USS New York - Guide 204
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 28 ก.ย. 2024
- The New York class, battleships of the United States Navy, are today's subject.
Read more about the ships here:
www.amazon.co.uk/U-S-Battleships-Illustrated-Design-History/dp/1591142474
www.amazon.co.uk/Naval-Firepower-Battleship-Gunnery-Dreadnought-ebook/dp/B00KTI0T0E
www.amazon.co.uk/Conways-Worlds-Fighting-1906-1921-History/dp/0851772455
Naval photos and more - www.drachinifel.co.uk
Model ships of many periods - store.warlordga...?aff=21
Want to support the channel? - / drachinifel
Want a shirt/mug/hoodie - shop.spreadshi...
Want a poster? - www.etsy.com/u...
Want to talk about ships? / discord
Want to get some books? www.amazon.co.uk/shop/drachinifel
Next on the list:
-L-20e
-Abdiel class
-Panserskib (Armoured ship) Rolf Krake
-HMS Victoria
-HMS Charybdis
-Eidsvold class
-IJN “Special” DD's
-SMS Emden
-Ships of Battle of Campeche
-Tashkent-1934A Class
-HMS Plym (K271)
-Siegfried class
-HMS Caroline
![[TH] FS vs BME - VCT Ascension Pacific - Lower Bracket Final](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/wnygqsR2Fig/mqdefault.jpg)
Pinned post for Q&A :)
Uss Wisconsin!!!You are Great. Infact your videos are helping me in my studies.
The story goes that the US didn’t use convoys to move shipping along its east coast - leading to an unnecessarily high loss of ships and sailors to German subs - because the otherwise competent Admiral Ernest King just didn’t like the British… as one does. So was this situation really just the result of a single imperious idiot or more a matter of logistical requirements… strategic warfare CAN lead you down some pretty dark roads.
Being that the RN still believed it would require a dozen Battleships post war I'm going to provide them with them. In order to achieve this I'm going to have a pair of lions started in 38, 39 and 40 as was planed, compensating for the lack of triple 16" turrets by using more quad 14" until such a time as the 16" triple is available, and I'm going to have a pair of Vanguard laid down in 1941, using the turrets used OTL and the turrets from the 15" monitors meaning the Roberts class is never built and the Erebus class is disarmed in 1940 before terror is sunk. In order to compensate for the lost of the 15" monitors I'll have the Erebus class rearmed with twin 13.5" turrets (of which their are 9 in storage) and a pair of 13.5" monitors built instead of/as the Roberts.
How would the British war industry need to be changed before the war in order for such a build program to be feasible? How destructive would such a plan be with the industry as it existed? How is post war RN doctrine affected? etc.
Many articles state that Germany had to hand over the Nassau and Helgoland classes as a compensation for the scuttled ships ? Does it imply that there was an opportunity that Germany could have kept these ships if the other ships were not scuttled ?
If one of the Tillman designs had actually been built but scaled down to a 50000 ton displacement, how do you think such a design would compare to the later Iowa class? And do you think this design could have been modernized to be acceptable for service in WW2? Thanks Drach!
I went aboard the Texas in the 1980s. The tour was almost completely unsupervised; where they didn’t want you to go no lighting was installed. In the engine room a number of deck and access plates had been removed; you could see the cranks and down into the bilges. An awesome sight to behold. I enjoy your channel, not only for the history but for your wit and superior use of the English language. Thanks for all you do.
It was still quite open ~5 years ago. I'm sure that I wandered further than they would like and if I hurt myself it would be all on me. As I hadn't seen anyone else, I went back up.
Had the honor of visiting/exploring USS TEXAS & San Jacinto Battlefield about 12 years ago or so. Was able to wander around the ship on own accord. Was awesome to explore.
I've worked triple expansion (S.T. Crapo 1996) and Skinner Uniflow steam engines on the SS Badger and the St. Mary's Challenger on the Great Lakes. I'll bet that the Texas's engines are monsters!!
They produced 28,737 shp on trials and a maximum speed of 21.05 knots
3:00 Hey now, as a NY state resident I vehemently object to that statement. There's no "possibly" involved there, those were definitively the worst AA mounts ever stuck on a ship and I defy you to prove otherwise. When New Yorkers do something wrong, we do it the wrongest of all. :)
When you see '2x1 3in AA guns' on any US battleship/ship in general from the late 1910s, chances are it's mounted on the cranes. Not just the New York.
@@5peciesunkn0wn No way. Who thought that up?
You New Yorkers don't do everything wrong. Plenty of other places here in the U.S screw things up just as equally bad if not worse.
Too bad your state wasn't able to preserve the ship though.
@@nymuseum1601 Down in Florida there are two types of Yankees. Those that visit are just 'Yankees". Those that stay are "Damn Yankees". :)
@@5peciesunkn0wn It was a common bit of design idiocy, true.
My personal story about a different USS New York. I grew up in NYC with the Twin Towers as a backdrop to every single day in my younger life. The use of steel from the Towers in the hull of LPD-21, USS New York is therefore extremely significant to me. Alas, I was not there for her commissioning. However, that immediate Monday my flight into NYC was delayed 1 hr. When my flight finally descended below the clouds, we were over Coney Island Beach and Amusement Park. From this bird's eye view, there she was! USS New York! steaming towards the opening in the breakers. The 2 escorting chase boats turned away, and she crossed the harbor entrance. Proud, alone and underway for the open ocean as a Commissioned Combatant of the US Navy for the first time, USS New York! This will always be the greatest moment for me with ANY ship.
US Navy 1914: Eh, just put a couple pop guns on top of the cranes to fend off planes
US Navy 1941: DAKKADAKKADAKKADAKKADAKKADAKKADAKKADAKKADAKKADAKKADAKKADAKKADAKKADAKKADAKKADAKKADAKKADAKKADAKKADAKKADAKKADAKKADA
MORE!!! DAKKA!!!!!!!!!!!!.
@@ln7929 THAT'S STILL NOT ENOUGH!!!! MORE DAKKA GODDAMNIT!!!!
@@o484 ^ US Navy, 1941-45
You are not wrong. I just got the model of the New York to build. It is basically an anti aircraft gun platform that happened to look like a battleship lol
"Might've run over a U-boat"?
I'm sure the presumably loud *clang* was just someone dropping a large wrench or something.
Given the scars on the hull afterward, and the loss of UB-113 and UB-123 in the general time and place, it seems more likely than not that it was a submarine. While recent claims seem to put UB-123 elsewhere, UB-113 was "sunk by a North Sea barrage mine", i.e., no witnesses and pure conjecture.
@@kemarisite Thanks.
Sounds like a conversation between a parent and a teenager who has just got his battleship licence...
"Care to explain what happened to the USS New York?"
"Sorry Dad. I think that I might have run-over a submarine."
Maybe they were those stealth Japanese torpedo boats?
I find the armament of torpedo tubes on battleships intriguing. Do you have any videos that discusses this specifically?
Mostly just jokes about the absurdity of it.
An American pre-AA gun on every piece of deck available. If it's a space without food? Torpedoes.
XO: "Sir we need to stop there is a U boat in our path!"
Captain: "Didn't you see our bumper sticker? We brake for nobody!"
Helmsman: "U-boat dead ahead Captain--"
Captain: "RAMMING SPEED!"
Texas and Mikasa are the two ships at the very top of my list to see.
Thank you. My dad served on the New York during WW II in the Atlantic, North Africa, gun training cadets in the Caribbean (his favorite he said), then Iwo Jima and Okinawa. We have a video he did for a project my daughter was making in high school where he said "We thought we sink if we'd hit a log, but damn she was still floating after two A bombs!"
They built those old ladies tough.
Sorry Ronald, As much as I'd like to know what you said, Im unable to decipher it. Would you please give it a second attempt..
The original USS New York was a pre-dreadnought built in 1891 and scuttled in Subic Bay the day after Pearl Harbor. A great dive.
My father served on the old New York in 1939-1940, his gun was 5” belt side but never said wether port or starboard
Can we get a review ****Canopus-class battleship**** and especially the Canopus. Seems she had a very colorful history. Even to the end. And there might be good old pictures of her firing her main Guns. Right up your ally. Keep up the good work sir!
Canopus class battleship? I thought the Canopus was a repair ship scuttled in the Phillippines in 1942.
@@lawrencelewis8105 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canopus-class_battleship
@@rayg.2431 Hmm- well I learned something. thanks!
When I see photos of those early 'tower' AA mounts, the word I think of is, 'WHIP'.
Wonderful! I always look forward to a drachinifel video, especially battleships
0:50 Battleship 1910 and Battleship 1911
John Browning; "I think I'll design a pistol, call it the Model of 1911, and it will fight and last over 100 years."
And look good doing it.
It is not that simple for the 1911
3:05 That is a picture of USS Vulcan AR-5 , nice to see it!
94 barrels on board, yet not a drop of rum.
A crime against humanity for sure
If you believe that, I have some enlistment papers I'd like you to sign.
Are we not going to talk about the time USS New York attacked Venus?
American 14" standards are the most beautiful American battleships change my mind
USS New Mexico and USS California 14" Gun mounts
Hmmm, depends if we are talking about the ships or just about the gun turrets
@@davidandmartinealbon3155 First I thought he was talking about the gun mounts now I realize he was talking about the Standard battleships armed with the 14" Guns
I dunno... I do love me some Iowa's...
@@TheEvilChipmunk Montana Battleship models look sexy to
It's amazing to hear American Congress trying to cut back spending. This hasn't been the case in a very long time.
Awesome thanks 👍
I'm pretty sure that it's already on the list, but just in case, Operation Crossroads as a Wednesday special? Pretty please?
The USS Texas is at her permanent home. What Texas is trying to do is raise enough money to take her completely out of the water so that the corrosion stops. This may be done where she sits or they may create a new area just forward of where she's located.
Any updates on the Texas restoration? It's been quite a while since I heard anything. Hopefully, they figure it out soon and fix the ship.
The Christmas ship
why did the USS New York have a giant clock?
SO, at 109 years old.. Is Texas, other than Constitution the oldest USN ship still "afloat"?
Off the top of my head, I remember two preserved ships that fall between Constitution and Texas: the 1854 sloop Constellation and the 1895 cruiser Olympia.
@@bfrobin446 Very true. Constellation was rebuilt several years ago because she was rotting out and in danger of sinking right there in the harbor. However the rebuilding did not include making her capable of sailing on her own. When she 'sailed' to the Naval Academy at Annapolis MD after the overhaul the move was done with tugs the entire way. I doubt she will have that ability restored to her as it has in Constitution.
Olympia is another ship whose 'bottom is rotting out' due to electrolytic corrosion. While some repairs have been done and more scheduled, she really needs the care she can receive only in a fully equipped drydock and shipyard.
USS Olympia is older than Texas.
@@WALTERBROADDUS USS Olympia is not a battleship though. Texas is the oldest surviving dreadnought type battleship.
@@johnlee1297 Texas never fought anyone. Golf clap.👏🏿😏
I was a guest aboard the latest USS New York at her commissioning in New York City. You may recall that her bow is made of steel from the World Trade Center buildings hit on 9/11. A fine name for a fine ship.
New York should have been preserved and Nevada should have been as well
USS New York best girl with her sister Texas
The Battleship Texas Foundation is currently working to restore the ship and move it to a dry berth so it can last for future generations. They are very much in need of donations.
You can find more about the ship, the restoration project, and a chance to donate or buy a piece of the ship at battleshiptexas.org/.
Me: clicks on video
Wife: Seriously, more boat porn?
battleship go brrr
The state of USS Texas is sad. The organization taking care of it just doesn't have the funds to properly do their job. I believe I read how they planned to spend one year's money on buying more pumps and generators just to keep the ship afloat.
Ask Bill Gates to cut a check..... 😏
That isn't correct. Within the last 6 years, $50 million was spent in major repairs made to hull framing and the keel to make her strong enough for towing. The state of Texas has committed another $35 million and the ship is being prepared for tow to a shipyard where most of its outer hull shell plating will be replaced below the waterline. This should happen sometime after the first of the year. Once she receives that, a new wood deck and paint, she will be towed to a new home. That has yet to be determined.
194th
My be not.
not the best looking battleship.... however...ten guns!
Can I ask for a video on the WRENS Operation Outward during WW2? Little known today but it seems like one of the most effective offensive actions and could have been used more widely if the British had realised just how incredibly destructive it was for Germany. 🙂
3:10 US Navy out here playing a real-life tower defense game.
Seriously though, who thought that was a good idea?
Apparently the US navy did
I suppose the logic went “if we mount the guns at deck level their arcs of fire will be obscured by the ship, so lets put them on a tower to make them able to cover more sky per barrel”.
wasn’t the worst idea on paper, but Battleships aren’t made of paper
While I can see the benefit of good firing acrs how were they supposed to ensure a continuous supply of ammo to the guns?
@@gildor8866 men with baskets on their backs, since I don't see any pulleys or elevators going up
@@maxkennedy8075 I love this. I'm going to steal this >:)
Which is good on paper, but X isn't made out of paper.
The AAA gun mounts, seen at 4:50, look a bit like candle holders.
Candle holders always make a nice gift.
@@paulpeterson4216 Bull Durham
Must admit I also thought that. Maybe that's what the crane is for so as they can hoist up the new candle. They invented the flamethrower to light the candle.
I hope they painted it yellow or orange or, at least, painted a targeting cross at the top side.
Otherwise it would practically be invisible to enemy fighter planes.
Sarcasm off!
That puts the same mounts as seen at 3:08 in better perspective.
That said, I think it was a great idea:
1) I don't think any Navy in the world has found a better use for the unused real estate at the top of any kingpost.
2) It puts the weapons that much closer to their intended targets, which is always an advantage (at least until nuclear weapons getting invented.)
When Drach mentioned many gunmounts getting raised in the mid-1920s refit, he missed an opportunity for another swipe at these mounts.
As a FYI - The 1918 Federal Reserve US Banknote features the image of the USS New York battleship on the back of the note. So in a sense, this ship lives on! Take it Easy ... MarK
Found it, eBay, 2 dollar bill,$ 1700, could get the link to post.
Definitely one of the classes that come closest to being the platonic ideal of a "battleship" in my mind, if just in terms of aesthetics- heavy, powerful, utilitarian, yet somehow elegant- a gal that gets the job done and looks great while doing it.
I agree, though personally if someone tells me to think of a battleship the one I think of first is the inter-war Queen Elizabeth's, the one's with the big box on top of a tripod mast
Yes, a beautiful ship.
My grandfather was a WW2 Navy vet, served on the Lexington during the Battle of the Coral Sea among many others in his 30 year career, but he was long retired after I was born. He had a lot of books on ships, and my ideal battleship was his--USS North Carolina. Such a sleek silhouette.
Concerning the new 14" naval guns for the US Navy. When authorized, the guns were not only larger, but the AP shells (soft-capped 1400 pound enlarged US Navy 870-pound soft-capped 12" Mark 14 AP projectiles) now also had to withstand a specification that required a 10-degree angle off from the old right-angle testing against scaled-up Class "A" armor (face-hardened using some version of the Krupp thick-faced armor type, though at the time both Bethlehem Steel and The Midvale Company used in-house developed variants that did not use a thin super-hard Cemented ("Harveyized") surface layer, since only Carnegie Steel was willing to pay Krupp the license to make a variation of Krupp Cemented (KC) armor called Carnegie-Krupp Cemented (CKC)). Only after the Krupp patents were declared invalid by the US Supreme Court in 1912 did Midvale and Bethlehem start to make their own variations of KC armor with the cemented surface layer added.
Carnegie never made large naval gun projectiles, to my knowledge, but Bethlehem, Midvale, Firth-Stirling (its US company), and the new-to-projectiles firm of Crucible Steel Company did (Firth-Stirling eventually got out of this business just before or during WWI, but the other three listed here continued making large AP shells for the US Navy through the end of WWII). In fact, by the mid-1930s Crucible became the best AP projectile company in the world, starting with the US 14" Mark 16 MOD 8 AP projectile design, which was about the best, most-damage-resistant, hard-capped AP shell ever made starting in early 1942, with other AP shells from 6" through experimental 18" being matched to it as the test standard to reach from then on. When the first batches of the new 14" AP shells were made for test purposes circa 1910, Bethlehem, Midvale, and Crucible entered a test lot of shells for the new 10-degree test standard. The acceptance standard allowed two test failures taken randomly from the lot of the several shells tested against the Class "A" plates, but a third failure was "curtains" for the projectiles submitted. Bethlehem had no test lots EVER succeed during these tests (I do not know when it finally fixed its problems, though it made good AP shells in WWII). ALL Midvale lots passed, most with no failures whatsoever, while Crucible also had no lots fail, though there were a few lots that had one individual shell failure that almost failed that lot.
Shortly thereafter, Midvale started making for the large guns its "Midvale Unbreakable" AP shells that at up to 15 degrees obliquity almost never broke when hitting any armor at all, with the sole US exception of the Midvale Non-Cemented Class "A" plates made from 1906 to1912 before the Krupp patents were eliminated. (This armor had a new tempering process that, was not understood at that time and prevented what was later called "temper brittleness" so that these plates could shatter ANY projectiles whatsoever made at that time that did not have a hardened AP cap at any angle at all, no matter how thick it was or large the projectile was. Only Austro-Hungarian Witkowitz KC of the WWI era seems to have been similar in its damage-causing ability of all armors designed before about 1930. After 1930, most, but not all, new face-hardened armors were similarly improved in toughness by using better tempering systems and could also shatter any soft-capped shells.) The first of these new super-strong-bodied shells was the 8" Mark 11 first made in 1911, but only when the 12" Mark 15 MOD 6 (this MOD being the new Midvale version of that AP shell design) of 1916 did the US Navy finally realize that all of its other AP shells were now obsolete and changed all of its requirements to meet the new Midvale shells or fail the armor impact tests. The 14" Mark 8 and the 16" Mark 3 AP shells used through the 1930s until replaced by the new hard-capped designs were all of this soft-capped Midvale shell type, regardless of who made them.
This failure by Bethlehem Steel to be able to pass even one single test lot of 14" AP shells during the time period just before WWI shows that their quality control needed a BIG FIX. Their armor plates taken from the sunken OKLAHOMA after Pearl Harbor and tested at the US Naval Proving Ground, Dahlgren, Virginia, during WWII also showed a wild variation in the armor plate metallurgical properties from plate to plate when three such Bethlehem OKLAHOMA belt plates were tested and given metallurgical tests comparing them to modern (WWII, that is) plates. One Midvale Non-Cemented plate was also taken from OKLAHOMA (at that time the individual plate lots could be bought from all three manufacturers in a crazy quilt per ship) and turned out to have an 81% deep face (!!!), which was the thickest ever used to my knowledge, and which was partially why it could shatter the old Midvale shells, but this plate had two features noted during the testing: One was that it did have the huge scaling effect against AP shells that made it inferior in penetration resistance to 14" and up AP shells even when they shattered, noted in tests made in 1920 and 1921, so it was only superior for stopping soft-capped AP gun projectiles up to about 12" size. The second point was the extremely good quality control of the plate's various parameters, including a very smooth and uniform hardness shift from the face of about 490 Brinell (600-700 Brinell cemented layer not used due to the Krupp patent fight) in a flat line to about 25% in from the surface and then a very smooth long "ski-slope" hardness decrease to a flat 200 Brinell soft back layer at the 81% point -- this was about the best quality control I have ever seen in this hardening process, and the opposite of Bethlehem's wild changes inside each plate with no two plates being even remotely similar. No wonder Midvale became the new standard to match at that time in both armor and projectiles.
Thanks for the in-depth (penetration?) reply! May I ask what your professional background is? Metallurgist?
@@davidb6576 No. I taught myself basic metallurgy from reading A LOT of US Navy and Army documents on armor and projectile manufacture and testing and from the huge book THE MAKING, SHAPING, AND TREATING OF STEEL (9th Edition of 1971) by the United States Steel Corporation (what was once Carnegie Steel Corporation). My training was as a Physicist and Mathematician (UCLA Dual Major 1972) and my first professional permanent job started in December of that year as a GS-7 Electronics Engineer (lowest possible pay grade for this job title) at what was then called the US Naval Ship Missile Systems Engineering Station (NSMSES or "Nemesis"), Port Hueneme, California, (a tenant facility on the huge "SeaBee" Base there) for the TERRIER Guided Missile Systems Department. When digital computers, the UNIVAC 1218B, called in the US Navy the General Purpose Computer Mark 152 ("C-152"), for TERRIER (and the digital version of TALOS) began to be added in the next few years, slowly replacing all of the older versions of the TERRIER Mark 76 Guided Missile Fire Control System with the MOD 6 and MOD 7 versions (different experimental radar upgrades, later combined in MOD 8) during upgrades, I changed to a Computer Engineer when that Job Title was established in 1976, though I had actually been such an engineer for a couple of years already as NSMSES built a TERRIER digital computer test facility (we had to do our own wiring of the place, though the huge equipment, including an entire AN/SPG-55B TERRIER tracking and guidance radar unit on the roof, was done by professional construction personnel). The C-152s replaced the old electro-mechanical Computer Mark 47 ("C-47") and, eventually, these upgrades also replaced the older various types of TERRIER missiles (BT(N) and HT/HTR) with the new Standard Missile (SM-1, the first version of what with upgrades to its control systems was also introduced in TARTAR and, finally, as the huge upgrade SM-2, in both of these and in Aegis, which eventually replaced both TERRIER and TARTAR). TERRIER had its ships suddenly, with no warning to us whatsoever, wiped out with a no-more-non-nuke-steamships order in 1990 by the end of 1992, after which I transferred to TARTAR and eventually, when that also went away, to doing some Aegis peripheral (Dahlgren will release Aegis central software and hardware work only from its "cold dead hands", as Aegis is its primary "rice bowl") and FFG-7 "mini-TARTAR" system work, including, eventually, becoming the sole SOFTWARE QUALITY ASSURANCE person in my department until I retired in 2014.
I had a fascination with battleships from my high school days (I graduated from Venice High School, Los Angeles, California, in 1966) and during my college days I worked at NSMSES during the summer once and during the summer twice at the US Naval Weapons Center, China Lake, California (only 100 miles from Death Valley and it felt like it!), where I learned how to program computers in FORTRAN 6, among other things. These Navy summer jobs were quite interesting and informative to me and I thought I might like to work for the Navy after I graduated (my grades were not quite high enough for UCLA Physics Department Graduate School). Also while at college a friend of mine introduced me to playing various miniature wargames (Napoleonic, Army, and Navy battles using small ship models -- this was extraordinarily fascinating to me and I played many hours with a club using dining room floors, large table tops (some made in huge auditoriums from many such tables pushed together) and even, on an elementary school playground, a full scale naval game using 300' tape measures for range estimation checking (you REALLY understood how tiny even a huge battleship was at such large distances!). As I played the naval games I noted elaborate rules for ship maneuvering but the rules for armor penetration were extremely simple, not much different from those used in the late 1930s by the Fletcher Pratt Naval Wargame, which was the basis for the more complicated rules I played under. I got copies of the rules and studied them closely. Then one day things changed: I was playing a naval miniatures game on the floor of a friend's kitchen, with several players recreating a WWI battleship/battlecruiser Britain/German battle and I was using a German battleship. At that time I was still rather new at doing the eyeball range estimation to try to hit the British enemy ships and could not hit the broadside of a barn from the inside. But I kept trying and, finally, I got a single hit on a British battlecruiser. I didn't expect much, since I had been hit a few times and the referee had done his "mumbo-jumbo" and only minor damage to my ship had resulted. This time, however, the referee came back and stated that the British battlecruiser had blown up and was removed from the game. I was "floored" but my happiness did not last long, as every British ship on the opposing side used me as a target and wiped me out in two turns. After the game, I asked what they used for hit effects resolution and he showed me a large table with numbers from zero to 100 on the side and effects of various sort stated, with the minimal armor penetration requirements to allow that hit. I had already some idea of the very simplistic ship armor setups and armor penetration tables used (side armor only for WWI battles), but had not really studied how they were used in the damage computations at this time. The referee showed my how he used telephone numbers from a large telephone book and die rolls to determine the random numbers for placing hits on a target when you estimated the range correctly. My hit had been a big ZERO, which was a main magazine and, at the ranges given (scaled for the floor) my shell had penetrated and KABOOM! This was so game-changing (in all the meaning of this term) to me, that I set out to understand more about how armor worked, since my study of pictures in JANE'S FIGHTING SHIPS showed a much more complex armor design than the simplistic tables used in the game. I decided to figure it out, since I was a physics and math major. How hard could it be (hubris to the max!)? Well, after more than 50 years of study on armor and projectile interactions, I have some success that is at the Internet Web Site NAVWEAPS.COM in my section of that site, but still have things I do not know yet. Considering how it is just two metal objects being banged together, you get some really fundamental understanding as to how complex our universe really is...
@@nathanokun8801 Interesting (sincerely)! A gamer geek, in modern parlance ;). You should get some correspondence going with Drach, surely he could do an additional segment on armor and shell penetration with your help.
I would like a more detail discussion of battleship masts. Just how were they laid out and what all was in there.
Some AA guns, ranging scopes, binoculars...and a phone to ring up lunch orders.
3:21 "Important safety tip..thanks Egon" Dr Peter Venkman
Love old US dreadnoughts. Tough old girls.
For those interested, and possibly unaware. There are regular updates posted regarding the preparations aboard Texas, for her journey to drydock in the near future. The updates are available at.......
www.battleshiptexas.org/battleship-updates/
Good information on what and how things are being done, accompanied by pictures. Latest update is from Oct 30, at this posting
It's a shame other dreadnought era capital ships left intact after WWII, like the Goeben, were carelessly sunk or scrapped, even after surviving into the seventies....
Bloody shame the state of Texas these days.
It appears they're actually on the job, righting the wrong.
Being originally from Houston, TX, and interested in military history, I spent a lot of time aboard the Texas in her berth near the San Jacinto monument. I’ve been all over the old girl. It’s a shame they’ve let her rot away the way they have.
Thank you, another fine video. I hope Texas gets the repairs she needs and a proper home soon.
Right, suggesting some ships I'd love to see covered in the future:
John C. Butler class DEs
USS Samuel B. Roberts
Casablanca class CVEs
USS White Plains
(Can you tell I've been reading Last Stand of the Tin Can Sailors lately, and rewatching your Battle off Samar video?)
USS Hoel
USS Heermann
(might as well round out Taffy 3)
Shiratsuyu class DDs
Yuudachi
Finally (for now, and because I'm slightly evil)
Schleswig Holstein (well, not just because I'm evil, I genuinely think it would be interesting)
If he ever does post WWII ships I'd love to see something on Charlie Adams class destroyers. They were still around when I was in the Navy and I always thought they were good looking ships!!
That shot at 7:07 of USS Texas listing like that is both sad and incredabily frustrating seriously how can a group who's sole job is to keep the warship intact fail so badly.
The ship is owned by the state. Any museum struggles to suck at hind teat for subsidies and grants and even regular operating funding isn't safe. Not just in the USA but worldwide. In my country, our national airline gets billions of dollars, the maritime museum, of national significance, I volunteer at gets nothing extra despite at least 40% shortfall in receipts. And ships are costly.
There is always money for tax cuts for the rich, subsidies for companies, the military. Then a lot of nothing and then things like roads, education. Amongst the unwanted stepchildren (unless positive publicity is involved) are museums.
Well last year the Texas state congress passed a funding bill to help get her dry docked and repaired. As of now they are doing patch work for the move to a shipyard in Louisiana for an extensive repair and then she will come back to Texas. They haven’t announced a permanent home for her yet, but it won’t be in Houston anymore from what I’ve heard.
Josh, part of the problem is the people who ask for these ships think that since they will be moored 'forever' they will last forever. They don't understand or they ignore the continuing problem of electrolytic decay and corrosion which requires periodic inspection by experts and replacement of the 'Zincs' and other electrolysis fighting materials regularly as they decay. This and other active corrosion fighting efforts (including periodic painting) can get expensive which is one reason the USN has divested itself of most of the older, more worn out, out of date and less useful ships in the 'mothball' fleet.
Sooner or later the bill for repairs and upkeep will come due or 'the bottom will rust out of her' as is happening with Texas and she becomes in danger of flooding out and sinking at her moorings ... not a good ending for such a grand old lady.
Looking at various internet photos and news stories, that is during a 2017 leak that developed, not a normal position it was kept. They closed the museum and did repairs.
Uss Olympia needs help more. th-cam.com/video/-5yzJsOB4EI/w-d-xo.html
Funds for ships is not a huge priority. They are not like dogs in the cold in ASPCA ads. Or those kids in Shriners Hospitals Ads.
Please do one on USS Pennsylvania.
That anti-aircraft mount looks like something you’d see in a video game! Wow! I don’t think I’d want to be on that, ever.
Typical Drach, makes an incredibly good video, in an easily digestible format. Great content, you're doing a service to TH-cam.
I know post WWII Britain was broke. But it's sad the Vanguard or Warspite wasn't saved as museum ships.
Yes, they should have saved one ship from each class.....
Can you do the I-400
Very little vids about the battleships and spotter aircraft of d-day
Drach, have been watching your 5 minute guides for over a year now, love them. Any chance you could do one on the USS Eldridge of Philadelphia Experiment Fame? (Yes I know the experiment never happened, but it's made that an interesting ship.)
My Dad served onboard USS New York (BB-34) from March 1943 to November 1945 when he was released from active duty
I look at those cage masts and wonder how many sailors lost their lunch, and any other meals, on a particularly windy day. Bad enough on a tripod but at least they did not add to the swaying.
Saturday Morning, I used to wake up and watch cartoons. Now I wake up and watch Drach. Thanks Drach.
A great ship but I always find the aesthetics of US ships a little utilitarian. Or perhaps that's just over exposure to all things American and the fact Britain never preserved any of its own dreadnoughts. Sour grapes.
Britain never preserved any dreadnoughts as it was broke after the war, people wanted food on their plates...not rusting battleships...
@@Chris-m-m02 Warspite tried to run away though!
@@davidkaminski615 Yes, I always think it is a shame that it is HMS Belfast, rather than HMS Warspite, that is moored in London. Of all the RN ships, she deserved to be retained as a museum. Rather like it is a shame they scrapped USS Enterprise.
We need more Ships on the list
Us navy has a problem. Sulution: More gun!
And?
"accidental" uboot raming
I hate when noble warships are discarded as such, give them a proper send-off before they are dismantled and use that steel for future heavy destroyers and cruisers,
By the time the USS Texas is mended I will probably be long dead,
This was awesome. Thank you Drach for doing this video. I just wish the New York was preserved as well.
There was actually an effort by New Yorkers to save her as a museum, too, but the USN stated that her use as a target was too vital to gain information on nuclear weapons effects. Presumably, they wanted to use her and Arkansas, with their distributed armor schemes, to compare with Pennsylvania and Nevada, with their all-or-nothing schemes.
@@rdfox76 I just read something about that. The navy needed the New York for the atomic tests. It still stinks that she was used for that purpose. I wished they salvaged some of the Japanese ships that were sunk at their moorings for those tests, instead of the New York. I have a model of her. She was beautiful.
@@rdfox76 also I wish they found New York's final resting place. I saw her last picture on navsource. It was her capsized with 2 Essex class carriers pasting her. I say she fought to stay afloat.
I have very different accounts of a sailors life in the Royal Navy throughout the age of sail some show it just sort of hell and others show it not all that bad on author commented the extra men required in battle made it much easier on all the when there was no battle and most of the time there was no battle just tedious blockade duty
Update on USS Texas, she is in dry dock for a multi million dollar and multi year rebuild.
Drachinifel congratulations on 300000 subs dude!
And of course its great news that she has been succesfully towed to Galveston for the start of hull and other repairs...
Texas, the Last Dreadnought!!!
TEXAS!! Thats my old girl, she's being prepped to move in January or February of next year
Requesting a video on the Victorian Ironclad Battleship HMS Inflexible, from 1876.
i went onboard Texas as kid
Texas is a beauty, yea shes a thick girl but those lines are outstanding.
Nothing wrong with thick girls.
@@jeffreyskoritowski4114 As long as the lines are good.
Review the ss alabama
Grew up listening to my great grandfather talk about his time on the New York.iirc he joined in '37 What stories he had.
@2:30 ... in a rare case of politicians listeing to the experts ....
It's not so simple. It has more to do with who's state gets the fat government contracts.
Thanks Drach
Given where the AA guns were originally mounted I do wonder just how they were going to get ammunition to them?
About time
So the gunners on the tower platforms became the worlds first manned whip antennas 🤣🤣🤣
Love the videos, all of them. Could you do a video on the San Giorgio armored cruisers??? I really like them. If you do I'd appreciate it.J
Idea for a unique ship in the USN was the US "Robin." This was the code name for the HMS Victorious. To me the interest would be going into the why the USN needed the ship, the arrangement of command structure with the RN and USN, and the engagements the "Robin" was involved in.
Considering that the USS Texas has been in brackish toxic waters near the Houston petrochemical plants for over 70 years, it is quite impressive that she is still with us. I bet the old battleship would be ready for duty again in no time if we could get Sarah McLaughlan to sing a sad song for it in a TV commercial.
I've said it before, on another of Drachinifel's excellent videos (without reaction) - is it only me irked by the representation of an RN sailor with a moustache (without the full beard)? When my father served (from 1937) and I bet from long before, it was in King's/Queen's Regulations that officers and ratings alike could only be clean shaven or (with permission of the Captain) wear the full beard. Nothing between permissible.
It's only you. :) Furthermore, I know in the U.S. Navy, and I suspect in the Royal Navy as well, it was up to the ships captain to choose which which grooming standards to enforce, and which to ignore.
@@thekinginyellow1744 No, it's as I've said (I've just consulted Queen's Regs). Different in the Royal Marines, of course, but the man pictured isn't a marine.
@@hermoglyph2255 I meant de facto, not de jure. The USN doesn't have a reg that gives the captain permission to not enforce grooming standards. Some just did it.
@@thekinginyellow1744 I'm not talking about the US Navy, but about the image of a sailor with 'HMS Splendid' on his cap which appears at the beginning of the video.
@@hermoglyph2255 Duh! I'm saying that just because there's a regulation doesn't mean that's what actually happens. I know this from firsthand experience.
The 3in guns on top of the crane posts was done because every extra foot of vertical range was considered worth while. It also gave them a better transverse range free of interference from radio wires which in those days were quite numerous. In 1914 you didn't have the electronics that decided radio frequencies, instead they varied them by different lengths of antennae wires. It was commander Sims who set US Navy gunnery standards, example: 3 8gun dreadnoughts = 18 guns per broadside, while 2 10 gun ships = 20 guns. Given short range, bad visability and no radar this was the best that could be achieved and of course the idea of the line of battle was still considered the gold standard of naval warfare.
By the way, the New York appears on the back of the $2.00 Federal Reserve Banknote ..
Drach, did you change your mouse? I heard some clicking during the video. Nevertheless great work as always.
One definite what if butterfly is that if Jean Bart had been fully operational during operation torch the Texas and New York where the closest battleships to have sent along with Massachusetts if they wanted to make it an unfair fight.
Fill the Texas with concrete like Mikasa. Park it anywhere in Texas. Plenty of places.
Love the New York class, so glad we still have the Texas. Beautiful ships as well.
SMS konig albert
SMS Tatra
ORP Gryf
Shipyard worker: How many AA guns you want?
New Yorks: Yes😐
American standards, nice looking ships and iconic for their day, even tho i am glad i no oinger have to grind them in wows, i do keep them as port queens, and on occasions i do take them out for a spin, and bring hinest sailing in a formation in the old cbt days was glorious
The torpedo bulges made it roll worse? Is it the round shape that does this? I would think added beam would help stability
Ah, a pleasant surprise for my lunch