Comments by "josh thomas-moore" (@joshthomas-moore2656) on "IJN Kongo - Guide 174" video.

@kaymish6178 Phoned in?
7
Kongo-san HIEI!
4
Kongo nee-san
3
Hiei!
3
1) HMS Hood vs one of the Kongo's as built and in 1941 in a open ocean and no magic BB's to make either go bang? 2) How do the four Kongo's compare to Beatty's and Hippers squadrons at Jutland? 3) In a Previous Drydock you said the Kongo's would have been a great help for the British BattleCruisers had they been there but how would they have effected the battle if they had been helping the German Battlecruisers? 4) Which class was the most useful for the Japanese the Kongo's Nagato's or Yamato's? 5) Was their anyway to get more use or a better way to use the Kongo class?
3
@thanakonpraepanich4284 But Kongo-san
2
@bkjeong4302 i agree with you on this all navies who had carriers were all guilty of putting Battleships and Battlecruisers to escort carriers, but the Kongo's have few actions to distinguish themselves in comparisons to ships like Warspite with her battle record and Yamato and the Kongo's were the main non-carrier capital ships who did something in WW2 for Japan so i think people are using that argument because of a lack other things distinguish them. Which personally i do feel is a shame they were good ships just misused, i mean Krishima did do a number on South Dekota and Hiei did do a lot of damage so they were a force to be reckoned with when they were around.
2
@bkjeong4302 Pretty much and yeah i agree
2
@bkjeong4302 a defence for this might be the Japanese might have been thinking what if a cruiser or destroyer group got close to the carriers (Its unlikely but not impossible) a battle-cruiser would blow them out the water as Kongo did to the Samuel B. Roberts when they swapped to HE rounds.
1
@bkjeong4302 I'm not saying it wasn't flawed but the Japanese were thinking before and even during the war that carriers were useful but battleships were still the kings of the seas, by Toronto and Pearl Harbour this was clearly not the case but when they refitted the ships and came up with the ideas on what to use the Kongo's for the carriers was still untested in a major war and everyone had their own ideas how to organise the fleet. The need for big gun escort for carriers was an untested theory and like all untested theories it was based on what they knew at the time, its just technology had moved on since then that made the theory debunked and they did prove good service for Japan and their moments of real action was when they weren't near the carriers like Guadalcanal and Samar.
1
@Justin-rv7oy In a previous Drydock (Sorry can't remember the number) Drach did say his real criticism was in how they were used not on the ships, they were used more like the Warpsite and they really shouldn't have, they didn't have the armour for the tasks they were given. And i believe in either the last Drydock or one before Drach said the Renown and Kongo's were the posters for the WW1 era ships in WW2 in doing well.
1
@bkjeong4302 Sorry Glory was wrong word but i couldn't come up with a better one at the time. What i mean is the times they were in the most action and most useful (weather they won or not), as while with the carriers they kind of just sat around and battleships and battlecruiers should be using the guns its what they are for.
1