Talk:Battle of Arawe

Re-write

I think that this article (which I largely wrote) is so underdeveloped that it needs to be pretty much re-written from scratch. I will be doing this at: User:Nick-D/Drafts8 and all contributions and comments are, of course, very welcome. Nick-D (talk) 00:39, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Comments

Here are some comments on the article as I found it today. I may have to continue these at a later date, and as such have divided them into sections based on the article itself:

Lede

• Lede needs to be expanded to two paragraphs for the size of the article

Background

• 'Accordingly, reinforcements were dispatched to strategic locations in the area in an attempt to slow the Allied advance' - Can we have a few details of what these forces were and where they went, even if it's only at division/army level?
• 'The goals of this operation were to establish air and PT boat bases which could be used to further reduce the Japanese forces at Rabaul and secure the straits between New Guinea and New Britain to allow convoys to pass through it en-route to operations along New Guinea's north coast and beyond' - Very long sentence, suggest cutting into two.
• 'To this end, GHQ planned to capture Cape Gloucester at the western end of New Britain and Gasmata on the island's southern coast.[5] The veteran 1st Marine Division was selected for the Cape Gloucester operation.[6]' - Who was chosen for the landings at Gasmata before it was cancelled?
• Any Australian opinions on the Gasmata landings and general landings on western New Britain?
  • Not that I could find. Australia was pretty much locked out of decision making by this time, particularly for American-dominated operations like this one. Nick-D (talk) 08:17, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
• 'This landing had three goals; firstly to divert Japanese attention away from Cape Gloucester, secondly to establish a defensive perimeter and make contact with the marines once they landed and thirdly to establish a base for PT boats' - You've already mentioned the plan to establish the PT boat base in the previous sentence. Not sure how to redword that, but I think it needs editing to avoid the repetition.

Prelude

• 'The commander of the PT boat force in the South-West Pacific, Morton C. Mumma' - Can we have his rank please?
• 'Two subsidiary landings were planned to take place one hour before dawn and before the main body of the Director Task Force landed at House Fireman Beach on the Arawe Peninsula' - Does this mean that of the two landings, one was an hour before and and the other before the main body landed, or were both at the same time (ie the main landings were also an hour before dawn). Can this be clarified please?
• 'One landing would capture Pitoe Island to the Peninsula's south as it was believed that the Japanese had established a Japanese radio station and defensive position there which commanded the entrance to Arawe Harbor' - Repetition of 'Japanese'
• 'US Navy members of the planning staff were concerned about the subsidiary landings as a nighttime landing at Lae in September had proven difficult' - Although pertinent to the article, this sentence seems to have been stuck on a little, as it doesn't flow into the next section; can it either be moved, or more likely expanded a little to detail their concerns?
• 'Like the units of the 1st Cavalry Division, the 112th Cavalry Regiment was smaller and more lightly armed than US infantry regiments and had only two battalion-sized squadrons compared to the three battalions in infantry regiments' - I realize the comparison with 1st CavDiv to infantry divs is needed to show that they were smaller and more lightly armed, but as 1st CavDiv hasn't been mentioned before, this needs reworking slightly - ie why is 1st CavDiv important - I assume it was the main/only Cav division in the Pacific? And did the 112th belong/was attached to 1st Cav Div?
  • I think that the reference to the 1st Cavalry Division should be removed as it's not directly relevant (the 112th was an independent regiment with no relationship to the 1st Cavalry Division). Nick-D (talk) 10:26, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
• 'The US Navy's Beach Party Number 1 also landed with the Director Task Force and was withdrawn once the beachead was secure.' - Wrong tense for this section, should be 'would be landed' etc.
• 'USAAF and RAAF units operating under the Fifth Air Force would support the landing but only limited air support was to be available after December 15. - Why was this?
• 'The 1st Battalion, 81st Infantry Regiment was assigned to defend Cape Merkus but didn't depart Rabaul until December as it needed to be reorganised after suffering casualties when the ship it was travelling on from China was sunk' - Comma after December
• 'The force at Arawe comprised 120 soldiers and sailors in two temporary companies drawn from the 51st Division.' - Who commanded this force?

Battle

• 'The APDs carrying Troops A and B of the 112th Cavalry Regiment closed to within 1,000 yards (910 m) of Umtingalu and Pilelo island and unloaded the soldiers in rubber boats' - Given the preceding tense, I think the correct wording would be 'into rubber boats' Also, how many mer were in each troop?
• Troops A and B - they belonged to 1st Squadron, I assume, as 2nd Squadron came after them? If so, this needs to be mentioned. And if so, why isn't the section referring to 2nd Squadron describing its own troops, whatever letters were assigned to them?
• 'USS Shaw, the destroyer assigned to support the landing, was unable to provide supporting fire until 0542 she initially couldn't determine if the soldiers in the water were in her line of fire; once she had a clear shot she silenced the Japanese positions with two salvos from her five inch guns.' - Not sure what the missing word is here, but one is missing.
• 'Once ashore the cavalrymen advanced across the island' - So their landing was unopposed?
• 'The goal of this operation was to destroy a Japanese radio station believed to be at the village of Paligmete on the island's east coast.' - Was it ever destroyed, given that the site of the landings was switched?
• 'Conyngham remained in the area to rescue survivors of the landing at Umtingalu and withdraw later that day' - Wrong tense

Aftermath

• 'In this it was successful.' - Needs a citation
• From the text, it seems that Cunningham was very cautious, probably overly so given the forces facing him and his superiority in materiale and men. Is there nothing that comments on this - any criticism made of him, for example, or later historical analysis.
  • Not really. I'm not sure that he was particularly cautious - he was ordered only to secure the Arawe Peninsula and his initial combat force was pretty small (only two small battalions) and isolated, so calling in reinforcements made sense.
• I notice that there are few sources later than the '80s used in any detail - are there no other sources, especially ones that aren't from official histories, that cover this in any detail?
  • Not that I've been able to find. The official histories are the only sources to cover this campaign in any detail, and are well regarded (as an aside, 'CARTWHEEL: The Reduction of Rabaul' is actually a really good read). Nick-D (talk) 08:45, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
    • Oops, actually there's a 2006 PhD dissertation on the 112th Cav I'm yet to make use of. Nick-D (talk) 08:51, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
      • He turned it into a book. It's very good. Hawkeye7 (talk) 12:31, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Differing numbers in sources

Hata's book, which I just added to the references section, has somewhat different numbers than Morison. For example, he says 54 fighters attacked the first day, and two, not one, fighters were shot down. Hata is a more recent book, so should we use his numbers? Cla68 (talk) 12:10, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Also, Hata says IJN 20 fighters were lost over Arawe and Cape Gloucester in December, not 34. Were some of the aerial attacks by IJA air units? Cla68 (talk) 12:49, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Some of the aircraft which attacked Arawe were based in New Guinea, and so were probably Army aircraft. I'd agree with using Hata's figures - they can be assumed to be superior to Morison's, I think, given that they'd be based on more recent study of Japanese sources (which Morison may not have had access to at the time). Could you please add them in? Nick-D (talk) 22:35, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Sure thing. Hopefully, later today. Cla68 (talk) 22:28, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Congrats on TFA

Just wanted to send a little note to the editors who have contributed to this article and nominated it for featured article status that I enjoyed reading this tremendously informative and entertaining article.--ColonelHenry (talk) 15:11, 15 December 2013 (UTC)