Trent Telenko Profile picture
Jun 14, 2021 25 tweets 12 min read Read on X
This thread is another visit into the pyrrhic victory known as Operation Iceberg, the Apr 1945 invasion of Okinawa.

This thread is based on my Aug 2013 Chicagoboyz column "Technological Surprise & the Defeat of the 193rd Tank Battalion at Kakuzu Ridge"
chicagoboyz.net/archives/38455…
1/ XXIVth Corps 19 April 1945 situation map showing the 27th InThis is the wreck of a M4 Sherman tank on the approaches to
On 19 April 1945, the US Army’s 27th Inf Div launched an attack against the Kakuza Ridge position held by the 32nd Army on Okinawa with the 193rd Tank Btn's 30 tanks, S.P. assault guns, and attached armored flame throwers from the 713th Flame Tank Btn.
2/ This is a 713th Flame Tank Battalion M4 Sherman rebuilt as a
When the battle was over, 22 of the 30 AFV had been destroyed in a coordinated ambush by Japanese AT- guns, artillery, mortars & suicide close assault teams. Among the dead was the commander of the 193rd, on whom blame was laid for attacking without infantry in close support.
3/ This is a detailed Fire Plan Map of the Imperial Japanese ArThe commander of the 193rd TB had a great deal of faith in tThis is the description of the Sherman "backscratcher&q
After the catastrophe at Kakuzu Ridge, th 193rd TB was effectively disbanded & their remaining tanks were used as replacements by other US Army TBs.

This battle is referenced in most narrative account of Okinawa as proof of the tougher defenses US soldiers and marines
4/ Mines are not your friend.
...would face in an invasion of Japan.

It turns out that while this particular narrative has a great deal of truth, it isn’t the whole truth

Reversing Churchill, this narrative has a huge lie buried in a bodyguard of truth.
5/
The most important truth of this battle was that US troops suffered a technological surprise. The IJA were listening to the SCR-300, SCR-500 and SCR-600 series FM radios of US infantry, tanks and artillery forward observers at Kakuzu Ridge (& other battles through out the
6/
Pacific in 1945) with Japanese Type 94 (1934) Mark 6 walkie-talkie radio that was issued to every IJA Inf. btn.

US tanks were equipped with FM radios & their operators were told the IJA didn't have any FM gear & took no security precautions.
n-mmra.net/radio/94-6/94-…
7/
The poor performance of the 193rd Tank Btn on Okinawa at Kakuzu Ridge could be easily explained if that were the case.

So, serious charges require serious proof. Where's the proof?

"Show me the money!"

8/
This is the transcript of the 2005 PBS Show “Victory in the Pacific” that includes an interview of an Okinawan Student Conscript Katsuo Nagata who carried 10kg suicide bombs to Kakazu Ridge the night before the failed 193rd Tank Battalion/105th Infantry Regiment attack.
9/
So, the night before the 193rd TB's attack, the IJA independent 272th Inf Regt. knew US tanks were coming, check.

Where is the proof the IJA was using it's Type 94 (1934) Mark 6 walkie-talkie radio to monitor & exploit US Army radio communications?
10/
First let look at IJA radio via History of Technical Intelligence SWPA 1942 - 1945 Pg 90

"Lt Ford found that the Japanese type 97 portable wireless telephone set could receive signals clearly from US frequency modulated SCR-610 & SCR-300 sets at distances of 2300
11/
...to 3000 yards. This was important, as messages in the past had frequently been sent in the clear on these two sets. The 41st Division Signal officer, the G-2, and the Division artillery were given this information."

The capabilities of the type 94 walkie-talkie radio were
12/
...noticed in Luzon as well.

Intelligence bulletin. Vol III, No 12, Aug 1945 issue, noted that:

JAP WALKIE-TALKIE
Tests conducted with four Japanese Type 94 (1934) Mark 6 radios on Luzon reveal that it is possible for this amplitude modulated set to

cgsc.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/compoundob…
13/
...communicate with both the U. S. SCR-610 and SCR-608 FM sets. A small two-unit set of the Walkie-Talkie design, the Type 94 Mark 6 is standard equipment within the Japanese infantry battalion.

Results, of the tests show that the enemy sets operate satisfactorily with the

14/
...SCR-610 within a range of 1/4 to 1 & 1/2 miles, and with the SCR-608 within a range of 1/2 to 4 & 1/2 miles"

The article also detailed how to covert & maintain the IJA Walkie-Talkie with US Army batteries & vacuum tubes!

15/
So, the IJA had both radio means (link) & the motives. How do you prove the IJA about used its opportunities?

To understand this, you need to become familiar with the US Army vs USMC naming conventions for M4 Sherman main armament flame tanks.

lonesentry.com/manuals/handbo…

16/
The USMC called it's Iwo Jima M4 Sherman main armament flame tanks "C.B. Mk-1" AKA Construction Battalion Mark One.

Over the radio it was simply "Mark One"

17/
The US Army Chemical Warfare Service used a complicated designation that was more abused than used. It runs as follows:
Flamethrower, mechanized, main armament, CWS-POA "75" H1-H2

CWS - (see above)
POA - Pacific Ocean Area
"75" H-1 - See CB-H-1 Gun
H-2 - See fuel tanks
18/
Now we turn to IJA General Mitsuru Ushijima (same man both uniforms)

Ushijima issued 32D ARMY COMBAT DIRECTIVE No. 13. Which was captured, translated and reprinted in “Information on Japanese Defensive Installations and Tactics”, ARMY WAR COLL CARLISLE BARRACKS PA.
20/
Ushijima directive (see text clips) came out after the US landings but before Marines used flame tanks in Southern Okinawa.

The 10th Army & XXIVth Corps Army units never called flame tanks "Mark One's"

So where was Ushijima getting "M-1" in DIRECTIVE No. 13 ?

21/
The only answer that works is that the IJA garrison on Iwo Jima heard USMC tank crew in the clear over their FM radios. Then the garrison there passed that information to Japan.

After reviewing IJA GHQ passed the intelligence to Gen Ushijima's 32nd Army staff.
22/
This brings up very difficult historical questions for the last year of the Pacific War starting with Navajo code talkers at Iwo Jima.

While they were a safe code there...

...they were not EVERY CODE at Iwo Jima.

23/
How many US Marine infantry attacks were anticipated by Lieut. Gen. Tadamichi Kuribayashi's garrison because they were listening to USMC tankers talking in the clear on FM radios they thought secure?
24/
No historical research on the last 12 months of ground warfare in the Pacific War that uses official American military histories can be relied upon. Extensive primary research on both any surviving Japanese and American military documents must be done with the idea
25/
...that low level American FM radio communications could and were monitored. Only then can you select items from the official histories for use.

“Trust, but verify” applies as much to military history as it does to nuclear arms control treaties.
/End

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Trent Telenko

Trent Telenko Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @TrentTelenko

Aug 19
I've gotten a lot of comments on this thread here and via DM. I'm going to share one from a Cold War gray beard on the engine that powers the FP-5.

"FP-5 is around 4 x Tomahawk in mass.

FP-5 Engine🧵
...With a similar configuration, drag will not be dominated by lift induced wing drag but will form drag which is typical for 500 knots air speed jets and missiles with low aspect ratio wings.

2/
...So a rule of thumb estimate is that you will need around 4 x the thrust of a Tomahawk F107-WR-402 700 lbf (3.1 kN) engine for an FP-5 Flamingo GLCM.

3/
Read 7 tweets
Aug 19
Slowly, with a lot of notice, Trump is morphing into Pres. Biden

This territorial concession malarkey is exactly what the Biden Administration was playing games with in Nov 2021 via an op-ed by Samuel Charap of RAND in the Nov 19, 2021 Politico.

1/
That Op-Ed advocated, in effect, that the US abandon Ukraine to Russia in exchange for other concessions by Russia, greenlighting Russia's invasion of Ukraine.

It was understood in Nov. 2021 era DC that Charap...


2/rand.org/pubs/commentar…
...was Jake Sullivan's totem animal for surfacing ideas of "de-escalation" with Russia.

Former Estonian President Ilves and Prof Stephan Blank utterly shredded the Charap/Sullivan thought balloon.

Seeing Trump revive that Charap/Sullivan thought ballon now is sickening🤮

3/3 Image
Read 4 tweets
Aug 18
The issue for Russia with the FP-5 is that its range makes Russian national air defense practically impossible.

Ukraine can reach facilities on the other side of the Urals and north to Murmansk with the FP-5.

Once Ukrainian drones overwhelm a border SAM battery sector.

1/ Image
FP-5's sent through the drone peak saturation area can 'squirt through into a great empty' low at high subsonic speeds.

Only an AWACS with late production SU-30 with look down/shoot down PESA radars can deal with them.

H/T @DrnBmbr
2/ Image
Furthermore, FP-5's are going to have electronic counter measures (ECM) and counter-countermeasures (ECCM) installed as standard.

The FP-5 will have at least a 24 element CRPA element layout to beat GPS jamming...

3/
Read 5 tweets
Aug 12
Pres Zelenskyy of Ukraine just made an interesting statement:

"Let me give an example from yesterday, roughly like this: the Russians suffer about a thousand losses per day — that’s 500 killed and 500 wounded.

1/
I’m not even counting the 10 prisoners and so on. More precisely, 968 losses for Russia: 531 killed, 428 wounded, and 9 captured.

We had 340 losses in one day: 18 killed, 243 wounded, and 79 missing in action," he said."

2/
500 Russian KIA versus 18 Ukrainian KIA is a 29.5 to one ratio in favor of Ukraine.

Total Russian casualties of 1,000 versus 340 Ukrainian is a 2.9 to one ratio in favor of Ukraine.

3/
Read 5 tweets
Aug 12
Actually, the Soviet Union in the "Great Patriotic War" did suffer worse casualties and win.

It is that fact which powers the "Russian WW2 exceptionalism" myth that Putin used to zombify Russians over 20 years to make suicidal assaults over and over again.

1/
I said something like what Chuck just said about Russian casualties in July 2024.

Chuck now, like I did then, underestimates how powerful cultural conditioning is in making armies able to take horrific losses and continue.

2/
As long a Putin's propaganda keeps Russians believing they are winning by taking miniscule slivers of Ukrainian land.

The Russians will keep coming.

It doesn't mean Russia will win. It means Russia is paying a disproportionate blood debt which will have to be paid.

3/
Read 17 tweets
Aug 11
The map below underlines a real innumeracy issue with lots of Western analysts of Ukraine's OWA drone strategic bombing campaign.

BLUF: 40,000/52 weeks is ~769 Ukrainian OWA drones launched a week on average for the whole year.

Ukrainian OWA Drone🧵
1/
Historic war mobilization production curves are heavily back loaded.

That is, the production rates of B-17's and B-24's bombers in the 3rd quarter of 1943 versus the 3rd quarter of 1944 showed a much higher production rate in late 1944.

2/ Image
Image
We are mid-way through the 3rd quarter of the 2025 where Ukraine's OWA drone annual production goal was 40,000.

Ukraine should be around 850-950 OWA drones a week in August 2025 and will be close to 1,200 a week in the 4th qtr. of the 2025.

3/
Read 5 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(