Pohl sounded energetic, yet the conditions attached to fleet operations made meaningful action unlikely. The submarine campaign was outside his immediate operational control, while fleet sorties could be excused whenever weather, screening, readiness, or another prerequisite failed. Only two advances occurred in February and March and four in April and May, illustrating the gap between assertive presentation and operational tempo. The criticism is institutional as well as personal because the plan made responsibility for failure easy to shift elsewhere.
Notable Point · 33:18-35:19
A plan structured to claim success and deflect failure
Pohl's policies projected action while distributing responsibility so success enhanced his reputation and failure could be blamed on implementation or conditions.