.

A Flying Squadron, and what that composed of, or indeed where it would need to be based, was never properly identified (for the reasons set out in post 16). It was one of the options considered during the first two years of war as a means of deterring Japan and, as you say, re-assuring the Dominions. But there was no hard and fast "doctrine" that meant a Flying Squadron had to be sent (as opposed to something larger if circumstances permitted - or indeed nothing at all if, god-forbid, things had really turned pear-shaped) that was set in stone pre-Pound and Churchill and that they were unwittingly wedded to.

Of course a Flying Squadron was never meant to be able to defeat a Japanese fleet, but then until a volte-face in policy - R-Class? Really? - the RN were not supposed to fight north of Singapore until a proper, balanced fleet was available.

[Buckrock]

ORIGINAL: warspite1
Well quite [&:] but that has nothing to do with certain people saying, after the sinkings, that if only Indomitable hadn't run aground, she would have been with them. The two don't appear to follow given the timings and the lack of proof (unless Boyd is wrong) that she was meant to be.

Whether Indomitable would have been part of a later Far Eastern Fleet - like the R-Class or the Nelsons - is irrelevant to that question.

Maybe she was, maybe she wasn't - I don't pretend to know the answer -but if Boyd is right, she wasn't anything to do with the initial Force Z because her name was never formally mentioned in that connection - although plenty of people mentioned her afterwards.

So we're finally getting to the author's arguement.

I assume because there was no mention of Indomitable in the October meetings and no orders were actually issued for her to sail for the Indian
Ocean, the author is therefore suggesting that there is no evidence that Indomitable was to be part of Force G and by default, Force Z.

The initial Force Z was created when the original members of Force G put to sea on Dec 8th. Several authors (including Middlebrook&Mahoney's
"The Sinking of the Prince of Wales and Repulse") have pointed out there was an agreement between Churchill and the Admiralty that a "fast
carrier" would be part of the "deterrent force" (Force G) being sent to operate in the Indian Ocean and that the Admiralty had already put
plans in place for the Indomitable to head there once her working up period was completed in November.

Other factors then intervened but if these authors are correct then Indomitable was very much earmarked for the original Force G and by
association, would likely then have been part of Force Z had the Japanese not had such a rushed timetable.

Pick your author.

IMO, even if Indomitable not run aground at the start of November, the loss of the Ark Royal later that month would likely have put any
immediate plans on hold for her to head Far East, at least till the Japanese attacked anyway.

[Orm]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

Of course a Flying Squadron was never meant to be able to defeat a Japanese fleet, but then until a volte-face in policy - R-Class? Really? - the RN were not supposed to fight north of Singapore until a proper, balanced fleet was available.

And what, at that time, would have been considered a proper, balanced fleet ? I suppose that definition would have changed as the war progressed.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: Orm

ORIGINAL: warspite1

Of course a Flying Squadron was never meant to be able to defeat a Japanese fleet, but then until a volte-face in policy - R-Class? Really? - the RN were not supposed to fight north of Singapore until a proper, balanced fleet was available.

And what, at that time, would have been considered a proper, balanced fleet ? I suppose that definition would have changed as the war progressed.

warspite1

Yes, certainly as the plans for defence of the Empire evolved during the inter-war years and technology moved on apace. Then of course once the shooting war started and the theories and ideas were actually put into practice, the notion of what constituted a balanced fleet was pretty much turned on its head. That would take time of course - and as one example, the debates in the US Navy about battleships vs carrier in 1943 are fascinating.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: Buckrock

ORIGINAL: warspite1
Well quite [&:] but that has nothing to do with certain people saying, after the sinkings, that if only Indomitable hadn't run aground, she would have been with them. The two don't appear to follow given the timings and the lack of proof (unless Boyd is wrong) that she was meant to be.

Whether Indomitable would have been part of a later Far Eastern Fleet - like the R-Class or the Nelsons - is irrelevant to that question.

Maybe she was, maybe she wasn't - I don't pretend to know the answer -but if Boyd is right, she wasn't anything to do with the initial Force Z because her name was never formally mentioned in that connection - although plenty of people mentioned her afterwards.

So we're finally getting to the author's arguement.

warspite1

I find the Indomitable aspect interesting but I don't think this is the 'author's argument'. That is more to do with, in his view, the 'accepted' version of events about the roles of Churchill "recklessly disregarding professional naval advice" and Pound "the weary First Sea Lord, lacking the political shrewdness, intellect, temperament, and constitutional robustness to face down a dominant prime minister" being the opposite of the way they have been depicted. That to me is what is really interesting. This book is not about Force Z per se, but by its very nature, Force Z will feature heavily in the story.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: MakeeLearn


He was on HMS INDOMITABLE

http://www.royalnavyresearcharchive.org ... SMOC9xOnb2


Shows a time frame. Would be best not to have a shake down in open seas. The Jamaica incident changed the itinerary.

warspite1

Cool [8D] Thanks for posting.

[Orm]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Orm

ORIGINAL: warspite1

Of course a Flying Squadron was never meant to be able to defeat a Japanese fleet, but then until a volte-face in policy - R-Class? Really? - the RN were not supposed to fight north of Singapore until a proper, balanced fleet was available.

And what, at that time, would have been considered a proper, balanced fleet ? I suppose that definition would have changed as the war progressed.

warspite1

Yes, certainly as the plans for defence of the Empire evolved during the inter-war years and technology moved on apace. Then of course once the shooting war started and the theories and ideas were actually put into practice, the notion of what constituted a balanced fleet was pretty much turned on its head. That would take time of course - and as one example, the debates in the US Navy about battleships vs carrier in 1943 are fascinating.

Indeed.

What do you think a proper, balanced fleet would have looked like from '39 to the fall of Singapore. And what should it really have looked like if it were to have any chance of making any difference?

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: Orm

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Orm



And what, at that time, would have been considered a proper, balanced fleet ? I suppose that definition would have changed as the war progressed.

warspite1

Yes, certainly as the plans for defence of the Empire evolved during the inter-war years and technology moved on apace. Then of course once the shooting war started and the theories and ideas were actually put into practice, the notion of what constituted a balanced fleet was pretty much turned on its head. That would take time of course - and as one example, the debates in the US Navy about battleships vs carrier in 1943 are fascinating.

Indeed.

What do you think a proper, balanced fleet would have looked like from '39 to the fall of Singapore. And what should it really have looked like if it were to have any chance of making any difference?

warspite1

There are a number of problems in answering that:

1. Despite the evidence to the contrary in the Mediterranean, the British did not seem to consider the threat from naval air as one would have thought. Here they were presented with first hand battle-experience, but lessons don't seem to have been absorbed.

2. The sad fact was the RN was playing catch-up in carrier warfare. Even a force of 3-4 armoured carriers would have suffered while the aircraft failed to live up to requirements. Yes there would be defensive advantages - as was shown in 1944/45 - but low numbers of aircraft and low quality would have been a big problem.

3. The fact is the RN would have needed all their new weaponry in theatre. Thought of deploying the R-class was bizarre, but sadly even the modernised Queen Elizabeths would have been just too damn slow. The KGV's and Renown, the Illustrious and Ark Royal, the Didos and the Towns - anything less and who knows? Doesn't leave much for the Regia Marina or Tirpitz and Scharnhost to take on....

4. Most of these ships come on line as the war progresses - few are available in 1939.

[Buckrock]

ORIGINAL: warspite1
I find the Indomitable aspect interesting but I don't think this is the 'author's argument'. That is more to do with, in his view, the 'accepted' version of events about the roles of Churchill "recklessly disregarding professional naval advice" and Pound "the weary First Sea Lord, lacking the political shrewdness, intellect, temperament, and constitutional robustness to face down a dominant prime minister" being the opposite of the way they have been depicted. That to me is what is really interesting. This book is not about Force Z per se, but by its very nature, Force Z will feature heavily in the story.

We can at least agree the Indomitable was always a historical no-show regardless of whatever was planned originally.

The Churchill-Pound situation is open to interpretation. In late Oct '41, the Admiralty signaled that Force G would make for Singapore. Brodhurst's
"Churchill's Anchor" suggests Pound never intended to send POW beyond Cape Town but "political pressure" forced his hand. In other words, Churchill
made him do it. But there is no surviving documents to prove or disprove it. Oddly, there are even letters written between the two men days later
where both are still acting as if no final decision had yet been made as to where in the Indian Ocean should Force G be deployed.

[Buckrock]

ORIGINAL: Orm
What do you think a proper, balanced fleet would have looked like from '39 to the fall of Singapore. And what should it really have looked like if it were to have any chance of making any difference?

The Eastern Fleet as initially proposed by the Admiralty in mid 1941 and hopefully to be at Singapore by Mar '42 before anything bad happened:-
Nelson, Rodney, 3-4 'R' Class, Renown, Ark Royal, 10 cruisers and 32 destroyers.

The 'R' class and other older ships were to be "modernised" before deployment.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: Buckrock

ORIGINAL: Orm
What do you think a proper, balanced fleet would have looked like from '39 to the fall of Singapore. And what should it really have looked like if it were to have any chance of making any difference?

The Eastern Fleet as initially proposed by the Admiralty in mid 1941 and hopefully to be at Singapore by Mar '42 before anything bad happened:-
Nelson, Rodney, 3-4 'R' Class, Renown, Ark Royal, 10 cruisers and 32 destroyers.

The 'R' class and other older ships were to be "modernised" before deployment.

warspite1

Ark Royal and Renown were going there because the USN was going to take over from Force H at Gibraltar. But Ark Royal was lost and Pearl Harbor happened anyway so.....

The 'modernising' of the R-class was limited to sticking some AA guns on the old tarts. They were useful for trade escort and..... well that was about it.

[JeffroK]

When PoW left for the east, escorted by Electra & Express, they were called Force G

On arriving at Colombo they were joined by Repulse, Encounter & Jupiter and sailed for Singapore.

From the RAN Official HIstory

[Buckrock]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

The 'modernising' of the R-class was limited to sticking some AA guns on the old tarts. They were useful for trade escort and..... well that was about it.

Surely that would have been enough to see off the warships of a second rate power like Japan. Knowing the Admiralty, it all would have worked out just fine.