Shinano: The Forgotten (And Terrible) First Supercarrier

[@dulio12385]

Abe knew, the moment they assigned him the Yukikaze as escort, he was a dead man. In any battle the Yukikaze is in she survives with narry a scratch and everyone else dies screaming. She was there when all the carriers were lost at Midway and she was the escort for both the Musashi and the Yamato when they both were sunk. Had she continued serving in the ROC Navy, Taiwan would probably be part of China by now.

[@28ebdh3udnav]

There's only one China. The republic of China and then communist hell of Bejing

[@dulio12385]

@@28ebdh3udnav You mean West Taiwan.

[@jochenstacker7448]

​@@28ebdh3udnavdafuq does that mean

[@SapphirosCZ]

@@dulio12385 The Republic of China is the official name of Taiwan. The fact that westerners dont use it just shows that they still shit their pants before communist china.

[@ivanruzic2592]

@@dulio12385 Or South Mongolia, or Northern Tibet. Take your pick.

[@JDHitchman]

Fun fact that was not mentioned is that initially, the U.S. Navy’s reaction to Commander Joseph Enright’s report of sinking the Shinano was one of disbelief. The Office of Naval Intelligence did not have the Shinano on their records, as Japanese secrecy had been so tight that they were unaware of its existence1. They thought all Japanese carriers had been accounted for, and it was only after the war that the report was verified and acknowledged as accurate

[@miskatonic6210]

Why don't you tell us some fun facts about 9/11? You seem to love fun facts about events when hundreds of people were killed.

[@Mascifin]

​@@miskatonic6210You seem fun.

[@SanderDoesThings]

​@@miskatonic6210 That seemed completely unnecessary? He's just telling a fact

[@braxat52]

@@miskatonic6210 Fun fact. 2001 wasn't the first relevant 9/11 at all worldwide. Another known 9/11 happened in 1973 in Chile, where a US "encouraged" coup led to a 17 years long dictatorship with a death toll of over 3000 people. Funnily enough, that wasn't even the first 9/11 in Chile either, where the date goes as back 1541 with an indigenous rebellion that led to the destruction of the city of Santiago.

[@gruntforever7437]

@@braxat52 moral relativism is pretty contemptible and I notice you leave out examples by pretty much every other nation in history; but then again I love all the hate morons like you have for the us

[@alexius23]

When USS Archerfish sank the Shinano the US Navy refused to accept his claim of Commander Enright. They gave him credit for sinking a cruiser. Only after the War did the Navy brass realize what Archerfish had achieved.

[@martinadams7949]

I have my dad's copy of the presidential unit citation, he got after he was out of the navy

[@christopherconard2831]

The Navy refused to admit Japan could produce a carrier of that size. But they spent a lot of the war claiming the Japanese couldn't do a lot of what they did.

[@1121494]

Could have helped him if they had somehow managed to make a photo when they had to surface or before the shot.

[@o2benaz]

⁠@@christopherconard2831And your source for “The Navy refused to admit……..” is: A. US Navy Archives, B. Library of Congress, C. your opinion?

[@Dreznin]

​@@o2benaz Naval History and Heritage Command published an article on the Archerfish two years ago. Considering that's an official government source, I'd go with that. So what's your source for thinking it's not the case?

[@vanroeling2930]

When you said little is known about the Shinano, I can completely understand this. Having worked for a major Japanese company for 5 years, I learned that everything is on a need to know basis. If they felt that you didn’t need to know, you weren’t told. That’s just how they roll.

[@robertf3479]

There is also the point that Japan's Navy of the late 1930s and through WWII was absolutely paranoid about keeping every bit of information about the Yamato class secret, so much so that when it was apparent Japan was going to be defeated the IJN ordered the destruction of ALL records and photographs of Yamato, Musashi and Shinano. They were so effective that US Naval Intelligence knew nothing about their construction until Yamato herself was sighted by reconnaissance aircraft and later by submarines. Even then all the Intel weasels could do was make estimates about armament (they thought she mounted a new model 16" gun similar to Nagato's, armor, displacement and so forth.) Yes, I can 'bad-mouth' the intel guys because I was one during the Cold War. Much of what is known about the ships comes from interviews with workmen who actually designed and built the ships as well as those few sailors who survived the war. Details of the turret armor comes from armor intended for Shinano but never installed including a piece of turret face armor that was eventually brought to the US and subjected to tests at Dahlgren Viginia including one where it was SHOT with a 16" superheavy AP round at point blank range under ideal laboratory conditions. Photos of it can be found through Google.

[@parlertrick]

Also need to know applies to the rigid seniority systems in Keiretsu.

[@AdmRose]

Also the Japanese destroyed almost all the documentation about the Yamato class battleships after the war ended. Honestly we’re lucky we even have a picture of the damned thing.

[@christopherconard2831]

​@@AdmRose The Germans, and lesser extent Italian, military did the same thing. Fortunately (Or unfortunately, for Germany), the were masters of having everything in duplicate and were unable to destroy everything. The Japanese went to the extreme. All records in any way related to the military or government were destroyed. Post war even stuff as mundane as recruitment records were hard to find. They intended to make it impossible to tell where items were sent, or even how much was made. Troops surrendering after the Emperor told them to sometimes even went as far as burning their uniforms. This is why you occasionally see pictures of recent Japanese POWs wearing just boots and underwear. Though it is also sometimes about not wanting to bring the shame of surrender on their unit. They were effectively declaring themselves an unperson.

[@TheSnowMan-cy9tu]

This practice is great for counter intelligence, but it stifles innovation. Guess you got to pick your poison. If they were able to talk about certain aspects of the ship then maybe its shortcomings would have been addressed.

[@Jayjay-qe6um]

Shoki Fukae, a Japanese actor who played villains in movies and TV show, is one of the surviving crew members. He was rescued after drifting for 12 hours at the time of the sinking.

[@Cas-Se78.97]

A bit odd to compare the Yamato to the Texas. The latter might have been modernized to fight in WWII, but at her core she was still a WWI era ship. For context, the Texas was commissioned barely a decade after the Wright Brothers' first flight. I understand not comparing to the Iowa class, as that was also a massive late-war ship, but a better comparison might have been the King George V or North Carolina.

[@MrBenjamin334]

Yes, that was a bizarre comparison to make. Interestingly, when Yamato made its last voyage, the bombardment force TF-54 that Texas was part of was ordered to intercept. Pretty sure that Texas wasn't intended to be part of that first line, though.

[@PeteOtton]

The Yamatos were designed to take on two US Standards at once. This would have included the ships built prior to the North Carolinas and South Dakotas. More the Pennsylvanias. The Texas though modernized was originally a Dreadnaught era ship. The Iowa's would have been an interesting match up against Yamato and if Halsey and his staff had had their wits about them, the battle of the Surigo Straights would have been vastly different and would have been the last last slugfest of Battleships. The interesting spoiler would have been who got torpedoes into the water first and how many hit their mark, and would TF 38.2 have lingered in the area for 12-24 hours longer before refueling throwing their weight of aircraft into the mix at dawn, whittling down the Japanese for Lee?

[@Ragnaroknrol]

Agreed. The Iowa class ships were more of a match and why they weren't the comparison makes no sense.

[@phann860]

@@Ragnaroknrol I don't think so, 9 16" guns against 9 18.1" guns would not be a good outcome for the Iowa class. But it didn't matter anyway as the US would have bombed and torpedoed the Shinano long before her guns would have had time to engage, not that she had any guns. The Yamato also never had to fight a Battleship because airpower sorted her out, probably the biggest kamikaze ever.

[@LcplAnimeGuy]

Yea especially because the Iowas exists hell he could have used that metric submarine Bismarck and Tirpitz

[@cabbievonbump]

HIMJS Shinano. Her service life was measured in hours and was the largest ship ever sunk by a submarine, the USS Archerfish. She made world history in that way, despite never having a single plane launch from her decks.

[@Plaprad]

Glad to see more people using the actual prefix instead of IJN.

[@gregwasserman2635]

Actually, the Japanese did not use a prefix for their ships. Certain authors may use a prefix, in the same way they called the Type 93 torpedo as the "Long Lance" (in fact, no one in any navy referred to them as the "Long Lance" in WW 2), but the Japanese navy never did.

[@Plaprad]

@@gregwasserman2635 I remember as a kid, my uncle read a book and asked my grandfather what he thought of the Long Lance. My grandfather, who was on a BB for the war just asked "What in the hell is a "Long Lance"?" He also believed the only thing you need to care about in regards to torpedoes is whether it's going away from you or towards you.

[@brentdallyn8459]

We know that already...why the re-cap

[@ibeatyoutubecircumventingy6344]

first read about it in that awesome readers Digests books that used to be everywhere

[@jima1878]

Built in Yokosuka Naval Shipyard, in drydock #6. The area around the drydock had (has) steep, rocky, vegetation-covered hills and cliffs, which contain tunnels dug for the purposes of cover and concealment for the workers. When I was stationed there, there were still remnants of the tunnels as well as tall poles supposedly used to support camouflage netting during the building of the ship (so I was told back then). I was also told that the workers were basically sequestered during the building of the ship as a security measure. Great video! Very detailed, especially considering the lack of information available.

[@Engine33Truck]

All of that is consistent with how Yamato’s construction was treated at Kure Naval Yard and Musashi was treated at Mitsubishi Heavy Industries in Nagasaki, so it’s likely true. So thorough was the secrecy of the three ships that no pre-launch photos of them are known to exist.

[@Engine33Truck]

@@jima1878 I once read a book about the life of Musashi and what you’re saying is pretty much exactly how the construction of Musashi was described by the author.

[@darkvisiongothacked]

I loved how many tunnels there were on and directly off base. was wild to realize JUST how nuts they went with their tunnel networks even if you could only see the bricked up (now) results.

[@rudolphpyatt4833]

There's actually an outstanding account of Archerfish stalking and sinking Shinano in Edward "Ned" Beach's classic nonfiction book, "Submarine!", which chronicles the exploits of various USN subs during the Pacific War. I highly recommend the book to anyone interested in the subject.

[@einfisch3891]

Just finished this book and I second that, I enjoyed it

[@jaimeosbourn3616]

There is another book entitled "Shinano" which details the hunting and sinking of the Shinano. Captain Enright help co write it.

[@saberdogface]

Didn't he write "Run Silent, Run Deep"?

[@rudolphpyatt4833]

@@saberdogface Yes, and its two sequels, “Dust On The Sea” and “Cold Is The Sea”, both excellent.

[@jaimeosbourn3616]

@@saberdogface I think so

[@wallyman292]

9:15 - Ah yes! The Battleship New Jersey! My wife and I were visiting her daughter in Philly years ago, and decided to take a tour of this ship. Hardly anyone was there, so they just gave each of us a tape recorded "guide", and off we went on our own! What a hell of a ship! Just standing on the bridge and looking out over the bow was incredible! It was an awesome time!

[@Engine33Truck]

Never been to New Jersey, though I want to go. I did tour Wisconsin as a kid, when she was still on “active reserve” status. So we couldn’t see most of the ship for security reasons. But yeah, standing on the bow and looking out ahead was extremely impressive. As was looking back and trying unsuccessfully to see the stern. I’ve been on several museum ships as a kid and an adult, and Wisconsin was the most impressive of them all.

[@Holmes846]

That’s not a sonar picture of Shinano. It’s a blown up overhead photo, possibly from the reconnaissance flight. No expedition has ever been recorded or claimed to have found the wreck.

[@drwayne88]

I was fairly sure the wreck has never been found, I am not even sure anyone has ever looked for her wreck, thanks!

[@TheDogGeneral]

Pretty sure the wrecks location is been approximated but I've never seen photographs or images of it over the course of these years I guess from a lack of interest in the ship I mean you would think the largest worship ever sunk by a submarine with Garner some degree of interest but they never ascertained its exact status to be certain last time I checked

[@amandarhodes4072]

There are a surprising number of large warships from the Japanese navy that have never been found. I believe at least one of the carriers from midway is still missing, Kongo is undiscovered and Shinano are the ones that come to mind. One possibility is that they have already been victims of the Chinese. HMS Prince of Wales has been robbed of her steel by Chinese scrap salvagers breaking international law protecting shipwrecks and the bodies of their crews. The whole end section of POW is missing with just a hole where it was and the entire wreck of HMS Exeter is missing with a crater where it was. I do hope expeditions do find the wrecks of the missing Japanese ships so we know they are safe and can be protected.

[@TheDogGeneral]

@amandarhodes4072 the preservation and maintenance of these historical sites must be maintained then if the Chinese are going to desecrate War Graves than they might not take so kindly if it is reciprocated and kind :)

[@lzh4950]

@@amandarhodes4072 I imagine some people might think that the Chinese scrap salvagers were avenging for the Opium War

[@7thsealord888]

Captain Enright went on to co-author a book about this experience (also something of an autobiography) titled "Shinano!", subtitled The Sinking Of Japan's Secret Supership". Quite interesting read. It should be noted that the recon flight causing Shinano's sudden move had not triggered any sudden responses from Allied commanders. Such was the quantity of information coming in by then, that these specific photos only got attention retrospectively, days after Shinano was well and truly sunk. Btw, as a special point of pride, USS Archerfish's crew always referred to their vessel as 'USS Archer Fish'.

[@martinadams7949]

My dad was on the Archer Fish that day. I have my dad's copy of that book . I think it's even autographed.

[@7thsealord888]

@@martinadams7949 Found him in the crew list in back. Respect. Small world. :)

[@martinadams7949]

There is that song(?) Read the books your father read. Read most of the ww2 sub books. When there is a book that is the , "complete" history of the navy and Archer Fish isn't in the index i don't read it.

[@7thsealord888]

@@martinadams7949 As an Australian, I have somewhat similar feelings about ww2 histories that ignore the contributions of the Commonwealth in general, and of Australia in particular.

[@Norbrookc]

I love how Simon compares the Yamato to the Texas, which at the time was the oldest battleship in the US fleet. He ignores entire classes of US battleships which were active during WW 2.

[@PeteOtton]

Isn't there something like 5 or 6 design generations between Texas and Iowa?

[@Norbrookc]

@@PeteOtton Yes. Texas (and New York) were the last "dreadnaughts," built before WW 1. Comparing them to Yamato is like comparing New Jersey to Fuso. After that you had several generations, of ships. The South Dakota and North Carolina classes were the late '30's, followed by the Iowa's. There were several classes in the 20's as well.

[@michaeldriggers7681]

​@@Norbrookcthank you, that's very interesting and informative.

[@Norbrookc]

@@michaeldriggers7681 You're welcome. I follow a number of the naval history channels (recommend Drachinifel's). One of the ways to tell how many battleships there were is to look at the hull numbers. Texas is BB-35. Wisconsin, the last of the Iowa's, is BB-64.

[@allanfifield8256]

@@Norbrookc Hull numbers 45 to 48 were assigned to ships that were never completed. Scrapped when 11% to 38% completed in the early 1920's.

[@bsgnerd]

I like you providing the book reference at the end. It’s good to acknowledge relevant work and its author.

[@VersusARCH]

It was a huge aircraft transport/ferry with an asw carrier airwing. Carrier usefulness as a frontline deck in WW2 had more to do with the ship's speed than tonnage... Shinano's Yamato class battleship heritage gave it a top speed of about 27 knots. Frontline carriers required 30+.

[@bkjeong4302]

TBF, given how much armour was removed from her, Shinano might have been able to hit 30kts had she actually been finished.

[@brucesim2003]

Kaga says hi.

[@richardcranium3579]

@@brucesim2003oh snap

[@stuartdollar9912]

27 knots would have been adequate to launch and receive aircraft...but, it's not much of a margin of error.

[@SSSeTEDS]

​@@stuartdollar9912Kaga's quoted top speed is 28 kts. The Brits made due with escort carriers as slow as 12 kts.

[@Tundraviper41]

Additional information: While Shinano was converted into a carrier from a battleship, at the time of her conversion work to begin, 'Some" Portions of the 400mm main belt was already installed before her battleship design was discarded. Those portions of the lower and upper Armor belt was kept IF they were already installed before the conversion work, everything else after was greatly reduced, in some areas the armor belt went from 400mm (15.7 Inchs of armor) where the main battery barbettes used to be, to around 6.9 inches of armor everywhere else, (Flat armored surfaces could range from 3.5 inches to 7 and a half inches thick). Shinano despite loosing tonnage from her conversion, Her Machinery and remaining 15.7 inch armor belt still provided pretty good stability on the lower hull, Additionally a proper torpedo Protection "Bulge" was added, which the Battleship design lacked, BUT the Armor belt joints behind the torpedo protection were still vulnerable to damage from torpedoes strikes, which as found in the Yamato and Musashi's service life would cause the Armor plates to Buckle from the force causing the armor to become undone, which was a design flaw Shinano inherited from her sisters design. But when it came to the superstructure and Hanger deck, lessons learned from the Carrier Taiho design, Shinano along with the Taiho had the sides of their hangers unarmored in order reduce top heaviness, but an Armored flight deck was carried just like Taiho to provide protection from bombs. To prevent the situation that caused Taihos Downfall, ( a Build up of Aviation fuel fumes caused by a submarine Torpedo that ruptured her fuel tanks, and since Taiho had a fully enclosed hanger deck, the fumes could not be purged from the ship fast enough and after accidently sucking up the fumes into the ventalation system, a spark occurred somewhere in the then fuel air bomb Taiho, caused her to Explode) Shinano was built to have an open hanger deck with open and closable shutters that could close the hanger deck off to the elements or battle if needed.

[@jimtalbott9535]

Is there a word for the mechanical action caused by the impact of a shell on armor plate, rivets, and other components? Not the after effects, such as spall, but the actual mechanical forces involved that do the damage.

[@AdmRose]

@@jimtalbott9535Shock/impact loading.

[@christopherconard2831]

I didn't realize they'd switched from British to American design theory. The British, up through WWII , saw carriers as battleships minus big guns, plus airplanes. So enclose everything you can behind armor. The Americans saw them as an airport that happened to be able to float. So keep areas open and ventilated. There were exceptions and this is oversimplified, but it was the major difference in design philosophy.

[@PeteOtton]

@@christopherconard2831 The British were also expecting to be operating half way around the world and needed a stronger flight deck, or if they were in home waters they needed to withstand the daily North Sea weather and frequent storms.The US had one or two carriers damaged in typhoons damaging the flight deck.

[@Engine33Truck]

@@PeteOtton Carrier design and doctrine was messy up to and through much of WWII for all nations. Taihō was a departure from “Pacific carrier doctrine” towards “European carrier doctrine” not because of a change in philosophy, but because Taihō (and any planned sisters) were intended to be battle carriers. Taihō’s role was to be the vanguard, or “tip of the spear” of the carrier fleet. That would put her in a position more commonly where she’d have to defend against heavy attack. Taihō wasn’t originally intended to be a unique ship, but none of her sisters were laid down likely in favor of more Unryū class carriers.

[@captainobvious9233]

The Shinano, despite it's size was designed as an auxiliary carrier, not a front line carrier. While was supposed to have a small air group of its own, it was meant to carry replacement aircraft, ordinance and fuel for other carriers. So basically, the the time it was launched, it was a white elephant since the few carriers that Japan had left had no aircraft or trained pilots. I wonder what they would have done with it had it not been sunk by the Archerfish. I can imagine them loading it up with Kamikaze aircraft and sending it on another one way mission like the Yamato, perhaps in at attempt to strike a U.S Naval anchorage.

[@Engine33Truck]

That’s what I figure would’ve happened. The Imperial Japanese Navy had a lot of unrealistic beliefs about the war. To the point they still believed there was a way to win, even after Leyte Gulf. The IJN didn’t have nearly as much of a shortage of aircraft as they did pilots, a problem they seemed intentionally ignorant of. Their policy of leaving good pilots on the front lines until they all died most certainly did not help matters, nor their willingness to waste aircraft and pilots on kamikaze missions. Shinano’s intention of being a floating aircraft repair ship like HMS Unicorn, and the godawful conversions of Ise and Hyūga into hybrid battleship-carriers were evidence of the IJN’s delusion. Yamato wasn’t sent to Okinawa because the IJN genuinely believed she could do some good. She was sent there because the IJN’s high command knew the public would never accept the war ending unfavorably with her intact, so she had to die in a glorious “last stand”. Her crew knew that too. Which, fun fact, wasn’t the first time IJN’s high command had an idea to send a battleship on a one-way mission (but the first time was for a different reason). Had Shinano not been sunk, she would’ve either been loaded up on suicide craft, like you said, or relief supplies. Either way, she would’ve been sent towards either Iwo Jima or Okinawa. By the time she would’ve been fully completed, the IJN wouldn’t have the ability to supply her with any air group.

[@geodkyt]

While there isn't a formal definition, Forrestal (and the follow on US classes) are supercarriers because they are *fleet carriers* , who could operate a *larger air wing* and *larger aircraft* than their contemporaries. They need the "warship" range and speed to do offensive missions. Shinano's origin as a battleship hull design, and the fact they had fitted out the armor and the lower decks spaces and equipment for that role before finsihing her as a carrier meant she was *severely* compromised as a carrier (and the vestigial battleship armor is the reason for her "biggest carrier until Forrestal" status). Shinano was built as a *support* carrier to ferry aircraft, more akin to a really large, fast, heavily armored version of the US "jeep carriers". She couldn't undertake a fleet carrier role, despite her size, speed, and survivability, bevause she couldnt support and maintain a *working* airgroup commensurate to the effort of having out there. Her pruporlse was not to be the tip of the spearhead - it was to keep that spearhead sharp by dragging along 120 aircraft that basically couldnt be used operationally *from* Shinano - they would fly from Shinano to their new home carriers and operate from there.

[@eddapultstab2078]

You have a point but the counter point is that this is all academic since the ship was rushed incomplete, and sank before it even could go under sea trials in that state. We will never know if it would actually be a successful ship since all plans and the people who designed it are long gone. But to it's credit, it was not like the moskva as even in its decades of life was never able to leave port without a tugboat even with modernization.

[@ThePhengophobe]

Even more interesting when the term "super-carrier" was first used by the NYT in reference to HMS Ark Royal, 22,000 tons standard displacement and designed to operate 72 aircraft, however only realistically operating 50-60. The only definition I could find is by Websters, "a very large aircraft carrier".

[@boardmike82]

Thanks for the info. As my surname is Forrester this brings me extra joy 😂

[@Engine33Truck]

Correct. Shinano’s indigenous air group (meaning the one permanently assigned to her) was intended to be a fairly small air wing, likely purely fighters for defense and escort. Shinano’s role, however, did mark a major departure from established IJN carrier doctrine. The IJN’s carrier doctrine up to that point was that the air wing AND their mother ship operated as one cohesive group, meaning a “plug and play” of attaching different squadrons (or even parts of squadrons) wasn’t possible without time to train together. That regimented doctrine led to issues during the war, such as Zuikaku being unavailable to sail with the rest of the Kidō Butai for Operation MI (aka Battle of Midway). Her air wing was decimated at Coral Sea, yet Shōkaku’s was mostly intact. Zuikaku was mostly undamaged, Shōkaku was too damaged to stay on the front lines. Because of the IJN’s carrier doctrine, Zuikaku taking Shōkaku’s air wing to replenish her own would be operationally impossible, forcing both carriers to return to Japan. This is in stark contrast to the USN’s carrier doctrine in which squadrons operated independently as their own units, trained together, and in somewhat loose coordination with the mother ship. That gave USN carrier squadrons the ability to operate with any other squadron and from any carrier and function just fine. Operations were also standardized across all carriers, rather than specific to each carrier and its respective air group. That proved to be a much better policy, also at Midway. Yorktown returned from Coral Sea badly damaged with a fairly depleted air wing. USS Saratoga was at Pearl Harbor undergoing repairs after being torpedoed by a submarine (which left her unavailable for both Coral Sea and Midway). Yorktown’s air group was replenished with aircraft and pilots from Saratoga, with almost no training needed.

[@7thsealord888]

Actually, the IJN's mentality for much of the Pacific War was that, at some point, the USN would attempt to breach their defensive perimeter and a huge Jutland-style battleship-centred battle would eventuate. So, the IJN carriers did most of the heavy lifting early on, while most of their BBs were kept back waiting for this expected big battle. Unfortunately for them, the Allies and their island-hopping strategy did not really play into this plan. So, when Japan's BBs finally did begin sallying forth as a last resort, it was mainly on suicide runs, whether intended or not.

[@christopherconard2831]

Their battleships, when combined with escorts and air cover from carriers would have been devastating to any fleet in the Pacific. Unfortunately for Japan they never had the chance to use the combination at full strength despite numerous attempts to pull America into such a fight. The closest they came was Midway and we'd read all their plans in advance, so were ready for them. Even immediately after that Japan wanted to continue. But the US fleet (Admiral Halsey?) was smart enough to realize they'd meet after sundown and didn't want to really find out how good they were at night fighting, so turned away. Commanders of both fleets were criticized at home for being timid, and not following up on a weakened enemy. Though those away from the battle had no idea how much each had lost until much later.

[@7thsealord888]

@@christopherconard2831 The Battle Of Midway is a very good example. The IJN command set up this highly intricate attack plan, whereby several different fleets would all be dancing around doing various things, to a very specific schedule, with no allowance for lack of cooperation by the enemy. The reality was that this complexity was counter-productive. The Aleutian Diversion Force (with its own carrier) grabbed a coupe of islands unopposed, but saw no combat and achived nothing else. The Main Fleet, with its Battleships, was over a hundred miles away from the carrier force and, yet again, saw no combat and achieved zilch. At least one IJN commander suggested the following with 20-20 hindsight. If the IJN had instead taken a 'blunt instrument approach' and merged the carriers with the Main Fleet, they would likely have been unstoppable at Midway. Instead .....

[@bkjeong4302]

@@7thsealord888 The blunt force scenario would still have resulted in failure, because the battleships might as well have stayed back like they historically did. *The entire reason battleships were proven obsolete in WWII was because carriers extended battle ranges to the point battleships were physically unable to shoot at enemy ships if even one side had carriers.* The Americans can just not bother attacking the harmless Japanese battleships and attack the Japanese carriers instead, which were the actual target for the Americans.

[@7thsealord888]

@@christopherconard2831 Inclusion of the battleships as part of a 'blunt instrument' approach would have run against IJN thinking of the time, I fully agree on that. HOWEVER, the added AA of these battleships and their escorts would have been an added factor in protecting the overall fleet, just as the USN itself did in later stages of the war. Fuchida, one of Yamato's top commanders, makes this exact point in his later 20-20 hindsight writings about the battle. It would not be unthinkable that some of the US aircraft would sufficiently diverted to attack BBs instead of CVs. BBs are generally tougher to sink than fully-laden CVs, and given just how close-run the Battle Of Midway was, I think this qualifies as an interesting 'What If?'

[@PeteOtton]

@@christopherconard2831 Halsey was beached for Midway (possibly shingles.) Frank Jack Fletcher was in command, which he turned over to Ray Spruance after the Yorktown was torpedoed and stopped. Spruance had the good sense to know his main offensive weapons were his planes and not to try closing with a superior force at night when he couldn't launch those planes. Halsey was bold and brash, the moniker bull was apt, and might have continued sailing west right into the heart of the Japanese cruisers and destroyers that formed the escort for the carriers. This likely would have been a disaster as the Japanese were better night fighters and had effective torpedoes with a very long range.

[@richardlong3745]

She made a lot of firsts in her short life and one of them was having the most internal open holes in commissioned warship during wartime conditions while underway.

[@geodkyt]

More than *Moskva* ? 😂

[@Engine33Truck]

@@geodkytyes lol. Moskva was at least complete and devoid of any compromising internal holes. Until Ukraine created several, that is. Shinano was only around 80% completed, so she could also earn a first of “least completed warship to ever be commissioned”. Or “first warship to be commissioned and turned over to her captain with a ‘some assembly required’ note”.

[@JoelWright2-ir6el]

Despite being spooked by the 1 Nov 1944 B-29 recce mission over Tokyo (actually an F-13A, a photo recce version of the B-29), the IJN ironically need not have rushed Shinano out of Tokyo Bay to the Inland Sea. It's apparent the USAAF's XXI Bomber Command HQ on Saipan wasn't aware or wasn't interested that the F-13's photos contained a picture of a carrier. According to the book "Strategic Air War Against Japan" by Maj Gen Haywood Hansell, USAF retired, the F-13's mission that day was to photograph aircraft and engine plants in the Tokyo area. Over 7000 photos were taken, so IMO it's not likely the USAAF photo interpreters at Saipan would have wasted their time looking at ships at Yokosuka Naval Yard/Base or in Tokyo Bay in general. They would have prioritized identifying aircraft manufacturing plants to bomb. Those would be the initial priority targets of the newly arrived B-29s in the Marianas, not IJN naval vessels or installations. Interestingly, Hansell states that all copies of the photos from that mission were sent to Admiral Nimitz's command at Pearl Harbor. So the US Navy also apparently overlooked, misinterpreted, or ignored this photographic evidence. Since Shinano was built in such secrecy, the USN had no SIGINT on the carrier and therefore thought it had accounted for all of the IJN's remaining carriers. Of course, the IJN couldn't have known any of this and had to assume Shinano was spotted and therefore vulnerable to B-29 attacks. Even if Shinano's departure from Yokosuka had been delayed a few days as its captain had requested, it probably wouldn't have made any difference.

[@PeteOtton]

The Kamikaze threat was a much greater threat at that point. Stopping production of aircraft or destroying them on the ground was a higher priority for the USN and USAAF. Between the Marianas and the Philippines the IJN's carrier based aircraft and more importantly pilots had been decimated.

[@Engine33Truck]

The IJN high command also seemed a bit intentionally ignorant as to how bad their pilot shortage problem actually was. While they eventually acknowledged they no longer had a carrier air fleet, they seemed to not realize the USN was more aware of their pilot shortage than they were. The pitiful numbers of carrier aircraft mustered against the 5th Fleet at Philippine Sea and the 3rd Fleet at Leyte Gulf confirmed to the USN that the IJN no longer had the ability to arm their carriers. So the IJN didn’t realize the USN had decided Japanese aircraft carriers were no longer a primary threat by November 1944. The IJN also had a strange belief that high-altitude level bombing was much more of a threat than it actually was, even against ships in port.

[@PeteOtton]

@@Engine33Truck They kinda knew it, Ozawa knew he was bait, and overly aggressive Halsey fell for it. The B29 threat became realistic once the USAAF stopped trying to do high altitude level bombing with block busters and switched to low level bombing with incendiaries. Ships aren't much good when the food, fuel, and munitions are burned up on the docks and their isn't anyone left to load them aboard ship.

[@Engine33Truck]

@@PeteOtton true. Ozawa, like his superior Kurita, were examples of front line commanders that had a realistic view of the situation. The admiralty holed up in Imperial General Headquarters had lost almost all touch on reality by mid 1944

[@JeffEbe-te2xs]

The Japanese couldn’t chance it Had to move Not attacking the sub was a mistake

[@JohnSmith-gb5vg]

Geez, you don’t even mentioned the book written by the very submarine captain that sank her! Which by the way had a hard time getting credit for sinking her.

[@francisyan542]

Pardon how nitpicky I am but here are things I noticed 0:57 ‘May I present the IJN Shinano’ *proceeds to show footage of a Yorktown-Class Aircraft Carrier, most likely USS Enterprise* 4:09 *shows Akagi prior to her second refit which made her topmost flight deck longer and got rid of her other 2 flight decks*

[@jameswalker7899]

One thinks often of this sinking. It didn't have to become the tragedy represented by enormous loss of life. But as you imply, Abe unduly delayed the order to abandon ship, leaving most of the crew trapped below. One can only imagine their horror as the waters rose up within the hull. While there is satisfaction in a great naval victory as scored by USS Archerfish, there is simultaneous grief for the many lives that were lost, most of which losses were unnecessary.

[@Engine33Truck]

Shinano and the people on her were unnecessarily doomed. IJN high command grossly overestimated how at risk she was. She was only around 80% completed and had no business leaving port. Her fire mains and bailing systems were inoperable because they lacked pumps, meaning the few portable pumps she had on board was the only means of pumping out water (it should be noted her crew lacked training in operating those pumps). Also her escorts literally pulled back into port from Leyte Gulf and were being immediately ordered back out to sea. They were damaged and low on fuel, provisions, and munitions. Captain Abe Toshio asked for 3 days to try to fix some of Shinano’s issues, as well as his escorts getting repairs they needed and allow their fatigued crews to recuperate. That request was denied. Her course also took her out into open waters for some reason, putting her at a higher risk of contact with a US sub than hugging the coastline might’ve. From what I can gather, I believe Shinano to be Abe’s first command. When she was hit, he and everyone else were overconfident about Shinano’s abilities. Abe also didn’t believe American torpedoes to be able to seriously damage Shinano as they were known to be less potent than their Japanese counterparts. That led to him maintaining full speed and damage control efforts to initially be reportedly lax.

[@danielroke778]

Thanks!

[@johnc2438]

A more apt comparison might have been to show specs for Yamato- and Iowa-class battlewagons, both of WWII vintage.

[@alexreitler]

Interesting how I randomly searched for this channel and a brand new video was uploaded 15 minutes ago

[@lastguy8613]

Simon is all seeing young one..

[@rfarevalo]

This channel uploaded a lot of videos as they need to earn an income. How is that interesting?

[@zackwilliams5063]

Yeah I mean its pretty normal for a big KZbin channel to upload videos. Sounds like you read too much into nothing.

[@zackwilliams5063]

Also how did you randomly search for it? If you're searching for it then that's something being done with intent, not random.

[@duanebrimhall2556]

`In a book I read about this, the author speculated that one of the torpedoes, when it exploded on the armour belt, shoved a girder, used to separate the inner and outer hulls, into the ship itself. After that, all it took was time for its demise.

[@tbrooke3016]

KZbin stopped serving me notifications for MegaProjects and I forgot to check updates! I have now rang the bell but I have a few months of videos to Binge! 🥰 Thank you for putting a video out that KZbin wanted to push to me more than the others for some reason 😅

[@panzerschreck3726]

See "Godzilla Minus One." Yukikaze helped take out the Atomic big guy.

[@dr69_420]

The Archerfish was awarded (post ww2) the largest amount tonnage sunk by a US sub from a single ship during all of ww2. The reason why it was awarded after ww2 the Admiralty didnt believe the sub sunk such a large ship.

[@WarshipMolester]

Shinano will never be forgotten by me

[@ijnnagato]

Hello skk

[@ChloeKruegerSenpai]

Weeb

[@Practitioner_of_Diogenes]

Name and image check out.

[@matt65535]

Haiiiiii shikikan!

[@-Crimson-knight-]

Hello skk👋

[@Reepicheep-1]

"The water pipes and their sealing? They won't be installed until Tuesday." Archerfish's crew stated for years they sank a massive carrier. Intel people kept denying it as they didn't think Shinano existed. 'You may have sunk a tiny carrier, but nothing the size you claim.' Took decades to confirm the kill as a Yamato-size carrier.

[@matt65535]

Yep, they were initially credited as sinking an escort carrier (a tiny carrier closer to a cruiser, where a fleet carrier was more the size of a battlecruiser or battleship), just because intel didn't think Japan could have anything bigger than that available.

[@P1aty]

Finally! Such a underated story I wish there was more youtube videos on the amazing story this ship and submarine had. Thanks for the content!! :)

[@bobby_t4bles]

Interesting video, but I'm not sure why they keep using a World War I era battleship in comparison to the Yamato class

[@JediBearBob]

Indeed. At least compare them to their contemporaries.

[@leem.9332]

I agree, time wise that’s like comparing a P51 mustang to a F15 Eagle, approximately 35 years apart.

[@Cailus3542]

A dreadnought, at that.

[@liamc9998]

@@Cailus3542, I was just about to mention that. The differences between dreadnoughts and the more modern - or even treaty-era - battleships of WWII (1930 and up) are substantial.

[@JeffBilkins]

Yea, the Iowa's would be the most logical comparison as biggest US battleship and are still around, just like Texas.

[@gamedude412]

The Shinano wasn't a supercarrier It was a Fleet floating Warehouse, It was meant to be the hub for other carriers to supply from along side garrisons. Like of it as the Carrier verison of the Uboat TypeXIV milkcows.

[@johnculver2519]

Or perhaps HMS Unicorn, Britains 'honestly not a carrier gov' maintenance ship

[@panzerwolf494]

Yeah, he mentions that

[@JeffEbe-te2xs]

What other carriers All the Japanese ones were sunk

[@Dilbert-o5k]

Apparently there was one other ship that sported an 18 inch gun, the Lord Clive a British monitor that had one 18 inch gun fitted for shore bombardment. It was used in the D Day campaign iirc

[@justinbruck9602]

To be pedantic, the Yamatos were armed with 18.1" guns. Hence why the get to have the title of largest undersea boom stick.

[@UchihaPercy]

Not only that, Monitors aren’t considered front line ships.

[@Wyomingchief]

​@@justinbruck9602they are literally the world's greatest Battleship coral reefs😂😂

[@JH_789]

Of all of Simon's channels and all their videos on all the ships named Shinano, tis is easily in my top 10.

[@hyenafur]

Damage control? In our moment of triumph! I think you over estimate our damage! - Toshio Abe

[@stevenblackwell4903]

😂

[@annoyed707]

@@stevenblackwell4903 To be fair, he would have gotten away with that comment, were it not for those pesky kids.

[@martinadams7949]

My dad was on archerfish , you got the story down pretty good. One point my Dad said was the shipyard workers uniforms looked like officer uniforms, so the crew was confused on who to listen to.

[@strangerranger2565]

Your opening video of the Shinano is actually of a Yorktown class (look at the funnel and director tower).

[@robertf3479]

Ironically that photo is probably of Enterprise, I believe the superstructure seen behind her is an Essex class carrier. There were none in service while Yorktown or Hornet were around.

[@Wyomingchief]

​@@robertf3479OMG somebody that actually knows World War II aircraft carriers❤ Thank you I was going to make this comment you save me the trouble. It's amazing how uninformed people can be just by doing a little bit of research. The only reason I even watched this video is because I do have an interest in World War II aircraft carriers, so by listening to this video you would be very ill-informed

[@ZenkoTheGreat12]

Only like two photos of Shinano actually exist…but yeah, that’s Enterprise with an Essex in the background.

[@robertf3479]

@@Wyomingchief I like to think of myself as something of a naval historian specializing in the USN and of WWII. It's odd to think that more remains of Yorktown and Hornet than of Enterprise today even though those ships are resting in their warship's graves. May they and their crews Rest in Peace. I still believe that the Flight Deck of USS Enterprise (CV 6) would have been a more appropriate site for the Surrender Ceremony than USS Missouri.

[@hardy_boehm]

Dear Simon, I am very happy that you give both metric and imperial measurements for items. Kudos for that! But might I ask you to not alternate back and forth about which you voice? The numbers are on the screen, but it get’s confusing when you speak one and then a short time later you speak the other. Thanks for your consideration.

[@rodneybarnes4509]

I’m Team Forrestal because I served over three years as a fleet sailor aboard her in the early 1989s.

[@stevenblackwell4903]

I had always believed that we served on the first one. I didnt know about this vessel. ( CV-59; V1 & SLEP in Philadelphia)80-84.

[@nekophht]

To be fair... Shinano's "air group" would basically be... a Midway's air group in size. Of non-jet aircraft. And it wouldn't even reach that, because the actual air group was ~50 planes and everything else was to be a replacement for other carriers' losses. Calling her a supercarrier would be like calling a Tiger II an MBT because it weighed about the same as an Abrams.

[@Vyraal87]

Loved the mention of the Texas, any chance we could get a full video on her? Especially with her currently undergoing restorations.

[@michaelheckmann3791]

Yeah, pointing out the known unknowns is always a good look.

[@zackwilliams5063]

"Just bc there's an absence of evidence doesn't mean there's evidence of absence. Simply bc you know something exist does not mean it is non existent. There are known knowns, there are known unknowns, but there are also unknown unknowns. Things that we don't know that we do not know." -Gin Rummy

[@kallekas8551]

Wow! Surprised to wake up to a Shinano video! Cool!👍

[@richardmeo2503]

Strange that Yamamoto who advanced IJN aviation allowed those 3 behemoths to be built. Japan's worse mistake other than failing to finish off Pearl Harbor, was in not taking Midway a week later. Had they done so that Dec. it would have prevented the Doolittle Raid and the Battle of Midway. Saving their carriers.

[@MrSheckstr]

It wasnt until after the disaster at Midway that the Shinano would start being rebuilt as a carrier…. Yamamoto needed naval aviation of ANY KIND at that moment, not battleships that wouldnt be finished before it was too late ….

[@Wyomingchief]

You have to realize that the vast majority of Japanese admirals, were battleship admirals. In fact most of the captains that were in charge of their Fleet carriers, had absolutely no experience in Naval Aviation. The United States had the same problem, luckily we lost so many battleships at the beginning that carrier Aviation got thrust to the Forefront

[@Wyomingchief]

Also Admiral Yamato had very little input on what was being built, it was those Battleship Admirals that were the vast majority of Admirals who were controlling the purse strings

[@richardmeo2503]

@@MrSheckstr Japs needed carriers, but had lost so many of their well trained carrier pilots that Shinano was a waste of time.

[@richardmeo2503]

@@Wyomingchief Just like US. Our dependence on carriers was caused by Pearl Harbor. They were our only surface weapon that had any punch.

[@gamehacker5692]

Can we get the Fletcher Class of DD’s?

[@xessenceofinsanityx]

Whether or not she was a supercarrier, she certainly was not a super carrier

[@radioactive9861]

ZING!

[@Edax_Royeaux]

She wasn't even finished when she was sunk.

[@jgbandbjb92709]

Super reef.

[@JeffEbe-te2xs]

By weight she was

[@pablopeter3564]

Thanks for this video, you did a remarcable job and paid tribute to those ones who fought for their country. SHINANO BANZAI ¡¡¡¡¡

[@MrGeforcerFX]

Comparing Yamato to Texas seems weird, Texas was laid down in 1911, Yamato in 1937. Comparing it to the Iowa class makes more sense and would put the two ships much closer together in technology.

[@emberfist8347]

Agreed. The Iowa admittedly came late in the war, but it was designed outside of the inter-war naval treaty restrictions of other US ships. The Japanese were blatantly cheating by making the Yamato so the Iowa is the best comparison.

[@su-57stealthfighter73]

​@@emberfist8347Japanese Blatantly cheating when building Yamato?? In the first place both British and US permitted Japan to only have 60 ships compared to 100 of theirs ,by signing the Washington naval treaty ,so building Yamato is not cheating it was built to compensate for the numbers of ship .... What US and British did is more of Humiliation ...

[@emberfist8347]

@ You forget the part those treaties specifying how big a battleship could be and how big its guns could be.

[@su-57stealthfighter73]

@@emberfist8347 that's the exact reason why Japan didn't sign the Washington naval treaty ,imposing limited number of ship and tonnange to Japan ,they humiliated Japan by passing that treaty specially when their navy already had more battleships ...

[@emberfist8347]

@@su-57stealthfighter73 No Japan did sign it. They didn't sign the Second London Naval Treaty which was a separate one and that was because they were pissy that League of Nations was calling them out for their Invasion of China. Not to mention you ignore Japan's tonnage limit was generous to them. They got more than Italy or France. The US and UK only had larger overall tonnage limits on account of having two oceans to cover while Japan only had one.

[@lozetchells9164]

Brilliant video, expertly narrated as always!

[@politicsuncensored5617]

I would say the Shinano was more of a hybrid type carrier rather than a - "Supercarrier". She was like you pointed out a battleship Yamato class hull that really wasn't suited for a supercarrier. At best Shinano would likely have carriered 50 or so aircraft and Japan was planning to use her as a support carrier. The USS Forrestal on the other hand was the first large scale designed carrier with mainly jet aircraft. It would have been more interesting if the Shinano had been completed as the 3rd Yamato class BB rather than as a large incomplete flawed carrier. Would she have been at the battle of the Philippine sea and would she have survived that battle or had been sunk like the battleship Musashi? Shalom

[@Engine33Truck]

Had she been completed as a battleship, she would’ve been sunk by the war’s end with certainty. Yamato was sent on her one-way mission not because the IJN command thought she could actually accomplish something useful, but because they knew the public would never tolerate Japan losing the war with Yamato still intact. The IJN high command believed Yamato *had* to die gloriously, and her crew was well aware of that. Something similar would’ve happened with battleship Shinano had she survived Leyte Gulf. Also, while people still debate whether Shinano was a “super carrier”, USS Midway (or even Lexington and Saratoga) would be much closer to a true pre-Forrestal “super carrier”.

[@Justin_Saves]

Awesome episode! Thank you for all the hard work 🤘😝👍

[@aircraftcarrierwo-class]

It wasn't that Shinano wasn't "built properly". She was incomplete and being moved to a drydock further north to be finished out of range of bomber attacks from Okinawa. When you said she had a service life I was already raising questions-- because she didn't _have_ a service life. She was never completed or commissioned. The fact that she wasn't even finished is a large part of why the crew were unable to control the flooding, with watertight seals not all installed yet and several doors stuck open due to equipment/cables from onboard work crews.

[@Engine33Truck]

Weirdly, she was formally commissioned on 19 November 1944. I’ve never been able to learn a reason why she was commissioned in an extremely unfinished state and without sea trials, but it happened nonetheless.

[@aircraftcarrierwo-class]

@@Engine33Truck my mistake then, but it may have also been a legal necessity to move the hull. She was nowhere near finished.

[@SwanOnChips]

I've heard about this before but not embellished with all the great details!

[@sniperboom1202]

The order to move Shimano never made sense to me. Like think about it. The IJN knew subs were in the foastal waters by this point. They knew that the bombing raids thus far had only used incendiary bombs and bombs lighter than 1000 lbs. The worst a bombing raid would do it damage the ship and the port. Botg of which can be repaired there with little extra space. Verses losing the ship they spent two years converting. Its madness

[@jimtalbott9535]

Madness was rampant in Japan’s military leadership by that point. Madness started the second Sino-Japanese war, and they never looked back.

[@christopherconard2831]

Possibly a mentality of "Better the Devil you know". If they could have gone full speed, and if they could have made it beyond the coastal patrols into open sea, they would have stood a better chance. Two big "ifs". Similar to Germany finally deciding to turn loose the Bismarck. It could only get lucky and escape so many bombing attempts while in port. There was also the problem of different levels within the military, both Army and Navy, not being open about their level of readiness. Or openly lying about it. The higher levels may have thought it was more complete than it really was.

[@morstyrannis1951]

Another factor may be that no navy officer likes to be in port. Virtually all of the training they have to fight their ship is useless when it’s tied up at a dock or buoy.

[@Engine33Truck]

Despite them being one of the finest navies in the world, the IJN’s high command often proved to be comically incompetent. In addition to what you already said, they also knew high-altitude level bombing was basically useless against ships even in port. So they grossly overestimated the risk to Shinano. They also still would not acknowledge how bad their pilot shortage actually was, or that their carrier fleet was 99% useless. So they also grossly overestimated Shinano’s importance to themselves and as a target. Evidence shows that the reconnaissance photo taken of her wasn’t even acknowledged by the US until long after she sunk, as it was one photo amongst 6,000 taken on that mission. The course they had Shinano take also took her way out into open sea for some reason.

[@JeffEbe-te2xs]

If the Air Force thought there was a carrier they would have sent everyone to bomb it

[@VincentNajger1]

that's the most in breaths i think I've heard from Simon. New mic?

[@SpartanElite43]

All the battleship videos you've done but none on The Iowa Class Battleships?...

[@crazyeyez1502]

Honestly, if you want a video on the Iowa's, you'd probably be better off going to their respective channels. Battleship New Jersey has a fantastic channel, with daily uploads.

[@SpartanElite43]

@@crazyeyez1502 oh I love watching their channels as well and I've even done a 4k video tour of USS New Jersey with Ryan Szimanski as tour guide (hes amazing btw) and i even fired a 5 inch gun, all that is in a playlist on my channel. I just would love to see this channel do a video on the Iowas as they clearly enjoy making battleship videos and would be fun video I think.

[@Engine33Truck]

In terms of warship informational videos, everyone and their brother has done a video on the Iowa class. So I’d much rather see videos of more obscure ships.

[@curryboyftw]

Shoutout the effort for transparency and factual reporting sourcing ❤

[@JediBearBob]

Shinano lacked the capacity of even a true fleet carrier and while commissioned, she was never completed. So no, not a supercarrier.

[@annoyed707]

It was also completely lacking a cape.

[@JeffEbe-te2xs]

Is by weight As said we don’t know how many planes she could carry

[@JurjenHettinga]

Wouldn't the Iowa class have been a better comparison to the Yamato class?

[@Engine33Truck]

A closer one than Texas, certainly.

[@DG-jq7il]

The Shinano wasn't a super carrier, it was just a big carrier, and it was more of an aircraft transport than aircraft carrier. The Midway Class was closer to a super carrier than the Shinano.

[@Engine33Truck]

Correct, or even USS Lexington and USS Saratoga. They were gargantuan when completed compared to other carriers of their time. Hell, they were bigger than any other carrier built UNTIL Shinano and Midway. They also had the largest hangars of any aircraft carrier until USS Forrestal.

[@josephtutela1066]

Simon You are the Greatest Of All Time (GOAT)!!

[@USSMaineBB-95]

At full displacement Shinano was 71,890 tons when Forrestal was 82,402 tons That’s almost 11,000 tons heavier (10,512 exact) Plus why compare Yamato to Texas ?, because the Iowa Class were a much bigger threat to both Yamato and Musashi as they had 50 caliber 16 inch MK7 Guns Also Shinano is likely forgotten as there’s very little information and details about her less than a month voyage and unlike Yamato and Musashi her wreck has yet to be found

[@ussriverside88]

I knew Forrestal was heavier but I didn’t think it was that much

[@gryphonaeo479]

I massively recommend the book, Shinano!, as there are so many more details that go unsaid in this video. I cannot recommend it strongly enough!

[@alexbenis4726]

They really should look for her wreck, the ship was such a mystery and could teach us much. Just think, if her hull is in one piece she will give us the only example of an intact Yamato class hull, worth looking for her just for that.

[@procatprocat9647]

18:00 photo of the ship laying on the seabed today. They know where it is

[@alexbenis4726]

@@procatprocat9647 I don't know why they said that on the video, that's not a wreck photo, it's the carrier under construction taken by a B29 Recon. It's unknown if anyone has actually located the wreck but doubtful.

[@procatprocat9647]

@@alexbenis4726 fair enough. Then I agree with you - I hope it's found before it degrades back to dust

[@Engine33Truck]

The Japanese government has stated as far back as 2001 that they don’t want her to be found, for whatever reason. They still maintain that position even in the era of sunken IJN warships being visually accounted for.

[@grugbug4313]

Solid! Top KEK! Peace be with you.

[@PoleTooke]

0:18 the fact that that stock footage exists 😂😂😂

[@Karagianis]

6:20 Where are you getting this from? There isn't a single source I can find that quotes more than 55. 47 aircraft is the most common figure.

[@gregwasserman2635]

Calling the Shinano a super carrier is a stretch. Even if the ship had been used as a carrier, it would have not scared the USN, as they had well over a dozen Essex carriers, each of which could carry around 100 aircraft. All three ships built on the Yamato class hull proved to be great targets.

[@jeffleach9023]

Why compare the Yamoto to the Texas, a much older ship? Comparing it to the Iowa would make more sense (especially with that sneaky photo of USS New Jersey that was used).

[@stalkingtiger777]

I wish that one Yamato class would've survived. Too bad it wasn't meant to be. 2/3 sacrificed to the altar pride and hubris.

[@Cailus3542]

The Americans would've just expended them in the atom bomb tests, or just scrapped them.

[@kaltaron1284]

They probably would have used it for atomic bomb tests or sold it for scrap metal after the war either way. There is a nice 1:10 model of it though.

[@kar4tube]

Fascinating topic! Thank you.

[@russdority6295]

Archerfish visited Sydney in the mid 60s. I had the pleasure of going to sea in her for a day

[@geoffreylee5199]

When saying tons, are they long tons of 2200 lbs? or short tons of 2000 lbs? Are they Imperial gallons or short gallons?

[@davidjernigan8161]

The Texas was a pre WWI dreadnought class ship. A better comparison would be a New Jersey class battleship.

[@liamc9998]

Iowa was the class leader, just to be “that guy”.

[@justinbruck9602]

Or the German super battleships, at least by tonnage.

[@blazewardog]

​@@justinbruck9602 Germany had 2 middling Battleships. They didn't even have any good ones let alone super ones.

[@johnramsey2009]

New Jersey would have been a better comparison but Texas is a super dreadnought.

[@Wyomingchief]

Never heard of the New Jersey class of battleships😂😂 I'm assuming you're referring to the Iowa class battleships, of which the USS New Jersey was one

[@jaxik6506]

She may have been intended to be the worlds first super carrier but what the Shinano ended up being was the single largest coral reef ever planted by a submarine.

[@jimtalbott9535]

Now I have to see Drachinifel weigh in on this. Unless he has, and I’ve missed it.

[@Wyomingchief]

Pretty sure he's done a video maybe not specifically on it but possibly of the late War carriers

[@biffbobfred]

Historiograph has. It’s in many ways better than this. kzbin.info/www/bejne/b33KlJKEqdx0prM

[@MarchHare59]

Shinano's biggest problem was her slow speed. The Yamato Class battleship had a top speed of 27 knots, which is well below the 30 knot minimum speed required to be an effective fleet aircraft carrier.

[@Cailus3542]

Ironically, Shinano probably would've been more effective as a battleship.

[@texan-american200]

Highly doubtful.

[@magnemoe1]

@@texan-american200 Well they had sailors but not pilots for one, if Shinano was am Midway class carrier she would not be very useful if she did not have pilots for her planes. But Japan was also very scared about risking their Yamato class battleships.

[@samsignorelli]

Yamato and Musashi weren't...the class as a whole didn't cover itself in glory. Musashi never fired on a surface ship, and Yamato saw more action in anime than in real life.

[@George_M_]

Her messed up interior space due to conversion exacerbated the damage from the torpedo strike. They may have launched her with more damage control crew too.

[@bkjeong4302]

Given how useless not only her sisters but WWII-era battleships across the board were?

[@CybershamanX]

(4:09) Is the Akagi the inspiration for those weird triple-deck space carriers in Space Battleship Yamato? 😎

[@TamagoHead]

The crypto folks who broke Germany’s enigma and the Japanese Purple had a major impact on shortening the war. Simon is a great narrator.

[@dccyo444]

I just can't stop laughing at the thumb nail on the left of my screen. The caption says, I made a1800's French Absinthe To See if I Trip Balls, Ha!

[@joeblow6568]

the Oka's were not her 'air group'. they were cargo.

[@TheFallen1013]

Ohka*

[@DeaconBlu]

Cool vid! Thanks folks!

[@kuddles29]

Texas is a nice ship but wouldn't an Iowa make a better comparison? We even have multiple still as museum ships.

[@Potato-pl5cr]

I think they choose Texas as a comparison for the awe of the size difference for people that don't know much about battleships. If they compared the Iowa to the Yamato people would be like, eh it's really not much bigger.

[@bkjeong4302]

Actually, the idea of not completing Shinano as a battleship had been around before the end of 1941 as a result of Force Z finally getting the IJN to realize they had screwed up and shouldn’t have built the Yamatos (though they were hardly the only ones to have done so: this was a problem endemic in WWII navies in general). As a result all work on Shinano was suspended temporarily, and construction only resumed just so they could launch her to clear the dock.

[@airborngrmp1]

Yamato: Sunk by aircraft, 1945 Operation Ten-Go. 10 American aircraft lost. Musashi: Sunk by aircraft, 1944 Battle of Sibuyan Sea. 18 American aircraft lost. Shinano: Sunk by submarine, 1945 prior to sea trials, Sea of Japan. No American losses. People talk about the waste of resources that was the Atlantic Wall, or the fanciful V weapons of the n*zis, but the three hulls of the Yamato class netted basically nothing of any military value during the entire war for the Japanese Empire despite their enormous cost.

[@Asuspiciousbush]

To be fair, the Yamato sank an escort carrier and probably a destroyer or two. Still a horrible career for one of the largest battleships ever built, but that's more than 10 (I heard it was 12) aircraft lost.

[@metaknight115]

Yamato did sink the escort carrier Gambier bay and the destroyer Johnston, and helped to sink the destroyer Hoel with excellent long range gunnery at the battle off Samar. More than nothing at least. The Japanese battleship Mutsu would have to be the biggest waste of recourses. Her construction allowed by US to build the battleships Maryland and West Virginia and the UK to build HMS Nelson and HMS Rodney. She then did nothing throughout the war besides firing a single frontal salvo at a US spotting aircraft, them mysteriously blew up in port. She sank -4 battleships and wasn't even sunk in combat,

[@ThomasW.Insall]

The Midway US aircraft Carrier was built on a battle ship hull also. Which made her a bit top heavy and caused her to roll a bit to much when in heavy seas. Espeecially when the Navy added the slanted deck up date and redid the elevators.

[@Joseph-z7s3b]

My Shinano? Wasn't that a song by The Knack? Christ I'm old....

[@andredeketeleastutecomplex]

My Shalona is a wonderful japanese rock track.

[@Truthteller1s]

😂

[@Hillbilly001]

​​@@andredeketeleastutecomplexIt was Sharona you plonker. Cheers from Tennessee

[@PxThucydides]

I think you have that wrong! The song was, "My, sure own her."

[@Joseph-z7s3b]

@@PxThucydides Or as the mighty Weird Al Yankovich said "my bologna."

[@MarsJenkar]

If you want to see more details about the sinking of Shinano, I would recommend the Historigraph video which depicts the tactical situation. The impression I got from _that_ video was that Abe's decisions in trying to deal with Archerfish were a result of not-unreasonable assumptions of what he had to deal with; his decisions, unfortunately, just so happened to be exactly wrong for the situation he was _actually_ in. As Montemayor would put it, "So goes the fog of war".

[@MarsJenkar]

The video in question: kzbin.info/www/bejne/b33KlJKEqdx0prM&pp=ygUSc2lua2luZyBvZiBzaGluYW5v

[@MrSunlander]

the film footage is not the Shinano, more like a Yorktown-class; the still image is the Shinano.

[@Wyomingchief]

Yeah there's no film footage that exists of the shinano, and in fact I think there's only four verified photos of her

[@jimtalbott9535]

15:50 - Yes, these would have been the Type 14 torpedo…..but no, they didn’t contain the flaws of their earlier cousins.

[@briancox2721]

Not an aircraft carrier, let alone a super carrier if you never fly off an aircraft.

[@Cailus3542]

It could operate aircraft. It just never got the chance. Mind you, Japan's naval aviation was so degraded this late in the war that it would have hardly mattered. Shinano was a giant support carrier for fleet carriers that no longer existed.

[@liamc9998]

You know you’re a terrible carrier when both of your none converted, battleship sisters are better carriers than you were. At least they could launch aircraft.

[@ronin4647]

That WAS FANTASTIC!!???????!!!! Bob

[@Wyomingchief]

No it was mid at best. He got a lot of information wrong and even mislabeled a few pictures that he has. Which is understandable considering there's not more than three or four known pictures of this aircraft carrier

[@Dilbert-o5k]

Those 18 inch shells have almost more range than your average EV, and have just as fiery ending

[@TexJester-no8th]

Underrated comment!! 👍🏻🤣

[@jackcade68]

I used to play a game on my Sega game system called PTO, (Pacific theatre of operations). This was a couple of lifetimes ago, but this ship was familiar to me because of that alone.

[@michaelsommers2356]

_Shinano's_ service life was shorter than this video.

[@carlsoll]

2:58 That’s crazy you fired these massive weapons *on* board

[@HandyMan657]

Should have just reached out to Drach, he is the maritime man after all.

[@biffbobfred]

Historiograph: kzbin.info/www/bejne/b33KlJKEqdx0prM