You don't need torpedoes on a battleship when there are so many destroyers with them. Iowa's ability to refuel escorting destroyers allows the destroyers to act as detached torpedo launchers while the big guns go to work.
I would be extremely excited....like unreasonably excited for some one of my age and professional capacity....but yes just short of high pitch squealing excited. No a good appearance for a 42 year old master mariner lol
@@jaysonlima7196 agreed, I would be forced to restrain myself! It would be unseemly for a 56 year old former MLB Coxswain to act like a giddy school girl 🤣 The only thing that would be better would be to meet Patrick O'Brien if he was still alive!
Drach mate, you’re an absolute legend in your own right, but watching you collaborate with Ryan was the equivalent of an early Christmas/Chanukah celebration all in one. Im not trying to be funny, but if you do another collaboration in future could you use a less form fitting t-shirt? I realise that as men grow older that our t-shirts start to emphasise our moobs as well as the beer bump that resembles an early 2nd trimester pregnancy, and how difficult it can be to keep these things under control but that’s the price of age. Personally, at the age of 60yo I look like I’m in the start of the third trimester, and to some degree it’s true. Unfortunately the aliens currently growing quickly is a bunch of aggressive tumours which metastasised to Stage 4 terminal C, with a hospice room already booked, but as a retired British “Royal” /Bootneck (1978-2006) ready to “cross the bar”. I only mention this, not out of some desire for whatever, but to thank you so much for everything you’ve produced throughout your videos as they’ve been incredibly informative, fascinating, and a great distraction from everything else going on. Believe it or not I’ve found that the combo of morphine pump and Fentanyl patches as part of the pain relief (if only!) has a negative effect on memory. As a result I find that I end up watching your videos several times over and I’m still amazed at the information you provided that I missed/forgot the first time around! I’d argue that if a book or video is worth watching/reading several times over then the author has succeeded beyond all expectations and you, sir, are overly qualified in this respect. Thank you for everything, you’ve been such an amazing boon during a bit of an awkward time, Best regards, David S. Burley in Wharfedale, West Riding of Yorkshire.
@@Forced2DoThis1 thank you so much for the kind words. It’s more than likely that anything you hear from now on will be from my widow. She was a GP and Palliative Care Consultant that I met via an internet dating app. We “chatted “ for a short while, never meeting as her job was busy (not that she mentioned it! What are the odds that a bar-steward like me would spend his final days with someone that could cope with the whole cancer, PTSD (and everything that went with it?). Diagnosed in 2012 as my 52nd birthday was due and prognosis was 18months tops. That wasn’t good enough for Pam or this bloody mindedness of a Yorkshireman/scotsman and retired RM and C Squadron, Shaky Boats? All that matters is the skeletal dude, dressed in black, and carrying a scythe, seems reluctant to come for a wet or two. Perhaps it’s the F&S blade I keep handy (lol) or just the bloody mindedness that deters his visit? If I could I would give my attitude/luck to those of my men that struggled to cope with civvie street (and a government that couldn’t give a feck). I found the hardest part of the job wasn’t the getting up close and personal with those that tried to kill my men, but the writing letters home. The lads were so young and carefree, thinking that they were indestructible (just as we all do) that it made writing to families/loved ones that much harder. If you’re a veteran or know veterans then you’ll understand. Thanks anyway - stay safe, keep your head down and live a long life.* *as dictated to Pam in September 2023. He had written numerous letters and comments about his service life and asked that I explained his final thoughts as he finally “crossed the bar” in October 2023.. On behalf of myself and Dave I’d like to wish you all well. He tried to write multiple comments that might be helpful to those struggling with PTSD and it’s his final thoughts that I try to send to those that write to him. I’m unsure how much longer I can keep going with this, although he said at the end that it was probably more important than anything he could do for those he counted as brothers - even the much younger USMC!
I can assure you good sir Drach...that it was as much if not more fun to watch....with your impeccable knowledge, as well as Ryans knowledge and unabating enthusiasm....collab's with both of you are always a pleasure to watch, thank you and Ryan for this one. Cheers from Sydney Aus!!!!
WHAT! Drachinfel on this channel!!!! Drachinfel is THE gold standard, top shelf , best of the best in all things naval history. What a great treat for the fans. 2 solid guys with immense knowledge discussing our favorite subjects.
If your battleship comes into range of something worth a torpedo, and you haven't sunk it with your main guns, you have done something really really stupid! That is why you have destroyers and cruisers!
I can see fringe reasons to do that IE: Bismark where the ship was dead in the water and the torpedo fired from the British BBs was just an attempt to send it under faster. It might also be useful in a scuttling scenario like if you have a crippled carrier that you need to put down to keep the enemy from getting it. Both of those situations are so fringe that it's not even funny and arguably the torpedo is just a waste of displacement on anything armed with a 10inch or greater gun Now why ships like Salem didn't have torpedoes is beyond me. At cruiser ranges it's still a usable if slightly last ditch weapon.
@@Its-Just-Zip And you should still have the destroyer escort. You might want them out as an sub screen but you can call some in for the execute. Now its a bit lucky that the US early WW2 did not focus much on torpedoes. On the other hand, if the US has a few torpedo cruisers it might fix their torpedo issues earlier even it they was useless ships
I would argue while two evenly classed battleships would have good odds of making it into torpedo range if they wanted to close, the problem is while it may make the enemy sink faster it will be slow to reduce the enemies firepower. Take the Nelson class whose torpedoes have a max range of 15000 yards on the high setting and 35 Knot top speed, it will take that torpedo almost 14 minutes till impact. Meanwhile the ship could have fired 14 salvos during that time which at under 15000 yards have good odds of hitting, this is far more likely to cripple the enemy over a single torpedo impact.
This is basically what it's like to watch just one segment of Drach's weekly Q&A marathons. You don't just get an answer to a question, you basically get a full-on dissertation on the subject.
Drach is always a welcome guest in my book. Only he can make an hour video on the ammunition handling procedures of the Royal Navy interesting enough to watch all the way through.
my interest in naval history started with Drach in aug 2020 when I stumbled across the second pacific squadron video. After hearing about "the voyage of the damned" and all the shenanigans that ensued, I wanted to learn more. From there it continued onto Ryan, and others from there. I hope Ryan can one day make his way off to England in the near future for another colab video. (the video opening with you two washing down some hard tack with a cup of tea would be pretty entertaining but not required lol)
Great episode, excellent to have 2 experts discussing battle strategy. BUT When you ask at 16:14 who people would like to appear on Battleship collaborations: eh, sorry but I've got to go with.... Erica Eleniak... preferably jumping out of a giant cake....
I love watching Ryan and Drach, but will love to see them with the Chieftain, the Mighty Jingles and final Animarchy History. Lock these five in a room and lets see what kind of video we get!!!
To paraphrase David Fletcher's take on the absurd gunnery doctrine used in the Charioteer tank, "You're not supposed to DO things like that with a battleship, it's SILLY."
I think two words - Savo Island - make the best argument in favor of torpedoes on cruisers. Maybe the real issue is how much training and skill it takes for a navy to get to that level of deadly proficiency with torpedoes in WW2 era, vs training up radar-assisted gun crews. So torpedoes were kind of a cottage industry compared to long range gunnery.
The IJN trained for night surprise attacks with long-range torpedoes, and were very good at it. It caught the USN by surprise, but they learned to adjust and eventually could spot them further away with radar. USN had no idea IJN torpedoes had such range.
Love seeing the collaboration! Keeping this museum items preserved and afloat is important. Lest they go to scrap and the history and knowledge they provide will go to waist.
What justifies the American view is BuOrd's famous inability to field a functional torpedo in the first place. Not having them on the cruisers and battleships saved weight not having weapons that wouldn't have worked in the first place.
The anime crossover we've all been waiting for (excluding the Battleship vs Battlecruiser videos where you reference each other, I don't count that). Anytime you have Drach on your channel or vice versa I will be watching. On a slight side note: as a NJ taxpayer I appreciate you getting monetized. It may not be saving me much money, but the attempt really does count for a lot to me.
The Japanese had the long lance, the US had the mark 14, that's the reason for the difference in doctrines. The long lance was an extraordinary weapon, if you have it you'll want to use them everywhere. The mark 14 couldn't hit the side of a barn and when it did it just bounced off rather than explode. If that's your torpedo you wouldn't want to use it anywhere that you don't have to.
The Mark 14 was a turkey, but basically nobody in the US navy knew that until after the US joined the war. The doctrine was written down long before that.
@@davidalbeck811 Even if the mark 14 worked it was vastly inferior to the long lance. The maximum range of the mark 14 was only 9000 yards, the long lance had a range of 44000 yards, 25 miles. That's the same range as the Iowa's guns and farther than the guns on the South Dakotas and North Carolinas. The mark 14 had the same range as the 5" guns on a destroyer. Putting a long lance on a battleship makes sense because it was effective at battleship ranges. The US put torpedoes on destroyers where their range was comparable to the range of the guns but they didn't put them on anything bigger because they would have been completely useless.
Question: How come warships could often go faster than their "top speeds". HMS Rodney, who's top speed was classified as 23 knots, easily exceeded 25 knots when she chased down the Bismarck. Yamato's top speed was 27 knots, but it's estimated that she could have easily made 28 knots. Samuel B Roberts was designed to go up to 24 knots, but made 26 knots during the battle off Samar. I'm confused, why would ships not go that fast during their sea trials
Might have something to do with governments wanting their platforms top performance numbers being classified. They might not want an enemy knowing how fast they can move resources from point A to point B. I guess it would be a handy little secret.
If I recall from some information Drac shared Top Speed was "Top Speed where we'll still have an engine left afterwards" For example Rodney was on her way to the US for a major overhaul, so doing serious long term damage to the engine wasn't a concern as long as she could engage Bismarck. Replacement parts were already waiting in the US
That is typically a speed calculated of a design calculated power generated. Frequently the propulsion plant will actually produce more power that design - or operators do unauthorized improvements or design changes. Currently - for US Navy during sea trial it is Navy crew aboard - plus some from the shipyard- Ship at that point is still technically property of the Shipyard. They will not risk that danger in that condition. Also design consideration are for a certain loading condition - lighter- less fuel or other weights perhaps faster. I have heard some stories of some ships faster at a fuller load - higher depth- density improves the propeller effectiveness.
Collaborations are generally good, especially where the knowledge bases are complementary for the discussed subject. for example, Drach with aviation specialists when discussing naval aviation
Possible in my mind - or Lexington (CV-2) IF not you are not confusing have torpedo tubes with it having an undesired torpedo attraction system (enemy torpedo). Ok - There was work (modern last 20 years) on a system with anti-torpedo system on Carriers - that for a launching system used the same modern torpedo tubes from DDG/CG/FFG. Also recall in WW2 the carriers operated torpedo bomber and probably had dedicated torpedo magazines.- hmm - do the modern ones have similar for the ASW torpedoes carried by the helicopters.
@@wfoj21 my father served on the Aircraft Carrier Hancock (CV-19). I am going to have to ask him about this again, but if my memory serves I swore he said something to me at one time about CV-19, or some of the other Essex class carriers implementing some sort of the same system?????
What is source of the footage of guns being loaded at 11:39? The ships shown right before that look like French ones from the 1900s and guessing the uniforms too. I have never seen that loading set up before, looks mighty cool. I love seeing how the guns were loaded in the various navies in those dreadnought/ predreadnought years.
I can guess a couple reasons why USN dropped torpedoes on BBs. 1. Underwater tubes put q 21" opening in the hull below the waterline. 2. On deck mounts position 100s of pounds of high explosives in a lightly armoured (or unarmoured) structure. Basically, these could become large bombs if struck by even a heavy cruiser shell or semi-AP bomb. This could rarely sink a BB (being above the main armour deck) but could damage fire control, radio aerials not to mention light AA cannon. "Let's put several 500-1000 lb GP bombs on deck ..." USN let's not. 3. Prior to WW II the USN envisioned BBs and even cruisers to fight as part of a task force be it based around a BB core or carriers. These should have CL, CA and DDs in the screen. Leave torpedoes to the DDs (e.g., Surigao Strait). Only when much of the BB force sat in the mud of Pearl Harbor did the USN have to resort to smaller forces of just CAs/CLs + DDs (1sy Guadalcanal) or BBs + DDs (notably 2nd Guadalcanal). The USN doesn't seem to have planned to use BBs (or cruisers, but let the subs loose) in a raider role (Bismarck e.g.). Convoy escort v commerce raiders maybe (would've loved to see BB55 or BB57 class v Bismarck class, IOWA class is a no contest IMO due to speed, 16"/50s & fire control). 4. Carrier aircraft: these can be launched at far greater range in larger numbers and can attack from unexpected directions.
Ryan Please tell us the story of TURPITZ.( maybe you have in the past and I've missed it). I think most of us know about the Bismarck story, which was cool, but wonder how many people know the unbelievable lengths the British went through to finally sink her. Tell about Barns Wallace and the tall boy bomb and the "DAMBUSTER SQUADRON". Maybe a complete 30 min video on that remarkable story alone. Of all the stories of battleships this must top the list I would think. thanks
Funny thing about Atlanta, they indeed have torpedoes and the last USN WWII era cruiser armed with torpedoes, before the modern guided missile cruisers came into service
Drac is great, he says he name so infrequently I do not know how to pronounce it. I think it's excellent they you have been working with other you tube channels. And would want to see more of you and him.
Torpedoes are a volatile armament to keep sitting around. With heavy guns, the propellant and warheads are stored separately in the magazines. Torpedoes on deck have the propellant and warhead mated together and sitting in the tubes. That's kind of like keeping ready-use heavy shells sitting inside the turrent well before the action.
Wow !!! So THATS how you say Drachinifel ! 😄 I've been pronouncing it , " Drack.....shin.... Eiffel " ! 😂 Love to see collaborations between my favorite RUclipsrs !
I had the impression that American battleships ditched their torpedoes because of range disadvantage -- closing to torpedo distance when the battleships had 14-inch and 16-inch guns that could reach out 20 miles was regarded as hazarding the battleship for no good reason. Getting rid of torpedoes aboard American cruisers and battleships was probably a good idea because of the sorry excuses for Mark XIV torpedoes. It was a different story with American destroyers--the torpedoes were the Sunday punch of the destroyers and at the Battle off Samar one of the destroyer escorts was supposed to have removed its torpedo tubes but the captain wanted to keep something bigger than a 5"38cal dual purpose.
The other interesting trivia question is which nation operated battleships but never had a torpedo armed battleship (or battlecruiser) in service? The answer is Brazil. Chile, Argentina, Greece and Turkey all had torpedo tubes on their battleships at some point, but the Minas Geraes class didn't and the Rio de Janiero wasn't taken into Brazilian service but instead British (after a brief detour through being bought by Turkey but not delivered yet).
You could do a collab with Othais of C&RSenal (who Drach has also worked with) on what kinds of small arms would have been carried historically on the New Jersey.
Another possible reason US BBs and CAs left off torpedoes, the US Navy's torpedoes were awful. It took until 1943 to get them mostly debugged. Drac has a great video documenting the Navy's struggles to make their torpedoes work. As late as Oct 1944, USS Tang, one of the top-scoring subs in the war, was lost to a malfunctioning torpedo that made a circular run and hit her. US torpedoes during the early war were effectively useless, and submarine crews were blamed for not using them right or for poor shooting. The Japanese blitzkrieg would have been much more costly if the subs in the Philippines had functioning torpedoes. The air-launched and ship-launched torpedoes weren't much better. The Japanese put much R&D and training into their torpedoes, and the Long Lance proved powerful and deadly in the early war engagements.
I like the collaboration with Ryan and Drach. This one was particularly informative. Now I know why U.S. cruisers and battleships landed their torpedo launchers. Please, keep working together.
Anytime Ryan and Drach work together its worth watching. Keep the collaborations coming guys!
Co-lab, co-lab, co-lab!
It would be nice if Ryan was a guest for Drachinifel's drydock episodes.
Im eagerly awaiting Drachs video on his visit to the New Jersey
@@hawkeye5955 That would be an interesting one - probably have to be fairly selective about the subject matter (avoid the Greco-Romano era....)
Yes!
You don't need torpedoes on a battleship when there are so many destroyers with them. Iowa's ability to refuel escorting destroyers allows the destroyers to act as detached torpedo launchers while the big guns go to work.
And mobile anti aircraft guns
And a armada of submarines
Imagine being on vacation in Hawaii, heading over to Pearl and running across Ryan and Drach filming a video
99.999% of the people wouldn't have a clue 😂
@@JoshuaTootell sadly, you're correct, but those who did know would be ecstatic!
I would be extremely excited....like unreasonably excited for some one of my age and professional capacity....but yes just short of high pitch squealing excited. No a good appearance for a 42 year old master mariner lol
@@jaysonlima7196 agreed, I would be forced to restrain myself! It would be unseemly for a 56 year old former MLB Coxswain to act like a giddy school girl 🤣 The only thing that would be better would be to meet Patrick O'Brien if he was still alive!
Totally photobombing that one
This was great fun to film :)
Drach mate, you’re an absolute legend in your own right, but watching you collaborate with Ryan was the equivalent of an early Christmas/Chanukah celebration all in one.
Im not trying to be funny, but if you do another collaboration in future could you use a less form fitting t-shirt? I realise that as men grow older that our t-shirts start to emphasise our moobs as well as the beer bump that resembles an early 2nd trimester pregnancy, and how difficult it can be to keep these things under control but that’s the price of age.
Personally, at the age of 60yo I look like I’m in the start of the third trimester, and to some degree it’s true. Unfortunately the aliens currently growing quickly is a bunch of aggressive tumours which metastasised to Stage 4 terminal C, with a hospice room already booked, but as a retired British “Royal” /Bootneck (1978-2006) ready to “cross the bar”.
I only mention this, not out of some desire for whatever, but to thank you so much for everything you’ve produced throughout your videos as they’ve been incredibly informative, fascinating, and a great distraction from everything else going on. Believe it or not I’ve found that the combo of morphine pump and Fentanyl patches as part of the pain relief (if only!) has a negative effect on memory.
As a result I find that I end up watching your videos several times over and I’m still amazed at the information you provided that I missed/forgot the first time around! I’d argue that if a book or video is worth watching/reading several times over then the author has succeeded beyond all expectations and you, sir, are overly qualified in this respect.
Thank you for everything, you’ve been such an amazing boon during a bit of an awkward time,
Best regards,
David S.
Burley in Wharfedale,
West Riding of Yorkshire.
@@Lord_Ronin_The_Compassionate May MANY more such opportunities happily present themselves to you for the rest of your days. 👍🏿
@@Forced2DoThis1 thank you so much for the kind words. It’s more than likely that anything you hear from now on will be from my widow. She was a GP and Palliative Care Consultant that I met via an internet dating app. We “chatted “ for a short while, never meeting as her job was busy (not that she mentioned it! What are the odds that a bar-steward like me would spend his final days with someone that could cope with the whole cancer, PTSD (and everything that went with it?). Diagnosed in 2012 as my 52nd birthday was due and prognosis was 18months tops. That wasn’t good enough for Pam or this bloody mindedness of a Yorkshireman/scotsman and retired RM and C Squadron, Shaky Boats?
All that matters is the skeletal dude, dressed in black, and carrying a scythe, seems reluctant to come for a wet or two. Perhaps it’s the F&S blade I keep handy (lol) or just the bloody mindedness that deters his visit?
If I could I would give my attitude/luck to those of my men that struggled to cope with civvie street (and a government that couldn’t give a feck). I found the hardest part of the job wasn’t the getting up close and personal with those that tried to kill my men, but the writing letters home. The lads were so young and carefree, thinking that they were indestructible (just as we all do) that it made writing to families/loved ones that much harder. If you’re a veteran or know veterans then you’ll understand.
Thanks anyway - stay safe, keep your head down and live a long life.*
*as dictated to Pam in September 2023. He had written numerous letters and comments about his service life and asked that I explained his final thoughts as he finally “crossed the bar” in October 2023..
On behalf of myself and Dave I’d like to wish you all well. He tried to write multiple comments that might be helpful to those struggling with PTSD and it’s his final thoughts that I try to send to those that write to him. I’m unsure how much longer I can keep going with this, although he said at the end that it was probably more important than anything he could do for those he counted as brothers - even the much younger USMC!
I can assure you good sir Drach...that it was as much if not more fun to watch....with your impeccable knowledge, as well as Ryans knowledge and unabating enthusiasm....collab's with both of you are always a pleasure to watch, thank you and Ryan for this one.
Cheers from Sydney Aus!!!!
WHAT! Drachinfel on this channel!!!! Drachinfel is THE gold standard, top shelf , best of the best in all things naval history. What a great treat for the fans. 2 solid guys with immense knowledge discussing our favorite subjects.
He has been on many NJ videos
To answer the viewer question, the Béarn was the only carrier that anyone was ever stupid enough to arm with torpedoes.
Who built that?
@Sam Brown the French
lol of course it was that one
@@Dem0nActual Of course it was them...
I mean most carriers had torpedoes. They were just made to be launched by plane, and not by torpedo tube
The reaction to people going over to check Drach's "5 Minute Guide to Warships" channel and see the 4-6 hour long videos would be priceless.
If your battleship comes into range of something worth a torpedo, and you haven't sunk it with your main guns, you have done something really really stupid!
That is why you have destroyers and cruisers!
Or maybe you are proving that you are invulnerable to them and can get up close and personal with them. ;)
I can see fringe reasons to do that IE: Bismark where the ship was dead in the water and the torpedo fired from the British BBs was just an attempt to send it under faster. It might also be useful in a scuttling scenario like if you have a crippled carrier that you need to put down to keep the enemy from getting it.
Both of those situations are so fringe that it's not even funny and arguably the torpedo is just a waste of displacement on anything armed with a 10inch or greater gun
Now why ships like Salem didn't have torpedoes is beyond me. At cruiser ranges it's still a usable if slightly last ditch weapon.
@@Its-Just-Zip And you should still have the destroyer escort. You might want them out as an sub screen but you can call some in for the execute.
Now its a bit lucky that the US early WW2 did not focus much on torpedoes.
On the other hand, if the US has a few torpedo cruisers it might fix their torpedo issues earlier even it they was useless ships
I would argue while two evenly classed battleships would have good odds of making it into torpedo range if they wanted to close, the problem is while it may make the enemy sink faster it will be slow to reduce the enemies firepower. Take the Nelson class whose torpedoes have a max range of 15000 yards on the high setting and 35 Knot top speed, it will take that torpedo almost 14 minutes till impact. Meanwhile the ship could have fired 14 salvos during that time which at under 15000 yards have good odds of hitting, this is far more likely to cripple the enemy over a single torpedo impact.
@@jerithil And they more likely would use secondary guns
This is basically what it's like to watch just one segment of Drach's weekly Q&A marathons. You don't just get an answer to a question, you basically get a full-on dissertation on the subject.
And proof. You can't forget the proof.
Drach is always a welcome guest in my book. Only he can make an hour video on the ammunition handling procedures of the Royal Navy interesting enough to watch all the way through.
It's the humor that does it. Those little potshots at the people at the time are great.
"They picked me up on the side of the road" best opening line yet for Drach
Edit: was it Bearn? the French Normandie turned CV?
Brits can make fun of themselves with such charm. 😁
Wikipedia says Béarn
In the defense of the French, torpedoes _did_ have a longer range than ramming prows.
HMS Eagle also had 18 torpedo tubes
@@cod5329 In the original design, but they were removed before she was finished.
As always a great collaboration. It's always fun to see you and Drach chat about naval matters.
Collabs with interesting people are interesting collabs. Drach knows his shot. His drydock series is great.
I love the clear unabashed bromance between Drach and Ryan.
my interest in naval history started with Drach in aug 2020 when I stumbled across the second pacific squadron video. After hearing about "the voyage of the damned" and all the shenanigans that ensued, I wanted to learn more. From there it continued onto Ryan, and others from there. I hope Ryan can one day make his way off to England in the near future for another colab video. (the video opening with you two washing down some hard tack with a cup of tea would be pretty entertaining but not required lol)
That was a great video.
Drach and Ryan make a great team. keep up on the colabs.
The simplest answer is: "Because if you're an enemy ship within torpedo range of an Iowa class BB you have already been sunk."
drach is like a walking encyclopedia.
at least when it comes to boats of the last 2 century's
Great episode, excellent to have 2 experts discussing battle strategy.
BUT
When you ask at 16:14 who people would like to appear on Battleship collaborations: eh, sorry but I've got to go with....
Erica Eleniak...
preferably jumping out of a giant cake....
Love to see collaborations especially with drach! Two of my favorite channels
Well WW1 US Pre-Dreadnoughts, Dreadnoughts and Super-Dreadnoughts had torpedoes but i believe most had theirs stripped out in the 1930s
I love watching Ryan and Drach, but will love to see them with the Chieftain, the Mighty Jingles and final Animarchy History. Lock these five in a room and lets see what kind of video we get!!!
To paraphrase David Fletcher's take on the absurd gunnery doctrine used in the Charioteer tank, "You're not supposed to DO things like that with a battleship, it's SILLY."
The Chieftan. Have him man the boilers and run an "Oh my God, the Battleship is on fire~" drill.
Yes, please do more collaborations with Drachinifel!
Over the years I’ve really grown fond of this channel but I sure appreciate the collaboration with Drach. It’s awesome thank you!😊
I think two words - Savo Island - make the best argument in favor of torpedoes on cruisers. Maybe the real issue is how much training and skill it takes for a navy to get to that level of deadly proficiency with torpedoes in WW2 era, vs training up radar-assisted gun crews. So torpedoes were kind of a cottage industry compared to long range gunnery.
The IJN trained for night surprise attacks with long-range torpedoes, and were very good at it. It caught the USN by surprise, but they learned to adjust and eventually could spot them further away with radar. USN had no idea IJN torpedoes had such range.
Love your collaborations with Drachinifel.
I hope you guys enjoyed the Bowfin. As a former employee of the Bowfin I'm glad you guys were able to come and see it.
Love seeing the collaboration! Keeping this museum items preserved and afloat is important. Lest they go to scrap and the history and knowledge they provide will go to waist.
I love seeing you and Drach doing episodes together! He's great and I could watch conversation between Ryan and Drach all day.
What justifies the American view is BuOrd's famous inability to field a functional torpedo in the first place. Not having them on the cruisers and battleships saved weight not having weapons that wouldn't have worked in the first place.
But they didn't know that pre-war...
nice to see the 2 experts together.
Love the collaborations with Drach. Love his channel too. Definitely would welcome more. So perfect.
Drach and Ryan are the Dynamic Duo and DEFINITELY would like to see more collabs featuring these two.
The anime crossover we've all been waiting for (excluding the Battleship vs Battlecruiser videos where you reference each other, I don't count that). Anytime you have Drach on your channel or vice versa I will be watching. On a slight side note: as a NJ taxpayer I appreciate you getting monetized. It may not be saving me much money, but the attempt really does count for a lot to me.
Speaking of anime crossovers, have you seen Drach’s collab with animarchy? 😁
@@grahamstrouse1165 did not but intend to now.
Don't forget that Drach's video about his visit to New Jersey during his NA tour is still incoming!
Drach and Ryan are always a must watch.
More Drach/Ryan co-labs yes, please. As for other co-labs...The History Guy?
Drachinifel is great... walking encyclopedia, for those that remember what that is. Keep up the great work!
The Japanese had the long lance, the US had the mark 14, that's the reason for the difference in doctrines. The long lance was an extraordinary weapon, if you have it you'll want to use them everywhere. The mark 14 couldn't hit the side of a barn and when it did it just bounced off rather than explode. If that's your torpedo you wouldn't want to use it anywhere that you don't have to.
Yep
The Mark 14 was a turkey, but basically nobody in the US navy knew that until after the US joined the war. The doctrine was written down long before that.
@@davidalbeck811 Even if the mark 14 worked it was vastly inferior to the long lance. The maximum range of the mark 14 was only 9000 yards, the long lance had a range of 44000 yards, 25 miles. That's the same range as the Iowa's guns and farther than the guns on the South Dakotas and North Carolinas. The mark 14 had the same range as the 5" guns on a destroyer. Putting a long lance on a battleship makes sense because it was effective at battleship ranges. The US put torpedoes on destroyers where their range was comparable to the range of the guns but they didn't put them on anything bigger because they would have been completely useless.
Glad to see collaborations. I've been fortunate enough to tour the Bowfin, avid follower of the Battleship New Jersey channel.
Double treat today!
It’s a very natural fit, you two, given your respective knowledge and experience. Happy to see many more of these collaborations.
Drach and Ryan, some of the best content on the internet.
The collaborations with Drachinifel are always welcome. His knowledge of naval matters is exceptional.
When nerds flock together................ awesome Vid guys, love to see more collaborations from you two.
More Drachinifel is always welcome!
Never saw two naval rock stars together before. A treat for me.
Great presentation. Ryan and Drach should team up more often!
Easily my 2 favorite Military Historian channels so these collaborations are perfect to me
That's wonderful you two were able to be in Hawaii, and even together. I lived there ten years, and went to Pearl several times.
In World of Warships I use the Atlanta and Flint as very powerful destroyers. I like this format.
Love the collaboration. Ryan and Drach are a great team. Love both channels. Please keep them coming.
Thanks for a great discussion on this subject. Appreciate your cooperation in this.very insightful.
Ryan and Drach are an EPIC combination!!!
Question: How come warships could often go faster than their "top speeds". HMS Rodney, who's top speed was classified as 23 knots, easily exceeded 25 knots when she chased down the Bismarck. Yamato's top speed was 27 knots, but it's estimated that she could have easily made 28 knots. Samuel B Roberts was designed to go up to 24 knots, but made 26 knots during the battle off Samar. I'm confused, why would ships not go that fast during their sea trials
over-heating the bolier :)
Might have something to do with governments wanting their platforms top performance numbers being classified. They might not want an enemy knowing how fast they can move resources from point A to point B. I guess it would be a handy little secret.
If I recall from some information Drac shared Top Speed was "Top Speed where we'll still have an engine left afterwards" For example Rodney was on her way to the US for a major overhaul, so doing serious long term damage to the engine wasn't a concern as long as she could engage Bismarck. Replacement parts were already waiting in the US
@@richcbri Also a good point. The aspect of “disposable funds” based on mission importance would play a part.
That is typically a speed calculated of a design calculated power generated. Frequently the propulsion plant will actually produce more power that design - or operators do unauthorized improvements or design changes. Currently - for US Navy during sea trial it is Navy crew aboard - plus some from the shipyard- Ship at that point is still technically property of the Shipyard. They will not risk that danger in that condition. Also design consideration are for a certain loading condition - lighter- less fuel or other weights perhaps faster. I have heard some stories of some ships faster at a fuller load - higher depth- density improves the propeller effectiveness.
Huge fan of Drac's work. Always enjoy what you bring to the table Ryan. Another interesting and informative look at history.
Collaborations are generally good, especially where the knowledge bases are complementary for the discussed subject. for example, Drach with aviation specialists when discussing naval aviation
Great Video with Ryan and Drach
Great Collaboration. Follower of both channels. 👍
Always love seeing my favorite museum curator and history youtuber together
I absolutely love both of your channels. It’s fantastic to see you guys working together.
As commerce raiders, torpedoes on the German heavies made sense, as a quick way to finish off merchantmen whike saving the main guns
Oh hey it's my two favorite naval historians in the same video!!!!!
Really enjoyed this collaboration!
Awesome collaboration!
I believe the aircraft carrier that Ryan was speaking of is the Saratoga.
Possible in my mind - or Lexington (CV-2) IF not you are not confusing have torpedo tubes with it having an undesired torpedo attraction system (enemy torpedo). Ok - There was work (modern last 20 years) on a system with anti-torpedo system on Carriers - that for a launching system used the same modern torpedo tubes from DDG/CG/FFG. Also recall in WW2 the carriers operated torpedo bomber and probably had dedicated torpedo magazines.- hmm - do the modern ones have similar for the ASW torpedoes carried by the helicopters.
@@wfoj21 my father served on the Aircraft Carrier Hancock (CV-19). I am going to have to ask him about this again, but if my memory serves I swore he said something to me at one time about CV-19, or some of the other Essex class carriers implementing some sort of the same system?????
The Colabs with Drac are awesome 👍😊
Now you just gotta get him onto New Jersey with you.
He did in April; the video has yet to be released (soon...)
considering the type 95s range its understandable the japanese would go all out
What is source of the footage of guns being loaded at 11:39? The ships shown right before that look like French ones from the 1900s and guessing the uniforms too. I have never seen that loading set up before, looks mighty cool. I love seeing how the guns were loaded in the various navies in those dreadnought/ predreadnought years.
I can guess a couple reasons why USN dropped torpedoes on BBs.
1. Underwater tubes put q 21" opening in the hull below the waterline.
2. On deck mounts position 100s of pounds of high explosives in a lightly armoured (or unarmoured) structure. Basically, these could become large bombs if struck by even a heavy cruiser shell or semi-AP bomb. This could rarely sink a BB (being above the main armour deck) but could damage fire control, radio aerials not to mention light AA cannon. "Let's put several 500-1000 lb GP bombs on deck ..." USN let's not.
3. Prior to WW II the USN envisioned BBs and even cruisers to fight as part of a task force be it based around a BB core or carriers. These should have CL, CA and DDs in the screen. Leave torpedoes to the DDs (e.g., Surigao Strait). Only when much of the BB force sat in the mud of Pearl Harbor did the USN have to resort to smaller forces of just CAs/CLs + DDs (1sy Guadalcanal) or BBs + DDs (notably 2nd Guadalcanal). The USN doesn't seem to have planned to use BBs (or cruisers, but let the subs loose) in a raider role (Bismarck e.g.). Convoy escort v commerce raiders maybe (would've loved to see BB55 or BB57 class v Bismarck class, IOWA class is a no contest IMO due to speed, 16"/50s & fire control).
4. Carrier aircraft: these can be launched at far greater range in larger numbers and can attack from unexpected directions.
Re #1: Big ship hulls are absolutely full of holes already.
Ryan Please tell us the story of TURPITZ.( maybe you have in the past and I've missed it).
I think most of us know about the Bismarck story, which was cool, but wonder how many people know the unbelievable lengths the British went through to finally sink her.
Tell about Barns Wallace and the tall boy bomb and the "DAMBUSTER SQUADRON".
Maybe a complete 30 min video on that remarkable story alone.
Of all the stories of battleships this must top the list I would think.
thanks
LOVE THE COLLABORATIVE ENERGY!
Funny thing about Atlanta, they indeed have torpedoes and the last USN WWII era cruiser armed with torpedoes, before the modern guided missile cruisers came into service
At first I was like Drach has unbeatable history knowledge but then, Ryan has his own Battleship so I guess it’s a tie. Hahaha ❤
ALWAYS worth hearing Drach.
I hope you guys do a video of him exploring battleship New Jersey with you 2 together
Always good to hear you and Drach
Drac is great, he says he name so infrequently I do not know how to pronounce it. I think it's excellent they you have been working with other you tube channels. And would want to see more of you and him.
Really cool to see Drach on this channel.
Excellent content. I was cracking up 1/4 in when Drach had the mic like "I'm asking the questions here".
Torpedoes are a volatile armament to keep sitting around. With heavy guns, the propellant and warheads are stored separately in the magazines. Torpedoes on deck have the propellant and warhead mated together and sitting in the tubes. That's kind of like keeping ready-use heavy shells sitting inside the turrent well before the action.
It’s great having the two of you guys together.
Wow !!!
So THATS how you say Drachinifel ! 😄
I've been pronouncing it , " Drack.....shin.... Eiffel " ! 😂
Love to see collaborations between my favorite RUclipsrs !
Ryan and Drach together is like Superman and Batman. World's Finest.
I love the collaboration with Drach. Please do more of these.
I had the impression that American battleships ditched their torpedoes because of range disadvantage -- closing to torpedo distance when the battleships had 14-inch and 16-inch guns that could reach out 20 miles was regarded as hazarding the battleship for no good reason.
Getting rid of torpedoes aboard American cruisers and battleships was probably a good idea because of the sorry excuses for Mark XIV torpedoes.
It was a different story with American destroyers--the torpedoes were the Sunday punch of the destroyers and at the Battle off Samar one of the destroyer escorts was supposed to have removed its torpedo tubes but the captain wanted to keep something bigger than a 5"38cal dual purpose.
more collabs pls! Maybe cover some more about the early sailing american warships?
My great grampa who joined the navy in 1912 was a torpedoman on USS North Dakota went to Vera Cruz with her too
Because those ships were built to fight from afar.💣💥
Please Ryan make more collaboration videos!!!
The other interesting trivia question is which nation operated battleships but never had a torpedo armed battleship (or battlecruiser) in service? The answer is Brazil. Chile, Argentina, Greece and Turkey all had torpedo tubes on their battleships at some point, but the Minas Geraes class didn't and the Rio de Janiero wasn't taken into Brazilian service but instead British (after a brief detour through being bought by Turkey but not delivered yet).
You could do a collab with Othais of C&RSenal (who Drach has also worked with) on what kinds of small arms would have been carried historically on the New Jersey.
My two favorite channels together!
Another possible reason US BBs and CAs left off torpedoes, the US Navy's torpedoes were awful. It took until 1943 to get them mostly debugged. Drac has a great video documenting the Navy's struggles to make their torpedoes work. As late as Oct 1944, USS Tang, one of the top-scoring subs in the war, was lost to a malfunctioning torpedo that made a circular run and hit her.
US torpedoes during the early war were effectively useless, and submarine crews were blamed for not using them right or for poor shooting. The Japanese blitzkrieg would have been much more costly if the subs in the Philippines had functioning torpedoes. The air-launched and ship-launched torpedoes weren't much better.
The Japanese put much R&D and training into their torpedoes, and the Long Lance proved powerful and deadly in the early war engagements.
No one predicted the fighting in Iron Bottom Sound off Guadalcanal, aka Torpedo Heaven. Night time close quarters combat.
The IJN prepared extensively for it, hence their superiority even over early radar. The big surprise was the range of their torpedoes.
Awesome collaboration! Two thumbs up!
Collaborate MORE. Drach is a wealth of information your subject mater overlaps perfectly.
I like the collaboration with Ryan and Drach. This one was particularly informative. Now I know why U.S. cruisers and battleships landed their torpedo launchers. Please, keep working together.