Comments by "Gregory Wright" (@gregorywright4918) on "The Development of US Navy Tactics (1895-1939) - From Small Beginnings..." video.

@jameshanlon5689 Drach did two videos on the newer Texas, here's the latest one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S3jYpuf1Fp4
2
@glennricafrente58 The USN was probably third best at night fighting before WW2. Unfortunately, they met the best in August 1942 before they had really tested out their pre-war doctrines in real wartime experience (the old adage "no plan will survive the first encounter with the enemy" is especially true of doctrines developed during peacetime). And their squadron-level admirals were mostly the worst at learning from their own mistakes. John Shepherd seems to think prewar doctrine was oriented around radar, but radar was still in its infancy and I have not read a lot of USN discussion of radar tactics before 1939. Most of the development of naval radar tactics for search and fire control seems to have happened as the first generation of equipment got out to the fleet in 39-41, but there was also a lot of shortcomings discovered and corrections requested. In particular the limitations of radar in waters near land at night was unexpected. Plus the whole understanding of radar-assisted fighter direction seems to have been neglected until we saw how much better the RN and RAF were doing it in 41-42.
2
@leapofaith97 Here's Drach's answer to the first part of your question: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K_DEHvLvMak
1
@piritskenyer "What-If"ing is fun, but delivering the plans for a foreign-built gun is hardly going to allow the US to build it right away. Gun foundries have decades of experience in the "how" of making guns, and each does it a little different. I doubt we could emulate 100% of the French maker's techniques without several years of learning how, and I also doubt that we would try to do it 100% the way they did it - every manufacturer seems to think that "our way is better than the others". Plus there's the whole metric-to-imperial measurement system to conquer...
1
@154Kilroy Several navies used full-rigged sailing ships for training naval cadets in the early 20th century. The US Coast Guard still does. I think it is because a sailing ship gets you closer to feeling the real influences of the wind, waves and weather than engine-powered ships. Plus a lot of naval traditions come directly from sailing times, as well as a lot of naval jargon. Seeing first hand what a main brace does, and how rigging is spliced, gives you a new understanding of "Splice the Mainbrace"!
1
@Kim-the-Dane-1952 I think the mustache gives it away...
1
@joshthomas-moore2656 The Japanese switched to oxygen-enriched torpedoes in the 30s, which are much more powerful but also much more dangerous if they get hit. The center of a ship is the most likely target for incoming shells, so it makes sense to move delicate, explosive equipment out of that area. The USN also recognized this issue and stopped putting their seaplanes in the center of the ship, moving them to the rear as well.
1
@ph89787 If the USN had 1944 levels of tactics and experience at Midway in 1942, they would have been much better at coordinating a strike group, keeping it together and covered by the fighters; their fleet formations would have combined multiple carriers together for better defensive fire and CAP coverage, and their radar-based fighter direction would have been much better organized, to name just a few. They still would have struggled with the Devastator, but with fighter cover and more experience they would not be going in alone and the IJN CAP would have had to decide between taking on the torpedo or dive bombers. They would also know more about how the IJN operated, so they would not have wasted so much flight time searching for the KB but would have anticipated it's movements better and plotted a more direct intercept path. And the land-based CAP intercept of the first strike on Midway would have been better organized with better anti-Zero tactics. As for the USAAF, it would also have more experience with IJN operations and known that high-altitude bombing of ships just doesn't work. As for the KB with 1944-level air groups, they would have been slaughtered. The vast majority of the good IJN pilots were dead by then.
1