Top 10 Longest Battleship Hits: NEW RESEARCH

[@BattleshipNewJersey]

Get $5 off your next order through my link sponsr.is/magicspoon_battleship_0724 or use code BATTLESHIP at checkout. Or look for Magic Spoon in your nearest grocery store!

[@greatwarships2758]

Hi, excellent video, probably one of my favorite videos from the channel so far. Can you please include some links (in a comment or video description) to the sources used for further ease of access?

[@Zeppflyer]

I can't wait for the Drachinifel special discussing this. But yeah. I'll buy the logic. The target isn't the ship. It's the box around the ship where the shells can do damage.

[@timothyreilly4499]

Hell Yeah. That should be good for at least a 3 hour dry dock episode from Drac!!!

[@davideidolon927]

Drach has already discussed a few of Yamato's long range near misses and said that they are near misses, not hits. If the shell actually penetrated the target underwater that would still be a hit, everyone agrees that hit below the waterline are still hits, but shells exploding near a target and causing damage have always been classified as near misses.

[@vapormissile]

​@@davideidolon927you need to draw a line, for purposes of discussion. But it sure is fencing with words: Someone on a battleship sank an enemy ship, shot it to death with the ship's gun, without hitting it.

[@lukedougherty7078]

Hood! Drach!🤘

[@odiemac]

Drach is gonna be so mad he called Kongo a Fast Battleship 😂

[@paemt6220]

Years ago, at a friend's family picnic, I had the honor of talking with a gentleman who served in the pacific as a Gunner's Mate on a Bofors 40mm. I don't recall which ship but I think it was a destroyer. The thing I remember most about our conversation was how much respect he had for the Japanese gunnery. He said they were excellent! So much so that he remembered times when his group would avoid the Japanese all day due to their superior gunnery, then close and attack at night because the Japanese did not have fire control radar and we did. The other thing I remember was how much he lit up when he said he was on a 40mm and I said, "oh, the Bofors". I was in my mid 20's then and I think he was very happy someone younger was interested. I think we talked for about 3 hours. One of the best conversations I have ever had.

[@GeorgiaBoy1961]

@paemt6220 - Those are great stories... as a WW2 naval historian, I always love to learn new things...and there is always something new to learn when it comes to that conflict. The Japanese navy operated on wartime footing throughout the 1930s, since they were already presuming (behind closed doors, of course) that the U.S. would be their likely opponent. They drilled gunnery and torpedo drills relentlessly, and took special steps to select men with especially acute vision to serve as lookouts and gunnery officers. They also took the trouble to test and select men with exceptional night vision capabilities. And as the coming of war later proved, their technology and weaponry was first-class much of the time. All of these steps bore fruit when the war began, and the navies of the allied powers all paid the price in the early going in the Pacific, i.e., the U.S., British, Commonwealths and the Dutch. The Japanese also used colored dies for identification of a particular ship's guns, to aid in identifying the fall of shot at long range. This proved especially useful if several ships were engaging the same target, or just in the chaos of battle. The tide turned eventually, not only due to technological advances such as superior U.S. radar-controlled fire control, but due to the rising experience and expertise of the U.S. Navy, so hard won in those early IJN victories, and in the middle years of the war when things were in the balance.

[@monsieurcommissaire1628]

What a gift. To have had any conversation with one of the heroes of the Greatest Generation is an honour, and you had a really good one. Let us always remember and revere them, and do our best to follow the examples they gave us.

[@pappawsprink5851]

Any time you have to report of damage or injury I believe that you have to count that as a hit.

[@red2001ss]

My mothers Step-dad, aka my Step-Grandfather, was on Gambier Bay when it was taken out by Yamato. He ended up in the water, but was rescued. Lucky to survive all that back then. He passed away in 2006.

[@JB0143RP]

Taffy 3 gave them hell as best they could

[@HybridRenoII]

My Fraternal Grandfather Chester M. Richie was on Gambier Bay and he survived but yeah... Yamato ironically is my favorite Warship I love this dudes vids but the pic looked like Gambier under fire and that is why I'm watching it now as opposed to later

[@markmclaughlin2690]

My Father Kenneth McLaughlin served on CVE-73 USS Gambier Bay

[@ronbailiff2832]

I can’t add much to this discussion but as an old Navy Gunners Mate (USS Bordelon DD 881) it was almost awe inspiring to see a battleship fire a broadside with their 16” guns. Seen it several times off the coast of Vietnam and will never forget that. Thanks older swaby’s for your sacrifice!

[@esmith3329]

I LOVE that Big Mamie (USS Massachusetts) is on the list and that the French sent back one of the 16" rounds she sent into Jean Bart, which is on display on board BB-59.

[@christianweagle6253]

14" rounds

[@topshotz17]

​@@christianweagle625316"

[@mdb831]

@@christianweagle6253 16 inch en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Massachusetts_(BB-59)

[@mdb831]

@@christianweagle6253 16 inch

[@ab-dm3md]

@@christianweagle6253incorrect. What US battleship was believed to have fired the first and last 16” shell? Google is your best friend

[@joeb5316]

Considering how heated the Brits and Germans can get in their squabbles (i.e. was Bismarck sunk or scuttled), drawing both of their ire is a bold move, sir.

[@davidncw4613]

😆so true

[@G777GUN]

It was scuttled but it also sank. So I dont see your point.

[@SealofPerfection]

My take on the Bismarck is this: She was sinking regardless. The scuttling just helped it sink faster. But if your enemy beats you to the point you feel you need to scuttle and abandon ship, then they sank your Battleship. Doesn't really matter who let in the final bit of water.

[@vapormissile]

​@@G777GUN"was sunk" is not the same as "sank" If you get in a sword fight & the other guy falls on his sword, you can't really claim you stabbed him to death.

[@WilhelmvonFahrvergnugen]

perhaps a maritime duel is in order....

[@MrWashingToad]

Your list, in corrected curator units, ships with the longest shot is recorded with **: #10 At a range of roughly 10,150 curators distance, *IJN Yamato* (battleship) vs. USS Johnston (DD-557) (destroyer) #09 At a range of roughly 11,000 curators distance, *IJN Yamato* (battleship) vs. USS Gambier Bay (CVE-73) (escort carrier) #08 At a range of roughly 11,350 curators distance, *USS West Virginia (BB-48)* (battleship) vs. IJN Yamashiro (battleship). #06 At a range of roughly 13,000 curators distance, *HMS Warspite* (battleship) vs. Italian Navy ship Giulio Cesare (battleship) #06 At a range of roughly 13,000 curators distance, *Kriegsmarine (Nazi Germany Navy) Scharnhorst* (battleship) vs. HMS Glorious (aircraft carrier) #05 At a range of roughly 14,000 curators distance, *USS Massachusetts (BB-59)* (battleship) vs. French Navy ship Milan (destroyer) #04 At a range of roughly 11,250 curators distance, *USS Massachusetts (BB-59)* (battleship) vs. French Navy ship Jean Bart (fast battleship) #03 At a range of roughly 15,000 curators distance, *IJN Kongō* (fast battleship) vs. USS Heermann (DD-532) (destroyer) #02 At a range of roughly 17,000 curators distance, *IJN Yamato* (battleship) vs. USS White Plains (CVE-66) (escort carrier) #01 At a range of roughly 18,000 - 20,000 curators distance, *USS New Jersey (BB-62)* (battleship) vs. IJN Nowaki (destroyer)

[@JZsBFF]

Is tha the same unit as curator's size?

[@papajohnloki]

Lundgrens book states the shell exploded under the White Plains- not a hit unless you believe that the hybrid battleshil Ise suffered 33 bomb 'hits'

[@gregorywright4918]

USS Mass. vs MN JeanB - should that be 14,250 curators rather than 11,250?

[@briancisco1176]

If a projectile hits an enemy vessel underwater, causing damage, how can that be anything other than a HIT. A "near miss" kills fish.

[@Matt-mt2vi]

Apples and orange comparison. If it was a fleet carrier or other ship its unlikely anything would be damaged much less a dent. As thin and weak hulled as those carriers were, even compared to a Destroyer. Even they are not as fragile as a fish. The Gambler Bay type carriers were a thin, walled, non-reinforced civilian hull ship made into an extremely slow and unbalanced ship that was never intended to be used in any waters that were even slightly contested. Although they ended up doing so and were easily severely damaged and, in most cases, sunk. That other warships shrugged off. Well, the projectile didn't hit the ship. The claim is that a near miss exploded near the ship. There are issues with that claim. But let's go with it, and let's look at other real-life scenarios that are not apples and orange like yours. If say I got knocked on my ass by an IED explosion but received no injures. I would slend the next 20 years saying I got nearly hit. Saying otherwise would be wrong. If shrapnel hit my vest or it punctured my skin, then I could say I got hit. If a boxer or MMA fighter misses a hit, but the other fighter gets injured for some reason in dodging that hit the other fighter, she shouldn't get a point for a miss. A hit is a hit. A miss that misses it a miss. A near miss is when injures or damage is received by shrapnel or explosive force. The infatuation people have that want to change definitions

[@FaceIntoKeyboard]

Agreed. If damage is done, it's a hit. It may not be as brutal as a full on metal-on-metal connection, but lots of shells were designed to do damage nearby.

[@fifteenbyfive]

I think what we're saying is that it's more accurately a "near hit."

[@peteranderson037]

It comes from armchair admirals who haven't been within 8,000 miles of a war engaging in goalpost moving and thinking that war is a game played for points. Instead it's about hurting and killing the other guy before they can do the same to you, then do it again and again until they give up or there's nobody left to hurt or kill. If your ship fires a shot at another ship and the result of that shot is the other ship's crew takes casualties, the ship slows down, and the stacks start belching black smoke, then its a hit and everything else is just semantics.

[@michaelhuffor6732]

Agreed.

[@crazyguy32100]

I've always had a spoft spot for Duke of York hitting Scharnhorst. It may not be as long ( about 20,000 yards) but it was during a true battleship vs battleship duel that damaged both sides, where most of the ones on this list were a battleship firing on a target with impunity, as the target had nowhere near the range or aiming capacity to fight back.

[@rohanthandi4903]

Was that the only 2 way Radar directed Battleship fight? fucking insane

[@crazyguy32100]

@@rohanthandi4903 Yep. Battle of the North Cape. December 26th 1943. Pitch black, in a force 8 gale ice storm, in the winter, in the Arctic ocean, North of the very tip of Norway. Probably the worst weather conditions imaginable, at the top of the world, in the winter storm from hell. At full speed (26-31knots) battleships from both sides blasted at each other using radar plotting, muzzle flashes and occasional starshells only. 2nd last battleship v battleship action in history, the last one being Surigao Strait, which was an execution, not a fight. Scharnhorst was alone, heading for safety and would have gotten away to fight another day but the very last long range, unaimed, salvo from Duke of York found a boiler room and axed her speed, sealing her fate. Scharnhorst went to the bottom as a worthy foe. After the battle the British Admiral told his officers "I hope that if any of you lead a ship into action against a many times superior opponent, you will command your ship as gallantly as Scharnhorst was commanded today"".

[@joshuamccasland8180]

@@crazyguy32100as a combat veteran on land and I have to say I can’t imagine the tension in the air on the ships as the sea gave em a FN beaten as the shells rained in amongst the black of the night. That changes a man

[@Matt-mt2vi]

Although your statement is mostly true. It wasnt the only one of 2 warships engaging each other. The USS Johnson was engaging multiple Japanese ships and was on what was basically a suicide mission. Yes the 5in fire was basically useless, but it did fire Torpedoes, that missed. The USS New Jersey was straddle by one of the Destoyers she was engaging, the torpedoes would have hit her if she wasn't warned by US Aircraft. The thin skinned CVE at Samar could of done some real damage that day if they had been warned (One of many Halsey failures leading up this battle) The Jean bart which was a Battleship but was not fully operational and was moored. did fire at the Massachusetts and the Massachusetts was hit and nearly hit by several shells. The Jean Bart is lucky to not have been operational as one of the shells pentrated its empty secondary munitions locker. But yes its the only Battleship maneuvering duel on open waters

[@MCLegend13]

⁠@@Matt-mt2vithat’s all very true and great points and all but none of Those aforementioned points you stated don’t really count for the point he was trying to convey. Reason being is that as they either aren’t against moving targets or aren’t a pure battleship vs battleship scenario which is why HMS Warspite and HMS Duke Of York should get more notice because they scored extremely long range hits against other fast moving Battleships 1 engagement was Modern Battleship vs Modern Battleship HMS Duke Of York vs Scharnhorst and the other one was refitted Dreadnaught vs refitted Dreadnaught HMS Warspite vs Giulio Cesare. But still you do bring very valid points nonetheless

[@BobGreyson]

I took a Behind the Scenes Firepower tour on Massachusetts about a month ago and the guide, a retired gunners mate on Wisconsin was adamant that Massachusetts hit a French destroyer at 29,000 yards

[@battleshipcove-americasfle2150]

It is highly believed from USS MASSACHUSETTS records and oral histories at the museum, French records, and Vincent O'Hara research that BIG MAMIE hit French destroyer Boulonnais at ~30,000 yards. However, we have no confirming evidence at this time like there is for the MILAN hit.

[@wstavis3135]

I seem to recall there is some actual evidence to this as well, but no definitive proof.

[@BobGreyson]

He noted the new evidence about the hit that Ryan mentioned and then kept hitting the math of the plotting solution

[@paulhutchinson7582]

My father was on the Massachusetts for the entire war . He told us they had hits on two ships during the battle. Yes the French ship was at a pier when it was hit.

[@rogerstlaurent8704]

Just a little fun facts about the Big Mamie in one of her 16 inch gun turrets there is a scorecard on how many ships the Big Mamie hit and sunk in the battle of Casablanca 2 Destroyers and 1 French Battleship the Jean Bart .. Also in that battle the Jean Bart fired an 8 inch shell hitting the Big mamie giving her a Bandaid cut for damage .. But the 16 inch AP shell from the Big Mamie Tour Through Jean Barts Amor Plating and exploded 30 feet inside of the Jean Bart

[@gregkarkowsky967]

Thank you for naming the other historians. I was wondering how many folks did the research.

[@Bigjohnbklyn]

I’ve heard multiple times that Iowa and New Jersey during Hailstone had many extreme long range engagements and sunk fleeing Japanese ships because Admiral Spruance wanted to engage with the battleships and not let the carriers have all the fun

[@Matt-mt2vi]

And he got lucky they didn't get hit by torpedoes because of that insistence.

[@manilajohn0182]

Neither Iowa nor New Jersey registered any main battery hits during Operation Hailstone. As much as I hate to say it, Iowa's main battery gunnery was rather poor. She engaged Katori in a daytime clear visibility scenario using the Mark 8 at an average distance of less than 14,500 yards. When she opened fire, Katori had already been hit by a torpedo, from 2- 7 bombs, numerous 8" and 5" hits from U.S. cruisers and destroyers, was making no more than 1- 2 knots at best (one report had her dead in the water) and was already sinking. Iowa fired 46 rounds. Per the ship's after- action report, the captain claimed no hits, stating that all salvoes were straddles. He also added that the main battery shell splashes were easily visible both visually and by the Mark 8. There are two likely reasons for this. The first was the significant shell dispersion of the class (1.9% of range for a nine- gun salvo). The second was a relative lack of main battery gunnery practice for the crews after they arrived in the Pacific.

[@gregkarkowsky967]

Dude, I follow a lot of KZbin personalities and your commercial segues are some of the best. I hope you advertisers are taking notice.

[@sirboomsalot4902]

I had known about Yamato’s hit on White Plains, but New Jersey’s against Nowaki is a TIL for me. There really hasn’t been enough written about that engagement.

[@andrewhoughton8606]

Ryan has mentioned this battle before I think

[@Tuning3434]

@@andrewhoughton8606 Operation Hailstone, the Feb. 1944 carrier raid on Truk Atol. The Unofficial History of the Pacific War channel has a dedicated video on it, where Seth, Bill and official unofficial 3rd member Jon Parshall wail on Spruence for risking his brand new battlewagons in an surface engagement while the carriers could strike with impunity: Maikaza was able to send a torpedo salvo towards New Jersey that passed way to close to anyone's liking.

[@duanem.1567]

Fascinating information about Yamato's shells being designed to travel and be effective underwater.

[@memyshelfandeye318]

The japanese had a whole range of those shells for nearly every gun size - look up "Type 91 shell". But in the end, it looks like they didn't really work out, because performance on direct hits on armour plates was poor and hits on non-armoured parts only resulted in overpens, the shell detonating way behind the target if at all.

I beleive that if the shot causes damage to the target ship then it should count as a hit. That is the entire purpose of the shot to cause dmage.

[@AdmiralLj]

That is not how characterization work, a direct impact is a "HIT" Damage from a shell that do not directly impact is a "Near miss".

[@jerrycornelius]

That's just what I was thinking! I'd be interested to know the greatest distance at which a shell caused substantial damage to or sank an opponent rather than just, for example, soaked the uniform of anyone on deck

[@bufatutuagonistes8876]

I watched the NJ's drydocking videos by Ryan S. He's a genuine historian, basing his opinions on facts and being clear about any conjecture. Very impressive guy...like many of the other ship museum leaders.

[@mountdeaneer]

I'm biased, but love that BB-48's hit on Yamashiro made the list. Imagine being on the receiving end of that one at the time - nighttime, no spot planes, just bleeding-edge radar and fire control. Almost wizardry.

[@manilajohn0182]

The hits on Yamashiro by West Virginia were unconfirmed. Per West Virginia's after- action report, the initial claim was made that "...the first salvo was a straddle with numerous hits...". This was later qualified by the statement that "There were possible and probable hits in all salvos. Three pronounced flare- ups were observed on the target at the splash time of our 1st, 2nd, and 6th salvos". This could just as easily have been Yamashiro firing back. Moreover, Yamashiro's wreck has been discovered and explored. The ship (which was not adequately protected against even 14" hits) is essentially intact and was sunk primarily due to six torpedo hits by U.S. destroyers.

[@grumpyboomer61]

I'm going to land on the side of damaging shots count. Case in point. There were occasions where Allied ships engaged advancing enemy tank formations, whereby they may not have actually hit a tank, but came close enough to flip it over or onto it's side. As a former infantryman, that's a hit in my book.

[@x1heavy]

There is a account of that in one of the books I read first hand. The tank crew affected burned. That one hit was able to halt the assembly and march to contact by the armor that day.

[@mikepotter5718]

I understand HMS Rodney once hit Europe at 41,000 The Captain was heard to remark "when your shooting at those distance it really a matter of luck: :)

[@brucesim2003]

Missing a continent really would take a bit of bad luck.

[@daniel-leejones8396]

​@@brucesim2003my thoughts exactly, ha.

[@michaelpielorz9283]

Well, small Europe isn`t that easy targe you may think!

[@battleshipcove-americasfle2150]

We 100% agree with the longest Battleship to Battleship hit in history coming from USS Massachusetts off Casablanca against JEAN BART. Further, we agree that MASSACHUSETTS has also been mentioned as hitting French Destroyer MILAN from a range estimated up to 28,000 yds (13.7 nmi). The projectile slammed into the crew’s quarters and exploded, taking out the radio room, sickbay, and rupturing the ship’s starboard hull at the waterline. Over a hundred crew were killed or injured in this strike; crippled and aflame, Milan turned her rudder and began drifting towards shore so she would not sink in deep water. BIG MAMIE is believed to have the single longest direct hit on a moving enemy vessel by any battleship in history. This all on her rookie battle.

[@manilajohn0182]

This is not one shred of clear evidence which supports your claim that Massachusetts actually hit Milan. French reports that she was hit by 16" shells are no more reliable than U.S. reports that USS Johnston was hit by 14" shells off Samar. The simple fact here is that claims such as this without clear evidence by an individual with your tag constitute grandstanding- and are a back- handed slap at the other officers and men of the other U.S. vessels present that day who performed their duty in the action against Milan. At least you ended your post with the disclaimer that "BIG MAMIE is believed..." Jean Bart was a stationary target, which great simplified Massachusetts' gunnery.

[@markwilliams2620]

​@manilajohn0182 Lighten up, Frances.

[@farmerned6]

Jean Bart wasn't MOVING in open sea So nope, that was just shelling a stationary target

[@manilajohn0182]

@@markwilliams2620 You need to think things through.

[@Matt-mt2vi]

​@manilajohn0182 one ship was only recently found in 2019, the other didn't sunk, but was beached. Which means getting physical evidence, is easy compared to the other. One deing so deap its kinda hard to get evidence. But of course , you're mistaken on what was debated. It wasn't if it was struck by a 16-inch shell. Both US and French records are clear on that, plus the shell fragments and the ships French Capt also stating that. The debate has always been at what range.

[@austinturney745]

Seems a fair list - there are always ambiguities but a near miss that causes "significant" damage or injures or kills crew is not really just a miss - particularly when you have in some cases shells designed to do underwater damage when they "miss" but are near to the hull or under the keel. After all some torpedoes are specifically designed to "miss" and detonate under the hull and break the ship's back - so not at all a miss in reality.

[@MCLegend13]

HMS Duke Of York is underrated and I’d say at least deserved an Honourable mention. Although despite not being as long range as the other ones on this list she did score a very long range hit on the fast moving Scharnhorst. I can’t remember the exact number statistics but I still recall that it was still pretty impressive that the 14 inch shell hit from such a long range hitting a boiler room and causing the ship to lose speed dramatically and eventually lead to her sinking at the hands of the Cruisers and Destroyers bombarding her with their torpedoes.

[@CalebEssig]

Im a HUGE history fan at just 11 years old

[@EricDKaufman]

Welcome to the party, kid. It gets wild

[@AirJoe]

You're in the right place. There's an Infinite amount of videos here 😂

[@bobbenson6825]

Good for you! I wish I had this available to me at your age. Not to mention Drachinifel's site.

[@derekwalker6727]

Go for wee man, be a sponge, take it all in , you will be amazed at what you will learn unconsciously by just being interested subject. I can guarantee you that what you learn here will relate to other subjects. Good luck, take care.

[@geographyRyan]

I'm very proud of my state ship Massachusetts for making 4 and 5 on the list!

[@chadhartsees]

Oooh that camera and the white balance! Looking good!

[@J_Halcyon]

I'll buy the logic on near misses. The goal of firing the guns is to remove or diminish the ability of the enemy ship to sail or fight. If you fire your guns and the shell causes the enemy ship to take damage or casualties you've successfully degraded their ability to sail and fight. The alternative is that you can sink a ship with gunfire without ever hitting it. To draw a parallel with a contemporary weapon system, the ideal way for a torpedo to do damage is to "miss" the target and explode underneath it instead.

[@DrVictorVasconcelos]

Just wanted to say that you're 100% right about history. It's so common that we find a new source and we realize that some dude 50 years ago that forged our view of a historical event had taken a source at face value that in hindsight was clearly biased.

[@charlesjohnson4933]

I agree with ur list. But the USS Washington is a battleship killer and needs a shout-out.

[@18robsmith]

I always thought it strange that with ranges in the region of 25 miles the longest range hit was at about half of that. Thanks for doing some digging and showing that hits were probably attained further out.

[@HunterSteel29]

This list made me re-evaluate the engagement between Yamato and White Plains. When translated to Metric (the system I grew up with), Yamato scored her hit on the White Plains at 31km. This is 7km further than her max surface radar can detect which means that Yamato achieved a very accurate firing solution on a ship no longer than 180m with pure optical range finding (none of her spotter planes were up because of American aircraft in the air.) At this point I am going to assume that anyone who said that Yamato's gunnery was terrible are either being satirical or haven't researched their battle logs. If White Plains had been the size of a Sodak/North Carolina/Iowa class Battleship, then that hit would've been a direct hit. (and she achieved it on her 3rd salvo.)

[@Matt-mt2vi]

According to some accounts the Yamato spotter was directing fire and was shot down not long afterwarfs. The Japanese also had some advanced maps that were ahead of it's time. Much like grid coordinates that we use in maps today As for size the USS White plains was not small, it was about the same size as most pre WW2 BB. As for it's actual beam that would include it's flight deck, ment the top 1/3rd of the top part of the ship actually slightly wider than Iowa class BB. It was also had half the speed of the Iowa's BB and could hardly maneuver as it extremely top heavy. So no chasing the splashes or wild turns that a fast BB could do it any other combat warship could such as IJN Nowaki. But yes if the Iowa or any other fast Battleship only went about 14kt sailed in basically a straight line even under fire, it would have been nearly hit as USS White plains was or if plunging fire was used (at that range probably not) hit the BB

[@dcy665]

Your mood change when you push the magic spoon got me laughing.

[@matthewalbers31]

add man

[@tomhenry897]

Sugar high

[@jimcat68]

I'm not enough of a historian to argue with these claims, but it is encouraging to see new scholarship shedding light on these past events.

[@JZsBFF]

History is a tricky thing, it all depends on who you ask. I agree with you though that a fresh look at things can't hurt. Sometimes a good distance is the best thing to observe correctly.

[@ianmacaulay8021]

Love this new evaluation and research of BB history. I've been watching this channel since the early days and this is definitely one of my favourite episodes. Looking forward to hear Drachinifel and other historians weigh in on the topic.

[@noneforyoumgimbo]

This type of historical content is great. If we don't learn from history, we are doomed to repeat it... Thank you for pursuing the history of this ship...and presenting it for everyone to see.

[@danielrose-tt7os]

That is pretty darn good on the protein level. One thing about rounds fired from battleships against ground targets. With the bursting charge so much smaller than dedicated ground attack bombs (aka the 500,1000,2000 lb bomb) why and how so much damage. I am thinking in particular about the shelling from the USS Wisconsin on that 155mm gun position in North Vietnam.

[@garymcclellan593]

What impresses me most in this is how many of these shots are on DD. Small, tough targets for such a long range shot. I'm good with the Near Miss designation. As you note, that can be more devastating than a through and through.

[@Todd-p4t]

I'd like to say direct hit. It's the totally stupifying 'Oh My God's shot. Bending a bullet stuff, but as you say if speed drops, smoke billows or anyone wounded or killed has to count. So very interesting, Ryan!

[@mindwarp42]

In this case, considering the targets hit by the Japanese Type 91 AP Shells, IMHO they were near misses because the Japanese thought they were aiming at targets with actual armor like heavy cruisers and larger carriers, and so aimed for where they expected the armor belts to be. Since they aimed too low for that, we get the seeming near miss - but because their AP shells were legitimately designed with that type of dive to hit the belt in mind, we get a lower than expected actual hit. If the IJN had realized their targets were just DDs (and to them, DEs were considered DDs since they had torpedoes) and CVEs, they might not have used APs that would just go straigtht through lightly armored ships, and switched to the good ol' Sanshiki HE shells instead.

[@lunatickoala]

@@mindwarp42 The Sanshiki (Type 3) shells weren't the HE shells but the AA shells that were developed in a somewhat misguided attempt to use battleship main guns as AA guns.

[@oogsaggie]

Bravo Ryan for a new look at the topic. Keep up the good work!

[@ddegn]

*"The World Wondered"* is a great name for a WWII Pacific Theater book. A lot of "near misses" caused a lot of damage.

[@themecoptera9258]

Also the code phrase for the day when Samar occurred was “the world wonders”

[@ddegn]

@@themecoptera9258 "the world wonders" was padding at the end of the coded message which wasn't part of the actual message. Where did you hear it was "the code phrase"?

[@rogergoodman8665]

I agree with you, Ryan. If damage was incurred, it was a hit. There were also kamakazi planes that caused severe damage to ships without actually making direct contact.

[@demoskunk]

My 2 favorite battleships are #1 and #2, which is fitting . I'm also a fan of Massachusetts, so good to see her rank so high.

[@edwardhewer8530]

Great stories. Wasn’t really aware that Yamato got some licks in. RIP all.

[@brucefelger4015]

Good list, Effective hits should always count.

[@underthesettingsun2199]

"now, here's where it sounds like I'm being biased in making this list" I knew we were going to Operation Hailstone. More seriously, you make an excellent point about the false dichotomy of "near miss" vs. "direct hit", particularly for the Japanese shells and their specific design intention to strike "short" of the target and dive.

[@oconnorsean12]

My brother in law spells it Szymanski, so close.... I started watching about 5 months ago and am absolutely fascinated with the channel. My father in law was torpedoed exiting the Panama canal on the Roger B Tanny. I need a vacation and I am seriously considering a visit to the Battle Ship New Jersey. Thank you for your love of naval history!

[@jppagetoo]

There are some excellent KZbin readings of firsthand accounts of the Battle of the Phillipines near San Bernardino Straight, Samar, Surigao, and in Leyte Gulf. Both Japanese and US sailors wrote acounts that are used. There was incredible bravery shown in those battles. Some of these shots are discussed there.

[@Norbrookc]

and let the arguments begin! 😉

[@rearspeaker6364]

it's time to build a time machine so we can go and measure theses shots........

[@p35flash97]

I knew WV's shot on Yamashiro would make this list. WV does it at night, with radar. Damn.

[@kristoffermangila]

And thus she exacted revenge for Pearl Harbor.

[@GeorgiaBoy1961]

That's known as "avenging Pearl Harbor," wouldn't you say?

[@andrewpettola6097]

What was the official distance of the Bismarck's sinking of HMS Hood? Also, although it was not a great range (less than 9,000 yards), the USS Washington's salvo on the IJN Kirishima during the Naval battle of Guadalcanal was impressive.

[@babyhuey6342]

Not sure if there is an official record, but I think the fatal salvo was fired between 16 and 17,000 yards.

[@sb859]

What range did USS Texas use when she flooded her port side to increase the range at the D-Day Landings? Not a naval combat action, but still it had to be a long way.

[@SealofPerfection]

Roughly 17 degrees of elevation. The New York class (New York and Texas) could only elevate their guns 15 degrees max. They flooded the torpedo blisters on Texas to get 2 degrees more elevation which would be roughly another mile or two of distance. So probably 14 miles, max.

[@sb859]

@@SealofPerfection great, thank you sir.

[@Disek666]

"not enough us warships on the lists... let's make our own list!" vibe

[@timandellenmoran1213]

Just a comparison and contrast: with the hits that Yamato scored with the underwater near misses, compare USS Washington's hits on Kirishima that are underwater that could be like a stone skipping on the water or under water. This I believe is Robert Lundgrem's belief. Great job Ryan!!

[@enscroggs]

9:35 Allow me to butcher that ship's name slightly less grievously: "JOO-lee-oh CHAY-sah-ree"

[@andywindes4968]

Great video. You might mention that in Spruance’s determination to use the New Jersey’s guns in a surface fight, he nearly got her torpedoed by a long lance.

[@rvail136]

I agree that near misses, often actually do damage as often the shells often do hit the target, even if the shell passes THROUGH the target as the Yamato did on the Johnston.

[@tools6106]

Nice list. Putting yourself in the crosshairs for this list is ambitious! Keep it up!

[@manilajohn0182]

It definitely gets hits on his channel.

[@dancasey9660]

Now for the shortest range shot. Probably should keep it to battleships, as DD'S probably have fought at very close range. I wonder if Admiral Lee in the Washington wins that discussion? Would also like to see who takes the prize for the longest shot in WW1?

[@JohnSmith-w8u]

I'd be interested in watching a video of from start (sighting of a target) through prep (decision, calculation, prepping turret) to firing with videos of where the 'action' takes place and in (reasonably) real-time. Kind of like a re-enactment. Thanks for your videos, they make me better informed and are thought provoking.

[@selkiemaine]

Agreed 100%. Also, both New Jersey and Nowiki (sorry, I don't have the name in front of me and may have mangled it) were running at top speed, and I believe that the Japanese destroyer was maneuvering. As another author had pointed out some time ago, if she had been a battleship sized target, that shell would have been a clean hit. And, IMO, had she been a battleship sized target, she wouldn't have outrun an Iowa class!

[@andrewhoughton8606]

The hit drop it's speed down which would be death sentence to a DD against a fast bb

[@selkiemaine]

@@andrewhoughton8606 if I recall correctly, they were able to bring the speed back up quickly enough to continue to outrun the US fleet. The New Jersey stopped firing fairly quickly simply because they didn't feel like wasting ammo. The destroyer wasn't a high enough priority target this late in the war to make it worth the effort of resupply. It's entirely possible that if they're stuck it out and fired a few more times, they would have directly hit the destroyer.

[@andrewhoughton8606]

@@selkiemaine then could see why it wouldn't count as anything more than a near miss

[@selkiemaine]

@@andrewhoughton8606 I see your point, but I feel, like Ryan does, that riddling the ship with splinters counts as damage. Even if the damage was not crippling, it was still widespread damage. Think about it this way - if a 16" shell put a hole in the ship's funnel and kept going without exploding near the ship, which is the likely outcome of a hit there, it would be considered a hit - even if the ship was functionally unimpaired. A hole in the funnel might have been less damaging to the ship than the splinter damage that she did suffer. So, it's not the extent of the damage, it's that damage was caused by the shell. I would point out that the explosive power of these shells is a major component in their effectiveness, and it doesn't matter where the explosive goes off, so long as the fragments do damage.

[@andrewhoughton8606]

@@selkiemaine lol I never said it didn't I said I could see why it would not count

[@thevictoryoverhimself7298]

Warspites claim as i've always heard it is "The longest battleship on battleship hit in history". There simply werent many battleship on battleship fights in the pacific. The only two i know of (Washington vs Kirishima Night action at Guadalcanal and Yamashiro vs Standard types firing squad at Suragao strait) were short range ambushes. There are photographs of washington firing salvos with its guns almost fully depressed.

[@ostsan8598]

The World Wonder'd is a wonderful book. I thought Yamato's hit on White Plains would be No 1, but I'm ok with giving that spot to New Jersey.

[@combatwomble5584]

I whole heartedly agree that any shot causing damage should count, but dissagree on the range point you made at the beggining. The variables involved in making max range shots with battleship guns always amaze me, you factor in 20 to 30 second flight time and both target and shooter moving in 3 dimensions the idea that even one shot lands is amazing. And to think that radar of the time had the fedility to track at 37000 yards and allow a hit is both hard to fathom and terrifying if true. Great list though

[@franksposato6072]

If you like the work of Robert Lundgren, he published an article last year about the battle of Henderson Airfield that completely changes the history of what we thought happened in the November 13th night battle.

[@cosmopezzolla996]

Ryan, said what he said.....BB-62 WINS!!! Nah Nah........... sorry I couldn't help it, I love Battleship New Jersey! Thanks to all that served on all the other ships in our fleet!

[@benx6264]

I did a double take when you started discussing New Jersey in the #1 spot. Because I I first thought you said she scored hits on Milwaukie.

[@kennardjohnson7875]

Hms Rodney on Bismark, is the longest battleship on battleship.

[@BrianHoff04]

Darn.. forgot to mention.. Ryan.. I so appreciated your comment defining how records of history work. That they are as accurate as the most recent evidence would indicate. So easy to say yet so often we forget, and continue to believe a story from 10 years ago as if it just happened today. It's exactly like science (thus why colleges treat history as a science). We can all get pretty funny about "facts" sometimes. They are a fact, until something new is discovered. Then the new thing shall update history and become the new fact. Awesome sauce stuff! I could say more.. but on the internet that just always ends up looking like an argument. Arguments always have a cause, rarely are they caused by facts. I can't recall the last argument about gravity ;-) Or the Earth? Oops.. we do see arguments about the Earth all the time. 😞

[@RangieNZ]

Ryan, the 'sponsored' section, was brilliant. Possibly one of only a few videos on YT ever, where I actually wanted to buy the sponsored product! :)

[@niclasjohansson4333]

Warspite, did only score a single hit on "Cesar",and the Italian ship did straddle Warspite just before that hit ! Sharnhorst hit Glorious at a slightly longer distance, and than Gneisenau did the same at an almost similar range, (she was trailing behind Sharnhorst at the time), so Gneisenau might infact beat Warspite, and the fact is that the German ships hit Glorious several times as she tried to run away at a similar speed !

[@Neneset]

Numbers I've seen would put Warspite, if anything, ahead of Scharnhorst.

[@manilajohn0182]

@@Neneset Scharnhorst hit Glorious at approximately 26,400 yards. Warspite hit Giulio Caesare at approximately 26,000 yards.

[@strixaluco7423]

The definition of "hit" (Treffer in german) is someone/something achieving physical contact with a target. If a near miss causes damage to a target there has been physical contact via splinters, shockwaves or something else. The intact physical body of the shell doesnt have to touch the target to achieve the definition of a hit. In addition causing damage with near misses was something navies considered building their ships and shells, like the expample with Yamato. We also have the Flechter-Class destroyers, which got splinterproof armor to deal with near misses, Bismarck and the Soviet DDs used their main guns shooting in the water to deter or destroy enemy planes from with the splinters(and water fountains).

[@waltermcinnis]

Great video. These folks are popping off in the comments and having fun!

[@lindsaybaker9480]

Prior to the Second World War, HMS Warspite was based in the Mediterranean and was conducting main gun battery fire drills in a designated exercise area which was supposed to be known by all mariners. Anyway a passenger ship apparently strayed into this area and almost got obliterated by 15 inch shell fire.

[@mchrome3366]

I’m complaining rah rah rah rah. Great video.

[@piperp9535]

A hit is a hit, a miss is a miss. I don't get why people try and argue this.

[@AmosDohms]

I'd love to see a video covering the longest ranged hit over time, perhaps starting in the 1890's? I am not quite sure if I buy the near miss as a hit for the purposes of this discussion, but either way New Jersey's hit is insanely impressive.

[@TheEvertw]

I totally trust Ryan to not be biased in constructing & presenting the facts in this list. However, I'd argue that Ryan is totally biased in doing this exercise because he suspected NJ would be high on the list, and producing this video because of the top spot for NJ. This video would probably not have been produced if NJ was on spot 11.

[@oteliogarcia1562]

Question is, how many damaging "near misses" by the British, French, Italian and German battleships have been accounted?

[@dandarling152]

We differ on the definition of near miss/hit. Other than that, your list is spot on. If you called the list "10 longest range salvos that cause damage" We would 100% agree.

[@TheInquisitiveFool-cf6uj]

The issue with range during WWII and the previous time periods is that the technology at the time did not allow for complete accuracy of where the shot originated from and how far it was when it actually hit the target.

[@adriencervera4011]

Please go in depth about new jerseys and mamis long range hits, both sound very entertaining 👍

[@mikemason9727]

I love that you guys have preserved so many of your great battleships. I'm ashamed at the fact that we Brits haven't preserved a single one. Our best is HMS Belfast, a light cruiser.

[@GeorgiaBoy1961]

@mikemason9727 - Re: "I love that you guys have preserved so many of your great battleships. I'm ashamed at the fact that we Brits haven't preserved a single one. Our best is HMS Belfast, a light cruiser." It is a real shame that none of those battle-wagons were saved, not just from WW2 but perhaps even WW1, considering the outsized role the Royal Navy played during those years, and the key role Great Britain had in the development of the battleship as a weapon of war. When my wife and I traveled in Britain over thirty years ago in the early 1990s, we toured the HMS Belfast. Saw the Imperial War Museum, too, which was great also. But I wish HMS Warspite had survived; she was a real fighting ship, that one! "Sink the Bismarck" the old early 1960s black-and-white film, has been one of my favorite naval war films for a long time. Surprisingly good special effects for the era, too. I can distinctly remember a couple of friends and I, as grade-school kids, imitating PM Churchill's voice and saying to one another, "I don't care how you do it... you must sink the Bismarck!" My goodness, that was a long time ago... my childhood, I mean!

[@leftseat30]

Glad there's a place for sea nerds to "gather." Besides books I felt alone for a long time. Also, could you imagine being on the receiving end of 16 or 18" rounds fired from waaay beyond visual range?!

[@beaugator]

Cool! Now you need to figure out which ship made the most hits resulting in a sinking. Now that, is a daunting task but, your up to it Ryan!

[@henrycarlson7514]

So Wise , Thank You . As far as I am concerned Any hit that does Actual Damage is a hit

[@Knight6831]

Well do we know what shells from IJN Yamato actually hit Gambier Bay as USS Gambier Bay has not yet been found

[@rearspeaker6364]

knocked it into the twilight zone..................

[@duanem.1567]

Japanese Navy records.

[@Plaprad]

One thing I can think of is the dye packs. It was known the IJN used them in the battle, the colors were known, and I'm sure at least a couple sailors saw the color of the splash that hit Gambier Bay. Then you have Japanese records. If they say "We shot at this target at this time." and the American records state "This ship was hit at this time..." then it was a likely hit.

[@skurjo9975]

I agree that a near miss can be more damaging than an actual hit. But the qualification in your own title is "hit". To me if the shell hits the water and also hits the ship that is a hit, if it hits the water and shrapnel from the actual shell hits the ship causing damage that"s a hit, although a bit of a grey area. Even though a near miss causes damage the water causes the damage and no part of the shell makes contact it is not a "hit" a hit is a hit by the definition of the word. The best way to incorporate them is to call them "damaging shots" which is really the most important aspect of shooting in the first place. I dont care if I get a "HIT" or not as long as I'm doing damage to the enemy.

[@littlecoldhands]

This is actually the metric why Warspite and Scharnhorst hold the record. As an analogy, a team in football scores when the ball goes into the goal. No points for hitting the goal posts. Goal post hits still "damage" the goal though, and it certainly causes a lot a hearts to stop beating for a while.

[@ethanmckinney203]

Consider ground artillery firing (indirectly) at moving trucks. If the shells land 10m from the truck and the trucks are set on fire and torn up by shrapnel, did those shells miss? (This is particularly relevant for the New Jersey's shot because they were firing high explosive shells, which caused damage exactly as they were supposed to: through fragmentation.)

[@anvil5356]

@@littlecoldhands It’s a good analogy, but in this case the goal posts have been moved, There doesn’t seem to be any distinction between a ‘Direct Hit’ and close enough.

[@UthurRytan]

​@@littlecoldhands Slightly different, Warspite and Scharnhorst hold the record because no other ship beyond reasonable doubt were the ones that hit (or were at longer range than said claims). By direct hits, maybe Yamato and otherwise almost definitely Kongo would have the new record for longest direct hit on moving ship

[@michaelwild888]

I love this...But I am waiting for the Drachinifel version. I think near misses count as they do damage.

[@odog1999]

Does this mean Ryan's turning the YT channel into a greatest hits list?

[@xPureNRG007x]

As a battleships enthusiast: when he said “…while I work on my 1:1 scale model battleship” - Ryan has now been elevated to official “hero” status in my world.

[@agskytter8977]

Every time I see a magayaght in the Mediterranean I wonder why these billionaire showoffs can't order a replica of Bismarck from Blohm&Voss in Hamburg? 😎

[@robrowe2298]

Go controversial, always a good way to attract attention. Nearly had me there. 😂

[@the-chow-hall]

Caused damage, good enough for me! GO NEW JERSEY

[@deadpass]

Love when Ryan gets all sassy. Great list and I need to get myself a 1:1 scale battleship.

[@scottcooper4391]

Where are you going to put it ? 😁

[@lreintjes9423]

What about BB Texas at Normandy targeting tanks?

[@tonystevens9278]

A good video Ryan. It does depend upon how you phrase the question? If the question is refined to specifically establish the longest range hit by one battleship upon another where both vessels are at sea and able to manoeuvre the answer will change. That being said of course pure battleship to battleship encounters in WWII were extremely rare. Another interesting question to ask might be what were the most devestating battleship' salvos of the War? Clearly, Bismarck's destruction of HMS Hood is one contender but there are also some recorded instances of several shells hitting from one salvo. HMS Warspite 's first salvo at Matapan for instance where reportedly five shells hit of the 6 that were fired.

[@shona1224]

For fun I asked CHatGPT this question and initially it came up with West Virginia as having the longest hit, I queried if Warspite was not longer and it agreed that worldwide that was seen as the longest hit, implied in Worldwide is that the first answer was not worldwide - read into that what you will. Asking about New Jersey Destroyer hit it said many historians disagree if this happened or not - it did agree the Massies hit on Jena Bart was longer but she was stationery so not so much. I am from the UK so obviously biased but I do wonder if all navies categorised a damaging shot in the same way. Just because USA logs record damage from a hit hit water but caused damage do they all do that. Also how can we be so certain who fired at who - some said well if log USA says at xx time we got hit and Log Japan at same time says we shot at that we have proof - firstly did they have a man recording hits with a watch during a battle and did this man have a watch that was set to a standard time that the enemy was also using - I think not. The other aspect of "historians" we should also consider is - are they selling a book about a particular ship, if so then inevitably there is bias in their interpretation. The same way I am biased because this list features mostly ships involving American or Japanese ships, not the Royal Navy. I feel Ryan's opening comment that it erked him (or something like that) that the longest hit was not an American ship shows immediately someone looking for a way to make it so. After all I believe the Italian navy had guns that could fire further than anyone else's - but not one Italian ship on the list - so either firing far not the issue - or by only looking at one data set to find an answer is the issue. Last question on this - would this video have been made if after compiling the data Ryan had concluded the No 1 was Yamato not NJ - I think not - and that's why all history needs to be seen as interpretation not fact.

[@charlesmaurer6214]

From Chat, I could see Libby sleeping on ship so the first tour of the day can show a sailor making his bunk.

[@adamski-l5w]

I agree that the concussive impact of near misses should be considered in the list. After all, the ships in question are engaged in mortal combat and I don’t think anyone cares about records. I reckon they cared about doing their duty and then getting home safely. I’m sure that any effective shot counts. I would define effective as a shot that degrades the enemy ship’s ability to threaten your ship or fellow ships in your squadron. By agreeing with Ryan on this point I would then suggest that for a shot to count some sort of judgement on damage done is needed.

[@stevewindisch7400]

Great work. "Come on now Reginald, let go of the trophy, you are just embarrassing yourself." ;)