Comments by "Adam Bainbridge" (@AdamMGTF) on "The Drydock - Episode 063" video.

Something worth telling the ships design team if you ever invent time travel. 🤔
3
I read a fantastic book by Stephen Fry recently that got me thinking. Perhaps time travel is already possible. And the state of history is simply as good as it can be. Trying to change anything for the better would just somehow make things worse. I always think of this when I read comments on the internet about how the axis powers should have done xyz. 🤔 The reality is. It's easy to pick faults with the design of a ship, tank or aircraft in retrospect. I would much rather understand why the decisions taken, were taken. Sadly, there's no where near enough reaserch into such things. Or any sources we'd need have been lost to time.
3
In addition to what alganhar has said, I think you have missed the point of the drydock November-Bravo. The idea is to answer questions and possible alternative histories/matchups. But not to the ends of the earth. If he went into the detail your asking, it'd take up the whole hour. And apart from analysing every little detail of reasoning behind the answer... You'd not change the answer. It couldn't be done. And any idea that it may be done to Portsmouth is laughable (as anyone who's been there would tell you). The question was asked and very well answered :) Oh... I think the Germans had 11 boats at seat on the eve of war. I could be wrong. But that number sticks in my head.
3
@jonrolfson1686 yep. Also. Something that people on the internet always seem to forget. Especially in YouTube comments. The people at the time were lead by the best and brightest. There was a dam good reason they did XY and Z. I just read a comment where someone said "they should have launched midgit subs from big ships in a ship Vs ship battle". Forget how stupid an idea that is... Why didn't the poster think for one second that maybe if it was a good idea, someone would have done it. Comment threads on here are full of ideas that the poster thinks is amazing. None of them stop to think that maybe, in a war where the best and brightest were working towards a common goal. That maybe they could out think an armchair general on social media (even if the latter has the gift of hindsight). It boggles my mind. I've studied WW2 for 30 years nearly. And I can't think of a single thing that the allies should have done that they didn't. Given what was known and possible at the time. The same can actually be said for the axis. People say "Rommel should have done this or that". The man was a military genius. For god sake. A 14 year old who's played world of tanks is not likley to come up with a better stratagy for the Afrika Corps to win in the Desert 😳 Ok. Rant over. I really shouldn't read YouTube comments when I can't sleep lol
2
@alganhar1 interesting info there. I also could add that prien was a skipper of costal submarines in the first days of the war. It's how he got a sea going command. No doubt he had much better experience of costal areas than skippers who had been posted to the seat going boats. Even if the krigsmarine had 5 skippers as good as him. Would they have the necessary experience to matter? As a side note. The amount of fleet units the Americans had in PH is much higher than the RN would have had in dock in September 39 anyway. The ships were already at sea. Basically the entire question of a German U-boat pearl harbor goes from unlikely, to impossible to laughable. The more anyone with knowlage of the circumstances thinks about it. I'm surprised Drach' used up as much time as he did to consider the question. God knows what November-Bravo has to complain about 😂
2
Not sure about that. How would it attack a u boat? Flying boats had to be dam Sharp to catch a u boat before it went into a crash dive. A airship not only moves way way slower. But it'd be much easier to spot, both visually and on radar. It wouldn't be much use as a scout for this reason also. It'd be seen long before it could vector in an escort. Good rule of thumb the internet seems to forget when looking back at ww2 in perticular. As a rule, if it had been a good idea. They'd have at least tried it. The smartest people in any given country were trying to win the war for said country. Even with hindsight, we can rarely see a better course of action than that which was taken at the time.
2
A very very easy mistake to make. As I'm sure we'll all discover when the crown passes to a new monarch
2
@GrahamCStrouse but if they were expecting Jutland II Why would they remove them?
1
The problem there being that the u boat would find the airship fairly easy to spot. They were looking out for (much smaller) hunter killer aircraft as it was. Also. The emissions of the radar set could have been intercepted. The RN used airships in ww1. There's a reason they'd don't use them in ww2. The smartest people in any given country were assisting their country in coming up with technology and tactics to win the war. If something so simple would have won the battle of the Atlantic. They would have done it. (Which is a rule of thumb internet "historians" seem to forget. It's something I was taught in A level history 15 years ago.)
1
@pekkamakela2566 I read a book recently on commerce raiders in both world wars. Float planes were used. But purely as a scout. Not to attack, the raider itself did the attacking. :) Not a full answer to your question. But it's something
1
@kemarisite really? I've not read about that. Do you have any books you could recommend? What I've read so far has been mainly odd books I've found in charity shops. And I've not read anything like that. :)
1
Didn't he cover that in the Great lakes special? The answer being. The lakes versions were not as good or anywhere near as long lived. Because unseasoned wood. They weren't expected or meant to last. Otherwise. They was very little difference (technologically speaking)
1
You need to ask questions in the post above... He probably won't see it here. ;)
1
Happy to help
1
Why would you? You designing a ship in the 1930s. You have no way of knowing that a freak torpedo hit from an obsolete aircraft will disable the rudder in 5+ years time in a war you don't believe will happen. So Why would you add another rudder? You wouldn't. Which is why they didn't. Hindsight is a wonderful thing. And utterly useless. It's also a very bad thing to have in mind when analysing historical decisions
1