The surprising fall of Singapore

Discussions on WW2 in the Pacific and the Sino-Japanese War.
Post Reply
User avatar
Zaf1
Member
Posts: 758
Joined: 16 Aug 2009, 16:01
Location: Kota Bharu, Malaysia

The surprising fall of Singapore

#1

Post by Zaf1 » 20 Jul 2010, 12:48

Hi

The fortress Singapore fell to the Japanese in 70 days. The British were certainly surprised how quiclky it fell. The Japanese I think estimated that it might take 100 days to fall. Was the Japanese also was surprised that it fell so quickly?

Regards

Zaf

cstunts
Member
Posts: 607
Joined: 17 Aug 2006, 05:45
Location: USA

Re: The surprising fall of Singapore

#2

Post by cstunts » 20 Jul 2010, 17:38

Hi Zaf,

Yamashita was given 100 days (mid-March '42, roughly) to complete the campaign against Malaya/Singapore, and accomplished this in conserably less time. The causes for this catastrophe are well-documented, but according to everything I've seen, the Japanese knew full well how weak British pre-war plans were, and how vulnerable Singapore was...Perhaps both the British and Japanese were surprised at how rapidly the campaign ended, but in the long run both also knew it was a foregone conclusion.


User avatar
Peter H
Member
Posts: 28628
Joined: 30 Dec 2002, 14:18
Location: Australia

Re: The surprising fall of Singapore

#3

Post by Peter H » 20 Jul 2010, 23:53

In fact Yamashita was never happy with the Japanese advance although it ended up averaging 12 miles a day.He had also forgone deploying the four divisions initially offered him(only 3 were used,I think the fourth,the 21st Division,was then kept as a Southern Army reserve) to speed things up----less men,less road congestion,less supply holdups etc.

Pushing the Japanese air umbrella in Malaya south speedily was also the key---the swift capture of air bases,fuel oil supplies etc meant Japanese air units got in quickly,moved quickly and provided an air support(strafing,bombing) that made it hard for the British to concerntrate or move entire units effectively into blocking positions.

User avatar
Zaf1
Member
Posts: 758
Joined: 16 Aug 2009, 16:01
Location: Kota Bharu, Malaysia

Re: The surprising fall of Singapore

#4

Post by Zaf1 » 21 Jul 2010, 13:26

Hi,

I think the British already knew that Singapore was ill-defended when the war in Europe began. One of the COS Appreciation report stating this was sent to Singapore by the S.S. Automedon ship but en route it was captured by a German Hilfskreuzer (auxiliary cruiser) Atlantis (Schiff 16) and the German skipper Captain Berhard Rogge gave it to the Japanese commanders. This might have been very influential to the Japanese commanders.

The 25th Army contained more infantry divisions (5th,18th, Imp Gds and the 56th- which didn't participate) and tank regiments for capturing Singapore than the rest of the Southern Army groups.

What's surprising also was the Japanese troops were on the verge of running out of ammunition in Singapore when the British unexpected conveyed the message that they wanted to surrender. Yamashita was relieved and decided to persuade Percival to surrender as soon as possible, which he did.

Fatboy Coxy
Member
Posts: 872
Joined: 26 Jul 2009, 17:14
Location: Essex, UK

Re: The surprising fall of Singapore

#5

Post by Fatboy Coxy » 21 Jul 2010, 20:58

A big surprise to the Japanese was the large number of Allied troops captured in Singapore, they didn't realise there were so many!

Your right about the Japanese running short of artillery rounds, but you have to remember Yamashita had changed the plans at the begining of the campaign. Originally he was going to capture North Malaya, and then rest and resupply, but having got the British on the run so successfully, decided to continue to push, and keep them running.

Steve
Regards
Fatboy Coxy

Currently writing https://www.alternatehistory.com/forum/ ... if.521982/

User avatar
Peter H
Member
Posts: 28628
Joined: 30 Dec 2002, 14:18
Location: Australia

Re: The surprising fall of Singapore

#6

Post by Peter H » 22 Jul 2010, 11:39

Homma got canned for the Philippines campaign being way over schedule.The resistance at Bataan etc drew the fighting out.Obviously the British in Malaya did not have the luxury of such a position---basically uninhabited,compact and with secure sea flanks.

Its said that Churchill pledged that Singapore would be the equivalent of the Soviet bastion at Sebastopol(the seige there occurring at the same time) but this was not to be so.I think popular resistance in a siege situation holds better when your own people are both manning the battlements and are in the rear.The colonial nature of the Singapore experience meant basically Europeans defending the Asian populace from the Japanese but I don't think both groups saw it as a be all to end all battle.The Europeans weren't defending their home ground and parents,womenhood and children,the majority of Asians did not have their own sons in the frontline.

SVaaka
Member
Posts: 298
Joined: 23 May 2007, 16:50
Location: Finland

Re: The surprising fall of Singapore

#7

Post by SVaaka » 22 Jul 2010, 13:24

Would be intresting to know the captured armament in Singapore, numbers and so cause obviously they had there also fieldartillery.

User avatar
Zaf1
Member
Posts: 758
Joined: 16 Aug 2009, 16:01
Location: Kota Bharu, Malaysia

Re: The surprising fall of Singapore

#8

Post by Zaf1 » 22 Jul 2010, 15:58

Hi Peter,

You are right about the lack of locals in this battle. The local soldiers were some Malay soldiers which was highly praised by Percival and some of the local volunteer force were almost completely forgotten although they played considerable part in it.

I met some one who lives not to far from my home. We talked about WW2 and I showed him the relics I found at the battlefield where the Japanese landed at Kota Bharu beach on 8 December 1941. He told me seeing these wartime relics bring a lot of the memory of his father who fought in that war. His father was then a captain in the Perak local defence, part of the British army at Lenggong and when the Japanese invaded Kota Bharu he took part in the mini- 'Operation Matador' as part of Krohcol. The Krohcol force had advanced into southern Thailand to go to Pattani where the Japanese also landed. His force crossed the border and halted at Betong to go to 'The Ledge' when he saw a sea of Japanese soldiers riding bicycles. The Australian forces with them had turned and retreated back to Kroh. He and a few men had no choice but to surrender. This caused him to dislike the action of British soldiers.

They were later sent to Burma on the Death Railway but he and a dozen others managed to swim away on the river. Only 2 survived to arrive back home in Malaya. His family was surprised to see him still alive although almost unrecognizable with having long beards. The Japanese later found him and tortured him such as the water treatment where his stomach was pumped with water and the Japanese jumped on it. He was later released. He and his family moved elsewhere and met a family whom they were very closed like a family. He continued resistance with sending wireless radio signal from top of his roof. He then met a British resistance force under Dobree of Force 136 at Bukit Chermin. Dobree was his former employer at the government department he used to work before the war. However the family he met whom he was closed with somehow informed the Japanese of his activity. He was captured again and tortured again. He was hung up with ropes tied not to his hands but to his thumbs, then the Japanese beat him with bamboo rods. He was later blinded and was slotted to be beheaded. His wife and family gathered to read Quran and say final prayers for him. Later a Japanese officer came and told his family that the Japanese had surrendered after atomic bombs killed many of his people. He was saved by the atom bomb.

He was later awarded OBE or Order of the British Empire. He used to show his scars on his back from Japanese beating with bamboo rods. Later in his life he just couldn't buy anything made by Japanese including cars because of the trauma of his ordeal. I think it's worthwhile to remember all those unsung warriors such as this person

Regards

Zaf
Last edited by Zaf1 on 22 Jul 2010, 16:08, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Zaf1
Member
Posts: 758
Joined: 16 Aug 2009, 16:01
Location: Kota Bharu, Malaysia

Re: The surprising fall of Singapore

#9

Post by Zaf1 » 22 Jul 2010, 16:04

SVaaka,

There are still some British artillery pieces mostly in Singapore and some in Penang at fortress fixed defence sites since the British relied on these big guns, some big 15-inch guns for defences. Some captured field guns were used later by the Japanese.

Regards

Zaf

cstunts
Member
Posts: 607
Joined: 17 Aug 2006, 05:45
Location: USA

Re: The surprising fall of Singapore

#10

Post by cstunts » 22 Jul 2010, 16:26

Hello,

The Japanese kept surprisingly precise and thorough accounts of all captured Allied weapons--both at Singapore, of course, and later on Java.
Anything they could not repair or utilize was to be used as scrap, due to their chronic shortage of metals.

FWIW

SVaaka
Member
Posts: 298
Joined: 23 May 2007, 16:50
Location: Finland

Re: The surprising fall of Singapore

#11

Post by SVaaka » 22 Jul 2010, 17:42

Coastal artillery is not the issue - info of them is easily found, but artillery like aa-guns, fieldartillery, mortars and at-guns. This is rather intresting, cause anyway the defenceline betweem Singapore-island and mainland was not too wide. So it would be nice to know what sort of arms and how many had Singapore garrison in use prior Japanese attack. Incase there were some 30-50000 troops in Singapore, rough 3 div - I suppose thay had also some artillery support?

Fatboy Coxy
Member
Posts: 872
Joined: 26 Jul 2009, 17:14
Location: Essex, UK

Re: The surprising fall of Singapore

#12

Post by Fatboy Coxy » 22 Jul 2010, 20:35

Hi SVaaka

a good document detailing what artillery the Japanese captured in Singapore and Java can be found here

http://cgsc.cdmhost.com/cdm4/item_viewe ... 1#metajump

It details the plans of what the Japanese intended to do with these weapons, but I don't know how well they followed the plan.

Steve
Regards
Fatboy Coxy

Currently writing https://www.alternatehistory.com/forum/ ... if.521982/

User avatar
Peter H
Member
Posts: 28628
Joined: 30 Dec 2002, 14:18
Location: Australia

Re: The surprising fall of Singapore

#13

Post by Peter H » 22 Jul 2010, 21:56

The Americans refered to the four large coastal guns at Tarawa as the 'Singapore guns' but later research shows these were ex-IJN battleship Vickers guns from around 1904.

SVaaka
Member
Posts: 298
Joined: 23 May 2007, 16:50
Location: Finland

Re: The surprising fall of Singapore

#14

Post by SVaaka » 23 Jul 2010, 01:39

Hi Steve, Thank you very much for this fabulous info. This confirms my personal thoughts why Singapore and Malaya was lost. It didn´t have anything to do with lack of troops, lack of food or water - all these came afterwards - as we can see certainly not because lack of armament. British seem to have moore material on Singapore than finnish army when The Winter War started - and they lost the battle. I think main reason for this was plain and simply - lack of spirit to fight. Plenty of AA, reasonable number of good artillery supported by good number of mortars and enough Antitan-guns. Truth is that they had fight or part of the troops had fight trough Malay, but not all. There is one key element in winning the battles and it is the will to win and certainly good leaders which british did not have.

Carl Schwamberger
Host - Allied sections
Posts: 10055
Joined: 02 Sep 2006, 21:31
Location: USA

Re: The surprising fall of Singapore

#15

Post by Carl Schwamberger » 23 Jul 2010, 03:17

SVaaka wrote:... and certainly good leaders which british did not have.
As they say in the management consulting business: "The fish rots from the head first".

Post Reply

Return to “WW2 in the Pacific & Asia”