29.01.2013 Views

US Marine Corps - The Black Vault

US Marine Corps - The Black Vault

US Marine Corps - The Black Vault

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Savo—Tbe Galling Defeat 377<br />

<strong>The</strong> basic task was protection of the transports and cargo ships by the<br />

Screening Group irrespective of the approach route of a Japanese surface<br />

force. A plan which protected only against the particular approach chosen<br />

by the Japanese would not have passed muster.<br />

In this connection, it is worth noting that the Japanese battle plan called<br />

for a division of their attack force into two attack groups and that they did<br />

so divide. As the Japanese stated it:<br />

Crudiv 6 was to attack the transports at GUADALCANAL, while Crudiv 18<br />

was to attack the TULAGI transports.<br />

****<br />

It was the original plan for the FURATAKA group [Crudiv 6] to take the<br />

outer course, but they took the inner course. I do not know why. I was with<br />

the inner group on the TENRYU [Crudiv 18] .58<br />

In March 1943, in response to a long questionnaire from Admiral<br />

Hepburn, Rear Admiral Turner wrote:<br />

<strong>The</strong> difficulty of having two national services in one organization is recognized.<br />

It is believed that this was a mistake, although it was felt at the time<br />

that Admiral Crutchley’s force [Task Force 44] probably was a more effective<br />

tactical unit than the remainder of the force [Task Force 62], which had<br />

never operated together, and whose vessels were from several task forces in<br />

both the Atlantic and Pacific Fleets. In connection with the matter of employing<br />

Admiral Crutchley’s force in Task Force Sixty-Two, I made the specific<br />

recommendation to Admiral Fletcher that all units assigned to me should be<br />

from the U. S. Navy. See my despatch 200135 of July. This recommendation<br />

was not approved. so<br />

Until someone comes forward with a workable alternate plan whereby<br />

the three approaches to the two groups of unloading transports could all be<br />

covered by an undivided Screening Group, labeling the division of the<br />

Screening Group a mistake is an opinion of one uninformed (a) of the<br />

seagoing standards and procedures of the Australian and United States Navy<br />

in August 1942, or (b) that all the cruisers in TF 62 had not been trained<br />

together, or (c) that all the ships of the United States and Australian Navies<br />

in TF 62 were not fitted with both radar and voice radio, or more probably,<br />

(d) of the lay of the land and depths of water in the Savo area.<br />

Admiral Turner’s reaction to Morison’s comment that Rear Admiral Scott<br />

W<strong>US</strong>SBS, Interrogations of Ja@ne$e Oficials,<strong>US</strong>SBS Interrogation No. 255, Vol. I, p. 255.<br />

(Rear Admiral M. Matsuyama). Hereafter only the <strong>US</strong>SBS Interrogation No, and the page from<br />

Irzterrogatiom of Japanese Oficiah will be cited.<br />

rnRKT, Memorandum for Admiral Hepburn, Mar, 1943, p, 10, Hepburn Report, Annex F.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!