HMS Vanguard VS USS New Jersey 

It's a shame that the British never saved the HMS Vanguard, it's so wonderful that all for Iowa's in the class were saved and are still with us..😊

As mentioned in other comments below, HMS Vanguard was designed to use supercharges. These guns were also capable of firing the same projectiles while using these supercharges which gave a maximum range of 37,870 yards (34,630 m) i.e. over 21 miles. Regarding saving a battleship as a museum ship, I would have preferred to save HMS Warspite as that had our best battleship history and HMS Vanguard never fired its guns in anger, not even in the Korean war as also mentioned below. Great review, thanks

As a five year old my father took me to see her aground outside the Still and West pub at The Point in Portsmouth Harbour. Gutted and sitting high in the water on her way to the breakers yard, she looked utterly enormous to my child's eyes.

My father took us on board HMS Vanguard as she was being stripped in Portsmouth Harbour. We had just been on board HMS Victory. My dad saw a hole in the fence next to the dock. So in we went. It was not long before we were spotted. The duty officer challenged us so My dad got out his WW2 RNVR documents that he carried all the time. So we were honored and taken to the forehead under the 15 inch turrets. Then we went up top to the bridge to gaze forward. It was the most amazing visit ever as a young boy and we were so proud of my dad, who served all the days of WW2. True story promise.

It always brings a smile to my face when I hear of a warship breaking loose on the way to the scrappers. As if to say, not without a fight mate!

Vanguard’s 40mm AA gun system was pretty cool: There were 6 autoloading barrels per mount and each mount had its own local radar director. They were serious about AA after the disaster of Repulse and Prince of Wales, although the former dodged (or “combed”) about 12 aerial torpedoes, which was a magnificent display of ship handling.

It is hard to deny the Iowa class 16" guns were some of the best and most powerful every built. Posters keep mentioning the 15" supercharge. By most accounts, the supercharge was developed for older 15" gun British warships that did not have their gun mount elevation increased during refit. The supercharge was intended to increase range on older ships as an emergency measure, not to increase firepower. It was very hard on the guns, and according to most sources, supercharging was not used on new/refitted ships like Renown, Vanguard, or the Queen Elizabeth's. Vanguard overall is one of the best battleships to be built, and one of the best looking. While the 15" was not the most powerful gun in service by WW II, it was rugged, reliable, and accurate. In other words, well proven and superbly battle worthy. Some have called it the finest heavy battleship gun built by the Royal Navy. It makes some claim to being one of the best of all time, despite not being the most powerful.

Great video! If nothing else HMS Vanguard was with a doubt one of the most beautiful battleships ever made.

Thanks for this. It's a sin my country never had the for sight to preserve this beautiful ship as you guys have done!

Some have said when Vanguard broke free, it was an act of defiance to escape her fate. Rather sad really

I know Vanguard didn't fight in WW2, but come on UK... you could have saved this ship. Last British battleship ever build, low mileage, no battle damage, etc.

Great video, thanks for taking the time to produce. My dad served on HMS Repulse and was on board when it was sunk in December 1941. Battleships and battlecruisers were magnificent feats of engineering but emerging technology (such as guided missiles) made them obsolete in modern times.

Fun fact one of the 15” guns from the legend herself, HMS Warspite, was put aboard Vanguard. Sadly when she was scrapped, they scrapped the gun and the rest of them too. I personally think at least one of Vanguard’s guns should have been on display in front of IWM, instead of HMS Resolution’s.

Iowas are pretty. The prettiest of all battleships. Vanguard was handsome. The most handsome of all battleships.

Come on Ryan, you know the only battleship that could take an Iowa is Warspite!

Thank you for this video. I grew up in a home behind Portsmouth Harbour and saw Vanguard in the distance many times. We children cried our eyes out when she was sent for scrap, and many former sailors had an unexpected need for a handkerchief.

"...if they were in the right place..." Halsey throws a hissy-fit. Lee throws his ships into position.

The RN 15" shell had a 50% larger bursting charge than the USN 16" super heavy shell. IIRC the USN estimated less than 3% chance of hits on a non-manoeuvring battleship sized target at maximum range of the 16" 45.

I am sad that the UK didn't turn the Warspite and the Vanguard into museum ships. The UK might have been strapped for cash at the time, but you can mothball a ship for a long time, until you have the cash.

Perhaps if Britain had not been under such economic duress, post-1945, the Royal Navy (and Captain Hindsight) could've maintained her (not mothballed) until such time as anti-air weapons had caught up with the jet age; imagine 1982 and a Seawolf-armed HMS Vanguard, rocking-up of East Falkland, for the shore-bombardment gig, "Eh, Amigo, escucho un tren expres, viniendo!

Her turrets were from Courageous and Glorious, the guns were from the stocks of 15 inch guns, some of which had been mounted in other ships, the Royal navy had extra gun barrels,so that guns could be taken out in refits and overhauled,being replaced by barrels from reserve stocks. These weapons were then overhauled and fitted to other ships as required.Also, Vanguard was intended to reinforce the far eastern fleet, originally, however , the need for escorts took priority for obvious reasons. The desire for a battleship with all the lessons of the second world war was the main reason she was continued and completed. Problem was, she was a ship without a war to fight in an era when the battleships time had passed.

Great video, just to add a few points. The reason the Royal Navy steered away from armoured conning towers was because in practice it was found the crew would often use the secondary 'open' bridge in combat to gain better visibility. This is also reflected in the conning towers of the KGVs, Nelson/Rodney and the refits of Warspite, Queen Elizabeth, Valiant and Renown. It was just dead weight so the armour was cut back. As for her main battery, many place too emphasis on the fact the guns were of WW1 vintage and didn't cut it in WW2. The reality is with super charges (David K Brown's book Nelson to Vanguard states the work was carried out to fire at 30 degrees elevation with super charges but were never issued because the war was over) Vanguard had a theoretical range of over 35,000 yards, but as you point out the chances of hitting at that range is doubtful even for modern battleships like Vanguard or Iowa. The 15 inch shell was still capable of penetrating any armour of any ship at 'realistic' engagement ranges. Her fire control was second only to Iowa and she would of been a formidable oppenent to even the Yamato in poor visibility/weather and at night.

Unless I am mistaken, the squared off stern was called the “transom” stern and actually added hydrodynamic “length” to ship at higher speeds. This effectively increased the length to width ratio (finesse?) and permitted higher speeds for less power. Conversely, at lower speeds the transom actually slowed the ship down

Some armour from the Vanguard was used in the British Steel River Don Works apprentice shop as the floor, I was an apprentice in the early 70s don't think I ever damaged it.

Went aboard HMS Vanguard during her last Navy Day, before she was decommissioned.

Quite fair and measured analysis that makes clear that Royal Navy battleships were based on a lot of battle and sea experience across the totality of two world wars, and it is far from clear cut that the Iowa’s were superior. Therefore issues such as crew training, experience and the nature of how any meeting took place would likely be the decisive factors. Thank God the RoyaL Navy since 1815 has not had to fight the US Navy and it’s incredible resources which would always be decisive and that USA and Uk remain the closest of friends and allies.

The only British built battleship to end up as a museum piece is the "Mikasa" in Japan. At least one of the "King George V" should have been saved and moored on the Thames. What were these people thinking. Eight of the US battleships were retained as museum pieces.

In theory, Vanguard’s gun’s aren’t as anemic as they first appear. According to British naval historian D.K. Brown, Vanguard was built to accept “supercharges” for its 15”/42 guns. These increased powder charges increased muzzle velocity by a couple hundred FPS, increasing the range and striking power to very close to more modern 15” guns. These were never actually issued to Vanguard because it was never in a war and the charges increased barrel wear, but they were issued to the Revenge class during WWII to make up for their 20 degree elevation. Again, these charges didn’t make the 15”/42 comparable to the 16”/50 or even 16”/45, but it did get them within spitting distance of the guns on Bismarck or Richelieu.

HMS Vanguard, the battleship armed with 'her Great-Aunt's teeth'.

My Ex GF's grandad was on a RN Destroyer during that exercise and storm and told me about it about 10 years ago before he died. He said that alot of the smaller ships had to go back alongside or to shelter where possible, but he remembered seeing Vanguard at sea before his ship 'escaped'. He said that as everyone else slowed or ran, Vanguard sped up and ploughed into it with no dramas at all...except the damage that most ships suffer during heavy seas! I was on a few RN Destroyers and in heavy seas it was normal if we lost all of our upper deck fittings and stantions and all that jazz and things were bent. I know of a storm that bent a 4.5 inche gun barrel and another than moved the turret in it's housing. The worst was our QD ladder was completely buckled when we came through the Bay of Biscay! That was a nasty nasty storm and when a Ship goes over 30 degress plus, it gets scary as every time it does, it feels like you aren't coming back up. I did think that with the more modern warships, that Radars and things were supposed to fall off at 45 degrees plus, so if IOWA was going over to 50, then that must have felt horrendous and been really scary on board. You don't know how scary heavy seas are until you have been in a few!!! Great Video. All of your videos like this are superb. You are a guy that really knows his stuff. Just take more than one torch with you haha.

Great series, thank you. I am glad you quote "on paper" as the realities of battle mostly disregard statistics; who would have thought that two 6" cruisers and and 8" cruiser could have forced an 11" panzerschiff into running way?

The other thing the RN found with Conning Towers, was that the senior offices tended not to use the conning tower even if there was one. You can see in the design of the Nelson class how the Conning Tower was a small almost afterthought.

Oh my, an Iowa rolling 50 degrees, that's scary

Fun FACT: in the movie, 'Sink the Bismark', the British capital ship gun loading scenes were taken from practice exercises in a 15" turret of HMS Vanguard.

Vanguard was my Uncle Martin's last ship. His first ship Was Ajax. He was at the River Plate.

You can tell Ryan just walked in from chipping paint somewhere, sat in a chair and did all this with no prep, no script, no prompts, etc. Gotta give the guy some credit here, and maybe at least a comb!

Dear old Vanguard... I was near the end of my apprenticeship as a shipfitter (fitter and turner) in HM Dockyard, Portsmouth when they paid her off. I went on board as they were stripping her of anything useful and went to the engineers' workshop where I found some 1/4" and 3/8" HSS cobalt tool bits. I grabbed them as a souvenir and they are now in my shed where I sometimes take one to grind a new tool. She didn't want to leave Pompey Harbour and swung towards the Still and West pub as she neared the Round Tower. Thank you for the information/comparison and the video footage of Vanguard. Unfortunately the UK was still paying for WWI and with the added debt of WWII she had to go.🇦🇺

A cutaway picture, a full colour center piece included in the English Eagle magazine, more a paper really, designed to be bought and read by young lads allover the British Commonwealth included HMS Vanguard. I collected each centre piece from the Eagle and thumb tacked these onto my bedroom walls.

The design was originally designed to use new 16in guns in a 3 gun layout with 3 turrets, but war pressures and delays resulted in those not being made, so the ship design was revised to take spare 15in guns/mounts/turrets instead.

Two things I'd like to see. I'm not sure if the fully complete 1950s/60s Jean Bart was done during thr Richelieu video but that would be interesting. In a non comparison video I think it would be fun to talk about the last battle cruiser ever in service (unless you count the Kirovs) the Yavuz

The Iowas are beautiful ships, but the Vanguard is a beauty too. Other than the Warspite, the Vanguard is the battleship I wish England had kept.

I kind of miss these long format videos their packed full of knowledge

Wonderful talk as usual, I really like this series. I should point out that the Iowa's use high-pressure boilers which give more power but are more complicated and hard to repair. The British used standard boilers which were simple and easy to repair if battle damaged, it was a deliberate choice.

I was a little surprised at the omission of any discussion of Vanguards radar, gun direction or command spaces/capabilities (beyond the bare statements about the 40mm and 5.25 inch batteries.) I would been interested to learn about Vanguards capacities in these areas.

This was the last ship my grandfather served aboard, he was in the Cameron highlanders during ww1 in the trenches and at the out break of ww2 he joined the Royal Navy and served onboard a minesweeper not sure about the name though as my grandfather passed away in the 1970s so I never had the pleasure of knowing him but I do know my grandmother not got him home until the 1950s when he finally said goodbye to his military service for good, he served all over the world and contracted malaria during his time in the navy whilst serving in Asia somewhere, I think it might have been Malaysia but not sure, I would have loved to have heard about his military days

Interesting point, HMS vanguard costed 11.5 million pounds, USS Iowa where around 100 million each. With the exchange rate being around 2.3 ish at the time the British could have build almost 4 vanguard per Iowa..... impressive!

I wish my dad could have seen this video. The Vanguard was his first and only ship. He left school as early as possible in 1944 to join the Royal Navy and served as a radar man on her maiden voyage, the tour of South Africa with the Royal family, etc. I thought I saw him lying on the deck, sunning himself with his fellow matelots, but on closer inspection the guy looks too old. My dad would have only been a teenager.

Good lord, a 50 degree roll must have been absolutely terrifying!

New to the channel but have watched several of your videos. Keep up the good work. I've never been on an Iowa but I have been on board the USS North Carolina BB55 several times as I'm from North Carolina. That being said I would like to see possibly a North Carolina Iowa comparison, and possibly a comparison with the South Dakota class. I have heard and I think I may have also read it somewhere that the navy discovered that the armor layout of the North Carolina class was actually better from a protection standpoint than the Iowa's. Don't know how true that is but I think it would be neat to see a comparison between the two. Again keep up the good work.

A battleship as a yacht?! Now, that's what I call one heck of a yacht! Good video Ryan. Did you ever do a video on when the Iowa served as transport for President Roosevelt to the Tehran Conference in 1943?

"**if they were in the right place**". Epic.

There’s an interesting newsreel of Exercise Mainbrace where Vanguard is seen operating in tandem with USS Wisconsin.The 15” gun turrets of the Courageous-class were modified and modernized to fit the standards for Vanguard. She was launched by Queen Elizabeth II.

Great comparison, wished they had updated her by removing the aft turrets and giving her missiles, considering the size of a Sea Slug, this would have made sense. Now complete fantasy, a Falklands conflict with Ark Royal with Buccaneers and Vanguard, Blake and Tiger, facing off the Belegano.

What I like about this guy is he looks like the kind of guy you’d see as a crew member of a large cargo ship. He just looks like a sea man.

My uncle served on HMS Vanguard, including the Royal Tour in 1947. Shame they scrapped it, would have loved to have seen her up close.

While Vanguard may have TECHNICALLY had a thicker belt at 14 inches but Iowa's was an internal angled belt that gave her the equivalent protection of 17.3 inches.

One thing that very rarely gets addressed when comparing the USN fast BB to any other battleship is the USN sparing no expense in their construction. Armor grade STS (special treatment steel) was used lavishly in these ships in places and areas where all other countries, especially the UK, would use cheaper and easier to work with construction grade steel. When the Admiralty toured the Washington BB56 they took note of how now expense was spared and the high quality fittings throughout the ship in comparison to the KGV class. This kind of detail could mean the difference between victory or defeat in the heat of a battle. As a reference KGV cost ~£7,400,000 or $30,000,000. Vanguard $47,000,000. The North Carolina cost about $70,000,000. Iowa $100,000,000.

Fantastic!. Its a great looking ship.

Funny thing about HMS Vanguard If HMS Hood hadn't sunk at Denmark Strait, Vanguard's stuff would have gone to Hood but Vanguard might have ended up as an Aircraft Carrier

It truly is a shame that no British battle cruisers or battleships were ever saved from the scrap yard.

I love these comparison videos. Great job guys!

My father served on HMS Vanguard and took part on the exercise mentioned here Ex Mariner in 1953

Always had the opinion that Vanguard was somewhat of a "budget battleship." Glad to see it still seemed to perform very well with what it had to work with - with sensible and smart design choices.

I love how unique vanguard’s hull is amongst battleships, the flat back looks so aggressive… it almost makes me think of a scaled up modern cruiser

I believe the color film of the vanguard next to the house is when she broke free on the way to the scrappers.

One of these guns holds the record for a hit on a moving target at sea. 26400 yards. That is the maximum practical range of the rangefinder due to the curvature of the earth. Radar is needed for longer ranges.

Biting the bullet, Vanguard was a mistake. Extra fleet carriers would have perhaps been a better investment..

One thing that has been left out is the surface fire control systems. The KGVs had the AFCT 9. Vanguard had the AFCT 10. In fact she was the only ship with that fire control system. The Iowas like the North Carolinas and South Dakotas had the Mk 38. Vanguard like the American ships had the M37 fire control system for the secondary battery. The KHVs had the HACS. The Mk 37 was clearly superior to the HACS. The Mk 38 and the AFCT 9 were comparable. The AFCT 10 was superior to either against a manoeuvering target. The Iowa would have had superior firepower against a fleeing target or in shore bombardment. But in a broadside action with both ships free to manoeuver the Vangard could if properly handled have scored considerably more hits, possibly enough to make up for the greater damage of the hits from the American gun.

One thing not mentioned is the Vanguard had a real world much faster and more reliable shell loading system.

The fact that with the click of a button I get to tune in to a thoroughly educational video the likes of this & other Battleship New Jersey productions is what makes RU-vid great.

If battleships were still relevant in 1945, Vanguard would have had 16" guns.

Do you have anymore information about the Iowa's bows being replaced with vanguard styled bows? I've never heard anything about it before, and it's quite fascinating.

DK Brown a royal navy designer who was active at the time indicated not only that Vanguard fitted for supercharges but that with the superior metallurgy of British armour approximately 10% better than US armour he would have given the Vanguard even odds against an Iowa and a fair chance against Yamato. In addition the bursting charge of the 15/42 AP or even the 14/45 AP was greater than that of even the 16/50 super heavy. In addition the 15/42 is widely regarded as the most accurate capital ship gun of all time

If anyone wants to see more of HMS Vanguard, like how the guns were loaded, then watch the film 'Sink the Bismarck'.

An amazing video as always, but I would note that Vanguard was larger than Bismarck at standard displacement. I’m pretty sure that battleships are not measured at deep load, and by going by that, Vanguard was about 4000 tonnes heavier.

15:38 I love that ship photo, seems to feature the then Royal Family including the late HM Queen Elizabeth the II with the crew of HMS Vanguard. Wonderful memory

HMS Vanguard VS USS Iowa (Part two) Sea Worthiness specifics. - Vanguard was designed after many lessons was learned from the British's greater wealth of navel combat experience. These lessons especially from the King George class made it very resilient with its armour layout, fuel choice, auxiliary command systems, automation & how it's propellers were configured but also how the bow shear/flare was designed for rougher Atlantic weather. It also had a second massive break water. In operation Mariner where war games were conducted with the Vanguard and Iowa class. It was apparently reported by eye witnesses at the time Vanguards turrets remained fully functional and could maintain a speed of 26 knots with only a 12 degree roll when a storm hit but the Iowa had a 26+ degree roll and had to reduce speed and was consistently suffering from impaired use or complete loss of functionality of its forward turret due to flooding & huge roll. Resulting in it loosing a 3rd of its main armament & therefore reducing it to 6 guns while the Vanguard still had 8 guns available. Add this to the fact Vanguard could turn in 940 yards & Iowa needed 1006 yards then I believe this gives Vanguard the advantage in conditions that aren't perfectly calm which is common. It simply had better reliability and maneuverability. The British sacrificed a little speed for battle reliability and Americans vice Versa simple as that. My conclusion. - I believe both ships are awesome & beautiful with significant advantages & disadvantages over eachother & once these factors are realistically assessed they are both highly capable of defeating eachother & it would more than likely come down to their Captains/Crews training & experience (It's another subject but I believe the Americans although fast learners unfortunately wasn't in the same league as the British in regards to training and experience as they were already engaged in WW2 for 2 years before America even joined the war and had the most powerful and experienced navy for generations up until that point (An Island race that conquered 22% of the world and were involved in the biggest sea battles like Jutland, they know about ships and training), even now the SBS & SAS run rings around the seals & delta. But assuming in a perfect world that the Captain's/Crews decisions & performance are perfect then in calm conditions I give it 50/50 but as conditions get tougher the Vanguard gains more advantage in the real world. If I had to be stationed on a ship during this battle I would choose the Vanguard personally as paper battles & reality are far different & the Vanguard is a far more balanced war machine built for war not to have the best numbers on paper. I often hear during Iowa VS Yamato debates a strong case for the Iowa closing the distance with its superior speed to get within range where it's superior targeting/fire control system (Vanguards was equally as good) can punch critical holes into the Yamato until it's defeated while the Yamato is missing shot after shot but in reality the Iowa makes a big target & it will be hit and I believe it won't take many 18.1 inch 3219lb armour piercing shells or 2998lb high explosive Yamato shells which had 33kg bursting charge's compared to Iowa's 18kg (FYI neither shell was as heavy as HMS furious 18 inch shells) to critically damage the Iowa before it can critically damage the Yamato. Therefore giving the Yamato the advantage. Now the reason I've briefly touched on this is because I believe there's more of a chance of the Iowa defeating the Yamato (35% chance max although some say with pure mathematics only 12%) then defeating the Vanguard in anything less than calm seas. Styles make fights and the rougher the sea the tougher the Vanguard become. HMS Vanguard for me. P.S: She had one of Warspites guns and therefore the spirit to break free in defiance on her way to the breakers and the Queen used Red wine to launch her. Ferocity and Class.

My Dad took my two big brothers to look at the old girl at Faslane, we moved into the area soon after as my pop was a newly trained MOD Plod and the base was expanding for Polaris.

During the 1970s I worked with an engineering supervisor who had been the Gunnery Officer - 'Guns' - on HMS Vanguard He said that one day in 1957 or 58 we got a signal which read - 'Go to sea and don't come back with any 15 inch ammunition'. So we went out into the North Atlantic, well away from any shipping lanes, and fired it all off Yes, it's a shame that we couldn't have preserved a big gun ship Some of the best known, like Warspite were just so old and worn out that it would have been difficult & expensive, but a better choice could have been Vanguard or the best of the KG V class

HMS Vanguard is my second favorite Battleship right after Iowa. And I believe that Vanguard is actually heavier than Bismarck and only lighter than Tirpitz by less than 500 tonnes. I am actually surprised by her sea-keeping ability. Had she been finished prior to 1943, she would have been the queen of the Atlantic Ocean. Great video!

Great footage of her refusing to leave Portsmouth on the way to the breakers.

The guns were beefed up to fire supercharges which meant they could fire alot further plus a higher velocity, however the supercharges would ruin the guns alot quicker so they decided to only use during war time, as she never seen a naval war then she never fired them. Vangaurd was very good in rough seas due to her bow, she was better than the iowa's at high speed through rough waters. I think alot of people see the Iowa's as the best battleships ever built but most will have the later changes in mind which modernised them right upto to the 90's, im sure the Iowa's and Vangaurd were alot closer when these 2 class of ships were actually designed and built in the mid to late 40's, one thing is for sure though and both were great looking ships.

I’m going to disagree on the remark about the 15” guns not holding up compared to “modern contemporaries”. The Yamatos’ guns, while powerful, weren’t particularly accurate, as they weren’t even rifled. And it’s a bit of an insult to say that 15” Mark I is inferior to the 16”/45s of the interwar. The 15” Mark I is certainly just as good as the Colorado-class” 16” guns. Here’s a comparison between the 15" Mk I and the 16” Mark 7 : Both guns fired at 2 rounds/min. The 15" Mark I's HE Shells are more even with the Iowas' in terms of HE Shell weight, though the Iowas' AP shells are 40% heavier. But that's not counting their Target shells and their post-Korean War shells. The Bursting Charge for the 15" Mark I's APC shells are slightly superior to the Iowas' guns', but the Iowas' are superior for the HC bursting charge. The 15" Mark I's bursting charge was 22 kg (48.5-pound) Shellite or 27.4 kg (60.5-pound) Lyddite, depending on the shell for APC, while the HE Mark VIIIb was 59 kg (130-pound) TNT or TNT/RDX. The Iowas' guns' bursting charge was only 18.55 kg (40.9-pounds) for AP, but the HC was 69.67 kg (153.6-pounds). The Iowas' guns' propellant charge is superior. The propellant-charge of the 15" Mark I was 196 kg (432-pound) SC 280 with standard charges (being 222.2 kg (490-pound) SC 300 with SuperCharges), whereas the 16" Mark 7 had 299.4 kg (660-pound) at Full Charge during WWII and 138.3 kg (305-pound) at reduced charge during and after WWII, while the post-war Full Charge was 297.1 kg (655-pounds). The 15" Mark I's working pressure is higher. The working pressure for the 15" Mark I was 20 tons/in² (23 tons/in² with SuperCharges) vs. the 18.5 tons/in² of the Iowas' guns. Both guns were about even in muzzle-velocity. The Iowas' guns had a muzzle-velocity of 762 m/s (2,500 ft/s) for new guns, while avrg. guns had 739 m/s (2,425 ft/s). the 15" Mark I's is 749 m/s (2,458 ft/s) with Standard charges, while going to 804 m/s (2,638 ft/s) with supercharges. And prior to postwar innovations with the powder charges rather than gun construction, the 16" Mk 7 actually had a shorter barrel life by about 40 rounds.

I have a book about British Battleships and it says that had Vanguard been finished earlier enough they were going to offer it to the Royal Australian Navy to fight in the Pacific but Australia didn’t have to people to man it.

Excellent video and presentation…thank you

My father served on the Vanguard in '52/3, his favourite ship he was always proud to say. It still shocks me to watch the video of it being cut up :(

From Fraser, husband of Leslie My paternal grandfather served on the battleship Dreadnought in the 1st World War. When I was quite young, (8 or 9) we had a school trip to Portsmouth and on a trip round Portsmouth Harbour, I remember seeing Vanguard. We also went round Victory, Nelson's flagship at the Battle of Trafalgar. Of course in those days, we had a big navy !!

the same 15-inch guns that in the Warspite scored the longest hit from a moving ship to another moving ship?

My yacht is 1950's vintage Grumman Sport Canoe with a 4hp Johnson outboard. Imagine having a battleship. Be hard to fish from probably.

Have you read the naval institute press book on the vanguard ? It explains why the American battle ships had better range because is double reduction gears for the props in US ship of WW2. It also stated US 17” inch armor was equal to British 16 “ inch , British Armor was a thought to be a little better. The US armor was was harden 50% of its thickness to counter a new nose cap shell the had super penetration do you know any thing on this ?

One thing I've always wondered is: Were the "big guns" on battleships originally intended for shore bombardment, or for ship-to-ship combat? Or were they intended for both? Which were they used more for? I know that depends on the battle and the setting.

Great video. At 17:00 you see Vanguard moving down the Clyde and passing SS Queen Elizabeth, which is being repainted from her wartime troop-ship grey to Cunard's house colours, in anticipation of her starting passenger liner service. At the time, Queen Elizabeth was the largest ship in the world. Both ships were built at the same yard - John Brown's Clydebank yard, back up the river. Regarding the 15" gun on the Vanguard - I'm sure the US Navy did a report on the efficacy of all the main armaments of battleships, and the 15" came out favourably compared to other weapons. It was something I saw referred to, but I can't find the actual report anywhere on the web.

She was slightly bigger than Bismarck, in fact, Though slightly smaller than Bismarck's later sister ship, Tirpitz (which had received some minor modifications).

Hey Ryan, remember that Iowa was still a treaty battleship and the limits of the escalator clause allowing 45,000t and 16” weapons. The 15”/42 was claimed by the USN in documents to be the most accurate gun if WWII. According to Oscar Parkes “British Battleships” Iowa was Rolling 26° each way while Vanguard rolled 15° each way. Despite being the last battleship constructed she relied heavily on rivets due to the need for welding to construct antisubmarine vessels. As such welding was limited to non strength members with her entire hull girder, armament foundations, and side protection systems being riveted. Her draft was limited to 35’ after calculations showed hull stresses would be higher than designed. Additional top weight necessitated strengthening upper decks to support it, however no strengthening was done to the keel/bottom. This moves the neutral axis of hogging and sagging higher up, over stressing the bottom hull plates. Even with the restriction she suffered opened hull plates during trials. Her dry bow that she wasn’t designed for made this situation worse, adding more stress in rough weather and being so dry she was often driven too hard in rough seas. These restrictions meant she could either carry ammo or fuel, never a full load of both. In the 1955 refit she was due to have enough weight savings employed to allow fuel fuel, ammo for 6 main guns and half her secondary but she was placed in reserve instead and eventually scrapped. British cemented armor is estimated to be 10-20% more effective than USN class A against battleship calibre shells. The 5.25” greenhouses on Vanguard were larger and had double the elevation and train rates compared to the mounts on KGV/Dido.

Good morning , I do believe the French battleship Jon Bart was not finished by 1950’s. The Repluse was the best ship in the fleet when it came to gun duals. She was able to stratal faster then every other big gun ship. If she was given the upgraded as the Renown prior to the sacrifice in Singapore.she would have had the anti-aircraft guns, she survives and even saved PoWales. It was also known that if she survived the torpedo attack, the Japanese didn’t have any more torpedos and she would have returned to Singapore along with the damaged PoW where battle damage would be repaired enough to join the US fleet in Hawaii. This was thrown around in the Admiralty at the time as fleet in the south was cruising to their sacrifice. There is a web sight called to “Armoured Carriers”. On this sight you will hear the recorded voices of the survivors of the “British Fleet”. I believe you will find this enjoyable as the voices of the fleet come alive. Forever in His service

Great video Ryan! But Queen Elizabeth ll didn't christen her. Princess Elizabeth did😉 I didn't know that till your footage here. How lovely they both look!

The longest moving battleship on battleship hit was HMS Warspite against Italy’s Guilio Cesare in July 1940 at 26,000 yards, that’s over 14 miles. I doubt we will ever see naval battles like that again.

The Lion-class battleships’ guns were a modified design from the 16” Mark I that was used on the Nelson-class. The Mark II/III and Mark IV used in the design phases of the Lion class were a bit interesting. The II/III were nearly identical save for the structural details of the jacket of A-tube. The Mark IV, which is what they would’ve been built to have had they entered service, was a huge step-up from the Mark I and II/III. Mark IV was designed to fire a heavier shell at a marginally lower velocity. In terms of the Lions I have a love for the 1944 design, where they would have had the 3 triple 16” Mark IV guns in the Mark III turrets, and 12 twin 4.5" Mark V dual-purpose guns, 6 per side, in RP 41 Mark VI turrets.

Thank you, this was wonderful, interesting.

Should do a comparison Iowa vs h. Class ships