The Drydock - Episode 219 (Part 2)

[@Drachinifel]

Pinned post for Q&A :)

[@cvproj]

Regarding Richelieu's turret arcs: Another factor mitigating against a direct in-line stern chase would be the size of the target. From dead astern, the target ship is only a couple of degrees wide and very hard to hit. From off to the side, it is considerably larger...

[@josephenders1893]

Would you consider doing a video on how to startup a warship of different eras? From cold boilers to moving. It's very loosely connected to my work, so I've been curious about it recently. If you don't think it's worth a full video can you give a brief overview of how boilers were started and whether they used standardized startup procedures or if they just kind of winged it.

[@ericjones9487]

How does the Royal Navy handle the change of Monarch?

[@seanm2511]

I had always thought of a stern chase as a most obdurate or determined chase

[@stevevalley7835]

@@josephenders1893 One of the movies I saw, where the ship sat adrift for several hours, maybe "The Enemy Below", maybe "Action In The North Atlantic", showed one of the firemen lighting an oil fired boiler. He first picked up a metal wand, maybe 3-4 feet long. Tied a piece of cloth or wick material to the end. Opened the cover of a little cup on the front of the boiler, which was full of fuel oil. Dipped the wick in the oil, then lit it with a match. Then he stuck the wand through an access port in the front of the boiler near one of the burners, and turned on the oil valve to the burner. It follows that they need electricity first, to run the fuel pumps and blowers for the boiler, so that would come from an auxiliary diesel driven generator, that is started by a battery, or power from shore. At some point, the turbo-generators are cut in, so the ship can go on full internal power. Then, you can see about starting the main engines. In one of Drac's pieces from his US trip, he was in the boiler room of a ship, and might have touched on some of the procedure.

[@ericthemorose]

Note: in the US Navy, the rank of "Fireman" was used for junior sailors who were in any of the engineering jobs.

[@panzermensch1577]

Still is! Was to be an MM, Machinist Mate, and overall title was still Fireman. Thank you for mentioning.

[@CharlesStearman]

The British equivalent would be 'Stoker'.

[@davidbirt8486]

@@CharlesStearman or clanky, or spanner w*****, all said in jest of course......

[@bozodeclown67]

Former Fireman USN here too. At the time, I had no idea "fireman" meant the poor SOB who had to shovel coal in a furnace all day long. 1990's era Navy was much kinder!!!!

[@themanformerlyknownascomme777]

@@CharlesStearman as the old sea shanty goes: A stoker ain't a stoker with a shovel anymore!

[@readhistory2023]

@42:03 Torpedo launchers. The US was working a version of the system back in the 80's. The torpedos would sit on the ocean floor for 6 months listening for enemy ships by their screw noises. Basically they were a minefield that could tell friend from foe.

[@colbeausabre8842]

After WW1, Sir Robert Hadley stated his firm was ready to build shells up to 21 inch caliber. He was hurriedly told to shut up and not make the naval arms race worse.

[@AsbestosMuffins]

its one thing to build a 21" shell, its another thing to build a gun for it, and an entirely different thing to build a ship that can bring that gun, shells, and charge to where its needed

[@agesflow6815]

Thank you, Drachinifel.

[@rayschoch5882]

Physical conditioning… My Dad was a carrier-based fighter pilot in the Pacific in 1944, and basketball was a VERY popular activity among both maintenance personnel and pilots during his squadron's combat tour. Softball on land, but basketball on the ship.

[@mikeynth7919]

There is a photo of Gerald Ford playing basketball on a carrier. The elevator was lowered to make the court,

[@Wolfeson28]

This has actually become a semi-regular tradition in US college basketball, with a game being played on the flight deck of an active-duty carrier in San Diego harbor for Veteran's Day/Remembrance Day. They just had Gonzaga play Michigan State on Veteran's Day (last Friday) aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln.

[@craigfazekas3923]

@@mikeynth7919 You stole my thunder !! 😆 Yes, aboard the Independence class USS MONTEREY. My reference for this is within the pages of The INDEPENDENCE Light Carriers, by Andrew Faltum. 🚬😎

[@colbeausabre8842]

Drach, the PPI display was in wide use by Mid-WW2, SG (with PPI) was first available in the Pacific in October 1942 and installed on all cruisers and destroyers by early 1943. 955 were produced by 11/43. SC-2 (the first model of SC to have PPI) had 450 sets produced by December 1943.

[@Rammstein0963.]

Both parts so close together, I like this, thank you Drach.

[@vespelian]

With regards to Richelieu's arc of fire, the gunnery duel between Strasburg and Hood would bear this out.

[@mrpe1923]

if you have a look at the battle of Denmark Strait: when Prince of Wales turns away and Bismarck/Prinz Eugen choose to follow, they would end up very quickly in a straight line. I think its really a matter of cirumstances? Thank god POW has some guns at the back :).

[@jonashemmingsson7301]

Adding to the discussion, wouldn't the ship being chased be able to "zig-zag" between salvos, turning slightly to one side to fire the forward guns, then turning away while reloading? I seem to recall reading about Scharnhorst doing something along those lines at North Cape.

[@vespelian]

@@jonashemmingsson7301 Technically yes but the action would impede her gunlaying and targeting ability as the target would be periodically out of sight.

[@princeoftonga]

AW finished the Drydock for this week😫😫 Looks again: YAY more Drydock!!😁😁

[@colbeausabre8842]

"The USN originally procured torpedoes by contracting with private manufacturers. Each vendor was assigned their own Mark number series and was given a designation in metric or in metric and english dimensions specifying how large was the torpedo in both diameter and length and the manufacturing name. For example, the first Bliss-manufactured torpedoes based upon the Whitehead torpedo patents were designated as the Whitehead 3.55m x 45cm Mark I. The first Bliss-Leavitt torpedoes manufactured to their own design were designated as Bliss-Leavitt 5m x 21-inch Mark I. In 1913, the practice of assigning a series of marks to each manufacturer was changed to a single series of marks covering all manufacturers and older torpedoes were redesignated. Surviving 45 cm torpedoes were designated as Types A through C while the 21-inch torpedoes were designated as Mark I through Mark 4. Details may be found in the Pre-World War II USA torpedo datapage. From that time onwards, the Mark number alone, or in a few cases the Mark and Mod numbers, uniquely identifies each torpedo. USA torpedoes since that time are simply designated with "Mark" followed by a Numeral and a "Mod" followed by a number representing the change made since the basic design. For example, the Designation "Mark 12 Mod 2" means that the torpedo is the twelfth torpedo designed by the USN and that it has undergone two design revisions since the first model. In 1922, all torpedoes prior to the Mark 7 were declared obsolete and removed from service. As of that point, only the Mark 7 (17.7") and Marks 8, 9 and 10 (all 21") remained in service. All USN 18 inch torpedoes are actually 17.7 inches (45.0 cm) in diameter. During World War I production was at the Alexandria Torpedo Station at Alexandria, Virginia. This station was closed shortly after the war ended. Production prior to World War II was at the Naval Torpedo Station at Newport, Rhode Island. Efforts to reopen the Alexandria Station prior to World War II were frustrated for political reasons for 11 years before it was finally reopened in July 1941. In addition to these two, Bliss and the Pontiac Division of General Motors made torpedoes during World War II and Westinghouse developed the Mark 18 Electrical Torpedo. After World War II, Honeywell and later General Dynamics were the primary manufacturers while General Electric made some of the acoustic ASW torpedoes."

[@michaelkovacic2608]

Admiral Werner Fuchs, who was intimately involved in the design process of the German WW2 battleships, found the Richelieu layout very commendable, since it offered the largest field of fire for the entire main battery, thus giving considerable tactical freedom to the commanding officer. However, the Germans found their own 4x2 layout generally superior, since it offered much more redundancy and higher rate of fire (and also better dispersion, although I doubt the Germans were aware of Richelieu's dispersion problems) at the cost of a longer citadel.

[@joshkamp7499]

And using these superior Tectonic design philosophies they managed to build a ship 5000 tons heavier while having poorer protection, shorter range, and significantly slower speed.

[@michaelkovacic2608]

@@joshkamp7499 I assume the word you wanted to use is "teutonic", since tectonic is something completely different. Tirpitz achieved 30,8 knots on recorded speed trials with a full combat load. I have no official speed data for French battleships with a similar load, but I'm pretty sure Richelieu had at the very best a 1 knot speed advantage. Also, the Bismarck class had its boilers divided into 6 boiler rooms, giving excellent redundancy, while the Richelieu had only 2 - a single lucky hit on the bulkhead had the potential to wreck Richelieu's entire powerplant. Bismarck lost 1 boiler room at Denmark Strait, yet could still maintain 28 knots. I'd love to see Richelieu achieve the same feat. Regarding range, Tirpitz is rated for nearly 9000 miles at 19 knots, while Richelieu is rated for 9500 miles at 15 knots, so your statement doesn't have any data backing it up here. Regarding armor, it is true that deck armor of Bismarck was somewhat inferior to foreign designs, and admittedly Richelieu had a very impressive 150 to 170mm deck. But given Richelieu's horrible dispersion, this is of little importance anyways, since Richelieu would be highly unlikely to score a hit at ranges where Bismarck was vulnerable. During her deployment with the British Pacific Fleet, Richelieu carried out gunnery trials which showed that the French 15inch gun produced 3 times the dispersion radius of the British 15inch/42 of WW1 - the probability of scoring a hit dropped by a factor of 4 when doubling the dispersion radius. By comparison, the German 380mm/52 had excellent accuracy and very tight shell groupings. Regarding the general layout, it is a matter of preference. I highly doubt that we can definitely say which layout is superior, since different navies will assign different priorities to their engineers. Overall armor of the Richelieu was probably better, but when it comes to main battery performance, there can be very little doubt that the Bismarck takes the cake.

[@gerardlabelle9626]

@@michaelkovacic2608 I rather like the sound of the Tectonic Knights.

[@tommeakin1732]

@@michaelkovacic2608 you sound like a reasonably smart guy - but what world are you living in to have this perspective? I really struggle why some people are so motivated to preach the supremacy of German things - reality be damned. Its entirely "mainstream" to do that as well, which is what really blows my mind

[@phaeronseherekh1754]

@@tommeakin1732 Most notable thing the guy did was say German battleships weren't awful, unless the Richelieu is supposed to be the peak of ship design.

[@bobbobinson6209]

One series I actually read by David Weber, co-authored with Eric Flint was 1632. Quite fun and expansive series about dropping a modern town into 30 years war Europe.

[@AsbestosMuffins]

I actually worked in the ruins of one of the former torpedo factories built immediately after ww2 in Cleveland. it was a strange building having been occupied from 1950-2004 by a series of shrinking companies constantly getting bought out until ratheyon kicked them out of the torpedo market. Never seen a building with so many locker rooms or so much fire retardant on the walls

[@avgj0378]

The torpedo factory in Alexandria is still there, though its now art studios and retail space.

[@mbryson2899]

The torpedo factory in Forest Park, IL still stands, too. It was turned into a shopping mall, I worked there for a time. They manufactured the dud Mark 15 that passed through _Shigure's_ rudder. They also made the aerial Mark 13s used at Coral Sea and Midway.

[@disbeafakename167]

Yup! I used to go past it on my way to and from work.

[@johnshepherd9676]

I watched "From Here to Eternity" for the first time with my father who was a prewar regular. Boxing was an important part of the story. I asked him if he ever boxed. His response was "why would I want to get into a fair fight?"

[@mastathrash5609]

@25:18 the boxing lads in the still photo just reminded me of every time there was a half proper fight in high-school.

[@sse_weston4138]

Cheeky using the Hoche at 20:17 (for context, this French warship rammed and sank the steamer Marechal Canrobert in 1892)

[@ronabitz5156]

To add to your book list is the "Safehold" series also by David Weber. It has age of sail battles in a lost colony in the far future.

[@MrMont-ue8kh]

Thanks as always for lots of good thought and information and for all your research and time! RE: your ramming collision analysis: if the law of conservation of momentum holds (there are no outside forces) the less massive vessel will have the largest change in velocity in a collision. So the smaller vessel is most in danger of losing masts. Of course your basic analysis still holds - how could one always be sure of enough of a mass advantage to lower the risk of ramming to acceptable levels?

[@sillypuppy5940]

HMS Incomparable might have been useful during the D-Day bombardments.

[@chloehennessey6813]

If you were to design a modern heavy cruiser; modern fire control, modern radar, modern armor- even composite armor like on Abrams tanks? Which size main guns would you choose?

[@leogazebo5290]

Can't wait for the next drydock

[@mikeynth7919]

One thing I don't know about ramming with a steamship - how was the ship prepped for ramming? It is a great shock to the crew and the machinery to be going forward and then the sudden stop. Was there a procedure to get the ship and crew ready for this especially in the machinery spaces, because boilers and engines getting that couldn't be good for fires and steam lines. Additionally, all of those galleys with fighting towers - how were those actually fastened down to prevent those flopping over upon hitting another ship or being hit by another ship?

[@timengineman2nd714]

General Question: I have Battleships and Battlecruisers 1905-1970 (by Bayer), is there anything similar for Aircraft Carriers? For Cruisers?

[@magnemoe1]

44:00 Drøbak Sound is a bit over an kilometer wide, assume the channel for an 10K ship is much narrower. So you are in range of anything not pistol caliber. But some torpedo boats would be nice to have there. I guess that torpedo boats was better than an fixed torpedo battery most places

[@Aelvir114]

36:02 I will always detest Wargaming’s “modernization” of Incomparable. Yeah, a massive ship like that would totally have only 4-inch/45 Mk XVI dual-purpose guns as the only secondary battery and even have deck-mounted triple torpedo-launchers, and change her large single funnel to two Hood-style funnels and yet somehow having Hood’s as-built 32 knots instead of Incomparable’s actual 35 knots, and let’s also give her a functional aircraft catapult, despite having 40 mm Bofors in Mark IV Hazemeyer and Mark VII single-mountings, the Hazemeyer mountings didn’t arrive until at least 1942, and the Mark VII mountings weren’t ordered until May 29th, 1945. In mid-to-late-1942, the British battleships (and even cruisers) were quickly having their catapults removed and replaced with lifeboats. Realistically this modernization would be a 1945/1946 configuration, at the very least, which means her catapult would be long since replaced with lifeboats. Even gameplay-wise, having only 4-inch secondaries is a super smooth-brain move on WG’s part. Personally I think she would’ve either modernize her á la Warspite by giving her 5.5-inch guns removed from Hood (probably mounted 3 or 4 per side of where the catapult was and 2 or so per side fore and aft, the latter likely being in the place of where the torpedo-launchers are) in mid-1940 and supplement them with several 4-inch/45 Mk XVI DP-guns OR she would be modernized akin to Renown with 24 or 28 4.5"/45 DP-guns in either 12 or 14 Mk II BD twin-mounts.

[@davidbirt8486]

the ships boats were carried on the hangar roof whilst athwart ships catapults were installed. when removed a deck house was generally built on the vacated catapult deck and the ships boats were relocated. The space atop the hangars were used to mount additional automatic aa guns.

[@johnfisher9692]

Oh Drach I understand just how HUGE the Honor Harrington series is as I have them all, They are well worth the read even though in later books he stumbles a bit and there's a bit too much politics. At the very least read the first book "On Basilisk Station" It shouldn't take you long and is still one of the best, before the universe got so complicated. Another series by Mr Weber is the Mutineers Moon series. Only 3 books long with the first 2 being absolutely top notch. The third is a bit of a disappointment but after the 2nd, where can you go?

[@RonJohn63]

27:10 It hurts _me_ to see the way that White Shorts Boy is holding his right hand.

[@jacobmoss6830]

How can this comment exist, this video hasn't existed for eight hours.

[@FandersonUfo]

@@jacobmoss6830 - Patreon member probably - he gets early access

[@mastathrash5609]

I thought the same, but hopfully I feel like maybe he actually threw a big shot because the other lad is dodging excessively wide. Hopefully the Lad in the white shorts is just re-entering himself and bringing his guard around front but who knows, It's a really great photo and very entertaining looking at all the Motley crew in the background watching.

[@RonJohn63]

@@FandersonUfo that's right.

[@FandersonUfo]

@@RonJohn63 - 👍🛸✨

[@davidbrennan660]

42:00 go the Brennan Torpedo!

[@timengineman2nd714]

@ 6:47, I was thinking. of being engaged by perhaps both German ships taking flanking positions where you're only going to be able to shoot at one... while the other one goes into the blind zone and fully engage you!

[@lewiswestfall2687]

Thanks

[@sadwingsraging3044]

Drach studiously keeping away from the martial pecuniary pursuits of the athletic events organized any time a ship, especially if more than one ship, pulled into port. Aaaand if the port is fortified with a fairly large force, even better if it is a rival or allied force, you can be sure there will be some promoters under orders to set up a bit of vigorous athletic competition.

[@scandor8599]

The middle parts of the Honorverse are best - where Weber gets settled in, but before his massive crush on his own character gets too stifling

[@Noble713]

Re: David Weber.....I enjoyed the early books in the series, but the main character is an increasingly-unbelievable Mary Sue. The battles are cool, definitely Age of Sail lines of battle in .....spaceeeee!!!!! Overall I prefer some of his other works like the Starfire books (essentially background material for the tabletop board game of the same name). The two books that cover the Arachnid War ( "In Death Ground" & "The Shiva Option" ) have some really good battles as well as characters who actually die.

[@johanlundstrom1561]

The first say two Honor Harrington books aren't terrible. The latter ones are. You want to listen to actually _good_ "Royal Navy in Space" books, go for 'Dread Empire's Fall', which is very good.

[@Zee_warthunder]

Hi drach it’s kearsarge bismarck man

[@johnspurrell1200]

The Komandorski battle with the Salt Lake rear turrret damaged for a while was an example. Not precisely the same, but similar.

[@kemarisite]

I haven't seen anything about Salt Lake City suffering damage to its rear turrets during the battle. I am aware that the rear guns fired off all available AP shells and also fired some 26 high capacity shells, and I can understand the ship adjusting course to use the forward guns in addition to carting AP shells from the forward magazines back to the rear guns.

[@johnspurrell1200]

@@kemarisite you are correct. I just reread and watched acoounts. The hits caused the oil leakage and contamination of oil lines to the boilers with sea water and loss of power and the rear magazines were almost out of AP rounds. They switched to high explosive with contact fuses that caused the IJN to think they were from aircraft bombs dropped through the cloudy ceiling. Thanks for the correction.

[@GaldirEonai]

Regarding the Honorverse series, I'm kind of torn about recommending them to anybody. On one hand, Weber built an interesting universe and he's very good at describing tactics and strategy in an engaging way. On the other he can't write a decent piece of dialogue to save his life. Every time you've got ships blasting each other it's great. Every time two characters start talking about something that isn't specifically tactics and/or strategy, the cringe gets overwhelming :P.

[@anarionelendili8961]

Really? I didn't get that impression at all. I found the series highly entertaining, apart from a couple of niggles. 1.) The technological pace is insane, as they go pretty much from a Nelsonian fleet battles to carrier battles and pretty much end with precision guided missiles. Also, this means that the battles become more of a 'who has better tech' curbstomps than anything else. Battles tend to be over with a single salvo, which does detract from the enjoyment for me. 2.) The scale of action goes up significantly as Honor climbs up the rank ladder. It does make sense, but it does mean that you lose some of the individual ship maneuvering and action. 3.) While there are opponent PoV chapters right from the start (and which do a great job humanizing the 'honorable opposition'), as the scale of the action goes up, so does the amount of sitting around the table and talking. Also, the Mandarins are pretty much repeating the talking points of the earlier Legislaturists when it comes to propaganda. Here I would definitely agree that the dialogue is a snoozefest, at least for me, and on rereads, I often skip those chapters or just skim them briefly. These above things combined means that I much prefer the older books (and prequels), where the tech is lower and Honor is commanding a single ship (or a small squadron), and there is less PoV politicking.

[@mikeynth7919]

And boxing helps for those "rare" occasions when on shore leave and someone starts 'dissing' your ship. So to speak.

[@mikepette4422]

Just responding to the Malta question. So these massive sea/air battles show once again how BADLY the Italians and Mussolini in particular messed up by not attacking Malta with every single thing at their disp[oal on the very first day of Italy's entry to the war. This should have been their sole concern until they had the Island of Malta under their control and I'm sure the place was not ready for an all out invasion o day one. Since most of the UK's focus would have been on the Battle of Britain.

[@rorypenstock1763]

Why was it hard to retrofit guns with flintlocks?

[@cp1cupcake]

I'm pretty sure this is like the fifth time I have heard Drach say you wants to read the Honor Harrington series but has no time......

[@samoilenko3887]

When i was in my „childhood” naval analytics time, i thought that 2 quad turrets of richeleu/strassbourg is a pinacle of gun layout, maybe only one octuple turret that can shoot in all 360 can be better. But then i understood that not everything is so easy. Still, is it a revolutionary design? Is it superior to 6 fore 3 aft and the 4 fore 4 afts? Why then new battleships like iowas weren’t built with the quadrouples? Is the only problems of this layout is loosing half of firepower if one turret got hit and the complexity of quadruple turret itself?

[@joechang8696]

In battle of Sibuyan sea, 5 fleet carriers and 1 light carrier flew 259 sorties to attack center force, much of it against Musashi, and mission kill one cruiser. Japanese AA was not as good as US , nor did their force have as many escorts. I don’t think center force was in circular formation? Of course, battleships were better at withstanding damage than carriers

[@Alex-cw3rz]

00:00:33 how about the Royal Navy using it's night tactics Edit: you talked about it

[@jonsouth1545]

For 1915 Incomparable's 11-inch angled armoured belt, 4-inch deck, and 14-inch Barbettes are actually excellent and better than most Battleships of the period, her deck is slightly better than the Revenge and an inch better than the QE class BBs and with the armour being angled 11 inches is far from being bad. The armour just looks ridiculous due to the 20-inch guns if they had swapped twin 20s for say triple 15 or 16s or even triple 18s using the guns designed for Furious the design would be considered very highly and wouldn't be the meme joke it is today. In many ways, the ridiculous 20-inch gun choice hides the kernel of an excellent ship her armour is nowhere near as bad as people often think and would definitely offer a level of protection against 15 and 16-inch guns at combat ranges and complete immunity to the German ships of the period (11 and 12-inch guns). Incomparable is very similar in displacement to Hood and while Hood was built with slightly better belt armour (12 inches compared to 11) despite being an earlier design Incomparable comfortably outdoes Hood on every other metric in regards to protection and would still be considered perfectly serviceable in WW2 (she has better protection than even the refitted Nagato) and with the sheer amount of space, an Incomparable armed with 9 smaller (15, 16 or even 18-inch)guns say would still be very good in WW2, especially, if like the QEs she had an extra 2 inches added to her deck in the refit even more so if they got an extra inch on her belt as that would up it to 6 inches on the deck and 12 inches on the angled belt i.e. the same as an Iowa although the 11-inch angled belt would still offer some protection against 15 and 16-inch shells and would definitely offer almost complete immunity against ships like Kongo, Scharnhorst, Ise etc.

[@genericpersonx333]

Mind, the issue Fisher was trying to solve was how to keep battlecruisers viable in his traditional fashion, namely to skip the process of slow iterative upgrades in firepower, protection, and speed by going straight to a much larger upgrade. The whole point of battlecruisers, so far as Fisher was concerned, was to have stand-off range against enemy cruisers and battlecruisers so they could dominate the cruiser war. He didn't want battlecruisers to fight battleships, because that was what the battleships were for and better at. When Germany threatened to have equal or better armored cruisers, Fisher skipped to the battlecruiser. When Germany answered with equal or better battlecruisers, he pushed for new battlecruisers with bigger guns but only armored enough to have a theoretical stand-off range against those German battlecruisers. Indeed, HMS Renown dropping armor back down to levels similar to HMS Invincible reflected this idea that Renown didn't need >9'' belts to fight German battlecruisers with 12'' guns because the 15'' guns should be defeating German armor at much greater ranges. Jutland laid bare that the armor schemes of even HMS Queen Mary were inadequate against 12'' guns, and with Germany threatening to bring 35cm or bigger in future, the Admiral Class was pushed to have just enough armor to alllow 15'' guns to have stand-off against the new German guns. This worked, with HMS Hood being more than able to meet and beat any known battlecruiser sailing or planned at the time, but it invited the problem that Fisher always wanted to avoid, namely just iterative upgrades to the fleet slowly keeping ahead of the enemy while lots of older ships became increasingly irrelevant despite the expense. HMS Incomparable was classic Fisher: just skip the slow upgrade process and head right to an upgrade that would ensure at least a few years of real dominance. With 20'' guns, HMS Incomparable theoretically would always have stand-off range on anything other than a battleship purposefully built around resisting 20'' gunfire, and that meant HMS Incomparable would basically be the equal or better of any likely battlecruiser to come for at least ten years, giving Britain at least that amount of time where the high seas would be mostly safe for British commerce from enemy battlecruisers.

[@808bigisland]

A lateen is a gaffmain and foresail combined. It's not ideal. Square sails limit angle of attack. They fell out of use the better naval architects understood power transmission. Navies invested in 3 and 4 deckers squareriggers and then rasé (french..shaved) them to make them faster to keep up with newer designs. Later barks used up to 7 gaff rigged masts. They could be operated, hoisted and reefed from deck with a minimal crew.

[@kkupsky6321]

Q&A I have been watching your channel regularly and was interested to learn Britain had a navy. Could you go more into how to bribe you way into being an officer during the age of sail? Also bless you guys and you’re new found naval traditions I think it’s cute.

[@notshapedforsportivetricks2912]

And I understand that King Charles is thinking of setting up a military unit to be called the Brigade of Guards. Can't wait to see their uniforms.

[@colbeausabre8842]

IIRC, the USN retired its last coal fired ship in 1940.

[@robertsneddon731]

USS Sable and USS Wolverine were coal-fired all the way through to 1945. Special cases though.

[@gokbay3057]

I wonder which one would be a superior layout for a "Deutschland" style raider, 2 turrets forward (quad or triple) or one forward one aft.

[@nco_gets_it]

The HH series is good reading, but the plots are definitely armored. Also, the main character is something of a Mary Sue. Still, I have enjoyed the reads and recommend that series. Pournelle, Laumer, and Dick are better reads, and Asimov is interesting (if boring), if you are more interested in a realistic galactic scenario, and John Ringo is great if you want action packed pulp novel style reading. For the record; I read everything Ringo puts out because a fast paced, action packed series is far more enjoyable for my own enjoyment than a series of novels or novellas that may as well be modern poli-sci textbooks.

[@robertsneddon731]

Weber's Honor Harrington series is Death By Excel, spreadsheet carnography. I mean it, the "battles" were wargamed out using spreadsheets to keep track of fleets and missile storms. HH herself is doomed to succeed, when I abandoned the series about six books in she was on track to become Space Pope. A better Age of Sail in Space series are the David Drake books starring Daniel Leary, a thinly-disguised Jack Aubrey character and his accomplice, killer librarian Adele Mundy who works as his intelligence officer. Real sailing spaceships with barefooted riggers in spacesuits climbing masts to set sails and midshipmen going hullside to take starsights as they navigate through the void, coming to safe harbours on various planets and enjoying shore leaves. Epic stuff, much better than the Weber books IMO. The first book is "With the Lightnings" in which Daniel Leary takes his first command, the corvette Princess Cecile. By "take" I mean he commandeers it in the best tradition of the (thinly disguised) Royal Navy.

[@Owktree]

@@robertsneddon731 The best advice I got on the Honor Harrington books was read them until you wanted to throw it at the wall. And then quit since they will not get better. The Drake books are definitely better. I am currently working my way through the O'Brien Aubrey/Maturin books. And to be honest the SF versions are an interesting variant/homage, but simply not as good.

[@robertsneddon731]

@@Owktree Sadly the walls of my home are only half-metre thick sandstone so throwing a Honor Harrington book at them could cause some serious structural damage (and annoy the next-door neighbours). If I had some surplus Krupp armour from a redundant battleship to act as a backstop then maybe I'd risk it but...

[@stevewhite3424]

@@Owktree I am intrinsically less violent so I simply quit buying the damn things. :)

[@jonsouth1545]

The supposed issue of being able to stay in the "blindspot" of a ship simply isn't practical and ignores basic physics to explain it better, think of two superimposed circles one bigger than the other to stay in the blind spot and maintain the same relative position the big circle has to complete 1 revolution in the same time the small one does. That means that the bigger the difference in the radius of the two superimposed circles the higher the speed of the outer circle needs to be to maintain a relative position thus if you have a Bismarck trying to stay in the "Blindspot" of a Nelson or a Richeliue even at a short range fight of say 15km to stay in the blind spot Bismarck needs to be traveling at over 700 Knots, in addition, the speed would also go up exponentially with the distance between the two objects.

[@twt000]

Wow caught this 15min out.

[@colbeausabre8842]

By 1945, Task Force 38 (Fast Carriers) mounted more AA weapons by late 44/early 1945 than all of Great Britain

[@stevewindisch7400]

I recently found a great interview from an officer who commanded an LCT at D-Day and who later was part of the Okinawa radar picket. kzbin.info/www/bejne/n2GmYZxsZbOWrMk

[@Trek001]

Talk about ramming and you don't mention _Thunder Child_ - come on, @Drachinifel...

[@Knight6831]

An incomparable modernisation would be more expensive than a Hood refit

[@سامحمحمد-ز4خ]

هل من الممكن ترجمه هذه الماده للعربيه

[@anatolib.suvarov6621]

Algorithm Engagement Comment.

[@merlinwizard1000]

13th, 30 October 2022

[@josephkool8411]

Compared to the Italian Pisa class boats how good or bad was the Georgios Averof?