Jean Bart did sail to Casablanca under her own power in June 1940; she was moved out of her building dock by tugboats, but completed the rest of her voyage using part of her own powerplant :)
Drach, glad you're fully recovered this month and able to recite your Blackburns without fits of coughing! Best wishes to you and your family for a happy and healthy 2024!
In fairness, even post war the US WW2 ships lived far longer lives than any thing from Europe even just post war. DD-837 Sarsfield, a fletcher class left service all the way in the 1970s, and many of the Gearings served into the 2000s in Asia. The director of the new jeresy museum often uses the term "gold plated" when referring to construction standards of WW2 USN warships, they simply got built at a higher standard with better materials
While I was the Engineering Log Room Yeoman, I was trying to get what was needed for our enlisted engineering crew to take the exams for promotions. I couldn't get the (scratch off the black covering a/b/c/d/e answer) exam sheets. Talking to my counterpart on another ship of the same class, I found out that he could get the answer sheets, but couldn't get the test book! A quick hand shake later he was reordering his sheets and I was reordering the test books!! Both ships had a number of promotions soon afterwards!!! (And yes, we were moored (tied) to the same pier at Philadelphia (Pennsylvania)! They were on the west side and we were on the east side!!)
Supply problems: In one of C. S. Forrester's short stories about the USN in the Pacific a submarine tender that prided itself on having everything that the submariners needed and if they didn't have it they could make it becomes embarrassed when a lucky shot from a bypassed Japanese garrison destroys their entire stock of toilet paper, so they didn't have it and they couldn't make it. Edit: Just checked, it is titled "USS Cornucopia".
Man, I do enjoy (world wide) "ship naming conventions" (starting 1:08) And USS Cornucopia is a prize winner for a submarine tender. Thank you for the information! 😊
Reminds me of the _USS Skipjack,_ which went without toilet paper for a year. Mare Island, the supply depot, apparently couldn't identify the material. The letter Captain Coe sent is definitely worth reading.
That story is in the collection "The Man in the Yellow Raft" and you might be amused that most of the stories take place on a fictional destroyer named the USS Boon.@@babboon5764
Yep... named so because the previous Kearsarge had sank Semmes' C.S.S. Alabama, and it has become one of the more consistently used names in the USN, only going out of service for very short periods of time.
I like the British interwar and WWII destroyer naming convention. Each class they take the next letter in the alphabet and the entire class starts with that letter.
I can neither confirm nor deny that a 688 submarine out of Norfolk departed for deployment and forgot to order toilet paper. This issue was corrected, until the sub pulled in and got fully restocked, by issuing each man one roll of toilet paper and you had to use that at your own risk as you needed to. They only had enough for each crewmen to have one roll. So supply issues still persist, it happens.
Supply problems: I worked in refugee camps in the middle east. On presenting a particularly wretched group in need of blankets to a msf quartermaster late on a cold clear night, I was told none were available. After asking why, I was informed that if these were given blankets, there might not be enough for anyone who came tomorrow. I gave them a paddington extra hard stare and took the blankets.
The Dutch Navy tended to name its ships after Naval heroes and after places, especially places (islands, towns, mountains) in the Dutch East-Indies. The latter convention has been largely abandoned. There are, to my knowledge, two fixed rules in the Dutch Navy: There must always be a ship named after Admiral de Ruyter and there must be a ship named after van Speyk (the latter is rather less deserving of the honour than the former, but it was a decree by the first king of the Netherlands, van Speyk being a fanatical orangist).
It should be noted that high speed steel wasn't developed until 1910, so the cutting, milling and drilling of metal was limited to what ordinary high-carbon steel could accomplish.
I think the best way to describe the Japanese destroyer naming conventions would be natural phenomenon. Wind (-kaze), waves (-nami), tides (-shio), the moon (-zuki/suki), weather conditions like Blizzard, Storm, or Haze (Fubuki, Arashi, Kasumi, etc), plus some months or seasons and a couple unqiue ones like Wakaba (Young Leaves) or Shiranuhi (Phosphorescent Light).
Japanese destroyers are easily my favourite set of names from any nation. What they're actually named for (translation) and the names themselves are so cool.
People seem to forget, Mahan wrote "The Influence of Seapower Upon History" Not "The influence of Decisive Naval Battle Upon History". Mahan is on the whole right that navies and sea power is vital, however where people go wrong is thinking that a fleet must be used to destroy the other navy rather than that a fleet in some cases should exist to protect your own shores from an enemy. In short a Fleet in being for some nations should be a defensive not offensive tool.
25:41 The Japanese tried something like this with the Hiei, she had some of her armour and guns removed, they then claimed she was a training ships, though they kept the armour and guns in another location, but she was a ship built before the treaties and they were claiming she wasn't a warship at this point, they were just lying.
The Soviets did the same "disarming" their bombers nuclear capablity. The US honoured the treaty and destroyed the equipment for their bombers, but the Soviets just took theirs off the air frames and stored them on site by their bombers so it could be reinstalled if a crisis loomed before turning into WWIII. IIRC, it only took a couple hours to put back.
So everyone has naming conversations but the Royal Navy who does choose the name of a ship at the end of the night when all the bottles have been emptied 😂
I have heard that Churchill persistently (and unsuccessfully) tried to get King George V to agree to calling a battleship 'Oliver Cromwell.' The King was not keen on honouring the man who had helped kill his ancestor!
I think this might be apocryphal, as Sir Winston was a supporter of the Monarchy... Though he might have had the idea of "selling" Parliament on a class of ships that includes Cromwell...
He also persistently tried to get a ship named after the former Prime Minister William Pitt but King George V refused as he was a former Naval Officer and knew just what nickname sailors would give a ship with that name.
The did eventually name a destroyer HMS Cromwell, although it was completed after the war and was immediately sold to Norway. Not sure if it was officially named after Oliver Cromwell, they could claim it was named after someone else in the family (such as Thomas Cromwell) or the village of Cromwell.
Couldn't agree more. Easily one of the best US admirals of the Second World War. I was very happy when his picture showed up at the question. "Black Shoe Carrier Admiral" is an amazing history books. One of my favorites.
I think "Black Shoe Carrier Admiral" goes a little far in the opposite direction, with Lundstrom seemingly unwilling to criticize anything Fletcher did despite taking a blowtorch to decisions made by everyone from King and Nimitz on down. Nonetheless, I do agree that Fletcher was better than his historical reputation typically portrayed him. A decent admiral, though hardly in the elite tier.
A fictional reference to supply problem is in the book" the ship with the flat tire" new supply officer thinks tp is ordered by the roll so marks 1000 but when told it by the double gross says someone will catch my mistake since i cant catch the paperwork. Then the simitrucks show up with 288,000 rolls. It actually earns some misplaced respect from a petty officer who had gone through supply shortages in ww2
Many thanks Drach for all your hard work. Been listening for just under a year, always listen while walking, cleaning and driving. My naval history was always lacking, so many thanks.🇦🇺
Thank you ever so much for your defense of Admiral Fletcher. A most cogent description of the reality succinctly delivered. Some time I would hope you might gove your even handed attention to the career of one Admiral Husband Kimmel.
Something to remember with Australia around 1900. We had lots of 2 things the world needed. Gold and Wool. The export of these brought a lot of money into Australia. In the 1880’s, Melbourne was reputedly the richest city in the world
You mentioned the Chilworth gunpowder works in Hampshire. Although there is a Chilworth in Hampshire, on the outskirts of Southampton, the gunpowder works was at Chilworth in Surrey, near Guildford.
It's in the location I was visualising, but despite being relatively local, it seems my mental image of where the Surrey/Hampshire border is, is a little north of where it actually is 😀
I was delighted to learn about Admiral Cochran's inventing hobby and engineering hobby. One of the more fascinating figures of Naval, or any other, history. That might be a subject for a Wednesday, or Funday Friday presentation.
Regarding the idea of cruisers in the channel at 22:16 - you might argue that the various sea forts built to protect various key ports and waterways were a kind of half-way-house to that idea - placing a bunch of AAA offshore, but not risking valuable cruisers to do so.
Admiral Rickover changed the submarine naming convention of sea life names. When a junior officer asked him why since it was a tradition that also made sense, Rickover replied, "Fish don't vote!"
@@DaremoKamen Well... the guys naming the Virginia-class seem to have stopped caring about that. Although if you want my honest opinion, submarines using the old battleship-naming convention is the _least_ egregious change in naming conventions given how powerful American subs are nowadays.
@@Eboreg2 They stopped naming Virginias after states because they ran out of states. The class is planned to be 66 boats and you've only got 50 states with 18 already taken by Ohios. At least the names they are picking are sensible and historical, not choosing to name carriers after people who should have destroyers named after them or warships after civil rights leaders and someone like Giffords.
@@billyshakespeare17wut. While i agree the new names do suck, its very funny to think the biggest most advanced fleet at sea, with the best missiles, planes, sensors, etc could be seen as a downgrade over historic fleets just bcs the ships have illfitting names.
For the British "R" names, the "Empress of India" does, in fact, fall into that line of nomenclature, provided that the name is announced by an Announcer, with a fluent "Scooby Doo" dialect....
Re a Waffen SS Navy, the relationship with the army was that the Waffen SS were only allowed to recruit those not initially eligible for the Wehrmacht. Iirc they could recruit from police, who were excluded from conscription, Volksdeutch; those in the conquered or annexed regions regarded as in some degree German (though over time, the Heer started recruiting those too), and foreign volunteers.
Kearsarge (BB-5) is the only US battleship not named after a state. Interestingly, she was an Essex class carriers. It was also a sloop of the line during the US Civil War. Another interesting note. Kearsarge was one of the names used on another ship while the older ship was still in commission.
The minefield question reminds me of the joke for land based minefields: "How many mines do you need to make a minefield? None, just put up a sign". As soon as you *think* there's a minefield somewhere, there effectively is.
If you consider the American battlecruisers that were ordered, the naming convention is split. Lexington and Saratoga were named after Revolutionary War battles, while the remainder of the class were named after the original heavy frigates.
Ozawa was a decoy due to a much more recent battle than the Battle of the Philippine Sea. Ozawa's carriers on 25 October 1944 would have been fully loaded with aircraft if not for a major battle over Formosa less than two weeks earlier (conveniently termed the Formosa Air Battle of 12-16 October 1944). 300-500 Japanese aircraft (Army and Navy) were destroyed by the aircraft and anti-aircraft guns of TF-38, including most of the aircraft assigned to Zuikaku and her three light carrier consorts. Admiral Toyoda, during his interrogation by the Americans postwar, claimed the following: "I stated that I expected your offensive against the PHILIPPINES would commence around August or September; that is not to say that we were prepared at the time to meet that offensive, for the reason that our forces, both Army and Navy, had lost practically all their supporting aircraft at the various operations and it took anywhere from four to five months to replenish the lost aircraft." Other interrogations and records show the IJNAS, prior to the battle over Formosa, had largely recovered their aircraft losses (in quantity, not pilot quality). In mid-October the Japanese lost over Formosa another Philippine Sea-size force of aircraft, making the IJN carriers useless as an aircraft striking unit against the amphibious invasion against Leyte coming later that same month. However, it's hard to see how U.S. intelligence could have divined the Japanese temporary setback (had Ozawa's carriers survived they potentially could have embarked replacements that were expended in the Kamikaze attacks during Iwo Jima and Okinawa). The Japanese plan committed 1800 aircraft against TF-38 over Formosa, but 600 were not available, meaning at best (from the American point of view) 1300 Japanese aircraft allocated to striking Halsey's fleet were still intact by 17 October 1944. That left a potent force avaliable for Leyte Gulf (over 300 Japanese aircraft committed to that fight two weeks after Formosa). Moreover, the Formosa Air Battle featured Japanese aircraft flying exclusively from land bases from both Japanese military services. Telling IJA and IJN fighter aircraft apart was exceedingly difficult, as the Ki-43 was so similar to the A6M the Oscar was also commonly termed the 'Army Zero' by Allied pilots over Asia, so sussing out that the striking power of Ozawa's carriers had been smashed over Formosa was a tall order. Goes to show that Allied intelligence appears to have had a good handle on the variable nature of the air threat: while building new aircraft carriers would take three years, the building time to construct the aircraft to embark aboard that carrier fleet would be reduced to three months by 1945 for the Japanese.
For warships disguised as merchant ships when constructed, the Japanese tried that with a few liners. But the conversion time was excessive and the results weren't so great. I wonder if they would have been more successful if they had gone with a train ferry design. The train deck as the hangar deck, clear the upper works for a flight deck. Possibly leaving space in the hull to install more propulsion machinery during conversion.
Regarding admirals (though we tend to primarily think of him as a general) with interesting hobbies, what about Rupert of the Rhine? General, admiral, artist, scientist.
Listening to the description of IJN Type descriptions, why do I feel like Drach should have tossed in, "Except February, which has 28." Feels like more exceptions than pattern. :-)
2:48:52 Another major reason why the IJN didn't have a whole lot of mobile/distant repair capabilities was because for most of the time leading up to WWII, their plans didn't see much need for them. With their Kantai Kessen doctrine, the IJN spent most of the interwar period planning for a major naval war to be decided by a single major battle relatively close to Japan (similar to Tsushima). So between their focus on a short war, and assuming that major combat would take place near their own major ports and facilities, developing the capability for performing major long-term repairs on ships thousands of miles away from the home islands just didn't seem like a high priority. Combined with the budgetary constraints Drach mentioned, which meant they were often choosing between a couple of dedicated repair ships or a new battleship/carrier, it's quite understandable why they made the choices they did.
1:46:40 I figured you would say Suffren. The English literally just called him The Admiral. Gives you some idea about how they rated him. Edit - Fun choice, btw.
Happy new year's sir,sitting here,cold beer watching your show. Our granddaughter running around keeping Nanny busy while eating supper. Have a great 2024.
Re: the Bismarck gunnery discussion. Why did defeated ships not surrender to their opponents thus saving the lives of their crews. On land, units and sometimes armies surrendered en masse. While at sea, every battle seemed to be a fight to the end - or at least was intended to be.
Hello Drachinifel! I am a huge fan of your content and recommend you to everyone I know. Before the advent of gunpowder, were ships ever equipped with ballista or other seaborne siege / warfare weaponry? I love the Age of Sail videos the most. Thank you so much for everything!
Sweden building more coastal defence ships wasn't just an idea that was scrapped and the ball was in motion to build one more. There's a 1939 design with 4 x 10 inch guns that was finished and yard space allocated but due to the outbreak of war funding was reallocated to projects that could be built more rapidly
To answer your query about foreign sales of Abrams, yes, they are stripped of several key sensitive components before they’re sold to partner nations. This goes for all US military vehicles. Obviously can’t get into specifics. And I’m speaking from the POV of having been the XO to the unit responsible for repairing foreign donations to Ukraine last year. As for bureaucratic red tape clogging up supply lines, I’ve got stories for days. It still happens and it’s a daily occurrence.
I was stationed aboard a U.S. submarine in the 80s. We ran out of CO2 for the coke machines. They tried using nitrogen instead. In the end, we ended up doing a 3 month patrol without the coke machine. Not a happy crew.
Slightly tangential, but you’ve just made me realise that the Battlestar type launch system actually makes an awful lot of sense, certainly within the context of the reimagined series. If you’ve just completed a hyper light jump you have no prior knowledge of what is around you, so you’d want to deploy a defensive screen ASAP after you arrive; being able to launch a substantial portion of your air wing simultaneously is pretty good way to achieve that.
My contribution to things that sound plausible, but probably aren't. I've wondered why submarines didn't carry time delayed mines to deploy when being held down by depth charging? Seems an escort vessel hitting a mine may give the others pause.
The biggest thing about export models being improvements on original domestic versions is usually down to timeframe. The Russian T-90 for example, often cited as an export tank with a better variant going abroad. Designed before the break up of the Soviet Union it was a good design for its time albeit basically an improved T-72. The Russia that succeeded the SU was broke and only built T-90s in small numbers which eventually dried up. The company requested permission to export in order to keep the lines running with such small Russian orders and this was granted. But this permission was given over 10 years after the T-90 was developed and it would be 20 years after initial development that the Indian T-90S were delivered. Obviously India didn't want to order a 20 year old tank so it was an improved version. But the Russian army resumed purchasing T-90 a couple of years later and basically used the Indian version as the T-90A. So there was only a "better" export variant for 4 years and that was because Russia was not buying tanks in that 4 years. The process essentially repeated with T-90M and T-90MS. A similar thing occured with post Soviet Russian aircraft. In this case it greatly helped Russia, the lines were kept running and an improved T-90 was developed and tested basically for free. The downside being Russia was very behind on tanks in the 90s, but it could afford to build or develop modern tanks anyway.
When I was in the army we arrived at Afghanistan to find that the equipment they had shipped ahead of us hadn’t been sealed properly in the shipping container and had been exposed to salt water and ocean during its trip. Needless to say all out M240s, M2s, and Mk19 were completely destroyed
There was one US Battleship not named for a state - USS Kearsarge (BB 5) named in honor the Civil War-era USS Kearsarge. She was lead ship of her class and sister ship of USS Kentucky (BB 6).
You called? Truth be told, this was during U-505's 10th patrol, the capture happened during U-505's 12th patrol. In fact, it's 5th-9th naval patrols all had to be aborted due to technical issues and sabotage from French dockworkers and Captain Zschech had been the butt of numerous jokes from his fellow submariners up to that point. The stress just proved to be too much for him.
With Naming conventions Japanese and Americans (at least until the Cold War) show best consistency (US does have Kearsarge and the State named ACRs while Japanese carriers in late WW2 also changes from the pretty consistent flying creature (with exceptions of conversions Akagi, Kaga and Chitose, Chiyoda) to including the heavy cruiser/battlecruiser scheme of mountain names for new built carriers of the Unryu class, with the exception of the Unryu herself). Russians (both Soviet and not) and Germans are not too bad either. French and British are more inconsistent even if British have some great in class naming conventions and really cool names overall.
00:39:49 - It appears no one made an "export model" ship like the Soviets would do with tanks. In fact, most "foreign equivalents" seem to have been improvements on the original design. Was it the small (often singular) numbers ordered that led to this? Another factor to mind is the Soviet export model system was ultimately because the customers demanded it, not because the Soviets wouldn't or couldn't provide better. Rare was the Soviet standard system that could not be purchased or licensed. Rarer was the Soviet standard system that had a price-tag that anyone other than Soviets would willingly pay in full. This lead to the Soviet Union to develop cheaper export models that would sell, especially to the Warsaw Pact. The Soviets would have LOVED to sell their own Red-Army standard T72s and such to their Warsaw pact members especially, but apart from the DDR, they were nearly always politely told "we'll take the export variant at ~70% of the price, if we take anything at all." The thing about the people buying ships back in the day is that they usually wanted quality, if only to make up for the limited quantity they could acquire at any given point, and so they were okay with paying reasonably well for the ships.
I feel like claiming the US had the best produced ship class of each category during WW2 is rather disingenuous. The United States had the distinct advantage of having the world's largest industrial base and the benefit of not being particularly threatened by WW2 before, nor during their direct involvement. All of these things gave them the luxury of developing and testing new designs quite late in the 1930's without the desperate immediacy of falling bombs and including some of the lessons learned the hard way by *other* nations. These late designs also benefitted from the steadily disintegrating treaty system. Finally, the simple fact that a huge number of their ships mounted radar sets was probably more tactically relevant than any inherent speed, armor or firepower advantages.
Osprey's "The SA 1921-45" states that organization had a maritime arm, The Marine SA, which was created in 1934, operating what would be known in the US as cabin cruisers on the German coat, lakes and rivers. Partei cells aboard merchant vessels were also part of the organization - interestingly, the commander of these cells was did not have to be the ship's master or one of his officers - it might be a seaman or stoker. The Marine SA was designed to be a reserve to the navy and to provide pre-enlistment training for those wishing to join the Kriegsmarine.
not sure which ships had them, but for certain, even some of the smaller ships working further north seem to have on occasion used a Gouemon "Boiling Barrel bath" filled with mineral-rich water, believed to among other things have healing and strengthening properties... the practice is a tradition dating from much older days, & since the water is always recycled, it was not really a big drain on the water supply a father of one of my friends actually took one of those baths home after the war... still sits in the family bathhouse, naval insignia and all....
I can't add anything specifically about bathhouses in Japanese warships, but I did once experience such on a Japanese ship. This was not a cruise ship, where I imagine it is common to have Jacuzzi-style hot-tubs with a sea view for the bathing-suit-clad occupants to enjoy. It was a relatively prosaic ferry between Osaka and Pusan (in South Korea), and the bathhouse was a simple affair, deep inside the ship. There, passengers could clean up and (after fully rinsing off the soap, as dictated by custom) enjoy a few minutes in the communal tub, while completely starkers. Clearly, the designers of the ship considered this to be the least that their passengers would expect during the 23 hours required for the crossing. It therefore comes as no surprise to learn that bathhouses were (and probably still are) included in Japanese naval vessels, presumably being important for crew morale during a long voyage. Certainly these will make it clear to all that they are "in this together". And, for those who noticed the "..in calm seas." comment in the question... The water sloshing around in the tub, due to the swell in the Tsushima Strait, did provide some extra amusement that a traditional land-bound sento cannot.
@0:35:36 There's a large circle at the "9 'o'clock" position by the gun. Thinking that the mount would normally be turned either fore or aft, this would line up with the ladder rungs you mentioned. So I believe that this was the access hatch for manning (now-a-days Crewing) the gun mount....
Given that the US was the only country that designed ships with the lessons of war built into the design, there is no argument regarding the best technical designs. But service/resources spent, the best cruisers would be the Kormorans.
Regarding the Lawer-Admiral wouldn't leading a fleet into battle be seen as just another way of settling property boundaries, except between nations instead of individuals?
Hi Drac, is the illustration at 34ish (Definition of a Man of War) a depiction of Sir Cloudesley Shovell's fleet encountering the Isles of Scilly? Or something else?
RN names are consistent, they just revolve around applying a hierarchy of names to ships rather than sticking to a naming convention. All the names of turn of the century Pre-Dreadnoughts, Dreadnoughts and Battlecruisers, then later with Carriers were "higher tier" names worthy of capital ships while Cruisers got the lesser ones Frigates once used and Destroyers and others picked up the rest. The only major difference was when a naming convention was held to, like the demotion of battle names in the Battle Class Destroyers or the Flotilla Leader convention of being named after admirals resulting in Exmouth going from a Battleship name down to a Destroyer one. The major theme of turn of the century RN names was looking back at major warship names during the Revolutionary/Napoleonic Wars and other historically significant ones and choosing them to honour the time around the centennial of Nelson's life. This convention was originally applied later to nuclear submarines as a hat tip to their major role in modern naval warfare, but then with the Swiftsures the old letter convention of diesel subs reasserted itself and displaced it.
![[UNCUT] The Loyal Pin ปิ่นภักดิ์ EP.6 (2/4)](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/GgeGQOP10RQ/mqdefault.jpg)
"He who controls the gunpowder is going to control the war." Was a very Dune-esque statement by Drach.
The powder must flow.
@@jlvfr World of your own guys 🙄
Happy New Year when you're back with us mere mortals
To an Australian this is the first Drydock of 2024. Pleasure to have it, mates.
Indeed
HNY mate!
May you an yours have one of Best Ones !
Assa Canadian. Shoulder to shoulder.
@murrayscott9546
Do what to a Canadian?
Jean Bart did sail to Casablanca under her own power in June 1940; she was moved out of her building dock by tugboats, but completed the rest of her voyage using part of her own powerplant :)
Drach, glad you're fully recovered this month and able to recite your Blackburns without fits of coughing! Best wishes to you and your family for a happy and healthy 2024!
"USN had far and away the best late war class of ships!'
*USN was the only one with late war class of ships.*
In fairness, even post war the US WW2 ships lived far longer lives than any thing from Europe even just post war.
DD-837 Sarsfield, a fletcher class left service all the way in the 1970s, and many of the Gearings served into the 2000s in Asia.
The director of the new jeresy museum often uses the term "gold plated" when referring to construction standards of WW2 USN warships, they simply got built at a higher standard with better materials
While I was the Engineering Log Room Yeoman, I was trying to get what was needed for our enlisted engineering crew to take the exams for promotions. I couldn't get the (scratch off the black covering a/b/c/d/e answer) exam sheets. Talking to my counterpart on another ship of the same class, I found out that he could get the answer sheets, but couldn't get the test book! A quick hand shake later he was reordering his sheets and I was reordering the test books!! Both ships had a number of promotions soon afterwards!!!
(And yes, we were moored (tied) to the same pier at Philadelphia (Pennsylvania)! They were on the west side and we were on the east side!!)
Supply problems: In one of C. S. Forrester's short stories about the USN in the Pacific a submarine tender that prided itself on having everything that the submariners needed and if they didn't have it they could make it becomes embarrassed when a lucky shot from a bypassed Japanese garrison destroys their entire stock of toilet paper, so they didn't have it and they couldn't make it. Edit: Just checked, it is titled "USS Cornucopia".
Man, I do enjoy (world wide) "ship naming conventions" (starting 1:08)
And USS Cornucopia is a prize winner for a submarine tender.
Thank you for the information!
😊
Reminds me of the _USS Skipjack,_ which went without toilet paper for a year. Mare Island, the supply depot, apparently couldn't identify the material.
The letter Captain Coe sent is definitely worth reading.
Is that what's meant by *'Striking an underhand blow'* ?
They'd have been better off serving on the Enterprise
I'm pretty sure Forester just made up that name, I can't find any real ship listed with that name.@@williestyle35
That story is in the collection "The Man in the Yellow Raft" and you might be amused that most of the stories take place on a fictional destroyer named the USS Boon.@@babboon5764
The U.S. Navy had one Battleship NOT named after a state... U.S.S. Kearsarge.
Yep... named so because the previous Kearsarge had sank Semmes' C.S.S. Alabama, and it has become one of the more consistently used names in the USN, only going out of service for very short periods of time.
That's just what the state of Kearsarge wants you to think...
The problem with trying to rules-lawyer the naval treaties is that they were _written_ by the biggest rules lawyers in the world at the time.
And ones who had navies to back them up.
We just call them “Lawyers”
I like the British interwar and WWII destroyer naming convention. Each class they take the next letter in the alphabet and the entire class starts with that letter.
I can neither confirm nor deny that a 688 submarine out of Norfolk departed for deployment and forgot to order toilet paper. This issue was corrected, until the sub pulled in and got fully restocked, by issuing each man one roll of toilet paper and you had to use that at your own risk as you needed to. They only had enough for each crewmen to have one roll. So supply issues still persist, it happens.
Supply problems: I worked in refugee camps in the middle east.
On presenting a particularly wretched group in need of blankets to a msf quartermaster late on a cold clear night, I was told none were available.
After asking why, I was informed that if these were given blankets, there might not be enough for anyone who came tomorrow.
I gave them a paddington extra hard stare and took the blankets.
The Dutch Navy tended to name its ships after Naval heroes and after places, especially places (islands, towns, mountains) in the Dutch East-Indies. The latter convention has been largely abandoned. There are, to my knowledge, two fixed rules in the Dutch Navy: There must always be a ship named after Admiral de Ruyter and there must be a ship named after van Speyk (the latter is rather less deserving of the honour than the former, but it was a decree by the first king of the Netherlands, van Speyk being a fanatical orangist).
It should be noted that high speed steel wasn't developed until 1910, so the cutting, milling and drilling of metal was limited to what ordinary high-carbon steel could accomplish.
I wasn't actually expecting a Drydock this week with it being the holidays. Drach thank you for blessing us witha 6 hour one
I think the best way to describe the Japanese destroyer naming conventions would be natural phenomenon. Wind (-kaze), waves (-nami), tides (-shio), the moon (-zuki/suki), weather conditions like Blizzard, Storm, or Haze (Fubuki, Arashi, Kasumi, etc), plus some months or seasons and a couple unqiue ones like Wakaba (Young Leaves) or Shiranuhi (Phosphorescent Light).
Japanese destroyers are easily my favourite set of names from any nation. What they're actually named for (translation) and the names themselves are so cool.
People seem to forget, Mahan wrote "The Influence of Seapower Upon History" Not "The influence of Decisive Naval Battle Upon History". Mahan is on the whole right that navies and sea power is vital, however where people go wrong is thinking that a fleet must be used to destroy the other navy rather than that a fleet in some cases should exist to protect your own shores from an enemy. In short a Fleet in being for some nations should be a defensive not offensive tool.
25:41 The Japanese tried something like this with the Hiei, she had some of her armour and guns removed, they then claimed she was a training ships, though they kept the armour and guns in another location, but she was a ship built before the treaties and they were claiming she wasn't a warship at this point, they were just lying.
The Soviets did the same "disarming" their bombers nuclear capablity. The US honoured the treaty and destroyed the equipment for their bombers, but the Soviets just took theirs off the air frames and stored them on site by their bombers so it could be reinstalled if a crisis loomed before turning into WWIII. IIRC, it only took a couple hours to put back.
So everyone has naming conversations but the Royal Navy who does choose the name of a ship at the end of the night when all the bottles have been emptied 😂
The royal navy runs by it's own subset of Parkinson's law (look it up...)
I have heard that Churchill persistently (and unsuccessfully) tried to get King George V to agree to calling a battleship 'Oliver Cromwell.' The King was not keen on honouring the man who had helped kill his ancestor!
I think this might be apocryphal, as Sir Winston was a supporter of the Monarchy... Though he might have had the idea of "selling" Parliament on a class of ships that includes Cromwell...
Distant predecessor, but not ancestor. There is a break with George I, whose ancestry goes back to James I, father of Charles I.
He also persistently tried to get a ship named after the former Prime Minister William Pitt but King George V refused as he was a former Naval Officer and knew just what nickname sailors would give a ship with that name.
The did eventually name a destroyer HMS Cromwell, although it was completed after the war and was immediately sold to Norway.
Not sure if it was officially named after Oliver Cromwell, they could claim it was named after someone else in the family (such as Thomas Cromwell) or the village of Cromwell.
Completely agree that Fletcher is vastly underrated. “Black Shoe Carrier Admiral” is a great book that reviews Fletcher’s actions and decisions.
Couldn't agree more. Easily one of the best US admirals of the Second World War. I was very happy when his picture showed up at the question. "Black Shoe Carrier Admiral" is an amazing history books. One of my favorites.
I think "Black Shoe Carrier Admiral" goes a little far in the opposite direction, with Lundstrom seemingly unwilling to criticize anything Fletcher did despite taking a blowtorch to decisions made by everyone from King and Nimitz on down. Nonetheless, I do agree that Fletcher was better than his historical reputation typically portrayed him. A decent admiral, though hardly in the elite tier.
Drach's last video of 2023. happy new year, chat.
My personal favourite of the Patreon nicknames was "Indy Nidell's fursona" and the way Drach went "...apparently?" After reading the name.
A fictional reference to supply problem is in the book" the ship with the flat tire" new supply officer thinks tp is ordered by the roll so marks 1000 but when told it by the double gross says someone will catch my mistake since i cant catch the paperwork. Then the simitrucks show up with 288,000 rolls. It actually earns some misplaced respect from a petty officer who had gone through supply shortages in ww2
You forgot to mention "Lucky Jack Aubrey", with an unusual hobby, he was an astronomer.😄
Many thanks Drach for all your hard work. Been listening for just under a year, always listen while walking, cleaning and driving. My naval history was always lacking, so many thanks.🇦🇺
Plz keep Long Month End DRYDOCKs! It’s all I live & long for each month. Pretty plz, with your favourite toppings & stuff!
I've decided to enjoy New Years Eve with a viewing of the colorized version of Sink the Bismark.
Happy New Year to everyone.
Thank you ever so much for your defense of Admiral Fletcher. A most cogent description of the reality succinctly delivered.
Some time I would hope you might gove your even handed attention to the career of one Admiral Husband Kimmel.
Something to remember with Australia around 1900. We had lots of 2 things the world needed. Gold and Wool. The export of these brought a lot of money into Australia. In the 1880’s, Melbourne was reputedly the richest city in the world
You mentioned the Chilworth gunpowder works in Hampshire. Although there is a Chilworth in Hampshire, on the outskirts of Southampton, the gunpowder works was at Chilworth in Surrey, near Guildford.
It's in the location I was visualising, but despite being relatively local, it seems my mental image of where the Surrey/Hampshire border is, is a little north of where it actually is 😀
Great answer. Thanks buddy.
I was delighted to learn about Admiral Cochran's inventing hobby and engineering hobby. One of the more fascinating figures of Naval, or any other, history.
That might be a subject for a Wednesday, or Funday Friday presentation.
Regarding the idea of cruisers in the channel at 22:16 - you might argue that the various sea forts built to protect various key ports and waterways were a kind of half-way-house to that idea - placing a bunch of AAA offshore, but not risking valuable cruisers to do so.
Heh. The HMAS Australia managed to pull off a name of an entire continent and no one seemed awares.
Well ... technically the continent" is called Australia and Oceania. . .
😊
What about HMS Africa, HMS America, HMS Asia, and HMS Europa?
@@ernestcline2868 lol
The USN was very good at naming conventions until the past 50+ years. Since then it’s been awful.
Admiral Rickover changed the submarine naming convention of sea life names. When a junior officer asked him why since it was a tradition that also made sense, Rickover replied, "Fish don't vote!"
@@DaremoKamen Well... the guys naming the Virginia-class seem to have stopped caring about that. Although if you want my honest opinion, submarines using the old battleship-naming convention is the _least_ egregious change in naming conventions given how powerful American subs are nowadays.
@@Eboreg2 They stopped naming Virginias after states because they ran out of states. The class is planned to be 66 boats and you've only got 50 states with 18 already taken by Ohios.
At least the names they are picking are sensible and historical, not choosing to name carriers after people who should have destroyers named after them or warships after civil rights leaders and someone like Giffords.
@@nektulosnewbie Agreed. I am afraid the deterioration in naming conventions is illustrative of the downgrading of our current military.
@@billyshakespeare17wut. While i agree the new names do suck, its very funny to think the biggest most advanced fleet at sea, with the best missiles, planes, sensors, etc could be seen as a downgrade over historic fleets just bcs the ships have illfitting names.
For the British "R" names, the "Empress of India" does, in fact, fall into that line of nomenclature, provided that the name is announced by an Announcer, with a fluent "Scooby Doo" dialect....
Re a Waffen SS Navy, the relationship with the army was that the Waffen SS were only allowed to recruit those not initially eligible for the Wehrmacht. Iirc they could recruit from police, who were excluded from conscription, Volksdeutch; those in the conquered or annexed regions regarded as in some degree German (though over time, the Heer started recruiting those too), and foreign volunteers.
Thank you for all your work ! Happy New Year .
The germans where very consistent when it comes to naming U-Boats since the 1930s....
Kearsarge (BB-5) is the only US battleship not named after a state. Interestingly, she was an Essex class carriers. It was also a sloop of the line during the US Civil War. Another interesting note. Kearsarge was one of the names used on another ship while the older ship was still in commission.
This is great to listen to while I’m building plastic models in a rare day of quiet.
The minefield question reminds me of the joke for land based minefields: "How many mines do you need to make a minefield? None, just put up a sign". As soon as you *think* there's a minefield somewhere, there effectively is.
Thank you for another year of great videos. And most of all, thank you for making a video about the USS Vestal. Happy New Year!
If you consider the American battlecruisers that were ordered, the naming convention is split. Lexington and Saratoga were named after Revolutionary War battles, while the remainder of the class were named after the original heavy frigates.
Happy New Year Drach!
Ozawa was a decoy due to a much more recent battle than the Battle of the Philippine Sea. Ozawa's carriers on 25 October 1944 would have been fully loaded with aircraft if not for a major battle over Formosa less than two weeks earlier (conveniently termed the Formosa Air Battle of 12-16 October 1944). 300-500 Japanese aircraft (Army and Navy) were destroyed by the aircraft and anti-aircraft guns of TF-38, including most of the aircraft assigned to Zuikaku and her three light carrier consorts.
Admiral Toyoda, during his interrogation by the Americans postwar, claimed the following:
"I stated that I expected your offensive against the PHILIPPINES would commence around August or September; that is not to say that we were prepared at the time to meet that offensive, for the reason that our forces, both Army and Navy, had lost practically all their supporting aircraft at the various operations and it took anywhere from four to five months to replenish the lost aircraft."
Other interrogations and records show the IJNAS, prior to the battle over Formosa, had largely recovered their aircraft losses (in quantity, not pilot quality). In mid-October the Japanese lost over Formosa another Philippine Sea-size force of aircraft, making the IJN carriers useless as an aircraft striking unit against the amphibious invasion against Leyte coming later that same month.
However, it's hard to see how U.S. intelligence could have divined the Japanese temporary setback (had Ozawa's carriers survived they potentially could have embarked replacements that were expended in the Kamikaze attacks during Iwo Jima and Okinawa). The Japanese plan committed 1800 aircraft against TF-38 over Formosa, but 600 were not available, meaning at best (from the American point of view) 1300 Japanese aircraft allocated to striking Halsey's fleet were still intact by 17 October 1944. That left a potent force avaliable for Leyte Gulf (over 300 Japanese aircraft committed to that fight two weeks after Formosa).
Moreover, the Formosa Air Battle featured Japanese aircraft flying exclusively from land bases from both Japanese military services. Telling IJA and IJN fighter aircraft apart was exceedingly difficult, as the Ki-43 was so similar to the A6M the Oscar was also commonly termed the 'Army Zero' by Allied pilots over Asia, so sussing out that the striking power of Ozawa's carriers had been smashed over Formosa was a tall order.
Goes to show that Allied intelligence appears to have had a good handle on the variable nature of the air threat: while building new aircraft carriers would take three years, the building time to construct the aircraft to embark aboard that carrier fleet would be reduced to three months by 1945 for the Japanese.
For warships disguised as merchant ships when constructed, the Japanese tried that with a few liners. But the conversion time was excessive and the results weren't so great. I wonder if they would have been more successful if they had gone with a train ferry design. The train deck as the hangar deck, clear the upper works for a flight deck. Possibly leaving space in the hull to install more propulsion machinery during conversion.
Regarding admirals (though we tend to primarily think of him as a general) with interesting hobbies, what about Rupert of the Rhine? General, admiral, artist, scientist.
Also Pliney the Elder. Admiral, naturalist, historian.
High recommendations to Godzilla -1
Seeing Takao shooting for only that few minutes of screen time was amazing
Such a phenomenal film, everything about it is amazing.
Listening to the description of IJN Type descriptions, why do I feel like Drach should have tossed in, "Except February, which has 28."
Feels like more exceptions than pattern. :-)
2:48:52 Another major reason why the IJN didn't have a whole lot of mobile/distant repair capabilities was because for most of the time leading up to WWII, their plans didn't see much need for them. With their Kantai Kessen doctrine, the IJN spent most of the interwar period planning for a major naval war to be decided by a single major battle relatively close to Japan (similar to Tsushima). So between their focus on a short war, and assuming that major combat would take place near their own major ports and facilities, developing the capability for performing major long-term repairs on ships thousands of miles away from the home islands just didn't seem like a high priority. Combined with the budgetary constraints Drach mentioned, which meant they were often choosing between a couple of dedicated repair ships or a new battleship/carrier, it's quite understandable why they made the choices they did.
1:46:40 I figured you would say Suffren. The English literally just called him The Admiral. Gives you some idea about how they rated him.
Edit - Fun choice, btw.
Happy new year's sir,sitting here,cold beer watching your show. Our granddaughter running around keeping Nanny busy while eating supper. Have a great 2024.
Merry Christmas and a happy new year Drach!🎉🎉
May 2024 bring you to NZ for some reason! 😂
Happy new year to our friends upside down 🙃😉!
Glad I found this channel early this year, it has been quite interesting learning about naval history. Happy New Years Drach.
"Photon emitting porcine" got a laugh out of me. Brilliant phrasing of that question.
Excellent as always, Sir Drach!
Re: the Bismarck gunnery discussion. Why did defeated ships not surrender to their opponents thus saving the lives of their crews. On land, units and sometimes armies surrendered en masse. While at sea, every battle seemed to be a fight to the end - or at least was intended to be.
Isn't it that the captains don't realise they are losing till they explode?
Yay, I love the long drydocks
Hello Drachinifel! I am a huge fan of your content and recommend you to everyone I know. Before the advent of gunpowder, were ships ever equipped with ballista or other seaborne siege / warfare weaponry? I love the Age of Sail videos the most. Thank you so much for everything!
Sweden building more coastal defence ships wasn't just an idea that was scrapped and the ball was in motion to build one more. There's a 1939 design with 4 x 10 inch guns that was finished and yard space allocated but due to the outbreak of war funding was reallocated to projects that could be built more rapidly
To answer your query about foreign sales of Abrams, yes, they are stripped of several key sensitive components before they’re sold to partner nations. This goes for all US military vehicles. Obviously can’t get into specifics. And I’m speaking from the POV of having been the XO to the unit responsible for repairing foreign donations to Ukraine last year.
As for bureaucratic red tape clogging up supply lines, I’ve got stories for days. It still happens and it’s a daily occurrence.
Happy New Year🎉
I was stationed aboard a U.S. submarine in the 80s. We ran out of CO2 for the coke machines. They tried using nitrogen instead. In the end, we ended up doing a 3 month patrol without the coke machine. Not a happy crew.
Slightly tangential, but you’ve just made me realise that the Battlestar type launch system actually makes an awful lot of sense, certainly within the context of the reimagined series. If you’ve just completed a hyper light jump you have no prior knowledge of what is around you, so you’d want to deploy a defensive screen ASAP after you arrive; being able to launch a substantial portion of your air wing simultaneously is pretty good way to achieve that.
USS Kearsarge BB-5 was the only battleship named after the sloop which was named after a mountain (Mt. Kearsarge) in New Hampshire.
Thanks Drach.
When it comes to proofing black powder weapons, I have personally proofed modern-day built flintlocks, double charge double ball
That baseline is bangin' 👌
Happy New Year Dr. Drach 🍻
My contribution to things that sound plausible, but probably aren't. I've wondered why submarines didn't carry time delayed mines to deploy when being held down by depth charging? Seems an escort vessel hitting a mine may give the others pause.
How could you forget the great Russian composer Admiral Nikolai Rimsky-Korsakov.
Supply issues: the First Fleet transporting convicts to Australia in 1787 apparently left Britain without powder for its small arms...
The biggest thing about export models being improvements on original domestic versions is usually down to timeframe. The Russian T-90 for example, often cited as an export tank with a better variant going abroad. Designed before the break up of the Soviet Union it was a good design for its time albeit basically an improved T-72. The Russia that succeeded the SU was broke and only built T-90s in small numbers which eventually dried up. The company requested permission to export in order to keep the lines running with such small Russian orders and this was granted. But this permission was given over 10 years after the T-90 was developed and it would be 20 years after initial development that the Indian T-90S were delivered. Obviously India didn't want to order a 20 year old tank so it was an improved version. But the Russian army resumed purchasing T-90 a couple of years later and basically used the Indian version as the T-90A. So there was only a "better" export variant for 4 years and that was because Russia was not buying tanks in that 4 years. The process essentially repeated with T-90M and T-90MS. A similar thing occured with post Soviet Russian aircraft.
In this case it greatly helped Russia, the lines were kept running and an improved T-90 was developed and tested basically for free. The downside being Russia was very behind on tanks in the 90s, but it could afford to build or develop modern tanks anyway.
When I was in the army we arrived at Afghanistan to find that the equipment they had shipped ahead of us hadn’t been sealed properly in the shipping container and had been exposed to salt water and ocean during its trip. Needless to say all out M240s, M2s, and Mk19 were completely destroyed
There was one US Battleship not named for a state. BB-5 USS Kearsarge
The USN did have one outlier for capital ships, U.S.S. Kearsarge, BB-5.
The interesting part of Mahan...between Germany and Japan Mahans writings served the US quite well...
There was one US Battleship not named for a state - USS Kearsarge (BB 5) named in honor the Civil War-era USS Kearsarge. She was lead ship of her class and sister ship of USS Kentucky (BB 6).
Happy New Year Drach
The US stuck to the state battleship naming convention, except for the Kearsarge.
Happy new year everyone!
eepereg-U505 captain might have been concealing the top secrets he held
You called?
Truth be told, this was during U-505's 10th patrol, the capture happened during U-505's 12th patrol. In fact, it's 5th-9th naval patrols all had to be aborted due to technical issues and sabotage from French dockworkers and Captain Zschech had been the butt of numerous jokes from his fellow submariners up to that point. The stress just proved to be too much for him.
With Naming conventions Japanese and Americans (at least until the Cold War) show best consistency (US does have Kearsarge and the State named ACRs while Japanese carriers in late WW2 also changes from the pretty consistent flying creature (with exceptions of conversions Akagi, Kaga and Chitose, Chiyoda) to including the heavy cruiser/battlecruiser scheme of mountain names for new built carriers of the Unryu class, with the exception of the Unryu herself). Russians (both Soviet and not) and Germans are not too bad either.
French and British are more inconsistent even if British have some great in class naming conventions and really cool names overall.
Found an article relating ablutionary facilities on board ww2 warships.
Bath tubs are definitely a thing.
Don’t forget the time in the American revolution Washington crossed a frozen river on Christmas Eve to attack the Hessians
00:39:49 - It appears no one made an "export model" ship like the Soviets would do with tanks. In fact, most "foreign equivalents" seem to have been improvements on the original design. Was it the small (often singular) numbers ordered that led to this?
Another factor to mind is the Soviet export model system was ultimately because the customers demanded it, not because the Soviets wouldn't or couldn't provide better. Rare was the Soviet standard system that could not be purchased or licensed. Rarer was the Soviet standard system that had a price-tag that anyone other than Soviets would willingly pay in full. This lead to the Soviet Union to develop cheaper export models that would sell, especially to the Warsaw Pact.
The Soviets would have LOVED to sell their own Red-Army standard T72s and such to their Warsaw pact members especially, but apart from the DDR, they were nearly always politely told "we'll take the export variant at ~70% of the price, if we take anything at all."
The thing about the people buying ships back in the day is that they usually wanted quality, if only to make up for the limited quantity they could acquire at any given point, and so they were okay with paying reasonably well for the ships.
I feel like claiming the US had the best produced ship class of each category during WW2 is rather disingenuous. The United States had the distinct advantage of having the world's largest industrial base and the benefit of not being particularly threatened by WW2 before, nor during their direct involvement. All of these things gave them the luxury of developing and testing new designs quite late in the 1930's without the desperate immediacy of falling bombs and including some of the lessons learned the hard way by *other* nations. These late designs also benefitted from the steadily disintegrating treaty system. Finally, the simple fact that a huge number of their ships mounted radar sets was probably more tactically relevant than any inherent speed, armor or firepower advantages.
2:40:23 Perhaps the most notable use of the cross deck catapult was in a scene in 1944's 'Wing And A Prayer'.
Osprey's "The SA 1921-45" states that organization had a maritime arm, The Marine SA, which was created in 1934, operating what would be known in the US as cabin cruisers on the German coat, lakes and rivers. Partei cells aboard merchant vessels were also part of the organization - interestingly, the commander of these cells was did not have to be the ship's master or one of his officers - it might be a seaman or stoker. The Marine SA was designed to be a reserve to the navy and to provide pre-enlistment training for those wishing to join the Kriegsmarine.
not sure which ships had them, but for certain, even some of the smaller ships working further north seem to have on occasion used a Gouemon "Boiling Barrel bath" filled with mineral-rich water, believed to among other things have healing and strengthening properties... the practice is a tradition dating from much older days, & since the water is always recycled, it was not really a big drain on the water supply
a father of one of my friends actually took one of those baths home after the war... still sits in the family bathhouse, naval insignia and all....
I can't add anything specifically about bathhouses in Japanese warships, but I did once experience such on a Japanese ship.
This was not a cruise ship, where I imagine it is common to have Jacuzzi-style hot-tubs with a sea view for the bathing-suit-clad occupants to enjoy. It was a relatively prosaic ferry between Osaka and Pusan (in South Korea), and the bathhouse was a simple affair, deep inside the ship. There, passengers could clean up and (after fully rinsing off the soap, as dictated by custom) enjoy a few minutes in the communal tub, while completely starkers.
Clearly, the designers of the ship considered this to be the least that their passengers would expect during the 23 hours required for the crossing. It therefore comes as no surprise to learn that bathhouses were (and probably still are) included in Japanese naval vessels, presumably being important for crew morale during a long voyage. Certainly these will make it clear to all that they are "in this together".
And, for those who noticed the "..in calm seas." comment in the question...
The water sloshing around in the tub, due to the swell in the Tsushima Strait, did provide some extra amusement that a traditional land-bound sento cannot.
@0:35:36 There's a large circle at the "9 'o'clock" position by the gun. Thinking that the mount would normally be turned either fore or aft, this would line up with the ladder rungs you mentioned. So I believe that this was the access hatch for manning (now-a-days Crewing) the gun mount....
Happy new year to you all
Given that the US was the only country that designed ships with the lessons of war built into the design, there is no argument regarding the best technical designs.
But service/resources spent, the best cruisers would be the Kormorans.
Regarding the Lawer-Admiral wouldn't leading a fleet into battle be seen as just another way of settling property boundaries, except between nations instead of individuals?
Hi Drac, is the illustration at 34ish (Definition of a Man of War) a depiction of Sir Cloudesley Shovell's fleet encountering the Isles of Scilly? Or something else?
RN names are consistent, they just revolve around applying a hierarchy of names to ships rather than sticking to a naming convention.
All the names of turn of the century Pre-Dreadnoughts, Dreadnoughts and Battlecruisers, then later with Carriers were "higher tier" names worthy of capital ships while Cruisers got the lesser ones Frigates once used and Destroyers and others picked up the rest. The only major difference was when a naming convention was held to, like the demotion of battle names in the Battle Class Destroyers or the Flotilla Leader convention of being named after admirals resulting in Exmouth going from a Battleship name down to a Destroyer one.
The major theme of turn of the century RN names was looking back at major warship names during the Revolutionary/Napoleonic Wars and other historically significant ones and choosing them to honour the time around the centennial of Nelson's life.
This convention was originally applied later to nuclear submarines as a hat tip to their major role in modern naval warfare, but then with the Swiftsures the old letter convention of diesel subs reasserted itself and displaced it.
_Enemy sail sighted!_
Very well. I shall inform the captain.
****BANG****
Seems he heard it.🤨
Drydock release on the day I'm embarking on a big minecraft project.
Ji ji... He said "sloop" 😊