Type 1936A / Narvik class - Guide 298
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 29 сен 2024
- The Type 1936A class destroyers of the Kriegsmarine are today's subject.
Read more about the ship here:
www.amazon.co....
www.amazon.co....
www.amazon.co....
Naval photos and more - www.drachinifel.co.uk
Model ships of many periods - store.warlordga...?aff=21
Want to support the channel? - / drachinifel
Want a shirt/mug/hoodie - shop.spreadshi...
Want a poster? - www.etsy.com/u...
Want to talk about ships? / discord
Want to get some books? www.amazon.co.uk/shop/drachinifel
Pinned post for Q&A :)
Which aircraft put more terror into both Artic and Atlantic convoys? Heinkel He-111s or Ju-87 Stukas?
Why was it called the Narvik class? Ships are designated Z-Number and Narvik isn't in Germany, was it an ally designation?
@@emperordave3006 yep, Narvik was what the Allies dubbed the class
@@Drachinifel thank you
Who has the best ship naming conventions right at this very moment in time?
A few more notes on these ships:
Unlike earlier German destroyers, the Narviks were unnamed and only had their hull numbers, similar to German uboats. The 8 earlier ships were called the type 1936A, while the latter 7 ships were called the type 1936A(mob), the mob being short for Mobilmachung, which translates to mobilisation, indicating that they were built as a war emergency and were not planned to be built prewar.
Drach mentioned that Z28 mounted 4 single guns in a superfiring layout fore and aft. This was because Z28 served as command ship for the FdZ (Commander of German destroyer forces). This ship needed additional quarters for the staff officers, and these were mounted atop the aft deckhouse, where originally, one of the 150mm guns was placed. This gun was therefore moved into the superfiring position forward. Apparently, this layout meant that Z28 had better seakeeping qualities than her half-sisters. Z28's conversion was necessitated by the loss of the previous flagship, Z21 Wilhelm Heidkamp, at Narvik.
The Narviks were powerful ships, this was demonstrated when they engaged the Royal Navy's standard destroyers, which usually carried 4 guns of 4.7inch caliber. During 1942, two Narviks, namely Z24 and Z25, severely damaged 4 of these ships while attacking convoys and HMS Edinburgh in Arctic waters: Amazone, Fury, Foresight and Forrester. Z25 is furthermore sometimes also given credit for the torpedo hit that proved to be the final nail in the coffin of HMS Edinburgh. This is, in my opinion, a rather good service record. Neither Z24 nor Z25 were equipped with the twin turret at that time.
They had some success against merchant ships. In late 1942, Admiral Hipper's Ar196 floatplane located the large Soviet tanker Donbass and an escort ship (afaik an ASW ship) and guided in Z27, which sank both ships with gunfire and torpedoes.
Their bad seakeeping was in full display in December 1943, however, when several Narviks and Elbing class torpedo fought two British light cruisers in the Bay of Biscay. Z27 was lost in this battle. She had served as the flagship of the flotilla commander, Captain Hans Erdmenger, who had commanded Z21 Wilhelm Heidkamp during the Narvik campaign.
I assume that you meant "Mobilmachung" rather than "Mobilmaching" given that the latter is not a german word
yeah thanks for a rather more balanced look at them. sometimes drach just gets too far on his "i'm an engineer" high horse ( half my relatives are engineers too and its rather much the same conversations about everything lol )
@@boreasreal5911 thank you, captain obvious. I fixed it, happy now?
@@mikepette4422 thank you, I generally really enjoy Drachs content but sometimes his "German ships weren't efficient" thing gets a bit annoying. Warships need to be effective, being efficient is only a bonus imo, and as long as you have the money, resources and workforce to spare, building your ship 10 or 15% bigger than other countries is nothing to be ashamed of.
I don't want to criticise Drach too much, since he is generally quite fair and on top of that very enjoyable to watch, but sometimes he just goes a bit too far when talking about German ships. Yes, being bad at seakeeping is certainly inconvenient, and their lack of AA bit them quite hard in the latter half of the war, but they did give good service to their country overall, as listed above.
Imagine how good they could have been if they weren't so oversized and inefficient lool
I've been looking forward to this... since DD development interwar period video.
"As the vessels no longer displayed a strong desire to cosplay as U-Boats" I laughed out loud at that. Well done!
That engagement with HMCS Haida and Huron plus the Polish destroyer Piorun and some British units including Black Prince is quite a story. Drach: please consider doing a Wednesday Rum Ration on that event.
He visited Haida last month and hopefully when he shows the tour of the ship he’ll touch on it!
Hope so - it’s ranks with the tale of the two guys from HMCS Oakville who boarded the U-Boat while naked.
I believe the subject has been broached before.
Hell, I hope he does it with Alex.
No way, that sounds boss la!
Pronounciation tip
Vier has the same F sound as Four and is pronounced like the word Fear
So "Flak-Fear-ling"
Vier is the German word for the number 4, and Vierling means Quadruplet... in this case, a 4-barreled mount.
The naming convention dates back to the at least the Early Modern Period, where gunmakers would make twin-barreled rifles and shotguns, and sometime one of each!, called Zwillings (twins) from Zwei (Zwo in some dialects) + ling.
Likewise, a tribarrel weapon is a Drilling (Drei + ling) 8-)
@@chemech While compelling...it's the several decades older convention to name twins, triplets and quadruplets this way, which is where the gun-makers pulled the naming from. Anything that is X of a kind has been named the same thing, that is just the words to use.
Also thanks for the explanation, obviously as a native speaker I needed to be explained how my language works :D
@@Chrinik Well, I had no way to know that you are a native speaker, and there are many, many people reading this who aren't native, or even school trained, speakers, so don't take it personally... it wasn't directed at you anyway...
Maybe worth mentioning that the 1936As had the same flawed "staukeil" stern design as the type 1934s. It didn't help with the seakeeping problems.
Do you mean that kind of overlap? I thought that would be for mine laying, so the mines don't get sucked back to the screws of the laying ship. On some of the pics you see rails running almost the length of the ship, which I presumed to be for minelaying. Drach didn't mention this, but I wonder how much mine laying these ships did.
@@dougerrohmer All German destroyers were fitted for minelaying (though not all actually did it). What I'm referring to was a wedge-shaped section added under the transom behind the screws and rudder - the idea was to deflect the prop wash downward and so force the stern up and the reverse the usual 'squatting' effect at high speed. But mostly it stressed the hull and pushed the bow down. On the 1936A that made the bow-heavy issues even worse.
Yes. I was intrigued by that shape. It is definitely not the flat end of the Vanguard.
@@johnjephcote7636 I was surprised Drach didn't mention it, seems his sort of thing. Perhaps he is saving it for the 1934 class video. Maybe I should pop a question about it in the Q&A.
Not what you'd call a well-balanced design, the Narviks. On the bright side however, you could probably coax a few extra knots out of the things by simply loosing off X and Y guns at regular intervals.
The version that tossed out the 15cm guns for 5x1 127's probably was, but never really got the chance to prove itself.
Ah the smol light cruisers or maybe heavy destroyers
They're essentially among the ancestors of modern day frigates.
The French loved their long calibre anti-aircraft weapons
Indeed. They proudly surrendered many of them.
@@richardm3023 haha
ugh those SINGLE SHOT 37mm AA guns. I mean the Imperial German Navy had a potentially better AA gun in the 1880's with 37 and 47 mm Maxim guns mounted on many ships. Whoever approved that design ( along with the French who I think also had a single shot 37mm gun ) need to be shown what an aircraft was and how fast they fly.
It's one of those moments in history (out of laundry lists attributable to the 3rd Reich) where we can only think of that old saw, "Never interrupt your enemy when they're making a mistake."
I wonder if the pitchman for those single-shot 37mms had a cousin behind the Japanese adopting those mountains of dyspeptic 25mm guns 😆
One of the ships of the class, Z28, was built as a flotilla leader. She had staff enlarged facilities in the after structures (known as 'the office') at the expense of the third after gun. In compensation for this lost gun she had two guns forward, but in single mounts instead of the standard designed double mount (not available at the time).
It happened that the configuration of four 150 mm guns in single mounts, two forward and two aft, proved a much more stable ship than the rest of the class.
Looking in hindsight, it would be a much better class if all the ships had the 4 single 150 mm guns as in Z28 and the saved weight could have been dedicated to additional AA guns. The double gun mount was in fact considerably heavier (60 tonnes) than two singles (2x 20 tonnes).
The Type 1936As were at least an interesting and unique design, even if in practice some of those design decisions proved more to their detriment than their benefit. Maybe it's just because of Z23, but I do have a bit of a soft spot for these weird, not-so-little destroyers.
I like them, but their were really a piece of crap when it came to any sort of reliability
I have to agree on both the aethetic and performance parts.
I can totally understand the soft spot because of Z23
The Germans were strange with there Destroyer development. Using the 150mm main gun were there 127mm was the more practical main gun.
Ah the not Sub-Destroyer of Germany, nice one , i really like that one in WoW. - if you know how to drive them around.
Imagine trying to manhandle 100 pound shells from the ammunition hoist to the breech in a seaway - lots of broken fingers, smashed hands, and broken toes from dopped shells. From NAVWEAPS "Although this was a powerful gun for a destroyer, it had a slow rate of fire for a destroyer weapon and was really not suitable for such a small ship. The heavy weight of the shells was also a problem as the gun mountings lacked power assist, meaning that the shells had to be manually fed into the breech. As these guns were used primarily in open mountings, bad weather greatly hampered their operation."
According to Wikipedia it was semi-automatic.
@@TTTT-oc4eb That means the breech is closed automatically by a powerful spring when a round is inserted manually into the breech. When the gun fires, the recoil causes a cam surface opens the breech, ejects fling the case out and the breech locks in place ready for the next round. it does NOT mean the rounds are loaded into some sort of magazine and mechanically loaded from there.
@@TTTT-oc4eb Here'a a video showing a semi-automatic breech on a tank ruclips.net/video/ovO9MwX5LlU/видео.html
German AA wasn't the best but it was considerably better then contemporary designs (hello France, Japan and Italy !). British DDs were also sunk left right and centre by axis aircraft. And the only thing US DDs had going was their DP main battery; the light AA left a lot to be desired.
HMCS Haida museum ship Hamilton Ontario Canada 2022
Interesting take on the " transom stern" ? Could you elucidate on the hydrodynamics of this design.
Yes please!
Aye. It looks awkward. If the ship had to go full stop in a following sea, I’ll bet it got quite interesting.
Still some ofmy favourite bed-time stories. Something about naval architecture/design/nonmenclature and history just sends me. Thank you. My Dad served in the merchant marine 38-48,approximately. At Greenwich they have a good assortment of models of such " tramp " steamers ( at the PrincetonHotel in Vancouver the walls were covered with Photo's of such t craft ). If you and your team were to do something more deeply on those craft it would take me back to him.
"...Z32 was sunk by the HMCS Haida..."
I KNOW THAT SHIP! 😁Beautiful ship, too. Had the pleasure to visit her.
A bit of cheek calling them the Narvik Class, in memory to the predecessors now residing at the bottom of Narvik Fjord.
Amazing - they didn't get completely wiped out by 1945... a feat by itself.
Going into the war, it appears from what I can find that the Kriegsmarine had access to 88mm dual-purpose guns, 105mm low-angle secondary armament guns, a few low-angle 127mm guns made by boring out the 105 design, and the 150mm.
They were not completely satisfied with their 105s and 127s, and decided that they wanted the heavier punch of the 150mm guns... which looked good on paper.
However, by 1938, they are reported to have gone back to specifying the 127mm guns, but that destroyer type never got built, and they appear to not have been able to swap-out the 127s for the 150s on the existing ships.
Supply chain logistics issues and the active war situation appear to have locked the Kriegsmarine into these ships for the bulk of their destroyer force, with some earlier pre-war types still in service.
Three of the Destroyer 1936B were built with 5 x 12,7 cm guns.
It would also be worth mentioning that their twin 150 mm mounts were designed originally for the O-class battlecruisers but were then used for the Narviks after they were cancelled.
Was there something about another newer lighter turret that would have eventually replaced the twin they were fitted with?
There's nothing wrong with a destroyer being a bit... Top heavy.
Nimi was my Azure Lane starter.
Good to see that a good chunk of drach viewers are indeed cultured
Same
Based
@@S0RGEx Wissen es macht!
Stacked DD, best DD
I know Drach only does warships from the WW2 era and earlier but I haven't heard why in any of his videos. Anyone know? I'd love to hear his takes on so many Cold War era NATO & Soviet ships! Perhaps he's just not interested or it just isn't his area of expertise so he doesn't feel the content would be up to his standards? Total speculation I know, but I'd love to hear him talk about the progress of radars and fire control systems, new armament like missiles, and I'm especially curious as to his thoughts on how ships are armored in that era given how just making armor thicker was no longer the solution.
If anyone knows if greatly appreciate it!
probably partially to do with classification of documents, Cold War era ships could prove to be a fishing expedition into a dry pool, that's a lot of time and resources spent better on ships with name and fame in the periods with active naval combat
From answers he's given in various videos already, basically what @Voron Agrrav has already said. Add in politics, copyright issues etc and he sticks to nothing later that the Korean War, some lea room given for ships launched in his time frame but continued to serve after it. If you want his opinions on more modern Naval history check out the Bilgepumps podcast series he contributes to.
Drach has said it is due to information available is often intentionally inaccurate and sometimes bound up in political agenda.
He's said in a few dry docks. Basically, the technology is significantly different and the history is murkier as a lot of the information is still secret or sources conflict due to the relative recency of the cold war
Distilled from what videos on the question I've seen, anything pre-Cold War is largely public domain and declassified, so there's more meat to be had, whereas afterward we get into still-classified and politicized murk.
Curiously, weak AA armament of german destroyers doesn't really correspond with their losses to air attack.
Some, of course, were lost - but generally german combat ships of main classes were not sunk from air other than when moored in ports, and had considerable scores of air kills through their service careers.
(come to think of it, Bismarck was basically the only exception, which crippled reputation of all german AA)
To be fair, the naval war played a much lesser and different role in the European theater compared to the pacific theater. Germany needed to transport much less by ship, and rarely needed to cross long open ocean that couldn't be protected by land-based fighter aircraft. German warships tended to be used in the offensive role against allied convois, and often only in the arctic waters that were difficult to operate in for U-boats and aircraft. Those attack runs tended to be fast and short to minimize the risk of enemy action. So it should not come as a suprise that losses tended to occur in harbor.
Iirc Bismarck AA director were too advance for swordfish, resulting most of the AA shells explode far further to the front of the target
@@Deadlock-g4t there is no such thing as "director too advanced". If director can't measure slow speed - it simply sucks; and Swordfish weren't especially slow for a 1941 torpedo plane doing its torpedo run - most of those were limited by torpedo drop limitations to only slightly higher speeds.
In case of Bismarck two rear directors were simply not her intended ones(intended ones were sold to the Soviet Union), and were unstabilized(land) luftwaffe types insted.
That made the whole system very wanting - not because they couldn't provide guns with relevant data with good crews(they could), but it went against the whole logic behind german AA FC. The system kinda crumbled.
@@neniAAinen ahh.. that's a new info
You learn something everyday i guess
How often were they exposed to air attack? There were probably not many RAF torpedo bombers off northern Norway, or in the Baltic Sea.
At this point, I think it's masochism that drives Drach to keep saying "contre-torpilleur." He is getting pretty good at it though!
Z23? THATS NIMI!!!
WISSEN IST MACHT!
Replying to the ever-drowsy Benson-Laffey "VHAT? NEIN! You're not allowed to do zat! Quit messing vith me, or you're gonna regret it!"
@@royasturias1784 Angry Nimi, best Nimi ^^
I knew being up at 4am would pay off at some point!
West coast?
@@josepetersen7112 Arizona actually, but with the lack of DST, it's basically PST now (until the next change).
Last time I was this early, HMS Victory was a front-line fast battleship.
HMS Victory will never admit she is no longer a front-line fast battleship. That's why we keep her in a drydock, we need plenty of warning if she tries to escape.
Can you do a guide on the polish destroyer that single handedly took on the Bismarck? The great piorun
Thinking of this particular story it reminds me very much of the Ukrainians but then again they are linked .
Single handedly? So you are ignoring the four Tribal Class that made up the five ship Flotilla Piorun was part of then? It was a five destroyer flotilla that harried the Bismarck the night before her final battle, not just the Piorun.
I believe he does cover this story as part of his video about the various navies in exile that fought alongside the Royal Navy.
@@alganhar1 However it was the Piorun on the approach to Bismarck who just sent a signal “I am a Pole”
@@alganhar1 watch lazerpigs video
Z23 Nimi
These ships look like the Germans tried to do too much on small hull because they thought bigger was better.
150mm is also the smallest newtonian telescope that is worth it. Or so said Patrick Moore.
(Given that I have a 150mm f/5 newtonian, I tend to agree.)
WG: *gives it 127 mm guns*
Drach, I know it's probably quite far down on the list but I think a detailed run-down of the various attempts to sink the Tirpitz would make a good Rum Ration video.
Ah yes, flawed, but for commanders of taste, the best pick amongst starter destroyers in that certain other silly boat game.
_Z23: Deutsches Qualität._ 😎
As a wise man once said:
"DOITSU NO KAGAKU WA SEKAI ICHI"
godspeed shikikan
I wholeheartedly agree XD
@@sgrb387 I mean, this video sort of proves otherwise, but go off I guess fellow SKK
Most german ships would roll over if wows took seakeeping into consideration
@@chazzerman286 yeah I know
I just wanted to say the meme
"U-Boat Cosplay": Flashbacks of U-571...
Yep
Good News!
A new Drac video for Saturday Lunchtime
One of them was named HMS Nonsuch and used for underwater explosive trials (along with the likes of HMS Jervis and HMS Orion). She was of interest because of her welded construction. Unfortunately she broke in half after 1 test ( from memory) and was quickly scrapped after .
Drach, have you got any files on the tests performed on HMS Marlborough and Emperor of India in 1931? I believe that they had great impact on RN design but I’ve never seen any pictures or official documents online.
Z38 would become HMS Nonsuch.
@@diegoferreiro9478 cheers! My interest in warships was in part from buying a matchbox model of z38!
@@MattVF So am I! In fact, I did it many years ago (1983), some years later I did it again (as the Z39), I lost both, and in 2020 I found some unboxed original Matchbox sprues on ebay, so I was able to have the pair sailing again on my book shelf... If I'm not mistaken Revell still has the reference on catalogue from the old Matchbox moulds.
The design showed German lack of ocean-going destroyer experience pre-1940 - seakeeping and steadiness as a gun platform were more important than weight of shell, especially in the Arctic and Biscay areas, a fact that the Germans recognized in their later designs when they reverted to 12.7cm guns. And yes, the high pressure steam plants were prone to defects due to lack of prior testing. Likewise the G7A torpedoes they were armed with. But they were tough, versatile and overall quite successful ships, especially in the Baltic. And very handsome. Not their fault they were asked to operate in areas and on tasks for which they were not designed.
Thank you very interesting.
Why is it called the Narvik class? Is it because off the battle off Narvik?
In commemoration, yes
My guess would be that they were built/completed post-Narvik, which saw most of the German destroyer force wiped out.
So they're replacements (though must have been planned prior to Narvik).
Hopefully someone who's not guessing will come along with a more precise answer in minute ;)
I believe this was the codename of the Allies. The Germans referred to them as the type 1936A and type 1936A(mob)
The US Navy classified them as Narvik Class destroyers, The Kriegsmarine never did call them so.
For more info see: ONI 204 German Naval Vessels, August 1942.
Can you review the HMNZS Kiwi a Bird class minesweeper of the Royal New Zealand Navy
Might as well just do all three HMNZS Kiwi, HMNZS Moa and HMNZS Tui. Maybe the engagement between the Kiwi, the Moa and the IJN I-1 on 29/01/1943 or the sinking of IJN I-17 By the Tui assisted by USN Kingfisher float planes on 19/08/1943.
Advance Boiler Technician BT3 Bryant U.S.S. Gridley CG-21 checking in. Father was CPO electrician Jesse J. Bryant U.S.Submarines Atlantic 1946-67.
The Narvick's were pretty good looking ships that would not look out of place today. Indeed, some modern missile destroyers, without stealth, look similar. Do others think the same ?
Interesting that the first few pics were flying the US flag…
Germany: We have Narviks! Canada: Screw you meet the Haida!
At 1:18 it looks as if the destroyer is flying and American flg
It is, the shio was in US hands after the war
@@Drachinifel I thought so. First glance made my wonder if I saw that flag correctly.
USS DD-939, former Z39.
Nice spot !! I doubt many had caught that the first time around....
Interesting, thank you both Clive & Drach !!
🚬😎
My Uncle died when a U-boat torpedoed and sunk HMS Penelope (an Arethusa-class light cruiser) at 40.55°N 13.25°E off Naples. HMS Penelope was also known as HMS Pepperpot after her hull was "peppered" by a German air attack. Have you done a vid on her and or her Class ? if not is that possible please. Obviusly I have a family interest that i would like to pass on the next generation. Thanks
one thing that allways confuses me is are the german guns 127mm or 128mm since i see both being talked about
z23, z39 in wows ?
Yes.
Narvik was a splendid destroyer and gave royal marine a jolly headache!
Finnaly!!
Nimi best bote
Maybe a video about the type 1936 class destroyers
That flag in the pics looks very USA.
Good in Theorie
A very german Design Philosophie.
Yesterday we had Drach dispelling myths about Bismarck, now we have him pointing out the issues and flaws with German DDs again. Drach isn't going to be very popular in certain circles at the moment lol
@trueblue23 I think any rabid WW2 German fan falls under wheraboos, since the wheremacht did consist of all arms of the German military
Except that yesterday's video doesn't prove much one way or the other. Bismarck's outer layers were never meant to be immune. Unless the entire armor deck and its slopes can be examined, we don't know how effective the armor scheme really was.
Concerning the bad seakeeping of the Narviks, this is not exactly a secret. Official German documents frequently refer to it. They were pretty powerful ships, as I pointed out in the comment section.
@@michaelkovacic2608 I would argue that yesterday's video did provide strong evidence that a number of people have misrepresented the Cameron report to further their own ends. Worth it for that alone. As for the Narviks, yes, powerful warships on paper or a millpond. The North Sea is not often a millpond.
Nah, the problems with German destroyers are pretty well known. The best Kriegsmarine ships were the smallest - and the largest; S-boats, U-boats and Bismarck/Tirpitz. The light cruisers the worst.
@@gwtpictgwtpict4214 this " a number of people" refers to people that are beyond facts and will believe whatever they like. They exist not only on the German side, however. Lots of British or American fanboys shittalk Bismarck when in reality, a more balanced view would be appropriate.
Your comment on the Narviks is funny, too. Their seakeeping issues were certainly inconvenient, but that issue does not eliminate their good service record (which I posted somewhere here, 1 cruiser irreparably and 4 destroyers seriously damaged).
Just as an example, Scharnhorst and Gneisenau had bad seakeeping as well, and nevertheless, they put more enemy shipping to the bottom than any other BB class, afaik.
👍
"Cosplay as U-boats"!
Interesting class.
Ahhhhh
"The vessel's strong desire to play a U-boat". Brilliant wordology, well done! 😆😆😅😅😅😅😅😂😂😂😂🙂🙃🙂🙃⬇⬇⬇
I'm always amazed that the Germans ever thought of producing a dual-purpose 5" gun.
They did, later in the war, but it never went in production.
These are flying an American flag yet you're saying they are German. What did I miss?
Taken by the US as war prizes after the war.
Post-war capture😉
:)
lol first
i had a chance
HAD
6 minutes ago versus my 5, I acknowledge that you won :(
Goof looking ships tbh
Very odd that they didn't go with diesel power for these ships, given the Kriegsmarine's experience with the technology. Would seem to make a lot of sense in terms of building a smaller ship with the other space needs required by the heavy armament.
Diesels were much heavier and bulkier than their steam plant for the same power output.
No surviving vessels?
"SUPER FIRING" ????
Why were German destroyers and light cruisers so bad? They seemed to do quite well with larger ships (and e-boats and U-boats)
Navy restrictions, making the majority of the surface ships of the German Navy by any other name green-water vessels on execution
That transom tho...
I’m curious why these ships never received names unlike the earlier KM destroyers
128* mm. 149* mm.
Drachism of the Day: "a strong tendency to cosplay as U-Boats"
Does the recording at the end say, "that's it for this video" or "thatsit for this video"?
А можна с титрами?
My question is why so few destroyers and screening vessels.
Honestly my favorite destroys while not the best I like them.
Thank you, Drachinifel.
Hi Mr Drach.
Can you do a video on the IJN destroyer Black Shimakaze please? I just got it in World of Warships: Blitz (mobile).
He's done Shimakaze already, it's only from a couple months ago so shouldn't need to search back that far.
kreigsmarine nightmares
Ships were flawed, but like most German warships of the era, they were beautiful.
Cosplay as U-Boats!!!! Love it.
the v in vierling pronounces like your f
I have heard rumors, not verified, that Germany considered a destroyer with multiple 105mm mountings, not unlike the IJN Akizuki. One wonders if such a vessel might not gave been more useful for the brief and vicious nature of German destroyer operations. In theory, they'd have lent better AA to escorted ships and veritable blizzards of stinging shells against enemy destroyers. I can see why they felt obliged to go bigger with so many big destroyers being launched, though.
That would take foreknowledge which they did not have...
For a 1936 - effectively pre-war - point of view, these ships were intended more to fight against RN destroyers and cruisers, and deliver a knock-out punch when they hit.
Fast actions against lighter craft such as MTBs and MGBs and multiple aircraft do not appear to have been anticipated.
The Germans had very effective 88mm dual-purpose guns (the Army and Luftwaffe used them as the FLAK 36 and FLAK 38) as well as some pretty good 105mm guns used in secondary batteries on other classes of ship.
Interestingly, the 127mm/45 is reported to be a bored out derivation of the 105mm, and a low-angle gun when I searched it out on Naval Weapons (NavWeaps), and was used on some German destroyers, and was slated to be used on the never built Type 1938 destroyers.
So, it sounds like the Kriegsmarine was less than satisfied with the 150mm guns as their destroyers main weapon, but their logistical situation blocked them from changing them out.
After 1945 the French navy were now converts to the religion of 'More dual-purpose dakka' but realised that their existing destroyer guns weren't good enough. They had a lot of captured German twin 105mm turrets and ammo, so used those on their escorts and destroyers. So yeah with hindsight the Germans would probably have been better off.
Great work Sir thank you
I see a lot of American flags on these ships. I assume they were war prizes post war.
Z29, Z34, and Z39 were.
IJN Yubari please :P
83rd, 27 August 2022
Just before 5 minutes is that a Gearing class on the outside?
More likely to be an Allen M. Sumner from the masts/funnels configuration
great video
In these photos it appears that the ship is carrying a US flag.
That's USS DD-939, former Z39. She had the latest upgrades known as 'Barbara' refit with improved radars and AA suite at the expense of one 150 mm gun.
👍👍👍👊👊
Why is it called the Narvik class? Why name your ship after a different country's city?
Probably because of the famous destroyer battles off Narvik.
@@RayyMusik I dont get it, they lost the destroyer battles of Narvik.
If anything, were I the dictator in charge at the time I'd have had anyone mentioning the place summarily shot.
@@ToreDL87 😆 Well, losing a battle was sometimes seen as an act of heroism by those Nazi lunatics. There‘s also a propaganda poster about the ’holy sacrifice‘ by German soldiers in Stalingrad.
They were never called Narvik Class by the Kriegsmarine, they called them Typ 1936A and Typ 1936A (mob).
The US Navy classified them as Narvik Class Destroyers (DD23 - 43) which included both Type 1936A and Type 1936 A(mob).
For further information see: ONI 204 German Naval Vessels, August, 1942, revised October 1942.
4:35 What is that small boat in the forground with the round things on top?
Possibly an admirals barge. The round areas could be viewing platforms for when VIP's come to inspect the fleet.
@@fus149hammer5 Thank you.