The Drydock - Episode 053

[@Drachinifel]

Pinned post for Q&A :)

[@mattblom3990]

Are there any major patrol boat actions in World War II where they obtained significant successes?

[@nickboy3024]

What is your opinion on Naval youth groups like the British Sea Cadets? Do you think they contribute a good image of the navy within a society?

[@Segalmed]

Both the US and the Germans had a 'torpedo crisis' in WW2. Were they the only ones? Were the technical or the bureaucratic problems the decisive factor? Germany had a guided torpedo program already in WW1 and a large number of projects in WW2. What about other nations in either World War? The only one I am currently aware of the is the British Fido aerial anti-submarine torpedo. I hope you'll do general special (he he) or series on torpedoes one day.

[@FullSemiAuto357]

I heard what you said to Chieftain about pronunciation and etymology of Drachinifel... but I've just been saying DragonWaffle the whole time. Is it OK with you if I just continue with that?

[@kylarstern7550]

Would the japanese have been better of if the yamato-class had been 75.000t superCARRIERS? Were there any plans for supercarriers in ww2 or before? Aside from project habakkuk Also: in the yamato vs n3 part you talked about yamato dictating the range. Did enemys really knew enough about each others ships so they could make such calls?

[@lunatickoala]

The IJN and IJA had such a ferocious rivalry because they arose out of two of the strongest rival domains in the Edo period, Satsuma and Choshu. They did manage to form the Satcho Alliance for long enough to overthrow the Tokugawa Shogunate in the Boshin war, but after the Meiji Restoration, they became the two strongest factions in the new government and essentially continued their old clan rivalry.

[@icemule]

That was a great comment, I've watched literally hundred's WWll docs and have never heard such a great explanation, thanks.

[@Kevin_Kennelly]

Drachisms of the Day: 5:25 "Basically, roaming 'death squads' of British and American ships looking for things that haven't yet been exploded." 6:39 "And moving at such speed that U-Boats were just like, "Hmmm! I hear a ship coming. Up periscope." Zzmmmmmmmm. "AH! Oh well, back to looking for merchantmen. Never mind." 12:48 "I'd say, to a certain degree, they probably hated each other more than they hated some of the people they were fighting." 14:10 "There was almost a 'Klingon-level' of rivalry between officers within the same naval service." 30:07 "It's like saying "Well, yes. This person has the advantage in killing you if he runs you down with a 32-ton HGV, as compared to this person who is ONLY hitting you with a 7.5-ton moving van." I DOUBT you're really gonna appreciate the difference that much." 33:58 "And then N3 unleashed the torpedo salvo of 'complete unexpectedness'." 37:11 "You don't want a Spearfish or an ADCAP coming towards you, much less six. Umm...or worse if you have the misfortune to meet an angry Seawolf-class. But never mind." 39:15 "The British would probably have gone, "Hmmm. You declare for our enemies, do you? It's real pity you're using those Vickers 14-inch guns, isn't it? Ah well, I guess we have some spare 14-inch guns. Anyone buying?" 42:31 "Submarines submarines everywhere. And, oh dear, carrier-aircraft." 45:41 "On a battleship, it would be considered a medium weight AA weapon at best and 'Why the hell have you put this thing on our ship? Why can't we have something better?" 46:48 "You also have to consider things like 'inertia' and 'momentum'. Which are fairly related." (Newtonian snark) 50:55 "The answer tends to sound a bit 'waffley'". 54:10 "If you just did a straight swap...ahhh...the British would rip your hand off, in their efforts to shake it. And thank you from the highest-of-heavens for the absolute easy ride you've just given them." 54:53 "But that was because it was handed a weapon that was probably better at beating the enemy over the heads with physically in a boarding action, than actually firing at them." 55:13 "The phrase 'a little bit faster than the Bureau Of Ordnance' can be applied to many things including Competitive Snail Racing."

[@USSAnimeNCC-]

Dang man that some deication

[@xerxeskingofking]

He's saying Hgv. Heavy Goods Vehicle.

[@USSAnimeNCC-]

My favorite it 54:53 i can picture it XD

[@Kevin_Kennelly]

@@xerxeskingofking Thank you Sir. After a few minutes hunting for it on Google, I gave up. Would it have killed him to call it a 'lorry'??? And don't get me started on 'scouser'.

[@xerxeskingofking]

Yea, British English is full of fun little phrases like that. It's the name of the licence category, as opposed to LGV, Light Goods Vehicle. But, notably , using HGV and its counterpart LGV (light goods vehicle) isn't just a English thing. The Germans have SKV/LKV which are "Heavy cargo wagon/light cargo wagon".

[@sreckocuvalo8110]

Not a Drachism, but I will suggest it: ''You might fail, but at least you are not mark 14 torpedo.''

[@josefandreasson8509]

I want this on a T-shirt

[@sreckocuvalo8110]

@@josefandreasson8509 Make it so Mr. Drachinifel

[@jimtalbott9535]

I saw one of those recently at the naval museum at Keyport, WA - USA. It's a DOD funded museum, so the sign said they had "challenges" with it. Lol, challenges.

[@stevehomeier8368]

Bloody Marvelous!!!!

[@matthmaroo1984]

German sub U505 in Chicago is an amazing experience with a lot of supporting material. The museum keeps the sub in near perfect condition in doors and it’s a can’t miss experience. Also Chicago is a beautiful city as well as Lake Michigan!

[@sarjim4381]

Warning! This is going to be another of my "War and Peace" type posts. :) The plan, as I understand it, for covering landings on the Japanese mainland from air attack would have mainly been assigned to massed squadrons of Fletcher, Sumner, and Gearing class destroyers. There was a rushed refit of most of these units from mid-1944 to right up to August 1945 for every ship of these classes to have at least twelve 40mm Bofors guns with fourteen and even sixteen on the Gearings. This was done by landing all the torpedo tubes and, in typical USN fashion, covering the available deck space with twin and quad mount Bofors, supplemented by 20mm mounts wherever they would fit. Another goal of these refits was to install completely up to date radars and fire control equipment to allow every vessel to use VT rounds in their 5"/38 guns. Magazine spaces previously used to store torpedoes were given over to gun round storage. Many of the Sumner and Gearing class ships would also have been radar pickets, much like we saw in the earlier campaigns. The destroyers would have been backed up by the various permutations of Atlanta class cruisers, any of the three British Dido class that could have been spared from carrier screens, and masses of Cleveland and Baltimore cruisers. Most of these ships had increased AA guns fitted along with the requisite radars and fire controls systems. The Canadian Prince Robert, a former passenger vessel converted to a merchant cruiser and later as an auxiliary antiaircraft cruiser, had performed well in the Mediterranean. It was expected her main role in the planned invasion of Japan would be covering landings and escorting supply ships. Many British, Australian, and New Zealand destroyers, corvettes, sloops, and frigates would have been assigned to cover landings of British and Commonwealth troops. The major push with the British ships, in addition to increased AA defense, was adding air conditioning and stores refrigeration equipment. Ships built for the North Atlantic would have been much reduced in combat effectiveness in the tropics without these additions. The accounts of men serving on some unconverted warships serving in the Pacific are quite harrowing in terms of below decks temperatures and humidity. The 31 RN submarines were expected to play a major role in patrol and reconnaissance offshore from Japanese naval bases, rescuing downed carrier pilots, and attacking any remaining Japanese warships foolish enough to sortie from port. A little remembered ship was the HMS Ariadne, an Abdiel class fast minelayer, and one of the first RN vessels of the later Pacific Fleet, joining the US Seventh Fleet in January, 1944. Her very high speed was put to good use landing many US Army raiding forces on various islands as well as laying over 1,000 mines. The other two Abdiel class minelayers assigned to the British Pacific Fleet (BPF) would have been equally useful if they had been ready for BPF use before the war ended. In addition to the better known roles of the battleships and carriers of both navies, a major role for the British was the Fleet Train (BFT). The BFT had 54 large ships, from oilers to ammunition ships, and well over 100 smaller ships assigned. The RN had extensive experience supplying their ships while underway. Many of the ships were Royal Fleet Auxiliary (RFA) vessels, and some were mostly manned by merchant seamen. It was expected the British Pacific Fleet would be sustained by their own Fleet Train with enough excess capacity to also supply some USN ships. It didn't quite work out as planned, with some USN supply ships needing to be added to the BFT. Nevertheless, the ships and crews performed magnificently under sometimes horrendous condition, since many BFT vessels didn't have a/c or refrigeration. The high intensity work of underway replenishment and island supply without the help of even one air cooled space onboard tested the mettle of the crews, and they stood up better than could be expected. A humorous sidelight described by one of the RFA crewmen was when a special alarm sounded, and the men rushed up on deck. The men weren't carrying helmets and life vests that you might expect with most alarms. This alarm had men carrying soap and towels, since the alarm let men below decks know of a passing rain squall so they could cool off and get in a shower, both rare experiences on most RFA ships. As usual, a combined British/American operation couldn't go off without politics getting in the way. It started with Churchill want to use British forces to recapture lost British territory like Burma and Hong Kong and leave the Pacific islands to the Americans. Strong protestations from the Chiefs of Staff eventually overcame Churchill's objections. The RN chiefs rightly believed that not participating in the eventual conquest of the Home Islands of Japan would decrease British influence in the Pacific and rob the RN of valuable experience participating in fleet operations and amphibious landings larger than any they had done in the past. BPF experience was part of the planning for the Suez operation and, indirectly, gave the RN confidence they could support amphibious landings in the far off Falklands. Things on the American side were no better. The Commander-in-Chief United States Fleet and Chief of Naval Operations was Admiral Ernest King. He was a well known Anglophobe who saw the British as coming in after most of the battles were over and then claiming part of the prestige of helping to defeat Japan. He raised so many objections to the offers of help from the British that Roosevelt himself had to intervene and essentially order that King accept the offer of a BPF. It appeared to the public that allies were cooperating in the defeat of Japan when the reality was the USN was dragged kicking and screaming into accepting the offer. King, after grudgingly accepting, set down a requirement that the BPF be totally self-sufficient. Try as they would, the BPF wasn't capable of that, and later USN aid was freely given, sometimes over the objections of Adm. King, and some BPF supply ships aided USN ships. Admiral Nimitz had more pragmatic objections based on the differences in British aircraft, carrier operations, and a myriad of logistical problems, from incompatible radios to completely different guns and ammunition between the two navies. To the credit of both navy's operational staffs, most of these problems were overcome in a matter of six months. Adm. Nimitz became an enthusiastic supporter of the BPF carrier forces after seeing their performance at Okinawa, when the armoured decks of the fleet carriers and well trained damage control teams allowed RN carriers to absorb Kamikaze attacks and continue to operate. All in all, and ignoring the political interference, it was quite a performance from two fleets that had to learn to work with each other in a matter of months.

[@WALTERBROADDUS]

Long, but thumbs up worthy...😎👍

[@sarjim4381]

@@WALTERBROADDUS Thanks, Walter. I always try to tighten up the wording but, try as I might, it still comes out like a book. :-)

[@icemule]

@@WALTERBROADDUS Longest comment I've ever seen on KZbin and I've been on KZbin for a long time, but great comment.

[@taccovert4]

"I have the ability to throw paint at things"....so you're still better at giving signals than Seymour......

[@its1110]

Still far beats my ability at painting.

[@taccovert4]

@Skodaman2 Ahh, the official policy of the Navy

[@its1110]

@Skodaman2 Is this where the idea of the dead having gray skin comes from?

[@its1110]

@Skodaman2 Have you seen the book __Why Cats Paint__? I'm drawing a picture in my mind of a ship crewed by cats.

[@andrewcox4386]

"The torpedo salvo of complete unexpectedness" 🤣🤣

[@USSAnimeNCC-]

It happens to us sometimes 🤣

[@thearisen7301]

Museum ships in California - USS Iowa in Los Angeles - USS Hornet in Oakland - USS Midway in San Diego - SS Red Oak Victory in Richmond (Victory ship, related to Liberty ships) - SS Jeremiah O'Brien in San Francisco (functioning Liberty ship) - USS Pampanito in San Francisco (Balao class submarine) - SS Lane Victory in Los Angeles (It's pretty close to Iowa actually) - USS Recruit (2/3 scale escort destroyer used for training) - USS Dolphin (Deep diving research sub with several "firsts" and records) - Star of India These are the ones I can think of off the top of my head but I think this is a pretty good list of options. ;)

[@disbeafakename167]

Didn't even include the mighty moe in Hawaii?

[@virusguy5611]

... I think the juiciest piece of info we learnt is that drachnifel is married. Naval history nerds... rejoice!!! There is hope after all!

[@Wallyworld30]

I pretty sure he's mentioned being married in one of his recent collaboration videos although I don't recall which. Perhaps in his interview by The_Chieftain?

[@cvproj]

Back in the anti-sub video (last week!) he verified that his wife did the voice of Miss Mine. "Yay! I win! I win! I win!" (We need a Miss Mine t-shirt...)

[@kemarisite]

@@Wallyworld30 yes, and he mentioned that his wife provides the "mine" voice in some of the videos like the one on Operation Cerberus.

[@johngregory4801]

@@kemarisite Mines LOVE making new friends! I never would have known that without Drach!

[@lycossurfer8851]

She met him when he was a cool biker dude..........

[@aidanwiggins2751]

Battleship Cove in Fall River, MA is a favorite of mine. The ships are a little rough in places, but there is nothing like being free to explore a South Dakota class battleship. They have the USS Massachusetts (of course), a Gearing-class destroyer, the USS Lionfish, an East German corvette, and what I believe are the last wooden PT boats in the US. All around a good time. Though, to be fair, my fondness of the place is heavily influenced by happy memories of when I was a Cub Scout. We were able to stay the night on board the Massachusetts. An unforgettable experience to say the least.

[@disbeafakename167]

My dad and I used to make a biannual pilgrimage there. It was awesome as a kid, and even cooler as I got old enough to enjoy it.

[@BestAnswer12549]

I was going to get married there

[@longdo5910]

11:57 On the rivalry between the IJA and IJN. The main cause of hatred seems to be the fact that the IJN was establised by men like Enomoto Takeaki and Katsu Kaishū who were from pro-Shogunate samurai while the IJA was created by members of the Satsuma and Chosu clan who were pro-Imperial.

[@Edax_Royeaux]

@Marcelo Henrique Soares da Silva One thing you have to understand about the Japanese is that they modernized extremely quickly. The people leading Japan during WWI probably grew up under the Shogunate, where clans were punished or rewarded based on their allegiances in the Sengoku Jidai (1600). With the overthrow of the Shogunate, the same thing happened in reverse, so there just wasn't enough time for these clan grudges to die out. The Boshin civil war only ended in 1869 so you still had families with elders who remembered what life was like before the Emperor took over and punished the Shogunate supporters. Japan was extremely traditional during its isolationist period so it would not be uncommon for clans to harbor century long grudges.

[@willrogers3793]

I agree with several of the lads in the comments, U-505 at the Museum of Science and Industry in Chicago, Illinois is definitely worth a visit. One qualifier though: get ahold of the schedule for the times that they have guided tours planned, because you can’t just walk on board. If I’m remembering things correctly, they cut an “enter” and “exit” hole in the side of the hull, and the guided tours take you through the majority of the ship’s internal areas. But you’re unfortunately not allowed to walk in and wander around on your own, and you can’t go up onto the deck or the conning tower. (This was something that really saddened me when I went to visit, I really wanted to get a look at the deck guns up close.) But on the bright side, besides getting a look at the insides of a WWII submarine, the exhibit around her has a massive amount of doodads and widgets from the war in the Atlantic (I distinctly remember there being a depth charge projector and a hedgehog launcher towards the entrance of the exhibit), and you can actually get a fairly close look at the underside of the ship, too; she isn’t floating in the river, they literally suspended her off the ground and built the museum building around her, so you can literally walk underneath the ship. Also, you might consider paying a visit to the Liberty Memorial in Kansas City if you have the time to spare. I don’t remember what all they have of naval things (Kansas *is* a thoroughly landlocked state, after all), but it’s got an immense amount of relics and exhibits, all from WWI. In fact, I think it’s the largest WWI museum in the USA, potentially even the largest in the world (although I’m probably wrong about that last bit). It looks decent-sized from the outside, but the vast majority of the museum proper is actually underground, *beneath* the memorial. (The memorial itself is pretty cool, but don’t go up the tower if you have a fear of heights. Just don’t.) And I know these last two have absolutely nothing to do with naval history, but I’d still recommend them for a visit if you ever have the time and the inclination: the National Air and Space museum in Washington, DC and the Strategic Air Command (SAC) museum in Omaha, Nebraska are both fascinating places. The SAC museum has one of the few B-36 Peacemakers left in existence, and the nickname “aluminum overcast” isn’t much of an exaggeration, the thing is just *massive.*

[@WildBillCox13]

A most interesting question. Here's my spin on it: First? My understanding of topic. Reduce cross section of penetrator and you increase penetration for an equal weight/mass round (and propellant charge*). Smaller impact area transfers more energy into a smaller point, concentrating stress on a hard, but brittle, surface (face hardened plate is the similar to Tempered Glass for its method of impact resistance). That's the good part. Unfortunately, artillery rounds in flight are affected by aerodynamic/fluid dynamic factors the same as any Mach2-3 Jet. There is a "perfect" length versus diameter plus optimal ogive for every particular caliber of gun. Make an artillery round too long (L:W) and it tends to nutate severely in flight, which loses accuracy, and absorbs muzzle energy through greatly increased drag. That's the bad part. Now for a bit of hard evidence. Planet Slo-Mo has a video posted where they fire both the 12.2cm P Obr 42/L46 AND the M4 (L) Tank's 76mm M1A1/L51, and follow the rounds in flight. Notice that even these, supposedly "perfect" shapes are prone to nutation throughout their flight. Longer L:W rounds are far worse. kzbin.info/www/bejne/rqGtaXilfNJ_q6c So-o, why not? Diminishing returns. Disclaimer: I am no military expert. I am old and have spent most of my life reading military history and technological examinations of military gear. For absolute understanding, let me recommend Ian Hogg. *Reducing barrel diameter makes you increase the heat and pressure in your chamber, too. You'll need a reinforced Breech,, Chamber and Barrel to push the same mass the same speed through a smaller barrel.

[@rentond3666]

u-505 in Chicago one of the only 2 Type-IXc subs preserved and with an interesting story to boot

[@jesseestrada8914]

This is what I was going to say. Also I'd love to use the excuse to have lunch in Chicago with Drach and his other fans.

[@matthmaroo1984]

I recommend the U505 as well and I would love to go too!

[@davidkaminski615]

USS Silversides (Gato class) in Muskegan, Michigan is not too far (a day trip) from U-505 and provides a good comparison of American vs German engineering. While u-505 is dry and Silversides is wet, one can take a tour through both.

[@Bill_Falsename]

@@davidkaminski615 second the silversides

[@6763100]

There is also LST 393 in muskegon Michigan but at a different location than the uss silversides, and the air zoo in Kalamazoo has some aircraft under restoration from the bottom of lake Michigan after less than successful landings on uss sable & uss wolverine. Opposite side of Michigan in bay city you have uss Edson DD 946 korea vintage destroyer.

[@admiraltiberius1989]

Drach is tossing out all kinds of spicy meatballs this episode. I love learning and laughing at the same time. Fantastic video as always sir. As far as museum ships, I HIGHLY recommend the USS Kidd in Baton Rouge Louisiana. I believe its the only Fletcher class that is fully back to her WW2 condition. They have a nice small museum with models, artifacts and other things. The USS Alabama is 2 or so hours to the east down the I-10 interstate. And she is also in fantastic condition. I'm sure you have some followers who could have lunch, meet and greet near or at either ship. Even further east is the Pensacola Naval air museum. I personally live in Lake Charles and as of right now the USS Orleck is docked here. But she's in rough condition and likely to be moved or scrapped very soon.

[@Kevin_Kennelly]

Tossing spicy meatballs cause me to 'coffee-spit'.

[@TheSchultinator]

And the USS Alabama is a twofer since the USS Drum Gato-class submarine is parked next to it

[@admiraltiberius1989]

@@TheSchultinator the D Day museum is also in New Orleans, just to the south of the Kidd. But good point about the Alabama.

[@cracklingvoice]

Can confirm the USS Kidd museum being excellent. I need to go see the Orleck before she's gone.

[@admiraltiberius1989]

@@cracklingvoice Its a real shame about the Orleck, she was brought to Lake Charles on promises that were hollow as a drum. Hopefully she makes it to Jacksonville.

[@jerry2357]

USS Constitution is well worth a visit. I was lucky enough to be able to visit when I was on a business trip a few years ago. If you visit HMS Trincomalee and/or HMS Unicorn before you cross the Atlantic then you have a basis for comparison. U505 in the Chicago Museum of Science and Industry is interesting, but not a significantly different experience from the EML Lembit in Tallinn (which is a bit closer to Britain), USS Pampanito (in San Francisco) or other submarines of that period. BTW, if you go to San Francisco to see USS Pampanito, there is also the Liberty ship SS Jeremiah O’Brien nearby. I got an incredible sense of space in the engine room of that ship, compared with (say) HMS Belfast, where every inch of the engine room space is crammed with equipment. I found the Intrepid Sea Air & Space Museum in New York very interesting. There is a 1950s diesel-electric nuclear cruise missile submarine USS Growler there, as well as the aircraft carrier. Of course, there’s a lot of naval aircraft on display, too. Top of my wishlist for a ship to visit across the Atlantic is the Canadian Flower class corvette Sackville. I have been interested in corvettes since I read the Cruel Sea when I was a schoolboy well over 40 years ago.

[@attempttoreview4411]

I agree. The USS Constitution was a very good frigate. Fair warning Drach, it's an active naval yard.

[@chriscushing1275]

Drach- if you are going to see the Olympia on your US trip, I urge you to come a bit North, and see the USS Slater in Albany! It's the only Destroyer Escort afloat in the US, it's very authentic, and wears a gorgeous camo scheme after a recent stint in drydock. It's a small ship, but an extremely nicely cared for representative of an important type of ship. If you do come this way, do let me know, and I'd be happy to do what I can to facilitate that leg of your trip. I've gotten many hours of enjoyment out of your channel, and I'd like to see my city's little museum ship on it.

[@jeffreypapierz1215]

Great Episode, especially loved the last two questions. With regards to US museum ships, I've taken it upon myself to visit as many as possible. A few suggestions I have would be: -USS Slater in Albany, NY - last surviving destroyer-escort -USS Taney in Baltimore, MD - last ship afloat from Pearl Harbor attack (sail frigate USS Constellation is also in display there) -The ships of Battleship Cove in Massachusetts, which also include a Soviet-built missile corvette from the East German Navy -The ships in the San Diego Maritime Museum, such as the Soviet Foxtrot-class submarine B-39 and the American experimental/testing sub USS Dolphin (USS Midway is within walking distance of the museum as well) -And lastly, as a local Chicagoan, I am obligated to recommend the U-505 at the Museum of Science and Industry here. Whatever you decide to do, enjoy yourself.

[@DubGathoni]

53:00, it does depend on where that hole. Put it below the water line and things get interesting.

[@kennethdeanmiller7324]

That is very true! However, the smaller & lighter shell is also going to slow a lot quicker in the water and if it's pointed like a normal shell it is likely to tumble as well. Which is why such ships would put their magazines BENEATH the water line. I believe it did once happen to a Cruiser to where a shell made it into a magazine but 1) because it hit the water first the shell flipped over backwards and then penatrated into the magazine & 2) cuz it flipped over backwards the trigger to detonate the shell was never flipped so no explosion & 3) cuz the shell was also followed by a massive amount of water pressure it soaked most of the powder before it COULD explode. I forget what ship it happened to, but I remember Drach talking about it at some time.

[@maxgamer7951]

>Be me >Havent watched all the dry docks. >Realises theres upwards of 60 hours of drach to watch >Happy.png

[@TheOreoOverlord]

I know this comment is 4 years old but this was me when I found the Playlist, only now there's hundreds of hours of it!

[@andon_RT]

@@TheOreoOverlord I'm in my own watching of all of them. At my current progress, I should be caught up.... in January sometime.

[@AnimeSunglasses]

N3 to Yamato: "There's something I ought to tell you..." Yamato: "Oh? What's that?" N3: "I am not left handed!"

[@Maddog3060]

Touring museum ships here? Cool! I'm actually going to start doing that myself, with my first trip in October; I'll be going to Patriots Point outside Charleston, SC, where the (Essex) USS Yorktown and the USS Laffey are on display, along with a couple of USCG cutters, before I head up to Wilmington to see the USS North Carolina. Those are fairly close to where I live (Orlando) so the drive won't be too bad. I've always wanted to visit the museum ships in my country and now that my job and finances have stabilized I can do so. I hope that when you do have your trip you tell us all about it! I'm planning to see everything in-country eventually so hearing your opinions on the various museums will be illuminating to my planning. Remember there's all sorts of small ships around the country; even Cleveland has a DD and a sub and Chicago of all places has U-505 on display in their museum of science and industry.

[@matthmaroo1984]

Maddog3060 I used to live in Charleston , the Yorktown is a must see

[@Larshjort]

Loved visiting Patriots point last year, both ships and the sub was awesome to see. But where are those cutters located?

[@davidkaminski615]

While you're in Charleston, check out the CSS Hunley Preservation lab! They do weekend tours. Also, don't forget the other side of Florida! Pensacola Naval Air Museum and Mobile, Alabama has the USS Alabama and USS Drum!

[@davidkaminski615]

USCGC Ingham was moved to Key West and USCGC Comanche is swimming with the fishes.

[@Maddog3060]

@@davidkaminski615 Ah. I was going by the Wikipedia entry so I guess it's out of date.

[@ScholRLea]

Might I suggest some merch with pictures of French pre-dreadnoughts bearing the caption "Battle Hotel"?

[@ajahlaabib8972]

Just a note on the IJA/IJN rivalry in the period immediately after the restoration, the army and navy represented two rival clans. The navy= satsuma, Army=chosu, these clans were traditional enemies who had temporally teamed up to restore the emperor, they spoke different not always mutually intelligible dialects of Japaneses, had radically different Bushido codes, cultures(satsuma had their own colonies, illegal external trade and were deeply influenced by Chinese néo-Confucian thought, samurai were also 10% of their domain population compared to 1 or 2% else where hence part of the reason why the navy didn't want conscription as that would fill up valuable jobs with non satsuma peasants )and experiences with the outside world, both used their respective services to provide sinecures for out of work samurai and until 1880ish most IJN admirals had never been to sea & all were from satsuma( hence the expression "any idiot can become an admiral as long as he is from satsuma"). During this period the Emperor was unable to stop both services appropriating funding(or risk a coup) and they took up a huge amount of the national budget but after the introduction of a Parliament, both sides initially found it very hard to funding.(every single member of the lower house rode in on a anti-taxation wave, and where not about to re-introduce taxes for more military funding) The way to get around this was by allying with a political party and pushing service centric polices and trying to ingratiate themselves with both the voters and politicians. For example the navy wanted expansion into the south seas, while the army wanted Asian expansion and both had political parties, civil societies and newspapers which pushed this view, so if you wanted to win an election in a navy area you must trumpet south seas expansion in an army area the opposite . Things started to get really bad when a several hundred Japanese workers were trapped,in a temple, by Chinese rebels both services wanted the glory of the rescue but it got out of hand when the navy declared they would sink any army troop transports that entered the area( Popularity= more funding=more sinecures). Little incidents like this would continue to happen. When democracy really started going during the Taisho era, things started to get even more out of hand as now both sides represented opposite ends of the political spectrum, especially as the old clan based animosities began to fade, and the emperor wasnt strong enough/willing(Horihito) to reign them in. Sources Making Waves: Politics, Propaganda, and the Emergence of the Imperial Japanese Navy, 1868-1922 Kaigun: Strategy, Tactics, and Technology in the Imperial Japanese Navy, 1887-1941 The Last Samurai: The Life and Battles of Saigo Takamori( digs into the differences between the two clans) Emperor of Japan

[@isaact825]

I've toured about half of the capital museum ships in the US. I don't know how far you're willing to drive/fly, because they're kinda spread out all over the country. Of the eight battleships, Texas won't be available and Missouri is in Hawaii, so you'll probably not make those two. Driving down the East coast starting in Virginia, you can hit USS Wisconsin (Norfolk), North Carolina (Wilmington), and Alabama (Mobile), as well as USS Drum, also in Mobile. That gives you one member of each of the fast battleship classes. That also runs you past Charleston as well, with USS Yorktown (CV-10) USS Clamagore and USS Laffey . That's just a hair over a thousand miles of driving, but it's probably the shortest distance you can possibly drive while seeing the most museum ships for your trouble. Also! Being at Battleship Alabama means you're only an hour or so from the National Naval Aviation Museum at Pensacola, which is my favorite museum in the world. If you time it right, you can see the Blue Angels do their practice runs, all sorts of aircraft, and a small shrine to the USS Enterprise (CV-6), with an actual piece of the ship where you can touch it. This particular journey would also let you see 3 of the 5 remaining OS2-U Kingfishers. www.google.com/maps/dir/USS+Wisconsin+BB-64,+1+Waterside+Dr,+Norfolk,+VA+23510/USS+North+Carolina,+Battleship+Road+Northeast,+Wilmington,+NC/USS+Yorktown+CV-10,+Mount+Pleasant,+SC/USS+Alabama,+Battleship+Parkway,+Mobile,+AL/@33.6836664,-86.6872393,6z/data=!3m2!4b1!5s0x89aa1fb90652da3f:0x239716f331a7e820!4m26!4m25!1m5!1m1!1s0x89ba9873418937f9:0x9c274a47ca02b90a!2m2!1d-76.2953745!2d36.848397!1m5!1m1!1s0x89aa1fb84831ad59:0x9d2e579b1bd2d539!2m2!1d-77.9543704!2d34.2365524!1m5!1m1!1s0x88fe709056b59e09:0x39955f0b5f0c284f!2m2!1d-79.9085323!2d32.7904357!1m5!1m1!1s0x889a4546cbb67455:0x2b8464983e59f46a!2m2!1d-88.0144261!2d30.6818034!3e0

[@blogsblogs2348]

HMS Invincible during falklands war had severe issues with vibration in the habitation areas... most notably in the flight crew bunkage. .. this was known to be a design fact before she commissioned and was not at all appreciated during the intensive falklands operations...

[@h0riz0n45]

For a museum ship, try the Pampanito in San Francisco. There is an audio tour all about her service. Also nearby is a preserved Liberty ship.

[@robertthecag1230]

You also have the USS Hornet across the bay in Alameda.

[@scottygdaman]

@@robertthecag1230 lol posted the same.

[@chuckhainsworth4801]

I'd like to add the two cents of the son of a swab jockey regarding pre-dreadnoughts "catching shells" in a dreadnought battleline, "You find men to crew it." Support vessels are on a battleline for a reason, catching shells is a byproduct of doing their job. Only the most cavalier of commanders (Custer level incompetence), or the most desperate of situations, would ships be sent out to catch shells.

[@CharlesStearman]

One of the arguments used to justify sending the obsolete ships of the Russian "3rd Pacific Squadron" to join the 2nd was that they would draw fire from the more important ships.

[@davidtanner665]

@@CharlesStearman Russian admiralty, was not know to be benevolent to it sailors, or displaying high levels of competence.

[@CSSVirginia]

Yamatos final mission springs to mind. Suicidal bravery, or throwing away lives if you are less charitable.

[@chuckhainsworth4801]

@@CharlesStearman and the sailors remembered their admirals attitude when they became the backbone of the revolution.

[@michalsoukup1021]

Maybe if you would send them out with barely a skeleton crew of volunteers...

[@steveamsp]

Boston would be a great choice for Museum ships. In Boston itself are the Constitution and Cassin Young (Fletcher class). And an easy drive away is Battleship cove in Fall River, with the Massachusetts (South Dakota Class), Joseph P Kennedy Jr (Gearing class), Lionfish (Balao class submarine), a couple PT boats, the Hiddensee (Soviet Tarantul 1 Class missile corvette). Also good would be Philadelphia, with the Olympia on that side, and New Jersey across the river. Another possibility would be in Buffalo, with the Little Rock (Cold war modified Cleveland Class), The Sullivans (Fletcher) and Croaker (Gato class).

[@christopheryoung3356]

On the way from Boston to Fall River, stop in Quincy to visit the USS Salem (a Des Moines class heavy cruiser) at the former Fore River Naval Shipyard (which also has a long and storied history) where she was built shortly after WWII. If you're continuing down the coast from Boston to Philly, the Intrepid in New York is definitely worth a visit with its service in WWII and Vietnam and its involvement as a recovery ship for Mercury and Gemini capsules.

[@steveamsp]

@@christopheryoung3356 BAH.... I KNEW I forgot something. Probably because I didn't realize the Salem was there 15 years ago when I did the other tours.

[@TheSchultinator]

...well darn, I thought the USS Alabama and USS Drum sitting together was a good number of vessels :D

[@kitawithsomenumbers]

If you're going to the States then please let me propose the Haida! "But wait" I hear you say. "Isn't that in Canada? Isn't this just some Canadian trying to get attention?" And you would be right! However if you were to go to Buffalo you can see a Fletcher. But not just any Fletcher! The USS The Sullivans! Toss in a Gato and a Cleveland and it's shaping up to be a great deal, right? But wait, there's more! You'd be less than 2 hours away from the Haida! 4 for the price of 1, limited time only! You could see all 5 in a day! How can you let this deal slip by? Jokes aside all 12 of us Canadians would love to see you check out the Haida. Bonus round: HMCS Sackville is only a quick 10 hour drive away from the USS Constitution. Can't get more obscure than a Canadian Flower class!

[@DavidConnor]

AND take your wife on a second honeymoon to Niagara Falls. Whether on a below zero day in January or a high 80's day in June, the Falls are ALWAYS breathtaking. You might call this trip, a fiver, on less than a tank of gas.

[@johnfisher9692]

Loving the Drydock episodes as I have from the start. I learn so much despite the problem of stuffing more information into my worn out old brain. Maybe I need a refit. The part about the limited use of Pre-Dreadnoughts in a Dreadnought battle fleet was well done. I did cringe then then the questioner made the statement that they could at least be used to catch shells for more valuable units. Obviously this person has played too much WoWs. These ships would be crewed by PEOPLE and I'm uncomfortable with someone disposing of them so callously. As I'm sure they wouldn't like it nor would their brothers in arms. I guess too many MMO players forget this real life difference. People aren't pixels. Another point I thought of during the discussion about dense tank like shells is that compared to naval battles, tanks engage at what would be considered point blank range for a large ship and the trajectory is flat, where as naval gunfire at most battle ranges is a parabolic arc which would somewhat negate the hyper velocity you are trying for. Drach, if you want an engineering nightmare imagine designing a taper bore gun for a Battleship's main armament. On that I leave you to your nightmares.

[@siremilcrane]

John Fisher I don’t think that’s fair, I just figured in a life or death total war situation a nation would use every asset available to it, a lot of money and equipment was used on those ships I wouldn’t imagine Germany or Great Britain would want to let them go to waste. This is coming from the same nations that sent thousands of their own men to their deaths in the meatgrinders of the Somme and verdun, I don’t think they were saving those predreads for humanitarian reasons Drach did answer my question well though, I didn’t know about the disparity in fire control and rangefinders

[@athopi]

@@siremilcrane Not to mention rates of fire. I'm sure you saw Drach's vid on the French fighting hotels where one example fired 1 round every 4 minutes, but after a late update it was reduced to 1 round every 40 seconds. So it would depend on loading machinery updates the pre-dreadnoughts got, as well. (pixel killer!)

[@andrewcox4386]

Having just visited Gallipoli & also read some of the correspondence of the general staff, some of whom considered it perfe tly OK to sacrifice 10 allied soldiers for 1 german if it meant gaining a few inches of ground I have to conclude that the concept of lower ranks actually being people was unfortunately not very widespread in WWI 😕

[@hart-of-gold]

"HMS New Zealand solos" As an Aussie, even I would love that on a shirt.

[@ovk-ih1zp]

As an less well known ship try USS Little Rock( only remaining Cleveland) in Buffalo NY, USS Constitution in Boston or USS Constellation in Baltimore. I did a once-in-a-lifetime trip to DC about a decade ago & did go to Constellation but I am STILL kicking my self for not taking AMTRAK to Boston to see Ol' Ironsides.

[@zacharyradford1708]

You have to go to battle ship cove In Massachusetts. Features the Massachusetts, and several other ships including a couple very well restored PT boats.

[@yalelingoz6346]

I read Tyga's question slightly differently. I think they are asking (if I may rephrase it) "If guns can't get any bigger than 14 inches, could you increase the length, and therefore the weight of a 14 inch shell? Would a longer, 14 inch shell with the weight of a 16 inch shell be usable substitute for a 16 inch shell?" The short answer to that is kind of, but only at very short range and low gun elevation. At meaningful range it becomes a no. One of the less thought of reasons that pretty much all the historically used shells were much the same shape, is that you need a very narrow variance in drag, spin, balance, and eccentricity to get the shell to 'nose over' at the apogee of it's ballistic arc so that the nose points toward the target. If you make the shell too much longer to accommodate extra mass, you end up with the shell 'belly flopping' into the target.

[@davidedens6353]

From personal experience I can tell you that a 20 x0 brush works great for teeth and eyes and I use superfine point pens for script on purity seals and such

[@CanuckWolfman]

Museum Ships! Wrong country, but right continent: get yourself to the HMCS Haida if you can

[@jesseestrada8914]

Lol name checks out.

[@glenmcgillivray4707]

Maybe drach should do a tour by age, oldest ships first. (Probably all ships at the Port while he is there)

[@yourearidiculouslunatic8435]

No one cares LEAF

[@thepolishnz]

No one expects the torpedo salvo of complete unexpectedness

[@Mahros1]

How compatible were the different nations' weapons of a similar calibre? Could the UK ships use US 14" shells and vice versa? Did the Japanese have the same 14" bores as the UK/US? Were the WW1 12" guns essentially interchangeable throughout the various navies? Were the Bismarck's 15" guns the same bore as, for example, the Hood's?

[@ThePTBRULES]

Dach, if I were, Hit Boston first, USS Salem, Constitution and Fletcher Class around Boston. An hour south is Battleship cove w/ USS Massachusetts + other ships. Then you can Hit New York and the Ships there, then Philadelphia for the Olympia, an Hour south you can get to Baltimore and see the USS Consolation, USS Turok*, USCG/USS Taney* which was at Pearl Harbor + SS Chesapeake. Lastly, you could go to DC if you wanted to, and even see the plate of Yamato grade turret armor, etc. Lots of museums. All you traveling would be less than 3 hours between cities, and you would get the whole range of shipping.

[@rossrichards4057]

And if he's ready up there he can visit either USS Albacore in New Hampshire or USS Nautilus in Connecticut

[@andrewb1921]

Not to mention, USS New Jersey literally across the Delaware River from Philadelphia.

[@clayramsey7140]

The USS North Carolina is terrific. Large parts of the ship are accessible. Just a couple of hours away is the USS Yorktown and other ships in Charleston harbor. One more is the USS Midway in San Diego. It’s also very accessible with lots of historical planes and ... the HMS Surprise is nearby.

[@athopi]

The Norfolk Naval Museum, Portsmouth Lightship, Hampton Roads Naval Museum (Featuring Monitor), USS Wisconsin in Norfolk, The lighthouse in Virginia Beach (first commissioned public works facility in US- 1791) All in the Norfolk/Hampton Roads area... A few hours drive south gets you to the CSS Ram Neuse in Kinston N.C., And then there is the USS North Carolina a couple more hours south in Wilmington. Back up to the Hampton area is the Jamestown Colony site and there are a couple of period recreations that are amazing in their accurate "smallness". Brave folk , those first colonials, to travel on those tiny ships... Between Kinston and Wilmington is Atlantic Beach where Fort Macon is located. A harbor defense, star fort designed by then US Lt. Robert E. Lee.

[@ianward8658]

Come to North Carolina we have the confederate ironclad CSS Neuse and the USS North Carolina not to mention Charleston and Richmond aren’t too far away.

[@scottdoberstein824]

Come round to the midwest! We’ve got the silversides and an LST in muskegan (muh-skee-gan) and a U-boat in chicago.

[@simonforget280]

Get a look at HMCS Haida (Hamilton, ON) if time allows. Keep up your excellent work!

[@corporaltommy4407]

Museum ships in US? ALL OF THEM! Just joking. Also, there is a Mrs Drach? Nice on you

[@murderouskitten2577]

why joking ? imagine the amount of work that will it take for one person :D thats about 3 months at minimum if he really push it :)

[@joeblow9657]

I'd doubt it but then again I didn't know Chieftain had a wife and kid either so who knows

[@neilwilson5785]

Only all the latest aircraft carriers. what are they even for?

[@Lazarus7000]

Check out the Nautilus, the world's first nuclear submarine! There's a decent little museum attached to it with some interesting stuff.

[@GrahamCStrouse]

Lazarus Long Saw her when I was a kid. Very cool experience!

[@disbeafakename167]

Hey I got to see that one as a kid too! I wish I was old enough to appreciate it though.

[@Lazarus7000]

@@disbeafakename167 I've been twice and remember it well. It's a little claustrophobic by my measure (which is saying something as I've been described as a "Mole" and a "Mushroom") but I understand it's spacious for a submarine even by modern standards. It's also an interesting halfway-house between traditional ship-shaped submarines and modern dildo-shaped ones.

[@brucermarino]

44:19 - PHYSICAL LIMITATIONS ON SHELL PERFORMANCE? Thank your Drach, for another great episode. I genuinely appreciate your depth of knowledge and delightful presentation style. “BZ”! And, a great comment, Dennis. Since your comment and Tyvers(?) physical limitations of shell performance question go together, I’d like to offer the following. My apologies for the length. There are several interrelated issues. I believe the idea is that for a given barrel strength only so much pressure (related to muzzle velocity) can be exerted prior to barrel failure. By increasing the diameter of the shell the area of the base is increased. Thus, the same barrel pressure can be exerted over a greater projectile area increasing velocity whilst keeping the barrel pressure within the elastic (and other) limits - to avoid “BOOM,” as the inestimable Drach is wont to say. This is the principle behind the high velocity (typically in the area 5,000 f/s / 1,500 m/s) tank guns. They fire a subcaliber projectile in which a sabot (French for shoe) surrounds the smaller caliber projectile in the larger caliber barrel to provide the gas seal. In unrotated projectiles, this principle can be seen in the low-pressure, long-range, sub-caliber projectile for the "Dynamite Gun" of USS Vesuvius (ordered 1886). (See Drach’s video.) They had a smaller diameter shell with a sabot to seal the barrel. It can also be seen in the rifled "Squeeze Bore" antitank guns WW II in which the barrel tapered near the muzzle to literally reduce the diameter of the specially constructed projectile such that in the early part of the barrel the (then) larger diameter shell could take advantage of the same pressure being exerted over great area increasing velocity and then have its diameter reduced near the muzzle. (The velocity was still sufficient to be greater than the friction of the reduction in the diameter of the projectile.) The idea was to produce a fast projectile in a reasonably strong but not overly (“super” for us Yanks...) heavy gun and then to reduce the projectile cross-sectional area to minimize drag and maintain remaining velocity longer and hence range, drop, etc. Unfortunately, if one chooses to use sub-caliber projectiles to increase range (say a six-inch projectile from Tyver’s[? - sorry] eight-inch gun) one also reduces shell volume running counter to the original intention of increasing the range and effectiveness of an eight-inch gun to a point rivaling a battleship main weapon. A related problem is the rifling. As a projectile increases in velocity greater mechanical stress is placed on the rifling of the barrel. This increased stress increases wear and results in a loss of accuracy due to gas leakage and, possibly, wobble. (Note the high-windage or clearances, in a smoothbore infantry mortar.) Consequently, most high-velocity tank guns are smooth-bore. That is, they do not rotate their projectiles for stabilization or they would fire few rounds - more anon... The famed Paris Gun of WW I [based on a naval weapon] could reach out to 82 mi / 130 km. To accomplish this, the muzzle velocity 5,400 ft/s / 1,640 m/s, similar to modern, high-velocity tank guns. The ensuing wear forced the manufacturer, Krupp, to produce shells each(!) of which was slightly larger than the previous one to compensate for barrel wear. Each was also sequentially numbered and loaded after careful barrel measurements and calculations for propellant charge were made between shots - for starters...) Barrel wear was constant and planned for concern. To keep smooth-bore projectiles stable in the absence of rifling rotating them, they are fin-stabilized (or, possibly, have some exotic guidance system?). That is, they substitute aerodynamic surfaces for gyroscopic stabilization. While good at short ranges, high velocities, and relatively small-sized projectiles, the variability of atmospheric conditions make this a very inaccurate technique at all but absurdly short ranges in naval engagements. I think, however, the core answer to why not use longer, denser projectiles is gyroscopic stabilization. For a projectile to be stabilized by rifling it needs to spin fast enough and, given the strength of rifling, there are not only material limits to this, as noted above. And, the necessary rate of spin increases with the length to diameter ratio of the projectile. This becomes unmanageable in projectiles with very large length to diameter ratios. That is, simply lengthening a projectile, will not work since the length to diameter ratio of a spin-stabilized shell has practical limits for effective gyroscopic stabilization. (Both tops and gyroscopes are not usually tall, thin, and stable.) This largest ratio is generally taken to be 1:5, although I recall 1:7 in one source. Thus, you cannot simply lengthen a shell in a spin-stabilized gun to increase its density and consequent range and hitting power because it will not rotate sufficiently fast to be stable and, hence, accurate in flight. (Consequently, this is why smooth-bore tank guns firing discarding sabot, with very their large length to diameter ratios use fin stabilization.) I apologize for any inaccuracies, generalities, etc. Critique is more than welcome. I am an amateur and basically did the above from memory in too short a time. Thanks, Bruce

[@richardmeyeroff7397]

I think that you didn't get the jist of the question. To put it as i understood it, Let us say that you took a 14 inch shell weight and designed a 12 inch shell with that same weight with the 12 inch gun being able to use the same charge as the 14 inch gun how well do you think it would do. Would you need to change the length of the barrel etc.

[@Bill_Falsename]

you should definitely check out the USS Edson in Bay City, Michigan

[@janmortensen9314]

Back in 1991, driving from Tallahasse to New Orleans; we drove through Mobile,Alabama. Just south of the bridge was USS Alabama so we had to make a stop. Mored just behind her was the USS Drum (Gato class) and a B52 was parked there as well. Still remember going through a hatch in the deck armour and being surpriced over the space in Drum having seen Das Boot... yes aware that there was no crew and stacked supplies ;-) I can see that they now have added visitor building, other planes, guns, tanks, boats.

[@oloflarsson407]

As for the question of getting more penetration out of a given caliber, there would be three options, and all of them would be bad. All options would suffer from much shorter barrel life, effectively meaning that a BB och BC, would burn out it's barrel, before it would get to the bottom of the magazines. Option number one, would be a heavier, full caliber round (i.e. a longer round), with higher muzzle energy, then standard rounds. That would result in a round that would stabilize poorly, giving it poor accuracy. Secondly, the long length and marginal stability, would make the round likely to deflect and break up on impact. The second option, would be a APDS-round. Discarding sabot round were around at the time, but APDS was not around until 1940, by which time the Washington naval treaty was no more. APDS could either be made out of steel, that would shatter on impact against heavy armour (that was an issue even with high velocity full calibre guns with steel shot, like the 17pdr, german 75mm L/70 and 88mm L/71), or from tungsten, which would be prohibitively expensive. The behind armour effect would be very low, but in the end, that doesn't matter, because APDS of the time, had horribly low accuracy, so they would be useless for a long or medium range engagement. The third option would be a APFSDS round, but that would have even less behind armour effect than a APDS-round, and either way, APFSDS wasn't invented yet, and wouldn't achive good accuracy until ~1980.

[@sarjim4381]

A small addition on the PT boat torpedo tube question. They were mounted at about a 10% outboard angle to allow the torpedo to run straight as the PT boat was turning away. This allowed the boat to flee from its opponent after firing and make it less likely that a turning torpedo was going to hit the PT boat.

[@31terikennedy]

You should do a study on American Civil War Monitors. They stayed in U.S. Naval Service until just after the turn of the century.

[@AdamMGTF]

Just commented on all the ww2 videos asking for a Drachinifel collaboration. They eventually gave in and replied 🤣 hope you up for it Drach'!!

[@Lemonjellow]

Hey Drach, it may be a bit off the normal beaten path for your average ship tour, but LST-325 is sitting here in Evansville, IN on the Ohio river just waiting for you. Also you can see the shipyards, aka a giant parking lot now, where they built LSTs. You could actually get in touch with the group who takes care of the museum ship and get a private tour I'm betting. If you are interested and need any Southern Indiana info and assistance drop me a line.

[@yclepe]

RE the conversion of the Normandie to an aircraft carrier Something somewhat like that was actually done A small but I think interesting aside to WWII Nautical history were the USS Wolverine and USS Sable which were side wheel (Yes I said side wheel) Great lakes passenger excursion Steamers which were converted to aircraft carriers and were used on Lake Michigan to train most of the US and indeed Allied carrier pilots. They were based out of Navy Pier in Chicago The pilots flew from Great Lakes Naval Air Station just North of Chicago. This meant that the Allies did not have to use a vulnerable warship (carrier) with all of its attendant protection (destroyers etc )for training After the war I understand that the allies found out that the Japanese had been quite mystified about what we were doing to train pilots The ships had extremely limited storage for airplanes and were known to just shove damaged planes over the side in order to be able to continue training. Recently a few of thse planes have been salvaged off the bottom of the lake Hope that little bit of trivia is of some interest

[@richardw2566]

Pancakes and eggs plus a Drydock episode, what a fine way to start a Sunday morning. As for Museum ships worth a visit. USS Texas at San Jacinto State Park, south of Houston, is the only remaining Dreadnought. She is getting pretty rough and needs all the help she can get. It is somewhere between disgusting and embarrassing that Congress pisses away more money per hour than it would cost to dry berth and preserve this beautiful ship for the next 100 years. USS Kidd At Baton Rouge, Louisiana is the only Fletcher class in WW2 configuration. USS North Carolina at Wilmington, NC. USS Alabama at Mobile, Alabama is displayed alongside USS Drum, a Gato class submarine and a bunch of warbird aircraft. USS Massachusetts at Battleship Cove, Fall River, Massachusetts, there are several ship displayed there including an East German Corvette. I've not had the chance to visit the Massachusetts. She's still on the bucket list.

[@samstewart4807]

Do you know if any of the Bismarck shell spoters survived?

[@ryantuttle5246]

Uss Alabama, it is an amazing museum! 100000000/10. You can basically go wherever u want in the superstructure and go into all 3 of the 16” turrets.

[@Dave_Sisson]

I love that American hyperbole. A particularly exuberant Brit, Canadian or Australian MIGHT give a score of 11 out of 10 to something they really liked, but a Yank goes completely over the top with 100 million out of 10. :-)

[@michaelpfister1283]

Two recommendations: USS Alabama, which has a couple of other ships in the same location, but there is a great pair of subs close to each other: The U-505 at the Museum of Science and Industry in Chicago, IL and right across the lake in Muskegon, MI is the USS Silversides. The Silversides is actually really cool as it is very well preserved and they do a good job with the tours.

[@Dennis-vh8tz]

RE: heavy small diameter projectiles to circumvent Naval treaty limits. The question wasn't about large diameter relatively heavy and low velocity projectile versus a smaller diameter, relatively light and high velocity projectile. Rather the question was comparing projectiles of different diameter with similar weights and (presumably) velocities. Thus the discussion of slow heavy projectiles versus light fast projectiles wasn't directly relevant. With similar shell weights and velocities, I believe the advantage of the larger diameter gun would come down to internal ballistics. I forget the exact reason, but propellant energy is transferred more efficiently to a larger diameter projectile; therefore, with a set projectile weight and velocity the larger diameter gun would have a lower operating pressure; therefore, it would be both: easier to design and manufacture, and have a longer life (number of shots) before losing accuracy and requiring replacement. I assume (I believe correctly?) that metallurgy and barrel life requirements will set the maximum acceptable pressure and velocity. At this maximum pressure and velocity, the larger diameter gun will be able to fire a heavier shell and thus have an advantage over the smaller diameter gun. Looking at historic exceptions seems to support this. The US 16" super heavy AP shells sacrificed velocity and thus close range armour penetration for weight and aerodynamics to improve long range armour penetration. The Italian 15" high velocity AP shells sacrificed barrel life for high velocity and the superior close range armour penetration that came with it.

[@brucermarino]

Dennis, Great comments. I've added some additional information on this in my comment.

[@joeboscarino2380]

Depends on when you do your tour for the Texas . Nothing has been decided yet on the move . There are concerns related to the move . If its not done this winter it will be another year do to hurricane season . I've worked on Texas a few times in the past at Todd Shipyards and I don't see how the politicians and park officials figure that Texas is sound enough to float then make the long trip to Alabama . To tell you the truth it's a game that politicians are playing , some figure if its moved to Alabama , they can then move it to Galveston from it's historical home in Houston . The approved plan in 2008 was to dry dock in place and repair . Thats the engineers plan . I'll keep you all informed about what's going on .

[@kirkmorrison6131]

There is in Alexandria Virginia at the Torpedo Factory a WW2 Torpedo built there on display

[@johnshepherd8687]

It's an Art Studio now.

[@kirkmorrison6131]

Yep but the last time I was there the Torpedo was near the entrance.

[@zachnewman8622]

Ive had a chance to visit USS Wisconsin BB-64 on display at Nauticus naval museum in Norfolk, Virginia. There's a harbor tour available at the museum as well if you care to take a look at more modern ships and submarines as well. Also the National Aquarium in Baltimore, Maryland has a Tench Class submarine USS Torsk, as well as the sloop of war USS Constellation. All are worth a look in my opinion.

[@matthmaroo1984]

Zach Newman he might get to drive past the bulk of the Atlantic fleet too! At least 1 to 4 carriers docked

[@zachnewman8622]

Oh yeah you can definitely see some of the fleet from the interstate but the harbor tour boat can take you about as close as you can get without having to enlist, or getting pink misted by a CIWS.

[@Lord_Foxy13]

Not American but in Canada there is a few I'll list a few of them 2 Sailing ships from 1812 HMS Bee and HMS Tecumseth on manitoulin island, of course HMS Haida in " , HMCS Sackville a Flower class destroyer, HMCS Ojibwa a Oberon class sub, CSS Acadia a an Edwardin era science ship and is apparently extremely well preserved and Finally Hector a Dutch built sail ship

[@micuu1]

Came into the comments to recommend Haida and Sackville. If you visit them, let us know so I can meet you there!

[@cpofastforward7720]

CSS Acadia currently closed for renovations but two jetties over is the last remaining Flower Class Corvette, HMCS Sackville.

[@Lord_Foxy13]

@@cpofastforward7720 thanks for the info, I just did some quick searching

[@CaptainCoffee37]

USA ship tour recommendation: To get the most bang for your buck Drac, may I recommend a New England driving tour. Start in Boston - USS Cassin Young (very close to WWII spec Fletcher), USS Constitution, and down in Quincy USS Salem (only surviving Des Moines). Then drive southwest to see Battleship Cove with USS Massachusetts, USS Joseph P. Kennedy J (Gearing class), USS Lionfish (Balao class) and a few other small things. Continue on to New York City to see USS Intrepid and her museum, then head upstate to Buffalo, NY for the Buffalo and Erie County Naval & Military Park where they have USS Little Rock (Talos missile converted Cleveland class), USS The Sullivans (another Fletcher) and USS Croaker (Gato class sub). For extra credit, you can then drive up to Niagara Falls, see that, then pop over into Canada and see HMCS Haida in Hamilton, Ontario! All that nets you 1 BB, 1 CV, 4 DDs, 1 CA, 1 CL, 2 SS, and a tall ship frigate! In a mere 700 miles of driving!

[@christiancobb5309]

The USS Alabama of course! Not obscure, but a must. Also because it’s the only museum ship within a feasible drive of me and I’d like the chance to meet my Naval History Idol :p Edit: There’s also the USS Drum there, and it’s fun.

[@EvilPanada]

The USS Lexington (CV-16) is absolutely one of my favorite ship/Museum that I have ever been on/in. Would highly recommend, even though its been a while since I've been there.

[@northwoodsrailproductions4538]

I would pay a visit to the USS Cobia in Manitowoc, WI as the city built subs for WW2, hence why a Great Lakes City in Wisconsin has a submarine

[@HillChild73]

Across lake Michigan is USS Silversides, a Gato class in Muskegon MI.

[@azog23]

One thing worth visiting is the USS Blueback in Portland. Once a fortnight they have a 3-4 hour tour of the submarine done by a submarine veteran that goes over parts of the sub you don't usually see on the normal tour.

[@jf5016]

My favorites are the North Carolina in Wilmington. NC and Patriots Point, Charleston SC. The Yorktown usually needs some TLC but there's lots to see including the Medal of Honor museum. The Laffey is in pretty good shape and full of info. Of course, Charleston is a no-miss adventure for Mrs. Drach!

[@WHix-om4yo]

Two ships in one stop would be the USS Alabama (BB60) and the submarine USS Drum at Mobile, AL. The coastal fortifications in the west end of Santa Rosa Island at Pensacola, Florida might also be of interest since they were used from the 1830s to the 1950s. I grew up there. Also, as a bonus, you can visit Admiral Raphael Semmes' home and see some of the salvaged artifacts from the CSS Alabama in the city museum in Mobile. Oh, and the aviation museum at Pensacola Naval Air Station.

[@Basilzaharoff1]

Love your show. Please do something on the battle of the Rufiji Delta.

[@chrislewis8865]

Trivia time again. What would have happened had the USA not dropped the bomb? There were clearly plans afoot to carry out a Normandy-esque invasion of the Japanese mainland. When the war in Europe ended, my father, a sergeant in the Royal Army Service Corps (now the Royal Corps of Transport) was on the Isle of Wight as part of a team being put together to ferry casualties from the beaches to waiting hospital ships offshore using small boats. My assumptions here would have to be 1) I have little doubt there would have been numerous concurrent beach heads assigned to each of the invading armies and that my father would have been present at one handed to a British unit. 2) The allied forces would have had to have 100% control of air and sea otherwise they daren't risk parking a hospital ship just offshore. 3) I guess the use of hospital ships indicates that in the first instance, horrific levels of casualties were expected at the beachhead, followed by the fact that if field hospitals were set up ashore, if the word 'Banzai!' was heard outside, with the Japanese not being renowned for their respect for either a large painted red cross or the Geneva convention, everyone inside - doctors, nurses - male and female, the wounded and orderlies could expect to be carved up by extremely sharp Katanas. In a modern battle group which would be the flagship? When Eskimo was included as part of a combined NATO exercise in the Arctic, we were assigned to a battle group based around the aircraft carrier USS Independence (which looked big enough that we could have come alongside, hooked up the falls from her davits and been lifted aboard as if we were just a sea boat!). The admiral aboard the Independence was most certainly the flag officer and the aircraft carrier was the flagship. A small anecdote related to this; we were shadowed from the start of the exercise by a Krivak class Russian cruiser. After a few of days of this, the admiral in charge signalled the Russian, told him to close up to a position as part of the aircraft carrier's escort screen and to report immediately if any hostile ships or submarines were detected! Surprisingly, the Russian ship did as he was told, the rest of us were informed so that we didn't all just signal in at the same time 'WTF's he doing there???!!!?' and he stayed with us until the end of the exercise. Inter-service rivalries? Try the Para's and the Royal Marines. There was a rather good book which you should look up if you do not already have it - I lent my copy to someone, never got it back and I can't remember who I lent it to, but it is by an ex Para called Vince Bramley and it is called 'Excursion to Hell' an account of 2 Para's involvement in The Falklands. Two incidents are described in there. Firstly, when the Argentinians surrendered, it was decided the Paras and Marines should march into the town in two single files alongside each other. As they got closer to the town, the leading soldiers in each file started marching at a quicker pace, then quicker still, then broke into a run in order to try to be the first to arrive for the 'Glory' of their regiment. The second incident was on the way home on board their troopship - yes, apparently someone had the bright idea of putting both on the same ship. At dinner one evening, someone must have either said something out of turn in the queue for food or someone tried to barge in, I cannot remember which it was if the book even said, but it ended up in one almighty punch up, the net result of which was that the two were subsequently not allowed to eat at the same time.

[@ryangale3757]

For Museum ships in the US, the USCGS Ingram down in Key West is a bit more of an obscure one that I highly recommend. You don't get full access to the ship, but you do get pretty good access, and it is in very good condition as I remember it (it was a few years ago, to be fair) last time I was there.

[@kpaw1019]

In one day you can go to Camden, NJ and tour the USS New Jersey. They have Halsey's cabin preserved as it was during the war. After that, get the rarest of treats and look across the Delaware River and see the USS Olympia, still docked at Penn's Landing. It's a short drive across the Ben Franklin Bridge to tour the flagship of the fleet that won at Manila Bay in 1898. Can easily tour both in the same day.

[@Ushio01]

Lets be honest if the UK had N3's around Japan would have never built Yamato it would have been A-150's or even bigger with them not entering service till 42 or even 43.

[@themadhammer3305]

I agree, Yamato was designed as a counter to treaty battleships like Nelson and North Carolina. The very existance of an N3 or maybe even a G3 would have made the form of Yamato actually built a totally different beast

[@trekkie1701c]

There's the USS Turner Joy in Bremerton, Washington, which is open for viewing by the naval base there. There's a free naval museum as well. You can then take a foot ferry from there and actually see (across the water, but still relatively close) the naval ships docked there. IIRC the USS Carl Vinson is scheduled to be there for a little bit, I think. It's also not unheard of to see a Submarine!

[@missingnola3823]

I would suggest touring the USS Alabama; it's not difficult to let the director of that park to give you some seriously free access to the ship and its many nooks and crannies. He has a lot of knowledge and passion for that ship and really appreciates others who share same. There are also some other things to see there, including the submarine USS Drum and an SR-71 Blackbird, though you don't get to climb around those to your heart's content.

[@mikolajgrotowski]

If I remember correctly, most vibrations in turbine-powered ships were caused by propellers cavitation. In high speed and massive power, on propeller water boil by low pressure and creates bubbles, This generate vibrations. Early turbine military ships have lower speed, and this effect was not that strong. Later construction of machines use bigger reduction rate and biggers and slower rotate propellers. A similar problem appears in early nuclear submarines, especially soviet ones.

[@ThumperE23]

Okay Drac, if you're doing the US Museum ship route, just remember the sheer scale of the United States. Most of the ships are concentrated, as a quick Google search will tell you on the east coast. With large concentrations in the North East. I would suggest when you do Olympia do New Jersey, they are quite literally across the river from each other. Also Do Battleship Cove in Fall River Massachusetts, it has three ships including the South Dakota Class Battleship Massachusetts. Charleston has the USS Constitution and a Fletcher Class Destroyer Cassin Young. Also Quincy, MA has the Salem. If it's winter I would avoid Buffalo, since the weather sucks up there. But that has a light cruiser Little Rock I believe and The Sullivans. NYC has the Intrepid. South Carolina has the Yorktown and the Destroyer Laffey. Wilmington, NC has the North Carolina. Baton Rouge LA has the Kidd a Fletcher Class in WW2 Configuration. So it would depend on where and how long. But visiting Massachusetts gives you more bang for your pound.

[@calvingreene90]

The "Blue Ghost" in Corpus Christi. CV-16 USS Lexington.

[@ravage1789]

US Museum ships to check out: Destroyer Escort USS Slater in Albany, NY. Ship is in fantastic shape, it still is on the water, admission is very reasonable ($9). If you're looking for some under-appreciated ships to visit, this one is phenomenal. Battleship Cove, Fall River MA. USS Massachusetts, USS Lionfish, USS Joseph P Kennedy, a PT boat, and East German Corvette Hiddensee all in one spot. U-505, Museum of Science and Industry, Chicago IL. Fantastic exhibit, recently renovated and much more fleshed out experience over what it was previously. SS Jeremiah O'Brien, Liberty ship, San Francisco, CA. Another one for the under-appreciated category. In addition, there's the USS Pampanito maybe 200 yards up the pier as well. There's dozens of museum ships to check out in the US, but these, especially the USS Slater, are well worth checking out if you're going on a museum ship tour.

[@rodneygaul2227]

I love your Drydocks , I look forward to the listening

[@animal16365]

Could you do a rant on the Bureau of Ordnance

[@DarthEarp]

For USA Trip. If you are on the east coast. i'd visit USS North Carolina in Wilmington NC. It's a great port city and is close to two civil war era coastal forts, (Fort Fisher, a fairly large and important fort, and Fort Anderson, a smaller fort next to an early colonial town, which is a very cool museum that most locals dont even know about) I wish you luck in your USA trip

[@galaxy_canon6039]

The USS New Jersey is an excellent tour. Allthough I went 10 years ago it was amazing. Pretty cool to look through the gunsights and stuff. It's also an excellent location as it's close to the uss nautilus which while not the best tour for space reasons but would make an excellent video in it's own right. Just the fact that they're both so close together. Thanks

[@princeofcupspoc9073]

On tank guns versus battleship guns, it's not only a matter of scale. The difference between a great gun and a mediocre gun is not based on simple physics, but instead how long the designers can test to find the optimal in all categories. Length of barrel: longer barrel means better accuracy due to rifling, but means decreased range due to resistance for the round to get out of the barrel. However it can mean MORE velocity, depending on how quickly the charge can turn into gas. Then there's the charge itself: more charge means faster round, but it also means heavier breach and barrel, not to mention the length of the round, which means more room to reload in an already cramped turret. As to the round itself: you want a material that is dense and hard, but you might not have the resources to make enough rounds. See Germany's lack of tungsten/wolfram. Today we use depleted uranium, which is basically uranium with all the best fissionable isotopes removed for nuclear power and/or bombs. Those are the easy ones. Now we get to deal with the target. Slope of armor: it was found between the wars that sloping armor, relative to an incoming shell, gave you better protection due to thickness of armor gained as well as an incoming AP (solid shot armor piercing) shell bouncing off at an angle. (Also consider that most round will not come in straight on, but at some angle to the front of the tank. But the gun designers had an answer, and that was APC (armor piercing capped). Basically you design your shell with heavy brittle material in the back, and something soft like lead in the front. This gives the round more time to "stick" and penetrate. The problem there is that lead deforms at those speeds which ruins accuracy, so they upped the acronym to APCBC, which stands for armor piercing capped ballistic capped. Now we have an APC round with a thin shell of steel around the the lead front end to protect it from deforming. That is, until it hits the target. The round hits, the thin front shell cracks, the lead "squashes," and the heavy hard part of the round penetrates. At least in theory. However to add more fun, there are several other rounds that proved effective against various designs of armor, such as the US HVAP (high velocity armor piercing) round which was for the most part a dense tungsten core surrounded by light aluminium. There's the modern ubiquitous DS (discarding sabot) round, which is a long, thin, dense "dart" fired from an unrifled barrel with a light "baffel" around the dart that flies off right after firing. And my favorite, the "squash head," which is designed to NOT penetrate. Instead it "squashes" completely onto the armor, which creates a "shock wave" which causes the inner wall of the armor to fracture and fill the cabin with shrapnel. One of the reasons that composite armor is critical on the modern battlefield is to have layers that can take the energy of a squash head, and distribute/absorb the energy so that the armor does not fracture when hit. To throw another monkey wrench into the matter, there's the HEAP (high explosive armor piercing) round. The round does not actually penetrate the armor, instead when triggered, a charge is fired which creates a stream of hellaciously hot metal to burn a small hole through the armor, and fill the inside of the tank with same. This round was very popular with lower velocity guns (howitzers generally), since penetration does not depend on kinetic energy. So metallurgy, rare minerals, chemistry, cost, training, optics, stabilization, range calculation, and a dozen other factors all had to be balanced against each other. Generally a tank would carry three types of rounds. HE (high explosive) for use against soft targets. Although sometimes they would carry HEAP instead, since the blast affect is similar enough. They would be the cheaply available AP, APC, or APCBC round against armored targets. And then usually some special round which was less available, but saved for the hardest targets, such as HVAP or DS. Oh but that's not all. There are smoke rounds, phosphorus rounds, and other specialist type charges. In some ways the naval gun versus armor game changed up at a slower pace, since ship building and design took significantly longer, where as the gun versus tank game changed rapidly. The history of the war on the eastern front was one of constant upgrades as the Germans and Soviets were always trying to find an edge against the other. Sometimes technology even went backwards. The Soviets found that using a relatively slow HE round fired from a 152mm howitzer would blow the turret off the best of the German tanks, so no need to penetrate.

[@nicholusmenard9176]

If you make it down south then you can visit the USS Yorktown, USS Laffey, and USS Clagamore in Charleston, SC at the Patriots Point Museum. Possible to also see the CSS Hunley during certain times. Also visit USS North Carolina in Wilmington, NC.

[@jasonmcnulty3246]

As always, thank you for all of your wonderful work. My recommendations for ships are USS Midway (San Diego, CA) and USS Blueback (Portland, Oregon). I'd also suggest RMS Queen Mary in Long Beach, CA. It's not a warship, but well worth the visit.

[@raymondsmart496]

very much enjoyed this episode, thank you

[@joedanker3267]

I recommend the USS Massachusetts. She’s a museum ship in Fall River, MA. The museum, Battleship Cove it’s called, also has a Fletcher class destroyer and a submarine. My first of many visits here when I was a wee lad with my father ignited my lifelong love of ships and naval war fare. The museum is a nice facility but I highly recommend attending during the summer months or fall months The weather in this port city can be dreadful during the winter and spring.

[@ThorinOakenshieldGSD2023]

If you can get out to the west coast I recommend San Diego for the U.S.S. Midway. From a historical perspective besides being the carrier most associated with assignment to Japan, it had the misfortune of being upgraded with blisters along the hull side which the Japanese yard that did the work recommended against. the ship finished it's carer basically as a helicopter carrier. The blisters made the ship less stable in high seas. Well stocked museum. Also nearby Balboa Park has an excellent air and space museum along with model trains. The Midway usually has a Nimitz class in the background berthed across the way. It' is also worth noting that Conrado Island which is in the bay is where the Japanese sent pilots to learn how to fly from Curtis at the same time he was training American aviators. They were exposed to early U.S. naval air doctrine there. Within walking distance of Midway you have two Subs, one Russian one U.S. and several sailing ships, some original some replica. B-39 Submarine Californian HMS Surprise (Used in Master and Commander) PCF 816 Swift Boat San Diego Harbor Pilot Boat San Salvador Star of India Steam Ferry Berkeley Steam Yacht Medea USS Dolphin About a four hour drive north you have the U.S.S. Iowa in San Pedro, along with a liberty ship that sails in re-enactments.

[@rogercoulombe3613]

The thing with comparing submarine forces is that you can't completely separate the submarines from the rest of the Navy. Japan would have been in a much better place to improve their ASW capabilities if they didn't have to worry about the unstoppable swarm of US carriers and surface ships. Likewise, the Royal Navy wouldn't have been able to operate as freely against an opponent that was actually capable of projecting significant naval power.

[@piritskenyer]

Hey Drach, can you cite your insight forstating that the 330 of the Dunkerques was not massivel more powerful than the 283's of the Scharnhorsts? Based on what reading I've done, the 330 outclased the 14" Mk VII of the KGV's *massively* in terms of penetrative and destructive power, and the 14" Mk VII was one of the best 14" guns "on the market". I also don't entirely agree with your assessment of Strasbourg being massively vulnerable to the Scharnhorsts. While Dunkerque herself was only protected against the 283mm/52 of the Deutschland class, Strasbourg was beefed up in terms of protection explicitely because of the rising threat of the Scharnhorst class' greater protection requiring them to close the distance and more powerful /54.5 weapons.

[@Drachinifel]

The main issues are that the French guns suffer accuracy issues due to close packed guns in the turrets, albeit this is fixable, and due to the differences in armour, even Strasbourg os vulnerable at realistic battle range to Scharnhorsts guns, whilst Scharnhorst has some marginal protection at the outer bands of combat ranges. With regards to the KGV 14" gun, that gun still has a larger bursting charge and is therefore more destructive, albeit that the penetration of the French gun as very good for it's calibre. Basically, it's a combination of factors that mitigate it's effectiveness. If they introduced delay coils on the guns and/or added an extra inch or two of armour on top of Strasbourgs thickness, then it completely changes things and gives the French ships a significant advantage.

[@piritskenyer]

@@Drachinifel That is fair. Thank you for your reply. I read an unsubtantiated comment somewhere that the French actually started firing half salvoes from the quads (left of pairs first then right of pairs (guns I, III, V and VII followed by II, IV, VI and VIII) to mitigate the effects of blast in the absence of delaying coils. Have you heard anything regarding this? Also, it is true that the 14" had a substantially larger bursting charge, that slipped my mind. the point about the monstrous penetration of the 330 stands however. I still really think that you give the Dunkerques a little more stick that they actually deserve, but I accept your essessment towards their survivability, while maintaining that the guns on the Scharnhorsts would have still had a hard time against Strasbourg. Pitting the two Renowns and the two Dunkeks against the Twins would have certainly been a very interesting affair in my opinion. I think the two greatest shortcomings of the Dunkerques were the lack of radar-assisted (and later guided) firecontrol and very weak AA.

[@kemarisite]

@@Drachinifel I thought standard practice on those quad gun French turrets was to fire one gun in each half turret (i.e., guns 1 and 3 or 2 and 4) to minimize that interference. Granted that means they're firing half-salvos all the time, but often does a ship get a chance to fire a full salvo for a high percentage of hits?

[@Drachinifel]

@@kemarisite it was introduced in some ships once the problems were appreciated fully, but not from the outset.

[@Saberjet1950]

In Duluth MN there's a old CG cutter named Sundew, she privately owned now but i wouldn't be surprised if you could get him to let you on. shes fully operational and its quite cool. I crewed her for a few days while i was in Sea Cadets.

[@primastanislaus9184]

I'd recommend the only surviving pre-Dreadnought Battleship. Mikasa Museum Ship is quite easy to access and recently they added more English friendly description and if its not enough, I volunteer to translate.

[@ericschmottlach6257]

To address the question of a “Can a smaller diameter shell be made longer and heavier, like in a tank” You answered the question in terms of a balance of firepower. In tank combat the actual length of the penetrator with the same diameter makes a massive difference in armor penetration. The question asked I believe is “why not make the actual warhead “that much longer” to compensate for the smaller diameter? Same throw weight but longer projectile but having in a similar mass. What are the advantages and disadvantages of a large diameter shell vs a smaller diameter shell that is longer and the same mass?

[@joearnold6881]

Obviously you must come to Boston to see the USS Constitution. We’ve got things like Fletcher class destroyer USS Cassin Young in lovely museum-ship condition (last I checked), etc. Battleship Cove is close by as well. BB-59 Massachussetts, a wwii us sub, and an East German corvette are among its charms.

[@eleuchte]

Also the USS Salem in Quincy