As a language nerd, I was hoping you would elaborate more on the origins and language of the channel name. Though, I get the feeling you were intentionally vague...
Q&A: I’m curious on your thoughts on the decisions of Rear Admiral Troubridge to not intercept Goeben during WW1. I’ve heard arguments both for and against him.
That's strange, the documentary Battleship (2012) led me to understand that a museum ship could be reactivated to fight aliens in only the length of an AC/DC song.
Drachisms of the Day: 55:36 "Wins the Vlad Tepes award for cruel and unusual punishment of an enemy who was already horribly beaten into the ground anyway." 1:09:12 "When you build a ship where your secondary battery out-ranges your main battery and it's supposed to be a Dreadnought, you really really have learned the meaning of failure." 8:10 "Then you have 'Mongo The Elephant'. Yes, I said that correctly, 'The Elephant'. He lived on HMS Courageous for a while." This is NOT a 'Drachism'. This is a plea for an entire episode dedicated to Mongo. WTAF!!! 1:28:41 "Sooo, the Battle of the Barents Sea is more seen as a failure due to the sheer comedic ineptitude of the whole engagement." 1:52:17 "I need a drink."
Kevin Kennelly honestly while I truly love the work that Drach does explaining navalisms and their history, it is the Drachisms that really push this channel over the top IMHO from a great channel to an amazing channel.
@@JohnSmith-kg2rt Yeah, Drach is amazing. No other content creator on RUclips knows his subject nearly as good as him. He can literally do a Q&A on the fly without research needed. His mind is a Naval Encyclopedia.. incredible.
48:00 "My recommendation would be..." *whips off mask to reveal it was Jackie Fisher the whole time* "A Y E A R O F B A T T L E C R U I S E R P R O D U C T I O N"
Just want to say how much I enjoyed your Bismark episode. It was truly the best presentation of the engagement I've ever come across in any media. It really brought all the aspects, especially the tragic to life, while I also learned that an American coast guard vessel was involved if only on the fringe, something I had not been aware of. Also I would like to repeat something I mentioned in an earlier post. The British Pathe RUclips channel has many short videos on Royal Navy ships. Its quite interesting to see many of the ships mentioned here from the perspective of the actual times. Thanks again for all the work and time you put into this wonderful channel.
Yeah, I laughed. I couldn't tell if he was channeling the Japanese portrayals of Americans being dishonorable and wiping htem out, or channeling Japanese portrayals of their destruction being their own dishonor. It's hilarious either way.
A@awwwa well, '10' was a bit disappointing and the sound quality was absolutely shit. It's as if the final master was fed along a piece of string between two baked bean tins
For people who don't know. The USS Texas is at a weird spot to visit. It in the middle of a bunch of Oil Refinery. I do like the fact it on the same of the Battle San Jacinto. But I can see why it hard to vist. You don't see it from the Highway and there like one sign for the exit.
To return the Yamato to service (considering she'd survived the war), you'd need to attach Star-Drives, Tachyon HoloDAR, Deflector Field generators, life support . . . a Pepsi machine . . . and issue the women in the crew Spandex bodysuits*. *For those who don't live in a Sci-Fi world, let me tell you: Spandex clad women (and men) is a two-edged sword. It's sort of inversely proportional as physical appeal is greatest when professional power and influence levels are at their lowest. A Spandex clad recruit is one thing. A Spandex clad 65 year old admiral is quite another**. **Go figure.
You forgot the Wave Motion Gun. And uniform problem can be easily counteracted by keeping the grey-bearded admiral all the time in non-spandex dress uniform..
I love your channel mate. Please keep the videos coming. I am very glad that the Texas will be drydocked. I am sure it had no small part to your video.
There were so many reports from all navies in WWI and WWII of how ship's mascots contributed to the crew's morale that it just seems like modern foolishness to outlaw them, particularly cats, which serve a useful purpose aboard every ship. Sometimes things were so bad that passing around the ship's cats and dogs for a good petting were the only thing that kept the men going. I hope we don't have to go through another major conflict to find out the truth of this.
Plus, cats proved to be especially good at controlling any rodent problem that might arise. There was even one ship’s cat who continued hunting rats after being wounded & while the ship was under fire. www.mnn.com/family/pets/stories/cats-at-sea-7-famous-seafaring-felines www.thevintagenews.com/2018/07/21/simon-the-cat-hms-amethyst/
@@TraditionalAnglican Yes, that's what I meant about cats also being useful aboard any ship. There's no ship of anything over 100 feet that's not infested with rats, and the good old tabby is the best control mechanism. You can't pass around the Orkin Man for a good petting either.
Seriously, the idea that cats aren't allowed on the ships for "hygiene" reasons is insane, when rodent infestations are one of the biggest hygiene problems on a ship.
As a USN veteran (11-15) I don’t think it would be a good situation for the mascot on a modern naval vessel, not to mention personally I think it’s morally wrong and inhumane to put an animal with no actual military purpose in the line of danger. They can’t make that choice like a person can
Here’s an inept naval officer from the Far East, specifically Joseon Korea: Won Kyun, who scuttled most of his fleet at the start of the Imjin War, then asked the soon-to-be-legendary Admiral Yi Sun-sin to do the work for him (which he did, spectacularly). And then he spent the rest of the war generally being incompetent, especially compared to Yi. When Yi was temporarily fired and jailed (which was an even bigger moment of stupidity, but that’s another story), Won Kyun replaced him and proceeded to get nearly the entire Korean navy sunk and himself killed by ignoring things like recon, concentration of force, and the tactics his colleague developed to take full advantage of the Korean dominance in naval artillery. This was the only Korean naval defeat of the war in open battle, and it reduced the navy to 13 ships total (!!). Resulting in Japan regaining naval superiority after six years of tactical and strategic naval defeats, which suddenly removed much of the logistical challenges Japan faced before. Needless to say Yi was quickly reinstated after this. Thankfully he was competent enough that having the navy reduced to 13 ships didn’t stop him from winning a major battle against a Japanese fleet ten times the size of his own. He eventually regained naval superiority, partly by having more ships built as fast as possible, and partly because the Ming Chinese navy had joined the fight and he would eventually be in charge of that force too.
Would you pretty, pretty please with creme and sugar on top do a video on the battle of the Barent Sea? I enjoy all your videos but the one you do on historic naval battles (particularly the debacles) are the best.
With regards to the German navy having an aircraft carrier in WW I, there were plans in 1918 to convert the hull of the unfinished Italian liner T/P Ausonia. This led to the German navy giving up on rebuilding the cruiser SMS Roon into a mothership for seaplanes. It was planned that the ex-Ausonia should be able to launch 13/19 seaplanes as well as around 10 wheeled aircraft. However, those plans came to nought, as the war ended before any work on the ship could be done. The ship was broken up in 1922.
When I first saw the paper flying in the intro, I jokingly thought "Somebody lost their homework!" Thanks to today's episode, I now find that could be it. :-)
Drach I've been binge watching your videos for the last couple of weeks and just wanted to say a massive thank you for the wonderful content I only wish I could find an equivalent afv channel
The whole CVN-65 segment was just a giant drachism fest. "And before the Japanese know what's happened everything is on fire and it's most dishonourable"
Well, this was a first. I was actually asleep before the Drydock posted for once. I get to watch it rested instead of nearly passing out the entire time. :-) The Texas isn't in the best location to attract tourists so moving it closer the Houston would probably be a good thing. No one outside the project management team knows where Texas will be moved and how it will be moored, but at least there's now going to be enough money available for extensive repairs.
I volunteered to work on the Texas the last time she was dry docked. Apparently multiple degrees and international work experience qualifies one to chip paint and sand the deck. Humbling experience, and well worth the effort. That repair was done with donated money. Kudos to the State of Texas for stepping up and providing the money since we have a surplus - conservative government at work - and I hope the new site is much more accessible than the current one. Once there the site is nice, however, you have to deal with Houston traffic, which all by itself can ruin your day.
Another excellent video, sir. In regard to turret designation on American DDs, the nomenclature to which I was exposed was that the main guns (5-38s or 5-54s) were numbered from bow to stern. Most-forward 5" mount was designated as 'Mount 51', second as 'Mount 52', etc. Since neither of the ships to which I was TAD had large numbers of small-to-medium caliber weapons During my time in service, there were limited 40mm Bofors, a pair of twin-40mms mounted on either side of centerline, 01 level aft. The APD to which I was TAD (USS Beverly W. Reid, a converted DDE) was limited to a single 5-38, mounted forward. There were no 20mm or .50-cal weapons mounted. On USS Barney, DDG-6, there were two 5-54 turrets, one forward of the bridge, another on main deck, well aft. AA protection was provided by a two-arm missile launcher, just forward of Mount 52, at 01 level. During a WestPac deployment in 1968, several .50-cal mounts (as an anti-small-craft weapon) were added, but had been removed I guess Sixth Fleet wasn't as worried about NVA torpedo boats on a Med cruise in 1969. Sorry, I can't post photos of either ship in this comment, but both ships have photos at Wikipedia.
One of the big problems with re-activating a museum ships not only the equipment, but many of the skills needed to run them are lost. This was one of the contributing factors in the number two turret explosion on the USS Iowa.
A lot of splash distinguishing was done using a "scotch tape" range scale on the PPI scope, or the typical radar display we've all seen. The CIC crew knew how far their shells would travel within a range of about 30 meters. They also knew how far the target was from their ship, also within about 30 meters for a cruiser and above size target. They literally used a piece of scotch tape with that data in pencil on a piece of tape and paste it on the screen. That served as a visual marker between the range of a splash and range of the target, and a new tape was made fr each salvo Since no other ship could have been firing at exactly the same time at the same target, shell splashes for your ship could be pretty accurately determined by watching the flight of your shells as pips on the PPI along the scotch tape scale. A range difference between a splash and the target that didn't match your scotch tape scale couldn't be yours, only the ones that matched your scale. It's really quite a simple concept once you understand it, but one that wasn't part of the normal radar features at the time. The Navy crewman who first came up with the scotch tape scale is lost in the sands of time, but the scale was in wide use in the Pacific by the middle of 1944. These innovations were distributed to the fleet and the Allies using the Combat Information Center Magazine starting in July, 1944. These are mostly available online at maritime.org/doc/cic/ and make fascinating reading for electronics nerd types like me. From reading the magazines, it seems the scotch tape scale was already known by July 1944, so some early electronics nerd sailor had already worked out the general concept by then. The scale was added electronically to postwar radars, so the the vast supply of scotch tape needed in a CIC faded by then.
Well, no arfield was named Henderson Field untill Maj. Henderson died in the battle of Midway. However, you are partially wrong. The airfield on the Midway's Sand Island was named Henderson Field well after the war and bears the name to this day. However, second arfield, on Midway's East Island (well actually first one, as Sand Island field wasn't even built whwe battle took place) was named Henderson Field immidietly after the battle, and bore the name until it's closure in 1945.
Re Mongo (found online:) >>> was on HMS COURAGEOUS 1974-1979, and we adopted an African Elephant that someone found tethered to a bollard next to the taxi rank on Helensburghs main street. We called him *Mongo* and he lived in an old Chacon that we put in our Lay-apart store just up from 6-Berth. When we eventually left Faslane, to go to Chatham for re-fit, Capt SM3 granted permission for Mongo to go with us. We chained him to the starboard rails of the fin and hoofed it down the Gareloch on the step. Mongo was as happy as larry, but the casing party spent most of their time trying not to step in enormous piles of elephant shit. Anyhow - we encountered some very bad weather in the Irish Sea (surface passage) and come the morning - Mongo had simply disappeared. God! I miss that elephant. Ask any ex Courageous ships company - they'll vouch for me. He was a brills elephant and good company for the Upper Deck Trot. R.I.P. Mongo. (Here is only one of two known photographs that exist of Mongo actually on the casing of HMS COURAGEOUS as we sailed out of Faslane, with AFD 60 visible in the background).
Inept admiral: Jacob von Wassenaer Obdam - a land army colonel put in charge of the Dutch fleet for political reasons due to deep divisions within the Netherlands at the time. He actually had a pretty decent idea on how to counter the British (relying on firepower rather than boarding), but it took a competent admiral (De Ruyter) and the construction of larger purpose-built warships (such as De Zeven Provincien) in order to successfully put it into practice - all after Obdam got himself killed in a naval battle.
Regarding the Enterprise CVN 65 vs CV 6 is partly demonstrated by the movie, "Final Countdown" of the early 80s. USS Nimitz is time warped to Dec, 1941.
That sounds like an awful film! The pitch sounds like something straight out of an american naval enthusiast's wet dream, shooting down countless Japanese aircraft with virtual impunity.
@@sergarlantyrell7847 Actually, only two Japanese planes were shot down. Most of the film revolved around the idea of affecting time. Kirk Douglas, Martin Sheen, Charles Durning and Katherine Ross were in it. As was I as a background extra.
I also remember the long barrel 40mm bofors gun being so much better than the standard so much so that sweden seemed to be the only ones to get it. Well as an example of the opposite
Henderson Field was on Guadalcanal. Named in honor of United States Marine Corps Major Lofton Henderson, commanding officer of VMSB-241 who was killed during the Battle of Midway. Back in 1942 all three runways were on Eastern Island. Sand Island was a flying boat base. Sand Island did not have a runway for land based airplanes in June 1942.
Fantastic video as always Drach, thanks for answering my questions. Some thoughts I had. Have you thought about maybe doing a t shirt for sell on Etsy or something similar? I'm sure your subscribers could submit a variety of ideas for you. Secondly, I'm not entirely convinced that if the British Navy had been badly mauled at the Falklands, and things were getting even worse. That a US Navy Taskforce wouldn't have showed up to support them. The US couldn't afford for its major Naval cold war ally to lose face like that. Thirdly, the Texas is getting 35 million dollars but the entire thing makes me nervous. They want to move her to Alabama for repairs and I dont think you can risk moving her that far. And I don't think the US Coast Guard will certify her to move. Shes in such a bad way. Though the new budget for her does include a 99 year maintenance and care budget as well to be figured up later. I wish they'd fix her up, sink her down into the dock that's her permanent home. The upper superstructure is level with the ground essentially. And you walk down to get to the main deck. That way you can build a climate controlled structure over the top to further preserve it. And show off some cool artifacts as well. Lastly, it's a real shame that the Dora gun didnt survive. That would be amazing to see in a museum or something.
The Iowas intentionally fired all available shells, wasting the barrel liners, prior to becoming museum ships. All barrels require relining. The industrial base for that evolution is long gone. :-(
The US navy's goal by mid-1944 was to have all destroyers assigned the Pacific theater that retained their twin quad torpedo launchers to be be fitted with at least ten 40mm barrels, those with a single quad launcher to have at 12 barrels, and the complete anti-kamikaze ships with no torpedo launchers were fitted with between 14 and 16 barrels. The most heavily armed were some Gearing class ships with a pair of quad 40mm mounts amidships in the same positions as the landed torpedo launchers, a pair of twin mounts opposite the bridge, and another pair of twin mounts aft ahead of the depth charge tracks replacing the previous three to five single 20mm mounts at the same location. This was a total of 20 barrels. At the same time, all the remaining single 20mm mounts were replaced with twin mounts. Most of these ships were used as radar pickets that were heavily attacked by Japanese aircraft once they realized ot importance of their early warning role. The ability of these ships to send up a hail of antiaircraft fire was a surprise to Japanese pilots and caused many suicide attacks to be broken up, especially when there were enough destroyers available to assign pairs to a radar picket station. The problems with this kind of heavy armament was not the stability issues that have been written about, it was where to berth and feed all the extra crew. Each quad mount required a crew of 8-10 and twins 4-5. that was a total additional crew just to man the mounts of 32-35 men compared to the original three twin mounts. This doesn't count the additional crew needed for ammunition handling, magazine manning, and machinist and gunners mates to repair and maintain the mounts. The additional electronics and Combat Information Centers already required an additional ten to fourteen men before the armament changes, so even the Grearings were hard pressed to find space for these crew, and it was even worse for the converted Fletchers and Sumners. Even the amount of extra provisions required was estimated to add some thirty tons to the displacement, not to mention the additional cooks and stewards needed. The USN before the kamikaze threat prided itself on every crew member having their own berth. By April, 1945, hot bunking, hammocks, and even deck sleeping was the norm. Many more complaints by the men centered more around the difficulties of getting a hot meal than the rough berthing. Letters home from Pacific theater destroyer crews told of waiting for up to two hours to get through the mess line, only to have that disrupted by general quarters for another air attack. Some gun and CIC crews ate nothing but sandwiches and coffee for days on end. If you want to start sailors to bitching, don't feed them hot meals, and the bitching from crews extended from letters to their families all the way to letters to their Congressmen and Senators.
Very informative video. Regarding the question of animals on ship, in particular the hamster aboard HMS Eskimo, which Eskimo are you referring to, the WW2 destroyer or the post war frigate? If the latter, then I served aboard her from 1979 to 1981 and I don't recall seeing a hamster or indeed any of the crew mentioning it either. If it lived in the laundry, then these were manned by Hong Kong Chinese, a couple of whom were in my mess and again no mention of it by them either! Thanks also for the info on the books, Friedman, Garzke etc. Will look them up.
Thanks for the bit about the Iwo Jima loan offer. I had not heard that one before. My first choice would have been Lexington for reasons of size and speed, and probable lack of any really state of the art, thus classified, radar or comm equipment, so it could be handed over to a mercenary crew. On the other hand, the Lex was completely unarmed.
Adding to 8:49, the the russians have the A-222E Bereg-E, a 130mm SPG in a truck for coastan defense duties. And for Battleship calibre guns, the had the 2B1 Oka (420mm) and 2A3 Kondensator (406mm), not for coastal defence duties but battleship calibre nonetheless.
If you like ship building in space maybe try out Space Engineers^^ You have way more building options, more creative freedom (also thx to a buttton of mods) it only lacks the nice survival of Empyrion
I don’t know if I should’ve been laughing at the replace Enterprise with Enterprise (Hella fast edition) as much as I was. The thought of how they’d probably just sail up to japan and bomb it into submission with one Carrier is brilliant
Interesting shells: Japanese HE shells with Shimose explosive, used at Tsushima - designed specifically to set the targets on fire and wreck their superstructure.
1) The proper form is: "Ineptitude". 2) IMHO: Lengthening the barrel does improve efficiency--up to a point (I cite the 5cmKwK38/L43 versus the L60 in example). You can gain about 100mps improvement in MV that way, which equals slightly better accuracy, penetration, and range. To make full use of the concept, however, one increases the propellant charge in order to impart much greater velocity to the emergent projectile (or dumbfounded sparrow). This method can increase MV to a much higher number (as much as 1000mps more), but requires much higher chamber pressures (and heat) to accomplish it. That leads in every case to shorter barrel life. You can restore longevity to the HV weapon by overdesign of its chamber and barrel, but that's seriously expensive, resulting in a much heavier, hugely more expensive, gun (cough 17pdr cough). Ultimately, logistics is everything, and wins. Shorter barrels are more economically sustainable*. It was the increase in industrial technique that empowered lengthening of warship guns between the wars. Nineteenth century metallurgy gave us the 42--45 caliber Main Battery guns so much used in WW1 designs. The late 1930s saw another level--up of design because of improved metallurgy, machinery, and technique. Iowa class battleships exemplified this change by bringing the 16"/50cal rifle into the spotlight. Dedicated Secondary Batteries, which had things like the venerable 5"/51 cal Rifle, and the various 6" weapons studding the sides of the Kongos, and Deutscher everythings, disappeared as quick as forward looking nations could manage, to be replaced with shorter barrel, Dual Purpose, mounts and weapons. *Imagine what would've happened if one ship's guns burned out in the middle of a fight! Pretty difficult to replace your 11" Rifle's barrel at sea. ""Radio intercept reports the following, sir! I quote, verbatim! 'Britisher pigdogs! Stop pummeling us, won't you, while we replace these furshlugginger barrels'!"
Drachinifel, Appendix 5 in "Shattered Sword: The Untold Story of the Battle of Midway" talks about the odds of an amphibious landing on Midway if the IJN won the naval battle. Assuming you own the book, I would take a look at it. They (the authors) are actually pretty skeptical about the Japanese odds for a number of reasons. Great video as always.
Without carrier air defense, the IJN just shells the airfields into uselessness (as they almost did at Henderson Field), and then just fire for effect on what's left. U.S. troops just couldn't last long.
@@lamwen03 The air attack on Midway damaged a lot of the obvious structures but did almost no damage to the defenses themselves, only caused 6 KIA and did not knock out any of the defenders' heavy guns (five 5-inch guns, twenty-four three-inch guns (mostly AA but that wouldn't matter much to the invaders), forty-eight .50 cal and thirty-six .30 cal machine guns and a number of 37-mm and 20-mm automatic cannon from the antiaircraft unit). The timing of the landing, as planned, left little time for a pre-invasion bombardment. The Japanese navy had no practice in target identification or selection and the marines were well dug in with fortified positions, in some cases concrete covered bomb proof shelters. You can't fire for effect on targets you can't identify. Based on American experience in later invasions, the short, perfunctory bombardment with no direction probably wouldn't have accomplished much. Also IJN pilots had little to no training in close air support. The navy existed for sinking warships, not helping the despised army. The Japanese had little experience at opposed landings. Their doctrine emphasized unopposed landings, usually at night. They had had bad experiences at the few opposed landings they had tried so far during the war at Wake Island and some small operations in the Philippines. Neither the navy or the army had rehearsed the landings, either separately or together. The defenders had been reinforced to between 3,000 and 4,500 personnel, most of whom were marines so they were all trained as infantrymen, even the support staff. Compare that to the invasion force numbers of 5,000 men, only 2,500 of which were actual combat troops (the rest were construction and survey details and a weather detachment). The defenders even had a platoon of M3 Stuart light tanks on Sand Island. The geography of the island required that the Japanese offload their troops outside the exposed coral reef between 200 and 400 yards from shore. They had nothing like the American Amtracs to traverse the reef mounted. So the troops would have had to wade onto the reef and then once they crossed that they would have to wade the lagoon in sometimes chest deep water. All while under heavy automatic fire. That's just a quick and partial breakdown of their logic. It doesn't really do it justice but I thought it was well reasoned (as was the rest of their books' conclusions)
@@bcoop1701 I think a naval bombardment (as opposed to just air attacks) would have reduced the garrison's effciency massively. Nothing they could do to stop that. But I'm glad they didn't have to find out.
bcoop1701 - That was one limited airstrike (1/2 of the strike a/c were held back) with no follow-ups. If the American carriers hadn’t left Pearl until after the attack, it would have taken 2 days for them to get to where they could’ve launched a strike on the Japanese. Unlike the actual battle, the Japanese would have known they were coming & even Adm. Nagumo would’ve sent a lot more search a/c to locate the Americans. ATST, the Japanese would’ve had 2 days to bomb Midway from the air & 1 day of concerted bombardment from the sea. That should have eliminated much of the ability of the remaining defenders on Midway to resist. Even the courageous defenders on Wake Island weren’t able to stop the Japanese once the Japanese had brought in overwhelming forces.
@@lamwen03 The Americans conducted a 3 hour combined bombardment of airstrikes and naval gunfire (including battleships) prior to landing at Tarawa and it did little to the defenders' defensive positions. Shore bombardment that wasn't being corrected directly onto targets by observers on the ground was consistently overestimated and ineffective for pretty much the entire war. Each shell, even battleship caliber shells, only does damage to dug in targets if it basically lands on or right near them. Otherwise most of the explosive force/shrapnel just flies overhead. Not saying it would be an easy time for troops on the ground but the Japanese routinely recovered to fight effectively immediately post-bombardment and there is no reason to believe that the American marines at Midway would have performed any less.
8:20 "...It's the Royal Navy; don't ask." Dammit, man, now I HAVE to ask! Why was there an elephant on an aircraft carrier? (Or was this before when she was still a battlecruiser? Or was this the later HMS Courageous?) Inquiring minds want to know! 51:30 There was a novel written about that, The Final Countdown (no relation to the song). Time Travel BS, man. Authors, just say "NO" to Time Travel.
As far as Battleship caliber guns mounted on tracks go ... Ever dependable soviets tried it ... Twice at least ... 2A3 Kondensator 406mm , 2B1 Oka 420 mm . With one round every 5 minutes on a good day it is not likely it would do much other than trying to hit a ship ... There were some guns to be pulled by tractor ... Like atomic annie which at mere 11" compensated by using atomic fission ammo, hence the name ...
Pets on ships. Look up unsinkable Sam. Survived the Bismark.. rescued by HMS cossack .. sunk. Rescued put on the ark royal then the HMS lightning.. one salty cat
Unsinkable Sam is a myth. Cossack crew don't remember picking up such a cat. Not to mention it was Dorsetshire and Maori which picked up Bismarck's survivors.
One thing about Midway is that the Japanese invasion force was smaller then the force to defend Midway. They probably could eventually defeat Midway because its supplies would run out, but it would be hard to simply storm ashore an take it.
@@alanmcclenaghan7548 I wonder if there was any wartime confusion between the one on Midway and the captured one on Guadalcanal that the Marines then named Henderson Field.
Cruse missiles have proven to be very accurate at hitting fixed targets as in landing inside the hanger accurate. Crew members put at risk by this is zero. They are rather costly.
To me, It sounds more like an inverse of "The Battle of Dorking: Reminiscences of a Volunteer" by George Tomkyns Chesney 1871 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Battle_of_Dorking
I'm happy you caught the Texas announcement. I live down the coast a bit from her in Corpus Christi, Texas. It'd be awesome to have the Texas moored here but I fear that also having the USS. Lexington on site as well would cause conflict with attendance for both museums. Can't wait to see how the rebuild goes.
52:00 Simple answer. The Enterprise could basically sink the entire Japanese Fleet. Even without the issue of Logistics with just the weapons and aircracft the ship has on it, it would be able to cripple the Japanese fleet to such a extent that they would lose with the ships avalable in 1941 to the US even after Pearl Harbor. That's not even considering it would be packing actual nuclear bombs on board.
I always skip questions like ‘what would be the difference if you replaced this ship with a much more technologically advanced counterpart while the enemy stays the same’. Of course it’s gunna be one sided, everyone knows that.
Since you mentioned the lesser known WW2 surface conflicts in Solomons, how about looking at those - ? Empress Augusta Bay? And how about a look at the few known cases of post WW2 ship versus ship missile engagements - you mentions the Indo-Pakistani wars, there were also a few in the Arab-Israeli conflicts. ? Any others ? The Falklands war were all air launched Exocets if I recall.
Drachinifel: Just for the records on effectiveness of missiles, the USS Long Beach shot down a MIG at 61 miles away with a Talos missile. However, Talos did not last much longer as an effective weapon system.
@Ron Lewenberg Yes, too bad the FC radar was not given that ability. Not until after SM-2 was around for a few years that they figured out how to do this.
Congratulations, you received a question and gave an answer that are actually VERY close to home for me. Pets on board ship. I would be very interested to know where (and when) the information about the hamster on HMS Eskimo came from as I was serving on that ship when there were actually TWO (subsequently several) hamsters and either an alligator or crocodile, I'm not sure which - and, yes, you did read that correctly, were on board. The year was 1974, round about April time, maybe early May, the ship had come out of a major refit in its Chatham home base, had been through its Portland work-up and then we went aross the North Sea, through the Kiel Canal and up the east coast of Denmark to a town called Aabenraa for a jolly for a few days. Jolly Jack being Jolly Jack, one of the first discoveries, after the nearest bar, was an 'Adult shop'. Once the magazine shelves had been cleared of all adult reading material, attention was turned to a nearby pet shop and two separate purchases of hamsters were made, one for the Seamen's mess and, if memory serves, one for the Radio Operators' mess. After a few weeks - possibly when we had deployed to the West Indies station in June of that year, I recall the two hamsters - the Seamen's male and the RO's female, being introduced to each other on the Seamen's mess table and, much to everyones entertainment, mating. The result, inevitably, was several baby hamsters. What eventually happened to the original two hamsters and their babies I do not recall, however one of them may very well have been the one you referred to. The other pet was purchased by another rating whose name I forget, but who must have clearly been well and truly drunk at the time, which was not actually unusual for him, and who probably didn't even notice which of the two reptiles he was buying, hence it ended up being called 'Allicroc'. Obviously, it was not a mature reptile and was only about 18 inches, at most, long at the time. Being now a lot more mature and respectful of the other creatures we share this planet with, I am pretty amazed that the proprietor of the shop saw any wisdom whatsoever in selling such an animal to an obviously p****d up sailor who probably had no idea how to look after it, had no idea what conditions it needed to be kept in or what it needed to be fed on - it probably ended up with scraps, maybe the odd sausage, or if it was extremely lucky, a pork chop. I don't know what it was kept in, I assume a cage of some sort, but after not very long it escaped and ended up goodness knows where - I suspect it probably died a very miserable death in some nook or crannie and was very likely still on board when the ship was scrapped in Bilbao in 1992. Prior to Eskimo, I spent a few weeks getting shipboard experience on a minesweeper converted to a diver training ship (by putting a decompression chamber on the quarterdeck) called HMS Laleston. There was a lovely GSD bitch on board whose name I forget. We, also, went for a jolly, but to a town called Bayonne in the south of France which was holding a millenium celebration and had invited the UK to send representatives (us) because of the affinity between the town and Britain - Bayonne being the last stop off place in France for British servicemen on the run from the Nazi's before being escorted across the Pyrenees into Spain. Just before we left HMS Vernon to go there, one of the officers went on leave taking the dog with him. Now you mention the ban on pets, I don't know whether the dog was taken off because of that or whether it was simply the normal precaution against rabies or other transmittable diseases.
F for the Appledore shipyard, yet another British Shipyard shut down, even though the government offered the company a contract to keep it open Btw Appledore Shipyard built the bows for the Queen Elizabeth class
1:23:01 - “Dual Purpose AA’” - What about the German 12.8 cm x 58 which were used to shoot down high-flying bombers? These were especially based in twin mounts in the Berlin Flak Towers, & were effective in spite of the lack of proximity fuses. These same guns found their way onto Jagdtiger “Tank Hunters” which proved to be effective even against Stalin 2 Heavy Tanks (one was actually deserted by its crew after destroying 16 T-34/85’s & running out of ammunition).
As far as the question about self propelled artillery to be used as coastal defenses. The largest allied artillery of WW2 that was truly self propelled was the 240mm gun or about 9.4 inches this together with the 8” gun made up the heavy artillery section of the allied artillery so anything larger would have been like some of the German monsters not really self propelled except within its firing position
Um the USS Constitution is the oldest active warship, and to this day it is still active with an active Navy Crew. Although, it's more an active museum. Never the less the USS Constitution if all and all fails can be sent to war by SECNAV. Once a year she gets underway to open sea when the seas are calm. I sailed on her in 2002 when I was on the USS Preble DDG-88 when we commissioned the PREBEL, which is named after Commodore Preble which, his flagship was OLD IRONSIDES. So, have a NAY Day. God Speed....!
In regards to the question of CVN-65 in WW2, I think there was a (bad) movie from the early 80's where something like that happened. If memory serves, when I convinced my mom to rent it, got home, and showed it to my dad, he summed it up quite well: "Might as well be the starship Enterprise."
I would mention Nishimura before Kurita when it comes to bad admirals. The "Enterprise"question would actually be more interesting if the airgroup and weapons would be of the 1940s. So the question then would be how many contemporary planes could you fit on the CVN and how much of a difference would that make? It would still be a huge improvement. I agree about that remarkable series of surface naval engagements in the Solomons. I would say Spruance or Halsey for losing the war in a day. This is why King was so supportive of Spruance after the Philippine Sea (before it was realized the IJN had no more air power.)
I nominate Nagumo Chuici and Yamaguchi Tamon of CARDIV 2 at Midway. They had every opportunity to get Hiryu out of range of the US aircraft but chose to close the distance with the Americans and thus cost Japan a carrier that they didn't have to lose. Failed to adapt during the battle.
Regarding the BB35, The Texas, the HUGE issue is will she survive a wet tow to the eastern ends of the gulf of the Mexico to a dry dock. If she be put on a heavy lift ship, the odds are quite a bit better. Many in the know regarding the Texas don’t think she can survive a tow that far.
NMCCW Structurally, 50 million was spend to repair the keel structure under the engine rooms up to the beginning of the boiler spaces. The tank tops of the double bottom were replaced as needed. The boilers have been hung from the 3rd deck instead of having the full wight of the keel under them. The outer hull is the issue. The torpedo blisters are where almost all of the leaking and pumping is going on. The blisters could flood and she would still float. I believe they added about 3000 tons of buoyancy. Just towing her to Galveston to Todd ship yard in 1988 saw accelerated flooding as she went. Sadly, Todd shipyard and the dry dock there is no more. She would have to cross the Gulf of Mexico to reach a dry dock.
Well, it all depends on how badly you need combat ships. ANY museum ship can be made combat ready no matter its age if the need is great enough. Even ones in near dust like USS Texas or USS Olympia. All you need is the willingness to spend the big dollars and enough skilled workers to do the job.
Every year the USS Constitution is towed into Boston Harbor turned around, then back again to her berth in the Charlestown Navy Yard. That way her hull wears evenly over winter. However, 20+ years ago (early 1990's) I watched the USS Constitution underway independently powered by her sails. This was in celebration of her 200th anniversary. Her hull was reinforced and repaired in the early 90's. Her masts, sails and rigging were all replaced 10 years later. Im confident in saying that the USS Constitution is seaworthy. After all, 85% of her hull has been replaced with replicant materials in the last few decades. That cannot be said of the USS North Carolina, the Iowas, the South Dakota's, the Olympia, the Texas and other capital ships now functioning as museums.
The Iowas could be returned to service, but in reality the steam plants would be ripped out and replaced by gas turbine/generators/electric drives. Not hard now.
As to an actual invasion of Midway, the two key facts I've heard brought up as to why it would fail are the very short bombardment that would be undertaken by the surface forces, which later war US bombardments against lighter fortifications was shown to be insufficient. The plan also probably would have been followed as everything is going to plan in this situation, and that the Japanese would be hesitant to maintain bombardment position for too long a period so close to Hawaii and a potentially large submarine threat. The second was that the actual forces which would be going ashore were essentially light infantry who would have had to wade through the reefs to get to the islands on foot, and considering the US forces garrisoned there and the equipment they had, later actions in the war would see this force disposition to be very US favored.
The biggest issue with Midway Island, is just how fucking small it is. It is genuinely possible that even with a relatively short bombardment with Yamato and Musashi which if memory serves were present would probably destroy most if not all of the equipment and probably the majority of the troops there because of just how small the island is. In an interview that drach did it was described as about the size of a postage stamp which quite frankly given the size of Midway relative to most other islands I would absolutely agree with that also if memory serves Midway is practically flat with basically no cover whatsoever unless you start digging.
In terms of bombardment, you can’t compare the pretty much flat (and as stated in the video basically just airfield) nature of Midway to Islands later on in the war which were mountainous and had plenty of natural protection against US bombardment
@@Fuse1990 Not all of the islands the US invaded, even late in the war were mountainous, and even when they were they weren't wholly so. Anyways I don't remember the sources so don't take my position as all that firm.
In regards to getting a museum ship ready for active duty again, it kind of depends. A fletcher or something could probably brought up to original state in a few months...with upgrades for semi-modern combat? A year or so. An Iowa class B.B...well likely never since they’re no longer in reserve and there’s no infrastructure at all capable of supporting them still left. A carrier like the Yorktown probably about a year. Biggest issue for larger ships is a lack of shipyards in the US to accommodate them. I’m speaking only for the US if that wasn’t obvious...
Pinned post for Q&A :)
As a language nerd, I was hoping you would elaborate more on the origins and language of the channel name. Though, I get the feeling you were intentionally vague...
How effective were bored out guns such as the Italian 320 mm guns, were they worth it, and what reason is there for boring out guns?
Q&A: I’m curious on your thoughts on the decisions of Rear Admiral Troubridge to not intercept Goeben during WW1. I’ve heard arguments both for and against him.
Q&A what would a gun duel between HMS Orion and USS Texas look like and what are your thoughts on the preservation of USS Lexington CV16
What system do you use for naval wargaming.?
That's strange, the documentary Battleship (2012) led me to understand that a museum ship could be reactivated to fight aliens in only the length of an AC/DC song.
When doing a training or refit montage, music choice is key.
Drachisms of the Day:
55:36 "Wins the Vlad Tepes award for cruel and unusual punishment of an enemy who was already horribly beaten into the ground anyway."
1:09:12 "When you build a ship where your secondary battery out-ranges your main battery and it's supposed to be a Dreadnought, you really really have learned the meaning of failure."
8:10 "Then you have 'Mongo The Elephant'. Yes, I said that correctly, 'The Elephant'. He lived on HMS Courageous for a while." This is NOT a 'Drachism'. This is a plea for an entire episode dedicated to Mongo. WTAF!!!
1:28:41 "Sooo, the Battle of the Barents Sea is more seen as a failure due to the sheer comedic ineptitude of the whole engagement."
1:52:17 "I need a drink."
Don't forget "I guess they were playing with Capital Conquest mode enabled"
Kevin Kennelly honestly while I truly love the work that Drach does explaining navalisms and their history, it is the Drachisms that really push this channel over the top IMHO from a great channel to an amazing channel.
Kevin Kennelly I liked the bit about CVN-65's flight deck being so big that kamikazes would bounce off and bounce repeatedly.
"And before the Japanese know what's happened everything is on fire and it's most dishonourable"
Drachinifel remember when a one hour drydock was a big deal? Now we're approaching 2 hours. Your the hardest working man on RUclips.
We are now at like 6+ hours
@@JohnSmith-kg2rt Yeah, Drach is amazing. No other content creator on RUclips knows his subject nearly as good as him. He can literally do a Q&A on the fly without research needed. His mind is a Naval Encyclopedia.. incredible.
@@Wallyworld30 it really is amazing
48:00 "My recommendation would be..."
*whips off mask to reveal it was Jackie Fisher the whole time*
"A
Y E A R
O F
B A T T L E C R U I S E R
P R O D U C T I O N"
Meanwhile Captain America’s response
No I don’t think I will.
Gustav the railway cannon
Thomas's angry German uncle
The little engine that could..... obliterate you.
@@CSSVirginia
There's nothing little about Gustav.
@@The_Crimson_Fucker ITS ENGINE MIGHT HAVE BEEN.
@@The_Crimson_Fucker caps lock is the dumbest damn button in history... lol
eventually these episodes will end up going for so long, it just runs as a 24/7 live stream lol
Yang M I hope so,,,lol
Yang M - I’m ok with that.
If D would make it I would come, possible pun intended.
.Lewd
Best day ever!
An elephant onboard "Don't ask"
I'm asking
The Lost Beaver
Exactly. How the hell did that happen?
Indeed. This absolutely *requires* further elaboration.
They snuck it aboard and hid it in somebody's footlocker whenever an inspection came about 😉
@@bkjeong4302 Considering how long sailors can be at sea, Beaver should be the last thing they loose!
the cvn 65 enterprise is another final countdown thing
Always nice to hear when a museum ship gets some proper maintenance and care.
I have donated to the Texas for years, small amounts of course.
Just want to say how much I enjoyed your Bismark episode.
It was truly the best presentation of the engagement I've ever come across in any media.
It really brought all the aspects, especially the tragic to life, while I also learned that an American coast guard vessel was involved if only on the fringe, something I had not been aware of.
Also I would like to repeat something I mentioned in an earlier post.
The British Pathe RUclips channel has many short videos on Royal Navy ships.
Its quite interesting to see many of the ships mentioned here from the perspective of the actual times.
Thanks again for all the work and time you put into this wonderful channel.
Extra long vid
Extra short sleep
Extra strong coffee
That's how I roll
Oh my god. This is me today.
it do be like that my man
Yup... two nights in a row now
"Everything is on fire and most dishonorable." LOL.
Yeah, I laughed. I couldn't tell if he was channeling the Japanese portrayals of Americans being dishonorable and wiping htem out, or channeling Japanese portrayals of their destruction being their own dishonor. It's hilarious either way.
@@Terrekain It's both. The answer is always both.
Time stamp please?
I loved the bit about the flight deck being so big that kamikazes would bounce off and bounce repeatedly.
A@awwwa well, '10' was a bit disappointing and the sound quality was absolutely shit. It's as if the final master was fed along a piece of string between two baked bean tins
For people who don't know. The USS Texas is at a weird spot to visit. It in the middle of a bunch of Oil Refinery. I do like the fact it on the same of the Battle San Jacinto. But I can see why it hard to vist. You don't see it from the Highway and there like one sign for the exit.
I found it by accident. Pulled up to the museum and saw a tripod mast looming over the trees. Very cool but no one will see it.
Sounds like Barents Sea might be a good candidate for it's own special in Drachinifel style....
Thanks for answering my question about cats in pretty swift time, Drach.
PS Thank you Drachinifel for the news on the old battle wagon "USS TEXAS" and keeping her in your thoughts!!! BRAVO 👏👏👏👍⚓️
To return the Yamato to service (considering she'd survived the war), you'd need to attach Star-Drives, Tachyon HoloDAR, Deflector Field generators, life support . . . a Pepsi machine . . . and issue the women in the crew Spandex bodysuits*.
*For those who don't live in a Sci-Fi world, let me tell you: Spandex clad women (and men) is a two-edged sword. It's sort of inversely proportional as physical appeal is greatest when professional power and influence levels are at their lowest. A Spandex clad recruit is one thing. A Spandex clad 65 year old admiral is quite another**.
**Go figure.
Mandatory retirement at 35!
HAHAHAHAHAHA!
You forgot the Wave Motion Gun. And uniform problem can be easily counteracted by keeping the grey-bearded admiral all the time in non-spandex dress uniform..
I love your channel mate. Please keep the videos coming. I am very glad that the Texas will be drydocked. I am sure it had no small part to your video.
I was delighted to hear she is going to be drydocked and brought back. I yelled so loud I almost woke up one of my residents.
The "Vlad Tepes award for Cruel and Unusual Punishment" had me rolling :P.
There were so many reports from all navies in WWI and WWII of how ship's mascots contributed to the crew's morale that it just seems like modern foolishness to outlaw them, particularly cats, which serve a useful purpose aboard every ship. Sometimes things were so bad that passing around the ship's cats and dogs for a good petting were the only thing that kept the men going. I hope we don't have to go through another major conflict to find out the truth of this.
Plus, cats proved to be especially good at controlling any rodent problem that might arise. There was even one ship’s cat who continued hunting rats after being wounded & while the ship was under fire.
www.mnn.com/family/pets/stories/cats-at-sea-7-famous-seafaring-felines
www.thevintagenews.com/2018/07/21/simon-the-cat-hms-amethyst/
@@TraditionalAnglican Yes, that's what I meant about cats also being useful aboard any ship. There's no ship of anything over 100 feet that's not infested with rats, and the good old tabby is the best control mechanism. You can't pass around the Orkin Man for a good petting either.
Seriously, the idea that cats aren't allowed on the ships for "hygiene" reasons is insane, when rodent infestations are one of the biggest hygiene problems on a ship.
@@RedXlV I guess our modern navies don't get this. Poisoning rats is better than having some allergic cats around. Idiots.
As a USN veteran (11-15) I don’t think it would be a good situation for the mascot on a modern naval vessel, not to mention personally I think it’s morally wrong and inhumane to put an animal with no actual military purpose in the line of danger. They can’t make that choice like a person can
Here’s an inept naval officer from the Far East, specifically Joseon Korea: Won Kyun, who scuttled most of his fleet at the start of the Imjin War, then asked the soon-to-be-legendary Admiral Yi Sun-sin to do the work for him (which he did, spectacularly).
And then he spent the rest of the war generally being incompetent, especially compared to Yi. When Yi was temporarily fired and jailed (which was an even bigger moment of stupidity, but that’s another story), Won Kyun replaced him and proceeded to get nearly the entire Korean navy sunk and himself killed by ignoring things like recon, concentration of force, and the tactics his colleague developed to take full advantage of the Korean dominance in naval artillery. This was the only Korean naval defeat of the war in open battle, and it reduced the navy to 13 ships total (!!). Resulting in Japan regaining naval superiority after six years of tactical and strategic naval defeats, which suddenly removed much of the logistical challenges Japan faced before.
Needless to say Yi was quickly reinstated after this. Thankfully he was competent enough that having the navy reduced to 13 ships didn’t stop him from winning a major battle against a Japanese fleet ten times the size of his own. He eventually regained naval superiority, partly by having more ships built as fast as possible, and partly because the Ming Chinese navy had joined the fight and he would eventually be in charge of that force too.
Would you pretty, pretty please with creme and sugar on top do a video on the battle of the Barent Sea? I enjoy all your videos but the one you do on historic naval battles (particularly the debacles) are the best.
Frank Dantuono check out Dudley Pope’s book called 73 North (if you haven’t already). Wonderful account of the battle and Sherbrooke as a man
*Kaiser invades new York*
US: Guess I'll mobilize now
With regards to the German navy having an aircraft carrier in WW I, there were plans in 1918 to convert the hull of the unfinished Italian liner T/P Ausonia. This led to the German navy giving up on rebuilding the cruiser SMS Roon into a mothership for seaplanes. It was planned that the ex-Ausonia should be able to launch 13/19 seaplanes as well as around 10 wheeled aircraft. However, those plans came to nought, as the war ended before any work on the ship could be done. The ship was broken up in 1922.
When I first saw the paper flying in the intro, I jokingly thought "Somebody lost their homework!" Thanks to today's episode, I now find that could be it. :-)
Back issues of Connie Rodd.
Some yeoman left the file cabinet drawer open?
Drach I've been binge watching your videos for the last couple of weeks and just wanted to say a massive thank you for the wonderful content
I only wish I could find an equivalent afv channel
"Like some kind of hilarious on fire screaming skipping stone" - Drachinfel 2019
The whole CVN-65 segment was just a giant drachism fest.
"And before the Japanese know what's happened everything is on fire and it's most dishonourable"
Well, this was a first. I was actually asleep before the Drydock posted for once. I get to watch it rested instead of nearly passing out the entire time. :-) The Texas isn't in the best location to attract tourists so moving it closer the Houston would probably be a good thing. No one outside the project management team knows where Texas will be moved and how it will be moored, but at least there's now going to be enough money available for extensive repairs.
I volunteered to work on the Texas the last time she was dry docked. Apparently multiple degrees and international work experience qualifies one to chip paint and sand the deck. Humbling experience, and well worth the effort. That repair was done with donated money.
Kudos to the State of Texas for stepping up and providing the money since we have a surplus - conservative government at work - and I hope the new site is much more accessible than the current one. Once there the site is nice, however, you have to deal with Houston traffic, which all by itself can ruin your day.
Another excellent video, sir.
In regard to turret designation on American DDs, the nomenclature to which I was exposed was that the main guns (5-38s or 5-54s) were numbered from bow to stern. Most-forward 5" mount was designated as 'Mount 51', second as 'Mount 52', etc. Since neither of the ships to which I was TAD had large numbers of small-to-medium caliber weapons
During my time in service, there were limited 40mm Bofors, a pair of twin-40mms mounted on either side of centerline, 01 level aft. The APD to which I was TAD (USS Beverly W. Reid, a converted DDE) was limited to a single 5-38, mounted forward. There were no 20mm or .50-cal weapons mounted.
On USS Barney, DDG-6, there were two 5-54 turrets, one forward of the bridge, another on main deck, well aft. AA protection was provided by a two-arm missile launcher, just forward of Mount 52, at 01 level. During a WestPac deployment in 1968, several .50-cal mounts (as an anti-small-craft weapon) were added, but had been removed I guess Sixth Fleet wasn't as worried about NVA torpedo boats on a Med cruise in 1969.
Sorry, I can't post photos of either ship in this comment, but both ships have photos at Wikipedia.
One of the big problems with re-activating a museum ships not only the equipment, but many of the skills needed to run them are lost. This was one of the contributing factors in the number two turret explosion on the USS Iowa.
Degraded powder and an authority figure ignoring precautions to prove he was right were the primary causes.
I’m naming my new kayak “The Kamchatka!!”
Oooooh dear
That's gonna go well
Edward Cofer - mad lad
bob bobson I was going to include,”We are all doomed!” as a motto.
NMCCW I was going to include,”We are all doomed!” as a motto.
I was going to include,”We are all doomed!” as a motto.
Thank you for the marathon.
Pretty sure the Mighty Mo was put back into service in a matter of ten minutes in order to repel an alien invasion.
The AARP crew had it running in time for the early Bird special.
Yeah,but ACDC can jump start anything.
Yes, by the same crew that carried a 16" projectile on their shoulders.
Excellent as always! Your first section, the news about USS Texas, made my day!
Hurrah for the Texas! Texas saved! Can’t wait to visit her one day, it’s a bit troublesome when you live on the opposite side of the world
A lot of splash distinguishing was done using a "scotch tape" range scale on the PPI scope, or the typical radar display we've all seen. The CIC crew knew how far their shells would travel within a range of about 30 meters. They also knew how far the target was from their ship, also within about 30 meters for a cruiser and above size target. They literally used a piece of scotch tape with that data in pencil on a piece of tape and paste it on the screen. That served as a visual marker between the range of a splash and range of the target, and a new tape was made fr each salvo Since no other ship could have been firing at exactly the same time at the same target, shell splashes for your ship could be pretty accurately determined by watching the flight of your shells as pips on the PPI along the scotch tape scale. A range difference between a splash and the target that didn't match your scotch tape scale couldn't be yours, only the ones that matched your scale. It's really quite a simple concept once you understand it, but one that wasn't part of the normal radar features at the time. The Navy crewman who first came up with the scotch tape scale is lost in the sands of time, but the scale was in wide use in the Pacific by the middle of 1944. These innovations were distributed to the fleet and the Allies using the Combat Information Center Magazine starting in July, 1944. These are mostly available online at maritime.org/doc/cic/ and make fascinating reading for electronics nerd types like me. From reading the magazines, it seems the scotch tape scale was already known by July 1944, so some early electronics nerd sailor had already worked out the general concept by then. The scale was added electronically to postwar radars, so the the vast supply of scotch tape needed in a CIC faded by then.
A tortoise on HMS Fearless? I guess they were taking the turtleback armor concept literally.
Henderson Field is on Guadalcanal. Midway's Airfield was not renamed "Henderson Field" until well after the war
Well, no arfield was named Henderson Field untill Maj. Henderson died in the battle of Midway. However, you are partially wrong. The airfield on the Midway's Sand Island was named Henderson Field well after the war and bears the name to this day. However, second arfield, on Midway's East Island (well actually first one, as Sand Island field wasn't even built whwe battle took place) was named Henderson Field immidietly after the battle, and bore the name until it's closure in 1945.
Re Mongo (found online:) >>>
was on HMS COURAGEOUS 1974-1979, and we adopted an African Elephant that
someone found tethered to a bollard next to the taxi rank on Helensburghs main
street. We called him *Mongo* and he lived in an old Chacon that we put in our
Lay-apart store just up from 6-Berth. When we eventually left Faslane, to go to
Chatham for re-fit, Capt SM3 granted permission for Mongo to go with us. We chained
him to the starboard rails of the fin and hoofed it down the Gareloch on the step.
Mongo was as happy as larry, but the casing party spent most of their time trying not
to step in enormous piles of elephant shit. Anyhow - we encountered some very bad
weather in the Irish Sea (surface passage) and come the morning - Mongo had simply
disappeared. God! I miss that elephant. Ask any ex Courageous ships company - they'll
vouch for me. He was a brills elephant and good company for the Upper Deck Trot.
R.I.P. Mongo. (Here is only one of two known photographs that exist of Mongo actually
on the casing of HMS COURAGEOUS as we sailed out of Faslane, with AFD 60 visible
in the background).
.....what the hell.......
Inept admiral: Jacob von Wassenaer Obdam - a land army colonel put in charge of the Dutch fleet for political reasons due to deep divisions within the Netherlands at the time. He actually had a pretty decent idea on how to counter the British (relying on firepower rather than boarding), but it took a competent admiral (De Ruyter) and the construction of larger purpose-built warships (such as De Zeven Provincien) in order to successfully put it into practice - all after Obdam got himself killed in a naval battle.
Regarding the Enterprise CVN 65 vs CV 6 is partly demonstrated by the movie, "Final Countdown" of the early 80s. USS Nimitz is time warped to Dec, 1941.
That sounds like an awful film!
The pitch sounds like something straight out of an american naval enthusiast's wet dream, shooting down countless Japanese aircraft with virtual impunity.
*documentary
@@sergarlantyrell7847 Actually, only two Japanese planes were shot down. Most of the film revolved around the idea of affecting time. Kirk Douglas, Martin Sheen, Charles Durning and Katherine Ross were in it. As was I as a background extra.
@@sergarlantyrell7847 It's not a bad movie. Disney did it pretty well.
@@sergarlantyrell7847 I have to agree. If USN gets CVN 65 then IJN should bring Godzilla!
Love the longer format
a battleship competition that i didn't know about!? I must not watch this channel enough.
Warship guide idea: HMS M-1, 305mm on a sub. Or the M-Class in general
Jay Niece what about the Surcouf?
I also remember the long barrel 40mm bofors gun being so much better than the standard so much so that sweden seemed to be the only ones to get it. Well as an example of the opposite
51:30 *splash the zeros, I repeat splash the zero's!*
Henderson Field was on Guadalcanal. Named in honor of United States Marine Corps Major Lofton Henderson, commanding officer of VMSB-241 who was killed during the Battle of Midway. Back in 1942 all three runways were on Eastern Island. Sand Island was a flying boat base. Sand Island did not have a runway for land based airplanes in June 1942.
Fantastic video as always Drach, thanks for answering my questions.
Some thoughts I had. Have you thought about maybe doing a t shirt for sell on Etsy or something similar? I'm sure your subscribers could submit a variety of ideas for you.
Secondly, I'm not entirely convinced that if the British Navy had been badly mauled at the Falklands, and things were getting even worse. That a US Navy Taskforce wouldn't have showed up to support them. The US couldn't afford for its major Naval cold war ally to lose face like that.
Thirdly, the Texas is getting 35 million dollars but the entire thing makes me nervous. They want to move her to Alabama for repairs and I dont think you can risk moving her that far. And I don't think the US Coast Guard will certify her to move. Shes in such a bad way. Though the new budget for her does include a 99 year maintenance and care budget as well to be figured up later. I wish they'd fix her up, sink her down into the dock that's her permanent home. The upper superstructure is level with the ground essentially. And you walk down to get to the main deck. That way you can build a climate controlled structure over the top to further preserve it. And show off some cool artifacts as well.
Lastly, it's a real shame that the Dora gun didnt survive. That would be amazing to see in a museum or something.
The Iowas intentionally fired all available shells, wasting the barrel liners, prior to becoming museum ships. All barrels require relining. The industrial base for that evolution is long gone. :-(
The US navy's goal by mid-1944 was to have all destroyers assigned the Pacific theater that retained their twin quad torpedo launchers to be be fitted with at least ten 40mm barrels, those with a single quad launcher to have at 12 barrels, and the complete anti-kamikaze ships with no torpedo launchers were fitted with between 14 and 16 barrels. The most heavily armed were some Gearing class ships with a pair of quad 40mm mounts amidships in the same positions as the landed torpedo launchers, a pair of twin mounts opposite the bridge, and another pair of twin mounts aft ahead of the depth charge tracks replacing the previous three to five single 20mm mounts at the same location. This was a total of 20 barrels. At the same time, all the remaining single 20mm mounts were replaced with twin mounts. Most of these ships were used as radar pickets that were heavily attacked by Japanese aircraft once they realized ot importance of their early warning role. The ability of these ships to send up a hail of antiaircraft fire was a surprise to Japanese pilots and caused many suicide attacks to be broken up, especially when there were enough destroyers available to assign pairs to a radar picket station.
The problems with this kind of heavy armament was not the stability issues that have been written about, it was where to berth and feed all the extra crew. Each quad mount required a crew of 8-10 and twins 4-5. that was a total additional crew just to man the mounts of 32-35 men compared to the original three twin mounts. This doesn't count the additional crew needed for ammunition handling, magazine manning, and machinist and gunners mates to repair and maintain the mounts. The additional electronics and Combat Information Centers already required an additional ten to fourteen men before the armament changes, so even the Grearings were hard pressed to find space for these crew, and it was even worse for the converted Fletchers and Sumners. Even the amount of extra provisions required was estimated to add some thirty tons to the displacement, not to mention the additional cooks and stewards needed. The USN before the kamikaze threat prided itself on every crew member having their own berth. By April, 1945, hot bunking, hammocks, and even deck sleeping was the norm.
Many more complaints by the men centered more around the difficulties of getting a hot meal than the rough berthing. Letters home from Pacific theater destroyer crews told of waiting for up to two hours to get through the mess line, only to have that disrupted by general quarters for another air attack. Some gun and CIC crews ate nothing but sandwiches and coffee for days on end. If you want to start sailors to bitching, don't feed them hot meals, and the bitching from crews extended from letters to their families all the way to letters to their Congressmen and Senators.
Know nothing of naval warfare but love this channel.
If you love this channel, you know something of naval warfare.
Very informative video. Regarding the question of animals on ship, in particular the hamster aboard HMS Eskimo, which Eskimo are you referring to, the WW2 destroyer or the post war frigate?
If the latter, then I served aboard her from 1979 to 1981 and I don't recall seeing a hamster or indeed any of the crew mentioning it either. If it lived in the laundry, then these were manned by Hong Kong Chinese, a couple of whom were in my mess and again no mention of it by them either!
Thanks also for the info on the books, Friedman, Garzke etc. Will look them up.
Battle of the Barents Sea might need its own special
Thanks for the bit about the Iwo Jima loan offer. I had not heard that one before. My first choice would have been Lexington for reasons of size and speed, and probable lack of any really state of the art, thus classified, radar or comm equipment, so it could be handed over to a mercenary crew. On the other hand, the Lex was completely unarmed.
Adding to 8:49, the the russians have the A-222E Bereg-E, a 130mm SPG in a truck for coastan defense duties. And for Battleship calibre guns, the had the 2B1 Oka (420mm) and 2A3 Kondensator (406mm), not for coastal defence duties but battleship calibre nonetheless.
If you like ship building in space maybe try out Space Engineers^^
You have way more building options, more creative freedom (also thx to a buttton of mods) it only lacks the nice survival of Empyrion
I don’t know if I should’ve been laughing at the replace Enterprise with Enterprise (Hella fast edition) as much as I was. The thought of how they’d probably just sail up to japan and bomb it into submission with one Carrier is brilliant
Interesting shells: Japanese HE shells with Shimose explosive, used at Tsushima - designed specifically to set the targets on fire and wreck their superstructure.
VersusARCH
The powder also exploded randomly easily.
Maybe that is why they had guns explode and ships catching fire in harbour.
1) The proper form is: "Ineptitude".
2) IMHO: Lengthening the barrel does improve efficiency--up to a point (I cite the 5cmKwK38/L43 versus the L60 in example). You can gain about 100mps improvement in MV that way, which equals slightly better accuracy, penetration, and range.
To make full use of the concept, however, one increases the propellant charge in order to impart much greater velocity to the emergent projectile (or dumbfounded sparrow). This method can increase MV to a much higher number (as much as 1000mps more), but requires much higher chamber pressures (and heat) to accomplish it. That leads in every case to shorter barrel life. You can restore longevity to the HV weapon by overdesign of its chamber and barrel, but that's seriously expensive, resulting in a much heavier, hugely more expensive, gun (cough 17pdr cough). Ultimately, logistics is everything, and wins. Shorter barrels are more economically sustainable*.
It was the increase in industrial technique that empowered lengthening of warship guns between the wars. Nineteenth century metallurgy gave us the 42--45 caliber Main Battery guns so much used in WW1 designs. The late 1930s saw another level--up of design because of improved metallurgy, machinery, and technique. Iowa class battleships exemplified this change by bringing the 16"/50cal rifle into the spotlight.
Dedicated Secondary Batteries, which had things like the venerable 5"/51 cal Rifle, and the various 6" weapons studding the sides of the Kongos, and Deutscher everythings, disappeared as quick as forward looking nations could manage, to be replaced with shorter barrel, Dual Purpose, mounts and weapons.
*Imagine what would've happened if one ship's guns burned out in the middle of a fight! Pretty difficult to replace your 11" Rifle's barrel at sea.
""Radio intercept reports the following, sir! I quote, verbatim! 'Britisher pigdogs! Stop pummeling us, won't you, while we replace these furshlugginger barrels'!"
The 5cm KwK (armed the PzIII) was made in L42 and L60.
The 7.5cm (armed the PzIV) was made in L43 or L48.
Drachinifel, Appendix 5 in "Shattered Sword: The Untold Story of the Battle of Midway" talks about the odds of an amphibious landing on Midway if the IJN won the naval battle. Assuming you own the book, I would take a look at it. They (the authors) are actually pretty skeptical about the Japanese odds for a number of reasons. Great video as always.
Without carrier air defense, the IJN just shells the airfields into uselessness (as they almost did at Henderson Field), and then just fire for effect on what's left. U.S. troops just couldn't last long.
@@lamwen03 The air attack on Midway damaged a lot of the obvious structures but did almost no damage to the defenses themselves, only caused 6 KIA and did not knock out any of the defenders' heavy guns (five 5-inch guns, twenty-four three-inch guns (mostly AA but that wouldn't matter much to the invaders), forty-eight .50 cal and thirty-six .30 cal machine guns and a number of 37-mm and 20-mm automatic cannon from the antiaircraft unit).
The timing of the landing, as planned, left little time for a pre-invasion bombardment. The Japanese navy had no practice in target identification or selection and the marines were well dug in with fortified positions, in some cases concrete covered bomb proof shelters. You can't fire for effect on targets you can't identify. Based on American experience in later invasions, the short, perfunctory bombardment with no direction probably wouldn't have accomplished much. Also IJN pilots had little to no training in close air support. The navy existed for sinking warships, not helping the despised army.
The Japanese had little experience at opposed landings. Their doctrine emphasized unopposed landings, usually at night. They had had bad experiences at the few opposed landings they had tried so far during the war at Wake Island and some small operations in the Philippines.
Neither the navy or the army had rehearsed the landings, either separately or together.
The defenders had been reinforced to between 3,000 and 4,500 personnel, most of whom were marines so they were all trained as infantrymen, even the support staff. Compare that to the invasion force numbers of 5,000 men, only 2,500 of which were actual combat troops (the rest were construction and survey details and a weather detachment). The defenders even had a platoon of M3 Stuart light tanks on Sand Island.
The geography of the island required that the Japanese offload their troops outside the exposed coral reef between 200 and 400 yards from shore. They had nothing like the American Amtracs to traverse the reef mounted. So the troops would have had to wade onto the reef and then once they crossed that they would have to wade the lagoon in sometimes chest deep water. All while under heavy automatic fire.
That's just a quick and partial breakdown of their logic. It doesn't really do it justice but I thought it was well reasoned (as was the rest of their books' conclusions)
@@bcoop1701 I think a naval bombardment (as opposed to just air attacks) would have reduced the garrison's effciency massively. Nothing they could do to stop that. But I'm glad they didn't have to find out.
bcoop1701 - That was one limited airstrike (1/2 of the strike a/c were held back) with no follow-ups. If the American carriers hadn’t left Pearl until after the attack, it would have taken 2 days for them to get to where they could’ve launched a strike on the Japanese. Unlike the actual battle, the Japanese would have known they were coming & even Adm. Nagumo would’ve sent a lot more search a/c to locate the Americans. ATST, the Japanese would’ve had 2 days to bomb Midway from the air & 1 day of concerted bombardment from the sea. That should have eliminated much of the ability of the remaining defenders on Midway to resist. Even the courageous defenders on Wake Island weren’t able to stop the Japanese once the Japanese had brought in overwhelming forces.
@@lamwen03 The Americans conducted a 3 hour combined bombardment of airstrikes and naval gunfire (including battleships) prior to landing at Tarawa and it did little to the defenders' defensive positions. Shore bombardment that wasn't being corrected directly onto targets by observers on the ground was consistently overestimated and ineffective for pretty much the entire war. Each shell, even battleship caliber shells, only does damage to dug in targets if it basically lands on or right near them. Otherwise most of the explosive force/shrapnel just flies overhead. Not saying it would be an easy time for troops on the ground but the Japanese routinely recovered to fight effectively immediately post-bombardment and there is no reason to believe that the American marines at Midway would have performed any less.
The CVN-65 question just makes me want a "The Final Countdown" remake where they actually stick around and fight the war.
Better yet, how about the reverse? A JMSDF Aegis Destroyer refights 1942. ruclips.net/video/WAEU4apIx7c/видео.html
@@WALTERBROADDUS I see you are a man of culture
Sounds sort of like David vs. Goliath but without the sling or like Bambi meets Godzilla...
8:20 "...It's the Royal Navy; don't ask."
Dammit, man, now I HAVE to ask! Why was there an elephant on an aircraft carrier? (Or was this before when she was still a battlecruiser? Or was this the later HMS Courageous?) Inquiring minds want to know!
51:30 There was a novel written about that, The Final Countdown (no relation to the song). Time Travel BS, man. Authors, just say "NO" to Time Travel.
Google was my friend here, saoceast.com/blog/?p=126
It was obviously Dumbo on a secret mission...
Why not? If the battlecruiser Tiger could try to put a Bengal tiger on board as a mascot, why not the elephant?
As far as Battleship caliber guns mounted on tracks go ... Ever dependable soviets tried it ... Twice at least ... 2A3 Kondensator 406mm , 2B1 Oka 420 mm . With one round every 5 minutes on a good day it is not likely it would do much other than trying to hit a ship ... There were some guns to be pulled by tractor ... Like atomic annie which at mere 11" compensated by using atomic fission ammo, hence the name ...
Pets on ships.
Look up unsinkable Sam. Survived the Bismark.. rescued by HMS cossack .. sunk. Rescued put on the ark royal then the HMS lightning.. one salty cat
Guess it's unlucky to put cats on ships.
@@rimmipeepsicles1870 yikes I've heard that. It's an interesting story the Germans named it Oscar which sounds like man overboard in kreigsmarine
Unsinkable Sam is a myth. Cossack crew don't remember picking up such a cat. Not to mention it was Dorsetshire and Maori which picked up Bismarck's survivors.
@@ariancontreras4358 that's a cat for ya..
@@scottygdaman So cats don't exist now? Good to know.
Thank you for all you do to put the information out,
One thing about Midway is that the Japanese invasion force was smaller then the force to defend Midway. They probably could eventually defeat Midway because its supplies would run out, but it would be hard to simply storm ashore an take it.
New York would defend itself rather effectively, I would think. Certain parts of that town just shouldn't be invaded.
Henderson Field was on Guadalcanal, not Midway Island.
I thought that too, but the airfield on Midway is called Henderson field: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henderson_Field_(Midway_Atoll).
@@alanmcclenaghan7548 I wonder if there was any wartime confusion between the one on Midway and the captured one on Guadalcanal that the Marines then named Henderson Field.
Cruse missiles have proven to be very accurate at hitting fixed targets as in landing inside the hanger accurate. Crew members put at risk by this is zero. They are rather costly.
“And it’s most dishonorable” lmfao
The Baltic project makes me wonder if someone had read "The riddle of the Sands" and wondered if it could be done in reverse.
To me, It sounds more like an inverse of "The Battle of Dorking: Reminiscences of a Volunteer" by George Tomkyns Chesney 1871 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Battle_of_Dorking
I'm happy you caught the Texas announcement. I live down the coast a bit from her in Corpus Christi, Texas. It'd be awesome to have the Texas moored here but I fear that also having the USS. Lexington on site as well would cause conflict with attendance for both museums.
Can't wait to see how the rebuild goes.
Realistically speaking you need three carriers of every class to keep constant operations. One in maintenance on for training and one on operations
52:00 Simple answer. The Enterprise could basically sink the entire Japanese Fleet.
Even without the issue of Logistics with just the weapons and aircracft the ship has on it, it would be able to cripple the Japanese fleet to such a extent that they would lose with the ships avalable in 1941 to the US even after Pearl Harbor. That's not even considering it would be packing actual nuclear bombs on board.
Cripple is a bit mild, methinks. Even usinthe conventional munitions Enterprise was packing annihilation would be the most probable result.
I always skip questions like ‘what would be the difference if you replaced this ship with a much more technologically advanced counterpart while the enemy stays the same’. Of course it’s gunna be one sided, everyone knows that.
I wonder how many WW2 era planes they could fit on board, the big issue would be the next time they'd have to refuel her reactors.
The Battle of the Java Sea is an unheard of battle.
Wasn't that a running fight, knife range, cruisers and destroyers? What I recall reading (long, long ago) made my hair stand on end.
Since you mentioned the lesser known WW2 surface conflicts in Solomons, how about looking at those - ? Empress Augusta Bay? And how about a look at the few known cases of post WW2 ship versus ship missile engagements - you mentions the Indo-Pakistani wars, there were also a few in the Arab-Israeli conflicts. ? Any others ? The Falklands war were all air launched Exocets if I recall.
52:00 haven't y'all seen "The Final Countdown" (1980)?? A modern carrier travels through a time rift to just before the attack on Pearl Harbor...
I was thinking the same thing! Great movie
Drachinifel: Just for the records on effectiveness of missiles, the USS Long Beach shot down a MIG at 61 miles away with a Talos missile. However, Talos did not last much longer as an effective weapon system.
@Ron Lewenberg Yes, too bad the FC radar was not given that ability. Not until after SM-2 was around for a few years that they figured out how to do this.
Congratulations, you received a question and gave an answer that are actually VERY close to home for me.
Pets on board ship.
I would be very interested to know where (and when) the information about the hamster on HMS Eskimo came from as I was serving on that ship when there were actually TWO (subsequently several) hamsters and either an alligator or crocodile, I'm not sure which - and, yes, you did read that correctly, were on board.
The year was 1974, round about April time, maybe early May, the ship had come out of a major refit in its Chatham home base, had been through its Portland work-up and then we went aross the North Sea, through the Kiel Canal and up the east coast of Denmark to a town called Aabenraa for a jolly for a few days.
Jolly Jack being Jolly Jack, one of the first discoveries, after the nearest bar, was an 'Adult shop'. Once the magazine shelves had been cleared of all adult reading material, attention was turned to a nearby pet shop and two separate purchases of hamsters were made, one for the Seamen's mess and, if memory serves, one for the Radio Operators' mess. After a few weeks - possibly when we had deployed to the West Indies station in June of that year, I recall the two hamsters - the Seamen's male and the RO's female, being introduced to each other on the Seamen's mess table and, much to everyones entertainment, mating. The result, inevitably, was several baby hamsters.
What eventually happened to the original two hamsters and their babies I do not recall, however one of them may very well have been the one you referred to.
The other pet was purchased by another rating whose name I forget, but who must have clearly been well and truly drunk at the time, which was not actually unusual for him, and who probably didn't even notice which of the two reptiles he was buying, hence it ended up being called 'Allicroc'. Obviously, it was not a mature reptile and was only about 18 inches, at most, long at the time. Being now a lot more mature and respectful of the other creatures we share this planet with, I am pretty amazed that the proprietor of the shop saw any wisdom whatsoever in selling such an animal to an obviously p****d up sailor who probably had no idea how to look after it, had no idea what conditions it needed to be kept in or what it needed to be fed on - it probably ended up with scraps, maybe the odd sausage, or if it was extremely lucky, a pork chop. I don't know what it was kept in, I assume a cage of some sort, but after not very long it escaped and ended up goodness knows where - I suspect it probably died a very miserable death in some nook or crannie and was very likely still on board when the ship was scrapped in Bilbao in 1992.
Prior to Eskimo, I spent a few weeks getting shipboard experience on a minesweeper converted to a diver training ship (by putting a decompression chamber on the quarterdeck) called HMS Laleston. There was a lovely GSD bitch on board whose name I forget. We, also, went for a jolly, but to a town called Bayonne in the south of France which was holding a millenium celebration and had invited the UK to send representatives (us) because of the affinity between the town and Britain - Bayonne being the last stop off place in France for British servicemen on the run from the Nazi's before being escorted across the Pyrenees into Spain. Just before we left HMS Vernon to go there, one of the officers went on leave taking the dog with him. Now you mention the ban on pets, I don't know whether the dog was taken off because of that or whether it was simply the normal precaution against rabies or other transmittable diseases.
F for the Appledore shipyard, yet another British Shipyard shut down, even though the government offered the company a contract to keep it open
Btw Appledore Shipyard built the bows for the Queen Elizabeth class
Finol ahh yeah I misremembered, they did build the bow section according to Wikipedia as well as a few other bits
1:23:01 - “Dual Purpose AA’” - What about the German 12.8 cm x 58 which were used to shoot down high-flying bombers? These were especially based in twin mounts in the Berlin Flak Towers, & were effective in spite of the lack of proximity fuses. These same guns found their way onto Jagdtiger “Tank Hunters” which proved to be effective even against Stalin 2 Heavy Tanks (one was actually deserted by its crew after destroying 16 T-34/85’s & running out of ammunition).
As far as the question about self propelled artillery to be used as coastal defenses. The largest allied artillery of WW2 that was truly self propelled was the 240mm gun or about 9.4 inches this together with the 8” gun made up the heavy artillery section of the allied artillery so anything larger would have been like some of the German monsters not really self propelled except within its firing position
Um the USS Constitution is the oldest active warship, and to this day it is still active with an active Navy Crew. Although, it's more an active museum. Never the less the USS Constitution if all and all fails can be sent to war by SECNAV. Once a year she gets underway to open sea when the seas are calm. I sailed on her in 2002 when I was on the USS Preble DDG-88 when we commissioned the PREBEL, which is named after Commodore Preble which, his flagship was OLD IRONSIDES. So, have a NAY Day. God Speed....!
In regards to the question of CVN-65 in WW2, I think there was a (bad) movie from the early 80's where something like that happened. If memory serves, when I convinced my mom to rent it, got home, and showed it to my dad, he summed it up quite well: "Might as well be the starship Enterprise."
I would mention Nishimura before Kurita when it comes to bad admirals.
The "Enterprise"question would actually be more interesting if the airgroup and weapons would be of the 1940s. So the question then would be how many contemporary planes could you fit on the CVN and how much of a difference would that make? It would still be a huge improvement.
I agree about that remarkable series of surface naval engagements in the Solomons.
I would say Spruance or Halsey for losing the war in a day. This is why King was so supportive of Spruance after the Philippine Sea (before it was realized the IJN had no more air power.)
I nominate Nagumo Chuici and Yamaguchi Tamon of CARDIV 2 at Midway. They had every opportunity to get Hiryu out of range of the US aircraft but chose to close the distance with the Americans and thus cost Japan a carrier that they didn't have to lose. Failed to adapt during the battle.
52:18 aka the movie The Final Countdown from 1980
Regarding the BB35, The Texas, the HUGE issue is will she survive a wet tow to the eastern ends of the gulf of the Mexico to a dry dock. If she be put on a heavy lift ship, the odds are quite a bit better. Many in the know regarding the Texas don’t think she can survive a tow that far.
Mike Kent - I’m worried about her structural integrity and buoyancy.
NMCCW Structurally, 50 million was spend to repair the keel structure under the engine rooms up to the beginning of the boiler spaces. The tank tops of the double bottom were replaced as needed. The boilers have been hung from the 3rd deck instead of having the full wight of the keel under them. The outer hull is the issue. The torpedo blisters are where almost all of the leaking and pumping is going on. The blisters could flood and she would still float. I believe they added about 3000 tons of buoyancy. Just towing her to Galveston to Todd ship yard in 1988 saw accelerated flooding as she went. Sadly, Todd shipyard and the dry dock there is no more. She would have to cross the Gulf of Mexico to reach a dry dock.
Awesome news about the Texas. I don’t care where in Texas she ends up as long as she’s properly repaired and dry berthed.
You missed a question in the description time marks around 1:07:00
A tortoise on HMS Fearless until the 1980s.. turtles are really great guys.
1:30:27 "Run away!!" Am I the only person who thought of Python?
Well, it all depends on how badly you need combat ships. ANY museum ship can be made combat ready no matter its age if the need is great enough. Even ones in near dust like USS Texas or USS Olympia. All you need is the willingness to spend the big dollars and enough skilled workers to do the job.
YES! I heard the news about the USS texas too. Very excited and have to say, about time
Every year the USS Constitution is towed into Boston Harbor turned around, then back again to her berth in the Charlestown Navy Yard. That way her hull wears evenly over winter. However, 20+ years ago (early 1990's) I watched the USS Constitution underway independently powered by her sails. This was in celebration of her 200th anniversary. Her hull was reinforced and repaired in the early 90's. Her masts, sails and rigging were all replaced 10 years later. Im confident in saying that the USS Constitution is seaworthy. After all, 85% of her hull has been replaced with replicant materials in the last few decades. That cannot be said of the USS North Carolina, the Iowas, the South Dakota's, the Olympia, the Texas and other capital ships now functioning as museums.
The Iowas could be returned to service, but in reality the steam plants would be ripped out and replaced by gas turbine/generators/electric drives. Not hard now.
At least, the museum Battleships still have engines; the Intrepid has a cafeteria instead.
As to an actual invasion of Midway, the two key facts I've heard brought up as to why it would fail are the very short bombardment that would be undertaken by the surface forces, which later war US bombardments against lighter fortifications was shown to be insufficient. The plan also probably would have been followed as everything is going to plan in this situation, and that the Japanese would be hesitant to maintain bombardment position for too long a period so close to Hawaii and a potentially large submarine threat.
The second was that the actual forces which would be going ashore were essentially light infantry who would have had to wade through the reefs to get to the islands on foot, and considering the US forces garrisoned there and the equipment they had, later actions in the war would see this force disposition to be very US favored.
The biggest issue with Midway Island, is just how fucking small it is. It is genuinely possible that even with a relatively short bombardment with Yamato and Musashi which if memory serves were present would probably destroy most if not all of the equipment and probably the majority of the troops there because of just how small the island is. In an interview that drach did it was described as about the size of a postage stamp which quite frankly given the size of Midway relative to most other islands I would absolutely agree with that also if memory serves Midway is practically flat with basically no cover whatsoever unless you start digging.
In terms of bombardment, you can’t compare the pretty much flat (and as stated in the video basically just airfield) nature of Midway to Islands later on in the war which were mountainous and had plenty of natural protection against US bombardment
@@Fuse1990 Not all of the islands the US invaded, even late in the war were mountainous, and even when they were they weren't wholly so. Anyways I don't remember the sources so don't take my position as all that firm.
Alaska's 12"/50s worked really well. New Mexico also went to a 14"/50 over the Pennsylvania's 14"/45.
In regards to getting a museum ship ready for active duty again, it kind of depends.
A fletcher or something could probably brought up to original state in a few months...with upgrades for semi-modern combat? A year or so.
An Iowa class B.B...well likely never since they’re no longer in reserve and there’s no infrastructure at all capable of supporting them still left.
A carrier like the Yorktown probably about a year.
Biggest issue for larger ships is a lack of shipyards in the US to accommodate them.
I’m speaking only for the US if that wasn’t obvious...