Comments by "" (@BobSmith-dk8nw) on "King George V class - Design, Service and Myths" video.

  1.  @TTTT-oc4eb  Your arguments are irrelevant Bean Counter. When all these Capital Ships were designed - no one knew how things were going to shape out. You are also ignoring the fact that had Halsey left his Battleships to cover San Bernardino Strait things would look much differently than you have depicted. It wasn't the fault of the Iowa's designers that Halsey was stupid. Also - Halsey having been stupid not to leave them to guard the strait - THEN - he pulled them and sent them down there after it was to late - just as they were about to make use of those big guns on the Japanese decoy fleet. THEN you are ignoring the fact that the Japanese COULD have chosen to employ their main fleet off Guadalcanal - back when it could have made a difference - and the fleet actions we might have had then could have been much different. As to the slower classes of battleships before the Iowas - 1 knot can make a real difference over time. Yes - those classes could and did escort Carriers - but - the Iowa's were better at it - if for no other reason than they were faster. The speed of the Fleet Carriers - (Carriers being fast so they could get as much wind over the deck as they could) - was not the limiting factor if their escorts couldn't keep up with them. Also - as I believe I have pointed out to you in the past - there are only so many ships that can be fit in a fleet formation and still be in range of the ships they are protecting using WWII technology. Cruisers take up about the same amount of maneuver space as a Battleship. Thus - you can better fit battleships in a fleet formation to protect carriers with their AA than you can Cruisers. The closer they were - the more 5"/38 guns could participate and closer still more 40mm guns could participate. Fleet Defense is conducted in layers. First the Destroyers, then the Cruisers and then the Battleships - and then the Carriers. Trying to use Cruisers to protect the Carriers - is penny wise and pound foolish. You want as much protection as near the Carriers as you can get - and THAT - is what you get with Battleships in that role. The other thing is - those Cruisers had to come from some place - and them being used in the Center of the Formation - takes them away from the next layer out. Lastly - Battleships can take more punishment themselves - and not have to withdraw or be left behind because of damage than Cruisers. Smart Asses like yourself are not nearly as smart as they like to think they are. There are reasons why the term Bean Counter - is a pejorative. .
    18
  2.  @genericpersonx333  Yeah. Nobody knew that. The other thing about the way the Americans did things - was that they were the richest most powerful industrial country in the world - and if they wanted to build all those 16" gun Battleships - they didn't care how much it cost. They weren't choosing between Battleships and Aircraft Carriers - they were building both and as many of each as they could. Other nations couldn't do that. I had some guy tell me once that the Four Engine Bombers the Americans built - took more resources to build than they destroyed. My response was - that, first off I doubted that - but - even if it was true - the Americans had the resources to use - and the Germans didn't have the resources to lose. Bean Counters think like that ... I'm retired now but when I was working ... I had to deal with RL Bean Counters and ... don't like the stupid sons of bitches .... The simple fact was - that the money they saved on things was going to be paid for in blood by the people using them ... I had been one of those people, my friends were some of those people and I worked with those people. So my enmity towards the little twits I encounter on YouTube is well earned ... At least no one is likely to die because of the little twits on YouTube. .
    10
  3.  @genericpersonx333  OK. I see it all the time where you have people who cling to some theory partly because they believe in it and party because they don't want to be proven wrong. For the rest of it - yes - as mentioned here - there were some highly intelligent people wrestling with these issues and - some of them came up with solutions that were different than others. Here - one issue that deserves more thought - is that each of these groups of people were deciding what they were going to do - based on their nations priorities. The British, Americans, Japanese, French and Italians all had different perceptions of what they needed to prioritize. Italy, for example, never built any aircraft carriers because they considered their large boot of a nation, sticking right out into the middle of the Med. a sufficient aircraft carrier for their needs. They were wrong about that - but they weren't just being stupid. As with Force Z - land based air and naval forces just ... never were able to work together that well. In the '30's - you had all these people with all these theories ... and most of them were wrong. If you look at what those Air Power guys like Billy Mitchell and Douhet actually said - they were horribly wrong. Yes - Air Power turned out to be fantastically important - but NOT in the way these people had thought it would be. Some people have wondered about the naming the B-25 after Mitchell - since it being a Medium Bomber - it was just the kind of aircraft this Four Engine Minded Air Power Advocate hated (according to the person making that remark). [shrug] .
    5
  4.  @genericpersonx333  So - do you think he really believes his own bull shit - or - that he's just a Troll? .
    4
  5.  @genericpersonx333  Yes. .
    2
  6.  @davidtuttle7556  Don't forget Desert Storm. USS Missouri Gulf War Tomahawks https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Eevs2IL7y8 Of course - that was in addition to the guns ... which had Iraqi troops trying to surrender to the Wisconsin's drone ... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qE42jDFBlWE .
    1