The Drydock - Episode 240

[@JohnSmith-of2gu]

56:40 Ahh a classic "one, at sufficient velocity" joke! Drach knows his nerd business.

[@michaelimbesi2314]

The typical method for dealing with a boiler tube that has sprung a leak is to shut down the boiler and let it cool, and then go into the steam drum and the mud drum and hammer plugs into the ends of the offending tube, sealing it off from the rest of the boiler. After this is complete, the boiler can be relit and used as normal. The pressure of the boiler will hold the plugs in place, and without water behind it, the remains of the tube will just melt away. The boiler will work fine, just with a lower steam generation capacity. After this has happened a couple times, the boiler will need to be re-tubed. Side note: a tube going in a water-tube boiler isn’t going to do any real damage to the crew. The tube is small enough that the rate of the leak will not be large enough to be dangerous, and because the tube is inside the boiler, the escaping steam simply vents up the funnel. There’s a reason that water-tube boilers were also known as “explosion-proof”.

[@vikkimcdonough6153]

1:03:50 - I SpringSharped out a G3-fast (32-knot) N3, and it came out over 4,000 tons _heavier_ than _Yamato_ - which, if you account for both the additional displacement needed to go from 28 to 32 knots and the savings from the N3's all-forward layout, is pretty much in line with _Yamato_ being about N3-efficient but for the handicap of a conventional fore-and-aft turret layout.

[@NathanOkun]

Note that the USS MONTANA Class had 5"/54 guns replacing the other 5"/38 guns in the Navy. The 5"/54 after WWII replaced the 5"38 gun in single fully-automatic mounts of destroyers and cruisers made after WWII, especially all long-range-missile-armed warships that had both a gun and a missile launcher/ The 5"/54 gun fired a heavier 70 pound (31.75 kg), much more streamlined time/VT-fuzed AA or Special Common (base-fuzed SAP type) anti-surface target set of shells versus the 5"/38 55 pound (24.95 kg) blunter-nosed shells. The muzzle velocity is about 200 ft/sec (61 m/sec) higher than the 5"/38. Only late in the 2oth Century did the higher-velocity 5"/62 automatic guns replace the 5"/54 in the new US warships. The twin mounts on MONTANA were located like in NORTH CAROLINA and WASHINGTON, one deck lower than IOWA and SOUTH DAKOTA Classes, and were slightly larger to handle the longer recoil and longer ammo. I also think that the mounts were slightly more armored at 2.5/3" thick compared to 2/2.5" for the smaller prior fast battleships. The heaver 5"/54 ammo may have slowed the rate of fire somewhat unless mechanical assistance was provided in the mount, but the shells had a longer range, higher velocity to make aiming easier, a larger explosion charge/blast radius against aircraft, and better penetration against light armor or lightly-protected land targets. These may compensate if the rate of fire is slower.

[@gregorywright4918]

Weren't those 5"/54s originally in the Midways?

[@NathanOkun]

Drach, you need to do a major discussion on the effects of various electric power types (various kinds of AC versus DC) that had major effects on the improvements in warship systems in the Age of Ironclads and after, most especially fire-control and inter-system ("step-by-step" transmitters versus "synchros/Selsyns" and "magnetic amplifiers") analog data transmission devices through the end of WWII -- digits later replacing all of these. This is IMPORTANT!!!

[@j-pbelliveau4439]

4:46 As a Canadian, I'm not used to hearing about Erebus and Terror surviving.

[@notshapedforsportivetricks2912]

It's a bit of a puzzle why they kept recycling the names as well. I put it down to the british fondness of celebrating spectacular failures. For example, what other nation's most famous sporting tropht (The Ashes) celebrates their most noted defeat in a game that they invented and in which victory, as the late Alan Coren commented, can never be a triumph as it just brings you back to the point that they shouldn't have lost it in the first place.

[@beaker126]

Hey Drach, would you ever consider doing a video about the Panama canal? While not strictly a naval topic, there's no doubt it changed how navies, especially the U.S. deployed their ships. Given your engineering experience I bet it would be fascinating.

[@ricardokowalski1579]

The Panama Canal touches so many things Signaled the downfall of Lessep (Of Suez canal fame), and created a political/financial scandal in France Splintered Panama from Colombia Drove forward malaria research and use of DDT, with enormous consequences in S-america, asia and africa Replaced the overland Acapulco to Veracruz trade route, and the taxes it produced to the mexican government Affected the size of marine vessels, merchant and military Brought thousands of asian workers to the americas, and a lasting cultural heritage Set precedent regarding the transit rights for the Montreux Convention (Crimea was also an issue back then, Crimea is always and issue) Gave us the beautifully designed Gatun dam spillway, an under appreciated masterpiece. kzbin.info/www/bejne/m3eteauCmNVkjc0 And all that before we even talk about steam shovels, dredges, the locks, the control valves, the fact that the whole thing runs on gravity Yeah... a video on the canal would be great.👍

[@mbryson2899]

Not just deployed but designed.

[@WALTERBROADDUS]

Not a bad topic...

[@sadwingsraging3044]

I asked for this a long time ago. Both the Suez and the Panama! Along with the obligatory rant on how much harder and extra wear and tear it was to round the horns before they were built.

[@gregorywright4918]

Re the question at 39:00, on a warship just about everything in engineering is duplicated, triplicated, or quadruplicated, so first of all a particular problem is powered down and bypassed, with alternates taking up the slack or the ship just having less power. The ship, depending on it's size, carries some spares for frequent problems (such as turbine blades, bearings or shaft seals) which can be swapped in by the engineering crew if they have time to strip down the item once it is cold. Often it has to wait until the ship is not underway, but I've heard of some repairs being done during long cruises. Bigger ships have machine shops where parts can be adjusted, repaired or fabricated. At a port there may be more parts or a machine shop, or the ship might tie up next to a repair tender. If it is serious the ship may be routed to a shipyard where specialized workers and machines can be found. Some things like boilers and gears can be operated without fully repairing the part, they are just less efficient. Other things, like high-speed turbines, are carefully balanced and cannot be run with broken blades, but individual blades can be swapped out as they are identical. If the enclosure or the main shaft is damaged, that is much more serious and would have to wait for shipyard attention.

[@scottgiles7546]

He LIVES! I was worried as the post came late. Don't want something to happen to a respected content provider.

[@greenseaships]

21:11- Drach if you don't have it, get "The Zeppelin in Combat" By Douglas Robinson! It's English language, hundreds of pages, FULL of pictures and diagrams and covers everything from the pre-war earliest navy zeppelins to the scuttlings after the war! The hard part will be editing down what you want to include! Plenty of copies around; not too expensive.

[@darrellsmith4204]

I read that as "Led Zeppelin in Concert" and had momentary confusion. lol

[@na3044]

+1 on that, that book is basically the definite source. There's also the (somewhat rare) "Der F.D.L." by Thor Goote, a biography of Strasser himself. Also YAY Drach answered my stupid question!

[@ssmith5048]

@@darrellsmith4204 I think Led Zeppelin concerts counted as some type of combat due to their devastating performances.

[@greenseaships]

It occurs to me that airships may be too broad a subject for Drach to handle. Almost like we need a 'Drach for airships' on YT. :P

[@na3044]

@@greenseaships Hm, maybe ask Rex' Hangar?

[@natthaphonhongcharoen]

When talking about ships or spacecraft the importance of toilet design is often underappreciated. Even though it is just as important as the other exciting parts of the design.

[@glenchapman3899]

So funny story. If you see the plans for the original Enterprise from Star Trek fame, although never shown in the series, the toilet was right next to the turbo lifts on the bridge. Would have loved to see someone meaning to go to the toilet accidentally end up in the lift lol

[@687grayfox]

Fun ship toilet fact, the toilets in the US Gerald R Ford, the USN's latest and greatest super carrier, use a vacuum design like airliner toilets, and their pipes are too narrow for the volume of material they have to process, requiring periodic flushing with a special acid because they get clogged up, each time costing the navy $400,000.

[@RuralTowner]

@@687grayfox Don't let Army or other vising Land Lubbers on board that have been eating nothing but MREs for the past 2+ months.

[@Wolfeson28]

@@glenchapman3899 Or someone absent-mindedly heading for the turbolift and ending up at the wrong door. "Deck fi...oh shit, sorry, lieutenant!"

[@grantamos6299]

The other less titillating parts

[@micheallinke9278]

I like it when you delve on obscure ships. Hoping the Thai coast defense ships get some future air time. The remains of one are just outside Bangkok that can be scampered on. Interesting that several Japanese built Thai navy ships are museum ships, the only examples of Japanese war time era ships still preserved.

[@michaelpiatkowskijr1045]

Adding to the ship upgrades and how long are they economical. When you look at ships like Victory, Constitution, Essex class carriers, Midway class carriers, Iowa class battleships, and the Enterprise are really exceptional. On the outside of the Iowas, these ships spent most of their lives in operation. These ships had one big thing in common. Strength. They were the right size with the right cost to remain relevant.

[@AndrewPalmerMTL]

I seem to recall a relatively recent discussion that suggested Troubridge's courtmartial was one of the factors which led Cradock to his doom at Coronel. My question is: Given the circumstances of the evacuation of Crete and Cunningham's determination to NOT let the Army down, which occurred in mid 1941, could this have led Adm Phillips (some 6 months later) to take greater risks with Force Z from a similar "the Army is counting on us to prevent landings" idea?

[@uncleroysmusic]

57:26 James Earl Jones in "Field of Dreams"..."I'm going to hit you with this pipe until you go away."

[@nukkinfuts6550]

HMS Terror such a fitting name for that ship!

[@22NF2]

"....Prince Eugen's hydrophone operators were not dumb." Or Russian circa 1900-1905; they could tell they were two British capital ships and not imaginary torpedo boats.

[@Wolfeson28]

Well, false submarine/periscope/torpedo sightings or hydrophone/sonar contacts are a very common thing. I don't think it's an insult to Prinz Eugen's hydrophone operators to suggest that they might have been mistaken at something where even experienced operators frequently do make mistakes. Especially considering the barrage of unusual underwater noises that would have been going on around the same time with Hood's destruction and sinking.

[@TomFynn]

When the British Task Force 317 sailed south during the Falklands War/Conflict, the ASW guys were understandably a bit trigger happy, so it can be said that the first victim of the Falklands War was not the truth but some whale.

[@michaelkovacic2608]

Scharnhorst did use her torpedoes at North Cape - her captain was a torpedo specialist. I think examination of her wreck has shown one launcher to be empty, but I might be wrong here.

[@TrickiVicBB71]

I was going to say the same thing. Either Flower Class Corvettes kamikazes into Bismarck or try to time their depth charges in front of Bismarck to go off underneath it when it passes.

[@derise328]

Tubes that fail are generally plugged. Replacement isn't required until the percentage of plugged tubes is exceeded in which case, the tube bundle will be replaced.

[@na3044]

First of all, my good man, Thanks a LOT for answering my question! Secondly as for the photos, here's a few ideas: First of all the best book on the german ones I found was Patrick H. Robinson: "The Zeppelin in Combat". For images I'd say your best bet would be contacting one of the Museums, Tondern Airship Museum in Denmark, and the Zeppelin-Museum in Friedrichshafen. Again, damn, than answer really made my sunday, thanks for that and all the other enjoyable work! :)

[@na3044]

If you need any info I'd be happy tpo help, since my youth when I discovered my Grandpas Book about Kptlt. Strasser rigid Airships have been a passion of mine. WIkipedia alone has a ton of Photos, all free of copyright. The reason I mentioned the german Airship Detachment is because their efforts inn WWI were the most impressive of the lot. The british only discovered how to actually build some after they recovered an abandoned Zeppelin. Hell, the first vehicle to cross the ocean by air in 1919 was R39, a brotish copy of a german navy Zeppelin. Or L59, over 6000 km in the air to deliver ammunition to Lettow-Vorbeck -ö when they went half the way to Africa they got a radio that he had capitulated, and so they turned around without stopping and went home.

[@TheFreaker86]

00:59:10 Ryan Szymanski talked about the Brig and its Toilet in a video on USS NJ's channel

[@88porpoise]

3:30 Would it even matter what country you ordered from? I am reasonably confident that anyone you order the ships from finding itself in a major war is going to want those vessels (with a possible exception of it you are in the same war).

[@Drachinifel]

The relative strength of the countries in question and their preexisting relationships can make a significant difference.

[@88porpoise]

@@Drachinifel I would assume that if you are ordering naval ships from a foreign shipyard that you would generally be the significantly weaker party (with the main exception being when just staring to build out naval infrastructure). Out of curiosity did the US, France, Italy or other countries seize (or compel the sale of) vessels under construction in WWI or WWII? I know the US delivered Argentina's battleships well before they joined the war but I assume some smaller vessels were being built in these countries.

[@briancox2721]

@ 43:59, the guns can elevate in the turret independently. Did the fire control not send individual corrections to each barrel to account for different effects of combined pitch and roll on each gun?

[@sskuk1095]

The question about the Yamato class was very interesting!

[@davidbrennan660]

The Monty Python sketch on Barry Zeppelin and the later one on Von Zeppelin throwing Govenment Ministers and foreigner Ambassadors out his balloon.................ahhhhhhhhhhhhhh!! Must be part of a general Airship Video.

[@TheAsh274]

USS "Macon" rhymes with "bacon"

[@billbrockman779]

Living in Georgia, it cracks me up to hear Drach pronounce it, but I’m sure I would mess up English town names worse.

[@tbretten]

​@@billbrockman779kzbin.info/www/bejne/q4qxq6Sdipyhl5Y :D

[@dougjb7848]

And B rhymes with G and that stands for “Good!!” 😋

[@MrNicoJac]

I just cannot help but read that and think of Macron (the French president), And pronounce it like that, just without the R 😅😂 (still appreciate the explainer though)

[@tedhill5983]

I live an hour from Akron. It is pronounced Ack-run ^_^ But then we pronounce everything weird here. I live in Wooster pronounced Worcester. We have streets such as Beall [Bell] and Bever [Beaver]. Our state also has Berlin [Burr-lin], Canton [Can-tonne] is near and rhymes with Akron, and Medina [Meh-dine-uhh]. And that is just in the north east quadrant.

[@nco_gets_it]

regarding toilet water, I worked on a USMC base and every toilet on the base had a sign that read "Water Non-potable". So being a 30 year Army veteran I had to ask the Marines there--is drinking toilet water an actual problem for Marines. Apparently, the answer is no--which led to more questions. Bottom line, every military decision like this is written in blood, injury, or illness. If having a fresh water toilet was considered necessary to prevent illness, then someone, somewhere, drank toilet water to get out of duty.

[@princeoftonga]

Oh I can totally believe that. I believe that a army trick to get out of duty was to swallow a little bit of cordite! It’d make you quite ill and turn your skin really pale and grey.

[@daguard411]

I just watched your review of the CSS Alabama, have you done an episode on the other ships involved with the Confederacy's efforts in the Pacific?

[@Niels_Larsen]

Now I'm curious about your thoughts on the Richelieu efficiency.

[@xt6wagon]

On the US Standard Battleships, I'd rate them higher in use as defensive units off the US coast. I rate them lower for anything offensive unless its to hit something fairly close. I'd want higher speed if I'm going to be playing with other battleships in unfriendly waters.

[@RedXlV]

Regarding Yamato's 5-inch secondary guns...bear in mind that the Japanese used a completely different gun on their battleships and cruisers than they did on destroyers. Destroyers carried the 12.7cm/50 3rd Year Type, which from the Ayanami-class onward were given high enough elevation to be nominally dual-purpose, but were really bad at it. Battleships and cruisers, on the other hand, used the 12.7cm/40 Type 89, which was designed as a pure AA gun. "Dual-purpose" capability for it was purely incidental, simply a result of 1.9kg of Shimose powder being adequate to damage unarmored surface targets too. Six twin turrets per side (incidentally, what the real Yamato ended up after her final refit, so *very much* doable if the 15.5cm triple turrets had never been part of the design) is therefore a pretty decent heavy AA battery. Not as good as the US battleships achieve with five twin turrets per side, because the 5"/38 is just plain better than the 12.7cm/40 (higher rate of fire, better velocity, better fire control system), but above average for the 1930s.

[@gokbay3057]

Good point.

[@Noble713]

I like Drach's alternate Yamato design, with a smarter secondary/DP layout.

[@WindHaze10]

and replace all 20mm guns with 40mm bofors and you got the perfect battleship for the era.

[@ousou78]

​@@WindHaze10 and somehow give the Japanese 100mm VT fuse. Now that's a ship you don't want to fly near.

[@bkjeong4302]

@@ousou78 Nah, still no match for air superiority. Will shoot down more planes, still can’t do a damn thing about a carrier strike group staying a few hundred miles away and launching aircraft.

[@michaelkovacic2608]

Regarding the splinter deck, Bismarck's main armor deck could be considered as such, since the point of her spaced armor array was to detonate both bombs and artillery shells before they reached her main armor deck - both the 50mm upper deck and the 145mm upper belt were thick enough to reliably trigger the fuse. When reading original documents from her designers, you get the impression that Bismarck's designers were relatively confident in this system. During the bombing of Tirpitz, it was shown, however, that aerial bombs may detonate above the main deck, but there wasn't really a guarantee for it.

[@nukkinfuts6550]

Well aerial bombs did grow in size from when they designed Tirpitz and she was sunk and the development of fuses did not stand still either..

[@michaelkovacic2608]

@Nukkin Futs sure, I just wanted to point out the idea behind German armor schemes, since they were fundamentally different from other nations.

[@MonkeyJedi99]

The main reason to make the expeditions to the Northwest Passage was to later inspire Stan Rogers to write a song that was later performed by Unleash the Archers. To tie it closer to the channel, a Canadian folk punk band also covered the song. The band? The Dreadnoughts.

[@airplanemaster1]

Hey Drach! I know it's coincidental, but thank you for posting on my birthday lol! It's an excellent present.

[@Dave_Sisson]

With an average of three posts per week, Drach will post every two and a bit birthdays.

[@napalmholocaust9093]

Around 44 and ten seconds, the shedding light question;- has all that fire control been solved in modern times? Is there still an issue with firing ahead and having to ignore roll? And have tri-axial mounts reached the larger calibers yet? I'm not well versed on the modern control limitations.

[@thetorturepenguin]

great answers as always Drach- Would the Tennessees have been a good age comparison to Hood? They were both laid down in 1916. Maybe not though, as Hood at this point was very much a battlecruiser.

[@MadMax-bq6pg]

From the Universe of Absurdity tales (volume XXVI, no. 3.14) ten thousand flower class vessels mob Bismarck in kamikaze relays until firstly Bismarck runs out of all munitions. The attacking relays now continue until Bismarck runs out of fuel. The boarding party accepts the surrender. On Bismarck’s bridge. From the Admiral. At cutlass point. Home for tea & medals.

[@keithrosenberg5486]

USS Samuel B Roberts did go into battle with an enemy battle line. Roberts did have three torpedo tubes though.

[@DisheveledSuccess]

“I hope you catch shrapnel with ya fæce!” Lol best imaginary naval insult

[@ricardokowalski1579]

Or the ever popular "you mama so ugly sharpnel runs away from her face" 😂

[@gregorywright4918]

Although if it's coming from a deck penetration it would probably hit the top of the head...

[@DisheveledSuccess]

@@gregorywright4918 scalp is just top face….. lol 😂

[@notshapedforsportivetricks2912]

I was thinking of a more ... remote part of the anatomy.

[@DisheveledSuccess]

@@notshapedforsportivetricks2912 remote, austere, dank…. Lmfao

[@dougjb7848]

Did monitors have fire Director gear sufficient to track moving targets?

[@H3ADHUNT3R70]

On his normal background with the man and the ship in the drydock, I now can't unsee the little smiley right to the left of his head in the portholes

[@SCjunk]

Fuse on a HE shell such as a 8.8cm SCK C/35 Ubts gun (code name Krokos) would have a standard HE shell fitted with EK 28 - EK 28 was a naval term [don't ask it is German] for a tube beneath the balistic cap incoporating a variant of AZ 23 fuze, This would not even be armed before it cleared the muzzle - being a standard Krupp centifugal multiple spring arrested weight arming fuze so working on the suposition that a C35 had standard rifling for its type at1/30 to 1/38 increasing twist a L/38 (actual rifled barrel length) would take at least one full turn to exit the barrel so would not arm until it was in flight probably at least a further barrel length from the muzzle. so in the case of U156 the likely hood is the pressure build up in the barrel blew the gun, just as in land serrvice artillery to put a gun beyond use (dare I say scuttle on a Naval video) requires some sort of block in the barrel - a shell forced into the muzzle, or hammer head forced into the breech followed by a shell, then fired -chances are the fuze and the accelerator will never initiate the main charge.

[@tomdolan9761]

We know approximately how many main gun hits versus rounds fired were obtained at Jutland. Do we have any similar statistics concerning the number of hits obtained by torpedoes versus the number expended?

[@gregorywright4918]

You mean just at Jutland, or in general? For more general, numbers are out there, but I don't know if anyone has compiled overall stats beyond what Vince O'Hara did in "US Navy Versus the Axis". They should probably be separated by nationality, launcher (air, ship, sub), and war (WW1 very different than WW2).

[@jlvfr]

On the _Flower_ madness, there's one thing you do: load them up with marines or commandos, and storm the ship!

[@scottgiles7546]

Make that Polish Marines and you have a winner....

[@bkjeong4302]

That doesn’t really fix the issue of how they’re going to catch Bismarck in the first place.

[@jlvfr]

@@bkjeong4302 get in front of them. _Flowers_ sailing in from multiple angles.

[@spikespa5208]

One has to wonder about some of the questions Drach gets.

[@jlvfr]

@@spikespa5208 "if we put a trimaran hull on the Bismarck and armed it with V1 rockets..."

[@964cuplove]

You should really consider to acquire some animation skills and use them, eg at 8:17 I have no clu what you are showing here, what the various materials thicknesses and shadings mean and for sure not what the splinter deck might be.. by the sound of it it’s more a wall than a deck (as a deck is a top floor / walk-on-roof - right ?! A simple arrow (easy enough in e.g. Final Cut Pro or Premiere) would go a long way, let alone some colored overlay both ideally timed to when you talk about things at the very least add a legend- pleaze

[@magnemoe1]

34:00 Some places like the Baltic get surface ice on the sea. I assume this is even more common in northern Canada, yes thus is often brackish water, less salty than sea water but still it proves salt water can freeze. Also freezing water is one option to distilling to make high proof alcohol. I say this was a bit wishful thinking

[@Dave_Sisson]

If you go to the northernmost part of the Baltic Sea and taste the water, it is just a bit brackish. There's probably more fresh water from rivers than salt water from the sea in the mix.

[@pwmiles56]

I thought large naval guns were never stabilised, in the sense of instantaneous compensation for the ship movement. They were just too big. The method was to aim as if the ship was upright, then fire when it was. Sorry if I'm wrong!

[@kemarisite]

There is a lot of that. However, during WW2 new built and rebuilt US ships had remote power control (RPC) for main and secondary guns (maybe 40 mm, but 20 mm were hand operated) in both elevation and training. This means that the signal from the fire control system, rather than going to a pointer that the gun crew would try to match manually, would go to a massive electric motor that would elevate the gun(s) or rotate the mount/turret. Guns with RPC display a certain amount of what we think of as stabilization, not to the level of a Leopard 2 not spilling its beer meme, but quite a bit better than just waiting until the gyros say we're uptight and level before allowing the guns to fire.

[@sammymartin7891]

there's a lot of that in modern Tanks. the sights are stabilized not the gun and the gun fires when they are in coincidence

[@kemarisite]

@@sammymartin7891 this is not.possible if only the sights are stabilized. kzbin.info/www/bejne/jHjdg5msnNOGldU

[@sammymartin7891]

@@jackgee3200 Not in an older Tank Fire Control System.

[@DeliveryMcGee]

@@kemarisite More "It tries to stay on target, hold the trigger and it'll fire when it gets in place", as opposed to "'Fire!' 'On the wa'[THUNK ping!]" of modern tanks

[@project9701]

I'm wondering what will happen when our esteemed host hits Drydock Episode 420 (September 6, 2026) or 666 (March 23, 2031)... ...and how much FUN we'll have when we get there...

[@beastboy0078]

"Rock-Steady?" ROCKING STONE!

[@hughgordon6435]

After the end of hostilities in Europe there were anomalous U Boat missions! Were/was there anything similar with Japanese subs?

[@beaker126]

It wasn't after, but what's arguably the last attack by and action against a U-boat took place on May 5th, known as the battle of point Judith. There's some some talk that they'd been told to stand down, but either didn't get the message or the captain ignored it, you might find it interesting.

[@hughgordon6435]

@@beaker126 I was thinking more of the mystery u boats turning up off Argentina? Any Jap eqivalence?

[@gregorywright4918]

@@hughgordon6435 There were so few of the big ones left, and Japan was so short on fuel, plus there was no "escape to Argentina" option for the Emperor or his minions.

[@DubGathoni]

Question: how is standard deviation delt with within the context of the inter war treaty system? What ships are design with as displacement and what they end up with as displacement are generally two different things. Example, could I get around the treaty by designing a 35-thousand-ton ship, but build it so poorly that it ends up being overweight in for but not with line of thinking.

[@TotallyDapper]

Your second pronunciation of Nevada was correct. :)

[@geofftimm2291]

@Drachinifel THANK YOU!

[@tomdolan9761]

I agree in retrospect the six inch secondary armament on the Yamato class was useless. Given the war they ultimately found themselves in some form of smaller caliber dual purpose and purely anti aircraft quad mounts would have much more effective

[@bkjeong4302]

The problem is that in that such a war, having a battleship at all in the first place isn’t ideal since it’s going to be used as a gigantic and pointlessly overarmed CLAA (as happened with the Iowas).

[@tomdolan9761]

Agreed but at the beginning of WW2 all sides were still fighting the last war and the various navies version of the ‘Gun Club’ controlled appropriations. The rapid development of naval aviation neutered the battleship as a major combatant although the fast battleships still had fleet utility as flagships because of their size and as enormous anti aircraft platforms .

[@gerardmdelaney]

All of the US battleships, and the Alaskas, did serious work in fire support and pre-landing preparation of the beaches.

[@tomdolan9761]

Of course but their primary reason to exist was as ships of the line to do battle with their counterparts and warfare at sea left them largely obsolete for that role. Only two of the six Alaskas were completed, four of the six Iowas and none of the five Montanas even had a keel laid. One wonders how many carriers the US might have built had the not built those they did complete

[@gregorywright4918]

@@tomdolan9761 The build decisions were all made in the 1938-40 timeframes, well before war experiences, and you really don't have WW2 experience against moving battleships until 1941. The point was to have a well-balanced fleet, able to handle both air and surface threats by day or night and in all kinds of weather. American fleet problems of the 1930s pointed to the utility of the aircraft carrier as an independent striking unit. but also it's fragility and need to be able to fall back on (or behind) a heavier surface element at night or in bad weather. Early Mediterranean experience of 40-41 was a mixed bag, even seeing the heavily armored Illustrious getting pounded and knocked out. Build decisions were revised in 1942 as more experience piled up, but you still see the faster battleships escorting the carriers throughout the war and being tasked with dealing with potential surface threats (that never materialized or were bungled like off Samar) into 1945. And immediately after the war there were no peer opponents to worry about.

[@bkjeong4302]

Flower-class depth charge kamikaze against Bismarck….I now really need an animation of this happening. Edit: I think that, with the last three questions, this may be the first drydock where we have had consecutive questions on Bismarck, on Iowa, and on Yamato. Even more hilariously the questions start off with a ridiculous premise and end with a serious discussion, and also follow an order of increasing displacement for the ships being discussed.

[@xt6wagon]

Yamato also has eclosed triple 25mm AA guns. I can't imagine that tonnage being worth anything. 25mm is bad enough but then you spend all that steel enclosing it. Putting it on a mount to support that steel. Oh and as so much of Yamato, had rule of cool curves all over its design. No lazy engineer make everything out of flat plate here!

[@george_364]

Ryan of the Battleship New Jersey channel had answered the question about the toilet and the fresh water. Being on Missouri as New Jersey doesn't have the original brig.

[@SkywalkerWroc]

"Every dual-purpose gun is a compromise between anti-surface and anti-air" - but *why?* DP guns are just regular guns with more degrees of elevation + additional shell type. In a number of guns all they had to do is a redesign of the mounting, and they turned anti-surface gun into dual-purpose (this was particularly common in the early interwar period). I can imagine "some" compromise being done when mount increased in mass, but it did not always happen (in some cases decreasing the mass was a part of the redesign goals along with increasing the maximum elevation) or it was negligibly small compared to other sources of the increased mass (most notable source being the added armoring or various changes desired for increased rate of fire).

[@yosemitesm07]

Is Drach going to Tankfest, and if so, which days

[@Drachinifel]

Maybe, depending on how dates line up

[@princeoftonga]

Nice. Lunch break and Drydock. Does it get any better?

[@thedarkwarlord3061]

I was on Wisconsin in December of 2022 and the guide said the brig was hot and not fun for the inmates so the inmates would drink the salt water to get sick so they would be sent to the infirmary that had AC and better food than they would have got in the brig

[@dougjb7848]

23:30 For as much money as each nation spent to build battleships to combat and destroy the battleships that all other nations were spending so much money to build, the frequency with which any battleships directly fought other battleships makes it seem like battleships were rather pointless.

[@stevenjennings197]

Hey Drach, do you know if the Kriegsmarine or Royal Navy looked at copying the US Navy's Super Heavy shells?

[@vikkimcdonough6153]

I thought _Hood's_ torpedo launch was an unintentional discharge triggered by some random failure or another as the ship broke up and sank?

[@kemarisite]

Hood's torpedoes had a low speed setting, for long range, of 25 knots. At that speed, over the nine minutes from Hood's destruction until Prinz Eugen begins maneuvering to avoid torpedoes, the torpedoes would only travel about 7,500 yards. So a launch a few minutes earlier may be likely.

[@vikkimcdonough6153]

@@kemarisite What was their range on their _faster_ speed setting?

[@kemarisite]

@@vikkimcdonough6153 8,000 yards, according to navweaps. It may well have been incidental and the sound just carries that far, because the range at the slow setting is still only about 13,500 yards and wouldn't have caught up with B and PE anyway.

[@gregorywright4918]

There are several interdependent steps involved in firing torpedoes, such as opening the outer doors, I have never heard of them accidentally firing when the ship (or sub) was struck.

[@kemarisite]

@@gregorywright4918 these were above-water torpedo tubes mounted on the weather deck or one deck down that would need to be trained outboard (think of the recent HMCS Haida video) to fire. No outer door to open like on a submarine or below-water torpedo tube.

[@tomdolan9761]

I should think the effectiveness of dual purpose guns changed as the war went along as radar direction and VT fusing became prevalent.

[@thetacticalbowspamer850]

what is the 1870-1880s historical batleship ship norm and what was the best ship

[@stevewhite3424]

Calculations are relatively simple when all you have to change the input variables. Developing the formulas is where the work lies 😂

[@stevewhite3424]

@@jackgee3200 Well I certainly wasn't saying it was simple at the same time except.for maybe at time of development no one was solving differential equations under fire. ;)

[@dougjb7848]

1:09:00 My guess? “All of them.”

[@hughgordon6435]

Drach? Why are imperial gun calibres mixed with metric? As in the 4.5 , the 5.25? Is it shorthand or is there some logical technical reason?

[@WALTERBROADDUS]

Because they were using that system and not the metric system at the time.

[@alanhughes6753]

Because some countries used metric calibres, while other countries (US & UK being the main ones here) use imperial?

[@vikkimcdonough6153]

Different countries. Some (US, UK/Commonwealth) used imperial (or, in the U.S. case, U.S. customary) units for measurement. All the other major naval powers (Germany, France, Russia, Japan, Italy...) used metric units, but commentators from (or catering primarily to users in) U.S./UK/Commonwealth countries, like Drach, will frequently convert metric measurements to their imperial (or U.S. customary) equivalents for ease of comparison (and I suspect that the reverse is also true).

[@hughgordon6435]

@@alanhughes6753 a measure( imperial) cannot be sub divided by metric? Pounds and ounces cannot be devided by 10?

[@hughgordon6435]

​@@vikkimcdonough6153 so? Is a 4.5 inch gun four and a half inch or is it four inches and .5 of an inch? Different results!😮

[@TheWareek]

how usefull would monitors have been to the Marine's in the pacific, they could have provided shore bombardment, with the advantage of the navy not taking them away to do some other mission, i.e. chase Japanese aircraft carriers.

[@bkjeong4302]

They’d have been useful if they could actually get across the Pacific. During the Vietnam War the USN did use improvised monitors (modified landing craft with big guns mounted on) which did a better overall job at less cost than New Jersey.

[@TheWareek]

@@bkjeong4302 thats so true the Pacific war was really on another scale when distances are considered. I am reading a good book at the moment on the logistics involved.

[@Dave_Sisson]

I wonder what the British did with their monitors after D-Day? I know they moved a lot of carriers and battleships to the Indian and Pacific oceans, so perhaps the monitors went with them and bombarded places like Burma or Borneo?

[@TheWareek]

@@Dave_Sisson you should read the "The forgotten fleet" about the British pacific fleet. It was large powerful and totally dwarfed by the US navy.

[@spikespa5208]

@@Dave_Sisson At least a couple were used later in the Scheldt campaign in the Autumn of '44. One was going to the Far East when the war ended.

[@jonbicho9840]

Could you do a 5 minute guide to the HMS Charon?

[@WALTERBROADDUS]

🤔Any info on the Drydock accident with RV Petrel?

[@SuperchargedSupercharged]

and who is going to find the ships now?

[@WALTERBROADDUS]

​@@SuperchargedSupercharged Good question, as it seems the US Navy owns it now....

[@Scoobydcs]

is there a pined post for q and a? would the great eastern have survived the impact that sank titanic?

[@Cbabilon675]

All the pictures that I've ever seen a Yamato I've only seen the two 6" turrents one forward, and one aft. So, where are the others?

[@Drachinifel]

One on each wing amidships before they replaced them with the first version of the AA battery.

[@sadwingsraging3044]

00:21:58 Yes please! 🥤🤩🍿 Threaten us with a good time Drach. 🌄🌞🌇👈🏻🥺Blimps

[@kurtreese7408]

I thought the Japanese used cruiser torpedo launches the most?

[@gregorywright4918]

The most of any nationality, or the most of their different classes of ships? They did use them a lot more than the US, but their destroyers seem to have used them more than the cruisers.

[@duneydan7993]

Hi Drach, I'm not sure it's the place to ask that but could you make a video about a small minesweeper called BYMS-26? It's story is very special and quite important for many people around the world! (I wont tell you its newest name it would spoil the surprise) Although, it might be a bit outside of your area of interest...

[@nathanlentner3129]

Please review USS Kearsarge BB-5

[@Aelxi]

Yus virgin bIsMaRcK vs Chad Flower class swarm

[@dougjb7848]

I have to point out that it’s a bit unfair to use the QE class as yardstick (or meter stick) because the QE sprang from a distinct RN decision to design a world-beating battleship, budget and intra-fleet compatibility be damned. Had the USN not constrained itself (or been constrained by Congress) to the Standard concept, surely the New Mexico or Tennessee class could have lined up.

[@ShadowDragon1848]

Did not know that Drach considered Bismarck as so bad.

[@bkjeong4302]

Well, she was probably the worst-designed of the WWII-gen battleships, and by a significant margin.

[@PalleRasmussen]

You must not have listened muh to him yet. I am glad for you, you have many hours of Drach to enjoy yet.

[@greener2497]

I mean... it IS bad

[@ShadowDragon1848]

@@bkjeong4302 Has he made a video about that?

[@gregorywright4918]

@@ShadowDragon1848 Go to the Videos section on his KZbin site and search on "Bismarck". A half-dozen will pop up (several Drydocks) where he is asked about issues and comparisons. OK, maybe a dozen or two...

[@craigpalmer9196]

the flower carries a radio

[@Christopher-ix8ql]

Poor Drach. "Na-Vah-Da". I know they say it wrong. Even the people in the State know they say it wrong. But thats how they say it, Except for the ones that don't. Also "Pew-jit Sound"- Puget Sound

[@dougjb7848]

30:40 “Mine is bigger than yours.”

[@davidcomtedeherstal]

SMS Pommern was sunk by torpedos of another ship.

[@MrHowhot]

When are you going to host venom on?

[@Eric_Hutton.1980]

Bismarck vs USS Johnston. Much better than a bunch of Flower class vs Bismarck.

[@gregorywright4918]

At least she has torpedoes.

[@johnfisher9692]

in a weird time traveling information scenario, Bismarck learns how Johnston stood up to Yamato and says "Nope, not tackling that" and leaves :)

[@TheSmsawyer]

I am just giggling to myself thinking about the concept of a kamikaze airship.

[@notshapedforsportivetricks2912]

Think R101.

[@TheSmsawyer]

I’m just assuming it would get lit up like a Christmas tree with 40mm rounds. Hydrogen not good. 🤔

[@LeCharles07]

20:44 addendum needed. Submarines are just airships. Change my mind.

[@sammymartin7891]

If your explanation of how gun stabilization on warships works is accurate that's messed up !!! We had gun stabilization on our Tanks and it was very simple. when they can move the gyroscopes will become he stabilized and with mechanically compensate well ignoring operator control input. there were no mathematical equations involved at all there were balanced knobs on the stabilization control that allowed you to adjust for environmental changes affecting the gyroscopes.

[@sammymartin7891]

@@jackgee3200 the tanks that I crewed on for 20 years (from loader to platoon Sergeant to Armor Officer Advanced course instructor) The stabilization system did not go through the computer at all. The first 21/2 years I went from loader to driver to Gunner to Tank Commander the vehicles we had (M-60 A1 RISE Passive) The rangefinder ballistic computer and stabilization system all fed information into the Ballistic Drive separately by mechanical linkages and hydraulically into the Turret Drive motor.

[@sammymartin7891]

@@jackgee3200 I served from 1978 to 1999

[@t44e6]

Please move to Rumble, fight KZbin censorship.

[@salty4496]

:)

[@issacfoster1113]

Yummytoe

[@merlinwizard1000]

6th, 26 March 2023

[@scottgiles7546]

"I haven't examined the plumbing layout (on an Iowa)" WHY haven't you examined the plumbing layout? I smell another possible Wednesday video here....

[@dougjb7848]

If you smell a video about plumbing, it’s probably focused on failures of plumbing. 😂😂

[@scottgiles7546]

@@dougjb7848 Clearly my word choice was focused elsewhere. It's not as if I have a history of snark or such.....

[@dougjb7848]

@@scottgiles7546 Did I just get sarcambushed?

[@heikkiremes5661]

Nevada = Neh-vaeh-dae.

[@michaelhitchcock9255]

Lol, re the request for an episode on dual purpose guns. Honestly, your idea overcomplicates the issue. Just do an episode on guns that were specifically and intentionally designed and built to be dual purpose guns. Don't expand it out to guns that might possibly at need be used as dual purpose guns. -- You can't help yourself. The simple question on the American Standards and you act as if you didn't understand the question and spent forever coming up with a new sort of question with all kinds of caveats. Most of us want simpler answers to our questions. If you then do a later detailed analysis of the subject, fine, we enjoy that, but simple questions should get simple answers, especially the yes-no questions you seem to have so much trouble answering with yes or no.

[@keithmoore5306]

Drach what are some of the more whimsical or unique ship names or names that had different meanings in different navies that would make someone say what the? say has there ever been a warship named asinine or the hooker?