The First Team

[Mike Malanaphy]

Hi folks,

Just finished reading John B. Lundstrom's duo about naval fighter combat in the Pacific frpm Pearl Harbor through the Guadalcanal campaign. I had bever read any of Lunstrom, but if the rest of his work is as good athese too, I'm sold. Like Blair, he fills every page with tons of details and useful knowledge about the planes, the ships, the pilots and the organization of the USN carrier arm. He carefully disects every air battle from the early raids through the defense of Henderson Field. He has interviewed many survivors from both sides and tells the Japanese side as well.

I had never heard of the F4F-7 of the Grumman Wildcat, an unarmed recon plane with an unrefuelled range of 3,700 miles issued to each carrier post Midway or the theory that the USS Porter, which was torpedoed and sunk while picking up a ditched TBF crew, was hit by the MK XIII from that plane which activated on contact. Or how close the margin of victory was on October 13 when most of Henderson Field's aricraft werte destroyed in a Japanese Bombardment. THe few planes from Henderson were able to destroy unloading Japanese transports while a powerful Japanese Zero CAP overhead never saw the attackers.

From the Japanese view, they suffered tremendous losses in skilled leaders in many of the later engagements, a loss from which they never recovered. In his analysis of the effectiveness of US AA fire at Santa Cruz against TF 16, he shows 29 Japanese aircraft shot down around the ships. He credits 16 to the CAP and 13 to the ships mainly Enterprise and South Dakota's 40mm which were particularly effective agasinst dive bombers.

Of particular interest is his examination of pilot claims and actual losses by the Japanese and Americans. Some of teh discreapancies are amazing including one phantom battle agaist torpedo planes claimed by CAP figther pilots were no Japanese planes were present. Gives some insight into how little hard information commandres got about the effectiveness of their actions.

Both are worthy additions to your library or get them from the library to read.

[old_pop2000]

Hi folks,

Just finished reading John B. Lundstrom's duo about naval fighter combat in the Pacific frpm Pearl Harbor through the Guadalcanal campaign. I had bever read any of Lunstrom, but if the rest of his work is as good athese too, I'm sold. Like Blair, he fills every page with tons of details and useful knowledge about the planes, the ships, the pilots and the organization of the USN carrier arm. He carefully disects every air battle from the early raids through the defense of Henderson Field. He has interviewed many survivors from both sides and tells the Japanese side as well.

I had never heard of the F4F-7 of the Grumman Wildcat, an unarmed recon plane with an unrefuelled range of 3,700 miles issued to each carrier post Midway or the theory that the USS Porter, which was torpedoed and sunk while picking up a ditched TBF crew, was hit by the MK XIII from that plane which activated on contact. Or how close the margin of victory was on October 13 when most of Henderson Field's aricraft werte destroyed in a Japanese Bombardment. THe few planes from Henderson were able to destroy unloading Japanese transports while a powerful Japanese Zero CAP overhead never saw the attackers.

Both are worthy additions to your library or get them from the library to read.
I concur, I've read both. Great detail and nice drawings and maps. I found the evolution of fighter direction interesting along with the development of the Thach weave. Seems the ability to move the whole squadron on and off the carrier, as a team was vital to keeping the squadrons in fighting trim.

[Ed Rotondaro]

Hi folks,

Just finished reading John B. Lundstrom's duo about naval fighter combat in the Pacific frpm Pearl Harbor through the Guadalcanal campaign. I had bever read any of Lunstrom, but if the rest of his work is as good athese too, I'm sold. Like Blair, he fills every page with tons of details and useful knowledge about the planes, the ships, the pilots and the organization of the USN carrier arm. He carefully disects every air battle from the early raids through the defense of Henderson Field. He has interviewed many survivors from both sides and tells the Japanese side as well.

I had never heard of the F4F-7 of the Grumman Wildcat, an unarmed recon plane with an unrefuelled range of 3,700 miles issued to each carrier post Midway or the theory that the USS Porter, which was torpedoed and sunk while picking up a ditched TBF crew, was hit by the MK XIII from that plane which activated on contact. Or how close the margin of victory was on October 13 when most of Henderson Field's aricraft werte destroyed in a Japanese Bombardment. THe few planes from Henderson were able to destroy unloading Japanese transports while a powerful Japanese Zero CAP overhead never saw the attackers.

From the Japanese view, they suffered tremendous losses in skilled leaders in many of the later engagements, a loss from which they never recovered. In his analysis of the effectiveness of US AA fire at Santa Cruz against TF 16, he shows 29 Japanese aircraft shot down around the ships. He credits 16 to the CAP and 13 to the ships mainly Enterprise and South Dakota's 40mm which were particularly effective agasinst dive bombers.

Of particular interest is his examination of pilot claims and actual losses by the Japanese and Americans. Some of teh discreapancies are amazing including one phantom battle agaist torpedo planes claimed by CAP figther pilots were no Japanese planes were present. Gives some insight into how little hard information commandres got about the effectiveness of their actions.

Both are worthy additions to your library or get them from the library to read.

Mike:

I have them both and just ordered his book "Black Shoe Carrier Admiral" which I'll probably tackle first. Lundstrom sometimes gets criticised by some readers who feel that since he doesn't have a Phd, he's not a real historian. To which I say nonsense. You don't need letters after your name to write history.

[asnrobert]

Mike:

I have them both and just ordered his book "Black Shoe Carrier Admiral" which I'll probably tackle first. Lundstrom sometimes gets criticised by some readers who feel that since he doesn't have a Phd, he's not a real historian. To which I say nonsense. You don't need letters after your name to write history.

I'm reading that book now. Very dense with info.

[john964]

Mike:

I have them both and just ordered his book "Black Shoe Carrier Admiral" which I'll probably tackle first. Lundstrom sometimes gets criticised by some readers who feel that since he doesn't have a Phd, he's not a real historian. To which I say nonsense. You don't need letters after your name to write history.Very true look at Richard Frank he's written 2 very good books and IIRC he is a lawyer.

[Ed Rotondaro]

Very true look at Richard Frank he's written 2 very good books and IIRC he is a lawyer.

John:

Exactly! It may take the non-academic longer to write their book, but it doesn't make it any less valid. Some of the best military history is written by former military personnel with a good background and the chance to examine the primary sources. Carlo D'Este comes to mind here.

[old_pop2000]

Writing a battle narrative simply requires good research skills, good writing and the patience to carefully layout the sequence. Many trades use those kinds of skills. Now, a good analysis requires some different but similar skills. IMHO.

Don't laugh, but I have been toying with the idea of writing a book. Ok, Ok, you can quit laughing. STOP IT, KYLE!! No Ed, I am not crazy, but I did stay in a Holiday Inn once or twice. :p:p:D:D

[john964]

Writing a battle narrative simply requires good research skills, good writing and the patience to carefully layout the sequence. Many trades use those kinds of skills. Now, a good analysis requires some different but similar skills. IMHO.

Don't laugh, but I have been toying with the idea of writing a book. Ok, Ok, you can quit laughing. STOP IT, KYLE!! No Ed, I am not crazy, but I did stay in a Holiday Inn once or twice. :p:p:D:DJust a sugestion but start small by submitting articals to various magazines eg Sea Classics, MHQ, World War II, and Naval History

[Ed Rotondaro]

Just a sugestion but start small by submitting articals to various magazines eg Sea Classics, MHQ, World War II, and Naval History

John:

Exactly! You get to learn the ins and outs of good historical writing and build up a resume for future publications.

[Mike Malanaphy]

Writing a battle narrative simply requires good research skills, good writing and the patience to carefully layout the sequence. Many trades use those kinds of skills. Now, a good analysis requires some different but similar skills. IMHO.

Don't laugh, but I have been toying with the idea of writing a book. Ok, Ok, you can quit laughing. STOP IT, KYLE!! No Ed, I am not crazy, but I did stay in a Holiday Inn once or twice. :p:p:D:D

Hi Dennis,

Bet it would be a best seller. : )

[old_pop2000]

Hi Dennis,

Bet it would be a best seller. : )
Well, I believe that I would have to start slow, like the other members suggested.
Whether it was best seller, is another matter.

[Ed Rotondaro]

Writing a battle narrative simply requires good research skills, good writing and the patience to carefully layout the sequence. Many trades use those kinds of skills. Now, a good analysis requires some different but similar skills. IMHO.

Don't laugh, but I have been toying with the idea of writing a book. Ok, Ok, you can quit laughing. STOP IT, KYLE!! No Ed, I am not crazy, but I did stay in a Holiday Inn once or twice. :p:p:D:D


Dennis:

Do you have a topic picked out and a time period?

[old_pop2000]

Dennis:

Do you have a topic picked out and a time period?
Well Ed, I have a few self doubts about what I know, to what depth and can I convey it in a logical, analytical manner. I have high standards and I may have to return to college and take composition and other courses pertaining to this subject.

Interesting idea, writing articles for magazines. That sounds interesting.

No subject or time period has been chosen.

[Ed Rotondaro]

Well Ed, I have a few self doubts about what I know, to what depth and can I convey it in a logical, analytical manner. I have high standards and I may have to return to college and take composition and other courses pertaining to this subject.

Interesting idea, writing articles for magazines. That sounds interesting.

No subject or time period has been chosen.


Dennis:


You could take a course a semester and do it at leisure. If you take courses on history, you can be guaranteed of having to write a great deal which should help with any composition issues you might feel you have. One semester I had three history classes, an English class and my final Political Science course. I must have written 10 papers that semester.