Greatest admiral of all time

[RF]

I haven't seen the record of Yi Sun-shi.

Can you give us a record or references?

[lwd]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yi_Sun-sin
http://www.jadedragon.com/history/yisunshin.html
http://www.geocities.com/yi_sun_shin_adm/yisunshin.html
or any of the others at
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&sa=X ... in&spell=1

[RF]

This certainly an impressive record, and a commander who understood logistics and supply, and who also knew how to get the most out of his men. It would have been interesting to see what would have happened if he had been available to fight against the Japanese during the Sino-Japanese war of 1894-1895 or during the annexation of Korea in 1910.
However - I don't think he had as great a long term influence on history to the extent that Nelson did, as neither Korea or China went on to become great empires in the way Britain did, or indeed the Japanese ultimately did.

It would also have been interesting if he was in a later age, say the 1930's, and a senior Admiral in the IJN......

[Terje Langoy]

Admiral Sir John Arbuthnot "Jackie" Fisher

From the naval thesis "Speed is armour" he gave birth to the battlecruiser and by doing so, he won my vote. Just think of it, built to "outrun what they couldn't outgun, outgun what they couldn't outrun" and so forth give them an edge in both ends of the scale. There's of course no signs of superiority if running but chances to prevail despite inferiority are greatly increased. Greatest is a question of definition. This is my definition. And I really like battlecruisers.

[Vic Dale]

I personally voted for Nelson because of his ability to adapt to varying circumstance and knew how to spot and exploit an enemy's weakness; disposition of ships weather etc. To me he embodies the best qualities of a good admiral in that he was first a great seaman, a fighter and a leader. He could operate at strategic and tactical level equally well and he could switch between one and the other with ease.

I know too little of other Admirals too make useful judgement over many of them, but I would like to deal with a few who have been mentioned.

The most over looked admiral and one who did not get a mention is Jellicoe. He was a technician among naval strategists, commanding a fleet whose power could be decisive in a single day, if his enemy would stay and fight. He could also lose the war in a single day, if by his strategy he lost a large enough number of vessels. It was imperative that heavy force was brought to bear at precisely the correct point. For this Jellicoe laid his plans and exercised his fleet incessantly so as to be able to deploy quickly and wrong-foot his opponent. Not only did he cross Scheer's "T", he managed to place his fleet right across his path blocking his escape rout. Scheer was forced to perform a 'battle turn away' leaving his fleet in disarray, though not as bad as it would have been if he had not practiced this defensive maneouvre. The German fleet managed to slip through the British fleet during the night.

This great clash of force resulted in the German fleet being continually forced onto the defensive and although the Germans fought well and lost fewer ships and men than the British, any claim to victory must go to Jellicoe, because from that day the German fleet never again ventured out in force. His victory was won with relatively little noise and because of this, he does not get the recognition he is due. It was his opponent who was forced to leave the battlefield without a fight and in complete disarray.

Vic Dale

[RF]

At last, the first paragraph is something we can agree on Vic!

[irving1941]

My vote goes to Nimitz. Why everubody give so much to Yamamoto? His magnifocent plan for Pearl didn´t work. At Midway he lost big time with that supercomploicated nonsense plan of his. Why attack the Aleutinas at all while the important engagement was at Midway? Why to blame Nagumo? He could have threatened to resign if they didn´t let him have the personal command of Kido Butai. He had done the spoiled brat thing before to get his way... But Nimitz, Nimitz is the MAN all the way. Unlike the western front clowns the allied had and the theater actor MacArthur who didn´t accomplish anything until his strike at Inchon Nimitz was a fighter, was a planer, was cunning schemer. Midway is heavenly art on earth. Only Nelson beats that but Nelson is past time history of a dead empire. But Nimitz. With some Nimitz now and a Stonewall Jackson and, the exception, a Curtis L´May Korea, Vietnam and the Gulf could have been quite different all the way.
NIMITZ!!!!!!!!!

[RF]

On what basis are you claiming MacArthur was an actor and achieved nothing in WW2? This was an unjustified aside.

I have no doubts Nimitz was a very good planner and strategist. But many other commanders put into the same position as Nimitz would have adopted the same strategy. It doesn't make Nimitz the greatest, but still a very good commander.

[tnemelckram]

I cast my vote for De Ruyter. Nobody ever did more with less over such a wide area for so long (about one and a half decades).

Andrea Doria is the father. His son, Gain Andrea Doria, was at Lepanto. Since the two are not differentiated, a vote here is actually for two people's accomplishments over almost fifty years (1530-1580).

[Pr_Eugen]

IMHO,Isoroku Yamamoto...

[Bgile]

IMHO,Isoroku Yamamoto...

I thought a lot more of Adm. Yamamoto before reading Shattered Sword.

[Pr_Eugen]

IMHO,Isoroku Yamamoto...

I thought a lot more of Adm. Yamamoto before reading Shattered Sword.

The history is written by winners...

[lwd]

IMHO,Isoroku Yamamoto...

I thought a lot more of Adm. Yamamoto before reading Shattered Sword.

The history is written by winners...

However Shattered Sword relies heavily on Japanese records. Midway does rather offset any of his other operations.

[Pr_Eugen]

However Shattered Sword relies heavily on Japanese records. Midway does rather offset any of his other operations.

Always there is a probability that the necessary reports undertook only... For to the given situation.

[lwd]

However Shattered Sword relies heavily on Japanese records. Midway does rather offset any of his other operations.

Always there is a probability that the necessary reports undertook only... For to the given situation.

? I'm not at all sure by what you mean by this.

I have been thinking a bit more about this though. I'm not sure a strong case can be made for Yamamoto. I see 5 or perhaps 6 major ops under his control. Lets look at them:

1) Pearl Harbor - very successful but not particularly original and a success mostly because it caught the US by surprise. It also was an operation that if it worked would prevent the Japanesese from being able to implement their most widely accepted strategy at least within an acceptable time frame.
2) The Indian ocean raid - again very successful but an overwhelming force and not particularly original.
3) Coral Sea - While arguably a tactical victory for the Japanese they gave up their strategic objective as a consequence of this battle and lost CV power at a time when they couldn't aford it.
4) Midway - A flawed plan that resulted in Japan loosing its 4 top CVs. A disaster that more than offsets any one and perhaps all of the successes listed here.
5) The Gaudacanal Campaign - Another disaster for Japan. While they last about as many ships they simply couldn't aford to do so and they lost the cream of their naval air as well.
6) (Not sure whether or not this one should be included) The destruction of the British, US, and Dutch naval forces in the SW Pacific. Again an overwhelming force against an unprepared enemy.

Where in this is a case for greatest admiral? Part of Yamamoto's stature seams to come from how well he is portrayed in post war US histories.