Pinned post for Q&A :) Also, apologies for not knowing how a turbocharger actually works! This is why I stick to ships and not aircraft or land vehicles 😀
Was there any attempt anywhere during the age of sail to develop any other type of shot besides the usual? (Round, chain, canister, etc) such as the conical shells we know of now? And if so, by whom and to what success?
I read on a forum that US WW1 face-hardened armor was around 20 percent less effective than WW2 era material, so the US standard BBs had a belt of only around 280mm effective WW2 era armor. Is this true? Another question: I found your argument for mass-produced Scharnhorsts instead of Bismarck, Graf Zeppelin etc very interesting. Given how much the Kongos were used in the Pacific war, wouldn't it have been wiser for Japan to stick with the Treaty and build something like the Kongo replacement BC in large numbers?
In Flags of Our Fathers, we see a japanese shore battery on Mt. Suribashi hit the superstructure of what looks like a battleship, targeting presumably its bofors mounts. The battleship in question appeared like a USN fast battleship. My question is, do you know of any USN fast battleships in the naval bombardment of Iwo Jima that was hit?
Hi Drach, Present day navies seem to have fleet wide, standardized training for the various benefits that standardized training brings. But I guess some time in the past naval training varied from ship to ship and even within a given vessel. When did standardized training and proceeduress become common practice?
Drach, a turbocharger doesn't send the exhaust back into the intake, it uses it to spin a turbine which Spins an impeller which forces more air into the combustion chamber exactly like a supercharger, hence why turbochargers used to be called turbo-superchargers. the main difference between turbo and superchargers is a supercharger impeller is mechanically driven of an engine while a turbocharger uses the exhaust to spin the turbine which itself spins the impeller.
@@Rammstein0963. U-Boats had mechanically driven superchargers, because 4-stroke diesels don't make decent power without forced induction (usually a turbo nowadays, hence that high-pitched whine over the diesel rattle when a truck/lorry passes you)). As opposed to a lot of their aircraft diesels/oldschool American truck engines which were two-stroke, and won't even work without a belt-driven blower (or a workaround using the crankcase as the blower like in a chainsaw, but that's a lot harder to do on a multi-cylinder engine.)
22:37 The USN Garcia Class DE/FFs had what is referred to as "Pressure Fired" boilers. These boilers had exhaust driven turbo chargers vs steam driven blowers which saved ~10% on stem requirements. The combustion air pressure was supplied at 50 psia as apposed to a conventional boiler operating at 15-30 inches of water column. The high pressure means more molecules are striking a given surface area which greatly increases the heat transfer rate allowing for a much smaller and lighter installation ie: 2000 vs. 2100 lb. of refractory for a conventional boiler. The physical size of the boiler was about half that of a conventional boiler of similar capacity. The boilers looked like a large pressure vessel standing on end with the steam drum mounted horizontally above. They were fired with a diesel type fuel which eliminated problems of carbon buildup in the turbo charger. A problem developed in the connections of the supper heater tubed to their headers that was later resolved, but not by the time that the final design of the Knox Class leading Gibbs & Cox to recommend conventional boilers for the class. I realize this is outside of the time period that you normally cover, but is still germane to the question at hand. Keep up the good work
One thing I have always found strange is how similar Scharnhorst and Gneisenau were (the superstructure layout is honestly more of a cosmetic difference), while you probably need 2 hours to explain all the differences between Bismarck and Tirpitz.
Jumped off a dock on the landword side of vancouver island, temperature was refreshingly plesant. Jumped off a pier on the seaward side, only 10° cooler...... and aspirated a worrisome bit of ocean during the debilitating pretzel part of the cramps. Which was functionally indistinguishable from not being able to swim and probably a contributing factor for the myth sailor can't. Even though I can swim, knew that I was going in, had a full breath of air, no heavy boots or clothes, wasn't concussed or wounded I still could have drownd just from not dipping a toe first. I In situations of actuall adversity deferential temperature could easily claim a majority of folks who go overboard, and to the observer it would appear as if they just screamed stopped treading water and sank.
On the question about the movie “Below” weapon “No Room for Mistakes: British and Allied Submarines in European Waters” makes mention on page 76 of a weapon called U-Bootsdrachen in use at the beginning of WW2 and describes it as a sweeping wire with a grapnel at the end that was supposed to hook on a submarine and pull and explosive charge down against the outer hull but notes that it was never successful.
As to sailors knowing how to swim, in my time the navy did not require or teach you to swim. They did provide survival training that would keep you afloat for as long as possible. This included making a bouyant device out of nearly any article of clothing you had including your cap, your trousers or even your shoes, This was done by trapping air in them by cupping them on the water. You could tie your pants legs at the ends and float for several minutes before the air bubbles out and you have to refill it. You shirt would work the same way. The other training was how to enter the water feet first and arms crossed from a height simuating a ships deck and how to keep from having your life jacket from being ripped off entirely. Lastly was the technique on how to swim underneath water that is on fire from fuel. Of course if you coudn't swim in the first place you would find the maneuver difficult..
Even today, it is fairly common for people to join the navy not knowing how to swim. When I joined the USN back in 2003, somewhere between 1/3 & 1/2 of the people that arrived at basic training at the same time as me could not pass the basic swim test (which is incredibly easy) and required remedial training.
The real surprise to me is people assume swimming is a universal skill when more than half the population lives in places with little to no access to swimming facilities. I grew up with grandparents who had a pool, beaches within an hour, and it being central Florida, most every place had a pool with some public access. Meanwhile, my cousins in New York City had one dirty "community pool" that could only be accessed by walking through several dangerous city blocks. I swim like a fish; my cousins not so much. Ironically, my one cousin became a merchant mariner and harbor master, but swimming was not a priority skill for him to do any of that.
Went through boot during COVID. I can't speak for "normal" divisions, since 50/80 guys I was with were SO contracts. Of the rest of us, only one failed the swim test. He was Nigerian and just couldn't give himself to the water for the float test. He'd always panic. Which makes sense if you haven't had experience. Hope he made it.
For a ship whose career mirrored its namesake I would go with the Age of Sail French 74 gunner 'Annibal' (Hannibal) commissioned in 1778. Her action at the 1779 Battle of Martinique had some pretty close parallels to the Carthaginian general's tactics. Attacked by a far superior force and alone against 7 British ships of the line she used superior positioning to nullify their numbers until help arrived and she and a pair of 64 gunners held off 15 British ships which broke off the action after Annibal lured them in range of costal defenses, like Hannibal would draw Roman forces into ambushes/reinforcements. She didn't sink the whole squadron or anything like a naval Cannae but did make the British squadron pay for their overconfidence. Her participation in Suffren's Indian operations saw plenty of successful actions but no decisive victories, much like Hannibal's own vain attempts to make the Romans surrender. She (albeit renamed to Achille) met her Zama at the Glorious First of June when she was captured although not without a fight and not in useable condition.
Thanks for this comment. It got me to read the Wikipedia article on the ship. Googling the ship also produced some cool paintings of tall ships. It’s a fascinating history although I’m tempted to engage in some unnecessary wordplay “Annibal in portem,” and so forth. Renaming the ship Achille isn’t much better, Achille’s keel comes to mind.
Re:convoys. A big advantage of the system in defending against U boot attack had to do with removing targets from the ocean. A convoy was not much more easily sighted from a low lying U boot than was a single ship. When ships sailed individually, and thus were more evenly distributed across the ocean, U boots sighted them more frequently and the lone ships were easy targets. When ships were gathered in convoys, the rate of sinkings declined, even if those convoys had weak escorts.
14:09 when they trained for sword work in the age of sail they would often use something called singlestick. This was a game employing roughly similar cuts, thrusts and parries as were used with the cutlass, but as it was played with wooden sticks with wicker hand guards; hits, although painful, were not often dangerous.
Able Seaman Bob Tilburn, 20 years old. lasted in the North Atlantic for about two hours before being rescued by the HMS Electra, aided by a rescue float, although he nearly succumbed to the cold.. "Tilburn leapt towards the water and began to discard anything that might weigh him down. Tilburn succeeded in removing his tin helmet, gas mask, and duffel coat before the water swept him over the side."
Minor Point - The French Battleships of the Richelieu class used boilers where the exhaust gas drove a turbine which powered the forced draft fans. This same system was used by at least one class of post-war US destroyers.
Re-upping my suggestion for my fellow Patreon subscribers to voluntarily skip asking a question for the end of December Patreon Drydock. Let's give Drach some well-earned time off over the holidays! Spread the word.
No way, I say crack the whip and let's see if we can get a new record for length, hoping for 12 hours or so, in December. If 2000 more people get on board the Patreon train and start asking questions, that shouldn't be a problem. Drach, better stock up on your coffee, your going to need it.
I recall reading that the British had improved the basic Krupp process to the point where their armour was about 10% stronger than the German for the same weight. A significant difference. British engines were also more reliable, which again made a difference in sustained high-speed running.
Hey Drachs. In Kane's book about his experience in WW2 he talked about the Japanesse distroyers using grappling hooks to snag a boot on the bottom and then sliding depth charges down the cable to kill it. He actually reported this as he observed it from afar when in the Yellow sea I think and one of our boats had gone to the bottom but was not sunk, something they would do to hide while making repairs. Also, on US ships some men would not be in the 'work station' and have to get to their GQ station from berthing or the like and that could be a ways away. Also, not all stations are work stations and not manned continously so that would make people moving about required. I was an electrian and worked in the engine room, but we had emergency generators near both ends of the ship, plus damage control parties that required us again fore to aft. The bigger the ship the more and farther the people have to go. I am sure the RN had simular issues, but they may not be talked about as much.
The 1957 US documentary series, "Silent Service" season 1 episode 3 tells how a Japanese destroyer did in fact use a grappling hook on a wench to catch and then to attempt the pull the USS Thresher to the surface. It almost worked. It is possible the idea for the movie "Below" was taken from this real life event, but only very loosely so.
I've read a number of historical age-of-sail novels in which RN ships encounter one another at sea and follow what I assume is the actual historical procedure: they first exchange recognition signals (challenge/reply) to confirm both are British and then hoist their individual identification signals which are listed in an Admiralty reference book that gives the name of the ship, its rating and its captain at the time the book was last updated.
I remember my first battle station post, 3" countermeasure reloader. Was a submariner so the way to get there was quiet and make fast; fun part we once launched oranges across the harbor against the Greenville to see if we could scare the topside watch.
Love the many references to ! beloved slowpoke USN 'standards'! Even a gratuitous Pict of Tennessee. Have also encountered different answers as to whether Colorados had 16" armour at belt over magazines and machinery. For the record, Tennessees and Colorados are freQuently called the 'Big Five', yet are built on the hull originally designed for New MeXicos. Tennessee's only advantage over NMs was higher elevation of 14\50s, and, of these vessels, NMs had new years still inadequate machinery installed during major '31-'35 refits. Vanadium!
Different manufacturers of armor had different ideas of what made the best kind of plate. They all had to meet the minimum test specs, but some had better quality control and higher-than-minimum resistance. Some of this was modified by the test specs of the navy that they made armor for, which can degrade the best armor they could have made due to the specs requiring results that turn out to be counter-productive for the optimum resistance (for example, US Navy WWII Class "A" face-hardened tests requiring certain nose damage effects on all impacting APC projectiles, which caused the manufacturers to have to make the face layer too thick for the heavy battleship side armor thicknesses (scaling), even though this part of the test really did virtually nothing to improve the armor against high-quality APC shells due to the good AP cap design and general APC shell toughness). All nations made face-hardened armor with different properties due to design and manufacturing skill limits, different ideas as to what is important (amount of explosive filler in their shells, etc.), and such less-than-beneficial test requirements.
One of the early adopters of Motor ships was the Bank Line of Glasgow. they purchased some second hand in the 1920's with one being built in Germany in 1916 and built a Class of 12. Several ships were used by the RN in WW2 as antiaircraft vessels. The Speybank was captured by the Atlantis. On a trip from Japan renamed Doggerbank she took the survivors of the Thor and Ukermark (ex Altmark) and war cargo to go to France. She was torpedoed by U 43 and all except 1 died.
All the arguments about face hardening, wood-backing, chromium additions...high quality steel. The arc of protecting Sea-going vessels is pretty much summed up in Monty Python and the Holy Grail. "Oh shut up, and go and change your armor!"
Aloha. Having watched people on the beach for a while - 99% are barely able to float nevermind swimming a 100m distance and that's in ideal calm and warm water. I swim and freedive in chaotic swell sometimes and dive through 9f breaks and can last for 3-5 hours in warm water (-1 c watertemp can make a huge difference at a warm 28c) It takes a long time to develop situational-and environmental-awareness and on how to 100% reliably time your breathing as not to inhale water..which is the cause of drowning here by unfit people. Havent inhaled water ever ;-) Survival odds sink dramatically with cold water...I windsurfed between ice floats on alpine lakes and snowed in Japan.
My ship USS Voge had an actual turbocharged Boiler to supply air. The boiler was under high pressure in the combustion chamber and the So the amount of air molecules was high so a great deal of fuel could be put in.
01:39:49 - Why was Hood not overhauled in the late 1930's? I'd expand on this to more emphasize the sort of problems that HMS Hood was kept in the water to help deal with, specifically the Japanese and their battlecruisers. The British and Japanese had serious tensions during the 1930s, at precisely the time the Hood was due for modernization. As Drach notes elsewhere, the Kongos were especially dangerous ships in a pre-airpower-dominated naval world, but HMS Hood, having been built to fight tougher battlecruisers than Kongo, was more than a match to a Kongo one on one. This meant that by just existing, the Hood ensured Japan would not be able to scatter the four Kongos to the high seas to savage the British cruiser fleets unchecked. The moment HMS Hood went into drydock, this could be interpreted by Japan as an opportunity to strike while Britain was basically defenseless against the Kongos. Not the only factor for sure, but something of significance all the same.
Italy also deserves some more mention as their sudden spurt of modern cruisers and updated battleships in the 1930s turned the Mediterranean into a much more dangerous area than it had been during the 1920s.
@@davidharner5865 The KGVs were not around until well into 1939, and by that point, the Kongos had been 30+ knots for some time, so they would have still been faster enough to prevent a KGV battleship chasing them down. HMS Repulse and Renown were dangerous, but also basically equal to any Kongo, as neither Kongos nor Renowns had armor to achieve stand-off within practical gunnery range. Even with updated firecontrol, hitting moving targets beyond 20,000 yards was proving more luck than skill, and both Kongo's 14'' guns and Renown's 15'' guns could blow through the armor of the other at 20,000-25,000 yards without any difficulty. This gives the Royal Navy two battlecruisers against four Japanese vessels with about equal odds in battle (ie, the first to hit the other's citadel probably winning). Renown's superior speed only really gave the British ship the choice to decline battle, because if it wanted to be close enough to have a reasonable chance of hitting a Kongo, it would have to be within range of the Kongo anyway. HMS Hood, on the other hand, was the one ship that could face down any Kongo with better odds than not, being built to handle German battlecruisers arguably more powerful than the Kongos ended up being. This changed the math from a 2-1 superiority in battlecruisers in Japan's favor to a 3-4 matching weighted in Britain's favor because the Japanese guns were not certain to defeat HMS Hood's armor at practical combat ranges. Remove HMS Hood for a lengthy modernization, that is a number of years where Japan could be tempted to leverage that 2-1 battlecruiser advantage to ravage Britain's vulnerable lines of communication. So long as Hood was on the table, Japan had no decisive advantage to leverage under prevailing naval thought.
Drach, thank you for all you do! I know you are busy, but would you, please, add existing IJN Nagato and ~USS Montana reviews to battleship 'playlist'? Also, at some point would you, pretty please with butterScots, do a segment on the building process? As in deciding requirements, drawing plans, laying keel through adding turrets and machinery &c. Many thanks either way!
When you say a sailor “will do a real number” I imagine the navy dropping everything to sing and dance on deck. Do a number with those voices and crew for choreography.
Even today a lot of Scottish fishermen cannot swim. It is said that if the sea wants to take you it will. In addition though described as light fleet carriers the Colossus class 13190 tons were used as fleet carriers
As a citizen of Kiel city, home to the great mutiny of the high seas fleet and the following German revolution. There was fighting. Between sailors trying to spread freedom throughout the city and Germany by proxy and local imperial troops.Sure. But the warships themselves? Story i heard was that those big ole batteries were trained at the officers district of ...roughly translates as "direbrook", a beautiful forest and hillcountry uptown area above the harbor. Yeah well......edit: though i actually doubt that story to some degree. You would need comically low shell velocity to hit many of those areas from the harbor. At least the mansion desitrict. The naval command and academy posts etc though......yeah, clean line of fire....
You also have the quality control level of the manufacturer of the armor. In the US before WWI, Midvale had very high standards, Carnegie seems to have been OK (not known about the details), but Bethlehem was CRAP (I mean it!). When plates from OKLAHOMA were removed to test at NPG, Dahlgren for knowledge about the ship steels used in the older ships, they had three 13.5" belt plates that had so many differences between each other that they were not easily shown to be the same KIND of armor, to say nothing about the resistance of those plates to test impacts. Before that, Bethlehem totally failed when it tried to make the first US Navy 14" AP shells circa 1910, while Midvale passed every single shell and Crucible Steel Corporation made shells that mostly passed, but with a couple of failures. I hope this was not also true in WWII, but you need to know what you are doing and Bethlehem fell on its face compared to its competitors in both armor and projectiles. Kind of sad, really...
Frankenstien's monster is made captain of a ship, which one is fitting for him? Had this thought in october but lapsed and then forgot. So a nightmare before Christmas question.
At two hours forty-two minutes or so you talk about visionaries imagining future technologies, I recall in I believe the second of The Chieftain's "Readings From The Book of Armaments" videos he reads a request from a soldier in WWII for a sight capable of seeing through smoke and fog, which it would take something like thirty years to realize.
Regarding holystoning, I seem to recall once seeing an illustration of sailors using a quite large holystone (similar to a curling stone) which they were swinging from side to side across the deck using a pair of ropes. A Google search failed to turn up anything similar, so I wondered if this method was actually used or if this was a bit of artistic licence.
31:18 I believe the biggest difference between Kiel and Kronstadt were the political and military situations of Germany and the USSR at the time they occurred. Militarily, in both cases, the local forces proved unreliable and willing to join the rebels. The big difference was that the German military was desperately short on resources (including manpower) and facing continuous defeats on the front in late 1918. In contrast, large scale fighting in the Russian Civil War was over at the time (which was one of the things that prompted the uprising as they expected authoritarian policies to relax as military necessity eased) and the Soviets could take their time bring more reliable forces into the area, something the Germans couldn't really do as everything was committed already. Politically, the Kiel Mutinies pretty much immediately spread out from Kiel while the Soviets successfully contained the Kronstadt uprising to Kronstadt by a combination of force (against bases ont he mainland near Kronstadt) and by making concessions (namely in Petrograd). This meant the Soviets could take nearly two weeks to assemble a reliable force to attack Kronstadt while the Kiel mutiny lead to the abdication of the Kaiser and the Armistice in a week.
How does a warship get those heavy shells from magazine into gun? I don't see cranes, etc in 1860's photos? I'm a USN veteran and loading 3" (35 pound) shells was real hard graft. We did it elbows to rib cage and after 4 hours we were knackered!
What was the reason for offloading guns in port, during the age of sail was it to stop sagging and warping or keeping the guns in better condition? Is that a consideration museum ships have to take?
Nope, sorry but nope. Supercharging involves taking a specific volume of any given gas and then compressing it. (Glad you spotted that one @Drachinifel) Whether this is done via a belt or gear driven supercharger or by an exhaust gas driven turbine supercharger (aka turbocharger) makes no odds. A steam turbine is not a form of turbocharger. What is possible, and I have no idea if this was used in first half of the 20th century, is the concept of compressing steam. Admittedly this is more practical when dealing with non-boiling water. Heat water to 85c+ then pull a vacuum, you get steam flashed off the water. Pass this through a compressor and and you can get more power when you feed the steam through a turbine.
The German sailors were so morally correct in their aims that people had trouble opposing them. "I don't wanna commit suicide for no reason" is a valid motivation.
Regarding wargames, it doesn't help if, when you don't like the game's outcome, you bully the umpires into changing it (The Japanese did this with the wargame over plan MI[Midway operation]).
One reason was that the wood most in need of replacement was often the planking under the guns which got seriously torn up by the wheels in action. Apparently to the extent that the XO, or first lieutenant, or whatever you choose to call him, was often highly stressed out by captains who conducted a lot of gunnery practice. Even gunnery drills that did not feature the recoil of live ammunition would gouge and scar the decks. Considering just how much of the deck space would be subject to this wear, and by definition would have a gun inconveniently sitting on it, would make it a real time saver to get them out of the ship at a dedicated wharf with purpose designed rigging and lifting equipment, and probably all the stuff to inspect the guns are they came out. Also, to an extent, ships in that age commonly radically changed their armament according to forseen requirements, to the extent that sometimes ships might have their gundecks denuded of long guns to be replaced by carronades, or perhaps the visit was specifically to switch from 18lb to 24lb battery, and the timbers were going to be enormously upgraded. There are others, these are the only two I have read about. The biggest thing about naval artillery, that really comes through when you read about the period accounts of design and use in ships, is guns are super heavy, and extremely awkward lumps of metal that need secure restraint which is designed into the ship for each gun, and doesnt exist at all elsewhere because its heavy complkex and expensive... The ship is designed to have their enormous weight sitting pretty much exactly where they are. Moving a few around continuously would be huge labour, crew getting hernias (seriously a huge issue), and destabilizing the ship to boot. So even if it didn't save time to get them all out before starting refits, even somewhat minor ones, I would think it would be worth it for safety, as able seamen and skilled shipwrights and builders did not grow on trees.
Precisely how do the “Force” names correspond to Royal Naval ship assignments? I understand, for example, that Force H is/was based in Gibraltar. Are these fleet designations? Smaller battle groups? Are these roughly equivalent to US fleet numbers, like 6Th Fleet?
How did the change from sailing masters to professional officers change the officer corp ie an officer might be a successful officer (fighting and more importantly prize’s) but couldn’t sail a dingy in the Solent (yes over exaggerating) but you understand the point
Nooo.. dont appologize... I love it... Well, I'm gonna try and enjoy it as much as I can... I love the long format ones... They are pretty much the only ones I listen to. And they got cancelled... So sorry for your pain... But I love the long form for this month... So thanks... Much appreciated
i had to because of the current situation concerning the battleship texas .. i live in Florida..i rea an article that these local businesses were complaining about the ship being in the way of their "view".... people died on that 100 year old vessel so you can earn that money on that water front view. shame on you all for complaining about loosing a few dollars becuse the vessels in the way. appreciate your history and respect and honor the Sailers who fought and died to keep those people in a country where they can complain about a "view" dunno if anyone will see this ..but its my piece .cheers
Concerning ship aesthetics and looks, at this point I personally don't perceive any ship as ugly. (Maybe except for some of the WoWS paper-paper ships).
in the first image of the gun wharfe there's a lot of f's where it feels like there should b S's i.e storehoufe and baftion where it feels like it should be storehouse and bastion, why is this?
Every time I do this Jack makes me want to delete my things because he says exactly what I already said this time I'm not going to but Jack does such a good job that you can't get much by him
Pinned post for Q&A :)
Also, apologies for not knowing how a turbocharger actually works! This is why I stick to ships and not aircraft or land vehicles 😀
Was there any attempt anywhere during the age of sail to develop any other type of shot besides the usual? (Round, chain, canister, etc) such as the conical shells we know of now? And if so, by whom and to what success?
I read on a forum that US WW1 face-hardened armor was around 20 percent less effective than WW2 era material, so the US standard BBs had a belt of only around 280mm effective WW2 era armor. Is this true?
Another question: I found your argument for mass-produced Scharnhorsts instead of Bismarck, Graf Zeppelin etc very interesting. Given how much the Kongos were used in the Pacific war, wouldn't it have been wiser for Japan to stick with the Treaty and build something like the Kongo replacement BC in large numbers?
Regarding the swords and officers' freedom in choosing their weapon...did any particularly eccentric officer ever bring e.g. a full-size claymore? :P
In Flags of Our Fathers, we see a japanese shore battery on Mt. Suribashi hit the superstructure of what looks like a battleship, targeting presumably its bofors mounts. The battleship in question appeared like a USN fast battleship. My question is, do you know of any USN fast battleships in the naval bombardment of Iwo Jima that was hit?
Hi Drach,
Present day navies seem to have fleet wide, standardized training for the various benefits that standardized training brings. But I guess some time in the past naval training varied from ship to ship and even within a given vessel. When did standardized training and proceeduress become common practice?
But we love putting up with you for hours on hours, Drach! It's why we stick around!
I agree wholeheartedly
Indubitably!
Enthusiastically
Give Drach and ourselves bionics and we could put it up with it for days and days
also ur a good writer :)
9:11 Damn, looks like I can’t escape Mechanics of Materials lectures even by watching my fav channel :P
Drach, a turbocharger doesn't send the exhaust back into the intake, it uses it to spin a turbine which Spins an impeller which forces more air into the combustion chamber exactly like a supercharger, hence why turbochargers used to be called turbo-superchargers. the main difference between turbo and superchargers is a supercharger impeller is mechanically driven of an engine while a turbocharger uses the exhaust to spin the turbine which itself spins the impeller.
Thanks for the clarification!
Didn't the Kriegsmarine experiment with these for U-Boot engines?
@@Rammstein0963. U-Boats had mechanically driven superchargers, because 4-stroke diesels don't make decent power without forced induction (usually a turbo nowadays, hence that high-pitched whine over the diesel rattle when a truck/lorry passes you)). As opposed to a lot of their aircraft diesels/oldschool American truck engines which were two-stroke, and won't even work without a belt-driven blower (or a workaround using the crankcase as the blower like in a chainsaw, but that's a lot harder to do on a multi-cylinder engine.)
@@DeliveryMcGee Weren't most submarine diesels two-strokes?
Some modern engines do what's called exhaust gas recirculation for emission reasons which would be a likely terrible idea with wood or coal though!
22:37
The USN Garcia Class DE/FFs had what is referred to as "Pressure Fired" boilers. These boilers had exhaust driven turbo chargers vs steam driven blowers which saved ~10% on stem requirements. The combustion air pressure was supplied at 50 psia as apposed to a conventional boiler operating at 15-30 inches of water column. The high pressure means more molecules are striking a given surface area which greatly increases the heat transfer rate allowing for a much smaller and lighter installation ie: 2000 vs. 2100 lb. of refractory for a conventional boiler. The physical size of the boiler was about half that of a conventional boiler of similar capacity. The boilers looked like a large pressure vessel standing on end with the steam drum mounted horizontally above. They were fired with a diesel type fuel which eliminated problems of carbon buildup in the turbo charger. A problem developed in the connections of the supper heater tubed to their headers that was later resolved, but not by the time that the final design of the Knox Class leading Gibbs & Cox to recommend conventional boilers for the class.
I realize this is outside of the time period that you normally cover, but is still germane to the question at hand.
Keep up the good work
Thank you.
One thing I have always found strange is how similar Scharnhorst and Gneisenau were (the superstructure layout is honestly more of a cosmetic difference), while you probably need 2 hours to explain all the differences between Bismarck and Tirpitz.
Jumped off a dock on the landword side of vancouver island, temperature was refreshingly plesant.
Jumped off a pier on the seaward side, only 10° cooler...... and aspirated a worrisome bit of ocean during the debilitating pretzel part of the cramps. Which was functionally indistinguishable from not being able to swim and probably a contributing factor for the myth sailor can't.
Even though I can swim, knew that I was going in, had a full breath of air, no heavy boots or clothes, wasn't concussed or wounded I still could have drownd just from not dipping a toe first. I
In situations of actuall adversity deferential temperature could easily claim a majority of folks who go overboard, and to the observer it would appear as if they just screamed stopped treading water and sank.
On the question about the movie “Below” weapon “No Room for Mistakes: British and Allied Submarines in European Waters” makes mention on page 76 of a weapon called U-Bootsdrachen in use at the beginning of WW2 and describes it as a sweeping wire with a grapnel at the end that was supposed to hook on a submarine and pull and explosive charge down against the outer hull but notes that it was never successful.
As to sailors knowing how to swim, in my time the navy did not require or teach you to swim. They did provide survival training that would keep you afloat for as long as possible. This included making a bouyant device out of nearly any article of clothing you had including your cap, your trousers or even your shoes, This was done by trapping air in them by cupping them on the water. You could tie your pants legs at the ends and float for several minutes before the air bubbles out and you have to refill it. You shirt would work the same way. The other training was how to enter the water feet first and arms crossed from a height simuating a ships deck and how to keep from having your life jacket from being ripped off entirely. Lastly was the technique on how to swim underneath water that is on fire from fuel. Of course if you coudn't swim in the first place you would find the maneuver difficult..
Even today, it is fairly common for people to join the navy not knowing how to swim. When I joined the USN back in 2003, somewhere between 1/3 & 1/2 of the people that arrived at basic training at the same time as me could not pass the basic swim test (which is incredibly easy) and required remedial training.
The real surprise to me is people assume swimming is a universal skill when more than half the population lives in places with little to no access to swimming facilities. I grew up with grandparents who had a pool, beaches within an hour, and it being central Florida, most every place had a pool with some public access. Meanwhile, my cousins in New York City had one dirty "community pool" that could only be accessed by walking through several dangerous city blocks. I swim like a fish; my cousins not so much. Ironically, my one cousin became a merchant mariner and harbor master, but swimming was not a priority skill for him to do any of that.
@@genericpersonx333 My friend lives in Florida and cannot swim, we make fun of him for it.
Went through boot during COVID. I can't speak for "normal" divisions, since 50/80 guys I was with were SO contracts. Of the rest of us, only one failed the swim test. He was Nigerian and just couldn't give himself to the water for the float test. He'd always panic. Which makes sense if you haven't had experience. Hope he made it.
I joined knowing how to swim but I had never jumped into water before so that 10 foot jump scared me so much lol
The image of the Texas in drydock at 44:55 is extraordinarily striking.
For a ship whose career mirrored its namesake I would go with the Age of Sail French 74 gunner 'Annibal' (Hannibal) commissioned in 1778. Her action at the 1779 Battle of Martinique had some pretty close parallels to the Carthaginian general's tactics. Attacked by a far superior force and alone against 7 British ships of the line she used superior positioning to nullify their numbers until help arrived and she and a pair of 64 gunners held off 15 British ships which broke off the action after Annibal lured them in range of costal defenses, like Hannibal would draw Roman forces into ambushes/reinforcements. She didn't sink the whole squadron or anything like a naval Cannae but did make the British squadron pay for their overconfidence.
Her participation in Suffren's Indian operations saw plenty of successful actions but no decisive victories, much like Hannibal's own vain attempts to make the Romans surrender. She (albeit renamed to Achille) met her Zama at the Glorious First of June when she was captured although not without a fight and not in useable condition.
Thanks for this comment. It got me to read the Wikipedia article on the ship. Googling the ship also produced some cool paintings of tall ships. It’s a fascinating history although I’m tempted to engage in some unnecessary wordplay “Annibal in portem,” and so forth. Renaming the ship Achille isn’t much better, Achille’s keel comes to mind.
Uuhhohh
Huuuu
Uuum
I normally listen to these before sleep, this one I downloaded for a flight back to Oz, thanks Drach!
My wife says Ilisten to Drach more than I do to her. Well, if she knew more about naval history....
Re:convoys. A big advantage of the system in defending against U boot attack had to do with removing targets from the ocean. A convoy was not much more easily sighted from a low lying U boot than was a single ship. When ships sailed individually, and thus were more evenly distributed across the ocean, U boots sighted them more frequently and the lone ships were easy targets. When ships were gathered in convoys, the rate of sinkings declined, even if those convoys had weak escorts.
14:09 when they trained for sword work in the age of sail they would often use something called singlestick. This was a game employing roughly similar cuts, thrusts and parries as were used with the cutlass, but as it was played with wooden sticks with wicker hand guards; hits, although painful, were not often dangerous.
Able Seaman Bob Tilburn, 20 years old. lasted in the North Atlantic for about two hours before being rescued by the HMS Electra, aided by a rescue float, although he nearly succumbed to the cold.. "Tilburn leapt towards the water and began to discard anything that might weigh him down. Tilburn succeeded in removing his tin helmet, gas mask, and duffel coat before the water swept him over the side."
As an amatuer blacksmith, I for one love phase diagrams!
Minor Point - The French Battleships of the Richelieu class used boilers where the exhaust gas drove a turbine which powered the forced draft fans. This same system was used by at least one class of post-war US destroyers.
God, these long videos are great. You also have been lucky to have a good voice for long form discussion/narration.
Re-upping my suggestion for my fellow Patreon subscribers to voluntarily skip asking a question for the end of December Patreon Drydock. Let's give Drach some well-earned time off over the holidays! Spread the word.
Sure, why not
Commenting again to say hear hear
No way, I say crack the whip and let's see if we can get a new record for length, hoping for 12 hours or so, in December. If 2000 more people get on board the Patreon train and start asking questions, that shouldn't be a problem. Drach, better stock up on your coffee, your going to need it.
@@Frankenspank67 lol you are really ахуелс
I recall reading that the British had improved the basic Krupp process to the point where their armour was about 10% stronger than the German for the same weight. A significant difference. British engines were also more reliable, which again made a difference in sustained high-speed running.
1:04:05 Drach we all know the Royal Navy has the most aesthetically pleasing ships because they have the GIGANTIC SUPERSTUCTURE OF DOOM
The better question about the movie Below (and U-571 for that matter) is how the hell a German destroyer made it into the Atlantic post-1941.
1:38:99. Graf Spee. Fights honorably to death at sea around South America after causing significant damage.
Hey Drachs. In Kane's book about his experience in WW2 he talked about the Japanesse distroyers using grappling hooks to snag a boot on the bottom and then sliding depth charges down the cable to kill it. He actually reported this as he observed it from afar when in the Yellow sea I think and one of our boats had gone to the bottom but was not sunk, something they would do to hide while making repairs.
Also, on US ships some men would not be in the 'work station' and have to get to their GQ station from berthing or the like and that could be a ways away. Also, not all stations are work stations and not manned continously so that would make people moving about required. I was an electrian and worked in the engine room, but we had emergency generators near both ends of the ship, plus damage control parties that required us again fore to aft. The bigger the ship the more and farther the people have to go.
I am sure the RN had simular issues, but they may not be talked about as much.
Edward Beach had a Japanese ASW officer describe that process in his second novel "Dust on the Sea".
I actually love the longer episodes
The 1957 US documentary series, "Silent Service" season 1 episode 3 tells how a Japanese destroyer did in fact use a grappling hook on a wench to catch and then to attempt the pull the USS Thresher to the surface. It almost worked. It is possible the idea for the movie "Below" was taken from this real life event, but only very loosely so.
Perhaps a very attractive wench could lure the crew of the sub.
I've read a number of historical age-of-sail novels in which RN ships encounter one another at sea and follow what I assume is the actual historical procedure: they first exchange recognition signals (challenge/reply) to confirm both are British and then hoist their individual identification signals which are listed in an Admiralty reference book that gives the name of the ship, its rating and its captain at the time the book was last updated.
Simples: if it smells of garlic, sink it...
I remember my first battle station post, 3" countermeasure reloader. Was a submariner so the way to get there was quiet and make fast; fun part we once launched oranges across the harbor against the Greenville to see if we could scare the topside watch.
Did it scare them?
@@coltinyancey6420 no never got close
Class, pure class. Makes me want to study history.
I need some sleep, i'm so thankful is Drachinifel is back
These Videos Are Awesome! Greetings From Nevada USA.
I love these long form Q&As
1:02:33 Drach dealing with the golden apple situation far better than Paris did :P.
Love the many references to ! beloved slowpoke USN 'standards'! Even a gratuitous Pict of Tennessee. Have also encountered different answers as to whether Colorados had 16" armour at belt over magazines and machinery. For the record, Tennessees and Colorados are freQuently called the 'Big Five', yet are built on the hull originally designed for New MeXicos. Tennessee's only advantage over NMs was higher elevation of 14\50s, and, of these vessels, NMs had new years still inadequate machinery installed during major '31-'35 refits. Vanadium!
New Mexico's hull is a Pennsylvania hull with the new standard bow and superstructure (designed for the WW1 naval expansion) to save time and money.
I am loving hours and hours of you every week. :)
that's a gorgeous picture of Texas in Drydock illuminated at night
Different manufacturers of armor had different ideas of what made the best kind of plate. They all had to meet the minimum test specs, but some had better quality control and higher-than-minimum resistance. Some of this was modified by the test specs of the navy that they made armor for, which can degrade the best armor they could have made due to the specs requiring results that turn out to be counter-productive for the optimum resistance (for example, US Navy WWII Class "A" face-hardened tests requiring certain nose damage effects on all impacting APC projectiles, which caused the manufacturers to have to make the face layer too thick for the heavy battleship side armor thicknesses (scaling), even though this part of the test really did virtually nothing to improve the armor against high-quality APC shells due to the good AP cap design and general APC shell toughness). All nations made face-hardened armor with different properties due to design and manufacturing skill limits, different ideas as to what is important (amount of explosive filler in their shells, etc.), and such less-than-beneficial test requirements.
One of the early adopters of Motor ships was the Bank Line of Glasgow. they purchased some second hand in the 1920's with one being built in Germany in 1916 and built a Class of 12. Several ships were used by the RN in WW2 as antiaircraft vessels. The Speybank was captured by the Atlantis. On a trip from Japan renamed Doggerbank she took the survivors of the Thor and Ukermark (ex Altmark) and war cargo to go to France. She was torpedoed by U 43 and all except 1 died.
All the arguments about face hardening, wood-backing, chromium additions...high quality steel. The arc of protecting Sea-going vessels is pretty much summed up in Monty Python and the Holy Grail. "Oh shut up, and go and change your armor!"
Aloha. Having watched people on the beach for a while - 99% are barely able to float nevermind swimming a 100m distance and that's in ideal calm and warm water. I swim and freedive in chaotic swell sometimes and dive through 9f breaks and can last for 3-5 hours in warm water (-1 c watertemp can make a huge difference at a warm 28c) It takes a long time to develop situational-and environmental-awareness and on how to 100% reliably time your breathing as not to inhale water..which is the cause of drowning here by unfit people. Havent inhaled water ever ;-) Survival odds sink dramatically with cold water...I windsurfed between ice floats on alpine lakes and snowed in Japan.
My ship USS Voge had an actual turbocharged
Boiler to supply air.
The boiler was under high pressure in the combustion chamber and the
So the amount of air molecules was high so a great deal of fuel could be put in.
01:39:49 - Why was Hood not overhauled in the late 1930's?
I'd expand on this to more emphasize the sort of problems that HMS Hood was kept in the water to help deal with, specifically the Japanese and their battlecruisers. The British and Japanese had serious tensions during the 1930s, at precisely the time the Hood was due for modernization. As Drach notes elsewhere, the Kongos were especially dangerous ships in a pre-airpower-dominated naval world, but HMS Hood, having been built to fight tougher battlecruisers than Kongo, was more than a match to a Kongo one on one. This meant that by just existing, the Hood ensured Japan would not be able to scatter the four Kongos to the high seas to savage the British cruiser fleets unchecked. The moment HMS Hood went into drydock, this could be interpreted by Japan as an opportunity to strike while Britain was basically defenseless against the Kongos. Not the only factor for sure, but something of significance all the same.
Italy also deserves some more mention as their sudden spurt of modern cruisers and updated battleships in the 1930s turned the Mediterranean into a much more dangerous area than it had been during the 1920s.
KGVs and ReKnowns existed by that time, seven vessels all faster than as-built Kongos.
@@davidharner5865 The KGVs were not around until well into 1939, and by that point, the Kongos had been 30+ knots for some time, so they would have still been faster enough to prevent a KGV battleship chasing them down.
HMS Repulse and Renown were dangerous, but also basically equal to any Kongo, as neither Kongos nor Renowns had armor to achieve stand-off within practical gunnery range. Even with updated firecontrol, hitting moving targets beyond 20,000 yards was proving more luck than skill, and both Kongo's 14'' guns and Renown's 15'' guns could blow through the armor of the other at 20,000-25,000 yards without any difficulty. This gives the Royal Navy two battlecruisers against four Japanese vessels with about equal odds in battle (ie, the first to hit the other's citadel probably winning). Renown's superior speed only really gave the British ship the choice to decline battle, because if it wanted to be close enough to have a reasonable chance of hitting a Kongo, it would have to be within range of the Kongo anyway.
HMS Hood, on the other hand, was the one ship that could face down any Kongo with better odds than not, being built to handle German battlecruisers arguably more powerful than the Kongos ended up being. This changed the math from a 2-1 superiority in battlecruisers in Japan's favor to a 3-4 matching weighted in Britain's favor because the Japanese guns were not certain to defeat HMS Hood's armor at practical combat ranges. Remove HMS Hood for a lengthy modernization, that is a number of years where Japan could be tempted to leverage that 2-1 battlecruiser advantage to ravage Britain's vulnerable lines of communication. So long as Hood was on the table, Japan had no decisive advantage to leverage under prevailing naval thought.
Another excellent episode
1:13:55 man the 4.5" mount replacing the forward superfiring pair of 6" turrets on top of the original turret’s barbette is such an eyesore
Callum just did a good video on the rescue buoys
Drach, thank you for all you do! I know you are busy, but would you, please, add existing IJN Nagato and ~USS Montana reviews to battleship 'playlist'? Also, at some point would you, pretty please with butterScots, do a segment on the building process? As in deciding requirements, drawing plans, laying keel through adding turrets and machinery &c. Many thanks either way!
When you say a sailor “will do a real number” I imagine the navy dropping everything to sing and dance on deck. Do a number with those voices and crew for choreography.
Ive got a 6 hour drive tomorrow, and now i know 3 of those hours will be filled with naval history.
I don’t mind the longer time format but I understand you can only do so much
Even today a lot of Scottish fishermen cannot swim. It is said that if the sea wants to take you it will. In addition though described as light fleet carriers the Colossus class 13190 tons were used as fleet carriers
As a citizen of Kiel city, home to the great mutiny of the high seas fleet and the following German revolution. There was fighting. Between sailors trying to spread freedom throughout the city and Germany by proxy and local imperial troops.Sure. But the warships themselves? Story i heard was that those big ole batteries were trained at the officers district of ...roughly translates as "direbrook", a beautiful forest and hillcountry uptown area above the harbor. Yeah well......edit: though i actually doubt that story to some degree. You would need comically low shell velocity to hit many of those areas from the harbor. At least the mansion desitrict. The naval command and academy posts etc though......yeah, clean line of fire....
2:45:12 I'm going to go with Seydlitz activated "Second Wind" ablitiy.
Heal was on cool down.
You also have the quality control level of the manufacturer of the armor. In the US before WWI, Midvale had very high standards, Carnegie seems to have been OK (not known about the details), but Bethlehem was CRAP (I mean it!). When plates from OKLAHOMA were removed to test at NPG, Dahlgren for knowledge about the ship steels used in the older ships, they had three 13.5" belt plates that had so many differences between each other that they were not easily shown to be the same KIND of armor, to say nothing about the resistance of those plates to test impacts. Before that, Bethlehem totally failed when it tried to make the first US Navy 14" AP shells circa 1910, while Midvale passed every single shell and Crucible Steel Corporation made shells that mostly passed, but with a couple of failures. I hope this was not also true in WWII, but you need to know what you are doing and Bethlehem fell on its face compared to its competitors in both armor and projectiles. Kind of sad, really...
Areal tours are how the Japanese got intelligence on the layout of Pearl Harbor
Frankenstien's monster is made captain of a ship, which one is fitting for him?
Had this thought in october but lapsed and then forgot. So a nightmare before Christmas question.
At two hours forty-two minutes or so you talk about visionaries imagining future technologies, I recall in I believe the second of The Chieftain's "Readings From The Book of Armaments" videos he reads a request from a soldier in WWII for a sight capable of seeing through smoke and fog, which it would take something like thirty years to realize.
Regarding holystoning, I seem to recall once seeing an illustration of sailors using a quite large holystone (similar to a curling stone) which they were swinging from side to side across the deck using a pair of ropes. A Google search failed to turn up anything similar, so I wondered if this method was actually used or if this was a bit of artistic licence.
Damn the Defiant! HMS Defiant. Have you seen this film Drach?
2:45:33 How about "The Phoenix" as a nickname for Seydlitz.
Regarding the Russian ship question, I quite like the 1715 Ingermanland 4th Rate. Very sexy ship :)
31:18 I believe the biggest difference between Kiel and Kronstadt were the political and military situations of Germany and the USSR at the time they occurred.
Militarily, in both cases, the local forces proved unreliable and willing to join the rebels. The big difference was that the German military was desperately short on resources (including manpower) and facing continuous defeats on the front in late 1918. In contrast, large scale fighting in the Russian Civil War was over at the time (which was one of the things that prompted the uprising as they expected authoritarian policies to relax as military necessity eased) and the Soviets could take their time bring more reliable forces into the area, something the Germans couldn't really do as everything was committed already.
Politically, the Kiel Mutinies pretty much immediately spread out from Kiel while the Soviets successfully contained the Kronstadt uprising to Kronstadt by a combination of force (against bases ont he mainland near Kronstadt) and by making concessions (namely in Petrograd). This meant the Soviets could take nearly two weeks to assemble a reliable force to attack Kronstadt while the Kiel mutiny lead to the abdication of the Kaiser and the Armistice in a week.
The British also had the rescue buoys too but there's looked more like boats
The First Rate Santa Ana was captured at Trafalgar and recaptured by the Spanish two days later.
Oi! Cap'n! The gun deck crew are training hard with their sword and other arms.
***Captain heavy sweating***
Love the Neil Gaman reference.
"You wot, m8?!?" Chav Drach is the strongest anime final form, fight me.
Sounds like a Blackadder episode on Rotton Burroughs.
How does a warship get those heavy shells from magazine into gun? I don't see cranes, etc in 1860's photos? I'm a USN veteran and loading 3" (35 pound) shells was real hard graft. We did it elbows to rib cage and after 4 hours we were knackered!
Look "Parbuckling" on the YT-Channel of USS New Jersey: ruclips.net/video/XIUMDok3y2o/видео.html
Not only problems in the Age of Sail. Did British systems not recognise Exocet Missiles as friendly weapons in the Falklands War?
What was the reason for offloading guns in port, during the age of sail was it to stop sagging and warping or keeping the guns in better condition? Is that a consideration museum ships have to take?
It was done for major work and the guns were in the way of the work and want a ship as light as possible for drydocking
@@senecanero3874 thanks
There were also steam super heaters on a lot of USN warships.
For the US I might suggest building only battleships and destroyers for way too long.
What happened to HMS Victory's bronze cannon that Nelson placed aboard her she now has all iron cannon ??
A lot less water pressure to help break things in a dock than a dam too.
Where does a frigate sit on the battleship genealogy tree?
Destroyer
Frigate
Cruiser?
Or is uk just destroyer and frigate now?
Nope, sorry but nope. Supercharging involves taking a specific volume of any given gas and then compressing it. (Glad you spotted that one @Drachinifel) Whether this is done via a belt or gear driven supercharger or by an exhaust gas driven turbine supercharger (aka turbocharger) makes no odds. A steam turbine is not a form of turbocharger.
What is possible, and I have no idea if this was used in first half of the 20th century, is the concept of compressing steam. Admittedly this is more practical when dealing with non-boiling water. Heat water to 85c+ then pull a vacuum, you get steam flashed off the water. Pass this through a compressor and and you can get more power when you feed the steam through a turbine.
Is MP just member of parliament? I never knew what it stood for
Aye.
The German sailors were so morally correct in their aims that people had trouble opposing them.
"I don't wanna commit suicide for no reason" is a valid motivation.
Hood.
Beautiful..
County class. Beautiful.
Fletchers. Yum
yess have battle ship texas people in one a show would be great!
28:25 But what about a Robber Button?
Regarding wargames, it doesn't help if, when you don't like the game's outcome, you bully the umpires into changing it (The Japanese did this with the wargame over plan MI[Midway operation]).
Hi, why did the wooden ship have to off load their guns when in port for a long time?
One reason was that the wood most in need of replacement was often the planking under the guns which got seriously torn up by the wheels in action. Apparently to the extent that the XO, or first lieutenant, or whatever you choose to call him, was often highly stressed out by captains who conducted a lot of gunnery practice. Even gunnery drills that did not feature the recoil of live ammunition would gouge and scar the decks. Considering just how much of the deck space would be subject to this wear, and by definition would have a gun inconveniently sitting on it, would make it a real time saver to get them out of the ship at a dedicated wharf with purpose designed rigging and lifting equipment, and probably all the stuff to inspect the guns are they came out.
Also, to an extent, ships in that age commonly radically changed their armament according to forseen requirements, to the extent that sometimes ships might have their gundecks denuded of long guns to be replaced by carronades, or perhaps the visit was specifically to switch from 18lb to 24lb battery, and the timbers were going to be enormously upgraded.
There are others, these are the only two I have read about.
The biggest thing about naval artillery, that really comes through when you read about the period accounts of design and use in ships, is guns are super heavy, and extremely awkward lumps of metal that need secure restraint which is designed into the ship for each gun, and doesnt exist at all elsewhere because its heavy complkex and expensive... The ship is designed to have their enormous weight sitting pretty much exactly where they are. Moving a few around continuously would be huge labour, crew getting hernias (seriously a huge issue), and destabilizing the ship to boot. So even if it didn't save time to get them all out before starting refits, even somewhat minor ones, I would think it would be worth it for safety, as able seamen and skilled shipwrights and builders did not grow on trees.
@@charlesparr1611 hi and thank u
@@samstewart4807 I wonder if Drach has done an extended video on refits in the age of sail, that would be pretty interesting I would think.
at what point is it easier to just make a new uss texas than to repair the old one?
Precisely how do the “Force” names correspond to Royal Naval ship assignments? I understand, for example, that Force H is/was based in Gibraltar. Are these fleet designations? Smaller battle groups? Are these roughly equivalent to US fleet numbers, like 6Th Fleet?
if this is a question for drach put it under the pinned comment.
where does Drach's intro music come from?
That was interesting. Thank you very much.
The narration is awkward and too slow. 1.5x was closure to a normal speed.
@31:39 Do YOU want to be the MAA to tell the guy on the left he can't be mutinying? He'd break you in half and disappear you into a void space...
00:25:42 "I grew so rich that I was sent/by a pocket borough into Parliament..." - Sir Joseph Porter, "HMS Pinafore"
“I always voted at my party’s call/And I never thought of thinking for myself at all.”
"I thought so little they rewarded me/by making me the Ruler of the Queen's Navee."
More hours please.
How did the change from sailing masters to professional officers change the officer corp ie an officer might be a successful officer (fighting and more importantly prize’s) but couldn’t sail a dingy in the Solent (yes over exaggerating) but you understand the point
Nooo.. dont appologize... I love it... Well, I'm gonna try and enjoy it as much as I can... I love the long format ones... They are pretty much the only ones I listen to. And they got cancelled...
So sorry for your pain... But I love the long form for this month... So thanks... Much appreciated
i had to because of the current situation concerning the battleship texas .. i live in Florida..i rea an article that these local businesses were complaining about the ship being in the way of their "view".... people died on that 100 year old vessel so you can earn that money on that water front view. shame on you all for complaining about loosing a few dollars becuse the vessels in the way. appreciate your history and respect and honor the Sailers who fought and died to keep those people in a country where they can complain about a "view" dunno if anyone will see this ..but its my piece .cheers
Here we go
Concerning ship aesthetics and looks, at this point I personally don't perceive any ship as ugly. (Maybe except for some of the WoWS paper-paper ships).
in the first image of the gun wharfe there's a lot of f's where it feels like there should b S's i.e storehoufe and baftion where it feels like it should be storehouse and bastion, why is this?
Old school English way of writing s 😀
Every time I do this Jack makes me want to delete my things because he says exactly what I already said this time I'm not going to but Jack does such a good job that you can't get much by him
2:04:22 "Back in the day, if an ambassador showed up..."