OmG!!! I don't think that I could manage to listen to Drach & Co for 5+ hours every week! Don't get me wrong, I do ENJOY kicking back and listening to a NEW 5+ hour Drydock, but even IF Drach could manage to answer & record 5+ hours a week, there is a thing known as too much of a good thing! I'd get burnt out listening to that much Drach, and I'm sure Drach would get burnt out trying to answer & record 5+ hours a week of Drydock too! The fact that he is able to research & study many different aspects of Naval warfare is what makes his channel so interesting. He is able to show us how Naval warfare went from boarding actions to canon broadsides, & then iron clads to Dreadnoughts & Fast Battleships to Aircraft carriers. And then aircraft carriers go from having old biplanes to the best prop driven monoplanes to jet aircraft. And the 5+ hours of Drydock once a month with a regular weekly Drydock of a little more than an hour, is sustainable for Drach to accomplish while bringing us all the other content that keeps the channel fresh with new & appropriate content!!
Side note on the cammo article: during the 1991 Gulf War the RAF painted some GR.1 Tornados in a tone of pink. On the ground they stick out like sore thumbs but, in the air, looking at them from above and at at a distance, they almost disappear...
Yes, please, I’d like to hear your book recommendations in the form of reviews of new and old books. And perhaps a video like the ones on the major navies, but on miscellaneous topics that wouldn’t fit under a single navy (such as books on technology or specific weapon systems).
That's what I love most about our Internet. Books carry knowledge, but they get outdated. I once tried to learn the Finnish language using the only book I could get my hands on at the time. "Das deutsch-finnische Wörterbuch für den Soldaten" from 1940. Let's just say that I raised some eyebrows when I visited the parents of my Finnish girlfriend. 😅
Destroyer ram bows--- My dad was skipper of BORDELON (DDR881 at the time) in the mid 50's. This was a long-hull Gearing, and dad once mentioned to me that they had incorporated a 2 foot deep 2" ( about 40 cm deep by 5 cm thick,for those who use measurements not related to a king's foot size) steel plate in the bow in case they had to ram a sub. My weight assessment is that would weigh about 2.5 tons on a 2400 ton ship. I have no other sources, and dad died a decade ago. OTOH, I recall a photo in the Virginian Pilot around this time of a 12 foot gash in a concrete pier when it was rammed by a sister ship. Dad said they had to repaint the bow.
I recall reading somewhere that the origin of this was the discovery of an aircraft that had gone missing in the Sahara some years before, the paint of which had faded to a pink colour that made it very hard to see except at a short distance.
re: two-decker first rates. To get something like 50 heavier guns on two decks, I think you wind up with a longer ship. Wooden warships were already being built to the maximum length of an unbraced hull, going longer or putting more weight at the ends would result in a short life. There had been experiments with cross-bracing, you can see in in USS Constitution, but it didn't catch on until after the Napoleonic wars. (There's a really nice engineering video idea.)
Re: Guns for two deck first rate. (Douglas's 'Treatise on Naval Gunnery' is about the first book to read if you're interested in 19c naval gunnery). Tests on a captured USN ship (maybe Chesapeake in Halifax) confirmed that heavy guns at short range were too powerful to produce a good crop of splinters, and that carronades, double shotting, and reduced charges were good ideas. If the sort of ship envisaged were built, long guns on the upper deck and big carronades on the lower would be an option. So would 32s on the lower and 24s bored out to 32 on the upper
A question for future episodes, was there any kind of organized overall command structure for the British, French and Italian navies during WW 1 or was there just an agreed upon division of areas of responsibility with each navy operating independently within them.
>Finnish Navy in WWII someone remembers Finland had a Navy back then! Woo! I know, Finland has had a Navy even after that, but it lost it's teeth when the submarines had to be scrapped & the Coastal Defence Ship Väinämöinen was handed over to the Soviet Navy as a part of the war reparations, the Finnish Navy may have been able to regain some of its' strength since then, but until at least two of the new Pohjanmaa-class multi-role 'corvettes' (which I think are actually frigates but don't tell the Russians that-) have been commissioned the Finnish Navy is in a rather sorry state, sure they can lay enough mines to make navigating the Gulf of Finland absolutely impossible without an entire fleet of purpose-built mine-clearing vessels in just a day, but doing so would probably be frowned upon unless a war was declared first.
I'm sorry to hear of the demise of the topic-centric book recommendations videos - they were interesting and useful. On the plus side, the proposed new format also sounds interesting and useful. Similar to the question at 35:15, do you have any book recommendations in English for the Regia Marina of the period from unification to the Washington treaty? Virtually everything on that period covering other navies (Marder on the RN, Ropp on the MN, Sondhaus on the KuKKM) seems to say something along the lines of "nation X did Y because they were scared of the Italians", but English works looking at the situation from the Italian persepective are frustratingly difficult to find, especially given the impression I get (as you mention regarding the interwar/WW2 period) that there's no shortage of works in Italian.
Oh, absolutely. I was looking for some books that would cover details of the equipment on the Italian warships of that time period, and there's *nothing* in English. 😒 It's insane, that we have a miniscule details of the Japanese fuses used by some then-outdated teritary guns, but no concrete details of the shells of the main surface combatants in the Italian navy 🤦♂
submarine camouflage: what if instead of trying to be invisible, you went for simply breaking the silhouette? Like, painting part of the topside in a way that's optimal against detection from above (maybe using two or more colors, one or more for blending in on surface & one or more for blending in submerged) & painting the rest of the topside with a color scheme that blends in with the horizon? Some of the paint scheme would always stand in contrast to the surroundings sure, but Mark One Eye Ball is attached to a Mark One Brain that is configured to look for clearly defined shapes (especially familiar ones-) & in the absence of clear silhouettes to simply ignore irregularities as mere optical illusions. That's how disruptive camouflage patterns work on land, even when the colors of your camouflage uniform may not match the coloration of the terrain around you, if enough of it is similar enough to your surroundings, the rest WILL get ignored by the observer's brain (I have personal experience of using surprisingly simple methods of simply obfuscating my silhouette & becoming virtually invisible to naked eye unless the eye in question KNOWS to look for me in a specific spot, the single hardest part of camouflaging a person is covering any skin, and even that becomes a non-issue if the amount of exposed skin is small & irregularly shaped enough for a brain to ignore.)
I've always wondered, how would Jutland have changed if the Russian Baltic Fleet had sailed from port and pinned the German High Seas fleet in a pincer between itself and the Grand Fleet? While I know that kind of thing is a hard sell considering the accidental encounter that Jutland kind of was, I am curious of the Ganguts vs the German Battleships and some of the escape routes being cut off or made a bit more difficult for the Germans.
Q&A : I love the pagoda masts of the IJN, particularly Fuso and Yamashiro. Why the pagoda masts? Why were the IJN the only users of the magnificence that were the pagoda masts? Did the pagodas actually destabilize the ships balance? Can you discuss some of the more obscure deck levels and what they were used for?
They do look impressive. The Japanese didn't have room in their superstructure for various updates they wanted to add after the initial construction of certain ships. The Pagoda Masts evolved as structures wrapped around a strengthened tripod to provide platforms for these upgrades. You can see this for yourself by going to wikipedia and looking at the picture of IJN Fuso at her trials in 1915 - where the pagoda doesn't exist and the tripod is easy to see - then on the same page look at the trials picture from 1933 after many upgrades. Other nations would rebuild the superstructure instead of just adding to the mast. Take a look at pictures showing the changes to QE class battleships or to the battleships sunk at Pearl Harbour to see how this worked out for other powers. Having a rear mast as a place to put backup systems must have seemed like a good idea at some point. However, over time, with most navies, the rear masts tended to lose any manned structures they might have had as a result of real world experience: the output from the smoke stacks tended to make the rear structures uninhabitable under many circumstances.
As the desired speed of destroyers went up, it was necessary to increase the strength of the bow in order to withstand the pounding of the sea. People should keep this in mind: except in the earliest days, a destroyer might be 'lightly built' overall but that doesn't mean the bow is weak. It's not designed to be a ramming bow, but it is stronger than one might otherwise expect. Even with this reinforcement, destroyers would have to slow down quite a bit when the seas became rough to avoid taking damage. A 35 knot destroyer might be forced to slow down to 18 knots or even lower in rough seas. Those interested in actual measurements of ships in rough seas and the associated modeling might start with "Seakeeping Trials on Three Dutch Destroyers" [Bledsoe, Bussemaker, Cummins 1961] and "Slamming of Ships: A Critical Review of the Current State of Knowledge" [Henry, Bailey 1970]. In general, larger vessels are less affected by rough seas. A destroyer that can easily outrun a cruiser in calm water will probably be caught by the cruiser in bad weather. This is one justification for having cruisers and larger ships in general for naval powers of the North Atlantic, which has notoriously rough weather on many occasions. A destroyer can ram a sub, and this did happen on many occasions. Keep in mind that the sub - while unarmored - need to have an immensely strong hull to withstand the water pressure at depth. The fact that the destroyer has a reinforced bow to handle rough weather helps it overcome that strength to damage the sub. One well known ramming example occurred in the encounter where USS Buckley (DE) rammed U-66 in WW2 (1944). Look up 'USS Buckley bent bow' to see a nice picture of what happened to the bow of the Buckley as a result. A sub can also ram a destroyer: supposedly this also happened in that same encounter, with U-66 breaking the Buckley's starboard propeller shaft as a result of the impact. It was a tough fight.
06:35 - You mention Japanese success in decrypting US signals. We hear a lot about Bletchley Park and Station Hypo. I would ask for a comparative analysis of the effectiveness of each combatant.
As someone who is only now starting a more serious study of naval history, (Compared to a haphazard reading of shortly post WWII autobiographical accounts) I'd love to get hear your opinions of both current and older works - anything you're willing to share. Knowing why you think a work would be worthwhile, or what you thought flawed, in an otherwise good work, would be interesting to hear. I've enjoyed the book recommendation videos, but a monthly highlight of one or two works seems like it would be a much more digestible bolus, than what had been presented before. Going with one new and one older work seems an excellent idea, too.
With respect to the ram bow question, could the destroyer have a special 'submarine only' cutting bow? with the intent that it would ride up onto the sub (so not stopping immediately) as the destroyers would be the class hunting down subs.
Re the 16 inch gunned ships vs 15 inch gunned ships I note that in Brown's"The Grand Fleet"that the RN considered after tests that the US standard 2100lb 16 inch shell had not only a smaller bursting charge than the 15"/42 but no better penetration value than the"Green boy"shell fired by the 15"/42. Why then other than reasons of"they have a 16" therefore so must we"did the RN not arm the Nelsons with the 15"/42?
Re: 10:00 launching torpedo on an active warship - if I'm not mistaken, any WW2 warship going at a cruising speed, would be going too fast to detect torpedoes with sonar, no?
(Question) I don't know if you've already done this however, can you discuss the situation with Cpt Charles MC Vay his court martial and the situation post the sinking of USS Indianapolis? Thanks
Do the destroyers Akigumo and Makigumo deserve credit for sinking USS Hornet, or was the carrier already sinking to the damage inflicted by air attacks, and their torpedoes just made her sink faster
I know it is unusual to say no to more free content; however, I consume your work instead of buying/reading books. I am one of the reasons that your book series got fewer views.
Other noise activating devices, as in what sounds like a very happy and content hatchling that I’m guessing loves the sound of their dad’s tones as much as the rest of us listening
Destroyers usually act as escorts for friendly units so having a bunch of destroyers with ram bows doesn’t seem like a good idea to me. Your chance of accidentally ramming a friendly seems greater than ramming an enemy.
WW2 active submarine sonar is the equivalent of screaming "I am here, come and kill me". And, yes. That applies to destroyers equipped with ASDIC - they are the hunters, not the hunted.
Active sonar had some valid uses, even for subs. For example, the system the USN deployed late war to let subs detect mines was an active submarine sonar system. It was magnificent for navigating through the big mine fields Japan laid - to protect key strategic locations - without hitting a mine. This let the subs move into target rich waters that the Japanese thought were protected.
Dear Drach, Sometimes I have difficulty hearing the answers. Do you think you could stop waffling so Little Drach can answer the questions properly? Thanks!
Ram bows on destroyers? Destroyers had the nickname of "tin cans" meaning very lightweight construction to achieve high speeds at minimal costs. Any more questions?
What do you mean we could have had iron hulled ships in the 1840's and what battles and wars would have been different if they had existed? What went wrong with them being 20 years early?
Metallurgy wasn't quite advanced enough for it just yet. An iron hulled ship at the time would be fine in yhe tropics, and other earmer environments, but extremely brittle and virtually useless in colder environments, like say the North Sea or north Atlantic.
Regarding the question of allied command knowingly risking friendly forces in light of current intelligence: that still happens today. There is always a cost/benefit analysis done to determine if the risk is acceptable in order to preserve intelligence sources and methods. It's an extremely *dirty* job, lemme tellya.
37:00 If somebody is brave enough to make an electronic transcript (Word file) of some books in Italian we should be able to use AI to translate those books!
The internet is forever they say. If true your baby will listen to himself cry in the background while you narrate about navel history in the future. That’s an awesome thought.
So the IJN doctrine of using subs as capital ship killers did kind of make sense in context due to the relative lack of merchant targets and the US not being dependent on foreign trade to maintain its war effort?
if the Bismarck broken out into the Atlantic after fighting the battle of the Denmark straight what type of measures would the British take with their convoy escorts how much damage with the Bismarck and flicked on Adelaide shipping and what type Skirmish or battles the Bismarck fight. dAY 131
The question on submarine camo reminds me of the comedy film Operation Petticoat, in which a fictitious US sub in the early days of the Pacific war is painted pink, to the confusion of the Japanese.
Destroyers did sometimes sink submarines by ramming, but the resultant hull damage usually put the destroyer out of action as well, so captains were generally advised against it.
@@CharlesStearman They also removed the destroyer and its anti aircraft guns and depth charges from the the force . If you read about the Operation Pedestal you will then find another destroyer is allocated to escort the damaged one home, further depleting the escorts!
Think about the equation for kinetic energy. What gets squared, mass or velocity - and what implication does that have for ramming? Then look at the case of Glowworm (DD) versus Admiral Hipper (CA) in WW2. Find out how much damage the destroyer did to the heavy cruiser. Does that match your expectations? Also, consider that not all portions of a big ship are armored - that's called the 'All or Nothing' design principle. Finally, destroyers need to have a strong enough bow to withstand the pounding of heavy seas at speed. While the ship as a whole is lightly built, there's probably more reinforcement in the bow than you might expect, for that reason.
@drachinifel I received in my flow of video a complete french version of your TenGo opération same vidéo, french AI voice and french subtiles. Channel is named "Histoire navale avec Drachinifel" with your logo with a blue tint. You might want to know.
Would be more amusing and useful, if it was the video our hero did about the Battle of Trafalgar. As the article in La Gazzette Nationale ou Le Moniteur Universel, about the battle contained some slight inaccuracies.
I hear a very healthy little drack, helping you out in the background😊😊❤
I thought it was a whale on hydrophones 😂
9
The offical name for a little drach is drachling i believe
only 70 minutes?! I demand another 5+ hours!
24 hour marathon livestream 🙃
@garomcfbgdd3211 ouch. That's hard on drach lol.
@@bull614 Not to mention cutting into the cuddle time with Mini Drach and do you want to face the wrath of mini Drach??
I'm not that crazy 😄
@johnfisher9692 um no. I've faced a lot, including my own twins, and I figured out not to push my luck lol
OmG!!! I don't think that I could manage to listen to Drach & Co for 5+ hours every week! Don't get me wrong, I do ENJOY kicking back and listening to a NEW 5+ hour Drydock, but even IF Drach could manage to answer & record 5+ hours a week, there is a thing known as too much of a good thing! I'd get burnt out listening to that much Drach, and I'm sure Drach would get burnt out trying to answer & record 5+ hours a week of Drydock too! The fact that he is able to research & study many different aspects of Naval warfare is what makes his channel so interesting. He is able to show us how Naval warfare went from boarding actions to canon broadsides, & then iron clads to Dreadnoughts & Fast Battleships to Aircraft carriers. And then aircraft carriers go from having old biplanes to the best prop driven monoplanes to jet aircraft. And the 5+ hours of Drydock once a month with a regular weekly Drydock of a little more than an hour, is sustainable for Drach to accomplish while bringing us all the other content that keeps the channel fresh with new & appropriate content!!
My favorite channel to fall asleep to (tinnitus). There's no plot to follow and lose. I already know who won and who lost.
insomnia and tinnitus is a truly unpleasant duo
Sunday morning coffee. Drach, Baby Drach in the background and another great DD. Thanks.
I thought there was another video playing somewhere LOL
Side note on the cammo article: during the 1991 Gulf War the RAF painted some GR.1 Tornados in a tone of pink. On the ground they stick out like sore thumbs but, in the air, looking at them from above and at at a distance, they almost disappear...
Autocorrupt really hit your spelling hard.
@@AnimeSunglasses :O :O :O omfg...
@@jlvfr I know the feeling!
9
@@АртурМилкович why are you just leaving 9 on every post, Cirno?
It's nice to know that princess drach likes to help daddy talk about sonar 😅
Yes, please, I’d like to hear your book recommendations in the form of reviews of new and old books. And perhaps a video like the ones on the major navies, but on miscellaneous topics that wouldn’t fit under a single navy (such as books on technology or specific weapon systems).
That's what I love most about our Internet.
Books carry knowledge, but they get outdated.
I once tried to learn the Finnish language using the only book I could get my hands on at the time.
"Das deutsch-finnische Wörterbuch für den Soldaten" from 1940.
Let's just say that I raised some eyebrows when I visited the parents of my Finnish girlfriend. 😅
Destroyer ram bows---
My dad was skipper of BORDELON (DDR881 at the time) in the mid 50's. This was a long-hull Gearing, and dad once mentioned to me that they had incorporated a 2 foot deep 2" ( about 40 cm deep by 5 cm thick,for those who use measurements not related to a king's foot size) steel plate in the bow in case they had to ram a sub. My weight assessment is that would weigh about 2.5 tons on a 2400 ton ship. I have no other sources, and dad died a decade ago. OTOH, I recall a photo in the Virginian Pilot around this time of a 12 foot gash in a concrete pier when it was rammed by a sister ship. Dad said they had to repaint the bow.
17:55 Camouflage, red: this is also why the SAS landrovers, 'Pink Panthers' were that colour to hide in the desert.
I recall reading somewhere that the origin of this was the discovery of an aircraft that had gone missing in the Sahara some years before, the paint of which had faded to a pink colour that made it very hard to see except at a short distance.
99
A few tears back, I visited Holland 5. Bumped my head, ouch. when I bumped my head on Onslow. It hurt. Holland 5 was like a gentle kiss.
Stephen
My 1903 Midshipman's training training manual from the US Naval Academy described submarines as, 'Vessels of dubious military value'.
A pretty reasonable statement at the time.
99
I think a book review series is a great idea
re: two-decker first rates. To get something like 50 heavier guns on two decks, I think you wind up with a longer ship. Wooden warships were already being built to the maximum length of an unbraced hull, going longer or putting more weight at the ends would result in a short life. There had been experiments with cross-bracing, you can see in in USS Constitution, but it didn't catch on until after the Napoleonic wars. (There's a really nice engineering video idea.)
Re: Guns for two deck first rate. (Douglas's 'Treatise on Naval Gunnery' is about the first book to read if you're interested in 19c naval gunnery). Tests on a captured USN ship (maybe Chesapeake in Halifax) confirmed that heavy guns at short range were too powerful to produce a good crop of splinters, and that carronades, double shotting, and reduced charges were good ideas. If the sort of ship envisaged were built, long guns on the upper deck and big carronades on the lower would be an option. So would 32s on the lower and 24s bored out to 32 on the upper
It's Saturday night and Drach's alright!! 😁
18:30 Whooooaaa!
That puts a _totally different_ spin on the Red Baron story from WW1 😮
A question for future episodes, was there any kind of organized overall command structure for the British, French and Italian navies during WW 1 or was there just an agreed upon division of areas of responsibility with each navy operating independently within them.
>Finnish Navy in WWII
someone remembers Finland had a Navy back then! Woo!
I know, Finland has had a Navy even after that, but it lost it's teeth when the submarines had to be scrapped & the Coastal Defence Ship Väinämöinen was handed over to the Soviet Navy as a part of the war reparations, the Finnish Navy may have been able to regain some of its' strength since then, but until at least two of the new Pohjanmaa-class multi-role 'corvettes' (which I think are actually frigates but don't tell the Russians that-) have been commissioned the Finnish Navy is in a rather sorry state, sure they can lay enough mines to make navigating the Gulf of Finland absolutely impossible without an entire fleet of purpose-built mine-clearing vessels in just a day, but doing so would probably be frowned upon unless a war was declared first.
Do you hear Baby Drach?
I thought the pink US sub was because Tony Curtis could only get red and white primer?
aaaawwww we can hear mini drach! love hearing them
I thought it's a guinea pig 😅
@@sebastianriemer1777 Nope, guinea pigs sound like UFOs.
I like your new book old book review idea! My limitation is English only. But definitely don't let my limitation limit your idea!
I'm sorry to hear of the demise of the topic-centric book recommendations videos - they were interesting and useful. On the plus side, the proposed new format also sounds interesting and useful. Similar to the question at 35:15, do you have any book recommendations in English for the Regia Marina of the period from unification to the Washington treaty? Virtually everything on that period covering other navies (Marder on the RN, Ropp on the MN, Sondhaus on the KuKKM) seems to say something along the lines of "nation X did Y because they were scared of the Italians", but English works looking at the situation from the Italian persepective are frustratingly difficult to find, especially given the impression I get (as you mention regarding the interwar/WW2 period) that there's no shortage of works in Italian.
Oh, absolutely. I was looking for some books that would cover details of the equipment on the Italian warships of that time period, and there's *nothing* in English. 😒 It's insane, that we have a miniscule details of the Japanese fuses used by some then-outdated teritary guns, but no concrete details of the shells of the main surface combatants in the Italian navy 🤦♂
Thanks for answering my question drach.
submarine camouflage: what if instead of trying to be invisible, you went for simply breaking the silhouette? Like, painting part of the topside in a way that's optimal against detection from above (maybe using two or more colors, one or more for blending in on surface & one or more for blending in submerged) & painting the rest of the topside with a color scheme that blends in with the horizon? Some of the paint scheme would always stand in contrast to the surroundings sure, but Mark One Eye Ball is attached to a Mark One Brain that is configured to look for clearly defined shapes (especially familiar ones-) & in the absence of clear silhouettes to simply ignore irregularities as mere optical illusions. That's how disruptive camouflage patterns work on land, even when the colors of your camouflage uniform may not match the coloration of the terrain around you, if enough of it is similar enough to your surroundings, the rest WILL get ignored by the observer's brain (I have personal experience of using surprisingly simple methods of simply obfuscating my silhouette & becoming virtually invisible to naked eye unless the eye in question KNOWS to look for me in a specific spot, the single hardest part of camouflaging a person is covering any skin, and even that becomes a non-issue if the amount of exposed skin is small & irregularly shaped enough for a brain to ignore.)
Best opening jam on RUclips 😊😊
I've always wondered, how would Jutland have changed if the Russian Baltic Fleet had sailed from port and pinned the German High Seas fleet in a pincer between itself and the Grand Fleet? While I know that kind of thing is a hard sell considering the accidental encounter that Jutland kind of was, I am curious of the Ganguts vs the German Battleships and some of the escape routes being cut off or made a bit more difficult for the Germans.
Q&A : I love the pagoda masts of the IJN, particularly Fuso and Yamashiro. Why the pagoda masts? Why were the IJN the only users of the magnificence that were the pagoda masts? Did the pagodas actually destabilize the ships balance? Can you discuss some of the more obscure deck levels and what they were used for?
They do look impressive. The Japanese didn't have room in their superstructure for various updates they wanted to add after the initial construction of certain ships. The Pagoda Masts evolved as structures wrapped around a strengthened tripod to provide platforms for these upgrades. You can see this for yourself by going to wikipedia and looking at the picture of IJN Fuso at her trials in 1915 - where the pagoda doesn't exist and the tripod is easy to see - then on the same page look at the trials picture from 1933 after many upgrades.
Other nations would rebuild the superstructure instead of just adding to the mast. Take a look at pictures showing the changes to QE class battleships or to the battleships sunk at Pearl Harbour to see how this worked out for other powers.
Having a rear mast as a place to put backup systems must have seemed like a good idea at some point. However, over time, with most navies, the rear masts tended to lose any manned structures they might have had as a result of real world experience: the output from the smoke stacks tended to make the rear structures uninhabitable under many circumstances.
The title "Battle for the Middle C" made me think of a disagreement during a piano duet.
Happy Thanksgiving America
yes please once a month book review.
As the desired speed of destroyers went up, it was necessary to increase the strength of the bow in order to withstand the pounding of the sea. People should keep this in mind: except in the earliest days, a destroyer might be 'lightly built' overall but that doesn't mean the bow is weak. It's not designed to be a ramming bow, but it is stronger than one might otherwise expect.
Even with this reinforcement, destroyers would have to slow down quite a bit when the seas became rough to avoid taking damage. A 35 knot destroyer might be forced to slow down to 18 knots or even lower in rough seas. Those interested in actual measurements of ships in rough seas and the associated modeling might start with "Seakeeping Trials on Three Dutch Destroyers" [Bledsoe, Bussemaker, Cummins 1961] and "Slamming of Ships: A Critical Review of the Current State of Knowledge" [Henry, Bailey 1970].
In general, larger vessels are less affected by rough seas. A destroyer that can easily outrun a cruiser in calm water will probably be caught by the cruiser in bad weather. This is one justification for having cruisers and larger ships in general for naval powers of the North Atlantic, which has notoriously rough weather on many occasions.
A destroyer can ram a sub, and this did happen on many occasions. Keep in mind that the sub - while unarmored - need to have an immensely strong hull to withstand the water pressure at depth. The fact that the destroyer has a reinforced bow to handle rough weather helps it overcome that strength to damage the sub.
One well known ramming example occurred in the encounter where USS Buckley (DE) rammed U-66 in WW2 (1944). Look up 'USS Buckley bent bow' to see a nice picture of what happened to the bow of the Buckley as a result.
A sub can also ram a destroyer: supposedly this also happened in that same encounter, with U-66 breaking the Buckley's starboard propeller shaft as a result of the impact. It was a tough fight.
06:35 - You mention Japanese success in decrypting US signals. We hear a lot about Bletchley Park and Station Hypo. I would ask for a comparative analysis of the effectiveness of each combatant.
Thanks Drach.
10:22 Mini-Drach demonstrates active sonar.
As someone who is only now starting a more serious study of naval history, (Compared to a haphazard reading of shortly post WWII autobiographical accounts) I'd love to get hear your opinions of both current and older works - anything you're willing to share.
Knowing why you think a work would be worthwhile, or what you thought flawed, in an otherwise good work, would be interesting to hear. I've enjoyed the book recommendation videos, but a monthly highlight of one or two works seems like it would be a much more digestible bolus, than what had been presented before. Going with one new and one older work seems an excellent idea, too.
The Hungarian Navy at least gave Horthy an excuse to keep calling himself "Admiral."
The book idea is cool.
With respect to the ram bow question, could the destroyer have a special 'submarine only' cutting bow? with the intent that it would ride up onto the sub (so not stopping immediately) as the destroyers would be the class hunting down subs.
Book recommendations=yes
Re the 16 inch gunned ships vs 15 inch gunned ships I note that in Brown's"The Grand Fleet"that the RN considered after tests that the US standard 2100lb 16 inch shell had not only a smaller bursting charge than the 15"/42 but no better penetration value than the"Green boy"shell fired by the 15"/42. Why then other than reasons of"they have a 16" therefore so must we"did the RN not arm the Nelsons with the 15"/42?
I wonder when Drach will release a Drydock Supercut.
Probably never. It'd be hundreds of hours long.
You can make a custom playlist of them.
Re: 10:00 launching torpedo on an active warship - if I'm not mistaken, any WW2 warship going at a cruising speed, would be going too fast to detect torpedoes with sonar, no?
Might not hear the torpedoes, but any ship with hydrophones would hear an active sonar ping.
@Drachinifel ohh... Good point!
(Question) I don't know if you've already done this however, can you discuss the situation with Cpt Charles MC Vay his court martial and the situation post the sinking of USS Indianapolis?
Thanks
Yes please do a month book review
Heads up on books coming out would be terrific! Edit: It's entirely too easy to invent work for you.
@53:00 - if the Italians had built their Incomparable clone, would the Brits have to rename her "HMS Comparable"?
Do the destroyers Akigumo and Makigumo deserve credit for sinking USS Hornet, or was the carrier already sinking to the damage inflicted by air attacks, and their torpedoes just made her sink faster
Probably the latter.
I know it is unusual to say no to more free content; however, I consume your work instead of buying/reading books. I am one of the reasons that your book series got fewer views.
Other noise activating devices, as in what sounds like a very happy and content hatchling that I’m guessing loves the sound of their dad’s tones as much as the rest of us listening
I'd be very interested in a monthly book review with a new/older volume split.
Destroyers usually act as escorts for friendly units so having a bunch of destroyers with ram bows doesn’t seem like a good idea to me. Your chance of accidentally ramming a friendly seems greater than ramming an enemy.
Sunday dose of Drach
WW2 active submarine sonar is the equivalent of screaming "I am here, come and kill me". And, yes. That applies to destroyers equipped with ASDIC - they are the hunters, not the hunted.
Active sonar had some valid uses, even for subs. For example, the system the USN deployed late war to let subs detect mines was an active submarine sonar system. It was magnificent for navigating through the big mine fields Japan laid - to protect key strategic locations - without hitting a mine. This let the subs move into target rich waters that the Japanese thought were protected.
@@bluelemming5296 That makes sense.
Gracias
The USS Cod has a pink periscope head on display in the aft torpedo room. Perhaps the color scheme thing is why.
Dear Drach,
Sometimes I have difficulty hearing the answers.
Do you think you could stop waffling so Little Drach can answer the questions properly?
Thanks!
Plz compress audio a little? Would help so much
It was nice hearing your baby in the background.
Our babies aren't babies anymore 😂
29:00 The three countries in the book 1984. Manipulate them to fight against each other?
Ram bows on destroyers? Destroyers had the nickname of "tin cans" meaning very lightweight construction to achieve high speeds at minimal costs. Any more questions?
17:30 Pink Subs, let me guess they add Green stars to boot. Waitdoes mean that Operation Petticoat was based of a true story?
Not really in the scope of the channel but regarding letting an attack happen: the whole urban legend / conspiracy theory of the Blitz on Coventry.
can I have the theme tune / intro music for my ringtone please? 😇
Was a submarine against a Samurai code?
What do you mean we could have had iron hulled ships in the 1840's and what battles and wars would have been different if they had existed? What went wrong with them being 20 years early?
Metallurgy wasn't quite advanced enough for it just yet. An iron hulled ship at the time would be fine in yhe tropics, and other earmer environments, but extremely brittle and virtually useless in colder environments, like say the North Sea or north Atlantic.
👍👍
Regarding the question of allied command knowingly risking friendly forces in light of current intelligence: that still happens today. There is always a cost/benefit analysis done to determine if the risk is acceptable in order to preserve intelligence sources and methods. It's an extremely *dirty* job, lemme tellya.
37:00 If somebody is brave enough to make an electronic transcript (Word file) of some books in Italian we should be able to use AI to translate those books!
Submarines should have been painted to resemble enemy capital ships. At least then there would be a very low chance of being hit by a bomb
I heard a drachinispawn making baby noise?
HMS Defiant
The internet is forever they say. If true your baby will listen to himself cry in the background while you narrate about navel history in the future.
That’s an awesome thought.
So the IJN doctrine of using subs as capital ship killers did kind of make sense in context due to the relative lack of merchant targets and the US not being dependent on foreign trade to maintain its war effort?
I have read that Seeadler on Manus Island had at its peak 800 ships in harbour at one time
if the Bismarck broken out into the Atlantic after fighting the battle of the Denmark straight what type of measures would the British take with their convoy escorts how much damage with the Bismarck and flicked on Adelaide shipping and what type Skirmish or battles the Bismarck fight. dAY 131
do you really expect us viewers to recommend that you NOT produce content??? (and i thought you knew us)
Deja Vu ....
The question on submarine camo reminds me of the comedy film Operation Petticoat, in which a fictitious US sub in the early days of the Pacific war is painted pink, to the confusion of the Japanese.
Sneed
A destroyer is a lightly built auxiliary of little displacement. There is not enough mass to cause ram damage to, maybe, subs or fishing cutters.
Destroyers did sometimes sink submarines by ramming, but the resultant hull damage usually put the destroyer out of action as well, so captains were generally advised against it.
@@CharlesStearman They also removed the destroyer and its anti aircraft guns and depth charges from the the force . If you read about the Operation Pedestal you will then find another destroyer is allocated to escort the damaged one home, further depleting the escorts!
Think about the equation for kinetic energy. What gets squared, mass or velocity - and what implication does that have for ramming?
Then look at the case of Glowworm (DD) versus Admiral Hipper (CA) in WW2. Find out how much damage the destroyer did to the heavy cruiser. Does that match your expectations?
Also, consider that not all portions of a big ship are armored - that's called the 'All or Nothing' design principle.
Finally, destroyers need to have a strong enough bow to withstand the pounding of heavy seas at speed. While the ship as a whole is lightly built, there's probably more reinforcement in the bow than you might expect, for that reason.
Destroyer's bow design is to achieve high speed . A Ram bow would limit the speed making the destroyer of less use.
:)
8th, 1 December 2024
@drachinifel I received in my flow of video a complete french version of your TenGo opération same vidéo, french AI voice and french subtiles.
Channel is named "Histoire navale avec Drachinifel" with your logo with a blue tint.
You might want to know.
Would be more amusing and useful, if it was the video our hero did about the Battle of Trafalgar. As the article in La Gazzette Nationale ou Le Moniteur Universel, about the battle contained some slight inaccuracies.
only 70 minutes?! I demand another 5+ hours!