If, at flank speed, you see the ship and the Immigrant Song starts playing in your head, then it's a battleship. If it doesn't sound silly to name the ship the USS Hell Yeah!, it's a battleship. And if you can envision the main gun's shell flying toward the target with an angry Theodore Roosevelt carrying an equally displeased bald eagle in one hand and a flaming sword in the other on it, then it's definitely a battleship.
Libby 'the intrepid and dauntless' is also Ryan's videographer who follows, and sometimes leads, Ryan into some of the most convoluted nooks and crannies of the New Jersey. Lets hear it for Libby!
If you have not already done a video on it , I would like to know how many rounds each of New Jersey's 16" guns have fired up to her 1990 decommissioning. Thanks.
Libby has the right instinct about what appeals to the mass market, however I think there are a good number of people who are interested in the channel and also are the type of person interested in details like the changes from generation to generation of ships. I think its worth recording a couple videos talking about the deeper details and trying them out to see how people engage with the content.
@@aland7236 Just because they sank doesn't mean they weren't badass. They just took the first loss. It's like being on point in Vietnam, everyone's gunning for you... 😅
@@IndianaIT The only thing the Iowa's are good at today is parking offshore and obliterating coastal defenses. But I bet they'd make a good platform for all of these anti-missile defenses we have today. That's the one area they excelled at in WWII too (a large deck area for mounting systems to).
I enjoy learning about and analyzing the subtle differences in ship classifications, but I understand if your channel needs to focus on more widely popular content. Thank you for all you do behind the scenes to present such interesting videos!
This young man is hyper involved with his job, and he is totally awesome. I enjoy all of the videos I've seen so far. If I ever get the chance to see the NJ, I hope he'll be my guide.
Although I agree a Carrier is completely different. It still has to be pretty frightening to have a super carrier parked off your shore and to see a strike package fly over your city.
That's because the Battleship can hurl 9 2000 pound shells about 24 miles, while the carrier can hurl 400 500 pound shells about 200 miles. (That's 4 500 pounders on 100 aircraft)
Almost certainly. When it's impossible to dodge things and everything can see you, the only defense is armor. The only warships is space probably will have to be battleships.
@@CharliMorganMusic i'd say it depends on weaponry If we end up having ftl weaponry, i'd bet on a mix of carriers and battleships but anything limited to sub-light will be dominated by carriers or electronic warfare destroyers (and likely the mega railgun sub-variant in specific)
I think "the expanse" does a great job with future weaponry: Long range battle with torpedoes/rockets. Mid-range (too close to dodge a straight shot) with railguns and lots of PDC against the torpedoes and for very short-range and small-target work. Are current warships even able to "eat" direct hits? Tanks will also just go up in flames when hit with an appropriate weapon. Not sure if passive armor is still a thing.
Some friends and I build and run large scale radio controlled model ships, warships primarily. My largest is a model of USS Indianapolis (scratchbuilt superstructure on a commercially made hull) a little over 4 feet long. I also have a couple of Fletcher class DDs, one in WWII configuration and the other a 1960s era "FRAM" can with flightdeck and hanger. When I've had them on display or running on the lake it never failed that both adults and kids would call them 'Battleships' simply because they have a bunch of guns in "turrets." "No sir, that's a heavy cruiser, this other one is a destroyer and both are much smaller than a battleship." If my friend Rich is running on the same day I point at his USS Missouri (about 6 feet long) or his USS Montana (even bigger) and say, "THAT is a battleship!"
You talk about the projection of power. I was in my mid teens when the New Jersey opened up with the big guns. I remember how it was the headline of many newspapers globally. It was the top story for the network news shows as well. The pride I and everyone I knew was unbelievable. We are sorely missing that now. I really believe at least one of the Iowa class should be on active duty
As much as the characteristics of the ships themselves, I'm interested in the decision-making behind the design and construction of WWII ships. Please consider making a video on ships whose design or construction represented a significant, perhaps unanticipated, compromise between the initial intent and real-world constraining factors (e.g., budget, resources, time, etc.).
Drachinfel Naval Historiographer is the go to source here. He gives exactly this kind of detail. He coverage is historically minded. His political and financial deep dive END shortly into the post WWII era. Additionally, He now has uploaded over 200, A 5 Minute Guide to Warships: More or Less. They are each a detailed synopsis of the ship's existence. i believe this man is, or has been, as close to the bottom of the British Admiralty's files as is humanly possible. i really hope you like it!:-)
Hey Ryan I served on the USS Sacramento A0E 1 in 1984. I flew to pearl harbor after coming home from boot camp for 30 days after a1 school. When I got to pearl harbor I found my way to payroll dressed in my blue winter uniform and I was sweaty. On base there. I found out my ship was out to sea and I was put on temporary service and I was stationed on Ford Island. My job wa@ to jump in the back of a pickup truck and ride around the base there and hop into a car and drive it to a different place on the base. I worked from 8 am to about noon every day. After being relieved from duty we were free to go wherever we wanted. Me and my buddies rented a car and went exploring around the island. It was a awesome time in my life. I loved the USA Sacramento that ship was huge. 55 thousand tons fully loaded and we carried 9.9 million gallons of petrol. 2.5 million gallons for aircraft jp 5. The rest we refueled other ships in the 7th fleet. We were fast I was qualified for helmsman Lee helmsman and all the watches we were required to do. I was a member of the 360 degree club . Which means when you are at the helm say at 2 am in the morning it's typical quiet . Say for instance you are sailing on a course of 179 degrees steady as she goes what we did was apply a 5 degree slow turn or even a right 5 or ten degree turn and what you done was to do it so Smoothly that no one on the ship could tell that you were making a clear 360 degree turn without any noticing.
I recently joined a collaborative writing website, and looking at some of the content, I kept finding baffling references to modern "battleships." That experience, just this year, was the first time I realized that some people use the word "battleship" as a generic term... This is a good, well-summarized explanation. I'll be sending a few people here, heh... One missing thing is why battleships aren't used any more. Basically, they were generally less effective in combat than theorized, and often were built more for deterrence and political posturing than for combat. In wartime, battleship construction was relatively rare, as most nations focused on vessels that could be finished faster and were more expendable and versatile. With the advent of reliable air assault on warships at sea, and the performance of battleships and battlecruisers in World War 2, there was a great deal of consensus after 1945 that battleships were obsolete. Also: regarding warship nomenclature, I doubt "battleship" will ever return to standard terminology, but the term "cruiser" is currently being stretched to the limits--since the 1970s or 80s, several nations, notably the UK and USSR, have called certain aircraft carriers "cruisers" for political reasons. I believe it's partly because of treaties regarding the Bosporus and the Black Sea, am I right?
Yes, an in-depth classification of ships sounds awesome! I usually classify ships based on role. Since fleet composition is variable I don't trust umbrella terms that much. Also I usually associate the term battle-ship with the large heavy armed and armour ships, so if it is "armed to the teeth", in a rather evident manner, I'd called it a battle-ship.
It does to me, also. It seems to get very confused around frigates and destroyers. And ships that are primarily missed armed and those that are gun armed. My uneducated understanding is that some ships heavier than destroyers are called frigates in order to get the funding from congress.
That's because sci fi throws around three tearms like battleship, battlecruiser, and dreadnaught, with knowing their context, a big gun capital ship even knowing what they are. There has not been big gun capital in living memory for most people.
Luckily we are discussing this from the USN perspective, which simplifies the answer: battleships carry the ship type designation BB, everything else is not a battleship !! :-)
Great explaination of 100yrs of Naval warfare development explained in under 20 minutes, it's a bit simplified but the key points are there. There was a documentary called Battleships that tried to do that and it ended up becoming a mini serries. Since we've moved onto Harpoon missiles and AEGIS missile systems doubt any modern naval ship is worthy of being called a Battleship and just plain Warship.
I would like to see a video that goes more in depth about the different classes of warships and what the differences between them are, like destroyers and destroyer escorts versus cruisers and light and heavy cruisers versus frigates and corvettes, that kind of thing. I like this channel because the kinds of warships that I like the most are the kinds used during WWII, and you guys take care of such a ship for posterity :-)
If you feel like going into fine detail on any subject, just when you get to that point give a warning to less interested folks to jump ahead to a particular time spot to get back to the low information section (in a nice way). Anyway, I like the treatment at the beginning on this clip that sums up the question and goes on in more detail.
A question: late 19th early 20th century warships sometimes have a gallery at the stern. Example at 3:48. is there a technical term for this structure? What's the purpose? Fresh air for officers? It seems to me that this was more frequent, but not exclusive, with IJN but I could easily be mistaken
They started out in the Age of Sail as separate structures, stern galleries (the rows of windows across the stern) and quarter galleries (the small windowed structures on either side of the stern). I'm not sure if the stern galleries really had any purpose besides admitting light into the captain's cabin (they were called "lights", not windows). The quarter galleries were the officers' toilets. Seriously. The overhanging structure of the quarter gallery allowed the waste to fall right into the sea without dirtying the side of the ship. It also gave the officers a private place to do their business, unlike the very public (and open air) head on the bow where the sailors went. Later on, as ships' sterns became round, the structures probably just merged into a continuous set of galleries around the stern. I imagine they stuck around in the late 19th century only because of naval tradition.
@@hunter35474 Thanks. That's sort of what I was thinking: It's there because something's always been there. An interesting observation about officers' privacy, although it's the wrong location for a poop deck. (Sorry, the bad pun forced itself on me.)
I would love to see a video on the history of size classifications. Maybe you could also include something on the various classes of the WWI and WWII eras, or point me to a video I haven't found yet if you already did cover that. Thank you, and I enjoy these videos immensely.
@@stevewindisch7400 1. Who are those guys? :) 2. Irn Bru...because Irn Bru. 3. The Catalina is better than the Blackburn Blackburn. - What to say to liven up a certain live stream. :) 4. Admiral Sir Reginald Guy Hannam Henderson 5. Question: Best plot armor? Answer: Warspite. 6. Bilgepumps
A detailed explination of the evolving Battleship classifications would be great. I hear the different terms used in many videos, but never is the historical progression explained.
Great video, i have been watching your channel for some time and would just like to say that i really appreciate the content you are sharing with us thank you.
You bring out the exact argument that I put forth as to why BBs should still be in service. They are perfectly awesome. I served on a super carrier. But, despite seeing all these planes day-in-and-day-out, watching them launce with full loads of munitions, it was never the awe I felt as I walked about the decks of New Jersey when she was in Alameda in 1969. BTW, a super carrier can launch it's aircraft while tied up or at anchor. There was some type of incoming that needed to be intercepted while Ranger was tied up in Japan. She launched an armed F-4J Phantom. I've got a picture of that somewhere.
Better still, let it float offshore and sail rounds over your head and listen to the horrendous blasts like was done (from what I heard) in Lebanon by one of the Iowas.
I think early battleships are fascinating, given the rapid revolution of ship design from 1850 to 1900. I would love to see more content on this! It's an area of warship history that I think doesn't get as much attention as 1900-1950.
"will there ever be battleships in the future?" This is one of the places where I think science fiction gets it right. I would expect some of the largest space fairing for ships, at least for the initial periods of whatever that sort of warfare looks like to be battleship classes. Battleships being vessels equipped with large guns acting as the center of a battle group and intended to engage other worships with their guns.
Personally, I can’t really see battleships ever coming back in any significant capacity; missiles and the occasional directed energy weapon are (projected) kings of space combat. Armor is heavy, heavy things limit acceleration, limited acceleration means less survivability. The most passive defense I’d imagine on realistic space warships is major redundancy.
@@aristeas3176 oh I'm absolutely sure they won't look anything like current battleships. I would expect a lot more point defense than a lot less armor, but I would also expect there to be a class of warship designed around using large accelerator cannons instead of projected energy, especially early on.
@@aristeas3176 I have concluded that space cadets have a bit of difficulty differentiating between science and science fiction. Then there's engineering. I'd estimate that very few science fiction buffs have taken engineering physics 101, 102, 102, or 201 at the collegiate level.
@@1968gadgetyo The only way to put a massive spaceship into space is by building the drydock on a mineral rich asteroid, thereby avoiding lifting the necessary materials from the earth's surface and ataining escape velocity. ( The energy and equipment necessary to lift the materials from the earth's surface would be cost prohibitive.) We will not see massive spacecraft built within our lifetimes.
Ryan, if you think a video idea is interesting to you, then rest assured there are other Navy ship nerds watching your channel that would also find that particular video interesting. If you make the video, we'll watch it!
A little different, but I would like to see you run through an overview of all major classes of surface combatants from smallest to largest (maybe corvette to battleship).
The protecting power aspect was interesting. I never heard anything about this exactly before. I knew that they ship sail the Great White Fleet around. But I never heard that if it was in your Port you really couldn't do much about it. It would just sit there and you couldn't sink it you couldn't move it and it may get angry and turn its guns on you. That was a neat picture you painted
The Largest warship ever built was the USS Enterprise being like 7 or 12 feet longer than any of the new Carriers. ALSO almost had better armor than most Battleships. Funny story when the first Gulf war broke out, an Iraqi cab driver tried to drive his cab into the side of the Enterprise in Alameda. CA (Sulu was not hurt). Even if the cab was full of explosives would mean the 1st Div would have had to paint over the chipped paint.
I think it would be interesting to se a video on the Washington and London Naval treaties. Why were they initiated, why did countries want to participate (or not), were they successful in economic terms, in military terms, what other limits were imposed besides the displacement of battleships, etc. Thanks.
Just a thought: Fun facts, late in the age of sail, the British developed a Rating system to cover the relative capability of warships. Corvette and frigate are French terms for the smallest and the "main" warships of the day, respectively. Destroyer is a modern reworking of the term Torpedo Boat Destroyer, and used to be •smaller• than the frigates of their day. With the advent of the submarine, destroyers got bigger and nastier than frigates (although the line between the two can be a bit blurry).
'Battleship details'...the abyss yawns. 😎 To me, the haziest distinction is between 'battleship' and 'battle cruiser'. I have watched different historians twist this into a truly epic pretzel! I wouldn't be surprised if blows have been exchanged over this...
I watched the entire episode of you talking about floor tiles. So go nuts and tell us everything. Going to ask do you play World or Warships or any table top naval warfare games(Harpoon, Seapower, ect.) Those would be interesting episodes. Challenge the other curators to a game of something see who wins!
I think aircraft carriers (or aircraft) can indeed project power. Nothing the random civilian or frontline soldier would see. But on the higher levels, it will get noticed when an unannounced aircraft enters your airspace, and you can only watch while it flies right over your palace. Some states do shit like this on a daily basis.
I was in my teens in the mid/late 1980's.... I had a pair of brothers that lived next door to me while growing up. Both of those neighbor boys were good friends of mine. The older brother was probably 5 or 6 years older than me and went off to the US Navy after high school. I still remember the day when the younger brother told me that his older brother was going to be station on the USS Missouri. It was a big deal back then but I was to young to fully understand how cool that was. I have not seen those boys much in the last 30 years, but if/when I ever see the older brother again, I will be sure to ask as many questions as I can about his time on Battleship Missouri.
@@SlipFitGarage my great uncle Howard served on a battleship in ww2 ithank it was the Pennsylvania. I still have his veteran hat with a ship he served on somewhere in my stuff in a box in storage along with the flag from his funeral and some casings from his funeral. The old dude was sharp as a tak at 92. Had some pretty good war stories. He said they mostly did shore bombardments and escorting troop convoys. I'll never forget the stories though about how the whole ship would shake when they let loose on the 14-in guns. When I was a kid I used to stay the night at him and my Aunt Betty's house all the time and he told me and we get the whole house cleaned up when we get back from church I tell you some war stories. The man lost both of his brothers one in world war II and the other one in Korea still loved his country and the navy to the day died. It does kind of make me regret not serving.
@@RetiredSailor60 I think my old neighbor served on it right after it was recommissioned in 1986.... I'm not sure if he was still on it in 1991 during Desert Storm.
My understanding . . as an English speaking Brit. is that all ships that are armed and used by a Naval power are Warships, hence the name. Thereafter we divide them into classes such Battleships, Cruisers, Destroyers, Frigates etc.
My main classifying characteristics of a battleship are, heavy armor, large mounted guns and speed. But id argue that the submarine has largely taken over the role of the battleship in a lot of regards. Aside from the naming conventions. As you mentioned, the battleship puts a real fear into any nation friend or foe when they see them coming into port or off the coast. A submarine puts the fear into a enemy, at least ones with a developed and organized military, that they literally could be anywhere and are almost undetectable. A sub like the USS Florida for example could come by and launch her cruise missiles before anyone even realizes its off shore. Attack subs can practically guarantee that if your fleet hasn't left port already, it isn't going to. And of course the nuclear capability of the boomers. Thing is though, a battleship looks much sexier then a submarine that's for sure.
Kirovs are definitely the closest thing to a battleship there is after they retired the Iowas, I don't know about the Russians but the US classifies them as battlecruisers and they are the only battlecruisers still in operation anywhere today.
I’d love to see a video about Battleship Minnesota if you find enough content for a video, I think she was a cool ship and she was featured briefly in a recent ww1 animated movie about the ww1 war dog sgt Stubby. I can’t afford a donation right now but I have been on board so there’s that 😁 love your content!
An interesting political aside - under Jimmy Carter, the mantra was "know the threat", and we referred to ourselves on bridge-to-bridge as "United States frigate". One of the reasons we loved Reagan, was the change to "be the threat" and "United States Man-of-War".
Libby is right it will be boring, but I still would be happy to have a 1880 to ww1 catagory/listing. I think you've talked a lot about ww1- to the end of battleships. Which makes sense like you say, it's what go to work on.
At 13:40 it LOOKS like they are ramming a shell that has already had full rifling engraved on the driving band. 🤔🤷🏻♂️ Maybe an optical illusion or maybe a loading trainer?
The Kirov class is a modern battlecruiser/battleship. It traded guns for missiles just like all other ship types and armor is no longer relevant. Kirov is designed to destroy anything encountered on the seas (including carriers) and is great at power projection. It performs all the tasks that define a battleship although in an evolved, modern way.
I sometimes "classify" the fast battleships as "Ultimate Battleships". The perhaps good description of a battleship is the most heavily armed and armored ship in the fleet. However, another way is a heavily armored ship with large caliber guns.
There was the unrealised class of "super battleships" in WW2 A-150 from Japan, H-Class by the Germans and the Montana which is an iowa but thicker, more big guns and a bit slower
I'd love to see a comparison video of the Alaska Class Crusiers versus the and Scharnhorst Class. A battle which the cruisers have bigger guns then the battleships. The Alaska's would have less armor, and but more speed. The Alaska's against the Admiral Graf Spee would be an interesting comparison.
I would just call them floating artillery platforms as that’s kind of what they are(putting it simply). But one question, what you call the Alaska’s? Battleships, battle cruisers, or something else
The news media, just as confused as the rest of us usually and along with common parlance, interchange Warship and Battleship with equal emphasis. Yet, opportunities to demonstrate this duality are rare these days since what we think of as Battle/Warships are seem mainly in Maritime Museums in countries whose navies operated these sea going leviathans in the first instance. Personal opinion: The same need for Battleships looks to have almost disappeared these days and their clear vulnerability to air attack makes them a juicy target for an opposing Navy and Airforce. Heavy bombardment of shore targets may still offer some relevance for a country that can sent one to sea, but in the absence of any specific personal knowledge of the subject, none seem to be available, even from a mothballed fleet, that can be returned to service before any showdown with a similarly equipped Navy can be fought. Battleships are of the past and last used by the USN when USS New Jersey showed up off the coast of North Vietnam to shell Hanoi. Here's a quote from: The Common Interest. "Over the course of her relatively short Vietnam patrol New Jersey fired 5,688 16-inch gun rounds and 14,891 five-inch gun rounds, far more than she fired during World War II and the Korean War combined. She was never seriously attacked by North Vietnamese forces. "Over the course of her relatively short Vietnam patrol New Jersey fired 5,688 16-inch gun rounds and 14,891 five-inch gun rounds, far more than she fired during World War II and the Korean War combined. She was never seriously attacked by North Vietnamese forces".
I took "battleship" to mean "a heavily armored capital warship armed with a main battery consisting of large caliber guns intended to fight in a "line of battle" although that definition is not intended to be fully comprehensive as there are outliers and inconsistencies across all navies around the world and different tactics used other than "line of battle". For example, the Iowas where built more with an escort and later AA role in mind across the vast Pacific and so "on paper" almost look more like heavily armored battlecruisers or floating AA batteries that can double as battleships.
My guess is that the next time a Battleship is proposed will be when railguns are put in to activate use. Perhaps by a scaled up Zumwalt design or perhaps something that focuses on armor and takes after modern tank design to defeat anti ship missiles. A ship with guns featuring the range and power of railguns and the armor and/or stealth to defeat anti ship missiles would be quite formidable to non peer nations and still have a place against peer competition.
speaking of predreadnaught battleships; can you do a video about the uss ohio bb-12? there doesnt seem to be much out there about her. yes i think battleship etc ship classifications will be used again. but not with a wet navy or anytime soon. i do think they will be used in reference with space warships. would love to see a bb recognition guide. also do you know anything about or can you direct my anywhere that knows anything about us navy m-1 helmet markings and colors? there doesnt seem to be much conformity or general info about them.
"I never talk that short about stuff" and that is why I watch this channel
If, at flank speed, you see the ship and the Immigrant Song starts playing in your head, then it's a battleship. If it doesn't sound silly to name the ship the USS Hell Yeah!, it's a battleship. And if you can envision the main gun's shell flying toward the target with an angry Theodore Roosevelt carrying an equally displeased bald eagle in one hand and a flaming sword in the other on it, then it's definitely a battleship.
100% True!
Okay that makes perfect sense. 😁😁
Technically speaking, they are correct.
FYI, the History Channel will be airing a special on this upcoming Memorial Day (May 30th 2022) about Theodore Roosevelt.
Libby is right about almost everything, but I am more than willing to listen to you classify battleships by whatever system you choose.
Whos libby
@@patrickgaynor2423 the editor
@@patrickgaynor2423 Ryans the brawn. Libbys the brains behind these vids.
Libby 'the intrepid and dauntless' is also Ryan's videographer who follows, and sometimes leads, Ryan into some of the most convoluted nooks and crannies of the New Jersey. Lets hear it for Libby!
@@francissullivan5900 Hip hip hooray!
If it takes up 4 squares, it's a battleship
No. Class of ship Size
1 Carrier 5
2 Battleship 4
3 Destroyer 3
4 Submarine 3
5 Patrol Boat 2
I sea your a man o' culture aswell.
Grozzy- Battlecuisers and Cruisers are significant as well.
Destroyers were originally designated as Torpedo Boat Destroyers.
If you have not already done a video on it , I would like to know how many rounds each of New Jersey's 16" guns have fired up to her 1990 decommissioning. Thanks.
Libby has the right instinct about what appeals to the mass market, however I think there are a good number of people who are interested in the channel and also are the type of person interested in details like the changes from generation to generation of ships. I think its worth recording a couple videos talking about the deeper details and trying them out to see how people engage with the content.
That old footage is awesome!!
Ryan you've improved so much as a speaker. Just fun to watch
Shipyards: *Slaps top deck of battleship "You can fit so many guns on this bad boy"
Navies: I'll take 'em!
Sounds pre WW1 French Navy. Anyway, you could replace Shipyards with 'Lockheed Martin' or 'General Dynamics'.
Difference.
Ship = cool.
Battleship = unstoppable badassness
Hood, Bismarck, Yamato, and many more. would like to share some news with you lol.
@@aland7236 Just because they sank doesn't mean they weren't badass. They just took the first loss. It's like being on point in Vietnam, everyone's gunning for you...
😅
@@aland7236 Plenty of carriers at the bottom of the sea also.
I wonder how Iowas would fare if they were refit and would be able to fire modern, smart ammunition like the stuff that was planned for the Zumwalts.
@@IndianaIT The only thing the Iowa's are good at today is parking offshore and obliterating coastal defenses. But I bet they'd make a good platform for all of these anti-missile defenses we have today.
That's the one area they excelled at in WWII too (a large deck area for mounting systems to).
I enjoy learning about and analyzing the subtle differences in ship classifications, but I understand if your channel needs to focus on more widely popular content. Thank you for all you do behind the scenes to present such interesting videos!
I think that would be interesting. That's why we watch your channel, to learn about Battleships.
Thank you for explaining :) I find black-and-white photos of battleships in rough waters(probably the Pacific) completely awe-inspiring!
This young man is hyper involved with his job, and he is totally awesome. I enjoy all of the videos I've seen so far. If I ever get the chance to see the NJ, I hope he'll be my guide.
Although I agree a Carrier is completely different. It still has to be pretty frightening to have a super carrier parked off your shore and to see a strike package fly over your city.
That's because the Battleship can hurl 9 2000 pound shells about 24 miles, while the carrier can hurl 400 500 pound shells about 200 miles. (That's 4 500 pounders on 100 aircraft)
What a fun video. I would love so see more about the evolution of warship design. A modern "Destroyer" is nearly the length of the USS Arizona.
15:04 or 15:05 you can see the shell leaving the muzzle and drawing a spike of powder smoke behind itself ahead of the main plume!!! That's so cool.
I think if the class designator “battle ship” ever gets used again it will apply to spacecraft
Almost certainly. When it's impossible to dodge things and everything can see you, the only defense is armor. The only warships is space probably will have to be battleships.
Sci-fi has already done it. They are called battle-cruisers
Space battleship yamato intensifies
@@CharliMorganMusic i'd say it depends on weaponry
If we end up having ftl weaponry, i'd bet on a mix of carriers and battleships but anything limited to sub-light will be dominated by carriers or electronic warfare destroyers (and likely the mega railgun sub-variant in specific)
I think "the expanse" does a great job with future weaponry: Long range battle with torpedoes/rockets. Mid-range (too close to dodge a straight shot) with railguns and lots of PDC against the torpedoes and for very short-range and small-target work.
Are current warships even able to "eat" direct hits? Tanks will also just go up in flames when hit with an appropriate weapon. Not sure if passive armor is still a thing.
Some friends and I build and run large scale radio controlled model ships, warships primarily. My largest is a model of USS Indianapolis (scratchbuilt superstructure on a commercially made hull) a little over 4 feet long. I also have a couple of Fletcher class DDs, one in WWII configuration and the other a 1960s era "FRAM" can with flightdeck and hanger. When I've had them on display or running on the lake it never failed that both adults and kids would call them 'Battleships' simply because they have a bunch of guns in "turrets."
"No sir, that's a heavy cruiser, this other one is a destroyer and both are much smaller than a battleship." If my friend Rich is running on the same day I point at his USS Missouri (about 6 feet long) or his USS Montana (even bigger) and say, "THAT is a battleship!"
That would be so cool to watch -- I mean probably gets old quick but man, sounds like so much fun.
You talk about the projection of power. I was in my mid teens when the New Jersey opened up with the big guns. I remember how it was the headline of many newspapers globally. It was the top story for the network news shows as well. The pride I and everyone I knew was unbelievable. We are sorely missing that now. I really believe at least one of the Iowa class should be on active duty
As much as the characteristics of the ships themselves, I'm interested in the decision-making behind the design and construction of WWII ships. Please consider making a video on ships whose design or construction represented a significant, perhaps unanticipated, compromise between the initial intent and real-world constraining factors (e.g., budget, resources, time, etc.).
I would also love to hear about this kind of stuff.
Yes. Learning about the "why" is so much more interesting than the "what".
Drachinfel Naval Historiographer is the go to source here. He gives exactly this kind of detail. He coverage is historically minded. His political and financial deep dive END shortly into the post WWII era. Additionally, He now has uploaded over 200, A 5 Minute Guide to Warships: More or Less. They are each a detailed synopsis of the ship's existence.
i believe this man is, or has been, as close to the bottom of the British Admiralty's files as is humanly possible.
i really hope you like it!:-)
@@seanqpter see my comments to NewLexican
@@somebod8703 see my comments to NewLexican
17:42 - that would make a super split screen with Drachinifel! Or side by side when he visits the USA.
Hey Ryan I served on the USS Sacramento A0E 1 in 1984. I flew to pearl harbor after coming home from boot camp for 30 days after a1 school. When I got to pearl harbor I found my way to payroll dressed in my blue winter uniform and I was sweaty. On base there. I found out my ship was out to sea and I was put on temporary service and I was stationed on Ford Island. My job wa@ to jump in the back of a pickup truck and ride around the base there and hop into a car and drive it to a different place on the base. I worked from 8 am to about noon every day. After being relieved from duty we were free to go wherever we wanted. Me and my buddies rented a car and went exploring around the island. It was a awesome time in my life. I loved the USA Sacramento that ship was huge. 55 thousand tons fully loaded and we carried 9.9 million gallons of petrol. 2.5 million gallons for aircraft jp 5. The rest we refueled other ships in the 7th fleet. We were fast I was qualified for helmsman Lee helmsman and all the watches we were required to do. I was a member of the 360 degree club . Which means when you are at the helm say at 2 am in the morning it's typical quiet . Say for instance you are sailing on a course of 179 degrees steady as she goes what we did was apply a 5 degree slow turn or even a right 5 or ten degree turn and what you done was to do it so Smoothly that no one on the ship could tell that you were making a clear 360 degree turn without any noticing.
I recently joined a collaborative writing website, and looking at some of the content, I kept finding baffling references to modern "battleships." That experience, just this year, was the first time I realized that some people use the word "battleship" as a generic term... This is a good, well-summarized explanation. I'll be sending a few people here, heh...
One missing thing is why battleships aren't used any more. Basically, they were generally less effective in combat than theorized, and often were built more for deterrence and political posturing than for combat. In wartime, battleship construction was relatively rare, as most nations focused on vessels that could be finished faster and were more expendable and versatile. With the advent of reliable air assault on warships at sea, and the performance of battleships and battlecruisers in World War 2, there was a great deal of consensus after 1945 that battleships were obsolete.
Also: regarding warship nomenclature, I doubt "battleship" will ever return to standard terminology, but the term "cruiser" is currently being stretched to the limits--since the 1970s or 80s, several nations, notably the UK and USSR, have called certain aircraft carriers "cruisers" for political reasons. I believe it's partly because of treaties regarding the Bosporus and the Black Sea, am I right?
Yes, an in-depth classification of ships sounds awesome! I usually classify ships based on role. Since fleet composition is variable I don't trust umbrella terms that much. Also I usually associate the term battle-ship with the large heavy armed and armour ships, so if it is "armed to the teeth", in a rather evident manner, I'd called it a battle-ship.
It does to me, also. It seems to get very confused around frigates and destroyers. And ships that are primarily missed armed and those that are gun armed. My uneducated understanding is that some ships heavier than destroyers are called frigates in order to get the funding from congress.
That's because sci fi throws around three tearms like battleship, battlecruiser, and dreadnaught, with knowing their context, a big gun capital ship even knowing what they are. There has not been big gun capital in living memory for most people.
I love it how the subscriber count goes up every time I watch a new video. Here's hoping for that silver play button by New Years.
We're hoping so too!
Luckily we are discussing this from the USN perspective, which simplifies the answer: battleships carry the ship type designation BB, everything else is not a battleship !! :-)
I’d love a video series going through the different gens of battleship comparing and contrasting them.
Great explaination of 100yrs of Naval warfare development explained in under 20 minutes, it's a bit simplified but the key points are there. There was a documentary called Battleships that tried to do that and it ended up becoming a mini serries. Since we've moved onto Harpoon missiles and AEGIS missile systems doubt any modern naval ship is worthy of being called a Battleship and just plain Warship.
I would like to see a video that goes more in depth about the different classes of warships and what the differences between them are, like destroyers and destroyer escorts versus cruisers and light and heavy cruisers versus frigates and corvettes, that kind of thing. I like this channel because the kinds of warships that I like the most are the kinds used during WWII, and you guys take care of such a ship for posterity :-)
If you feel like going into fine detail on any subject, just when you get to that point give a warning to less interested folks to jump ahead to a particular time spot to get back to the low information section (in a nice way). Anyway, I like the treatment at the beginning on this clip that sums up the question and goes on in more detail.
A question: late 19th early 20th century warships sometimes have a gallery at the stern. Example at 3:48. is there a technical term for this structure? What's the purpose? Fresh air for officers? It seems to me that this was more frequent, but not exclusive, with IJN but I could easily be mistaken
They started out in the Age of Sail as separate structures, stern galleries (the rows of windows across the stern) and quarter galleries (the small windowed structures on either side of the stern). I'm not sure if the stern galleries really had any purpose besides admitting light into the captain's cabin (they were called "lights", not windows).
The quarter galleries were the officers' toilets. Seriously. The overhanging structure of the quarter gallery allowed the waste to fall right into the sea without dirtying the side of the ship. It also gave the officers a private place to do their business, unlike the very public (and open air) head on the bow where the sailors went.
Later on, as ships' sterns became round, the structures probably just merged into a continuous set of galleries around the stern. I imagine they stuck around in the late 19th century only because of naval tradition.
@@hunter35474 Thanks. That's sort of what I was thinking: It's there because something's always been there. An interesting observation about officers' privacy, although it's the wrong location for a poop deck. (Sorry, the bad pun forced itself on me.)
I would love to see a video on the history of size classifications. Maybe you could also include something on the various classes of the WWI and WWII eras, or point me to a video I haven't found yet if you already did cover that. Thank you, and I enjoy these videos immensely.
I would like to see videos on the generational dreadnought designs. That sounds interesting.
Check out Drachinifels channel he has several vids on them ;) Also Dr. Alexander Clarke's channel.
@@stevewindisch7400 Those 2 are the best on YT.
@@stevewindisch7400
1. Who are those guys? :)
2. Irn Bru...because Irn Bru.
3. The Catalina is better than the Blackburn Blackburn. - What to say to liven up a certain live stream. :)
4. Admiral Sir Reginald Guy Hannam Henderson
5. Question: Best plot armor? Answer: Warspite.
6. Bilgepumps
Dreadnought designs are like battleship designs but retarded
I would love to see your talk about the various various of classes of battleship.
A detailed explination of the evolving Battleship classifications would be great. I hear the different terms used in many videos, but never is the historical progression explained.
Great video, i have been watching your channel for some time and would just like to say that i really appreciate the content you are sharing with us thank you.
You bring out the exact argument that I put forth as to why BBs should still be in service. They are perfectly awesome. I served on a super carrier. But, despite seeing all these planes day-in-and-day-out, watching them launce with full loads of munitions, it was never the awe I felt as I walked about the decks of New Jersey when she was in Alameda in 1969.
BTW, a super carrier can launch it's aircraft while tied up or at anchor. There was some type of incoming that needed to be intercepted while Ranger was tied up in Japan. She launched an armed F-4J Phantom. I've got a picture of that somewhere.
5:26 what is that running along the side of that ship??
Coal chutes. They would run coal along that catwalk from the collier or lighter and dump it into those chutes down to the bunkers.
Gunboat diplomacy. Send a battleship and let it float off shore menacing.
Cross-posting Drachisims?
Better still, let it float offshore and sail rounds over your head and listen to the horrendous blasts like was done (from what I heard) in Lebanon by one of the Iowas.
I think early battleships are fascinating, given the rapid revolution of ship design from 1850 to 1900. I would love to see more content on this! It's an area of warship history that I think doesn't get as much attention as 1900-1950.
Example: You showed photos of the Redoubtable, but didn't even mention her by name!
"will there ever be battleships in the future?" This is one of the places where I think science fiction gets it right. I would expect some of the largest space fairing for ships, at least for the initial periods of whatever that sort of warfare looks like to be battleship classes.
Battleships being vessels equipped with large guns acting as the center of a battle group and intended to engage other worships with their guns.
Personally, I can’t really see battleships ever coming back in any significant capacity; missiles and the occasional directed energy weapon are (projected) kings of space combat.
Armor is heavy, heavy things limit acceleration, limited acceleration means less survivability. The most passive defense I’d imagine on realistic space warships is major redundancy.
@@aristeas3176 oh I'm absolutely sure they won't look anything like current battleships. I would expect a lot more point defense than a lot less armor, but I would also expect there to be a class of warship designed around using large accelerator cannons instead of projected energy, especially early on.
@@aristeas3176
I have concluded that space cadets have a bit of difficulty differentiating between science and science fiction.
Then there's engineering. I'd estimate that very few science fiction buffs have taken engineering physics 101, 102, 102, or 201 at the collegiate level.
@@richardivonen3564 Space battles are more like Iron Sky (yes, Nazis in space or moon) than Space Battleship Yamato.
@@1968gadgetyo
The only way to put a massive spaceship into space is by building the drydock on a mineral rich asteroid, thereby avoiding lifting the necessary materials from the earth's surface and ataining escape velocity.
( The energy and equipment necessary to lift the materials from the earth's surface would be cost prohibitive.)
We will not see massive spacecraft built within our lifetimes.
~12:40,
so Vanguard wasn't built under the escalator clause?
Most all your. Video are interesting. Some more. Than other
Ryan, if you think a video idea is interesting to you, then rest assured there are other Navy ship nerds watching your channel that would also find that particular video interesting. If you make the video, we'll watch it!
Word origins, meanings and evolution. The etymology💜 of the word Battleship. This was unexpected!
Ryan,
This video makes you my hero.
🙏💜🖖
Another great job! Thank you!
A little different, but I would like to see you run through an overview of all major classes of surface combatants from smallest to largest (maybe corvette to battleship).
My own loose standard is a “Battleship” is a vessel that is designed to directly engage other warships in “sustained” combat and win the day.
The protecting power aspect was interesting. I never heard anything about this exactly before. I knew that they ship sail the Great White Fleet around. But I never heard that if it was in your Port you really couldn't do much about it. It would just sit there and you couldn't sink it you couldn't move it and it may get angry and turn its guns on you. That was a neat picture you painted
There's also the term costal battleship, typically operated by countries on the Baltic, but I consider these to be monitors.
The Largest warship ever built was the USS Enterprise being like 7 or 12 feet longer than any of the new Carriers. ALSO almost had better armor than most Battleships. Funny story when the first Gulf war broke out, an Iraqi cab driver tried to drive his cab into the side of the Enterprise in Alameda. CA (Sulu was not hurt). Even if the cab was full of explosives would mean the 1st Div would have had to paint over the chipped paint.
I think it would be interesting to se a video on the Washington and London Naval treaties. Why were they initiated, why did countries want to participate (or not), were they successful in economic terms, in military terms, what other limits were imposed besides the displacement of battleships, etc. Thanks.
From a few months back:
ruclips.net/video/dcblpkfj3lI/видео.html
Drachinifel has done one also:
ruclips.net/video/amsMUo1Az00/видео.html
What's the name of the ship at 3:55? It's such a cool design
Would love to hear more battleship breakdowns!
Please do a video on battleship classification; i wouls find it VERY useful. Thanks from the UK
We're glad you never talk that short about stuff 😉
Just a thought: Fun facts, late in the age of sail, the British developed a Rating system to cover the relative capability of warships. Corvette and frigate are French terms for the smallest and the "main" warships of the day, respectively. Destroyer is a modern reworking of the term Torpedo Boat Destroyer, and used to be •smaller• than the frigates of their day. With the advent of the submarine, destroyers got bigger and nastier than frigates (although the line between the two can be a bit blurry).
'Battleship details'...the abyss yawns. 😎
To me, the haziest distinction is between 'battleship' and 'battle cruiser'. I have watched different historians twist this into a truly epic pretzel! I wouldn't be surprised if blows have been exchanged over this...
Regarding changing meaning of ship type terminology, under Cromwell's Parliamentary Navy, the term "Frigate" referred to the line of battle ships.
Interesting , Thank You. You film it I will watch it
Ryan Please do a video breaking down all the sub-categories of Battleships, and what the differences are.
I watched the entire episode of you talking about floor tiles. So go nuts and tell us everything. Going to ask do you play World or Warships or any table top naval warfare games(Harpoon, Seapower, ect.) Those would be interesting episodes. Challenge the other curators to a game of something see who wins!
I think aircraft carriers (or aircraft) can indeed project power. Nothing the random civilian or frontline soldier would see. But on the higher levels, it will get noticed when an unannounced aircraft enters your airspace, and you can only watch while it flies right over your palace. Some states do shit like this on a daily basis.
Some states use sonic booms as a way to terrorize civilians.
Video idea....could America have built a Yamato type BB?
The Montana class. Designed to go toe to toe with Yamato. Turn out to be better to build a ton of escort carriers with dive bombers.
If there were still battleships when I graduated high school I would have joined the Navy.
I was in my teens in the mid/late 1980's.... I had a pair of brothers that lived next door to me while growing up. Both of those neighbor boys were good friends of mine. The older brother was probably 5 or 6 years older than me and went off to the US Navy after high school. I still remember the day when the younger brother told me that his older brother was going to be station on the USS Missouri. It was a big deal back then but I was to young to fully understand how cool that was. I have not seen those boys much in the last 30 years, but if/when I ever see the older brother again, I will be sure to ask as many questions as I can about his time on Battleship Missouri.
Same here
@@SlipFitGarage my great uncle Howard served on a battleship in ww2 ithank it was the Pennsylvania. I still have his veteran hat with a ship he served on somewhere in my stuff in a box in storage along with the flag from his funeral and some casings from his funeral. The old dude was sharp as a tak at 92. Had some pretty good war stories. He said they mostly did shore bombardments and escorting troop convoys. I'll never forget the stories though about how the whole ship would shake when they let loose on the 14-in guns. When I was a kid I used to stay the night at him and my Aunt Betty's house all the time and he told me and we get the whole house cleaned up when we get back from church I tell you some war stories. The man lost both of his brothers one in world war II and the other one in Korea still loved his country and the navy to the day died. It does kind of make me regret not serving.
My brother served on USS Missouri during the first Gulf War
@@RetiredSailor60
I think my old neighbor served on it right after it was recommissioned in 1986.... I'm not sure if he was still on it in 1991 during Desert Storm.
thanks for the upload
My understanding . . as an English speaking Brit. is that all ships that are armed and used by a Naval power are Warships, hence the name. Thereafter we divide them into classes such Battleships, Cruisers, Destroyers, Frigates etc.
My main classifying characteristics of a battleship are, heavy armor, large mounted guns and speed.
But id argue that the submarine has largely taken over the role of the battleship in a lot of regards. Aside from the naming conventions.
As you mentioned, the battleship puts a real fear into any nation friend or foe when they see them coming into port or off the coast. A submarine puts the fear into a enemy, at least ones with a developed and organized military, that they literally could be anywhere and are almost undetectable.
A sub like the USS Florida for example could come by and launch her cruise missiles before anyone even realizes its off shore. Attack subs can practically guarantee that if your fleet hasn't left port already, it isn't going to. And of course the nuclear capability of the boomers.
Thing is though, a battleship looks much sexier then a submarine that's for sure.
9:00 can you talk about that ship on screen, with the like stacked turrets. I want to know why they were like that.
I would love hear you talk about it
There were the Kirovs that were the closest to modern day "Battleships" once the Iowa's left.
A fair comment.👍
Kirovs are definitely the closest thing to a battleship there is after they retired the Iowas, I don't know about the Russians but the US classifies them as battlecruisers and they are the only battlecruisers still in operation anywhere today.
Yes please, your views on the generations of pre and post dreadnoughts would be very interesting.
I’d love to see a video about Battleship Minnesota if you find enough content for a video, I think she was a cool ship and she was featured briefly in a recent ww1 animated movie about the ww1 war dog sgt Stubby. I can’t afford a donation right now but I have been on board so there’s that 😁 love your content!
Great stuff!!
What is the thing on the turret?
*USS North Carolina fidgets nervously*
"I'm glad people mostly argue about Hood and Kongo"
An interesting political aside - under Jimmy Carter, the mantra was "know the threat", and we referred to ourselves on bridge-to-bridge as "United States frigate". One of the reasons we loved Reagan, was the change to "be the threat" and "United States Man-of-War".
I apologize for any flame war I may start, but the Alaska class, light battleship, battlecruiser or large crusier?
At 12::43 j noticed #3 turret does not have the bloomers installed. Any ideas why? Good video and information.
Libby is right it will be boring, but I still would be happy to have a 1880 to ww1 catagory/listing. I think you've talked a lot about ww1- to the end of battleships. Which makes sense like you say, it's what go to work on.
At 13:40 it LOOKS like they are ramming a shell that has already had full rifling engraved on the driving band. 🤔🤷🏻♂️ Maybe an optical illusion or maybe a loading trainer?
What are those diagonal lattices or whatever on the hulls of Dreadnaught era large Warships?
Torpedo net booms.
My brother served on USS Missouri during the first Gulf War. I attended the Memorial service for the USS Iowa Explosion in 1989.
The Kirov class is a modern battlecruiser/battleship. It traded guns for missiles just like all other ship types and armor is no longer relevant. Kirov is designed to destroy anything encountered on the seas (including carriers) and is great at power projection. It performs all the tasks that define a battleship although in an evolved, modern way.
Yes, please do the dreadnaught video. Thats my vote
Here's our video on dreadnought: ruclips.net/video/oHb_3ab-S2c/видео.html
I'll guess: a battleship is a specific type of ship and a warship is a ship meant to shoot things that isn't also a boat.
I sometimes "classify" the fast battleships as "Ultimate Battleships". The perhaps good description of a battleship is the most heavily armed and armored ship in the fleet. However, another way is a heavily armored ship with large caliber guns.
There was the unrealised class of "super battleships" in WW2 A-150 from Japan, H-Class by the Germans and the Montana which is an iowa but thicker, more big guns and a bit slower
I'd love to see a comparison video of the Alaska Class Crusiers versus the and Scharnhorst Class. A battle which the cruisers have bigger guns then the battleships. The Alaska's would have less armor, and but more speed. The Alaska's against the Admiral Graf Spee would be an interesting comparison.
Alaska class versus a Panzerschiff ends quickly and badly for the Kriegsmarine.
Ryan, were the North Carolina and South Dakota classes considered to be fast battleships?
Yes. The slow ones had a 21 knot speed.
I would just call them floating artillery platforms as that’s kind of what they are(putting it simply). But one question, what you call the Alaska’s? Battleships, battle cruisers, or something else
I would call the Alaska a Battlecruiser, but the USN called it a large cruiser
The news media, just as confused as the rest of us usually and along with common parlance, interchange Warship and Battleship with equal emphasis.
Yet, opportunities to demonstrate this duality are rare these days since what we think of as Battle/Warships are seem mainly in Maritime Museums in countries whose navies operated these sea going leviathans in the first instance.
Personal opinion: The same need for Battleships looks to have almost disappeared these days and their clear vulnerability to air attack makes them a juicy target for an opposing Navy and Airforce. Heavy bombardment of shore targets may still offer some relevance for a country that can sent one to sea, but in the absence of any specific personal knowledge of the subject, none seem to be available, even from a mothballed fleet, that can be returned to service before any showdown with a similarly equipped Navy can be fought.
Battleships are of the past and last used by the USN when USS New Jersey showed up off the coast of North Vietnam to shell Hanoi.
Here's a quote from: The Common Interest.
"Over the course of her relatively short Vietnam patrol New Jersey fired 5,688 16-inch gun rounds and 14,891 five-inch gun rounds, far more than she fired during World War II and the Korean War combined. She was never seriously attacked by North Vietnamese forces.
"Over the course of her relatively short Vietnam patrol New Jersey fired 5,688 16-inch gun rounds and 14,891 five-inch gun rounds, far more than she fired during World War II and the Korean War combined. She was never seriously attacked by North Vietnamese forces".
I took "battleship" to mean "a heavily armored capital warship armed with a main battery consisting of large caliber guns intended to fight in a "line of battle" although that definition is not intended to be fully comprehensive as there are outliers and inconsistencies across all navies around the world and different tactics used other than "line of battle". For example, the Iowas where built more with an escort and later AA role in mind across the vast Pacific and so "on paper" almost look more like heavily armored battlecruisers or floating AA batteries that can double as battleships.
HMS Glorious could have used an Iowa class escort when encountering KMS Scharnhorst and KMS Gneisenau.
You pretty much hit it on the head! Especially with the force projection side of it.
With the sinking of many battleships during WW2, I think that ended the battleship as a major force at sea.
Great job
I want a more in depth video. It’s not boring to me I love that stuff.
My guess is that the next time a Battleship is proposed will be when railguns are put in to activate use. Perhaps by a scaled up Zumwalt design or perhaps something that focuses on armor and takes after modern tank design to defeat anti ship missiles.
A ship with guns featuring the range and power of railguns and the armor and/or stealth to defeat anti ship missiles would be quite formidable to non peer nations and still have a place against peer competition.
speaking of predreadnaught battleships; can you do a video about the uss ohio bb-12? there doesnt seem to be much out there about her.
yes i think battleship etc ship classifications will be used again. but not with a wet navy or anytime soon. i do think they will be used in reference with space warships.
would love to see a bb recognition guide.
also do you know anything about or can you direct my anywhere that knows anything about us navy m-1 helmet markings and colors? there doesnt seem to be much conformity or general info about them.