Comments by "Gregory Wright" (@gregorywright4918) on "The Drydock - Episode 160" video.

That is one difference, and a more modern one. Naval spec gets down to the level of reinforced scantlings to withstand battle damage, higher-test more-expensive materials, and redundant control and communication systems.
3
@archibaldlarid3587 Sometimes the war equipment itself was redesigned for faster, cheaper production. The Russians were masters at that, hence the numbers of tanks they produced compared to the German precision production methods. Plus they had access through the US and UK to scarce materials.
3
You could try it on a ship-design simulator, but my guess would be no. The Scharnhorst and the Alaska had 9x 11"/12" guns, and they were 30,000 ton ships. The Hippers were 16,000 tons. Usually the armament is chosen first, then the ship is designed around it. Up-gunning the armament requires either expanding the ship size or dropping the number of guns.
2
@genericpersonx333 I think you've got the USN operational doctrine almost completely right for the 30s. The carriers were part of Scouting Force, so would normally be escorted by cruisers and the new fleet destroyers. Their job was to find the enemy fleet, especially the battleship line, deal with the enemy carrier force, and bring the US battle line into contact with their counterparts. The new "fast" battleships were designed to counter the fast IJN battle line, the upgraded Kongos, especially if they were on an independent sortie. The notable trend in both RN and IJN was higher speed in the battle lines, so the US had to keep up with their own "flying wing". Pearl Harbor brought a re-alignment of fleet organization during 42, and lessons learned that year were worked into the new organizations that evolved in 43. I have Learning War by Hone - good book.
2
wait till next weekend...
2
@snoopytheace4487 Destroyers were torpedo-boat killers. Cruisers were destroyer-killers. Battle-cruisers were cruiser-killers. And fast battleships were battle-cruiser killers. Take your pick.
2
@BeanyFfm Drach did a whole video on Operation Catapult, I think your questions were answered there: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1aoi33VAAO4
2
@chucksneed5670 In the age of sail each deck had a lieutenant in charge of the guns, but they would await the captain's command on how to fire. If it was just "Fire", then it was up to the lieutenant. If it was "Fire as you bear", then they would fire progressively. They could also be ordered to fire high (especially with chain-shot, aiming to dismast for capture) or low (for the hull). The captain might also order double-shot if he was expecting to get into close quarters (lower range) or a raking position. After the initial commands and the first broadside it was hard to relay specific orders over the noise and flying shot, so each deck was often on their own. The Royal Navy appreciated the disabling capacity of rapid fire, so they trained their gun crews to reload as quickly as possible and to continue firing without waiting for command. So a "broadside" would be each gun that can bear firing once, even if it is not together. Some reports were that the RN could get three "broadsides" out in the time it took the French to get two.
2
Drach did cover turret considerations in an earlier Drydock. Check the topic list and look in the mid-XXs (50-90ish).
2
@philipgadsby8261 The problem with the Implacables was fundamental - their dual hangars only had 14 foot clearance, and newer planes required at least 16 foot (preferably 17.5). They were bigger ships with more SHP, but their lifts and hangar clearance doomed them to an early retirement. The rebuild of Victorious did include 17.5 foot hangar height (apparently they razed her to the hangar deck and rebuilt upwards; must have been fun reorganizing the armor). When they took her in they thought they could get it done in a few years and not have to deal with the engines, but as the rebuild stretched out due to changing requirements and funding shortages they realized she was not aging well.
1
Same problem in the US with the USAF...
1
What about the crew?
1
@stevevalley7835 The Kongos were rebuilt, including re-engining to double their SHP, in the '30s while still under the Treaty. Of course, they had "creative interpretations" of Treaty rules...
1
@stevevalley7835 The "US spies" that failed to get anything on the Yamatos? The US already knew the Japanese had been progressively building ships to be faster than the US Standard line. The NCs and Iowas were designed to outdo them, not to replace the Standard line but to be a "flying wing" that could chase them down and prevent the kind of special tactics the Brits were planning with the faster QEs. The SDs were designed to be the next version of the Standards, with the Montanas their bigger brothers. All of this was roughed out in the mid-30s, well before the carrier became the center of the fleet. Pearl Harbor threw a monkey-wrench in the plans, and also showed the power of massed carriers. The problem Kido Butai had was staying power. It could raid for a couple days, but then had to return to a decent port to refuel and rearm. Once the IJN added fast battleships to KB, the US had to as well. Aircraft could not protect the carriers at night or in bad weather.
1
@stevevalley7835 The SD AA as built was average for mid-41, but was upgraded progressively in 42-44 with 20- and 40-mm mounts and the VT fuze for the 5"ers. I don't think it would do much better than PW in December of 41, especially against well-trained Bettys and Nells without air cover.
1
You would have to take out BOTH sets of turrets fore and aft, rebuild the area for a single larger turret ring, and then drop in a single 11" turret instead. Since the Hipper is 50 ft longer, you might be able to keep the same machinery spaces for the extra 3 kts, but you would not be able to up-armor her without having to add bulges.
1
@RedXlV A compound delta wing like that won't fold, it usually has fuel tanks.
1
@DELTATROOPER5555 Dry-docking those ships would be impossible before WW2, but they sound like they would be big enough to fill the Habakkuk role if they could build a flight deck on them. They are not especially fast (25kts?), but comparable to the other cruise ships used for transports that sailed without escort and relied on speed to avoid U-boats. If you have "none of the modern tech" aboard, how are they propelled? As far as converting to troop transports, compare the WW2 cruise liner numbers pre- and post-conversion to the numbers those ships carry - what was it, about a 10x increase? There would probably be a bit more room if you took out the pools, theaters and waterslides. The pre-WW2 ships had small cargo holds, but the modern ones do not.
1
@jakemillar649 No question - just the modern subs alone could take out either WW1 or WW2 navies. Add in the stand-off options of missiles and aircraft and the older ones stand no chance. It would be more a question of whether they have enough modern torpedoes to take everything out.
1
@jimmycen7498 To help get the speed up, cruisers and destroyers have a higher length-to-beam ratio (more like 10:1) compared to battleships (more like 6:1). The width of the turret barbette becomes a limiting factor, so twins or triples are favored. The Richelieu was designed to bring all the magazines into one tight space so armor can be maximized. Armor is not the primary consideration on a cruiser - speed is.
1
@gcut3912 Depends on what the "modern warship" could fire back, assuming you are ruling out AS missiles. Most modern ships don't have much in the way of armor beyond some kelvar-protected spaces. You could probably make swiss cheese out of an LCS.
1
The 40mm was used more later in the war because the smaller calibers (50-cal, 1.1", and 20mm) could not stop a kamikaze from hitting the ship. The bigger shell had much more hitting power and could rip apart a plane. They came in single, twin, quad, and sextuplet mounts, so they could replace light or medium weight mounts, and they paired well with existing directors.
1
I think he's out-of-town on some visit or research, so he scheduled the episode and postponed the admin.
1