View Full Version : The Mighty Mo And The Japanese Surrender
The Sailor
13-01-2008, 06:05
Kamikaze Attack
On April 11, 1945, a Japanese A6M "Zero" Kamikaze flew into the side of the USS Missouri while it was operating off the coast of Okinawa. The plane hit the side of the ship, just below the main deck, causing a shower of debris on the deck. There was only minor damage to the ship and no casualties among the ship's crew. Visitors touring the USS Missouri Battleship today in Honolulu's Pearl Harbor, can still view the dents in the side of the ship and there is a sign telling the story of the Kamikaze attack. See pic below
THE SURRENDER on her deck
On August 5, 1945 the atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, Japan and on August 9, Nagasaki. On August 15, 1945, three years, eight months and seven days from that fateful day at Pearl Harbor, the Japanese surrendered and the war in the Pacific was over.
The Instrument of Surrender was signed on September 2, 1945 on the 01 deck level of the Missouri, anchored in Tokyo Bay, near the city of Yokohama, Japan. Japan’s delegation consisted of 11 men who had traveled in secrecy from Tokyo. General Douglas MacArthur signed in his capacity as Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers.
Joining him as signatory was Fleet Admiral Chester Nimitz along with representatives of China, United Kingdom, Soviet Union, Australia, Canada, France, Netherlands and New Zealand. The Japanese Foreign Minister, Mamoru Shigemitsu, signed on behalf of the Emperor of Japan and the Japanese Government General Yoshijiro Umezu, Chief of the Imperial General Staff, signed on behalf of the Japanese Armed Forces.
Hundreds of American sailors lined every inch of the Missouri when
General MacArthur delivered an eloquent speech.
USS MISSOURI
Ordered: 12 June 1940
Laid down: 6 January 1941
Launched: 29 January 1944
Commissioned: 11 June 1944
Decommissioned: 31 March 1992 (Final)
Struck: 12 January 1995
Status: Museum ship
General characteristics
Displacement: 45,000 tons (45,700 t)
Length: 887.2 ft (270 m)
Beam: 108.2 ft (33 m)
Draft: 28.9 ft (8.8 m)
Speed: 33 knots (61 km/h)
Complement: 1,851 officers and men
8 × Mark 36 SRBOC Super Rapid Bloom Rocket Launchers
Armament: 1943:
9 x 16 in (406 mm) 50 cal. Mark 7 guns
20 × 5 in (127 mm) 38 cal. Mark 12 guns
80 x 40 mm 56 cal. anti-aircraft guns
49 x 20 mm 70 cal. anti-aircraft guns
A prettier ship one would never see.
herakles
13-01-2008, 07:49
As I recall, one of the Japs had a severe limp. I know they were deeply humiliated by having to sign the document and in public.
And then followed the war crimes trials!
I have a copy of the surrender document Montgomery made the German generals sign in his tent, somewhere in Europe.
The Sailor
13-01-2008, 08:30
Another thing that happened was that the Japanese was having trouble finding the place where he was to sign. Macarthur barked loudy to his aids, "SHOW HIM!"
herakles
13-01-2008, 08:54
And congratulations on your 200th post Sailor. That's a lot of words. All of them interesting and worth reading.
Except when you whinge, you ****** Colonial!!
I would have thought that 200 would trigger a promotion. It seems not to be the case. So, it's shore leave and half pay for you!
Funny you should post on the Mighty Mo. Yesterday at a book fair I came across Paul Stilwell's monolithic book "Battleship Missouri". However much US battleships interest me (had a lovely walk round the "Massachusetts" last summer) I was not going to fork out 40 pounds for a book!!
Harley
Funny you should post on the Mighty Mo. Yesterday at a book fair I came across Paul Stilwell's monolithic book "Battleship Missouri". However much US battleships interest me (had a lovely walk round the "Massachusetts" last summer) I was not going to fork out 40 pounds for a book!!
Harley
herakles
13-01-2008, 20:03
Case of the stutters Harley??!!!!!
40 pounds for that book? Oh dear. Rip off.
Hadn't noticed that! Yes, it happens when I'm nervous :p.
The guy was shockingly flexible on some prices though - he tried to stuff the "Anatomy of the Ship - Queen Mary" into me - the price on it was forty pounds, he offered it to me for twenty-five! Pricing his books up a treat...
He did surprise me with the revelation a grandfather had gone down with "Monmouth" in 1914, another relative was sunk on "Hermes" in '42 and one went down with a cruiser. An unlucky sea-faring family!
Apologies for yet more OT.
The Stilwell book was interesting for the attention shown to the grounding in 1950. Lovely pictures showing all the main secondary ammunition being off-loaded. A nice carpet of 5"/38 ammo surrounding a 16" barbette.
Harley
TheDigger
15-01-2008, 11:41
When you look at the size of the ship and a Jap "Zero" you wonder what this guy was thinking when he dived on it like shooting elephants with a shotgun continue peppering away you might get somewhere but one thing is for sure you will certainly get him mad.
The AA fire from this ship would be something that we will never see again
The Sailor
15-01-2008, 22:00
Back in 1987 the Mo came to Fremantle for some R&R on her trip home to the US.
I knew this chap who had a brother in the Australian/American friendship association and he was able to get us on board with a small party to be shown over the ship.
There is a brass plaque on the deck where the surrender was signed.
I bought this hat whilst on board and have kept it down the years in perfect condition.
I can't believe that it is over twenty years ago.
Don Boyer
27-09-2009, 00:16
I posted this elsewhere, but here is a picture of the massive damage caused by the kamikaze that hit the Missouri. Damage was repainted.
Don Boyer
27-09-2009, 21:02
The man with the limp at the surrender ceremony was Mamoru Shigemetsu, Japanese Premier. He limped due to having a leg blown off by radical elements of the government many years before because he opposed the expansionist nationalistic fervor generated by the Imperial Army adventures in Manchuria and later China. The Emperor had a false leg made for Shigemetsu that didn't fit very well, but he wore it anyway even though it was painful.
Shigemetsu, a former Admiral, was probably the only Japanese at the ceremony who truly had sought peace. The military members of the group, had they not been under orders of the Emperor would have killed themselves rather than show up at the ceremony. Several of them did commit seppuku after the ceremony, including General Imezu, who signed for the Imperial Army. None of them have been missed much.
Something that will clear the air about the whole surrender controversy. 99 percent of the responsibility for the dropping of two atomic bombs on Japan rests with the Imperial Japanese Army and no other entity. Their xenophobic attitudes and intense desire to avoid losing face even at the cost of destroying the Empire overrode all other considerations, even when loss of the war was obvious to all parties concerned in mid-1944. Even after the second atomic bomb had been dropped, the Imperial Army (and their by then navy lackeys) opposed surrender under any conditions other than they kept all territory they had gained, tried war criminals in their own courts, and disarmed the troops themselves.
The Emperor of Japan did the one thing the Imperial Army could not counter. He used a central tenant of the Imperial Army's organizational structure against them, and intentionally so, although it's never been alluded to. All recruit Imperial Soldiers and Sailors were taught from day one in the "Imperial Rescript for Soldiers and Sailors" that all military orders given, even by the lowliest private, were to be considered,in essence, orders from the Emperor himself. Naturally, those were words on paper, and not necessarily taken literally, but the Emperor, by giving a direct order to the highest commanders in the military, put them exactly in the quandary they needed to be in. He created a crucible in which the truth and reality had to intrude on the mythic thinking of the Army with their twisted code of Bushido they all rallied around.
To disobey the Emperor in front of the entire Army and navy, to say nothing of the lowly civilians would be an unbearable loss of face --- they would not have been living up to the precepts of the Imperial Rescript they had forced on everybody else.
Therefore, they either obeyed the orders, or used those short swords they had been issued with for just such happy occasions. Fortunately, there were enough senior Army men with the backbone to carry it off, despite the attempts of hotheads to destroy the peace process and even kill the Emperor if necessary.
The blind stupidity of adherence to the Army's Bushido vision of the world almost destroyed and entire nation. Only by the narrowest of margins was this catastrophe averted -- a catastrophe the Imperial Army hierarchy would have been more than happy to let the nation suffer if it meant they didn't lose face and stayed in power. America did have a deliverable third atomic bomb -- parts of it were already on Tinian, and within a month a steady delivery could have been set up, although it would probably not have been necessary.
The issue of the Soviets would have just made a really bad situation even more galling and insoluble.
astraltrader
27-09-2009, 22:33
I agree totally with what you say Don.
I have always found it a fascinating irony that Hirohito used a central tenant of the Imperial Army's organizational structure against them because in many ways Hitler employed a similar ploy in his handling of the officers of the Wehrmacht made possible by his insistance on an oath of fealty.
The real parallel was the quandary that both the Japanese and the German officers found themselves in...
william dillon
11-12-2009, 23:21
Kamikaze Attack
On April 11, 1945, a Japanese A6M "Zero" Kamikaze flew into the side of the USS Missouri while it was operating off the coast of Okinawa. The plane hit the side of the ship, just below the main deck, causing a shower of debris on the deck. There was only minor damage to the ship and no casualties among the ship's crew. Visitors touring the USS Missouri Battleship today in Honolulu's Pearl Harbor, can still view the dents in the side of the ship and there is a sign telling the story of the Kamikaze attack. See pic below
THE SURRENDER on her deck
On August 5, 1945 the atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, Japan and on August 9, Nagasaki. On August 15, 1945, three years, eight months and seven days from that fateful day at Pearl Harbor, the Japanese surrendered and the war in the Pacific was over.
The Instrument of Surrender was signed on September 2, 1945 on the 01 deck level of the Missouri, anchored in Tokyo Bay, near the city of Yokohama, Japan. Japan’s delegation consisted of 11 men who had traveled in secrecy from Tokyo. General Douglas MacArthur signed in his capacity as Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers.
Joining him as signatory was Fleet Admiral Chester Nimitz along with representatives of China, United Kingdom, Soviet Union, Australia, Canada, France, Netherlands and New Zealand. The Japanese Foreign Minister, Mamoru Shigemitsu, signed on behalf of the Emperor of Japan and the Japanese Government General Yoshijiro Umezu, Chief of the Imperial General Staff, signed on behalf of the Japanese Armed Forces.
Hundreds of American sailors lined every inch of the Missouri when
General MacArthur delivered an eloquent speech.
USS MISSOURI
Ordered: 12 June 1940
Laid down: 6 January 1941
Launched: 29 January 1944
Commissioned: 11 June 1944
Decommissioned: 31 March 1992 (Final)
Struck: 12 January 1995
Status: Museum ship
General characteristics
Displacement: 45,000 tons (45,700 t)
Length: 887.2 ft (270 m)
Beam: 108.2 ft (33 m)
Draft: 28.9 ft (8.8 m)
Speed: 33 knots (61 km/h)
Complement: 1,851 officers and men
8 × Mark 36 SRBOC Super Rapid Bloom Rocket Launchers
Armament: 1943:
9 x 16 in (406 mm) 50 cal. Mark 7 guns
20 × 5 in (127 mm) 38 cal. Mark 12 guns
80 x 40 mm 56 cal. anti-aircraft guns
49 x 20 mm 70 cal. anti-aircraft guns
A prettier ship one would never see.
Why were the French at the ceremony ?:(
John Odom
12-12-2009, 00:36
Billy, Viet Nam was then "French IndoChina," and they were defeated there by the Japanese, so they were combatants represented at the surrender.
John Odom
10-01-2010, 20:21
Saturday, Jan. 9, 2010
Mighty Mo out of dry dock at Pearl Harbor
HONOLULU (AP) The battleship where officials from Japan and the Allied Forces signed surrender documents ending World War II came out of dry dock Thursday after three months of maintenance and repairs.
Tugs began pulling the USS Missouri,which has been turned into a museum, about five hours after shipyard workers started flooding Pearl Harbor's Dry Dock 4.
Sen. Daniel Inouye, a Hawaii Democrat, was to speak later in the day at a private ceremony, according to The Honolulu Advertiser. Capt. Gregory R. Thomas, commander of Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard and Intermediate Maintenance Facility, and retired Vice Adm. Robert K.U. Kihune, chairman of the USS Missouri Memorial Association, were also slated to speak.
The renamed Battleship Missouri Memorial resides in Pearl Harbor, moored a few hundred meters from the USS Arizona, a battleship sunk during Japan's Dec. 7, 1941, attack that drew the U.S. into the war. The surrender documents were signed on the Missouri's deck on Sept. 2, 1945, in Tokyo Bay.
The battleship was also used in the Korean and Persian Gulf wars before being decommissioned in 1992. The memorial opened in January 1999.
Following a soft reopening in mid-January, the Battleship Missouri Memorial will officially reopen Jan. 30, one day after the 66th anniversary of the dreadnought's launch from Brooklyn Navy Yard.
The association operates the battleship as a historic attraction and memorial.
Don Boyer
10-01-2010, 22:39
Thanks for the post, John -- you beat me to it.
I plan to go visit the Missouri as soon as my schedule allows and get some photography in of her new coat of paint. She will be open partially on the 15th, and fully opened on the 30th is my understanding.
Not sure what that means in terms of touring the ship -- probably the inside tours may be restricted until they get everything hooked back up.
astraltrader
10-01-2010, 23:53
I really like this stern photo of the mighty Missouri. :)
John Odom
11-01-2010, 00:58
She is a beautiful ship, from any angle!
Don, when you go, get a few shots of the USS Oklahoma memorial. At the dedication it was covered with people, and we got few pictures of the memorial itself.
Don Boyer
11-01-2010, 04:16
Terry: You're spot on as usual with a quality shot of Missouri. I had not seen that one before.
John: I will make it a point to get photos of the Oklahoma Memorial...last time I went to the Missouri I was "on a schedule" with my son and we skipped the Oklahoma Memorial, which I have not seen yet in person. Might be a week or two, but I'll get photos and post them and forward to you.
steve roberts
16-01-2010, 11:29
Hi Don and All.Although the picture of the Kamikzi attack on The Mighty Mo has been posted before.I rember being shown it in school and being told several crew were killed.We all know now this is not true.If you take a close look at the photo,all the guys on the light AA guns seem to be too busy to even notice the Zero! Cheers Steve.
66326
66327 We come uncleen oops Unseen
designeraccd
16-01-2010, 11:59
Many pics of her now at this link..........
http://www.navsource.org/archives/01/63k.htm
DFO ;)
Don Boyer
16-01-2010, 17:00
As has been posted on the Missouri website, the ship is now back at her normal berth after a considerable spell in drydock being cleaned, shined and buffed.
I will be in the area today and over the next few weeks and will get some photographs of her looking sharp. I may not go on board this weekend, but will get around to it soon.
Today's target on Ford Island will be the new Oklahoma Memorial, which I have not had a chance to see yet up close.
That kamikaze photo is probably one of the most dramatic of its kind, reproduced in almost every WWII book. Half the Japanese pilot was buried at sea with full military honors by the Missouri's crew by order of the ship's Captain. That did not sit well with some.
There is also a photograph of some of the aftermath of the crash -- most notably a 40mm quad mount with one of the aircraft's 13 mm machine guns jammed in one of the 40 mm barrels. (13mm is actually 12.7 mm -- the Japanese rounded mm designations up or down all the time. 12.7 mm is .50 cal.)
Don Boyer
16-01-2010, 23:14
As promised, here are some shots of the USS Missouri back at Pier F-5 on Ford Island from her cleaning and painting. I was busy with other things, mainly the USS Oklahoma Memorial, so I did not cough up the $20 for an on deck pass to the ship this time, but I will do so soon and get some close ups of her without a speck of rust in sight -- how rare it is to find any ship in that condition!
astraltrader
17-01-2010, 00:29
Great photos Don.
Thanks for taking the time to upload them for us. :)
steve roberts
17-01-2010, 09:38
Hi Don.She looks very "Spick & Span" Almost ready to sail,as soon as her crew boards her. Regards Steve.:)
JarrowDave
17-01-2010, 17:54
TWO ANECDOTES:-
1) I heard somewhere that when USS Missouri was opened to the New York public soon after the war, the opening was closed early as the children of NY were doing far more damage to the ship than the IJN had ever done.
2) In the episode of "The World at War" that dealt with the Japanese surrender there was an interview with Premier Shigimetsu's aide. The chap, who was quite young at the time, apparently, looked around at all the allied fleets present, and asked the premier,"What made you think that you could beat this lot?"
Don't know if either of them are true, but they should be.
JD:)
John Odom
17-01-2010, 19:10
They didn't believe they could really beat us. They thought we would just quit when we began taking casualties. They expected a negotiated peace, favorable to them. That is how all previous wars, for them, had ended. Many Japanese consider the demand for "Unconditional Surrender" to have been "unfair."
Don, It's nice to see her looking pristine once more. As a general observation, RN warships at anchor have their guns trained almost horizontally, whereas US ships tend to have them more elevated. Is there any reason for this, or am I imagining it?
Dave Hutson
17-01-2010, 19:53
Hi Don,
Again a great set of photos of the Missouri , she is exactly as I remember from my visit and a credit to the Memorial Staff, the Guides and the youngsters that keep her that way. But then I have said this on the Pearl Harbour thread before.
Sometimes I wonder at our lot - several years ago we closed a depot in Plymouth and they were going to chuck out a huge dining table. Lucky enough someone remembered it was the table the [I think] Japanese signed the surrender on for our lot - so it was saved at the eleventh hours. I will try to retrieve the exact story and post it.
Regards
Dave H
p.s It was recalling the table on the Missouri that prompted the second para.
Don Boyer
17-01-2010, 23:10
Don, It's nice to see her looking pristine once more. As a general observation, RN warships at anchor have their guns trained almost horizontally, whereas US ships tend to have them more elevated. Is there any reason for this, or am I imagining it?
I am not sure of the Navy etiquette surrounding the fully elevated guns. Usually referred to as the "victory position," I think it is a subtle way of saying "We're No. 1." The Missouri's guns were in this position for the surrender ceremony if I remember correctly. But I note, for example, when our ships visit a foreign port, we don't do that --the guns are level. To do otherwise would probably be considered "tacky" at the least. We particularly don't do it at RN ports, as the RN is the senior service. For "shows" and "displays" they are often fully elevated for the duration of the event, then returned to battery.
Love the Pictures Don, she's looking Mighty sharp,
wonder if they will release some shots of her underside once it have been cleaned and painted, just to comp[are with those 'before shots' i posted a while back
Re: Guns, HMS Belfast's Guns are trained on a location in NW London, when I worked at the RAF Museum we assumed they were aimed at the museum cos at the time there was a bit of inter museum rivalry between the RAFM and Duxford (also owned by the IWM, like Belfast) heh
Don Boyer
18-01-2010, 05:56
I noted JDs comment on the World at War segment on the Japanese surrender.
I would bet that if such a conversation occurred, it would not have been directed at Minister Shigemetsu himself. He was well known as a part of the peace faction before and during the war. He well knew it would not be good to get into a war with America, Britain and the Dutch. The gentleman probably asked how the Japanese government (which meant the Imperial Army) could have thought they could beat the US, and the answer to that is very complicated but can be basically laid down no only to the incredible mis-judgement on the part of the Imperial Army as to America, but also their incredible mis-judgement of their own capabilities in war.
Individual Japanese soldiers in the field were incredibly tough and resourceful fighters, some of the best in the world, and any organization who has fought them would agree. The leadership of those soldiers was incredibly poor -- short sighted and egotistically blinded by a twisted revision of the Bushido concepts. Therein lies their great failure. For all the gassing the Japanese Army did about Sun Tzu, they forgot almost all his great tenants, the most fatal being you have to know yourself as well as your enemy; as it turned out the Imperial Army officer corps as a whole failed on both those counts.
Don, thanks for your reply about the elevation of the guns. The elevated position for the Missouri's guns is entirely appropriate.
steve roberts
18-01-2010, 18:26
Hi Don Re your post on the gun position when visiting an away port. It used to be a little trick that Dashing Destroyer Captains used to pull when "Rendering Honours"The turret guns were under the automatic control of the gunnery director position and when the Salute was sounded,the guns would raise to full elevation,turn to Port or Starboard as required.Then dip fully before training fore & aft in the level position.It looked quite neat!!! Regards Steve.:D:D:D:D
Don Boyer
22-01-2010, 01:58
I had heard of the destroyers doing that kind of "dance" with the guns as part of a salute. Never saw it done. Of course, that was back in the days when you could find more than one mount on a destroyer!
When I was stationed on Guam, one of our "old salts" who'd served in lots of ships told me that they used to be able to make quite a display on the old cruiser Worcester with her six rapidly moving twin 6" turrets, both for formal salutes and to impress the ladies on during "Navy Day" type events. Nowadays about all we get to do is watch a VLS door slam open...lol!
Regards
jbryce1437
27-02-2012, 12:28
I received this link to newsreel footage of the Japanese surrender signing ceremony in Toyko Bay. Supposedly, unseen footage.
http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=vcnH_kF1zXc&feature=player_embedded
Jim
Clive 58
27-02-2012, 12:35
Re: Guns, HMS Belfast's Guns are trained on a location in NW London, when I worked at the RAF Museum we assumed they were aimed at the museum cos at the time there was a bit of inter museum rivalry between the RAFM and Duxford (also owned by the IWM, like Belfast) heh
I heard HMS Belfast's guns were trained on Scratchwood Services, which is very the RAF Museum at Hendon. Perhaps the public are told Scratchwood, but it's actually the RAF Museum? :)
Don Boyer
27-02-2012, 22:57
Re the surrender footage...while all of it is seldom seen in one piece, like a lot of war footage, bits and pieces of it and stills taken from it, show up all over the place. (At least it wasn't taken by the famous "Brownie camera" -- :rolleyes:!)
Note the very clear photos of the arrival of the Japanese delegation, which does not include then CPT Mitsuo Fuchida, who said in his biography that he was there. We are finding today that much of his commentary on the war needs a very large salt shaker, quite a comedown from one who basked in the glory of Gordon Prange's Pearl Harbor and Midway research for years!
The footage is an outstanding look though -- especially if you focus on the background where you can see so many of the war's movers and shakers, including most of the British and Commonwealth delegations, if only briefly.
Regards,
skipperbob
05-03-2012, 05:39
Hi Don and All.Although the picture of the Kamikzi attack on The Mighty Mo has been posted before.I rember being shown it in school and being told several crew were killed.We all know now this is not true.If you take a close look at the photo,all the guys on the light AA guns seem to be too busy to even notice the Zero! Cheers Steve.
66326
66327 We come uncleen oops Unseen
I have been fascinated by the photo of the kamikaze about to hit the MO since I was a child. I couldn't believe how those men stuck to their guns as the Japanese plane came that close, a few feet higher and it would have plowed right into that quad 40 mount. The other thing that always interested me about this pic was - where are the gun barrels for the twin 5in mount just below the plane? They must really be depressed, can't see any sign of them.
The Missouri was out in Korea, I remember seeing her come to a bouy in Sasebo. She was quite a sight.
ensign2547
05-03-2012, 17:33
Jim,
Thanks for posting the newsreel footage, I've seen segments of it but never the full version.
Don Boyer
07-03-2012, 17:38
Re the post by skipperbob: Sticking to the guns is one of those unfortunate things one gets paid for during wartime. The gun crews were very lucky to avoid causalties, as large pieces of the aircraft and half the pilot's body landed on deck, starting a small fire, soon put out. Other than two small dents in the hull (a photo of which is posted on the forum) the only other damage was a ruined 40 mm gun barrel -- on of the Zero's .50 cal guns jammed right in to it, barrel to barrel -- what are the odds on that! There is also a photo of that in the naval archives online and I think also posted here on the forum. Not as well known is that Missouri was clipped by a second kamikaze, this one slamming into the aircraft crane. Since the crane is long gone, there's no evidence left of that hit.
vBulletin® v3.6.7, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.