Yeah, the Navy had an absolute compulsion verging on total obsession with mounting light and medium AA on any unoccupied horizontal surface on pretty much any hull with a pennant number on it. :D
I love that Ryan took what some would consider a "toy" and made it a tool for a curator to use to explain the history of his charge. Keep up the great work.
One of the main reasons I love this channel is……. Not because I’m a Navy man……. Although I am endlessly interested in naval history because in a very real way it is the history of the world It’s because of my man Ryan’s hair!?!?! Ryan doesn’t do the pomp and flash. He goes on camera dirty, hair goin crazy just to dump his massive knowledge of the artifact he is in charge of on all of us. Ryan is not the centerpiece of the channel…… He’s just the narrator, it’s awesome!!!! Thank you Ryan!
What a brilliant episode. The acid test of a great curator, is the ability to tell stories about their collections in ways that people interested. Been hooked on your channel for a while. Well done Libby for making a star out of Ryan.
Cobi probably created the model to make sales. They have an "If enough of you want it then it will happen" approach to sales. Get their things on pre order because they double in price once public.
Those models are very impressive. Love the way you can adapt them to the period correct configuration by just simply swapping out pieces. Perfect for exactly how you demonstrated them!
Honestly, the best way to get a feel for or visualize how any of the Iowa's looked in their WW2 configuration is to take a short road trip over to the USS Massachusetts's or down to the USS North Carolina or Alabama. While not as large as the Iowa's, the North Carolina's and South Dakota's had a somewhat similar deck layout. As in it is very easy to see the subtle evolutions of the Fast Battleships, and they all mostly got what the others got. regardless of specific class. But the 3 museum ships that I mentioned never were refit or went back into service after WW2. So they are still in their late WW2 configurations.
One proposal that I've seen for improving the Iowa-class AA performance is the so-called "King-Nimitz" redesign. The story goes that King and Nimitz (or their staffs) got together to review the performance of various classes of ships in the Navy. They came up with a rough drawing of an Iowa with the secondary armament layout of a late war heavy cruiser, centerline 5"/38 twin fore and aft, with the remaining 8 5" mounts in roughly the same positions as they actually are. The 40mm mounts are also reorganized for clearer firing arcs. All of the 20mm mounts are twins in this proposal. I thought the proposal also included the deletion of all or most of the armored conning tower, but I'm not certain if that's the case. These changes were significant enough that they could only be applied to Illinois and Kentucky, since they were still under construction. Ryan did a video on this topic on May 24, 2021.
That's correct on every arcade however the war was pretty much concluded at that point in the end the Iowa's were a compromise design in both arms and Armament speed and architecture especially in room for electronics radar that such thing redundancies and backups I think the napkin story is true I think Ernest King and Chester Nimitz both wanted to improve the Iowa's if they had the chance when that lunch or dinner or whatever it was they had knowledge of the atomic ordinance being developed but to be fair nobody really knew if the Japanese would surrender when we take that for granted as of the current date. But to be fair the war could have continued for another 6 months year or two I think it would have gone on at least into 1946 had we not drop the atomic bomb Kentucky and Illinois would have been finished eventually by then certainly Kentucky if not Illinois even though Kentucky's construction started after Illinois it didn't have as Many suspensions and Kentucky was basically complete up to the second deck my mother's father served on the USS North Carolina during the war he was an engine man and my dad's old man he was Marine Raider Pacific island campaign they would concur with that commanders and strategists and captains were never satisfied with aa firing arcs. But given how ship architecture works you can only maximize it to a certain extent I am of the opinion you can never have too many arms or armaments on a ship but if the USS Indianapolis is any example you can overload a warship of any kind I completely agree with you JB I believe the conning Towers were mostly at this point proven not to Be an Effective asset anymore it wasn't like the Great War and Naval Wars before ships just weren't engaging each other at close range anymore and even if you're in the county Tower it takes a direct hit from a comparable Salvo you're going to be jelly from the concussion blast so that was something they had to reprioritize USS West Virginia had hers deleted when they updated her superstructure so that didn't impede her fighting ability at all yet is in the pipeline.. I don't believe they would have augmented the existing for Iowa's though if they were going to implement this upgrade it would have been on successive designs ships bb65 and BB 66 for sure estimates for the conversion that Admiral Nimitz and Admiral King had outlined would have taken what I've read anywhere between 4 months to the better part of a year to implement but it's hard to say I don't think we'll ever really know the road not taken I think once the ships left Dry Dock architectural changes were never going to happen unless the ships were catastrophically damaged and had to be brought in for a yard period That's something that we do see had Hood not been destroyed at the hands of Bismarck that would have absolutely been the case for a retrofit had she survived her engagement but she did not she suffered the same fate as all other battle Cruisers when going up against a traditional battleship in an alternate timeline somewhere Illinois and Kentucky were completed along the retrofit outlined by Admiral King and they were impressive
@@jonathanjones3623 Keep in mind, Japan was bingo on fuel(with exactly 0 production available) while tied to the pier, much less underway. The war could not have continued as an actual war.
@@Grimmwoldds I understand what you're saying but just because they were practically out of oil reserves didn't mean the war could not have gone on there are plenty of conflicts that endure and continue regardless of petroleum products I mean the Viet Cong didn't really have a Navy to speak of other than a small hodgepodge of littoral combat vessels brown Water Navy if you will They carried on the war against the United States for better part of a decade that's when they say the Vietnamization of Japan is basically what would have occurred had the Japanese not surrendered I think the Japanese would have carried on the fight had they not surrendered fuel or not I would still consider that to be a war even when one side exhausts one resource or element or another. My father's father was a marine during World War II and there were plenty of occasions that he told me of Japanese combatants after they ran out of ammo literally soared knives taking their empty rifles with their bayonets and charging anyway still combat capable if not combat effective I think that dedication while on the battlefield can serve you well long-term worked against them when we develop the atomic bomb The Japanese had proven to be absolutely ruthless and ferocious and was just another reason why Truman authorized the historical mission of dropping the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki and I know he was grateful that the war was brought to an end when it was
@@jonathanjones3623 Vietnam was a proxy war. No relevance here. We're talking about an isolated island nation with no ability to operate a navy or air force, no petroleum to operate their vehicles, a starving population due to food production and distribution systems breaking down, an already smashed industrial base with many of the workers having been killed or displaced away from industrial production areas, total exhaustion of the "warrior" supply to conscript, and a high command that was losing it's most competent officers to "defeatism"(actually realism). Their only option was surrender after Guadalcanal. They were spending their navy at the battles of the Philippine Sea and Leyte Gulf, knowing they were about to become completely useless and the war was unwinnable. Once the American navy controlled the coastline(not to mention a unbelievably vast submarine fleet), their population became defenseless targets. There was no way for them to conduct a war, only get pounded until they ceased to exist.
@@Grimmwoldds proxy war large scale conflict relatively speaking doesn't matter Al-Qaeda has demonstrated quite definitively as of recently and the ground forces in the ongoing war in Ukraine that as long as you have capable foot traffic men and women willing to take up a rifle and fight or any blunt instrument for that matter the working carry on I disagree with you on that matter it is perfectly relevant an island nation with an Able Body population can wage some effective resistance whether it's coordinated effective or not the Japanese were a devoted people to their way of life the emperor and we're quite content to make any and every effort to stop the American forces from coming on to their Shores and soil. You are absolutely correct about food production stockpiles reserves resources they were diminished and out you're saying they're only option was surrender that's not the case surrender was not a a guaranteed certainty and I know this because I have been to Japan and I have spoken to a few World War II veterans from the Japanese camp death and service of one's cause was hardly something they didn't contemplate civilian Soldier or otherwise it was expected and anticipated and ingrained in Bushido To get pounded until they cease to exist as you put it with something they were perfectly contend and ready to do which is why Truman opted for the atomic bomb to coerce them into the idea that that was a practical application Mizuki Tano was a soldier I spoke to who actually fought in the battle of pelalu, i did field exercises with his great grandson and company, I take his word for it I'm sure there was some demoralized fatigue soldiers absolutely but if it was the case as you say with no give or take then why didn't they already sue for peace they had no plans to unless the emperor in their military High command decreed as such I take exception to people saying that the wars conclusions were for Granted and they were not, nobody in 1945 until after the atomic bombs were dropped new for certainty that Japan was surrender there's some people that take issue the fact that we wanted to have them make an unconditional surrender or that the Soviet Union was a truly fearsome terrifying Force for the Japanese To be certain sir I think they were there were some that were terrified at the prospect of the Soviets entering the war not from a combat perspective but the idea that the Soviets would incorporate Japanese territory into their personal territory I am often a big proponent that the atomic bomb was necessary to drive home for the living the war was over But the same fighting spirit that galvanized and enabled the United States to emerge victorious in the war was the same Warrior spirit of in the face of overwhelming odds who gives a rat's ass about the odds when the survival of One's Own society that stake one's way of life after speaking to Mr Tano I can guarantee you there was not defeatism in every Arena many were prepared to fight till The Bitter End and would have done so without any hesitation or qualm And like Its my take that being said Vietnam does have a relevance because it was that contingency that World War II commanders wanted to avoid it's the reason why Robert E Lee during the Civil War surrendered With Honor further resistance would not have achieved results or success and what happened in Vietnam could have been the case with Japan very easily. How we got mired in the environment in Vietnam could have very easily been the case in the Japanese home Islands easily and I will have to take exception and disagree with you whether it's full scale conflict or a proxy war we dropped more ordinance in Vietnam than we did the entire second World, War is War and with 17 years of service in the Air Force I can tell you Bloodshed is bloodshed Ideologies backed up by faith can be quite compelling and as long as I was still breathing and my heart was still beating and I have my weapon in my hand I would have always continued to persevere and Soldier on and in the end I'm grateful that the war ended when it did lives were spared and the world to get back to some semblance of normal
Dad had several uncles that served in WWII. None that I know of served in the Navy. He tried to get into the Navy after graduation ('60 or '61) to shoot the big guns. Denied for hearing issues. WWII was still an interest for him ... and after living with him for almost 20 years ... for me. You're doing a great job here. Thank you.
First thing that popped into my mind reading this title was the scene in Aladdin when the (Robin Williams) Genie is pointing out the emergency exits on the flying carpet. "Here, here, here, here... EVERYWHERE!"
The way to decide if the Anti-Aircraft system need additional modification would be to plot all the cones of fire of the existing anti-aircraft positions to see where the least barrel could be brought to bear on a threat.
I don't recall any mention of the "suicide circle" located on the fantail, just aft of turret # 3; I served on BB63 50-51. When I came aboard in Sasebo, Japan and until we returned to Norfolk in May '51 there were about 10 single mount 20mm arranged in a semi circle, behind armor plating about waist high. These were left overs from WWII and the kamikaze attacks on naval ships, but were removed during the overhaul at Norfolk. The crane was still there but the spotter planes had been removed.
Better question. What happened to the guns? Were they scrapped? Repurposed to other ships? Turned into displays? Or, are they preserved in a warehouse somewhere?
oh dear watched this curator and NJ for years and now I see I had not subscribed and rung the bell ! Good job google for keep feeding me his videos anyway ;) I fixed the error now.
man if ever an over the bow shot, muzzle blast from the first main gun turret would be terrifying if you're manning the position immediately forward of it.
To improve the ship's AA, either 1) replace the sixteen-inch turrets with about ten 5"/38 mounts each, or 2) modify a sixteen-inch mount to give it higher elevation, and then develop a sixteen-inch AA round. I figure a single such round would wipe out an entire enemy formation with a single shot.
2 questions I have- what are the pros and cons of 20 vs 40 mm, and why did they alternate between even and odd numbers of guns? Shouldn't there of been the same number of guns port and starboard, thus an even number?
Additional .50 calibre machine guns were fitted to ships serving in the Pacific, as an extra anti-aircraft defence. It was not uncommon to have up to 24 .50 calibre Brownings mounted on each side of the ship's superstructure..... One of these Iowa class ships ( I can't recall which one) still has a large dent on it's side at virtually deck level, caused by a kamikaze hitting it at that point.
I think the short answer to the title question is - Anyway there is space under the sky. Basically WWII warships of any country of any size bristled with them. On WWII carriers of any country, AA guns were mounted beside and below the flight deck, as well as fore and aft, and on the island. I know as I've built enough of the models in 1/600 and 1/700 scale. Those tiny m*thaf*****s were a pain to assemble and to glue.
Certainly upgrading the 40mm to Mk-33s would have been a major upgrade. I was a Gunner on Mk-33s in the 90s when the US Navy was still using them very heavily, especially on amphibious and supply ships such as LPHs and LCCs. I often wonder if they had been upgraded - which, if any, would have been retained in the 80s refit. would they have kept at least the bow and stern pairs. The 20mm was a light weight gun with limited range. by the end of the war it was nicknamed the "door knocker" because its main effect was as an extra pair of eyes showing the 40mm directors where a close threat was for them to aim at. I think fewer mounts, all twin would have freed up space for more 40mm, perhaps each side aft of the #3 turret, instead of the 20mm farm arrayed there. Another pair could have been mounted on the main deck abreast the aft fire control in-place of the 20mm mounts there and tied to the same director as those above them.
The Mark 22 doesn't get completed until late. The Mark 26 then obviously even later. So it seems realistically that only increasing the 40MM was really the only thing available until late 44-45.
Have there ever been any plans/ideas floated to replace the 5"/38 guns with newer gun systems on the Iowa-class? Like perhaps replacing them with 5"/54 Mark 45 or even the 76mm OTO-Melara during the 80's recomissioning?
That was talked about. The problem is that the modern 5" and 3" gun mounts extend through the deck and cutting through the armor would have taken too long and added too much cost to the initial refit. Had the Iowas remained in service in the 90s, a more complete refit had been proposed that would have added 5"/54 twins like the Montanas were going to use. The Midways had these guns in single mounts. The tricky part was whether or not the ammunition would make it past the turns in the hoists.
With all these AA positions everywhere, I've always wondered what the men who man them did when the 16" guns were fired. Did they temporarily run indoors, then run back to their guns? Or did they just duck and cover and stick their fingers in their ears?
Mostly along the best lines of sight but definitively what makes that hard is because the ships were built in batches of two at a time and a different yards the Navy was constantly taking things off putting things on so I think Ryan touched upon it in another video somewhere. But definitively it's anybody's gas and one spot is good as the next I think the longevity of anti-aircraft platforms with guns instead of missiles was already on borrowed time World War II was the last conflict where you had propeller driven airplanes after that it would be Jets so I don't know escorts to protect the carriers from engagements from other surface ship and nominal air power. I would say they did that pretty well but the Iowa specifically and their siblings did provide effective anti-aircraft fire and denied the enemy the ability to use their own ordinance but technology flew past them it's one of the reasons why all the AA batteries were eventually removed after the war but during they were indispensable and effective that being said it just seems like the 40 millimeter bofors are just so destructively more effective I get the 20 mm auroraelicans are more numerous more compact easier to use by comparison the amount of training to use the 20 mm as opposed to the 40 is considerably less as well. But I think the 20 mm was already on its way out before the war even started more effective than the M2 Browning by every stretch of the imagination though I've read from Sailors accounts they hated servicing the 20 mm because of how tight all the tolerances were the 40 mm was a much more simplistic design from a maintenance perspective still I would have had a few M2 brownings capped on the station just for those instances where you could have had boarding action
@@tomhenry897 yeah I believe it's ian McCallum on there it's been a while I may have seen it but that's correct in metric terms I think a 50 caliber machine gun is a 12.7 MM projectile so the 20 mm significantly bigger by an increment or two LOL would be better suited for shooting down aircraft my mother's father from his time on the USS North Carolina was always telling me that the M2 ma Deuces were always easier to clean and perform maintenance than the 20 mm guys used to draw straws according to him on who had to break the damn thing down he didn't have to worry about it too much he was an engine man on the North Carolina so he didn't see too much action up on the decks when combat were in play but if they ever needed an extra set of hands he never hesitated I miss him I see these videos reminds me of the heroic effort that they all did for the greater good
By the time NJ was sent to the pacific, most air attackers would have already released the bombs or torpedos by the time they got int range of the 20MM. Get rid if most if the 20MM mounts, replace them with twin or quad bofors 40MM. Late war, once the VT fuze has been battle tested and found to be super effective, replace the quad 40s with open mount 3 inch or 5 inch guns, as topweight was getting to be an issue. Keep a few twin 20MM mounts scattered around, primarily as antiboat defense. This would have been very important to defend against the kamikaze boats that japan was building in vast numbers near the end of the war. Those would have been a big threat if the invasion of the main islands had not been mooted by the A-bombing. I don't recall how well understood AA defense effectiveness of the VT fuse would have been at the time, nor do I know if the USN knew about the kamikaze boat threat prior to invasion of Okinawa. so a bit of 20/20 hindsight.
I think Mr Ryan from this point forward. 👉 Is going to use his new model every chance he can. Lol 😆 it is perfect to create a 3d model in our own heads.
If all the sea was that'll go on in a modern context or if the funding is available all the sea Rams in the world see Rams are basically anti-air missile launchers they can fit in pretty much anywhere a 40 mm gun position can too turning Battleship New Jersey into the world's first medium range anti-air missile battery for Gatling garage platform
I would replace as many 20 km as possible with single or twin 40mms. It would give you a longer range and heavier hitting gun. Or reach out to the British for their 6 barrel 20mm mount.
I sure you've been ask, but have you talked to the World of Warahips game people? I play a ton of this game. I have the Iowa & the Missouri, which are the only two they have released in the game so far. Maybe get ahold of them some how, and offer what you know. Seems like you have a lot of knowledge for them.
I think it might be faster and easier to mention where the AA guns were not located on Battleship New Jersey.
I don't think they put any in the admiral's head. Otherwise, ...
Ooh! I know this one! Inside the armored Citadel.
Yeah, the Navy had an absolute compulsion verging on total obsession with mounting light and medium AA on any unoccupied horizontal surface on pretty much any hull with a pennant number on it. :D
Immediately thought of Drachinifel and his "How many guns did American warships have? All of them."
Just about everything you can fit on there including the kitchen sink and a tuning fork LOL
I love that Ryan took what some would consider a "toy" and made it a tool for a curator to use to explain the history of his charge. Keep up the great work.
Well, they are 1:300 models. They are meant to be decoration
One of the main reasons I love this channel is…….
Not because I’m a Navy man…….
Although I am endlessly interested in naval history because in a very real way it is the history of the world
It’s because of my man Ryan’s hair!?!?!
Ryan doesn’t do the pomp and flash. He goes on camera dirty, hair goin crazy just to dump his massive knowledge of the artifact he is in charge of on all of us.
Ryan is not the centerpiece of the channel……
He’s just the narrator, it’s awesome!!!!
Thank you Ryan!
The reason I started watching this channel was because of Ryan. I thought whose this guy whose just got out of bed to do a video.
What a brilliant episode. The acid test of a great curator, is the ability to tell stories about their collections in ways that people interested. Been hooked on your channel for a while. Well done Libby for making a star out of Ryan.
I love these videos where you use models to explain things. Would love to see some of the other more strictly to-scale models that the battleship has.
I think it’s really cool that Cobi sent him the set to review. That’s how you know they care
Cobi probably created the model to make sales.
They have an "If enough of you want it then it will happen" approach to sales.
Get their things on pre order because they double in price once public.
Those models are very impressive. Love the way you can adapt them to the period correct configuration by just simply swapping out pieces. Perfect for exactly how you demonstrated them!
Honestly, the best way to get a feel for or visualize how any of the Iowa's looked in their WW2 configuration is to take a short road trip over to the USS Massachusetts's or down to the USS North Carolina or Alabama. While not as large as the Iowa's, the North Carolina's and South Dakota's had a somewhat similar deck layout. As in it is very easy to see the subtle evolutions of the Fast Battleships, and they all mostly got what the others got. regardless of specific class. But the 3 museum ships that I mentioned never were refit or went back into service after WW2. So they are still in their late WW2 configurations.
One proposal that I've seen for improving the Iowa-class AA performance is the so-called "King-Nimitz" redesign. The story goes that King and Nimitz (or their staffs) got together to review the performance of various classes of ships in the Navy. They came up with a rough drawing of an Iowa with the secondary armament layout of a late war heavy cruiser, centerline 5"/38 twin fore and aft, with the remaining 8 5" mounts in roughly the same positions as they actually are. The 40mm mounts are also reorganized for clearer firing arcs. All of the 20mm mounts are twins in this proposal. I thought the proposal also included the deletion of all or most of the armored conning tower, but I'm not certain if that's the case. These changes were significant enough that they could only be applied to Illinois and Kentucky, since they were still under construction. Ryan did a video on this topic on May 24, 2021.
That's correct on every arcade however the war was pretty much concluded at that point in the end the Iowa's were a compromise design in both arms and Armament speed and architecture especially in room for electronics radar that such thing redundancies and backups I think the napkin story is true I think Ernest King and Chester Nimitz both wanted to improve the Iowa's if they had the chance when that lunch or dinner or whatever it was they had knowledge of the atomic ordinance being developed but to be fair nobody really knew if the Japanese would surrender when we take that for granted as of the current date.
But to be fair the war could have continued for another 6 months year or two I think it would have gone on at least into 1946 had we not drop the atomic bomb Kentucky and Illinois would have been finished eventually by then certainly Kentucky if not Illinois even though Kentucky's construction started after Illinois it didn't have as Many suspensions and Kentucky was basically complete up to the second deck my mother's father served on the USS North Carolina during the war he was an engine man and my dad's old man he was Marine Raider Pacific island campaign they would concur with that commanders and strategists and captains were never satisfied with aa firing arcs.
But given how ship architecture works you can only maximize it to a certain extent I am of the opinion you can never have too many arms or armaments on a ship but if the USS Indianapolis is any example you can overload a warship of any kind I completely agree with you JB I believe the conning Towers were mostly at this point proven not to Be an Effective asset anymore it wasn't like the Great War and Naval Wars before ships just weren't engaging each other at close range anymore and even if you're in the county Tower it takes a direct hit from a comparable Salvo you're going to be jelly from the concussion blast so that was something they had to reprioritize USS West Virginia had hers deleted when they updated her superstructure so that didn't impede her fighting ability at all yet is in the pipeline..
I don't believe they would have augmented the existing for Iowa's though if they were going to implement this upgrade it would have been on successive designs ships bb65 and BB 66 for sure estimates for the conversion that Admiral Nimitz and Admiral King had outlined would have taken what I've read anywhere between 4 months to the better part of a year to implement but it's hard to say I don't think we'll ever really know the road not taken I think once the ships left Dry Dock architectural changes were never going to happen unless the ships were catastrophically damaged and had to be brought in for a yard period
That's something that we do see had Hood not been destroyed at the hands of Bismarck that would have absolutely been the case for a retrofit had she survived her engagement but she did not she suffered the same fate as all other battle Cruisers when going up against a traditional battleship in an alternate timeline somewhere Illinois and Kentucky were completed along the retrofit outlined by Admiral King and they were impressive
@@jonathanjones3623 Keep in mind, Japan was bingo on fuel(with exactly 0 production available) while tied to the pier, much less underway. The war could not have continued as an actual war.
@@Grimmwoldds I understand what you're saying but just because they were practically out of oil reserves didn't mean the war could not have gone on there are plenty of conflicts that endure and continue regardless of petroleum products I mean the Viet Cong didn't really have a Navy to speak of other than a small hodgepodge of littoral combat vessels brown Water Navy if you will
They carried on the war against the United States for better part of a decade that's when they say the Vietnamization of Japan is basically what would have occurred had the Japanese not surrendered I think the Japanese would have carried on the fight had they not surrendered fuel or not I would still consider that to be a war even when one side exhausts one resource or element or another.
My father's father was a marine during World War II and there were plenty of occasions that he told me of Japanese combatants after they ran out of ammo literally soared knives taking their empty rifles with their bayonets and charging anyway still combat capable if not combat effective I think that dedication while on the battlefield can serve you well long-term worked against them when we develop the atomic bomb
The Japanese had proven to be absolutely ruthless and ferocious and was just another reason why Truman authorized the historical mission of dropping the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki and I know he was grateful that the war was brought to an end when it was
@@jonathanjones3623 Vietnam was a proxy war. No relevance here.
We're talking about an isolated island nation with no ability to operate a navy or air force, no petroleum to operate their vehicles, a starving population due to food production and distribution systems breaking down, an already smashed industrial base with many of the workers having been killed or displaced away from industrial production areas, total exhaustion of the "warrior" supply to conscript, and a high command that was losing it's most competent officers to "defeatism"(actually realism).
Their only option was surrender after Guadalcanal. They were spending their navy at the battles of the Philippine Sea and Leyte Gulf, knowing they were about to become completely useless and the war was unwinnable. Once the American navy controlled the coastline(not to mention a unbelievably vast submarine fleet), their population became defenseless targets. There was no way for them to conduct a war, only get pounded until they ceased to exist.
@@Grimmwoldds proxy war large scale conflict relatively speaking doesn't matter Al-Qaeda has demonstrated quite definitively as of recently and the ground forces in the ongoing war in Ukraine that as long as you have capable foot traffic men and women willing to take up a rifle and fight or any blunt instrument for that matter the working carry on
I disagree with you on that matter it is perfectly relevant an island nation with an Able Body population can wage some effective resistance whether it's coordinated effective or not the Japanese were a devoted people to their way of life the emperor and we're quite content to make any and every effort to stop the American forces from coming on to their Shores and soil.
You are absolutely correct about food production stockpiles reserves resources they were diminished and out you're saying they're only option was surrender that's not the case surrender was not a a guaranteed certainty and I know this because I have been to Japan and I have spoken to a few World War II veterans from the Japanese camp death and service of one's cause was hardly something they didn't contemplate civilian Soldier or otherwise it was expected and anticipated and ingrained in Bushido
To get pounded until they cease to exist as you put it with something they were perfectly contend and ready to do which is why Truman opted for the atomic bomb to coerce them into the idea that that was a practical application Mizuki Tano was a soldier I spoke to who actually fought in the battle of pelalu, i did field exercises with his great grandson and company, I take his word for it I'm sure there was some demoralized fatigue soldiers absolutely but if it was the case as you say with no give or take then why didn't they already sue for peace they had no plans to unless the emperor in their military High command decreed as such
I take exception to people saying that the wars conclusions were for Granted and they were not, nobody in 1945 until after the atomic bombs were dropped new for certainty that Japan was surrender there's some people that take issue the fact that we wanted to have them make an unconditional surrender or that the Soviet Union was a truly fearsome terrifying Force for the Japanese
To be certain sir I think they were there were some that were terrified at the prospect of the Soviets entering the war not from a combat perspective but the idea that the Soviets would incorporate Japanese territory into their personal territory I am often a big proponent that the atomic bomb was necessary to drive home for the living the war was over
But the same fighting spirit that galvanized and enabled the United States to emerge victorious in the war was the same Warrior spirit of in the face of overwhelming odds who gives a rat's ass about the odds when the survival of One's Own society that stake one's way of life after speaking to Mr Tano I can guarantee you there was not defeatism in every Arena many were prepared to fight till The Bitter End and would have done so without any hesitation or qualm
And like Its my take that being said Vietnam does have a relevance because it was that contingency that World War II commanders wanted to avoid it's the reason why Robert E Lee during the Civil War surrendered With Honor further resistance would not have achieved results or success and what happened in Vietnam could have been the case with Japan very easily.
How we got mired in the environment in Vietnam could have very easily been the case in the Japanese home Islands easily and I will have to take exception and disagree with you whether it's full scale conflict or a proxy war we dropped more ordinance in Vietnam than we did the entire second World, War is War and with 17 years of service in the Air Force I can tell you Bloodshed is bloodshed
Ideologies backed up by faith can be quite compelling and as long as I was still breathing and my heart was still beating and I have my weapon in my hand I would have always continued to persevere and Soldier on and in the end I'm grateful that the war ended when it did lives were spared and the world to get back to some semblance of normal
Dad had several uncles that served in WWII. None that I know of served in the Navy. He tried to get into the Navy after graduation ('60 or '61) to shoot the big guns. Denied for hearing issues. WWII was still an interest for him ... and after living with him for almost 20 years ... for me.
You're doing a great job here.
Thank you.
I'm pretty sure even the toilet seats had AA mounts on the Iowa-class.
Another great video from the battleship. Thanks
Beautiful video Ryan, ever since I found you're channel I've tried to watch them all.
First thing that popped into my mind reading this title was the scene in Aladdin when the (Robin Williams) Genie is pointing out the emergency exits on the flying carpet. "Here, here, here, here... EVERYWHERE!"
Is that soundproofing on the bulkheads? Starts of a recording studio?
Imma pull out my…model ships. Whew!!
The way to decide if the Anti-Aircraft system need additional modification would be to plot all the cones of fire of the existing anti-aircraft positions to see where the least barrel could be brought to bear on a threat.
Interesting thank you Ryan I got a huge collection from that time frame great video
I don't recall any mention of the "suicide circle" located on the fantail, just aft of turret # 3; I served on BB63 50-51. When I came aboard in Sasebo, Japan and until we returned to Norfolk in May '51 there were about 10 single mount 20mm arranged in a semi circle, behind armor plating about waist high. These were left overs from WWII and the kamikaze attacks on naval ships, but were removed during the overhaul at Norfolk. The crane was still there but the spotter planes had been removed.
Thank you, this is an amazing video to watch
Better question. What happened to the guns? Were they scrapped? Repurposed to other ships? Turned into displays? Or, are they preserved in a warehouse somewhere?
Warehouse and used or given as needed
As they got obsolete got scraped
May be some still stored for the reserve fleet
@@tomhenry897 Maybe Morphy's will have one for sale & Ian could invite Ryan to disassemble & reassemble & fire it.
Where /weren't/ there AA guns seems the better question
What we would like to see in a Video ? The Cobi Model in a Tub . we want to see it float .
oh dear watched this curator and NJ for years and now I see I had not subscribed and rung the bell ! Good job google for keep feeding me his videos anyway ;)
I fixed the error now.
Got should go to the USS NC. That thing is frozen in WWII, that was put away brand new. Sad!!!
I would have liked to see the USN add the twin 40mm/70 Fast Forty to the New Jersey as multi-modal guns.
man if ever an over the bow shot, muzzle blast from the first main gun turret would be terrifying if you're manning the position immediately forward of it.
To improve the ship's AA, either 1) replace the sixteen-inch turrets with about ten 5"/38 mounts each, or 2) modify a sixteen-inch mount to give it higher elevation, and then develop a sixteen-inch AA round. I figure a single such round would wipe out an entire enemy formation with a single shot.
Surprised a radar fuse wasn’t made for the 16s
I'd like to see a video about your thoughts about the film battleship and the probable and improbable parts of the final scene with the Missouri
4:05 oooh ... he has a scale model
with movable components
I love the proper navy pronunciation of yokosuka
2 questions I have- what are the pros and cons of 20 vs 40 mm, and why did they alternate between even and odd numbers of guns? Shouldn't there of been the same number of guns port and starboard, thus an even number?
“people like me who spend way too much time on Iowa class battleships.”
Is that even possible, to spend too much time on Iowas?
Additional .50 calibre machine guns were fitted to ships serving in the Pacific, as an extra anti-aircraft defence. It was not uncommon to have up to 24 .50 calibre Brownings mounted on each side of the ship's superstructure..... One of these Iowa class ships ( I can't recall which one) still has a large dent on it's side at virtually deck level, caused by a kamikaze hitting it at that point.
I think the short answer to the title question is - Anyway there is space under the sky. Basically WWII warships of any country of any size bristled with them. On WWII carriers of any country, AA guns were mounted beside and below the flight deck, as well as fore and aft, and on the island. I know as I've built enough of the models in 1/600 and 1/700 scale. Those tiny m*thaf*****s were a pain to assemble and to glue.
Thank you
Q: Where are the AA guns on an Iowa class battleship?
A: Yes.
Certainly upgrading the 40mm to Mk-33s would have been a major upgrade. I was a Gunner on Mk-33s in the 90s when the US Navy was still using them very heavily, especially on amphibious and supply ships such as LPHs and LCCs. I often wonder if they had been upgraded - which, if any, would have been retained in the 80s refit. would they have kept at least the bow and stern pairs. The 20mm was a light weight gun with limited range. by the end of the war it was nicknamed the "door knocker" because its main effect was as an extra pair of eyes showing the 40mm directors where a close threat was for them to aim at. I think fewer mounts, all twin would have freed up space for more 40mm, perhaps each side aft of the #3 turret, instead of the 20mm farm arrayed there. Another pair could have been mounted on the main deck abreast the aft fire control in-place of the 20mm mounts there and tied to the same director as those above them.
The Mark 22 doesn't get completed until late. The Mark 26 then obviously even later. So it seems realistically that only increasing the 40MM was really the only thing available until late 44-45.
Were there ever plans to put AA missile launchers on any of the Iowas? SAMs were around since at least the late 50s, after all.
Have there ever been any plans/ideas floated to replace the 5"/38 guns with newer gun systems on the Iowa-class? Like perhaps replacing them with 5"/54 Mark 45 or even the 76mm OTO-Melara during the 80's recomissioning?
That was talked about. The problem is that the modern 5" and 3" gun mounts extend through the deck and cutting through the armor would have taken too long and added too much cost to the initial refit. Had the Iowas remained in service in the 90s, a more complete refit had been proposed that would have added 5"/54 twins like the Montanas were going to use. The Midways had these guns in single mounts. The tricky part was whether or not the ammunition would make it past the turns in the hoists.
With all these AA positions everywhere, I've always wondered what the men who man them did when the 16" guns were fired. Did they temporarily run indoors, then run back to their guns? Or did they just duck and cover and stick their fingers in their ears?
Hello my name is ryan, I don't always comb my hair but when I do, I use a balloon lol! Great video though as usual.
Mostly along the best lines of sight but definitively what makes that hard is because the ships were built in batches of two at a time and a different yards the Navy was constantly taking things off putting things on so I think Ryan touched upon it in another video somewhere.
But definitively it's anybody's gas and one spot is good as the next I think the longevity of anti-aircraft platforms with guns instead of missiles was already on borrowed time World War II was the last conflict where you had propeller driven airplanes after that it would be Jets so I don't know escorts to protect the carriers from engagements from other surface ship and nominal air power.
I would say they did that pretty well but the Iowa specifically and their siblings did provide effective anti-aircraft fire and denied the enemy the ability to use their own ordinance but technology flew past them it's one of the reasons why all the AA batteries were eventually removed after the war but during they were indispensable and effective that being said it just seems like the 40 millimeter bofors are just so destructively more effective I get the 20 mm auroraelicans are more numerous more compact easier to use by comparison the amount of training to use the 20 mm as opposed to the 40 is considerably less as well.
But I think the 20 mm was already on its way out before the war even started more effective than the M2 Browning by every stretch of the imagination though I've read from Sailors accounts they hated servicing the 20 mm because of how tight all the tolerances were the 40 mm was a much more simplistic design from a maintenance perspective still I would have had a few M2 brownings capped on the station just for those instances where you could have had boarding action
Forgotten weapons did a video mon a navy twin 50
Don’t know the deployment history
Believe the 50s were replaced by 20s
@@tomhenry897 yeah I believe it's ian McCallum on there it's been a while I may have seen it but that's correct in metric terms I think a 50 caliber machine gun is a 12.7 MM projectile so the 20 mm significantly bigger by an increment or two LOL would be better suited for shooting down aircraft my mother's father from his time on the USS North Carolina was always telling me that the M2 ma Deuces were always easier to clean and perform maintenance than the 20 mm guys used to draw straws according to him on who had to break the damn thing down he didn't have to worry about it too much he was an engine man on the North Carolina so he didn't see too much action up on the decks when combat were in play but if they ever needed an extra set of hands he never hesitated I miss him I see these videos reminds me of the heroic effort that they all did for the greater good
By the time NJ was sent to the pacific, most air attackers would have already released the bombs or torpedos by the time they got int range of the 20MM. Get rid if most if the 20MM mounts, replace them with twin or quad bofors 40MM. Late war, once the VT fuze has been battle tested and found to be super effective, replace the quad 40s with open mount 3 inch or 5 inch guns, as topweight was getting to be an issue. Keep a few twin 20MM mounts scattered around, primarily as antiboat defense. This would have been very important to defend against the kamikaze boats that japan was building in vast numbers near the end of the war. Those would have been a big threat if the invasion of the main islands had not been mooted by the A-bombing. I don't recall how well understood AA defense effectiveness of the VT fuse would have been at the time, nor do I know if the USN knew about the kamikaze boat threat prior to invasion of Okinawa. so a bit of 20/20 hindsight.
Who decides how many of what and where?
Does the captain have any input?
Well, this Ryan, we can't let him near the Nuclear Weapons, he still likes to play with model ships.. I know!
How effective would the 1945 configuration been against an air attack like that that sank Yamato.
How many shipyards can handle a Iowa class today?
I never understood why they didn't put a quad 40 mm position on turret 3. So I guess that's my one change to the AA defense on an Iowa.
There was a 40mm on turret #3 of BB63. On the way home from Korea ('51) I slept under it on those warm south Pacific nights.
Ryan is great!
Was all this done in dry dock or was some done at sea?
Answer every were the navy could fit on in world War ii.
Oerlikons, Oerlikons everywhere.
Lol Ryan used the old Reagan trust but verify line, a venerable Russian proverb, look it up!!!
Those guns would still be useful against drones.
If I was a captain or admiral when first in service or present. Or future. As much anti air craft as possible every caliber
The had them mounted inside out of the rain.
Interesting :)
Do a colab with ian mccollum of "forgotten weapons"
I think Mr Ryan from this point forward. 👉 Is going to use his new model every chance he can. Lol 😆 it is perfect to create a 3d model in our own heads.
Ryan just came up with this video idea as an excuse to play with his toy model😂
That is exactly what happened and we have no shame in that.
What I am moving of the stuff around so much
Who makes the model ships that you use
Cobi: www.buildcobi.com/cobi-building-block-sets-tanks-submarines-ships-battleships-world-of-wwii-small-army-tank-museum/cobi-executive-edition-iowa-class-battleship-set-4836
To improve AA, more 40mm
Surely 15:15 is blasphemous.
IS it possible to spend "way too much time" on Iowa class BBs?
😁
AA design circa 1942-44.
1. Is there a gun here?
2. Why isn't there a gun here?
3. Let's put a gun here.
Zemansky is clearly insane.
It’s the hair, right? Lol
Somebody send Ryan a comb. lol
add more boom.
Answer: everywhere
I think a better question would be; Where weren't the AA guns on BB NJ? By 1945 USN warships bristled with AA guns.
Gazda guns
If all the sea was that'll go on in a modern context or if the funding is available all the sea Rams in the world see Rams are basically anti-air missile launchers they can fit in pretty much anywhere a 40 mm gun position can too turning Battleship New Jersey into the world's first medium range anti-air missile battery for Gatling garage platform
I think the US Navy should have trained Sharks with friggin laser beams on there head to swim around the ship.
is it me or does Ryan look like he just crawled out of bed ?... with that awsome hairdo
뉴저지 시청의 오바마 대통령 앞으로 서신을 보낸 허태영입니다.jfk공항에서 지하철 타고 가면 어디에서 내려서 버스편이 있는지 시청앞까지 도착할수 있도록 알려주세요.맵을 설명하여 주세요.gps등...
From A former shipmate ruclips.net/video/nIzm4xz0hLc/видео.html
I would replace as many 20 km as possible with single or twin 40mms. It would give you a longer range and heavier hitting gun. Or reach out to the British for their 6 barrel 20mm mount.
u need a stylist my guy
That hair though
You are having way to much with the toy, it must be taken away from you for your own good.
I sure you've been ask, but have you talked to the World of Warahips game people? I play a ton of this game. I have the Iowa & the Missouri, which are the only two they have released in the game so far. Maybe get ahold of them some how, and offer what you know. Seems like you have a lot of knowledge for them.
4th, 1 December 2022
Either take up a collection for a comb, or just get yourself a WW2 hair cut.
you need to fire your hairdresser 😁😁
Dude! You are too young to have a crazy old man hair do. Don't worry about thinking: it happens, but heck do something with it!
Ryan are you from Wisconsin??,?
Is EVERYWHERE a correct answer?
what happened to your hair??
The poor guys trying to cover his male pattern baldness