IJN Amagi - Guide 103
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 29 сен 2024
- The Amagi class, never-quite-built battlecruisers of the Imperial Japanese Navy, is today's subject.
Want to support the channel? - / drachinifel
Want to talk about ships? / discord
Next on the list:
-Tosa Class
-Alaska class
-Derfflinger class
-Yorktown class
-Tre Kronor class
-Nelson class
-Gato class
-Admiralen class
-H class (NB)
-Greek 'Monarch' class destroyers
-'Habbakuk' project
-USS Texas
-USS Olympia
-HIJMS Mikasa
-County class
-KMS Tirpitz
-Montana class
-Florida class
-USS Salt Lake City
-Storozhevoy
-Flower class
-USS San Juan
-HMS Sheffield
-USS Johnston
-Dido class
-Hunt class
-HMS Vanguard
-Mogami class
-Almirante Grau
-Surcouf
-Von der Tann
-Massena
-HMCS Magnificent
-HMCS Bonaventure
-HMCS Ontario
-HMCS Quebec
-Lion class BC
-USS Wasp
-HMS Blake
-HMS Romala/Ramola
-South Dakota (1930's)
-SMS Emden
-Väinämöinen and Ilmarinen
-Destroyer Velos
-U.S.S. John R. Craig
-C class
-HMS Caroline
-HMS Hermes
-Iron Duke
-Kronprinz Erzerzorg Rudolph.
-HMS Eagle
-Ise class
-18 inch monitor
-Mogami
-Vanguard
-De Zeven Provinciën
-South American Dreadnoughts
-Fletcher class
-USS Langley
-Kongo class
-Grom class
-St Louis class
-H class special
-All-big-gun designs
-USS Oregon
-Gascogne
-Alsace
-Lyon and Normandie classes
-Leander class
-HMS Ajax
-Project 1047
-O class
-R class
-Battle class
-Daring class
-USS Indianapolis
-Atago/Takao
-Midway class
-Graf Zeppelin
-Bathurst class
-RHS Queen Olga
-HMS Belfast
-Aurora
-Imperator Nikolai I
-USS Helena
-USS Tennesse
-HMNZS New Zealand
-HMS Queen Mary
-USS Marblehead
-New York class
-L-20e
-Abdiel class
-Panserskib (Armoured ship) Rolf Krake
-HMS Victoria
-USS Galena (1862)
-HMS Charybdis
-Eidsvold class
-IJN “Special” DD's
-SMS Emden
-Ships of Battle of Campeche
-HMS Tiger
-USS England (DE-635)
-Tashkent
-1934A Class
-HMS Plym (K271)
-Siegfried class
Specials:
-Fire Control Systems
-Protected Cruisers
-Scout Cruisers
-Naval Artillery
-Tirpitz (damage history)
-Treaty Battleship comparison
-Warrior to Pre-dreadnought
-British BC Ammo Handling
-Naval AA Special
-Drydocks
Music - / ncmepicmusic
Q&A questions here :)
No questions. Just keep up the good material
My world of warships buddies and I really dig these videos
How do you think the RN would have racted on an alternativ History, where Scharnhorst and Gneisenau are one raidingparty in the Atlantic, Lützow and Scheer the Second, Hipper Eugen and Blücher the third and Bismarck and Tirpitz the Fourth. Would this kind of threat been enough to force the British to the Table, ofc while the Italians don t change their Actions in the Mediteranian
I d suggest Taking May1941 as the Date of the breakthrough of the Last Huntinggroup with the first 3 leaving aroung the same time from french ports
And as a follow up, if the French Navy actually escaped to Britisch Ports to fight another day, how big would those ships have impacted this scenario?
Drachinifel Q&A to consider: a general overview of the limitations of the post WWII German navy and likewise the limitations placed on the Japanese Self Defense naval forces.
I noticed Algerie (and other french designs) has a round metal framework sticking out from it's rear sides. What is this for?
"Putting all the unpopular officers on the ships" 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
⁉️ There MUST be a cheaper, more "efficient" way to get rid of "unpopular officers" than to design an entire class of 45,000 ton, poorly armored battlecruisers for them to "perish on"! A single bullet would save approximately 45,000 tons of steel, and hundreds of thousands of man-hours of labor..... Another option, and bare with me here, would be to demote them, and give them solitary positions at far-away posts..... That way you'd be saving the 45,000 tons of steel AND the 1 bullet. 🤪
4:44 Welcome onboard IJN Retirement.
Report to your quarters near the forward magazine.
@@HighlanderNorth1 popular and capable are rarely one and the same.
Would you better captain ships with the popular or the capable?
@@pjagger1989
🤔 After re-reading my original post, it's obvious I didn't word it very clearly. It's been nearly a year since I posted it, so I'm not even sure what specific point in the video I was responding to. Since I don't have time to re-watch the entire video to figure it out, I'll just say that I'd obviously rather have capable officers than "popular" ones(in the same way it's better for a parent NOT to act like a best friend to their kids in order to be "liked"). Obviously good leadership and competent direction are more important than being "likeable" in EITHER circumstance.
@John Higgins
❓🤔❓ Hmm.... "Cultural" and "Marxism", you say? Can't say I've ever heard of EITHER of those 2 terms! What do they mean? Can you please use them in a sentence? 😁
No, seriously, I'm guessing you must've read one of my "anti-Marxism" comments somewhere else? I'd certainly prefer to have never heard of the M word, but it's hard to forget, since it's literally responsible for most of the human suffering over the past 105+ years!
Along with it's political descendants(fascism and Naziism), Marxism should've been kicked into the dustbin of history LONG AGO. But since it's the most well-funded ideological cult in history, our western democracies are now being intentionally subverted and poisoned by it!
I might be wrong but I believe in the book Kaigun by Peattie and Evans, 8-8-8 came to mean a third group of 8 ships, not 8 yrs.
As always, thanks!
That one hit on the Akagi also knocked out the fire suppression system on the hanger deck. Talk about good/bad luck depending on which side you were on.
I must say that first carrier conversion is something to look at. I mean i can’t say it’s horrifying to look at but it is certainly a special duckling.
Anyways awesome video and thank you!
In the book "Shattered Sword", Akagi was described as "not a pretty ship but she wasn't to messed with either".
Steve17010 they were referred to being homely, but Kaga was thought to be a happy ship.
A suggestion for a video - the Shinano, the third of the Yamato class Battleships. Her construction was slowed in the early part of the Pacific War. After the Battle Of Midway, it was decided that she would be converted into an aircraft carrier. She was commissioned in late 1944, when the encroachment of Allied bombing raids led the Japanese leadership to order her to sea whilst still incomplete She was heading to a more secure anchorage escorted by three destroyers when the group was intercepted by the US submarine Archer-fish.
A number of things worked against the Shinano. Her captain was worried about getting swarmed by a US submarine wolf pack. To that end, he kept his escort very close by rather than letting any of them chase down the lone US submarine that remained surfaced and tracking them on radar.. He was so worried about evading this non-existent 'wolf pack' that the lone Archer-fish was able to keep up and work its way into firing position. The Archer-fish captain, Joseph Enwright, set his torpedoes to run unusually shallow, reasoning that the flooding higher up in the hull would destabilise the target and possibly even capsize it (he was right). When struck by these torpedoes (four hits out of six launched), the Shinano maintained top speed to avoid further attacks from the 'wolfpack' - this greatly worsened the rate of flooding. Since the Shinano was not fully complete, a number of her watertight bulkheads in fact were not. She remains the largest ship[ ever sunk n by submarine.
All covered in 'Shinano!' , a book co-authored by Captain Joseph Enwright, covering the sinking in detail, as well as Archer-fish's career before and after..
I thought the taihou was the largest ship sunk by a submarine
@@Robert53area Shinano was much larger than Taiho, 69k tons loaded versus 37k tons.
- Tosa
- Alaska
- Derfflinger
The next three weeks are gonna be great.
A Tuberculosis Fox sent me here
Koff koff
Carrier islands elsewhere were not put on the port side because pilots tended to pull in that direction when landing if something went wrong. I wonder if Akagi ever had any accidents in its carrier with its pilots doing this.
Additional information, IJN doctrine at the time was for fleet carriers to operate in pairs. Thus to improve recovery of aircraft one carrier had a port island and the other a starboard island so the circling air groups would have less chances of interfering with each other. They stopped doing this after Soryu and Hiryu. The pilot issue probably influenced the decision as well as standardizing designs.
From the Destroyerman books
4:50 wow Hood was really massive
Cris Hansen
She was actually about big as, or bigger than, the battleships that would get designed and built in the late 30s-40s, at least in terms of mass. In fact she was longer than the ship that would eventually sink her at Denmark Strait.
6:13 did they really put heavy turrets on the front of the lower flightdecks? Man that was a weird time for carrier design
Carriers were so new, no one quite knew what they were doing. 😂
My personal favorite was the four twin 8" turrets the Lex and Lady Sara sported upon commissioning. After all...they were conceived as battle cruisers! Sources state the 8" inch guns were removed, used as coastal batteries in Hawaii and the two carriers got the 5" dual purpose guns fore and aft of the island. The Lex was a valiant ship...but it always seemed the Saratoga was on 'injured reserve' whenever things got dicey. Thank God the Enterprise was there to pick up the slack! Cheers!
@Stuart Aaron True. Was slated to receive them...but the Battle of Coral Sea intervened.
When the hulls were converted, the aircraft of the day were slow, short-ranged biplanes with light payloads.
That meant as members of the scouting forces, these carriers were likely to run into enemy Treaty cruisers and so the idea was to arm them with 8 inch guns so they could defend themselves in that event.
Fortunately that idea was never put to the test since aircraft carriers are full of flammable and largely unprotected aircraft and their support systems.
Great video. Akagi was the flagship of the Japanese fleet that attacked Pearl Harbor it still had most of the Japanese film of the attack. It was lost when the Akagi was sunk.
Just in time for the upcoming _Azur Lane_ event.
Ehh, just what I was thinking.
I honestly think the Azur Lane event was a factor... that or just odd timing.
Just odd timing, it's been on the list for months.
I mentioned it first, if indirectly.
Such impeccable timing. In a few days, an event featuring this ship in some ludicrously popular mobile game will come.
Try to guess the game. I'm not telling.
Lemme guess, azur lane
This ship figured prominently in the SF Alternate history series, Destroyermen, by Taylor Anderson.
I’ve been reading Destroyermen, so I keep remembering this ship as the one from that series with 10 10-inch guns.
That Destroyermen thing w/ Amagi's 10s was puzzling to me also... but it was Sci Fi so no pesky facts please!🙄
@@jcwoodman5285 It is the most cursed fictional naval design I have ever heard of.
Just rewatching this and, yeah, I have to wonder what Anderson was thinking. He had the other stats of the ship correct, but a 41k ton capital ship armed with 10" guns is odd, to put it mildly. He had to be aware this ship had 16.1" guns, but...well, it's alternative history. I can only guess he felt it made the ship less intimidating when it was going to be facing off against 1200t DDs, but...weird. He did throw in a few other oddities for ships making it to Alternate Earth, but most were spot on. Weird.
I have never understood the battlecruiser concept. Deliberately building a major warship that has no hope of standing up to it's own guns for long seems ridiculous to me.
Other then taking on armoured cruisers - which obviously became obsolete the day the Invincible hit the water - what were they supposed to do? Scan for the fleet? You can use cruisers for that. Take on other battlecruisers? Well that is bound to end badly. Join the battle line? Obviously not.
I guess I can see the point of the Invincibles (rendering armoured cruisers inert). But after that - I see no point to them.
To oppose a fleet like the British, they make a certain amount of sense: The Brits tended to build lighter, long-range cruisers to serve as fire brigades in far-flung parts of the Empire. A battle cruiser could carry out the role of commerce raider and also deal with those lighter cruisers and any destroyer escorts by blasting them at long range. If another heavy ship came along, they'd have a fair to good chance of outrunning it, depending on the circumstances and they could always get in a lucky hit that might disable, if not sink their bigger opponent. It would also be able to carry a larger store of ammunition and so stay "on station" longer than cruisers could.
@@kenle2 I understand your point.
But I still don't agree with the concept.
The Amagi can take on another cruiser.
But nothing else.
It cannot begin to take on a battleship.
And it cannot even take on another battlecruiser for long...not with a puny 9.8" belt.
And it costs the same or more than a battleship.
That is a TON of money/resources for a ship that can only scan for the fleet and take on cruisers.
For the same money - you might as well buy 3, solid cruisers.
Concept was that given RN enemies were probably French and German, both, especially France were more invested in cruiser, and can build a lot of them. So instead of response in the same kind, a capital ship with cruiser speed that powerful enough to wipe cruiser squadron out was better investment when up against numbers of cruisers RN thought they were up against
Love your videos as always.....the Amagi plays a central role in Taylor Anderson's alternative history book Destroyermen.
In the book she's fitted out as a proper battle cruiser.
Well she is a bit more of a super cruiser because of her 10 inch guns. I will admit that in the book she did have a better fate than her real counterpart.
So glad other people are into destroyermen as well. It’s what got me into naval combat and ships!
@@jakesolver4359 the final book was a kick in my heart, I had no idea he was finished.
@@admiraltiberius1989 it really is a shame the main series is finished up. But hey he is releasing periodic short stories and spin offs in the same universe! Currently coming out with a prequel about how the NUS made the passage
@@jakesolver4359 Do you know where I can look for those?
Thank you so much! I love this ship to bits. It was singlehandedly responsible for my love for WoWS.
On the other hand I'd like for you to make some more videos on destroyers, seeing as how many different ones there were. (and among those the Akizukis are my most wanted. 🦆 🦆 🦆)
This ship? Not the more well known ones like Yamato or Bismarck?
@@nobblkpraetorian5623 Yes, this one. Back then I didn't really kniw anything about naval history, so I just went up the IJN BB and CA lines because people had recommended them. I really like the Nagato, and when I got to the Amagi it was by far the best ship I'd owned up to that point. And it was a beast. Then Bismarck came out I was really let down by its main guns, so instead I focused on killing other Bismarcks in my Amagi. It was so much fun that I got really attached to the game.
Yea can you also do the German “zerstörer” destroyers as well?
I am sure you find it interesting that Tosa herself technically still exists today, she was sank as a target.
REALLY unpopular officers...as opposed to just the unpopular ones! Seriously, though, at about the 4:50 mark, you have a graphic with the plan views of a number of the notional capital ships originating from the end of WWI. Is this available? I'd love to have it.
Keep up the good work, I love these!
Wouldn't it be fun to wargame some of these paper ships? Lexington v. Amagi, Amagi v. G3? Fascinating, for me at least, but I'm a bit bent.
Just a thought for future videos: could you try and make sure that you make the images large enough that the captions are actually visible? In the image at 1:46, for example, the ship names are so small they're almost impossible to read.
Design A-150 class battleships?
Is what SHOULD be going up against Montana in wows
@@greatwarships2758 Nah. With the way damage is determined in World of Warhips, A-150 wouldn't be a good ship. It'd have atrociously bad DPM compared to Yamato, which already has the lowest DPM of all Tier 10 BBs (we don't talk about 457-Conqueror). Those 510mm guns would be the most powerful in the game on an individual shell basis, but they wouldn't be *enough* stronger than Yamato's 460mm to make up for having 1/3 fewer guns. And it's not as if making up for this by increasing the reload would be a good solution; even giving it the 510mm a stock reload of 30 seconds would be incredibly generous. NavWeaps estimates that the reload cycle would've been 48 to 60 seconds.
RedXlV
Even in reality the thing would be a DOWNGRADE from its predecessor class for that reason, despite the fact it was supposed to have radar-guided main guns.
@@RedXlV well it's going to be in the game
@@lordredlead2336 Sort of. What we're getting is Yamato with the main and AA guns changed. Because why model a new hull when you can reuse an existing one, Wargaming decided. The actual A-150 wouldn't have the 15.5cm secondary turrets and would have a thicker belt. Supposedly 457mm.
Takao class pls
Will you do a video on the SMS helgoland or another of the class. Interested to know what improvements were made over the nassau class, because they look quite similar
It is on the list to do eventually :)
1:25 All the funnels ;)
I read an engineering article ( somewhere ) that the reason the island was moved to the port side was because of changes to the engine-room spaces, and they decided since you want all the exhaust on one side, the starboard was easiest.
USN had better damage control procedure like flooding fuel lines with Co2. The Yorktown and the Enterprise had damage control supermen.
How come there calling an aircraft carrier thats been knocked over at the end of the war the amagi aircraft carrier?
Despite having heard the various politics a million times, I simply CANNOT wrap my head around what the various Naval Treaties were supposed to accomplish....besides giving the British a massive built-in advantage over everyone else,since when they inevitably broke down, the Brits could build more new ships faster than any other nation. Which raises the question as to why anyone else signed.
The lack of new capital ship construction collapsed the British Shipbuilding industry (or at least made it vulnerable so the global depression could virtually finish it).
The ban on building capital ships for non-signing countries also hurt the British Shipbuilding industry more than other signers.
Well it was the Americans that quickly outbuilt the British after it broke down
1) The British got to keep their position as the biggest naval power, only challenged by the US, instead of inevitably getting outbuilt by it after WW1.
2) dreadnought type ships were incredibly expensive, and an arms race with another nation would make it even more so. So by limiting a number of aspects the status quo would stay as is and that money could go attend other matters.
3) if you were Japan, you got to delay your rivals building ships and limited the power of each individual ship. Later on you could just rip the treaty and start building much bigger and more powerful ships. If not for the treaty Japan would've had 0 chances against the US in WW2, but because of it the americans barely had any modern capital ship.
Just subscribed! Looks like I have a lot of catching up to do!
How about some ships that eventually ended their carriers as Museums? USS Intrepid, USS Midway and the IJN Mikasa?
Orochi in Azur Lane.
Oh, I hope the USS Zumwalt gets added to the list.
Can we add CSS Alabama, CSS Shenandoah, and/or CSS Stonewall/HIJMS Kotetsu to the list?
Especially the CSS Alabama. Her commerce raiding cruise under the command of Captain Raphael Semmes is an epic tale indeed.
I would love this, a great uncle served on the CSS Alabama, and also CSS Shenandoah.
A super dreadnut with 140 secondary and torps pure Nipon design.
Thank you for your great video histories, an excellent catalog of videos preserving this data...
Yourself &... well, World o Warships has sparked a bit of a renaissance in Naval Design history.🤗
So you are telling me amagi,akagi,atago and takao were supposed to be sisters?
Cant find the pinned post and I think I asked this incorrectly before so ill ask again hopefully in the right place?
Would you do a comparison video between the kongo and reknown class battlecruisers both in ww1 and ww2 refit guises please?
In the book destroyermen there is an ijn Amagi.
Flagship for General of the Sea Hisashi Kurokawa
Akagi is my favorite CV.
I look forward to a more detailed video on her career.
If any nation could have built two capital ships per year for the rest of time it wold have been imperial Japan. ;-)
That sounds like more of an American type of thing to me.
Can we get a link for the full chart in 4:50
Another great entry. Q&A - many of the ships discussed had taken some war time damage, especially the WW2 era battleships, cruisers and carriers. What percentage of the crew are tasked with damage control? Forgive my ignorance, but I image there are a few people whose primary task is that but that everyone is expected to pitch in - so someone who works in section X or function A are expected during battle to pitch in as well. What about supplies and gear used in damage control? Planks? Welding gear? I wonder if ships that are designed to operate near a base would have different damage control "loads" than those designed to operate for months away. Again, great channel.
Ijn amagi is also a carriers name tho
HMS Glowworm?
Would love to see a review of the USS Alaska class, And how about comparing the Alaska to any of the Japanese battleships save of course Yamato/Musashi.
For your full Akagi ep to come I HIGHLY recommend 'Shattered Sword' if you have not already do read it! The definitive examination of the Midway Battle.
This source will help you fortify that Akagi end story here which is a bit off as to how & why...
Love your work, carry on!
>25 capital ships in total
Bit of a bad guess, there.
Thanks for the video and it's great to hear you sound much better than in recent previous episodes.
It's in some ways scary to hear how thin the armour was on these ships and the Lexington's despite gun size going from 12 inch to 16 inch since the Invincible's were designed.
I doubt either of those two classes would be able to stand up to a G3
A five minute guide that's nearly more a five minute guide (more or less) than a ten minute guide? Colour me surprised.
I'd love to see a Ferdinand class Romanian destroyer review, they were Italian built and both had interesting careers in the Black Sea against the Soviets.
Romanian submarine Delfinul (the dolphin) also had an eventful career during WW2.
888 praise khorne
Is the graphic at 4:50 available somewhere on-line?
Go full screen, take a screen shot, and crop it.
Guess they wanted to fight while running away. Why did the 'earthquake' image look like Hiroshima?
Just imagine if these things were built! Packing the same size guns as Nagato talk to extract and the Tosa would have been Monsters!
I do hope someday that the wrecks of all the Japanese carriers are discovered because I've always been curious about the damage and havoc that Wade mcclusky's SBD dauntless dive bombers wreaked upon the ijn akagi and the other imperial Japanese aircraft carriers sunk at Midway.
That’s Dick Best.
Hubiera sido el mejor crucero de batalla del mundo de haberse podido construir
Will the Surcouf be discussed eventually?
its in the list bro
Fantastic ships in WOWs.
Good to hear there are more people with good taste.
TY
well , it has to be , coz after it Izumo was TERRIBLE :D
This BB gave me the most wins than any other ships with a total of 689 wins
Also Ashitaka though I hardy see any of them. (The Kobayashi Makoto camo makes that thing an awesome credit earner too)
thank goodness the Dauntless dive bombers were in service in numbers by Midways and the USN was no long dependent of the Devastator. If it had been all they had, Midway may have gone much differently. Douglas didn't build too many bad airplanes, but the Devastator was a real stinker.
Most advanced TB of it's time. Aircraft design overtook it, just like the Zero.
@@lamwen03 I was an advanced airplane when it was first starting design in 1932. Part of the problem was the leisurely pace of testing and production, with the first plane not being delivered until 1937, almost three years after it was ordered. In addition to carrying a defective torpedo, its main problem was poor build quality. By 1940, the small fleet was worn out after only five or so years of service. There were stories of sailors policing the deck after a Devastator flight landed to look for parts that had fallen off. Combined with poor armor and an excruciatingly slow torpedo drop speed, the early success of the type were more surprising than the failures.
I watched a training video on how to press an attack with a Devastator. It was a horrifying long, very low level (due to the torpedo design ) that required a very close range drop. I'm surprised any got back past the AA fire.
@@lamwen03 You must mean the Devastator since the Dauntless was a scout and dive bomber, but, yes, flying a Devastator on a torpedo run must have been horrific. They couldn't drop their torpedo at speeds above 115 mph, and the sight used to aim the torpedo demanded it fly straight and level at 100 feet above sea surface maximum, at less than that 115 mph speed for almost two miles. Once the torpedo was dropped, the airplane was too underpowered and lumbering to be able to get back to altitude quickly, becoming easy meat for AA fire and Zeros. Thankfully, Douglas took over Northrop in 1937 and was able to quickly develop the Northrop BT-1 into what became the Dauntless. It was able to use its superb dive bombing abilities to fill in for the USN's poor torpedo bombing until the faults with early torpedoes were finally fixed in 1943.
Yes, corrected, thank you.
getting ready for War thunder
Hello - your videos are outstanding, and I especially look forward every Sunday morning to Dry Dock. Thank you! And with that, I'm requesting the Washington Naval Treaty and the first and second London Naval Treaties for a future Wednesday Special episode.
Thank you! Cheers
2+ years later and NO AKAGI CARRIER VIDEO. Cmon Drach! i need more of your awesome content!
Can the HMAS vampire-Daring class, HMAS Melbourne & Sydney-Majestic class to the list
Great video as always but you make the same mistake as I did when pronouncing Atago, us Brits add an R sound where there isn't one. I have been very firmly told by my Japanese friends it's pronounced At-a-go
Nice, I was looking forward to the planned but never build Japanese designs.
Every 5 gun turret
Man the Japanese really their loved 5 double turret designs huh
I can name at least the Amagi / Myoko / Takao / Mogami / Ibuki classes
That is a really cool illustration you show at about 4:49-5:23, from what I guess is a book. What is the name of that literary work? I think it would be a particularly good read.
I am VERY impressed with the quality of your videos. Please keep up the good work.
Thats it for this video. Thanks for watching. If you have a comment or suggestion for a ship to review. Let us know in the comments below. Don't forget to comment on the pent post for drydock questions.
My favourite ship in WoWS
whoa, didn't expect a polish slide in there
Drachinfel uses quite often slides from Sławomir Lipiecki (www.warships.com.pl/) and Maciej Chodnicki.
Polish naval research seems to be extremely thorough and detailed, I only wish I could actually read it instead of just admiring the pictures and diagrams they make.
Q&A
Sir: I may have missed it, but have you ever done a history of the IJN Junyo?
For a future video what about the HMS incomparable?
Interesting how early Japan started planning to counter US ?🤔
As always very informative and entertaining. Thank you.
Captions had fun with that, fav being the toaster to keep up with the emojis
This is a fantastically informative set of postings...thank you so much...
Awesome video
Ah, yeeeesssss
can you do a video on battleship mississippi
Do the German type 21 u-boat
Japan: Americans will have 25 capitol ships
Americans: We will have 24 Essex Carriers (and Enterprise.)
Japan: 0.0
Boxghost102 Japan built not only capital ship, they can also build 30 aircraft carriers of various types ruclips.net/video/2Pao8h3CDDg/видео.html
Americans: We also will have Taffy 3.
Japan: {shrugs shoulders}
[The USS Johnston has entered the chat.]
[The USS Samuel B Roberts has entered the chat.]
[Admiral Kurita has exited the chat.]
Well at least you have material for a bit
Great video, thanks!
I love the unorthodox Japanese shipbuilding of the period. Three flight decks, massive anti ship guns both in turrets forward and in casemates along the side. Different, if not so efficient.
It wasn't just the Japanese. The Lexingtons also had a significant 8" gun armament--4xtwin turrets--up until Saratoga's rebuild around '42. The reasoning was carriers might be menaced by light scouting forces and might need organic self defense against things like the new treaty cruisers. Of course, it didn't really work out that way, but the Japanese conversions did retain their casemate guns until they were sunk.
@@davefinfrock3324 It is true the American converted carriers Saratoga and Lexington had an impressive 8" artillery as main armament, but placed much more conventionally. Later they had them replaced with 5" dual purpose guns, much better suited for their needs, but still retained in the same position, as it was carried over on later classed of carriers in the US navy.
Whereas the RN was far more concerned with guns shooting over deck and possibly damaging aircraft and thus kept them sunk below the main deck line.
Their initial role as part of the scouting force led them being heavily associated with the cruisers. Hence the original reason for the C class designation in CV.
What’s the image at 4:50?
A repeated theme of japanese tools of war, sacrificing protection.
#Q&A Q&A..what is your opinion when comparing the italian zara class cruisers and french algerie class cruisers? And why u dont considered the zara as the best designed cruiser before ww2? Is it because of their less accurate guns?
A combination of relatively short range, relatively inaccurate guns and the fact that they were significantly over the treaty limits.
@@Drachinifel I don't see their being significantly over treaty limits as a design shortcoming. It's certainly not something that hindered the Zaras in service.
@@RedXlV no, but it does make comparisons slightly unfair, the main point being that Algerie achieved almost as much protection, better range and more accurate guns on a hull that displaced significantly less. Therefore, I would argue it's a superior design.
Thanks!
USS Idaho
first
Normally the anime-related comments come from KanColle or Azure Lane, but Amagi (in her carrier form) notably appears in the alternate history Strike Witches (or more broadly, World Witches) universe. Akagi features in the first season alongside eight Kagerou-class destroyers (all named), while Amagi appears in the second season and movie, along with a bunch of other Japanese, Italian, British, German, and American ships (all working together, as humanity is fighting aliens instead of each other).
One of the manga series also very prominently features four completed Kii-class battleships, and info on them in the back of the book makes mention that all four Amagi-class ships were completed as carriers, with the final two having been sold to Karlsland (Germany), thus dodging the issue of one being named Takao while there are also Takao-class cruisers in the universe.
The Ashitaka?!?! Were the IJN big fans of Princess Mononoke back then?! They should also have planned the Lady Eboshi, Spirit of the Forest, Moro, Okkoto, Kodama (for humor sake it should be the largest of the Mononoke inspired ships) and probably my favorite IJN Kohroko, a ship that would have had an interesting career no doubt!
It's a mountain. Such are IJN cruiser naming conventions.
@@typehere6689 I know, I'm assuming you haven't seen the movie then
Ah. So you do know.
On a side note, the Americans could get away with naming their flattops using the English translations of the names of Japanese ones due to overlapping of naming conventions. They never did, though.
Thanks for doing the Amagi. Built a few for HOI4, but all they ended up doing was convoy escort and shore bombardment.
HO14?
Hearts of Iron 4