why was japan supreme in 41/42?

why did the japanese army and navy so completely kick the crap outta u.s. and british forces in the winter of 41/42?
on land in the air,at sea.singapore,luzon,everywhere a complete route....how was this possible?

 

1) Suprise.
2) Allies underestimated Japanese equipments and men.
3) Britain was fighting survival war in Europe, it didn't have much men and equipment to spare to far east.
4) USA wasn't at war until december 1941 and therefore its military power facing Japanese wasn't exatly 'at full strenght'.

Here some reasons to start with...

 

Notmi pretty much covered the reasons. Keep in mind that the air of invincibility didn't last long. By June '42 there was Midway and August -December '42 there was Guadalcanal both major victories from which Japan really never recovered.

 

The Japanese Navy was also better trained, overall, than the US Navy, and better equipped in certain areas, especially aviation. Air superiority was a key factor in the string of Japanese victories in 1941-42.

 

The Japanese gained valuable experience in air tactics--and ground--fighting against the Chinese beginning in 1936 or 37 if memory serves. This translated directly into a superbly seasoned corps of soldiers and army/naval aviators.
It certainly didn't hurt to possess a first class fighter like the A5M2 Zero. They were also committed to aerial torpedo attack tactics... and their destroyers' use of the "Long Lance" torpedos made them a force to be reckoned with in naval battles. In comparison, the USN torpedos were unreliable, and frequently did not explode on contact.
Their naval training and experience in night-fighting tactics put the US Navy and allied forces at a distinct disadvantage in those early days as well.
The only bright spot was that their small-arms were inferior--rifles, pistols, light and heavy machine-guns--and their tanks just plain sucked.
hehe.

Tim

 

With regard to their land campaigns, the Japanese made sure to work together with various local nationalistic and anti-colonial movements which gave them a fifth column inside the French, British and Dutch colonies in South Asia. The colonial occupant forces did not have the support of the local population.

 

The Zero was a fine fighter up to 1942 and in the hands of an experienced pilot. After that it was increasingly outclassed. I agree that the IJN emphasis on night fighting was a distinct advantage( as the battle of Savo Island illustrated). The US Navy torpedo fiasco was a disgrace and it took much effort and a shakeup in the Navy bureau of ordinance to get that fact recognized. People like Commander "Swede" Momsen and Admiral Lockwood can be credited with sorting out that problem. I think though that the primary reasons were best summed up by Notmi..surprise..lack of preparation..both temporary situations.

 

Look at it this way, in the late 30's the Jap Army was running through China and Manchuria. The US was playing guns carved out of lumber.

 

I beleive the only men who were at the Garrison of Hong Kong were Canadian because Churchill knew Hong Kong was a lost cause and the Canadians volunteered.

 

i belive ther were many anzak,indian and uk troops at singapoor as well ...the british had many huge guns and great fortifactions at singapoor,unfortunatly all these weapons were pointed out to sea...apparently the brits,like the french with their maginot line ,could forsee an enemy approaching only from one direction....

 

I believe that's a myth, the guns of Singapore could, with a certain amount of effort be turned to fire in land however they were primarily equipped for anti ship work and lacked HE shells.

The Japanese came very close to retreat due to supply line problems (always a big Japanese problem) with better defences it could have been turned into more of a fight. But as someone has pointed out Britain had an enemy a mere twenty odd miles away enemies on the other side of the world were less of a priority.