<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: The precursor of ?The Bode Testament?
Review: In the fall of 1961, I read the original version of this work. Upon completion, I was troubled and puzzled. I reviewed the entire work finding no answers to my many questions. This has little to do with the brilliant writing of Mr. Newcomb. In a highly interesting style, Mr. Newcomb wrote what history had to offer. It was the history itself that caused the quandaries. This is a fascinating battle with many questions yet today, and it represents the worst naval battle defeat of our Navy, which few know about. The many unanswered questions were taken up 35 years later, in 1996, when I commenced research for "The Bode Testament," which appears on this site. Is there any higher compliment to a book that it becomes the basis for another? That the subject matter and the excellent writing of Mr. Newcomb were so pervasive that it was recalled 3 ½ decades later. I think not...
Rating:
Summary: The precursor of ¿The Bode Testament¿
Review: In the fall of 1961, I read the original version of this work. Upon completion, I was troubled and puzzled. I reviewed the entire work finding no answers to my many questions. This has little to do with the brilliant writing of Mr. Newcomb. In a highly interesting style, Mr. Newcomb wrote what history had to offer. It was the history itself that caused the quandaries. This is a fascinating battle with many questions yet today, and it represents the worst naval battle defeat of our Navy, which few know about. The many unanswered questions were taken up 35 years later, in 1996, when I commenced research for "The Bode Testament," which appears on this site. Is there any higher compliment to a book that it becomes the basis for another? That the subject matter and the excellent writing of Mr. Newcomb were so pervasive that it was recalled 3 ½ decades later. I think not...
Rating: 
Summary: Briskly told
Review: Just finished this work. I have not read any other books dedicated to this battle alone; my searches indicate, however, that this is still the definitive account of the battle, 60 years later. Plusses: Clear, lucid style. Prominent featuring of eyewitness accounts. Strikes balanced level of detail, rendering the work readable and valuable to readers of varying familiarity with naval terminology. And perhaps biggest plus of all; if you want to read something specifically about Savo, well, this is pretty much all there is (to my knowledge). Minuses: "Ship by Ship" narrative style sometimes leads to repeating relatively minor anecdotes, without apparent need. After a superb introduction, detailing Japanese operations up to the first salvo, the author almost completely ignores the Japanese perspective during the battle itself. Newcomb obviously had access to Japanese participants in order to write the opening chapters; why did he not include their accounts of what happened during the battle? Overall, well worth reading. Newcomb repeatedly emphasizes the shortcoming of a fractured chain of command, and divided forces (so too, did the investigating admiral after the fact). I would wholly agree that these were deep shortcomings in the Allied force. I suspect, however, that these specific factors may not have been decisive. ALL ELSE BEING EQUAL, if all 6 cruisers had been together in one group, under positive command of one flag officer, I personally believe that the outcome would have been similar. Horrifically poor long-range reconnaissance, poor communications, superior Japanese night tactics and weapon (an outstanding torpedo), and an early-war complacent atmosphere were more pertinent to the case at hand. The biggest SINGLE factor, I believe, was the complete breakdown of reconnaissance. These guys simply had no situational awareness. The most ably led, superbly trained force will still get bushwacked if they simply don't know what their environment is.
Rating:
Summary: Briskly told
Review: Just finished this work. I have not read any other books dedicated to this battle alone; my searches indicate, however, that this is still the definitive account of the battle, 60 years later. Plusses: Clear, lucid style. Prominent featuring of eyewitness accounts. Strikes balanced level of detail, rendering the work readable and valuable to readers of varying familiarity with naval terminology. And perhaps biggest plus of all; if you want to read something specifically about Savo, well, this is pretty much all there is (to my knowledge). Minuses: "Ship by Ship" narrative style sometimes leads to repeating relatively minor anecdotes, without apparent need. After a superb introduction, detailing Japanese operations up to the first salvo, the author almost completely ignores the Japanese perspective during the battle itself. Newcomb obviously had access to Japanese participants in order to write the opening chapters; why did he not include their accounts of what happened during the battle? Overall, well worth reading. Newcomb repeatedly emphasizes the shortcoming of a fractured chain of command, and divided forces (so too, did the investigating admiral after the fact). I would wholly agree that these were deep shortcomings in the Allied force. I suspect, however, that these specific factors may not have been decisive. ALL ELSE BEING EQUAL, if all 6 cruisers had been together in one group, under positive command of one flag officer, I personally believe that the outcome would have been similar. Horrifically poor long-range reconnaissance, poor communications, superior Japanese night tactics and weapon (an outstanding torpedo), and an early-war complacent atmosphere were more pertinent to the case at hand. The biggest SINGLE factor, I believe, was the complete breakdown of reconnaissance. These guys simply had no situational awareness. The most ably led, superbly trained force will still get bushwacked if they simply don't know what their environment is.
Rating:
Summary: The 2nd Greatest Disaster in the History of the U.S. Navy
Review: On the evening of August 9, 1942, a Japanese force of cruisers and destroyers steamed down "the slot" toward the American beachhead at Guadalcanal. Despite being spotted on four different occasions by Allied forces, these Japanese ships managed to achieve complete surprise on the unsuspecting Allied forces covering the entrance to Savo Sound. In the span of eight minutes, four Allied heavy cruisers (USS Astoria, USS Vincennes, USS Quincy, and HMAS Canberra) were sunk by the Japanese, whose expertise at night fighting and the use of torpedoes became painfully clear to the Allies on this night.
Why were the Japanese so successful and why were the Allies caught so completely by surprise? There are several factors. First, the Japanese cruisers carried torpedo tubes while the Allied cruisers did not. The Japanese used their torpedoes with deadly accuracy, while the Allies had to rely on guns alone. Second, the ultimate failure of the command structure of the Allied forces played a large part in the defeat. The Japanese force was spotted on its approach at least four times. Each time, the sughting was inaccurately described, or the message never reached those in charge of the ships. Also, the overall commander of the Allied forces, Admiral Crutchley, failed to notify the commanders of the other ships that he was removing his flagship, the HMAS Australia, from the group. This left no one in overall command. The cruiser captains were forced to fend for themselves. These factors, plus an overwhelming desire by the Japanese to succeed, led to the disaster at Savo Island. Had the Japanese continued the fight and attacked the American transports which were unloading off of Guadalcanal, the disaster would have been much worse for the Allies.
Author Richard F. Newcomb does a very good job describing this great loss for the Allies. He describes the intrepid Japanese Admiral Mikawa, who decided to attack the Americans, as well as all of the sightings of his force by the Allies. Perhaps his best work in this book is how he describes the action on each Allied cruiser, devoting a separate chapter to the Astoria, Vincennes, Quincy, and Canberra. A good follow-up to the battle is also provided at the end of the book.
I recommend this book. It does a good job of describing one of the darkest days of the United States Navy and the lessons which were learned from the defeat. These lessons led ultimaely to the defeat of Japan.
Rating:
Summary: Great Book-- but who did the cover?
Review: This is a well-written, insightful book on one of the most interesting naval battles of World War II. You've got to wonder about the publisher of the paperback edition, though, since the cover has a picture of some Marines making a landing. They sure didn't land on Savo Island, and the battle relates only tangentially to the landings at Guadalcanal. Ignore the cover art and buy the book.
<< 1 >>
|
