Comments by "John Fisher" (@johnfisher9692) on "Drachinifel" channel.

  1. Another weakness of Japanese carriers is that only one ventilation system was used whereas British carrier used a separate system for the hanger and another for the ship. This is what spread the fumes around the entirety of Japanese ships and why they were so vulnerable to battle damage. British precautions for the aviation fuel stowage were also very strict and although it meant they carried less fuel, no British carrier suffered from a bulk fuel fire like the Japanese carriers.
    406
  2. Great video and corrects many misconceptions about the Russian 2nd Pacific squadron. Because of the defeat some authors describe them and the commanding Admiral as totally incompetent when in fact they were brave and skilled people who fought as well as they could given the disadvantages of their circumstances. The Japanese fleet fought just as well but had every advantage possible with the exception of sheer numbers, and in this case quantity was NOT a quality all of its own.
    320
  3. Thanks Drach If I'm going back to the 1930's to rebuild my Dreadnoughts I'm going to want to grab all my reference books but my preference is to actually grab Drach to come back with me. I can only imagine the fun he would have when turned loose with full knowledge, authority and hopefully finance's to refit to his hearts content. Maybe I'd better bring Lady Drach too, otherwise Drach would be sad. Yes Drach, just step into the big blue Police box, nothing to worry about, Honest!
    221
  4. Great video The biggest flaw of the Z plan was it required the British and French to do absolutely nothing about expanding and modernizing their Navies. It bears frightening similarity to Tirpitz's Risk-flotte theory which ultimately proved a failure and a disaster for Germany. Strangely teh H-39's had even thinner belt armour than Bismarck and the inclusion of underwater torpedo tubes is strange considering all the problems encountered with them in WW1. It also weakens the hull and reduces watertight integrity. The 'fantasy' H-44 design was to have 20 inch guns and considering all the problems Yamato had with blast effect from her guns, I shudder to think what the effects of these monsters would have. Not to mention the very slow firing rate. With your redesigned German ships Drach, another thing to get rid of is the German obsession with the Triple screw propulsion system. It has been proved that either a twin or quad screw is better as the quad allows steering with the engines in case of rudder damage cough Bismarck cough Navies prefer a quad for larger ships as it provides redundency, which the military loves.
    121
  5. The Japanese use of submarines was very different to the German. The concentration on attacking warships made the task of guarding convoys in the Pacific much easier for the US Navy. I shudder to think of the havoc of German U-boats using wolf pack attacks against the less experienced US escorts in the Pacific The large size of the Japanese subs worked against them in evading an attacking warship.
    98
  6. Thanks Drach It is strange just how similar the fates of Craddock and Von Spee are. Both faced opponents with vastly superior ships and numbers and displayed outstanding courage and determination to do their duty. This battle also proved that Jackie Fishers "Dreadnought Armoured Cruisers" were excellent ships when used for the role they were designed for, not against the fast Battleships that was Hipper's 1stSG. Wonder how faster the battle would have been if the British ships had fully working AP shells? A flaw Jellicoe noted when he was 3rd Sea Lord but sadly did not pursue the matter after he left that position.
    96
  7. Love the Essex class. They were excellent carriers at war and the large number of uses they eventually filled proved the versatility of their basic design and the amount of growth built into them.
    85
  8. I can't imagine a twelve year old today doing what Nelson did. How times change
    71
  9. I can remember when you first started doing the Drydock and wondered that if there was enough interest you'd do more. As we approach episode 300, have you decided whether or not there is enough interest from your adoring public?😆
    68
  10. Thanks Drach. Nice to hear the correct music again. Someone in the US Bureau of Ordnance had a flash of brilliance, pity they never had the same for the torpedoes.
    64
  11. I can understand your heart break at the decision of scrapping the beautiful HMS Hood as one of the five choices but Hood was a hurried redesign to partially incorporate the lessons of Jutland. Scrapping her, Renown and Repulse in favour of building properly redesigned Admiral class ships does make sence, even if it's a cold blooded decision.
    63
  12. Great video The KGV's are the most under rated BB's of WW2. Too many concentrate on their 14inch guns and use this as a basis for their attack on the class but don't do the research to find out just how effective these guns were. In many ways better than their opponents 15inch weapons. As you stated, their armour was the heaviest in the world until the Yamato class came along and the only ship to be lost was sunk by a combination of a very heavy air attack (which would have sunk any capital ship at the time) and some bad luck in just where the torpedo hit. In battle the class did everything that was asked of them and did it well. With hindsight it's clear 9x14inch guns in 3 turrets would have been a better choice as well as a raked bow and more spacious turrets for the secondary guns. But hindsight is 20/20 after all. I could fix all this if I could get my TARDIS working. lol.
    62
  13. Liked the new start to the video One major problem with the US Treaty cruisers is that in order to save weight all the guns were mounted in single sleeve and could only elevate or depress as a complete unit whereas other Navies mounted the guns individually. As no two guns ae aver identical this was a weakness in the design which was also shared by some US BB's
    61
  14. Love the new intro. It shows just how much work went into building a ship and how physical it was at the start of the 20th century. And dangerous given there was no such thing as OH&S then. I read someone stating that the Washington Treaty didn't prevent WW2, but it probably prevented the Anglo-American war of the mid 1920's. Your point about if the UK-Japanese treaty continued brings this to mind. Q&A Would it have been useful if some of the light carriers had forgone strike aircraft and been pure fighter carriers designated to protect the fleet from enemy air attack. Given the smaller size of fighters you could carry much more of them and I think they would be a potent defence. Given the size of an Independence class air group of 24 fighters, 12 Db's and 9 Tb's I coud see an all fighter group of perhaps 55-60 aircraft. Later fighters were also powerful enough to carry a significant bomb or rocket load and could be used as attack aircraft in the absence of enemy aircraft.
    49
  15. Poor Langley The USN just couldn't make up their mind on what to do with the hull. Does she hold the record for the more roles she was rebuilt for? Or the Weight Watchers record for the most weight lost?
    48
  16. Well WoWs is a game with only a tenuous contact with reality. Their world view is very simple 1. Russian ships are godly 2. German and Japanese ships are demi-gods 3. Most others are...acceptable 4. British ships are punching bags and jokes to be nerfed They really seem to hate anything British. Jealousy probably.
    46
  17. Thanks for another informative video I had read about the half charge used by Monitor's guns. Thanks for clearing up the misconception.
    44
  18. The last Drydock for 2019 (sigh) Thanks for all your hard work in giving we naval history buffs our weekly reason to live :) And we'll be here in 2020 for more educational video on one of our favorite subjects The 10 ugliest non french ships was amusing. Poor French ships do nave a reputation before the beautiful shi[s bruilt just before WW2.
    43
  19. It just goes to show that no matter how strong we build ships or how arrogantly we think they are unsinkable, the power of nature leaves us humbled and in awe of her fury,
    42
  20. Excellent video I loved how you pointed out both the strengths and falws of these huge ships. All too many comment on just how powerful their guns were and how thick their armour was but ignore the lesser quality of that armour. Thick armour is nice, but if it is too brittle it will shatter and cause damage to the ship rather than protecting it. Another point against these ships is the massive cost of building up the infrastructure required to just construct them. Building slips had to be strengthened as did the cranes. A special ship built just to transport the huge gun turrets from the builders to the construction dock. The list goes on and should be added to the cost of the class. Another "weak" point of the class was the massive muzzle blast of those huge guns. The reason all the AA guns had shields was not to protect the crew from strafing aircraft but to protect them from the blast of the main guns, which could easily concuss anyone on the deck. And just imagine the horrific shock and blast damage,20inch guns would do to the ship and crew. Sometimes bigger isn't better and a British RN saying comes to mind "A lot of good ships are better than a few outstanding one's"
    42
  21. The ships cancelled by the Washington Treaty and their successors are truly fascinating and will forever be considered for many "What If" scenarios. The drawing of the Number 13 with the guns of B turret do seem to have an extremely high elevation.
    40
  22.  @Kyudaimonia  Well said. Germanophiles rave about the awesomeness of the WW2 ships, but history shows them to be poor value for money given the massive flaws in their design. I do wonder what the British design teams could have produced with the money and tonnage restrictions removed.
    37
  23. Excellent video Drachinifel All too many people rave about eh strengths of the Bismarck class yet ignore their weaknesses, yours is one of the few that point out the bad points of their armouring, especially the decks. While the Scharnhorst class had thicker belt armour than Bismarck, their decks were only 50mm, making them VERY vulnerable to long range fire and as you pointed out, the main power and communication lines were above the deck armour, therefore any hits could cause massive problems. Another point I have to bring up isn't a problem with the ships, but their ammunition. Few people comment on the very poor quality of heavy German naval shells in WW2. German naval shells had a high rate of failure, many only partially detonating or failing to go off at all. This would significantly affect the battle but it's something no game would actually program in as the players wouldn't think it fair if they played the Germans. Examination of PoW when to returned to harbour showed how little damage was caused by the poor quality of German ammunition. The most devastating hit was when a shell went through the bridge without exploding but killed most of the bridge crew. I think they found a dud shell from Bismarck and carefully removed it.
    36
  24. Always informative and entertaining Drach. The 43knot Hood, Wow, That'd give the chills to any foe trying to fight it. "Admiral, we cannot target the Hood" "Why Not?" "We can't depress the guns fast enough given its closure rate"
    33
  25. Thanks Drach A great ship bravely handled with a gutsy crew. Watching about USS Johnston's last fight it brought to mind an image of the skinny Steve Rogers from Captain America wavering on his feet saying "I can do this all day"
    33
  26. An ironclad returned as a wooded ship as the armour was worse than useless Not an 'honor' you want
    33
  27. And I don't blame Rodney being so upset at having a nice vacation being endangered. Who wouldn't get pissy.
    32
  28. Excellent video As you stated, there was nothing wrong with the original concept of the BC, it only went bad when the British used them for a role they were never designed for. And the loss of the three at Jutland was more due to very poor ammunition and cordite handling than a flawed design. The same almost happened to Seydlitz at Dogger bank but thanks to the courage and skill of the crew who flooded her magazines the ship was saved and the HSF learned a valuable lesson, something the British would have to wait for Jutland to learn.
    31
  29. Thanks for another video Despite their flaws the Nelson class were very powerful ships and not to be ignored. Yours is the first I've seen which actually mention the highly effective method of using water as additional armour. This is usually ignored by so others due to limited research. In defense of the so called "cheating" by the British with the water displacement armour scheme I say it was perfectly legal and NOT cheating as ANY other Navy could have done the exact same thing IF they had thought of it. This is far, far different compared to the total lies and treaty violations done by the Japanese, Germans and Italians as their ships did exceed the Standard Displacement as defined by the Washington Treaty or the case of the Germans, The Anglo-German Naval Treaty.
    30
  30. Poor Drach, running on fumes, it seems you need to put into dock for a refueling. Isn't coffee the fuel of we organic beings? Or seeing you're British. Tea? Have a great holiday. I've read a great deal about both Nelson and Jackie Fisher and both Admirals left an indelible mark of the Royal Navy. Would love to see a special on Admiral Fisher as there is far less written about him than Nelson. Jackie is a very...colourful person. A life time Naval officer who hated war but if it came he would throw himself whole heartedly into winning the war. He said "Humanize War, you may as well try to humanize HELL!" Nelson's contribution can best be summed up as "It takes the Navy two years to build a Battleship, it takes two hundred years to build a tradition" I had a thought about the question of the RN in the 1920's if Britain remained Neutral in WW1. A lot of the expansion of US industry was made possible due to the near unbelievably vast amounts of British money given to the US for supplies during WW1. Without that, could the US find the funds to expand its industrial base to continue the build up its Navy?
    29
  31. AS always, thanks for the time and effort you put into these wonderful video's I agree with you about HMS Hood. It was a good and effective design when it was commissioned and deserved its moniker "The Mighty Hood" It was lost due to fighting a ship 20 years younger than itself where it hadn't never had a proper full refit. It does not deserve to be on this list. A flaw I see in the Italian CL's is how very, very close together the guns are in the turrets. Not a good feature. One question I keep forgetting to bring up is the fact Bismarck knocked out it's own radar when firing its main guns. Wouldn't this have been revealed in the ships working up period?? It must have fired its guns during training, so why wasn't this problem found then?
    28
  32. Agree completely Another question no one wants to ask is : If the Nazi's had broken their word (and we know Hitler's track record of keeping treaty's) and lunged after the French fleet in 1940, COULD the French navy have scuttles the ships or would the confusion of the time let the Nazi's capture the fleet? Especially with the government at Vichy doing everything to aid their nre German friends. The Frech make much of the scuttling at Toulon in 1942, but they had two YEARS to prepare it. In the confusion of 1940 could they guarantee!!! they would have been successful? No they couldn't and could ANY nation take such a risk of such a powerful fleet falling into enemy hands? If the positions were reversed I think the French would have done exctly the same thing.
    28
  33. Thanks Drach When you started these did you ever, in either your wildest imaginings (or nightmares) think you would reach the level it has? And I've been listening and learning (oh the horror! lol) since I found this channel in its single digits. Thank you so much for all you have done. And an even bigger thanks to Mrs Drach for putting up with it all
    28
  34. Thanks for another great video Regarding the Japanese lack of anti submarine, ability I have to say they weren't the only one's who failed to learn the lessons of WW1. With the U.S. entry into WW2 Germany deployed a small number of U-boats to the US East coast where they wrecked absolute havoc. The American's totally rejected all plea's from the British to institute a convoy system as they declared "That wasn't the proper role for a fighting navy" and instead relied on regular patrols of DD's moving at high speed to deter attacks. We all know how that worked out. Q&A: I do have a question about the Anglo-German Naval Treaty of 1935. My research shows that Treaty allowed Germany to build up to 35% of the RN and the Germans insisted that meant total tonnage. I'm sure I have read the British insisted the Germans had to comply with the same limits pf individual tonnage the British were by the Washington and London Treaty's. Can you provide anything on this. I feel the British would not have been so stupid as to allow themselves to be so limited but allow Germany to build any size ships they felt like and feel that the extreme's Germany went to to hide the true displacement of their ships supports the fact they were supposed to obey the limits of the Washington and London Treaty's. Regarding the Tennessee Vs QE battle mid 1920s, a further factor to didn't mention is the cage masts of the US ships. These suffered badly from vibration, especially at high speed and would have effected the Tennessee's gunnery.
    28
  35. You really show just how fast technology developed during and after WW2. It was so rapid that a new fighter was barely introduced into service that it's replacement was just around the corner, which must have made this very "Popular" with the crew designated to service aircraft. I can hear them sighing "Not another new type" It also show the strength of the Essex class and how well they were designed that they were able to adapt to aircraft never dreamed of when they were on the board.
    27
  36. Thanks for a brilliant and well thought out and researched video. The massive numerical advantage held by the Allies at the end of the war makes any chance of a German victory unlikely, especially as many of the flaws revealed at Jutland had been corrected. Then again a Naval victory wasn't the point of the German plan, it was to get better terms at the peace conference table and to avenge German honour. Points a game cannot truly duplicate is that by late 1918 many ships of the High Seas Fleet were in poor mechanical condition due to low crew morale and falling discipline. Also many of the best officers and crew had been transferred to U-boats reducing efficiency and skills. Another point is that the quality of coal available to the HSF was very poor which would rapidly affect speed,
    25
  37. Thank you for a detailed report on one of the most important and powerful classes of Battleships ever completed. HMS Warspite seems to have had an extra special level of protection built in given her legendary ability to survive damage which would have sent many a lesser ship to the bottom. That model is awesome Drach and I am both envious and jealous of it. Take very good care of it and if by some impossible to understand reason, you get tired of it, put me down as someone who would be delighted to offer it a home. I used to build those Airfix models when younger but my skills were never of this caliber, and my eyesight has deteriated too much to ever hope of doing so again.
    25
  38. Thanks for another great episode The information about how difficult it is to build a large naval gun was an eye opener. I knew it took a long time to build them but didn't truly understand just how exacting it was. And they had to be strong to withstand the pressure of hundreds or pounds of cordite going off multiple times. On the Canadian BB. I do feel you made an error in this. If Canada had gone for the 10x15inch gun ship it would NOT have been capable of 25 knots. The original design for the QE's was a 10x15 inch gun ship capable of 21 knots as per the rest of the fleet. Calculations showed that they could remove Q turret and still have a broadside heavier than the 10x13.5 armed ships. By removing Q turret the space saved was used for more boilers to produce a 25 knot BB to act as a fast wing for the fleet. As to whether this ship would have survived the Washington Treaty would be the source of numerous debates. The Americans raised a massive stink over HMAS Australia, They demanded it be scrapped as they declared it part of the British fleet despite if being the flagship of the Australian navy as H.M. A. S., note the A there, and our only capital ship. I feel the Americans would have been similarly adamant about a proper Super Dreadnought even if it was the flagship of the Canadian navy as HMCS Canada. Another vital facility the Japanese ignored at Pearl Harbor was the vital machine shops and repair yards. If these had been destroyed, or even heavily damaged, it would have played havoc with attempts to maintain or repair any ship. The Japanese seemed to be more interested in a limited tactical victory and propaganda coup than in an intelligent, long term strategic success.
    24
  39. With all the praise heaped on German ships it's annoying that all too many people ignore just how massively they exceeded the treaty limits. Yes, they were forced to sign the Versailles Treaty, but that's what happens when you lose a war. These ships were not 'slightly' overweight. They exceeded the Versailles treaty limits of 10,000 tons by between 17-21%. That's a huge margin and any ships going over their design specs by that much would have severe sea keeping and stability problems and their speed would suffer. As this wasn't the case, these ships were designed to exceed the limits and Germany just lied and understated thir true tonnage as they later did for all their large surface ships. Much like Japan did for their cruisers and carriers. How about a video about the Flower class corvettes for all the incredible work they did escorting merchant ships in the Altantic in some of the worst weather.
    24
  40. Great as always Drach Wow, a class of seven BC's. That would have been the largest class of German capital ships ever built. I can easily imagine the British building even more ships to counter them.
    24
  41. Two things I thought of to do when waking up as Admiral Kimmel is to send every sub I could racing on the surface to intercept the Japanese fleet and have a signal standing by to inform them of a surprise attack on Pearl Harbour and take appropriate action. And send out recon aircraft along the same path, If discovered I think the Japanese fleet would have run for home. Sending the three Hippers out to raid Atlantic convoys has one big flaw. The absolutely terrible reliability of their machinery. It;s not hard to see them broken down and just awaiting capture due to engine failure. Thanks for the shout out regarding the RAN. Yes we are Tasmanian devils, not very big compared to some others, but with one hell of a powerful bite for our size.
    23
  42. Thanks Drach for another HMAS story Not hard to imagine of what Canberra's survivors thought of Turner and his USA first orders.
    22
  43. I'm tired Need to go to sleep WAIT, a New Dry Dock episode. COFFEE TIME!! Thanks for more learning and lack of sleep Drach. Your dedication to posting awesome episodes is fantastic and much appreciated. A battle between the German HSF and the US Navy would be compounded by each side's lack of bases and ability to refuel after a long voyage to just reach the enemy's coast. I have rad German ships were "famous" for the lack of comfort in their ships. This was accepted as they were designed for shout duration voyages and the crew would leave the ship and live in barracks ashore while in harbour. Despite the Kaiser and Tirpitz denying the HSF was aimed at Britain.
    22
  44. Thanks Drach HMS Hood was the largest warship for decades and certainly one of the most beautiful ships ever built. It is a tragedy she never got the reconstruction she deserved, if she had I think Bismarck's voyage would have ended in much sooner
    22
  45. Merry Christmas to you, Mrs Drach and of course Baby Drach's first Christmas Don't be surprised if she finds the wrapping paper just as much (perhaps more) fun as the actual presents
    22
  46. Thanks Drachinifel. You've convinced me, I'll stop imitating Kaiser Wilhelm ll who designed BB's in his spare time. I'm hiring some professionals to design and build my Dreadnoughts. And there's no way I;m naming any of them Captain.
    22
  47. Agree with you completely. The fuel tanks should have been one of the priority targets. The strongest fleet in the world is harmless without fuel. The Japanese didn't think like professional military people, they thought more like solo warriors rather than a coordinated military. As they say a champion team will beat a team of champions every time. Or in this case, soldiers beat warriors.
    20
  48. French warship design certainly was a confused mess. Did they start their discussion after they were well lubricated by a hearty liquid lunch?
    19
  49. Nice video I guess a Battleship firing its main guns at night nagates its stealth ability :) That is truly both an awesome and terrifying sight
    18
  50. Well Drach didn't just poke the hornets nest, he kicked it over and sprayed water on it just to be thorough. there will be as many opinions and definitions as there are people willing to argue them. Personally I do NOT regard the British I classes as BC's. They were conceived, designed and built as Dreadnought Armoured Cruisers but used in roles outside their concept. The German "BC's" of WW1 apart from Von Der Tann should be more properly be referred to by the phrase Drach coined 'Light Battleships" as they were designed to supplement the main battle line as therefore were armoured for this role. But of course people will have their own opinions and that's perfectly acceptable.
    18