The Most Feared Submarine in the Pacific during WW2
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 23 ก.ค. 2023
- In the bleak final months of 1942, even the most optimistic US commanders quivered at the thought of the Japanese Navy’s potential for destruction. Their nightmares soon turned into a harrowing catastrophe on the night of September 15.
Dashing deftly under the waves, a lone Japanese submarine, under the command of the intrepid Takakazu Kinashi, infiltrated the perimeter where USS Wasp and her accompanying vessels were escorting transport ships destined for Guadalcanal.
Encountering no resistance, the stealthy Submarine I-19 maneuvered herself into a perfect position, poised to strike the massive USS Wasp aircraft carrier.
Kinashi unleashed a torrent of six oxygen-fueled Type 95 torpedoes in a heartbeat, carving a path of devastation. Three struck true, ripping enormous gashes in the carrier’s hull and igniting violent fires within the beleaguered warship.
Despite the valiant efforts of US sailors, who fought tooth and nail to quench the flames, the fate of USS Wasp was sealed. Yet, the infamous path of devastation of Japan’s most notorious submarine had just begun...
![[ไฮไลต์] แบดมินตันชาย วิว กุลวุฒิ (ไทย) vs LEE Zii Jia (มาเลเซีย) รอบรองชนะเลิศ | โอลิมปิก 2024](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/mvBiEAqlssw/mqdefault.jpg)
USS Wasp was without a doubt a remarkable attempt to *both* build a Yorktown-class aircraft carrier, AND satisfy the Washington Naval Treaty when the US simply no longer had enough permissible tonnage to accomplish that feat, yet NO NAVAL OR MILITARY HISTORIAN HAS **EVER** DESCRIBED THE *WASP* AS “MASSIVE.”
USS WASP managed to get built bc it was essentially a “mini” Yorktown-class aircraft carrier that had had to sacrifice what turned out to be *crucial* armour around its fuel tanks. In fact, just before the Battle of the Eastern Solomons, commanding Vice Admiral Frank Jack Fletcher detached the Wasp and her accompanying Task Force 18 from his battle group, *both* bc the Wasp was low on fuel, *and* bc Fletcher--like most high-ranking US naval officers--was aware of just how vulnerable the Wasp was.
Yea, the "massive" label was off. Though it was quite surprising that the WASP could carry as many aircraft as the larger Yorktowns.
Inter services squabbles have always been a problem for us. Fortunately for us, the Japanese had it much worse
Inter service squabbles are always a problem for everyone. It's human nature to be argumentative and competitive, especially when things that can go bang are involved! 😂
I would've loved to seen the looks on their faces once they learned that it was neither the Army or Navy, but the IJN!
🤣😂😅😏
we had squabbles, but we used the same fuel, ammo, AA guns, etc across all branches so we only had to worry about 45acp, 30-06, 50 cal etc. everyone could use it. the japs couldnt even figure out common ammo
@@spudgunn8695the F.B.I. and C.I.A. are good examples. I've never been in the military but I've seen it in private business. At times it's almost as if different work shifts are at odds with each other for some strange reason. It's not even competition. So often they want to blame anything that goes wrong on the other. On the other hand I've worked at places where both shifts got along and if something got screwed up one would work to cover the other ones but so it didn't cause trouble and so the supervisors didn't know.
Tell me about it. The U.S would not use British torpedoes, the best, but used their own useless torpedoes, costing the lives of many, and naval staff hated to admit that they were at fault.
I wonder how much more damage US submarines would have done had they have had just half way decent torpedoes
They should have copied the Japanese Long Lance torpedo. They must have gotten their hands on one of them.
@@Outlier999BuOrd had a perfect Torpedo. There was absolutely nothing wrong with it. It was tested “extensively”. It was full proof…. On paper. Real world testing, who needs that?
Just like saying I wonder how much more damage the Germans and Japanese would have done if they had the atomic bomb
No matter how “technologically advanced” WWII Imperial Japan’s submarine fleet was, one massive, FATAL FLAW of Japanese submarine doctrine kept it from being nearly as effective as it might have been: the IJN considered it “beneath the dignity” of a Japanese submarine to engage any type of seafaring vessel other than a warship. Thus, after the US submarine fleet fixed their heretofore defective torpedoes by 1943 and began extensive commerce raiding on Japan’s merchant marine, strangling the home islands of fuel and other essential supplies, the Japanese sub fleet had almost NO effect on the merchant fleets of its three primary enemies: the United States, Britain, and Australia.
The Japanese know NOTHING about honor. They committed war crime after war crime. We managed to beat them single-handedly with our heroic and brave soldiers who maintained true dignity throughout the entire war despite fighting against abject cowards. God bless AMERICA!
Totally agree & have considered the impact of Japanese campaign upon a campaign against against West Coast shipping
Ha Ha. No Good Deed goes Unpunished. Lol.
The Italian Navy had the biggest Axis submarine fleet when it entered the war, second only to the USSR.
After settling into war operations from 1942 onwards, and rectifying initial torpedo defects, the US Navy's pacific based submarine fleet devastated Japan's merchantile marine until there were very few remaining.
Truth
@@ncander64 In terms of tonnage sunk, the most succesful Axis non German submarine of WW2 was the Italian "Leonard Da Vinci" which was lost in May 1943.
Please do a video about Laffey (Benson class destroyer DD-459). For the commenters please note that Dark Seas has done a video about USS Laffey DD-724 Allen M. Sumner-class destroyer not Laffey DD-459 Benson class destroyer which broadsided a Japanese battleship at point blank range.
Great video!
"The later models could cover approximately 100 miles at their most economical setting." The B1's range was more like 14,000 miles.
Thanks, 100 miles at their most economical setting...
I THOUGHT that sounded just a BIT low.
Yep, you beat me to it 😂👍
Damn it really does work.
Great episode!!
I don't understand why the Japanese never used their submarine fleet to it's full potential. Japan could have devastated the naval supply lines between the US and Canada on supply vesselsgoing to Australia, New Zealand and other Allied nations. Perhaps it was better that way because it would have prolonged the war.
The Japanese Navy was hidebound in its Submarine tactics, which ironically was the same as the USNs prior to WWII. However, unlike the American Navy which had to change the Submarines role to a commerce raider with a strategy similar to the German Navy because of the losses at Pearl Harbor, the IJN could or would not change even though their Navy lost the offensive Momentum after 1943.
Controled by battleship admirals that used them as scouts not combat vessels
B/c the entire war doctrine was based on dealing USA a killer blow against its war machine, to convince it to make a peace deal, not fight a long strategic war of attrition, down which path Yamamoto knew and said, there was no hope for Japan.
i19 spent months sinking cargo vessels near Fiji.
@@billpetersen298 Oh yeas it did. But that was not it primary mission. One thing about the IJN fleet, by the end of 1944 and into the beginning of 1945, morale in the service began to sink as they were being primarily used a supply vessels for the Army. Since the Imperial Army build its own submarines for that purpose, it would have been better to use it's submarine fleet as commerce raiders, like the US had to do in 1942.
Just great man. Thanks
Unsaid is that one of the missed torpedoes almost hit Hornet while she also was cycling aircraft. My guy almost got 2 carriers.
The video is outstanding, but what keeps me watching is the commentator. His voice and delivery puts a desperate feel to the battles he is speaking of. Thanks for a great look at the second world war. My father fought for the American air force as a bombardier and a tail gunner on a B17 but he never spoke of his participation in the war with us.
The Japanes submarine fleet could have been much more effective if they would have gone after merchant ships not solely warships. Torpedoing merchant ships was seen as dishonorable. This hindered an effective use of their large submarine fleet
>torpedoing merchant ships was seen as dishonorable
Really? But slaughtering civilians was OK in their mind?
@@blacktiger974e issue had to do with their naval doctrine. IJN naval doctrine was based on the so-called Kantai Kessen doctrine, which, by the start of WWII, consisted of the following:
- get rid of the American aircraft carriers first (mostly by relying on their own aircraft carriers) to secure air superiority and so the American carriers aren’t around to bomb your surface units.
- as the bulk of the American surface fleet moves towards Japan, reduce their numbers with torpedo attacks from submarines, destroyers and cruisers, in addition to air attacks from your now-unopposed aircraft carriers and from land bases on islands.
- mop up the remainder of the American fleet in a final, climatic battleship engagement (this part was completely pointless and based on the false assumption of aircraft carriers and battleships being able to work as complementary units to oppose enemy carriers and enemy battleships respectively, when the reality was that aircraft carriers rendered battleships obsolete and that enemy battleships weren’t much of a threat in a naval war dominated by carriers; however, the Americans also failed to realize this for basically the entire war, leading to both sides building new battleships they didn’t need and thus wasting tons of resources and manpower)
- ???
- win
Contrary to what is often assumed, the problem with this entire plan has nothing to do with the Japanese not realizing that aircraft carriers and not battleships were the real threat by this point (partly because nobody else realized that either until it was too late, and partly because the Japanese were actually planning to start this whole process by getting rid of enemy carriers). It does, however, contain a number of other fundamental problems, and among that is the idea of using submarines pretty much exclusively to attack enemy naval units. The issue with this is that pre-nuke subs were very slow, so that even the slowest surface ships could outrun them (especially when the subs were submerged), meaning that overall, even with their occasional successes, submarines in WWII proved hilariously ineffective at sinking enemy warships.
Japans subs controled by battleship admirals and bean counters
Used as scouts not combat vessels
Allowed only so many torpedoes for a target if miss oh well
It was common for the US and Germany to us 6 torpedoes on a merchant ship to sink it
@@blacktiger974 Baseless slander
Going after merchant ships was seen as dishonorable, but not machine gunning men in their life rafts.
War is …… well both strange and deadly, why the various services seem unable to work together when needed is a massive area of concern to me and why when we see and hear about the unwillingness to come together under the flag they all serve, it should be a court-martial affair for the senior staff!!
Great video, I learnt new stuff again.
Thanks
Bob
England
Thanks
Your ww2 videos are so interesting 🤔 keep it up please 🙏🥺 I'm addicted
impressive.
Gotta love The Dark Series
The I-19 was reassigned to reef duty by the USS Radford...
Nuff said
I just glad the I-19 was blowen a part with all hands. Shooting men in the water is just insane..
semper fi,,semper fortis
Wow!
Never knew the Carolina was supposed to be in Guadalcanal campiane. But she did survive an is still beautiful today in Wilmington NC
Although Japan's Type B1 submarines had terrific torpedoes and an impressive range, in virtually every other respect they were vulnerable. They were slow to dive, maneuvered sluggishly underwater, operated at a relatively shallow depth, and never mounted radar systems.
They did eventually get radar. It wasnt very good though. You forgot that their large size made them easy to detect on the surface, slow to dive, and easy to track when submerged. Not a winning combination.
USA had a problem at first that torpedoes would circle back at the sub that fired it.
I don't think the US was alone. I know when World War I a British submarine fired a torpedo in it turned around and came back their way and they just narrowly avoided being hit by it.
@@thomasswafford250 -- thank you
The USS Wasp was not massive, she was left over tonnage after building Yorktown, Enterprise, and Hornet.
Hornet was built after Wasp. After the treaty was abrogated September 1rst 1939. She was built to an improved Yorktown design to get her into the water as fast as possible. Her weight didnt figure into the treary. Broadly though yes you're correct.
“…6 bow torpedo tubes, which would be updated to 17 by the end of the war” - what the fuck?
“How many torpedo tubes do you have?”
“Yes”
I was just about to comment on this. Indeed WTF. I can't imagine what the confusion is.
Gosh - I've never heard of that before. One doesn't seem to hear much about Japanese subs. Their strategic application must've been flawed, because the US Pacific submarine fleet was enormously successful against Japanese maritime assets...
I've recently done a broad cover of Japanese submarines. Check it out if you're interested.
(Edit) while you're there check out her derpy sister I-33. It ain't pretty.
Yes, and the US Navy would have been more effective, lost fewer subs, lost fewer people if the defects of the Mark 14 torpedo were documented and rectified earlier.
@@katrinaanon1038 yeah I did a video on the mk14 years ago. Many, years ago. For the life of me I cant figure out why some people criticize early war sub commanders for being gun shy when they know their torpedoes are defective and their seniors (I'm look at you English) are telling them to use them anyway.
I DUNNO.....USS BARB was pretty badass....
If you know history you will not repeat history
Gunning down survivors in lifeboats has tarnish the reputation of the I-19
The wasp cv-7 was a small underequipped sub built under the limits of the naval treaties. Wasp was less than 15,000 tons empty. The USS Yorktown cv-5 was a little over 25,000 tons empty just to dispel the concept that Wasp was a behemoth. Wasp was a severe compromise in design and execution with less armor, protection and machinery than the much larger and more capable Yorktown. The compromise was so flagrant that instead of being a good sized CVL the navy opted for a less capable and less safe midget CV. Wasp 688 feet waterline vs Yorktown 770 foot waterline. Wasp had two shafts fed by 2 steam turbines using 6 boilers for 70,000 SHP and 29.5 Knots max. The Yorktown had 4 shafts fed by 4 steam turbines and 9 boilers for 120,000 SHP 32.5 knots max. (info source Wikipedia articles).
Fascinating new information. I wasnt fully aware of the Feb. '42 attack. It borders on criminal neglect that the biggest concern was there lack of situational awareness. 🤬
100 miles rang ? thats less than a coastal sub ? Leona
Not while being underwater.
@@katrinaanon1038 I must have herd it wrong, I got the imression you were talking about it max patrol range ? not the max time spent under water with out recharging the batteries, sorry. Leona
Amazing and interesting history. My thanks. Incredible also that people could be so, jacked up [sometimes called "bravery" saying that with vast respect] that they could go over the top with little more than crossed fingers, if you think about it. One might recall the trench warfare of WWI? Vast respect.
@5:25 you say, "the mission involved 2 colossal H8K flying boats" . . . . . @6:07 you say, "however, only 2 of the aircraft managed to reach the target." 🙄
One of these sailed between Victoria and Tasmania, launched a plane that reconnoitered Melbourne and Port Philip bay in 1942.
I feel like the USS Tang should’ve been more feared if it haven’t had sunk. It would have sank multiple ships heavily protected and was not sunk.
sunk by circular running torpedo, shows the US had not fixed their defective electric torpedoes by October 1944. The USS Tunny was also confirmed sunk by circular run by its only survivor.
The Wasp...RIP. God Bless
What is not mentioned is that Kinashi later went to Germany and was awsarded the iron cross by Hitler himself for sinking the Wasp.
you should have dropped depth chargers
Cargo submersibles have mostly vanished since WWII, if another major conflict breaks out they will be invaluable
Submarines arent really known for being spacious. Most subs tho do put carrying special forces high on their list.
👍👍👍
Looks like surfacing to machine gun survivors was astounding hubris.
"Moreover" count = 0. Very nice.
This sub sank a lumber ship right outside Los Angeles harbor
Wow! The Japanese navy had a nuclear submarine 1942! (:30)
I did not realize 'stealthy' meant 'nuclear' . . . . . so I guess we had nuclear Ninjas in the 15th century (;
Three minutes in..."OK, but...?"
I have been aboard The North Carolina.
I'd like to think that machine gunning survivors in their lifeboats brought Karma down on them. The end.
more dark seas
A fleet submarine with a range of 100 miles!? 😅 4:07 Never change! 😅
I think he meant on batteries.
Error ridden
@@angela20377definitely on battery power. They were all over the Pacific using the diesel engines!
Really 17 bow torpedo tubes? Cut it out.
She hit 3 ships at once. A CV, BB, and DD.
The CV Sank
The DD sank weeks/Months after due to hull damage
The BB was out of commission for weeks\months
So how does a Ship that got Torpedoed like the O'Brien did travel 3,000 miles only to Sink then because of the Torpedo ?
There must be a very interesting story attached to that. I would like to hear it if anyone knows anything about it.
Was that a helicopter at 4:39?
It was clearly a Hedgehog pattern that sank the sub, not 'depth charges' as stated by the narrator, if the footage really is of that final attack.
"17 bow torpedo tubes" ??????
I caught that too. Must have been the fabled "Deathstar" submarine 😅
As is tradition with Dark Seas. Probably meant they carried 17 torpedoes
lol . . . no doubt, I almost commented on that, but I went with the "2 planes set out, but only 2 planes made it to the target" . . . . . another 'over dramatization'.
Not the most accurate channel.
I hope Davy Jones strafed the I-19 crew as they tried to approach the pearly gates.
If we, the U.S., knew all this, imagine why we decided to fight Germany first and how devastating they could have been…..
HEY I SEE THAT WHEN I LOOK DOWN MY PANTS
2:24
She sat on the bottom, until the American fleet entered her range
Le parc à thème de la bataille de Stalingrad et devant le ranch de Murphy une statue de Gavin Newson sont nécessaires à Los Angeles
The audio is horrible! It’s way too fast!
Japan made a mistake by ordering their subs to concentrate on warships instead of cargo, fuel, and troop transport vessels 🚢. Only aircraft carriers were really essential. Allied subs concentrated on disrupting supply lines, making an exception for aircraft carriers.
I’m so happy they managed to kill everyone on that submarine!
Did any japanese unit not commit war crimes?
well technically speaking commitment of war is a crime so.... : /
yea typical americans way. a lot of commitment battle history, and source being, and films existing. are you nice spirits own.
you ignorance.
Japan never signed the Geneva Convention
@@alexius23 meant? say it
@@user-zj5kd8hk7d the Geneva Convention established the “Rules of War”. Japan refused to be bound by such White/European concepts.
WTF? Showing US nuclear SSNs and SSBNs? Really? You really need to do better.
Karma for machine gunning down helpless sailors.
HAHA 100 miles!!!
Not enough is said about how inhumane and nasty the Japanese were toward ship board survivors being unmercifully being raked with machine gun fire in lifeboats, a lot of Japanese never paid for all there war crimes, as bad or worse than the Nazis, yet never held accountable
Many of those responsible went to the Davey Jones Locker before they could be held accountable
The Germans and Italians were humane in comparison.
I mean shooting survivors on a raft is eh karmas a bitch.. Why would you shoot survivors with no weapons... Guess those depth charges were coming to you
17 bow tubes? Nonsense. Meant: 17 in the bow torpedo room. 100 miles range? I assume you meant under water, but that's even not even implied in what you said. The writing on this channel is going to hell. Sorry, but it just is getting careless, guy.
Still rather be a Brown shoe!!l lol JJ
I don’t like DH not because of the reasons you mentioned but because he calls out other drivers as having no respect, or no talent because he gets forced into the wall or spun when going for the win. But wen he does it, it’s just racing. He’s good a hall of fame-er but sometimes you get the bull, sometimes you get the horn. He should just deal with it like he expects others to do.
That sub was a total failure just like the french version.
Lots of inaccuracies and outright false info in this one!
Why didn't the Germans and Imperial Japan coordinate better and attack the British Empire first and controlling the whole Indian and Middle East first?? Trade with the Soviet union for it's resources and then take on the Americans next?
world dominate of communist's relation trap.
a lot of spiy communist intrude all government and high commander inside of manipulation to entirely one thing ends. every country.
they are called global elite now.
How would the planned invasion of England (Operation Sea Lion) have fared if supported by the Jap Fleet providing the RAF was wiped out? The RAF was on the ropes when the strategic error of switching to the London bombings started.
Second thing first. Japan and Germany did have peace treaties with the USSR. Japan's lasted until Aug 1945 when the USSR attacked Manchuria, up to that point both were kind of busy. Germany and the USSR had a peace treaty which Hitler abrogated in June 1941 because he was Hitler. That is to say trying to conquer the USSR was one of his main goals.
First thing second. They actually did. Go look up "the monsoon group". German and Italian subs that operated in the Indian Ocean/far east. Mostly out of Singapore and Sumatra. The problem was it was so far from Germany only a few subs could reach that far. Japanese subs did operate in the Indian Ocean with some success. If the operations of Japanese submarines wasnt so badly under reported you'd probably hear more about it. They could have done better yes but again their doctrine mostly emphasized attacking fleets rather than raiding commerce. Why didnt they focus on the British before taking on America? The answer is the Philippenes. Japan attacked Pearl because they were afraid once they captured Indonesian the US would use the Philippines to interdict the flow of raw materials from Indonesia to Japan. So they had to captured the Philippines. That meant going to war with the US. It is debatable that if they had just sailed right past the Philippines and invaded Indonesia the US would have stayed out of it and they could have readied their forces for the inevitable British retaliation. Something that might not have come depending on how the European war went without direct US involvement. We'll never know.
Thank you men of the USS Radford for sending them to the bottom , that's what ya get for machine gunning lifeboat survivors
FRICK GUYS I THINK THE THUMBNAIL MADE ME GAY HOLY FRIG
THE JAPANESE NEVER ATTACKED PEAR HARBOR.
Is it your 2 pizza videos and 14 subscribers that are going to rewrite history? What's that line by John Belushi in Animal House, "When the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor". Can I pre-order your new book about the history of the world or is it only for private members?
@@dicksonfranssenno no no. Hes right. Japan never attacked Pear Harbor.
@@dicksonfranssen Its not for stupid people.
@@dicksonfranssen Il send you the book of the fake landing on the moon or 9/11 or the Tonking incident or the bombing of the Maine in Havana or the attack on the liberty ship in 1967, that may awake you up.
Ye
Ne
Hold on, you've just called it petrol.
Are you feeling OK?
Imperial English mish- mash
@@ntabile no. Look in the dictionary.
@-GOODMAN1989- What's wrong with the word petrol? Have i heard something wrong in his statement?
@ntabile it's just weird hearing an American saying it.
Sorry but the japanese I19 submarine had a range of 14,000 nautical miles (26,000 km) at 16 knots, Not 100 miles!
Their torpedoes were deadly,but NO JAPANESE SUB WAS NOTORIOUS,MOST WERE SUNK,AND AFTERWARDS DID VERY LITTLE DAMAGE!
Gotta sink those Japanese ships!!!