Which Admirals from the age of sail would have been well adjusted to lead their nation's forces during the subsiquent ages, who would have done well during the age of Ironclads, pre-dreadnoughts and Dreadnoughts?
"Swings and roundabouts"? No ta, helter-skelter and witches' hat for me thank you. I've been told that Danes would run along the working oars of their ships. I've read about midshipmen on racing each other up and down the rigging. Is there any truth to these tales? Are there any other dangerous, exciting, fun and real games or toys specific to navies?
Your dedication to making great content, even while ill or recovering is really amazing. Honestly, didn't really notice a difference except maybe a couple times.
If you're doing Midway counterfactuals with Halsey in command, how about the chances that Halsey would have enough control/influence over Mitscher to prevent the flight to nowhere?
I wonder if minus Spruance at Midway his subsequent promotions are superseded by the advancement of Hewett when it came time to form the command staff for Fifth Fleet. Does Spruance end up commanding Seventh Fleet?
@@tomdolan9761possibly, but a big part of the reason that Spruance got tapped for the role in 5th Fleet was that after Midway he was Nimitz chief of staff. That was why chose him. He already knew that Spruance under him plan for the war. And Nimitz had already chosen Spruance for CoS before midway.
On the bright side Drach, you will hopefully get some good pain meds when they pull the tooth, and you can lay around for a day watching every Pirate's of the Caribbean movie in order.😊
Thank you for the amazing answer on my UK CL question. The Audio sounds fine. You're an absolute champion for continueing to do this after just having teeth out. Most would have postponed. Thanks Drach :D
Thanks for answering my question! Interesting that the late-war British torpedoes used Torpex. Did any of the larger, later Japanese aerial torpedoes (especially that almost Type 93-sized one) actually end up seeing use against enemy ships given the Japanese pilot shortage?
On the question regarding the more likely frigate encounter, it depends exactly how you phrase the question. You suggested about 150 total frigates, with 100-ish in various groupings, and 50 ish operating solo. Therefore if you were to say "I have just seen frigate X, was it solo: then its a 50/150 chance - not a majority, as you said. But if we instead asked "I just encountered a R$N formation with a frigate, was it solo?" - well, there's 50 singletons and say 100 sailing in groups of average size 5, so 20 such groups. That means that the likelihood that any encounter is a solo frigate is 50/70, because its the # of formations that matters. Its kind of the same maths as justified convoys, even badly escorted ones. Its the same chane to encounter a lone ship as to encounter 100; its the group you find. More ships in a group doesn't increase that chance by anything like the # of ships.
My grandfather served on LST 1014 as a cook and 40mm gun captain. The LST 325 is located in Evansville, In. Fully functional and a great day trip. They stole if from Greece before they could scrape it.
A long while ago I asked my father what that unusual dirty green boat was tied up alongside the pier in a Scottish loch. And yes, that's what it was. It must have been as long as the McBraynes ferry. I have no idea what it was doing there.
58:00 edited to include sources: I'm not sure you're right on this. The "sloop" probably is where you'd be on that. (A ship with fewer than 20 guns.) I'm cooking dinner and can't look in my books, apologies, but I think there are significantly more unrated ships than frigates. To your point, frigates frequently go on detached duty, but so do the unrated ships. Particularly when you count packets and tenders in that group. Edit - while the Wikipedia page is incorrect (rating system of the Royal Navy) on the number of sloops, they did have many more sloops than frigates, but unfortunately this page conflates all sloops with all unrated ships. So the page shows 169 frigates, fourth rates, and post ships, but 360 "sloops of war" with no cutters or schooners counted. I think this is incorrect, conflating bombs and cutters with sloops, brigs, etc. Mark Adkins's The Trafalgar Companion on page 27 says in 1804 there were 204 frigates to 324 sloops, brigs, and schooners (and I'm suggesting that sloops, brigs, and schooners more or less conducted the same role, obviously with some variations, but basically they did the same thing, which was mainly going out to make people miserable or protect convoys, discounting packet duty, etc.). Unfortunately, bombs and cutters are also counted in that number, which I think we can agree are different craft entirely with a different mission.
My commiserations on the tooth. I did a self extraction of a loose tooth the other week, as not ONE dentist within 50 miles could do it inside a month. Bent nosed pliers & numbing that side of my mouth by swilling single malt around for half an hour did the trick...
31:18 Another famous example of need to reassign a sidelined portion of a crew would be when Torpedo, Fighting and Bombing Three embarked on USS Yorktown to replace losses from Coral Sea as she sailed for her fate at Midway.
One impression I got from Friedman's _British Cruisers_ was that the 1920s-30s Royal Navy cruiser force was in a bind. And even moreso once the London Naval Treaty added limits on total cruiser tonnage. The Royal Navy wanted a lot of cruiser hulls since they needed numbers for the trade protection role. However, said cruiser also needed a lot of specialized bits (aircraft, torpedoes, AAA suite) in addition to enough main gun firepower to potentially fight the cruisers in other navies. Lastly, they also needed to be cheap enough and efficiently crewed enough for the Royal Navy and Great Britain to afford in the desired numbers. So some thrashing back and forth including the attempts at "cut rate" slightly smaller versions of larger cruisers. And also development at the lower end of the size scale eventually leading to both the Tribal- and Dido- class ships.
@@arisnotheles Sort of an answer to the large destroyers being built elsewhere that had a gunnery advantage over the older RN destroyers. Which sort of fit WW1 doctrine where the RN reinforced DD flotillas with light cruisers to give them a gunnery advantage over German DD formations and to help fight off German light cruisers.
Couldn't tell you were dosed up at all. Having been there, I know how it feels, though - definitely feels like it changes a lot! Hope you recover quickly!
Two cents on the Confederacy question. The South was basically a lost cause after Gettysburg given the large loss of life and seasoned troops. There was no effective way for the South to invade the North and from a population, food, and material point of view, the North could just economically out perform. Now add in a developed communication and rail network, you can shift resource more expediently than the South. Toss in a war of attrition, and there was no way the South could recover. Even if they got some sophisticated ships, you still have an issue of what's being brought in for trade, war material or consumer goods that were in high demand and could fetch even higher prices. I recall when they looked at the remains of a blockade runner, they found war material, but loads of consumer goods as well. A blockade runner or merchantman was there to maximize profits.
Thanks for answering my question, Drach. As regards whether Halsey was in command at Midway. While I believe that he may have initially decided to try to close on the Japanese fleet instead of pulling back. I believe there were enough sane individuals in his staff and on Enterprise to talk him out of it.
Well...I mean there were plenty of sane individuals on his staff at Leyte... Honestly, given that we have a historical example of Halsey charging off after a Japanese formation based on a poor assessment of how "defeated" the enemies were, and we know Halsey disagreed with Spruance's decision at Philippine Sea to not move west during the night before the battle, I think it's far more likely than not that Halsey would have gone after what he could legitimately have considered a defeated force at Midway. There's no guarantee that the two fleets would have actually found each other in open sea in the dark, but I think Halsey would very likely have put the U.S. force in position to be found.
Shame you didn't show a picture of D-Day when the allies chose to land at low tide in comparison to a landing at high tide. That's one of the things that Saving Private Ryan got wrong, it shows the landing far too close because the tide is high in the movie.
Re: Italian/French dreadnought refits: I think shooting for 16" is madness. For the Cavours, considering the extent of their historical reconstruction, it's not unreasonable that they could have been refitted with 8 modern 14" guns, in 4 twins. I would prefer such an arrangement over their historic 12.5" ish relining, and if you're gonna do a full rebuild I feel you might as well. The Bretagnes mostly need more speed, the guns are fine. Stuff some magical french machinery in there first, replace the guns with the ones on the Dunkerques later.
Yeah, the Bretagnes needed more speed and better shells, not bigger guns. 13.4" is a perfectly adequate gun size for a 24,000 ton battleship, but the French 13.4" shells weren't exactly brilliant with their rather lightweight projectiles. So yeah, either replacing them with the Dunkerque guns or relining the 13.4" barrels to create a 13"/47 gun firing the same projectiles would've been a huge improvement.
One ! If not the only ,constant of warship design? Appears to ge the magazine? Guns have changed, hull design has changed the ship operating parameters has changed.... magazines seem to be a constant? Has there ever been serious design changes to the magazine? If not why, and wtag would you do to improve the design???
Thanks for another Dry Dock Drach and I hope your pain goes away quickly I guess I'm lucky as an X-ray of my mouth and jaw showed that I have no wisdom teeth at all, they just aren't there. I must store my wisdom somewhere else, still looking for it though :)
The Confederates could have gotten a dozen top tier European ironclads and it really wouldn’t have made a significant difference. The Confederacy was defeated on land, and it was down to the Union having far more men and vastly better logistical infrastructure, and to Sherman laying waste to the Confederate heartland and industrial base and Grant running Lee ragged and outfighting him. Additionally, the USA was not nearly as far behind Europe as Drach seems to thing, and was actually ahead in some areas. Towards the end of the war, the US Army had significant numbers of men armed with repeating rifles and had begun to bring the new Gatling Gun into battle. Even if the Confederates had managed to hold out longer, it wouldn’t have helped them. They would have ended up with infantry commanders trying to use Napoleonic tactics against what were effectively early automatic weapons. Things would have ended up like the Battle of the Somme for the Confederates and the Battle of 73 Easting for the US Army.
One suggestion on the sub-class debate. One factor may be the total number of ships in the larger class. It makes little sense to start talking of single ships as subclasses, since at some level of granularity, ALL ships are different. So splitting the thirteen counties into subclasses still leaves decent numbers in each subclass, whereas doing so with the Hippers, or even the South Dakotas, leaves penny-packet subclasses.
Why wasn't USS New Ironsides upgunned to use Dahlgrens or Rodmans when they became available? If her purpose was to deter European involvement, it would have made her a legitimate combatant.
You often mention "splinter damage" , I recently watched a video on battlefield artillery recognition?, some of the archaeological artifacts called splinters were actually the size of half the shell,soooo splinter damage/ protection?? What was the empirical definition of a splinter?
Used it independently, yes. Picric acid, what the Japanese called "shimose powder", was also used as an explosive filler by quite a few other nations by WW1. The British called it Luddite (after the town it was produced in, Lydd), the French Melinite, the Austro-Hungarians Ecrasite. The Russians were also using it by 1894, just not in naval shells that would be used during the Russo-Japanese war. They used wet gun cotton as a filling, modifying their shells in 1907 (presumably to replace the weak burster), and going through a complete redesign of their shells by early in WW1. The US would make an ammonium salt of picric acid they called Explosive D and use that to fill their shells, which made for a slightly less powerful but much more stable explosive.
Regarding if the Confederate Navy actually took possession of the Laid Ironclads, there is one factor that reduces their ability to make an impact: After 1862, there were only three ports that could have been good targets: Charleston SC (till fall of 1863), Mobile AL and Wilmington NC, all distant from the major war fronts. With regards to Norfolk, they ships would have had to "counter-blockade" and have ground forces reoccupy captured territory (same issue with Charleston in 1864 and beyond). At this point, would Europe be willing to send merchantmen into the South? Likely would have delayed surrender, but after Lincoln's re-election, doubt that a negotiated peace was in the cards.
Like all alternative histories you have to look at alternative responses. If the Union found itself facing a new generation of confededate warships they would built their own in greater numbers. Any advantage gained by the Confederacy would have been short lived. The potential for British and French intervention is overrated. Both Prussia and Russia were pro Union. The Russians even sent a squadron to the US for a visit during the war. Any intervention in favor of the Confederacy had the potential for touching off a general European War.
@@johnshepherd9676 Russia versus France and England less than a decade after Crimean War? Add in Prussia, Austria and France who would be involved in a couple of wars after this. Add France's efforts in Mexico during that time, the fuel is there.
Just to add a bit to the discussion on the Confederacy obtaining foreign ironclads, it may also have impacted several fairly significant actions the Union pulled off since they had essentially supremacy of the coastal seas, everything from the Peninsular Campaign (troop transport via the sea), capture of Roanoke Island, New Orleans, Mobile Bay, etc., where the main forces came via the sea. But as you say, only would have delayed the inevitable.
but to even further add some.. the longer the war prolonged and the Confederacy kept the ability to trade, the more likely it was for other countries like the UK to accept them as an independent country. Which would have left the Union with a bit of a problem with international diplomacy. And ofcourse like you mentioned, the lack of succesfull actions along the coast would not improve Union Morale, and free a lot of Confederacy troops to fight more inland.
A tsunami only grows in height when closing in to the coast where the depth of the water reduces. Out on the sea it is often not much more than a ripple.
Went through the whole wisdom tooth thing as well, but for the life of me I saw no wisdom in the procedure unless it was "avoid dentists especially since there always seems to be a lil prick involved" :)
A suggestion for 01:00:49 - Was the Confederacy’s quest to obtain foreign built ironclads a fool’s errand? If you view the Confederates having gained access to significant numbers of foreign-built ships as a symptom of political support for the Confederacy from Europe, then the ships themselves are not the point - the fact that their existence demonstrates foreign support for the Confederacy is far more important, from morale and political reasons. They are not the same as "recognition" - which the Confederacy dreamed of, especially from the UK and/or France - but they would be a tangible indication of foreign support.
With hindsight, no remotely realistic amount of warships were going to win the war for the Confederacy. They lacked the manpower, industry and resources to defeat the United States so long as the United States was willing to fight (much like the situation later faced by Japan). So, at best, they could have strung out the war by intercepting US commerce and/or protecting Confederate commerce. But that doesn't mean they were wrong to order them. At the time (April 1862 would be before Antietam, let alone Gettysburg), the willingness of the US to fight it out and their ability to bring those resources to bear were not so clear with various Confederate victories on land and significant political opposition to the war in the United States. Extending the war and interfering with commerce (directly impacting the wealthy and powerful Americans) could contribute to wearing down the United States' willingness to fight. Not to mention and extension of the war provided more opportunities for the French and British to intervene, which was certainly possible up until the Emancipation Proclamation. With hindsight they wouldn't have mattered, but they weren't a fool's errand as they had the potential to be significant at the time.
00:23:05 - Why didn't the Japanese convert Ises and Fusos to CVs and continue to build Tosas and Amagis? Also of note, the Ises and Fusos were Japan's only complete modern battleships for most of the 1920s. If Japan marked any of them for conversion, they'd have been obliged to begin conversion sooner than later, meaning two of their four battleships out of action. Given Japan was already behind the ball with capital ship numbers, just four modern battlecruisers and four modern battleships against the Royal Navy's fourteen or so battleships (plus some battlecruisers) and the USA's dozen or so battleships, it would have been very dangerous for Japan between the signing of the treaty and the completion of new ships should war have broken out in the meantime.
I think you are laboring under a misapprehension. We are not talking about the Second World War, but the Washington Naval Conference which established that nations could make some carriers over 27,000 tons if made from an existing hull that would otherwise be scrapped. The original question was asking why Japan chose to convert incomplete battlecruisers (the Tosas and Amagis) into carriers, rather than converting the complete Fusos or Ises into carriers so they could have more powerful battlecruisers instead. I observe that if Japan had pushed to complete two battlecruisers and sacrificed two completed Fusos/Ises as carriers, then Japan would have spent a number of years with only six modern capital ships (the four Kongos and whatever two battleships were not converted) while the Nagatos and battlecruisers were completed. @@WALTERBROADDUS
Well, that is what Drach said. I merely expanded on his answer by noting the Japanese also would have had effectively no battleships if they had done what the original questioner suggested. @@WALTERBROADDUS
True, but the guns or other supplies those ships could have opened the way for might have. If the Union offensives in 1864 and victory in 1865 get delayed by even a year each, there's a plausible scenario where Lincoln loses the 1864 election (historically, the fall of Atlanta gave him a big boost there), and President McClellan agrees to a negotiated peace.
It is rather new technology. ABB bought them to market in 1990. Also, it is a electric drive system. FInland is building Coast Guard ships with the system. And they seem preferred for icebreakers. So the USCG may use them on new breakers.
The Union *did* starve the Confederacy’s armies by laying waste to the Shannendoah Valley and Sherman’s March through Georgia. The mission of General Sheridan was to lay waste to the Shannendoah so thoroughly that: “A crow flying across would need to carry his own provendor,”
The Alabama Claims were a series of demands for damages sought by the government of the United States from the United Kingdom in 1869, for the attacks upon Union merchant ships by Confederate Navy commerce raiders built in British shipyards during the American Civil War. The claims focused chiefly on the most famous of these raiders, the CSS Alabama, which took more than sixty prizes before she was sunk off the French coast in 1864. After international arbitration endorsed the American position in 1872, Britain settled the matter by paying the United States $15.5 million, ending the dispute and leading to a treaty that restored friendly relations between Britain and the United States. That international arbitration established a precedent, and the case aroused interest in codifying public international law.
As an aside - Just watched Victory at Sea (99times) "Midway is East" and it would seem that Adm. Spruance wont the battle of Midway - and of course Adm. Fletcher was there to assist ???? Bias Bias Bias.
Allowing Confederate raiders to be built in UK yards was incredibly stupid by the UK government as it nearly set a precedent that any power could have ships built in a foreign yard during a war. Think of WWI with Germany building ships in US yards what a potential disaster that would be.
the foreign vessels would not have made that much difference. Thye might have helped open a few blockades but it would not have lasted. The Union had too many monitors.
"Massive WW1 German reparations" is presumably tongue in cheek, since the first cash tranches of those reparations mostly consisted of a portion of overall America sourced loans to the Weimar Republic and the issue re rest of the payments due was essentially (pun alert !) kicked around until everyone had lost interest.
With the advent of jet engines and steam catapults why?? Was it still necessary to steam into the wind? Physics would exoect greater thrust and velocity would negateb the need to turn into the wind?
Steaming into the wind generates additional lift over the wings. The more lift you have, the greater the load you can get airborne within the length of your takeoff run. Once in-air refueling becomes a thing, it's not unusual for aircraft on a strike mission to take off with all the weapons and minimal fuel, meeting a waiting tanker as the very first step in the strike mission.
Help guys, I am looking for an episode where Drach expressed opinions about Britain and its colonial empire...can someone please tell me which one it is?
There is not much tidal range round the Pacific islands but round landing areas in Britain you might need 15' obstacles. They would be easily spotted by aircraft and either marked with buoys or destroyed underwater on the rising tide by swimmers using rebreather apparatus. Sorry, placing explosive destruction charges. Detonations while the swimmers are at work would disable swimmers. Where there is a tide there is also a current so the swimmers would start at that end and lay wires to the detonators as they went.
what's the going rate from the Tooth Fairy, back in the 80's , it was 50p. Is the tooth fairy beating inflation, and because of the monopoly status of it's business , the obvious breaking and entering at night, and the question re what does it do with said teeth, I'm not sure we should be enriching what obviously seems unfair and possibly illegal business practices by Tooth Fairy Inc
Pinned post for Q&A :)
Feel better with the teeth drach.
Aside from the Japanese, did any navy try to build modular warships where the various armaments could be swapped as needed?
Which Admirals from the age of sail would have been well adjusted to lead their nation's forces during the subsiquent ages, who would have done well during the age of Ironclads, pre-dreadnoughts and Dreadnoughts?
With the benefit of hindsight which turret model ended up being better overall? Aka twins for dispersed guns to prevent losses or triples
"Swings and roundabouts"?
No ta, helter-skelter and witches' hat for me thank you.
I've been told that Danes would run along the working oars of their ships. I've read about midshipmen on racing each other up and down the rigging. Is there any truth to these tales?
Are there any other dangerous, exciting, fun and real games or toys specific to navies?
32:26 One thing the Russian Navy excelled at was the development of binoculars as ranged weapons.
"Do you see Torpedo Boats?"
They couldn’t get the penetration right but the accuracy and rate of fire were outstanding
@@chpet1655
But after twenty, their shoulders started to weaken.
Your dedication to making great content, even while ill or recovering is really amazing. Honestly, didn't really notice a difference except maybe a couple times.
If you're doing Midway counterfactuals with Halsey in command, how about the chances that Halsey would have enough control/influence over Mitscher to prevent the flight to nowhere?
I wonder if minus Spruance at Midway his subsequent promotions are superseded by the advancement of Hewett when it came time to form the command staff for Fifth Fleet. Does Spruance end up commanding Seventh Fleet?
I don't think the Admiral is going to micromanage air ops?
@@WALTERBROADDUS Might have had less patience with Mitscher's antics from the start though.
if his flagship had been the Hornet@@GaldirEonai
@@tomdolan9761possibly, but a big part of the reason that Spruance got tapped for the role in 5th Fleet was that after Midway he was Nimitz chief of staff. That was why chose him. He already knew that Spruance under him plan for the war. And Nimitz had already chosen Spruance for CoS before midway.
18:17 All hail our Naval overlord, Mechano-Drach! (Salute)
On the bright side Drach, you will hopefully get some good pain meds when they pull the tooth, and you can lay around for a day watching every Pirate's of the Caribbean movie in order.😊
Thank you for the amazing answer on my UK CL question. The Audio sounds fine. You're an absolute champion for continueing to do this after just having teeth out. Most would have postponed. Thanks Drach :D
Great Drydock Drach. Hope you get past your tooth problem quickly.
Drach, hoping your feeling better very soon
The Drydocks just keep coming!!
Thanks for answering my question!
Interesting that the late-war British torpedoes used Torpex.
Did any of the larger, later Japanese aerial torpedoes (especially that almost Type 93-sized one) actually end up seeing use against enemy ships given the Japanese pilot shortage?
Tor(pedo) ex(plosive) what is difficult. ;) A useful tool.
On the question regarding the more likely frigate encounter, it depends exactly how you phrase the question.
You suggested about 150 total frigates, with 100-ish in various groupings, and 50 ish operating solo. Therefore if you were to say "I have just seen frigate X, was it solo: then its a 50/150 chance - not a majority, as you said.
But if we instead asked "I just encountered a R$N formation with a frigate, was it solo?" - well, there's 50 singletons and say 100 sailing in groups of average size 5, so 20 such groups. That means that the likelihood that any encounter is a solo frigate is 50/70, because its the # of formations that matters.
Its kind of the same maths as justified convoys, even badly escorted ones. Its the same chane to encounter a lone ship as to encounter 100; its the group you find. More ships in a group doesn't increase that chance by anything like the # of ships.
Thanks for answering my both of my questions Drach! :D
My grandfather served on LST 1014 as a cook and 40mm gun captain. The LST 325 is located in Evansville, In. Fully functional and a great day trip. They stole if from Greece before they could scrape it.
A long while ago I asked my father what that unusual dirty green boat was tied up alongside the pier in a Scottish loch. And yes, that's what it was. It must have been as long as the McBraynes ferry. I have no idea what it was doing there.
58:00 edited to include sources: I'm not sure you're right on this. The "sloop" probably is where you'd be on that. (A ship with fewer than 20 guns.) I'm cooking dinner and can't look in my books, apologies, but I think there are significantly more unrated ships than frigates. To your point, frigates frequently go on detached duty, but so do the unrated ships. Particularly when you count packets and tenders in that group.
Edit - while the Wikipedia page is incorrect (rating system of the Royal Navy) on the number of sloops, they did have many more sloops than frigates, but unfortunately this page conflates all sloops with all unrated ships. So the page shows 169 frigates, fourth rates, and post ships, but 360 "sloops of war" with no cutters or schooners counted. I think this is incorrect, conflating bombs and cutters with sloops, brigs, etc.
Mark Adkins's The Trafalgar Companion on page 27 says in 1804 there were 204 frigates to 324 sloops, brigs, and schooners (and I'm suggesting that sloops, brigs, and schooners more or less conducted the same role, obviously with some variations, but basically they did the same thing, which was mainly going out to make people miserable or protect convoys, discounting packet duty, etc.). Unfortunately, bombs and cutters are also counted in that number, which I think we can agree are different craft entirely with a different mission.
Not trying to be teacher's pet, but remember to like the video! Keep up the fantastic work good sir, my eternal thanks.
My commiserations on the tooth.
I did a self extraction of a loose tooth the other week, as not ONE dentist within 50 miles could do it inside a month.
Bent nosed pliers & numbing that side of my mouth by swilling single malt around for half an hour did the trick...
Best intro song of any show ever. Drach goes to America and all sudden wisdom teeth kick up.
18:54 SG 1 goa'uld or tok'ra Drach
31:18 Another famous example of need to reassign a sidelined portion of a crew would be when Torpedo, Fighting and Bombing Three embarked on USS Yorktown to replace losses from Coral Sea as she sailed for her fate at Midway.
Congrats on more than 7,000 questions answered Drach (including intros and admin)!
One impression I got from Friedman's _British Cruisers_ was that the 1920s-30s Royal Navy cruiser force was in a bind. And even moreso once the London Naval Treaty added limits on total cruiser tonnage. The Royal Navy wanted a lot of cruiser hulls since they needed numbers for the trade protection role. However, said cruiser also needed a lot of specialized bits (aircraft, torpedoes, AAA suite) in addition to enough main gun firepower to potentially fight the cruisers in other navies. Lastly, they also needed to be cheap enough and efficiently crewed enough for the Royal Navy and Great Britain to afford in the desired numbers.
So some thrashing back and forth including the attempts at "cut rate" slightly smaller versions of larger cruisers. And also development at the lower end of the size scale eventually leading to both the Tribal- and Dido- class ships.
@@arisnotheles Sort of an answer to the large destroyers being built elsewhere that had a gunnery advantage over the older RN destroyers. Which sort of fit WW1 doctrine where the RN reinforced DD flotillas with light cruisers to give them a gunnery advantage over German DD formations and to help fight off German light cruisers.
You sounded fine to me. Keep up the good work.👍
Thanks Drach.
Couldn't tell you were dosed up at all. Having been there, I know how it feels, though - definitely feels like it changes a lot! Hope you recover quickly!
42:48 I'm pretty sure the ship to the right is some flavor of light cruiser, possibly a Königsberg class ship.
Two cents on the Confederacy question. The South was basically a lost cause after Gettysburg given the large loss of life and seasoned troops. There was no effective way for the South to invade the North and from a population, food, and material point of view, the North could just economically out perform. Now add in a developed communication and rail network, you can shift resource more expediently than the South. Toss in a war of attrition, and there was no way the South could recover.
Even if they got some sophisticated ships, you still have an issue of what's being brought in for trade, war material or consumer goods that were in high demand and could fetch even higher prices. I recall when they looked at the remains of a blockade runner, they found war material, but loads of consumer goods as well. A blockade runner or merchantman was there to maximize profits.
Thanks for answering my question, Drach. As regards whether Halsey was in command at Midway. While I believe that he may have initially decided to try to close on the Japanese fleet instead of pulling back. I believe there were enough sane individuals in his staff and on Enterprise to talk him out of it.
Well...I mean there were plenty of sane individuals on his staff at Leyte...
Honestly, given that we have a historical example of Halsey charging off after a Japanese formation based on a poor assessment of how "defeated" the enemies were, and we know Halsey disagreed with Spruance's decision at Philippine Sea to not move west during the night before the battle, I think it's far more likely than not that Halsey would have gone after what he could legitimately have considered a defeated force at Midway. There's no guarantee that the two fleets would have actually found each other in open sea in the dark, but I think Halsey would very likely have put the U.S. force in position to be found.
Wisdom tooth be damned Sir; Drach's been at the rum ration I reckon.
Shame you didn't show a picture of D-Day when the allies chose to land at low tide in comparison to a landing at high tide. That's one of the things that Saving Private Ryan got wrong, it shows the landing far too close because the tide is high in the movie.
Re: Italian/French dreadnought refits: I think shooting for 16" is madness.
For the Cavours, considering the extent of their historical reconstruction, it's not unreasonable that they could have been refitted with 8 modern 14" guns, in 4 twins. I would prefer such an arrangement over their historic 12.5" ish relining, and if you're gonna do a full rebuild I feel you might as well.
The Bretagnes mostly need more speed, the guns are fine. Stuff some magical french machinery in there first, replace the guns with the ones on the Dunkerques later.
Yeah, the Bretagnes needed more speed and better shells, not bigger guns. 13.4" is a perfectly adequate gun size for a 24,000 ton battleship, but the French 13.4" shells weren't exactly brilliant with their rather lightweight projectiles. So yeah, either replacing them with the Dunkerque guns or relining the 13.4" barrels to create a 13"/47 gun firing the same projectiles would've been a huge improvement.
One ! If not the only ,constant of warship design? Appears to ge the magazine? Guns have changed, hull design has changed the ship operating parameters has changed.... magazines seem to be a constant? Has there ever been serious design changes to the magazine? If not why, and wtag would you do to improve the design???
What would you change in a weapons magazine?
@@WALTERBROADDUS why you think I asked?
@@hughgordon6435 I really don't know? 🤔 It's a secure space for ammunition. I don't know what other than make it more fireproof you're supposed to do?
@@WALTERBROADDUS yet again you belittle me! Is it fun for you
@@hughgordon6435 sorry you take it that way.
3:00
Do I hear puppy Drach and Mrs. Drach having a debate about three triple /vs/ four twin?
Thanks for another Dry Dock Drach and I hope your pain goes away quickly
I guess I'm lucky as an X-ray of my mouth and jaw showed that I have no wisdom teeth at all, they just aren't there.
I must store my wisdom somewhere else, still looking for it though :)
The Confederates could have gotten a dozen top tier European ironclads and it really wouldn’t have made a significant difference. The Confederacy was defeated on land, and it was down to the Union having far more men and vastly better logistical infrastructure, and to Sherman laying waste to the Confederate heartland and industrial base and Grant running Lee ragged and outfighting him.
Additionally, the USA was not nearly as far behind Europe as Drach seems to thing, and was actually ahead in some areas. Towards the end of the war, the US Army had significant numbers of men armed with repeating rifles and had begun to bring the new Gatling Gun into battle. Even if the Confederates had managed to hold out longer, it wouldn’t have helped them. They would have ended up with infantry commanders trying to use Napoleonic tactics against what were effectively early automatic weapons. Things would have ended up like the Battle of the Somme for the Confederates and the Battle of 73 Easting for the US Army.
One suggestion on the sub-class debate. One factor may be the total number of ships in the larger class. It makes little sense to start talking of single ships as subclasses, since at some level of granularity, ALL ships are different. So splitting the thirteen counties into subclasses still leaves decent numbers in each subclass, whereas doing so with the Hippers, or even the South Dakotas, leaves penny-packet subclasses.
Sounds like you have a Mk. 14 dog in the background there, Drach!
Why wasn't USS New Ironsides upgunned to use Dahlgrens or Rodmans when they became available? If her purpose was to deter European involvement, it would have made her a legitimate combatant.
A kedge anchor would be dropped on the way in if it was going to be used
You often mention "splinter damage" , I recently watched a video on battlefield artillery recognition?, some of the archaeological artifacts called splinters were actually the size of half the shell,soooo splinter damage/ protection?? What was the empirical definition of a splinter?
A piece of material mobilised by unwanted energy.
A rat that knows karate
@@dlscorp .....?..? Just what tf?
You mentioned that the Japanese navy at Tsuchima were using an explosive type that was very explosive? Did other navies copy it???
Used it independently, yes. Picric acid, what the Japanese called "shimose powder", was also used as an explosive filler by quite a few other nations by WW1. The British called it Luddite (after the town it was produced in, Lydd), the French Melinite, the Austro-Hungarians Ecrasite. The Russians were also using it by 1894, just not in naval shells that would be used during the Russo-Japanese war. They used wet gun cotton as a filling, modifying their shells in 1907 (presumably to replace the weak burster), and going through a complete redesign of their shells by early in WW1. The US would make an ammonium salt of picric acid they called Explosive D and use that to fill their shells, which made for a slightly less powerful but much more stable explosive.
The Russians decided to stay with their nominal salted binocular explosive instead of the more dangerous pyramidic acid formulation.
@@kemarisite thanks , I always wonder what lessons were learned?
Regarding if the Confederate Navy actually took possession of the Laid Ironclads, there is one factor that reduces their ability to make an impact: After 1862, there were only three ports that could have been good targets: Charleston SC (till fall of 1863), Mobile AL and Wilmington NC, all distant from the major war fronts. With regards to Norfolk, they ships would have had to "counter-blockade" and have ground forces reoccupy captured territory (same issue with Charleston in 1864 and beyond). At this point, would Europe be willing to send merchantmen into the South? Likely would have delayed surrender, but after Lincoln's re-election, doubt that a negotiated peace was in the cards.
Like all alternative histories you have to look at alternative responses. If the Union found itself facing a new generation of confededate warships they would built their own in greater numbers. Any advantage gained by the Confederacy would have been short lived.
The potential for British and French intervention is overrated. Both Prussia and Russia were pro Union. The Russians even sent a squadron to the US for a visit during the war. Any intervention in favor of the Confederacy had the potential for touching off a general European War.
@@johnshepherd9676 Russia versus France and England less than a decade after Crimean War? Add in Prussia, Austria and France who would be involved in a couple of wars after this. Add France's efforts in Mexico during that time, the fuel is there.
Just to add a bit to the discussion on the Confederacy obtaining foreign ironclads, it may also have impacted several fairly significant actions the Union pulled off since they had essentially supremacy of the coastal seas, everything from the Peninsular Campaign (troop transport via the sea), capture of Roanoke Island, New Orleans, Mobile Bay, etc., where the main forces came via the sea. But as you say, only would have delayed the inevitable.
but to even further add some.. the longer the war prolonged and the Confederacy kept the ability to trade, the more likely it was for other countries like the UK to accept them as an independent country. Which would have left the Union with a bit of a problem with international diplomacy. And ofcourse like you mentioned, the lack of succesfull actions along the coast would not improve Union Morale, and free a lot of Confederacy troops to fight more inland.
Were 5here any warships on any nation witnesses to the eruption of Krakatoa? And did it result in any changes to hull design to combat Tsunamis?
A tsunami only grows in height when closing in to the coast where the depth of the water reduces. Out on the sea it is often not much more than a ripple.
Went through the whole wisdom tooth thing as well, but for the life of me I saw no wisdom in the procedure unless it was "avoid dentists especially since there always seems to be a lil prick involved" :)
YESSS🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉
A suggestion for 01:00:49 - Was the Confederacy’s quest to obtain foreign built ironclads a fool’s errand?
If you view the Confederates having gained access to significant numbers of foreign-built ships as a symptom of political support for the Confederacy from Europe, then the ships themselves are not the point - the fact that their existence demonstrates foreign support for the Confederacy is far more important, from morale and political reasons. They are not the same as "recognition" - which the Confederacy dreamed of, especially from the UK and/or France - but they would be a tangible indication of foreign support.
was there in powered ships a speed faster than flank ? if so any records of this being used and how was it possible. ?
thx for the channel.
With hindsight, no remotely realistic amount of warships were going to win the war for the Confederacy. They lacked the manpower, industry and resources to defeat the United States so long as the United States was willing to fight (much like the situation later faced by Japan). So, at best, they could have strung out the war by intercepting US commerce and/or protecting Confederate commerce.
But that doesn't mean they were wrong to order them. At the time (April 1862 would be before Antietam, let alone Gettysburg), the willingness of the US to fight it out and their ability to bring those resources to bear were not so clear with various Confederate victories on land and significant political opposition to the war in the United States. Extending the war and interfering with commerce (directly impacting the wealthy and powerful Americans) could contribute to wearing down the United States' willingness to fight. Not to mention and extension of the war provided more opportunities for the French and British to intervene, which was certainly possible up until the Emancipation Proclamation.
With hindsight they wouldn't have mattered, but they weren't a fool's errand as they had the potential to be significant at the time.
18:17, Drach turned to Robo-Drach to answer this question
Skynet absorbed him to get naval artificial intelligence.
00:23:05 - Why didn't the Japanese convert Ises and Fusos to CVs and continue to build Tosas and Amagis?
Also of note, the Ises and Fusos were Japan's only complete modern battleships for most of the 1920s. If Japan marked any of them for conversion, they'd have been obliged to begin conversion sooner than later, meaning two of their four battleships out of action.
Given Japan was already behind the ball with capital ship numbers, just four modern battlecruisers and four modern battleships against the Royal Navy's fourteen or so battleships (plus some battlecruisers) and the USA's dozen or so battleships, it would have been very dangerous for Japan between the signing of the treaty and the completion of new ships should war have broken out in the meantime.
To what end? You lack pilots, planes and fuel.
I think you are laboring under a misapprehension.
We are not talking about the Second World War, but the Washington Naval Conference which established that nations could make some carriers over 27,000 tons if made from an existing hull that would otherwise be scrapped.
The original question was asking why Japan chose to convert incomplete battlecruisers (the Tosas and Amagis) into carriers, rather than converting the complete Fusos or Ises into carriers so they could have more powerful battlecruisers instead.
I observe that if Japan had pushed to complete two battlecruisers and sacrificed two completed Fusos/Ises as carriers, then Japan would have spent a number of years with only six modern capital ships (the four Kongos and whatever two battleships were not converted) while the Nagatos and battlecruisers were completed.
@@WALTERBROADDUS
@@genericpersonx333 I would imagine they felt that those hulls were not appropriate for the task? There's also the economics of the era to consider.
Well, that is what Drach said. I merely expanded on his answer by noting the Japanese also would have had effectively no battleships if they had done what the original questioner suggested.
@@WALTERBROADDUS
1:00:49 Those ships weren't going to stop Sherman from marching to the Sea.
True, but the guns or other supplies those ships could have opened the way for might have. If the Union offensives in 1864 and victory in 1865 get delayed by even a year each, there's a plausible scenario where Lincoln loses the 1864 election (historically, the fall of Atlanta gave him a big boost there), and President McClellan agrees to a negotiated peace.
Off topic but something I've always wondered about: Why don't modern warships use Azipods?
What are those?
I would imagine they add complexity, drag and weight, and warships are not expected to be manageable in harbors anyway
It is rather new technology. ABB bought them to market in 1990. Also, it is a electric drive system. FInland is building Coast Guard ships with the system. And they seem preferred for icebreakers. So the USCG may use them on new breakers.
The Union *did* starve the Confederacy’s armies by laying waste to the Shannendoah Valley and Sherman’s March through Georgia.
The mission of General Sheridan was to lay waste to the Shannendoah so thoroughly that: “A crow flying across would need to carry his own provendor,”
The Alabama Claims were a series of demands for damages sought by the government of the United States from the United Kingdom in 1869, for the attacks upon Union merchant ships by Confederate Navy commerce raiders built in British shipyards during the American Civil War. The claims focused chiefly on the most famous of these raiders, the CSS Alabama, which took more than sixty prizes before she was sunk off the French coast in 1864.
After international arbitration endorsed the American position in 1872, Britain settled the matter by paying the United States $15.5 million, ending the dispute and leading to a treaty that restored friendly relations between Britain and the United States. That international arbitration established a precedent, and the case aroused interest in codifying public international law.
What a precedent! That must be a story in itself.
Was it actually paid or did Britain just ignore it?
@@20chocsaday As far as I am able to determine, 8 million had been paid as of 1897.
"Alabama" Claims - Hansard - UK Parliament 1897 page
LOL, looks like there was a stowaway putting their £2 in worth a comments😂😂❤
As an aside - Just watched Victory at Sea (99times) "Midway is East" and it would seem that Adm. Spruance wont the battle of Midway - and of course Adm. Fletcher was there to assist ???? Bias Bias Bias.
Allowing Confederate raiders to be built in UK yards was incredibly stupid by the UK government as it nearly set a precedent that any power could have ships built in a foreign yard during a war. Think of WWI with Germany building ships in US yards what a potential disaster that would be.
the foreign vessels would not have made that much difference. Thye might have helped open a few blockades but it would not have lasted. The Union had too many monitors.
"Massive WW1 German reparations" is presumably tongue in cheek, since the first cash tranches of those reparations mostly consisted of a portion of overall America sourced loans to the Weimar Republic and the issue re rest of the payments due was essentially (pun alert !)
kicked around until everyone had lost interest.
"Swings and roundabouts"?
No ta, helter-skelter and witches' hat for me thank you.
Dog in background 😳
Thanks, I thought I was hearing things!
Mk 14 dog?
Algorithm support comment
With the advent of jet engines and steam catapults why?? Was it still necessary to steam into the wind? Physics would exoect greater thrust and velocity would negateb the need to turn into the wind?
Steaming into the wind generates additional lift over the wings. The more lift you have, the greater the load you can get airborne within the length of your takeoff run. Once in-air refueling becomes a thing, it's not unusual for aircraft on a strike mission to take off with all the weapons and minimal fuel, meeting a waiting tanker as the very first step in the strike mission.
Help guys, I am looking for an episode where Drach expressed opinions about Britain and its colonial empire...can someone please tell me which one it is?
I think you’ve made a mistake about landing craft and tides. A rising tide is good, but you land a LOW tide so beach obstacles are exposed
There is not much tidal range round the Pacific islands but round landing areas in Britain you might need 15' obstacles.
They would be easily spotted by aircraft and either marked with buoys or destroyed underwater on the rising tide by swimmers using rebreather apparatus.
Sorry, placing explosive destruction charges. Detonations while the swimmers are at work would disable swimmers.
Where there is a tide there is also a current so the swimmers would start at that end and lay wires to the detonators as they went.
:)
All this talk of Splinter damage.... just don't let the rats in the bilges learn karate
8th, 8 October 2023
I've had all four wisdom teeth pulled. So I share your pain.
My grandma just pulled out one of her own teeth at her house by herself. Man up and yank that tooth out yourself Drach.
what's the going rate from the Tooth Fairy, back in the 80's , it was 50p.
Is the tooth fairy beating inflation, and because of the monopoly status of it's business , the obvious breaking and entering at night, and the question re what does it do with said teeth, I'm not sure we should be enriching what obviously seems unfair and possibly illegal business practices by Tooth Fairy Inc
I did the same as your grandma while I was waiting for the plumber.
Who is paid the most per hour, dentist or plumber?
Oh joy, Wisdom tooth removal. It was just so much fun! NOT!!
52:57 yet the japanese would still have screwed it up