Chicago Boyz

                 
 
 
 
What Are Chicago Boyz Readers Reading?
 

Recommended Photo Store
 
Buy Through Our Amazon Link or Banner to Support This Blog
 
 
 
  •   Enter your email to be notified of new posts:
  •   Problem? Question?
  •   Contact Authors:

  • CB Twitter Feed
  • Lex's Tweets
  • Jonathan's Tweets
  • Blog Posts (RSS 2.0)
  • Blog Posts (Atom 0.3)
  • Incoming Links
  • Recent Comments

    • Loading...
  • Authors

  • Notable Discussions

  • Recent Posts

  • Blogroll

  • Categories

  • Archives

  • History Friday: Unit Conversion Error in the Pacific War

    Posted by Trent Telenko on April 4th, 2014 (All posts by )

    In previous History Friday columns and comments I have laid out that a great deal of the institutional and academic histories we have of the Pacific Theater of World War 2 are deeply flawed. These flaws are from both the post WW2 political and budget agendas of those governmental institutions and from the lack of understanding of the significant on-the-ground details by more recent academic and general histories.

    Following that theme, this week’s Pacific War History Friday column is the first of several that will deal with the concept of “engineering measurement unit conversion error” as it applied to the fighting in World War 2’s Pacific theater. By “engineering measurement unit conversion error” I mean problems similar to the one that destroyed the 1999 NASA Mars Climate Orbiter. NASA engineers missed an English system to metric system measurement unit conversion which caused the Orbiter to be lost. See this article “The Quick 6: Six Unit Conversion Disasters” for that and other examples.

    What does the 1999 NASA Mars Climate Orbiter have to do with the Pacific Theater of WW2?  Quite a lot, as it turns out!

    What does the 1999 NASA Mars Climate Orbiter have to do with the Pacific Theater of WW2? Quite a lot, as it turns out!

    It turns out that there were two major “engineering measurement unit conversion error” issues between the US Army and US Navy that affected Radar, gunnery and general topographic map making between the US Military services in the Pacific.

    The first issue was that the US Navy used nautical miles while the US Army used statute miles. The way this issue was dealt with was to give performance in a unit of measure both services could agree too — namely yards – for gun performance and for Radars involved with naval fire control, anti-aircraft and coast artillery.

    See Joint Chiefs of Staff document: “U.S. Radar – Operational Characteristics of Radar Classified by Tactical Application” FTP 217, 1 Aug 1943.

    This inter-service cooperation on gunnery and Radar directed gunnery lead to impressive amphibious gunfire support and air targeting plans like this one from Pelilu in 1944 —

    A common, grid coordinate based, fire support map used used by US air, sea and ground forces in the 1944 invasion of Peleliu.

    The problem with this Solomon like dividing of the baby was that this did not help US Navy and US Army units out in the field with other types of Radar that didn’t have their ranges converted to yards. One of the US Navy ARGUS Radar units war diaries I read made the point that the US Army designed and built SCR-270 Radars it used had calibrated range dials in statute miles, and per US Navy procedure it had to report to Naval fighter directors ranges and speeds in Nautical miles!

    This passage is from ACTION REPORT OF ARGUS 21 AT KWAJALEIN, 1 FEBRUARY- 29 FEBRUARY 1944 —

    The fact that the range dial of the 270 D is calibrated in statute miles makes it necessary to use some sort of conversion to get range in nautical miles. It is mandatory that ranges be given in nautical miles due to fact that Navy and Marine air speed indicators read in knots and Fleet doctrine prescribes nautical miles.

    US Army SCR-270 Radar used at Pearl Harbor and through out the Pacific War by Army, Navy and Marine Radar detachments.

    US Army SCR-270 Radar used at Pearl Harbor and through out the Pacific War by US Army, Navy and Marine Radar detachments.

    ARGUS 21 dealt with this issue by recalibrating the SCR-270 radar pulse timing to get a 1.15 increase in range to get the calibrated dial to show nautical miles rather than statute miles. This timing change also increased the minimum range of the Radar by the same amount, but let it report data in US Navy standard data format.

    That “US Navy standard data format” brings up the second major “engineering measurement unit conversion error” problem in the Pacific. The issue of reporting data in Polar versus Cartesian/Grid coordinates. The US Navy had used Polar coordinates for reporting Radar data for reasons of naval tactics in screening capital ships from torpedo attack by enemy Destroyers. When it moved on to using radar to direct fighters against incoming enemy raids, it continued the practice.

    An Example of a US Naval Plotting Board from a 1950 Radar Manual

    An Example of a US Naval Plotting Board from a 1950 Radar Manual

    The US Army used grids on maps for conducting indirect artillery fire. The US Army learned this from the British Army in World War One and expanded upon it in the interwar period and both the US Marines and US Naval surface forces used the same system (See Peleliu figure above). When the Royal Air Force adopted the same grid system for fighter direction in the Battle of Britain, the US Army Air Force copied it after Pearl Harbor.

    RAF Plotting Room with grid-coordinate reporting filter and operations maps.

    An RAF Plotting Room with grid-coordinate reporting filter and operations maps.

    And then used it through out the Pacific War including in the Solomons Campaign of 1942-1944. See photo below —

    Members of the Signal Corps using radar plotting board as an aircraft warning information center at 1st Island Command Headquarters, Noumea, New Caledonia -- <em>Original Signal Corps Caption  </em>

    Members of the Signal Corps using radar plotting board as an aircraft warning information center at 1st Island Command Headquarters, Noumea, New Caledonia Original Signal Corps Caption

    This US Army versus US Navy clash in Radar fighter direction data reporting paradigms was a major factors in both the Northern Solomon’s and Okinawa campaigns, which will be the subject of future columns.

    Notes and Sources:

    Mars Climate Orbiter links —
    edition.cnn.com/TECH/space/9909/30/mars.metric.02/
    http://mentalfloss.com/article/25845/quick-6-six-unit-conversion-disasters
    http://www.funnyjunk.com/funny_pictures/4591481/Nasa+Lost+125+millon/

    Military —

    ACTION REPORT OF ARGUS 21 AT KWAJALEIN, 1 FEBRUARY- 29 FEBRUARY 1944

    COMINCH P-013, RADAR BULLETIN NO. 6 (RADSIX), CIC MANUAL, UNITED STATES FLEET, HEADQUARTERS OF THE COMMANDER IN CHIEF
    http://www.history.navy.mil/library/online/cicmanual.htm

    “U.S. Radar – Operational Characteristics of Radar Classified by Tactical Application” FTP 217, 1 Aug 1943 http://www.history.navy.mil/library/online/radar.htm#contents

     

    6 Responses to “History Friday: Unit Conversion Error in the Pacific War”

    1. dearieme Says:

      A friend told me once of a problem with Royal Navy gunnery support for the army. The conversion between naval and military methods was performed by an officer who was ill, and checked by an officer who was incompetent. The consequence was that they shelled a church.

    2. MikeK Says:

      The Gimli Glider was a spectacular example of units of measure being messed up.

    3. MikeK Says:

      The Wiki article is probably a better version of the Gimli Glider story.

    4. RonaldF Says:

      I have frequently heard stories of radar being knocked out during landings due to the big guns. Tarawa lost almost all communication, supposedly due to shell concussion. Were there other reasons for this?

    5. Trent Telenko Says:

      RonaldF,

      This depends on the Radar and the bombardment.

      Vacuum tube electronics were delicate for the most part and Radar required both high power and complicated design with tight tolerances.

      Wartime design efforts changed the delicacy of vacuum tube electronics.

      Witness the proximity fuze, which was a disposable Radar unit fired through a anti-aircraft gun or field artillery at 10,000(+)gees.

      Japanese Radar was not very good over all, with a few exceptions, and their vacuum tube electronics were the worst of the major powers.

      However, the Japanese by the time of Okinawa became very skilled at camouflaging Radar sites from US Navy and USAAF photo reconnaissance.

      One was only found when it was over run by ground troops and a second required triangulation from US Navy radar intercept gear for a close range oblique photo mission to identify it for naval gunfire to destroy.

    6. Carolina Says:

      Great post, why not to switch to one single measurement unit? Why double standards for everything, even I get into trouble when buying something from abroad and it is in cm or meters. I think everyone should just switch to another standard.

    Leave a Reply

    Comments Policy:  By commenting here you acknowledge that you have read the Chicago Boyz blog Comments Policy, which is posted under the comment entry box below, and agree to its terms.

    A real-time preview of your comment will appear under the comment entry box below.

    Comments Policy

    Chicago Boyz values reader contributions and invites you to comment as long as you accept a few stipulations:

    1) Chicago Boyz authors tend to share a broad outlook on issues but there is no party or company line. Each of us decides what to write and how to respond to comments on his own posts. Occasionally one or another of us will delete a comment as off-topic, excessively rude or otherwise unproductive. You may think that we deleted your comment unjustly, and you may be right, but it is usually best if you can accept it and move on.

    2) If you post a comment and it doesn't show up it was probably blocked by our spam filter. We batch-delete spam comments, typically in the morning. If you email us promptly at we may be able to retrieve and publish your comment.

    3) You may use common HTML tags (italic, bold, etc.). Please use the "href" tag to post long URLs. The spam filter tends to block comments that contain multiple URLs. If you want to post multiple URLs you should either spread them across multiple comments or email us so that we can make sure that your comment gets posted.

    4) This blog is private property. The First Amendment does not apply. We have no obligation to publish your comments, follow your instructions or indulge your arguments. If you are unwilling to operate within these loose constraints you should probably start your own blog and leave us alone.

    5) Comments made on the Chicago Boyz blog are solely the responsibility of the commenter. No comment on any post on Chicago Boyz is to be taken as a statement from or by any contributor to Chicago Boyz, the Chicago Boyz blog, its administrators or owners. Chicago Boyz and its contributors, administrators and owners, by permitting comments, do not thereby endorse any claim or opinion or statement made by any commenter, nor do they represent that any claim or statement made in any comment is true. Further, Chicago Boyz and its contributors, administrators and owners expressly reject and disclaim any association with any comment which suggests any threat of bodily harm to any person, including without limitation any elected official.

    6) Commenters may not post content that infringes intellectual property rights. Comments that violate this rule are subject to deletion or editing to remove the infringing content. Commenters who repeatedly violate this rule may be banned from further commenting on Chicago Boyz. See our DMCA policy for more information.