Can you go into more details about prize awards for crews? What were certain ships worth, what kind of shares the different crew got, what happened to the ships once they were returned?
What does it mean for a ship to be protected against its own guns, since even battleship armor could be penetrated by small caliber rounds if the two ships were close enough? Thank you!
You are out here just giving master classes on naval history free to the public. I feel like I have such a good grasp on the topic after years of listening to you. It is at the point where I almost always have a good idea of how you are going to answer a question unless it is very obscure, but I still listen to every video. Well done sir.
The Industrieel Smalspoor Museum in the Dutch village of Erica holds an amazing variety of narrow gauge engines and their purposes. These light rail logistics were eminently suitable for port activities, as long as no heavy loads like coal or ore were involved.
I grew up with an uncle who did not have fond memories of Ju-87s. A member of 6 Div (Aust), the small Greek transport vessel he was on to 3 direct hits from them in the (you guessed it) evacuation of Greece. Despite the post trauma, he considered himself lucky as he was picked up by a Brit destroyer which conveyed him all the way back to Alexandria & he got to miss the fun & games of Crete. Long live peace and people not getting traumatised 👍
Interesting, a couple days ago again while running and listening to an old Drydock I was imagining the epic Szimanski/Drach crossover. Now it seems closer than ever.
To your first question: The Japanese T1 class are pretty much purposely built dedicated fast armed transport ships. Quasi-fast escort with stern launcher. 21 completed in WW2, size of a WW2 destroyer, front end looks like a destroyer, not as fast though.
I live 5 miles from where the Salem is moored at the old Quincy Shipyard. I actually passed it today. Also the nice thing about the Boston area is that the Constitution is at the Charlestown Navy yard. They also have a WWII destroyer, Caisson Young. In Fall River, about 2 hours South of Boston, is Battleship Cove where the USS Massachusetts is. I toured it as a Boy Scout in 1967 right after it was moored. Seen better days now but it is still impressive. They also have a Submarine and I believe a Frigate there. Up the street they had a nice maritime museum. When I was there with my son in the late 90’s the curator was a Titanic buff. He had managed to get the model from the Movie Titanic that came out in the early 50’s. They also had a bunch of other Titanic artifacts. So if you come to the Boston Area, there is a lot of sea going stuff to see.
Kudos to all of you guys leaving comments, you are all full of wisdom and knowledge of our history. Can I get a salute to all of our military out there we all thank you for your service.
I think I'd enjoy an episode on dockyard railways. I grew up in a town full of heavy industry. It sported all manner of locomotives and rolling stock. As a polite and inquisitive kid (and it being the litigation-light 70s) I was let to wander and pester. I wish I remembered more of it.
A problem the FAA had in WWII is the RAF ignored naval aviation; but what would expect from Billy Mitchell wanna-bes. The USN and IJN had their own 'air forces' under their direct, independent control. This allowed them to write specifications for naval aircraft that would be more suitable for naval operations.
As I understand it, the scuttling of the High Seas Fleet at Scapa was seen in Germany as partly erasing the stain of the mutiny (and surrender) and restoring the honor of the HSF, which minimized any long-term repercussions from the mutiny.
I don't see why. The mutiny was about not wanting to fight. Scuttling the High Seas Fleet would mean not wanting to fight again. Isn't it validating the mutiny?
@@Edax_Royeaux The scuttling was meant to prevent the british from getting their hands on the Fleet(atleast without a fight the germans could not win...Hard to fight with no ammunition)..Scuttling your ship to prevent the enemy from getting it is generaly considered to be rather honorable...In Hindsight,the scuttling may have prevented germany from possibly keeping a few of the Nassaus or Helgolands...That,and it had the potential to restart hostilities,as even scuttling your fleet was an act of war in these circumstances
@@NashmanNash Exactly my point, scuttling the ship prevented a future fight, which is exactly what the mutiny was aiming for. Which is why I find it strange that giving into the mutiny by scuttling nullifies the mutiny in an honor sense. Giving the ships intact to the British per the Armistice would be against what the mutiny would want because the British would eventually give some of the ships back because they can't use them.
well all those rebellious sailors were left out of the scuttling. they were either left home or if they became rebellious they were SENT home when they stripped down the crews
It's worth noting that there was an improved version of the F-4 Wildcat in service later in the war on the escort carriers. The FM-2 Wildcat was loved by pilots.
So glad to see your channel growing the way it is. Naval history is so rich and, it has been so invluential to the world we live in today. Great to know interest in it is alive and well, and you have made your hobby into your profession. Side note, are more episodes in the works with Justin? Loved those A6M episodes and looking forward to more about say, the F4F and SBD. Keep up the good work old boy, cheers from the Netherlands.
I honestly believe that naval history is the peak of yt history because you get to discuss psychology, economics, materials science, and of course classical physics.
The Clemson Class frequently were converted by removing two boilers not sure what other mods were made. I believe top speed was 25 knots in that configuration.
Well, if you told me "Have at it" I think I'd end elsewhere. 4x2 4.5" mounts, two pentad launchers, drop the speed to 41kts and yeah, Bofors. You'd have a Super-Tribal and I guess you'd see a lot more terrified Italian CLs being chased by packs of these monstrosities.
@@Maty83. So , only change is from 120mm guns to 113 mm guns ? And bit slower ? Also , the space we save by deleting one launcher should be used to establish tanning and chilling spot for overworked soviet sailors
As US CinC-PAC, Nimitz was pretty much given free hand, and often scared the War Department in Washington with the risks he took. The admirals under him like Fletcher, Spruance, and Halsey were pretty autonomous while at sea.
@29:40 I believe that all RN CVEs post Audacious were US built and by 1944 equipped with FM2 Wildcats and TBFs. The loss of Glorious and numerous other incidents demonstrated RN destroyer captains were not short of courage. The main difference would be the less advanced fire control systems of the RN destroyers. The superiority of the USN fire control systems to rapidly achieve fire control solutions and hold them while maneuvering was a big help to the Talffys but it was it was coolness under fire of the commander and dauntless courage of the destroyer Captains that saved the day. The RN was not lacking in that respect!
In the computer game ‘ Star control II ‘ one race had a star ship that had high speed a tiny forward mounted cannon and a huge rear mounted missile ( yes that race was a bit cowardly )
@@haldorasgirson9463 I know it isn’t true but I have this image of a french ship designer and french defense minister having a discussion François our new ship you have massive engines and nothing left for guns que ? Zat is because our engines our magnifique and our guns , they are merdé Oh ćest bon !
@@philvanderlaan5942 I just assumed all French ships have an auto-ordinance eject mechanism in the event the captain calls for emergency power. That is so unfair of me.
About the effect of the Kiel Mutiny on the Kriegsmarine. I stumbled over a comment from a Kriegsmarine officer in a book that actually had nothing to do with either navy, but it was, more or less, on this subject. The book "Berlin Diary" by William L. Shirer is about the rise of Nazi Germany as witnessed by the American journalist in the 1930's to mid-1940, when he was deported from Germany. He actually lived and worked in Paris, then Vienna and eventually in Berlin. At one point in the book; I believe shortly after the war started, Shirer was given a tour of a German light cruiser; I think it was the Konigsberg, but I can't be certain as I read the book at least twenty years ago, probably longer. One of the cruiser's officers told Mr. Shirer that class differences were not the problem they had been in the Imperial Navy. He made a point of saying that the officers and crew on this ship dined together as a measure of their solidarity. Now on one level this was obviously Nazi propaganda. It was a way of saying, "Look at us, we are all one big happy family and we are in this thing together." One the other hand, it did show that someone in the Kriegsmarine had thought about the Kiel Mutiny and perhaps the conditions that led to it.
Goddamnit Drach, you keep publishing new videos as I'm catching up. I don't mind it thought. Having new top tier material for background listening is always great.
I did not know I needed an LMM and Drachinifel crossover until now! (maybe we can wiggle in Chris Eden Green when talking about the Jellicoe Special coal trains)
I dunno, I could see the potential for a high speed strike transport in specific offensive roles. For instance, running an enemy's defensive patrols to insert troops behind their lines, such as into a port they thought was well protected. Actually, if you go back to the American Civil War, that basically describes the Confederate blockade runners; stripped down paddle steamers with shallow drafts specifically designed to go faster than any Union blockade ship that might try to catch them, and to make the run out to neutral British Bermuda and back as fast as possible. Also, if you did do a special specifically on dockyard railways, perhaps it might be worth looking into collaborating with a railway historian like Dr. Anthony Dawson, who is also a fellow TH-camr. I get the feeling you two would get on famously. Edit: Okay, yes, Lawrie's Mechanical Marvels is a brilliant chap too. So glad you got to team up with him. My other suggestion would've been Chris Eden-Green of Steam Locos in Profile.
Another long range projectile issue to factor is the, "Coriolis effect." Depending on hemisphere, a projectile will drift right or left due to Earth rotation.
Gunnery at long range is very difficult but the penetration values for big naval guns at distances beyond 20km are hillarious. The shells come down very steeply and can penetrate deck armour like its not there.
No it can't have anything to do with hemisphere, both hemispheres rotate the same way so hemisphere must be irrelevant? If you're in the southern hemisphere shooting north the drift is the same as in the northern hemisphere shooting north? Or am I wrong? Might be wrong just that's what flashed in my brain when i read the comment. Also besides shot direction would latitude not be the factor as the earths rotation is far greater at the equator than it is at say Scotland for example? I might be wrong just what my head says lol
@@mattsmith5421 an effect whereby a mass moving in a rotating system experiences a force (the Coriolis force ) acting perpendicular to the direction of motion and to the axis of rotation. On the earth, the effect tends to deflect moving objects to the right in the northern hemisphere and to the left in the southern and is important in the formation of cyclonic weather systems.
@Drackinifel, Just to add to your answer for the first question, several different companies currently operate "Fast supply boats" in the offshore oilfields around the world. While these obviously don't fit the exact parameters of the question/answer, and are far newer than what your channel typically covers, it is interesting. I believe the fast supply boats are capable of 30-35 knots, while the normal supply boats are typically more in the 20+ knot range. Obviously in the oilfield time = money, so sometimes it's worth it if you need a specific part delivered. A situation that is far less common in the military. However, these are the kind of boats that are being used in the US Navy's Ghost Fleet Overlord
@ 18:45 Russia/USSR had a 100 mm/56 B-34, which they already had available in single mounts, but were also developing a dual mount, the M3-14 & M3-16 which were designed for the Sovetskii Soyuz class battleships and Kronshtadt class battlecruisers. Also, there was the dual deck quintuple torpedo launcher from the Project 48 Kiev class, which placed two torpedo tubes on top of three, featured in WoWS on ships such as the Khabarovsk, which would have been a natural way of cutting the torp tubes down from 3 sets, to two. This design would be interesting, a sort of Russian Akizuki class, since the B-34 was originally designed as a heavy caliber AA gun.
The "Manxman/Abdiel" class of fast minelayers turned out to be nearly ideal fast transports once their roles as fast minelayers became less important. Same with the rebuilt WWI flush deck destroyers modified especially for the fast transport role. Even with the loss of two boilers, they were still capable of nearly 30 knots, and the former boiler spaces provided a surprisingly roomy space for up to 200 troops or several thousand tons of supplies. 31 ships were eventually converted, and the Navy was generally satisfied with their performance if not their material condition. The US Navy continues to have an interest in high speed transports with the currwnt 14 "Spearfish" class vessels.
Well the N class destroyers for Taffy 3 would be interesting to say the least As 3 navys used the N-Class destroyers. Royal australian , Royal netherlands , and Polish navys, 5 with the australians ( still property of the royal navy but crewed by the australians ) 2 with the dutch navy and 1 with the polish navy. The J and K class total 16 where in service with the royal navy.
Drachinifel I have 2 alternate History Questions. 1)The Royal Navy has a week of advance notice of the sailing of the high seas fleet that sailed to Jutland, what would they do , would they sail into the Irish sea then the Channel and come from behind to cut off the High seas fleet. 2) Put Admiral Cunningham in charge of the Grand Fleet , does the Royal Navy win ?
How strange is it that as soon as Drach started talking about trains, my brain immediately went to Lawrie. And then bam, he brought up Lawrie's channel. It's weird when my TH-cam subscriptions collide.
finally finished the last General Naval Chat and was going to go to bed, but I saw that this had just uploaded, so I guess sleep can wait until the sun is up!
If you're going to be visiting the Salem, I would highly recommend both visiting the Charlestown navy yard in Boston (USS Constitution and USS Cassin Young) and Battleship Cove in Fall River (USS Massachusetts, USS Joseph P Kennedy Jr, USS Lionfish, Hiddensee, and a couple of PT Boats)
Oh Drach, don't omit the most obvious connection between railways and warships - During World War II, I think toward the end, such as the spring or early summer of 1945, the USS Barb surfaced in a Japanese inlet and put a shore party ashore to destroy a Japanese train. The sail of the submarine afterward sported a silhouette of a locomotive. (EDIT: I had to change the nature of the attack on the train and included the name of the sub, which I could not recall in the original post)
@@davidlium9338 Nope, it was the USS Barb. I edited in more correct info in my post, above. ..... The USS Archerfish sank the biggest ship ever sunk by submarine which was a Japanese aircraft carrier. The Barb sank a lot of shipping in Japanese waters and then put ashore a party in Japan to rig a bomb to a train trestle. As the shore party paddled back to the sub in rubber rafts, a train came along and triggered the explosive in a spectacular pyrotechnic display that also triggered a forest fire. According to one story, the sub's legendary Medal of Honor-winning Commander Eugene "Lucky" Fluckey gave permission for all crew below not needed to run the ship could come topside to see the show.
Skua was absolutely not a design contemporary of the F3F or the SBU-1. Both of those aircraft were several years older in introduction and represented an entirely different generation of design. The monoplane SB2U Vindicator dive-bomber/scout-bomber precedes the Skua by a year in introduction and surpasses it in basically every metric (speed, bomb load, range) but forward facing armament (1x .50 vs 4x .303's). The F2A was test-flown in the same year and introduced into service less than six months after the Skua. The contemporary of the F3F was the damn Sea Gladiator.
@@alecblunden8615 More utility in terms of morale than practical effect, regardless. The 'damn' was merely to draw attention towards the differences in capability being described here.
Your explanation for the shortcomings of the Skua are more or less true but I think you overlook the obvious for why there was no follow on. The fact that the UK went to war in 1939 has little to do with short comings of the Fleet Air Arm. Japan went to war officially in 1937 and had little difficulty in developing new aircraft. Aircraft development was in the hands of the RAF until shortly before the war so the Fleet Air Arm had no fighter aircraft under development in 1939. The Seafire and Sea Hurricane were ad hoc emergency program to give the Navy modern aircraft. The US Navy had the next generation of aircraft under development in 1940 and developed new aircraft during the war. The Royal Navy developed no fighter aircraft on its own during the War and thw one or two strike aircraft it did develop were inferior to the US counterparts, except for the SB2C. The immediate post war aircraft like the Sea Fury and Vampire were developed for the RAF and adapted to Naval service like the Hurricane and Spitfire. The legacy of the lack of control of aircraft development prewar had a major long term impact in the post war period where a combination of reduced funding and force levels led to stretching out of development and small procurement levels that wasted what little funding they had. The UK would have been better off licensing aircraft like Panther, Skyhawk and Crusader than attempting to develop their own aircraft. It took until the 1960s for the Royal Navy to learn this lesson when they went with the F4.
You do make a good point about the Fleet Air Arm not having control over aircraft development in the late 1930s, but I’m not sure Japan’s situation was comparable. Japan was at war in 1937, but it wasn’t rushing to produce aircraft to fight against a peer opponent air force or navy. It therefore had the luxury of continuing its aircraft development at basically a peacetime pace. Britain was thrown right into the fire against Germany, and was forced to devote all its resources to combat the Luftwaffe. Since Germany had no carriers, and Japan hadn’t yet introduced more advanced aircraft, Britain simply didn’t rate naval aircraft development all that highly. I suspect there was also a feeling that if Japan started a war in the Pacific, Britain would have help from the US and time to deploy land-based fighters to the colonies. So there probably was strategic thinking involved. It just happened not to work out well.
@@bluemarlin8138 That is plausible but Britain was also preparing for war and the RAF was developing new aircraft. Japan's war in China was nearly on the same scale as Barbarossa. We in the west tend to forget the war China.
@@johnshepherd8687 The second Sino-Japanese War was a huge ground conflict, but the Chinese couldn't seriously challenge Japan in the air and had no significant navy, so there was no strain on the Japanese aircraft industry to produce planes "now now now" instead of developing and building newer designs. Japan knew it would not face much air opposition in China, and that its navy would be the branch facing off against its serious opponents---the US and Britain. While I haven't researched it, I think it's safe to assume that Japan focused on naval aircraft development because of this fact, and therefore developed better naval aircraft.
@@bluemarlin8138 It is not merely a question of what the Chinese could do. The war itself was a tremendous resource drain and Japanese economy. Resources are fungible. Resources spent on the war in China were not available for other purposes yet Japan continued to develop new aircraft. If the British aircraft industry could develop jet aircraft then why could they not develop naval aircraft? I think that answer lies with control of aircraft development by the RAF until 1939.
@@johnshepherd8687 I'm not saying the RAF didn't have a role in handicapping the Fleet Air Arm's development of new aircraft prior to WWII. I'm just saying the onset of war also had a major role, and the two worked in concert to handicap the FAA. If you look at the aircraft used by the RAF during the early years of WWII---when aircraft production resources were strained---they were either already in production or very close to production in 1939. The "new" fighters which came out between 1939 and 1944 were mostly just iterative improvements on the Hurricane and Spitfire. But at least they were starting with fairly advanced airframes for the time. The difference with the Fleet Air Arm is that they didn't have a lot of new naval aircraft in development, and when they got stuck with what was already in production or close to it, the technology was a lot further behind. However, it's not that difficult to see why high performance naval aircraft weren't prioritized in the 1930s----namely because other nations' naval aircraft weren't any better until 1940-41 and they thought they'd have time to match any improvements later on. (Dr. Alexander Clarke has also mentioned in one of his videos that a lot of the British naval aircraft were designed to undertake night operations, and therefore were designed for ruggedness and stability over performance. I'm not sure I buy this completely, but it may have played a role.) Sure, the British did develop advanced aircraft later in the war, but they weren't able to put them into production until they were comfortably on the offensive. As for resources being fungible, I'd disagree. Aluminum and radial engines weren't much use in a land campaign in 1937. Neither were aircraft engineers. Sure, the war with China put SOME strain on the resources Japan used to design and build aircraft. But it wasn't nearly as much as the strain placed on Britain in 1940.
Can you possibly make a guide on IJN Ikoma? I always wondered why it had pre-dreadnought main guns instead of what other ships of the same type had at the time.
Being from Arkansas...I've always been interested in "our" battleship. I've heard you say it was strong contender for best 12 in. gun battleship. Could she have been more comprehensively rebuilt in the 30's, giving her a much faster speed, heavier AA, and the new 12 in. guns that Alaska got..firing super heavy shells? How would such a USS Arkansas have stood against a Sharnhorst or the older Vichy French and Italian battleships?
If you could visit, perhaps visit Philadelphia and/or Pittsburgh for the USS Olympia and USS Becuna (in Philadelphia) and the USS Requin (in Pittsburgh)? Yes, travel between the 2 is about 4-5 hours, but you could also look around for other museum ships that may be closer to either city.
Even the US APDs weren't all that high speed, only in comparison with conventional cargo or troop transports. They took a four-stacker Clemson or Wickes destroyer, ripped out half the boilers (already bad for speed) and completely reworked the weapons (the two sunk early on off Guadalcanal had, IIRC, three 3" guns that they attempted to engage a Japaneses sub, oops, a destroyer squadron, with). Actual high speed for the APDs is in the mid-20s of knots.
Drach, re the blockade runner fast transport, there were the modified Fairmile's designed for fast transport through the Baltic to Sweden and back, Gay Viking and her sisters.
The FAA aircraft development was hampered by going to war in 1939. However, years of wrangling with the RAF, and losing, meant that they were always using lesser designs and aircraft that could, in theory, be dual purposed. The Swordfish was succeeded by the Albacore, the Skua by the Fulmar. Not until the Martlet, Sea Hurricane and Seafire does a decent carrier fighter become part of the FAA inventory. Not buying your argument 100%.
Regarding officer assignments in the age of sail, did an officer's previous single-ship command experience influence their later assignment to squadron or fleet command? For example, would an admiral who had never commanded a ship of the line be given command of a squadron of battleships?
On the question "what could an admiral decide on his own" I would say the answer is "what can he get away with?" In your example of Admiral Cunningham, had he decided to cut his losses early during the evacuation of Crete there's every chance that he'd be fired. We saw what Churchill thought of generals that weren't performing to his expectations and I can't see him treating admirals any different. Ultimately results matter, and if an admiral's superiors aren't happy with the results he's not going to be in command for long.
OK I didn't word myself precisely enough. What I meant about fast-track to command was not about prize money but bringing captured ship literally as in "mr Drachinifel you will take fifteen good man from the crew and bring this lovely french brig we just captured to a nearest British port where you will report to the ranking officer for your next assignment"
@@Drachinifel The slow part occurred after its shipping from the US transfer point. After that it meandered for three weeks at the mercy of the US Postal Service.
Drac talking railways!!! SIGN ME UP!!! Is there ever a possibility of talking about non Naval related railways ie Talyllyn, Bluebell or even Flying Scotsman herself?
Speaking of super fast transport craft it’s out of the time frame but the USSR has them, right? They were large hovercraft the kind with the rubber skirts I believe. The idea was to use them to invade Denmark in the event of WW3.
@@calvingreene90 "fast" and "well-armed" for transports, translating into a speed in the mid-20s of knots and a main battery of three 3"/50 guns. Two of them tried to intercept a Japanese submarine shelling Guadalcanal, found it was actually a group of Japanese destroyers shelling the island, and were quickly shot to pieces.
Completely off topic...What do know of the Lantaka? Recently heard of this weapon. A southeast Asian swivel gun first reported being used in the 1500s. Simple and effective it seems to have lasted at least into the 1900s in the Philippines against US troops. Was supposedly copied by the Portuguese and Dutch. Not a bad run.
BTW, I wouldn't exclude the Tribals just because they're a "one of", but because of the general deployment situation. Each of the three Taffys had a screen that was a mix of fleet destroyers and destroyer escorts, and the size of the Fletcher swarm means there are definitely a few available to fill out the screen of escort carrier task forces. The Tribals are such large and powerful destroyers that I can't imagine them screening lowly escort carriers as opposed to capital units except at desperate need.
Maybe just change the name from Destroyer to Saver or Evacuator…or Emergency Utility Vessel… The USS Ward was later converted into some kind of fast landing ship .. would it have worked well in that role ?
USS Ward (DD-149) was a Wickes class destroyer converted to a High Speed Transport (APD) in early 1943. The US built several dozen APDs during the war, converting them from the WW1 destroyers, and obviously found them useful enough to have made so many conversions.
@@kemarisite the Ward had an interesting service career…what with the first shots and first kill of the war not bad for an old ship … had a action packed second life as an APD … plus an ironic sinking ..it’s real classic story of Wartime Modifications ..
Three US built submarine chasers were converted by the Norwegians to operate as part of the "Shetland Bus" operations from Scalloway in Shetland to Norway in WW2. They brought supplies to the Norwegian Resistance in Norway and brought out Agents, escaped Allied air crew and refugees from Norway. They used there speed to avoid detection by the Germans.
Drac, if you manage to get to US and plan to visit USS Salem (in Quincy Mass), you definitely should try to get to Big Maimie & Co. I am within stones throw from USS Massachusetts and about hour away from Salem. Contact me with your plans and I will try to help you out as much as I can. My gaming group was mulling about an idea to game Perfidious Albion on USS Massachusetts and maybe send you a video. Around in this area is USS Nautilus in CT and a couple other subs ( I think). If you are interested in tanks ( more of Chieftains domain) there is a superb American Heritage Museum in Mass- largely Littlefield collection. They do have Higgins craft and received part of Uboat conning tower as a gift- on display.
Re Taffy 3 but British, I think more than the ships involved would be the people...would the Brits have had an Ernest Evans? Would they have had a Samuel B. Roberts? Would they have taken the throw caution to the winds approach the US forces did?
RN tradition and destroyer training/ethos doesn't really allow for anything other than ¨Charge!¨ in the situation. Destroyers are the waterborne cavalry- officers partially selected for aggression generally, for starters. They will know they are expected to die gloriously trying to aggressively defend their charges, for which their loved ones get a pension and posthumous medals, and failing to try do so in aggressive fashion is a court martial waiting to happen.
The RN destroyer skippers were as aggressive or even more aggressive as the USN counterparts. They would attack just as aggressively. It is more a matter of which classes the escorting ships were drawn from than the men in the tin cans. I suspect the outcome would be about the same; several IJN ships badly damaged, shot up, formation disrupted, some sunk with Kurita ordering a withdrawal with about the same losses in tin cans. The outcome would be similar to the historical result. At Samar the USN tin can skippers knew they were being asked to buy time for the rest of the invasion force. And they did just that. RN skippers in WWII showed the same aggressive spirit when needed even if the incidents are not as well known.
Do you know how one could research an officer who was according to family legend with Nelson at Trafalgar, especially if he had a common name like Smith?
The 'Trafalgar Roll' is available online I believe, listing most, if not all, the men who were there. If you get a match on that, the next step would probably be taking the name, rank and ship from there and looking in the national or Navy archives for further details. Email me if you need more detail :)
Correction, 57 on roll. And this is from the National Archives. The one I'm researching, according to family tradition, was a Scotsman, a Ship's captain, served with Nelson at Trafalgar, died in 1823 in Tennessee (USA) and is buried on what was at the time his brother-in-law's farm. The Trafalgar role at national archives has only one officer named John Smith, age unknown, birthplace unknown, he is a lieutenant (love the French spelling on a British Government website, btw) aboard HMS Africa, he served aboard HMS Africa from August 1805 until 23 December 1805 when he was discharged on promotion, and that is all they have on him. HMS Africa, based on dates, has to be the 64-gun Inflexible-Class Ship of the Line, service dates 11 Apr 1781 - sometime in period 1812- May 1814, when she was broken up.
Pinned post for Q&A :)
Can you go into more details about prize awards for crews? What were certain ships worth, what kind of shares the different crew got, what happened to the ships once they were returned?
Have you covered the uss cyclops?
Could you add canal mules to the railway special? The little guys deserve more attention. th-cam.com/video/Vi08EaWs81Y/w-d-xo.html
What does it mean for a ship to be protected against its own guns, since even battleship armor could be penetrated by small caliber rounds if the two ships were close enough? Thank you!
What would have happened if Britain, France or the US strongly violated the naval treaty instead of the later axis nations ?
You are out here just giving master classes on naval history free to the public. I feel like I have such a good grasp on the topic after years of listening to you. It is at the point where I almost always have a good idea of how you are going to answer a question unless it is very obscure, but I still listen to every video. Well done sir.
The Industrieel Smalspoor Museum in the Dutch village of Erica holds an amazing variety of narrow gauge engines and their purposes. These light rail logistics were eminently suitable for port activities, as long as no heavy loads like coal or ore were involved.
I grew up with an uncle who did not have fond memories of Ju-87s. A member of 6 Div (Aust), the small Greek transport vessel he was on to 3 direct hits from them in the (you guessed it) evacuation of Greece. Despite the post trauma, he considered himself lucky as he was picked up by a Brit destroyer which conveyed him all the way back to Alexandria & he got to miss the fun & games of Crete.
Long live peace and people not getting traumatised 👍
Interesting, a couple days ago again while running and listening to an old Drydock I was imagining the epic Szimanski/Drach crossover. Now it seems closer than ever.
And regarding the dockyard trains, maybe one with Lawrie's Mechanical Marvels.
Play a giant version of.. you sank my battleship.
@@scottygdaman Drach brings warspite and is unable to lose.
@@michaeltruett817 play in Alexandria ‘ You kinda sunk , kinda not sunk my battleship . ‘
@@michaeltruett817 Polite correction: 'lose'. To 'loose' is to let go or release something.
To your first question: The Japanese T1 class are pretty much purposely built dedicated fast armed transport ships. Quasi-fast escort with stern launcher. 21 completed in WW2, size of a WW2 destroyer, front end looks like a destroyer, not as fast though.
I live 5 miles from where the Salem is moored at the old Quincy Shipyard. I actually passed it today. Also the nice thing about the Boston area is that the Constitution is at the Charlestown Navy yard. They also have a WWII destroyer, Caisson Young. In Fall River, about 2 hours South of Boston, is Battleship Cove where the USS Massachusetts is. I toured it as a Boy Scout in 1967 right after it was moored. Seen better days now but it is still impressive. They also have a Submarine and I believe a Frigate there. Up the street they had a nice maritime museum. When I was there with my son in the late 90’s the curator was a Titanic buff. He had managed to get the model from the Movie Titanic that came out in the early 50’s. They also had a bunch of other Titanic artifacts. So if you come to the Boston Area, there is a lot of sea going stuff to see.
Kudos to all of you guys leaving comments, you are all full of wisdom and knowledge of our history. Can I get a salute to all of our military out there we all thank you for your service.
I think I'd enjoy an episode on dockyard railways.
I grew up in a town full of heavy industry. It sported all manner of locomotives and rolling stock. As a polite and inquisitive kid (and it being the litigation-light 70s) I was let to wander and pester. I wish I remembered more of it.
These things help me go to sleep. Thank you so much. You have such a soothing voice
Now I wouldn’t complain about a Naval Dockyard Railway Special!
Good show mate. Thanks for your work. -Rocky Mountain Yank
A problem the FAA had in WWII is the RAF ignored naval aviation; but what would expect from Billy Mitchell wanna-bes. The USN and IJN had their own 'air forces' under their direct, independent control. This allowed them to write specifications for naval aircraft that would be more suitable for naval operations.
As I understand it, the scuttling of the High Seas Fleet at Scapa was seen in Germany as partly erasing the stain of the mutiny (and surrender) and restoring the honor of the HSF, which minimized any long-term repercussions from the mutiny.
I don't see why. The mutiny was about not wanting to fight. Scuttling the High Seas Fleet would mean not wanting to fight again. Isn't it validating the mutiny?
@@Edax_Royeaux The scuttling was meant to prevent the british from getting their hands on the Fleet(atleast without a fight the germans could not win...Hard to fight with no ammunition)..Scuttling your ship to prevent the enemy from getting it is generaly considered to be rather honorable...In Hindsight,the scuttling may have prevented germany from possibly keeping a few of the Nassaus or Helgolands...That,and it had the potential to restart hostilities,as even scuttling your fleet was an act of war in these circumstances
@@NashmanNash Exactly my point, scuttling the ship prevented a future fight, which is exactly what the mutiny was aiming for. Which is why I find it strange that giving into the mutiny by scuttling nullifies the mutiny in an honor sense. Giving the ships intact to the British per the Armistice would be against what the mutiny would want because the British would eventually give some of the ships back because they can't use them.
well all those rebellious sailors were left out of the scuttling. they were either left home or if they became rebellious they were SENT home when they stripped down the crews
@@Edax_Royeaux The mutiny was defiance against the High Seas command. The scuttling was defiance against the British and the Allies.
It's worth noting that there was an improved version of the F-4 Wildcat in service later in the war on the escort carriers. The FM-2 Wildcat was loved by pilots.
So glad to see your channel growing the way it is. Naval history is so rich and, it has been so invluential to the world we live in today. Great to know interest in it is alive and well, and you have made your hobby into your profession.
Side note, are more episodes in the works with Justin? Loved those A6M episodes and looking forward to more about say, the F4F and SBD.
Keep up the good work old boy, cheers from the Netherlands.
I honestly believe that naval history is the peak of yt history because you get to discuss psychology, economics, materials science, and of course classical physics.
How on earth did that cute little engine (3:47) at Chatham Dockyard manage to get off the island of Sodor?
Fantastic video as always Drach.
Always love your work.
Thanks Drach and good luck on any possible trip.
Just make sure you can head back in these unsettled times.
The Clemson Class frequently were converted by removing two boilers not sure what other mods were made. I believe top speed was 25 knots in that configuration.
Thank you, Drachinifel.
19:25
Tahskent with 2x5 type 93 torps , 4 twin 120mm guns , and stick 40mm boffors everywhere you can - sounds like a war winning DD for me :D
I second this great design. Maybe add a Squid or Hedgehog launcher on the bow for asw as well
@@davidandmartinealbon3155 that would make it OP ....
all of this stuff would make her too top-heavy, and thus extremely unstable at high speed.
Well, if you told me "Have at it" I think I'd end elsewhere. 4x2 4.5" mounts, two pentad launchers, drop the speed to 41kts and yeah, Bofors. You'd have a Super-Tribal and I guess you'd see a lot more terrified Italian CLs being chased by packs of these monstrosities.
@@Maty83. So , only change is from 120mm guns to 113 mm guns ? And bit slower ?
Also , the space we save by deleting one launcher should be used to establish tanning and chilling spot for overworked soviet sailors
As US CinC-PAC, Nimitz was pretty much given free hand, and often scared the War Department in Washington with the risks he took. The admirals under him like Fletcher, Spruance, and Halsey were pretty autonomous while at sea.
Steam ships and steam locomotives in one video? That would be SICK
IRL live streams on the trip, would count as channel content as well. Go so long as you want.
@29:40 I believe that all RN CVEs post Audacious were US built and by 1944 equipped with FM2 Wildcats and TBFs. The loss of Glorious and numerous other incidents demonstrated RN destroyer captains were not short of courage. The main difference would be the less advanced fire control systems of the RN destroyers. The superiority of the USN fire control systems to rapidly achieve fire control solutions and hold them while maneuvering was a big help to the Talffys but it was it was coolness under fire of the commander and dauntless courage of the destroyer Captains that saved the day. The RN was not lacking in that respect!
Lol XD "Let's purpose-build a ship in case we need to run away really really fast"
In the computer game ‘ Star control II ‘ one race had a star ship that had high speed a tiny forward mounted cannon and a huge rear mounted missile ( yes that race was a bit cowardly )
Didn't the French really like especially fast ships?
@@haldorasgirson9463 I know it isn’t true but I have this image of a french ship designer and french defense minister having a discussion
François our new ship you have massive engines and nothing left for guns que ?
Zat is because our engines our magnifique and our guns , they are merdé
Oh ćest bon !
@@philvanderlaan5942 I just assumed all French ships have an auto-ordinance eject mechanism in the event the captain calls for emergency power.
That is so unfair of me.
About the effect of the Kiel Mutiny on the Kriegsmarine. I stumbled over a comment from a Kriegsmarine officer in a book that actually had nothing to do with either navy, but it was, more or less, on this subject. The book "Berlin Diary" by William L. Shirer is about the rise of Nazi Germany as witnessed by the American journalist in the 1930's to mid-1940, when he was deported from Germany. He actually lived and worked in Paris, then Vienna and eventually in Berlin.
At one point in the book; I believe shortly after the war started, Shirer was given a tour of a German light cruiser; I think it was the Konigsberg, but I can't be certain as I read the book at least twenty years ago, probably longer. One of the cruiser's officers told Mr. Shirer that class differences were not the problem they had been in the Imperial Navy. He made a point of saying that the officers and crew on this ship dined together as a measure of their solidarity. Now on one level this was obviously Nazi propaganda. It was a way of saying, "Look at us, we are all one big happy family and we are in this thing together." One the other hand, it did show that someone in the Kriegsmarine had thought about the Kiel Mutiny and perhaps the conditions that led to it.
My Friday morning travel to work will be interesting with this video in my headphones!
In terms of purpose-built high-speed transports, you could look at the Spearhead-class.
Goddamnit Drach, you keep publishing new videos as I'm catching up.
I don't mind it thought. Having new top tier material for background listening is always great.
So the US trip might finally happen! I look forward to an hour of great video of museum ships accompanied by completely impossible windswept audio!
I want to see the Drach/Ryan collaboration. It has to happen!!!
@@CSSVirginia I like that when someone mentions bad audio Ryan immediately comes to mind.
I did not know I needed an LMM and Drachinifel crossover until now! (maybe we can wiggle in Chris Eden Green when talking about the Jellicoe Special coal trains)
I dunno, I could see the potential for a high speed strike transport in specific offensive roles. For instance, running an enemy's defensive patrols to insert troops behind their lines, such as into a port they thought was well protected. Actually, if you go back to the American Civil War, that basically describes the Confederate blockade runners; stripped down paddle steamers with shallow drafts specifically designed to go faster than any Union blockade ship that might try to catch them, and to make the run out to neutral British Bermuda and back as fast as possible.
Also, if you did do a special specifically on dockyard railways, perhaps it might be worth looking into collaborating with a railway historian like Dr. Anthony Dawson, who is also a fellow TH-camr. I get the feeling you two would get on famously.
Edit: Okay, yes, Lawrie's Mechanical Marvels is a brilliant chap too. So glad you got to team up with him. My other suggestion would've been Chris Eden-Green of Steam Locos in Profile.
A drach LMM crossover? Oh my, thats going to be interesting.
Another long range projectile issue to factor is the, "Coriolis effect." Depending on hemisphere, a projectile will drift right or left due to Earth rotation.
Gunnery at long range is very difficult but the penetration values for big naval guns at distances beyond 20km are hillarious. The shells come down very steeply and can penetrate deck armour like its not there.
Statistical artillery. It's pretty good actually.
No it can't have anything to do with hemisphere, both hemispheres rotate the same way so hemisphere must be irrelevant? If you're in the southern hemisphere shooting north the drift is the same as in the northern hemisphere shooting north? Or am I wrong? Might be wrong just that's what flashed in my brain when i read the comment. Also besides shot direction would latitude not be the factor as the earths rotation is far greater at the equator than it is at say Scotland for example? I might be wrong just what my head says lol
@@mattsmith5421 an effect whereby a mass moving in a rotating system experiences a force (the Coriolis force ) acting perpendicular to the direction of motion and to the axis of rotation. On the earth, the effect tends to deflect moving objects to the right in the northern hemisphere and to the left in the southern and is important in the formation of cyclonic weather systems.
@Drackinifel, Just to add to your answer for the first question, several different companies currently operate "Fast supply boats" in the offshore oilfields around the world. While these obviously don't fit the exact parameters of the question/answer, and are far newer than what your channel typically covers, it is interesting. I believe the fast supply boats are capable of 30-35 knots, while the normal supply boats are typically more in the 20+ knot range.
Obviously in the oilfield time = money, so sometimes it's worth it if you need a specific part delivered. A situation that is far less common in the military. However, these are the kind of boats that are being used in the US Navy's Ghost Fleet Overlord
As a shiplover this calms me
@ 18:45 Russia/USSR had a 100 mm/56 B-34, which they already had available in single mounts, but were also developing a dual mount, the M3-14 & M3-16 which were designed for the Sovetskii Soyuz class battleships and Kronshtadt class battlecruisers. Also, there was the dual deck quintuple torpedo launcher from the Project 48 Kiev class, which placed two torpedo tubes on top of three, featured in WoWS on ships such as the Khabarovsk, which would have been a natural way of cutting the torp tubes down from 3 sets, to two. This design would be interesting, a sort of Russian Akizuki class, since the B-34 was originally designed as a heavy caliber AA gun.
The "Manxman/Abdiel" class of fast minelayers turned out to be nearly ideal fast transports once their roles as fast minelayers became less important. Same with the rebuilt WWI flush deck destroyers modified especially for the fast transport role. Even with the loss of two boilers, they were still capable of nearly 30 knots, and the former boiler spaces provided a surprisingly roomy space for up to 200 troops or several thousand tons of supplies. 31 ships were eventually converted, and the Navy was generally satisfied with their performance if not their material condition. The US Navy continues to have an interest in high speed transports with the currwnt 14 "Spearfish" class vessels.
Thanks Drach!
Thank you
Well the N class destroyers for Taffy 3 would be interesting to say the least
As 3 navys used the N-Class destroyers. Royal australian , Royal netherlands , and Polish navys, 5 with the australians ( still property of the royal navy but crewed by the australians ) 2 with the dutch navy and 1 with the polish navy.
The J and K class total 16 where in service with the royal navy.
Add one g class which will try to ram yamato after running out of torpedoes
Drachinifel I have 2 alternate History Questions. 1)The Royal Navy has a week of advance notice of the sailing of the high seas fleet that sailed to Jutland, what would they do , would they sail into the Irish sea then the Channel and come from behind to cut off the High seas fleet. 2) Put Admiral Cunningham in charge of the Grand Fleet , does the Royal Navy win ?
Thankyou
How strange is it that as soon as Drach started talking about trains, my brain immediately went to Lawrie. And then bam, he brought up Lawrie's channel. It's weird when my TH-cam subscriptions collide.
finally finished the last General Naval Chat and was going to go to bed, but I saw that this had just uploaded, so I guess sleep can wait until the sun is up!
0:37 The Japanese also converted the Mutsuki class destroyers to fast transports.
If you're going to be visiting the Salem, I would highly recommend both visiting the Charlestown navy yard in Boston (USS Constitution and USS Cassin Young) and Battleship Cove in Fall River (USS Massachusetts, USS Joseph P Kennedy Jr, USS Lionfish, Hiddensee, and a couple of PT Boats)
U S Navy was still using a lot of Brewster Buffalos, Grumman F6F WildCats, Doulas TBD Devastators, Vought SB2U Vindicator in 1941/1942.
Oh Drach, don't omit the most obvious connection between railways and warships -
During World War II, I think toward the end, such as the spring or early summer of 1945, the USS Barb surfaced in a Japanese inlet and put a shore party ashore to destroy a Japanese train.
The sail of the submarine afterward sported a silhouette of a locomotive.
(EDIT: I had to change the nature of the attack on the train and included the name of the sub, which I could not recall in the original post)
USS Archer-Fish, I believe!
@@davidlium9338 Nope, it was the USS Barb. I edited in more correct info in my post, above. ..... The USS Archerfish sank the biggest ship ever sunk by submarine which was a Japanese aircraft carrier.
The Barb sank a lot of shipping in Japanese waters and then put ashore a party in Japan to rig a bomb to a train trestle. As the shore party paddled back to the sub in rubber rafts, a train came along and triggered the explosive in a spectacular pyrotechnic display that also triggered a forest fire.
According to one story, the sub's legendary Medal of Honor-winning Commander Eugene "Lucky" Fluckey gave permission for all crew below not needed to run the ship could come topside to see the show.
Drac: visit the Intrepid in NYC! I could be there!
Shore logistics for fleets would be awesome! Aka fleet trains
Did not expect to find a lauree and drach fan crossover but hello to others
Skua was absolutely not a design contemporary of the F3F or the SBU-1. Both of those aircraft were several years older in introduction and represented an entirely different generation of design. The monoplane SB2U Vindicator dive-bomber/scout-bomber precedes the Skua by a year in introduction and surpasses it in basically every metric (speed, bomb load, range) but forward facing armament (1x .50 vs 4x .303's). The F2A was test-flown in the same year and introduced into service less than six months after the Skua. The contemporary of the F3F was the damn Sea Gladiator.
"Damn"Sea Gladiator? Like Faith, Hope and Charity which defended Malta in the early days of the siege?
@@alecblunden8615 More utility in terms of morale than practical effect, regardless. The 'damn' was merely to draw attention towards the differences in capability being described here.
Your explanation for the shortcomings of the Skua are more or less true but I think you overlook the obvious for why there was no follow on. The fact that the UK went to war in 1939 has little to do with short comings of the Fleet Air Arm. Japan went to war officially in 1937 and had little difficulty in developing new aircraft. Aircraft development was in the hands of the RAF until shortly before the war so the Fleet Air Arm had no fighter aircraft under development in 1939. The Seafire and Sea Hurricane were ad hoc emergency program to give the Navy modern aircraft. The US Navy had the next generation of aircraft under development in 1940 and developed new aircraft during the war. The Royal Navy developed no fighter aircraft on its own during the War and thw one or two strike aircraft it did develop were inferior to the US counterparts, except for the SB2C. The immediate post war aircraft like the Sea Fury and Vampire were developed for the RAF and adapted to Naval service like the Hurricane and Spitfire.
The legacy of the lack of control of aircraft development prewar had a major long term impact in the post war period where a combination of reduced funding and force levels led to stretching out of development and small procurement levels that wasted what little funding they had. The UK would have been better off licensing aircraft like Panther, Skyhawk and Crusader than attempting to develop their own aircraft. It took until the 1960s for the Royal Navy to learn this lesson when they went with the F4.
You do make a good point about the Fleet Air Arm not having control over aircraft development in the late 1930s, but I’m not sure Japan’s situation was comparable. Japan was at war in 1937, but it wasn’t rushing to produce aircraft to fight against a peer opponent air force or navy. It therefore had the luxury of continuing its aircraft development at basically a peacetime pace. Britain was thrown right into the fire against Germany, and was forced to devote all its resources to combat the Luftwaffe. Since Germany had no carriers, and Japan hadn’t yet introduced more advanced aircraft, Britain simply didn’t rate naval aircraft development all that highly. I suspect there was also a feeling that if Japan started a war in the Pacific, Britain would have help from the US and time to deploy land-based fighters to the colonies. So there probably was strategic thinking involved. It just happened not to work out well.
@@bluemarlin8138 That is plausible but Britain was also preparing for war and the RAF was developing new aircraft. Japan's war in China was nearly on the same scale as Barbarossa. We in the west tend to forget the war China.
@@johnshepherd8687 The second Sino-Japanese War was a huge ground conflict, but the Chinese couldn't seriously challenge Japan in the air and had no significant navy, so there was no strain on the Japanese aircraft industry to produce planes "now now now" instead of developing and building newer designs. Japan knew it would not face much air opposition in China, and that its navy would be the branch facing off against its serious opponents---the US and Britain. While I haven't researched it, I think it's safe to assume that Japan focused on naval aircraft development because of this fact, and therefore developed better naval aircraft.
@@bluemarlin8138 It is not merely a question of what the Chinese could do. The war itself was a tremendous resource drain and Japanese economy. Resources are fungible. Resources spent on the war in China were not available for other purposes yet Japan continued to develop new aircraft.
If the British aircraft industry could develop jet aircraft then why could they not develop naval aircraft? I think that answer lies with control of aircraft development by the RAF until 1939.
@@johnshepherd8687 I'm not saying the RAF didn't have a role in handicapping the Fleet Air Arm's development of new aircraft prior to WWII. I'm just saying the onset of war also had a major role, and the two worked in concert to handicap the FAA. If you look at the aircraft used by the RAF during the early years of WWII---when aircraft production resources were strained---they were either already in production or very close to production in 1939. The "new" fighters which came out between 1939 and 1944 were mostly just iterative improvements on the Hurricane and Spitfire. But at least they were starting with fairly advanced airframes for the time. The difference with the Fleet Air Arm is that they didn't have a lot of new naval aircraft in development, and when they got stuck with what was already in production or close to it, the technology was a lot further behind. However, it's not that difficult to see why high performance naval aircraft weren't prioritized in the 1930s----namely because other nations' naval aircraft weren't any better until 1940-41 and they thought they'd have time to match any improvements later on. (Dr. Alexander Clarke has also mentioned in one of his videos that a lot of the British naval aircraft were designed to undertake night operations, and therefore were designed for ruggedness and stability over performance. I'm not sure I buy this completely, but it may have played a role.) Sure, the British did develop advanced aircraft later in the war, but they weren't able to put them into production until they were comfortably on the offensive.
As for resources being fungible, I'd disagree. Aluminum and radial engines weren't much use in a land campaign in 1937. Neither were aircraft engineers. Sure, the war with China put SOME strain on the resources Japan used to design and build aircraft. But it wasn't nearly as much as the strain placed on Britain in 1940.
Drydocks make my dayjob more bearable :)
The Midland Railway Centre at Butterley has a 2 ft gauge railway system which has some ex-Royal Navy wagons.
Can you possibly make a guide on IJN Ikoma? I always wondered why it had pre-dreadnought main guns instead of what other ships of the same type had at the time.
Drach sorties the fleet again!
Being from Arkansas...I've always been interested in "our" battleship.
I've heard you say it was strong contender for best 12 in. gun battleship.
Could she have been more comprehensively rebuilt in the 30's, giving her a much faster speed, heavier AA, and the new 12 in. guns that Alaska got..firing super heavy shells?
How would such a USS Arkansas have stood against a Sharnhorst or the older Vichy French and Italian battleships?
Good morning drydock
If you could visit, perhaps visit Philadelphia and/or Pittsburgh for the USS Olympia and USS Becuna (in Philadelphia) and the USS Requin (in Pittsburgh)? Yes, travel between the 2 is about 4-5 hours, but you could also look around for other museum ships that may be closer to either city.
Almost certain that Philly/ Camden would be a must stop for the NJ and the Olympia. My guess would be Fall River, Camden/ Philly and Norfolk
Even the US APDs weren't all that high speed, only in comparison with conventional cargo or troop transports. They took a four-stacker Clemson or Wickes destroyer, ripped out half the boilers (already bad for speed) and completely reworked the weapons (the two sunk early on off Guadalcanal had, IIRC, three 3" guns that they attempted to engage a Japaneses sub, oops, a destroyer squadron, with). Actual high speed for the APDs is in the mid-20s of knots.
damm , last time i was this early , Mackenses where still considered for building :)
Drach, re the blockade runner fast transport, there were the modified Fairmile's designed for fast transport through the Baltic to Sweden and back, Gay Viking and her sisters.
The FAA aircraft development was hampered by going to war in 1939. However, years of wrangling with the RAF, and losing, meant that they were always using lesser designs and aircraft that could, in theory, be dual purposed. The Swordfish was succeeded by the Albacore, the Skua by the Fulmar. Not until the Martlet, Sea Hurricane and Seafire does a decent carrier fighter become part of the FAA inventory. Not buying your argument 100%.
Regarding officer assignments in the age of sail, did an officer's previous single-ship command experience influence their later assignment to squadron or fleet command? For example, would an admiral who had never commanded a ship of the line be given command of a squadron of battleships?
Short answer? Yes. Previous command was not needed. Promotion was not based solely on merit.
On the question "what could an admiral decide on his own" I would say the answer is "what can he get away with?" In your example of Admiral Cunningham, had he decided to cut his losses early during the evacuation of Crete there's every chance that he'd be fired. We saw what Churchill thought of generals that weren't performing to his expectations and I can't see him treating admirals any different. Ultimately results matter, and if an admiral's superiors aren't happy with the results he's not going to be in command for long.
Every time the opening starts I get a big smile.. let’s do some learning! What’s the opening track again?
Wat de dat dee I believe
Correction: wat dat dee
OK I didn't word myself precisely enough. What I meant about fast-track to command was not about prize money but bringing captured ship literally as in "mr Drachinifel you will take fifteen good man from the crew and bring this lovely french brig we just captured to a nearest British port where you will report to the ranking officer for your next assignment"
In minor channel notes, during this week, the Thunderchild poster that I ordered in the last batch was finally delivered.
Wow, how long was that in transit?
@@Drachinifel The slow part occurred after its shipping from the US transfer point. After that it meandered for three weeks at the mercy of the US Postal Service.
The last time I was this early ... hey! I've never been this early.
Drac talking railways!!! SIGN ME UP!!!
Is there ever a possibility of talking about non Naval related railways ie Talyllyn, Bluebell or even Flying Scotsman herself?
Speaking of super fast transport craft it’s out of the time frame but the USSR has them, right? They were large hovercraft the kind with the rubber skirts I believe. The idea was to use them to invade Denmark in the event of WW3.
If you are going to the states, you have got to go visit Ryan at USS New Yersey, I’d love a colab between you
The railways would be a great show. But I'd be more interested in the trucks that supplied.
There are also the RNAD railways. Two of the preserved railways I volunteer at have RNAD locos and trucks in service
Wasn't there a conversion of older US destroyers as fast transports or something?
Yes they took WWI four stack destroyers and removed half their boilers. They were fast and well armed for transports but very small payloads.
@@calvingreene90 "fast" and "well-armed" for transports, translating into a speed in the mid-20s of knots and a main battery of three 3"/50 guns. Two of them tried to intercept a Japanese submarine shelling Guadalcanal, found it was actually a group of Japanese destroyers shelling the island, and were quickly shot to pieces.
@@kemarisite
Do you think that any other transports in WWII would have done better attacking destroyers?
Let's see some pics (at least) of your model railroading!!!
Completely off topic...What do know of the Lantaka? Recently heard of this weapon. A southeast Asian swivel gun first reported being used in the 1500s. Simple and effective it seems to have lasted at least into the 1900s in the Philippines against US troops. Was supposedly copied by the Portuguese and Dutch. Not a bad run.
What’s the RN substitute for the American Butler class DE’s at Samar?
Probably Hunt class
BTW, I wouldn't exclude the Tribals just because they're a "one of", but because of the general deployment situation. Each of the three Taffys had a screen that was a mix of fleet destroyers and destroyer escorts, and the size of the Fletcher swarm means there are definitely a few available to fill out the screen of escort carrier task forces. The Tribals are such large and powerful destroyers that I can't imagine them screening lowly escort carriers as opposed to capital units except at desperate need.
Maybe just change the name from Destroyer to Saver or Evacuator…or Emergency Utility Vessel… The USS Ward was later converted into some kind of fast landing ship .. would it have worked well in that role ?
USS Ward (DD-149) was a Wickes class destroyer converted to a High Speed Transport (APD) in early 1943. The US built several dozen APDs during the war, converting them from the WW1 destroyers, and obviously found them useful enough to have made so many conversions.
@@kemarisite the Ward had an interesting service career…what with the first shots and first kill of the war not bad for an old ship … had a action packed second life as an APD … plus an ironic sinking ..it’s real classic story of Wartime Modifications ..
Portsmouth yes
Three US built submarine chasers were converted by the Norwegians to operate as part of the "Shetland Bus" operations from Scalloway in Shetland to Norway in WW2.
They brought supplies to the Norwegian Resistance in Norway and brought out Agents, escaped Allied air crew and refugees from Norway. They used there speed to avoid detection by the Germans.
If the visit would be so abbriviated and expensive wouldn't it be better to wait a while longer to come over?
How ab out doing a 5 minute guide on the casablanca class carrier.
Drac, if you manage to get to US and plan to visit USS Salem (in Quincy Mass), you definitely should try to get to Big Maimie & Co. I am within stones throw from USS Massachusetts and about hour away from Salem. Contact me with your plans and I will try to help you out as much as I can. My gaming group was mulling about an idea to game Perfidious Albion on USS Massachusetts and maybe send you a video. Around in this area is USS Nautilus in CT and a couple other subs ( I think). If you are interested in tanks ( more of Chieftains domain) there is a superb American Heritage Museum in Mass- largely Littlefield collection. They do have Higgins craft and received part of Uboat conning tower as a gift- on display.
Re Taffy 3 but British, I think more than the ships involved would be the people...would the Brits have had an Ernest Evans? Would they have had a Samuel B. Roberts? Would they have taken the throw caution to the winds approach the US forces did?
Pretty much expected behaviour for Royal Navy destroyer officers.
@@gwtpictgwtpict4214 AGREED
Glowworm's crew would say "absolutely, bring it on"
RN tradition and destroyer training/ethos doesn't really allow for anything other than ¨Charge!¨ in the situation. Destroyers are the waterborne cavalry- officers partially selected for aggression generally, for starters. They will know they are expected to die gloriously trying to aggressively defend their charges, for which their loved ones get a pension and posthumous medals, and failing to try do so in aggressive fashion is a court martial waiting to happen.
The RN destroyer skippers were as aggressive or even more aggressive as the USN counterparts. They would attack just as aggressively. It is more a matter of which classes the escorting ships were drawn from than the men in the tin cans. I suspect the outcome would be about the same; several IJN ships badly damaged, shot up, formation disrupted, some sunk with Kurita ordering a withdrawal with about the same losses in tin cans. The outcome would be similar to the historical result.
At Samar the USN tin can skippers knew they were being asked to buy time for the rest of the invasion force. And they did just that. RN skippers in WWII showed the same aggressive spirit when needed even if the incidents are not as well known.
what is the fin along hull of a ship
They built seige barges to attack Gibraltar - with sloped amour bot unlike the Merrimack but no engine - Ref The Gibraltar museum
not a naval question but will you be making merch?
Drachinifel knows Lawries Mechanicels Marvels.......
Me: The world is perfect
God Help me! I am not done with the 6 hour one! I am two behind. Will have to catch up on a road trip.
Didnt a sbd knock out a zero by nicking it with its wing tip?.
Has anyone countet how many times the word "however" is used through this series? just curious....
You haven't been playing the "take a drink every time Drach says "However"" game every Sunday?😀
@@AtomicBabel I formerly used "It depends" but the toll was fearsome.
@@AtomicBabel Thanks for the tip! Looking forward to sunday....
Did the British Navy HAVE an Evans?
Do you know how one could research an officer who was according to family legend with Nelson at Trafalgar, especially if he had a common name like Smith?
The 'Trafalgar Roll' is available online I believe, listing most, if not all, the men who were there. If you get a match on that, the next step would probably be taking the name, rank and ship from there and looking in the national or Navy archives for further details. Email me if you need more detail :)
@@Drachinifel Try picking out the right John Smith out of the 30 or so on the 'Trafalgar Roll'.
Correction, 57 on roll. And this is from the National Archives. The one I'm researching, according to family tradition, was a Scotsman, a Ship's captain, served with Nelson at Trafalgar, died in 1823 in Tennessee (USA) and is buried on what was at the time his brother-in-law's farm. The Trafalgar role at national archives has only one officer named John Smith, age unknown, birthplace unknown, he is a lieutenant (love the French spelling on a British Government website, btw) aboard HMS Africa, he served aboard HMS Africa from August 1805 until 23 December 1805 when he was discharged on promotion, and that is all they have on him. HMS Africa, based on dates, has to be the 64-gun Inflexible-Class Ship of the Line, service dates 11 Apr 1781 - sometime in period 1812- May 1814, when she was broken up.
5:37 I never knew that I would hear a JoJo reference I this channel
Who thumbs down these videos? Seriously.....
My guess would be wives & girlfriends.
People using touchscreen phones likely downvote at times when they actually intend to upvote.
I'm building an OFFENSIVE navy. We'll start with HMS Up Your's, HMS Wanker,and HMS Two Fingers Up