01:19:39 I can speak from personal experience of dealing with lightning damage. The only thing predictable about lightning is that it is unpredictable. We had a CCTV camera on an outside pole with an intercom box get hit by lightning almost 15 years ago. The lightning came inside on the coax cable, laughing at the so-called "lightning arrester" along the way, and hit the 16-port distribution amplifier. What the distribution amplifier does is take an input signal, amplify it, and then output it to several outputs. This lets multiple pieces of equipment use the TV signal without signal reflections and weak signal issues. In this case the amplifier sent video signal to the video matrix, for live monitoring, and to the DVR, for recording. This unit could take 16 camera inputs. The distribution amplifier got so hot from the strike that it melted the solder on many components, leaving heat damage on the unrelated equipment above it. However, the damage did NOT propagate to the video matrix, the DVR, or the other 15 cameras plugged into it. The lightning went into the distribution amplifier, but no further. Upon testing at the office, about 8 of the 16 ports were actually still functional. I still have that distribution amp at home as a souvenir of the story. All I had to do was replace the distribution amplifier and all the cameras, other than the one that got hit, worked again. The intercom system was completely fried. The lightning came into the main switcher, wrecking it as well as many of the intercom stations around the facility. I didn't work on that portion thankfully. Nor did I have to fix the outside camera that was originally hit. Several years before that, I was working retail and there was a huge rainstorm going on outside. The store was slow due to the weather. I and a couple of customers were chatting while looking out the tire center windows at the rain. We saw a bolt of lightning hit a manhole cover in the street while not touching the power pole or power lines 40' away from the manhole cover. Sure enough, a day or so later I was able to run out to the middle of the street and see a scorch mark on the manhole cover near one edge. So yea, lightning will often, but not always, strike the tallest object. It has so much energy in such a short time that the path it takes to ground is wildly unpredictable. The best you can hope for it to increase the odds of directing it away from sensitive things Hope people find this interesting.
About the question just before this one... I think what he was more asking about... Was THE DISTANCE difference... Even if you try and go to the early 40s to get something sort of similar. Tanks don't shoot as far... Correct??? Naval shooting distance is way way further. That is the aspect I think he was hoping for you to touch on, and so was I. But I was surprised that it kept on not being mentioned. I was so sad when I hear you say the next Name of someone... I was like NOOOOOO
I've got a rather funny story about lightning as well. We had a female Doberman who was a rather sweet individual named Cooder by my stepfather, Billy. And at the time we were staying in a couple of camper trailers on a 7 acre property in Georgia. Well, a storm had come up & I hadn't realized that Cooder was under my trailer. But the storm was causing flash type lightning every few minutes and evidently one of the flashes was grounded thru the trailer & evidently thru Kooder as well. My only evidence being the dog coming out from under the trailer howling. OmG you could practically hear it in her howls, "struck by lightning struck by lightning!!!" It had given her a jolt but she was OK. After a little love she appeared fine☆ My Mom's Mother actually died from getting struck while hanging out clothes when my Mom was very young. ☆Now, fast forward about a year & a half & we are living on a property in South Carolina building a house. And we have 16 x 32 block basement built & are now doing footings for the rest of the house. But we have the basement covered with a pool tarp & an extension cord from the temporary pole with electricity for lights. Since witnessing what a tornado can do several times when a storm came up, we preferred the basement to the campers we had. Well this one particularly bad storm had gotten us all into the basement. And lightning started striking the temporary pole we had. And the extension cord was wrapped around a metal frame doorway in the basement. It was actually 2 rooms 16 x 16. My Mom had a bed set up in the other room cuz the basement stayed cooler. Well anyway everytime lightning would strike it was blowing sparks thru the extension cord & off of the doorframe. It did this about 3 or 4 times in a matter of minutes & the top of the doorframe was glowing like the eye of an electric stove. Well we lit a few candles & after it was over put a new bulbs in the lamps. And started making sure everything was OK. Well, Kooder was so far under the bed in the other room that we practically had to lift the bed off of her for her to crawl out. She knew what that lightning could do & hid from it the best she could!!
The fuel shortage issue in the UK seemed to be a southern thing. Up in the wilds of Cumbria, there were no queues at all. One theory is that during the change from E5 to E10 petrol (10% ethanol now), some petrol stations let the tanks run completely dry before filling them with E10. This meant that a couple of petrol stations around London had no fuel for about an hour, so of course, the world was ending.
That was part of it. I was commuting between London and Portsmouth at the time and it was pretty scary, since most petrol stations were completely dry. Remember finally finding a petrol station with fuel, whilst running on fumes, somewhere in the middle of nowhere, and having to queue over an hour for fuel. I guess that's what I get for trying to be responsible and not needlessly panic buying.
1:11:00 -- And there are sometimes other considerations, as well -- the guns originally mounted in the Mark 1 Male tanks in WWI _were_ naval guns, which subsequently had their barrels cut down, reducing their muzzle velocity, for the practical reason that, with the full-length barrels, there was a risk of the muzzles burying themselves in the ground as the tank went across the terrain of no-man's land or crossed a trench line, putting the gun out of commission until the barrel could be cleaned out.
On the "Naval guns vs land guns" item: one of the best soviet AT guns of WWII was the D-10, a 100mm gun with a barrel length of 53.5 calibres, that was a land version of a naval gun. The D-10 went on to be used in the SU-100, T-54 and T-55.
Regarding the gun question, the dates are off slightly. The Soviets had some more advanced features in their tanks earlier than most people realize. This was in part due to their experience in the undeclared war with the Japanese at Kalkin Gol (several months in mid 1939), which involved a surprisingly large number of tanks and aircraft - the initial Soviet disasters on this battlefield taught a lot of valuable lessons which resulted in significant improvements to their tank designs. The eventual Soviet victory convinced the Japanese they didn't want to go to war with the Soviet Union, which had a significant influence on the naval war in the Pacific. But even before Kalkin Gol, the Soviets started design of bigger tank guns earlier than anybody else. For example, the L-11 gun was designed in 1938, entering production in 1939. It was a 30 calibre 76.2 mm tank gun that was used on a couple of Soviet tank models produced in late 1939. The US M3 tank would not be operational until 1941: it had a 30 calibre 75 mm gun, so basically an equivalent weapon but two years behind the Soviets. The long barrel Panzer IV would come out in 1942, so the US M3 in British hands was actually quite a shock to the Africa Korps when they first encountered it (though it didn't take them long to adjust, and the German 88mm AA gun could still kill everything on the battlefield even if their tanks couldn't penetrate the frontal armor). Though ahead in some ways, there were also significant problems with the Soviet tanks. The books by Steven Zaloga are generally well done and do a good job covering the problems and not just looking at the 'flashy statistics'. I suggest starting with Armored Champion which is the best overview of the topic of WW2 tanks I've seen. But your basic point remains unchanged even with the corrected dates: the naval guns have a much higher muzzle velocity and are far deadlier than equivalent tank guns of the same era - not to mention having far better aiming systems in many warships than any tank of the era.
Soviet tanks suffered from poor ergonomic considerations and poor quality control during production. They had below avrage optics, but good engines, and guns, and generally excellw t armour, at least past T34. They were also cheap, with cast turrets and few welds.
I hate it lol... its so fucking loud compared to the rest of it. Volume needs to he halved. I usually watch this late at night or play endlessly overnight. So jarring.
My grandfather volunteered for naval service in WW2; having done so at age 17 after completing high-school. He very much wanted volunteer, and he went with the navy since they offered a warm bed at night and 3 hot meals a day. Something the army and Marines lacked. Had he waited until he turned 18 there was a real risk of being drafted, denied those hot meals and being forced to sleep in a cold muddy trench.
Smart & forthright thinking on his part, for sure !! My grandfather was not able to serve- per se. He was too young for The Great War & too old for WWII. However, he was employed at RCA in Camden, NJ. His work there contributed toward technical aspects that no doubt found their uses on many a vessel, aircraft, combat vehicle, ect. Much respect to all that served the purpose back then !! 🚬😎👍
Should have gone for the RAF. The only service that (at the time) that sent officers to war and kept the enlisted busy at home. But Bomber Command had a bad casualty rate, so your mileage might have varied. Do you want to die falling in burning wreckage from 5km AGL or freezing to death in icy water? On the whole, 'rum, buggery and the lash' suggests the RAF would have been the more comfortable - though no less deadly - choice.
@me67galaxylife That was the conversation that my grandfather reported occurred when he asked my great grandfather for his advice as to which service branch to join. Which, given the context (his father and his uncle both being a veterans of WW1), the description of army service being associated with cold food and wet muddy trenches would seem to be an accurate one. Photos of soldiers in the cold and mud of ww2 aside.
Given his like I would guess so.... Also Drach how long have you been wanting to say that something was "deep sixed" I know you got your chance with the video about sable and wolverine.... but how long man tell me It has been on the list of things I want to say at some point for a long time
Today Drach forgot to mention the friendly fire incident during which he previously and famously commented…’ the sea air was filled by the sounds of curses and expletives in all fourteen official languages of the Austro-Hungarian empire’. 😂😂😂
@@theawickward2255 Cant remember, Im afraid. Ive watched Battle of Lissa and WW1 Adriatic Campaign again, but it was in neither of them. Hilarious it was, though - a classic Drachism. 😂
@@theawickward2255 Found it or, at least, something very similar to what I (mis)quoted☺️. Bombardment of Ancona, at 17:50. Whole engagement was a farce😵💫
Regarding the use of captured guns: The main portion of the guns of Fort Sullivan near Charleston, South Carolina in 1776 were French 24 pounders which had been aboard the French ship of the line Foudroyant when that ship had been taken by the RN in 1758. These guns had been allocated by the crown for the defense of Charleston - a task for which they proved quite useful. The crown probably had not anticipated that it would be the Royal Navy which would be repulsed by them in June of 1776. So, at least in that instance, captured guns were used to arm a colonial port.
"Having electrical illumination is all well and good but when the constant threat of Zeus-like smiting is a problem...." Your Drachism for the day, I'll have to find a way to put that into a safety report the next time I find a badly wired nightmare job the "electrician" has done.
Since we begin with Operation Downfall, it can only go up , or neutral buoyant, from here. Happy Easter, Sunday, or whatever you want today to be. Drachinifel and everyone.
My father volunteered for the Army/Calvery in WWII. He was scared of heights and would not even climb a six foot step ladder. He ended up as a tail gunner in a B-17. Survived 29 missions before returning home where he was given a medical discharge because of the stress from spending so much time in a bomber. He never would go up anything off the ground again.
Regarding the use of a naval gun as a tank gun; the big issue with naval gun on land is usally not the ballistic properties, but rather the weight. Naval guns are not designed with mobility (read: weight) as a major constraint. So one usally get less boom for a given tonnage then with a gun designed for ground use.
The german 88 was a naval gun originally. The soviet 100mm was also a naval gun, originally aistro hungarian in ww1, then italian, and finally soviet. Dual porpouse/naval AA guns share many of the requirements with a tank armament.
@@egoalter1276 That does not take away from the fact that they were ORIGINALLY Naval guns and that changes were made in order to make them suitable for use on land. One of the primary changes was, as indicated, dropping the weight as much as possible as the OP stated because when it comes to land vehicles, which tend to be far smaller than ships, weight is a much greater consideration. A rather extreme example to illustrate the point is the British 77mm HV that went on the Comet. That was originally derived from the 17 pounder, but was a very different gun from the 17 pounder. It used the 17 pounder projectile but its charge was the older 3 inch case. The breech block was correspondingly very different as the ammunition is now shorter than the 17 pounder, less recoil management is required because the smaller charge means less force transferring into said recoil, and so on. So as you can see, just because a gun is derived from a Naval (or in the 77 HV's case an AA) gun does NOT mean its the same as the original weapon. The OP was perfectly correct in noting that land guns derived from Naval guns are in fact often significantly different to the original Naval gun, and a large part of that is in fact to bring weight down as well as because what might work on a ship may well NOT work in a tank without significant redesign of both gun and ammunition.... EDIT: Oh, and the original German Naval 88 was not an AA gun originally, it was a secondary for some ships and the main armament for some of the smaller destroyers, NOT a Naval AA gun as at the time the air threat was essentially non existent at the start of WWI. The Naval 88 was used because it was at a small enough calibre that it could be easily converted for land use, but was powerful enough to be able to engage even high flying aircraft of the period. It was however never designed as a Naval Dual Purpose o AA gun because that threat did not exist at the time it was developed. By WWII the 88mm was a VERY different gun to the 88mm Naval gun it was originally derived from.....
Regarding fuze safety, many fuzes also had safety devices that relied on the setback from firing along with the rotation impacted by the rifling. The US base detonating fuze had some ball bearings that impeded the firing circuit until rotation spun them out of the way until they locked in position.
For Corsair is Fleet Air Arm service, read Carrier Pilot by Norman Hanson. One of the greatest WWII pilot's memoirs. It deails his exploits flying off RN carriers in the Pacific and details the training involved and the process of devising a method for reliably landin them on a carrier deck. They were difficult aircraft to get down safely and it was the FAA that worked out how to do it. Maybe that's one of the reasons for them being more popular than with the USN.
About copper-bottomed ships - ISTR reading somewhere that merchant ships of the time fairly rapidly learned that securing copper sheet with iron nails into the wooden hull was only a temporary fix, so non-ferrous nails were used. Whether copper, brass or bronze, I don't know. I assume the RN also experienced this.
"As well as the "buoyancy bomb" the British also developed the "Johnny Walker" bomb which worked on a similar principle but was designed to repeatedly sink and rise back to the surface (while also drifting sideways) until it hit something and detonated. It was created specifically for attacking the Tirpitz, and a number were dropped during an attack on 15th September 1944 without success (though Tirpitz was hit by a tallboy in the same raid).
Arc lighting also produces a nasty ultra-violet spectrum. Whether any sailors lived long enough to get cataracts from it would be another question. The American navy rejected the Corsair because it had landing characteristics they did not like. The Royal navy figured out a way around those problems. Of course, the American navy had the option of picking-and-choosing.
I learned to sail in small sloop-rigged boats. We were taught a routine for changing from one tack to the other: when ready, call out "ready about, hard alee !" Then push the tiller hard in the downwind direction, which makes the bow swing in the other direction. The boat turns about 90 degrees and ends up on the opposite tack with the wind coming over the other side of the boat.
@@derrickstorm6976 You call it out to alert any crew or passengers. When you cross the wind, the boom swings quickly from one side of the boat to the other. It's low enough to conk you HARD if you don't duck.
From what I've read, the American generally regarded the F4U (Corsair) as superior to the F6F (Hellcat) as well, as evidenced by the F6Fs being immediately scrapped after the war while the F4Us stayed in front-line service well into the 1950s. The reason the USN went in so much harder for F6Fs was (a) it was easier to fly, and much less likely to kill novice pilots, and most especially because (b) it was far cheaper (ended up being less than half the price). The F6F also took far fewer man-hours to build so it was possible to mass-produce them on a scale that just was not reasonable for the F4U. Far from being a second-line aircraft, the F4U was more regarded as the more "elite" of the two, but in far fewer numbers. Because the Marines were the first users of it (due to the landing issues you mentioned earlier), once huge numbers of F6Fs began arriving and the Navy was able to standardize, it did so which largely meant moving the F4Us off the carriers. The USN was very good at making use of its huge advantage in materiel, even when that meant having to make some relatively minor qualitative sacrifices.
There’s a video suggestion of the sinking of HmS sydney under this and the graphic just made me think of a question to pose to you sir drach, why didn’t ships guns feature the bore evacutor/ fume extractors as well as the i believe it’s called muzzle break ?
39:52 about Szent Istvan specifically, the turrets were designed to be balanced when the ready ammunition racks at the rear of the gun platform were full. I've heard different claims whether that ammunition was jettisoned to help balance the ship, or the ready ammunition wasn't carried at all due to lessons learned from Jutland, but either way each turret was off balance by more than 8t.
About hoarding goods: people hoarded toilet paper even here in Sweden. Sweden manufacture way more toilet paper then we could possible use. We make enormous amounts of toilet paper, and export it. Yet, somehow some people thought that the fact that toilet paper was a hoarding problem in other countries meant that we would have no toilet paper here.
On the conscript vs volunteer, another big issue with the numbers for the US was that at the end of 1942 they severly restricted voluntary enlistment in order to manage manpower and training etc. So pretty much anyone enlisted in 1943 onward was officially conscripted.
Regarding the concept of manufactured shortages - one of the less political ones to discuss would be the Johnny Carson Toilet Paper Shortage of 1973 that was sparked because in his monologue he made a joke about government TP being in short supply - not consumer grade TP - and this started a run on consumer TP in the US (and I believe Canada).
In the "Navies that rapidly evolved from almost noting in to major blue water navy" I would say that the German navy prior to WW I fits the bill as well.
Re: Marines in British ships in the high age of sail- One particularly important reason for Royal marines to be aboard ships was for their seperate command structure, duties, etc, as a hedge against mutiny- they were a visable incarnation of the authourity of the officers and a check on the crew in emergency, battle, etc. (And as sharpshooters, manning the topps, and so kn
wrt the modernization of Warspite, vs QE and Valiant, can't help but wonder why all of Warspite's 6" were not removed and replaced with the twin 4" DP mount. By the numbers on Navweaps, twin 4" vs single 6", the twin 4" has double the weight of fire per minute, and greater range, because the casemate mounts are limited to about 14 degrees of elevation.
Best definition I have heard for a cruiser: largest ship which can be built in reasonable numbers capable of independent fleet actions. Think Salvo Island...
In the XXth century the French conscription system flagged fishermen towards the Marine Nationale. They did their military service as sailors and if mobilisation came they returned to the Navy. Regarding capîtal ship building assuming no WWI, I think at some point the French army would have realised they were woefully short of heavy guns, and building something like a couple thousand 155+mm guns wasn't compatible with building a 28-capital ship navy.
I always had the impression that part of the reason sailors were expected to have an exceptional capacity for cursing was that they were well-traveled and therefore could call upon the profane words and phrases of many peoples and nations.
The Armored Carriers channel has a good series about various fleet air arm aircraft. It's called "In their own words", and is full of interviews with pilots who flew them.
Will Drachinifel Discuss the story of Alum Chine March 1913 which exploded at the exact location of the Dali? Could he also discuss the interesting and important ships and even the Golden Gate Bridge built at Bethlehem Steel at Sparrows Point where the Key Bridge collapsed?
My dad said when he was drafted for WW-2 they just went down the line. He said that the first group in front of him were drafted in the USN while he was in the group that was sent in to the US Army. He was drafted in 1942. My mothers brothers all were in the US Navy with one, Roy Strieter, going down with his ship, the USS Bristol, in the Med. Uncle Roy was career Navy having joined in the late 30s.
Best apples to apples comparison of guns I could find…M4 Sherman with a 76mm aka Fury easy8 and the 3 inch anti aircraft late WW2 from the Baltimore’s and Des Moines and Gearings and Sumners…both have 2700 fps muzzle velocities depending on ammunition choice
With the scenario being an amphibious vehicle, I would figure anti personnel performance would be emphasized over anti tank. High velocity shells tend to bury themselves reducing explosive performance. If looking at the US WW2 family of Shermans, I think the 105 would be the first pick, then the 75 and last the 76. But then would a 4.1" sink the vehicle when fired.
With regard to the arc lamps, it gets worse. The electric arcs give off a lot of UV, so they can cause sunburn, and will give your eyes arc flash if you accidentally look at them.
In reference to the question about LCS ships here in the USA, last summer I attended the Commissioning of the new Littoral Combat Ship USS Augusta. Named for my home state of Maine's capital. I was with a local fraternal, charitable group, which was providing the crew with free hot dogs and French fries. I met and was speaking with the Vice Admiral (he even gave me one of his challenge coins) and he was telling me that the brand new USS Augusta would probably only be in active commission for 5 years before being decommissioned.
1:18:24 IIRC the guns on the (I)SU-152 and ISU-122 *were* adapted from naval guns. A 4.1" gun is 104mm, absolutely colossal by the standards of the late 30s.
So the jingle goes," When approaching dead ahead PORT your helm and show your red." I have a model ketch made by my grand father in the late 1800's, on which the wheel is rigged so that turning the wheel to port would steer the ship to starboard. We long thought that this was a mistake, but found out that people with only a nautical reference, having never seeing an automobile, retained the tiller directions even with a wheel.
For the rudder orders, I think people realized that standardizing the orders around things like "left full rudder" or "right half rudder" just offered more clarity regardless of what particular steering system a ship might be using. If I order "left full rudder", I'm very clearly and explicitly stating that I want the rudder deflected to the left as far as it will go (or however far over constitutes the "full" position). Regardless of whether that's going to be accomplished by a helmsman on the bridge turning a wheel to the left or crew belowdecks moving an emergency tiller to the right, it's unambiguous what I want done, and the required orders are also quite concise (", ").
The Royal Navy did have conscripts in WW1, conscripts could state they preferred naval service when they were conscripted. In fact the Royal Navy got first choice of the conscripts. It might not have required that many conscripts compared to the army but it was definitely there. Personally, I'd argue volunteering instead of waiting to be conscripted counts as volunteering
I understand that in Australia during the Vietnam War, there was a period of several months between someone being notified that they were being conscripted into the army and the date they were required to turn up. During that time you could voluntarily join any of the armed forces and obviously you would not be required to turn up later with the conscripts. It seems likely this would also apply to other counties and other conflicts at other times?
As to the B Bomb I understand from reading on the matter where it is possible(there are few references mostly due to the fact that even up to the 1950's the designs were classified)that it was considered that even a 250lb B Bomb would sink or cripple any WWII capital ship which is why the original plans for a 2000lb B Bomb were modified
The Dutch Navy experimented with zinc sheating on wood covered iron-hulled ships, as a cheaper alternative to copper sheating. It did not do as well against fouling as copper, but it did galvanically protect the iron hulls helping these ships to survive well past their intended service life. The last remaining of these ships is HNLMS Bonaire (1877), now a museum ship in Den Helder.
I suspect drach is correct about lightning, but for a different reason. When electricity flows through a metal object it flows almost entirely around the outside. This is the same reason you’re safe in your car during a thunderstorm. So pretty much just the hull is receiving current. I suspect the electronics would be damaged because that high on the ship the current would be more concentrated, and the electronics are in the outside. For a wood ship the current would just follow the path of least resistance which might very well be through the ship.
drach ,sir? have I got this right? the japanese and american navies were both active in the Mediterranean at the end of WW1? what cooperation was there?
@ 2:26 - About the B - Bomb being shunned, I wonder whether this might be akin to the 'Window' row, ie fear by some that it might be copied and used by an enemy, see RV Jones*. Their logic being that we have more ships so would be at a disadvantage. *Who records Churchill's comment - 'Open the window'.
00:46:10 Patrick O'Brien depicts Jack Aubrey organising his shipwrecked crew to build a schooner from the keel up from salvaged wood and foraged green wood (Great Lakes style). It was fully a third the size of the wrecked frigate, and nothing about the author's description of how it was done rang any alarm bells. Given that O'Brien shares Forrester's reputation for writing fiction solidly grounded in historical fact, I always assumed he was basing this on known instances where this was done.
I learned the archaic helm commands from Mackenzie Gregory, who had been a Lt. on the bridge of Canberra at Savo. That had always confused me; his example was "port your rudder" used to mean walking or otherwise turning the tiller head to port, thus a starboard turn. He did say the change occurred some time in the early 30s.
We have the same fuel rush scenario in the US every time a hurricane is due to land; one is compelled to join in as the ensuing run on the stations could mean two weeks with no available fuel. I once nearly had to ram the "deer in the headlights" panicked woman behind me who was honking for my spot at the pump....but refused to reverse even a few feet so I could get out of her way and leave.
Panic induced shortages? In Australia, during initial lockdowns, it was toilet paper. Major capital cities ran out of toilet paper because of panic buying. Mass hysteria in action...
My understanding is that there was a genuine toilet paper shortage in _Western_ Australia during the early lockdown period, because it had to be shipped from the east and cross state travel was restricted. Unfortunately through the “power” of social media, this then spread to the rest of Australia and then pretty much the whole of the rest of the English-speaking world and panic buying did the rest.
I remember a case here in the UK when some bloke rocked up to a supermarket and bought its entire stock of toilet paper, apparently his idea was to make a killing selling it on e-bay. A week later everyone had calmed down and nobody wanted to buy his toilet paper on e-bay so he decided to return it to the supermarket for a refund. As there was nothing wrong with said toilet paper the supermarket smiled sweetly and refused the return as they were legally entitled to do. Bloke was not happy.
20:00 During COVID I was buying bread and commented to the cashier "I usually keep a couple rolls on hand" When they clerk gave me the death look I realized the lady behind me had 2 bulk packs 48 rolls 😄
It was my impression that port and starboard refer to sides of the ship , while left and right refer to directions. The port side of the ship is the left side when facing forward. But the ship turns to the left and right.
2:51:41 More people should listen to that bit, because it really shows just how much of an infrastructure crunch the Japanese were operating on. No amount of steel in the world is going to let them build that many of either carriers or battleships, and there is a reason they decided to build the four ships that they could build at once (the two Shokakus and the two finished Yamatos) as secret superweapon capital ships to get the most they could out of them (even if only half of them proved viable in practice)
Drach, tell us about the piece of art at the 1:40 mark. I see it has the Flag of the Kingdom of Drachinifel flying, so please share the details with the rest us.😁
I may be mistaken, but I believe that is the basic layout of the planned French Lyon-class battleships. The World of Warships modeling looks different, and is more like what it would have looked like if built in the 1930’s instead.
@Drachinifel I know Spain's Navy was essentially a non-entity in the '40s, but how would the Battle of the Atlantic/operation in the Mediterranean been altered if Spain and joined the Axis and given the Kreigsmarine use of Spanish ports?
The Atlantic War wouldn't change much, aside from the U-boats a reduced need for them to make a run through the Channel. The big impact would be in the Mediterranean, as the sure-fire loss of Gibraltar would effectively end supply runs to Malta and the North Africa (or at least the eastern parts of it) campaign. It wouldn't change the ultimate outcome of the war, but things would be a bit more dire for awhile.
@@Dave_Sisson Ah, I need to brush up on my geography. The latest info I have on the Azores is from a little after the time of the Great Spanish Armata, at which point they very much where Spanish possessions. I assumed they had remained that way.
@@hanzzel6086 My understanding is that the Azores were discovered by Portugal and remained their property except for the few decades when Spain owned Portugal.
Are there any interesting stories of accomplishments from translator officers in the age of sail assuming that was a dedicated role? Were there ever logistics, medical or engineer officers becoming admirals?
19:50 with all due respect i think that analogy was not equivalent, the TP issue was that office buildings and commercial spaces use a different format of TP than people do at home.
Yes if there are "space frigates" they will have Marines.. at least in the Star Ship Troopers universe (book please...) As Corvette Roger Young is carrying Mobile Infantry (in effect marines)
I wonder if part of the persoective on the Hellcat vs Corsair in the US and Royal Navies was due to the Royal Navy only getting fully involved in the Pacific after the Japanese pilots were devastated while the US had such a histoey facing off against the best Japanese pilots. Later in the war we also see the US shifting more Corsairs onto their carriers. As I understand they were much better at ripping kamikazes to pieces as well as being far superior in the ground attack/CAS role. The sorts of things that became more common in 1945 as the Britisj Pacific Fleet got into the fighting. And lets not forget, the Corsair was still in front line service with the USN after the Bearcat was replaced.
British Carrier pilots were operating Corsairs in active combat before the Royal Navy formed the BPF, LONG before. Just because they were not in the Pacific does not mean those Carriers were not busy. The British got the Corsair because the USN did not WANT it at the time because the thing was a sod to land on a Carrier, hence why it was pretty much relegated to the USMC to begin with. The Royal Navy was desperate for carrier Fighters however, but could not get hold of anything like enough F4F's or F6F's for the very simple reason tha the USN was buying the vast majority of them. A result they had to go with what they could get, and that meant Corsair, which meant they had to learn how to get the thing down safely on a carriers deck. The reason why the USN started using Corsairs was literally BECAUSE the Royal Navy had worked out how to operate them from carriers, not because they were better at killing Kamikaze's. The Corsair and the F6F had the same armament. I do get tired of people assuming that because they were not in the Pacific the British Carriers were not doing much fighting, and that they only really started once they got to the Pacific. Its an entirely false premise. HMS Illustrious suffered 6 bomb hits in one action, including 3 1100 pound, and one 2200 pound armour piercing bomb on one of the Malta convoy runs... and she survived, something I doubt any US or Japanese Carrier would had they been hit by 3 1000lb and a 2000lb armour piercing bomb....
@@alganhar1 The Malta Convoys were long done before the FAA had either Hellcats or Corsairs operational. By late 1943 carrier operations in Europe were fairly limited. The most notable were likely attacks on the Tirpitz. The Corsairs saw very little, if any, air to air combat in Europe. Most actual combat experience with the Corsair would have been the British Pacific Fleet.
Regarding helm commands for the USA, left and right rudder directions was in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR's). 46 CFR pertains to Shipping. However, at some point in the 21st century it is now okay to use port or starboard rudder commands on US ships. As Master I would joke with the harbor pilots; "We're bilingual" so you can use port and starboard or left and right.
This is only a guess, but could the limited space inside a tank turret have dictated the use of a shorter and therefore less powerful propellant case compared to a naval shell of the same calibre?
What you, Drach, need to do is (ahem, uh- rephrase that....) Drach, would you kindly research & upload a segment on Spanish/Republican light cruiser PRINCIPÉ ALFONSO/LIBERTAD ? Or if feeling inspired ? A study on the naval aspect of The Spanish Civil War ?... So get on it, (ahem, ummm) rather- I hope you'd consider my request that you'd delve into this convoluted pre-WWII subject matter. Warm regards from the Delmarva Peninsula !! 🚬😎👍
I got to tour Belfast in London. My goal is tour North Carolina and Wisconsin. That will cover all three Fast Battleship Class. I’ve been aboard Alabama 4 times. Really neat!
I worked in Mobile,AL for about 6 months. Commuting within a crew truck making an addition to Austal shipyard driving in from near my Dad's place in Pensacola, FL. We drove past the USS Alabama every day and every time I wanted to go tour the old ship. I had hoped to go aboard right about the time we were done with the addition. BUT someone dropped a heavy piece of metal & I lost the tip of my right handed birdy finger. Ended up not seeing the end of that job. But I did get $10k for the tip off my finger BUT I'd rather have had my whole finger.
I guess the best thing about Johnny Depp's character "Captain" Jack Sparrow is the fact that he realizes the freedom that being Captain of a ship gives him in that day & age. Not many people saw that & could stand being at sea that long. But in the movie because Jack Sparrow makes that desire for freedom of the sea known, that is what makes him a likable character.
So that could possible make HMS Inflexible the first to use electic christmas lights, imagine running around the ship looking for the blown bulb though at 800V it would probably be fairly obvious.
![เจ็บที่ยังฮัก - ม่อน วรวิทย์ [ Official Mv ] จอนนี่มิวสิค](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/KALIGSRSjFs/mqdefault.jpg)
01:19:39 I can speak from personal experience of dealing with lightning damage.
The only thing predictable about lightning is that it is unpredictable.
We had a CCTV camera on an outside pole with an intercom box get hit by lightning almost 15 years ago. The lightning came inside on the coax cable, laughing at the so-called "lightning arrester" along the way, and hit the 16-port distribution amplifier. What the distribution amplifier does is take an input signal, amplify it, and then output it to several outputs. This lets multiple pieces of equipment use the TV signal without signal reflections and weak signal issues. In this case the amplifier sent video signal to the video matrix, for live monitoring, and to the DVR, for recording. This unit could take 16 camera inputs.
The distribution amplifier got so hot from the strike that it melted the solder on many components, leaving heat damage on the unrelated equipment above it. However, the damage did NOT propagate to the video matrix, the DVR, or the other 15 cameras plugged into it. The lightning went into the distribution amplifier, but no further. Upon testing at the office, about 8 of the 16 ports were actually still functional. I still have that distribution amp at home as a souvenir of the story. All I had to do was replace the distribution amplifier and all the cameras, other than the one that got hit, worked again.
The intercom system was completely fried. The lightning came into the main switcher, wrecking it as well as many of the intercom stations around the facility. I didn't work on that portion thankfully. Nor did I have to fix the outside camera that was originally hit.
Several years before that, I was working retail and there was a huge rainstorm going on outside. The store was slow due to the weather. I and a couple of customers were chatting while looking out the tire center windows at the rain. We saw a bolt of lightning hit a manhole cover in the street while not touching the power pole or power lines 40' away from the manhole cover. Sure enough, a day or so later I was able to run out to the middle of the street and see a scorch mark on the manhole cover near one edge.
So yea, lightning will often, but not always, strike the tallest object. It has so much energy in such a short time that the path it takes to ground is wildly unpredictable. The best you can hope for it to increase the odds of directing it away from sensitive things
Hope people find this interesting.
About the question just before this one... I think what he was more asking about... Was THE DISTANCE difference... Even if you try and go to the early 40s to get something sort of similar.
Tanks don't shoot as far... Correct??? Naval shooting distance is way way further.
That is the aspect I think he was hoping for you to touch on, and so was I. But I was surprised that it kept on not being mentioned.
I was so sad when I hear you say the next Name of someone...
I was like NOOOOOO
I've got a rather funny story about lightning as well. We had a female Doberman who was a rather sweet individual named Cooder by my stepfather, Billy. And at the time we were staying in a couple of camper trailers on a 7 acre property in Georgia. Well, a storm had come up & I hadn't realized that Cooder was under my trailer. But the storm was causing flash type lightning every few minutes and evidently one of the flashes was grounded thru the trailer & evidently thru Kooder as well. My only evidence being the dog coming out from under the trailer howling. OmG you could practically hear it in her howls, "struck by lightning struck by lightning!!!" It had given her a jolt but she was OK. After a little love she appeared fine☆ My Mom's Mother actually died from getting struck while hanging out clothes when my Mom was very young.
☆Now, fast forward about a year & a half & we are living on a property in South Carolina building a house. And we have 16 x 32 block basement built & are now doing footings for the rest of the house. But we have the basement covered with a pool tarp & an extension cord from the temporary pole with electricity for lights. Since witnessing what a tornado can do several times when a storm came up, we preferred the basement to the campers we had. Well this one particularly bad storm had gotten us all into the basement. And lightning started striking the temporary pole we had. And the extension cord was wrapped around a metal frame doorway in the basement. It was actually 2 rooms 16 x 16. My Mom had a bed set up in the other room cuz the basement stayed cooler. Well anyway everytime lightning would strike it was blowing sparks thru the extension cord & off of the doorframe. It did this about 3 or 4 times in a matter of minutes & the top of the doorframe was glowing like the eye of an electric stove. Well we lit a few candles & after it was over put a new bulbs in the lamps. And started making sure everything was OK. Well, Kooder was so far under the bed in the other room that we practically had to lift the bed off of her for her to crawl out. She knew what that lightning could do & hid from it the best she could!!
The fuel shortage issue in the UK seemed to be a southern thing. Up in the wilds of Cumbria, there were no queues at all. One theory is that during the change from E5 to E10 petrol (10% ethanol now), some petrol stations let the tanks run completely dry before filling them with E10. This meant that a couple of petrol stations around London had no fuel for about an hour, so of course, the world was ending.
That was part of it. I was commuting between London and Portsmouth at the time and it was pretty scary, since most petrol stations were completely dry.
Remember finally finding a petrol station with fuel, whilst running on fumes, somewhere in the middle of nowhere, and having to queue over an hour for fuel.
I guess that's what I get for trying to be responsible and not needlessly panic buying.
1:11:00 -- And there are sometimes other considerations, as well -- the guns originally mounted in the Mark 1 Male tanks in WWI _were_ naval guns, which subsequently had their barrels cut down, reducing their muzzle velocity, for the practical reason that, with the full-length barrels, there was a risk of the muzzles burying themselves in the ground as the tank went across the terrain of no-man's land or crossed a trench line, putting the gun out of commission until the barrel could be cleaned out.
On the "Naval guns vs land guns" item: one of the best soviet AT guns of WWII was the D-10, a 100mm gun with a barrel length of 53.5 calibres, that was a land version of a naval gun. The D-10 went on to be used in the SU-100, T-54 and T-55.
Regarding the gun question, the dates are off slightly. The Soviets had some more advanced features in their tanks earlier than most people realize.
This was in part due to their experience in the undeclared war with the Japanese at Kalkin Gol (several months in mid 1939), which involved a surprisingly large number of tanks and aircraft - the initial Soviet disasters on this battlefield taught a lot of valuable lessons which resulted in significant improvements to their tank designs. The eventual Soviet victory convinced the Japanese they didn't want to go to war with the Soviet Union, which had a significant influence on the naval war in the Pacific.
But even before Kalkin Gol, the Soviets started design of bigger tank guns earlier than anybody else. For example, the L-11 gun was designed in 1938, entering production in 1939. It was a 30 calibre 76.2 mm tank gun that was used on a couple of Soviet tank models produced in late 1939.
The US M3 tank would not be operational until 1941: it had a 30 calibre 75 mm gun, so basically an equivalent weapon but two years behind the Soviets. The long barrel Panzer IV would come out in 1942, so the US M3 in British hands was actually quite a shock to the Africa Korps when they first encountered it (though it didn't take them long to adjust, and the German 88mm AA gun could still kill everything on the battlefield even if their tanks couldn't penetrate the frontal armor).
Though ahead in some ways, there were also significant problems with the Soviet tanks. The books by Steven Zaloga are generally well done and do a good job covering the problems and not just looking at the 'flashy statistics'. I suggest starting with Armored Champion which is the best overview of the topic of WW2 tanks I've seen.
But your basic point remains unchanged even with the corrected dates: the naval guns have a much higher muzzle velocity and are far deadlier than equivalent tank guns of the same era - not to mention having far better aiming systems in many warships than any tank of the era.
Soviet tanks suffered from poor ergonomic considerations and poor quality control during production. They had below avrage optics, but good engines, and guns, and generally excellw t armour, at least past T34. They were also cheap, with cast turrets and few welds.
Anyone else start getting happy when you hear the intro song?
It makes me want to grab a flapper and start dancin.'
I start getting sleepy lolz
It literally makes everything OK
@@charlesvaughan3517as drach once put it: naval history themed sleeping aid.
I hate it lol... its so fucking loud compared to the rest of it. Volume needs to he halved. I usually watch this late at night or play endlessly overnight. So jarring.
My grandfather volunteered for naval service in WW2; having done so at age 17 after completing high-school. He very much wanted volunteer, and he went with the navy since they offered a warm bed at night and 3 hot meals a day. Something the army and Marines lacked. Had he waited until he turned 18 there was a real risk of being drafted, denied those hot meals and being forced to sleep in a cold muddy trench.
Smart & forthright thinking on his part, for sure !! My grandfather was not able to serve- per se.
He was too young for The Great War & too old for WWII.
However, he was employed at RCA in Camden, NJ. His work there contributed toward technical aspects that no doubt found their uses on many a vessel, aircraft, combat vehicle, ect.
Much respect to all that served the purpose back then !!
🚬😎👍
It is always to use the cards and play your best hand when you cannot control your environment…. Wars doubly so.
Should have gone for the RAF. The only service that (at the time) that sent officers to war and kept the enlisted busy at home. But Bomber Command had a bad casualty rate, so your mileage might have varied. Do you want to die falling in burning wreckage from 5km AGL or freezing to death in icy water? On the whole, 'rum, buggery and the lash' suggests the RAF would have been the more comfortable - though no less deadly - choice.
well from actual army soldiers, you can see that, that's not how it went
@me67galaxylife That was the conversation that my grandfather reported occurred when he asked my great grandfather for his advice as to which service branch to join. Which, given the context (his father and his uncle both being a veterans of WW1), the description of army service being associated with cold food and wet muddy trenches would seem to be an accurate one. Photos of soldiers in the cold and mud of ww2 aside.
I just noticed the Drachinifel flag on the French Dreadnought - well played!.
I really can bust a jig to that intro!
Fr 🔥 🔥 🔥
I also give a little shimmy shammy when it comes on
Always tingles my jingle
"30 tons as high up as the gun turrets could be a problem, but let's roll with it"
Dammit, Drach, was that an intentional pun?
Given his like I would guess so....
Also Drach how long have you been wanting to say that something was "deep sixed" I know you got your chance with the video about sable and wolverine.... but how long man tell me It has been on the list of things I want to say at some point for a long time
Today Drach forgot to mention the friendly fire incident during which he previously and famously commented…’ the sea air was filled by the sounds of curses and expletives in all fourteen official languages of the Austro-Hungarian empire’. 😂😂😂
Which friendly fire incident was that again?
@@theawickward2255 Cant remember, Im afraid. Ive watched Battle of Lissa and WW1 Adriatic Campaign again, but it was in neither of them. Hilarious it was, though - a classic Drachism. 😂
@@theawickward2255 Found it or, at least, something very similar to what I (mis)quoted☺️. Bombardment of Ancona, at 17:50. Whole engagement was a farce😵💫
Regarding the use of captured guns: The main portion of the guns of Fort Sullivan near Charleston, South Carolina in 1776 were French 24 pounders which had been aboard the French ship of the line Foudroyant when that ship had been taken by the RN in 1758. These guns had been allocated by the crown for the defense of Charleston - a task for which they proved quite useful. The crown probably had not anticipated that it would be the Royal Navy which would be repulsed by them in June of 1776. So, at least in that instance, captured guns were used to arm a colonial port.
"Having electrical illumination is all well and good but when the constant threat of Zeus-like smiting is a problem...."
Your Drachism for the day, I'll have to find a way to put that into a safety report the next time I find a badly wired nightmare job the "electrician" has done.
Since we begin with Operation Downfall, it can only go up , or neutral buoyant, from here. Happy Easter, Sunday, or whatever you want today to be. Drachinifel and everyone.
My father volunteered for the Army/Calvery in WWII. He was scared of heights and would not even climb a six foot step ladder. He ended up as a tail gunner in a B-17. Survived 29 missions before returning home where he was given a medical discharge because of the stress from spending so much time in a bomber. He never would go up anything off the ground again.
Regarding the use of a naval gun as a tank gun; the big issue with naval gun on land is usally not the ballistic properties, but rather the weight. Naval guns are not designed with mobility (read: weight) as a major constraint. So one usally get less boom for a given tonnage then with a gun designed for ground use.
The german 88 was a naval gun originally. The soviet 100mm was also a naval gun, originally aistro hungarian in ww1, then italian, and finally soviet.
Dual porpouse/naval AA guns share many of the requirements with a tank armament.
@@egoalter1276 That does not take away from the fact that they were ORIGINALLY Naval guns and that changes were made in order to make them suitable for use on land. One of the primary changes was, as indicated, dropping the weight as much as possible as the OP stated because when it comes to land vehicles, which tend to be far smaller than ships, weight is a much greater consideration.
A rather extreme example to illustrate the point is the British 77mm HV that went on the Comet. That was originally derived from the 17 pounder, but was a very different gun from the 17 pounder. It used the 17 pounder projectile but its charge was the older 3 inch case. The breech block was correspondingly very different as the ammunition is now shorter than the 17 pounder, less recoil management is required because the smaller charge means less force transferring into said recoil, and so on.
So as you can see, just because a gun is derived from a Naval (or in the 77 HV's case an AA) gun does NOT mean its the same as the original weapon. The OP was perfectly correct in noting that land guns derived from Naval guns are in fact often significantly different to the original Naval gun, and a large part of that is in fact to bring weight down as well as because what might work on a ship may well NOT work in a tank without significant redesign of both gun and ammunition....
EDIT: Oh, and the original German Naval 88 was not an AA gun originally, it was a secondary for some ships and the main armament for some of the smaller destroyers, NOT a Naval AA gun as at the time the air threat was essentially non existent at the start of WWI. The Naval 88 was used because it was at a small enough calibre that it could be easily converted for land use, but was powerful enough to be able to engage even high flying aircraft of the period. It was however never designed as a Naval Dual Purpose o AA gun because that threat did not exist at the time it was developed. By WWII the 88mm was a VERY different gun to the 88mm Naval gun it was originally derived from.....
Regarding fuze safety, many fuzes also had safety devices that relied on the setback from firing along with the rotation impacted by the rifling. The US base detonating fuze had some ball bearings that impeded the firing circuit until rotation spun them out of the way until they locked in position.
For Corsair is Fleet Air Arm service, read Carrier Pilot by Norman Hanson. One of the greatest WWII pilot's memoirs.
It deails his exploits flying off RN carriers in the Pacific and details the training involved and the process of devising a method for reliably landin them on a carrier deck.
They were difficult aircraft to get down safely and it was the FAA that worked out how to do it.
Maybe that's one of the reasons for them being more popular than with the USN.
About copper-bottomed ships - ISTR reading somewhere that merchant ships of the time fairly rapidly learned that securing copper sheet with iron nails into the wooden hull was only a temporary fix, so non-ferrous nails were used. Whether copper, brass or bronze, I don't know. I assume the RN also experienced this.
You joke about going to sleep to these yet release them Sunday nights for us Aussies......
"As well as the "buoyancy bomb" the British also developed the "Johnny Walker" bomb which worked on a similar principle but was designed to repeatedly sink and rise back to the surface (while also drifting sideways) until it hit something and detonated. It was created specifically for attacking the Tirpitz, and a number were dropped during an attack on 15th September 1944 without success (though Tirpitz was hit by a tallboy in the same raid).
Tea Shortage , don't know how the country survived.
Food optional
Shelter optional
Tea not optional
-Captain Blackdder probaly
Arc lighting also produces a nasty ultra-violet spectrum. Whether any sailors lived long enough to get cataracts from it would be another question.
The American navy rejected the Corsair because it had landing characteristics they did not like. The Royal navy figured out a way around those problems. Of course, the American navy had the option of picking-and-choosing.
I learned to sail in small sloop-rigged boats. We were taught a routine for changing from one tack to the other: when ready, call out "ready about, hard alee !" Then push the tiller hard in the downwind direction, which makes the bow swing in the other direction. The boat turns about 90 degrees and ends up on the opposite tack with the wind coming over the other side of the boat.
Why did you have to do that?
@@derrickstorm6976if you need to go against the wind you have to go not directly into it, but in a zigzag
@@derrickstorm6976 You call it out to alert any crew or passengers. When you cross the wind, the boom swings quickly from one side of the boat to the other. It's low enough to conk you HARD if you don't duck.
From what I've read, the American generally regarded the F4U (Corsair) as superior to the F6F (Hellcat) as well, as evidenced by the F6Fs being immediately scrapped after the war while the F4Us stayed in front-line service well into the 1950s. The reason the USN went in so much harder for F6Fs was (a) it was easier to fly, and much less likely to kill novice pilots, and most especially because (b) it was far cheaper (ended up being less than half the price). The F6F also took far fewer man-hours to build so it was possible to mass-produce them on a scale that just was not reasonable for the F4U.
Far from being a second-line aircraft, the F4U was more regarded as the more "elite" of the two, but in far fewer numbers. Because the Marines were the first users of it (due to the landing issues you mentioned earlier), once huge numbers of F6Fs began arriving and the Navy was able to standardize, it did so which largely meant moving the F4Us off the carriers. The USN was very good at making use of its huge advantage in materiel, even when that meant having to make some relatively minor qualitative sacrifices.
The F4U-4, introduced in early 1945 was the highest performing US fighter period.
LCS is appropriately named as a class Little Crappy Ships, in my opinion, as a Navy veteran.
"The Germans are going to go after the tea convoys" don't joke about these things....
Armoured Carriers channel has recordings of interviews with FAA pilots who flew US aircraft in combat.
That's an excellent channel. Lots of great stuff.
There’s a video suggestion of the sinking of HmS sydney under this and the graphic just made me think of a question to pose to you sir drach, why didn’t ships guns feature the bore evacutor/ fume extractors as well as the i believe it’s called muzzle break ?
39:52 about Szent Istvan specifically, the turrets were designed to be balanced when the ready ammunition racks at the rear of the gun platform were full.
I've heard different claims whether that ammunition was jettisoned to help balance the ship, or the ready ammunition wasn't carried at all due to lessons learned from Jutland, but either way each turret was off balance by more than 8t.
About hoarding goods: people hoarded toilet paper even here in Sweden. Sweden manufacture way more toilet paper then we could possible use. We make enormous amounts of toilet paper, and export it. Yet, somehow some people thought that the fact that toilet paper was a hoarding problem in other countries meant that we would have no toilet paper here.
On the conscript vs volunteer, another big issue with the numbers for the US was that at the end of 1942 they severly restricted voluntary enlistment in order to manage manpower and training etc. So pretty much anyone enlisted in 1943 onward was officially conscripted.
9 Drydocks to 300 Part 1!!!
I wonder if we will be treated to a THIS. IS. DRYDOCK! Opening for that one.
Regarding the concept of manufactured shortages - one of the less political ones to discuss would be the Johnny Carson Toilet Paper Shortage of 1973 that was sparked because in his monologue he made a joke about government TP being in short supply - not consumer grade TP - and this started a run on consumer TP in the US (and I believe Canada).
In the "Navies that rapidly evolved from almost noting in to major blue water navy" I would say that the German navy prior to WW I fits the bill as well.
Re: Marines in British ships in the high age of sail- One particularly important reason for Royal marines to be aboard ships was for their seperate command structure, duties, etc, as a hedge against mutiny- they were a visable incarnation of the authourity of the officers and a check on the crew in emergency, battle, etc.
(And as sharpshooters, manning the topps, and so kn
wrt the modernization of Warspite, vs QE and Valiant, can't help but wonder why all of Warspite's 6" were not removed and replaced with the twin 4" DP mount. By the numbers on Navweaps, twin 4" vs single 6", the twin 4" has double the weight of fire per minute, and greater range, because the casemate mounts are limited to about 14 degrees of elevation.
Best definition I have heard for a cruiser: largest ship which can be built in reasonable numbers capable of independent fleet actions. Think Salvo Island...
In the XXth century the French conscription system flagged fishermen towards the Marine Nationale. They did their military service as sailors and if mobilisation came they returned to the Navy.
Regarding capîtal ship building assuming no WWI, I think at some point the French army would have realised they were woefully short of heavy guns, and building something like a couple thousand 155+mm guns wasn't compatible with building a 28-capital ship navy.
I was imagining Captain Haddock for the duration of the cursing explanation
Pithecanthropus! Ectoplasm!
Blue Blistering Barnacles!
I always had the impression that part of the reason sailors were expected to have an exceptional capacity for cursing was that they were well-traveled and therefore could call upon the profane words and phrases of many peoples and nations.
The Armored Carriers channel has a good series about various fleet air arm aircraft. It's called "In their own words", and is full of interviews with pilots who flew them.
30:00
And the Panzerschiffe had some stability concerns even as commissioned.
I just read The Happy Return 2 weeks ago and was wondering the same thing!
Will Drachinifel Discuss the story of Alum Chine March 1913 which exploded at the exact location of the Dali? Could he also discuss the interesting and important ships and even the Golden Gate Bridge built at Bethlehem Steel at Sparrows Point where the Key Bridge collapsed?
My dad said when he was drafted for WW-2 they just went down the line. He said that the first group in front of him were drafted in the USN while he was in the group that was sent in to the US Army. He was drafted in 1942. My mothers brothers all were in the US Navy with one, Roy Strieter, going down with his ship, the USS Bristol, in the Med. Uncle Roy was career Navy having joined in the late 30s.
Best apples to apples comparison of guns I could find…M4 Sherman with a 76mm aka Fury easy8 and the 3 inch anti aircraft late WW2 from the Baltimore’s and Des Moines and Gearings and Sumners…both have 2700 fps muzzle velocities depending on ammunition choice
With the scenario being an amphibious vehicle, I would figure anti personnel performance would be emphasized over anti tank. High velocity shells tend to bury themselves reducing explosive performance. If looking at the US WW2 family of Shermans, I think the 105 would be the first pick, then the 75 and last the 76. But then would a 4.1" sink the vehicle when fired.
With regard to the arc lamps, it gets worse. The electric arcs give off a lot of UV, so they can cause sunburn, and will give your eyes arc flash if you accidentally look at them.
In reference to the question about LCS ships here in the USA, last summer I attended the Commissioning of the new Littoral Combat Ship USS Augusta. Named for my home state of Maine's capital. I was with a local fraternal, charitable group, which was providing the crew with free hot dogs and French fries.
I met and was speaking with the Vice Admiral (he even gave me one of his challenge coins) and he was telling me that the brand new USS Augusta would probably only be in active commission for 5 years before being decommissioned.
1:18:24 IIRC the guns on the (I)SU-152 and ISU-122 *were* adapted from naval guns. A 4.1" gun is 104mm, absolutely colossal by the standards of the late 30s.
I am not sure if these sentencences are related, but just in case, those SPAAs have 152mm and 122mm guns
So the jingle goes," When approaching dead ahead PORT your helm and show your red." I have a model ketch made by my grand father in the late 1800's, on which the wheel is rigged so that turning the wheel to port would steer the ship to starboard. We long thought that this was a mistake, but found out that people with only a nautical reference, having never seeing an automobile, retained the tiller directions even with a wheel.
For the rudder orders, I think people realized that standardizing the orders around things like "left full rudder" or "right half rudder" just offered more clarity regardless of what particular steering system a ship might be using. If I order "left full rudder", I'm very clearly and explicitly stating that I want the rudder deflected to the left as far as it will go (or however far over constitutes the "full" position). Regardless of whether that's going to be accomplished by a helmsman on the bridge turning a wheel to the left or crew belowdecks moving an emergency tiller to the right, it's unambiguous what I want done, and the required orders are also quite concise (", ").
The fuel crisis happened in the ealry 70s here in the States as you brits say I was but a wee lad back then.
The Royal Navy did have conscripts in WW1, conscripts could state they preferred naval service when they were conscripted. In fact the Royal Navy got first choice of the conscripts. It might not have required that many conscripts compared to the army but it was definitely there. Personally, I'd argue volunteering instead of waiting to be conscripted counts as volunteering
I understand that in Australia during the Vietnam War, there was a period of several months between someone being notified that they were being conscripted into the army and the date they were required to turn up. During that time you could voluntarily join any of the armed forces and obviously you would not be required to turn up later with the conscripts. It seems likely this would also apply to other counties and other conflicts at other times?
How hard it would have been to change out the Round (KG V & Dido, et al) 5.25" turrets/gun-houses for the "Octagon" style aboard HMS Vanguard?
As to the B Bomb I understand from reading on the matter where it is possible(there are few references mostly due to the fact that even up to the 1950's the designs were classified)that it was considered that even a 250lb B Bomb would sink or cripple any WWII capital ship which is why the original plans for a 2000lb B Bomb were modified
The Dutch Navy experimented with zinc sheating on wood covered iron-hulled ships, as a cheaper alternative to copper sheating. It did not do as well against fouling as copper, but it did galvanically protect the iron hulls helping these ships to survive well past their intended service life. The last remaining of these ships is HNLMS Bonaire (1877), now a museum ship in Den Helder.
33:04 I believe this question has originated from the film greyhound where they do use left and right for turning orders.
I suspect drach is correct about lightning, but for a different reason. When electricity flows through a metal object it flows almost entirely around the outside. This is the same reason you’re safe in your car during a thunderstorm. So pretty much just the hull is receiving current. I suspect the electronics would be damaged because that high on the ship the current would be more concentrated, and the electronics are in the outside. For a wood ship the current would just follow the path of least resistance which might very well be through the ship.
NINE Drydocks til 300!!!
Captain Cook also repaired after hitting the Great Barrier Reef
LOVE the intro!!
hell yeah another 2+ hour one for bedtime.
Happy Easter
Thanks Drach.
drach ,sir? have I got this right? the japanese and american navies were both active in the Mediterranean at the end of WW1? what cooperation was there?
@ 2:26 - About the B - Bomb being shunned, I wonder whether this might be akin to the 'Window' row, ie fear by some that it might be copied and used by an enemy, see RV Jones*. Their logic being that we have more ships so would be at a disadvantage.
*Who records Churchill's comment - 'Open the window'.
7:12 thats exactly how World of Warships is. I know stay away from cruisers, but i see American cruisers i can get as close as i want
00:46:10 Patrick O'Brien depicts Jack Aubrey organising his shipwrecked crew to build a schooner from the keel up from salvaged wood and foraged green wood (Great Lakes style). It was fully a third the size of the wrecked frigate, and nothing about the author's description of how it was done rang any alarm bells. Given that O'Brien shares Forrester's reputation for writing fiction solidly grounded in historical fact, I always assumed he was basing this on known instances where this was done.
I learned the archaic helm commands from Mackenzie Gregory, who had been a Lt. on the bridge of Canberra at Savo. That had always confused me; his example was "port your rudder" used to mean walking or otherwise turning the tiller head to port, thus a starboard turn. He did say the change occurred some time in the early 30s.
Drach- could you do a vid on how exactly the big guns actually discharge, and why personnel were required to be below during such action.
The loss of the Shoho convinced the commander of the Port Morsbey invasion force, to call off that invasion. A plus for the Americans.
We have the same fuel rush scenario in the US every time a hurricane is due to land; one is compelled to join in as the ensuing run on the stations could mean two weeks with no available fuel. I once nearly had to ram the "deer in the headlights" panicked woman behind me who was honking for my spot at the pump....but refused to reverse even a few feet so I could get out of her way and leave.
1:09:54 Either Drach really liked this question or was taking a crack at the best polite "and this is why you're wrong" speech... Possibly both
Panic induced shortages?
In Australia, during initial lockdowns, it was toilet paper. Major capital cities ran out of toilet paper because of panic buying.
Mass hysteria in action...
TP was the shortage here too, than we have the people panic buying milk, eggs, and bread when ever snow is mentioned in the forecast...
Same here in California. Toilet paper and bottled water disappeared from the shelves in a single day.
saw this on some TH-cam channel or other? was going to laugh until I went shopping locally! scotland!
My understanding is that there was a genuine toilet paper shortage in _Western_ Australia during the early lockdown period, because it had to be shipped from the east and cross state travel was restricted. Unfortunately through the “power” of social media, this then spread to the rest of Australia and then pretty much the whole of the rest of the English-speaking world and panic buying did the rest.
I remember a case here in the UK when some bloke rocked up to a supermarket and bought its entire stock of toilet paper, apparently his idea was to make a killing selling it on e-bay. A week later everyone had calmed down and nobody wanted to buy his toilet paper on e-bay so he decided to return it to the supermarket for a refund. As there was nothing wrong with said toilet paper the supermarket smiled sweetly and refused the return as they were legally entitled to do. Bloke was not happy.
2h30 at last a formal naval explanation of "the higher the fewer"
20:00 During COVID I was buying bread and commented to the cashier "I usually keep a couple rolls on hand" When they clerk gave me the death look I realized the lady behind me had 2 bulk packs 48 rolls 😄
It was my impression that port and starboard refer to sides of the ship , while left and right refer to directions. The port side of the ship is the left side when facing forward. But the ship turns to the left and right.
2:51:41
More people should listen to that bit, because it really shows just how much of an infrastructure crunch the Japanese were operating on. No amount of steel in the world is going to let them build that many of either carriers or battleships, and there is a reason they decided to build the four ships that they could build at once (the two Shokakus and the two finished Yamatos) as secret superweapon capital ships to get the most they could out of them (even if only half of them proved viable in practice)
Is there any indication as to which of the four Myoko class cruisers scored the fatal hit on HMS Exeter which led to her scuttling?
One of the things I love about British swearing is that it’s terrific for insulting people online when you don’t want to get suspended.
Drach, tell us about the piece of art at the 1:40 mark. I see it has the Flag of the Kingdom of Drachinifel flying, so please share the details with the rest us.😁
I may be mistaken, but I believe that is the basic layout of the planned French Lyon-class battleships. The World of Warships modeling looks different, and is more like what it would have looked like if built in the 1930’s instead.
@Drachinifel I know Spain's Navy was essentially a non-entity in the '40s, but how would the Battle of the Atlantic/operation in the Mediterranean been altered if Spain and joined the Axis and given the Kreigsmarine use of Spanish ports?
The Atlantic War wouldn't change much, aside from the U-boats a reduced need for them to make a run through the Channel. The big impact would be in the Mediterranean, as the sure-fire loss of Gibraltar would effectively end supply runs to Malta and the North Africa (or at least the eastern parts of it) campaign. It wouldn't change the ultimate outcome of the war, but things would be a bit more dire for awhile.
@@hanzzel6086 Umm, The Azores are Portuguese and the Allies were allowed to base planes there half way WW2.
@@Dave_Sisson Ah, I need to brush up on my geography. The latest info I have on the Azores is from a little after the time of the Great Spanish Armata, at which point they very much where Spanish possessions. I assumed they had remained that way.
@@hanzzel6086 My understanding is that the Azores were discovered by Portugal and remained their property except for the few decades when Spain owned Portugal.
Ah yes, the T-word: torpedo boats.
Imho zuikaku and shokaku battle damage was more significant in coral sea
I need to know what that intro song is!
17:22 this is the only era of history The Spiffing Brit could be defeated in a turn based Historical Sim Game.
Are there any interesting stories of accomplishments from translator officers in the age of sail assuming that was a dedicated role? Were there ever logistics, medical or engineer officers becoming admirals?
19:50 with all due respect i think that analogy was not equivalent, the TP issue was that office buildings and commercial spaces use a different format of TP than people do at home.
lol
Yes if there are "space frigates" they will have Marines.. at least in the Star Ship Troopers universe (book please...)
As Corvette Roger Young is carrying Mobile Infantry (in effect marines)
Happy Easter 😊
APFSDS: Armour Piercing Fin Stabilized Discarding Sabot. ( Not “fin discarding”)
Stupid question time (if not asked before) - in the Royal Navy, who git the rum ration?
Did a sailor have to be at sea?
Did submariners get it?
Don't neglect another duty of boarded Marines in the Age of Sail; as a force in being to oppose, punish or deter a mutinous crew.
I wonder if part of the persoective on the Hellcat vs Corsair in the US and Royal Navies was due to the Royal Navy only getting fully involved in the Pacific after the Japanese pilots were devastated while the US had such a histoey facing off against the best Japanese pilots.
Later in the war we also see the US shifting more Corsairs onto their carriers. As I understand they were much better at ripping kamikazes to pieces as well as being far superior in the ground attack/CAS role. The sorts of things that became more common in 1945 as the Britisj Pacific Fleet got into the fighting.
And lets not forget, the Corsair was still in front line service with the USN after the Bearcat was replaced.
British Carrier pilots were operating Corsairs in active combat before the Royal Navy formed the BPF, LONG before. Just because they were not in the Pacific does not mean those Carriers were not busy.
The British got the Corsair because the USN did not WANT it at the time because the thing was a sod to land on a Carrier, hence why it was pretty much relegated to the USMC to begin with. The Royal Navy was desperate for carrier Fighters however, but could not get hold of anything like enough F4F's or F6F's for the very simple reason tha the USN was buying the vast majority of them.
A result they had to go with what they could get, and that meant Corsair, which meant they had to learn how to get the thing down safely on a carriers deck. The reason why the USN started using Corsairs was literally BECAUSE the Royal Navy had worked out how to operate them from carriers, not because they were better at killing Kamikaze's. The Corsair and the F6F had the same armament.
I do get tired of people assuming that because they were not in the Pacific the British Carriers were not doing much fighting, and that they only really started once they got to the Pacific. Its an entirely false premise. HMS Illustrious suffered 6 bomb hits in one action, including 3 1100 pound, and one 2200 pound armour piercing bomb on one of the Malta convoy runs... and she survived, something I doubt any US or Japanese Carrier would had they been hit by 3 1000lb and a 2000lb armour piercing bomb....
@@alganhar1 The Malta Convoys were long done before the FAA had either Hellcats or Corsairs operational. By late 1943 carrier operations in Europe were fairly limited. The most notable were likely attacks on the Tirpitz.
The Corsairs saw very little, if any, air to air combat in Europe. Most actual combat experience with the Corsair would have been the British Pacific Fleet.
Regarding helm commands for the USA, left and right rudder directions was in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR's). 46 CFR pertains to Shipping. However, at some point in the 21st century it is now okay to use port or starboard rudder commands on US ships. As Master I would joke with the harbor pilots; "We're bilingual" so you can use port and starboard or left and right.
This is only a guess, but could the limited space inside a tank turret have dictated the use of a shorter and therefore less powerful propellant case compared to a naval shell of the same calibre?
What you, Drach, need to do is (ahem, uh- rephrase that....)
Drach, would you kindly research & upload a segment on Spanish/Republican light cruiser PRINCIPÉ ALFONSO/LIBERTAD ? Or if feeling inspired ? A study on the naval aspect of The Spanish Civil War ?...
So get on it, (ahem, ummm) rather- I hope you'd consider my request that you'd delve into this convoluted pre-WWII subject matter.
Warm regards from the Delmarva Peninsula !!
🚬😎👍
I got to tour Belfast in London. My goal is tour North Carolina and Wisconsin. That will cover all three Fast Battleship Class. I’ve been aboard Alabama 4 times. Really neat!
I worked in Mobile,AL for about 6 months. Commuting within a crew truck making an addition to Austal shipyard driving in from near my Dad's place in Pensacola, FL. We drove past the USS Alabama every day and every time I wanted to go tour the old ship. I had hoped to go aboard right about the time we were done with the addition. BUT someone dropped a heavy piece of metal & I lost the tip of my right handed birdy finger. Ended up not seeing the end of that job. But I did get $10k for the tip off my finger BUT I'd rather have had my whole finger.
I guess the best thing about Johnny Depp's character "Captain" Jack Sparrow is the fact that he realizes the freedom that being Captain of a ship gives him in that day & age. Not many people saw that & could stand being at sea that long. But in the movie because Jack Sparrow makes that desire for freedom of the sea known, that is what makes him a likable character.
So that could possible make HMS Inflexible the first to use electic christmas lights, imagine running around the ship looking for the blown bulb though at 800V it would probably be fairly obvious.