Comments by "Gregory Wright" (@gregorywright4918) on "W&Z class - Guide 239" video.

Kind of ironic - Frank Jack Fletcher was sidelined, but the Fletcher class went on and on...
10
@VersusARCH After Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Iraq tried to stop the establishment of Israel back in 47 and 48 by invading Palestine and massacring every Jew they could find, then funding and helping terrorists sneak in to kill women and children in their beds at night. Everyone with a brain could see that Egypt and Syria were getting ready to invade Israel in 1967, with the publicly stated goal of wiping Israel off the map. Israel hit first, and did NOT take advantage of it's superiority by wiping THEM off the map. If you've ever been to northern Israel you would see why the Golan is necessary for creating a defensible border, and Israel returned to it in 1973 after beating the pants off Syria following ANOTHER sneak attack. Why do you hate Israel?
7
I think he compared US & RN guns, at least from AA perspective, here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HZqMqhUnVMU
2
@kemarisite The 5"/25 and the 5"/38 were used more often for AA fire; the 5"/51 was used more often for anti-ship fire (casement or low-angle mount). Did it also use the same shell?
2
@dcbadger2 Don't have a full video on history of flying boats, but this one did a decent job on PBYs: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iOi0o91Sw7U
2
@hammondpickle Multi-gun turrets are more complicated to build, especially as the shell size gets bigger. More turrets means more targets can be engaged simultaneously, and fewer guns down if a turret goes down from hits or mechanical/hydraulic problem.
2
@michaelj132 Drach has said in the past he cuts off "before the modern era", like around 1950ish, so as not to comment on modern equipment that may still be classified.
2
@RedXlV I think Israel had a few nukes by '67, and I doubt Brezhnev would have been politically free to use a nuke then. Things were different in '73.
2
@kemarisite They kept Nagumo and Kido Butai distracted and maneuvering to avoid attacks, as well as the CAP cycling, which wore them down and frustrated their ops schedule. In a sense, they were the "bait" in the trap...
2
@WayneBorean No high-angle mount?
1
@LSOP- Drach collects old photos...
1
@krestonkurotani3231 By "go past", you mean go bigger? Few destroyers did. The five inch shell is just about the right weight to be hefted by one man, anything beyond that starts getting too heavy and you need a hoist or more men to feed shells. Plus you still have the shell and powder together as one package; from 6" upwards you see them in two parts (except for some post-war 6" and 8" auto-loaders).
1
@hs5312 The US developed an 18" gun for testing, but found it only 10-20% better than the 16"/50 while it required much heavier mount and ammo feed systems, so they decided it was not worth it and agreed to 16" limit in WNT. Read Norman Friedman's book on US Battleships, there is a page or two on the comparisons.
1
@kemarisite Was Krupp Austro-Hungarian? I thought they were in Essen along the Rhine. Or are you saying A-H had no indigenous naval suppliers?
1
@dcbadger2 Yeah, he's interesting but sometimes he goes off on tangents. I thumbed-up your question, as the whole area of floatplanes and flying boats had significant impact on ships and tactics interwar (the USN and IJN had seaplane tenders to support squadrons in remote locations for forward scouting and attack). The IJN seems to have targeted the PBYs at Kaneohe both for the scouting threat as well as the counterattack potential. IJN sometimes used a flying boat as lead plane when a squadron of bombers or fighters were making a long-range transfer (like they did in DEI early in 42).
1