How to Build a Navy - Planning, Procurement, Production, Logistics

[@Drachinifel]

Pinned post for Q&A :)

[@augustosolari7721]

Why couldn't the Germans outbuild the Royal Navy, taking into account that on the Eve of the First World War their economy was somewhat more dynamic than the British?

[@connormclernon26]

Drachinifel What do you believe happened to sink the Hood? I’ve heard there were conflicting theories as to how it happened and I’m curious to hear your take on it.

[@petereckersley9789]

Did other countries learn something about shipbuilding from the Vassa’s failure.

[@Drachinifel]

@@connormclernon26 watch this space in about a month :)

[@kylarstern7550]

If you could design an ideal commerce-raider for germany in 1936 (instead of germany building the bismarck-class) what would it look like? (Surface ship, no U-boot)

[@ShadySheev]

1. Take out a massive loan 2. Build your battleship 3. Never pay back the loan because you're untouchable on your freakin' battleship 4. Repeat --> Navy acquired!

[@altair_204]

Ya but who would give you another loan

[@ShadySheev]

Those with substantial beach property. Would be a shame if a battleship dropped a shell or two onto it, right?

[@mgc7199]

Step 3 should be: Print more money to pay the interest and build more ships. That's how the USA got theirs.

[@VersusARCH]

Kinda what the French, under the finance minister Jean-Baptiste Colbert, did in the 17th century burning the Dutch.

[@ihl0700677525]

Lol. Problem is, your creditor probably have even more battleships than you.

[@Kevin_Kennelly]

Drachism Of The Day: "(in the US) Do you really want the Bureau Of Ordnance touching your weapons? Probably not. But sometimes you might be forced to." 26:45

[@calvingreene90]

With the USofA Navy in into and through WWII it is a fair criticism. As an American I have suggested that every Admiral and Captain there should have been shot for Dereliction of Duty which should also "encourage" the replacements.

[@useodyseeorbitchute9450]

@@calvingreene90 Shot? There may be problems... Proper sentence would involve being shot or bludgeoned to death in likely case of delivered weapons fail to work...

[@ironstarofmordian7098]

@@calvingreene90 I say that every officer there should've been keelhauled on an Iowa class while it circumnavigates the world.

[@bkjeong4302]

Fire the BuOrd executives out of the torpedo tubes instead as punishment?

[@Kevin_Kennelly]

Like all large organizations, the USN is guilty of a lot of stupid shit. The USN is particularly BAD at being guilty many many times. There is this example, Captain McVay/Indianapolis, trying to pin the '89 turret explosion on the Iowa on a 'gay' sailor...the list is ugly. BUT...consider the state of the USN on December 6th, '41. Then consider the state of the USN on September 2, '45. Let that sink in for a moment. You have to admit that, on the whole, they did a remarkable job. And they did stupid shit. They still do.

[@sreckocuvalo8110]

Yeah, forgetting to put the engine in your 50000 tons battleship is the worst, we all been there...

[@USSAnimeNCC-]

I play Minecraft and when I build my first ship I didn't plan very well and I could fit shit in and it wasn't a small build it was ship 140 blocks long and 23 wide I think ,right now I'm building a similar ship it about the same side and man thing a fit in nicely

[@bkjeong4302]

Harry Lagom Build a canal

[@petewood2350]

Oh well time to break out the orrs.

[@bobdan9856]

No, what is worse is forgetting to fuel up before leaving dock.

[@TheNecromancer6666]

I did in hearts of Iron. I had 4 Battlecruisers with 8 38cm guns and a 12 gun 15cm secondary battery. But I forgot to exchange the 30.000hp Tripple expension engine for the needed 200.000hp turbines.

[@bigblue6917]

Some years ago the Royal Navy and the US Navy were taking part in a joint exercise when one RN ship went to refuel with a US ship. The captain of the RN ship got a message from his admiral as to why he was using a US ship and replied that they gave Green Shield Stamps.

[@TheReaper569]

What does that mean

[@whatsoperadoc7050]

I had to look it up to get it but still hilarious.

[@colincampbell767]

A secret weapon the US has is that you never fight only the US. You fight us and our friends. Several years ago the Chinese published a propaganda picture of their carrier task force. We responded with a picture of a US carrier, a British carrier and an Indian carrier sailing side be side. We also have access to bases in the countries we are defending. Appreciation for US military forces in your country is directly proportional to the perceived threat from your neighbors.

[@BoxStudioExecutive]

@@colincampbell767 Not very secret if you're talking about it on youtube, is it?

[@RomanHistoryFan476AD]

@@BoxStudioExecutive not mean't to be.

[@richardscales9560]

Gotta love a 5 minute guide that goes to nearly 50 :-)... Mr Ambassador you are spoiling us

[@jeremyfeldmann7969]

There a few videos that are 5 mins. A few

[@sarjim4381]

The USN fleet of just underway replenishment vessels now numbers 16, and a replacement fleet of 20 is already under construction. There are fourteen 41,000 ton dry cargo/ammunition ships and well over 150 other special purpose, support, and supply ships. No other navy has the ability to supply such large numbers of ships at sea with virtually anything needed, from bandaids to new power plants, as the USN. The lessons of the long distances remote from any land base supplies in the Pacific during WWII were well learned.

[@vipertwenty249]

Just so long as you can persuade your politicians to remember the lessons of the past and not conveniently forget them to save money you'll be fine. The British navy has been pared down to the bone in terms of actual fighting ships, but the Admiralty has had the good sense to maintain as large as possible a logistics and supply capability so that if better funding does become available for combat vessels we will at least be able to maintain them at sea. Do it the other way round and your ships end up tied up in port because they can't actually go anywhere.

[@seanmac1793]

Nimitz called the service squadrons, the things that allowed the fast carrier task force to sail around literally anywhere, his secret weapon.

[@piotrd.4850]

@Jurassic Aviator USN will always have one single advantage over ANY enemy: location and geography of mainland US. They are in a hub where even without Panama Canal they can deploy to any part of World Ocean. No amount of investment or resource on behalf of other powers will change that. PS: PLAN recently concluded tour in Europe.

[@piotrd.4850]

@Doctor Detroit like... by ALL navies that have any use for it? Because few nations have anything approaching Blue Water Navy?

[@johnjephcote7636]

The film 'Mister Roberts' was a little gem set on a US supply ship-the USS Reluctant. James Cagney, Henry Fonda, Jack Lemmon, William Powell, dir. John Ford. 1955.

[@MrSchnebs]

Thanks much for the shoutout to the folks like me who sailed on the supply ships! I served about 2 years on an AO (fleet oiler - floating gas station and some supplies for you folks who didn’t serve in the USN); our captain always insisted in his speeches to the crew that in a crisis, the first question the people at the top asked was “Where are the carriers?”, but the second question was “where are the oilers and supply ships?” It’s not glamorous work, but like you said, without replenishment capability, the big gray ships with all the cool toys aren’t going anywhere.

[@ANonymous-bh1un]

Have you heard of Distributed Lethality? The newest head of the USN has decided that with the "networked" infrastructure we have now, you don't need a dedicated "warship" with lots of subsystems to target an enemy ship with. So things like Amphibious ships and Supply Ships with a few square yards of open deck space can mount some Harpoons/Naval Strike Missiles, receive targeting information from a plane/submarine/ship, and launch along with the dedicated warships. That was all the rage amongst weapon offerings at the annual Naval Conferences, but I haven't heard anything about it since then.

[@Baerinho]

the History Channel should literally buy your vids for a boatload of money and put their logo on it. Your quality is higher than almost anything produced professionally. Love your content!

[@gpeters111]

This

[@Digiidude]

Considering the current content of the history channel, this is faint praise. However, it is spot on.

[@barrylucas505]

"A boatload" ha! good one

[@nathanbrown8680]

That might sound good for the History Channel, but would Drachinifel want to devalue his brand by being associated with them?

[@Baerinho]

@keith moore I just went with the lowest hanging fruit. Those documentaries are almost all trash, trying to be flashy but zero content. I´d rather watch the "Battelfield S1-S6 Docus all over again. I only know the history channel because those are the docus i find on my youtube searches, and all of them are unwatchable :)

[@andyjim1734]

This reminds me of a quote from the Goon show. Judge- What is a navy? Seegoon- A navy, my lord, is an army entirely surrounded by water.

[@Fiddling_while_Rome_burns]

With Russia it tends to be more under the water.

[@benbaselet2026]

@@Fiddling_while_Rome_burns "Entirely surrounded" should mean also above :-)

[@trxnme2082]

For around 100 years, The Navy surrounded the armies of the world :) PAX Brittania, not necessarily a good thing, but historically intersting

[@lkrnpk]

@@Fiddling_while_Rome_burns or with a black smoke coming out of a chimney

[@scotthill2230]

@@Fiddling_while_Rome_burns running into each other is obvious as well.

[@Kwolfx]

I just finished reading a book* about the tortuous process the French Navy went through going from a wooden navy with their first steam powered vessels to what could be thought of as a modern (early 20th Century modern) navy. The system of French planning, procurement, production, and logistics had been in place since Jean-Baptiste Colbert had become France's Naval Minister in 1669. What may have worked well in the time of Louis XIV was a disaster in the mid to late 19th century. I'll give a couple of examples of why sticking with their old systems was so bad. The French would often build a wooden warship until it was about 80-90% complete and stop building until the ship was actually needed. Better to keep a nearly finished but as yet unneeded wooden warship out of the water where it could be more easily maintained rather than sitting in the water where it would more quickly deteriorate. The problem with doing this with 19th century iron and steel warships was how fast they became obsolete. If you design and start building a wooden warship in 1680, but don't actually launch it until 1690, it's probably going to be just as combat effective as a ship built and launched in 1690. If you start building a warship in 1880, but don't finish it until 1890, that ship is probably near the end of its life as a first class warship. Some French battleships of this period took twelve years to complete. If you have a wooden navy, you need to keep on hand lots of the right types of aged wood, canvas for sails, many different sizes of rope, anchor chains and anchors, among other things, to replenish and maintain your wooden fleet. The French tried to do this with engine parts for their new steam engines. The problem was the people who did the ordering didn't consult engineers to find out what types of parts would need replacement and what parts might last the life of the ship. This was also a time of rapid technological improvement so any extra ordered parts would be useless in a ship built just a year or two later, because that ship would have a newer and probably better designed engine. The old parts wouldn't fit in the new engine. It's said that French naval depots had mountains of obsolete parts taking up space for decades. It took decades for the top brass and ministers of the French Navy to first see the need and finally overhual this mess. They weren't stupid, they were just used to doing things the way they had been done for a couple of centuries. In some ways I think it was easier for planners in the German and U.S. Navies to design their systems from the ground up. They weren't stuck, or as stuck, with an old way of doing things. * The Development of a Modern Navy: French Naval Policy, 1871-1904

[@ANonymous-bh1un]

Did that book go into why the Jeune Ecole ultimately fell out of favor with the French, and what events/technologies led to this falling out of favor?

[@Kwolfx]

@@ANonymous-bh1un - First you have to understand that the split between supporters of the Jeune Ecole and what we might call battleship enthusiasts wasn't just a question of which technology gave the French Navy their best chance at victory against the Royal Navy or anyone else. It was a struggle that was, in many cases, tied up in the political beliefs of each officer. (As you might guess, making military decisions based on political affiliation is a really bad idea.) To be an early supporter of the Jeune Ecole meant you probably were a supporter of the Republic, and had republican ideals even before the fall of Napoleon III. If you were a battleship man, you were probably a monarchist and had been a supporter of Louis Napoleon III. You did everything you could to hold down anyone you suspected of having republican leanings from being promoted. This was true even if they had proven themselves in combat, as several French Naval officers did in the Franco-Prussian War. (Though that was leading naval detachments in ground combat.) The older (monarchist) officers accepted the Republic because they had no choice in the matter, but they tried to make certain that anyone given command of a battleship or higher up was a fellow monarchist. So what else are going to get to command if you're a young officer who supports the Republic but a much smaller ship, like a torpedo boat? It made believing the idea that torpedo boats would reign supreme much more palatable. Plus, there was at one high ranking naval officer who eventually became the Naval Minister who promoted the torpedo boat and was a key supporter of the Jeune Ecole in the 1880's. After about twenty to twenty five years of the 3rd Republic coming into existence (1870) most of the older monarchist crowd retired or died off. It made accepting some ideas of the Jeune Ecole much easier for non-politically influenced battleship supporters. Mostly they accepted commerce raiding and shelling of enemy cities as valid military ideas of the Jeune Ecole. Even ardent supporters of the Jeune Ecole started to realize that torpedoes and torpedo boats of the 1870's, 80's and 90's weren't up to the job of wiping out squadrons of battleships. Even in the early 1890's you had to get to within 600 meters of an enemy to have a fair chance (20 - 30%) to score a torpedo hit and 400 hundred meters gave you a very good chance (40 - 50%). Good luck pulling that off after the introduction of rapid fire secondary and tertiary battery guns. Smokeless gunpowder being introduced in the 1890's also eliminated or greatly reduced the de facto smoke screen that was created when a large number of warships opened fire when using the older gunpowder. The French Navy did work hard to practice realistic torpedo attacks. Well, eventually they did. I don't think they got past theory and wish fulfillment about torpedo attacks until the 1890's. So eventually they get the idea that some form of cruiser warfare could be mixed with having a battleline of capital ships. That's a simplified version how French Naval leaders started to make their decisions based on facts rather than politics and magical thinking. The really sad thing; from the French perspective, is between 1870 and the early 1900's the French Navy developed some real advantages over the Royal Navy. They had better naval guns and shells. They had better armor and developed better armor schemes. They developed more advanced torpedo tactics. They developed fleet cruiser tactics for both scouting and screening purposes long before the Royal Navy did. Unfortunately, they never had these advantages for very long (except the cruiser one which lasted maybe ten years), and they never had them all at the same time and these advantages weren't always that significant. For example, for a few years the French made better quality steel than was being produced in Great Britain, but it wasn't that much better. It wasn't face hardened like Harvey or Krupp steel. Plus, they were stuck with incredible waste and inefficiency I mentioned in my first post, and a lot more that I didn't mention. I'll mention one now. They liked to redesign their warships while they were under construction, rather than before they started building them, and the redesigns were usually by committee and some ships were redesigned several times while under construction, and by different committees. Think about how screwed up that is. Finally, when the British Admiralty sorted out their own design problems and got in gear, the wave of innovation combined with massive building programs was like a tidal wave washing away a sand castle on a French beach. That tidal wave started around 1890, give or take a year or two. Even before then the Royal Navy was just to damn big for the French to have a chance of taking on.

[@ANonymous-bh1un]

@@Kwolfx Thank you for the detailed reply. I've been asking that question of Drachinifel for weeks. He even put a mention in the channel update portion of a Drydock about possibly adding links to older videos inside new ones, but never told me where the video where he mentioned the Jeune Ecole was even though that was the question that had prompted it... So basically: the efficiency of secondaries had made the tiny torpedo boats inefficient delivery methods for torpedoes and focus shifted to larger "Torpedo Boat Destroyers" and Cruisers as torpedo carriers with Big Guns and the attendant Battleships to carry them returning to prominence in defeating an enemy fleet in French theory (along with the political considerations).

[@Kwolfx]

@@ANonymous-bh1un - That's the main thing. One other thing I forgot to mention is that early torpedo boats couldn't stand up to rough seas. There was an early belief that 40 to 70 ton torpedo boats could remain with the fleet even in stormy weather. A couple of early torpedo boats managed to ride out a major storm which gave French naval officers the false impression that their little ships were fully sea worthy. They weren't. A few months later one their new boats was snapped in half by a wave and another capsized. There was also a wargame where several torpedo boats remained with squadron of battleships for 21 days in moderately rough weather. The crews were sea sick almost the entire voyage and the rocking back and forth prevented them from using their stoves to serve hot food to the crew. They were deemed to be combat ineffective and would have been worthless in a real war. It's things like that led to building larger torpedo boats, which eventually led to the torpedo boat destroyer. Here's a link to a photo of an early French torpedo boat and this page also has good descriptions of the various classes of French torpedo boats from the 1870's up to WW1. When you look at the photos some of these boats look pretty sleek. Now take a look at the speed of these boats. Before the turbine was invented they just weren't fast enough to be the threat the supporters of the Jeune Ecole envisioned them to be. So you have a combination of rapid fire secondaries firing at torpedo boats that usually could only go at about 20 - 22 knots, and some were much slower. In the late 1890's some of them could finally reach 28-29 knots, but not faster. www.naval-encyclopedia.com/ww1/french-torpedo-boats

[@ANonymous-bh1un]

@@Kwolfx Interesting. Since you're interested in small, fast boats, you might be interested in a small-boat hull form (which they claim is "new"; not sure how it differs from a "Huckins" boat) debuted by ST Engineering last week: kzbin.info/www/bejne/qaK6ZXd_j9SNsNUm17s

[@adamdubin1276]

This is something I studied in School when I was studying to become an Ocean Engineer/Naval Architect, there are several cases where the engines and other such heavy machinery on a ship were removed during refits and repairs and then for whatever reason the dockyard needed to move the ship to another drydock or even temporarily refloat the ship to make way for something more important and the yard forgets to compensate for all of the weight that they just removed so when the dock is flooded the ship is suddenly very unstable and capsizes in the drydock resulting in damage to the ship, headaches for the workers and their supervisors as well as a very sudden and expensive mess in the dock that needs to be cleaned up before work can resume.

[@Tepid24]

37 minutes in: "So this is where naval logistics *really* start coming into play"

[@Tepid24]

@survivaltest 370 I love it! It's a damn shame he does videos like the 100minute long one on coastal artillery so rarely. Though the Drydocks have recently been getting longer and longer. I dream of a world where every Drydock is at least 2h long. Albeit at some point it'd get very exhausting for him and that's the last thing I want.

[@SuperLusername]

Congress: "What kind of navy do we actually want?" USN High Command: "Yes."

[@LordOceanus]

And so it was

[@looinrims]

@@LordOceanus only whenever existential threats materialize, the US government needs to toughen up a bit, social program spending is nigh pointless, and won’t do anything when an enemy shows up, and readiness as time has passed needs to be higher for faster reactions

[@gwcstudio]

A friend of mine once said "you can tell the purpose of a military by its logistics." He was Swiss. The US military is entirely about "force projection" - i.e.: offense. He pointed out that if the Swiss government ordered its military to attack someplace, his first question would be, "can we fly there on Lufthansa?"

[@sarjim4381]

Singapore is a good example of a modern navy that started with almost nothing. Even Singapore as a independent country didn't exist until 1965. It has gone from a navy with a few small ex-RN and USN ships to one with a growing and modern submarine force, six large missile frigates, six missile corvettes, numerous offshore patrol craft, and four large modern amphibious transport docks. They established all the naval schools and logistics depots needed to man and supply the ships almost from scratch into a system admired by most other navies. It's been quite a feat to get it done in the space of slightly more than fifty years.

[@nath9091]

Singapore is lucky in that their port is popular with world navies especially the USN and always has been. So they are lucky that they already have modem naval facilities which are cost neutral or profit making. With that stuff then it's a lot easier to just buy ships as you already have the infrastructure to repair and maintain them.

[@sarjim4381]

@@nath9091 While the RN facilities turned over to Singapore at independence were sufficient for a relatively short time, Singapore built three brand new naval bases starting with Brani in 1972, Tuas in 1994, and the huge Changi naval base, opened in 2004 and expanded several times since. A new 3.9 mile long berthing area suitable for the largest US carriers is the latest expansion. None of these bases were or are used commercially and are not "cost neutral".

[@nath9091]

@@sarjim4381 they still extensively service USN vessels with 7th Fleet logistics actually based in Singapore as well as sealift for the region. There are about 800 uniformed US military permanently there. As you note the Changi base can take aircraft carriers which Singapore clearly doesn't have. Either they're doing this as charity or the USN, RN and New Zealand are paying their way which allows for far better facilities than Singapore could otherwise maintain.

[@sarjim4381]

@@nath9091 The USN is paying docking and port fees so It makes sense for Singapore to build docks that can handle the largest ships the USN has. However, the USN didn't pay for the facilities. It was constructed by Singapore. The fees paid by the USN helps offset part of the cost of the base construction and expansion, but that still doesn't make the facilities cost neutral.

[@rudolfpeterudo3100]

The main thing with Singapore is "they trade with EVERYONE" no one is denied.

[@whiskeytangosierra6]

Logistics is a massive, and often overlooked, portion of anything modern. I won't forget when an offshore platform was shut in because the wise folks in Houston decided we would not need to order the one year operating spares that were recommended by our engineering design company. One point five days of lost production would have more than covered that entire purchase. Instead the whole platform was shut in for two weeks because we did not have a replacement gasket ($2.75 cost). Of course, the fool who made the decision not to buy the spares was promoted to a position of further incompetence.

[@JHNielson4851]

So he was made CFO?

[@whiskeytangosierra6]

@@JHNielson4851 Not immediately, however, ~12 years later the company was bought up at a bargain basement price. The policy of promoting people beyond their level of competence had it's consequences. I took a voluntary severance a couple of years earlier, could only tolerate so much insanity.

[@roryross3878]

That hold up for a $2.75 gasket sounds eerily familiar.

[@doktork3406]

tired of corruption and stupidity halting us time and time again corruption = treason of people and that warrants summary execution in my book

[@kurumi394]

Japan, 1941: has the world's third largest navy Japan, early 1942: has the world's largest navy Japan, 1945: has no navy *_navl planing_*

[@JTA1961]

SUB par I sink

[@paulsteaven]

The 1945 IJN can still stop any major amphibious landing planned by the Soviets.

[@fnnsvnssn2164]

@@paulsteaven Not in the Wargaming universe and thats the only universe I care about.

[@thomaspick4123]

What a waste of money. Build freighters, cargo terminals. Useful trade, not murdering people.

[@arnantphongsatha7906]

@@thomaspick4123 Yes, good idea. Let's build up wealth while entirely neglecting means to defend it.

[@nerdypizza23468]

I just tried to build a navy and now the Royal Navy is shelling my harbor. What do I do guys?

[@lukashei1870]

Ask the Chinese for ASh-Missiles.

[@zersetzung8550]

Invade the Soviet Union

[@ScienceChap]

Give up and sell cars to the British.

[@andrewszigeti2174]

Donate money to the anti-military political parties and hope the government changes hands soon.

[@wrayday7149]

Put up a sign reading “No shelling allowed!” That should do it.

[@obelic71]

So we start with 2 moral booster ships to start a Navy 1 A freezer ship who serves ice cream and meat for bbq 2 A tanker who serves the booze

[@HereticsRight]

Just make ships that use booze as fuel. That's getting two birds drunk with one stone.

[@wrayday7149]

So, a Russian ship, the start on fire and filled with booze.

[@lycossurfer8851]

Depending on the navy & how cold it is, the ship would have a range one hull length

[@obelic71]

@keith moore Smuggeling alcohol is the nr1 sport in all military branches. If you give a fighter pilot before departure a big bottle of whiskey and/or cigarettes and ask him to fly gentle, he will fly gentle to his destination😈

[@obelic71]

@keith moore Once i put around an Italian pilot in a F104 a lot of cigarettes and the cargo part of the drop/ tip tanks were filled to the max with bottles of wodka and rum. The amunition drum removed and that place was filled with several beer kegs. so the fighter became a beertruck. You could go to jail if they caught you. But the thanks of far away serving men who had a drink and/or smoke to boost moral on a dry declared base was and is still priceless.

[@hansheden]

"Amateurs talk about tactics, but professionals study logistics."

[@Baerinho]

Now i go and have play "convoy simulator" , uhm i mean "Greg Grigsby´s War in the Pacific" and enjoy the hell out of it :)

[@ringowunderlich2241]

This statement was made by a tactician, because a true professional will study all aspects of warfare.

[@MarkoLomovic]

@@ringowunderlich2241 Yeah it is out of context like this and sounds like complete nonsense, because you use tactic in logistic for example...

[@Dadecorban]

​@@ringowunderlich2241 True arm-chair military philosophers only argue in maxims and generalizations with little need of caveat, nuance, or context. You are all doing superbly.

[@DERP_Squad]

@@ringowunderlich2241 IIRC, the statement was made by a senior officer about the role of senior officers. Give the men and NCOs what they need, the rest will take care of itself.

[@BoleDaPole]

Thanks,☺️ my uncle just became war minister of our country😊 a few years ago and has tasked me with building up the navy😪. I had no clue where to start🤯, but this video helped😲🤓❤ a lot!

[@michaelleone9480]

I served on a CG in the USN for a number of years and for all of them I was a line handler. (Not a BM but hey small ship they pull from where they need to get things done.) Anyway we were at RAIMPAC in 2014 and were alongside an Australian tanker to refuel. Unfortunately after we hauled the refueling probes over and the pumps were started it was found out that they didn't seat properly. Just good enough for the the initial pressure check to pass. So when they hit them full bore they lasted about a minute before they both unseated and sprayed the crews and half the line handlers with fuel. I thankfully avoided getting drenched in fuel by about three feet because I had just walked behind our flight deck to get out of the wind and relax but stay on station. Unfortunately a new guy from my work center was following about five feet behind me was completely covered. He did not enjoy the decontamination process or his new nickname of oil slick.

[@allanmonroe692]

Roflmao, small ship!

[@allanmonroe692]

Roflmao, small ship!

[@EdMcF1]

Should Bolivia somehow get past the Chilean Army to the Pacific, this could be Drach's pitch for a consultancy position to expand the Bolivian Navy.

[@jamesb4789]

Bolivia did have a port until Chile took it away from them.

[@roscoewhite3793]

Something to note when assembling your logistical support fleet; do not include the Kamchatka.

[@johnmothershead1690]

Indeed!

[@simonbengtsson9241]

What if a ship was named "Kamchatka" instead?

[@alanfhall6450]

Just because no-one sees the torpedo boats doesn't mean they aren't there ...

[@tenarmurk]

But how will we spot the torpedo boats then?

[@jackmunro7]

This may be a tricky one: Would it be possible for you to do a couple of videos where you verbally annotate/explain some of the photos depicting the construction of ships. The pictures of Washington's construction in this video are really interesting and it would be great to learn more about them. For example the photo around 28.10 is really fascinating, seeing the cross section of the hull. It would be great if you could explain exactly what we are looking at! i.e. I think i see the starts of the torpedo bulges and maybe an area that looks set for the armour belt, but I am not sure! It would be great if you could explain what we are looking at, the stage of construction, how the outer layers of the hull is designed & where the armour belt is/will located in relation (i.e. does it sit on that very thick looking ledge, or will it already be in-place by that stage etc) to the image etc. Hope this makes sense!

[@jonsouth1545]

spent 5 years as a logistics officer in the RN was great fun

[@coryhall7074]

As an RN logi were you assigned to a particular ship or a specific class of ships, was it interspersed with shore duty? What was the most memorable resupply you participated in?

[@jonsouth1545]

@@coryhall7074 I spent a lot of time both on shore and ship duties swapping from one shore-base to a ship and then back to another shore base they didn't like to keep me in one place for too long in case I went native, but to be honest probably my favourite assignments was when I was assigned to Various RN HQ bases as you got to get a real jist of the bigger picture and get a real understanding of just how big the whole damn thing is

[@Makoto778]

Shipyards and dry docks are impressive pieces of infrastructure up close. I'm lucky that I pass by shipyards of Vancouver, Canada on my commute every day. Currently they are building ships for the Coast Guard, as well as doing dry dock work on a couple of ferries, with work on a couple of replenishment oilers for the RCN just about to start. Also funny story... A few month ago a collision between a oil tanker and a container ship occurred in the middle of Vancouver harbor. A few hours later, my ferry passed within 50 meters of the port side of the tanker and sure enough, there was 2 meter hole above the waterline and long scratches on the paintwork. The tanker ended up spending a few weeks at the local drydock.

[@Idahoguy10157]

In WW2 the U.S. Navy had to introduce air conditioning. Not for comfort. For the electronics. Electronics generate heat and they hate humidity

[@michaelsnyder3871]

Actually, the fleet submarines from the pre-war "S" class (the fleet boat, not the WW1 subs) had AC, the USN recognizing that 30-60 day patrols in a sub in the summer in the Central Pacific was a mass heat casualty exercise waiting to happen. Some senior officers and some in Congress complained, but the USN patiently explained that it had to do with crew EFFICIENCY not comfort.

[@CaptainSpadaro]

And most Japanese warships (save Yamato) did without...is it possible the lack of A/C on the Japanese side made a difference in how the battles went, or am I reading too much into it?

[@WagesOfDestruction]

when I used to service mainframe computers, I noticed that for these computers special air-conditioned rooms were built made of wood to stop static electricity. The operators' rooms nothing, they would sweat in the hot weather.

[@heatherparisi7078]

The "Building a Navy For Dummies" was an inspiring video and concept. Naturally more logistics and historical comparisons/evolution adds interest. For a 50 minute video this was superior in every way.

[@GeshronTyler1]

One of the major components of the US WW2 Pacific Naval/War logistics efforts was the building of self propelled modular dockyard modules that allowed for in-theater repair/maintenance along with the machine-shop ships.

[@troydeckert7273]

That's interesting. How were these used? In harbors?

[@chiron14pl]

I appreciate your focus on the importance of logistics and supply. One very significant factor which you ignored and I hope you do a separate video on it, is training a crew. Each age, sail, iron, steel, digital, has its own specialties that need a crew to execute with speed and proficiency, Morale of the crew is also important, which intersects with logistics and leadership. So please do some future videos on these topics.

[@mattknight6691]

You may be already fully aware of this - but a great resource for U.S. logistics during WWII is a two-volume set entitled - Global Logistics and Strategy: 1940-43 and Global Logistics and Strategy: 1944-45 by Richard M. Leighton and Robert W. Coakley which was published by the Center of Military History. These two books are a exhaustive record of American logistics (of all types, not just shipbuilding and planning) during the second world war. It lays out the DNA of the U.S. becoming a superpower in the 20th century. A must for logistics fans!

[@MakeMeThinkAgain]

There's a fun army equivalent of the logistical support talked about towards the end. Iraq was trying to support Syria (I believe) in one of their wars against Israel and so they sent a bunch of their best tanks. Only they hadn't bothered to buy the boring tank transporters and the tanks broke down before they could reach the front. Weapons may win battles but underway replenishment ships and tank transporters win wars.

[@Feiora]

Maybe it was leftover german influence... The whole, "Lets Ignore Logistics" thing....

[@BobSmith-dk8nw]

The actual fight (iirc) didn't go much better. The way I heard the story ... (this isn't - intended - to be a joke - as the way I was told the story - it was like this literally happened). The Iraqi Commander drives up in his tank to the Syrian HQ and goes in side. "What do you want me to do?" he asks. The Syrian Commander grabs his arms at the shoulders and looks him dead in the eyes. "Fight!" he says. The Iraqi Commander Salutes, about faces, goes out to this tank and gets in it, then he and his men ... drive on down to the battle. The problem was ... the Syrians there didn't know who these strange tanks were - and the Israelies didn't know who they were - so both sides shot at them. The Iraqi unit was quickly wiped out .... and with it Iraq's contribution to the Yom Kippur War. [Note: Subsequent research has indicated that the Iraqi force was not indeed wiped out: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yom_Kippur_War#cite_note-335 ] .

[@Gustav_Kuriga]

Ah, one of those typical stories that probably isn't true.

[@BobSmith-dk8nw]

@@Gustav_Kuriga It's hard to say how much of this is true and how much isn't. The thing about History is there are all kinds of things just like this - which really did happen - but ... there are also so many things which have been distorted. This is the reference I was able to find: " Iraq sent 6th Armoured Brigade, 8th Mechanized Infantry Brigade and 3rd Armoured Division piecemeal in the heat of the battle. 12th Armoured Brigade arrived on 15 along with a Special Forces Brigade (3 Battalions). This just added to the confusion. There was no planning of how to use these troops and no coordination. Iraqis were simply told to ‘go forward and fight’" web.archive.org/web/20090116071541/www.defencejournal.com/2002/nov/4th-round.htm O,Balance, Edgar. No Victor, No Vanquished: The Yom Kippur War (San Rafael, California & London: Presidio Press, 1978) p. 195 "No Victor, No Vanquished: The Yom Kippur War by Edgar O’Balance. A well balanced account of the events of 1973 war, not biased towards any party. O’Balance visited the battlefield three years after the war and met many officers on both sides who participated in war." - Hamid Hussain No Victor, No Vanquished: The Yom Kippur War Hardcover - June 1, 1991 by Edgar O'Ballance www.amazon.com/No-Victor-Vanquished-Yom-Kippur/dp/0891410171 So, while there is a reference to the basic point of my story, I do seem to be in error about the whole of the Iraqi contribution to the war being wiped out and have noted that error in the post above - but - I couldn't comment for sure whether or not individual Iraqi units - such as the unit in question - were wiped out - or seriously depleted. And - that is the trouble with incidents recited in KZbin posts - from memory. The thing to do with any KZbin post if you have a serious interest in it - would be to research it yourself. After all - I DID say it was a story. .

[@Gustav_Kuriga]

@@BobSmith-dk8nw That was actually a surprisingly thoughtful response, and I have a couple new books to check out. Thanks.

[@michaelsullo3698]

Another great video. Being a former naval and eventually a military logistician, it was succinct and to the point. It would be great if from time to time you could do a video on some of the naval support ships. They may not be as glamorous as the warships but some of them have very interesting histories of their own.

[@Feiora]

How many heads did you need to bash to make the logistical point? ^.^

[@granttelfer5865]

Thanks for another excellent video, Drach! I never served in a replenishment type ship, but I was intimately familiar with them. As a surface officer, first on a destroyer in the Tonkin Gulf, we seemed to be alongside a replenishment ship every three days. Running a Gearing class at 33 knots chasing carriers uses an incredible amount of fuel. My next ship, an Essex conversion LPH, needed replenishment for Marine ammunition and helicopter fuel. I was a principal replenishment OOD and spent hours keeping us between 120 to 150 feet from the supply ship, and as close as exactly even with it. Our Captain was in his chair right behind me, talking to the supply ship captain, and I used the communications line to judge my fore and aft position. My last ship was an APD, and we were jostled around a lot because of the relative size, and their wakes. One supply ship story of interest was the USS Sacramento (AOE-1) and USS Camden (AOE-2). Those two ships each used one half of the power plant built for the never completed USS Kentucky (BB-66) and those ships were fast. They loved to outrun the combat ships after replenishment, and did to us at least twice.

[@lupus67remus7]

I didn't expect to watch this to the end, but uncle Drach makes everything so much more interesting!

[@Matthew-jv1ee]

Drach u planning on building an empire??? Great video

[@jeova0sanctus0unus]

"How to build a navy" Tips that will be usefull in daily live for me.

[@hriz5961]

yep you never know when you will need em

[@juancarosio4266]

Probably one of the most informative KZbin clips ever! Many thanks!

[@benjaminjohnson628]

Somewhere there is a 3rd world dictator watching this early taking notes

[@TraditionalAnglican]

😱😂🤷🏼‍♂️

[@andrewszigeti2174]

Most tin-pot dictators are already well aware of this stuff. That's why they tend to have stuff like Soviet-built missile boats - cheap and easy to maintain but plenty of bang for the buck. One thing to bear in mind. "Third world" doesn't mean what you think it means. It's a throwback term to the Cold War. The First World was the U.S., NATO, and all their allies. The Second World was the Soviets, the Warsaw Pact, and all their allies. The Third World were the countries that remained unaligned. Thus, the First World contained nations like Honduras and Nicaragua, the Second World included Bulgaria and Cuba... and the Third World included places like Switzerland and Sweden. A more precise term for the type of nation you're talking about would be 'Undeveloped'.

[@jjquinn295]

And then realizing he will need to spend decades building the heavy industry to build a fleet before he can start his first ship.

[@bart7695]

@@andrewszigeti2174 that would make you Second World I believe, bur hardly undeveloped.

[@andrewszigeti2174]

​@@bart7695 : And what make you think that?

[@isaact825]

Drachinifel, you have to be one of the biggest nerds I've ever had the pleasure of listening to. As a long-time naval history nerd, thank you for doing what you do!

[@chuckwingo11]

As a companion piece to this video I'd love to see one on obtaining and training the personnel needed to man your lovely new navy. While the job U.S. industry did building a massive fleet in four years was amazing I've always thought that training the officers, sailors, and especially petty officers need to sail and fight those ships even more so. We're talking about taking farm boys and teaching them how to effectively use some of the most complicated machinery on the planet.

[@calvingreene90]

For the most part American farms had been mechanized by WWII these farm boys were not ignorant rubes that had never operated anything more complicated than a jackknife. One of the advantages the USofA Army had was that when a vehicle broke down better than 9 times out of 10 someone on it could get it running well enough to get to a motor pool.

[@chuckwingo11]

@@calvingreene90 You're completely right, the mechanical skills of many of our recruits and draftees was one of our big (although often overlooked) advantages.I should have made my point clearer. Until we started building space ships, a warship was the most complicated machine we knew how to build. The job we did, in three years, (by '45 that part of the job was done) of filling all the slots needed to navigate, replenish, maintain and then fight the ship still amazes me at least as much as building those ships.

[@tomhannah3825]

fun video! Thanks for this and your other vids I haven't enjoyed yet. As a veteran armchair strategist, I enjoyed many of your side references, especially about the American Navy and production facilities, and it was a fun way to spend an hour while sheltering at home from the Covid-19.

[@randymarine]

Awesome video, Brother. Your stuff has really helped me get through this Quarantine. Marines '93-'99 Semper Fi

[@sammybarnes9511]

I did 3 1/2 years on the USS Kiska AE-35, AE standing for Auxiliary Explosives, in the early 80s. With a full load out we carried 8,000 tons of explosives, 100,000 gallons of fuel for our helicopters and over 900,000 gallons of DFM for us. We were used as an auxiliary fueler on occasion.

[@MakeMeThinkAgain]

Missed a chance to mention those crucial USN floating dry docks in the Pacific War.

[@TheGixernutter]

I just like looking at pictures of Warships, and listen to someone who likes to tell me about the. It's a perfect match.

[@matthewrobinson4323]

Perhaps your magnum opus thus far!!! Serving aboard a destroyer, I have many memories of underway replenishment, or in USNavyese, "unrepping". Mostly ammunition when we were on the gunline off Vietnam. As I recall, we took on ammunition every 3 days. The Soviet Navy had an interesting system of unrepping, as we saw in the Sea of Japan immediately following the capture of the USS Pueblo in 1968. The ships came astern and appear to have stopped dead in the water, although on reflection, had they stopped in the Sea of Japan, they'd have rolled their masts out.

[@seafodder6129]

Heh, unrepping cured my seasickness. My first ship was an FF and the 1st day underway I'd be sick as a dog every time. Fine after that until we made a port visit and then it was rinse and repeat. After about 6 months of this very unpleasant routine we pulled out of Barcelona in the morning and unrepped that afternoon in what passes for rough weather in the Med (such that the cruiser in front of us ended up giving up and moving off). I was on the forward in-haul line and I don't know whether it was being in the fresh air vs being below decks (I was a hole snipe) or just not having time to get sick but that was it. Didn't get sick that day or ever again. Even in a storm later on in the North Atlantic during a NATO exercise that was bad enough to put us in drydock afterwards to repair all the damage incurred (sonar dome, cracks in the hull and broken masts).

[@matthewrobinson4323]

@@seafodder6129 I was a QM3 onboard a 2250 ton Gearing FRAM. I don't have any stats, but I can't imagine that the additional weight from the FRAM hadn't made the ship at least a bit more top-heavy than she was originally, even after amputating her 52 mount. When the Pueblo was captured, we were en-route to the gun line, but were diverted to the Sea of Japan to await further orders. While there, we escorted the Yorktown CV 10. Standing QMOW, I saw green water go over her bow and completely engulf her island. Her flight deck is 60 feet above the waterline. That, looking at it from a tin can, was somewhat interesting.

[@seafodder6129]

@@matthewrobinson4323 And I thought the Knox class FFs were small... We displaced almost 1k tons more than your old WWII vintage can. Worst part of the ride on the FF was when the bow came out of the water. The sonar dome would slam the surface like it hit a brick wall and then "shimmy" back down into the water like a coin sinking. Fun times watching the 1200# super-heated steam lines jumping when it hit and hearing the whole ship groaning from stem to stern as it did the shimmy. All while remembering that this thing was built by the lowest bidder... :) A few other fond memories of that storm: Holiday Routine for 3 days as it was unsafe to move about the ship. The weather decks were secured but I did go to the port aft enclosed passageway on the main deck and open the aft hatch leading to the fantail for a quick looksee. When I opened the hatch we were bow down and looking across the fantail all I could see was sky. A few moments later the bow was out of the water and all I could see was water. Quickly decided that was enough sight seeing for one day. Waking up halfway between my rack and the deck on a roll to starboard. I had a bottom rack so at least it wasn't a hard landing. Laying there flat on my back still half asleep and looking up as we rolled back to port seeing the guy we called "Big Red" in the middle rack across from me starting to come out. Fortunately, he hit up against the poles the racks were mounted on so he didn't come out and land on top of me. That would have been Very Bad... :) The chairs on the mess deck weren't attached to anything so they had them stacked up and tied down to the bulkhead. Cooks couldn't cook so we had cold cuts for the duration. The tables were welded to the deck so you had to sit on the deck and wrap one arm around a table leg so you wouldn't go sliding away whilst trying to eat. On the plus side, most everybody was seasick to one degree or another so the chow line was very short. That was the worst storm I rode through and to this day makes me wonder what kinda balls the guys must have had back in the days of wooden ships. I can't even begin to imagine what their sea stories were like.

[@OtakuLoki]

@@seafodder6129 We got the shimmy-shakes on the old skimmer Virginia in one really bad storm. 11Ktons, with the screws coming half out of the water and feeling the blades slam back into the water after they spun up with the reduced resistance as one or two blades were out of the water. They'd make the whole 600 feet of the ship shivery with that. And since the strut bearings on the shaft were meant to be lubricated by being in sea water, they'd scream like a banshee. 1/3 of the crew was completely incapacitated, and hoping to die; another third were barely functional, and would have been sicklisted if it weren't for the numbers who couldn't do anything. I agree with you - wonder just how those guys on the old wooden ships dealt - especially having to go aloft in that kind of crap. eek.

[@TheStefanskoglund1]

@@seafodder6129 Göteborg (the replica wood cargo ship - a east india ship) got in some bad weather in the India Ocean , the sails causes a list but it is a steady list and ship do get a fair more stable so the ride is much nicer compared with going on motor.

[@swarley39]

I've been watching and listening to these incredible videos (and very soothing voice) for at least 2 years and i just realized now that for some reason i want subscribed (i thought i had subscribed to the channel already so idk if it's a KZbin thing). I have learned so much about naval history and so many other technical things regarding ships that i never knew i would enjoy so much. My grandfather was in the Navy during ww2 and i forget which carrier he was on, maybe the Randolph, but i never knew i would enjoy naval history as much as i have from watching these videos

[@Julianna.Domina]

"We want to increase our standing relative to all the other navies" is the American navy's stance since its inception

[@jameshope7933]

Good call, Countries with small Navies may be happy,but their Navies are not.

[@drcovell]

The major obstacle to this objective is Congress (America’s only native-born criminal class-Mark Twain nailed that one!)

[@mikhailiagacesa3406]

I've had relatives and friends aboard Auxillary fleet ships. Thanks for the shout out!!!

[@Tomyironmane]

"In the US, do you *really* want the Bureau of Ordinance touching your weapons?" ... I cracked up. Oh my, you could do a video on all the ways those fossils ruined things.

[@calvingreene90]

Stop insulting fossils.

[@tonyharty3666]

Plank-owner USS Shasta AE-33. GMG3 Vietnam Vet USN 71-75. I served in the Working Navy.....lol. 2 tours to Vietnam and passed a lot of ammo. I enjoyed the British Enlisted Mans Club in Hong Kong. For some odd reason, the Aussie sailors didn’t care for you much. Must be some kind of competition......lol. Good vid mate!

[@jangelbrich7056]

Excellent. For a "primer", this is very detailed, I like the comparative analysis why or why not some things would be chosen and done. It is explaining how the "military industrial complex" has come about and why it looks so similar in so many different countries. One other less mentioned point (You mentioned it shortly) was geopolitics; You can buy ships from other nation(s) that You are friend with - which means from a nation that You have a common enemy with. I always wondered what motivated the French to help Turkey to build a navy, or what motivated the UK to help Japan with its first Navy (against the US?), after have literally nothing in that pocket before after centuries of seclusion. And, when the UK helped Japan with this, why did noone help China to do something similar ... at least as it appears today. Now China has drawn the historic lesson that noone will ever support China so it must be strong enough to support itself - and that is what they do now. Pretty scary. Even with all the signs of bubble economy in the background. And it all costs an insane amount of money, as You say it. Today I got a much better grasp why this is so.

[@viorelviorel2324]

Germany helped China they also got ships from France so i dont know what are you talking about China did buy foreign weapons and ships nobody refused to sell them

[@jangelbrich7056]

@@viorelviorel2324 I talked about 19th century developments, not of today. In the 1850-1880s, Turkey / Japan got some ships from France / UK. I know of no similar help to China in that era. If You have information, pls share ...

[@jangelbrich7056]

OK, I found something myself. Wikipedia of course as a starter: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperial_Chinese_Navy. "A series of warships were ordered from Britain and Germany in the late 1870s, and naval bases were built at Port Arthur and Weihaiwei. The first British-built ships were delivered in 1881, and the Beiyang Fleet was formally established in 1888". I admit I did not know that. Even for a German, these older relations to China are by large forgotten, also because of another fact: the city that produced the ships, Stettin, is now part of Poland, renamed Szczecin, after WW2. So I wondered what motivated Germany to support China, and why China ordered ships in Germany. Again I find geopolitics in the game: in contrast to the UK and France, Germany had minimal territory interests (they only had Qingdao, or Tsingtau) and did not appear as a greater colonial power like the UK. And in the 1880s, UK and Germany were rivals in many respects, of which the navy build-up racing is better known. So if the enemy of my enemy is my friend, then the logics is clear: pre-republican China, being under pressure from UK and France etc until WW1, selects the apparent rival to those, to regain some room in the power balance. Alas it did not help much. The new Imperial Chinese fleet was anihilated in the Yalu battle against Japan, despite being the most modern Asian fleet on paper.

[@viorelviorel2324]

@@jangelbrich7056 they did buy battleships from germany and at some point were stronger than the japanese so the whole nobody helped them is nonsense and you can find that on wiki

[@elcarto22]

An excellent series of videos all the way around. I'm a long time naval gamer and enthusiast, and I've learned much from your videos. Thank you for doing them!

[@johnfisher9692]

Thanks Drach What was that website to order a BB from? And can I put it on my credit card? Building up a navy is way more complex than just buying some ships and having Naval reviews to scare your enemy One point in the planning I feel you overlooked is People. Building up the machinery to make what you need is nice, but you nee the trained and experienced people to actually use that machinery and produce quality ships. This is an ongoing and very expensive part of the production. Those dock workers are another of the unsung heroes of any nation, the one's who actually build the ships and weapons and even the task of repairing a damaged ship. Did the Washington Naval Treaty play a part in the Depression? All those industry's withering away from lack of orders?? Excellent point about the equipment needed at a dock yard. The Yamato's were so big that the Japanese spent a fortune to enlarge the docks and had to strengthen cranes just to lift the guns and turrets onto the hulls. They even needed to build a special ship just to transport the turrets from the maker to the dockyard. One author said the German Navy had a huge advantage over the British as their dock yards were new and designed for a steel and steam navy whereas the the British one's were designed in the age of sail and had to be adapted. One the other hand the British yards had highly trained people and there were a lot of them.

[@jamesb4789]

Interesting point about the logistics train in the WW 2 Pacific war. The Japanese thought it would take years for the US to counter attack because of logistics reasons. No one had built a huge logistics fleet before to support at sea operations. Their island defense perimeter was based on the US being unable to supply a large counter attack in more than one point at a time. The same flood of US material into Europe also had the same impact. It had never been done before.

[@nwbritt]

Question for the Q&A. Can you discuss what led up to the revolt of admirals in the US Navy?

[@Xerethane]

Sitting on the West Coast of the United States are a number of "decommissioned" Naval Bases that no longer support the main fleet. Sitting in them are many, many additional supply ships, many of which are maintained and ready for use or activation in a theater of combat at any time. I learned this while taking an overnight tour of the USS Hornet WWII carrier in San Francisco bay. I asked some of the volunteer staff what those other ships in the docks were and was quite surprised when some of them turned on their lights that night and were clearly still very much ready to go.

[@RGC-gn2nm]

Industrial Standardization and Mass Production allowed for the explosion of activity during the war. Post war every design blue prints, jigs, special tools and dye used in the contruction of every major weapon system was archinved by the War Dept. Somewhere in the salt mines under Iowa is everything the post EMP generations will need to rebuild at least to the pre-transistor era.

[@davidzhiluozhang6205]

Very interesting! Can you point me to a place to learn more?

[@maximusmeridius3380]

One of the greatest shows of underway replenishment (or deplinisment) I witnessed in USN (CVN69 1983 to 1986) was on the way to drydock in 1986 when the were offloading all the bombs. Side to side going 15 knots two CH-47s would criss cross hooking a pallet of bombs off of the flight deck and dropping it off onto armorie ship while continuously airborne. One of the most amazing feats of flying I ever saw.

[@kamchatka_survivor1959]

A day without Drachinifel, is a day without sunshine! 😂 Being serious, I am amazed that, the British didn’t create Geometric dimensioning and tolerancing sooner. Through constant iterations of building ships, someone in the Royal Navy should have defined specifications to ensure quality control using metrology. Just a thought . Ed

[@rudolfpeterudo3100]

That sort of started with Samuel Pepys. Also with the "Ordinance Survey" around his time. Twas all about standardization.

[@willmoody707]

Fantastic guide. Thanks. I followed every step and it worked a treat! Taking it out for a spin in the North Sea at the moment. No problems so far

[@highgrounder5238]

This is perfect! Now, if my totally not inland country ever needs to build a navy, i know how to do it!

[@roscoewhite3793]

I was working in procurement before retirement, and yes, it can be horrible... thanx for the flashback, Drach!

[@ghrey8282]

Excellent! Seems like a good idea for a board game...

[@geraldgray4449]

A PC video game would seem to be better.

[@bkjeong4302]

Rule The Waves anyone?

[@chrislewis8865]

Hi, still catching up, thought this was a fascinating and eye opening look at the whole process. Was particularly interested in the logistics part and noted your request for people to give their stories about replenishment at sea (RAS). I have a couple of recollections from my days on Eskimo. We deployed to the West Indies station in June of 1974 making a brief stop at the Azores to take on some fuel. Generally speaking, the Atlantic was about as calm as you are ever likely to see the Atlantic. We came home in February of 1975 and that was a different matter entirely. This time, we took a direct course home, planning to meet up with an RFA refueling ship on the way. As you will be well aware, fuel doesn't just serve the purpose of feeding the engine(s) and making you move, it is a part of the ballast infrastructure that keeps the ship stable, so by the time we were a couple of days from the English Channel, not only were we experiencing a huge swell, we were also getting dangerously low on fuel, both to propel us through the water, and to keep us stable in that rough sea. So, we carried out a RAS as planned (actually, much later than planned because the Captain was waiting to see if the sea would calm down a bit). Back in those days (I would like to think it is different now) rather than using a simple piece of technology like a doppler radar, to assist with maintaining station on the tanker, we used a distance line; a length of sisal rope with bits of coloured bunting spliced into it at regular intervals which a deckhand on the RFA could tie to the railing and then disappear for a well earned cuppa while a seaman on the other ship (me in this instance) had to stand pretty much next to the Jack staff and keep it tight. So you can picture the scene, muggins here is standing right where Kate and Leonardo were stood in that scene in 'Titanic', if I looked down I could see the water either some forty or so feet away or coming right up to the point where I thought I was going to get wet feet. Keeping on top of what I was doing, I could look down at the tanker's well deck then a few moments later I would be looking up at her starboard bilge keel. Hauling in and letting out the distance line became a mammoth task and then the Officer of the Watch, the First Lieutenant if I remember rightly, grabs his megaphone and shouts out 'Able seaman Lewis, will you keep that distance line TAUT!'. At this point, I think the Captain must have intervened as the next thing I knew, a Petty Officer and two other seamen were behind me helping. That was probably one of the most frightening experiences of my life when I look back on it although, at the time, as they say, I was too busy concentrating on what I was doing to register how dangerous it probably was and to be scared. The second experience was quite amusing. A few months later we were on a combined NATO exercise just a little north of the Arctic Circle, again needed to top up with fuel and so we came alongside an American tanker, fired the gun line over and then started sorting out the distance line, fuel pipe etc. While we were doing this, I noticed drums, guitar amps and instuments coming out and being set up just aft of the tanker's bridge. Then a bunch of guys IN SHIRT SLEEVES INSIDE THE ARCTIC CIRCLE came out and started playing Eagles style Southern Rock. Suffice it to say, even in reasonably warm full foul weather gear, I chose to sit things out in the gun handling room until we were ready to break off rather than stand outside and be entertained, as much as I enjoy a good gig!

[@MayDayMei98]

"Why isn't new flagship moving yet?" "Apologies, admiral, we forgot to install the engine."

[@jamesb4789]

Excellent piece. One of the common characteristics of the major naval powers is the concentration of ship building in specific geographic areas. Britain had one of the most intensive and dispersed. Only the US had any comparable dispersion and even then 90% of its warships were built in four locations: Norfolk, Philadelphia, New York , and the boston region until recent decades. And logistics are the reason. In the US, marine material manufacturing centered on Philadelphia and Pennsylvania. Heavy battleship armor was made by Midvale (Philadelphia) , Carnegie Steel Homestead (Pittsburgh) and Bethlehem Steel in Bethlehem. Naval grade plate and structural steel was centered in Philadelphia as were engines, turbines, propellers, anchors, etc. No one built their plant where they could not easily supply the yards.

[@kennethknoppik5408]

You know what I was just thinking? I need to build myself a Navy! And then this video popped up thanks drach it will come in handy. When I'm finish I have an admiral's position available, are you interested??? Hahaha

[@derhesligebonsaibaum]

gonna use this for rule the waves 2

[@boraeananaren]

Look for Ultimate Admiral : Dreadnoughts. Looks interesting for later in year/next year.

[@rare_kumiko]

Yay another Drachinifel long video

[@ahmetserdarunal8229]

Jesus what am I doing? Why am I watching how to build a navy with my full attention?

[@kirktierney]

Really one of the best episodes. Packed with things to think about. Thanks!

[@Colonel_Overkill]

@Drach So, if your drydocks are on average an hour long with the occasional longer installment how large of a ship can be launched from them?

[@scorched1598]

About a week in size I believe.

[@josephjames259]

Most entertaining channel on KZbin. Thanks for what you do, Drach.

[@CBMMmercinary]

Question for drydock. Mercenary Navies from history?

[@JoseSanchez-dy7sg]

Forged Alliance Fprver hosts a game where the production and rescource gathering systems lead to the need for a lot of strategy just to produce a competant navy on time It's an RTS that does navy really well only as a secondary consequence of it requiring players to think ahead and carefully consider each decision or otherwise collapse under the weight of your mistakes

[@ColonelFrontline1152]

Can you make a video about the modernization of the Iowa class battleships.

[@hatchcrazy]

The more I learn about naval logistics the more I realize how huge of an advantage nuclear-powered carriers really are. Nuclear power won't solve problems of food, parts, etc., but now all the storage space you'd need for oil can be full of ice cream and guns instead. Having a ship that can just anchor outside someone else's port and sit there indefinitely is a hell of a power play.

[@USSAnimeNCC-]

Form the mist a shape, a ship is taking form And the silence of the sea is about to drift into a storm Sign of power, show of force Rise the Navy build the ship according to foe Pride of a nation the beasts made of steel warships in motion Be king of the ocean to rule the wave across the seven sea

[@pierresihite8854]

thats pretty good

[@DimoB8]

To lead the war machine To rule the waves and lead the Kriegsmarine

[@Scott11078]

On the subject RAS shortly after 9/11 my first ship USS Kitty Hawk CV-63 was given a special mission, one that has only recently begun to be declassified. We left Yokosuka and spent most of the trip to pick up our "special" guests steaming at 30+ knots. If you've seen the movie Spaceballs the "Bad" ship had the sign "We brake for no one" blowing through the straits of Malacca at 30 knots was quite the experince, we only slowed to 25 knots to refuel. As you can imagine it was a quick trip and as an engineer I didn't get much sleep. She was a damn good ship that deserved better than the fate she is now receiving. It's my belief the large amount of asbestos she still has consigned her to be scrapped for a damned penny.

[@macro2k7]

Have you read "How Carriers Fought: Carrier Operations in WWII by Lars Celander" ? only about a quarter of the way through it so far but it already seems one of the best books I ve read on Pacific and carrier warfare

[@Conn30Mtenor]

Good video. I would suggest (if it doesn't already exist) a video on Fisher's reforms.

[@scottmcintosh4397]

THE BUREAUCRATIC MIND: Save costs & ship the West Coast guns to meet the East Coast hull in the middle of the country 😝

[@w8stral]

Maximum number of senators and representatives who get a "piece" of the Pig...

[@westcoaststacker569]

Same method used for the Shuttle Program and the modern SLS program. Gotta keep Utah happy building those side boosters... etc.

[@Feiora]

Then what? cut a deep canal or something to get these beasts to sea?

[@jayschafer1760]

@@Feiora Well, the Army Corps of Engineers maintains much of the Mississippi River, and there's also the St. Lawrence Seaway connecting the Great Lakes to the Atlantic, so I'd say America pretty much has the equivalent of canals to the Midwest already.

[@Feiora]

@@jayschafer1760 Then instead of the middle of the country as Scott suggested would it not be easier to just widen and deepen the MR, then ship the hulls and guns to the GLs to use a reconfigured Seaway? (Damn the bridges in the way, those can be reconfigured to allow naval vessel traffic! Afterall we're already talking about a multi-million if not multi-billion dollar project to reconfigure several geographical areas of the United States!)

[@missouribob7850]

I am planning on starting a Space Force. This has helped a lot. Thank you.

[@kyle857]

Interesting topic.

[@lqr824]

If you don't have a navy and want one, I suggest that ton for ton, seagoing destroyers are your best bet. Instead of 4 2-barrel turrets and 3 centerline racks of torpedos, have 2 4-barrel turrets forward and 5 racks: 25 torpedo broadsides, and 8 barrels covering the forward 270 degrees. Keep weight lower by putting second turret directly behind first, NOT suprafiring. As long as you're at 5 degrees or more elevation you're fine. Both turrets share ammo but front turret is long-barrel, rear is short barrel for AA usage as well and elevates to 70 degrees. Move superstructure far back, to allow guns indirect fire backwards. Achieve capital-ship-type range with drop tanks. Achieve scouting range with a seaplane or two.

[@adamdubin1276]

If there is one hing we American's excel at more than anything else, it's supply lines.

[@EradWir]

Yeah as long as it's military talk about the supply lines of life saving medicine.

[@patrickb4620]

EradWir oh we have plenty of lifesaving medicine just not for me or you. The pharmaceutical corps like absuing patent law to stop cheaper alternatives.

[@JTA1961]

We excel at Coke lines... the only metric system we've mastered

[@jimalexander1896]

I guess I never realized just how many support ships are needed?...good job

[@blackbokis3064]

Regarding the competition, can we participate with something else than a BB? I am currently designing a CL. Also, how will the top 3 be determined if each has a different type of ship? How can someone with a DD be in the top 3 if the others have CAs and BBs?

[@Drachinifel]

BB or BC this month, other shop classes in coming months :)

[@blackbokis3064]

@@Drachinifel Alright thanks!

[@jed-henrywitkowski6470]

10:59 My uncle was stationed there for a bit. He was an electrician in the United States Navy, during the Vietnam War. Even though he was only an electrician, he had to have a security clearance (I do not recall what level) because, during the course of his duties, he could see classified information. My brother was also stationed there for a bit, while serving in the United States Marine Corps, as a communications specialist during the Iraq war (the 2000s).

[@MrGeoffHilton]

I wanted a navy until I watched this!

[@mikedench1110]

Fascinating! A lot of things to think about which had previously not occurred to me. Thank you.

[@michaelaustin310]

Missed crewing your navy.

[@michaelnovak4035]

I was stationed aboard USS Milwaukee (AOR-2) from 1978 to 1982. We primarily supplied the Eisenhower strike group. In 1981, we were part of a NATO North Atlantic exercise for 60 days. The RCMS oiler had to turn back on the 2nd day due to mechanical failure. So we were the ONLY oiler/replenishment ship supplying the entire force. There was one period we were either fueling, or taking on fuel, at sea, for 72 hours straight. I still do not remember the middle of that time of the cruise... I was Boawswain Mate of the watch on the bridge, working 4 hours on, 4 hours off for that time frame. And... the North Atlantic is COLD in May! Exhausted does not describe how we felt. Our Skipper Captain Donald A. Baker, applied for a unit commendation for our ship, but it was denied, an admiral above us determined we were operating under "wartime conditions " and therefore performed our duties within that realm.

[@No-dy3zk]

First to view,like and comment on one of my favorite KZbinr

[@juggy666]

Your videos are great, the detail and dry humour are wonderful! Thank you.

[@MrSwallows]

Meh, you just need a Wisdom Cube and pray to RNGesus that you'll have that SR ship.

[@juanestebangonzalez6973]

Ahhh, all good till kent and nevada show up

[@gkgameplaycz]

@@juanestebangonzalez6973 at least you have someone to serve breakfast for your Yorktown-class carriers

[@gangfire5932]

You reminded me of one of my books in storage that references (I think) a Norwegian submarine that sealed off one of its torpedo tubes. They store beer in it.

[@JTA1961]

If caught... it'll be "FIRE ONE" alright... 🍳😎♨