I actually got to tag along with Ryan and his crew as they recorded this. Now I get to see the finished version!

@craigbathurst1185

2 жыл бұрын

Do they take a lot of B roll film?

@robertspears6752

2 жыл бұрын

I'm jealous lol ryan seems like good people very smart

@alanbare8319

2 жыл бұрын

@@craigbathurst1185 It was less than 2 minutes for the hangar and practically none in the print shop. Those were the only two I was able to catch them recording.

@alanbare8319

2 жыл бұрын

@@robertspears6752 He's very personable, was even willing to pose for pictures with those of who hung out while he and his crew were recording. He seems to have done a lot research on the Salem before he came to visit.

@AirtimeAerial

2 жыл бұрын

@@alanbare8319 Ryan seems to be an immensely learned guy in warships overall, especially U.S.N. boats. Believe he's current prez of the museum ships assn too so prob knows more than the avg person about Salem just off the cuff. The 'personable guy' delivery from a great team thats truly into their work is perfect for the subject matter and why I think they've built a helluva channel. And it looks like Salem has a great cast of characters as well! Keep up the great work gang! 🎉💯

"...you don't want to spend too much time in this during a Murmansk convoy run." There goes Ryan again, taking all the fun out of bobbing in the Barents Sea in December

I get a kick each time Ryan uses the "curator" as a unit of measure. Keep it up buddy, you make interesting & entertaining content.

The tool board, I’ve heard it called “Shadow boxed” they do it for working on aircraft so you know you didn’t leave a screwdriver inside an engine cowling or inside the cockpit where it could jam flight controls.

The main reason for the tool silhouettes is so that anyone can instantly know when a tool is missing. In a worst case scenario a missing tool could be in a flight control system or engine that would down the aircraft midflight. The names on the silhouettes let everyone know what tool we are supposed to be looking for in a missing tool scenario.

@michaelmoorrees3585

2 жыл бұрын

Reminds me of high school shop class in the 1970s. It was a common feature.

@JustinSabourin

2 жыл бұрын

Also the norm for absolutely everything in a prison. Tools, medical stuff, weapons, kitchen equipment...

@MrDgwphotos

2 жыл бұрын

To borrow a phrase: "Be FOD free!"

@Zodliness

2 жыл бұрын

Also know as a 'Shadow board' like those used in prisons to ensure workshop tools get returned. Each prisoner would be issued with a numbered tag that corresponds to the issued tool and is written into a journal. I employed the same effective retrieval method to ensure my expensive electronics measuring equipment and tools get returned in my workshops. 👍🏻‍

@Zodliness

2 жыл бұрын

@@JustinSabourin Great in my workshop too, where everyone just wants to borrow something, until you need it and have to ask for it back. 🤣

I'm impressed with the amount of thought that went into the design of the Des Moines heavy cruisers. Having the aviation gas pumps surrounded by a water tank to douse any potential fire is just one example of the many innovative features to make these ships survive in battle.

@phurst4793

2 жыл бұрын

Experience gained during the war.

@alanbare8319

2 жыл бұрын

The water powered pumps used for fueling the aircraft was also genius thinking.

Great video! One almost can imagine grizzled combat veteran WW2 CPO's and warrants assigned to commission these CA's having a say in how some of the details were executed while the cruisers were still on the ways or fitting out. The innovations just smack of combat-earned wisdom.

It says a lot for the quality of construction workmanship AND of the work the yard put into laying the ship up when she was deactivated that the aircraft elevator is still working today.

I recall reading that one disadvantage of the rear hanger was that they placed a large resonant chamber directly over the screws, which could cause vibration issues under some conditions. Also, if the hanger flooded, as did the Houston's (CL-81) due to a torpedo hit off Formosa, dealing with the free surface water could be a problem. I imagine these would also have been issues with a rear hanger on the battleships. Vibration at certain speeds was a big enough problem for many ships as it was.

@tominiowa2513

2 жыл бұрын

Um, *hangar* .

@jamescameron2490

2 жыл бұрын

@@tominiowa2513 of course, a hangar may also contain hangers. ;)

@chemech

2 жыл бұрын

@@jamescameron2490 For the junior officers in the away party to use as sidearms... cutlasses for the enlisted men...

@jamescameron2490

2 жыл бұрын

@@chemech or for peacoats.

I just had a great look into Salem's 1956 hanger yesterday afternoon while watching the old Pursuit of the Graf Spree movie.

thank you for hanging out in the hanger

The hangar space is really neat. It would be cool if Salem made it part of a tour route (or just opened it up to the public). It is in rougher shape than the parts of the ship that are open, so I can see why they a don't have it open, on top of using it as a work space.

Ryan just gets better and better in these videos! It's too bad that the Des Moines was scrapped. I would have loved to see it preserved.

That raft is amazing, I hope they choose to keep this original as it is and perhaps use it as a template for a new copy. it is beautiful.

thank you for doing the heavy cruiser tours. I am in my glory! but even better...now yer in my space (3rd division.) bravo, it brings back so many memories i had forgot about. we kept the flag's yacht, a fancy staff car, a van, and maybe a couple 40' boats on the sides (off the elevator) on the news. never had a chopper onboard when i was there, though the flight deck was used a lot for them, mostly vert reps, but also they would land for various reasons as well. we had access to the jp4 as well, the best stuff for cleaning paint brushes and a valuable komshaw item. the cool thing about the flight deck and the elevator aft of it was it had deck grey w/ sand paint (we would get a bucket of sand from the sand locker) so we didn't have to holy stone that part. way easier to paint it every now and then. and aft of that the fantail was steel deck! our part of the deck started just aft of t3. and 1/2 of that was flight deck and the big sliding hatch for the elevator. thanks again.

The Northampton Class Heavy Cruisers CA 26 - CA 31 were the first U.S. Navy ships designed and built to have hangers with (2) large doors to store/work on the Sea Planes inside. Thanks for sharing your video.

@MalfosRanger

2 жыл бұрын

Shame that none of the old treaty cruisers are with us any longer.

@tonytrotta9322

2 жыл бұрын

@@MalfosRanger Yes, the U.S. Navy had a surplus of cruisers too but, none were saved. My dad (who passed in 2017 at 92) served on the USS Louisville CA 28 from 1943-46 and they tried to make a museum in Louisville but, it was too costly. They looked at dredging the Mississippi River and removing some of Louisville's upper structure to pass bridges and cost was the issue. I have visited the USS Little Rock CLG-4 but, she is not in her WW2 design. Take care!

On the WW2 Life Raft, one of the important thing to remember is that the Japanese had taken over most (but not all) of the world's rubber plantations! So large scale use. of Inflatable Life Rafts that could help several people was out of the question! Plus, they felt that a large number of Life Rafts would be hit by shrapnel from shell hits. Hence the WW2 Life Raft having several compartments and an inflatable would have issues keeping inflated with even a small number of holes..... BTW: the rubber shortage was the main reason why their was a gasoline restriction (via Rationing), so that people's tires wouldn't have to be replaced. Remember that this was before good synthetic rubber was around!! (The kids' toy Silly Putty was one such attempt to make a viable synthetic rubber!)

@studinthemaking

2 жыл бұрын

Kevlar was also to be a replacement for real rubber.

@evensgrey

2 жыл бұрын

It's a bit more complicated. There were a number of mass-produced synthetic rubbers around. Neoprene was invented in 1930 (although it smelled horrible until a newer and cheaper production process was developed that didn't produce the smelly byproducts was developed a few years later). There was another synthetic rubber compound developed in 1940. The problem is there's no synthetic rubber compound yet that makes tires that are as good as the ones made with natural rubber. To this day, radial-ply tires need some natural rubber to make the sidewalls work properly. High-performance aircraft tires are made entirely of natural rubber to survive the high loading they experience in landings. The gas rationing in the US and the reduced speed limits were not just to reduce tire wear and extend tire life but because the need for all natural rubber available to go for such things as military aircraft tires meant that what civilian tires there were just weren't as good as they'd been before the war.

@timengineman2nd714

2 жыл бұрын

@@evensgrey Neoprene was used on the Snorkel Heads of Nazi U-boats as an attempt to reduce their Microwave Radar profile (how much signal bounces off and goes back to the Allied Plane ardor ship. Also, actually all modern tires for transportation (including aircraft) are a blend. Enough stuff is added to give them longer life, ability to absorb heat, resist puncture, etc. that you can basically say that they are a blend of (mainly) Natural Rubber and some synthetic rubber.

@the4tierbridge

2 жыл бұрын

@@timengineman2nd714 I think it’s funny that as I’m reading this comment, I’m holding silly putty.

Even with a lot of unknown information - MAJOR SALUTE to those guys for having elevator still work. Might be more a matter of a very simple design, but. Another volume/ size comparison to the battleships. If ON the main deck - "dead" amidships - ship at normal operational draft- How high up are you? (what is the ship freeboard). NO Idea, I would NOT be shocked to hear maybe slighly more than NJ. Mega cool. Been Waiting for this video since I heard it was coming 2 weeks ago.

@Jreb1865

2 жыл бұрын

Yea, that elevator still working gets major cool points...I was wondering the whole time whether it did or not, and there it went up...

Taking into account the intended use of the Iowa's I would think not having a hangar is wise, the Iowa's being heavily divided with sealable spaces would give the crew more opportunity to halt flooding in my opinion. Having a hangar gives you a massive space to potentially have flood and little option for halting it unless you can access and plug the leak. With the intended use of a battle ship I'd think having a single massive space like a hangar would be more of a liability in battle and outweigh the potential benefits, for example if NJ ever had to slug it out with Yamato it would stand to reason that both ships would take immense damage and in that instance 20 rooms that can be sealed seem more valuable than one massive space that takes the same volume as the 20 rooms. I could however concede that 2 or 3 smaller single craft hangars instead of one large one could have been of benefit and mitigated the risk of a massive open space at least somewhat. Hopefully that all made sense.

@leftyo9589

2 жыл бұрын

agree, plus the fact in later days not having a hanger for helicopters is still no issue, as a BB never goes anywhere without its escorts, which carried helicopters.

@trey6388

2 жыл бұрын

Well said my friend

@gak2173

2 жыл бұрын

What Lefty O said!

@MarionTIA

2 жыл бұрын

Hangars sit pretty high above the waterline, and aren't really watertight to begin with, especially after you've traded a few shells. They also sit far outside any armored spaces on most surface combatants. I don't think they would have been a significant consideration concerning flooding. On the other hand, protecting aircraft from the elements while having a good space to maintain them is also very important if you plan to make extensive use of your aircraft. In any case, if you're sitting so low that your hangar flooding is a significant damage control concern, I would start considering abandoning ship. For the Japanese, seaplanes were a significant part of fleet recon, long range gunnery, and C2. Significant commitment of tonnage to aviation facilities can be seen on all their cruisers and battleships. They also devoted resources to making modern high performance seaplanes. This is in stark contrast to the USN, which saw a much more limited role for seaplanes.

I well remember the aft hangars on the nuclear cruisers Virginia and Mississippi. Very similar with an according door on top. We had those tool boards at VAW120 and VMFA106 and I put them in my Jiffy Lubes and my race shops. Keeps tools from getting lost permanently.

I love the Salem. Only been there once but I really want to go back this summer.

I read someplace that when the Royal Navy decided that the amidships hangars and planes were more trouble than they were worth , the hangars were converted into cinemas for the ships crew . Good for morale i guess .

Really interesting discussion about pros and cons of a little mini airplane hanger on a warship.

My neighbor was a BT on the Newport News during her Vietnam deployments. He retired as a command master chief.

Great to hear the "Curator" returning as a unit of height/length :-)

My father was hanging on the side of one of those rafts, when his destroyer (USS GREGORY, APD 3 ) was sunk at Guadalcanal... only the most seriously wounded were IN the raft, everyone else hung on the outside - with the sharks. Dad had 3rd deg. burns over 50% of his body, he was outside!

went to the salem this past weekend and got to see the hanger the volunteers there were grate, got to see all parts of the ship

During my Royal Navy training we were told that post war analyses showed that the Royal Navy lost more guys to hypothermia on Carley floats than drowning.

Before she finally went down in the battle off Samar, Commander Evans shifted from the bridge to the fantail of the Johnston and shouted steering orders to men operating a manual hydraulic steering pump. Is this aft emergency steering station in the hanger the same sort of equipment used that day? I've always kind of wondered what that scene looked like.

Knowing with 20:20 hindsight that helicopters would become a thing, a battleship design with a hangar of some sort on or near the fantail would have been a useful design feature, if a bit tricky to design into a fast battleship. Most likely, this would have taken form as a raised structure to some degree, which would have posed a challenge for the floatplane catapults, and even moreso for the ability to aim the aft turret's main guns due aft. Not an insurmountable challenge for the design team, but a tricky problem none the less.

I wish Ryan could give us a tour of the USS Alaska. We need a time machine

@WALTERBROADDUS

2 жыл бұрын

What is the deal with this Alaska fan club? They did next to nothing career wise.

@pitchpine5336

2 жыл бұрын

@@WALTERBROADDUS My grandfather helped build it!

@wll1500

2 жыл бұрын

@@WALTERBROADDUS that's exactly the deal. We hate the fact that such beautiful ships were built and then scrapped almost immediately

@alexmelia8873

2 жыл бұрын

I like the idea of super cruisers. Plus it helped they had gorgeous lines

@lesleyjoe4804

2 жыл бұрын

@@WALTERBROADDUS they In my opinion are the sexiest cruiser ever built

Nice 👍 thank you 😊

Wow, this was very interesting. Thank for you making this video.

We did a scout sleepover on Little Rock in Buffalo many years ago. At the stern there is a very large meeting room that was originally the hangar. Consider a trip to Buffalo. USS Little Rock, Fletcher class USS The Sullivans, a fleet sub, and lots of other exhibits. A lot to look at all in one place.

@BattleshipNewJersey

2 жыл бұрын

We have talked extensively about going to Buffalo. Hopefully in the spring!

@SteamCrane

2 жыл бұрын

@@BattleshipNewJersey Allow plenty of time!

The Baltimore class cruiser later carried Kingfisher sea planes and the Kingfisher had fixed wings. It also meant that it could not be stored in the cruiser hangers. The Seahawk with folding wings could be stored or worked on in hangers. Great video of the hanger area.

I think the tool board with the tool silhouettes is maybe to make it obvious when a tool was left in an aircraft, where it may cause some damage.

That after underdeck hangar was also a feature in one of the 70s era designs: The Vriginia-class nuclear powered cruisers. The space was meant for a belowdecks helo hangar, with an elevator lift and rolling desk. Because of issues with the helo (I think that Congress chose not to buy the helo designed for the space and nothing else in the inventory would work with that space) the space aboard the Virginias never was used as hangars, and the aft weather deck ended up being used to mount two of the 4 cell Armored Box launchers like those on New Jersey.

@ARCNA442

2 жыл бұрын

The issue wasn't with the helicopters (the Virginias used a standard SH-2), it was with the hanger doors. Because the hangar door had to double as the flight deck, they adopted a more complex design than the WWII cruisers that fit flush with the deck. However, it ended up leaking in practice and the CGNs were AAW ships that operated in larger task forces so they just dropped the idea.

@OtakuLoki

2 жыл бұрын

@@ARCNA442 and this is why you should always double-check your scuttlebutt stories. Thanks for the correction.

Ryan, the reason you have shadow boards is not only to know where to return tools it is also to insure tools don't go missing inside an airplane and I used it as a mechanic to insure my tools did not walk out of my shop in someones car and prevent me from having to keep replacing tools that are very expensive if you buy professional level tools. Almost every tool I had was shadowed that I used daily and each and every time i locked up my tools at the end of a day I checked every single tool to insure it was in its place.

Midships hangers made launch and recovery of aircraft easier and safer plus damage from blast was lessond. US fuel safety on ships was quite poor in the early years. British precautions were more through the the point where the US thought them overly complicated until they received battle damage.

I stood on top of the Hanger door to get a better picture of turret #3 and the after superstructure when I was on board Salem on November 6th. Did not get down to the hanger deck but have seen it in the movie " Pursuit of the Graf Spee".

@jeffersonchau7171

2 жыл бұрын

lol MA bois stronk

Its great that you talked about the life raft. I remember when I was younger (much much younger) and all I knew about were inflatable boats like we would use when swimming around Cape Cod. I would always think "why would they put those right there where they are going to get shot up and then be useless". Thinking that they were all inflatables. Later I learned what they really were and I always knew the idea of keeping them in an exterior location was so that they could get to them quick. But I will always remember back when I thought it was stupid to keep inflatables where they would be destroyed in most situations where they would be needed. You have to love some of the stuff you think from when you were a kid. addendum: Just to add, it really is nice hearing someone pronounce boatswain properly. The number of people who pronounce it like its spelled annoys me to no end.

The Battle of the River Plate (film) was shot on the USS Salem standing in for the Gaf Spee. The hanger was in a scene where the crew from the sunk cargo ships were brought onboard.

The prop wrench has a single keyway at the handle end of the hole, rather than flats. The key to be used is hanging there, partially hiding the keyway. The nut would probably have multiple keyways, to allow repositioning the wrench as the nut turns. Similar wrenches were used by steel mills for large machines such as rolling mills.

Huh, all these times you talked about a propeller wrench I thought it was like the old Boy Scout joke about snipe hunting and left-handed smokeshifters.

I did fitting and machining at a campus that also trained up stokers in the Royal Australian Navy for fitting. They use the term 'shadow board' for the board with the tools; it's a handy way to see what's missing and where to return the tool to. We had to give a tag with a number stamped on it to checkout tools so if someone needed what we had, they knew who to go see. At the end of the day you had to return all tags which were counted and if there weren't enough tags, it meant you hadn't returned a tool.

Very cool! Thanks for the video. 👍

During the night brawl between battleships the USS South Dakota Blew it scout planes to pieces when they fired the 16 inch guns over the stern supposedly the first couple rounds set them on fire then the next couple rounds blew the carcass over the side and put out the fires I think I read somewhere on the USS Washington Admiral LEE and the ship Captain had his float planes flown off at dusk so they wouldn’t get damaged by the big guns during the expected big gun battle

great video! thanks ryan

It was my understanding that during WWII, USN cruisers were considered scout vessels more than battleships. So it makes sense that they would host aircraft whereas the battleships would not. I think Ryan himself said the main purpose for aircraft on a battleship was to spot the fall of shot, not to go looking for the enemy. But I would think that during a heated battle having a plane circling over the enemy radioing "A little more to the left" seems... unwise.

@ARCNA442

2 жыл бұрын

Interestingly, cruisers and battleships were even supposed to be equipped with different aircraft - battleships were to get the OS2U that focused on spotting and did not have folding wings, while cruisers were to get the SOC and SO3C that focused on scouting and did have folding wings (although the failure of the SO3C meant this didn't really happen in practice - and the two types were combined in 1944 with the SC).

Having an onboard hangar may seem advantageous, however the WW1 and interwar battleships showed that having room for parts and supplies was a better trade-off than the ability to spot using your own planes which have limited protection and had to be retrieved using cranes and precision maneuvers. Also, by the time the Iowas were launched, battleships were already shown to be liabilities in naval engagements with aircraft and faster support ships being able to deliver a killing blow with minimal risk of life- a battleship would have a crew of around 2000 while a submarine or KB (German equivalent of the PT Boat) crew was under 200. So having redundancy in fuel and supplies and more deck space for anti aircraft artillery was better for the usability of the Iowas. Speed and firepower were the focus by the 1940s, as the raid on the Italian navy and the whole Bismarck confrontation showed the importance of armor and anti-air defenses over the need to sight your own main guns. When the initial plans were laid the Washington Naval Treaty was still a consideration as well, so to ensure not having to scrap new ships after the war due to similar agreements it’s likely that designers and the political administration saw it better to not have bulky equipment that could result in the craft being forced into retirement.

Thanks nice video..

The placement of the aviation fuel (and even more so on NJ, in the former gun tub with an open bottom so you can just yeet the entire thing off the stern) reminds me of the concerns people have about external spare fuel stowage on some tanks (the Soviets did it a lot in WWII, and the Cold War Swedish S-tank had skirts made of jerry cans, using the spare fuel as armor over the wheels, much like a battleship uses its fuel bunkers as part of the armor) -- "What it the fuel can gets hit and catches fire?" "It's diesel, it probably won't catch fire from a hit, but if it does, being liquid, pours out onto the ground and you drive away."

Super informative

The part about the captain's car made me wonder, do/did naval vessels carry a few utility trucks, jeeps, or even motorcycles for use in ports?

@WALTERBROADDUS

2 жыл бұрын

Naval stations and bases have vehicles at the Port already.

@jimwjohnq.public

2 жыл бұрын

Sometimes 'RHIP' - rank has it's priveledge.

I think it would have been - adding a few Seahawks for spotting, recon and defensive ASW would have been a very handy feature. The Kirovs have 3-5 helos, too. If matching them was ever part of the design, adding helos would have been great. Also, though they couldn't have really known it at the time, the first Arleigh Burkes have a flight deck but no helo. If the Iowas had gotten a hangar, then the Burkes could be used as escorts and range-extending fueling stations for the helos, thus improving the BB's ASW screen. This might have made for a useful surface action group into the 1990s. (also, having the Seahawks for missile targeting might have made keeping TASM around make a bit of sense.)

Ryan, I’ve been an aircraft mechanic for the military and defense sector for ten years. I always say “I want my toolbox at home to be neat organized like my work box”. Still hasn’t been organized. Even the toolbox I brought home from work that was neat and organized with everything labeled has become completely disorganized…. I wish you luck and hope your garage will look better than my messes.

That tool board is reminiscent of a Plomb/Proto board, really cool.

Great video, love seeing this! Ya, I think the Iowa's would be better with internal hangars. You can use them for storage anyways even if you don't have planes in them.

Such a cool space.

That tool board looks so useful

That hanger board is what now called 6s, or 5s. Any well managed factory will look exactly like that. The ventilation holes are to prevent confined space dangers

A great work space area.

On the USS Newport News we did have modern lifeboats.

Salem is amazing

Well modern USN ships still have hangars for Helicopters . The main mission of the Helicopters being ASW work .

Ryan is now a unit of measurement. It’s official, I’m going to start using it.

It also makes a great space for storing Talos or Tartar missiles on converted ships.

I’m pretty sure I’ve read one of the potential issues with having a hanger in the hull as opposed to on it is that you have a very large space that could admit a lot of water if the stern was sufficiently damaged. Horses for courses. Everything is a trade off.

I don't mean this in a hostile or negative way, I want that to be abundantly clear - just take the humor as it is. I love all of these videos - it's like watching Michael Scott from "The Office" explaining how to load the copy machine.

You've probably answered this in a video I haven't yet watched but I was wondering how you became curator. As my dad was chosen to be one I do know you definitely have to love your job and have people skills both of which you got covered and I for one apprentice that.

That cutout in the bulk head at teh end is interesting a valve behind a bulkhead where no one can get to the valve to operate the valve.

awesome

I could write a bit about this. The requirements for battleships would dictate that no aircraft. No aviation fuel to catch on fire during a big gun battle. If bunker oil is the only fuel on the ship. The almost always fire during battle, is more manageable. At the time they were planned gun ships were gunships. Less flammable is always the correct choice. Aviation fuel fires on all other ships is a big deal. In the late 20s, and all through the 30s for the U.S. The U.S. had 3 carriers. The capital ships were still going to be big gun battleships. With Pearle Harbor , we had to shift gears. The coming big window of learning about how to create and supply carrier battle groups. In all out war, the sky was the limit for the U.S. We wanted our ships as safe as possible for the sailors. At the start of the war big gun tactics still in place. Naval aviation was still pretty new. Spotting with airplanes. The Japanese didnt have any effective spotting radar. The range of the spotting plane was the distance. It was not really a naval aircraft war. Once we figured it all out. Screening Cruisers and destroyers would have aircraft eventually. The Japanese lost a lot of ships to fire. The Zeros were pretty flammable. We had our window. Figuring out what worked. All the battlships that have aircraft and aviation fuel on board were a lot more prone to damage.

I believe the reasoning behind a lack of a hanger on US battleships was to avoid creating a hole in the armor, and therefore avoid compromising the armor scheme.

@ARCNA442

2 жыл бұрын

US battleships had an "all or nothing" armor scheme where the ends of the ship (where a hanger would be) were entirely unarmored.

Interesting video. One suggestion soften the light and adjust your aperture(if you can get away with a shallower depth of field) or iso your being washed out. I'd also recommend a bit of color grading. Keep up the good work.

A hangar deck on a battleship was probably not necessary. If the cruisers had aircraft use the cruisers aircraft or in the later war use carrier based aircraft. It basically comes down to the limited volume inside the hull of the ship. Making the ship larger increases costs and could actually require increased propulsion requirements to avoid a reduction in speed.

Will you guys do a video of the section or armour from Japanese battleships they used to test the 16 inch guns

Ok it is a good idea to add a hanger to an Iwoa class battleship, here’s the thing if you have the hanger you could hold more supplies and two you can still leave the planes on the deck and have more room for fuel supplies and other things

I sometimes think there is a case for the United States to develop new all-gun cruisers or even battleships. The semi-automated 8" guns on the Salem are just down-right cool in their efficiency, but the 16"/50 was no slouch either. 105mm or 155mm guns would be compatible with the ammo used by ground forces, but the 5 inch isn't a bad choice either as far as a secondary battery might go. A small, enclosed hanger at the rear of the ship could provide a space for things like a V-22, a UH-1Y, an F-35, even something like a CH/MH-47 could have it's rotors folded up and made to fit. If some way to provide ammo more efficiently could be found, the 20mm Phalanx CIWS could defeat incoming aircraft, missiles, and rockets handily. Chain guns in the 20-to-30mm range for small-boat defense could be set along the decks in remotely-controlled mounts (with provisions for local control, of course.) A platoon-sized element of MEU(SOC) or FAST Marines could accommodate their provided "country" on ship. And America's vast coal reserves could be converted via means like coal-liquefaction or the Fischer-Tropsch process into just about any desired liquid fuel, from gasoline to diesel and kerosene, never mind bunker C. Oh, the possibilities are endless!

Im watching this again after having spent the day on board Salem. In fact, I still smell like Ship, and I like it. Ha!

How did that steering position move the rudder - all shafts and gears? wow!

I think it would depend on just what was in the storage areas on the Iowas.

Quick question about the New Jersey, how often do you guys have to repaint the hull? I am just more curious than anything thing.

The story at the Carli float raises for me 2 questions. Does New Jersey have a modern version on board currently and is there a video about it. And secondly, what were the ships boats used for, and is there a video about the subject.

A post-WW2 modification of an Iowa, in my opinion, would see the aft main turret removed and replaced with additional space for accommodation, storage/equipment and a hangar for helicopters. The aft deck would have a large helipad.

What kind of a car?

What's the volume of the hangar when measured in cc's (cubic curators)

Im no naval historian, but my thinking is that the battleships wouldn't really ever go without escorts (that would theoretically have their own planes), and adding all the facilities for an airplane hanger, let alone all the launching and supporting equipment, seems like its a ton of extra work and expense for what can be likely better done by other ships. To my non-expert eyes, it seems like adding aircraft to battleships is just more hassle than its worth...but since it seems like everyone did it, it clearly was worth the effort. I don't know how many extra crew, extra tonnage, used volume, and extra, flammable, fuel was required, but it seems like that would be a lot, better used elsewhere, for a few planes on a battleship.

This reminds me of the scene in "Battle of the River Plate" when Capt. Dove is taken prisoner by the Germans aboard the Graff Spee.

Considering the Iowa class Battleships were FAST battleships a hangar section would have been a conflict to that design goal, potentially slowing their maximum speed. In WW2 speed would have been majorly important, less time crossing oceans by major margins. In combat if the hangar / aircraft are not majorly useful to the ship it would not be a benefit to a ship, especially if that can be delegated to a support ship, which it likely was. Also I'm assuming the deck plating configuration of the Iowa's may would have been compromised by the hangar.

A hangar would have helped the SoDak when she destroyed one of her floatplane! Also I wonder if the deeper draft out back on the Iowas would help with the cavitation they had at extreme speeds?

I am sure the designers of the Iowa class had a good reason for not including a hangar.

The three types of measuring systems in use today: The Metric system, the Imperial system, and the Curator system.

Maybe a good video would be the USS Oregon BB3 one of the first Battleship museums and what eventually happened.

"Curator": a unit of measurement equal to 6 feet, 2 yards or 1 fathom.

Cruisers were scouting ships and thus aircraft were important. Battleships were not specifically for scouting.

The deck of the hangar should be at or above main deck and constructed with drainage in mind. That means that the number 3 turret needs to be mounted as high as number 2 turret, to have a clear field of fire over the hangar. But moving the hangar outside the armored hull presents its own problems; you're adding weight both above and aft of the ship's center of gravity (CG). So it's not likely that this can be done as a modification to an existing ship, but would have to be included in the original plans for construction. If it was ever considered for a mod to the Iowas, it likely would only have worked out with the removal of turret 3, and I can't imagine the trade-off of firepower for a hangar would have made sense to the decision makers. But now I'm curious; what's the story with the Montanas? Would they have been built with hangars in any location?

Hi, can you confirm what was in the hanger in 1953 when Salem turned up at Zakinthos Greece. I’m interested in the M170 Willys jeep that are alleged to have been on board.

Cruisers were considered the "eyes" of the fleet, pre-aviation.

One curator tall. OMG! :D