Historic events that turned on luck (war, bomb, England, raids)

[bus man]

I was thinking about how, sometimes, important historic events hinge on some small, random bit of luck (either good or bad), and how the outcome might have been totally different were it not for that one piece of chance.

The one that comes to my mind was during the Battle of Midway in World War II. Dive bombers from the American carrier Enterprise were trying to find the Japanese carrier task force, but were heading in the wrong direction and had reached the limit of their search range without finding them. But then, at the point of having to give up and turn back for home, the squadron leader spotted the wake of a single ship, heading somewhere at great speed. The leader guessed that the ship must have been a liaison vessel between the different task forces, and was heading back towards their carriers. It was actually the destroyer Arashi, which had previously been detached from the carrier group to deal with the American submarine Nautilus and was at that moment racing to rejoin that group. But in any case, the dive bombers changed course to follow that ship . . . and sure enough, it led them to the Japanese carriers.

In the actual event, it was this very group of planes from the Enterprise that destroyed the carriers Akagi and Kaga. But if they hadn't chanced upon spotting the Arashi -- and for that matter, if the Nautilus hadn't attacked the Japanese fleet earlier in the morning, thus necessitating Arashi to hang back from the rest of the group in the first place -- those two carriers would have remained intact after the morning raids. (It seems reasonable to assume that Yorktown's planes would have still destroyed Soryu as they did IRL, with or without the concurrent attack from the Enterprise planes.) If the Enterprise planes had not found the carrier group and joined in the attack, the un-attacked Akagi and Kaga would have added their planes to those of Hiryu (which, IRL, was the sole surviving carrier from the morning raid) that subsequently attacked Yorktown. It seems plausible to conclude that the squadrons of three carriers (and not just one, as IRL) would have sunk Yorktown in one strike, and thus the follow-up strike would have probably damaged if not sunk both of our remaining carriers (instead of being sent against the damaged but still intact Yorktown again, as happened IRL). And thus, were it not for that little bit of luck in the Enterprise planes encountering the Arashi at just the right moment, the United States would have probably lost the Battle of Midway.

What other historical events can you think of where a little bit of luck played such an important role?

[Ummagumma]

Don't know if this can be called a "draw of luck" but the Battle of Hastings was lost by Harald due to a somewhat random action by his troops. They held the high ground and successfully resisted many attacks by the Normans, with another large body of Harald's troops just a day away. At one moment however after repealing yet another attack, some hot heads decided to chase the retreating Normans down the hill, breaking the shield wall and opening a gap that the Normans immediately exploited. If this pretty random event didn't happen, the Normans would never take England, the Hundred Years War would never happen, and the whole history of Europe would be different.

[Grandstander]

Originally Posted by Ummagumma

Don't know if this can be called a "draw of luck" but the Battle of Hastings was lost by Harald due to a somewhat random action by his troops. They held the high ground and successfully resisted many attacks by the Normans, with another large body of Harald's troops just a day away. At one moment however after repealing yet another attack, some hot heads decided to chase the retreating Normans down the hill, breaking the shield wall and opening a gap that the Normans immediately exploited. If this pretty random event didn't happen, the Normans would never take England, the Hundred Years War would never happen, and the whole history of Europe would be different.

My understanding is that William designed the feigned retreat with the specific purpose of drawing pursuit and creating gaps in the shield wall. If falling for a trick is bad luck, then this was bad luck.

[Ummagumma]

Originally Posted by Grandstander

My understanding is that William designed the feigned retreat with the specific purpose of drawing pursuit and creating gaps in the shield wall. If falling for a trick is bad luck, then this was bad luck.

This is indeed one theory, but I've seen arguments against it.

There were many waves of Norman attack on the Saxon shieldwall throughout the day - if I recall correctly the battle started early in the morning and lasted until dusk. And each unsuccessful attack ended in a retreat.

The first line in Harald's shieldwall at Hastings was not the fyrd but the much more experienced, elite housecarls. It's unlikely that they would not attack the real retreats throughout the very long battle yet would suddenly become so gullible and fall to the feigned ones by the end of the day. A likely explanation was that the retreat was real but chasing the retreating Normans down the hill was a grave mistake that provided Wilhelm the opportunity to strike. AFAIK the only source talking about the "feigned" retreats was the "official" one, the Chronicles written by the Wilhelm's chaplain. A "feigned" retreat sounds so much better than "our troops ran and were chased and then we saw an opportunity".