Talk:Indian Ocean raid

message: It has been suggested that Japanese Raids into Indian Ocean be merged into this article or section.
The articles deal with the same subject and events- Vikrant Phadkay
I agree the articles should be merged. Rakeshsharma 00:50, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge

message: The results makes a number of claims/analysis which express an opinion. These should all have a citations from an attributable source, none more so than "and its occupation would have made the British position in India untenable".  --Philip Baird Shearer 18:35, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Results section

message: An episode that is missing here is an air attack on the Japanese carrier fleet by 9 British Bristol Blenheim bombers on April 9. No hits were scored, but what happened to the Blennheims is not entirely clear to me. The Tabular record of movement of the Japanese battleship Hiei from www.combinedfleet.com (probably constructed from mostly Japanese and American sources) states that five were lost to the combat air patrol of Zeroes:
9 April 1942:
At 0600, the Striking Force launches 91 "Val" dive-bombers and 41 "Zeke" fighters, led by Cdr Fuchida, to attack the British naval base at Trincomalee, Ceylon. They find the harbor empty, but wreck the base's facilities and shoot down nine planes. The HARUNA launches a "Dave" floatplane that spots an enemy carrier 65 miles south of the base. 
At 0900, the Striking Force launches 90 aircraft that sink the old light carrier HMS HERMES and the Australian destroyer HMAS VAMPIRE. Nagumo's aircraft also find and sink the corvette HMS HOLLYHOCK, depot ship HMS ATHELSTANE and the oiler BRITISH SERGEANT. 
During the day, nine of the Royal Air Force’s No. 11 Squadron’s Bristol "Blenheim" bombers attack Nagumo's Force. They score no hits and lose five of their number to the Striking Force's Combat Air Patrol "Zekes". BatDiv 3 and the Striking Force depart the Indian Ocean through the Straits of Malacca for Singapore. 
However a rather old book on the Pacific war I've read (that contained some myths and errors, but possibly used British sources) stated that the Japanese were so surprised that no Blennheims were lost.
Veljko Stevanovich 22. 7. 2007. 19:45 UTC+1
The official UK war history - War at Sea 1939-1945, by Roskill - says on page 28 of Vol II (available online at http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/UN/UK/UK-RN-II/UK-RN-II-1.html):
"Nine R.A.F. Blenheims of No. 11 Squadron - all we had to strike back with - took off to find the enemy; but they got no hits, and five of their number were lost."
Scartboy (talk) 18:59, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  RAF attack on the Japanese carrier force 

message: The entry as it is currently written says that the English claimed to have shot down 18 Japanese air craft but the Japanese only "admitted" to losing five. There could certainly have been confusion about both sides' losses back in 1942, and both sides could have claimed more kills than they scored while not admitting all of their own, but that was almost 70 years ago and there is no need now for propaganda claims one way or the other. Are the English records available to document the English losses? Are the Japanese records available to document the Japanese loses? Books have been published in recent years that use the day-by-day records of both sides to document these things in detail. Maybe one of you who has the information can provide that information. (71.22.47.232 (talk) 04:08, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Japanese air loses 

message: How about adding the amount of wounded/dead to the casualties and losses section, instead of just talking about planes and boats? GrimmC (talk) 17:38, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Losses section

message: The article states in the beginning that:
"The Japanese under Chūichi Nagumo compelled the Allied (largely Royal Navy) forces to retreat to East Africa, leaving the Japanese unopposed in the Indian Ocean."
Later on it refers to the Japanese "mastery of the Indian Ocean," etc.
What does that even mean? After the Indian Ocean Raids, the IJN carried out exactly zero major operations in the Indian Ocean. The British Eastern Fleet, meanwhile, carried out Operation Ironclad in May 1942, one month after the Indian Ocean Raids. The Indian Ocean was open to British shipping, not so to Japanese shipping.
These bizarre and nonsensical statements about Japanese mastery of the Indian Ocean run contrary to known facts and are unsupported by any facts, arguments, or scholarship. They should be stricken from the article.
216.214.188.112 (talk) 20:14, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Japanese unopposed in the Indian Ocean? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Indian Ocean raid. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120630044158/http://www.dutcheastindies.webs.com/nagumo.html to http://www.dutcheastindies.webs.com/nagumo.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:13, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Indian Ocean raid. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140810054947/http://www.journal.dnd.ca/vo7/no4/stuart-eng.asp to http://www.journal.dnd.ca/vo7/no4/stuart-eng.asp
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:12, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I don't think that the RN much bothered with characterizing their carriers as fleet, escort or whatever until they started design work on the Colossus and Majestic classes which they official designated as light fleet carriers. So I'm gonna remove light, escort or fleet from the article entirely.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 22:57, 9 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Good thinking on that; never crossed my mind to look there. I'll see the IP editor responds; if not, I'll change both of them to light carriers.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 03:27, 12 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Categorization of Hermes