The Navy Sunk Japan's Top Secret Aircraft Carrier (And She Was Massive)

The Navy Sunk Japan's Top Secret Aircraft Carrier (And She Was Massive)

Here's a great article about the sinking of the Shinano by the submarine USS Archerfish (SS/AGSS-311). The Shinano was a Yamato class battleship that was converted to an aircraft carrier. However due to a rush to get the Shinano into service , She was able to be sunk by the much less capable Archerfish.

It's a great history lesson for all.

At 6:10 am, Enright eased his vessel to periscope depth but, despite excellent visibility in the morning sunlight, could spot nothing in any direction. Exhausted, he headed for his bunk. At 10:55 a sailor woke him to say, “Cap’n, sonar heard—in fact we all heard—a deep rumbling explosion pretty far off. The officer on duty said to tell you he thinks it was our target going to the bottom.” The skipper smiled and went back to sleep.

a reply to: grey580

You know.............there's a message in that story for the US Navy and its forces moving against Iran at the moment.

I've been seeing several articles of late to the effect that the US Navy's Leadership is, in pursuing this Air Craft Carrier based attack groups is pursuing yesterday's strategy and that because of technological advances, missles and new long range torpedoes and tactical nuclear missile capabilities, Air Craft Carriers are as obsolete today as Battle Ships were after the invention and development of the Airplane after WWI.

Of course, because of the awesome sums of wealth generated by way of kick-backs from Naval contractors and the MIC, the Navy won't wise up until there's a catastrophe that embarrasses them into the dark ages.

a reply to: TonyS


You say that but let's not forget the Chinese are building a third carrier and the Russians are planning one too.

originally posted by: TonyS
a reply to: grey580

You know.............there's a message in that story for the US Navy and its forces moving against Iran at the moment.

I've been seeing several articles of late to the effect that the US Navy's Leadership is, in pursuing this Air Craft Carrier based attack groups is pursuing yesterday's strategy and that because of technological advances, missles and new long range torpedoes and tactical nuclear missile capabilities, Air Craft Carriers are as obsolete today as Battle Ships were after the invention and development of the Airplane after WWI.

Of course, because of the awesome sums of wealth generated by way of kick-backs from Naval contractors and the MIC, the Navy won't wise up until there's a catastrophe that embarrasses them into the dark ages.

Will you folks stop saying that? A carrier is not obsolete.

You think it's that easy? 😂

You should probably leave the military discussions to people who actually know what they are talking about.

a reply to: Bluntone22

And.........that's altogether true!

Never said I was correct, just said what I've been reading of late. But truthfully, how useful is an Air Craft Carrier to a nation who's enemies have tactical nukes in orbit, ready to be launched toward Earth?

Then........there's this.
www.dailymail.co.uk...

American military chiefs have been left dumbstruck by an undetected Chinese submarine popping up at the heart of a recent Pacific exercise and close to the vast U.S.S. Kitty Hawk - a 1,000ft supercarrier with 4,500 personnel on board. By the time it surfaced the 160ft Song Class diesel-electric attack submarine is understood to have sailed within viable range for launching torpedoes or missiles at the carrier. According to senior Nato officials the incident caused consternation in the U.S. Navy. The Americans had no idea China's fast-growing submarine fleet had reached such a level of sophistication, or that it posed such a threat. One Nato figure said the effect was "as big a shock as the Russians launching Sputnik" - a reference to the Soviet Union's first orbiting satellite in 1957 which marked the start of the space age.

Ooops!

One off? Maybe not.
www.popularmechanics.com...

A Chinese submarine stalked the aircraft carrier USS Ronald Reagan for "at least half a day" on October 24, according to a US official quoted by CNN. The incident occurred off the coast of Japan, where the Reagan is based. The official did not state how close the submarine got to the Reagan. In 2006, a Chinese Song-class submarine surfaced within five miles of the aircraft carrier USS Kitty Hawk, apparently without being detected.

Air Craft Carriers ARE, big targets.

a reply to: TonyS

The aircraft carrier platform provides much more than destruction of a target, Its a mobile support and command center, with eyes in the theater.

You cant, hold a enemy, without feet on the ground, so the aircraft carriers multiple applications are what make it far from obsolete.

a reply to: TonyS

Kitty Hawk was in an area she wouldn't have been operating in if there was a war with China. It gave every advantage to the SSK. They also weren't running active ASW at the time. A MAD antenna flying over it would have given warning something was there. They might still have gotten close, but not as easily.

As for Reagan, no one but the people involved and their superiors know if the sub was detected, as it should be.

Arleigh Burke could probably singled handedly sink any ship from the WWII Era.

Let alone something like a Zumwalt railgun.

At the same time, anyone with capable satellites could see those coming from a far enough distance that an aircraft carrier could scramble defenses, capable of an adequate counter strike.

Aircraft carriers are not obsolete, they just need a fully functioning defense system with satellite aided coordination.

Now... If you could neutralize satellite visibility... It would probably be possible to sucker punch an aircraft carrier.

The downside to that situation is that you will be met with the full reaction force of whoever you just sucker punched.

No one wants to go toe to toe in that situation, regardless of the countries involved.

Edit: Now, if you're into interesting Navy conspiracy stuff... Consider the fact that our deep ocean nuclear submarines are dispersed across the ocean depths. Several countries have them. Are they for mutually assured destruction? On the surface, yes. However, I entertain the idea that a deeper more meaningful mission is the reason for this dispersion and their maintenance. If an extraterrestrial attack on our planet were to occur, they could theoretically wipe out most land based weaponry very quickly... But would this simultaneously destroy these deep ocean nuclear subs? Maybe not. They could be a deterrent for that level of scenario. If you're not capable of wiping out our oceans as well as our land based civilizations, you may not want to poke the hornet nest. The amount of energy required to obliterate the oceans so that even deep sea nuclear subs go down, is magnitudes higher than just blowing up all our land military bases. Water isn't just a medium of engagement, it's a giant energy sopping shield.

Laughing my ass off!

The Shinano wasn't even badly damaged after the torpedo attack. Mistakes in damage control, the inexperience of her officers and the enlisted personnel's blind obedience of those officers, led to her destruction.

a reply to: TonyS

Are you honestly comparing a modern carrier battle group with a poorly manned/equipped, though large, ship that was also extremely poorly escorted... Lessons?

OK. Here it is. Don't pick fights you can't win.

The IJN Shinano was, up until the Midway-class, the largest carrier ever built. It was, however, not even remotely as capable as the US navies Essex class, or even the older pre-War carriers such as the Yorktown-class (Yorktown, Hornet, Enterprise), or the Lexington and Saratoga, both built on battle-cruiser hulls.

It was a waste of resources that could have been better utilized in building escort vessels/anti-submarine warfare vessels to combat the Gato-, and Baloa-class submarines, and other slightly older classes that gutted their maritime economy.

a reply to: TonyS

No one knows if the submarine that "stalked" the Reagan was detected, or not. No one is talking, nor should they. So no one knows other than the folks who should know.

If I had to guess, and that's all it is, that submarine was probably boresighted by at least one set of ASW weapons systems. CBG's often have an attack sub around for just such occasions...or so I'm told.

Your entire premise...that somehow or other carriers are "obsolete" is contrary to all the evidence out there.

a reply to: Archivalist

Now... If you could neutralize satellite visibility... It would probably be possible to sucker punch an aircraft carrier.

Satellites are very predictable. When you know where they'll be looking, you don't have your ships in that area. At 30+ knots, a carrier can do a whole lot of moving before that satellite can be adjusted to look elsewhere. Then you have emission control (emcon, I believe it's called?), this was stealth before there was stealth.

a reply to: Zaphod58

A MAD antenna flying over it would have given warning something was there. They might still have gotten close, but not as easily.

I've heard rumors that they can discriminate whale tonnage at depth so submarines no longer have the advantage they used to have for high tech countries like China. The wow factor of a large carrier with fast planes still has value at enrollment time..

a reply to: JIMC5499

I fully blame Japanese leadership for allowing a non fully operational ship to take to the ocean during war time. Guarded by non fully functioning destroyers.

Huge mistakes were made all around.

a reply to: seagull

That's usually the case when you start off building one type and then decide it'll make a great conversion to something else halfway through.

originally posted by: JIMC5499
Laughing my ass off!

The Shinano wasn't even badly damaged after the torpedo attack. Mistakes in damage control, the inexperience of her officers and the enlisted personnel's blind obedience of those officers, led to her destruction.

Yes spot on. If you go back and look at Midway its the same story poor damage control on the part of the IJN. The book Shattered Sword: The Untold Story of the Battle of Midway. It really goes into detail about the differences between the USN's approach to damage control vs. the IJN's. There was an element of luck with the hit as the carrier in question had turned perfectly for a broadside and the torpedoes hit right along a flaw in the torpedo bulge. But thats war. The Bismark's shells hit the one spot on the Hood as well.

The Yorktown took 3 dive bomb hits and got back into the fight albeit for a short period before being torpedoed

Also the USS Archerfish was hardly a second class sub it was a Balao-class submarine which was more or less state of the art in terms of US fleet boats

a reply to: Zaphod58

The US navy, the IJN, and the British--actually everyone who did the carrier thing prior to WW2...did conversions of some sort. The US did Langley, Saratoga, and Lexington, the latter two were very successful, the Langley, as proof of concept did OK, not as a fully operational warship...

The IJN (Imperial Japanese Navy) did several conversions--the two large carriers Akagi and Kaga, a battlecruiser conversion and battleship conversion respectively, also a few other conversions that were much less capable.

The Royal Navy did three (I think) HMS Furious, Eagle, and **brain fart** can't remember it's name...began with a C.

The Italians started one, the Aquila, but never got much beyond initial planning stages if I remember correctly.

The French had the Bearn, built on a Normandie class battle ship hull--it was less than impressive.

The Germans had plans for the Graf Zeppelin, and a conversion, but neither was completed.

Conversions were hit or miss, and none were as capable as purpose built carriers. Though with their sheer size, Lexington, Saratoga, Kaga, and Akagi were quite successful. But none were as capable as the later Essex-class were, or the Taiho-class carrier of Japan would have been.

Shinano, had it lived to see any use, would not have been all that successful. Too slow. Its known plane handling capabilities were nothing to write home about, either. Something that large should be able to handle more than 40 or 50 aircraft.

Just incidentally, the British had much the same issue, for much the same reasons... They built the ships with armoured decks, and belts. Makes 'em hard to sink!! Read about the ordeal of HMS Illustrious for an example of just how tough the Brits built that class of carrier. Impressive just about describes it! But at the cost of plane capacity and handling.

The US went the other way, emphasizing striking power, and relying on its airwing and escort ships for survival against attack.

a reply to: grey580

Given that this screw up was kinda bad, but Midway was an absolute disaster for them...

I would guess, even without the atomic bombs, the US would have probably still defeated Japan.