How tired and in need of a refit was WW2 Ark Royal at the time of her sinking? I have heard suggestions that watertight doors could no longer be closed.
Campbell on his book "Jutland", argues that RN anti-flash precautions simply didnt work, something that seems to be confirmed by the fact that in Lion there were only 8 charges (enough for two shots) in the turret, all in authorized positions, and the turret still suffered a catastrophic chain reaction that would have destroyed the ship if the magazine had not been flooded by then, and in spite of flash and pressure having an easy way out though the missing turret plates. Jellicoe agreed mentioning that it appeared that if a turret got penetrated, a RN ships was likely to blow up. Yet, the idea that excess cordite charges overwhelmed or bypassed supposedly disabled anti-flash features seems to be widespread, why is that?
Hey Mr Inifel big fan. Alot is said about Japanese night optics in WW2 but could you explain how they work? I don't think I've ever seen a picture of one.
@@trauko1388 I think it was in Brown's "The Grand Fleet" where I read of post-war testing that showed the flash doors used in British capital ships were too weak. If the doors were closed, an explosion would blow them open, defeating their purpose. Why does the story persist that the safety features had been intentionally defeated by the crew? It may be true, or maybe not. The dead can't tell us. It is easier for the higher ups to blame the victims, than to admit that maybe their design was not fit for purpose. When the turret on Iowa suffered an explosion in 1989, the Navy was very quick to blame one of the men in the turret, floating a story that he had decided to commit suicide, and take everyone else in the turret with him, by placing a detonator in the gun to ignite the charges before the breech was closed.
Given that the _Courageousses'_ belt armor was so thin that it couldn't protect against anything heavier than machine-gun fire (and was iffy against even that), would they have been better forgoing belt armor entirely and using the saved displacement to give them actual structural integrity?
In regards to the question about interwar technology development. As important as radar was. I would like to make a case for the operational use underway replenishment. While there had been experiments in the past. The active use of Navies being able to refuel underway from oilers And resupply under power really grew in this time frame. The ability of ships to operate for extended periods without the need to dock in port; was critical to operating Worldwide.
Fascinating comment. Being able to replenish underway brings a number of advantages. First off, replenishment represented a lot of time for ships. Refueling represented a big time commitment for ships with many spending 1 day every two to three weeks just refueling. If I just pick a number 5% seems easy, which would represent one fueling day out of 20, I could then say, that with underway refueling you could go 5% farther, fight 5% more, or use 5% fewer people. However, one also need to consider time to head back to base, (a non productive time) Yet in reality, refueling in the middle of the ocean could allow you to go twice as far, cover four times the amount of area. That extra range could also be spent fighting and patrolling deep in enemy territory, (enemy concentrations were often far from home base). If you measure effect by "number of days fighting the enemy/patrolling deep in territory" underway replenishment may have doubled or tripled effectiveness of the force. It becomes a real force multiplier. Every ship, man and piece of equipment has a limited lifespan, so going further out allowed the country to get many times more "use" out of ships. Running a supply ship may not seem important, but armies run on their stomachs. There is a quote amateurs talk tactics, professionals talk logistics.
I agree- RADAR is huge! And it can be used to track submarines! During a fleet exercise in 1991, we used a 53F gun fire control radar to track the periscope of a submarine and went so far as to have it plotted in CIC as a radar contact. We all had a few chuckles over that one and at the STG's (Sonar guys) expense since they had not yet found the contact.
Side Note. As radar developed.. it was discovered that you can alter the beam pattern by the shape of the reflector. Parabolic is the overall best at making a round "pencil" beam. Cosecant square eventually became best at detecting snorkel subs. The old SPS-10 used this style of reflector
53:12 I think one of the other things to keep in mind is throughout the war the 15 inch gun was never seen as not doing enough when it hit in WW2. I think we get a little too top trumps in terms of gun shells, the thing that matters was the effect on the other end and the 15 inch shell proved it was very potent on the receiving end.
I suspect that this has partly to do with the general lack of strategic value for battleships in WWII and a corresponding decline of capital ship-grade gunfights.
Indeed, the Scharnhorst's would depart after only one hit from Renown landed, likewise a single hit from Warspite sent the Italians running, the 15/42's still packed more than enough punch to deal with anything save the Yamato's its just the ships they got to shot at tended to take the option of running away before they could take any sustained damage from the fight. Or you had fights like Narvik and Mattapan where the 15 inch was just deleting smaller ships at very close range
@@Frankenspank67You reach a practical size limit for these things. The limitations of mid-century material technology and both human and electronic control limitations made anything much larger than 16” or so pretty much pointless by modern-century. Japan was able to build a 19” gun that could just about fire but loading the things would have been ludicrously impractical as would finding a ship to mount them on. For smaller guns that require human loaders and a rapid rate of fire the world’s pretty much settled on 5” as a practical limit. Anything much larger than that and you basically need ALL the steroids or an auto-loader. Yamato’s 46 cm/18.1” guns & the earlier British 45.7 cm/18” gun were already pushing practical limits. Rate-of-fire was poor & Japan’s limited access to high quality iron ore made these weapons a little pointless.
1:42:00 - Also, had _Incomparable_ ever actually gotten to the serious-design phase, they'd've almost certainly found that it'd've needed a lot more displacement if they didn't want it to snap in half with the first wave, unless Admiral Fisher knew about a deposit of adamantium somewhere that he was planning on building the ship out of.
I looked up the captain of HMS Birmingham, from the Tsingtao incident. Patrick Brind was later knighted and made into a full admiral and served as the President of the Naval College Portsmouth, Commander of the Far East Fleet from January 1949 - February 1951 which is rather important given the business in Korea at the time. He was then the first commander of Allied Forces Northern Europe in 1952. He certainly was not a man to be trifled with even from the picture.
Regarding the US Navy’s Aviation Green Uniform, personally, I loved that outfit. It was comfortable and looked sharp. There is a principal reason that there are so few pictures of Aviation Officers wearing that particular garb. For the best part of the time that the “Av Greens” were being issued, the ensemble was considered a “Working Uniform” similar to oil and grime-stained dungarees, or flight suits, i.e., not deemed suitable attire for wear anywhere off base. That being the case, no officer could wear the uniform off base where a civilian could snap a picture, and since camera toting civilians were generally considered taboo anywhere on base, there were precious few opportunities for Aviators wearing the Av Greens to have their photo taken. That however, begs the question, why was this uniform considered on par with oil and grime-stained dungarees for off base wear? I put it down to professional rivalry or dare I say jealousy. The surface Navy despised any uniform apparel that set Aviators apart from the rest of the fleet. Flight jackets, garrison caps, and brown shoes drove them to near comic levels of distraction. They were successful, albeit briefly, to ban Aviation Officers from wearing their traditional “Brown Shoes.” That was a step too far, pun intended, and the brown shoes were soon reinstated. It has been a while now, but if I recall, it was not until the mid-1980’s that the Av Green uniform was briefly approved for wear off base. Even then there were numerous and varied restrictions. For example, I could wear the uniform out in town in the vicinity of my Squadron at what was then the Naval Air Test Center in Patuxent River, Maryland. However, if I had to make a run up to the Pentagon, located in Naval District Washington, D.C., just fifty miles north, for a meeting, its presence was strictly verboten! Soon after, the surface mafia was able to garner enough support to ban the uniform altogether. Too bad.
Every time I think I might actually complete my quest to watch every drydock episode, I'm at 160 now, Drach posts another patreon mini-series episode. 😢
Worke D on an oil rig in the north sea! Regarding seals on board, if the fire alarms went off all internal air conditioning was instantly swutched off, however after the checks were conducted and the INTERNAL A/C Was reinstated, the laundry out puts from the tumble driers had to be manually reset, the laundry was a bew build and the air con could not be integrated because of the bulkheads!!
Regarding a Maximum effort by the RN during the invasion of Japan. Did the UK have the logistical capability to keep that many capital ships deployed that far from British bases or would they have needed more support from the US (And would King have allowed it)
53:12 you also have to keep in mind at the time Italy was making very high velocity guns, whereas Britian was making relatively low velocity battleship guns. Making it make more sense for Italy than for Britain
In your video on the North Carolina you made a comment about the weight of the shot and she'll of the 5/38 , I draged out my old blue jacket Manuel to see if I could find the answer , and the answer is the powder charge weighed 32 lbs. And the shell weighed 54lbs. Hope this helps .
I agree in your assements between the Texas and Iowa. In going one step farther, the Pearl Harbor battleships seen even more changes. When you look at the Nevada, she saw the same upgrades as the Texas with maybe a better radar. They took off the crow's nest and placed radar sets. They took off the old secondary guns for new twin 5-inch DP guns. Really, the only parts of the ships that looked the same was the big guns. It wouldn't surprise me if they were the most changed warships ever that maintained their original designation and mission. USS Downes and USS Cassin would be interesting on how they fit in as well.
Jutland Night Action - "Christian Hülsmeyer (Huelsmeyer) (25 December 1881 - 31 January 1957) was a German inventor, physicist and entrepreneur. He is credited with the invention of radar, although his apparatus, called the "Telemobiloscope," could not directly measure distance to a target. The Telemobiloscope was, however, the first patented device using radio waves for detecting the presence of distant objects like ships." He gave a public demonstration of a working set in 1904. Imagine if the German Navy had backed development of his device. Radar directed gunnery in the High Seas Fleet in May, 1916?
The Capt of Birmingham reminds me of Wyatt Erpp from Tombstone. "You die 1st. get it? Your friends might get me in a rush, but not before i turn your head into a canoe."
RE The Whales question. It is certainly possible, even probable that phosphorescence can attract Whales. Phosphorescence is basically stress induced bioluminescence, and its a common strategy among many small marine organisms especially those that spend significant time deeper in the water column. Many species give off a flash of bioluminescence when attacked, or in response to something that could be construed as such (like a ships bows cutting through the water they are in). In essence what this does is act as a dinner here sign for larger predators that are within visual range, the smaller organisms are literally hanging out a sign that indicates to predators that something is over there bothering those ostracods and whatnot and it may well be edible. I do not think many people are aware of just how ubiquitous bioluminescence is in waters below the photic zone (the depth sunlight can penetrate to, which is about 200 metres maximum, though can be less depending on the water conditions). Virtually everything down there has bioluminescence in some form, and this strategy of utilising it when stressed in this way is actually fairly common. ] I could not tell you however how common it was, there just is not the data to do so, however that being said some of the larger baleen whales are definitely large and heavy enough to cause serious damage to a relatively lightly built wooden ship, especially if they are coming up from below at speed which is actually a fairly common tactic for Baleen Whales. Google bubble caging to see what I mean. So while I cannot say for sure just how common such incidents were, I can say that they are most definitely possible, even probable.
2:01:46 Dang Drach, you got me on the edge of my seat for this What if Alt History story. I love it and this needs to be in a long form book now. Thank you for that 😊
Re: U.S.Navy green aviator uniform. In the movie "The Caine Mutiny", Jose Ferrer, who plays Lt. Barney Greenwald-Van Johnson's defense attorney, wears one in a couple scenes. Go to the Wikipedia page for the movie and it shows a still of Ferrer in the green uniform.
Regarding the USN and their proliferation of uniforms, one thing great about having been in the USAF is we had one service dress uniform, with or without outer coat or sweater, etc. and one combat uniform, and one PT uniform. Made things so easy.
The USN had four distilling ships in WW2, Stag (AW-1) and Wildcat (AW-2) - converted Z-ET1-S-C3 (Liberty Ship tankers) - and Pasig (AW-3) and Abatan (AW-4) - converted T2-SE- A2 tankers- - to provide potabale water to the troops in amphibious assaults until water supplies could be established ashore. Imagine putting thousands of troops ashore on tropical islands with limited water supply and you understand the problem Stag Class = "Their conversion was to include facilities for a full Navy crew, an armament similar to that installed on Navy Liberty-type cargo ships, and three distilling units each capable of producing 40,000 gallons of fresh water. " Pasig Class = "Their special equipment was to include an evaporator plant capable of providing 120,000 gallons per day (three 40,000 gallon units as in the AW-1 class) and a large crane amidships capable of lifting 160 tons. The crane, similar to those installed on ENOREE (AO-69) and NIOBRARA (AO-72), was primarily for lifting LCT's on and off the decks of LST's at advanced bases, especially Eniwetok."
USS Tang would lay to at sea during the night. If she had no specific destination this was SOP. This conserved fuel for full power runs going after targets. The hydrophones, radar and all lookout stations would be manned. They would dive before dawn. Another fuel saving procedures was to charge the batteries, then shut down the mains and ran on the APU. This was done to again conserve fuel. USS Tang never was forced to terminate a patrol because she ran low on fuel. She slways ran out torpedoes.
Not much different to the way they responded against the Dido Class cruisers that were part of the escort. The Atlanta's were not in fact designed as AA Cruisers, they were actually designed as Destroyer Leaders, they just turned out to be very good AA platforms because of the 5 inch 38's. The Dido's by comparison were specifically designed as AA cruisers. The USA were not the only ones who came up with the idea of lots of smaller guns on cruisers for that role.
What they were designed for him what they ended up being used for was two different things. The Japanese called them machine-gun cruisers because of the speed at which their guns fired. I wonder if the didos or the Atlanta's had the greatest rate of fire.
WRT the IJN's emphasis on float planes, I seem to remember reading something about since their carrier doctrine was so very heavily offensive minded, they didn't want to dilute their striking power by having to use carrier planes for search/recon. Thus they endeavored to use float planes from the escorting ships instead - and this doctrine was significant in the design of the Tone class cruisers.
00:01 You also have to remember that these men were theorists with in the somewhat closed community of Naval officers. The kind of men who think more about advancing the profession. Bear in mind that Guardian did not develop Blitzkrieg tactics alone. He had the active collaboration of men like BH Liddle Hart, and George Patton. No one was thinking "country X should do this, and that. They were discussing how an armored force should be shaped and used.
@@tombogan03884 Lidell Hart had less influence on the development of German tactics than he liked to claim, and Patton had essentially zero impact. In fact its unlikely that most pre war German Generals would even have HEARD of him. Let alone be influenced by him. Another issue is the Germans never used the term Blitzkrieg, that was a name given by Western Media, and did not in fact accurately describe the German tactical doctrine. The actual name the Germans used was bewegungskrieg, which translates to Movement War. It was not even new, in fact you could, quite safely argue that bewegungskrieg was a development of the traditional Prussian method of warfare. Its essentially taking the German Stosstruppen tactics developed and used in 1918 and modernising them. Instead of being leg infantry as the stormtroopers of WWI were instead the infantry were mechanised (PanzerGrenadier regiments) with attached armour (Panzer regiments) to form the basis of the Panzer Divisions. How they operated however was essentially EXACTLY the same as the German Stormtroopers of 1918 operated, they just did it faster. They focussed on a relatively narrow frontage, punched through, and kept going, leaving the mopping up of stubborn defensive positions to follow up infantry. The task of the stormtroopers was to smash the hole then exploit it, which is EXACTLY what the Panzer Divisions were designed to do. So no, Patton and Liddell Hart had virtually NO influence on German interwar tactical development, they CLAIMED they did, but there is absolutely zero actual evidence of their claims being anything more than lies to make them appear better.....
If memory serves, I read in Geoffrey Bennett's Naval Battles of the First World War that a problem with the Monmouth class secondary batteries was that the lower ones could not be fought in a seaway, so I suspect that the changes made to the class in 1915 were for that reason.
1:42:43 One thing we must always remember in war is that everything and everyone is expensable. Yeah, it sucks when hundreds or thousands of lives are thrown away, but the reality is that those lives (along with the ships, planes, tanks, and everythign else) are chips to be played to increase the chances of overall victory. And in August 1942, the value of getting the SS Ohio to Malta was more tham worth the cost. Now the level of losses weren't sustainable over the long term, but they also knew that the plan was for a two pronged offensive in North Africa in the next couple months making Malta critical and (hopefully) not needing such efforts long term.
1:39:10 Wasn't the 108-foot width also dictated by the Panama Canal? IIRC, that's why the Iowas were 108 feet wide, so that they could (barely) fit through the Panama Canal locks.
7m02m - not sure when they really came into normal use Drach, but i was in at 99-05, the green uniform was ‘known’ and still around, but aviators wore flight suits the same way us enlisted personnel wore coveralls…whenever possible and even when we really should be in a higher level working uniform. Probably for much the same reason; a properly broken in set of coveralls was the next best thing to wearing sweats or jammies to work (sleepwear generally, specifically, onesie I think the brits call them?). I think the only time I EVER saw the green uniform was the occasional squadron person moving about on base whose squadron was assigned ashore because you cant wear coveralls/flight suits out and about. Depending on the base, they were generally frowned upon around base outside of the flight-line too, so…occasionally, greens. 2h07m13s: Drach, could it not also be said that by the time the technology needed to load at all angles was small enough to fit in the turret space available, both as the stuff got smaller and more powerful as well as the turrets got larger, it wasn’t really necessary any longer as the systems training the guns was sophisticated enough that it could easily put the guns in and out of battery for loading without any crew input or degradation in accuracy? So for battleships at least, the rate of fire isn’t that high so why not keep to simpler designs?
HMS Uganda - The Canadian government faced a crisis in both World Wars. A large part of francophone portion of the country viewed the armed forces as instruments of their oppression by the anglo majority and most did not want any part of the war. This led to a political decision that while their would be a draft, the only men sent to fight would be volunteers. The non-volunteer conscripts could only be used in defense of North America. This led to a brigade of these "Zombies" being told they were going to invade Kiska. When they protested, they were told to look it up, the Aleutians are part of North America. So you understand the view of the veterans of the Canadian 1st Army and I Corps (Italy), Number 6 Group of Bomber Command, the RCN and the crew of Uganda thinking, "I''ve done my bit, let these slackers finish the job in the Pacific"
Also there was still some bad feelings regarding the Battle of Hong Kong. It was felt the Canadian troops that were sent there were barely ready and barely equipped for a fight with a highly motivated enemy. They were not happy with Great Britain and we’re not eager to repeat unnecessary losses and of course the lousy British officers in charge of the ship didn’t help.
wrt the question about USN green aviator uniforms. iirc, the 1941 movie "Dive Bomber" gives a very good look at them, as well as pre-war air ops on the Enterprise, all in Technicolor. Regarding the issue of enclosed cockpit aircraft being flown with the canopy open, having the canopy open both improves visibility and makes it easier to get out of the plane if something goes wrong.
The Royal Navy was far from run down in 1688 as Both Charles II and James had invested a great deal in the fleet with the famous thirty ship programme inaugurated in the 1670s.
Ref the British in the Invasion of Japan. A considerable effort was to be made by the Commonwealth in support of 14th Army retaking Malaya and Singapore and the ANZACS in conquering the Netherlands East Indies (The Dutch were convinced that Britain would not return them to Dutch control after the war and that was one reason the US cut off deliveries of LST Mark 2's to the RN, forcing Britain to build the long serving LST Mark 3's with their steam (a set of frigate or two sets of corvette VTE engines) power
There was the mutiny of the Storzhevoy. While technically not to defect, they wanted to start another revolution, but it was supposedly what the Hunt for Red October was based on.
In an alternate universe the Tsingtao incident does lead to shots being exchanged between the RN and the IJN, dominoes start to fall, and WWII starts on the Chinese coast in January 1939... How would that turn out, assuming the RN deploys the bulk of its forces to the East in response to this development, and strips the Channel and the Mediterranean of capital ships?
Boring out gun barrels also means the walls would be thinner and you'd see them explode. Regardless of longer, shorter, elevation... They should be designed and manufactured for that caliber.
I wouldn't have wanted to be in the turret if they tried to bore a 15" out to be a 16". Granted it would be a half inch all the way around but those guns might whip or have major problems. Plus you would have to use more powder for a larger shell & will the turret be able to handle the recoil if not it could seriously damage the turrets or the guns or both. Basically when making bigger guns you need to design the guns & the turrets & the ship to handle such, otherwise your "flirting with disaster". You want your guns to kill the enemy not your own sailors.😊
Pretty sure the Birmingham only had 3 turrets at the point of the Mexican standoff with the three Haguros. I believe they had to land the fourth one to make room for the captain's balls. That was a man who understood to his bones Cunningham's later quote about it taking three years to build a ship but three hundred years to build a tradition [ hope I didn't butcher that too badly ].
2:50- Even the destinies of naval aircraft were usually directly affected by radar. Without shipborne radar, the history of naval aviation would be a lot less interesting.
At 1:14:40 I thoroughly enjoy that story! You can click on the time stamp to hear the story I'm talking about!! So in January 1939 the Japanese Navy & the Royal Navy come close to starting WW2 3 years earlier than the Japanese originally started hostilities with Britain.
If the engine on the Graf Spee's Aircraft had not broken down, and found out the British were bluffing on radio. Do you think they would have tried to make a break for it?
Yeah, all in all you can't really blame the Canadian sailors for when given the chance on whether to go home or continue fighting against Japan for choosing to go home. Especially for the reasons you gave too. Yeah, the first people back are going to grab up the best jobs, they get to see their families for the first time in who knows how long AND if they go home, then they have survived the war! If they go into the Pacific to fight the Japanese there is no guarantee they will all survive. Where they can say they did their patriotic duty & fought in the war & since they survived long enough to win against Germany, SOME may not be so lucky against the Japanese. And if you had personally been at war for 4-5 years and all of a sudden given the choice to go home or stay & fight, I know I'm going to choose to go home!!! Without even having to think about it very long! Because you know that in a war there is ALWAYS a chance of getting killed or even worse, getting seriously maimed & living! And then being disabled the rest of your life! So most are going to choose home. I'm sure the other Allies were rather irritated by this, however the USA & UK pretty much had the Japanese defeated already. The Japanese just didn't want to admit it yet. And finally atomic weapons would change their minds about surrendering! Thank God!
Re:Japanese float planes I think in your video on WW2 American and Japanese air group composition I believe you indicated that while American doctrine allocated a significant part of it’s air group to scouting, the Japanese dedicated their air groups to strike aircraft and fighters and relied on float aircraft on cruisers for scouting. This doctrinal difference may explain the Japanese interest/development of float planes.
The VS (scouting) squadrons flew the dive bomber of the day, and were qualified to carry out strike missions. To get longer range on an armed scouting mission they would carry 250 or 500 lb bombs, vs the 1000 pounders the Dive Bomber (VB) squadrons carried. See discussion in Shattered Sword.
Just ask again. Drach sometimes calls out the repeat questions but often puts a new spin on the answer. Anyway, if a thing is worth hearing it’s worth hearing again. Ive listened to 257 Drydocks and asap Im going to go back to Drydock 1 and do them all over again😂
Apart from the fact that there were excess 15'/42s + spare turrets, why didn't they just equip Vanguard with three quadruple 14' guns from the KGV which would have given a greater broadside than the 18 15.'?
Re: 00:07:02 - I've only seen the US Navy Green Aviators uniform in reference drawings, never in photos. How common was it? In addition the the Aviation Green Uniforms Aviation Officers and Chiefs wore brown shoes, while Surface Forces Officers wore Black Shoes. The distinction between the colors of the shoes actually common used the designate Naval Aviation personnel from the Surface Fleet personnel (in addition to "brownshoes" the term "airdale" was used when referring to Naval Aviation personnel). I'm not sure why, but Submariners were (and may still be) referred to as "bubbleheads", but I'm fairly sure that nickname actually originated in relation to Navy Hardhat Salvage and Repair Divers.
Re sonar, in the movies it appears every nations sonar had the same frequency when heard fron submarines, isbthis valid ,? Or is it a case of the frogs in films?
Having recently read Winton's "The Forgotten Fleet" it seems to me the main filter and control on the British Pacific Fleet in the remainder of 1945 and 1946 would have been how many ships their logistics train could keep supplied off the Japanese coast.
Regarding the feeding habits of whales, I've seen several wildlife films on TV showing humpback whales coming up vertically beneath shoals of fish to engulf them in their mouth, and at least some of these were filmed in the waters off south-east Africa.
I have issues with the Imperial Japanese Navy winning (or at least damaging) Task Force 58 at the Philippine Sea. 1. By 1944, the US Destroyers were to attack radar contact without waiting for orders. Sure, the Type 93 "Long Lance" has more range, and it can become a problem at night. As the pure oxygen they run on produces little to no wake. But this is mitigated if US Destroyers can first achieve a firing solution for their guns and torpedoes. Lee can use the destroyers to help his Cruisers and Battleships. There are issues with the presence of Yamato and Musashi because those 18-inch Guns would increase the standoff distance between the two battle lines. However, the mitigating factor for the IJN was that on 2 June 1944 (according to the combined fleet website). Yamato and Musashi engaged in gunnery exercises off Tawi Tawi against a destroyer at 38,280 Yards (35,000 meters). Musashi's Gunnery Officer Yunoki Shigenori was chewed out for the large spread from Musashi's main guns alone. Of course, at roughly the same time, Lee had his own issues with the Fast Battleship's own gunnery with their own bombardment of Saipan. But would the US Navy's radar and fire control allow the guns to acquire targets sooner than the Japanese equipment? 2. It would be a Mexican standoff between the two carrier forces. But at the same time, Mitscher has the means to get a strike against the IJN battle line earlier in the form of Torpedo Squadron 10 on Enterprise. I still remember the risk you bought up in your "What if Admiral Lee sailed west" video of either side having a friendly fire. Either Lee's ships would fire on the Avengers or LTCDR William I Martin (CO of VT-10)'s Avengers accidentally attack Lee's battle line. However, if Edward Stafford's book on Enterprise is anything to go by. Mitscher was planning on VT-10 to engage in a night attack on the Japanese fleet on 20 June. Had Task Force 58 hadn't spent that night recovering their pilots from the afternoon strike. For this scenario, if Mitscher authorises a night Torpedo or glide bombing by VT-10, the best target would be the battleships, given their size. Yamato and Musashi would be the primary targets for the attack. These attacks may not stop the Japanese battle line entirely. But it would mess with them in focusing on more than one target vector. Plus, they cannot devote much to their dual-purpose guns. Plus, unlike the American Carriers, the Japanese ones did not carry night fighters. At the same time, Mitscher would have the other carriers begin preparing to unleash deck load strikes before dawn. Its debatable which one gets off the deck first. But Mitscher would've been watching the time to launch his strike as soon as possible. This could result in the American strike arriving before the Japanese one and finishing their battle line and protecting Lee's ships as they withdraw. 3. There are also Kamikazes. Say by the start of 1944, the Imperial Japanese Navy High Command accepted that their pilots are no longer capable of fighting their way through an American CAP or anti-aircraft defence the conventional way, as they did in 1942. Instead, it is proposed that the planes launch from the carriers and suicide into the US ships. With the escorting Zeroes deliberately causing midair collisions with the CAP, Judy's Jills and Vals Kates make Kamikaze runs on Task Force 58. Once they have been launched, Ozawa retains a few fighters for self-defence and withdraws to a safe distance. The CAP was distracted by suicidal aircraft despite the formidable AA defences. Not all the aircraft would be shot down and could crash into the fleet and light carriers.
But in all out war do you think it would matter? I mean we rationed everything from gas to chocolate in ww2. If we devote all 20 of those sites to war production would it be enough?
2:21:56 well said. Never underestimate your opponent. It is a quick way to lose the war. We (America) almost did on several occasions unfortunately. Hubris is a very dangerous thing
“In no particular order” Well, not underestimating a potential enemy, *should* be the number one rule. It would behoove the US to remember this rule with regards to, let’s say China. I’m sure the higher level DoD individuals do, we can only hope. Especially considering the many other factors and realities influencing any would be action between the two States. I understand the hubris if some of these factors weren’t at play. But they are so the hubris is a mystery to me.
Thanks for the answering my question about boring the 15-inch/42! I thought the reduction in caliber might be an issue, thanks for explaining why. However, just a quick query on the maths: Wouldn't boring it to 15.6 inches have made it slightly over 40 caliber rather than 39 caliber? By my calculations, boring it to 16 inches would make it 39 caliber, not 38. (Barrel length of ~630 inches divided by 16 equals 39.375.)
The 1880's is a very "British" answer for the breechloader question. Wasn't the German and French Navy using breechloading guns fairly regularly in the mid to late 1870's?
Yep, even in the 1860's, but with the warships of that time being largely Broadside or central battery ships there was less impact on overall ship design as compared to when turrets became predominant.
Yep Drach is very right during the 1860s to 1871 Germany and France were rather preoccupied with each other to worry too much about building massive navies. France had hers and was content to be second fiddle to the RN under Napoleon III and Prussia was just barely starting out. It had sone very good ships but also some not so good and yes all equipped with breechloaders for the most part. And Damon it’s hard to find info on these guns like the Krupp 26 cm and the Krupp 17 and 21 cm guns.
@@Drachinifel is there any info out there on German and French breechloading naval guns. I have been scouring the Internet and there’s very little. The only gun with any info at all is the big Krupp 26 cm but even this is scant
wrt the question about boring out the 15"/42, the Washington treaty prohibited improvements in the main armament. Italy was given special allowance for improvement because her battleships were so obsolete. The newspapers of the time reported a general consensus among conference participants that 12" guns were obsolete. The treaty also prohibited changes in the type of mount. When the USN started modifying the mounts to increase elevation, there was considerable discussion among treaty members whether that was allowable, or a prohibited change in the type of mount.
The reconnaissance battle on land, sea and air is the first stage of any battle. Probably the clearest demonstration of this axiom of combat is the Battle of Gettysburg. The Union army had reconnaissance the Confederate army did not. This resulted in the most deadly Battle in History of the United States and a victory for the Union
Your kind of mixing apples and oranges a bit. The Gatling gun faded from use because of the superior technology of true machine guns. A powered Gatling guns advantage is that the multiple barrels able to fire and resist over heating while keeping up a high rate of fire. The cons of that is a rather bulky mounting requiring significant power and ammunition feeding. CWIS was was developed with the specific task of being a last-ditch defense of anti-ship missiles. These were small high-speed targets that may not have been stopped by anti-missiles or dual purpose gunfire. You are trying to make it into some sort of all around solution to air defense that everyone should have just jumped on? It's a little bit more complex than that. It requires not just the gun itself. But the whole fire control and the radar tracking system.
On upgunning KGV postwar, why not? Just ignore B turret. Replace it with AA or dual purpose secondaries. Why? In the age of radar guided fire control, two triple 16" turrets are probably all you need. And if they were having this conversation in real life, that would mean things went differently and battleahips were still seen as potent, so that would mean the Lions would be proceeding. 6 x radar controlled 16" would be a useful partner to a 9 x 16" Lion.
Because the First Sea Lord said they were to be put in reserve and "left to rot" because they were obsolete and Britain was bankrupt. The UK had rationing into the Fifties and Princess Elizabeth had to get special permission for her wedding dress because of the amount of material it used - more than rationing allowed. There was no money to play around upgunning them
The irony is that Drach so explicitly loathes politics, and politicians, yet is so obviously amused when members of the military engage in politics to manipulate governments to their ends. That’s being every bit as self serving, and conniving as any politician, it’s just in service to a different set of priorities. They are being precisely what they, and Drach purport to despise.
