February 1932: The Other “Attack on Pearl Harbor”

When we think of Pearl Harbor, December 7, 1941, immediately comes to mind. However, nearly a decade earlier, on February 7, 1932, Pearl Harbor was the site of another significant event: a mock attack designed to test the harbor’s defenses. This event, known as “Fleet Problem #13,” revealed vulnerabilities that would later prove to be prophetic.

In the early 20th century, the United States was acutely aware of rising tensions with Japan. The War Department had formulated War Plan Orange, a strategic blueprint anticipating a possible conflict. Part of this preparation involved simulating an attack to test the military’s readiness and Pearl Harbor’s defenses.

Rear Admiral Harry E. Yarnell, an experienced aviator, led the exercise with a striking resemblance to the actual attack that would occur in 1941. Using 152 aircraft launched from two carriers, Yarnell orchestrated a surprise attack on Pearl Harbor. The drill emphasized the element of surprise, attacking on a Sunday morning to catch the defenses off guard, similar to the Japanese strategy years later.

Yarnell’s forces first targeted the airfields, crippling the American ability to mount an aerial counterattack. The mock raid achieved its objective, highlighting Pearl Harbor’s vulnerability. Despite Yarnell being declared the winner initially, his warnings were largely ignored, and the War Department downplayed the significance of his findings.

Yarnell’s simulation underscored several critical points:

1. Surprise Attack Timing: Conducting the attack on a Sunday morning when the harbor was less vigilant mirrored the actual attack’s timing.
2. Airfield Targeting: Disabling airfields to prevent a counterattack proved to be a crucial tactic.
3. Carrier-Based Aircraft: The use of aircraft carriers for launching the attack foreshadowed the methodology used by the Japanese.

Despite these insights, the War Department did not take adequate measures to bolster Pearl Harbor’s defenses. The 1932 drill’s findings were largely shelved, leaving Pearl Harbor susceptible to a similar, real-world attack.

The eerie similarity between the 1932 drill and the 1941 attack raises questions about whether the United States had foreknowledge of Japan’s plans. While it’s compelling to think the 1932 exercise served as a direct blueprint, it’s more plausible that the Japanese recognized and exploited the same vulnerabilities identified by Yarnell. The attack on Pearl Harbor was a well-planned strike, aligning closely with the predictions made by the 1932 drill.

Today, visitors to Pearl Harbor can explore the World War II Valor in the Pacific National Monument. This site offers a profound journey through history, commemorating the events of December 7, 1941, and honoring the lives lost. Memorials for the USS Arizona and USS Oklahoma provide a somber reminder of the attack’s impact and the importance of vigilance in military preparedness.

The 1932 mock attack on Pearl Harbor serves as a historical lesson in the importance of heeding warnings and continually assessing vulnerabilities. While often overshadowed by the devastating events of 1941, the 1932 drill remains a critical episode in understanding the lead-up to America’s involvement in World War II.

The February 1932 “attack” on Pearl Harbor, although a simulation, revealed crucial weaknesses that were unfortunately not addressed in time to prevent the tragedy of December 7, 1941. The insights from Rear Admiral Yarnell’s exercise underscore the importance of preparedness and the need to learn from military simulations. Pearl Harbor stands today not just as a memorial to those who perished, but also as a testament to the lessons learned from history—lessons that must never be forgotten.