Hello Drach, can you tell us (in some of next Drydock episodes) more about admiral Richardson and his role in the biggest "i told you so!" in american history (attack on Pearl Harbor)?
Hi Drach, torpedo blisters and bulges are filled with liquid in most cases, correct? When a torpedo hits them, they bring 500-1000 lbs of explosive. Why doesn't that create a massive blast on the far side of the blister?
I am copying this post from the Santisima Trinidad Q&A in case you missed it there, because It makes me so happy to see you posting more age of sail content! Here goes: Any chance we could get some more obscure 5th rates? Been playing a lot of Naval Action (can recommend) and I’ve developed a love affair for the French ship “L’hermione”. From my pitiful knowledge on these ships, it seems to me that while Anglo-American 5th rates were built for durability and heavier armament, French frigates were built for speed and maneuverability. Is there truth to this?
What would be the likely effect of the RN building Rodney and Nelson to F3 specifications rather O3 under the WNT, and did they British make an error in not waiting another few years in get their 2 new capital ships built?
As a US Navy brat I spent my first 13 years on Naval basses, Which included four years at Pearl Harbor from the early to mid sixties. And was the base paperboy for three of those years. Allowed on and toured almost every ship in the pacific fleet, dry docks and submarine facilities And took grea6t interest in Naval history. We arrived a Honolulu on a repurposed Liberty ship and have had an interest in the ship that actually unglamorously won world war two. I respect you as a Naval Historian as no other. Can you do a video on the history of the Liberty Ship. Thank you.
Yeah, the blimps were surprisingly effective escorts, even without radar. They had great visibility and could loiter around a convoy for a long time. I feel a bit sorry for their aircrews, mind. Imagine the scene., a Pensacola bar. An attractive blonde approaches three naval aviators. Girl: So, flyboy; what sort of plane do you fly? Pilot 1: I fly an F6 Hellcat, miss. The plane that wiped out the Zeros at the Turkey Shoot. Girl: What about you, tall, dark and handsome? Pilot 2: I fly an F4U Corsair, miss. The plane that drove the japanese out of the Solomons. Girl: And you, hot stuff? Piĺot 3: I fly the Goodyear blimp, ma'am, and we've never lost a collier
With German redundancy I'm reminded of what was said about the Panther tank once: when it worked it worked wonderfully, but as soon as something broke it became a nightmare. Something about Germans makes them continue to make things exactly like that to this very day.
@1:00:30 Yes! As a Marine officer, I make this same observation about the US Navy: the Navy does real-world operations every single day, just to stay alive in their massively complex mechanical contraptions. This is simply not the case with land forces. The Marine Corps loves to treat everyone as a generalist, assuming that on-the-job training will enable any Marine to fill ALMOST any role. You simply cannot do this on a warship. If you pulled the engine room sailors and stuck them in the CIC/bridge, put the CIC Sailors down in ammo handling, and moved the ammo handlers into the engine room.....the ship would probably blow up/run aground/catch fire/etc. in less than a week. I assume in the Age of Sail there were similar considerations, if only to a lesser degree overall.
A note concerning the British NELSON/RODNEY 16" Mark IB APC Projectile (light-weight post-Jutland design). These shells were about the lightest 20th Century anti-armor shells (AP or SAP). They were designed with using high mussle velocity to increase flat-trajectory accuracy at short-to-medium ranges as well as getting improved armor penetration against the face-hardened side armor of battleships. The shells were a form of the Greenboy post-Jutland APC shells with the same 2.5% filler eright, though it might have been TNT with beeswax desensitizer, as used in British post-WWI 6" CPBC and 8" SAPC shells, instead of Shellite used by the other British APC shells after Jutland. In any case, it would use the Number 16D delay-action base fuze with originally a Lyddite booster, but very soon after commikssioning the fuze changed over to the much more reliable Tetryl booster type. The shape of these shells is unique to British Navy practice. First, they were the original type of elongated "B" streamlined design, with a much longer windscreen than the other "A" APC shell types then in use. However, unlike the later "B" designs introduced in the 1930s for British APC shells, the 16" APC Mark IB had a long conical windscreen (like the later Japanese Type 91 AP shells introduced in 1931) to get the optimum reduction in air drag at higher velocities. The later British "B" shells all had curved, long-radius-tangent-ogive windscreens similar to WWII US Navy and German Navy AP shells. At the lower velocities of the other British guns, the curved shape was better than the conical shape. This minimum-drag 16" Mark IB APC Shell windscreen was, like the ability to elevate the guns to 40 degrees, to give these lightweight shells the maximum possible range, even with their low weight causing increased drag compared to the other, heavier British APC shells. I do not know what the extra-long-range design requirement was for, considering that hitting enemy ships at such ranges was almost impossible.
Thank you for your concise and clear explanation of the choices that were made in deciding the relative thickness of deck vs. side armor in WWII battleships. Basically, there were no howitzers involved, so really steep plunging fire was not a worry. This makes good sense to me.
07:13 - The playing fields of my school were tucked in the north western arm of the Hilsea Lines. (Part of Palmerston's fortifications.) The changing rooms were the casemates of the cannons, with the training tracks still in place at each embrasure. Thank you for recalling some happy memories.
On the subject of deck awnings. I had the dubious honor of transiting the Panama Canal in late July (Mar Det USS Holland). The deck plates got so hot the hard rubber soles of our combat boots were leaving black "foot prints" on the deck.
Great video. There are four circular forts in the Solent and its eastern approaches; No Man's Land Fort, Spitbank Fort, St Helens Fort and Horse Sand Fort.
There's also Fort Fareham, Fort Wallington, Fort Nelson, Fort Southwick, Fort Widley and Fort Purbrook built along the ridge of Portsdown hill to the north of Portsmouth. They actually face inland as they were intended to defend against any French attempt to flank Porstmouth, take the ridge and shell the dockyards from there.
56:15- Don't forget (and while it may be largely outside the scope of this channel) the U.S. Navy DID invest quite well in radar-carrying picket blimps in the 1950s and 60s. As for rigid airships, IIRC correctly the Germans DID attempt to use the second Graf Zeppelin (LZ-130) to patrol British airspace with radar but the huge metal framework of the hull dissipated the radar returns so badly that the ship was basically useless for radar patrolling purposes.
As for the dirigible being an effective ASW platform I have seen it stated the during WW2 no ships were lost in a convoy while under escort by a blimp. Versions of these did carry radar, but may not have been during the war.
Another reason for the Axis powers not having dual-purpose secondaries on their battleships was that they were cheating on displacement, so they had a larger tonnage to spend on secondaries. The RN wasn't really happy with having to go with DP guns on the KGVs and would've preferred specialised guns for each roles, but staying within treaty limits forced them to go with a DP gun (which turned out to be the right choice anyway, but in the mid-late 30s nobody realised just how much AA firepower a warship would need).
I mean, if airpower is dominating the naval environment to the point abandoning anti-surface secondaries is a good idea, you really have to question whether you actually want to build a new battleship at all, since it’s likely any new battleship wouldn’t be able to do the job of a battleship anyways.
As a filthy American I forgot for a second that Jersey is the name of a channel island, and the concept of the state of New Jersey being opposed to the allies made me chuckle.
That is not true. It's no secret that the fall of Jersey would have caused a catestrophic loss in morale, that Germany would have no choice but to surrender and give up their precious glockenspiel and winter markets.
Look at the casement diagrams in the French Armoured cruiser book by Jordan & Caresse look at the Gueydon Class casemate on page 104 - the internal transverse bulkhead had the same protection build standard as the protective external armour (120 mm) the remaining interior walls were 50 mm protection and build standard.
The airships were really cool, especially with the parasite aircraft but a big waste of money. Also the metal structure would interfere with an internal radar.
@@greenseaships Thats why it worked! An aluminum skinned blimp was also built & tested. Worked well but the catastrophic failures of the zeppelins but the kibosh on that. All the US zeppelins crashed. The only survivor the Los Angeles was German reparations. The idea of flying a airplane off an airship is just so cool. Unfortunately didn’t work out.
The tragedy on board the USS Forrestal in 1967 is a prime example of what happens when of the majority of your specialized DC and firefighting crews are killed in the initial stages of a disaster.
00:55:17 On USN airships, and everything you suggested that the USN do with them... the USN did, with their non-rigid airships. Heck, they kept the blimps around into the '60s, and where building them into the late '50s for ASW and AEW, but even during the war they where refitting their extant classes, the 134-strong K class as one example, with surface search radar, dipping sonar, sonobouies and MAD equipment for subhunting. Cant find much about how the follow-on class was kitted out, but there where only 4 M-class blimps, but the 18 N-class blimps where used for ASW and as flying radar towers to fill gaps in the various offshore radar networks
Deck armour: plunging fire didn't really come a possiblity until radar ranging was a norm, by which time even long range battle ship engagement was over. The US and Austro Hungary (a lesser extent Germany and Italy) tried Large Sea Coast Mortars (11 inch + pit mortars on Coregidor and the huge single example of the 42cm M14 Mortar set up to guard Pola in 1914 ) but the reality before radar the chances of hitting enemy ships would be like an extremely large game of battleships -by the time the shore howitzers corrected for a near miss the target ship would have moved on.
Not only that, many battleship guns (including the 16”/50) were only capable of plunging fire at ranges beyond the capabilities of even radar-directed fire control, meaning that they were realistically not capable of landing plunging hits even if battleships in general weren’t conceptually obsolete by that point.
25:20 I believe this is the principle on which modern composite armour is based (not that anyone will officially say); rather than a single homogeneous slab of armour you have lots of hardened rods in a “softer” matrix. Essentially the entire armour is made of edges.
On your example of shells hitting sides or deck, the illustration actually shows is roughly twice the area for the deck than the belt. On my screen 4" of deck vs. 2" of side (both above and below the waterline).
I could be wrong but wouldn't the situation of the Channel Islands be a bit like that of Singapore? Essentially the shore batteries were pointing in the wrong direction. Once France had fallen and there was no air cover the defenders were in a very weak position. I seem to recall HMS Warspite knocking out some of the coastal guns by the simple tactic of shooting at them blind from the opposite side of the island and using a spotter plane to adjust fall of shot. The Germans couldn't shoot back because their guns were pointing out into the channel and HMS Warspite had sailed between the Island and France. The entire defence of the islands was predicated on the Germans still holding France. However there was no real reason for the allies to attack the islands before the end of the war. They were of no particular strategic value and the occupying Germans were treating the islanders comparatively well.
@@bkjeong4302 correct. A 15" AP shell hitting the ground among infantry will definitely kill anyone it hits directly, but will otherwise bury itself in the ground many feet deep before the delay fuse sets it off. In doing so, it basically creates its own grenade sump.
In regards to Kamikazes surviving that is a negative. But surprisingly there were instances of a mostly complete body. Enough to go through his pockets, take his watch and other personal effects. And enough to merit a military funeral instead of being hosed overboard.
32:04. The answer is really simple: American battleships didn’t have to deal with anything that could actually pose a significant threat to them after PH because the Japanese never took them seriously. Japanese carrier doctrine prioritized destroying enemy carriers first (because that was seen as absolutely necessary to set up the later battleline engagement-they didn’t want enemy carriers to become a factor then), so they overwhelmingly attacked American carriers and mostly ignored the battleships even back when Japan actually had enough pilots to pose a significant air threat to American vessels. And American battleships almost never got into surface engagements, and on the rare occasions they did, they were ridiculously overkill for anything they faced, save for Second Guadalcanal and Surigao; even in those two cases, the Americans had the benefit of newer, larger ships (plus a massive numerical and geographical advantage in the case of Surigao). Of fucking course they’re not going to be sunk-THEY NEVER ACTUALLY FACED MEANINGFUL OPPOSITION IN THE FIRST PLACE! Too many people assume that the survival record of American battleships indicates they were “unsinkable” or that they were the best warships in the USN because none of them were sunk outside PH, when the truth is that American battleships were rarely placed into situations where their survivability was tested (while other, overall more useful American warships were risked much more and thus took losses). Pretty damn hard for ANY ship to be sunk when the enemy isn’t putting in much effort trying to sink that ship. Had the Japanese made a concerted effort to sink American battleships while they still had meaningful airpower, it’s very likely a few would have been lost.
Right, it's one of those constant misunderstandings that I see, seemingly based off of people taking a cursory look at USN losses and wins compared to RN or IJN on Wikipedia and coming to the conclusion that USN ships were immortal and the best at everything, whilst ships from the other 2 must be more flawed, since USN losses were seemingly lower. It's also one of those things that will never change though. Most people don't look into this stuff in any sort of detail, and they don't bother to understand the contexts of each battle and each theatre
@@silverhost9782 I’ve literally seen people use the “they never sank” argument to claim the Iowas were superior to USN cruisers or destroyers in terms of value for money. Never mind that the reason cruisers and destroyers were sunk was because, unlike the Iowas, they actually went around putting themselves at risk due to being far more strategically useful vessels….
Alderney and in particular Guernsey were even more heavily fortified - the garrison on Guernsey had limited numbers of tanks and again a limited number mobile A/T guns 4.7 cm Pak (t) auf Pz R35 (f) also Guernsey had 3 x 30.5 cm L/52 guns and batteries of French 22 cm gun which was a formidiable block to any naval attack and lesser guns. Jersey also had 22 cm Schneider guns and 15.5 cm GPF (the same guns as worried the US at Cape Gris Nez at Normandy) - these covered the long sands between Le Braye and L'Etacq where the large sea wall was built, primarily because of the air strip and flat lands beyond and covering St Aubins bay where there is a sample section of sea wall the building of which was abandoned, but either way it would have been a slaughter -even the North coast of Jersey had fairly substancial strongpoints -because British forces had landed on these and other areas on Guernsey with high cliffs, so the reality is forget unless the British can get the US to bomb the Iland or Islands with an A bomb.
Drach, you were already my most respected youtuber, but after seeing you put in the A tier based off looks, you are now my most respected human ever. But come on, Why isn't Vanguard in S tier? and C tier for KGV!!! They weren't THAT bad!!!
Honestly, Jersey's small northern beach sounds like Tinian's. A small beach surrounded by cliffs that is easily blocked, with an easily invaded southern beach. The Americans simply did a massive feign to the south to lure the Japanese out of position immediately prior to the Americans committing to an actual landing in the north. I can see a similar landing happening in Jersey.
@@richardschaffer5588Yup. My response was made to Drach's "well, IF I were to invade Jersey this is how I would do it" hypo. So its assuming in argumendo that someone was convicted enough to actually invade Jersey notwithstanding Overload.
@@prussianhill I agree. Drach’s answer shows it would be an expensive bloody mess. The amazing thing is that Hitler fortified it so heavily, wasting resources.
Dodging shells at long range might be practical for a 1 on 1 engagement or maybe 2 on 2 but I don't see how it is going to work at a squadron level engagement. Unless your opponent's ships fire in unison each ship is going to react at different times which will break up the formation at best or lead to self destruction through collision at worst. Unless you have very good fire control you are also going cede the initiative to the enemy because you will be unable to compute range accurately. I would think that on a many on many engagement the best tactic is to drive on exchanging fire and relying shell dispersion at range to protect your ships rather than disrupting your formation and potentially allowing your opponent to engage and defeat you in detail as your formation comes apart
Weird that no one mentions that the twin 15 cm/48 turrets (Type 1936 destroyers and planned for the O-class battlecruisers and the Spähkreuzers) were capable of anti-aircraft work, though I don’t know how effective it was.
How could you have a tiny photo of a Italian battleship so low on your tier list on anesthetics. Also I don't know why but I like the look of Royal Sovereign / whatever the Russian called it, there is something about the camouflage scheme and superstructure can't exactly put my figure on it.
I saw a vid of a shallow angle, high speed car crash. The passenger was ejected at a combined angle between the two cars and hit a brick wall. So a belly-flopper pilot is probably getting pulled-out right under the nose but it collapses around them because there's nowhere to go. Too bad his legs are in the way 😢
Has the Army ever asked the Navy to make a ship specifically for supporting a beach landing? Say instead of huge 16” inch guns say a bunch of auto loading 5” or 8” guns with a bunch of mortars on board? Like the 60mm and 120mm mortars can fire a decent amount of distance from the water. Say a powered barge that can creep up at night and open up. But like an armored barge. I know some barges can take 70,000 tons
What would a coastal defense ship that was designed and built in the late 1930s that was built in a similar style to the Swedish Sverige class ships? Assuming they were built by the British and built for Norway, Sweden, and Finland, how would this affect the Norway campaign assuming 2 or 3 each and are used in addition to their existing ships and not as replacement for those ships. I didn't know about the the Finnish Vainamoinen class but it was roughly half the weight of the Swedish ships, but a early 1930s design.
29:48 yeah he has no chance as if you need another example, look at what happens when an airliner slams into the side of a mountain or into the water instantly tears the aircraft apart and most of the time kills everyone aboard instantly however there are cases where people have survived that
Other problems for costal defenses include testing near cities/ The 12 inch rifles of some forts near Los Angeles were tested in 1928. Can you say windows broken? They were heard at least as far as the San Fernando Valley.
Before that time, the US used enormous mortars, with the idea of quickly destroying ships with plunging fire, piercing the decks. They rarely held practice-shoots, as the noise was so great, especially in the walled-up gun pits, that crews would get concussions from the sound. Eventually they were fired electrically, with the crew taking shelter in blockhouses.
Question: In the battle between the South Daoka, Washington and Kirishima, did I understand you correctly at about 46:20 that the cascade of electrical failures on the South Dakota and the fires...did the Kirishima beat the South Dakota? Could the Kirishima have finished off the SD? I actually never thought about it, is it possible if the Washington wasn't there? I think maybe yes...?
If SD had been the only US battleship present, probably the IJN would have sunk her. All of the US destroyers were sunk or crippled by that point, and as superior as SD was to Kirishima in a vacuum...it doesn't matter much if you can't shoot back or hit anything. Kirishima would eventually have been able to penetrate SD's armor at close range, and once at least some of other IJN ships (2 heavy cruisers, 2 light cruisers, and 9 destroyers) reassembled and rejoined the fight, they would have overwhelmed SD. If nothing else, that's a heck of a lot of Long Lances. Nonetheless, considering most of SD's problems were self-inflicted, I wouldn't say that Kirishima actually beat SD in the historical battle. SD kind of just tripped over her own shoelaces and fell hard on her face.
@@Wolfeson28 thank you yes, I do agree, though I'd add that self inflicted damages would count against SD and for Kirishima, its llike the Bismark, was it sunk or scuttled, It didn't sink on its own...If SD had sunk it would make an interesting argument, ty again
1:04:30 Nelson may be cool, but he is going straight to C tier, if not F tier. Its B tier place would be well suited for Bismarck class, and Caio Duilio is going to B tier. Also Littorio is going out of the S tier. It may be kinda cool looking, but surely not as cool as Richelieu or Hood.
I think the real kicker for not liberating the Channel Islands by a contested invasion was probably the sheer cost in lives. The German resistance would have been fanatical, maybe not quite to the extent of the Japanese defence of some Pacific islands where the garrisons almost literally fought down to the last man. But the Jersey defenders may have been a bit more effective as they likely would have fought mainly from the fortifications and not gone in for massed banzai charges and such. So the fact that thousands of allied casualties were probable, coupled with a significant percentage of the civilian population of the island being killed in such fighting for no strategic advantage meant that the allied command made the right decision. Not that the islanders had a great time of it anyway the winter of 1944-45 was terrible for the civilian population and the garrison and had the war lasted much longer mass starvation was a real threat. The historical privations and liberation was preferable to the island becoming a cratered moonscape and 40-60% of the population being killed.
Thinking about it though I wonder if in September or October 44 the allies had parked 3 or 4 old Battleships off the islands and offered the garrison surrender terms may have worked.
@princeoftonga Honestly its a case of don't interupt an enemy whilst they are making a mistake. Yes you wnat to liberate the islands but in not attacking them you bypass 25,000 men. Not having to fight them in Normandy is very useful to the allied cause. Same as the island hoping campaign. Dont fight the enemy when you dont need to.
@58:50 an excellent run down on why the flexible airships (blimps) were so successful as convoy and anti-submarine escorts in the Atlantic. en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/K-class_blimp
You're kidding right. The Nelsons are THE most underrated ship designs EVER. They look incredibly powerful. The Iowas on the other hand, whilst elegant, look kinda generic tbh. Probably something to do with that disgustingly large stern.
@@matthewkidd7219 Yeah I knew that no one would have the evil in their heart to unsubscribe to drach. Nonetheless- personal preference. I think the Nelsons looked great, but then again I dont like the Iowa look, so different tastes I guess.
The Polish destroyers not getting recognized for their part is not suprising given the treatment of various Polish officers bye the British after the war. (see recent Mark Felton Video on the subject)
Ah yes, my favourite post-war phenomena. You have to love how Soviet, neo-nazi, and other anti-western and anti-British parties really went out of their way to turn the Poles, amongst others, against the people that literally went to war to honour their alliances when they could have otherwise stayed neutral or even joined the people aggressing against Poland. The entire world has apparently agreed that cold war Soviet propaganda nailed it when it came to it's analysis of western interactions with the nations that would go on to be conquered by the Soviets. That's interesting. Meanwhile all I hear about nowadays in the supremacy of the Polish minority in ww2 British service and how that's more worthy of attention than either the British or any other minor nations contribution. We live in clown world lol.
That wouldn't of been the RN's fault. That would of been the then current & post war Soviet navy's fault. As I'm sure you're aware the British Admiralty can only award battle honours to RN ships, the (at the time) Free Polish navy being a completely seperate entity. Something Felton has not (so far) decided to comment on.
@@tommeakin1732 Honestly, i've noticed an increase in the frequency of this narrative since Brexit too. Not sure if i'm imagining it, but that seems to have mobilised them further. Can't watch a single video about the BoB without someone waving the Polish flag in the comments section like a lunatic anymore lol
Pinned post for Q&A :)
Hello Drach, can you tell us (in some of next Drydock episodes) more about admiral Richardson and his role in the biggest "i told you so!" in american history (attack on Pearl Harbor)?
Other than the Grillo-class Regina Marina Mas boats, were there any other Electric warships in the time period the channel covers?
Hi Drach, torpedo blisters and bulges are filled with liquid in most cases, correct? When a torpedo hits them, they bring 500-1000 lbs of explosive. Why doesn't that create a massive blast on the far side of the blister?
I am copying this post from the Santisima Trinidad Q&A in case you missed it there, because It makes me so happy to see you posting more age of sail content!
Here goes: Any chance we could get some more obscure 5th rates? Been playing a lot of Naval Action (can recommend) and I’ve developed a love affair for the French ship “L’hermione”. From my pitiful knowledge on these ships, it seems to me that while Anglo-American 5th rates were built for durability and heavier armament, French frigates were built for speed and maneuverability. Is there truth to this?
What would be the likely effect of the RN building Rodney and Nelson to F3 specifications rather O3 under the WNT, and did they British make an error in not waiting another few years in get their 2 new capital ships built?
As a US Navy brat I spent my first 13 years on Naval basses, Which included four years at Pearl Harbor from the early to mid sixties. And was the base paperboy for three of those years. Allowed on and toured almost every ship in the pacific fleet, dry docks and submarine facilities And took grea6t interest in Naval history. We arrived a Honolulu on a repurposed Liberty ship and have had an interest in the ship that actually unglamorously won world war two. I respect you as a Naval Historian as no other. Can you do a video on the history of the Liberty Ship. Thank you.
The sheer number of hilarious Drachisms in the section on redundancy was truly delightful!
Yeah, the blimps were surprisingly effective escorts, even without radar. They had great visibility and could loiter around a convoy for a long time. I feel a bit sorry for their aircrews, mind.
Imagine the scene., a Pensacola bar. An attractive blonde approaches three naval aviators.
Girl: So, flyboy; what sort of plane do you fly?
Pilot 1: I fly an F6 Hellcat, miss. The plane that wiped out the Zeros at the Turkey Shoot.
Girl: What about you, tall, dark and handsome?
Pilot 2: I fly an F4U Corsair, miss. The plane that drove the japanese out of the Solomons.
Girl: And you, hot stuff?
Piĺot 3: I fly the Goodyear blimp, ma'am, and we've never lost a collier
Fighter pilots go for minutes, Bomber pilots go for hours but Blimp pilots stay up for DAYS!!
With German redundancy I'm reminded of what was said about the Panther tank once: when it worked it worked wonderfully, but as soon as something broke it became a nightmare.
Something about Germans makes them continue to make things exactly like that to this very day.
@1:00:30 Yes! As a Marine officer, I make this same observation about the US Navy: the Navy does real-world operations every single day, just to stay alive in their massively complex mechanical contraptions. This is simply not the case with land forces. The Marine Corps loves to treat everyone as a generalist, assuming that on-the-job training will enable any Marine to fill ALMOST any role. You simply cannot do this on a warship. If you pulled the engine room sailors and stuck them in the CIC/bridge, put the CIC Sailors down in ammo handling, and moved the ammo handlers into the engine room.....the ship would probably blow up/run aground/catch fire/etc. in less than a week. I assume in the Age of Sail there were similar considerations, if only to a lesser degree overall.
A note concerning the British NELSON/RODNEY 16" Mark IB APC Projectile (light-weight post-Jutland design). These shells were about the lightest 20th Century anti-armor shells (AP or SAP). They were designed with using high mussle velocity to increase flat-trajectory accuracy at short-to-medium ranges as well as getting improved armor penetration against the face-hardened side armor of battleships. The shells were a form of the Greenboy post-Jutland APC shells with the same 2.5% filler eright, though it might have been TNT with beeswax desensitizer, as used in British post-WWI 6" CPBC and 8" SAPC shells, instead of Shellite used by the other British APC shells after Jutland. In any case, it would use the Number 16D delay-action base fuze with originally a Lyddite booster, but very soon after commikssioning the fuze changed over to the much more reliable Tetryl booster type. The shape of these shells is unique to British Navy practice. First, they were the original type of elongated "B" streamlined design, with a much longer windscreen than the other "A" APC shell types then in use. However, unlike the later "B" designs introduced in the 1930s for British APC shells, the 16" APC Mark IB had a long conical windscreen (like the later Japanese Type 91 AP shells introduced in 1931) to get the optimum reduction in air drag at higher velocities. The later British "B" shells all had curved, long-radius-tangent-ogive windscreens similar to WWII US Navy and German Navy AP shells. At the lower velocities of the other British guns, the curved shape was better than the conical shape. This minimum-drag 16" Mark IB APC Shell windscreen was, like the ability to elevate the guns to 40 degrees, to give these lightweight shells the maximum possible range, even with their low weight causing increased drag compared to the other, heavier British APC shells. I do not know what the extra-long-range design requirement was for, considering that hitting enemy ships at such ranges was almost impossible.
Thank you for your concise and clear explanation of the choices that were made in deciding the relative thickness of deck vs. side armor in WWII battleships. Basically, there were no howitzers involved, so really steep plunging fire was not a worry. This makes good sense to me.
07:13 - The playing fields of my school were tucked in the north western arm of the Hilsea Lines. (Part of Palmerston's fortifications.) The changing rooms were the casemates of the cannons, with the training tracks still in place at each embrasure.
Thank you for recalling some happy memories.
Portsmouth Grammar School?
@@richardkua5129 - It was thus 60 years ago..
Ha... 26 years since I was there...
@@richardkua5129 42 years for me...
On the subject of deck awnings.
I had the dubious honor of transiting the Panama Canal in late July (Mar Det USS Holland). The deck plates got so hot the hard rubber soles of our combat boots were leaving black "foot prints" on the deck.
Great video. There are four circular forts in the Solent and its eastern approaches; No Man's Land Fort, Spitbank Fort, St Helens Fort and Horse Sand Fort.
There's also Fort Fareham, Fort Wallington, Fort Nelson, Fort Southwick, Fort Widley and Fort Purbrook built along the ridge of Portsdown hill to the north of Portsmouth. They actually face inland as they were intended to defend against any French attempt to flank Porstmouth, take the ridge and shell the dockyards from there.
56:15- Don't forget (and while it may be largely outside the scope of this channel) the U.S. Navy DID invest quite well in radar-carrying picket blimps in the 1950s and 60s. As for rigid airships, IIRC correctly the Germans DID attempt to use the second Graf Zeppelin (LZ-130) to patrol British airspace with radar but the huge metal framework of the hull dissipated the radar returns so badly that the ship was basically useless for radar patrolling purposes.
As for the dirigible being an effective ASW platform I have seen it stated the during WW2 no ships were lost in a convoy while under escort by a blimp. Versions of these did carry radar, but may not have been during the war.
Another reason for the Axis powers not having dual-purpose secondaries on their battleships was that they were cheating on displacement, so they had a larger tonnage to spend on secondaries. The RN wasn't really happy with having to go with DP guns on the KGVs and would've preferred specialised guns for each roles, but staying within treaty limits forced them to go with a DP gun (which turned out to be the right choice anyway, but in the mid-late 30s nobody realised just how much AA firepower a warship would need).
I mean, if airpower is dominating the naval environment to the point abandoning anti-surface secondaries is a good idea, you really have to question whether you actually want to build a new battleship at all, since it’s likely any new battleship wouldn’t be able to do the job of a battleship anyways.
Informative and relaxing 😌
Might be an idea to include all the land-based Palmerston forts in the discussion of them. It was an integrated plan.
Hurst Castle, on the Hamps coast, remains impressive, seeming intact and looked-after, with a history of re-use, and is accessable and open.
I’m sure the Allies saw no obvious advantage to conquering Jersey.
As long as the Axis were in control, there was no Bergerac, so win win. ;-)
I guess Jersey was symbolic, it gave the German dictator bragging right that he secured British home soil.
If so it was appropriately rejected as a worthy military target by the Allies.
As a filthy American I forgot for a second that Jersey is the name of a channel island, and the concept of the state of New Jersey being opposed to the allies made me chuckle.
That is not true. It's no secret that the fall of Jersey would have caused a catestrophic loss in morale, that Germany would have no choice but to surrender and give up their precious glockenspiel and winter markets.
Look at the casement diagrams in the French Armoured cruiser book by Jordan & Caresse look at the Gueydon Class casemate on page 104 - the internal transverse bulkhead had the same protection build standard as the protective external armour (120 mm) the remaining interior walls were 50 mm protection and build standard.
Great video, and I hope to find more on machinery upgrades as well. It's a race.
The K-class blimps that were used in the ASW role did mount radar.
The airships were really cool, especially with the parasite aircraft but a big waste of money. Also the metal structure would interfere with an internal radar.
@@richardschaffer5588 K-class were blimps. Which means no internal structure.
@@greenseaships Thats why it worked! An aluminum skinned blimp was also built & tested. Worked well but the catastrophic failures of the zeppelins but the kibosh on that. All the US zeppelins crashed. The only survivor the Los Angeles was German reparations. The idea of flying a airplane off an airship is just so cool. Unfortunately didn’t work out.
The tragedy on board the USS Forrestal in 1967 is a prime example of what happens when of the majority of your specialized DC and firefighting crews are killed in the initial stages of a disaster.
00:55:17 On USN airships, and everything you suggested that the USN do with them... the USN did, with their non-rigid airships. Heck, they kept the blimps around into the '60s, and where building them into the late '50s for ASW and AEW, but even during the war they where refitting their extant classes, the 134-strong K class as one example, with surface search radar, dipping sonar, sonobouies and MAD equipment for subhunting. Cant find much about how the follow-on class was kitted out, but there where only 4 M-class blimps, but the 18 N-class blimps where used for ASW and as flying radar towers to fill gaps in the various offshore radar networks
Deck armour: plunging fire didn't really come a possiblity until radar ranging was a norm, by which time even long range battle ship engagement was over. The US and Austro Hungary (a lesser extent Germany and Italy) tried Large Sea Coast Mortars (11 inch + pit mortars on Coregidor and the huge single example of the 42cm M14 Mortar set up to guard Pola in 1914 ) but the reality before radar the chances of hitting enemy ships would be like an extremely large game of battleships -by the time the shore howitzers corrected for a near miss the target ship would have moved on.
Not only that, many battleship guns (including the 16”/50) were only capable of plunging fire at ranges beyond the capabilities of even radar-directed fire control, meaning that they were realistically not capable of landing plunging hits even if battleships in general weren’t conceptually obsolete by that point.
25:20 I believe this is the principle on which modern composite armour is based (not that anyone will officially say); rather than a single homogeneous slab of armour you have lots of hardened rods in a “softer” matrix. Essentially the entire armour is made of edges.
Over 125 K-class "Blimps" - non-regid air ships - were used off the west coast of the U.S. to guard against submarines in WW II.
Drach, would you please consider an epidode on the US Navy's Fleet Train in WW2?
On your example of shells hitting sides or deck, the illustration actually shows is roughly twice the area for the deck than the belt. On my screen 4" of deck vs. 2" of side (both above and below the waterline).
An oldies station played Cab Calloway's "Wah-Dee-Dah" a week ago and I felt like Pavlovs dog..
I could be wrong but wouldn't the situation of the Channel Islands be a bit like that of Singapore? Essentially the shore batteries were pointing in the wrong direction. Once France had fallen and there was no air cover the defenders were in a very weak position.
I seem to recall HMS Warspite knocking out some of the coastal guns by the simple tactic of shooting at them blind from the opposite side of the island and using a spotter plane to adjust fall of shot. The Germans couldn't shoot back because their guns were pointing out into the channel and HMS Warspite had sailed between the Island and France. The entire defence of the islands was predicated on the Germans still holding France.
However there was no real reason for the allies to attack the islands before the end of the war. They were of no particular strategic value and the occupying Germans were treating the islanders comparatively well.
The Singapore guns thing is a bit of a myth. Three of the five had 360 traverse.
@@sillypuppy5940
The actual problem was the lack of HE shells.
@@bkjeong4302 correct. A 15" AP shell hitting the ground among infantry will definitely kill anyone it hits directly, but will otherwise bury itself in the ground many feet deep before the delay fuse sets it off. In doing so, it basically creates its own grenade sump.
Took me a while to understand where Cobriair was. It’s Corbiere presumably. 😂😂😂😂😂
In regards to Kamikazes surviving that is a negative. But surprisingly there were instances of a mostly complete body. Enough to go through his pockets, take his watch and other personal effects. And enough to merit a military funeral instead of being hosed overboard.
I know of the case where USS Missouri held a military funeral for a kamikaze pilot. Are there others?
Thanks Drach
32:04. The answer is really simple: American battleships didn’t have to deal with anything that could actually pose a significant threat to them after PH because the Japanese never took them seriously.
Japanese carrier doctrine prioritized destroying enemy carriers first (because that was seen as absolutely necessary to set up the later battleline engagement-they didn’t want enemy carriers to become a factor then), so they overwhelmingly attacked American carriers and mostly ignored the battleships even back when Japan actually had enough pilots to pose a significant air threat to American vessels. And American battleships almost never got into surface engagements, and on the rare occasions they did, they were ridiculously overkill for anything they faced, save for Second Guadalcanal and Surigao; even in those two cases, the Americans had the benefit of newer, larger ships (plus a massive numerical and geographical advantage in the case of Surigao).
Of fucking course they’re not going to be sunk-THEY NEVER ACTUALLY FACED MEANINGFUL OPPOSITION IN THE FIRST PLACE! Too many people assume that the survival record of American battleships indicates they were “unsinkable” or that they were the best warships in the USN because none of them were sunk outside PH, when the truth is that American battleships were rarely placed into situations where their survivability was tested (while other, overall more useful American warships were risked much more and thus took losses). Pretty damn hard for ANY ship to be sunk when the enemy isn’t putting in much effort trying to sink that ship.
Had the Japanese made a concerted effort to sink American battleships while they still had meaningful airpower, it’s very likely a few would have been lost.
Right, it's one of those constant misunderstandings that I see, seemingly based off of people taking a cursory look at USN losses and wins compared to RN or IJN on Wikipedia and coming to the conclusion that USN ships were immortal and the best at everything, whilst ships from the other 2 must be more flawed, since USN losses were seemingly lower.
It's also one of those things that will never change though. Most people don't look into this stuff in any sort of detail, and they don't bother to understand the contexts of each battle and each theatre
@@silverhost9782
I’ve literally seen people use the “they never sank” argument to claim the Iowas were superior to USN cruisers or destroyers in terms of value for money. Never mind that the reason cruisers and destroyers were sunk was because, unlike the Iowas, they actually went around putting themselves at risk due to being far more strategically useful vessels….
Alderney and in particular Guernsey were even more heavily fortified - the garrison on Guernsey had limited numbers of tanks and again a limited number mobile A/T guns 4.7 cm Pak (t) auf Pz R35 (f) also Guernsey had 3 x 30.5 cm L/52 guns and batteries of French 22 cm gun which was a formidiable block to any naval attack and lesser guns. Jersey also had 22 cm Schneider guns and 15.5 cm GPF (the same guns as worried the US at Cape Gris Nez at Normandy) - these covered the long sands between Le Braye and L'Etacq where the large sea wall was built, primarily because of the air strip and flat lands beyond and covering St Aubins bay where there is a sample section of sea wall the building of which was abandoned, but either way it would have been a slaughter -even the North coast of Jersey had fairly substancial strongpoints -because British forces had landed on these and other areas on Guernsey with high cliffs, so the reality is forget unless the British can get the US to bomb the Iland or Islands with an A bomb.
Dual purpose guns?
Yamato's 18 inch guns say hello with the sanshiki beehive projectiles. :-)
Drach, you were already my most respected youtuber, but after seeing you put in the A tier based off looks, you are now my most respected human ever.
But come on, Why isn't Vanguard in S tier? and C tier for KGV!!! They weren't THAT bad!!!
Honestly, Jersey's small northern beach sounds like Tinian's. A small beach surrounded by cliffs that is easily blocked, with an easily invaded southern beach. The Americans simply did a massive feign to the south to lure the Japanese out of position immediately prior to the Americans committing to an actual landing in the north. I can see a similar landing happening in Jersey.
Overlord made the Channel Islands irrelevant.
@@richardschaffer5588Yup. My response was made to Drach's "well, IF I were to invade Jersey this is how I would do it" hypo. So its assuming in argumendo that someone was convicted enough to actually invade Jersey notwithstanding Overload.
@@prussianhill I agree. Drach’s answer shows it would be an expensive bloody mess. The amazing thing is that Hitler fortified it so heavily, wasting resources.
@@richardschaffer5588 The best battle is the battle that can be won without ever firing a shot.
Dodging shells at long range might be practical for a 1 on 1 engagement or maybe 2 on 2 but I don't see how it is going to work at a squadron level engagement. Unless your opponent's ships fire in unison each ship is going to react at different times which will break up the formation at best or lead to self destruction through collision at worst. Unless you have very good fire control you are also going cede the initiative to the enemy because you will be unable to compute range accurately. I would think that on a many on many engagement the best tactic is to drive on exchanging fire and relying shell dispersion at range to protect your ships rather than disrupting your formation and potentially allowing your opponent to engage and defeat you in detail as your formation comes apart
Weird that no one mentions that the twin 15 cm/48 turrets (Type 1936 destroyers and planned for the O-class battlecruisers and the Spähkreuzers) were capable of anti-aircraft work, though I don’t know how effective it was.
At 7:30 that paint on the fort looks like a “error textures missing” I and I am laughing for to loud at 04:00, and might wake up others.
How could you have a tiny photo of a Italian battleship so low on your tier list on anesthetics.
Also I don't know why but I like the look of Royal Sovereign / whatever the Russian called it, there is something about the camouflage scheme and superstructure can't exactly put my figure on it.
Great video. But can you do a Persevet Class Battleship Guide? 😁
I saw a vid of a shallow angle, high speed car crash. The passenger was ejected at a combined angle between the two cars and hit a brick wall. So a belly-flopper pilot is probably getting pulled-out right under the nose but it collapses around them because there's nowhere to go. Too bad his legs are in the way 😢
Has the Army ever asked the Navy to make a ship specifically for supporting a beach landing?
Say instead of huge 16” inch guns say a bunch of auto loading 5” or 8” guns with a bunch of mortars on board?
Like the 60mm and 120mm mortars can fire a decent amount of distance from the water. Say a powered barge that can creep up at night and open up.
But like an armored barge. I know some barges can take 70,000 tons
There are plenty of WW2 examples of massed short range rockets being launched from LCT's? I used google images.
I found a source that said Dunkirk battle honour required the ship to been record to have evacuated troops.
What would a coastal defense ship that was designed and built in the late 1930s that was built in a similar style to the Swedish Sverige class ships? Assuming they were built by the British and built for Norway, Sweden, and Finland, how would this affect the Norway campaign assuming 2 or 3 each and are used in addition to their existing ships and not as replacement for those ships.
I didn't know about the the Finnish Vainamoinen class but it was roughly half the weight of the Swedish ships, but a early 1930s design.
I meant to add that it should be armed with either the British 14 inch or the British 15 inch 45 caliber guns.
I will open a campaign to bring back Zeppelins, because Zeppelins are cool.
Zeppelin NT. It's a thing since the end of the 1990s.
@@greenseaships I know. But they are a disgrace ^^
This may sound silly, but how did the gun crews get into and out of battleship gunhouses?
29:48 yeah he has no chance as if you need another example, look at what happens when an airliner slams into the side of a mountain or into the water instantly tears the aircraft apart and most of the time kills everyone aboard instantly however there are cases where people have survived that
Other problems for costal defenses include testing near cities/ The 12 inch rifles of some forts near Los Angeles were tested in 1928. Can you say windows broken? They were heard at least as far as the San Fernando Valley.
Before that time, the US used enormous mortars, with the idea of quickly destroying ships with plunging fire, piercing the decks. They rarely held practice-shoots, as the noise was so great, especially in the walled-up gun pits, that crews would get concussions from the sound. Eventually they were fired electrically, with the crew taking shelter in blockhouses.
Question: In the battle between the South Daoka, Washington and Kirishima, did I understand you correctly at about 46:20 that the cascade of electrical failures on the South Dakota and the fires...did the Kirishima beat the South Dakota? Could the Kirishima have finished off the SD? I actually never thought about it, is it possible if the Washington wasn't there? I think maybe yes...?
If SD had been the only US battleship present, probably the IJN would have sunk her. All of the US destroyers were sunk or crippled by that point, and as superior as SD was to Kirishima in a vacuum...it doesn't matter much if you can't shoot back or hit anything. Kirishima would eventually have been able to penetrate SD's armor at close range, and once at least some of other IJN ships (2 heavy cruisers, 2 light cruisers, and 9 destroyers) reassembled and rejoined the fight, they would have overwhelmed SD. If nothing else, that's a heck of a lot of Long Lances.
Nonetheless, considering most of SD's problems were self-inflicted, I wouldn't say that Kirishima actually beat SD in the historical battle. SD kind of just tripped over her own shoelaces and fell hard on her face.
@@Wolfeson28 thank you yes, I do agree, though I'd add that self inflicted damages would count against SD and for Kirishima, its llike the Bismark, was it sunk or scuttled, It didn't sink on its own...If SD had sunk it would make an interesting argument, ty again
Plus, no Kamikaze wanted to survive hit collision with a ship, regardless of the outcome
I would think that deck armor is more to resist bombs, than shells.
2 purposes - 1 for aircraft as you say, 2nd for ricocheting shells
Its very much for both
What is the ship in the background of your drydock videos
what USN ship is the airship moored at please.
1:04:30 Nelson may be cool, but he is going straight to C tier, if not F tier. Its B tier place would be well suited for Bismarck class, and Caio Duilio is going to B tier. Also Littorio is going out of the S tier. It may be kinda cool looking, but surely not as cool as Richelieu or Hood.
I think the real kicker for not liberating the Channel Islands by a contested invasion was probably the sheer cost in lives. The German resistance would have been fanatical, maybe not quite to the extent of the Japanese defence of some Pacific islands where the garrisons almost literally fought down to the last man. But the Jersey defenders may have been a bit more effective as they likely would have fought mainly from the fortifications and not gone in for massed banzai charges and such. So the fact that thousands of allied casualties were probable, coupled with a significant percentage of the civilian population of the island being killed in such fighting for no strategic advantage meant that the allied command made the right decision. Not that the islanders had a great time of it anyway the winter of 1944-45 was terrible for the civilian population and the garrison and had the war lasted much longer mass starvation was a real threat. The historical privations and liberation was preferable to the island becoming a cratered moonscape and 40-60% of the population being killed.
Thinking about it though I wonder if in September or October 44 the allies had parked 3 or 4 old Battleships off the islands and offered the garrison surrender terms may have worked.
@princeoftonga Honestly its a case of don't interupt an enemy whilst they are making a mistake. Yes you wnat to liberate the islands but in not attacking them you bypass 25,000 men. Not having to fight them in Normandy is very useful to the allied cause. Same as the island hoping campaign. Dont fight the enemy when you dont need to.
I gotta try this tier list.
Edit: very hard on my phone but gonna try on laptop
Sunday can begin..... .
@58:50 an excellent run down on why the flexible airships (blimps) were so successful as convoy and anti-submarine escorts in the Atlantic.
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/K-class_blimp
Wait...eaten by a Kraken?
I can't make out any of the ships on the tier list, can anyone provide a key? Iowas better be S tier!
sorry mate, Iowas A tier with Nelson. Dw though, QE, Hod, Richelieu and either Duilio or Cavour have taken the top spots.
@@thetorturepenguin Iowas are in the same tier as...Nelson? UNSUBSCRIBE!
You're kidding right. The Nelsons are THE most underrated ship designs EVER. They look incredibly powerful. The Iowas on the other hand, whilst elegant, look kinda generic tbh.
Probably something to do with that disgustingly large stern.
@@thetorturepenguin I'm kidding about unsubscribing but I do think the Nelsons are ugly ships.
@@matthewkidd7219 Yeah I knew that no one would have the evil in their heart to unsubscribe to drach. Nonetheless- personal preference. I think the Nelsons looked great, but then again I dont like the Iowa look, so different tastes I guess.
105mm guns is that a 4.1in gun
4.1338 to be precise.
The Polish destroyers not getting recognized for their part is not suprising given the treatment of various Polish officers bye the British after the war. (see recent Mark Felton Video on the subject)
Felton is a proven plagiarist fyi
Ah yes, my favourite post-war phenomena. You have to love how Soviet, neo-nazi, and other anti-western and anti-British parties really went out of their way to turn the Poles, amongst others, against the people that literally went to war to honour their alliances when they could have otherwise stayed neutral or even joined the people aggressing against Poland. The entire world has apparently agreed that cold war Soviet propaganda nailed it when it came to it's analysis of western interactions with the nations that would go on to be conquered by the Soviets. That's interesting. Meanwhile all I hear about nowadays in the supremacy of the Polish minority in ww2 British service and how that's more worthy of attention than either the British or any other minor nations contribution. We live in clown world lol.
Yeah, Felton is a joke. And they had a submarine with a screen door, can't be that great.
That wouldn't of been the RN's fault. That would of been the then current & post war Soviet navy's fault. As I'm sure you're aware the British Admiralty can only award battle honours to RN ships, the (at the time) Free Polish navy being a completely seperate entity. Something Felton has not (so far) decided to comment on.
@@tommeakin1732 Honestly, i've noticed an increase in the frequency of this narrative since Brexit too. Not sure if i'm imagining it, but that seems to have mobilised them further. Can't watch a single video about the BoB without someone waving the Polish flag in the comments section like a lunatic anymore lol
17th, 5 March 2023
Pearl Harbor
:)
HEHEHEHE ... eaten by a kraken!