Comments on: Best Mechanics will Win if U.S. Fights Japan

By: K!P

K!P — Sun, 18 Jan 2009 11:06:05 +0000

i read an article once that basicly stated taht japanese coulnd not be good pilots because they have narrow eyes, hence they lack 3d view.

By: StanFlouride

StanFlouride — Sun, 18 Jan 2009 01:08:10 +0000

LIEUT. JOHN EDWIN HOGG has two other articles here, one of which is from two years later and criticizes the US Navy’s readiness. The other discusses how navy inventions lead to civilian applications.

At the time this was written long-range observation aircraft were not available except as blimps and dirigibles. The ability of the US Navy to find and attack the Japanese fleets was due, in part to the Catalina Flying Boat which had a huge range.

By: slim

slim — Sat, 17 Jan 2009 20:07:45 +0000

Fascinating article, a peek into U.S. thinking in 1932. In some ways prescient, in others naive.
Hawaii is impregnable. Battleships don’t need much armor topside.

By: Eamon

Eamon — Sat, 17 Jan 2009 18:16:28 +0000

Nice catch Jari, I didn’t even notice that. “The Skeleton Harvest of Maple Hill Farm” is my new favorite book title.

By: Jari

Jari — Sat, 17 Jan 2009 17:30:55 +0000

True. On the lighter side, the guy in the Startling Detective ad looks like Mandrake on drugs.

By: Eamon

Eamon — Sat, 17 Jan 2009 08:52:14 +0000

It seems like a lot of articles about Japan and other nonwhite countries from the 30’s follow a weird pattern; strong, reasonable assessment and fairly accurate predictions before taking a hard right turn into racism.

I remember reading about US military leaders dismissing reports about the Zero’s capability because the Japanese couldn’t possibly be ahead of whites.

I also like how the author loses focus and starts talking about airships.