Which of the Iowas Received the Least Amount of Upgrades?

Поделиться
HTML-код
  • Опубликовано: 8 сен 2024

Комментарии • 280

  • @vburke1
    @vburke1 2 года назад +104

    Updating and bringing them back is the only reason we have any of these ships left at all, in my opinion. If they were never used again after WWII, there's no way all 4 of them would still exist today. If that means we have to sacrifice 1940s originality, it's worth it to still have them at all.

    • @phantomaviator1318
      @phantomaviator1318 2 года назад +7

      *cries in West Virginia*

    • @invadegreece9281
      @invadegreece9281 2 года назад

      @@phantomaviator1318 fair

    • @vburke1
      @vburke1 2 года назад +2

      @@jneale5204 Makes my point. The Iowas weren't driven obsolete by associated weapon advances. The old carriers simply couldn't be updated practically to keep up with the driving development of their associated aircraft.

    • @jmd1743
      @jmd1743 2 года назад +3

      I've been saying that the US Navy needs to cough up the money to pay for a proper indoor preservation facility that would include a dry dock, and a Hydraulic cylinder system like what HMS Victory uses to place proper pressure onto the wood ship's hull. I would rather not have 4 additional new destroyers if the expense were going to be that high.
      The USS Texas and the USS Olympic needs preservation facilities as well. I would have the USS Texas, USS Olympic, an Iowa Class, and something like a hydrofoil ship to represent the cold war all inside a giant building that would have renewable powered climate control equipment for the insides of those ships to occasionally dry them out from moisture.

    • @keithmcadams447
      @keithmcadams447 2 года назад +1

      @@jmd1743 interesting thought…and outrageously expense…guess that is why you didn’t put your name on the comment.

  • @brucesheehe6305
    @brucesheehe6305 2 года назад +92

    Most significant for the New Jersey IMO was Vietnam. It was the only one to serve and made a huge impact. It should have been used for the whole war - it made a great difference when there. Black Dragon.

    • @williamcostello8658
      @williamcostello8658 2 года назад +6

      Most significant period... When they built them

    • @dougc190
      @dougc190 2 года назад +13

      The girl I used to date her father was in Vietnam. They love the New Jersey being offshore. He said the 5-in from the cruisers and destroyer sound like pop guns, and when the New Jersey which fire it was a big bang and you hear that shell whistle over the top of you

    • @tonytrotta9322
      @tonytrotta9322 2 года назад +2

      @@dougc190 My cousin was in the Vietnam War in the U.S. Navy and said the majority of the bombardment was from the Destroyers and Cruisers.

    • @dougc190
      @dougc190 2 года назад +3

      @@tonytrotta9322 I have no doubt but that is probably the case all I'm saying is they knew when the New Jersey opened up

    • @tonytrotta9322
      @tonytrotta9322 2 года назад +4

      @@dougc190 Yes, you are correct! I saw the impressive USS New Jersey and USS Missouri in Bremerton, WA (Puget Sound Navy Base) in 1976 and toured her in 2005 in Camden, New Jersey. My dad who passed in 2017 at age 92 served in WW2 on the heavy cruiser USS Louisville CA 28 from 1943-46 and witnessed (52) sailors along with Rear Admiral Theodore Chandler buried at sea due to (3) kamikaze hits in the Pacific. In WW2, the majority of the island bombardment was from the Older Cruisers and Older Battleships and the Newer Cruisers and Newer Battleships like New Jersey, Alabama, North Carolina - Screened the Aircraft Carriers. P.S - There is a broad side on Y-tube showing an 8 inch 55 caliber which Louisville had and all the crew had to stand in a safe area when those guns were fired for they were loud! That projectile could be fired 18 miles! One of her gun turrets was found in the Nevada Desert in 2015. Take care! Check out this Y-tube video at the 39 second mark to see the Northampton class firing the main battery 8 inch 55 caliber guns! Turn up the volume! The deck was cleared when they fired these guns! ruclips.net/video/R28LJJ9aqZM/видео.html

  • @Angrymuscles
    @Angrymuscles 2 года назад +2

    I love the scrolling refresh rate bars going across the screen. Probably not intentional, but it makes it look like you recorded the video, played it back via VHS on a CRT TV or monitor, then pointed a modern camera at it and rerecorded it. Techmoan and LGR would both approve.

  • @gator1959
    @gator1959 2 года назад +35

    if the Iowa's had not been upgraded and modernized and been left in there original configurations I think with the limited funding allocated for maintaining mothballed ships, the Iowa's would have rusted away and been scraped a long time ago.

  • @zendoargos4988
    @zendoargos4988 2 года назад +20

    As historically significant as they were in their WWII configuration seeing as it was the last great naval war, the ships went on to serve the country that they were built to protect for another 50 years after the war and they required upgrades for that.
    If the Navy or the US Government themselves had decided to keep the 4 Iowa's in one place as a museum it would have been interesting to see one fitted out in the configurations from 4 different eras; WWII, Korea, Viet Nam, and the Gulf War.
    Since the 4 ships are in 4 different locations the current interpretation of each ship as it ended its service is fully appropriate.

  • @wepprop
    @wepprop 2 года назад +42

    Just my opinion, but if you want to see a battleship in pretty much its WWII configuration, you can go see Alabama, Massachusetts or North Carolina. They're not Iowas, but they're similar.

    • @readingrailroadfan7683
      @readingrailroadfan7683 2 года назад +3

      It definitely is a shocker when your use to being on South Dakota and North Carolina class battleships to all of a sudden jump to an Iowa. Having experienced it when I saw Whisky two weeks ago after seeing Massachusetts over the summer.

    • @jonathanjones3623
      @jonathanjones3623 Год назад

      Correct they're all fast battleships the North Carolina series the South Dakota series and then the eventual Iowa's or what became the Iowa is I still would contend Mr Szymanski here in the other Museum ships at some point we'll have to consider one change that Missouri of any of them should make and that's just a simply repaint the exterior to match its World War II camouflage Missouri just came out of a big refurbishment I think back in 2011-2012 whenever it was it may have been 2013 when I was there but they repainted the entire Hull and I thought wow and some of the museum personnel and facility workers there that had time to answer some questions they told me there was a big discussion amongst people at the Museum of whether or not to have the Missouri in her World War II era camouflage pattern on the outside they couldn't do much on the inside as Ryan has pointed out with New Jersey and the other siblings.
      But it seems like something simple they could do when needed I think if you did repaint the ships on the exterior you could get a lot more people to visit them the North Carolina the Massachusetts and the Alabama I would say have a luster to them that the other ships don't and it's true because the other ships were retained for so much longer and active service.
      I think you can you can absolutely do that if nothing else no material change no cutting of anything a simple pattern update would bring these ships more recognition from the public as I've said it before the New Jersey's nickname is the black dragon and right now that black dragon looks like the great dolphin I'm convinced if not during Ryan's time or any of the current curators time eventually In Our Lifetime someone will make the decision at the very least repaint these ships exteriors in their World War II configuration it is not diminishing their later service but I feel it enhances the conflict in which the ships have their Origins

    • @timbowden1680
      @timbowden1680 Год назад +2

      @@jonathanjones3623 Pro tip - punctuation is your friend. And ours.

    • @jasondiaz8431
      @jasondiaz8431 Год назад

      ​@Tim Bowden, but he used paragraphs 😅.

    • @doodledangernoodle2517
      @doodledangernoodle2517 5 месяцев назад

      I do wish at least one of the Iowa class were repainted in WWII dazzle/camo paint.

  • @gunnergoz
    @gunnergoz 2 года назад +3

    The volume of knowledge you retain of this class is probably unparalleled. Kudos.

  • @wolfhalupka8992
    @wolfhalupka8992 2 года назад +3

    I try and answer that in a different light... the modernisation of the Iowas that permitted their return to active duty in the 80s was extremely significant. it made possible their active and meaningful participation in the Gulf War being able to launch cruise missiles as well as shelling the enemy with 16in projectiles, linking the ages, and thus made sure the Iowas aren't remembered as mere relics of a time long gone but s having served the nation for so many years, always changing with the requirements. the missile carrying big gun battleship had found a new place in a modern fleet.

  • @jaybee9269
    @jaybee9269 2 года назад +7

    Thanks for another great video Ryan. (It literally awes me that you do these unscripted; your knowledge is impressive.)
    You’re could almost be a superhero-CuratorMan!

    • @KennethStone
      @KennethStone Год назад +1

      You should write to Marvel ASAP!

  • @ReformationHomested
    @ReformationHomested 2 года назад +2

    I think every Iowa class has its own most significant time period in some respects. Iowa carried FDR and evaded being hit by friendly torpedos (with president aboard), WWII ended on Missouri, Wisconsin had a pretty impressive temper tantrum in Korea, NJ was the only one reactivated for Nam, and they all played a deterrent role in the 80’s. So the 80’s is probably the best blanket answer but I think the answer can be justly nuanced on a ship by ship basis.

  • @craigbathurst1185
    @craigbathurst1185 2 года назад +16

    I would like to see photos of inside the ship during WW2 and display those photos in the area that they were taken. There are models of the Iowa Class Battleships in their WW2 configurations. These can be built and put on display on each ship.

  • @briancox2721
    @briancox2721 2 года назад +3

    I like the museum's approach to interpreting the ship. To use an analogy, it keeps as much of the story as possible, but turns those sections of the book that have become illegible into good flashbacks of important parts of the plot.

  • @loyalrammy
    @loyalrammy 2 года назад +2

    I was in the Navy in the 80’s and thought the Iowas were fantastic warships and I was glad they were brought out of mothballs. If I had finished out my twenty, I would have want to be stationed on one, but that was not to be. I worked in the radio room as an ET and we had UHF transceivers called SRC 20/21’s, and we had HF transceivers with R-1051’s and T-827’s. I think both sets had 1960’s versions and so are they in your recreated 1960’s Radio room? Also, I was a crypto tech who worked on UHF voice actuated cryptos called KY-8’s, amount other equipment. One thing I remember was how LOUD that room was….lol. We had mandatory ear protection muffs for whenever we worked in that space, which was most of the time.

  • @phillipbouchard4197
    @phillipbouchard4197 2 года назад +39

    Another interesting video. Having visited three of the four Iowa's I would agree with Ryan that Wisconsin received the most yard attention of the four during the 1980's reactivations. I also gained some insight from the staff at the Inactive Ship Facility at Philadelphia as to the material condition of both Iowa and Wisconsin when they received them in the early 1990's. The new Teak wood decking of Wisconsin is particularly striking in comparison to her older sister Iowa and was very noticeable when they were tied up side by side at Philadelphia when I visited them in the middle 1990's. Also I noticed that Iowa sat slightly lower in the water than Wisconsin which I attributed to the additional conning tower deck level she has that Wisconsin does not have.

    • @aspiringtechnician9252
      @aspiringtechnician9252 2 года назад +2

      I've only visited Wisconsin, back in 2017, and was surprised how new the ship looked since at the time I was just learning about the ships and didn't know Wisconsin had such a recent service history. Also, as a museum Wisconsin sits very high at the bow.

    • @chrisaustin9949
      @chrisaustin9949 2 года назад +9

      The Iowas should be as they were in the '90s. One point to make is that if you want to see what a battleship looked like during WW II you can see the USS North Carolina BB 55, USS Massachusetts BB 59, or USS Alabama BB 60. Those ships were deactivate shortly after WW II and never reactivated and they are maintained in their WW II configuration. Also the USS Texas BB-35, a WW I Dreadnaught, was upgraded to WW II technology and will be available after it is repaired.

    • @donraptor6156
      @donraptor6156 2 года назад +1

      The Wisconsin and Iowa had all the Teak decks replaced at Ingalls Shipbuilding.

    • @phillipbouchard4197
      @phillipbouchard4197 2 года назад

      @@donraptor6156 Having been aboard both Iowa and Wisconsin in the spring of 1995 I can attest that the deck repair work done to Iowa was sub-par to say the least as sections of the original teak that was so bad the yard replaced with Douglas Fir aft by Turret #3 . Needless to say Doug Fir does not hold up very well in Marine applications. The fact that the shipyard had to speed up the recommissioning date for the Iowa I am sure was a determining factor in the deck repair/ replace decision. From video I have seen of the Iowa as a museum ship she appears to have either P.T. Plywood or Marine grade plywood on most of her decks. Undoubtedly this is a temporary measure until they can replace the decking with teak.

  • @carisi2k11
    @carisi2k11 2 года назад +12

    I'd say the gulf war would be the iowa classes most significant time period because it had the tomahawk missiles and the drones which allowed them to guide the 16 inch guns on to there enemy. They were outshone by the aircraft carriers in WW2.

    • @goldenhate6649
      @goldenhate6649 2 года назад +2

      They were invaluable during the invasion of Okinawa for artillery support along with the other battleships.

  • @pacificdragon1
    @pacificdragon1 2 года назад +1

    A friend of mine who was stationed at North Island told me a story of meeting a Sailor who was a Double Plank owner to an Iowa class battleship. This Sailor had knowledge of the 16” Guns and was brought back out of retirement into the service during one of the recommissioning’s.

  • @bigsarge2085
    @bigsarge2085 2 года назад +13

    It's good that the Iowa's were modernized, which has become an integral part of their historic journey; as valid as their WW2 service/configuration.

  • @lexington476
    @lexington476 2 года назад +31

    When the Iowa class ships were brought back in the 80s, how long were they intended to be in service at that time? As in Wisconsin you said was brought back in 88 and decommissioned by 91, that's only like 3 years of service for all that work. Obviously the end of the Cold War the ships were no longer really needed, but if the Cold War had not ended when it had, how long were the Iowa's intended to serve?

    • @curtisquick5471
      @curtisquick5471 2 года назад +13

      If I remember correctly, there were additional yard periods with upgrades and modifications planed for all the ships during the 1990s. The explosion in Iowas turret 2 drew public attention and made the Navy start questioning if keeping such old ships around was a good idea. Along with the end of the Cold War meant that the ships could no long be supported on the reduced defense budgets.

    • @zoopercoolguy
      @zoopercoolguy 2 года назад +6

      There were plans to do a service life extension program (SLEP) for the Iowas. This would have added at least another decade or two to their active service lives. It is almost certain that the ships would have received a large number of vertical launch cells for Tomahawks and maybe some other missiles.

    • @donraptor6156
      @donraptor6156 2 года назад +3

      The ships were not refurbished enough to be in service long. The pipes and electrical were rotten! The Steam plants were patched together. They turned to be too expensive to operate.

    • @LOLHAMMER45678
      @LOLHAMMER45678 2 года назад

      Probably all gone by 2000. One VLS spruance had as many TLAM tubes as two battleships at a tiny fraction of the cost, and that was half the reason to bring them back in the first place

    • @zoopercoolguy
      @zoopercoolguy 2 года назад +2

      @@LOLHAMMER45678 But a Spruance couldn't show the flag as well as a battleship. I think further modernized Iowas would have served into at least the 2010s. A SAG based around an Iowa is an effective (and affordable) stand-in for a CSG in many instances. The USN has always needed roughly 15 carriers to meet its needs, but shrinking budgets and delays with the Ford have brought the number of active carriers down to below 10 at times. Four Iowa SAGs would have helped relieve some of the demands on the carriers and kept the Iowas around longer.

  • @rachelcarre9468
    @rachelcarre9468 2 года назад +1

    i’m am amazed at the range of tasks your position brings, from fixing plumbing to existential crisis in the early hours of the morning questioning the most appropriate periods of interpretation! However you and your colleagues both on USS New Jersey and around the World do an outstanding job, thank you!

  • @tippyc2
    @tippyc2 2 года назад +1

    Long time fan of the channel. You ask "who are we to say if these ships WWII services are more important than the gulf war services or Vietnam war services?" If not you then who else? I appreciate that you attempt to represent all the service periods with the reverence they deserve, but surely your opinion is more informed than anyone else who would come along and opine. If you ask me, Missouri's role as the location of Japan's official surrender makes her WWII service the most important of any in the class, but I'm just some armchair admiral over here commenting on a YT vid.

  • @doctordoom1337
    @doctordoom1337 2 года назад +6

    For the other 3 ships, it's difficult to say. For New Jersey, the ship was involved in significant events during every commission but what we have is her 1991 fit and that's how she should be interpreted.

    • @philnaegely
      @philnaegely 2 года назад

      and because those soldiers are most likely to visit too, makes sense to interpret her that way in addition to what ryan explained as well.

    • @jr5569
      @jr5569 Год назад

      @@philnaegely Sailors

  • @vesjohn4539
    @vesjohn4539 2 года назад +1

    Being fairly new at the end of WWII I think it was a must that they be used over the years and as time and technology increased they had to be modified to keep up.

  • @billb4696
    @billb4696 2 года назад +3

    My Dad "history teacher" and I were talking today. We were talking about what could an Iowa Class do in Ukraine if we decided to "display" one in the Black Sea. I told him about your channel and I think he is binge watching your entire channel now.

  • @chrisgarrett3969
    @chrisgarrett3969 2 года назад +1

    They're only a historical artifact now, not while they're still an active DOD asset. Now that they're museum ships, let's leave it to the pros to present them as best they can. Thank you. I love this stuff.

  • @thetruthseeker5549
    @thetruthseeker5549 2 года назад +2

    I am glad to hear the history is being respected, I fully agree that "restoring" any historical piece to make it "more original" only produces a facsimile, as well ads destroying the full history.

  • @dudeparistx
    @dudeparistx 2 года назад +1

    Good question. I have been to Battleship Texas a number of times. It would be interesting to see how much if at all it was modernized from it's original form but it appears to be pretty close to how it began life. Crew comfort was obviously not a high priority. I think any form the Iowa Class ships exist in now is important to preserve.

  • @RetiredSailor60
    @RetiredSailor60 2 года назад +1

    At 3:30 mark, you showed my former workspace, CIC (Combat Information Center). Chart table, DRT (Dead-Reconning Tracer) table, Radio Telephones, radar consoles, etc...

  • @sparkplug1018
    @sparkplug1018 2 года назад +1

    Honestly I think it was fantastic that the USN kept bringing them back as needed over the years. Because like so many other vessels, seems likely enough that if they hadn't at least had that in mind the Iowa's might have been scrapped well before the 90's, at least some of them.
    Unfortunately yes the original configurations were lost, but they've traded that for a pretty long service history as things go, which just adds to the legend that is the Iowa class battleship.

  • @richhagenchicago
    @richhagenchicago 2 года назад +1

    They may be too old now and require too much updating, but they are the last ships really designed to take hits and to keep slugging it out afterward. I would have thought that they would have been worth upgrading as closer in support for hostile areas for this reason. They are not unsinkable, but they could take hits that would sink virtually any other ship in our fleet. If the operating costs could be brought down, they would still be very valuable assets. I do not know if we can even make 14 and 16 inch armor currently. Certainly we could gear up to do so, but that alone would take significant time. If the Montana's had been built it would be interesting to see how they might have been upgraded into the current era.

  • @motaz1975
    @motaz1975 2 года назад +7

    doesnt matter how they look now, we have three other fast battleships in their original configs.

  • @captaincool3329
    @captaincool3329 2 года назад +2

    A specific question I have related to the this topic is whether any of the museum Iowas like New Jersey have ever considered re-installing examples of the removed 127mm secondary turrets? This is prompted by the scrapping of Gearing class destroyer Everett F Larson/ Jeonbuk in South Korea in December 2021 (source: wiki), and also leads me to ask if you know if any of her equipment was salvaged for use on similar 40s/50s museum ships, considering as spares would be- by now- harder and harder to come by.

  • @DJNUMA
    @DJNUMA 2 года назад +1

    I personally feel like the answer for each Iowa is different. New Jersey is probably the hardest to answer for given her activity in all those wars. Literally being pulled out of one of them due to how effective a threat she was. So for me Vietnam is her most significant based on that alone. If I had to give the others a time period i would give Iowa the WW2 Deployment, and Missouri the one where she snuck up on a task force and took them by surprise. Wisconsin i cannot answer because I dont know enough about her career.

  • @davidschroeder839
    @davidschroeder839 2 года назад +2

    The Iowas are the most gorgeous ships and I love them. Sometimes you have to bring the old ladys back and modernize them Many still see them as a show of naval power. But I am bias to the Iowas. :)

  • @mrjumbly2338
    @mrjumbly2338 2 года назад

    I like these types of discussions, Sometime I would like to hear comments on the USS Massachusetts and USS Alabama, since they never were recommissioned and were basically new when decommissioned as a comparison to the Iowa's.

  • @darthdeathmobile
    @darthdeathmobile 2 года назад +2

    If the question is what was the most historic time period for the Iowas, I think WWII is easily the right answer. It's really hard to grasp that one of the most significant events in human history was so recent that there are still people alive that lived through it. That said, they were built to be used and it's amazing they were still relevant into the 1990s. We still have other battleships in WWII configuration so we really aren't missing a lot with the exception of an example of a Standard Type.

  • @dennisjay3277
    @dennisjay3277 2 года назад +1

    Without the upgrades the ships would not have been as effective. I believe all of the ships are being displayed in the right way. Keep as much as you can the way you got it and change what doesn't make any difference.

  • @NomadShadow1
    @NomadShadow1 2 года назад +7

    I guess you could also argue that Illinois or Kentucky received the least amount of upgrades because they weren't ever completed? It depends on whether you count the two partially completed ships.

    • @edwardrhoades6957
      @edwardrhoades6957 2 года назад

      Part of Kentucky lives on as Wisconsin's bow, giving her the nickname WISKY.

    • @cherokee43v6
      @cherokee43v6 2 года назад +2

      @@edwardrhoades6957 Beat me to it! I was going to say Kentucky got the best upgrade! They attached a whole other battleship to her! ;)

  • @PaulSteinmayer
    @PaulSteinmayer 2 года назад +1

    I think bringing them back in the 1980s was a brilliant decision, and it's sad that not one remains in active service, as there is nothing else that can provide equal firepower in the world. In my humble opinion, they should design and build a new modern battleship with 16in guns! That said, preserving the Iowas in the condition that they last served is the right move because it shows the evolution of it's service life. After all, they aren't going to remove an angled flight deck from a modernized Essex Class carrier to make it appear in it's WWII straight deck configuration!

  • @AJAtcho
    @AJAtcho 2 года назад

    every time period which the ship has served is important and needs to be taught and learned

  • @henrycarlson7514
    @henrycarlson7514 2 года назад

    Interesting , Thank You . Thank You discusing the choices that are made as to the restorations . I think that You are doing a fine job . Personally I think that every thing they they did is potentually historicly important

  • @wedgeGTX
    @wedgeGTX 2 года назад +1

    What do you think, if for some (extreme) reason the navy decide to bring back the Iowa class battleships to active service and not scrap them, which one would be easier to upgrade for today's standards? I mean if a ship like the Wisconsin have the latest upgrades does it make the modernisation easier or harder compare to the New Jersey?

  • @devjaxvid
    @devjaxvid 2 года назад +1

    Very interesting question. This video and your April Fools video brought to mind a question in the a similar ballpark. Say we needed to modernize the NJ and bring her up to modern standards, What major systems would you keep/remove and what new systems would you add? What role would you suggest the NJ take on in the 21st Century Navy? For sake of argument let’s say money is no object.

  • @steveamsp
    @steveamsp 2 года назад +1

    I think there's a reasonable argument to be made that the Iowas' greatest service was actually in the 80s/90s.
    In World War II, by the time the Iowas entered service, the result was decided, and while they were very nice to have, the carriers were so much more important that the lack of the Iowas wouldn't have affected the outcome to any noticeable degree.
    For Korea and Vietnam, they were very good offshore gunnery platforms, and certainly helped, but again, weren't the critical piece.
    In the 80s they could be said to have been a significant factor in the downfall of the Soviet Union. Not in themselves, of course, but as a part of the overall naval buildup of the time, which the re-entry of the battlewagons to full service was probably the most visible portion. The fact that the US Navy was reactivating the Iowas to go along with the existing carrier force at the time was something the Soviets had to try to keep up with, but simply couldn't.

  • @gunnest6939
    @gunnest6939 2 года назад +2

    Do the museum organizations of the four battleships have a yearly conference, or competition for best crew of the year for bragging rights between groups?

  • @jth877
    @jth877 2 года назад +4

    Here's a question. Would you sacrifice one of the Iowas in order to have CV6 or maybe a standard BB preserved as a museum?

    • @erbmiller
      @erbmiller 2 года назад +2

      That's a hard question. The most decorated ship of the Navy, a missing link, or a ship successfully deployed almost half a century after being built. Probably Iowa or Wisconsin would draw the Short straw. Iowa was the last lead ship of us battleships built. Wisconsin was the last battleship to fire her guns in anger and it's believed that her UAV had the first successful surrender to a UAV. A standard would be cool, but arguably CV-6 to the Navy's history and the evolution of naval warfare is more important.

    • @williammacdonald3173
      @williammacdonald3173 2 года назад

      Hard question but yes. Sacrifice iowa or Wisconsin

    • @soundman447
      @soundman447 2 года назад

      You kinda have a "Standard class Battle Ship" with Texas. With all the upgrades she received I don't think you can really call her a dreadnought during WW2. As for Enterprise CV6 that is likely the biggest loss to history of any modern Navy.

  • @Moose0perator
    @Moose0perator 2 года назад +1

    To be honest with how large the ships are I’m so surprised that any of the battleships didn’t have any torpedo tubes or depth charges put in the backside of the ship I have always wondered. Just imagine big guns,high speed,good secondary’s,and etc

  • @KennethStone
    @KennethStone Год назад

    I think all the ships deployments are equally important, and all need to be interpreted. It makes the most sense to say something along the lines of "as built, this room was 'A', and it was modified to be 'B', and then again to 'C'." They're all equally valid to me.

  • @glenn6229
    @glenn6229 2 года назад +2

    Very good video !!! Can you give an opinion on which of the Iowa's is in the best physical condition after all these years ?

    • @tomnewham1269
      @tomnewham1269 2 года назад +2

      I think Ryan would answer Wisconsin is in the best condition. Ryan has done a video to answer the hypothetical question which Iowa battleship should be brought back in service and he said Wisconsin as it has the least amount of miles. So that may answer your question.

  • @nonna_sof5889
    @nonna_sof5889 2 года назад +1

    I feel like if they hadn't been reactivated we probably wouldn't have them. They also provided good shore fire support during their post-WW2 service. Nothing quite says "fuck everyone over there" like a 16" shell. The moral effect on both sides alone is enough to justify the cost.

  • @homelessjedi2843
    @homelessjedi2843 2 года назад +1

    What’s odd is really only 2 are heavily known the Iowa and Missouri. The New Jersey and Wisconsin or like the cousins you didn’t know you have.

  • @washingtonradio
    @washingtonradio 2 года назад +1

    I can see it being too expensive to retrofit any ship to an earlier period of her service so she was period accurate for that period. So the next best option is what the Iowas are doing, recreating earlier periods in various spaces to give visitors a feel for that period.

  • @ObamaTookMyCat
    @ObamaTookMyCat 2 года назад +1

    Its New Jersey, she was already half-modernized when she was in service for Vietnam.

  • @randybentley2633
    @randybentley2633 9 месяцев назад

    The best to answer the question of 'Should the Iowas have been brought back and updated...' would be to the servicemen/women whose lives were saved either directly or indirectly by the fact that these Ships and their Guns were on station.

  • @dalecomer5951
    @dalecomer5951 2 года назад +3

    Ryan, are you aware of the "friendly fire" incident with one of New Jersey's 16-inch guns during the Vietnam war?

  • @thomasmoore8142
    @thomasmoore8142 2 года назад

    I like that they were upgraded and used several times.
    There are a couple of things I would like to know regarding upgrades. I read that the NJ had it's Citadel lightened before Vietnam, anybody know for sure. I also read that her top flank speed was classified, that what speed that was sited was her flank speed she could comfortably maintain but could do substantially more for short periods of time, anybody know? I do know that North Carolina never could run her true flank speed because of bad shaking that never was fixed.

  • @tcofield1967
    @tcofield1967 2 года назад

    If they hadn't brought them back they would be razor blades by now. Upgrading and improving them kept them relevant. Maybe one or two might have been kept as museum ships like the North Carolina or Alabama but most likely the majority would have gone to the breakers. As for significant era, probably Korea. In WW2 the Iowas were a group among many. In Korea they were the only game in town and did the yeoman's work of heavy artillery sea based bombardment.

  • @kellyjackson1736
    @kellyjackson1736 2 года назад

    Think every time they left port was a important time. It’s also important to represent all of the time periods. From the 40s to the 90s it’s a amazing life span so many changes they seen.

  • @john-mf1qm
    @john-mf1qm 2 года назад +1

    Automate the main guns, swap main engines with a nuclear reactor, replace the bow turret with a VLS system, and the US navy would have one hell of a ship

  • @barrydysert2974
    @barrydysert2974 2 года назад +1

    It seems Ryan's decisions only come after much soul searching.
    Captain my Captain !:-)
    ⚡️🙏⚡️

  • @adamalton2436
    @adamalton2436 2 года назад

    Being modernized probably saved the ships. They were still existent in an era when interest in museum ships made them possible. How many ships (Enterprise, Warspite, Dreadnaught, Washington, South Dakota, Nevada, etc.) would have been museum-worthy if there hadn’t been a rush to send them to the breakers’ yard or if they’d been kept in reserve a few more years?
    Imagine if the navy hadn’t modernized the Iowas and just left them in reserve after World War 2. Very likely, they would be nothing more than their bells and a few bits of plank in a dusty glass case by now.

  • @davelewandoski4292
    @davelewandoski4292 2 года назад

    In my would I would love to see at least one Iowa in her original WWll configuration. Then we could compare her to the modernized sisters. But, if not brought back and modernized....that ship might not have survived. Their modernization is part of their history, and to not represent that would be a disservice to the ships and the men who severed on them. Thanks for another great video Ryan. I agree 100% with only back dating spaces if they have historical significance or have been damaged and need repair anyway.

    • @donraptor6156
      @donraptor6156 2 года назад

      Besides the Tomahawk launchers you would be hard pressed to recognize much difference. The interior had minimum habitually upgrades. We did add some Chilled water but no where enough. I have seen the upper fire rooms run 175 degrees air temperature. The Wisconsin and Iowa was Haunted! I know because I was on the Reactivation Crew!

  • @maxseed4730
    @maxseed4730 2 года назад +4

    I'd say it's the big j... I'm thinking the whiskey 64 took the most work.. she's the onley one that needed a new deck in the 80s

  • @rmp5s
    @rmp5s 2 года назад +2

    This is really interesting. Was just watching a Grim Reapers video (DCS World group) where they sim'd a bunch of ships against each other and they had all the Iowas in it. It'd be really cool for you guys to work on a collab together! Check them out! Video is called "Could A WWII Battleship Super Fleet Beat A Russian Carrier Group? (Naval 63) | DCS".

  • @cmcb7230
    @cmcb7230 2 года назад +1

    I’d like to know which of the four have the best chance of long term survivability based off their present locations. Iowa in sunny socal but in saltwater, NJ up north but in freshwater, Missouri in tropical Hawaii or Wisconsin on the east coast in saltwater?

    • @lancemckay5778
      @lancemckay5778 2 года назад +1

      I would guess New Jersey because she is in fresh water like you said.

  • @HM2SGT
    @HM2SGT 2 года назад

    7:09 Interesting, the diamond plate covers on gauges bottom centre…

  • @alexrichardson6346
    @alexrichardson6346 2 года назад

    was born in and all my family is from Missouri, this video is the most i have ever heard it called Missouri with a A at the end.

  • @nx014
    @nx014 2 года назад

    The Battleship USS Missouri is brought back in 1984. 1986 is when she is last placed in commission.

  • @navymm2snipes489
    @navymm2snipes489 2 года назад

    As an old crew member, I say leave them as is with some WW2, Korea equipment to fill in the blinks... there are already the USS Alabama BB60 and the USS Massachusetts BB59 full of WW2 equipment.

  • @paulmurphy773
    @paulmurphy773 2 года назад

    Would have been interesting if one of the Iowa's had been kept in their WW2 configuration and put direct out of mothballs into museum status, my choice would have been Missouri...in Pearl Harbor as now

  • @Loli4lyf
    @Loli4lyf 2 года назад

    they look intimidating i would fully support the recommisioning of these beasts even though thet get chewed by anti ship missiles

  • @christianvalentin5344
    @christianvalentin5344 2 года назад

    For those like myself on the west coast it isn’t a good option, but those on east coast have 3 similar generation battleships still in WW2 configuration.

  • @toddwebb7521
    @toddwebb7521 2 года назад

    If you was going to back date NJ to an earlier state I think Nam would be the most appropriate as she was the only one updated for that.

  • @BarefootPhilanthropist
    @BarefootPhilanthropist 2 года назад

    We are custodians of history, not it’s authors in my opinion. Platforms that cover multiple periods of history are hard to strike a balance. Perhaps if there is room pier side a structure can be built with exhibits of equipment and fittings from those different periods in the ships history. Dioramas etc, similar how the Tank Museum does it in the UK. Clearly a battleship is much larger than a Sherman tank but a room, cutaway or diorama isn’t necessarily.
    Ideally I’d love to see each of the Iowas represent a time period of the significant time periods of their activation. WW2, Korea, Vietnam, 80s+. Even better if they were all side by side! There is no way that would ever happen but it’s good to think what it could look like.

  • @mcduck5
    @mcduck5 2 года назад +1

    I also think they should have kept the two unfinished hulls and finished them instead of reactivation the 4 finished ships....

  • @HM2SGT
    @HM2SGT 2 года назад

    2:41 That Peter perfect goody two shoes first class master at arms with sixteen in!

  • @stangsaleens7
    @stangsaleens7 2 года назад +8

    I think with new technology battleships could still have a place in todays navy’s. The biggest limiting factor to the Battleship is its guns. They’re range is about 20-30 miles, which puts them in harms way for enemy missiles. The Army is currently studying a concept for an artillery cannon with a range beyond 1000+ miles which starts to get on par with what missiles can do. It also has some advantages that unlike a missile, a artillery round cannot be tricked by Chaff, Flares, jamming or stealth technology. Only armor and the ability to intercept the projectile will stop it, which also work against missiles too. Also Battleships are the a huge draw for any navy. What doesn’t scream more America! Than shooting a gun with ammo the size of a Volkswagen?? The only possibility of the IOWA’s ever seeing action again would be WW3 for shore bombardment, in the pacific. For the sake of humanity I’d rather see them as museum ships!

    • @Ran-dom1
      @Ran-dom1 2 года назад +1

      battleships have no place, due to the cost of running them, when a single destroyer could destroy one. It is much more viable AND CHEAPER to pump out paper ships with missiles. AKA destroyers.

    • @ashesofempires04
      @ashesofempires04 2 года назад +1

      Unguided projectiles fired to a range of 1000km would have a CEP of miles. That is, the area that they land in would be so large that hitting a target, even a stationary one, would be a miracle. In order to achieve hits on a target, the shell would need some form of guidance and ability to course correct. And that guidance would be just as susceptible to decoys, chaff, and flares. At that point the main advantage of a 16" artillery shell coming down onto a ship is that it simply cannot be intercepted and destroyed outright. CIWS and self defense missiles would be useless.
      In a world where bombs, torpedoes, and then missiles had not displaced naval guns as the weapon of choice for sinking other ships, it is likely that research into extended range projectiles would have continued. Base Bleed shells and then Rocket Assisted shells would have probably entered service. Sub-caliber sabot rounds were under research in the 50's and 60's and tested in Vietnam successfully. It is likely that they would have entered service, and by the late 60's the research that had resulted in the US's early guided weapons would have been applied to naval artillery, and we would have seen 5", 8", 12", and 16" guided shells entering service alongside sub-caliber rounds for the larger weapons, with the potential for ranges in excess of 100km. The sub-caliber sabots fired in Vietnam struck shore targets at a range of 75km.
      Combined with better propellant, modern metallurgy for stronger barrels, computer designed shells for better aerodynamic efficiency, and probably just an even longer 16" barrel, an alternative history battleship in the 80's could have been slinging heavy metal to a range of 150km with pretty high accuracy.

    • @CidVeldoril
      @CidVeldoril 2 года назад +1

      @@Ran-dom1 But the point about them being a huge draw is correct. While carriers are cool, they are not "16 inch guns firing with the might of ultimate destruction" cool. Battleships, even if you only operate one or two, could still have a place as "promotional material", that is, existing for recruitment purposes and firing their amazing superguns as a show of force.

    • @Ran-dom1
      @Ran-dom1 2 года назад

      @@CidVeldoril in this day and age, fighters and destroyers are way more scarier, then a huge ship. Hence why China has pumped out almost 30 destroyers in the last 5 years. That's like 5 times that of america.
      That's scary, if they made 1 battleship in that time, or two, I'd laugh. Cuz it'd be a joke.
      It's not a show of force. It's antiquated tech. It belongs in a museum oh whoops its already there.

  • @kurtjorgensen4379
    @kurtjorgensen4379 2 года назад +1

    Greatest ship's ever used besides by aircraft carriers and still should be used in my mind today except know one knows how to use here

  • @keithclark6521
    @keithclark6521 Год назад +1

    I think they should bring them back into service. Because nobody in there right mind would ever mess with an Iowa class battleship. If they did they would be stupid. And they should modernize them with 21st century technology. But leave them big bad ass guns on them.

  • @cherokee43v6
    @cherokee43v6 2 года назад

    Anyone wanting to see a Modern Battleship in its WWII configuration has 3 options, NORTH CAROLINA, ALABAMA, and MASSACHUSETTS. Additionally TEXAS is in its WWII configuration. Visually, NC would give the most similar look to a WWII Iowa Class, the SoDaks being more compressed in size.
    My thoughts are that the ships should be representative of their entire service lives, not just one particular era. Things like you highlighted, such as the fire control computers being 1930's vintage, or refitting historically non-critical spaces to be representative of a given era.

  • @HM2SGT
    @HM2SGT 2 года назад

    Whether a period\decade is “history” is highly subjective, & depends heavily on how long ago it was to you. I’m 53, the 80s & 90s were when I was enlisted, & it doesn’t seem long ago at all! But to the youth of today, it’s as ancient history as the 40s & 50s were to me as a kid.

  • @chargerknite236
    @chargerknite236 2 года назад

    For myself, when i visit a ship. I'm visiting the ship for its history. I would cringe if any ship is returned to their initial service. My opinion it would be a disservice to deny the history the ship and her crew had made during her service. I visit these ships to hear their story. New jersey's as you said isn't just WWII. USS Texas isn't Just WWI, or Lend Lease or WWII. But I don't mind either some part of any ship is restored to any one significant period of time to help tell the story of that time. They are old soldiers, and I want to hear their stories.

  • @retroriff
    @retroriff 2 года назад

    You know, if we can get just one of those ships revised and up to par with current upgrades, this would change the balance of power in the black sea .

  • @ensnipe2000
    @ensnipe2000 2 года назад

    The cost to modernize a BB was the cost of a Oliver Hazard Perry Frigate that is stored across the river, and they were much more survivable

  • @hillsidesmoke7592
    @hillsidesmoke7592 2 года назад +2

    Battleships weren't built to be museums, they were built to fight . I have no problem at all with the modernizations .

  • @whatever8282828
    @whatever8282828 Год назад

    I reckon if the Navy wanted to build a museum from scratch, they could do that, but why would they. These are combat equipment that must be maintained and upgraded so I reckon the balance between "as-provided" and a bit of historicity as a museum is done properly.

  • @sparkplug1018
    @sparkplug1018 2 года назад

    What are those blanking plates on the fire control computer? Looks like there was and instrument perhaps there at some point that was removed and blanked over.

  • @jackmarknagington3254
    @jackmarknagington3254 2 года назад

    One question I do have is on the fire control computer how come there are them 3 plates of steel covering 3 view holes? I'm curious as to why they where added?

  • @keithwalker2926
    @keithwalker2926 2 года назад +1

    Here's a question what would it take to Modernize (& due to their size) upgrade to Nuclear power?

    • @georgedistel1203
      @georgedistel1203 2 года назад +1

      Why would you suggest that for the simple reason that once they were run out they would be scrapped for sure. Future generations would never be able to walk the decks and hear stories of these great ships. I have only been on the Wisconsin am hoping to see New Jersey in the next year or so.

    • @quentincarr3660
      @quentincarr3660 2 года назад

      You would have to cut a huge part of the armored deck out along with several other decks to get to the engineering spaces and possibly a turret then gut it and then trying to make a reactor work in a space it wasn’t designed to be in for starters and the other part is we don’t have the infrastructure at are docks/dry docks to lift the 500+ tons of weight to get a turret out if it had to come out. There are videos of him talking about why it isn’t do able

    • @RealJohnnyDingo
      @RealJohnnyDingo 2 года назад

      I think it would be easier to start from scratch.

  • @marybabiec
    @marybabiec 2 года назад +1

    What about the USS Iowa - 61 ? Mary Babiec

  • @raybord1
    @raybord1 2 года назад

    WWII was def the most significant time period but I think showing all their history is the correct way to show the ships though.

  • @barrymccockiner6641
    @barrymccockiner6641 2 года назад +1

    Would all 4 Iowas become museum ships, instead of WW2 scraps, if not for reactivation?

    • @Joe-yz3uf
      @Joe-yz3uf 2 года назад

      Missouri probably would have survived because the surrender ceremony was on her deck but the other Iowas would have had a tough fight to avoid scraping.

    • @ArenBerberian
      @ArenBerberian 2 года назад

      @@Joe-yz3uf I’m not sure about that. 3 of the 4 survived until the 80s in their WW2 configs. At that point they would of been considered pretty historically significant anyway so there is a good chance they would all still be museums, just with 3 in their WW2 configs.

  • @bobbygibson3586
    @bobbygibson3586 2 года назад +1

    If we get hit with a EMP we'll need these analog guns and ships to work again

    • @redbovine
      @redbovine 2 года назад

      I would hazard a guess that $2billion would be a low estimate for reactivation for each one not including the navy having to buy them back from the museums.

    • @RealJohnnyDingo
      @RealJohnnyDingo 2 года назад

      There's always that alien invasion scenario. Nothing scares aliens like giant battleships! Just displaying them as museums has been enough to ward off the aliens so far.

  • @vger4156
    @vger4156 2 года назад +2

    Stick with the 40s era, that fire control system for the big guns is genius.

    • @wfoj21
      @wfoj21 2 года назад +1

      The question with the Fire Control- How much Would the new digital fancy new computer have cost? Accuracy - versus Original? - Then compare that accuracy change versus the destructive blast radius of the 16 inch shells? Then ask the question - How would the digital fancy new computer handle the shock of being that close to those guns when they were shot.

    • @gunnest6939
      @gunnest6939 2 года назад +1

      Great choice to film this answer video in a section of the ship retaining the most antiquated equipment. Good segway to talking about protection from EMP attacks.

    • @RealJohnnyDingo
      @RealJohnnyDingo 2 года назад

      @@wfoj21 during WWII the technology was tubes. those are fragile (like light builbs) and use a ton of electrical power. The data bits available would have made it difficult to have enough digits of precision to preserve accuracy and generate a good solution. Modern semiconductors could have made a kick-ass fire control computer, especially with phased array radar, UAVs and the like to direct the guns. Not to mention GPS directed shells. At some point you're better served by missiles & aircraft due to the range.

    • @donraptor6156
      @donraptor6156 2 года назад

      The original fire control was never changed. It was the same never modified and scary accurate.

  • @clydecessna737
    @clydecessna737 2 года назад +1

    Do any of the BB have NBC protection?

  • @navymm2snipes489
    @navymm2snipes489 2 года назад

    If you were to convert an Iowa class, the USS Missouri should be the one converted since it sitting @ Pearle Harbor with the USS Arizona representing WW2...

  • @deaks25
    @deaks25 2 года назад

    For me personally, it's all the most historically significant. Without WWII, there's a chance the Iowa's never exist, or at the very least not in the shape we know. Without Korea and Vietnam, the ships have little to no combat history and don't receive the refits that make them worthwhile retaining and re-using in the 1980s and without the Gulf War and the 'answering' to the Kirov's, the ships aren't brought up to a modern standard that makes preserving them much easier today.
    All of it is part of the ships' histories and to ignore any part of it does them a disservice. New Jersey's "Black Dragon" nickname, Missouri taking the Japanese surrender, Wisconsin's temper tantrum, Iowa's turret accident... all of it is historically significant and for me the best thing is to do exactly what is being done; showing the ships as they finished their careers but equally give flavours and insights into how the ships have changed over such a long period.
    In fact, one of the most fascinating things about the "Iowa class vs X ship/class/situation" video series is the fact the Ryan looks at how New Jersey might fair in her 1940's configuration AND her 1980's configuration, because the answer can be very different, because New Jersey was a very different ship at those points in history.

  • @AndrewRoppoli
    @AndrewRoppoli Год назад

    In my opinion if the Iowas had been left in the WW II configuration none of them would be around today to serve as museums or memorials.

  • @billkallas1762
    @billkallas1762 2 года назад +1

    Which one has the most of the original Guns?

  • @combatrock3069
    @combatrock3069 2 года назад

    It’s a battleship…it’s purpose is simple. Till it’s fully turned over to a museum organization, it’s still potentially a useful tool of war.

  • @darthdeathmobile
    @darthdeathmobile 2 года назад +1

    What did the navy do with the crew when New Jersey and Iowa went in for major yard upgrades during WWII?

    • @billpaine6241
      @billpaine6241 2 года назад

      If the work being done prevents the crew from living aboard, they’re housed in barracks ashore or in floating barracks barges moored nearby. If the yard period is going to last a relatively long time, some of the crew might be transferred to other ships depending on the needs of the Navy.