Pinned post for Q&A :)

@joshthomas-moore2656

2 жыл бұрын

On a few dreadnought ships i've noticed this tower like structure on top of some of the turrets like on picturea of the Kongo class they have one on the rearmost turret with said towers being connected by cables to the ships masts, what are the towers for and how did the cables not snap off when the guns turned?

@jona.scholt4362

2 жыл бұрын

Do you think Halsey recommends Spruance to take over his command at Midway because he doesn't want to risk (or he fears) another carrier admiral potentially getting a lot of credit and fame (and thus power) after a great victory? Wouldn't it be harder to turn the carrier group back to Halsey if a carrier admiral won the battle than a surface admiral like Spruance? It just seems like a calculated political move.

@alexandermatheson8312

2 жыл бұрын

The Mk I tank used a naval 6 Pounder Gun. Why was this gun selected for the tank? Are there many other naval guns used as tank cannons?

@fguocokgyloeu4817

2 жыл бұрын

If WW2 hadn't broken out, how much longer do you think it would have taken for carriers to take over? Would it have taken a later demonstration in a war or would peacetime development be sufficient to change?

@ph89787

2 жыл бұрын

To what extent during World War 2 did Naval Commanders distrust Radar?

Once again the Rum Ration isn't measured by ounces or liters or pints or gallons but by the frickin barrel!! Another hour long Wednesday Rum Ration; so let's raise our glasses (or barrels) and enjoy, Cheers!

@tominiowa2513

2 жыл бұрын

Need a lot of rum for 297K subscribers.

@skeletonwguitar4383

2 жыл бұрын

"by the barrel" Wrong, thats still an understatement, so far

@Ralph-yn3gr

2 жыл бұрын

Good thing I have a powerful liver.

@RCAvhstape

2 жыл бұрын

It's more like an unrep with the oiler just pumping the rum across in the hoses.

@MaxwellAerialPhotography

2 жыл бұрын

Fuel is generally measures in metric tonnes for warships, so is this rum ration.

The American admirals were not offing each other over their differences, unlike a certain opposing Navy.

@Guderian2

2 жыл бұрын

whatever navy could you possibly mean? Certainly not a certain navy with a rising sun ^^

@scottgiles7546

2 жыл бұрын

Also don't think the US Army of the time had a "hit list" of Admirals. Not even if the Army Navy game was lost...

@calvingreene90

2 жыл бұрын

@@scottgiles7546 True but this was about the carrier v battleship debate.

@paulsteaven

2 жыл бұрын

Question, how did the IJN admirals "offing" each other?

@transmaster

2 жыл бұрын

The problem with the Japanese military in general was the Army had control. They had the Samurai ethos thing going and also ignored the outside world. The Japanese Navy on the other hand did know what was out there. Senior Japanese Naval officers knew that they had no hope of defeating the United States in the long term. When you look at how the US fought WW2. The Pacific theater was almost a secondary front. We gave priority to the European theater. It wasn’t until late 1943 with war production in full swing that we start to prosecute the war with Japan with full resources. When Admiral Yamato said it his famous words: “I fear all we have done is to awakened a sleeping giant and filled him with terrible resolve” he knew exactly what was going to happen.

I have to stop binge-watching these. I woke up this morning dreaming about the pre-WW2 USN having 48 Standard model battleships in their battle line, one for each state, with a voiceover talking about the tripod mainmast of the USS 'Kansas' being a modern-day tourist attraction in downtown Wichita.

@masonreppeto882

3 ай бұрын

lol

As a boy in the late 1960’s I was living on Treasure Island My USN father pointed out Admiral Nimitz to me while he was shopping at the base exchange. The Admiral was such a short man but he seemed to radiate . “Fleet Admiral”. Seeing a Navy Captain pushing his shopping cart re-enforced the respect this man had. He had an estate on Yerba Buena Island in San Francisco harbor. I remember when Navy ships were moving to the Oakland naval base they had lookouts on the Signal bridge who would be looking at The Nimitz estate if they spotted him on his look out patio they did honors. It was so cool to watch.

@WALTERBROADDUS

2 жыл бұрын

My mind spins at the idea of Nimitz in the produce section.. 🥕🍒🍉🍎🤔

@Ugly_German_Truths

2 жыл бұрын

@@WALTERBROADDUS Produce? Try washing detergents :P

@WALTERBROADDUS

2 жыл бұрын

@@Ugly_German_Truths Nimitz with Tide coupons? 🤔

@faithnfire4769

2 жыл бұрын

Still such a strange thing to remember, there was a controversy for his statue at the Museum named after him. They had made the statue slightly larger than life possibly against his earlier wishes - to not appear as anything more than he was. The Museum's argument - to make the statue visible from over a sidewalk.

@transmaster

2 жыл бұрын

I really did not appreciate what I witnessed until I was in the US Navy myself, now with all of the years of study I appreciate him even more. Admiral King knew he was the only Naval officer who could handle General McArther. I was just looking at his biography. I must have seen him just before the stroke he suffered in 1965 that led to his death a year later. I feel so lucky to have briefly witnessed such history.

"Global Domination" Royal Navy to US Navy: *Not bad, kid.*

@SlavicCelery

2 жыл бұрын

Together Royal Navy and US Navy are still nearly unstoppable. The sheer amount of countries that would need to join forces to tip the balance in their favor is quite high. Especially late WW2.

@ulfosterberg9116

2 жыл бұрын

@@SlavicCelery Let's face it. US navy. Royal navy is an unimportant extension. Just like the French or any other navy that is.

@SlavicCelery

2 жыл бұрын

@@ulfosterberg9116 When it comes to crazy plans involving subs during the cold war, you're going to want the RN on your side.

It’s honestly amazing to see how far Drach has come. From 5 minute guides on warships to having large enough of a channel to draw in Naval historians oral the time. Way to go drach !!!

@jonathanstrong4812

Жыл бұрын

Way to go indeed Mr King

Burke's destroyer night battle tactics are very reminiscent of IJN night battle tactics. The broad plan of "Spot the enemy with superior sensors and set up for a torpedo ambush followed by accurate gunfire from a favorable position once the torpedos arrive" sounds like exactly what had just been done several times to the USN.

@kylefraser2822

2 жыл бұрын

Well the best teacher in war is often the enemy, so that makes sense really

@gregorywright4918

2 жыл бұрын

Yes, but the Japanese "superior sensors" was specialized binoculars along with specially-chosen lookouts, while the US was radar and CIC...

@mikeklaene4359

2 жыл бұрын

And the IJN had the "long lance" torpedo that completely caught the US Navy by surprise. Add that to the better optical aids and superior training, it is a wonder that any US ships survived the Solomons in 1942.

@sealpiercing8476

2 жыл бұрын

​@@gregorywright4918 Yes, I'm well aware. But in 1942 the USN didn't have any CIC, and the radar wasn't as good and wasn't consistently used effectively. During that time, specialized binoculars and chosen lookouts with good vision really did constitute superior sensors.

@Cailus3542

2 жыл бұрын

The British used that exact same tactic to sink the heavy cruiser Haguro in 1945. I wonder if that's a coincidence?

The way that Arleigh Burke trained and led his destroyer skippers so that they would perform well in his absence is reminiscent of the way good admirals led their frigate captains in the age of sail.

@ph89787

2 жыл бұрын

Speaking of which. When Burke was reassigned as Mitscher’s chief of staff. Mitscher jokingly ordered a Marine Sentry to ‘secure Captain Burke’. One time when a destroyer came alongside for refueling.

Awesome interview; he, Trent Hone, does a great job answering in an informative way that doesn't out you to sleep but is instead engaging. I hope we see another video with him in the future.

@tomcarpenter6929

2 жыл бұрын

Totally agree! Both the questions and answers were well presented and engaging. Drach - this is certainly one of, if not the best interviews. Now to go back and watch episode 1.

@scottpeters705

2 жыл бұрын

@@tomcarpenter6929 Lol ĺ loķle

It says a lot about McArthur that Eisenhower; the consumate diplomat who could work even with Montgomery, hated his guts.

@scottgiles7546

2 жыл бұрын

Montgomery? He had to work with De Gaulle!! Working with Montgomery is for amateurs by comparison.

@PalleRasmussen

2 жыл бұрын

@@scottgiles7546 I dunno about that, if you check how the Americans shafted the Free French for a long time, while licking the boots of the Vichy regime to try and get them to... I dunno what, de Gaulle's pricklyness is probably understandable. I might have been acting much worse.

@RCAvhstape

2 жыл бұрын

McArthur and Patton were both solid combat generals while also being prima donnas at the same time, which meant that more pragmatic and down to earth guys like Ike and Nimitz hated dealing with them but couldn't get rid of them because they were too good at their jobs, despite being insufferable. Monty was the same way, with the added complication of being the hero of America's ally and therefore even harder to get away from for diplomatic reasons.

@PalleRasmussen

2 жыл бұрын

@@RCAvhstape both Patton and McArthur are quite overrated due to the lingering effects of war propaganda. Same with Rommel and Montgomery.

@nickdanger3802

2 жыл бұрын

@@PalleRasmussen Good relations with Vichy France allowed the USA to sell to them and increase the "diplomatic" presence in North Africa. That facilitated the recruitment of high ranking officers before Operation Torch, the three US/UK landings in North Africa, November 1942. see Operation Flagpole

Considering how aggressive some "aviator" admirals were, being held back a bit probably wasn't all that bad of an idea. Fletcher was an effective admiral.

@richardschaffer5588

Жыл бұрын

Unleash the hounds! as opposed to push the hounds forward.

The observation of kamikaze tactics as a logical response to US developments in CIC and fighter direction is fascinating.

@Executioner9000

2 жыл бұрын

The other thing of note, is the Japanese realized all their planes were getting shot down anyway, so if the plane and pilot is already assumed dead by attacking, might as well make it count.

@PalleRasmussen

2 жыл бұрын

And they still had a higher survival rate than German U-boat crews...

@scottgiles7546

2 жыл бұрын

@@PalleRasmussen "And they still had a higher survival rate than German U-boat crews..." And the Kriegsmarine feels the BURN! (still)

@PalleRasmussen

2 жыл бұрын

@@scottgiles7546 I do not think so no.

@haldorasgirson9463

2 жыл бұрын

Turns out Kamikaze tactics actually reduced losses for the Japanese. That is why they used them. By 1944, attacking a US naval task force from the air was virtually suicide. Very few plane survived an attack, so you might as well go ahead and crash into a ship if you can. You were going to die either way and it increased the odds of doing damage that way.

Moosebruger was also responsible for developing a tactic for picket destroyers off Okinawa. When attacked while sailing in column and under kamikaze attack the fore and aft destroyer would turn to face the primary attack while the mid ship would remain beam of, bringing the attackers under a 3-way crossfire of AA fire. This was adopted across the picket groups. He commanded a 3 ship unit that my grandfathers ship was part of when developing this technique, including USS Wren and USS Ingersoll.

@stuartdollar9912

2 жыл бұрын

The fact he listened to his captains shows he was a good commander.

I've actually read one of the reports about that early AWACS idea. Over 10 years ago I had "volunteered" to help my dad organize a bunch of OSRD reports at the Library of Congress and stumbled across it in a box. I believe they wanted a radar that could see surface ships at a range of 100 miles and determined that the antenna would need to be 5,000 feet up to do it. It then said that it could be done with either a 5,000 foot mast or a radar equipped plane flying at that altitude, complete with hand-drawn artistic interpretations of both ideas (the plane even looked like a TBM). The conclusion was that the plane was the more practical option. That report was exactly as funny to read as you'd expect. Unfortunately I don't remember anything else about the report other than it was in the Radar division. The collection is in the Technical Reports and Standards Section, for anyone interested.

@tominiowa2513

2 жыл бұрын

Two radio masts have exceeded 2,000 feet (and one collapsed). 5,000 feet would be very challenging, and would require a trimaran ship for the guy anchors. Said trimaran would require dissembled into the three hulls for drydocking. Not to mention high winds would make the ship about as stable as HMS Captain.

@Ralph-yn3gr

2 жыл бұрын

@@tominiowa2513 That's what made the report so funny. That they took the idea "seriously" enough to even prepare a drawing of a ship with a 5,000 foot mast is hysterical, especially when combined with that very formal 40s writing style.

@lwilton

2 жыл бұрын

@@Ralph-yn3gr They had obviously forgotten WW I aerial history. They could have put the radar in a balloon and just towed it around with a destroyer. See? The synergy of both solutions! :-)

@gregorywright4918

2 жыл бұрын

@@lwilton They had tried the logistics of balloons during the 30s, both rigid and non-rigid, and found it difficult near land and practically impossible out to sea. Think about the size of a balloon you would need to haul a good sized radar, plus power generation and cooling, up to 5K, and what the weather could do to it there. Not to mention what enemy attack could do.

@lwilton

2 жыл бұрын

@@gregorywright4918 Oh I'll quickly agree that it is a non-viable method. But is it less viable than a 5000 foot high mast on a 500 foot long battleship? Yet they seem to have considered that without considering a tethered balloon.

"I think that it can be said that it can never be doubted that the goods will be delivered by this Nation, whose Navy believes in the tradition of "Damn the torpedoes; full speed ahead!" - Franklin D Roosevelt May 12th 1942

@michaeldonahue1009

2 жыл бұрын

Yeah, but in 1942 "Damn the torpedoes" was usually being said in reference to their own Mark 14s...

@gregorywright4918

2 жыл бұрын

Was that in reference to Coral Sea, or the Battle of the Atlantic?

@ZillyWhale

2 жыл бұрын

@@gregorywright4918 Battle of the Atlantic. Specifically in reference to the delivery of war materials to the United Kingdom.

Drac has excellent interviewing skills, he asks the questions and allows his guest the freedom to answer without interruption. Thank you!

John Lundstrom's "Black Shoe Carrier Admiral" is an excellent book.

@CFarnwide

2 жыл бұрын

The more I learn about how Admiral Fletchers reputation has been dragged through the mud, the more I want to get my hands on that book. Wonder if my local library has it…

A significant development after the Guadalcanal campaign was the development of air group coordination. The early carrier battles were really hit-and-miss affairs highlighted by many mistakes by the carrier task forces. By the time of the Marianas Turkey Shoot this had largely been worked out, and coordination was much improved. There still some bumps in the road in the rest of the war, but overall the USN had mastered the art.

@sundiver137

2 жыл бұрын

When the Brits loaned the U.S. "USS Robin" there was quite a bit information sharing between the RN and USN. The USN's biggest gain was the British method of air group coordination. Another thing the Brits figured out was how to land the Corsair on a flight deck. Apparently the RN liked the Corsair enough to figure out how to use it in carrier ops come hell or high water.

It is a marvel how this channel has grown in terms of informed and wide-reaching education on naval matters of the period it covers. This interview is just another instance of that.

@RobJaskula

2 жыл бұрын

Yes! I'd love to see Andrew Gordon on this channel! He and Drach have similar affability

@williamswenson5315

2 жыл бұрын

@@RobJaskula While I don't know this potential guest, I suspect anyone Drach has on will be fascinating.

@sundiver137

2 жыл бұрын

​@@RobJaskula That would be fantastic. A few other authors I'd like to see are John Lundstrom, Alan Zimm and Robert Massey.

@sundiver137

2 жыл бұрын

@@williamswenson5315 Gordon wrote "Rules of the Game:Jutland and British Naval Command", a great insight as to why Jutland went down the way it did.

@williamswenson5315

2 жыл бұрын

@@sundiver137 Thank you for that reference. I'll check on the title's availability and put it on my booklist.

These collabs are legitimate. What I enjoy about Drach's channel is the videos are equally as compelling as podcasts as one exercises or works, as videos.

man talking about the naval history with the dinosaurs and rebel corvette on his shelf in the background. this is the pound4pound the best YT chanel. love it!

One also has to consider that as we were getting better, they were also losing their better people. The Japanese pilots of 1944 were not the Japanese pilots of 1942. Absolutely nothing about WWII was equal between any of the sides. It was always an offensive action against a defensive action, the Japanese simply making their defensive perimeter a bit larger at the beginning.

@gregorywright4918

2 жыл бұрын

You might say "over-extended their defensive perimeter", if you look at Japanese battle plans up to the early 1920s versus how they extended it out to the Mandates in the late 20s into the 30s.

@doctordetroit4339

2 жыл бұрын

Japan bombed a nation that had 16X the economic potential they had, on top of being utterly isolated and wholly dependent on raw materials. They lost the war the second their fleet left for Pearl Harbor. It was national seppuku.

Japanese : surprise attack USA :surprise fleet Japan : Pickacu face

This channel is a gem and I will never stop smiling when new content rolls in

I'll assume "Global Domination" is fancy speak for "Big Sticks".

@NoPegs

2 жыл бұрын

Only the biggest sticks...

@dancingwiththedarkness3352

2 жыл бұрын

Speak softly and drop a big bomb?

@hydrodrift

2 жыл бұрын

@UNSCForwardontodawn Teddy Roosevelt And Ronny Reagan are the most badass presidents but FDR will always be my favorite

@falloutghoul1

2 жыл бұрын

@@hydrodrift The less said of Ronald Reagan's presidency, the better.

@thinkingagain5966

2 жыл бұрын

@@hydrodrift Reagan and FDR can both rot in hell

I think the one other advantage of the US Navy in this period is their capacity and ability to effectively utilize the nearly bottomless well of resources availible to them to near perfection, especially near the end of the war. Very few navy’s would have the organizational capability or mindset to be able to effectively utilize and prioritize the wellspring of resources that the US was able to produce.

@gregorywright4918

2 жыл бұрын

And at such a distance from the homeland. The Pacific war was fought at least 5,000 miles from home, while the European and Mediterranean wars were also fought 3-5,000 miles from home. Only the RN Pacific Fleet came close to this, and that depended partly on USN supply systems and bases to support them.

@zeitgeistx5239

2 жыл бұрын

Hate to break it to you but the USN never had nearly bottomless well of resources. By 44 it was obvious to war planners that the Germany was done for and Japan was effectively contained. Several naval projects were slowed down or cancelled outright as planners didn’t feel the threat justified it given that even the US ran into a steel shortage at that point. WW2 never saw the truly technological might of the US outside of the atomic bomb. Imagine B-32s, Montanas, dozens of Essex’s. By 1943 prototype super prop fighters that pushed prop fighter technology to the limit and could catch Me-262s began test flights. If the US was in the war as long as Japan or Germany you would’ve seen true American might.

@brucewilliams1892

2 жыл бұрын

I've seen a mention of the 'Fleet Train' supply convoys. Perhaps The Boss will consider an episode. Also 'pork and beans'.

@davidharner5865

Жыл бұрын

There is a story of a German General knowing his nation was beaten when he saw the remains of a chocolate birthday cake in an abandoned U.S. position.

This sort of detailed video makes YT worth visiting.

Wow! That was a little more nuanced than "More guns and bigger!". Quite the surprise.

Just like the men of the golden age of sail, rum rations make my day so much better.

min 31:55 "whipsaw"... Keeping two fronts plays into the oil supply strength of the USNavy, while forcing the IJN to spend their limited fuel in steaming between fronts. ALSO, two fronts make impossible to know which one is the true "kantai kessen" one....so the IJN never commits to either one.

Brilliant! I haven't been to sleep in over 48 hours and was actually starting to fall asleep, then I saw Drach uploaded a Wednesday special 8 minutes ago.... I can sleep later! Needs must!

@scottgiles7546

2 жыл бұрын

"I can sleep when I'm dead". Lights cigarette. Moves on...

What a treat, thank's Drach for bringing us these interviews.

Another outstanding collaboration. Really learnt a huge amount about US naval tactics from these two videos. Top work Drach!

Fantastic guest, once again. Thank you Trent!

A fantastic concise video. An exemplary interview of a very knowledgable guest who gave such rich context to this subject and opened some new avenues for me to walk down in the US district of the Pacific naval war.

I just love listening to you talk Drach.

Thank you, Drachinifel.

Fastest hour ever, clarity in questions, not just answers, very well organized.

Another excellent interview. Well done, Drach!

A fantastic conversation! I really loved the information, and I would love to see more of Mr. Hone

That's the first time I've heard of wartime implementation of AWACS. It's really interesting how such a newfangled thing that radar was at the beginning of the war, and something commanders didn't fully understand or implement optimally, became an indispensable tool for offensive and defensive operations by the end of the war.

Congratulations to Drach, amazing interview!

What a knowledgeable and engaging fellow Mr Hone is. Excellent interview, many thanks!

Nice to have somebody in a video who actually knows what he has to say beforehand, who is prepared for the interview and can talk straight without "ahh" and "mhhh".

@stevebengel1346

2 жыл бұрын

You're like, so correct, like you know?

@sundiver137

2 жыл бұрын

@@stevebengel1346 Totally!

@stevebengel1346

2 жыл бұрын

@@sundiver137 gnarly dude!

@gregorywright4918

2 жыл бұрын

Trent alluded that Drach sent him questions beforehand, so it flowed more smoothly.

Great guest!!! Thanks!

Thanks for this great Interview. And thanks for your great content in general.

Great interview! I never get tired of Naval History. (Fly Navy! USN 85-91, VP-46)

A great interview! Very informative.

Brilliant, thanks to you both.

This was really great content thanks Drach!

Kudos to Drac for enlisting this guest. The kind of in depth info so often lacking. Well presented, bullseye for all concerned.

Great conversation... Thanks!

Very informative and enjoyable...Looking forward to more of these.

Current reading Learning War right now. Thank you Trent for a great book.

An absolutely great video. You have out done yourself this time. I love your interview style. Great and informative video!

This was a great program. Very informative.

Early congratulation on 300t subscribers. Should go over in by the end of the month. Keep up the good work.

As always fantastic. Thank you.

Learned so much from this interview, particularly enlightening about kamikazes and radar developments with early form of AWAC.

Huzzah another Drachinifel video

Excellent Chat

Thank you for a very informative and entertaining video!

Every time I watch one of these videos I wonder why I find this stuff so interesting. Must be the presentation. Bravo. :)

Great interview

An hour just flew by, wow! Amazing.

Yet another great video, thank you!

Great video! Thank you. Sorry it took me so long to render my opinion which I know you have been waiting for on the edge of your seat for almost a year, but I didn’t want to rush into forming my opinion until I deeply considered your video.

USN tactics: Sends Essex and Independence class at the problem.

@Maritimesgestein

2 жыл бұрын

And if didn't go away repeat until until it does.

@isaaclao2380

2 жыл бұрын

tru

@ph89787

2 жыл бұрын

If in doubt. Add Enterprise

@scottgiles7546

2 жыл бұрын

@@ph89787 Period Enterprise or time travel Enterprise? (and not the Wee British Enterprise by any means )

@ph89787

2 жыл бұрын

@@scottgiles7546 CV-6

Very interesting and well presented. Thanks from Texas.

Interesting and informative history speak :) Thanks!

Brilliant! Thank you.

Thank you, great information!

amazing insight on the kamikaze tactic, I have never thought about it this way!

@Drachinifel where is your Trafalgar Day video?

Excellent! Guess I need to buy a book.

To quote M Bison. OF COURSE!

Excellent!

Man, 299,000 subscribers. I feel like I'm in the "Old Guard" having joined when Drach's channel had around 80,000 subscribers.

Maybe do a video on Operation Starvation from late in the war? May not be a complete naval campaign but it did sink a lot of Japanese ships and possibly could of ended the war sooner.

@zeitgeistx5239

2 жыл бұрын

I feel ya but that’s not a sexy topic and few academics have written about it. Maybe Justin Pyke will cover it. A really ignored topic.

I went to grad school with Corbin Williamson - always interesting to see how (or more usually, if) people make it in academia.

All very interesting and good.

Awesome book! I read it a month or so ago. I expected it to be a dry read, but it was quite readable.

@Dave_Sisson

2 жыл бұрын

As someone who writes non military history, I see that comment as the highest praise. It's hard enough to track down relevant information, arrange it in a sensible way, write it up and present it. But to make it highly readable, to make it a "page turner" is the goal of most writers who aim to produce popular histories rather than dull "dry read" academic papers.

@stevewyckoff6904

2 жыл бұрын

I'd have to disagree. I'm on page 324 and it's been quite a slog. He's a much better lecturer (at least with Drach leading the discussion) than an author for the non-professional consumer of military history.

Axis powers: America is a paper tiger. US Navy: we’ll go pew-pew. We’ll make more pew-pew than anyone else in the sea! Oh, and also we’ll learn to pew-pew at night.

@hughgordon6435

2 жыл бұрын

The Royal navy showed them how to pew pew at night then how to pew pew against all enemies (aka mir8mar).?

@karlvongazenberg8398

2 жыл бұрын

Und ze Kriegsmarine showed them, how to wage submarine war - the hard way, thought. :)

@citizenofvenus

2 жыл бұрын

UNLIMITED FLETCHER WORKS

@paulsteaven

2 жыл бұрын

@@ramal5708 nah, Axis powers knew that they won't be able to defeat the Americans once their war time industry kicks in. Especially the Japanese who wants a swift victory in Pacific by sinking/crippling US Navy's battleships and carriers at Pearl Harbor and also occupying US territories like the Philippine Commonwealth, Guam, Wake Island. Then there's Hitler.

@scottgiles7546

2 жыл бұрын

Not enough "pew's" in pew-pew for the USN of the time. (add a dozen or so to start)

Fascinating exchange about the Naval tactics with surface ships. The Navy also seemed to be innovative and adaptive with their Naval Aviation. I would like to discover the various processes they used to implement successes fleet wide.

Global Domination? This video is right up my alley!

"and when I press this pedal, that's when I enter world domination mode"

@andersmusikka

2 жыл бұрын

"And this dial controls how hot the sun is" (if I'm misremembering, or we're referencing different things, this comment won't make much sense 😀)

Was it Roosevelt or Truman who remarked about MacArthur, He has to be reminded he works for the President of the US rather than the other way around.

@PalleRasmussen

2 жыл бұрын

I do not know (Google probably does). Probably Truman, as he had some serious talks with him in the Korean War, and eventually fired him in favour of a more competent man who would also listen to his superior. It says a lot that Eisenhower, who worked with Monty and was known a a consumate diplomat, hated McArthur's guts.

@Hootkins.

2 жыл бұрын

I know for sure it was a line made by Truman in the movie _MacArthur_ but I don't know if Truman actually said it or if it was a line pieced together by script writers.

@georgewnewman3201

2 жыл бұрын

@@PalleRasmussen So did Roosevelt in the 1930s after Roosevelt became President while MacArthur was Army CoS.

@georgewnewman3201

2 жыл бұрын

@@Hootkins. I think either one could have said it after any number of arguments

@gregorywright4918

2 жыл бұрын

Part of the dynamic was MacArthur was a Republican and he was offered the nomination in 1944.

Made my day pog

I cannot have such a large Rum Ration just before work! I hope all is well Alex.

I went to Tarawa in 9777 as with the merchant navy (Bank line) near the beach was a big fixed gun. On the sheilding was a big jagged hole and on thhe breech was a brass plaque to British made and that it was from Singapore!

Rewatched this today, noting Trents discussion of comparing CIC and AIO development. Recently found a british website on the forgotten fleet, the British Pacific Fleet of 1944-45. It had a section on the experiences of "USS Robin" (HMS Victorious) in 1943. Lots of interviews with RN crew on their experiences. Highlighted a number of unexpected points, how the brits thought US shipyards, underway replenishment methods and flight deck procedures were better, but the Brits fighter control methods were better. Claimed the USN re-wrote their book to copy what Victorious was doing.

I never knew about the B-17's with radar and airgroup directors. It makes sense to have done this but i dunno why i never even thought about it

The USN got fed of being spammed by kamikazes and air attacks that they went all out on ship borne surface to air missiles in Project Bumblebee which today turned into Standard Missile series SM-2, SM-3, SM-6 etc, very capable missiles.

First video matching voice to face! 👍🏻

I wish these were in a podcast.

Great Video! Could you please make a video of what if the Washington Naval Treaty hadn't been signed?

I had no idea AWACS was such an old concept. And a B-17-assuming it still retained its guns, that would be one tough and heavily armed AWACS! I assume some might be removed though for weight and/or space reasons.

@janvanv

2 жыл бұрын

I have no idea of the weight of airborne radar of that range in the mid 40s, but I do know that by the time of the Lockeed P2V-7 in the mid/late 50s the radar equipent was over 7 tons and just the air condition junk was over 3 tons..Air conditioning for the radar stuff--tubes in those days..I know this from dinnertable conversations between my father and other pilots grousing about the unreliable air con junk and how as soon as that crapped out they would have to shut down the radars and abort missions..Meanwhile the crew would be baking and sweating in the cockpit (this over the Mediterranean) And those P2s had 2x Wright R-3350-32W Duplex-Cyclone with around 3500hp each --a fair bit more than the old Wright 1820s with 1200 hp each...I think that a B-17 converted would be very lightly armed and escorted due to weight limitations and lack of power.

@stuartdollar9912

2 жыл бұрын

I'm going to guess some of those guns would have been removed for weight purposes. Still, it would be interesting to know.

Wow. Just WOW

Global domination, Admiral King approves.