Just wanted to link this thread from earlier today which touches on a real event. That being the malfunction of the O2 system in Dick Best's SBD, which would sideline him after the battle and end his naval career when fumes reacted with a latent case of TB.

https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/dvsidw/richard_bestoxygen_tanks_in_wwii/

I have read slightly conflicting narratives about Midway. One has it that the ongoing attacks from land based aircraft, and then the doomed torpedo bombers from the US carriers, kept the Japanese fleet from launching their retaliatory strikes until the dive bombers showed up and devastated them. The second emphasizes that US carrier based aircraft were unable to organize their launches to achieve a doctrinal coordinated attack and that the arrival of the dive bombers was a freak accident. What is your view, or are they both right?

Was it only American Vs Japanese forces, or did any other countries take part in the battle?

For many years, the American impression of the battle was that US dive-bombers struck the Japanese carriers just as they were preparing to launch a strike, with bombs landing among the strike force spotted on deck. Where does this idea come from?

Did the Japanese actually capture American pilots and execute any? I looked into the battle before and I am honestly disappointed by the rather glaring errors in this movie.

Has the historiography around signals intelligence / code breaking and the Battle of Midway changed much in recent years?

I feel like the popular consensus for a while at least was that since the US broke Japanese codes (and used stuff like the uncoded "Midway is low on water" trick), that it gave the Americans an edge to the point of them pretty much always being the likely victors in the battle and the Japanese plans as being almost pointless. Is this taking things way too far? Has new research (especially into Japanese documents) changed views much?

I was disappointed in the 2019 movie "Midway" in that it glossed over RADM Spruance's role in the battle.

It is my understanding that the IJN officers who were interviewed post battle/war almost universally praised RADM Spruance's battle tactics.

Is that correct and can anyone provide some source material?

Thanks in advance

I'm interested in the historical memory of the conflict. Does the new film correspond to a specific representation of the battle in popular culture? Has the view remained the same since Midway (1976)?

Did submarines play any role before, during, or after the battle, such as for reconnaissance, harassment, or chase duties?

Shattered Sword professes to overturn established narratives of the battle. Has it come under any criticism for overstepping its bounds?

I was wondering what happened to Japanese survivors of the battle in its immediate aftermath, that is to say, pilots who had to ditch their aircraft due to the destruction of their carriers, as well as sailors who went overboard either voluntarily or due to impact blasts? Did Japanese support ships have time and opportunity to collect these men?

Please confirm what I heard before that one reason the Japanese carriers were sunk is because of their damage control procedures and their carrier design. My understanding is that in the IJN, that damage control was specialized and that their damage control parties were wiped out in the initial explosions such that the fires blazed out of control causing the carriers to sink. In the US Navy, all hands are trained in damage control. Also, the IJN, did not have armored decks nor did they purge the av gas in their plane fuel tanks so that once the fires started they could not be brought under control. In the US Navy, I understand it is practice to purge the fuel lines and replace the fuel with inert gas during operations. This is great, thanks!

Has the relatively recent discoveries of Kaga and Akagi changed or contributed to what we know, or has it simply been too soon to know? Similarly, did the finding of Yorktown in 1998 provide any new information?

Did American naval tactics shift after the battle because of certain successes and failures that occured in the battle, or did they continue to operate much in the same way as they had during the battle?

To what extent was the outcome of the battle the result of 'unforced errors' on Japan's part vs superior American resources and other factors?

Did float planes launched from cruisers play any role in the battle? Did they cooperate closely with carrier based aircraft?

So I remember once reading the Wikipedia article on the battle and it sounded like there was a lot of amateur hour on both sides, with lack of coordination between ships, fighters, bombers, etc and lots of bumbling and luck.

How then did it turn out to be so important and decisive?

I've heard a fair many passing references to how the movie was not accurate. I don't doubt inaccuracy... it's a Hollywood movie!

There are damn near zero explanations of why that is the case, though. And that is spectacularly unhelpful.

I have no doubt the movie is inaccurate. I want to know how it is inaccurate.

Is there a recommended summary of all the events during the battle? Perhaps a previous thread in this sub, or a youtube video that is particularly good and up to date?

What is the most historically accurate video game to replicate this and other naval battles within the pacific theater of WWII?