A proper attack on Pearl Harbor

Discussions on alternate history, including events up to 20 years before today. Hosted by Terry Duncan.
OpanaPointer
Member
Posts: 4247
Joined: 16 May 2010 14:12
Location: United States of America

Re: A proper attack on Pearl Harbor

Post by OpanaPointer » 08 Jun 2020 20:55

Sorry if this has been raised before: The NKB managed to refuel the warships at sea, would they have been able to refuel an invasion fleet as well?
Come visit our sites:
hyperwarHyperwar
World War II Resources

Bellum se ipsum alet, mostly Doritos.

paulrward
Member
Posts: 386
Joined: 10 Dec 2008 20:14

Re: A proper attack on Pearl Harbor

Post by paulrward » 08 Jun 2020 21:05

Hello All :

Mr. Glenn239 stated :
I don't see how the war is shortened if Japan succeeds in taking Hawaii. The fall of
Hawaii will lengthen the war. The question is, what good does that do for Japan, having a
longer war in which defeat is still inevitable? If to lose, then best done quickly.

Perhaps another viewpoint: What if, following a successful occupation of Hawaii, and
the subsequent occupations of the Midway, Wake, Guam, the NEI, Malaya, and the Philippines,
and a couple of nasty defeats of the USN as it fights to hold or regain Hawaii, the citizens
of the United States look at the board and say, " No Mas ! "


If the Japanese take Hawaii early on, and have the time to base some long range flying
boat squadrons there, along with a few squadrons of twin engine bombers and a couple of
hundred A6Ms, you would have a very tough air complement to crack in 1942.

Add to this the ability to move some of their submarine tenders into Pearl Harbor and Midway,
and putting a few squadrons of long range submarines into patrols around the Hawaiian chain,
and the waters become very dangerous for the USN ( Remember Saratoga, Yorktown,
North Carolina, Wasp, and Indianapolis- all damaged or sunk by IJN submarine torpedoes )

You might have a ' Fortress Hawaii ' situation that the United States is unable to reduce
before the beginning of 1944. And, if the USN, goaded by Roosevelt, attempts a counter
attack with all of the USN's available carrier strength in 1942 ( that would be five CVAs,
two CVLs, and four or six CVEs ) they would be facing an IJN force of as many as eight CVAs,
four CVLs, and two CVEs, along with the Chitose, Chiyoda, and Nishin, which could be used for
scouting with their floatplanes.

A battle at these odds would be essentially a toss-up. Meaning that it might be possible that
the IJN, after winning against the USN in a major fleet action in the summer of 1942, would
be in a very strong position to continue to fortify Hawaii while consolodating their gains in Asia.

At the same time, the United States citizens, faced with defeat after defeat, and having lost the
major part of their navy, might be in less of a mood to continue the war. After all, at this point,
the Atomic Bomb is still a ( top secret ) dream, the B-29s have no place to fly from, and the USN's
submarines are now sortieing from San Diego and Alaska, and are still making fruitless attacks with
defective torpedoes.


If the Japanese, at this point, ( late 1942 ) proposed a peace settlement, with all PoWs returned,
the Philippines evacuated by Japan, Hawaii returned as a de-militirized territory, and talks to begin
a re-establishing trade, a portion of the American Public might want to go along with it, rather
than continue to fight a long, bloody, and possibly unsuccessful War in the Pacific.

If the Japanese were willing to send a group of Peace Envoys to negotiate the settlement in the
White House, it might shorten the war, but in Japan's favor.

Just a thought


Respectfully :

Paul R. Ward
Last edited by paulrward on 08 Jun 2020 22:52, edited 1 time in total.
Information not shared, is information lost
Voices banned, are voices who cannot share information....

Richard Anderson
Member
Posts: 3066
Joined: 01 Jan 2016 21:21
Location: Bremerton, Washington

Re: A proper attack on Pearl Harbor

Post by Richard Anderson » 08 Jun 2020 21:07

Takao wrote:
08 Jun 2020 20:42
Actually that is not true. Genda first proposed an invasion in his original plan to attack Pearl Harbor. However, IGHQ focus was on the South. A Commander Yasuji Watanabe, returned to the invasion in September, 1941, and fleshed out Genda's plan with 2 divisions(30,000 troops), 80 transports + escorts, 32 destroyers, 8 cruisers, 4 battleships, 2 carriers, 6-8 submarines, and 10 tankers. With 1/2 a division landing at Haleiwa, and the rest in Kaneohe Bay - both landings were to be simultaneous, at midnight of 7/8 December, 1941(Honolulu time).
Interesting, I don't recall that. How did Watanabe expect to get them there unseen? He's got less than six hours from nautical twilight to do it in. Puts him kind of close to the islands.
"Is all this pretentious pseudo intellectual citing of sources REALLY necessary? It gets in the way of a good, spirited debate, destroys the cadence." POD, 6 October 2018

User avatar
Takao
Member
Posts: 3019
Joined: 10 Mar 2002 19:27
Location: Reading, Pa

Re: A proper attack on Pearl Harbor

Post by Takao » 08 Jun 2020 21:29

Richard Anderson wrote:
08 Jun 2020 21:07
Takao wrote:
08 Jun 2020 20:42
Actually that is not true. Genda first proposed an invasion in his original plan to attack Pearl Harbor. However, IGHQ focus was on the South. A Commander Yasuji Watanabe, returned to the invasion in September, 1941, and fleshed out Genda's plan with 2 divisions(30,000 troops), 80 transports + escorts, 32 destroyers, 8 cruisers, 4 battleships, 2 carriers, 6-8 submarines, and 10 tankers. With 1/2 a division landing at Haleiwa, and the rest in Kaneohe Bay - both landings were to be simultaneous, at midnight of 7/8 December, 1941(Honolulu time).
Interesting, I don't recall that. How did Watanabe expect to get them there unseen? He's got less than six hours from nautical twilight to do it in. Puts him kind of close to the islands.
At Dawn We Slept & various articles do not delve to much on that aspect. Probably because Kuroshima, Ugaki, and Yamamoto kiboshed the idea pretty quickly. Nor is there mentioned of how & with what these Japanese forces would be kept supplied.

The idea was there, but it was never more than an idea. Also, Genda was low on his initial estimate of 10,000 - 15,000 troops needed to capture Oahu.

paulrward
Member
Posts: 386
Joined: 10 Dec 2008 20:14

Re: A proper attack on Pearl Harbor

Post by paulrward » 08 Jun 2020 22:10

Hello All :

To Mr. T.A. Gardner : A very well considered reply. I have a question for you: have you had
the chance to read Albert A. Nofi's ' To Train the Fleet for War- U.S. Navy Fleet Problems 1923-
1940
? If you have the book, referring to pages 76 - 81, the 1925 Fleet Problems, the USMC
demonstrated that it could invade Hawaii in a two stage attack, first taking the island of Molokai,
and then, two days later, attacking the North Shore of Oahu at ( surprise ! ) Haleiwa and Barber's
Point. The Barber's Point landings were a bloody failure, but some 30,000 notional marines were
landed at Haleiwa, making the invasion a success. In 1925.....

........The Marines add 4 SBD from VMSB 232, somewhere between 10 and 20 (5 at
Ewa and up to 14 at Ford Island) F4F, and 7 SB2U-3 of VMSB 231.....
...........As for the PBY, if they were used to scout for the Japanese, I doubt seriously that
any would be shot down.........
............The USAAC bombers could either be dispatched to bomb the Japanese at sea like
at Midway,......................while if they engage the landing fleet they’re likely to damage
or sink some stationary transport ships as they did in the PI.
............More dangerous would be the Marine dive bombers still in service. These could definitely
mess up a ship, and the Marines do have sufficient fighters to escort them into combat.

"Or", as my grandfather used to say, " On the other Hand, We have Fingers..... " A number of
the Marine aircraft were shot up, and had to be repaired / cannibalized. Let us say they are
not available until Pearl Harbor +2, or the morning of Dec. 9th. They go out to attack the
IJN fleet based on a PBY sighting. Which is just as accurate as the PBY sightings at the Battle
of Midway, meaning they go out, and find ..... nothing. They come back, get a revised report,
and go out a second time. The Marine F4F escort is just as competent as Maj. Floyd Parks squadron
was at Midway, and they get shot out of the sky, The mixed force of Marine SBDs and SB2Us is
just as competent as Maj. Lofton Henderson's squadron at Midway, and they lose half their force,
and score exactly zero hits. Not a good day for the USMC.....


The USN could field a half-dozen heavy and light cruisers and about 40 + destroyers.
The Tennessee and Maryland can use their main batteries.......... Pennsylvania is problematic
being in drydock...........

The likelihood is the fleet abandons the harbor ..........probably proceeds to the West Coast
to join up with relief convoys and forces going to Hawaii from there.

Two CAs ( New Orleans, San Francisco ) Four CLs ( Helena, Honolulu, Phoenix, and Detroit,
an old Marlblehead class ) Plus, as you point out, about 40 destroyers. 20 of which are
new, and the other 20 are WW1 'four pipers' converted to DMSs and DMLs. This sounds a
lot like a job for John Wayne, going 'In Harm's Way' . Or, as you say, they just run out and
go to the West Coast.

As for the BBs in Pearl : The Tennessee and West Virginia can use their main batteries,
but if they fire against an invasion on the North Shore, they will be firing blind over the
low hills intervening. They would have to set up some kind of spotter system, with radios,
etc. Not the sort of thing that would be easy in the Post Attack chaos to do in a couple
of days. And, as for the Pennsylvania, her screws were taken off, her bunkers were drained,
and there was no ammunition on board. Might take a few days to get that sorted out......




As for the invasion combat, we must now consult the excellent posting of Mr. Takao :
Actually that is not true. Genda first proposed an invasion in his original plan to
attack Pearl Harbor. However, IGHQ focus was on the South. A Commander Yasuji Watanabe,
returned to the invasion in September, 1941, and fleshed out Genda's plan with 2 divisions
(30,000 troops), 80 transports + escorts, 32 destroyers, 8 cruisers, 4 battleships, 2 carriers,
6-8 submarines, and 10 tankers. With 1/2 a division landing at Haleiwa, and the rest in
Kaneohe Bay - both landings were to be simultaneous, at midnight of 7/8 December, 1941
(Honolulu time).

Wow. I mean, WOW ! If this is true, and I have every reason to believe Mr. Takao's
research, then the first invasion would have been a walkover for the IJA. Dec. 7th on Oahu
was P.F.C. for the U.S. Army. A lot of their ammunition was.... well, I will let the Pearl
Harbor Joint Hearings speak for me :

Pearl Harbor Hearing test.jpg

It is Noon on Dec. 7th. You are an anti aircraft mobile battery commander. You have been
moved into place to guard the Tank Farms. You need ammunition. First, you have to find
a truck. Then a driver. Then some guys to load and unload the truck. Then a guy who knows
how to get to the Crater. Then, you load everybody up, and drive to the Crater, and a 45 year
old Supply Sargeant tells you that YOU NEED A REQUISITION FORM, AND HE IS NOT GOING TO
UNLOCK THE AMMUNITION BUNKERS UNTIL HE GETS ONE !!



The night of Dec. 7th - 8th, you had soldiers shooting at each other, false alarms, panic and
disorder, and, in general, not much organizaion. If the IJA had shown up on the North Shore of
Oahu that night, they might have been able to drive to Waikiki Beach in time to watch the sun come
up over Diamond Head......


Again, thank you to Messrs. Gardner and Takao.


Respectfully :

Paul R. Ward
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Information not shared, is information lost
Voices banned, are voices who cannot share information....

OpanaPointer
Member
Posts: 4247
Joined: 16 May 2010 14:12
Location: United States of America

Re: A proper attack on Pearl Harbor

Post by OpanaPointer » 08 Jun 2020 22:18

paulrward wrote:
08 Jun 2020 22:10


The night of Dec. 7th - 8th, you had soldiers shooting at each other, false alarms, panic and
disorder, and, in general, not much organizaion. If the IJA had shown up on the North Shore of
Oahu that night, they might have been able to drive to Waikiki Beach in time to watch the sun come
up over Diamond Head......
Soldiers on hair trigger wouldn't have been a problem for the IJA?
Come visit our sites:
hyperwarHyperwar
World War II Resources

Bellum se ipsum alet, mostly Doritos.

paulrward
Member
Posts: 386
Joined: 10 Dec 2008 20:14

Re: A proper attack on Pearl Harbor

Post by paulrward » 08 Jun 2020 22:50

Hello All :

Mr. OpanaPointer stated :
Soldiers on hair trigger wouldn't have been a problem for the IJA?
Not if they are on the edge of panic, in the dark, with no field telephones or radios, and suddenly
they get hit with a well planned, well directed assault including knee mortars, machine guns, and
guys coming out of the dark with sharp katanas. The 'thirty year men' of the U.S. Army might break
and run. And if they do, the IJA gets ashore, and it's ' Katy, Bar the Door ! '


Now, historically, the Kido Butai was 200 miles north of Oahu at 06:00 local. If they start towards
Oahu, at say 12 knots, that's about 17 hours to get to a position to start landings. That means they
arrive at 23:00 hours on Dec. 7th. BUT ! The sun sets at about 18:00 hours local, so the final five
hours, or sixty miles of their approach, are under the cover of darkness. Historically, there was NO
air search by either the U.S. Army or USN on Dec. 7th, so the approaching task force would not have
been seen. And, on the off chance it was, there were already so many false alarms coming in that
you might have had a Career Peace-Time Officer say, " Confirmation ! I need Confirmation ! "
and nothing would be done about the report...


As the IJN fleet nears the coast, starting at about 21:00 hours, the soldiers and SNLF troops are readying
themselves, and the instant the ships begin dropping anchor, they start lowering landing craft. The
seas are relatively calm, the moon will set at about 03:00 ( it is a waning gibbous ) and it is to the south.
The IJN, to the north of Oahu, are not very visible, especially with dark grey ships and men whose faces
have been blackened with burnt cork.

For the U.S. Army troops in their slit trenches, the day has been one long nightmare. They are emotionally
stretched to the breaking point. For the IJN troops, this is the moment they have lived their lives for:
A chance to defeat a hated enemy, bringing honour to themselves and glory to their Emperor ! Ten
Thousand Years !



Respectfully :

Paul R. Ward
Information not shared, is information lost
Voices banned, are voices who cannot share information....

OpanaPointer
Member
Posts: 4247
Joined: 16 May 2010 14:12
Location: United States of America

Re: A proper attack on Pearl Harbor

Post by OpanaPointer » 08 Jun 2020 23:16

Bye.
Come visit our sites:
hyperwarHyperwar
World War II Resources

Bellum se ipsum alet, mostly Doritos.

User avatar
Takao
Member
Posts: 3019
Joined: 10 Mar 2002 19:27
Location: Reading, Pa

Re: A proper attack on Pearl Harbor

Post by Takao » 08 Jun 2020 23:29

Regretfully, Paul forgets that US planes were searching North & Northwest of Oahu. So, the invasion fleet would have been sighted well before it was in a position to land it's forces.

Oof course, this brings up, what is Kido Butai doing in the meantime. Preparing a 3rd strike or covering the invasion convoy?

Also, add two more CA to the American side, as Minneapolis & Portland were both South of Oahu. Further, Indianapolis was out in the vicinity of Johnston Island.

paulrward
Member
Posts: 386
Joined: 10 Dec 2008 20:14

Re: A proper attack on Pearl Harbor

Post by paulrward » 09 Jun 2020 00:24

Hello All :

Mr. Takao posted :
Regretfully, Paul forgets that US planes were searching North & Northwest of
Oahu. So, the invasion fleet would have been sighted well before it was in a position
to land it's forces.
From :

https://www.history.navy.mil/research/a ... eport.html

Actually, the PBYs were searching between 280 degrees and 300 degrees ( WNW to NW ) and
found nothing.


The SBDs from the Enterprise seached from 330 degrees to 030 degrees, but from the official
report of the C.O., which can be found at:

http://www.cv6.org/ship/logs/ph/eag-action19411207.htm
I was then ordered to report to Commander Patrol Two on Ford Island. Upon ascertaining
the number of planes from ENTERPRISE Group that had landed safely at this time (13 planes of
VS-6 and VB-6) I was ordered to send 9 planes out to search a section 330° - 030° distance 175
miles, and the remaining planes to investigate reports of hostile surface ships and sam-pans south
of Barber's Point and if found, to attack with bombs and gunfire. I then obtained permission to
station myself in the Ford Island Field Control Tower in order to be in direct communication
with the planes and the ENTERPRISE as a Coast Guard officer was the only officer detailed to
duty there. Due to the low power of the transmitter in the tower I could at no time communicate
with either. The lack of proper communication facilities, telephone and radio, were a contributory
cause to the loss of 4 airplanes of VF-6, which were shot down by our own AA fire, during the night.
I attempted to transmit landing instructions to them via the tower, but they were unable to hear.

It was necessary for them to land due to lack of fuel. Two of the six landed safely. I then attempted
to communicate with the ENTERPRISE via the tower voice set in order to recommend that no more
planes be sent in to Ford Island, without success.
I then learned that the remainder of the group
that had been launched had returned to the ship.
The operative phrase here is: " The lack of proper communication facilities, telephone and radio...."
In other words, even if the SBDs of the Enterprise had found the IJN, they apparently could not report]
it to anyone who could hear them, or pass that information along.



Of course, this brings up, what is Kido Butai doing in the meantime. Preparing a 3rd strike
or covering the invasion convoy?



Well, if the IJN and IJA had committed to an invasion, and if the Kido Butai has been augmented
with the Zuiho and Ryujo, and if the Invasion force is accompanied by the Hosho and Taiyo, then
they can do both. Nagumo can make his third strike, and then, after recovering that strike at
appx 18:00 hours local, he can proceed to a point say, 100 miles north of Oahu, close enough to
carry out air strikes to assist the landings, but not close enough to be seen from land. The ASW
and fighter cover for the Invasion Force could be provided by the Hosho and Taiyo, each of which
could have been armed with say, a dozen A5Ms and nine B4Ys, that would be enough under the
circumstances. As the invasion progresses, additional fighters could be sortied from the Kido
Butai as needed.


Minneapolis and Portland are south of Oahu, and were searching for the Kido Butai which had
been reported to the south. As for the Indianapolis, Johnston Island is 850 miles from Oahu. That's
about thirty hours from Oahu.


But, let's play USN aggressive. Kimmel boards the San Francisco, teams it up with the New Orleans,
Minneapolis, Portland, Helena, Honolulu, Phoenix, Detroit, and the 20 newer destroyers, and, on
the morning of December 8th, tries to attack the IJN Invasion Force that is landing on the North Shore.

He is met by one task force, the Six Battleships and four Suzuya Class CAs, under the command of
Yamamoto, and which is backed up by a later arriving second force, the four Kongos commanded by
Mikawa, both forces escorted by at least a half dozen destroyers. The question is, would this be a
replay of the Battle of the Java Sea, with Kimmel acting the role of Adm. Doorman, or would it be
more like Battle off Samar, with Kimmel playing the role of Kurita ? Hard to say....


But, this would be a fun battle to wargame, especially if we have Husband Kimmel go for broke,
and come in about two hours before dawn for a Savo Island style night action.

Respectfully :

Paul R. Ward
Information not shared, is information lost
Voices banned, are voices who cannot share information....

Richard Anderson
Member
Posts: 3066
Joined: 01 Jan 2016 21:21
Location: Bremerton, Washington

Re: A proper attack on Pearl Harbor

Post by Richard Anderson » 09 Jun 2020 00:43

OpanaPointer wrote:
08 Jun 2020 20:55
Sorry if this has been raised before: The NKB managed to refuel the warships at sea, would they have been able to refuel an invasion fleet as well?
The IJN had 24 AO and 2 AOG in commission on 7 December 1941. Seven of them - not quite one-third - were required to support Kido Butai. Four others were with the Southern Force's Distant Cover Unit. One (teeny little 380 GRT Moji Maru) was with the South Seas Force. The AO had a combined displacement of 233,657 GRT and aside from the 12 on operations most were old and slow, unsuited for fleet operations. Of course, glenn will trot along in a moment to say that does not include all of the tankers the Japanese had, which is true, but it is all the oilers they had in commission. It is not clear that any others than those 12 actually were trained in refueling.
"Is all this pretentious pseudo intellectual citing of sources REALLY necessary? It gets in the way of a good, spirited debate, destroys the cadence." POD, 6 October 2018

User avatar
Takao
Member
Posts: 3019
Joined: 10 Mar 2002 19:27
Location: Reading, Pa

Re: A proper attack on Pearl Harbor

Post by Takao » 09 Jun 2020 00:45

You might want to consult the Congressional record...your missing a lot of searches there.

You also seem to have a rather limited POV, bias I guess.

You forget Callahan & Scott at Guadalcanal - not a good outcome for Kimmel(but he will be remembered as the Hero who saved Hawaii), but far worse for the Japanese.

There is also Houston & Perth, where the Japanese inflict far more casualties on themselves.

User avatar
T. A. Gardner
Member
Posts: 2146
Joined: 02 Feb 2006 00:23
Location: Arizona

Re: A proper attack on Pearl Harbor

Post by T. A. Gardner » 09 Jun 2020 00:45

paulrward wrote:
08 Jun 2020 22:10
It is Noon on Dec. 7th. You are an anti aircraft mobile battery commander. You have been
moved into place to guard the Tank Farms. You need ammunition. First, you have to find
a truck. Then a driver. Then some guys to load and unload the truck. Then a guy who knows
how to get to the Crater. Then, you load everybody up, and drive to the Crater, and a 45 year
old Supply Sargeant tells you that YOU NEED A REQUISITION FORM, AND HE IS NOT GOING TO
UNLOCK THE AMMUNITION BUNKERS UNTIL HE GETS ONE !!
Now we're into the absurd again. A mobile 3" AA gun battery or battalion, probably the later since individual batteries don't operate outside the structure of a battalion but can be individually sited, has as part of it's TO&E the necessary tractors, trucks, and motor vehicles to give it mobility. That's why it is MOBILE!

So, assuming such a battery is assigned to move to a location and set up, it will. If it needs ammunition, the normal procedure, even at battery level, is to send the requisite trucks--ones organic to the battery-- to the ammunition dump to get ammunition. As part of that, the battery's supply officer along with several NCO's and a number of enlisted will go with the trucks. Each truck will have a driver and a co-driver assigned. The officer may be in one of the trucks or accompanying in a vehicle like a jeep with a driver (more likely).
At the ammunition dump, given events, if the "old Supply Sergeant" so much as gives that officer any lip he's looking at a court martial. He knows it, the officer knows it. The ammunition gets loaded, requisition form or not. That Sergeant isn't in a position to say "No" to an officer, any officer.

There won't be just one truck either. It will be a convoy of at least 6 to 8 trucks, one per gun or more. Ammunition isn't light. Each 3" round weighs 25 lbs. That means 100 weigh over a ton. That would be about the correct number per gun for use, so you can see that a convoy of vehicles would be needed. An officer in charge of the roughly 18 to 24 men sent to load the ammunition would be appropriate and the battery commander would definitely assign one for that purpose.

So, the above scenario is some sort of Hollyweird nonsense dreamed up to keep the US from succeeding even in the slightest.

Richard Anderson
Member
Posts: 3066
Joined: 01 Jan 2016 21:21
Location: Bremerton, Washington

Re: A proper attack on Pearl Harbor

Post by Richard Anderson » 09 Jun 2020 01:19

T. A. Gardner wrote:
09 Jun 2020 00:45
paulrward wrote:
08 Jun 2020 22:10
It is Noon on Dec. 7th. You are an anti aircraft mobile battery commander. You have been
moved into place to guard the Tank Farms. You need ammunition. First, you have to find
a truck. Then a driver. Then some guys to load and unload the truck. Then a guy who knows
how to get to the Crater. Then, you load everybody up, and drive to the Crater, and a 45 year
old Supply Sargeant tells you that YOU NEED A REQUISITION FORM, AND HE IS NOT GOING TO
UNLOCK THE AMMUNITION BUNKERS UNTIL HE GETS ONE !!
Now we're into the absurd again.
No, fantasy, from a formerly banned troll. No such thing occurred on 7 December. They had just returned from eight days on live maneuvers and had just turned in their issued ammunition at the Crater. They knew very well how to get it, where to get it, and where to take it, since the battery positions were already assigned - although some positions were not ideal due to property restrictions. I might dig for the battery readiness and location listing, but I have no interest in arguing with a fantasist troll.
"Is all this pretentious pseudo intellectual citing of sources REALLY necessary? It gets in the way of a good, spirited debate, destroys the cadence." POD, 6 October 2018

User avatar
T. A. Gardner
Member
Posts: 2146
Joined: 02 Feb 2006 00:23
Location: Arizona

Re: A proper attack on Pearl Harbor

Post by T. A. Gardner » 09 Jun 2020 03:22

One should note that AA battalions at the time were part of the Coast Defense branch of the US Army. A mobile battalion of 3" AA guns had intrinsic to it the following vehicles:

20 6 ton trucks
1 4 ton wrecker
55 2 1/2 ton trucks
1 3/4 ton truck
5 3/4 ton command cars
18 3/4 ton weapons carriers
1 ambulance
11 1/4 ton trucks (aka Jeeps)

So, I think they'd know right where to find a whole bunch of trucks...

Return to “What if”