The Drydock - Episode 047

[@Drachinifel]

Pinned post for Q&A :)

[@glennricafrente58]

What's the correct pronunciation for "casements"? Long a or short a? I've heard you pronounce them both ways.

[@erict7840]

Can we have a video of you drinking and singing traditional naval songs?

[@chippo5118]

How would the county class (probably London sub class)do against the hipper class?? Also love the video, it is great seeing really well sourced information videos like these on KZbin. Also have you read the book ‘CRUISER the life and loss of HMAS perth’ by mike Carlton?

[@DimoB8]

If you were in command of your own hypothetical navy with similar power to Britain and Germany a bit before, during, and a bit after the dreadnought arms race, how would you design your fleet? Would it focus on speed or armour? Battlecruisers or nah? Would it focus on submarines or in surface fighters?

[@matthewadami9092]

Lively class vs. Leda Class vs. Artois Class vs. Pallas Class, and which one is the best. I know the Pallas is a French design, but the Leda Class and to some extent the Lively Class are British copies of French hull design so it seemed appropriate to include.

[@mbryson2899]

I used to have weekly television shows I looked forward to. Uncle Drach's Drydock is what I look forward to every Sunday morning.

[@conorcrowley6256]

Unless you're in the patreon gang and get it on Saturday

[@mbryson2899]

He(ck) yeah, I'm in the Patrein Club! =) But, I'm in California. I love Uncle Drach's work to pieces, but I'm far to lazy to be awake when he first posts.

[@Kevin_Kennelly]

Drachisms Of The Day: 7:28 "unobtainium propeller shafts and Tardiss-like engine spaces" 9:07 "bears the somewhat dubious privilege of being one of the most modernized pre-Dreadnoughts of all time" 33:40 "also, growing a brain-stem and realizing that possibly the Enigma codes had been cracked" 43:12 (singing) "Skippy! Oh Skippy the bush kangaroo." 43:50 "Which spells very bad things for Prince Eugen who would be the one to catch most of that in the face" 49:25 "ramp up the power plant to EVEN MORE hilarious levels"

[@brockpaine]

You should add: "To a certain degree, they (the French Navy) were like a very truculent division of the Royal Navy fleet reserve."

[@glenmcgillivray4707]

Thermal shrouding to eliminate small variations on Barrell dimensions? Sounds useful on a boat that pitches up and down and rolls natively while in combat. obviously a small miss will lead to failing to get the first strike from concealed position where your opponent cannot spot you.... It's not like radar works with background clutter at sea! Waiiiit.

[@able34bravo37]

9:38 "WHY, GERMANY!?!!"

[@BornRandy62]

Trivia: Herman the German is a floating heavy crane siezed from the German Navy after WWII . It stayed at NAVSTA Long Beach in California for a very long time until base closure and since has been moved to the Panama Canal Zone . Still fully functional after 70 plus years since the end of the war

[@jamessullivan7692]

They sure did make things good back then didn't they

[@sarjim4381]

While the crews of British submarines suffered greatly from heat of the Indian and Pacific oceans, the biggest issue was the buildup of humidity and consequent buildup of condensation on the hull interior. This caused drips and streams of water to run down the surface of every space while the boats were submerged. This had a disastrous effect on the electrical and electronic equipment onboard in the days of everything being tube (valve) operated, especially in the later stage of the was as things like radar, radios, jammers, and sonars. The moisture even got into periscopes, making them almost useless until they could be dried out with time on the surface. The Amphion class finally solved the problem with effective air conditioning, but only two were completed in time for Pacific service. The time and expense put into the design of the boats served the RN well postwar, with the Amphions being the equivalent of the USN Gato class in long service, some being modernized rather like the GUPPY program, and the last not being decommissioned until 1974. The importance of air conditioning in tropical waters was well demonstrated by the experience of the HMS Turbulent in the Indian Ocean in 2011. The boat was running on the surface in 120 degree air temperatures when the air conditioning failed due to the intakes being clogged with large numbers of crabs and barnacles. Repair crews were unable to clear the intakes because the hull was too hot to touch. The only fresh air ventilation possible was the two hull hatches since nuclear subs are almost completely sealed vessels. The crew was progressively getting sicker due to heat exhaustion when the captain decided the only answer was to dive into cooler waters at 200 feet until the hull and interior cooled to manageable levels, allowing the intakes to be cleared.

[@rawleywagor4943]

In regards to thermal tech my experience is in the USN. As far as gun cooling the 76mm OTO Melara on the Oliver Hazard Perry frigates had a water jacket over the barrel that cooled it so it could keep up indefinite fire and never reach "Hot Gun" status (Hot gun means a round sitting in the chamber can cook off unexpectedly from soaking in latent heat.) As far as whole ship measures if you look at the stacks of an Arleigh Burke and I'm sure many other destroyer and frigate sized ships you'll notice that it seems over sized. The stacks are actually much smaller in diameter and those larger superstructures are used to pass air through and mask the IR signature of the stacks which would stick out like a sore thumb otherwise. It's still hard to hide the actual exhaust gasses but it's something. And USN ships actively use their gunsights for 5" located above the bridge on (DDG's) as a form of lookout and situational awareness. They also use the sensors on their MK38 Mod 2/3 mounts in tighter or more dangerous areas. This equates to multiple magnified eyes looking multiple directions in both visual spectrum and IR.

[@scottdrone-silvers5179]

Rawley Wagor I had assumed that hot guns was the primary cause of shells exploding in the barrels in WW1 ships, and one of those practical limitations that people like Wargaming ignore when making a game. Some of the rates of fire are approaching the “stonking” level (which i have understood as a defensive fire tactic that basically burned out the barrel as a trade off for a short burst of rapid fire)

[@rawleywagor4943]

@@scottdrone-silvers5179 I'm not well versed on WWI era gunnery. Perhaps the explosive filler was more susceptible to heat. I had always assumed in-barrel detonations back then were cause by a sympathetic detonation on an overly sensitive round or faulty fuse while firing A MK45 Mod 4 (5"/62) can go for several minutes at it's maximum rate of fire before heat even becomes a consideration. I would assume older guns scaled similarly to their caliber and rate of fire.

[@RocketGurney]

Excellent timing as always; I'm driving through the night and this is sure to keep me awake for at least the next 60 miles!

[@jochenheiden]

RocketGurney On the contrary, I find his posh English accent to be rather sleep inducing. Not in a boring way of course.

[@admiraltiberius1989]

The thought of Drach as being the High Lord Admiral of the Roman Navy is a fantastic one really. Only one or two steps away from being Emperor?? Maybe ?? Ha !!! Fantastic video as always, your content always deliver. And you are one of the best channels on KZbin.

[@johnfisher9692]

If Drach in command of the Roman naval construction is scary I have an even scarier thought. Imagine Drach going back to the early 1900's, getting introduced to Admiral Jackie Fisher and not being NOT being locked up as a crazy person but forming a friendship with Jackie and being hired as a civilian advisor to the Admiralty. Just what changes could you introduce Drach?? Have fun imagining that :) Hmmm Baron Drachinifel???

[@PaulfromChicago]

LOL @ USS Pennsylvania. 21 years from authorization to launch is perfectly normal for large USN warships. Glad to see not much has changed.

[@jamesduston9292]

The Roman question is one I never thought I would like but you answered so tasteful I almost want more

[@Zarcondeegrissom]

35:00 Oh, I also suspect Drach could also help the Romans improve the seaworthiness of there ships, so more of the fleets would survive the occasional storm they had a nasty habit of running into. FYI. The Romans did have a bad time against Carthage, mostly because they kept loosing ships in storms that Carthage's fleets avoided for the most part.

[@alganhar1]

Clinker building their ships would be one method of doing that, Roman and Greek ships were not clinker built. Also a more modern frame design to add both strength and more flexibility, allowing the vessel to flex and bend more in heavy seas.

[@RedXlV]

The other thing is telling them about how that "aeolipile" toy that Heron of Alexandria built could worked into an engine to drive ships without needing wind.

[@sugarnads]

Who won? ....indeed.

[@Vindicator_SD]

"If you have a decent salvage vessel and want enough equipment to outfit most of the afrika corps..." Ferb i know what we are going to do today.

[@TwistedSisterHaratiofales]

54:56 Love this picture. This is one of the pictures taken at an airshow of Japanese mock up planes that are usually associated with and or the planes themselves were used in movies in the late 1960's and 1970's. The planes are American planes. The 2 Zero aircraft in the shot are single seat Texas trainer aircraft, and were known as The Hollywood Zero, and the torpedo planes are also modified T6 Texas trainers that were made as mock up planes to use in movies like Tora Tora Tora.

[@cvproj]

BTW, Drach, it is not true that the U. S. Navy puts an anti-aircraft gun on every available space on deck. Need to keep an area clear to set up the bar-b-que for Steel Beach days...

[@meanderingpiper1376]

Sipping Bourbon and enjoying The Drydock. Perfect way to enjoy your day off. Another great video Drach.

[@nate6386]

Yay one of my favorite channels to watch while I can't sleep.

[@DarkFire515]

Given the principles applied in the creation of lorica segmentata infantry armour, I could see the Roman navy potentially grasping the concept of an iron plate armoured vessel. Having a fleet of armoured, bronze cannon armed vessel in the classical era = total world domination.

[@jamessweeney2456]

Could you have used anti aircraft shells from Yamato against another ships upper works, fire control or anti aircraft positions or carrier flight deck? If 100 flame throwers had hit the deck of saint lo off samar seems like a great psychological weapon. Love your channel!

[@coladirienzo3655]

sun is down, drydock is up I cannot sleep comfy times

[@ImRezaF]

I just would like to thank drach for recommending D.K. Brown's Nelson to Vanguard. My book just arrived 2 or 3 days ago.

[@Alex-cw3rz]

Also to add a British submarine HMS Venturer is the only documented instance where one submarine intentionally sank another submarine while both were submerged.

[@USSAnimeNCC-]

I'll love to hear that story

[@cvproj]

It was detailed in "U-864: Hitler's Last Deadly Secret", a television program from 2007. It's on KZbin at kzbin.info/www/bejne/rafUdaWgaM5rm8k. See also: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Action_of_9_February_1945 www.imdb.com/title/tt2098866/ It would be interesting to hear Drach's take on it, though.

[@JevansUK]

Jimmy Launders correctly guessed the Germans evasive action and hit her within his last shot. U864 had pretty bad luck to be limping back on a damaged diesel

[@Boric78]

Roman Canon protyping No 1: would have used slaves. "Spartacus go and put this flame in the hole on that tube over there. There's a good boy." Boom! "Should have used more bronze........."

[@Colonel_Overkill]

The USN Mk 14 torpedo had repair crews shaking with laughter as they buffed out the dent left by a direct hit. I think the sub captains language was harsher than the effect on enemy shipping.....

[@ferallion3546]

Something I think that civilian references misconstrue are the difference between initial ROF and sustained ROF during battle operations. From what I can see the term “theoretical ROF” is equivalent to a weapon system maintaining its initial ROF during a surface action which is dangerous as it can result in a hot gun, misfire, or the weapon system & or crew becoming casualties. Plus it would significantly increase its rate of barrel wear.

[@cvproj]

Another thing to be considered in ROF discussions is the target staying in range and arc of fire. It does no good maintaining a ROF if the target is way over there.

[@JevansUK]

That and flight time if you're hitting them most salvos you can get away without awaiting to fall of shot of your last salvo and applying a correction otherwise your going to hitting a lot of sea. Also ammo gets further away as the stocks get used

[@whiskeytangosierra6]

Really enjoyed your summation of AA mounts viewed as mount in toto rather than the more common instant discussion of ROF and range, totally ignoring the importance of how can you train and feed the guns.

[@lexington476]

22:47 has there been any walvage work or archaeology work on shipwrecks in the Mediterranean from World War II?

[@VersusARCH]

56:00 The Japanese did show initiative in some cases in just such situations: in the Battle of the Santa Cruz, the main air attacks by opposing sides'carriers were launched practically at the same time and ran into each-other mid-way. Some 9 escorting Zeros abandoned their mission and proceeded to attack the US strike force shooting down quite a few aircraft. That being said, a similar sutuation had occured during the previous Battle of the Easters Solomons but that time both sides just stuck to their plan and did not engage the other. Perhaps the initiative shown at Santa Cruz was a lesson learned at the Eastern Solomons, but I could not be sure. What is notable, though, is that US stuck to their plane in both cases.

[@Philistine47]

*Re: ROF.* One thing that a lot of "paper" assessments miss is that it's seldom useful to shoot faster than you can spot the fall of your shot and correct your aim. As gunnery ranges increased, shell flight times increased with them - and *useful* ROF for battleship main batteries approached one round per minute. *Re: AH Battle of the Java Sea.* If the Dutch have a Design 1047 in the Far East, the IJN would most likely respond by sending *two* Kongo-class, and/or a division of (light) carriers. The IJN always tried (I said "tried," not "succeeded," or even "properly understood how to") to maximize their advantages, and seeking out 1v1 duels when you have a preponderance of force is closer to maximizing your DISadvantages. *Re: AH Pearl Harbor.* The obvious first issue is that the IJN planners specifically chose the route of the Hawaii Operation attack force to keep it well clear of accidental early contacts. The USN would be unlikely to have a CV - let alone *multiple* CVs - in that area... Unless they were hunting the attackers, the operational security of the attack having been blown. So there's that. The second issue is, redirecting an airstrike once it was in flight was *extremely* difficult, bordering on impossible in 1941. (Especially if many of your aircraft don't even carry radios, though this was also the case for services with radios in every cockpit - and continued to be so for decades after WW2.) So not only would the Japanese first wave (almost) certainly proceed on to Oahu and attack as planned, but the second wave - already in the air by this time, and with no aircraft carrying torpedoes anyway - would *also* (almost) certainly carry out their planned attack. >90% confidence, even without considering what you might call "cultural factors." Of course if the US was forewarned enough to mass CVs NW of Oahu in advance of the attack, then every ship that could raise steam would be safely out of the target zone. And presumably the Army would also turn the air over Oahu into a CAP and flak trap.

[@Iris421989]

I love the intro music. So good

[@spartancanuck]

"WHY GERMANY?" Picture a Royal Navy crew incapacitating itself with tongue sprains.

[@scottdrone-silvers5179]

spartancanuck Poor Drach. He can’t be good at everything...

[@MakeMeThinkAgain]

Re: Japanese run into USN carriers at Pearl Harbor: Don't forget that the torpedoes for the first strike had been specially adapted to run shallow and the bombers were mostly carrying AP. A 2nd strike with a proper weapon load out might have been the smart move for the IJN.

[@esbendit]

What were the merits (and lack thereof) of coastal defense battleships?

[@attilakatona-bugner1140]

Cheap?

[@cvproj]

Slower than molasses in January?

[@JevansUK]

They're more mobile than a fortress but less capable than a frontline battleship.

[@marinhaalternativa3829]

You could pack more into offensive or defensive capabilites by sacrificing range stuff, like, you replace excesivve engine weight and fuel and supply weight for the same ammount of armour or guns

[@onejokeman2002]

Question 00:35:00 Drachinifel the isekai (speaking of that, a warship isekai would be fascinating, ie character goes to a primitive world and improves their naval technology leaving the people like "What magic is this?!" Even better if the world had magic and magical creatures...it would be the gate series but instead with warships ie AA battleship guns taking out dragon riders)

[@brianreddeman951]

Tankfest... Because there aren't enough old warships mobile to have a Warshipfest.

[@XCrawlFan]

That may be the first time I've heard of Anyone else using the General Quarters game! 😁

[@allancarey2604]

In referane to the submarine blockage question: I seem to remeber a prewar study that looked at whether the UK could feed itself if it was cut off from food imports (Providing the required calories and nutrition ect for the workorce). The answer was yes, food production was sufficent with a much greater reliance on vegitables. Apparently the downside was due to the physical volume of food consumed took a much longer time to eat & there was a very large increase in Gas. I really wish I could remeber where I read this - I want to say the Economist Magazine (Yeap that one) becouse occationally they come up with articles like that...but I dont think so

[@allancarey2604]

The question at about 32 mins in

[@whatsoperadoc7050]

28:15 Maybe it is just me but I ALWAYS want you to speculate.

[@bigblue6917]

I know the Japanese were very strict on sticking to orders. I have come across references to Japan attacking Russian, Soviet, positions using an artillery barrage and infantry attack even though the Russians had moved out of those positions before the attack started. The were ordered to attack those positions so they did so. During WW2 a clash between a British and Japanese patrol resulted in the Japanese patrol being whipped out. Captured documents revealed not only the route of the patrol and its objectives, but also that if they failed to complete all of their objectives then other patrols would be sent out on the same route at the same time until all the objectives were achieved. So the following night British set up an ambush along the route and sure enough along came the Japanese and again the patrol was whipped out. This happened on a number of nights until someone higher up asked why they had not received a report from the patrol. It was only now having found out no one was returning from the patrols were they finally stopped.

[@cvproj]

Even worse, many Japanese commanders would assume that orders had been successfully carried out, even to the point of issuing new orders to units (or ships) that no longer existed.

[@bigblue6917]

@@cvproj It's all that zen stuff. It still exists but in another reality. 😊

[@robert48044]

I really enjoy the intro music

[@ringowunderlich2241]

37:40 Why would they replace the only working turret on the KGV class with an additional non working one? ;)

[@HorthornNZ]

The British submarine force did sink just over 1.5 million tons of shipping

[@HorthornNZ]

697 ships for a total tonnage of 1.52 million tons - that would be a lot of rowboats. The British are 3rd of all the navies after the Germans and the Americans.

[@jimtalbott9535]

As for your "visit" to Rome at 35:00 - your knowledge of metallurgy would be FAR more important than anything else (think about all you know about iron and steel working) - Swords, Armor, ship plating, refining techniques - But in any event, that was a TERRIFIC question!

[@calvingreene90]

And then if not steam propulsion muscle powered screws that as well as being more efficient prevents a ship from being de-oared.

[@EstellammaSS]

Of course the Brits would name their submarine Tea Class

[@adamrudling1339]

boats Tetley and Tyhoo

[@UnintentionalSubmarine]

20:15 Sailors freely surrendering their alcohol for ice cream? They would barely have done so for food after a week on hard tack and rotten cabbage. They must have been near death from heat stroke down there! On the subs themselves, a number of years ago I was informed that while their service actions were plenty fine (particularly around Malta), it was their stationkeeping around various German controlled ports that provided the greatest benefits. As in the mentioned surprisingly common hits on German combatants, but even more importantly serving as ambushers and early spotters of German U-boats leaving port. Certainly the combat record against other subs was pretty damn good.

[@estoyaqui5386]

Years ago I got literary shat on in wows-forums for saying that battleships were shooting only one salvo per minute. Everyone knew it better because they took 30sec to read a wikipedia-article or saw it in wows^^ "Look it up in port you noob, BBs reload in 30 sec!!!!!!!!!" - yeah, sure....

[@attilakatona-bugner1140]

Armchair admirals/tankies/pilots are always cancer

[@TheAsh274]

@@attilakatona-bugner1140 Along with both extremes of the argument over armored/unarmored flight decks: "They are i d i o t s"

[@jochenheiden]

That cough shattered my eardrums, thanks.

[@dojokonojo]

Ave Imperator Drachenifel Caesar Augustus

[@MGBait]

A quick comment about Roman polyremes. Most of the big ships (sixes, sevens, eights, etc) had been built by the Hellenistic empires and according to Murray (Age of Titans) were built for harbour seiges. The Romans during the Punic Wars used mostly quinquerimes and quadriremes. I think in the Imperial period when the truly owned the Med, they no longer needed a big ship navy and relied mostly on much smaller ships (liburnians) for anti-piracy and other naval duties.

[@Gruoldfar]

Regarding the Schleswig Holstein, those two duchies were danish until 1864.

[@kryts27]

I like your channel. Please do more on early submarines :-)

[@Zarcondeegrissom]

congrats to the winners, the ships do sound and look very nice. B)

[@gbladewarrior6884]

Why were gattling style turrets never made for battleship main guns?.

[@Betrix5060]

The bottleneck for RoF is physically reloading the guns. Rotary turrets are only worthwhile if barrel overheating is the limiting factor on your maximal RoF. A chaingun design would be more reasonable, but of course that's pretty silly for battleship sized ammunition.

[@steveamsp]

I'd say that you, and any number of viewers (myself most definitely included) could easily be seen as being crazy today, to say nothing of going back to Rome.

[@DuckiestBoat959]

The Vatican needs a navy, there, I said it.

[@TraditionalAnglican]

21:00-22:00 - RN Submarines - You forgot to list the supplies RN Subs brought to Malta & the role those supplies played in keeping Malta alive in 1941-1942.

[@kemarisite]

Probably did about as little good as it did the Japanese on Guadalcanal. At best you're talking a few tons, maybe a few dozen tons (probably not) of foodstuffs to keep people alive (not very functional) per trip. As opposed to potentially thousands of tons on a single decent-sized merchant ship. Submarines are terrible for transporting stuff like heavy AA ammunition or bombs and aerial torpedoes to keep the strike aircraft in business. Or fuel for ditto.

[@JJCPaul]

Spring Sharp, I have heard you mentioned this numerous times and for some reason could not make out the pronunciation. This was my question for the Drydock, but no more.

[@ironstarofmordian7098]

The Lesser Weevil 18:30 best name.

[@vipertwenty249]

Would you please do a proper in depth video on the battle of the Falklands 1914 and what led up to it, with Von Spee's activities starting from the beginning of WW1. This seems to be very inadequately covered on utube.

[@eplekake3870]

In addition to the topics discussed in the video, the casement guns were not watertight. In case of hull damage there was less reserve buoyancy. Check out the sinking of the Szent Istvan here on YT, once the casements are submerged important reserve buoyancy far away from the vessel's center line is lost. This may have accelerated the sinking.

[@michaelwanamaker9829]

Please, please do a "how to SpringSharp" video, bot for 2.1 and 3.b beta. I want to use it but I find it so confusing.

[@truenetgmx]

On the topic of tankfest - can we expect you meeting with other youtubers on camera? Tik, militarny history visualized, jingles, chieftain and others?

[@Drachinifel]

Perhaps one or two :)

[@woodycarlile4730]

Are those black t-shirts your talking about for sale? A viewer of your channel since less than 500 members would love to buy one. Thanks and keep up the great work

[@Drachinifel]

If there are people who want it, sure I can make it available after tankfest. And many thanks for your continued viewership! :)

[@woodycarlile4730]

@@Drachinifel Great Thanks will contact you after next week for information on how to obtain.

[@Locochris1956]

The Commerce de Marseilles was over 4000 tons it fell apart was found to weak to stand in the British battle line but was much bigger than other 120 gun ships.

[@Digmen1]

Hi Drachinifel, great channel. Could you please advise where we submit questions fro future Drydocks please?

[@whatsoperadoc7050]

DigNap15 The Q&A thread pinned to the top of the comments in each video.

[@Drachinifel]

As said, the Q&A pinned post :)

[@spookyshadowhawk6776]

On the Roman ship's, careful with the cannon, decapitating a Roman Admiral with a exploding cannon wouldn't go over well. Rockets are safer!

[@kendog84bsc]

00:12:55 Listening to the answer for the question asking how effeecfive casement secondray guns are, I came to wonder if there were any ships that were cheese shaped.

[@jonathanevans4610]

It seems to me that at Denmark Straits Holland intended to concentrate his fire on Bismarck and allow for Prinz Eugen to be engaged by the Counties when they could, without Hood and the British would feel safe to close slower with all guns available and KGV is going be able identify Bismarck sooner than Hoods gunners also with the same Guns and FCT the KGV can use GMS which should get them on target faster assuming POW crew had trained on the system which seems to be the case as Hood and POW were going to use GIC. I have long wondered why when McCullen had served on Hood before POW he didn't ask Captain Leech to signal the Flag the he confirmed the right hand target to be Bismarck as he would have know that he had a better sighting postion

[@nordic5628]

FINALLY a Danish question

[@stephenbond1990]

Wasn't a kongo present at java sea? Or at least close enough to reinforce?

[@tomriley5790]

Lots of special forces operations depended on RN submarine support and the navigation for major landings

[@tomriley5790]

Would love you to speculate on the 1047s career working in cooperation with the RN.

[@geraldgray4449]

Which ship-of-the-line class is largest by number of guns?

[@MakeMeThinkAgain]

With knowledge of how the Pacific War actually played out, I would have gone with a South Dakota based ship or two with a total of 6 16" guns in a triple turret fore and aft, and an additional 5" twin where the super-firing turrets had been (plus 40mms). The armor would be the same so I'm hoping you could get an extra knot or two of speed. This would have resulted in an even better ship for providing AAA support for carriers while also giving a Halsey a slightly better option for defending Guadalcanal -- perhaps I should specify that all the electrical circuits would NOT be combined.

[@bkjeong4302]

Or you can just skip the giant hull and the big guns and just build two more Atlanta’s, though the SoDaks were laid down when nobody realized BBs were already obsolete.

[@johnpreisler6713]

so...coming soon: five minute guide to warships tankfest? find me a naval gun on tracks, please.

[@alganhar1]

Wasn't the 128mm on the Jagdtiger derived from a naval gun? I know the Su-100Y's 152 was a former Destroyer gun, but a) only 1 was ever built, and b) The only example ever is in Russia so not at Bovington! Those are the only two I could think of though.

[@rimmipeepsicles1870]

Forgot the fact that ww1 tank guns were originally Hotchkiss naval guns.

[@rossrichards4057]

I believe the Russians experimented with mounting their 130mm naval gun in a chassis similar to their other assault guns.

[@kamchatka_survivor1959]

Drydock? Dry-yeah!

[@frankdantuono2594]

Were light gas guns ever deployed on a modern warship? If not, did any navy experiment with LGGs?

[@mazack00]

Japanese Pagoda tower full explanation still needed

[@bkjeong4302]

mazack00 He already went over this in a previous video: they were there because the IJN wanted to add new targeting equipment without sacrificing turret space, so during reconstructions they built these gigantic masts rather than making an actual superstructure, and kept adding onto them.

[@mazack00]

Bk Jeong ... He said he was going to go over them level by level and i can't even find a video where he talks more than a brief mention about them

[@bukwok]

i have a stupid question,always heard ship how many ton,but how to weight in modern day and few hundred years ago.sorry for my bad english.

[@johnloman2098]

Something drac never says to the tank people who asked the tank questions is that one of the guns from the USS Texas which isn't the biggest of battleship guns weighs more than every mass produced tank in world war II

[@peterkroger7112]

S C H L E S W IG - H O L S T E I N

[@randomguy-tg7ok]

Oh, so you _had_ to do a battleship... Well here's my hopes for me winning the battlecruiser category, then!

[@Drachinifel]

You didn't 'have' to, it was just the primary design criteria, other designs just have wait a little longer :)

[@MeekTheGr8]

Why didn't the US upgrade the older battleships propulsion to give a little boost in speed like the USS West Virginia almost rebuilt the ship but kept the same propulsion.

[@brisktea64]

QA Are you having a cup of tea while your doing these vids.hear a spoon and cup rattling. I think its so cool becouse im haveing one two lol

[@RayyMusik]

Schleswig-Holstein - nothing easier than that. :D

[@geraldgray4449]

As for Japanese main armament used as AA, I have heard that Yamato's 18.1" had canister shot for AA. Can you verify this?

[@bkjeong4302]

Gerald Gray It’s not canister shot but a specialized shell (San-Shiki shell) that exploded at a set elevation and spewed flaming shrapnel. Except that since battleship main batteries suppress the other guns, firing these things actually lowered the amount of AA on the ship.

[@kemarisite]

Not just the Yamato, the Japanese made the incendiary shrapnel shell was made for all their large guns down to 20 cm (8"). Kongo and Haruna made e tensive use of them against Henderson Field on Guadalcanal in October 1942, and Hiei and Kirishima attempted to duplicate that in November leading to the Naval Battle of Guadalcanal.

[@Lintary]

Typical Dutch navy, tons of technology and tons of ready to go designs and barely anything ever gets builded and fielded :D

[@fusioncannon]

not enough windmills

[@Kipkat13]

YEEEEEEEEEEEEES

[@geraldgray4449]

Or size of guns?

[@SabinStargem]

Tossing in a badly designed ship, not really suited for competition nor reality. It is what I dub a "Siege Carrier". It is a carrier that has two landing decks to the left and right of a high central structure. The structure has a tall mast for radar apparatus and such, with a total of four single gun turrets in the fore and aft of the central structure. These guns have a high caliber, designed for barraging land structures foremost - so there is a focus on range and penetration. Further, the back and front corners of the two landing decks has a missile turret installed. These turrets are meant for anti-air primarily, but can be used against mobile land targets. This results in a total of four missile turrets, with at least three missile tubes. The purpose for having the gun turrets is to reduce the expense of eliminating coastal bases and other immobile issues. If I remember rightly, a shell costs something like $10,000 to $25,000. This is opposed to missiles, which apparently cost at least $200,000+ apiece. In effect, missiles are reserved for targets that the gun turrets can't deal with. In turn, the vehicles are used for whatever the missiles can't reach. I am pretty sure that anyone who designs ships for a living is now eying the nearest liquor bottle.

[@davidnelson9140]

Hay you tried theThe Admiralty Trilogy for min game

[@TheBeomoose]

Well my ship's composite strength was 1.00 so I claim a minor victory on that point!

[@coldwarrior78]

I could see a possibility of Sealion launching. If Luftwaffe had kept focus on smashing Fighter Command another few days, it could have thought air supremacy had been achieved. It wouldn't last but the operation would have launched. The result would have been bloodier than anything else from WWII. RN would have suicidally defended the channel with similar effort from the German air and naval forces. It would have been the Eastern Front right there on the Channel.

[@jamessullivan7692]

This is in regards to the statement made about the German enigma codes being cracked correct me if I'm wrong but before we sent any ships or aircraft to combat U combat and destroy the U boats they always had a faint of a spotter aircraft miraculously accurately spotting them thus keeping up the rules is just not correct Please let me know

[@Cbabilon675]

I know this may be a foolish question, but this is for somebody who doesn't understand. Why is it that on the ground base guns they are millimeter and in the Navy it's inches when they're both the same thing thank you.

[@JevansUK]

There's been a number of systems measure guns like the pound weight of the shell, of course the change from round shot to shells means that the weight vary more on the same diameter. Metric nations used mm/cm but the largest navy and largest exporter of naval ships used inches so most treaty's and textbooks at the time converted everything to inches

[@Cbabilon675]

@@JevansUK thank you so much for that detailed information. Like I said being new to the whole Naval standard and trying to understand it, and my son's being interested in it they ask me these questions so I try and get some answers as soon as possible. Thank you again.

[@Scoobydcs]

does anybody know where i can get hold of rule the waves (game) google is no help

[@conorcrowley6256]

Off the website. They recently released a sequel so I recommend getting that as it adds carriers

[@Scoobydcs]

@@conorcrowley6256 found it on their new site, no registration code yet though so hopefully theyl email me that tomorow

[@themythicalfire809]

Why don't these ships have chemical rounds like heat

[@alganhar1]

Angle of shell fall mostly I would say, in most actions the shells are coming in at an angle, only in a few cases are the ranges so short the shells have a relatively flat trajectory. Chemical charges like HEAT work best when they hit the armour flat on, they would lose a huge amount of their penetrative power when striking at an angle. Also you want the shell to physically penetrate the ship you are firing at, just burning through the armour is not what does the damage, the bursting charge of the shell exploding beyond the armour inside the ship is what does the real damage.

[@lycossurfer8851]

A HEAT round from what I've seen also leaves a relatively small diameter hole

[@kemarisite]

What these ships are firing at each other is armor-piercing capped ballistic capped (APCBC), which was the best thing against armor until the development of the shaped charge warhead. However, a tank has a fairly small internal volume with lots of important stuff inside the armor, so the majority of the time a penetrating hit will also be a mission kill. Many of those mission kills will start fires and become catastrophic losses, and almost all mission kills will be abandoned in the hope of later salvage and repair. There are exceptions, but they tend to be rare. For ships, you have a huge volume (even within the armor) and fewer things that will immediately mission kill the ship. Sabot or HEAT rounds will punch small holes in the armor, but won't affect much other than what just behind the armor. In contrast, your AP shell can penetrate the armor AND set off a, say, 30-50 pound explosive charge behind the armor to do far more extensive damage. Even with those kinds of shells, it's normal for a ship to be battered into submission by a dozen or more heavy-caliber hits. Again, there are exceptions (Invincible, Indefatigable, Queen Mary, Hood, Boise could have been), but they are rare.

[@dylanbartlett5509]

Do battleship Congo

[@alpteknbaser7773]

🇬🇧🇺🇸👏

[@cliverogers4933]

The IWM has available 4 x 30 interviews with Vice.Admiral Geoffrey Norman who served on HMS Queen Elizabeth at Galipoli as a junior officer and returning in command in the latter part of WWII www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/80008664

[@warrenlehmkuhleii8472]

Wow I never heard my last name as if it were Italian. Most people make this mistake, but it is pronounced, Lem-Kool.

[@daleeasternbrat816]

Bigger on the inside!