Could you expand on the lack of HE rounds for the 15 Inch guns at Singapore. I had understood that there were HE rounds in Singapore but the depot was so disorganised that they never made their way to the gun batteries in quantity.
To those, including MHV, who say you went off track or overboard....DON'T SWEAT IT! I love a good, wide ranging discussion! Most of the viewers on your channel aren't here for brevity, I suspect.
Additional facts about Oscarsborg (Oslo) fighting Blücher and Lützow: Due to fog and night the spotting distance was very short, on the order of about 2000 meters. The 11" guns at the fortress opened fire at about 1400 m range, pretty much guaranteeing hits. Due to manning shortages just 2 of the 4 11" guns fired, and just once each. The guns were open (the thumbnail for the episode and third last pic in the video is one of those guns at Oscarsborg), so the commander knew reloading with green crews under return fire would be suicide and the gun crews evacuated immediately after firing their single round. Both 11" shells hit the lead ship Blücher. There was also a 6" battery on the other side of the strait, manned by more experienced crews, and they scored 13 hits on Blücher at about the same range, as well as numerous 57mm hits to the superstructure. At the location of the torpedo battery the strait is just 700m across, so the speed of the torpedoes was almost irrelevant, you just can't miss at that range, and the target can't maneuver without running aground even if they spot the torpedoes in time. The actual torpedoes used (not the type, the actual physical weapons themselves) had probably been test-fired with inert warheads about 200 times each, and there was deep institutional knowledge as to how they behaved. The torpedo battery had 6 submerged launchers loaded and ready, and using two torpedoes on Blücher was calculated. If the rest of the task force had followed, Lüzow also had two torpedoes allocated, whilst Emden and Möwe would get one each. The battery is built in caves blasted out of solid rock, with underwater holes blasted for torpedo egress and three independent concrete reinforced concealed spotting locations, and would have been almost impossible to suppress by naval gunfire even had the location been known.
MHV asks perfectly reasonable question, yet it's one that no normal humanoid would ever think to ask. Drach replies in mind-blowing encyclopedic detail, matter-of-factly, effortlessly. He just KNOWS this stuff. This was a truly breathtaking collaboration, and it's only the Brief History version! This is precisely the kind of thing for which the word "awesome" is the appropriate descriptor.
One other not insignificant advantage of fortifications over ships in the age of sail is that the fortification was usually higher that the ship and could, and usually did, mount it's guns higher up on the walls and those guns were more accurate (no motion of the ship to account for). A ship under sail was significantly more vulnerable than a fortification and comparatively easy to get mobility limiting damage which would then leave it open to being pounded into splinters at the fortification's leisure. Ships under sail usually avoided engagements with fortifications until the RN and Dutch Navy under Admiral Lord Exmouth (Sir Edward Pellew) successfully attacked the Barbary powers fortifications. The ships used broadsides of grape shot to keep gunners away from the guns. Grape shot became sort of the standard way to attack fortifications until rifled guns and shells became common (US Navy used copious amounts of grape shot at New Orleans, for example).
And another advantage static guns never seem to get credit for, they can have any point in their effective range pre-plotted, making ranging shots unnecessary.
Yeah, all across the southern atlantic coast of Portugal, which is almost all cliffs with small beaches, there's plenty of ruined forts, between 40 and 100 meters above sea level. This were very small forts, with not that many guns so I would assume that their goal wasn't to fire at ships but rather at any landing parties arriving on the beaches.
Seems that land based guns need to be at choke points and their exsistence makes them known commodities. Aircraft and Cruise Missles kind of make it all a Moot Point at this juncture.
The content of this channel continues to be nothing but fantastic. Easily one of my favorite channels and I look forward to uploads. Keep up the great work!
I genuinly love that your videos are on the longer side. There is so much stuff that can't ever fit into 15 minutes and it is so refreshing to see someone actually taking the time to talk about it. Subscribed right away
Jutland: point which I have noted before the cordite in RN ships was stored in silk bags and the German in metal casing - also the RN cordite was not stable due to the use of a solvent base stabilising additive which after Jutland was changed; the German cordite stabiliser was solvent free and actually stabilised the cordite. I number of ships in other navies using the RN stabiliser had magazine explosions without the need for battle. The instability of the RN cordite and the storage in silk bags meant that the RN cordite would much more easily ignite due to flash and could flash itself due to excessive blast pressure waves. The safety procedures as said played a major part in the ship destruction but add to that the above points and the whole situation was so volatile it needed little to even penetrate the flash doors safety interlocks. The cordite in the magazines themselves was suspect and it is possible as the Italian and Japanese accidents showed (using early up to Jutland RN type cordite stabiliser) that the cordite in the magazines was not safe. Regards
John Hargreaves The US Navy also used bagged charges and they didn't have problems. Cordite contained a large proprtion of nitroglycerine, which made it less stable but the US propellant was mainly nitrocellulose. It was only the rearmost charge in German ships that was in a brass case, the rest was bagged but German propellant seems to have been more stable anyway.
Anyone that works around explosives in a lab or manufacturing facility, as well as electronic components, circuit boards and such are taught about the danger potential inherent with materials that are prone to store, generate and release static electricity, amongst several other things. Near the top of the list of materials that have this static electricity problem is silk. In fact, I've worked at an explosive's lab, an automotive airbag manufacturer facility and several computer/networking technician facilities (including a clean room), where employees were explicitly told that they could not wear, use or have on their person any silk items beyond the employee locker rooms and risk job termination if they are found to be in violation of this rule. I am stunned to read that a military, the caliber of the United Kingdom, would store cordite (an explosive) in a silk bag and have no problem with how easy a static electricity discharge could occur and... well, ignite the cordite. It might not have the same explosiveness as gun powder, but it is flammable and there are lots of items that are explosive stored next to it.
The British cordite charges were stored in metal containers Admiral Beaty ordered them removed from the containers beforehand in order to improve rate of fire.
If you are ever travelling/visiting the U.S. mid-Atlantic region I highly recommend a trip to the Fort Miles Museum at Cape Henlopen, Delaware. They have restored "Battery 519", a 12" casemate battery, which includes a 12" rifle from the old USS Wyoming. There are other pieces at the museum site, as well, including a 16"/50 from the Iowa Class (A spare barrel/breach assembly), numerous smaller weapons, both naval and fixed shore weapons, as well as field-pieces. Further up the Delaware Bay/River is Fort Delaware, a Civil War-era fort in remarkably good repair. Well worth the boat-ride to get to it.
Another interesting fort to visit is fort Morgan on mobile bay, Alabama. It has a history that spans from 1819 when construction began (being completed 1834) serving in the us civil war, to just during ww2 (1944) when the garrison was removed. The fort was given to the state in 1947. As such the fort shows layers of history from the original walls and earth works, to the more modern shore batteries that was in use later on.
I've been to Cape Henlopen and it is awesome! The towers used to aim the guns are not too far off and are worth a look also. As you'd expect, they have a spectacular view. You do *need* bug spray, however. It's in the middle of a wetland and is mosquito city. Does allow you to look for crabs as a distraction, though.
The site to catch the boat to Fort Delaware on the Jersey side of the river is also home to Fort Mott, home of a battery that had disappearing guns and I believe worked in conjunction with Fort Delaware. Not quite as well preserved as Fort Delaware, but worth a walk around!
Could yourself and MHV be tempted to do a 'brief' discussion every week? No? You sure? ... Excellent listen and I hope it not the last joint venture, worth every minute.
Having grown up near Fort Stevens in Oregon, US, I have always had a fascination with coastal defense fortifications. Ft. Stevens was situated to protect the mouth of the Columbia River, and actually was shelled by a Japanese submarine in WWII. Thanks for this video!
Along the straight of Juan de Fuca and north Puget Sound they had a number of 11" and 14" guns hidden on the forested hillsides.(The ages seem slightly newer than Ft. Stevens, which as I recall was armed just prior to WW1.) Most of them had the guns sold for scrap and the bunkers abandoned and overgrown decades ago. Rather than several guns in a fort they were somewhat scattered, maybe two guns in a location. I know there was some remote management via radio and telephone from an HQ and remote spotters; not just coordinating but actually computing and issuing firing solutions to several emplacements. The Columbia may have had similar central fire control.
Drach, many thanks for your great job!! I love in particular your general lectures such as this one, on ship armour, Enigma, Pearl Harbour etc. Excellent! A little footnote to this episode: Before WW2, in Poland, we also had a coastal defence system located at the tip of the Hel Peninsula. It consisted of 4 Bofors 152 mm artillery guns in solid and well camouflaged emplacements. The battery covered the entire Bay of Gdansk and therefore the maritime traffic to the then German port. After the outbreak of WW2, the battery enganged 2 German destroyers scoring 1 hit on Leebrecht Maas. On 25 Sept., it engaged the battleships Schleswig-Holstein and Schlesien with one hit on the first one. In the fire exchange, over 350 rounds of 280 mm and 150 mm shelled the battery resulting in 2 guns damaged (repaired in due course). The Hel Fortified Area was the last Polish post to surrender to the Germans as late as on 3 Oct 1939. Later, recognising the strategic importance of the location, Germans installed 3 huge 'Adolf' 406 mm coastal guns, which in the course of the war were removed and relocated among others to Norway. After WW2, Polish Army equipped the old emplacements with soviet 130 mm guns which remained until today and are part of the local war museum, along with the German 406 mm barbettes and the fire control tower. Besides, the peninsula is a great holiday resort. If you are in these parts someday, you should definitely visit! :D
Most excellent! I enjoy the shorter videos about specific ships and classes, but the ones you go in depth over broader themes, such as this one here, are truly great lectures. Keep up the great channel! Cheers!
two hours of erudite discussion, explanation, education, and interpretation by two fabulous channel experts who hold and express real opinions! please let us have many more brief histories I say, the longer and more frequent the better! Drach's channel gets better every episode !
I actually read that Fort Drum was very effective at turning the Japanese landing beaches into a slaughter house. How? The powder charges had been heating up, and this extended the range of the big guns beyond what the Japanese expected. With remote spotters on the beach they were very effective. Also the retaking of Fort Drum is USMC legend. Instead of trying to shell it, they had the schematics of all the air intakes. They dumped in a few thousand gallons of fuel and simply ignited it. It burned for days.
@Drachinifel this was a brilliant co production. I hope you'll do more of these in the future. You both have a great deal of knowledge to add to each other's channels. Thanks for doing this.
2 hours?!? Sheesh... thank God its a slow and calm day here at the Operating Room complex. Now I can put your ""brief"" history lecture on my headphones while doing my monthly reports...😁
Back in 1980, when I was stationed aboard my first sub in Charleston SC, I visited Fort Moultrie National Park. In the gift shop, I found a remarkably detailed book on the history of US coastal defense fortifications, including those built in overseas territories such as the Philippines. I still have it stashed away someplace. At one time, the US had the largest system of coastal defense fortifications in the world. And there are many places in the US where these installation have been preserved and turned into state or national parks, many of them from the era of the Endicott system of the late 19th and early 20th century.
I've been following this channel for ages, how did I miss this one? These 2 should do a weekly or at least monthly podcast that's a good 3 hours long. Lol this is such a great conversation.
Anyone interested in modern costal defense, should learn about the installations protecting San Francisco. It’s considered the second most important port in the USA, and measures were taken to protect against possible invasions during WW2 and the Cold War. The Nike missile sites in Marin Headlands make for a great hiking excursion and other sites like Baker Beach are accessible. World of warships has a great video on the history of the SF sites.
Saw a 2 hour "Briewf" history pop up. Went to store for Popcorn and a 6 pack of Bud. Sat back and enjoyed every second of it. Great job my friends. :-)
@@MilitaryHistoryNotVisualized not complaining, I much prefer something take longer and be the best it can than be rushed and half assed. Yall both do excellent work.
Age of Sail forts also had the advantages of usually mounting guns at high elevations, giving them more range and being above the maximum elevation of the ship guns and can be placed to take advantage of currents and sand bars.
It is my understanding that Army Rangers scaled the wall and disabled some of the German guns by using thermite grenades to disable the guns and effectively weld the firing mechanism and weld the breech blocks shut at night before the main battle started.
This is one of the greatest TH-cam collaboration videos ever, keep up the wonderful work Drachinifel and MHV! I love the long format of this discussion, it was highly educational and extremely entertaining!
Finland had engagements between their coastal artillery and the Soviet navy in the Winter war they also used their guns to shell the ice when soviet troops captured Viborg. Pre-war there was a cooperation with Estonia to close off the gulf of Finland to Soviet vessels with coastal artillery on both sides. Naturally this fell through when Estionia caved to the USSR and was occupied. However the Germans and Finns managed to blockade the gulf during most of the war in the east with a massive submarine net minefields and coastal fortifications supported by E-boats.
Should be added that the bloodiest sea battle of WW2 was between the soviet navy and finnish mine fields during the soviet evacuation of Tallinn. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_evacuation_of_Tallinn
Growing up I visited my grandmother who lived on the New England coast a couple miles ffrom Odiorne Point. In1942 the Odiorne family was pitched off their land and the farm was taken to build a coastal battery to overlook the entrance to Portsmouth NH navy yard. Two 16in guns were put in concrete mountings and trees were allowed to grow up to conceal them. After the war the navy scrapped the guns and moved out giving the land to the state of NH which made it a nature park with it's dense woods. I still recall walking into the woods and finding the huge concrete gun mounts with the name 'Battery Seamen" visible carved into the concrete. The interesting part was the place had become a major make out hideaway for horny teens in my day making the name seem all the more apt.
15:00 -- Everything I learned from life I did not learn from "Time Team" -- *BUT* Time Team has an excellent episode investigating the fortifications on the Channel Islands, the pre-WW2 ones.
My father served in the US Coastal Artillery during WW2 . He was drafted in late 1940 , trained along the Alabama Gulf Coast where they fired their guns out into the water . After training he was sent to Hawaii where there were no big coastal guns to speak of so he transferred to Military Police . Then came Sunday December 7 1941 . He said his company was forming up to march to church when the attack started . Since they lived behind Hickam Field they all ran over there . The base was being strafed and he said the planes were so low you could see the pilots . All their weapons were locked up so the men were throwing wrenches up into the air to try and hit the planes . After the attack there was fear of an invasion so the Army and Navy salvaged some of the big guns and ammunition from the wrecked battleships and mounted them as shore batteries and my father was put back into Coastal Artillery . Much later after the likelihood of an invasion became remote he was transferred to a AAA unit where he served in the Philippines and at Okinawa . All the gunfire left him half deaf and when he took us swimming at the YMCA when he got out of the pool the earwax would flow out of his ears , run down his neck and onto his chest . Sadly , he died in 1966 age 50 when I was 11 so I never got to talk to him man to man about the war .
Dear Kenner: Actually, in 1941 Oahu was one of the areas of heaviest coastal defense in the US. The Army had been fortifying the Pearl Harbor an Honolulu areas since before WW1. Just in the Pearl Harbor/Honolulu area at Forts Ruger, DeRussey, Weaver, and Kamehameha in 1941 there were 4 16", 2 14", 4 12", 2 8", 4 6" guns, plus 20 12" mortars, plus numerous 155mm guns and 240 mm howitzers, and even 2 8" railway guns. After the Pearl Harbor attack the Army kept thickening up the coastal defenses until the end of the war. They even emplaced 2 triple 14" turrets from the USS Arizona and a number of twin 8" turrets removed from the USS Saratoga and Lexington. Your Dad may have had any number of reasons to transfer from the Coast Artillery Corps to the MPs but lack of coastal defenses in Hawaii was not one of them.
Main reason why there was no coastal artillery before Dec 7, was because the US Army was more worried about Japanese Americans sabotage, what we would call Terrorism and the government thought they need more MPs to control the population on the inlands. After December 7 the Government realize that the islands’ were loyal and a invasion was a real possibility. Nevertheless, I never realized that the savage big guns from some of the destroyed battle ships. Thank you for the information.
My personal favourite is the single gun installed on St. Kilda in WW1 after a German Uboat came and shot up the admiraltys property on the island. It's worth noting that the German Uboat only destroyed Admiralty property, despite the fact that the town on St. Kilda could have been easily flattened. Also nobody on either side was killed barring a single lamb which makes the story alot nicer
Portsmouth is amazing. Warrior, Victory, pubs. Apparently the USS Harry S Truman visit in 2018 led to record pub profits. It was so huge, you could see it from the moon, or at least the Isle of wight. BTW, if you go there, don't expect Tom Bombadil to save you.
@@neilwilson5785 Yeah I planned to go down and see USS Harry s Truman when she was in, though work got in the way, bet she would have been one hell of a sight to see
Yeah - Drach, TIK, MHV, Chieftain and Dr Felton should collaborate for days! Maybe on a panel? You are awesome guys! Keep ii on. Love your Work! Greetings from Hamburg
Holy cow! Two hours with two of my favorite historical storytellers? I've got appointments all day today, but I've laid in an extra supply of hot chocolate and cookies for later tonight! :-)
The cannon on the the thumnail is a famous Norwegian cannon that was stationed on oscar-borg fort wich was a naval defence island. The cannons on that island sunk the german cruiser blücher and was sunket by 2 torpedos and 3-4 shells
Swedish and finnish naval doctrine of the first half of the 20th century was much based on coordination between coastal batteries (both fixed and mobile), coastal defence ships and mine fields. Post WW2, the surface forces were more and more replaced by submarines and fast missile and torpedo boats.
Fun fact: the picture of the cannon at 1:32:41 is one of three 28cm cannons at the Oscarsborg Fortress outside of Drøbak in Norway, my home town, they were responsible during the invasion of Norway of the sinking of the Blucher, an Admiral Hipper class heavy cruiser along with some severly outdated torpedoes :)
I spent 6 years as a cannoneer on the Americanized version of the total POS Bri’ish L118. It really is a POS. Emplacement is needlessly difficult, a hydraulic fluid relief valve on the recuperator is pointed so that it will spray directly into the gunner’s eyes and we had to canibalize an entire gun for parts to keep two up and operational over the course of a 15 month deployment to Iraq. You basically need almost a whole gun minus trails and cannon tube after you’ve fired 1,300 rounds. I was a Howitzer Section Chief. I know a bit of the math for field artillery. I really find this channel interesting. We on the land have to use different math due to firing non-line-of-sight. It’s the sort of trigonometry you’d see land surveyors using, more than likely. Learning about naval artillery is interesting. Good channel.
Thank you for this one Drach. if ever you visit my part of Canada. BC, you should visit Fort Rodd Hill. home to multiple 6 inch dissapearing guns and the last twin QF 6 pounder in the world
Just spent the best 2 hours playing world of warships while listening to this. Thankyou both for a really informative and interesting blast through the past.
The Video Thumbnail is of the Oscarsborg Fortress in Norway and the gun is 28cm, these guns disables the German Cruiser Blücher on April 9th 1940. The fort was built during the Union between Sweden and Norway and is named after the Swedish King Oscar I, there's a sister fortress in the inlet to Stockholm named Oscar Fredriksborg, it weas intended to be named Oscarsborg as well but to avoid confusion it got partiallyu named after an older fortress called Fredriksborg that it replaced. Borg is Swedish for Keep or Catle
British understatement at work again, a brief history that's almost 2 hours long. I can't complain though. Two of my favorite TH-cam channels doing a mash up is a good way to start the day. Thank y'all so very much for this video.
One of the survivors from Fort Drum (less than 30 out of 450 POW's) stated that the main reason they followed General Wainwrights surrender order was the fact they ran out of water. He said they had enough supplies that they could have held out until the US counter invasion in 44/45!
If anyone goes to the island of Malta on holiday, don't forget to visit Fort Rinella where you can see 100 Ton Armstrong coastal defence guns, that could fire a 1 ton shell over 8 miles. ;)
Sandy Hook, New Jersey has some great costal bunkers and forts. In the summer they open them up for tours. Also nearby there is also a 16in gun bunker.
This was a great discussion and not one minute over time! Many, many good points! No one interested in history in general and this topic in particular should miss this.
PS: The Germans didn't think the the fort was unmanned as the convoy headed for Oslo, but being relegated to a training fort for several years they didn't expect it to make any sort of coordinated resistance. They also did to a certain degree underestimate the outdated guns even though it was the, nearly equally vintage, unknown torpedo battery that scored the final blow. Due to the lack of knowledge of this battery they assumed the minefield had been activated and this was what Blucher had struck.
really love your style and work, Drach. I would love to hear about the naval encounter between the Spanish Armada and the British at Trafalgar. Have you done something on that?
There is a very interesting coastal battery in Norway near Trondheim. The Germans removed the 11" triples from the Gneisenau ready to refit her with 15" twins. One of these turrets can be found at the mouth of Trondheim Fjord at Austratt Fort. Basically the Germans used slave labour to dig a big hole in a rocky hill. They then put the complete mounting, powder handling room to turret, into this hole. This site is open during summer months with very good guided tours that take you through all levels of the mounting.
The Battle of Copenhagen actually is two distinct battles getting mixed up here 33:15 First in 1801, Nelson was not the highest ranking admiral, I think Parker was. The task for the British fleet was not to capture or destroy the Danish fleet. It was a murky agenda of pulling Denmark from The League of Armed Neutrality. Having completed that the British returned in 1807, without Nelson as he was dead. This time the agenda was to get rid of the Danish navy. This operation included troops landed north of Copenhagen, a siege of said city and the bombardment and destruction of a large part of the city. Heavy guns, explosive shells and Congreve's rockets with either an explosive load or a firestarter.
Great video. I've always been interested in this sort of thing. The United States east coast has a lot of old coastal fortifications which have now been turned into parks or museums. Some date back to the colonial days. During the War for Independence, when the British army occupied Philadelphia, the Americans made an effort to throttle the British supply lines by constructing a system of fortifications along the Delaware River south of Philly, consisting of Forts Mercer and Billingsport in New Jersey, and Fort Mifflin on the Pennsylvania side, with a set of submerged barrier obstacles strung between them across the river. The fire plan was apparently to get enemy ships caught in the barrier and then bombard them from the shore batteries. Fighting there resulted in at least one Royal Navy ship, the Augusta, running aground, catching fire, and being destroyed by a magazine explosion. Fort Mifflin stayed in service until well into the 20th Century as a US Army depot and is now a park next to the airport, while the other forts have been turned into parks as well. The forts saw intense combat, including land-based assaults. While I understand you were focused on fixed coastal defenses, particularly those that were armed with guns, I think you might've spent a few more minutes at the end talking about modern coastal defenses. As you mentioned they consist mostly of mobile surface to surface missile launchers as well as other dynamic defenses such as aircraft and maritime patrol vessels, but they still have a large influence on planning for modern warfare. The example that immediately comes to mind is the Iranian defenses on the Strait of Hormuz, which are apparently designed to control the Strait or at least to try to deny use of it by potential adversaries. This has likely had an influence on US policy in the region, and at least some deterrent effect on war. The loss of an aircraft carrier or an amphibious ship would be a pretty major disaster for the US Navy, which faces numerous seaborne platforms and batteries of missiles in a very confined region, barely large enough to even operate a carrier.
I was given to understand that the 5 by 15 inch guns at Singapore where there too defend the Class 1 Navel Dockyard and not mainly to defend Singapore Island, this being the reason for the ammunition being AP and Semi AP with no HE being supplied. Turrets from decommissioned Great War Cruisers where also deployed to deal with enemy cruisers, destroyers and landing craft. Of the 5 by 15 inch guns only the first 2 had limited range of rotation, the last 3 having full 360 degree. The Defense of Singapore being a duty for the Royal Navy, for who’s use the dockyard was constructed. The RAF had claimed it could defend Singapore far cheaper then the millions spent on building the new navy repair yard and 2 squadrons of bi plane torpedo bombers where deployed to this purpose. There used to be an Australian web site which specialized on the guns of Singapore but It has been absent for the last 10 years or so. John
Can we maybe have a monthly Drachinifel , MHV, Bismarck, and TIK podcast? Please? That would literally be the best thing ever... Something like: Each month a new theme, and then we can get perspectives on land, sea, air, logistics, everything... And all you 4 have to do is talk for a couple of hours and have the relevant books in front of you... (Maybe also a couple of hours to prepare, but this would likely be time spent on stuff for your own channel anyway) Potential format: Patreons get to pick the overall topic (in a poll made by the relevant channel within the constraints of interest for all 4 channels), which then rotates between the Patreons of all 4 channels... The winning topic is announced on the previous podcast, and each channel might make a supporting video of some sort during the month before the podcast, and viewers can in relation to the channel videos ask questions relevant for Q&A in the podcast. Later on you can maybe add extra segments (if you want), such as book and/or museum reviews (which is often better done in a debate, than just one person having one opinion). But start small and then grow (such as having guests)... Whether you want your 4 faces live on a video for YT or not is crucial. I would just like something on military history, which is similar to what TotalBiscuit did with gaming in the Co-optional Podcast. But well, I would love to have this, and have it as a fixed monthly feature. (weekly seems too aggressive, and I might not have time to listen to all of it) (I would also offer my logistical services if you need manpower support in order to make this happen - you can pay me in merch and Patreon goodies if you absolutely have to pay me something, I just want such a podcast to be a thing)
Denmark and sometimes Sweden controlled the access to the Baltic because the seaways are even narrower than Gibraltar but there are more of them. The Secret War plan for the cold war had Sweden and Denmark blocking channels by a massive mining operation supported by coastal artillery.
And during the Neutrality watch, the first thing that would have been leveled if the germans had attacked was the danish castle near Helsingborg that the nazis had taken over as an SS HQ by the Swedish 21 and 15.5cm coastal batteries on the ridges across the narrow strait within direct line of sight.
Excellent look at coastal defenses! Here in New England (USA), our Seacoast from the Canadian border to New York is a long line of coastline defense installations which were built starting in colonial times and upgraded until most being deactivated in 1946. Everything from cannon to doubling as P.O.W. camps, to mine depots, cruiser-sized guns, to radar installations and fire control towers disguised as lighthouses or ship superstructures.
Holy crap, I recognized the cannon in the thumbnail (one of the three guns part of the main battery, at Oscarsborg fortress in the Drøbak Sound in Norway) (1:35:00 this one)
This is the most underrated channel on TH-cam right here. I hope MHV helps gets this channel some much deserved attention. Captain D really knows his shit.
Were the 2 hours not enough? Lol. They had to leave some stuff out. Or they would have been talking for 2 years and only covered the known history upto the beginning of the Roman Republic 😂
On Dardanelles Gallopoli WW1. I recall reading that one of the issues for the ongoing fighting was that the Ottomans could defend with army (not navy/coastal) artillery. They could be limbered and moved. So when the UK counter battery fire started to get close they would go somewhere else making the UK restart the process all over. UK might also report, mistakenly, the army guns were knocked out as they had stopped firing when it was simply being moved. Though the size and thus range of the army guns were much less it was enough to engage ships in the narrows and for shelling the landing/supply beaches.
With regards to you comment near the end about Britain having the worst coastal defences, that's quite simply a function of the amount of coastline one would have to defend, both with regards to the British Isles and the British Empire. It's far more cost effective to sink that money into a navy that can move around to where ever it's needed. Where they did choose to invest in defences though (Malta, Singapore and Gibraltar etc.) they don't seem to do things by halves. Somewhat shorter specials on individual forts and batteries would be an interesting, break from the usual floating subjects, as they're a fairly niche part of naval warfare and so I think many people could learn a lot, even from relatively well "known" (have actually heard of) ones like Gibraltar.
In Singapore they did. Guns pointing out to sea. No defenses on the Johore Strait. Never thought they would be attacked through the back door. Also the Anglophiles (Europeans in general, the Brits weren't exempt the Dutch and French were just as bad) they considered themselves not only arrogant but superior. Thought their weapons were superior.
rudolf peter udo err Anglophiles is not the right word for this sentence. European and American arrogance in their superiority is the big failing. In the case of Singapore, they did think army could penetrate the jungle, as they didn't understand how to work with the jungle.
@@neildahlgaard-sigsworth3819 Oh I don't know as much the Japanese basically used the road and track network, with mechanized transport and bicycles only resorting to the jungle when they had to encircle a fortified position,or bye-pass it. Malaya east and west on the mainland had a reasonable road network.
@@rudolfpeterudo3100 I've seen references that suggest that at least in the case of Singapore, that's more because they believed that you wouldn't be able to bring a whole army through the jungle. A bit like not thinking the Germans could attack through the Ardennes forest. Throughout history, the most successful attacks seem to be where the terrain is the considered impassible till someone passes it and catches everyone off guard. But that's not a very good argument to suggest that their weapons weren't superior, in fact, if anything, going to such lengths to avoid a frontal assault on Singapore kind of suggests that the Japanese did think the British 15" gun batteries were superior to whatever the Japanese would assault them with.
@@neildahlgaard-sigsworth3819 I wouldn't limit that to European and America, that's the same flaw that's toppled many a rule around the world since the first kingdoms and empires. Anyway, you could also argue that the confidence in their own military superiority is good for peace as many wars were fought for dominance, if you feel that you already have dominance then there's much less reason for you to fight... everyone isn't spending their whole budget on an arms race... and regular conflicts but especially genocides and terrible things like that are less likely to occur if the stronger nation isn't paranoid just goes round killing everyone to secure their power-base. On the flip side if you don't think you're going to loose then you might be more inclined to invade weaker places, but I think on balance the former would probably outweigh the latter.
Format of a conversation is fine, but keep changing the pictures to match what you are talking about, like at 15:00 you are talking about stone vs brick forts you could show examples of each (like Fort Pulaski for a brick fort.). More pictures keeps peoples attention better.
![ตีสิบเดย์ [FULL] | เปิดใจ "อาจารย์ เบียร์ ฅนตื่นธรรม" นักสนทนาธรรมสายดุดัน!](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/vqaBI_mnoDk/mqdefault.jpg)
Pinned post for Q&A :)
What do you think about Sabatons new song about the Bismarck?
@@CSSVirginia the main thing I learned was that the Bismarck belonged to the Kriegsmarine :D
What do you think of the anime kancolle and haifuri ??
can you talk about the naval battle during the korean war
Could you expand on the lack of HE rounds for the 15 Inch guns at Singapore. I had understood that there were HE rounds in Singapore but the depot was so disorganised that they never made their way to the gun batteries in quantity.
we might have gone a bit over board with this one and off-track...
But with two of our favourite History youtubers? We love it already.
Just a bit...!
nah
Off track yes but not overboard
Naah. This was fantastic.
Fortunately, nobody cares!
2 hours long, a "brief history"...
WE DEMAND THE EXTENDED VERSION
Amen
amen
to be fair history is very long :) :P
i mean they didn't even get to the development of the wheel or agriculture lol
YES! DS9 IS A COASTAL FORT! TELL US ABOUT BUT😋
To those, including MHV, who say you went off track or overboard....DON'T SWEAT IT! I love a good, wide ranging discussion! Most of the viewers on your channel aren't here for brevity, I suspect.
Considering that I either listen to these while gaming, or on long drives for work... yeah brevity is a liability.
A most excellent " 'Five Minute' Guide to..." ;-)
20 of them :)
lol, its every bit of 5 minutes with a tad but more thrown in for good measure.
yes excellent title for a *AHEM* *ONE HOUR LONG VIDEO*
Damn this man. If his shows weren't so interesting and informative I would stop listening. I swear it!
It is very detailed for a five minute vid!
Additional facts about Oscarsborg (Oslo) fighting Blücher and Lützow: Due to fog and night the spotting distance was very short, on the order of about 2000 meters. The 11" guns at the fortress opened fire at about 1400 m range, pretty much guaranteeing hits. Due to manning shortages just 2 of the 4 11" guns fired, and just once each. The guns were open (the thumbnail for the episode and third last pic in the video is one of those guns at Oscarsborg), so the commander knew reloading with green crews under return fire would be suicide and the gun crews evacuated immediately after firing their single round. Both 11" shells hit the lead ship Blücher.
There was also a 6" battery on the other side of the strait, manned by more experienced crews, and they scored 13 hits on Blücher at about the same range, as well as numerous 57mm hits to the superstructure.
At the location of the torpedo battery the strait is just 700m across, so the speed of the torpedoes was almost irrelevant, you just can't miss at that range, and the target can't maneuver without running aground even if they spot the torpedoes in time. The actual torpedoes used (not the type, the actual physical weapons themselves) had probably been test-fired with inert warheads about 200 times each, and there was deep institutional knowledge as to how they behaved.
The torpedo battery had 6 submerged launchers loaded and ready, and using two torpedoes on Blücher was calculated. If the rest of the task force had followed, Lüzow also had two torpedoes allocated, whilst Emden and Möwe would get one each.
The battery is built in caves blasted out of solid rock, with underwater holes blasted for torpedo egress and three independent concrete reinforced concealed spotting locations, and would have been almost impossible to suppress by naval gunfire even had the location been known.
good info thanks
Thank you. Didn't knew that
Thank you for explaining
wonderful explanation. You should do a video :)
I believe either Drachinifel and/or Mark Felton have videos on TH-cam about this action.
“Brief History” *is nearly 2 hours long* 😂
British understatement strikes again! :D
I came here to say the same thing.
As its covering several hundred years I think that's not bad.
Oh good, it wasn't just me then.
Guys we all know you are not complaining. You are, like me, thinking "oh good two hours of
Drachinifel
." I'll get the coffee started. 😄👍
MHV asks perfectly reasonable question, yet it's one that no normal humanoid would ever think to ask.
Drach replies in mind-blowing encyclopedic detail, matter-of-factly, effortlessly. He just KNOWS this stuff.
This was a truly breathtaking collaboration, and it's only the Brief History version!
This is precisely the kind of thing for which the word "awesome" is the appropriate descriptor.
One other not insignificant advantage of fortifications over ships in the age of sail is that the fortification was usually higher that the ship and could, and usually did, mount it's guns higher up on the walls and those guns were more accurate (no motion of the ship to account for). A ship under sail was significantly more vulnerable than a fortification and comparatively easy to get mobility limiting damage which would then leave it open to being pounded into splinters at the fortification's leisure. Ships under sail usually avoided engagements with fortifications until the RN and Dutch Navy under Admiral Lord Exmouth (Sir Edward Pellew) successfully attacked the Barbary powers fortifications. The ships used broadsides of grape shot to keep gunners away from the guns. Grape shot became sort of the standard way to attack fortifications until rifled guns and shells became common (US Navy used copious amounts of grape shot at New Orleans, for example).
Not to mention Heated Shot from the Fort into a wooden ship, dry wood, tar and pitch make excellent bon-fires!
And another advantage static guns never seem to get credit for, they can have any point in their effective range pre-plotted, making ranging shots unnecessary.
Yeah, all across the southern atlantic coast of Portugal, which is almost all cliffs with small beaches, there's plenty of ruined forts, between 40 and 100 meters above sea level. This were very small forts, with not that many guns so I would assume that their goal wasn't to fire at ships but rather at any landing parties arriving on the beaches.
Seems that land based guns need to be at choke points and their exsistence makes them known commodities. Aircraft and Cruise Missles kind of make it all a Moot Point at this juncture.
Now I didn’t see this collaboration happening.
My two preferred youtube historians working together. Pretty exciting stuff.
You might want to check out MONTEMAYOR. Outstanding.
Great content, Glad to see MONTEMAYOR posting again.
hiding star forts ,, the military uses them for defense, but they did not build them , & there everywhere ,, --------- they are fractal forts ,,
I reckon Drach and Ian McCullum would have some long, interesting AF chats too.
The content of this channel continues to be nothing but fantastic. Easily one of my favorite channels and I look forward to uploads. Keep up the great work!
I love this channel. Can't get enough.
I genuinly love that your videos are on the longer side. There is so much stuff that can't ever fit into 15 minutes and it is so refreshing to see someone actually taking the time to talk about it.
Subscribed right away
Jutland: point which I have noted before the cordite in RN ships was stored in silk bags and the German in metal casing - also the RN cordite was not stable due to the use of a solvent base stabilising additive which after Jutland was changed; the German cordite stabiliser was solvent free and actually stabilised the cordite.
I number of ships in other navies using the RN stabiliser had magazine explosions without the need for battle.
The instability of the RN cordite and the storage in silk bags meant that the RN cordite would much more easily ignite due to flash and could flash itself due to excessive blast pressure waves.
The safety procedures as said played a major part in the ship destruction but add to that the above points and the whole situation was so volatile it needed little to even penetrate the flash doors safety interlocks.
The cordite in the magazines themselves was suspect and it is possible as the Italian and Japanese accidents showed (using early up to Jutland RN type cordite stabiliser) that the cordite in the magazines was not safe.
Regards
John Hargreaves
The US Navy also used bagged charges and they didn't have problems. Cordite contained a large proprtion of nitroglycerine, which made it less stable but the US propellant was mainly nitrocellulose. It was only the rearmost charge in German ships that was in a brass case, the rest was bagged but German propellant seems to have been more stable anyway.
Why were silk bags used? Is there an advantage to the material that some cheaper material wouldn't have?
@@hazzardalsohazzard2624 I believe static charge on other materials for bags not easily dissipated and increasing the risk of static spark.
Anyone that works around explosives in a lab or manufacturing facility, as well as electronic components, circuit boards and such are taught about the danger potential inherent with materials that are prone to store, generate and release static electricity, amongst several other things. Near the top of the list of materials that have this static electricity problem is silk. In fact, I've worked at an explosive's lab, an automotive airbag manufacturer facility and several computer/networking technician facilities (including a clean room), where employees were explicitly told that they could not wear, use or have on their person any silk items beyond the employee locker rooms and risk job termination if they are found to be in violation of this rule. I am stunned to read that a military, the caliber of the United Kingdom, would store cordite (an explosive) in a silk bag and have no problem with how easy a static electricity discharge could occur and... well, ignite the cordite. It might not have the same explosiveness as gun powder, but it is flammable and there are lots of items that are explosive stored next to it.
The British cordite charges were stored in metal containers
Admiral Beaty ordered them removed from the containers beforehand in order to improve rate of fire.
I’m continuously amazed by Drach’s encyclopedic knowledge on naval ships. I love all your content, keep up the good work!
Yeah, he's a savant.
Almost like he reads about this stuff..
@@BoleDaPole Yeah, I get that impression.
I've been a military history geek for nigh on fifty years now and that was bloody fascinating.
Well done that man :-)
If you are ever travelling/visiting the U.S. mid-Atlantic region I highly recommend a trip to the Fort Miles Museum at Cape Henlopen, Delaware. They have restored "Battery 519", a 12" casemate battery, which includes a 12" rifle from the old USS Wyoming.
There are other pieces at the museum site, as well, including a 16"/50 from the Iowa Class (A spare barrel/breach assembly), numerous smaller weapons, both naval and fixed shore weapons, as well as field-pieces.
Further up the Delaware Bay/River is Fort Delaware, a Civil War-era fort in remarkably good repair. Well worth the boat-ride to get to it.
Sounds cool. I recommend looking up Austrått Fort. Sadly the sister turret at Fjell was removed.
Another interesting fort to visit is fort Morgan on mobile bay, Alabama. It has a history that spans from 1819 when construction began (being completed 1834) serving in the us civil war, to just during ww2 (1944) when the garrison was removed. The fort was given to the state in 1947. As such the fort shows layers of history from the original walls and earth works, to the more modern shore batteries that was in use later on.
I've been to Cape Henlopen and it is awesome! The towers used to aim the guns are not too far off and are worth a look also. As you'd expect, they have a spectacular view. You do *need* bug spray, however. It's in the middle of a wetland and is mosquito city. Does allow you to look for crabs as a distraction, though.
The site to catch the boat to Fort Delaware on the Jersey side of the river is also home to Fort Mott, home of a battery that had disappearing guns and I believe worked in conjunction with Fort Delaware. Not quite as well preserved as Fort Delaware, but worth a walk around!
Could yourself and MHV be tempted to do a 'brief' discussion every week? No? You sure? ... Excellent listen and I hope it not the last joint venture, worth every minute.
Sees length of video
Checks watch
"Going to have to leave this until tomorrow"
Or for intervals over several days! I'd rather have watched this as a 4-part series.
"Brief history"... riight... ;-)
Having grown up near Fort Stevens in Oregon, US, I have always had a fascination with coastal defense fortifications. Ft. Stevens was situated to protect the mouth of the Columbia River, and actually was shelled by a Japanese submarine in WWII. Thanks for this video!
Along the straight of Juan de Fuca and north Puget Sound they had a number of 11" and 14" guns hidden on the forested hillsides.(The ages seem slightly newer than Ft. Stevens, which as I recall was armed just prior to WW1.) Most of them had the guns sold for scrap and the bunkers abandoned and overgrown decades ago.
Rather than several guns in a fort they were somewhat scattered, maybe two guns in a location. I know there was some remote management via radio and telephone from an HQ and remote spotters; not just coordinating but actually computing and issuing firing solutions to several emplacements. The Columbia may have had similar central fire control.
Drach, many thanks for your great job!!
I love in particular your general lectures such as this one, on ship armour, Enigma, Pearl Harbour etc. Excellent!
A little footnote to this episode:
Before WW2, in Poland, we also had a coastal defence system located at the tip of the Hel Peninsula. It consisted of 4 Bofors 152 mm artillery guns in solid and well camouflaged emplacements. The battery covered the entire Bay of Gdansk and therefore the maritime traffic to the then German port.
After the outbreak of WW2, the battery enganged 2 German destroyers scoring 1 hit on Leebrecht Maas.
On 25 Sept., it engaged the battleships Schleswig-Holstein and Schlesien with one hit on the first one. In the fire exchange, over 350 rounds of 280 mm and 150 mm shelled the battery resulting in 2 guns damaged (repaired in due course).
The Hel Fortified Area was the last Polish post to surrender to the Germans as late as on 3 Oct 1939.
Later, recognising the strategic importance of the location, Germans installed 3 huge 'Adolf' 406 mm coastal guns, which in the course of the war were removed and relocated among others to Norway.
After WW2, Polish Army equipped the old emplacements with soviet 130 mm guns which remained until today and are part of the local war museum, along with the German 406 mm barbettes and the fire control tower.
Besides, the peninsula is a great holiday resort. If you are in these parts someday, you should definitely visit! :D
Most excellent! I enjoy the shorter videos about specific ships and classes, but the ones you go in depth over broader themes, such as this one here, are truly great lectures. Keep up the great channel! Cheers!
two hours of erudite discussion, explanation, education, and interpretation by two fabulous channel experts who hold and express real opinions!
please let us have many more brief histories I say, the longer and more frequent the better!
Drach's channel gets better every episode !
This is just the kind of wandering, wide-ranging conversation it would be good to have in a bar with a lot of beer.
*Tea 🇬🇧
@@AdamMGTF nah, some pints of good ale. We need the tea on the day after 😂😂😂
I've played way too much Fallout new vegas. The bear looked weird without two heads
I actually read that Fort Drum was very effective at turning the Japanese landing beaches into a slaughter house. How? The powder charges had been heating up, and this extended the range of the big guns beyond what the Japanese expected. With remote spotters on the beach they were very effective. Also the retaking of Fort Drum is USMC legend. Instead of trying to shell it, they had the schematics of all the air intakes. They dumped in a few thousand gallons of fuel and simply ignited it. It burned for days.
Horrifying but effective
@Drachinifel this was a brilliant co production. I hope you'll do more of these in the future. You both have a great deal of knowledge to add to each other's channels. Thanks for doing this.
2 hours?!?
Sheesh... thank God its a slow and calm day here at the Operating Room complex. Now I can put your ""brief"" history lecture on my headphones while doing my monthly reports...😁
This video is called a “brief history”
You keep using that word but I don’t think it means what you think it means.
I am not left handed.
Lol
I think several hundred years covered in two hours could be considered brief?
"Brief" is a relative term...
I also don't think that any of his "5 minutes more or less" videos come in at under 5 minutes. :-)
'long history' is going back and watching it in real time.
Love the collaborations you guys should definitely do these more often.
Back in 1980, when I was stationed aboard my first sub in Charleston SC, I visited Fort Moultrie National Park. In the gift shop, I found a remarkably detailed book on the history of US coastal defense fortifications, including those built in overseas territories such as the Philippines. I still have it stashed away someplace. At one time, the US had the largest system of coastal defense fortifications in the world. And there are many places in the US where these installation have been preserved and turned into state or national parks, many of them from the era of the Endicott system of the late 19th and early 20th century.
What was your rate shipmate?
I had that book!. A very good book!!!.
name of book?
The Coastal Defense Study Group is still in business.
@@trentslvis4332 what's the book's name?
I've been following this channel for ages, how did I miss this one? These 2 should do a weekly or at least monthly podcast that's a good 3 hours long. Lol this is such a great conversation.
Anyone interested in modern costal defense, should learn about the installations protecting San Francisco. It’s considered the second most important port in the USA, and measures were taken to protect against possible invasions during WW2 and the Cold War.
The Nike missile sites in Marin Headlands make for a great hiking excursion and other sites like Baker Beach are accessible.
World of warships has a great video on the history of the SF sites.
I never imagine an opening photo of my city, instantly recognize it. Thank you for the great work, greetings from Valdivia, Chile
Saw a 2 hour "Briewf" history pop up. Went to store for Popcorn and a 6 pack of Bud. Sat back and enjoyed every second of it. Great job my friends. :-)
I have been waiting for this since you mentioned working on it over a month ago
yeah, my fault, it took me ages to edit this one.
@@MilitaryHistoryNotVisualized not complaining, I much prefer something take longer and be the best it can than be rushed and half assed. Yall both do excellent work.
Age of Sail forts also had the advantages of usually mounting guns at high elevations, giving them more range and being above the maximum elevation of the ship guns and can be placed to take advantage of currents and sand bars.
A great example of this is El Moro at old San Juan in Puerto Rico
It is my understanding that Army Rangers scaled the wall and disabled some of the German guns by using thermite grenades to disable the guns and effectively weld the firing mechanism and weld the breech blocks shut at night before the main battle started.
This is one of the greatest TH-cam collaboration videos ever, keep up the wonderful work Drachinifel and MHV! I love the long format of this discussion, it was highly educational and extremely entertaining!
Finland had engagements between their coastal artillery and the Soviet navy in the Winter war they also used their guns to shell the ice when soviet troops captured Viborg.
Pre-war there was a cooperation with Estonia to close off the gulf of Finland to Soviet vessels with coastal artillery on both sides. Naturally this fell through when Estionia caved to the USSR and was occupied. However the Germans and Finns managed to blockade the gulf during most of the war in the east with a massive submarine net minefields and coastal fortifications supported by E-boats.
@Charles DuBois Some Soviet U-boats sneaked through the net but it wasn't until Estonia fell that Soviet Naval operations exploded.
Should be added that the bloodiest sea battle of WW2 was between the soviet navy and finnish mine fields during the soviet evacuation of Tallinn. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_evacuation_of_Tallinn
@@lavrentivs9891 Evacuation of occupied Tallin
@@AdurianJ And it was immediatly occupied by Germany as soon as the Soviet union had evacuated.
@@lavrentivs9891 yes
I have been interested in this (coastal defense) all of my life, So glad I found your channel. Keep up the great work!!
Try the Coastal Defense Study Group.
Growing up I visited my grandmother who lived on the New England coast a couple miles ffrom Odiorne Point. In1942 the Odiorne family was pitched off their land and the farm was taken to build a coastal battery to overlook the entrance to Portsmouth NH navy yard. Two 16in guns were put in concrete mountings and trees were allowed to grow up to conceal them. After the war the navy scrapped the guns and moved out giving the land to the state of NH which made it a nature park with it's dense woods. I still recall walking into the woods and finding the huge concrete gun mounts with the name 'Battery Seamen" visible carved into the concrete. The interesting part was the place had become a major make out hideaway for horny teens in my day making the name seem all the more apt.
15:00 -- Everything I learned from life I did not learn from "Time Team" -- *BUT* Time Team has an excellent episode investigating the fortifications on the Channel Islands, the pre-WW2 ones.
My father served in the US Coastal Artillery during WW2 . He was drafted in late 1940 , trained along the Alabama Gulf Coast where they fired their guns out into the water . After training he was sent to Hawaii where there were no big coastal guns to speak of so he transferred to Military Police . Then came Sunday December 7 1941 . He said his company was forming up to march to church when the attack started . Since they lived behind Hickam Field they all ran over there . The base was being strafed and he said the planes were so low you could see the pilots . All their weapons were locked up so the men were throwing wrenches up into the air to try and hit the planes . After the attack there was fear of an invasion so the Army and Navy salvaged some of the big guns and ammunition from the wrecked battleships and mounted them as shore batteries and my father was put back into Coastal Artillery . Much later after the likelihood of an invasion became remote he was transferred to a AAA unit where he served in the Philippines and at Okinawa . All the gunfire left him half deaf and when he took us swimming at the YMCA when he got out of the pool the earwax would flow out of his ears , run down his neck and onto his chest . Sadly , he died in 1966 age 50 when I was 11 so I never got to talk to him man to man about the war .
What's with the ear wax? Like, how and why does that happen? It's a shame you never got to talk to him about it, but, we all know he's a damn hero.
Dear Kenner: Actually, in 1941 Oahu was one of the areas of heaviest coastal defense in the US. The Army had been fortifying the Pearl Harbor an Honolulu areas since before WW1. Just in the Pearl Harbor/Honolulu area at Forts Ruger, DeRussey, Weaver, and Kamehameha in 1941 there were 4 16", 2 14", 4 12", 2 8", 4 6" guns, plus 20 12" mortars, plus numerous 155mm guns and 240 mm howitzers, and even 2 8" railway guns. After the Pearl Harbor attack the Army kept thickening up the coastal defenses until the end of the war. They even emplaced 2 triple 14" turrets from the USS Arizona and a number of twin 8" turrets removed from the USS Saratoga and Lexington.
Your Dad may have had any number of reasons to transfer from the Coast Artillery Corps to the MPs but lack of coastal defenses in Hawaii was not one of them.
Main reason why there was no coastal artillery before Dec 7, was because the US Army was more worried about Japanese Americans sabotage, what we would call Terrorism and the government thought they need more MPs to control the population on the inlands. After December 7 the Government realize that the islands’ were loyal and a invasion was a real possibility. Nevertheless, I never realized that the savage big guns from some of the destroyed battle ships. Thank you for the information.
I consider myself lucky to have been down in Portsmouth when i was a student. Fortifications galore
My personal favourite is the single gun installed on St. Kilda in WW1 after a German Uboat came and shot up the admiraltys property on the island. It's worth noting that the German Uboat only destroyed Admiralty property, despite the fact that the town on St. Kilda could have been easily flattened. Also nobody on either side was killed barring a single lamb which makes the story alot nicer
Portsmouth is amazing. Warrior, Victory, pubs. Apparently the USS Harry S Truman visit in 2018 led to record pub profits. It was so huge, you could see it from the moon, or at least the Isle of wight. BTW, if you go there, don't expect Tom Bombadil to save you.
@@neilwilson5785 Yeah I planned to go down and see USS Harry s Truman when she was in, though work got in the way, bet she would have been one hell of a sight to see
Another great video brother!! Cool too see two of my favorite youtubers working together (:
Two well-spent hours; thank you for an entertaining collaboration.
I see a picture of Oscarsborg and that it's a video by you...
and click in 2 Seconds :)
German guns with Swedish shells.
The best combo
andreas pedersen those little shits actually saved Norway
I hope someone brought the popcorn and pepsi for this "brief" two hour video xD
I got your back, mate. I have Wotsits and Irn-Bru. Hope that's OK?
I got homemade chocolate cookies and coffee,tea or even milk.
Hell that sounds even better lol
I prefer bourbon and a cigar while listening to Drach. I usually finish my cigar right as the video ends. It’s the perfect trio.
TruckingShooter, I was gonna day some cold milk but ok!
Yeah - Drach, TIK, MHV, Chieftain and Dr Felton should collaborate for days! Maybe on a panel? You are awesome guys! Keep ii on. Love your Work! Greetings from Hamburg
My favorite military history channels doing a two hour long talk show! Is this heaven?
Holy cow! Two hours with two of my favorite historical storytellers? I've got appointments all day today, but I've laid in an extra supply of hot chocolate and cookies for later tonight! :-)
soooo awesome, two guys I already listen to, collaborating on a subject I've always been interested in! Two thumbs way, way up.
The American systems of forts is another fascinating topic when it comes to coastal fortifications
The cannon on the the thumnail is a famous Norwegian cannon that was stationed on oscar-borg fort wich was a naval defence island.
The cannons on that island sunk the german cruiser blücher and was sunket by 2 torpedos and 3-4 shells
Swedish and finnish naval doctrine of the first half of the 20th century was much based on coordination between coastal batteries (both fixed and mobile), coastal defence ships and mine fields. Post WW2, the surface forces were more and more replaced by submarines and fast missile and torpedo boats.
Two hours? Brilliant!
Dracinifel and Military History Visualized? Doubleplus good!
Fun fact: the picture of the cannon at 1:32:41 is one of three 28cm cannons at the Oscarsborg Fortress outside of Drøbak in Norway, my home town, they were responsible during the invasion of Norway of the sinking of the Blucher, an Admiral Hipper class heavy cruiser along with some severly outdated torpedoes :)
I was waiting for the 'more or less' in the intro. Thought you might not do it, but you did. So happy!
Jutland is ALWAYS worth the detour.
I spent 6 years as a cannoneer on the Americanized version of the total POS Bri’ish L118. It really is a POS. Emplacement is needlessly difficult, a hydraulic fluid relief valve on the recuperator is pointed so that it will spray directly into the gunner’s eyes and we had to canibalize an entire gun for parts to keep two up and operational over the course of a 15 month deployment to Iraq. You basically need almost a whole gun minus trails and cannon tube after you’ve fired 1,300 rounds. I was a Howitzer Section Chief. I know a bit of the math for field artillery. I really find this channel interesting. We on the land have to use different math due to firing non-line-of-sight. It’s the sort of trigonometry you’d see land surveyors using, more than likely. Learning about naval artillery is interesting. Good channel.
Thank you for this one Drach.
if ever you visit my part of Canada. BC, you should visit Fort Rodd Hill. home to multiple 6 inch dissapearing guns and the last twin QF 6 pounder in the world
Bermuda has some nice fortifications with a few pieces of artillery.
Just spent the best 2 hours playing world of warships while listening to this. Thankyou both for a really informative and interesting blast through the past.
The Video Thumbnail is of the Oscarsborg Fortress in Norway and the gun is 28cm, these guns disables the German Cruiser Blücher on April 9th 1940.
The fort was built during the Union between Sweden and Norway and is named after the Swedish King Oscar I, there's a sister fortress in the inlet to Stockholm named Oscar Fredriksborg, it weas intended to be named Oscarsborg as well but to avoid confusion it got partiallyu named after an older fortress called Fredriksborg that it replaced.
Borg is Swedish for Keep or Catle
The Blücher was damaged by the fortress' gun, but actually sunk by a subsurface torpedo battery that also was part of Oscarsborg.
British understatement at work again, a brief history that's almost 2 hours long. I can't complain though. Two of my favorite TH-cam channels doing a mash up is a good way to start the day. Thank y'all so very much for this video.
As a Norwegian, I appreciate the thumbnail
Nearly two hours with my favorite TH-cam military historians?!?!? I'll take it!
Fort Drum did successfully sink a few troop barges during the invation of Manila prior to Corregidor.
One of the survivors from Fort Drum (less than 30 out of 450 POW's) stated that the main reason they followed General Wainwrights surrender order was the fact they ran out of water. He said they had enough supplies that they could have held out until the US counter invasion in 44/45!
If anyone goes to the island of Malta on holiday, don't forget to visit Fort Rinella where you can see 100 Ton Armstrong coastal defence guns, that could fire a 1 ton shell over 8 miles. ;)
Only with Drach can a 2 hour video be a brief history! Love the titanic effort you put in!
A brief moment in TH-cam history. Two hours worth.
I had to watch it in bits and pieces over 2 days, but it was interesting from start to finish. Thanks for the extra effort!
Sandy Hook, New Jersey has some great costal bunkers and forts. In the summer they open them up for tours. Also nearby there is also a 16in gun bunker.
This was a great discussion and not one minute over time! Many, many good points! No one interested in history in general and this topic in particular should miss this.
A brief history
LAUGHS IN 2HRS
PS: The Germans didn't think the the fort was unmanned as the convoy headed for Oslo, but being relegated to a training fort for several years they didn't expect it to make any sort of coordinated resistance. They also did to a certain degree underestimate the outdated guns even though it was the, nearly equally vintage, unknown torpedo battery that scored the final blow. Due to the lack of knowledge of this battery they assumed the minefield had been activated and this was what Blucher had struck.
really love your style and work, Drach. I would love to hear about the naval encounter between the Spanish Armada and the British at Trafalgar. Have you done something on that?
There is a very interesting coastal battery in Norway near Trondheim. The Germans removed the 11" triples from the Gneisenau ready to refit her with 15" twins. One of these turrets can be found at the mouth of Trondheim Fjord at Austratt Fort. Basically the Germans used slave labour to dig a big hole in a rocky hill. They then put the complete mounting, powder handling room to turret, into this hole. This site is open during summer months with very good guided tours that take you through all levels of the mounting.
The Battle of Copenhagen actually is two distinct battles getting mixed up here 33:15 First in 1801, Nelson was not the highest ranking admiral, I think Parker was. The task for the British fleet was not to capture or destroy the Danish fleet. It was a murky agenda of pulling Denmark from The League of Armed Neutrality. Having completed that the British returned in 1807, without Nelson as he was dead. This time the agenda was to get rid of the Danish navy. This operation included troops landed north of Copenhagen, a siege of said city and the bombardment and destruction of a large part of the city. Heavy guns, explosive shells and Congreve's rockets with either an explosive load or a firestarter.
I love the fact that these videos still say "5 Minute Guide (More or Less)" :-) I hope you never change that.
This was fun.... so when can we expect to see a collaboration with Bismark from Military Aviation History on carrier borne aircraft?
Great video. I've always been interested in this sort of thing. The United States east coast has a lot of old coastal fortifications which have now been turned into parks or museums. Some date back to the colonial days. During the War for Independence, when the British army occupied Philadelphia, the Americans made an effort to throttle the British supply lines by constructing a system of fortifications along the Delaware River south of Philly, consisting of Forts Mercer and Billingsport in New Jersey, and Fort Mifflin on the Pennsylvania side, with a set of submerged barrier obstacles strung between them across the river. The fire plan was apparently to get enemy ships caught in the barrier and then bombard them from the shore batteries. Fighting there resulted in at least one Royal Navy ship, the Augusta, running aground, catching fire, and being destroyed by a magazine explosion. Fort Mifflin stayed in service until well into the 20th Century as a US Army depot and is now a park next to the airport, while the other forts have been turned into parks as well. The forts saw intense combat, including land-based assaults.
While I understand you were focused on fixed coastal defenses, particularly those that were armed with guns, I think you might've spent a few more minutes at the end talking about modern coastal defenses. As you mentioned they consist mostly of mobile surface to surface missile launchers as well as other dynamic defenses such as aircraft and maritime patrol vessels, but they still have a large influence on planning for modern warfare. The example that immediately comes to mind is the Iranian defenses on the Strait of Hormuz, which are apparently designed to control the Strait or at least to try to deny use of it by potential adversaries. This has likely had an influence on US policy in the region, and at least some deterrent effect on war. The loss of an aircraft carrier or an amphibious ship would be a pretty major disaster for the US Navy, which faces numerous seaborne platforms and batteries of missiles in a very confined region, barely large enough to even operate a carrier.
Listening while i'm in bed with covid, I appreciate the calm conversation, it sooths my brain, and I really appreciate that :)
I was given to understand that the 5 by 15 inch guns at Singapore where there too defend the Class 1 Navel Dockyard and not mainly to defend Singapore Island, this being the reason for the ammunition being AP and Semi AP with no HE being supplied. Turrets from decommissioned Great War Cruisers where also deployed to deal with enemy cruisers, destroyers and landing craft. Of the 5 by 15 inch guns only the first 2 had limited range of rotation, the last 3 having full 360 degree.
The Defense of Singapore being a duty for the Royal Navy, for who’s use the dockyard was constructed. The RAF had claimed it could defend Singapore far cheaper then the millions spent on building the new navy repair yard and 2 squadrons of bi plane torpedo bombers where deployed to this purpose.
There used to be an Australian web site which specialized on the guns of Singapore but It has been absent for the last 10 years or so.
John
Can we maybe have a monthly Drachinifel
, MHV, Bismarck, and TIK podcast?
Please?
That would literally be the best thing ever...
Something like:
Each month a new theme, and then we can get perspectives on land, sea, air, logistics, everything... And all you 4 have to do is talk for a couple of hours and have the relevant books in front of you... (Maybe also a couple of hours to prepare, but this would likely be time spent on stuff for your own channel anyway)
Potential format:
Patreons get to pick the overall topic (in a poll made by the relevant channel within the constraints of interest for all 4 channels), which then rotates between the Patreons of all 4 channels... The winning topic is announced on the previous podcast, and each channel might make a supporting video of some sort during the month before the podcast, and viewers can in relation to the channel videos ask questions relevant for Q&A in the podcast.
Later on you can maybe add extra segments (if you want), such as book and/or museum reviews (which is often better done in a debate, than just one person having one opinion). But start small and then grow (such as having guests)...
Whether you want your 4 faces live on a video for YT or not is crucial.
I would just like something on military history, which is similar to what TotalBiscuit did with gaming in the Co-optional Podcast.
But well, I would love to have this, and have it as a fixed monthly feature.
(weekly seems too aggressive, and I might not have time to listen to all of it)
(I would also offer my logistical services if you need manpower support in order to make this happen - you can pay me in merch and Patreon goodies if you absolutely have to pay me something, I just want such a podcast to be a thing)
Denmark and sometimes Sweden controlled the access to the Baltic because the seaways are even narrower than Gibraltar but there are more of them.
The Secret War plan for the cold war had Sweden and Denmark blocking channels by a massive mining operation supported by coastal artillery.
And during the Neutrality watch, the first thing that would have been leveled if the germans had attacked was the danish castle near Helsingborg that the nazis had taken over as an SS HQ by the Swedish 21 and 15.5cm coastal batteries on the ridges across the narrow strait within direct line of sight.
Excellent look at coastal defenses!
Here in New England (USA), our Seacoast from the Canadian border to New York is a long line of coastline defense installations which were built starting in colonial times and upgraded until most being deactivated in 1946.
Everything from cannon to doubling as P.O.W. camps, to mine depots, cruiser-sized guns, to radar installations and fire control towers disguised as lighthouses or ship superstructures.
Holy crap, I recognized the cannon in the thumbnail (one of the three guns part of the main battery, at Oscarsborg fortress in the Drøbak Sound in Norway) (1:35:00 this one)
th-cam.com/video/YZ79i11JSnU/w-d-xo.html
@@XC70n05 "kongens nei" is a good movie
This is the most underrated channel on TH-cam right here. I hope MHV helps gets this channel some much deserved attention. Captain D really knows his shit.
Wish you would have talked more on the 12" mortars 14" guns on Corregidor and defenses of San Francisco Bay.
Were the 2 hours not enough? Lol. They had to leave some stuff out. Or they would have been talking for 2 years and only covered the known history upto the beginning of the Roman Republic 😂
Oooh, how did I miss this? A treat, a 1h 58m - long treat!
>Brief History
>1:58:04
Yes this is Brief
The 2 most respected military historians on youtube... Time to grab some popcorn.
damn this is a good one. drach's knowledge is impressive!
On Dardanelles Gallopoli WW1. I recall reading that one of the issues for the ongoing fighting was that the Ottomans could defend with army (not navy/coastal) artillery. They could be limbered and moved. So when the UK counter battery fire started to get close they would go somewhere else making the UK restart the process all over. UK might also report, mistakenly, the army guns were knocked out as they had stopped firing when it was simply being moved. Though the size and thus range of the army guns were much less it was enough to engage ships in the narrows and for shelling the landing/supply beaches.
Brief, I like brief :)
Operation Brevity.
Holy moly this one's all over the place.
It's like 50 different topics here.
Interesting stuff.
With regards to you comment near the end about Britain having the worst coastal defences, that's quite simply a function of the amount of coastline one would have to defend, both with regards to the British Isles and the British Empire. It's far more cost effective to sink that money into a navy that can move around to where ever it's needed. Where they did choose to invest in defences though (Malta, Singapore and Gibraltar etc.) they don't seem to do things by halves.
Somewhat shorter specials on individual forts and batteries would be an interesting, break from the usual floating subjects, as they're a fairly niche part of naval warfare and so I think many people could learn a lot, even from relatively well "known" (have actually heard of) ones like Gibraltar.
In Singapore they did. Guns pointing out to sea. No defenses on the Johore Strait. Never thought they would be attacked through the back door. Also the Anglophiles (Europeans in general, the Brits weren't exempt the Dutch and French were just as bad) they considered themselves not only arrogant but superior. Thought their weapons were superior.
rudolf peter udo err Anglophiles is not the right word for this sentence. European and American arrogance in their superiority is the big failing. In the case of Singapore, they did think army could penetrate the jungle, as they didn't understand how to work with the jungle.
@@neildahlgaard-sigsworth3819 Oh I don't know as much the Japanese basically used the road and track network, with mechanized transport and bicycles only resorting to the jungle when they had to encircle a fortified position,or bye-pass it. Malaya east and west on the mainland had a reasonable road network.
@@rudolfpeterudo3100 I've seen references that suggest that at least in the case of Singapore, that's more because they believed that you wouldn't be able to bring a whole army through the jungle. A bit like not thinking the Germans could attack through the Ardennes forest.
Throughout history, the most successful attacks seem to be where the terrain is the considered impassible till someone passes it and catches everyone off guard.
But that's not a very good argument to suggest that their weapons weren't superior, in fact, if anything, going to such lengths to avoid a frontal assault on Singapore kind of suggests that the Japanese did think the British 15" gun batteries were superior to whatever the Japanese would assault them with.
@@neildahlgaard-sigsworth3819 I wouldn't limit that to European and America, that's the same flaw that's toppled many a rule around the world since the first kingdoms and empires.
Anyway, you could also argue that the confidence in their own military superiority is good for peace as many wars were fought for dominance, if you feel that you already have dominance then there's much less reason for you to fight... everyone isn't spending their whole budget on an arms race... and regular conflicts but especially genocides and terrible things like that are less likely to occur if the stronger nation isn't paranoid just goes round killing everyone to secure their power-base.
On the flip side if you don't think you're going to loose then you might be more inclined to invade weaker places, but I think on balance the former would probably outweigh the latter.
5 minute guide to warships? More or less indeed! Great to hear you two discuss!
Format of a conversation is fine, but keep changing the pictures to match what you are talking about, like at 15:00 you are talking about stone vs brick forts you could show examples of each (like Fort Pulaski for a brick fort.). More pictures keeps peoples attention better.
Oh two of my favourite presenters on a topic that I'd like to know more about. Perfect.