Pinned post for Q&A :)

@Alex-cw3rz

5 жыл бұрын

When you mention the royal navy having the lower safety Levels to increase the number of shells they fire, how many shells could they fire a minute.

@chrishopwood6938

5 жыл бұрын

If the Nelson class had of had the engines of the Hood would it of played a bigger role in WW2?

@conradflanagan5003

5 жыл бұрын

Similar to a question in the last Drydock episode, which ship would you have rather seen preserved: HMS Warspite or USS Enterprise?

@connormclernon26

5 жыл бұрын

Drachinifel what would have happened if the Royal Navy had more destroyers (say Tribals) at the start of the war?

@redtob2119

5 жыл бұрын

Drachinifel why did the Italian fleet perform so poorly in ww2?

"Tiger, will you blow up please?" Tiger: "HMS Tiger has learned the first aspect of not being sunk: not to blow up."

@dougjb7848

2 жыл бұрын

Okay, this needs more ups.

I literally choked laughing when you said "queen Mary was somewhat more performance impaired: it exploded". The dry humor is what makes these videos so much better than normal historical videos.

@johnalexander178

Жыл бұрын

He always has a little snip or pun sume where. I wish I new what show it was, he made fun of Americans. It was the best.

@firemedic105ns

Жыл бұрын

@@johnalexander178 the one where he talks about the Mk 14 torpedoes and the long lances are filled with his humour. They are awesome

@DIVeltro

Жыл бұрын

Tiger was, I must admit, a good looking ship. A surprisingly tough one as well.

@pfrstreetgang7511

Жыл бұрын

I learned not to drink while watching Drach

@peternicks7049

9 ай бұрын

Or, in this case dry, then very very rapidly wet humour as the stability of the magazines suffers a critical existence failure

HMS Tiger studied the Russian tactics at Tsushima and marginally improved upon them. "Shoot a lot, score barely any hits, take many hits, but unlike the Russians, do not capsize and sink." Good enough I suppose.

@jwenting

4 жыл бұрын

oh, and design a binocular thrower into the flag bridge so the admiral doesn't have to go outside...

@arthas640

3 жыл бұрын

Insinuating the Russians scored any hits of note. Forget the Battle of the Philippine Sea, I think Tsushima should be "the great Pacific turkey shoot"

@HighlanderNorth1

Жыл бұрын

☑️ Quite frankly, the only useful service Tiger provided at Dogger Bank and Jutland was to act as a diversionary target to soak up some of the German shells that would've otherwise been fired at other British battlecruisers, potentially blowing up more of them.

@BB-gd2so

5 ай бұрын

😊

They trained her so poorly that she didn't know to leave her flash doors open.

@daleeasternbrat816

4 жыл бұрын

I thought of that too!

@daleeasternbrat816

4 жыл бұрын

I thought of that too!

@roryross3878

4 жыл бұрын

@Michael What class of ship was that?

@BOORAGG

4 жыл бұрын

Flash doors work when they're closed.

@roryross3878

4 жыл бұрын

@@BOORAGG One would hope so!

Drachisms Of The Day: "And her crew's gunnery was downright terrible. Even by Beatty's standards." 6:30 "Up ahead, Queen Mary was somewhat more performance-impaired, as it exploded." 8:14

@brianreddeman951

5 жыл бұрын

This video was worth a replay just for the humor.

@admiraltiberius1989

5 жыл бұрын

Generally when a ship experiences a catastrophic explosion, performance will take a dive. As will the entire ship really.

@arionerron4273

5 жыл бұрын

@@admiraltiberius1989 same seems to go for airplanes, I observe

@arionerron4273

5 жыл бұрын

Don't forget the "alloud aircraft notification systems"

@AnimeSunglasses

5 жыл бұрын

The performance-impaired one was a (under)statement worthy of Beatty himself!

"Queen Mary was somewhat more performance impaired, as it exploded..." Nothing like the dry and sardonic humor of a Brit.

@Agallizo

5 жыл бұрын

Well, that quote is kind of true, he didn't lie.

@robertf3479

5 жыл бұрын

Indeed. That's one thing I find I like about Drach's commentary.

@jb76489

4 жыл бұрын

People all over the world have this same sense of humor, stop pidgeon holing, it’s dumb

@jamesharding3459

4 жыл бұрын

jb76489 But the Brits are known for it.

@HaydenLau.

4 жыл бұрын

@@jb76489 The British are famed for the art of the understatement

Every time I hear "2 anti-aircraft guns" slated to protect a capital ship I can hear Billy Mitchell laughing through the ether.

@michaelsnyder3871

Жыл бұрын

Throughout WW1, two guns from 3" to 4" did exactly that. The RN doubled the number of heavy AA guns and standardized on four guns in the 1920s. By 1933, the RN had the heaviest AA batteries of all the Great Power navies, with the octuple 2pdr mount and the quad .50. Billy Mitchell may have been right about the power of aviation IN THE FUTURE (from 1936-1940) but until then aircraft were little threat to capital warships. And his predictions for heavy bombers and level bombing remained unfulfilled through the end of WW2.

@rinzler9171

Жыл бұрын

Everything I hear "planes > ships" I think of the Turkey Shoot, when the 3rd Gen US Battlewagons repulsed waves of Japanese formations effortlessly.

@erichammond9308

Жыл бұрын

@@rinzler9171 you do realize that the "Great Marianas Turkey Shoot" was mostly an air-to-air battle, don't you? Over 10 planes shot down by aircraft for every 1 that was shot down by US AA fire, and roughly 3 times more aircraft were lost when US submarines sank their carriers out from underneath them than were shot down by AA fire.

@bluelemming5296

Жыл бұрын

@@erichammond9308 Good point about the CAP (combat air patrol) being the best form of air defense in WW2 - especially once the Americans figured out how to do it efficiently. However, it's also important to not under-estimate the importance of ship-based anti-aircraft weapons. One of the interesting points that caught my eye when reading detailed accounts of the Royal Navy ship losses in the campaign for Crete is how often the ships (with no air support) were able to hold off the attackers and stay out of serious trouble until they started to run out of anti-aircraft ammunition - especially when they were in groups of ships that could support each other. It's also noteworthy how many air attacks missed or did no or little damage to British cruisers in the Norwegian campaign where again they didn't have air cover - but also didn't get run out of ammunition (that last is based on reading British Cruiser Warfare: The Lessons of the Early War 1939-1941 by Alan Raven). Sure there were a few effective attacks, but they were the exception not the norm. I think the ship-based weapons - whether Royal Navy or US - when good quality weapons were present in numbers and used effectively by a skilled crew - forced the Axis pilots to choose between less accurate bomb/torpedo runs and a higher probability of being hit. Being human, they would generally choose the first option, unless they misjudged matters or simply lacked the experience to understand the choice they were making. As the saying goes: there are old pilots, and there are bold pilots, but there are no old bold pilots. Late war radar controlled guns and guns firing shells with radar based fuses (these exploded when they detected the metal of a plane) only made the ship-based gunnery even more effective - though still nowhere near as good as a well-run CAP with good aircraft and experienced pilots.

@thomaszinser8714

7 ай бұрын

And how many AA guns were defending the ships Mitchell sank?

"Colonel, we've managed to avoid exploding." "Good job lads."

@knusern666

5 жыл бұрын

better than the Hood..

@brucetucker4847

5 жыл бұрын

@@knusern666 HMS Tiger never got hit by 15" shells.

@glenmcgillivray4707

5 жыл бұрын

@@brucetucker4847 Given their lack of 'training' Crews may well have kept the doors into the Magazines closed between volleys. No idea if the rumours that they were often kept open for ROF benefits are true but frankly, if they WERE their lack of 'shakedown' may have been advantageous, with bad habits not being learned.

@SvenTviking

5 жыл бұрын

Glen McGillivray The idea that magazine doors were left open in combat is ludicrous. It does not improve rates of fire as the guns were fed by hoists that involved automatically closing door systems. Neither did they store propellant outside the magazines as the hoists for the guns were inside. Everybody knew the volatility of the cordite propellant, why else was it stored in armoured magazines? Ships had exploded outside of combat, notably HMS Barham which was blown to fragments in the Medway off Sheerness. The fact is that the Battlecruisers exploded at Jutland because they were a bad idea, used incorrectly and had their thin cruiser armour penetrated by Battleship size shells which detonated in or around their propellant magazines.

@glenmcgillivray4707

5 жыл бұрын

@@SvenTviking their concept was Cruiser Hunter-killers. It wasn't a bad idea, given the global nature of the British empire at the time. The bad idea was giving them battleship sized guns without moderate protection. Any ship with battleship guns will have the potential to deal massive damage to battleships: Good. But they will take the level of damage expected to be inflicted on cruisers: Bad. Combine with increased size of magazines? Terrifying. Really should have gone for slightly up-gunned cruiser caliber weapons and had batteries of 20 or so cruiser cannons. The Germans worked out early on their battle-cruisers would likely end up facing battleships (given their naval inferiority to the British at the time): so they split the difference and gave them middling Armour and protected their magazines carefully. Still they would have lost a number of ships at Jutland if the British had shells that worked reliably... Oh yeah I should add a question to the Q and A about the differences between British and German battle-cruiser design, and where the Germans got the mass for more armor that the British could not fit without slowing their ships.

Tiger: Doesn't explode Beatty: "There seems to be something wrong with this bloody ship today."

HMS Tiger, Gunnery 1/10 Luckiness 9/10 Looks 10/10

@rwbimbie5854

5 жыл бұрын

One of the originators of Draw Aggro team player

@tawelwchgaming8957

5 жыл бұрын

hit 3 of 300.... good god, and I thought my aim sucked

@johngregory4801

5 жыл бұрын

If you're going to suck, being lucky is all that's left.

@katrinapaton5283

5 жыл бұрын

You missed... Speed 11/10

@bengoodall6935

5 жыл бұрын

Tawelwch Gaming reckon I could have done better throwing the shells myself.

"There's something wrong with our bloody ships. You there!" "Us, sir?" "Why haven't you exploded yet?" "Well, we're trying, sir. But we can't seem to annoy the Germans enough, sir." "Well, stop being durable!" "Can't help it, sir."

@KrillLiberator

5 жыл бұрын

"Well, why don't you try bloody well hitting the Germans first! Hit hard! And then Keep On Hitting! That ought to annoy them." "Err, that's not your quote, Sir..."

@darrenbennett4437

4 жыл бұрын

Brent Keller lmfao ! Sounds like a Monty Python skit :)

4 жыл бұрын

Meanwhile a Japanese naval atache is observing the Tiger fighting, noticing the distinct lack of exploding, shaking his head going "Much dishonour...."

@garethgriffiths8577

4 жыл бұрын

Hold my pint!

@robertkyle2947

3 жыл бұрын

@@KrillLiberator m

"Certainly the most beautiful warship in the world then, and perhaps ever." - John Keegan, 1988

@8:17 Exploding does have a way of effecting a fighting ships performance. (The incredibly understated humor in these videos is perhaps my favorite part)

@themadhammer3305

5 жыл бұрын

One of my favourite quotes from Drach is "Terminal existence failure"

@MottyGlix

4 жыл бұрын

* affecting

@ThePhoenix198

2 жыл бұрын

@George Phillips That would be "British Humour" 😉

HMS Tiger: takes 21 hits without exploding. Scrapped. HMS Hood: never been used in battle. Dubbed "The Unsinkable."

@robertnichols4833

4 жыл бұрын

Hood might have done better in WWI, but tragically due to lack of funds never got the urgently needed interwar refit, that would have replaced the engines and put the weight savings into better armor that all knew was needed. Instead Hood ended up facing not only a real battleship, but the brand new state of the art Bismarck, as seriously outclassed as the doomed pre-dreadnought cannon fodder at Jutland, bringing to mind another famously futile British sacrifice bunt: the suicide charge of the light brigade.

@BOORAGG

4 жыл бұрын

Hood was never considered, nor known as, 'The Unsinkable.

@CanalTremocos

4 жыл бұрын

@@BOORAGG It's very much unsinkable since the battle of denmark strait.

@b_de_silva

4 жыл бұрын

@@BOORAGG she was dubbed "the unsinkable, the mighty hood"

@BOORAGG

4 жыл бұрын

@@b_de_silva Yes, the Hood was always given great press, but she was never considered 'unsinkable' by any reputable military or naval experts. Other 'unsinkable ships included the Titanic, Yamato, and even the Bismarck herself. Every great ship seems to get that tagline. However, the Hood was a national treasure and that boast helped British morale.

"Even by Beatty's standards" now that was funny. Beatty's motto "ready fire, aim"

@deltavee2

4 жыл бұрын

I'm surprised Beatty didn't dispose of the superfluous parts and just yell Fire, since it didn't really matter where the guns were pointed. In defense of the gunners, though, they hadn't been in a shooting war for the previous 200 years and were somewhat out of practice.

@AdamMGTF

4 жыл бұрын

@@deltavee2 not out of practice...the RN never stopped being obsessive about gunnery practice. I'm trying to think when the RN would have last fought in anger before Jutland. Sure as hell less than 200 years. The opium wars maybe. Or the Crimea. But still. Gunnery was always an obsession for the RN :) Beatty's take on it was just.... Wrong.

@angusmcangus7914

4 жыл бұрын

@@AdamMGTF No serious fleet engagements since Trafalgar. Read The Rules of The Game by Andrew Gordon. It recounts in great detail the defects of the RN at Jutland and in the years leading up to it. Beattie comes across as a classic narcissist.

@michaelmcneil4168

4 жыл бұрын

> Beatty's motto "ready fire, aim" ....miss, duck, fuuuuuu... FTFY.

@jamesberlo4298

4 жыл бұрын

@@michaelmcneil4168 & How does my Uniform look?

A piece of tiger’s machinery still exists at the internal fire museum in cardigan, Wales I think it might be the last pieced of working machinery that was present at Jutland

@williammurdoch468

5 жыл бұрын

Surely there is something remaining on HMS Caroline?

@lol62002

5 жыл бұрын

William Murdoch I think it’s the only like fully operational piece of machinery its a steam powered dynamo. There could be other pieces of kit about but I’m not sure in what state of operation they are in

@williammurdoch468

5 жыл бұрын

@@lol62002 I see.

@internalfire

4 жыл бұрын

One of the four 14 ton Browett & Lindley generating sets installed on Tiger was in store for many years at Greenwich, now in steam at Internal Fire Museum in Wales. It was removed when Tiger was scrapped and worked for many years at Storthes Hall Hospital.

"The end result was, by all accounts, a fairly good-looking ship . . ." He says about the prettiest battlecruiser ever. Gotta love that British understatement. ;D

@yankeesandy2545

2 жыл бұрын

I personally think HMS Hood looks better

@5000mahmud

2 жыл бұрын

@@yankeesandy2545 Agreed, Tiger IMO looks like the Kongo, nothing really stands out about it to me.

@kkang2828

Жыл бұрын

Nah reconstructed Renown is the best looking British BC

@MaxCroat

4 ай бұрын

Well, since it's all subjective, no. Lots of contenders for that spot.

“3” allowed aircraft notification systems”. :P

@johnandrews1334

5 жыл бұрын

I died at that point lol

@ThePhoenix198

5 жыл бұрын

Must admit I heard it as "a loud aircraft notification systems"

@jason12680

5 жыл бұрын

@@ThePhoenix198 i did too

@mojobudgiekayakfishing

5 жыл бұрын

@@jason12680 - ahh that makes a lot more sense!

@catfish552

5 жыл бұрын

I wonder if they're related to the German Heeresanklopfgerät of WWII.

5:15 The tripping over words followed by a “blaughhh” has to be one of the most relatable things I’ve seen on KZread. I do the same all the time.

Being early to a Drachinifel video is something to be treasured.

@badcarbon7624

5 жыл бұрын

Not sure on the links policy due to the new EU laws, but British Pathe has a short clip of the Tigers namesake cruiser joining the fleet in 1959.

I love that Drach keeps in little bloopers like the one at 5:15 . It adds levity, making his presentations so much more human and approachable :)

HMS Tiger "I may be terrible at everything, but by God, I'll do it so badly you cant even kill me" So basically the ship version of Darkness from Konosuba

@TheLiamis

4 жыл бұрын

Lol she Intentionally missed her shots just so she could take more hits.

@markgray3648

3 жыл бұрын

Oh, would those terrible German ships had their wicked way with her?

@jacobrzeszewski6527

3 жыл бұрын

@@TheLiamis No, she actually had terrible luck (which exists in Konosuba), which allowed her to have such incredible strength. Just like how Aqua’s incredible magic power was offset by her rock-like intelligence.

Drach, even your short videos are far more entertaining than 99.99% of everything on cable and broadcast TV. Your longer videos are well worth the wait. So don't worry about it, we'll be here with baited breath.

Ship with rubbish training becomes a training ship

@benbaselet2026

5 жыл бұрын

Perfect, just show the history of the ship and say "Don't do this".

@hymanocohann2698

5 жыл бұрын

Learn on junk, you learn to adapt, kids in early days of autos, tinkered around all the time, WWII rolls around and Uncle Sam had a base of mechanic minded recruits.

@benbaselet2026

5 жыл бұрын

@@hymanocohann2698 There's wisdom to that, but I think learning the basics of "everything" works on junk, learning to be very good at your very specific job is better taught at the correct target environment. Driving schools giving you a new Audi when your first car will be a banged up old honda... yikes.

@pickeljarsforhillary102

5 жыл бұрын

@@hymanocohann2698 In WWIII if we ever need Virtual Signaling Corps we can thank twateer.

@rimmipeepsicles1870

5 жыл бұрын

The irony, right

Tiger's tiger symbol 12:08 looks like it's screaming in terror instead of roaring. Presaging maybe?

Me: Behold HMS Tiger the greatest Battlecruiser of all Time Guy: Why's that? Me: She wasn't blown to pieces after taking a single hit

@Lgs260495

4 жыл бұрын

Seydlitz: Am I a joke to you?

@ogscarl3t375

4 жыл бұрын

@@Lgs260495 Yes... ;)

@ryanovski

4 жыл бұрын

@@Lgs260495 HMS Tiger- "Yes you are...."

@chrisoddy8744

Жыл бұрын

HMS Renown - stares disapprovingly

Let's be honest; at Jutland Tiger's abysmal gunnery wasn't upped by hitting Seydlitz. Seydlitz had a magnetic attraction to naval cannon shells, EVERYONE hit Seydlitz.

"Aircraft Notification Systems". Perfect description!

Drach Please do a video on what ever Topic that you want to do . Your vids are great and we enjoy them . How is that for a request ? Thank you for your efforts .

2:49 'Iron Dukes on steroids" Hahahah Lol 😂🤣😄 That made me laugh

@wonkagaming8750

4 жыл бұрын

Got me too

"Sir, we've been hit!" "Ahhhhhhh shit..................... why haven't we exploded yet?"

Any time you spend producing these videos is much appreciated

The retention of HMS Tiger would have resulted the scraping of HMS Iron Duke. The Washington Naval Treaty disposal schedule lists were based on the age the ships ships. Thus the question would be whether HMS Tiger had a better chance of reactivation in the late 1930s than the historically retained HMS Iron Duke. Historically HMS Tiger's 13.5-inch guns and mounting were retained and still in storage in 1939. HMS Iron Duke was still carrying out 13.5-inch shoots as a gunnery training and trials ship until 1939.

@RedXlV

5 жыл бұрын

The alternate possibility would've been retaining both Tiger and Revenge, but relegating Revenge to the training ship role. Though it would've been interesting if Tiger had retained instead of Iron Duke, and then both she and Hiei both got restored to full combat capacity after Japan pulled out of the treaties.

@geoffreymowbray6789

5 жыл бұрын

@@RedXlV HMS Lion and HMS Princess Royal had seen hard war service. Post war the naval powers agreed that 1 year of war service equated to 2 of peacetime wear and tear on hull but more importantly on machinery. All of the 13.5-inch gun battle-cruisers had nothing like the combat power of the Revenge class battleships. The 13.5-ch gun battle-cruisers were older and with exemption of HMS Tiger were in need of major mid life refits to met fleet needs of the 1920s. The 1930 London Naval Treaty saw the destruction of the reserve fleet with 8 light cruisers, over 50 destroyers, ?submarines going for scrap, and the battle fleet reduced from 18 to 15 battleships and battle-cruisers. Also four 7.5-inch gun cruisers were to be disarmed as training cruiser. The Admiralty was concerned with the loss of the two 13,5-inch battleships from the "Boys" training squadron as 20 percent of peace time initial enlistment of the RN was 15 and 16 year olds.

HMS Tiger: "Ha! Who says I'm a bad shot? I say those who shoots me seventeen times but fail to sink me are the ones who are bad shots!"

@ThePhoenix198

2 жыл бұрын

That only stands up if Tiger had sunk 2-3 ships with her 2-3 hits.

I greatly enjoyed the speculations at the end of the video. Thanks once again. Can't wait for the next ones!

Regarding Tiger vs Scharnhorst and Gneisenau, the reason for Admiral Lütjens refusing to engage Convoy HX 106 because it was escorted by Ramilles wasn't that he doubted his ships' ability to take Ramilles. It was that he was under very strict orders from Hitler not to engage capital ships at all. The same would've applied to Tiger. Had Lütjens defied those orders and tried to fight Ramilles, even given the inferior guns on his ships I suspect that he would've won that engagement. He did after all outnumber Ramilles 2 to 1, and his ships were 11 knots faster and also better armored. Thus, I disagree with the assessment that Tiger would've had less utility than an R-class early in the war. Even if she had a very limited refit, her speed would've allowed her to be used in duties other than just convoy escort. And Revenge herself did little of any importance during WW2, so discarding her to keep Tiger (or keeping her as the training ship instead of Iron Duke) would've been no big loss. And in terms of the logistics of keeping the BL 13.5-inch Mk V gun in service for a single ship? That would be somewhat of an issue, but remember that those guns were still in use as land-based artillery in railway mounts as well. Three of them were brought to Dover as part of the battery of cross-channel guns. So it's not as if Britain discarded their stores of shells and charges for guns of that caliber. And if Tiger's refit came in the late 1930s, it's possible that she could've had her 13.5-inch guns replaced with the same BL 14-inch Mk VII used on King George V. IIRC, those guns were designed so that they could work with the turrets, cradles, and shell hoists of the 13.5-inch Mk V, because initially there was consideration of using Iron Duke's remaining turrets to test-fire the new gun design.

@RedXlV

5 жыл бұрын

@Sean m Apparently Captain Hoffmann of Scharnhorst suggested to Lütjens the idea of using his ship as a decoy to draw Ramilles out of position (a fairly low-risk strategy, given Scharnhorst's superior armor and extreme speed advantage) so that Gneisenau could get within range to attack the convoy while remaining outside Ramilles' gun range. Given that Ramilles failed to identify Scharnhorst, it's possible that they didn't realize Gneisenau was also present, in which case such a tactic would've had some chance of success. There also would've been the option of simply trying to bombard the convoy from long range. The 28cm SK C/34 had a maximum range of 40km, though the odds of actually hitting a moving target at that range would be near zero. The BL 15"/42 Mk I in an older non-refitted mount like on Ramilles was limited to 20 degrees elevation and a maximum range of 26km with super charges (which I don't think had been issued yet in 1941) or 21km without them. So if they stayed at least 22km away, they could've fired on the convoy without Ramilles being able to respond. The accuracy at such ranges would've been low (though Scharnhorst *had* a year earlier scored a hit on Glorious from around 24km away), but it also would've been low-risk (at least so long as they didn't stick around long enough for reinforcements to arrive).

@brianprice544

5 жыл бұрын

RedXlV t

@TheMadNorsky

5 жыл бұрын

uh, guns on Scharnhorst/Gneisenau not inferior, just smaller diameter. After war testing of that gun by Allies showed the 28cm armor piercing shell was almost identical in performance to the 38cm shells as used on Bismarck and Tirpitz. It's a giant rifle so to speak, and ballistically, the 28cm as used in this case was a very fine performing gun.

@MaxCroat

4 ай бұрын

@@TheMadNorsky I don't know the exact numbers on those particular guns, but of course a huge factor is when the gun was designed. The 11 inch guns on the Scharnhorsts and Deutschlands were probably much better than WW1 German 11 inch guns, simply because they were of a much newer design. Apparently the Americans found out during testing that their new 12 inch guns (designed for the Alaska class) were about on par with the old 14 inch guns on their old "standard" battleships. And that is also a considerable difference in caliber, yet the new guns were simply more potent in general than old guns of the same caliber.

Now this is why I watch this channel!

That title though😂

Well done as allways my friend. Keep them coming, as this old Hippie loves your take on Naval ship history! :-)

Let's not forget that 1940s Kongou were classified as Fast Battleships due very extensive reftis (including increased hull armor) when Tiger would as it was mentioned in best case scenario received Renown treatment which would still put her in disadvantage in duel with her Japanese more heavy armored cousins.

My great grandad served on Tiger. I found a couple of his journals from that time in my aunts house while we were clearing it out after she passed.

The loss of the HMAS Perth and the USS Houston pin the Sunda Straight would be a story of heroic death against impossible odds.

I never get tired of the intro.

Outstandingly interesting. Thanks Drach

As I have posted before, the loss of three battlecruisers at Jutland was the result of almost suicidal ammunition handling processes as addressed by Brown, Friedman and Hobbs. None of three were destroyed by shells reaching the magazines. Beatty after Dogger Bank thought that a few more hits would have slowed the German battlecruisers enough to finish them off. Note that none of the battlecruisers (or their sisters) that blew up at Jutland blew up at Dogger Bank. Beatty initiated a policy in Battlecruiser Squadron of boosting the rate of fire by placing ready ammunition (shells and powder bags OUT of their stowage cans) in the turret, the handling room and outside the magazine. The result, with the flash doors left open and even wired open, was a powder trail from the turrets through the barbettes to the magazines. Even a partial penetration or spalling of heated fragments from the turret or barbette could have set off the train. This situation was covered up during the war and in the official reports and histories, only coming out as the 50 year rule on security of government documents expired. There was nothing wrong with the ships and their designs. A detailed review of range and bearing between the British ships and German ships shows that none the of German hits blamed for the exploded ships should have fully penetrated armor decks, but could have gotten partial penetration on turret roofs or barbettes. HMS Tiger was the one ship that refused to follow the squadron policy and maintained proper ammunition handling procedures, which gave the turret and magazine crews time to respond to the crisis. Against the German 28cm and 30.5cm guns (but not 38cm) at the same bearing and range scenario, even the HMS Renown and Repulse would have been reasonably safe from a magazine hit. Once rebuilt after the war with 9" belts and reinforced decks, they could have, with Tiger, been able to close with the "Kongos" in the Far Eastern war the RN planned for from 1919-1936 and badly hurt them, though they might have taken some severe damage from the Japanese 14" guns outranging them after their first rebuilds (the British turrets had 20 degree elevation and the Japanese at least 33), especially if the Japanese seized air superiority or supremacy over the battle line allowing for aerial spotting. The Japanese could have opened at 33,000 yds while the British were limited to not much more than 25,000 yards. Truthfully, unless rebuilt along the lines of the HMS Renown, HMS Tiger would have been a liability against the Japanese from 1933 on, so scrapping her in 1931 after the London Treaty was not such a loss.

I have always admired British BC's, not so great action records, but some of the finest looking ships built. And lets face it, a lot of darn cool names also!

Before I get one minute into this post I feel the need to express my appreciaton for all your work and scholarship ( was that a unintentionarry pun (?)., I hope not. Regardless, I find your work to be entrancing. Although I am not a rabid consumer of naval history/nonmenclature and do not find it EXTREMELY fascinating, I do find your work to be precise, matter-of-fact and sometimes enthralling. Please, keep up the good work, have a good life beyond this, eternally gratefull, Murray.

spent 4 years in united states navy on aircraft carrier really enjoy your presentation on defferent ships thank you.

Her exploded sisters, were caught with their doors open, ignoring "safety" in order to get more shots off really can blow your ship up.

@Marc83Aus

5 жыл бұрын

When only 1% of your shells are hitting why even try firing faster.

@davidtong2776

5 жыл бұрын

@@Marc83Aus: The simple reason is that historically, the side with the greatest volume of fire wins, land or sea battles. But does appear that the Battlecruisers lost that day were keeping their "Flash Tight" doors open to increase their rate of fire. Because of this a hit on the turret could and did flash down to the main magazines.

@kenoliver8913

4 жыл бұрын

Its directly because of the RN's reverence for tradition - "rate of fire won the day at Trafalgar (as it did), so rate of fire will win the day in 1916". In aid of reloading speed, not only were blast doors left open but cordite charges were left lying around on turret floors. I suspect Tiger's officers despaired of their gunner's skills and so said "OK lads, slow and steady will do".

@davidtong2776

4 жыл бұрын

@@kenoliver8913 Its all well and good until your, blows up.

She sounds like me in wows. Line up a perfect shot, 1 round veers off to the left the other to the right. 300 shots later a cruiser accidentally runs into one of my stray shells. I survive the round with 3%hp

Thumbed up for the description alone :)

One of history's inexplicable mysteries: Why was Beaty not court-martialled and shot for treason? There is a level if incompetence that is just inexcusable.

@charlesfollette2655

4 жыл бұрын

Failures from higher ranking officers are often treated with no punishment or promotion, history proves this

HMAS Australia would be quite a good ship to cover. (No bias at all)

@yeetspageet6707

5 жыл бұрын

Jurassic Aviator either

An entertaining and educational episode, as usual. Well done and thank you Sir. Please consider, perhaps as a Drydock question, why was Beatty not cashiered by the Admiralty? In each of the Battle Cruiser actions there was a massive screw up that cost the Royal Navy dearly. Allowing unsafe ammunition handling practices is not only incompetent, but criminal. No USN officer in command, who managed to survive Jutland and Dodger Bank would have had a career future.

@colinmartin2921

2 жыл бұрын

Possibly because Beatty was a flamboyant public figure, who was very aggressive, which played out well with the public. Maybe Beatty should have been more obsessed with accuracy rather than rate of fire.

@bazza945

Жыл бұрын

Beattie had high connections.

This guy is incredible !!… Thank you.

Very interesting. I enjoyed your suppositions about the Tiger if she had survived until WW2.

One of my favorite British Warships. It's very cool, that you tried to predict a possible future for the Tiger. She was upgraded from the Lion class, because of the Kongo class and a one vs one would have been very cool.

Fantastic video as always....I've always liked the Tiger class. Beautiful lines and a surprisingly durable design. It's a shame she wasn't retained but that could be said for alot of ships from that era. As someone with OCD that rear turret layout does give me a fit.

Now somewhere, I think it was one of Massie's books, I read that Tiger had a reputation as a repository for every deserter, defaulter, and attitude case. Strange, if true, that they would put all the bad apples on the sleekest, most modern unit.

@glennsimpson7659

5 жыл бұрын

When she was due to be manned, the RN was fully stretched with war manning of existing ships, and so Tiger had to take what she could get, which was the depot sweepings, and the discipline cases recently released from the brig. Only by paying off an existing big ship could a better quality crew have been found.

@roryross3878

4 жыл бұрын

So arguably the most rational warship crew afloat?

A certain Admiral reportedly muttered: 'There seems to be nothing wrong with this bloody ship today.'.

hello Drachinifel do you think you are going to make a video on the Ise class battleship but with the late war version ? Have a nice day :-)

"...Not exploding on the job." Well. You know British Battle-cruisers and their ammo storage... *Sweats nervously as tomorrow is the 78th Anniversary of The Battle of the Denmark Strait.*

@bkjeong4302

5 жыл бұрын

tobias GR3Y That one was just bad luck, not bad ammo storage or bad design.

Thourghly enjoyed the video , thanks.

5:14 I love that he keeps these in.

Q&A I've got 2 questions. 1. could you do a video on the Diddo class vs Atlanta class 2. Portholes on capital ships. Were they there there due to the lack of air conditioning?? Or were they there for some other reason??

@AdamMGTF

4 жыл бұрын

1. Do you mean Dido? 😂 2. Bloody good question sir! Worth putting in the Q&A post of a newer video so it may get answered!?

Always thought HMS Tiger was the prettiest of the Dreadnought Era BBs and BCs...

@AdamMGTF

4 жыл бұрын

Ironically she would wonder what the bleeding heck a BB or a BC was... Unless you mean a Ball Bareing? BC can't be the British commonwealth, was still the empire when she was launched 😂

@renown6386

4 жыл бұрын

Repulse and Renown looks much much better than her , but she was really fine and amazing indeed

@ussdesmoines1920

4 жыл бұрын

Adam Bainbridge BB is battleship BC is battlecruiser

Such a lovely looking ship

Would love to see a video on the USS Helena which was sunk at Pearl and then repaired

Turret layout is pretty similar to the kongo class... at least from my own memory of that class

@katrinapaton5283

5 жыл бұрын

The Kongos were designed by George Thurston, a British naval arcitect, and the Kongo was built in the UK. Like the Tiger I guess they were designed along the lines of an improved Lion.

I always thought it was a mistake to scrap Tiger. One valuable factor on the WWII naval battlefield which is extremely hard to upgrade is speed. One on one a modernized Tiger was a match for a Scharnhorst or a Kongo. Her 8 gun broadside vs 6 on Renown make her shell weight landed similar and having better odds of scoring hits. I assume by the 1940s the training issues would be sorted out 😉 She was also the equal of Hood in her lines, perhaps prettier. That’s not worth much in a fight but she’d look nice in a parade.

@joemaloney1019

2 жыл бұрын

Armed with modern 14 inch guns that were designed to fit her gun mounts and given modern machinery and dual purpose secondary guns she would have been a valuable addition to the RN of WW2.

Great video, KZread now has ads, they seem to think I may be interested in Fabletics. Delusional algorithms.

When you have time I would be grateful if you could review the scrap iron flotilla. Regards

All good stuff Waiting on part 2 3 and 4 of the 2d Pacific fleet. Ahhhhhh those 2,000 opium laced smokes I had a great uncle who was with the great white fleet and have a few old pictures 2 being 70 m.m. type one showing part of the fleet in china with Chinese gun boats at the harbor entrance guns pointed at the fleet. Let's see 2 river gun boats vs a few battle ships one British one French. Well symbolic I guess

1:30 now I'm just wondering how many British ship I could be playing in but they may have them be premium 🤔

Also love your vids although I'm new but I like em keep it up

5:15 WOW THIS IS THE FIRST IVE EVER HEARD YOU SLIPPED! What a magical moment for me...

I'm content with this being my birthday present lol

@kevg3320

5 жыл бұрын

Congrats on another full lap around our Solar System!!

@rimmipeepsicles1870

5 жыл бұрын

Cheers on accomplishing another seasonal series. A long and happy life for you!

Are you planning on covering HMS New Zealand? She had quite an interesting and charmed life, not to mention some national pride value for Kiwis such as me.

In 1943 there were a number of battle class destroyers built that had well armered turrets and were capable of a good thirtyfour knots. In the very early sixties i served on one of these for three years in the med These were very really good ships and there were four of these class ships that all served in the same group forbthat perjiod of time. Would be nice to see a videomof these.

Very interesting.

If it were up to me she would have been preserved as a museum ship. Such beautiful lines. It's a real shame she was unceremoniously scrapped.

@abrahamlincoln9758

2 жыл бұрын

Are there many museum ships from this era?

Hot diggity boys, we are getting dangerously close to an actual 5-minute video!

@kamakazi339

5 жыл бұрын

Longer is always better ;)

@blackrabbit212

5 жыл бұрын

@@kamakazi339 That's what she said.

@a.morphous66

5 жыл бұрын

kamakazi339 Well, sometimes, longer means it’s pencil-thin and you get the same amount out of that length as if you’d just compressed its mass into a short and thick one. However, Drach seems to have something of a universal thickness that never changes no matter how long it gets. Oh, sorry, what I meant to say was “Haha, dick joke.”

0:34 - Hi Dr. Nick!

I enjoyed the speculation on what if HMS Tiger had been retained into WW2. Your points on merits of Tiger vs a R class battleship are noted. But it would have been interesting if Tiger had been kept as a gunnery training ship in lieu of HMS Iron Duke, with the guns and armour being stored like the Japanese did with the similar Kongo class Hiei, and reinstalled as war clouds loomed.

The doctrine of speed in firing over accuracy proved a deadly failure. The sailors left the safety flash doors open to speed up firing lead to huge explosions.

I have seen some speculation in forums that HMS Tiger was, or may have been, considered for purchase by Holland for its Far East fleet in the late '20s or early '30s. Does anyone have any actual information on this?

at 4:40 -- I am surprised to see sighting hods on turret "A". Tiger was unique amongst British capital ships of this era for having "A" turret's sighting arrangements through slots in its turret face. I need to look into this further!

That ship had nice lines and it took a beating so you have to give it credit. I would of liked to have been there when the opposing fleets both limped into port. What a smack down that was at Jutland.

Stunning looking ship. Would love to have seen it kept and upgraded for WWII.

@TayebMC

5 жыл бұрын

Problem was that Britain might have been on the winning side in WW1 (And WW2) but in exception to all previous wars, the winner paid the bill for the war. America refused to relieve some of the dept, which in turn handicaped Britain preparing for WW2. This was of cause deliberate as the two countries were competing as world powers.

@nnoddy8161

5 жыл бұрын

@@TayebMC irrespective of available resources (somewhat unrealistic), I think a Renown-style upgrade would have seen her a much more versatile ship than one of the R Class battleships.

@glennsimpson7659

5 жыл бұрын

If. Money was available, it would have been better spent on Hood

@nnoddy8161

5 жыл бұрын

@@glennsimpson7659 and Repulse and QE2s and the next generation of heavy cruisers and, and, and. I get your point.

6:37 The real question is: was her gunnary terrible by 2nd Pacific Squadron standards?

@papajohnloki

4 жыл бұрын

no. you're talking about the Gold Standard of terrible gunnery and Tiger failed yo hit a single ship of her own fleet.

I have read that the 14" gun used on the KGV BB's was designed to fit in the 13.5" mounts used in Iron Duke and Tiger. Depending on the supply Tiger could have been refitted with those guns.

@mrz80

8 ай бұрын

That's one I haven't read before. Interesting.

Finally!

Excellent and comprehensive history of this ship. To me it seems her bad reputation stems mainly from being rushed into service without proper training and served with an Admiral whose 'gung ho' attitude didn't allow the ship to be used to it's best potential. The German BC's get massive praise for their toughness yet you clearly show that the British BC's were equally as capable of taking punishment and it was mainly poor stowage of their propellant that cause the losses. Plus a generous slice of both luck and skill for the Germans to hit the British ships turrets. Both Lion and Tiger took almost as many hits as the much more heavily armoured German BC's yet at the end of the day were still combat capable and spoiling for a continuation of the battle the next day while the German ships were hors de combat and running for home with their tails firmly between their legs.

@RelativeGalaxy7

5 жыл бұрын

John Fisher Well given how Lion herself was extremely close to exploding twice, only to be saved by one man and basically luck, I can’t say the same for Lion. Tiger maybe but even then, the hit on ‘Q’ turret partially detonated the ready charges and easily could have spread down into the ship itself. It wasn’t just the handling of the powder itself, the powder was a lot more volatile than german or American equivalents.

@dubsy1026

5 жыл бұрын

@@RelativeGalaxy7 The idea you can have a shell explode next to a powder charge of any kind and not have it explode seems pretty ridiculous to me, I have never understood the point of the volatility argument

@bkjeong4302

5 жыл бұрын

The German battlecruisers were being shot at by more ships, and received their worst damage from Jellicoe’s battleline. Not exactly a fair comparison.

@johnfisher9692

5 жыл бұрын

@@bkjeong4302 And the British BC's were shot at by the entire German battle line earlier that day, when visibility was far better. Not exactly fair to the British is it? Put it this way. Thinner British armour Vs efficient German AP shells while Thicker German armour Vs poor quality British AP shells. Seems to me the German ships had the better deal. But the point I'm making is that the British BC's were NOT the tin cans waiting to explode as many pro German fanatics crow about. They were tough ships able to take and dish out punishment. Take volatile cordite and dangerous handling procedures out of the equation and the British BC's stood up to the test of battle. As Drach said in the video, Tiger and Lion suffered almost as many HITS! as Seydlitz and Lutzow. And while the shells were smaller those hits were from shells which functioned as they were supposed to, while the British mostly exploded on contact. The next morning the British BC's were looking for a rematch while the German BC's were toothless wrecks running for home.

@bkjeong4302

5 жыл бұрын

John Fisher Missing my point. Much of the severe damage the German battlecruisers went through was inflicted by Jellicoe’s main battleline, rather than by Beatty’s squadron. On the other hand, most of the damage done to Beatty’s ships came from German BCs, even if the German BBs were also shooting at them (the correct term for battlecruisers is CC, but I’m using BC here because you’re doing the same) You’re making this out to be a battlecruiser vs. battlecruiser conflict where the British suffered less damage than the Germans (looking at the surviving ships), regardless of who actually inflicted that damage. A better analysis would be to argue that British BBs heavily damaged German BCs without suffering much damage in return. I do agree that poor propellant handling led to the severe British losses. Lastly, please stop referring to me as a “pro-German (or other nation) fanatic”. On my other comments on this channel I have made it very clear I don’t think of German (or other) designs as being invincible or world-class if there were genuine and severe problems with them (a la “incremental armour in WWII”)

Breaking up Tiger was a crime against art!

Any chance of you doing anything on sea mines? There was quite a large one dredged near the needles recently.

At last, a video about one of the "13,5 inchers", will there be one on Orion, Iron Duke or Lion i wonder ?....Or Von der Tann, mayby !

5:15 Me on every project I had to present in front of the class

Seems a shame she was never used in WW II. She was in effect a British Kongo class ship, and the Japanese used their Kongo class extensively during the war, more so than any other class of capital ship they operated.

Can I request a review about the USN's cancelled Battleship the south Dakota class actually the only got to the point of laying its keel but by 1920's the ships construction was halted due to the Washington naval treaty the armor platings were given to other ships and also used to strengthen the Panama canal and the existing 16"/50 caliber guns were transferred to the Us army for use as coastal defense batteries