Battle of the Eastern Solomons - Who won?

About six months or so ago I had read Eric Hammel's book Carrier Clash: The Invasion of Guadalcanal & The Battle of the Eastern Solomons August 1942. While I do not believe he made any mention as to who "won" the battle, I got the impression that Japan could say that tactically they won. While reading up on some stuff on the Internet, I noticed that several different websites called the battle an Allied Victory. So what was it. While the Enterprise was severely damaged the US carriers failed to make a strike on the Japanese Fleet carriers, though they sank the Ryujo and damaged a seaplane tender. I considered the battle based on what I read to be closer to a draw than anything. Indecision cost us such a great opportunity I can not consider this a victory.

Your thoughts?

 

I believe IJN technically "won" the night battles of 8/42. Overall they sunk more of our capitol ships in iron bottom sound.

 

The Japanese more or less won the battle, like they did in the Coral Sea, but it didn't give them a strategic advantage.

 

There was no clear victor, but but it was technically a US victory. The US sunk a light carrier, destroyer, light cruiser, and downed some 60 enemy aircraft while only loosing 20 planes and having one carrier damaged. The Battle also managed to delay Japanese reinforcements for a short time.

 

I think the loss of the USS Wasp and the USS Hornet are considered to be attributed to the Eastern Solomons losses.

 

Certainly not. The Battle of the Eastern Solomons took place on August 24-25 1942. The Wasp wasn't lost until September when in the early afternoon of September 15 1942 the Wasp flew off her fighters, but shortly afterwards was hit by three torpedoes fired by the Japanese submarine I-19. Two of the torpedoes struck her on the port side near the aviation gasoline tanks, while the third struck higher up and damaged the refulling system, which had already been ruptured. In less than an hour the order to abandon ship was given and she was finally finished off by the destroyer Lansdowne. The Hornet was lost in the Battle of the Santa Cruz Island occurring October 25-27 192. The Enterprise was the only ship which sustained heavy damaged during the Battle of th Eastern Solomons.

 

I realize that those losses had specific battle names, overall their losses were a part of the Guadalcanal campaign.

 

I was thinking of the night battles of Savo island on 8/9/42. We did win the battle of the eastern solomons.

"The Battle of the Eastern Solomons cost Fletcher 25 aircraft and 90 killed. In addition, Enterprise was badly damaged, but remained operable. For Nagumo, the engagement resulted in the loss of Ryujo, one light cruiser, a destroyer, a troop ship, and 75 aircraft. Japanese casualties numbered around 290 and included the loss of valuable aircrews. A tactical and strategic victory for the Allies, both commanders departed the area believing they had won a victory. While the battle had few long-term results, it did force the Japanese to bring reinforcements to Guadalcanal by destroyer which severely limited the equipment that could be transported to the island".

 

Right but I am pretty sure Mike is talking specifically about The Battle of the Eastern Solomons (August 24-25 1942)

 

Correct. Only the Battle of the Eastern Solomons in late August of 42.


I realize that Japan had lost more ships sunk than the Allied forces (I remember something about an Aussie ship being there), but not all battles are so cut and dry. The fact that there was some communications problems ended up with reports of the Japanese fleet carriers not being found, added with indecision on Fletcher's part in launching air strikes at known enemy forces in the area. The Heavily damaged seaplane tender was hit, IIRC (I'm at work at can't look in my book) by US aircraft launched only to clear the decks of the carriers when the Japanese air strike appeared on radar, by only six (IIRC) craft. Even then, none of those were direct hits but near misses (seaplane tenders are generally poorly armored). It was pure luck they even found it. The destroyer and troopship were both sunk by land based aircraft the next day, so I don't place it within the naval battle.

The fact that there was no long term advantage makes it even more difficult for me to consider this a strategic victory, but it is clear (at least in my eyes) that it was not a tactical victory, but closer to a draw.

 

Yes in the long run the battle is of almost no significance and it is hard to declare a victor. The Ryujo was an unsuccessful design anyway, the Japanese tried to put too much into a small hull and as a result the ship was top-heavy and had unsatisfactory aircraft handling arrangements because of the size and place of her two elevators. So I would say that it was a short term victory for the US in the few days following the battle as all it really did was delay the Japanese landing their forces, but in the long run it was no matter.

 

IMHO, part of why this could be considered a strategic allied victory was the Japanese loss of so many aircrews. Not enough to have immediate tactical issues, but just part of the slow unending process of attrition that the IJN could not afford.

 

Because Fletcher retired with Saratoga and Enterprise and conceded the field, it could have been a Japanese strategic victory. But, as usual, the Japanese failed to see the opportunity which had presented itself. The Japanese, IMO, once they ascertained that the US carriers had withdrawn, should have wheeled westward, fuel permitting, and struck Henderson Field the next day, perhaps in coordination with bombers from Rabaul. The next night, the battleships and cruisers should have been sent in to bombard the field. Again, fuel permitting, they should then have remained on station until Tanaka's transports landed the troops on Guadalcanal and withdrawn.

It's possible, however, that the Japanese did not have enough fuel in their warships to do this. I assume that Fletcher would have counterattacked with Wasp and Saratoga. The Japanese probably would have been at a disadvantage in that exchange because of the high aircraft losses they had suffered in the strike against Enterprise during the battle. But, in hindsight, since we know how the Guadalcanal campaign ultimately ended, it appears that it would have been worth the risk, as far as Japan is concerned, to be a little more aggressive in trying to neutralize and retake Henderson Field.

Because the results of the battle really didn't bring Japan any closer to retaking Guadalcanal, then I think it was an Allied victory.