The Battle of Midway, which was fought over and near the tiny U.S. mid-Pacific base at Midway Atoll, represented the strategic high-water mark of Japan’s Pacific Ocean war. Prior to the battle, Japan possessed general naval superiority over the United States and could usually choose where and when to attack. The Battle of Midway shifted the naval power dynamic of WWII. After Midway, the two opposing fleets were essentially equals, and that shift enabled the United States to take the offensive.
The battle began when Japanese naval forces moved on the base in an effort to draw out and destroy the U.S. Pacific Fleet’s aircraft carrier striking forces, which had embarrassed the Japanese Navy in mid-April during the Doolittle Raid on Japan’s home islands and then again at the Battle of Coral Sea in early May. Japan’s navy planned to quickly knock down Midway’s defenses, follow up with an invasion of Midway’s two small islands and establish a Japanese air base there. Their plan was for the U.S. carriers to arrive at Midway too late to save island and for Japanese forces to have a sweeping victory after U.S. naval forces proved insufficient compared to well-tested strength of their carrier air power.
How did the U.S. Navy seize the victory and shift the naval power dynamics? The easy answer is superior intelligence. American communications intelligence deduced Japan’s plan well before battle began and allowed Admiral Chester W. Nimitz, U.S. Pacific Fleet commander, to establish an ambush with Navy carriers ready and waiting for the Japanese.
On June 4, 1942, the trap – the second of the Pacific War’s great carrier battles – was sprung. U.S. naval aviators’ perseverance, sacrifice and skill, and a great deal of good luck on the American side cost Japan four irreplaceable fleet carriers; only one of the three U.S. carriers present was lost. Although the base at Midway was damaged by Japan’s air attack, the base remained operational and later became a vital component in the American trans-Pacific offensive.
“We are actively preparing to greet our expected visitors with the kind of reception they deserve,” Admiral Chester W. Nimitz, Commander in Chief, U.S. Pacific Fleet, wrote to Admiral Ernest J. King, the Commander in Chief, U.S. Fleet and Chief of Naval Operations, on 29 May 1942, “and we will do the best we can with what we have.” How did Admiral Nimitz plan to fight the Battle of Midway? His opposing fleet commander, Admiral Yamamoto Isoroku, Commander in Chief of the Imperial Japanese Navy’s Combined Fleet, had formulated his strategy for Operation MI, the reduction of Midway to entice Nimitz to expose his few aircraft carriers to destruction. The Japanese plan proved incredibly complex.
When one compares the convoluted nature of Yamamoto’s plan to Nimitz’s, the latter emerges as simple and economical. Aware of the nature of the Japanese operation that ranged from the Aleutians to Midway, and involved aircraft carriers in both areas, Nimitz concentrated his forces at the most critical location, poised to attack the enemy when long-range flying boats operating from Midway would locate him. The actual sighting of the Japanese on 3 June, heading for Midway, vindicated Nimitz’s trust in the intelligence information he possessed, information that had been vital to the formulation of his strategy.
Yamamoto, by contrast, could only hazard a guess where his opponent was: the American placement of ships at French Frigate Shoals and other islets in the Hawaiian chain, in addition to a swift exit of carrier task forces (Task Force 16 under Rear Admiral Raymond A. Spruance and Task Force 17 under Rear Admiral Frank Jack Fletcher) from Pearl Harbor, meant that (1) Japanese submarine-supported flying boat reconnaissance could not originate at French Frigate Shoals and (2) the submarines deployed to watch for American sorties arrived on station too late.
Knowing Japanese intentions and the forces involved, Nimitz maintained the emphasis on the central Pacific, and sent cursory forces, sans aircraft carriers, to the Aleutians. The Pacific Fleet’s battleships, on the west coast of the United States, played no role in the drama, because Nimitz’s primary goal was the same of his opponent: sink the enemy aircraft carriers. While the Japanese hoped to draw the U.S. carriers, that had operated out of range through most of early 1942, so too Nimitz desired to bring the Japanese carriers, that had operated in much the same fashion from Pearl Harbor through the Indian Ocean (and thus well beyond reach) to the same end: destruction.
Nimitz’s strategy was direct and to the point; the Japanese’ involved operations that were to divert American strength from the main battle. Nimitz’s knowledge of the Japanese intentions and deployment of forces, however, meant that he had no need to employ diversions to keep the enemy guessing. Nimitz knew where the enemy was to be and employed what forces he had to be there to meet him; he had faith in his commanders: Fletcher, victor of Coral Sea, enjoyed his confidence, and Spruance had come highly recommended by Vice Admiral William F. Halsey, Jr., his commander during the early eastern Pacific raids. When Lt.Col. Harold F. Shannon,. USMC, commanding the USMC garrison at Midway, declared he would hold Midway, Nimitz sent him what reinforcements he could, and provided them to Comdr. Cyril T. Simard, who commanded the overall defense forces at Midway. Popular legend has made much of the Japanese having four carriers and the U.S. Navy three. Midway itself proved to be the equalizer, serving as base for long-ranged aircraft that could not be taken to sea – four-engined heavy bombers (B-17) and flying boats in sufficient quantity for reconnaissance and attack. Nimitz gave Midway “all the strengthening it could take,” exigencies of war dictating the numbers and types of planes employed.
Nimitz clearly possessed tremendous faith in his subordinates, who were nevertheless guided by very clear instructions. His principle of calculated risk is, perhaps, his most brilliant contribution to the battle, in that it precisely and economically conveyed his intentions to his task force commanders. There was no doubt about what they were supposed to do, how they were supposed to do it, and what level of risk was acceptable. Nimitz’s operations plan for the defense of Midway is a model for effective macro-management, spelling out essential tasks in general terms, with a minimum of detail-specific requirements. Nimitz’s plan for the Battle of Midway avoided long-range micro-management and allowed the commanders on the battlefield to make key operational and tactical decisions.
One can contrast the simplicity of Nimitz’s OpPlan with the voluminous orders Yamamoto produced prior to the battle, many of which served little purpose in the final analysis. Nimitz, arguably a better strategist, possessed a clear vision of what he wanted to do – basically, to bring the Kido Butai to battle and to destroy it -- and he clearly communicated those intentions to his operational commanders. Good strategy, however, is useless without quality operational commanders who thoroughly understand the plan and are able to put that strategy into action.
Although Naval War College analysts believed that plans needed to be formed in light of enemy capabilities and not intentions, something for which they castigated Yamamoto, Admiral Nimitz’s battle planning benefited enormously from having a very good notion of enemy intentions derived from excellent radio-intelligence. Such precise and economic employment of forces could not have occurred unless he possessed the ability to gather strategic intelligence on the enemy. Indeed, one can argue that the battle would never have taken place at all had Japanese intentions been cloaked in mystery.
Nimitz’s active preparations for the Battle of Midway indeed provided a momentous reception for the enemy, and once he had issued his operations orders, he entrusted the fighting of the battle to subordinates. Knowing your enemy is coming is one thing, but meeting him on the battlefield and defeating him, is altogether another. In the actions of 4-6 June 1942, those subordinates, from flag officer to fighter pilot, more than justified his faith in them. They had written, Nimitz declared afterward, “a glorious page in our history.”
Tactical Lesson of Midway: The Thach Weave
When the U.S. Navy entered the war in the Pacific, fighting
squadron aircraft strength stood at 18 planes. Operational experience, showed
that more fighters were needed, to (1) protect the carrier herself and (2) to
protect the attack groups composed of dive/scout bombers and torpedo bombers.
Even when temporarily augmented to 27 planes, there were too few fighters to
adequately perform both missions. Since neither the Enterprise’s nor the
Hornet’s fighters accompanied their respective attack groups only
Yorktown’s experience proved instructive. First, only six Wildcat
fighters accompanied the attack group and they were relatively ineffective
against the Japanese combat air patrol onslaught. But even in numbers on
defense, they did not do well as Japanese carrier [dive] bomber and torpedo
plane crews fought their way through the U.S. combat air patrol (even though
augmented by fighters from TF-16) to twice cripple Yorktown and, after
the second attack, force her temporary abandonment.
The story of the fighter escort for the torpedo bombers and
dive bombers from the carriers, with the exception of that concerning the
Yorktown’s group, was altogether dismal. Indeed, the small number of
fighters from VF-3 that attempted to cover VT-3’s attack on the morning of 4
June had found the Americans overwhelmed by the Zeroes. The only silver lining
was the survival of most American fighters, a result owed in part to the
successful implementation of the “beam defense” tactic of Lt. Comdr. John S.
“Jimmy” Thach (of Yorktown’s VF-3), a tactic later named the “Thach
Weave” in his honor.
“It is indeed surprising,” Jimmy Thach wrote on the evening
of 4 June 1942, “that any of our pilots returned alive. Any success our fighter
pilots may have against the Japanese Zero fighter is not [Thach’s
italics] due to the performance of the airplane we fly [the Grumman F4F-4
Wildcat] but is the result of the comparatively poor marksmanship of the
Japanese, stupid mistakes made by a few of their pilots and superior
marksmanship and team work of some of our pilots. The only way we can ever bring
our guns to bear on the Zero fighter is to trick them into recovering in front
of an F4F or shoot them when they are preoccupied in firing at one of our own
planes.” Thach warned that unless the Wildcat’s performance was improved,
the F4F pilots could not carry out their mission, which would have a “definite
and alarming effect on the morale of most of our carrier based VF [fighter]
pilots. If we expect to keep our carriers afloat,” he concluded, “we must
provide a VF airplane superior to the Japanese Zero in at least climb and speed,
if not maneuverability.”
The problem was that on 4 June 1942, and for some time
thereafter, there was no way to improve the performance of the F4F. The Vought
F4U Corsair and the Grumman F6F Hellcat were under development, but a long time
away from equipping first-line carriers. Admiral Nimitz, in reviewing Thach’s
comments, noted an important distinction: in the Battle of Midway, the Japanese
fighters outnumbered the American. Finding that 27 fighters (a temporary
expedient) proved too few, the fighter strength was increased to 36. “If the
F4Fs were not equal to Zeros on a one-to-one basis,” historian John B. Lundstrom
has noted in his magnificent work The First Team, “Nimitz at least would
see to it that there were more F4F-4s available to fight.”
Providentially, while Jimmy Thach enjoyed 30 days leave at
his home in Coronado, he met with Lt. Comdr. James Flatley, who had been exec of
VF-42 in Yorktown in the Battle of the Coral Sea and who was commanding
the new VF-10, training at North Island. The two men, good friends, “freely
exchanged experiences and ideas.” Flatley had, almost simultaneous with Thach,
pondered fighter tactics in the wake of his own combat experience at Coral
Sea.
“Our planes and our pilots, if properly handled,” Flatley
declared, “are more than a match for the enemy.” He praised the F4F-4 Wildcat’s
“excellent armament [six .50-caliber machine guns], protected fuel system, and
greater strength…Let’s not condemn our equipment. It shoots the enemy down in
flames and gets most of us back to our base…Remember the mission of the fighter
plane, the enemy’s VF mission is the same as our own. Work out tactics on that
basis. We should be able to out smart him…”
Thach spent some of his leave revising the section on
“fighter tactics” in Current Carrier Orders and Doctrine, U.S. Fleet
Aircraft, Volume One, Carrier Aircraft USF-74 (Revised), and substituted
two-plane sections and four-plane divisions in place of the old three-plane
divisions. He also inserted sketches of the “beam defense formation” and
explained how it had been proved successful at Midway. Thach’s work, Lundstrom
notes, “offered the first steps in providing the Navy’s fighter pilots concrete
tactics to counter fighters with superior speed and maneuverability.” For those
significant efforts, setting forth and describing tactics proved in the crucible
of combat at Midway, Jimmy Thach would receive the Distinguished Service Medal.
Tayun:
ResponderEliminarGracias, como siempre, por proporcionarnos material del máximo interés, hoy muy oportunamete coincidiendo con el aniversario.Me gustaría compartir contigo, y con el resto de los miembros del club, algunas reflexiones:
1ª.- Se destaca muy certeramente el valor crucial de la SIGINT, tan vitales entonces como ahora, como no hace mucho recordabas.
2ª.- La superioridad numérica o material no garantiza por sí sola nada (aunque a veces ayuda un tanto...). Pero la combinación de mandos inteligentes y de recursos bien aplicados fue (y es) decisiva. En ese momento los americanos no gozaban de la abrumadora superioridad material de las fases posteriores de la guerra, pero aun asi prevalecieron, en lo que sin duda fue "their finest hour", cambiando radicalmente el curso de los acontecimientos.
3ª,. En relación con la anterior, el "factor humano" vuelve a ser decisivo, el mejor avión por sí solo tampoco garantiza el éxito, y me ha gustado mucho cómo explica el artículo la implementación de la "Thach Wave" y el aprendizaje sobre la marcha de las tácticas.
4ª.- Y más allá del factor humano en sentido puramente técnco, el coraje, el valor, los co... o como queráis llamarlo; para mí el episodio más conmovedor de Midway es el sacrificio de lo pilotos del VT-8 (también mencionado en el texto) de John Waldron,que montados en los obsoletos TBD y sabiendo lo que le espera, se hacen matar, distrayendo a las CAP y a la DCA y faciltando el trabajo a los Dauntlesses...
Adjunto enlace con vídeo...creo que vale la pena:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dL_2saZlNjQ
Perdón por el tostón.
Un saludo cordialismo.
Pablo.
Gracias, Pablo. Un abrazo.
ResponderEliminar