Admiral Crutchley and other non Japan/US/Aussie/NZ in the Pacific War

[HMan]

Crutchley was a British Admiral who won the Victoria Cross in WWI on a
commando raid on a German sub base. He also was at the WWI Battle of Jutland.

He was the skipper of HMS Warspite during the battle of Narvik in April 1940.

He was transferred to the Aussie navy where he was the second in command at
Guadalcanal, in command of the Destroyer/Cruiser force protecting the invasion
in August 1942. He was criticized for the defeat at Savo Island, the worst
US Navy defeat on the high seas, that also saw the loss of an Aussie cruiser.

None of the books I've read seem to think the criticism was justified, however.

So why was a British Admiral in command of a US/Aussie force that had no
British ships? Did he come close to being relieved because of Savo Island?

He commanded a mostly US/Aussie navy ship force with perhaps some other
Allied ships at least up to the Biak invasion in June 1944. Again, I don't
think there was any British ships in his command during this period.

It sounds like he had an interesting career, and I would love to learn more.
He must have been one of the few to have seen WWII action in both the
the Arctic and Tropics.

Did he serve at Leyte Gulf, and thus be able to claim action at the biggest
WWI and WWII naval battles? Was he at the battle of Surigao Strait and
thus have been at the largest battleship action of all time (Jutland) and
the last? Is there anyone with these distinctions?

Are there any other WWII admirals who won their nations highest award
for gallantry? What did Aussie/US subordinates/superiors and Crutchley
think of each other? Is there a biography on him?


What other non Japan/US/Aussie/NZ are in the WWII Pacific (e.g., not in
the CBI theater)?


Ones I can think of are:


German auxiliary cruisers made combat patrols in the Pacific, including before
Pearl Harbor. They had exploits such as sinking merchant ships, shelling the
island of Naura, and mining the strait between the N. and S. islands of NZ.


Pacific islanders


Dutch and British in the defense of Malaya and the Dutch E. Indies


HMS Victorious / USS Robin - the RN loaned this carrier to the US after
the battles of 1942 left the US with only one operational carrier.
It was dubbed "Robin" in an attempt to confuse Japanese naval
intelligence.

I wonder if the US tried to convince the Brits that to really fool
Japanese intelligence, they should name it after a battle the
US beat the British like other of their carriers - Yorktown,
Saratoga, Lexington.

(Its interesting that no carrier had the name of the biggest battles
in US history at their pre-WWII launch dates. That is Civil War
battles - I assume it is because that would be too controversial,
with some Civil War vets still alive).


Wau, New Guinea - A German miner, who knew the area from pre
war work led a Japanese force on an assault on the Aussie base
in Jan. 1943, using a little known trail.


German / Italian U-boats? - I know they were bases in Malaya,
but don't know if they got into the Pacific, or just the Indian Ocean.


Dutch and British subs - I believe they patrolled in the Pacific


A British fleet entered combat in Spring 1945.

[HMan]

The Wau, New Guinea blurb might be misleading ... The German
guided the Japanese force, he was not CO during combat.

Another one is Soviet forces in the Kurile islands at the
very end of WWII.

[Aber]

Crutchley was a British Admiral who won the Victoria Cross in WWI on a
commando raid on a German sub base. He also was at the WWI Battle of Jutland.

He was the skipper of HMS Warspite during the battle of Narvik in April 1940.

He was transferred to the Aussie navy where he was the second in command at
Guadalcanal, in command of the Destroyer/Cruiser force protecting the invasion
in August 1942. He was criticized for the defeat at Savo Island, the worst
US Navy defeat on the high seas, that also saw the loss of an Aussie cruiser.

None of the books I've read seem to think the criticism was justified, however.

So why was a British Admiral in command of a US/Aussie force that had no
British ships? Did he come close to being relieved because of Savo Island?

This might help explain:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commander ... lian_Fleet

It was not until 1944 that an Australian officer was commanding the RAN squadron - effectively they were closely integrated into the RN.

[HMan]

My apology for the late reply. So I can see why
Crutchley was CO of Aussie ships, but why was
he in command of US ships? Was it because
of seniority?

[antwony]

This might help explain:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commander ... lian_Fleet

It was not until 1944 that an Australian officer was commanding the RAN squadron

Even going by your own link, and using modern terminology, that's not a correct.

The commander of RAN who immediately preceded Crutchley was an Australian RN officer and a (English) RAN officer was the commander in the 1920's.

Defining the difference between Australian and British for that period is a long complex topic that I'm not going to get into here. But...

- effectively they were closely integrated into the RN.

For the purposes of this thread, that's a very fair statement

Did he come close to being relieved because of Savo Island?

Not that I've heard of. Although, HMAS Canberra was the third RAN cruiser that had been sunk within a 12 month period and we only had 2 more (operational ones) left. We didn't really have a cruiser squadron anymore and Crutchley wasn't going to be getting any more important commands. Also, by the standards of early war clusterf**ks against the Japanese, the Battle of Savo Is wasn't even near the worst.

The Australian sources I've read tend to blame the American destroyers on picquet for letting the Japanese pass by unnoticed despite being within a couple of a hundred metres of them and the torpedoes that hit the HMAS Canberra were (probably) from a USN destroyer too. Somewhat ironically, or perhaps appropriately, the American torpedoes of the era often didn't work. The ones that hit the Canberra did.

Don't think the Australian govt. /Navy wanted to make him carry the can and the Americans were going to be taking over all the major actions so don't think they wanted to be throwing their weight about

My apology for the late reply. So I can see why
Crutchley was CO of Aussie ships, but why was
he in command of US ships? Was it because
of seniority?

RAN made up a sizeable part of the fleet in the South Pacific in early 1942, of course we commanded other nation's ships. In addition, the RAN were meant to be experts at night time operations. This being said, all three of our cruisers that were sunk went down at night time.

[cstunts]

I do not believe American DDs torpedoed CANBERRA that night, and don't know a single serious naval historian who thinks they did. That's more on the level of Wiki-fact...
The original IJN records are pretty explicit about those attacks, as indicated in their track charts as well. (There are extensive IJN records, most available now online at JACAR, including charts of the battle & they give a quite clear, detailed picture of who was attacked and by whom & when, etc.)

The Australian book which makes that claim is among the weakest yet produced on Savo, and its arguments about the torpedoing are (to be very polite) contorted and fanciful.

However, it is perfectly fair to fault the US destroyers' work as pickets--in that task, they failed miserably.

[Sheldrake]

The British Pacific Fleet took part in quite a few operations in 1945 and were off Japan at the surrender.

The most senior British Army combat casualty of WW2 was killed in the Pacific theatre https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herbert_Lumsden.

General Arthur Percival was on the USS Missouri for the surrender.

He is next to Leclerc who represented France

[Steen Ammentorp]

Hi,

A small correction. Percival is not in this photo from Missouri. The officer besides Leclerc is the Canadian representative Colonel Cosgrave.

[Sheldrake]

Hi,

A small correction. Percival is not in this photo from Missouri. The officer besides Leclerc is the Canadian representative Colonel Cosgrave.

Thanks. He is there somewhere

[cstunts]

Percival is most certainly there--his face & cap (w/Red bands) is visible just above the head of Lt-Adm Helfrich of the RNN.

[antwony]

The Australian book which makes that claim is among the weakest yet produced on Savo, and its arguments about the torpedoing are (to be very polite) contorted and fanciful.

Presume you're referring to Commodore Loxton's book. Has been a long time since I read it and was quite young when I did. So, I am not going to disagree with you.

He was there; but then he did have an axe to grind... so yeah. Going a bit off topic and I aren't familiar enough with the book/ incident to debate this.

[Rob Stuart]

My apology for the late reply. So I can see why
Crutchley was CO of Aussie ships, but why was
he in command of US ships? Was it because
of seniority?

Crutchley was also at Coral Sea, and was senior to Fletcher. The USN was certainly not going to give him command of its carriers but it had no qualms about letting him command the RAN-USN cruiser-destroyer force there. US ships also served under the Dutch early in the war (e.g., Doorman had four US destroyers at Java Sea), and in Europe US ships were always under the RN officer who served as Eisenhower's naval commander, e.g. Ramsey during NEPTUNE.

[antwony]

Crutchley was also at Coral Sea, and was senior to Fletcher. The USN was certainly not going to give him command of its carriers but it had no qualms about letting him command the RAN-USN cruiser-destroyer force there.

Coral Sea was still Crace, the Australian guy I was referring to earlier, not Crutchley. Crace was promoted to Vice Admiral, and transferred to the UK, after the battle. Am uncertainly when Crutchley got promoted to full Admiral, but he was still a Rear Admiral in 1942 and didn't outrank Fletcher, which would have been semi ridiculous and extremely problematic.

[Rob Stuart]

Crutchley was also at Coral Sea, and was senior to Fletcher. The USN was certainly not going to give him command of its carriers but it had no qualms about letting him command the RAN-USN cruiser-destroyer force there.

Coral Sea was still Crace, the Australian guy I was referring to earlier, not Crutchley. Crace was promoted to Vice Admiral, and transferred to the UK, after the battle. Am uncertainly when Crutchley got promoted to full Admiral, but he was still a Rear Admiral in 1942 and didn't outrank Fletcher, which would have been semi ridiculous and extremely problematic.

You're right, I was confusing Crace and Crutchley. Sorry about that.

[Steen Ammentorp]

Percival is most certainly there--his face & cap (w/Red bands) is visible just above the head of Lt-Adm Helfrich of the RNN.

Yes - I stand correct, he is indeed in the back ground of the photo