USS Evarts - Guide 376

[@Drachinifel]

Pinned post for Q&A :)

[@bkjeong4302]

If you had to serve on any ship that was lost with all hands, which ship would you choose to maximize your chance of defying the historical statistic?

[@VintageCarHistory]

How common was it for small navy ships to enter civilian service after WWII?

[@limeguy36]

Say a fictional nation in the South Pacific with a good bit of cash wants to buy the incomplete hulls of the Bayern and Mackensen classes along with a tenative request for Bayern and Barden around the end of the first World War. The nation has a mostly neautral relationship with both the British and Germans, with a few previous ship orders going to the British. How much of this request would they realisticly get filled? The plan for the ships would be either have them completed in British yards to slightly modified designs or made seaworthy enough to make it to the Pacific.

[@nikujaga_oishii]

How common is it for interwar ships outside major navies (e.g. those operated by Swedish, Polish, Argentine, Spanish navies etc) to be fitted with relatively modern ASW or AAW gear of the time like hydrophone or centralized AA fire control systems? Were major countries willing to sell those on their export designs?

[@unryumaru2095]

Had the Germans been able to make their reload mechanisms compact enough to fit behind the guns, could the Scharnhorst-class have been armed with 14" 3-gun primary turrets?

[@stevewyckoff6904]

Oh boy, an open bridge for service in the North Atlantic, won't this be fun for December convoy runs.

[@davidmcintyre8145]

The reason for this was that using the best sensor then available the Mk1 human eyeball it was much much easier to spot surfaced U Boats at night which was when U boats preferred to attack convoys from an open bridge

[@Paludion]

That sounds like a specification requested by some bureaucrat in the Admiralty who never had to go in the North Atlantic or north of Scandinavia, or even went to sea in winter.

[@davidmcintyre8145]

@@Paludion No it was as a result of experience in WWI.

[@davidmcintyre8145]

@@Paludion Many of the upper echelons of the admiralty particularly those who drew up the specifications for new classes had been active service officers in WWI quite possibly in destroyers

[@jamesbuckner4791]

​@davidmcintyre8145 yup at least 2 were Destroyer squadron leaders

[@S0RGEx]

The Evarts-class were the only "short hull" DEs, as they had a length of only 289 feet while all subsequent classes measured in at 306 feet. And those 17 feet could make more of a difference than one might think. I found this story while doing my deep dive into the history of USS England: On the night of April 8, 1944, three DEs were sailing through rough seas en route to Espiritu Santo. Two "long hull" Buckley-class, USS England and USS George (who would go on to be an important and rather interesting 'character' in England's sub killing spree the following month), and the Evarts-class USS Seid; with England's captain, Walton Pendleton, serving as OTC. Pendleton was in a rush to get to Espiritu Santo since England had a boiler cleaning availability, so the DEs were making 18-20 knots through the choppy seas. England and George were handling the swells just fine, Seid not so much. Around 2000 that night, Seid's captain Henry Vaughn, asked Pendleton if they could slow down to 13 knots, which Pendleton denied. Around 2015, Vaughn again requested they reduce speed, since Seid was now in danger of breaking longitudinals. Pendleton responded, *"Tell him 'bullshit.'"* England's executive officer, John Williamson (who, if you know England's story, you know is a fucking wizard when it comes to ASW and all things DEs), knew Vaughn was a competent skipper and that Seid was a short-hull, and interjected, convincing Pendleton to at least let the three ships proceed independently. So finally, at 2041, they went their separate ways. So England sped ahead to Espiritu Santo alone, though to his credit, Pendleton spent much of the following day waiting to see that Seid arrived in one piece. Which she did, much to his relief, albeit with three broken longitudinals. Seid's war diary noted that this was the third time she'd experienced something like this, but upon inspection, she was found to be seaworthy, though some of her welds were weak and had to be re-welded. So yeah. Don't know what the point of me sharing that was, guess I just like blabbing about DEs and USS England.

[@BobSmith-dk8nw]

Yeah ... sometimes things like that can make a real difference ... .

[@markmaki4460]

I often wonder if the teaming of England and George by virtue of their name associations (think St. George, cross of St. George) was deliberate on the part of someone up the chain in USN.

[@mahbriggs]

An interesting little vignette!

[@richardschaffer5588]

I seem to recall that the RN was troubled by the stoutness/seaworthiness of USN ships serving in the North Atlantic. CVEs especially were redone by the RN I hope Drach can find the time to do a video on those CVE refits!

[@myparceltape1169]

The wrong kind of waves.

[@marcbondi8462]

One can do nothing but admire the men who went to sea and fought on destroyers of all types during WW2. Living conditions were primitive and they not only had to fight the enemy, but the sea trying to dispatch them as well.

[@truthboomertruthbomber5125]

Have you read “Little Ship - Big War” ? A great book by a plank holder on DE343. Built in Orange Tx.

[@bullettube9863]

My father served aboard a Cannon class DE, (DE 188 O'Neil ), which had a triple torpedo launcher. My dad always said he was in the "real" navy! Though DEs were not intended for anything except convoy duty they frequently did just about everything a destroyer could do, including scaring away Japanese battleships! No doubt the Japanese knew of their ferocious reputation! The O'Neil even stopped a kamikaze from hitting the USS Tennessee off Iwo Jima, which left a nasty scar on her bow.

[@aidanfarnan4683]

I love the minimalist design of this and the flower class. Anti-sub frigates are so interesting to me.

[@micnorton9487]

Yeah they're small but fast and versatile,, any WoW "admiral" can imagine commanding a carrier or a battleship or a strategic missile submarine,, but who are the active workhorses of any fleet, any winning fleet that is, and with these smaller types of ships a captain or an xo can really stand out...

[@mahbriggs]

@micnorton9487 Yes, in the Royal Navy the Destroyers were where one made their career!

[@micnorton9487]

@@mahbriggs Agree,, the sense of responsibility would be pretty heavy and any captain would have to resist the urge to become a captain Queeg lol... I'd much prefer the command style of lieutenant Junior grade McConnell on In harm's way, where instead of chewing out the guy for not being in uniform, he says, why don't you grab your uniform you're making us look like a bunch of pirates lol....

[@Andy_Ross1962]

Later variants had steam turbine electric power as well as diesel electric. The RN ended up with around a hundred all together. Crews were sent to the USA to train on one ship set aside for the purpose then they brought their own ship back across the Atlantic as part of a convoy. Their first stop was in to a shipyard where they received work to change them to RN standards, this included Removal of bunks and fitting of hammock rails, (More comfortable on a small ship and freed up a lot of space for more furniture like chairs and tables on the mess decks) Extra depth charge 'K' launchers and rails plus more depth charge stowage and changes to to bring electrical and mechanical systems in to line with RN standards.

[@glennsimpson7659]

In some cases they also removed the ice cream maker, much to the disgust of the British sailors.

[@rossswenson532]

There is something refreshing about ship designs on a tight budget. You can't have everything the wrestling about what is needed gives the result a simple economical ship.

[@mahbriggs]

Not just a monetary budget, but a time and shipyard budget as well! They needed them in a hurry and had to balence shipyard capability with everything else that they needed!

[@rossswenson532]

@mahbriggs You are absolutely right.

[@fredgilligan7982]

My dad served on the USS Evarts (DE-5) in 1944-1945. Great to see more information on this type of ship.

[@johngamlin2802]

Thank you for posting this info on the USS Evarts Class DEs! My father served on the USS Donaldson DE44 from 1944 thru 1945 in the South Pacific.

[@johngamlin2802]

Another change the British insisted on was 2 rudders as the original US design called for only 1 as with most USN ships. This was to aid with fast turning when hunting Uboats.

[@PaulHendrix-um4zt]

My father served on the Mitchell DE43 - they were in company on numerous occasions. According to my dad, the Mitchell and Donaldson raced each other on one occasion purely to see which ship was faster. Understandably, perhaps, this does not appear in the ship’s log. Don’t recall who won….

[@patrickl2195]

Always glad to hear mention of the Captain Class, one of those lost being the last ship to bare my family name.

[@AWMJoeyjoejoe]

My grandfather served on one of these. HMS Grindall (K477).

[@kpdubbs7117]

Always love learning about a new class I never knew about.

[@RCAvhstape]

That photo at 5:15 is beautiful. I love the little details like the cranes, railroad equipment, and the guy riding the bike along the dockyard at the left.

[@davidlavigne207]

Interesting in that the Evarts class DE were somewhat like the shorter 173 foot long Patrol Craft series. These had only one 3"/50 gun forward with a "Mousetrap" forward mortar bomb thrower (The American version of the much better British "Hedgehog), one single 40mm AA Gun with 3 20mm Oerlikons abaft the open flying bridge. On the fantail were 2 K-Gun Depth Charge Throwers on each beam with 2 Depth Charge Racks facing aft. The difference was only 2 diesel engines were required for a similar 18-20 knot speed, and a crew of 5 Officers and 60 enlisted sailors. My Grandfather served aboard PC-564 which was involved and heavily damaged in the Granville Raid on 8-9 March, 1945 off the Port of Granville, France. Unfortunately he was killed during the engagement with 3 Kriegsmarine Artillery Barges just south of the Channel Islands. If only they had been aboard a vessel such as the Evarts class.... I would love to do a presentation on Drach's channel about these vessels and/or the Granville Raid some day. Cheers.

[@davidlavigne207]

Thanks for the like. If you would care to do such a live podcast please reach out Drach. It would be an honor to add to your brilliant collection of naval history episodes. Love your channel. Cheers.

[@Fulcrum205]

To further exacerbate the escort shortage Clemson and Wickes were also being converted to amphibious transports, minesweepers, minelayers, and seaplanes tenders (and some subsequently converted to APDs). My cursory count was 66 conversions. Add in the 50 sent to the RN and you have 116 of the original 156 Clemsons already taken when the US entered WW2

[@ralphe5842]

The large floating crane at the five minute point in this film I believe is yd-26 a crane I worked on and made many parts for (even climbing around the rotate rollers to measure all of them) it was sold but was still in around about 2010

[@Me2Lancer]

I served on a US Navy ship DER 327. It was a converted WWII Destroyer Escort commissioned in December 1942 in Orange, Texas. Following the war, Brister was decommissioned. She was Recommissioned USS Brister DER 327 in the mid-1950s. Armament was 2, 3" 50mm gun mounts, triple torpedo mounts amidship port and starboard, a hedgehog mount between the enclosed bridge and the forward mount and 2, depth charge racks port and starboard aft. Our homeport was Apra Harbor, Guam assigned to patrol the Trust Territories of the Pacific under UN mandate. In November 1965 we began a homeward bound cruise via Sydney, Australia. After leaving Sydney we stopped in Pago Pago, Samoa. After leaving Pago Pago we embarked for a planned stop in Pearl Harbor. On arrival in Pearl Harbor orders for decommissioning were cancelled and we were ordered to proceed to the coast of South Vietnam where we patrolled from the DMZ to just south of Cambodia in the Gulf of Thailand. Brister remained there until 1968 when she was decommissioned.

[@chrisf4659]

I always 'like' Drach's videos before even watching them. I already know they will be great.

[@KeithFerguson-y8e]

Love your work, as a son of a sea cook I applaud you

[@RoadCaptainEntertain]

Father served aboard the USS O'Toole (DE 527) an Evarts class Destroyer Escort as a Gunners Mate 2nd class manning the aft main battery gun. Fathers ears bled for 25 years after the war and had back problems after being blown out of his gun mount and falling 15 feet to the steel deck below. The ship had quite a history but everything you find online about it seems it wasn't in the war much at all but after hearing dads accounts of where they went and what they did I have learned that the O'Toole's history is quite incomplete. Would love to see Drachinifel document O'Toole's history to right the wrong done to this ship, particularly it's ordeal as an escort for Army Convoy NY119 & the Atlantic Hurricane they encountered.

[@williamgreen7415]

Thanks!

[@a_funyun]

6 months keel laying -> completed is CRAZY

[@marckyle5895]

Almost like the Liberty ships

[@funnydaze2]

Good morning Drach!

[@guybutler5305]

I always wondered. When did the US/UK start cancelling orders of vessels that they knew would longer be needed in WW2 after the land war went full force in Europe and the war in Asia got closer to the home islands. ?

[@coryfogle5353]

While ...many...contracts for other items HAD been scaled back well before the VE day, the allied approach to Japan wasn't as clear. Nor were the military planners sure what would happen after VJ. What would the Russians do? What would China do?

[@guybutler5305]

@@coryfogle5353 thanks. Makes sense

[@tomhenry897]

When did construction of the Kentucky get stopped

[@OCCA]

My dad served on the USS Donaldson DE 44. Over one wave and under three is how he described heavy seas.

[@petestorz172]

Various marks of the 3"/50 gun were in service with the USN and USCG from 1900 to 1990. The earliest mark had a firing rate of 15-20 rpm, and a mark 22 with auto-loader had a firing rate of ... holy cow! Some designs are just so good you improve and adapt instead of replace (e.g. "Ma Deuce"). DEs were spectacular adequacy in large quantity for anti-submarine warfare. Their usage grew from convoy escort to hunter-killer task groups to escorting escort carrier task groups.

[@williestyle35]

I have to add something to the very last part of your comment. The "escort carriers" with their destroyer escorts did often form their own "hunter - killer" groups. One such group operating in the Atlantic under Rear Admiral Daniel V Gallery is the only one to capture a U boat on the high seas. They captured the U - 505 on June 4, 1944 and took her to America for research. The U - 505 now resides in her own special underground exhibition space at the Museum of Science and Industry, Chicago Ill.

[@mahbriggs]

But there were never enough of them, at least early in the war! Attempts early to form "hunter-killer" task groups failed due to a lack of numbers and how hard it was to find the submarines! Later in the war, with radio direction finding, (huff-duff), better air coverage, radar, and enough escort carriers, it became possible, but in the early days, there just weren't enough resources to form them! They didn't even have enough to adequately escort the convoys!

[@williestyle35]

@@mahbriggs this is a good point. The pre 1942 years were known as the "(first) happy times" because of the staggering success enjoyed by the U boat crews. The lack of adequate escort ships, air cover (including escort carriers), and detection equipment, had given advantage to the hunters in the unterseeboots for some time. America fully entering WWII and ramping up production of ships like we see here, ever increasing production of transports like the "Liberty ships" would help to start shifting the balance in favor of the Allies.

[@fancymclad1187]

I was just playing pacific storm last night and the evarts fascinated me. And now drach makes a vid on it.

[@leeanthony126]

Thank you drach ❤

[@scootergsp]

Another fine video, Drach. 👍

[@Joewalling68]

Can’t wait to see you at the new Jersey today!

[@SamAlley-l9j]

Thanks Drach.

[@samoilenko3887]

Good lord, we need to invest into cloning so we can clone Drach and have even more of his videos, they’re so good i’ve watched all of them and can’t wait for more!

[@painmt651]

One of the most concerning things regarding American war readiness is the total lack of ship building capacity in the USA…. We built most of the ships in WWII, but couldn’t do much today.

[@Mildly.Squeued]

And this is why politicians should be barred from any and all financial decisions regarding the building of warships at least with regard to readiness. Left to them it would be a glass of milk and a few cookies when the enemy arrived in our ports. WWII being an exception to the rule as the axis hadnt spent any real time attacking the US mainland or shipyards. Had they done so it may have been quite a different war.

[@bkjeong4302]

@@Mildly.Squeuedexplain how the Axis was going to attack the US mainland on that scale?

[@lewiswestfall2687]

Thanks Drach

[@stephennewton2223]

This mentions the 4 barrel, 1.1 inch AA weapon. I have read about it for years, but, know nothing about it. A video about it would be appreciated.

[@PaulHendrix-um4zt]

Evarts-class DEs are described as “tandem” diesel-electric drive (as opposed to the Cannon-class) but I’ve never been able to determine what this means. Two diesels nose-to-tail in a single engine room? Two diesels coupled end-to-end driving a single generator? My dad served on an Evarts-class (Mitchell, DE-43) from commissioning to de-commissioning, but I didn’t ask this question in time. I can’t find the engine room layout of these ships described in any reference books, other than that the diesels were “tandem” (not side by side).

[@jasonz7788]

Thanks drachif great work Sir

[@admiralateran2135]

Does anyone know what the ship behind is in the image at 03:40? I would say it might be a gearing, but the additional superfiring 5 inch single mount at the rear is throwing me off.

[@T_Hoog]

It's the Porter-class DD-357 USS Selfridge. The 'X' twin mount was replaced by a single to reduce weight. (Photo is NH 83887)

[@markmaki4460]

@@T_Hoog Oh yes good spotting there - i bet the single 5" was far more useful too, as it could actually elevate high enough to be truly effective for AA.

[@kimraudenbush615]

​​@@T_Hoog confirmed. I found an image of only USS Selfridge that appears to match the specified ship in 3:40. Refer to Photo 19-N-63621

[@admiralateran2135]

@@T_Hoog wow well done, that is indeed the ship thanks! I would have been searching all the wrong places!

[@johnfisher9692]

Thanks Drach Wonder just what sort of comments were made by USN officers when they saw the open bridge of these ships? Probably nothing that could be written here without getting into trouble 😉

[@kennethmorgan7949]

A great day

[@comstr]

Otherwise known as USS We Built This Yesterday

[@trickydicky2908]

The Brits obviously had a penchant for convertibles, even in warships.

[@truewarshipfan5342]

Can you talk about the SMS Brummer pls 😊

[@flaviosalatino8192]

Almost at half a Million! Really deserved I would say! Best warship porn channel

[@khaelamensha3624]

The best thing about this is saying our wife's : sorry it is Saturday I must watch my porn my war porn 😂 Rip Ian Banks author of the Culture cycle

[@marckyle5895]

It's better than the junk on cable for sure. Discovery, History etc. None of them are worth watching now.

[@bluelemming5296]

According to British military historian Correlli Barnett (e.g. The Audit of War), Britain had lots of deficiencies with respect to outdated industry, serious labour problems, and schools not producing enough engineers and scientists. Many of the facilities, for example, were too small and had outdated equipment and were not open to new ways of doing things. This probably accounts for a lot of the need to have ships like these built (and also many other ships refitted) in the USA. Barnett mentions in his books that many of these deficiencies were actually identified by an official study done in WW1 but interest in correcting the problems ended with the war and still hadn't been corrected by WW2. Of course, the USA had it's own problems (such as the torpedo debacle, and conflict of interest on the part of folks on the war production boards, the decision not to property test the P-38, the decision not to put a supercharger on the production P-39, and so forth), but in the area of general industrial and naval production seems to have done better than Britain - and not just for reasons having to do with being out-of-range of bombs. Given all these problems Britain had, it's actually quite remarkable how many of the scientific advances of the day came from Britain. For example, all the radars used on US ships during the war were ultimately derived from a British design that was freely given to the US as part of the process of firming up the friendship between the two nations.

[@williestyle35]

It was not only shipboard radar that the British "helped" America with. Airborne radar was further built up from British designs and ideas. My dad worked on land based radar... updates along side of advisors and technicians from the UK. His quartz "growing" project was absorbed into military programs and has inducted to the US Army Signal Corps (starting in summer 1943, he had been part of a "contractor project" prior to that, working from Central Florida).

[@cameronnewton7053]

Also the sheer amount of electronic warfare and navigation aids developed by the British during WW2 was staggering, "window" which was a radar countermeasure, early types of terrain sensing radar to determine whether you were flying over ocean, countryside, or city, H2S and OBOE which were both navigation aids, and the list goes on. The British scientific community *really* punched above their weight.

[@rupertboleyn3885]

British shipyards were actually more productive than US ones, due to having a more skilled workforce. However, they just didn't have enough of them, or enough manpower. Thus it made sense to buy US-made ships, especially things like Liberty ships and DEs, that could be made quickly by a relatively unskilled labour force, and have the British naval yards concentrate of larger and more complex warships.

[@williestyle35]

@@rupertboleyn3885 makes perfect logistical sense to let the Americans do mass production ships like these destroyer escorts and Liberty ships, because we kinda did specialize in building massive numbers of the same thing, over and over. The Model A and Model T Ford cars being a good example.

[@bluelemming5296]

​@boleyn3885 I would not be surprised to find the best British shipyards were extremely productive, and could do all kinds of things well that could not be done in many of the high-volume US shipyards with a less skilled workforce. Whether or not they were more productive than the best US shipyards seems like a question that would take a lot of research and number crunching to show. There are places like Bath in Maine in the USA that have an almost 400 year legacy of shipbuilding (the first English ocean-going vessel built in the Americas was built in Bath in 1607 - the pinnace Virginia, followed by a gap before ship-building returned later that century), and still builds military ships today. I'm sure one could find places in Britain with even longer histories, but what's a few centuries between friends? Corelli Barnett was looking at the entire picture, not just the top performers. He gives examples in his books of shipyard under-performers in Britain, so they certainly existed alongside the top performers. He was a British military historian so I don't think his statements are a result of anti-British prejudice, just acknowledging a problem did exist (and building on the British government study done by others in WW1, which acknowledged many of the same issues). I have no doubt the US had under-performers as well. In his naval fiction books, author and former US naval officer PT Deutermann mentions a certain US mid-atlantic naval yard in very negative terms on multiple occasions and I am sure this is based on real experience. The books (and his naval experience) are set far post-WW2 but I have no doubt the situation was the same in WW2. If one wanted to compare British and US shipyards, determining who was the best seems like a very complicated question. It's not even clear to me what 'best' means in this context. The ship designs were not identical, and a lot of parts were likely used that were imports either from other businesses in-country and from other countries, which affects metrics like total time to completion. Barnett, incidentally, gives examples of this situation, though more focused on the fighter aircraft like the Spitfire than the ships if I recall correctly - again, he's looking at the broad picture and not specifically focusing on naval issues. There are issues like welding versus rivets as well, and probably all sorts of other 'materials science' issues: these things affect production time and can complicate comparisons. Plus there is shared technology like the Bofors guns - an imported Swedish design that required a lot of reworking to turn it into something that could be mass-produced and used on both US and British ships. I think Barnett's point that having been the leader in world industrialization actually resulted in some real liabilities for Britain by the time WW2 came around is interesting. It quite surprised me, but his arguments are well written, have lots of examples, and generally make sense. If there are problems with these arguments - nobody is perfect so there might well be - then I think somebody would have to do a lot of research and number crunching to show that. From a ship-building perspective, the conclusion follows that Britain could not make full use of her available manpower because of the many problems with British industry - not necessarily in the top performers, but overall - and this was a driver (but not the only driver) for sending work to the USA. It's also worth noting that a lot of the success of US wartime production was due to the efforts of unique people like William “Big Bill” Knudsen - a Norwegian immigrant who started his career as a machine tool operator and eventually became the CEO of General Motors. He gave up that job to go work for FDR, and set up the system that would run wartime production based on his GM experience - working for the President for 1 dollar a year (quite a step down from a CEO's salary!). His willingness to work with FDR out of patriotism had a strong influence on a lot of people - especially his peers in other companies - that didn't like FDR. He did a fantastic job - his experience working both as an 'ordinary guy' and later as a 'CEO' gave him an understanding of how things worked at different levels in the production chain, insight that few other people had - and he made a lot of key decisions before things were handed over to others as a result of politics - but his decisions ultimately shaped the entire program of wartime production and had a lot to do with the overall success and efficiency of that production system. It's a bit of history that pretty much demonstrates the foolishness of certain strongly anti-immigrant people in the USA today. WW2 was very much an international effort for the Allies, with people from many different backgrounds making substantial contributions.

[@ryanwilbur3554]

Drach, can we get a Tacoma-class video?

[@Steve-vz5wv]

What's all the loose stuff that flies off the turrets when guns fire

[@gyrene_asea4133]

look at the older intros and you will see even more of the "cartridge" bags that enclosed the charges. Not all of it burnt when fired.

[@williestyle35]

I am not sure if Drachinifel has ever actually answered this himself. As the other commenter noted - this would probably be parts of the bag from the propellant charge that were not completely burned on firing. Could be some loose debris from the ships deck and such, as well.

[@mkaustralia7136]

He did in a dry dock, but I cannot guess how far back that was.

[@sugarnads]

Also paint peels off and gets flung

[@williestyle35]

@@mkaustralia7136 oh, that is good to know. Thank you

[@GaryChurch-hi8kb]

Over 300 feet was the rule to cope with North Atlantic rollers and anything shorter sucked. The U.S. Coast Guard 327's, WW2 escorts and now gone, were considered the best riding cutters.

[@alexfogg381]

Possibly stupid question, do you plan on covering the PC-415 class sub chasers? Also is a video about the USS Slater part of your plans for the future?

[@doctorshawzy6477]

my father served on hms inman

[@icaindianen]

USS Evarts is helping me find my gun.

[@JaymesEaston]

What was the British reasoning for an open bridge rather than a closed bridge?

[@S0RGEx]

Better situational awareness and Improved visibility to better spot u-boats and whatnot.

[@victorboucher675]

"Tradition" is a poor substitute for "reasoning", so the question would therefore be "Why was tradition chosen over logic?".

[@hammer1349]

I had initially mistook the 3" guns for 40mm mounts 😅

[@chpet1655]

Maybe something of their actual record as escorts would be nice ? No big deal though

[@notshapedforsportivetricks2912]

I've never heard if this class of escort before. They certainly demonstrate the advantages of keeping it small. I mean, six weeks on the stocks! You couldn't get a Toyota delivered that quickly

[@brianpate7107]

Yeah, it was particularly hard to get Toyotas during WWII. 🙂

[@marckyle5895]

@@brianpate7107 Especially since they were called ToyoDa (D is not really captialized) at the time. They made stuff for the IJA and also used allied prisoners as slave labor.

[@brianpate7107]

@@marckyle5895 Interesting. I wasn't aware of the name change.

[@bf1701]

"...sent to Britain and entered service as the Captain class..." That choice of name feels *extremely* cursed. 🙃

[@marckyle5895]

Imagine being Captain Captain of the HMS Captain!

[@kennethhanks6712]

The "Captain" class for the Brit DEs not a referent to the ill fated early turret ship "Captain" but to the scheme where they were all named for notable past RN captains (Blackwood, Torrington, Balfour, etc).

[@timwilliamanderson]

You’d really have to have BDE to operate these

[@jasonebone6464]

This is the first time I think the first word of the video was whilst. 😋

[@lukedogwalker]

Interested to know why Cochrane was so keen that antisubmarine escorts should have torpedoes.

[@Easy-Eight]

Wonder how many subs they sank?

[@robertmoyse4414]

What would anyone called Cochrane know about fighting at sea?

[@sourcreamandcurtains]

This is uncanny. Did you speed up the audio by 110% ?

[@richardjmcguire-zw1cw]

Wow

[@joemaloney1019]

Two props/ rudders?

[@ROBERTN-ut2il]

2 and 1

[@kennethhanks6712]

All the sources I have found list the Captain (Buckley/Evarts in US parlance) class frigate/DE to have twin rudders with their twin screws which gave them an excellent turning circle diameter of between 280 to 350 yds at 16-18 knot speeds-excellent for sub hunting!

[@johngamlin2802]

2 props and 2 rudders. I found a copy of the US Bureau of Ships design doc to confirm this as was demanded by the British.

[@Wolfeson28]

USS Wyffels - I mean, if anyone's looking for a subtly naval-themed pet name.😁

[@XRGisXIN]

HMS Pegasus Hydrofoil Gunship, please!

[@merlinwizard1000]

42nd, 24 February 2024

[@jayfelsberg1931]

Robert Carny was an innovator, as you can see from the idea for DEs. His best known role during WW was Halsey;s Halsey' chief of staff, when he was was Halsey;s Hal chief of staff, when he was responsible or keeping Bull sober and alert. I recommend Evan Thomas' "Sea o Thunder" to show what a challenge this was. He later servedd in an important command in NATO and as CNO. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Carney

[@elig7563]

@trevor_evarts , FYI I guess

[@carloschristanio4709]

The world is lucky that americans forgot what america was

[@rikk319]

?

[@robertbertagna1672]

Thanks!