Comments by "Steve Valley" (@stevevalley7835) on "The Drydock - Episode 128" video.

  1.  @thehandoftheking3314  As I understand, you are asking about a WWI scenario similar to the WWII scenario of recycling the turrets from the WWI Courageous class battlecruisers on HMS Vanguard as a time and cost saving expedient. These are some of the issues to run into recycling guns and turrets from the 1890s on new-build ships circa 1914: First, the turrets are 20 years old. Turrets from the 1890s vintage Majestic class battleships were installed on monitors during WWI to provide fire support. First issue was the turrets needed to be modified to allow much higher elevation, so they could fire to a greater range. The second issue, discovered after the monitors were in use, was the systems in the turrets, like the hydraulics, were old and brittle and frequently broke down. Another issue was that the older guns, being designed for short range, were only 25-35 caliber, so inaccurate at longer range. Another problem was some pre-1900 guns were designed for black or brown powder and performance was sub-optimal with smokeless or Cordite. The USN had a particularly bad run in the early 1900s as their designers did not understand the dynamics of smokeless and the 8"/40s and 12"/40s that were, supposedly, designed for smokeless blew their muzzles off with disturbing regularity, requiring an extensive rebuild and reinforcement program be implemented. Then there was the safety issue. Early turrets were designed with single stage hoists operating in the open. There was a disastrous incident on USS Georgia in, iirc, 1904 where an ember in the gun from a previous shot (they didn't have air purge systems in the guns then either) touched off the first bags rammed for the next shot. The flames shooting out of the breech ignited the other bags sitting on the hoist, Burning chunks of propellant fell down the open hoist and ignited more bags in the handling room at the bottom of the hoist, next to the magazine. Probably the only reason Georgia didn't go up like a Roman candle was USN smokeless is a bit less volatile than Cordite. Some 35 men died. They retrofitted trunks and shutters around those open hoists, but later turrets, with two stage hoists, are much safer. Then there is the simple issue of size. Early pre-dreadnought guns were typically 12". By WWI, 14-15 inch guns were the thing.
    3
  2.  @thehandoftheking3314  I understand the thought process. Then you get into the details. The 12" guns on the Canopus class were only 35 caliber. Those on Dreadnought were 45 caliber. Longer gun means more time that the shell is in the gun, so more time for a bigger charge to burn, giving the shell a stronger push, so you get more range. Muzzle velocity on the 12"/35 was 2367fps. MV on Dreadnought's 12"/45s was 2700fps. Pulling old guns off obsolete ships to install on cheaply built, disposable, monitors, during the war emergency was fine. The monitors with old guns on them were all scrapped shortly after the end of the war. The RN only kept the monitors that had state of the art 15"/42s on them. Putting already obsolete guns on new build capital ships with a 20 year expected service life is a different matter. I also understand your point about income from scrapping, but the scrap value of a ship is tiny compared to the build cost. I found a newspaper article about Dreadnought being sold for scrap in 1921. The article cites a cost to built Dreadnought of "almost" $10M, and sold for scrap for $200,000.
    3
  3.  @coyotehater  Good question. the UK had been at war with Germany for two years, but was not officially at war with Japan until Dec 8, 41, so the US declaring war on Germany would not automatically put us at war with Japan. Good question, would being at war with Germany cause more naval assets to be moved from the Pacific to Atlantic? The US Asiatic Squadron based in the Philippines amounted to the Houston, Marblehead and 13 four pipers. If the entire force had joined Force Z, they probably would not have enough AA to save PoW and Repulse, and someone would have objected to all the US surface force taking off for Malaya, leaving the islands with only subs and PT boats for defense.
    3
  4.  @dimitriouchemistry2215  two examples: the Greek battleships Lemnos and Kilkis were sunk by Stukas on April 23, 1941. The Wiki article says the Stuka was used in the anti-shipping role with "considerable success", without giving specifics.
    2
  5.  @aliceosako792  This is somewhat related to the question on the post a few days ago. I see an opportunity. I looked in my 1928 USN port directory, and there were no drydocks in Singapore longer than 500 feet. With the Sutherland and Fitzroy docks already existing, and too narrow to accommodate capital ships, as well as too short, the only place I see at Cockatoo Island for a larger dock is where the two old long slipways are. So, I would try to negotiate a deal with the Admiralty where, if the Admiralty covered the cost of a drydock that could accommodate the RN's largest ships, saving them a trip back to England for major work, then the RAN would have all it's ships built in yards in England, rather than building anything at Cockatoo. That way Australia gets a very large dock, and maintenance business from the RN, and UK yards pick up business from the RAN. A larger dock at Cockatoo would certainly have come in handy. A County fits nicely in Sutherland, but I have seen a pic of a carrier in Sutherland , where the edges of the flight deck overhang the edges of the dock, and they probably could not have closed the gate behind it if the stern had an extra coat of paint on it.
    1
  6.  @nnoddy8161  off the top of my head, game changer at Java Sea and Sunda Strait, because they were heavy surface engagements with IJN cruisers and destroyers. Probably non-event at Coral Sea as that was a USN fast carrier group. PoW and Repulse would probably not get involved at Guaduacanal due to the close quarters, but Perth, if surviving, might get into it. Seat of the pants hunch is Exeter, if surviving, would stick with the PoW and Repulse. PoW would stand out in the Dutch East Indies theater as being one of the very few with a really decent AA suite. Houston's AA armament had been augmented since she was built, totaling, by then, 8-5"/25s and 4-1.1". Marblehead and the 4 pipers had obsolete 3" AA guns. The wild card would be what would happen to the Dutch cruisers, if they survived? Not being constrained by "Not Invented Here" they seem to have mounted a significant number of 40mm Bofors. Would the force be able to defend itself against air attack in the Java Sea?
    1