Does a higher muzzle velocity lead to higher dispersion? Littorio's excessive dispersion is usually attributed to the propellant charges, but several sources indicate that the muzzle velocity was reduced by something like 50 meters per second in an attempt to improve dispersion.
Regarding naval bombardment, why did the allies never used something similar to the Modified Type 3 incendiary rounds? They would be useful against fortifications simply by sucking the oxygen out of the air, without damaging the terrain that impedes the movement of assaulting troops.
Re: Panama Canal My father was a "Plank Owner" (Commissioning Crew) of the USS Washington; BB-56, he remembered going through the Canal during WW2 (this is long before all of the modern systems that keep a ship with equal distance between each side from the walls of the Locks) and how they were screaming at him for not taking measurements as the ship kept scrapping the walls as the Locks Lifted (Gulf of Mexico/Atlantic side) or Lowered (Pacific side). The thing is that if she was centered perfectly, there would be only 10 inches of gap on each side! And the way the water was flowing, this caused the ship to shift, and not always parallel to the walls of the Lock!!!
Don't know what could have been done for that, except carry a _lot_ of of timber or tyres (or something custom made and even more expensive) for rubbing strakes or similar.
@@williamchamberlain2263 Trouble is, no Room! Your basically trying to stop a 45,000 ship (actually more) with something thin enough to allow the ship to enter and then leave the lock, so about 6 to 8 inches (~152 to ~203 mm) and nothing that thin can take that weight, especially when you remember the ship is moving vertically in the lock as the water level changes.... Now they got laser "rangefinders" combined with computer controlled winches to keep the ship in the desired position!
I don't know what everyone's got against poor old Kamchatka, she was the ONLY ship keeping a proper lookout for the marauding swarms of Japanese torpedo boats that infested all the world's oceans.
The Nagato class had their turrets replaced in the 1930s with the ones originally made for the TOSA class..which allowed a much higher elevation, but with the same 41cm guns
17:30 while I’m not aware of any warships with mixed steam propulsion plants, the White Star’s Olympic class ships had triple-expansion plants on the outboard screws and a Parsons turbine for the central shaft. It can be, and was done. As well, while not a mix between reciprocating and rotating power plants, in my early days in the U.S. Navy when steam propulsion was still the primary type of power plant for large combatants there were ship classes with mixed turbine plants, most notably with a set of cruising turbines for long passages.
I have just responded to this mixed propulsion in a bit more detail earlier in this responses area. As far as I know combined steam turbine and/or steam turbiine was rarely adopted. A COSAS/COSOS (combined steam and/or steam) installation still has to be boilered for high power. Maritime folklore - "steam turbine propulsion would be great is if wasn't for those boilers". Gas turbines do away with the boilers, also the gland steam as a bonus factor. Designers are very much aware of the changing demands on ship space and weight for machinery plus fuel, procurement, operating and maintenance costs through the ship's life for the range of operating profiles for which the ship is targeted. Fuel between gas turbine an steam propulsion isn't the issue it ued to be. Some years ago the Royal Australian Navy abandoned the burning of furnace fuel oil in their legacy steamships (Type 12 D/Es and Adams DDGs). .Diesel was burned instead. It is reported that a major issue was the supporting of the fuel in the shps; tanks. Tank heating was no longer required. I believe our gas turbine ships (FFGs and onwards) burn diesel oil. Peter Edmonds Naval Architect Perth Western Australia
Just got to check out Vicksburg, MS last week. Was so cool crossing the Mighty Mississippi and picturing the Gunboats cruising around up and down there.
Just imagine him talking complete bollocks, answering the questions just by making stuff up without someone ever noticing lmao But it's awesome he's factual. And I wouldn't wonder if he really just knows a lot of the stuff
This is how I picture every dry dock, just Drach being an all knowing omniscient narrator who is the ship god. Then I remember he’s actually a human being and may need a break which we all need to give him.
Drydocks are almost impossible to predict for time spent recording. Sometimes I know the answer immediately, sometimes I can spend half a day chasing down a single scrap of data. :)
The Brodie System, Was ,used for launching light observation planes. L-5 Sentinel. RAF tested it in India for jungle use without runways. Worked pretty well for launch and recovery.
If I may be a little informative in the matter of the British pilfering lumber, and this was what made the Constitution the fastest ship at the time. All ships suffer from hogging, the bending of her keel due to the center of the hull being more buoyant than the bow or stern. At the time the Constitution sailed, the ways the ships designers would fight this was by using "diagonal kickers." These were hefty "L" shaped chunks of wood that were fastened between the hull and lumber supporting the decks. The flaw in this was they had to have the kickers that were poor for the job as it went against the grain of the woods strong point. In the American Allegheny Mountain Range is the only place where Live Oak trees could be found. The unique thing about the livie oak trees is that they grow more like a bush than a standard oak tree. What these trees did was grow so that the ship builders could get the diagonal kickers by cutting the elbows so that at no point is the stress going across the grains weak areas.
1:21:26 Some cannonades had elevating screws rather quions the wedge shape peice. For almost all ships it was a guesstimate from the Gunner at the range. But Captain Philip Broke captain of HMS Shannon had the Quoin grooves marked into them for various ranges and on the evelating screw marked ranges with paint. He also made indentation marks around the guns which would give bearings for the guns to fire at, so a gun Crew could fire the gun irrespective of their ability to see the target, a sort of blind fire system. This meant the entire gun deck could focus on one part of an enemy even when the gunners couldn't see the target, a very early version of what you could call a central fire control. They would even do blindfolded drills were the crews were told the bearing and distance the target was at and they had to lay the gun on the target while blindfolded and this could be considered an early director fire control. He also had tangent sights to his guns as well.
@01:27:00 The bit about Carriers in High Seas reminded me of your Operation Rheinübung video where a pilot from Ark Royal pilot describes the take off for the first attack on Bismark as involving at one moment climbing a slippery slope and the next plunging down hill towards the sea. I guess that needs must when the devil drives, and that sometimes they would fly even when it looked impossible.
Keep in mind that Chokai was also hit by a torpedo from Samuel B Roberts. I think that's what ultimately sealed the ship's fate along with the bomb hit.
One to add to the list of converted ships that excelled at their new role: USS Halibut SSGN/SSN- 587. She originally served as a Regulus cruise missile platform, but was converted in the mid 1960’s to perform electronic surveillance and intelligence gathering. It was Halibut that first proved the ability of a submarine to tap and record submerged Soviet communication cables in the Sea of Okhotsk.
While certainly a valid candidate for discussion based on merit, I daresay she falls a bit outside Drach's self-imposed time period for coverage of the channel.
D-Day Radar "Small boats, along with aircraft from RAF Bomber Command, simulated invasion fleets approaching Cap d'Antifer, Pas-de-Calais and Normandy. Glimmer and Taxable played on the German belief, amplified by Allied deception efforts over the preceding months, that the main invasion force would land in the Calais region. Big Drum was positioned on the western flank of the real invasion force to try to confuse German forces about the scale of the landings. These operations complemented Operation Titanic, which was intended to confuse the Germans about the D-Day airborne forces."
Re: carrier flight ops in heavy seas: I could swear I've seen film of a carrier launching aircraft and then burying the bow as the plane momentarily disappears in the spray only to struggle back into actual flight after a pregnant pause.
Also, comedy joke: if modern American supercarriers are prevented from flight ops due to weather, they don't need to be launching aircraft, because the weather is doing their job for them in ruining the enemy's day.
Concerning damp Russian powder at Tsushima, a German book I have states that the nitrocelluose charges got some extra water added to them while still at home for safety reasons, assuming that the majority would evaporate while the fleet would be making its way through the tropics. Otherwise it would dry out on the way creating danger of spontaneous combustion. But - according to the book - the amount added was miscalculated and far too high, i.e. it had not yet returned to normal levels when the fleet went finally into action.
Plus a lot of the existing radar stations were looking across the shortest gap where the invasion was most expected. It is worth noting that 2 invasion "fleets" were simulated by bombers dropping chaff to give a fleet like return on the radar systems
I've heard during the Doolittle Raid, they used the waves to help get the B-25s airborne. They'd launch with the Hornet going up. The reasoning was to give the B-25s an additional height off the water so they had more room to get speed to fly. Turned out, the B-25s actually jumped off the deck. Pilots had to nose down so it wouldn't stall. I've also heard the pilots had to push down on the nose so they could use the entire available run on the carrier.
I could watch ships and heavy seas all day long it is so amazing watching the most powerful things humankind has ever made get tossed around like children's toys in the bathtub
Two asides - I believe the Japanese actually had a few ships with both triple-expansion and turbine engines in the 1920s. Fuel saving? Conservatism? Production difficulties? Will have to try and chase down more info. Also, there's a quote from the Kaiser upon the outbreak of WW1 where he accused 'Georgie and Nicky' of playing him false, and then said 'if grandmother as alive she never would have allowed it.' But hypotheticals are unknowables.
A significant example of mixed propulsion machinery was the White Star Olympic class (1908 - 15) of OLYMPIC. TITANIC (the iceberg ship) and BRITANNIC. This was to solve other issues, not the dual speed regimes (cruising and combat).of warships. These ships had triple (?) expansion, and thus reversible engines on the wing shafts, and a dirct drive LP tubine on the centre shaft. They would manoeuvre with the wing engines exhausting direct to the condenser. When full away on passage this exhaust steam would be diverted to the turbine, and then on to the condenser. The centre propeller and turbine rotor were able to attain a suitable common RPM for their operational power. This cut out the need to build immense LP reciprocating cylinders, and avoided the need for both gearcases and astern turbines. Note that steam tubines for marine propulsion had made its spectacular appearance with TURBINIA at the 1908 Diamond Jubille Spithead Review, and that the design and building of large marine gearcases was still in its infancy. (The fully reconstructed TURBINIA in on display in Newcastle upon Tyne.) We had to wait until the entry of the gas turbine for marine propulsion late 20th century for mixed machinery solutions ro the dual speed operationg regimes of warships. This gave us the various combinations for combined COXA/OG where X is S steam, G gas, D diesel. A is and, where both modes operate at high power, and O is or, for gas only at high power. As far as I know, the gas turbine was the only option offered for the high power mode. I haven't researched this area. Peter Edmonds Naval Architect Perth Western Australia
@@peteredmonds8069I think the Russians use CONAD or CONAG. The US nuke carriers of course are equipped with two nuclear reactors, which, I suppose, technically gives them a CONAN propulsion system…
Hello Drach, I've been watching your videos for some time now and wanted to thank you for the content you make available for free. They have rekindled my interest in military history and naval history. The mix of British humor, vast knowledge of the subject, and an eye for picking out interesting pieces of history to share puts you in the highest tier of history channels.
Another idea I have seen in Chokai’s loss (a recent one that developed after the RV Petrel expedition) is that Kongo sank her due to mistaking her for an enemy vessel, given that Chokai was in her line of fire when she took damage and that Kongo’s logs report firing on a ship that may have been Chokai at approximately the right point in the battle. If this is true (and this is a big if), it only further adds to how little Kongo actually achieved during the battle compared to what older accounts have consistently claimed.
Interesting fact I heard, that HMS Victory has live oak at her bow, which obviously needs to be strong, due to the sea, so one long peice that is naturally curved more than normal oak, is what they'd want and they had taken some live oak from America and brought it back to England in the 1750s
I’m sure you have a huge backlog of ships that you want to do videos on about their service. I’m also quite sure my suggestion (if you don’t already have the vessel on your list) would come out around 2024 but here goes. The Japanese announced very recently that they have located the USS Albacore in about 300’ of water. We’ve been waiting since August for the US Navy to send divers down to verify before an official announcement is made. The vessel had an interesting history including hitting the Taiho with one of her torpedos. Thanks for a great channel!
@@greenseaships Military history has always been a great interest to me especially naval history. The finding will finally close a chapter in my family history once the navy verifies it. The Japanese researcher does have a short video on you tube about it, unfortunately it’s all in Japanese.
Britain getting directly involved in the WW1 land war was a major shift in policy if not a full blown aberration. Previously the British Empire left its competition to slug it out, then afterwards bought assets at bargain basement prices. If they had stayed out of WW1 there would have been no stalemate and at least the French overseas assets would have become available.
The book "Mud, Blood and Poppycock" by Gordon Corrigan addresses a number of modern misconceptions about WW1 and Britain's part in it. It states that a key part of British foreign policy at the time was that no single power should be allowed to have exclusive control of Britain's access to the Continent, which would have been the case if Belgium and the French channel ports all fell under German control.
Regarding the beginnings of the Marines as a force - Yes, and then give them their own small air force and navy, in fact, so small that they will be the 3rd strongest force in the world :)
The Navy having to step in for the Army: Watching the Queen's funeral, was reminded why the sailors pull the gun carriage with the coffin. From the time of Queen Victoria's funeral in 1901.
Hope you doing ok buddy, seems like we aren't getting some of those classic cheeky as heck Drach jokes that you normally throw into your vids here and there. Still great videos, just hope you are still enjoying making this content like you always have in the past.
just commenting to say that british MTB's and GB's were equipped with radar but most of the set's equipped were in a fixed forward position requiring the boat to turn for the radar and that german boats did also equip radar and radar detectors but these were mainly for the lead boat.
Re: the Chokai and the explosion that crippled it, an article I read recently telling about the torpedoes being intact did not mention the possibility of reserve torpedoes being hit so I will have to keep that information in mind when discussing the battle. However, the article did float a hypothesis that the Chokai had been the victim of friendly fire, being hit by a shell from (IIRC) Kongo. Supposedly the Chokai crossed the line of fire of the Kongo right at the time of the explosion. Drach, what do you know of this?
A per file maximum can be worked around this by splitting zips into multiple parts. Any decent archive program (7zip) will have an option to split an archive into volumes at creation. Make each volume just under the max size and upload them all. They can be combined by downloading each to one file directory and opening the first one with any decent archive program.
Re: PT boat radar -- the book Dog Boats at War calls out how helpful it was to the MGB/MTB flotillas in the Med once they began operating with the US PT boats -- because the PT's radar (which seems to have had a plan position indicator (ppi) display) was much superior to the radar on the D-class MGB/MTB boats. They'd use the more lightly armed PT boat with its superior radar as lookout, and to coordinate the movements of the larger and more heavily armed boats.
@ 1:23:12 I've seen a picture of a US Mark 13 Torpedo with a wooden cylinder around its head and a wooden box around its fins. The (short) paragraph attached implied that the cylinder would slide down the body of the torpedo while the box would break off more than it slid off. Sorry it has been about a decade since I've seen that picture and I can't remember if it was a web site, or book. But Wikipedia does have a good write up of the efforts of CalTech. The Cylinder (aka pickle barrel) not only protected the Gyro, etc. from impact but increased the drag by about 40% with the Box or Ring (aka Drag Ring) helped allow drops of up to 800 feet (240 meters) at 260 knots (299.2 mph/481.5 kph) at a range of up to 1,000 yards (914.4 meters)!!! I don't know if the tests that the IJN did improved upon the tail box or tail fins that they used at Pearl Harbor and added a box or cylinder at the nose of their torpedos or not. I also seem to remember reading about the Capt. of the Lexington seeing both on an overturned (i.e. shot down) Kate (Nakajima B5N) at the Battle of the Coral Sea but that would be back in a period of the late 1960's to the late 1970's! So I can't remember what book I read that in!
It eventually got even better than that. "These problems were greatly reduced by the latter years of the war. Torpedoes had fin stabilizers, nose drag rings and tail shroud rings added, all of which worked to slow the torpedo after it was dropped so that it struck the water nose-first and at an acceptable speed. These improved the drop characteristics such that the recommended aircraft maximum launch parameters were increased to a height of 2,400 feet (730 m) and a speed of 410 knots." "On one occasion in early 1945, six torpedoes were dropped from altitudes between 5,000 and 7,000 feet (1,500 to 2,100 m). Five out of the six were observed to make their runs hot, straight and normal." Dropping at this kid of speed and altitude allows the torpedo to be dropped from well outside the effective range of point defense AA artillery like the 25 mm. www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WTUS_WWII.php#22.4%22_%2856.9_cm%29_Mark_13
@@kemarisite Thanks! The work the CalTech did during the war was impressive! They used a very clear lake so that they could get clear high speed film so they could analyze what was happening, along with properly weighted practice torpedos (originally, the practice torpedos weighed noticeably less than "warshots" which is why US sub torpedos ran deeper!) and then fished them out of the water and examined the torpedo externally and internally. They found things that needed reinforcing, etc. All of these allowed the Mark 13 to become arguably the second best air dropped torpedo of WW2. (IJN, due to the weight of the warhead, and the speed of the torpedo, is probably the best. thankfully after Midway, their ability to use them was severely reduced.....)
My condolences for the loss of Her Majesty the Queen. I’m an American who was based at Holy Loch Scotland in the 1980s. I was treated better in the UK than the US. I have an English bloodline as well. I just wanted to say I thought Queen Elizabeth was a classy lady and she loved her country and her people. I love your channel, subscribed years ago!
The OMAHA Group heavy ships were: Bombardment Group Commander Rear Adm. C. F. Bryant, USN USS Texas (flagship) (Old BB) Capt. C. A. Baker, USN USS Arkansas (Old battleship) Capt. F. G. Richards, USN FS Georges Levgues (Flag) (9-6", 8-3.5") Capt. de Vaisseau A. Laurin, FN FS Montcalm (cruiser) Capt. E. J. H. L. Deprez, FN HMS Glasgow (cruiser) 8-3.5" Capt. C. P. Clarke, RN
@@benwilson6145 I've only seen the on line version "Transcribed and formatted for HTML by Patrick Clancey, HyperWar Foundation" so I have no idea whether or not I need to argue with the Vice Admiral or with the transcriber, but in either case "8-3.5"" is wrong. As a Town Class light cruiser the Glasgow had 12-6" guns (reduced to 9 some time after D-day), plus 8-4". In fact, though the RN in WW2 had a large variety of small calibre guns (3", 4", 4.5", 4.7", 5,25", etc.) I don't think that there was a 3.5".
Thanks for another great Drydock Drach. You have said many times in upgunning a ship, you can gain two inches in gun caliber and lose one gun. The German plan for the Scharnhorsts was to gain FOUR inches while losing one gun. Does this violate the standard rule or show the Germans made allowances to upgun these two ships during their construction. What other changes would be necessary to make this work? Like shell hoists, storage of shell and charges, etc.
As always, thank you. Perhaps I misunderstood but the 50 cal rifles as opposed to 45 cal rifles on the Sd and NC classes, was a substantial upgrade and an entirely new weapon.
On medieval ship armor There are a few, extremely rare, cases of flagships being plated with metal in ~16th century. Specific ships mentioned are Venetian flagship and Hospitaller Santa Anna (these two have managed to find their way even to Wikipedia), but what that plating was for is questionable. It could have been preservation only, or perhaps meant as some sort of defense against ramming by Ottoman ships (Ottoman ships specifically because they tended to be smaller than their European counterparts).
19:10 The Ardent class of 64 gun 3rd rates were much more useful after razeed. (On the other hand, Agamemnon was never razeed and she gnf vs Santisima Trinidad.)
27:00 Just casually discussing how chats and asides between three people could have prevented World War I drives home Arendt's point about the banality of evil.
Exactly, I realized years ago how much of a waste was made of the 19th century’s wealth and growth because of WW1. Shows how much ego and personalities in leaders can undermine years of diplomatic and economic goodwill.
10:50 The golden 'chicken' on the HMS Cavalier sounds an awful lot like the "Golden Cockerel" that adorned the P&O ocean liner ORIANA from 1960. She carried the decoration in honor of her record fastest speed between Southampton and Sydney. Must be another fine British nautical tradition. Incidentally, unlike Cavalier, Oriana gave up her cockerel to her namesake of 1995 when the latter ship entered service, despite the fact that the newer Oriana held no particular speed record.
FOR THE MARBLEHEAD pitchers you may want to look for news papers my uncle was on the ship and he had clippings from them arriving on the east coast with the deck at sea level
wasn't it King Edward that made the Alliance between GB and France Possible at all !!! So if Victoria still had been Queen in 1914 GB and France wouldn't have been Allied in the first place?? or am i completely wrong???
As a son of a chef engineer I know how large the royal navy lexicon on colourful language is if you do get hold of this letter please send me a copy .I'll post it on jack speak lol
I could've sworn I saw a Chinese anti ship rocket from before the age of steam and steel. Pretty much a rocket with a sled underneath to skim the surface of the water with a small charge or flammable liquid that would start fires on the enemy ship. Who knows if it worked or was actually built? Could've also been for use against port fortifications.
On your Lexington class get X weight from dropping a turret assessment the Lexington class as planned had 9" barbette and 11" turret face. Idk whether you are using a Lexington thickness for the calculation or something more inline with what they are trying to armour up to type thickness but either way interesting to hear about
Well on the upgrading guns question probably some question as to whether you only consider a ship completed with original guns or designed for something else then changed before built... Obviously the NC class were designed for quad 14s they never got. The CO class were literally TN class except with twin 16s instead of triple 14s, but they were built with 16s they didn't pull 14s off of TN class to turn them into Colorado's the on paper Bismarck before it was ever actually started was going to be actually treaty compliant with 350 mm guns till Japan rejected the London treaty and the whole design got scaled up to 380 mm guns but it was literally still on paper not a ship In WWI the Germans considered a better armament for the König class, but they were too far into construction and had the barbettes in so 350mm mackensen guns with 1 less barbette wasn't an option
Ty sir for what you and Ryan and the other curators too got a chance to see bb60 and drum at Mobile Ala so awesome met friends and peeps that support this ship Dakota class and drum gato with so many battle stars Ty support
00:42:44 I imagine the idea of going to war on the Italia would have been a miserable prospect for most of the crew, who would be on or around the gun decks and waterline, knowing that they had literally no protection. The ship would be alright! But the crew would be rolling the dice far more so than any contemporaries with even modest armour schemes.
I wonder what would have happened if, during the battle of Leyte gulf, Kurita’s centerforce, consisting of Yamato, maybe Musashi, Nagato, Kongo, and Haruna fought the American ww1 battleships, while the two Fusos fought taffy three.
@@bkjeong4302 You underestimate the centerforce, and you underestimate Yamato and Musashi by a LARGE quantity. Yamato and Musashi were literally designed to take on 2-3 American standards at once and win. The battleship guns would have bounced off the Yamato and Musashi's armor, while Yamato and Musashi were capable of one shotting the American battleships. Nagato was very capable of sinking a Colorado, and very well could have attacked and sank Maryland, Tennessee, California, or Pennsylvania instead, and with ease. While I doubt Kongo and Haruna would have been very effective at sinking one of the enemy battleships, they would have drawn fire off the three battleships, and make their jobs easier, and would have been very effective at their originally designed role, destroying enemy cruisers. Speaking of which, centerforce outnumbered the us force in cruisers. Between more cruisers, and the two Kongos firing that them, they would have gone down without much of a fight. Yamato and Musashi would take on 2 of the American battleships each, while Nagato would help sink them as well. The only thing I see that could seriously threaten the centerforce was the destroyers and pt boats with their deadly torpedoes. The two sides were even with destroyers, and with the cruisers and battleship's secondary guns would put a stop to the destroyers, but the pt boats will be very hard to hit and very deadly. However, the destroyers and battleship secondary guns. Ultimately, Yamato and Musashi, with the additional help of Nagato, would wipe the floor with the 6 fast battleships. Kongo and Haruna could attack the American battleships to detract them for Yamato and Musashi and use their guns to wipe the floor with the cruisers. They would then all attack the destroyers and pt boats with their guns. A single HE battleship shells could take out a destroyer, while a single 5-inch shell could take out the pt boats.
@@metaknight115 The problem here isn't with the Yamatos (at least not during a daylight engagement-if something like Surigao happens I'm not too keen on their chances here). The problem is with the rest of the Japanese capital ship force. Nagato packs a decent punch but is underarmoured, the Kongos even more so. Yes, they're significantly faster than the Standards, but all that means here is that they can run away to avoid getting destroyed. In the end, the Yamatos (or even just Yamato, if Musashi has been lost) will end up having to face down all the modernized Standards on their own due to the other three Japanese capital units having either been forced to flee or having been sunk. And that's not odds where I think ANY battleship can come out on top.
Actually, Colorados were armoured against 16" (16" belt over magazines and machinery, 18" turret face), Nagatos hull is not protected against 14". Not to mention the 14" BBs involved carried 12 guns apiece, and with 13.5" belts and, again, 18" faces, are capable of taking Kongo class hits. 48 14" and 8 16" is a log of firepower, eventually something gives. IF the IJN ALLOWED the pathetically slow things within range.
@@davidharner5865 You guys are talking about all the Battleships targeting the Yamato twins, which would not be the case. About 3 of them are going to be targeting the two Kongos and Nagato, meaning Yamato and Musashi would only be coming under fire from 1-2 battleships. By the time other ships started targeting the pair, they would have made short work of the battleships that they were targeting and two Yamatos versus, at the most three battleships armed with 14inch guns to early 16 inch shells would be an execution for the American battleships.
If they hadn’t misused the Atlanta class cruisers and got them sunk, Drach. How do you think they would have faired with say: the newer fire direction radars in 1945 as light anti air cruisers? Or even shore bombardment.
What is that burning british ship on the painting you show during the last question? She seems to be demasted by a Constitution type heavy frigate and seems to be fairly heavy herself, the gundeck is partially covered by debree, but it looks like 15-16 guns on the lower deck (per side). Some sort of razee perhaps?
As for Queen Victoria having a possible influence on WW1, I think Willie was already off his rocker by 1914, and anything Granny might have told him wouldn't have made any difference at all.
10:51 As an American, "chicken" connotes cowardice. Thus, the fastest ship could run away the fastest. 20:23 Didn't you answer this question a week or two ago?
@@CanalTremocos "weakest, but starts fights with all of them sounds pretty stupid. Anyway, I'm not doubting you at all, just commenting on what Americans think when seeing a chicken.
To me, another American, “chicken” in a race context brings to mind a type of (stupid) contest to see who gets the nearest to death without pulling out or actually dying. In that era, racing a ship would involve being willing to push the ship’s equipment nearer to its failure point than the other competitors are willing to, which would certainly qualify as an example of a “Chicken Race”. No idea if the term is even that old though.
@ 13:58 At least all of the Aircraft would (probably) be off, since Prewar, the Air Groups would have flown off and land on the various Naval Air Stations... Of course this would have probably caused the loss of the majority of their Air Groups since they would have suffered from the attention of Japanese Vals (Aichi D3A dive bombers) and Zeros (Mitsubishi A6M fighters)!
Hey Boss I have a modern Naval question about the Japanese Helicopter carriers being converted to host VTOL F-35. I was curious what would be the maximum carrier speed for VTOL recovery of these yet undelivered F-35's (outside of real wind speed) Can you help?
@@WALTERBROADDUS I was curious if there is a speed limit i guess its on the VTOL OR pilot skill vs ground effect issue . I was curious if the carrier had to drop to like 12 knots for recovery . Not that a limit like that couldn't be of use as its sonar detection and torpedo detection suite would logically become a better sensor at educed speed . I may have to look at carier ops data for old harriers on British ships to see if thee is a VTOL trend thank you for input.
@@geopoliticsjunkie4114 actually it's less about skill and more software now. Raytheon developed a auto landing system for both the b and c model. It allows you to land the f 35 up to sea state 5 conditions .
Regarding ships being better in roles they weren't built for: After the complete and utter clusterfuck that was the Lake Tanganyika campaign in WW1, the surviving vessels pretty much all went into civilian jobs. Now, most of them had been converted civilian vessels to begin with, but this also included the purpose-built motor boats Spicer had dragged to the lake. By all accounts they were used until they fell apart, doing significantly better than they ever did under that utter lunatic :P.
Drach, re: Omaha Beach fire support. You repeat the erroneous "legend" (perpetuated by British sources) that the US Army "didn't want anything to do" with the specialized armour ("funnies") developed by the British. Refer to Richard C Anderson in "Cracking Hitler's Atlantic Wall" and other references that mention; 1) YES, the US Army was interested BUT the British workshops could not turn out the required equipment in time to get crews trained by Operation Neptune. The British depots could barely supply their own needs. The Duplex Drive tanks were adopted early enough for the US to produce their own kits and the US Army only had to use British DD Shermans for training (350 conversion kits built by Firestone Tire and Rubber and applied to M4A1 tanks at the Lima Tank Depot). 2) Anderson also mentions that, because of the physical arrangement of Omaha Beach, much of specialized armour, like Churchill Crocodile, would not be able to engage the Germans on the bluffs. The ETOUSA was not quite stupid, the British couldn't supply the equipment and their historians mocked the US for "not wanting" the fruits of British genius!
That seems to go against a number of primary documents from testing range reports that indicate US officers observing them dismissed them as 'unnecessary'. A number of preserved WW2 specialist tanks are also labelled as having been built in US factories.
Drach: Now when it comes to aircraft carriers if they'd been hit they would be less likely to roll over in the first place because they don't have huge heavily armoured gun turrets up top HMS Formidable: Want to bet?
Pinned post for Q&A :)
Does a higher muzzle velocity lead to higher dispersion? Littorio's excessive dispersion is usually attributed to the propellant charges, but several sources indicate that the muzzle velocity was reduced by something like 50 meters per second in an attempt to improve dispersion.
Did ships that look like slippers (i.e. HMS Nelson, HMS Victoria) always come in pairs?
How effective would HMS Vanguard have been if she had been kept in service and refitted for use in the Gulf War like the Iowa class battleships
@@Rdeboer Russians also had some, I think those might have not been in pairs.
Regarding naval bombardment, why did the allies never used something similar to the Modified Type 3 incendiary rounds? They would be useful against fortifications simply by sucking the oxygen out of the air, without damaging the terrain that impedes the movement of assaulting troops.
Glad you took your time between these, Sir. Hope you are feeling better.
Thank you for everything, Drach! Reminded of 'Hope You're Feeling Better', Santana from "AbraXas"!
Here, here!
Re: Panama Canal
My father was a "Plank Owner" (Commissioning Crew) of the USS Washington; BB-56, he remembered going through the Canal during WW2 (this is long before all of the modern systems that keep a ship with equal distance between each side from the walls of the Locks) and how they were screaming at him for not taking measurements as the ship kept scrapping the walls as the Locks Lifted (Gulf of Mexico/Atlantic side) or Lowered (Pacific side). The thing is that if she was centered perfectly, there would be only 10 inches of gap on each side! And the way the water was flowing, this caused the ship to shift, and not always parallel to the walls of the Lock!!!
Don't know what could have been done for that, except carry a _lot_ of of timber or tyres (or something custom made and even more expensive) for rubbing strakes or similar.
@@williamchamberlain2263 Trouble is, no Room! Your basically trying to stop a 45,000 ship (actually more) with something thin enough to allow the ship to enter and then leave the lock, so about 6 to 8 inches (~152 to ~203 mm) and nothing that thin can take that weight, especially when you remember the ship is moving vertically in the lock as the water level changes....
Now they got laser "rangefinders" combined with computer controlled winches to keep the ship in the desired position!
42:12 "There was a lot of issues with the Russian 2nd Pacific Squadron."
And he didn't even MENTION the Kamchatka!!
I don't know what everyone's got against poor old Kamchatka, she was the ONLY ship keeping a proper lookout for the marauding swarms of Japanese torpedo boats that infested all the world's oceans.
I do hope you see torpedo boats
The Nagato class had their turrets replaced in the 1930s with the ones originally made for the TOSA class..which allowed a much higher elevation, but with the same 41cm guns
17:30 while I’m not aware of any warships with mixed steam propulsion plants, the White Star’s Olympic class ships had triple-expansion plants on the outboard screws and a Parsons turbine for the central shaft. It can be, and was done.
As well, while not a mix between reciprocating and rotating power plants, in my early days in the U.S. Navy when steam propulsion was still the primary type of power plant for large combatants there were ship classes with mixed turbine plants, most notably with a set of cruising turbines for long passages.
I have just responded to this mixed propulsion in a bit more detail earlier in this responses area. As far as I know combined steam turbine and/or steam turbiine was rarely adopted. A COSAS/COSOS (combined steam and/or steam) installation still has to be boilered for high power. Maritime folklore - "steam turbine propulsion would be great is if wasn't for those boilers". Gas turbines do away with the boilers, also the gland steam as a bonus factor. Designers are very much aware of the changing demands on ship space and weight for machinery plus fuel, procurement, operating and maintenance costs through the ship's life for the range of operating profiles for which the ship is targeted.
Fuel between gas turbine an steam propulsion isn't the issue it ued to be. Some years ago the Royal Australian Navy abandoned the burning of furnace fuel oil in their legacy steamships (Type 12 D/Es and Adams DDGs). .Diesel was burned instead. It is reported that a major issue was the supporting of the fuel in the shps; tanks. Tank heating was no longer required. I believe our gas turbine ships (FFGs and onwards) burn diesel oil.
Peter Edmonds Naval Architect Perth Western Australia
Just got to check out Vicksburg, MS last week. Was so cool crossing the Mighty Mississippi and picturing the Gunboats cruising around up and down there.
Great Drydock as always. Glad you are feeling better. Hope you enjoyed your trip to Hawaii, meeting up Ryan Z. had to be fun.
I like to think that drach doesnt research any of these questions, he just knows them
Just imagine him talking complete bollocks, answering the questions just by making stuff up without someone ever noticing lmao
But it's awesome he's factual. And I wouldn't wonder if he really just knows a lot of the stuff
He does research, but his memory for detail is scary sharp.
(Metallic computerised voice) Drach has extensive files……
This is how I picture every dry dock, just Drach being an all knowing omniscient narrator who is the ship god. Then I remember he’s actually a human being and may need a break which we all need to give him.
Drydocks are almost impossible to predict for time spent recording. Sometimes I know the answer immediately, sometimes I can spend half a day chasing down a single scrap of data. :)
The Brodie System, Was ,used for launching light observation planes. L-5 Sentinel. RAF tested it in India for jungle use without runways. Worked pretty well for launch and recovery.
If I may be a little informative in the matter of the British pilfering lumber, and this was what made the Constitution the fastest ship at the time. All ships suffer from hogging, the bending of her keel due to the center of the hull being more buoyant than the bow or stern. At the time the Constitution sailed, the ways the ships designers would fight this was by using "diagonal kickers." These were hefty "L" shaped chunks of wood that were fastened between the hull and lumber supporting the decks. The flaw in this was they had to have the kickers that were poor for the job as it went against the grain of the woods strong point. In the American Allegheny Mountain Range is the only place where Live Oak trees could be found. The unique thing about the livie oak trees is that they grow more like a bush than a standard oak tree. What these trees did was grow so that the ship builders could get the diagonal kickers by cutting the elbows so that at no point is the stress going across the grains weak areas.
1:21:26 Some cannonades had elevating screws rather quions the wedge shape peice. For almost all ships it was a guesstimate from the Gunner at the range. But Captain Philip Broke captain of HMS Shannon had the Quoin grooves marked into them for various ranges and on the evelating screw marked ranges with paint. He also made indentation marks around the guns which would give bearings for the guns to fire at, so a gun Crew could fire the gun irrespective of their ability to see the target, a sort of blind fire system. This meant the entire gun deck could focus on one part of an enemy even when the gunners couldn't see the target, a very early version of what you could call a central fire control. They would even do blindfolded drills were the crews were told the bearing and distance the target was at and they had to lay the gun on the target while blindfolded and this could be considered an early director fire control. He also had tangent sights to his guns as well.
@01:27:00 The bit about Carriers in High Seas reminded me of your Operation Rheinübung video where a pilot from Ark Royal pilot describes the take off for the first attack on Bismark as involving at one moment climbing a slippery slope and the next plunging down hill towards the sea. I guess that needs must when the devil drives, and that sometimes they would fly even when it looked impossible.
Keep in mind that Chokai was also hit by a torpedo from Samuel B Roberts. I think that's what ultimately sealed the ship's fate along with the bomb hit.
One to add to the list of converted ships that excelled at their new role: USS Halibut SSGN/SSN- 587. She originally served as a Regulus cruise missile platform, but was converted in the mid 1960’s to perform electronic surveillance and intelligence gathering. It was Halibut that first proved the ability of a submarine to tap and record submerged Soviet communication cables in the Sea of Okhotsk.
While certainly a valid candidate for discussion based on merit, I daresay she falls a bit outside Drach's self-imposed time period for coverage of the channel.
That USS Halibut was fit for jehovah
@@seafodder6129 fair
D-Day Radar "Small boats, along with aircraft from RAF Bomber Command, simulated invasion fleets approaching Cap d'Antifer, Pas-de-Calais and Normandy. Glimmer and Taxable played on the German belief, amplified by Allied deception efforts over the preceding months, that the main invasion force would land in the Calais region. Big Drum was positioned on the western flank of the real invasion force to try to confuse German forces about the scale of the landings. These operations complemented Operation Titanic, which was intended to confuse the Germans about the D-Day airborne forces."
Re: carrier flight ops in heavy seas: I could swear I've seen film of a carrier launching aircraft and then burying the bow as the plane momentarily disappears in the spray only to struggle back into actual flight after a pregnant pause.
Also, comedy joke: if modern American supercarriers are prevented from flight ops due to weather, they don't need to be launching aircraft, because the weather is doing their job for them in ruining the enemy's day.
Concerning damp Russian powder at Tsushima, a German book I have states that the nitrocelluose charges got some extra water added to them while still at home for safety reasons, assuming that the majority would evaporate while the fleet would be making its way through the tropics. Otherwise it would dry out on the way creating danger of spontaneous combustion. But - according to the book - the amount added was miscalculated and far too high, i.e. it had not yet returned to normal levels when the fleet went finally into action.
Plus a lot of the existing radar stations were looking across the shortest gap where the invasion was most expected.
It is worth noting that 2 invasion "fleets" were simulated by bombers dropping chaff to give a fleet like return on the radar systems
BTW- Jellico cats get confused at night is singularly the greatest YT ship/Broadway history name I have ever seen. Bravo.
Yep. Awesome name
So sorry about your Queen Drach..she touched many lives
I've heard during the Doolittle Raid, they used the waves to help get the B-25s airborne. They'd launch with the Hornet going up. The reasoning was to give the B-25s an additional height off the water so they had more room to get speed to fly. Turned out, the B-25s actually jumped off the deck. Pilots had to nose down so it wouldn't stall. I've also heard the pilots had to push down on the nose so they could use the entire available run on the carrier.
I could watch ships and heavy seas all day long it is so amazing watching the most powerful things humankind has ever made get tossed around like children's toys in the bathtub
Two asides - I believe the Japanese actually had a few ships with both triple-expansion and turbine engines in the 1920s. Fuel saving? Conservatism? Production difficulties? Will have to try and chase down more info. Also, there's a quote from the Kaiser upon the outbreak of WW1 where he accused 'Georgie and Nicky' of playing him false, and then said 'if grandmother as alive she never would have allowed it.' But hypotheticals are unknowables.
A significant example of mixed propulsion machinery was the White Star Olympic class (1908 - 15) of OLYMPIC. TITANIC (the iceberg ship) and BRITANNIC. This was to solve other issues, not the dual speed regimes (cruising and combat).of warships. These ships had triple (?) expansion, and thus reversible engines on the wing shafts, and a dirct drive LP tubine on the centre shaft. They would manoeuvre with the wing engines exhausting direct to the condenser. When full away on passage this exhaust steam would be diverted to the turbine, and then on to the condenser. The centre propeller and turbine rotor were able to attain a suitable common RPM for their operational power.
This cut out the need to build immense LP reciprocating cylinders, and avoided the need for both gearcases and astern turbines. Note that steam tubines for marine propulsion had made its spectacular appearance with TURBINIA at the 1908 Diamond Jubille Spithead Review, and that the design and building of large marine gearcases was still in its infancy. (The fully reconstructed TURBINIA in on display in Newcastle upon Tyne.)
We had to wait until the entry of the gas turbine for marine propulsion late 20th century for mixed machinery solutions ro the dual speed operationg regimes of warships. This gave us the various combinations for combined COXA/OG where X is S steam, G gas, D diesel. A is and, where both modes operate at high power, and O is or, for gas only at high power. As far as I know, the gas turbine was the only option offered for the high power mode. I haven't researched this area.
Peter Edmonds Naval Architect Perth Western Australia
@@peteredmonds8069 Thank you for this!
@@peteredmonds8069I think the Russians use CONAD or CONAG. The US nuke carriers of course are equipped with two nuclear reactors, which, I suppose, technically gives them a CONAN propulsion system…
A good account of USS Marblehead is the book “Where Away?”
I enjoyed that book!
Hello Drach, I've been watching your videos for some time now and wanted to thank you for the content you make available for free. They have rekindled my interest in military history and naval history. The mix of British humor, vast knowledge of the subject, and an eye for picking out interesting pieces of history to share puts you in the highest tier of history channels.
Another idea I have seen in Chokai’s loss (a recent one that developed after the RV Petrel expedition) is that Kongo sank her due to mistaking her for an enemy vessel, given that Chokai was in her line of fire when she took damage and that Kongo’s logs report firing on a ship that may have been Chokai at approximately the right point in the battle.
If this is true (and this is a big if), it only further adds to how little Kongo actually achieved during the battle compared to what older accounts have consistently claimed.
Well, she may have sunk A ship at least then...😂🤣
Interesting fact I heard, that HMS Victory has live oak at her bow, which obviously needs to be strong, due to the sea, so one long peice that is naturally curved more than normal oak, is what they'd want and they had taken some live oak from America and brought it back to England in the 1750s
Why would they have taken oak from the US to England?
Probably because North America had larger live oaks by that point in time.
I’m sure you have a huge backlog of ships that you want to do videos on about their service. I’m also quite sure my suggestion (if you don’t already have the vessel on your list) would come out around 2024 but here goes. The Japanese announced very recently that they have located the USS Albacore in about 300’ of water. We’ve been waiting since August for the US Navy to send divers down to verify before an official announcement is made. The vessel had an interesting history including hitting the Taiho with one of her torpedos. Thanks for a great channel!
Took me a minute to figure this out! I thought 'wait a minute! USS Albacore is a museum ship in New Hampshire!' LOL
@@greenseaships Military history has always been a great interest to me especially naval history. The finding will finally close a chapter in my family history once the navy verifies it. The Japanese researcher does have a short video on you tube about it, unfortunately it’s all in Japanese.
Britain getting directly involved in the WW1 land war was a major shift in policy if not a full blown aberration. Previously the British Empire left its competition to slug it out, then afterwards bought assets at bargain basement prices. If they had stayed out of WW1 there would have been no stalemate and at least the French overseas assets would have become available.
And no-one would believe the British if they gave there word just as no-one believes the Russians Chinese and Americans
The book "Mud, Blood and Poppycock" by Gordon Corrigan addresses a number of modern misconceptions about WW1 and Britain's part in it. It states that a key part of British foreign policy at the time was that no single power should be allowed to have exclusive control of Britain's access to the Continent, which would have been the case if Belgium and the French channel ports all fell under German control.
Lst 325 in Evansville Indiana has a video of the Brodie system working along thier tour route
Regarding the beginnings of the Marines as a force - Yes, and then give them their own small air force and navy, in fact, so small that they will be the 3rd strongest force in the world :)
The Navy having to step in for the Army: Watching the Queen's funeral, was reminded why the sailors pull the gun carriage with the coffin. From the time of Queen Victoria's funeral in 1901.
Hope you doing ok buddy, seems like we aren't getting some of those classic cheeky as heck Drach jokes that you normally throw into your vids here and there. Still great videos, just hope you are still enjoying making this content like you always have in the past.
The Brodie system - doing what Sparrowhawks did with Macon and Akron, only closer to the sea.
Lovely.
just commenting to say that british MTB's and GB's were equipped with radar but most of the set's equipped were in a fixed forward position requiring the boat to turn for the radar and that german boats did also equip radar and radar detectors but these were mainly for the lead boat.
I was thinking about naval rocket artillery the other day and was looking for a drydock where you talked about them. Guess I should have just waited.
I would add the Abdiels as ships designed as minelayers but found most of the use as super fast transports.
If you want to see the brodie system in operation go too Rex's hanger he has a collection of some film of the system working.
Re: the Chokai and the explosion that crippled it, an article I read recently telling about the torpedoes being intact did not mention the possibility of reserve torpedoes being hit so I will have to keep that information in mind when discussing the battle. However, the article did float a hypothesis that the Chokai had been the victim of friendly fire, being hit by a shell from (IIRC) Kongo. Supposedly the Chokai crossed the line of fire of the Kongo right at the time of the explosion.
Drach, what do you know of this?
"Regulations are for the information and guidance of the Commander. They are NOT absolutes."
A per file maximum can be worked around this by splitting zips into multiple parts. Any decent archive program (7zip) will have an option to split an archive into volumes at creation. Make each volume just under the max size and upload them all. They can be combined by downloading each to one file directory and opening the first one with any decent archive program.
Re: PT boat radar -- the book Dog Boats at War calls out how helpful it was to the MGB/MTB flotillas in the Med once they began operating with the US PT boats -- because the PT's radar (which seems to have had a plan position indicator (ppi) display) was much superior to the radar on the D-class MGB/MTB boats. They'd use the more lightly armed PT boat with its superior radar as lookout, and to coordinate the movements of the larger and more heavily armed boats.
for training, the weather makes a difference. what they tried to explain to us was that if we had to go, we went, no matter what the weather was
@ 1:23:12 I've seen a picture of a US Mark 13 Torpedo with a wooden cylinder around its head and a wooden box around its fins. The (short) paragraph attached implied that the cylinder would slide down the body of the torpedo while the box would break off more than it slid off.
Sorry it has been about a decade since I've seen that picture and I can't remember if it was a web site, or book. But Wikipedia does have a good write up of the efforts of CalTech. The Cylinder (aka pickle barrel) not only protected the Gyro, etc. from impact but increased the drag by about 40% with the Box or Ring (aka Drag Ring) helped allow drops of up to 800 feet (240 meters) at 260 knots (299.2 mph/481.5 kph) at a range of up to 1,000 yards (914.4 meters)!!!
I don't know if the tests that the IJN did improved upon the tail box or tail fins that they used at Pearl Harbor and added a box or cylinder at the nose of their torpedos or not. I also seem to remember reading about the Capt. of the Lexington seeing both on an overturned (i.e. shot down) Kate (Nakajima B5N) at the Battle of the Coral Sea but that would be back in a period of the late 1960's to the late 1970's! So I can't remember what book I read that in!
It eventually got even better than that.
"These problems were greatly reduced by the latter years of the war. Torpedoes had fin stabilizers, nose drag rings and tail shroud rings added, all of which worked to slow the torpedo after it was dropped so that it struck the water nose-first and at an acceptable speed. These improved the drop characteristics such that the recommended aircraft maximum launch parameters were increased to a height of 2,400 feet (730 m) and a speed of 410 knots."
"On one occasion in early 1945, six torpedoes were dropped from altitudes between 5,000 and 7,000 feet (1,500 to 2,100 m). Five out of the six were observed to make their runs hot, straight and normal."
Dropping at this kid of speed and altitude allows the torpedo to be dropped from well outside the effective range of point defense AA artillery like the 25 mm.
www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WTUS_WWII.php#22.4%22_%2856.9_cm%29_Mark_13
@@kemarisite Thanks!
The work the CalTech did during the war was impressive! They used a very clear lake so that they could get clear high speed film so they could analyze what was happening, along with properly weighted practice torpedos (originally, the practice torpedos weighed noticeably less than "warshots" which is why US sub torpedos ran deeper!) and then fished them out of the water and examined the torpedo externally and internally. They found things that needed reinforcing, etc.
All of these allowed the Mark 13 to become arguably the second best air dropped torpedo of WW2. (IJN, due to the weight of the warhead, and the speed of the torpedo, is probably the best. thankfully after Midway, their ability to use them was severely reduced.....)
My condolences for the loss of Her Majesty the Queen. I’m an American who was based at Holy Loch Scotland in the 1980s. I was treated better in the UK than the US. I have an English bloodline as well. I just wanted to say I thought Queen Elizabeth was a classy lady and she loved her country and her people. I love your channel, subscribed years ago!
The OMAHA Group heavy ships were:
Bombardment Group Commander Rear Adm. C. F. Bryant, USN
USS Texas (flagship) (Old BB) Capt. C. A. Baker, USN
USS Arkansas (Old battleship) Capt. F. G. Richards, USN
FS Georges Levgues (Flag) (9-6", 8-3.5") Capt. de Vaisseau A. Laurin, FN
FS Montcalm (cruiser) Capt. E. J. H. L. Deprez, FN
HMS Glasgow (cruiser) 8-3.5" Capt. C. P. Clarke, RN
This is so confusing to read
Surely HMS Glasgow had 12 -6" rather than 8-3.5"?
@@mikehall4121 Go and argue with:
Naval Guns at Normandy
By Vice Admiral Morton L. Deyo, USN (Ret)
@@benwilson6145 I've only seen the on line version "Transcribed and formatted for HTML by Patrick Clancey, HyperWar Foundation" so I have no idea whether or not I need to argue with the Vice Admiral or with the transcriber, but in either case "8-3.5"" is wrong. As a Town Class light cruiser the Glasgow had 12-6" guns (reduced to 9 some time after D-day), plus 8-4". In fact, though the RN in WW2 had a large variety of small calibre guns (3", 4", 4.5", 4.7", 5,25", etc.) I don't think that there was a 3.5".
Thanks for another great Drydock Drach.
You have said many times in upgunning a ship, you can gain two inches in gun caliber and lose one gun. The German plan for the Scharnhorsts was to gain FOUR inches while losing one gun.
Does this violate the standard rule or show the Germans made allowances to upgun these two ships during their construction. What other changes would be necessary to make this work? Like shell hoists, storage of shell and charges, etc.
As always, thank you. Perhaps I misunderstood but the 50 cal rifles as opposed to 45 cal rifles on the Sd and NC classes, was a substantial upgrade and an entirely new weapon.
On medieval ship armor
There are a few, extremely rare, cases of flagships being plated with metal in ~16th century. Specific ships mentioned are Venetian flagship and Hospitaller Santa Anna (these two have managed to find their way even to Wikipedia), but what that plating was for is questionable. It could have been preservation only, or perhaps meant as some sort of defense against ramming by Ottoman ships (Ottoman ships specifically because they tended to be smaller than their European counterparts).
19:10 The Ardent class of 64 gun 3rd rates were much more useful after razeed. (On the other hand, Agamemnon was never razeed and she gnf vs Santisima Trinidad.)
To be fair, a weak ship well-handled by her crew and captain will generally prevail over a powerful ship ill-handled, all other factors being equal.
Brilliant video thank you 👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍
27:57 “We will not be amused.”
27:00 Just casually discussing how chats and asides between three people could have prevented World War I drives home Arendt's point about the banality of evil.
Exactly, I realized years ago how much of a waste was made of the 19th century’s wealth and growth because of WW1. Shows how much ego and personalities in leaders can undermine years of diplomatic and economic goodwill.
10:50 The golden 'chicken' on the HMS Cavalier sounds an awful lot like the "Golden Cockerel" that adorned the P&O ocean liner ORIANA from 1960. She carried the decoration in honor of her record fastest speed between Southampton and Sydney. Must be another fine British nautical tradition. Incidentally, unlike Cavalier, Oriana gave up her cockerel to her namesake of 1995 when the latter ship entered service, despite the fact that the newer Oriana held no particular speed record.
Video dropped 22 mins ago and 197 LIKES Outstanding!!!
One of them is mine, but I didn't cheat as I watched it on Patreon a day or two ago.
Kaiser Wilhelm II isn't the only leader to mistake a politician's meaning regarding invasions. Such as Saddam Hussein, Vladimir Putin, etc.
And the first Kim, as well.
FOR THE MARBLEHEAD pitchers you may want to look for news papers my uncle was on the ship and he had clippings from them arriving on the east coast with the deck at sea level
Thanks for the file Drach! Time to fire up the printer and grab some tabs and a highlighter. Shoofles
USS Kearsarge used chains to armor itself before the battle of Cherbourg against the CSS Alabama.
@15 minutes. The OTHER factor in the battleships rolling over is ALL their torpedo bulge compartments has been "opened for inspection" the day before
35:30 just send both alaska's, the japanese might genuinely be confused by a battlecruiser pair that are just for AA fighting
54:17 what about the "Tiny Tim Rockets" For the ww2 section of the question.
Well, they are aerial rockets and not strictly naval ones.
What about them? Ships didn't fire them
@ 1:16:16 There's also a report that the IJN Chokai was hit by a torpedo... (I forget if it was launched by a DD or a DE, sorry.)
A first rate ship of the line had wooden armour to a certain extent as the side of the ship was thick enough to resist frigate calibres
wasn't it King Edward that made the Alliance between GB and France Possible at all !!!
So if Victoria still had been Queen in 1914 GB and France wouldn't have been Allied in the first place??
or am i completely wrong???
As a son of a chef engineer I know how large the royal navy lexicon on colourful language is if you do get hold of this letter please send me a copy .I'll post it on jack speak lol
I could've sworn I saw a Chinese anti ship rocket from before the age of steam and steel. Pretty much a rocket with a sled underneath to skim the surface of the water with a small charge or flammable liquid that would start fires on the enemy ship. Who knows if it worked or was actually built? Could've also been for use against port fortifications.
Coffee and Drydock 👍
On your Lexington class get X weight from dropping a turret assessment the Lexington class as planned had 9" barbette and 11" turret face.
Idk whether you are using a Lexington thickness for the calculation or something more inline with what they are trying to armour up to type thickness but either way interesting to hear about
Well on the upgrading guns question probably some question as to whether you only consider a ship completed with original guns or designed for something else then changed before built...
Obviously the NC class were designed for quad 14s they never got.
The CO class were literally TN class except with twin 16s instead of triple 14s, but they were built with 16s they didn't pull 14s off of TN class to turn them into Colorado's
the on paper Bismarck before it was ever actually started was going to be actually treaty compliant with 350 mm guns till Japan rejected the London treaty and the whole design got scaled up to 380 mm guns but it was literally still on paper not a ship
In WWI the Germans considered a better armament for the König class, but they were too far into construction and had the barbettes in so 350mm mackensen guns with 1 less barbette wasn't an option
Ty sir for what you and Ryan and the other curators too got a chance to see bb60 and drum at Mobile Ala so awesome met friends and peeps that support this ship Dakota class and drum gato with so many battle stars Ty support
I was hoping you were going to say it was title length limit that prevented the long-titled book of guns being uploaded...
00:42:44 I imagine the idea of going to war on the Italia would have been a miserable prospect for most of the crew, who would be on or around the gun decks and waterline, knowing that they had literally no protection. The ship would be alright! But the crew would be rolling the dice far more so than any contemporaries with even modest armour schemes.
Thanks
Have a great time at Pearl Harbor and in Hawaii!
I wonder what would have happened if, during the battle of Leyte gulf, Kurita’s centerforce, consisting of Yamato, maybe Musashi, Nagato, Kongo, and Haruna fought the American ww1 battleships, while the two Fusos fought taffy three.
Centre Force loses hard. The Yamatos are the only ships the Japanese have that can handle the Colorados and even they’re badly outnumbered.
@@bkjeong4302 You underestimate the centerforce, and you underestimate Yamato and Musashi by a LARGE quantity. Yamato and Musashi were literally designed to take on 2-3 American standards at once and win. The battleship guns would have bounced off the Yamato and Musashi's armor, while Yamato and Musashi were capable of one shotting the American battleships. Nagato was very capable of sinking a Colorado, and very well could have attacked and sank Maryland, Tennessee, California, or Pennsylvania instead, and with ease. While I doubt Kongo and Haruna would have been very effective at sinking one of the enemy battleships, they would have drawn fire off the three battleships, and make their jobs easier, and would have been very effective at their originally designed role, destroying enemy cruisers. Speaking of which, centerforce outnumbered the us force in cruisers. Between more cruisers, and the two Kongos firing that them, they would have gone down without much of a fight. Yamato and Musashi would take on 2 of the American battleships each, while Nagato would help sink them as well. The only thing I see that could seriously threaten the centerforce was the destroyers and pt boats with their deadly torpedoes. The two sides were even with destroyers, and with the cruisers and battleship's secondary guns would put a stop to the destroyers, but the pt boats will be very hard to hit and very deadly. However, the destroyers and battleship secondary guns. Ultimately, Yamato and Musashi, with the additional help of Nagato, would wipe the floor with the 6 fast battleships. Kongo and Haruna could attack the American battleships to detract them for Yamato and Musashi and use their guns to wipe the floor with the cruisers. They would then all attack the destroyers and pt boats with their guns. A single HE battleship shells could take out a destroyer, while a single 5-inch shell could take out the pt boats.
@@metaknight115 The problem here isn't with the Yamatos (at least not during a daylight engagement-if something like Surigao happens I'm not too keen on their chances here). The problem is with the rest of the Japanese capital ship force. Nagato packs a decent punch but is underarmoured, the Kongos even more so. Yes, they're significantly faster than the Standards, but all that means here is that they can run away to avoid getting destroyed.
In the end, the Yamatos (or even just Yamato, if Musashi has been lost) will end up having to face down all the modernized Standards on their own due to the other three Japanese capital units having either been forced to flee or having been sunk. And that's not odds where I think ANY battleship can come out on top.
Actually, Colorados were armoured against 16" (16" belt over magazines and machinery, 18" turret face), Nagatos hull is not protected against 14". Not to mention the 14" BBs involved carried 12 guns apiece, and with 13.5" belts and, again, 18" faces, are capable of taking Kongo class hits. 48 14" and 8 16" is a log of firepower, eventually something gives. IF the IJN ALLOWED the pathetically slow things within range.
@@davidharner5865 You guys are talking about all the Battleships targeting the Yamato twins, which would not be the case. About 3 of them are going to be targeting the two Kongos and Nagato, meaning Yamato and Musashi would only be coming under fire from 1-2 battleships. By the time other ships started targeting the pair, they would have made short work of the battleships that they were targeting and two Yamatos versus, at the most three battleships armed with 14inch guns to early 16 inch shells would be an execution for the American battleships.
Best opening song ever.
If they hadn’t misused the Atlanta class cruisers and got them sunk, Drach.
How do you think they would have faired with say: the newer fire direction radars in 1945 as light anti air cruisers? Or even shore bombardment.
Plenty of ships of that class did function very well in both of these roles.
I think the Missouri video was during the Korean War
What is that burning british ship on the painting you show during the last question? She seems to be demasted by a Constitution type heavy frigate and seems to be fairly heavy herself, the gundeck is partially covered by debree, but it looks like 15-16 guns on the lower deck (per side). Some sort of razee perhaps?
1:32:50 Are there more stories like this, I find it highly amusing.
I guess Rodney has the goat, Cavalier the chicken :)
As for Queen Victoria having a possible influence on WW1, I think Willie was already off his rocker by 1914, and anything Granny might have told him wouldn't have made any difference at all.
She also would’ve been old as F by then…
10:51 As an American, "chicken" connotes cowardice. Thus, the fastest ship could run away the fastest.
20:23 Didn't you answer this question a week or two ago?
A bit of an ironic turn there because the cockerel is the bravest farm animal. It is weaker than any other but starts fights with all of them.
@@CanalTremocos "weakest, but starts fights with all of them sounds pretty stupid.
Anyway, I'm not doubting you at all, just commenting on what Americans think when seeing a chicken.
To me, another American, “chicken” in a race context brings to mind a type of (stupid) contest to see who gets the nearest to death without pulling out or actually dying. In that era, racing a ship would involve being willing to push the ship’s equipment nearer to its failure point than the other competitors are willing to, which would certainly qualify as an example of a “Chicken Race”. No idea if the term is even that old though.
@@RonJohn63 "deep fry that in nuggets"?
When americans see chicken they mmmmm fried mmmm fries mmmm milkshake .......what else can i eat?
@ 13:58 At least all of the Aircraft would (probably) be off, since Prewar, the Air Groups would have flown off and land on the various Naval Air Stations... Of course this would have probably caused the loss of the majority of their Air Groups since they would have suffered from the attention of Japanese Vals (Aichi D3A dive bombers) and Zeros (Mitsubishi A6M fighters)!
So the Missouri in ww2 just gave the Japanese 3 guns barrage, the Wisconsin in Korea returned fire with all 9
39:22
I didn't know Cunningham was Dutch? 😅
Didn't he mention that he would add a link below for some documents that were too large for where ever he would normally put them?
In reference to a ships beam, did the Germain and other axis powers plan for Panama passage in their designs?
Not really, because they didn't use it.
Hey Boss I have a modern Naval question about the Japanese Helicopter carriers being converted to host VTOL F-35. I was curious what would be the maximum carrier speed for VTOL recovery of these yet undelivered F-35's (outside of real wind speed) Can you help?
Off hand , I don't think there is any speed limitation?
@@WALTERBROADDUS I was curious if there is a speed limit i guess its on the VTOL OR pilot skill vs ground effect issue . I was curious if the carrier had to drop to like 12 knots for recovery . Not that a limit like that couldn't be of use as its sonar detection and torpedo detection suite would logically become a better sensor at educed speed . I may have to look at carier ops data for old harriers on British ships to see if thee is a VTOL trend thank you for input.
@@geopoliticsjunkie4114 actually it's less about skill and more software now. Raytheon developed a auto landing system for both the b and c model. It allows you to land the f 35 up to sea state 5 conditions .
@@WALTERBROADDUS Thank you input
@@WALTERBROADDUS Sorry forgot to give your comment a like I cant even find this question answered for Harrier so far
Belt armour tends not to be so heavy, the biggest penalty is deck armour as it covers a far greater surface area.
Regarding ships being better in roles they weren't built for:
After the complete and utter clusterfuck that was the Lake Tanganyika campaign in WW1, the surviving vessels pretty much all went into civilian jobs. Now, most of them had been converted civilian vessels to begin with, but this also included the purpose-built motor boats Spicer had dragged to the lake. By all accounts they were used until they fell apart, doing significantly better than they ever did under that utter lunatic :P.
Drach, re: Omaha Beach fire support. You repeat the erroneous "legend" (perpetuated by British sources) that the US Army "didn't want anything to do" with the specialized armour ("funnies") developed by the British. Refer to Richard C Anderson in "Cracking Hitler's Atlantic Wall" and other references that mention; 1) YES, the US Army was interested BUT the British workshops could not turn out the required equipment in time to get crews trained by Operation Neptune. The British depots could barely supply their own needs. The Duplex Drive tanks were adopted early enough for the US to produce their own kits and the US Army only had to use British DD Shermans for training (350 conversion kits built by Firestone Tire and Rubber and applied to M4A1 tanks at the Lima Tank Depot). 2) Anderson also mentions that, because of the physical arrangement of Omaha Beach, much of specialized armour, like Churchill Crocodile, would not be able to engage the Germans on the bluffs. The ETOUSA was not quite stupid, the British couldn't supply the equipment and their historians mocked the US for "not wanting" the fruits of British genius!
That seems to go against a number of primary documents from testing range reports that indicate US officers observing them dismissed them as 'unnecessary'.
A number of preserved WW2 specialist tanks are also labelled as having been built in US factories.
I can't find that We Transfer link anywhere? Am I missing it?
It's up now :)
Leaving already a 👍🏻 here. Will watch/listen later.
How hard did it suck to be on a Japanese submarine?
From above the bow of Iowa class BBs look much like the profile of a Gharial (मगर मछली).
to appease the algo-deities...likingandcommenting
What's going on with Drach guys does anyone know?
Drach: Now when it comes to aircraft carriers if they'd been hit they would be less likely to roll over in the first place because they don't have huge heavily armoured gun turrets up top
HMS Formidable: Want to bet?