Comments by "Steve Valley" (@stevevalley7835) on "The Drydock - Episode 162" video.

  1. On the question of a world without Bofors: in the 1920s, John Browning designed a 37mm AA gun for the US Army. Due to lack of funding for the Army, the design sat on the shelf for several years, then was refined by Colt, and put into production in the late 30s. If USN BuOrd got over it's "not invented here" syndrome and adopted the Browning, instead of developing the 1.1", they would have gotten along quite well without the Bofors. The initial design of the 37mm, the M1, was fed with rigid clips from the left side, which would complicate multiple gun mounts. The M9 development switched to metallic link belt ammo, and was redesigned so both right and left feed versions could be built. I suspect that, fundamentally, any multiple mount designed for the Vickers could be adopted to the Browning, due to the similar ammo feed systems. The Browning had significantly more range than a Vickers, but a somewhat smaller shell. In US Army service, the Browning was replaced by the Bofors, starting in 43, as the Bofors offered advantages of longer range, larger shell, and somewhat more reliable operation.
    10
  2. wrt completing Francesco Caracciolo, I did some back of the envelop calculations several months ago. Italy was building a lot of destroyers in the 20s. If Italy had canceled a number of those destroyers, that would have freed up enough funding to complete Caracciolo. Another problem was the armament. The guns were built by three different contractors, to three different designs. The guns were supposed to have the same ballistics, but I would want all the guns on the ship to match. By 1918, Terni had only built 3, and two had been installed in a shore battery near Venice, leaving 1 additional Terni. Two Pozzuolies had been installed at Brindisi, an additional pair of Pozzuolies installed on a monitor that had sunk, and two more Pozzuolies were installed on improvised monitors, leaving six. Of the nine Ansaldo built guns, seven were handed over to the army, which converted four of them to railroad guns. An additional pair of Ansaldoes were installed on a monitor. Three of the Ansaldoes turned over to the army appear to have never been used. So there were not eight guns of any single manufacturer that were unused, for installation on Caracciolo. In addition, the installations at Venice and Brindisi look like battleship turrets, so they may have been taken from the battleship program as well. Beyond the lack of guns, the Caracciolo design has been criticized as not having enough torpedo protection, nor enough deck armor, by post-WWI standards.
    3
  3.  @WALTERBROADDUS  yes, I would expect a significant working up time. Before Richelieu joined the RN force in the Indian Ocean, she worked with the Home Fleet for five months after her refit in the US. My favorite scenario is where Richelieu and Jean Bart make for the UK, rather than North Africa when France falls. And both Dunkerques just happen to be in the Atlantic and make for the UK as well. Over the following months, the French ships are reequipped with UK AA armament and exercise with the Home Fleet. When Bismark tries to break out, the three French ships make for the Denmark Strait, because they are faster, while KGV and PoW make for the closer Faroe Islands channel. The obsolete battlecruisers serve as a backup in case Bismark breaks through the first line. Of course, for the French ships to serve willingly with the RN in 41 would require Reynaud to skip across the channel, set up a government in exile, and denounce collaborators like Petain and Darlan.
    2
  4.  @kemarisite  I thought about a single or twin 1.1, on an improvised mount to give the PT guys in the Solomons a bit more hitting power than the Oerlikon, but it may be too heavy. If the USN had adopted the 37mm, they probably would not have bothered with the 1.1. When the 37mm evolved to the M9 version, I can see the USN stealing the design of the Japanese twin Vickers mount, and the UK quad Vickers mount, as in the pic Drac showed. The specs, Navweaps for the Bofors and a 1944 Army manual for the Browning 37mm: ceiling: Bofors 22,299ft, Browning: 18,600ft, range Bofors 11,133 yards, Browning: 8,875 yards, projectile weight; Bofors HE: 1.985lbs, Browning HE: 1.34lbs, rate of fire 120rpm for both. For the Vickers Mk VIII: ceiling 13,300ft (HV version), range 5,000yds, projectile weight HE HV 1.81, HE LV 2.0lbs, rate of fire 115rpm.
    1
  5.  @kemarisite  alrighty, we have established (?) that the Browning 37mm M1/M9 (metallic link belt fed both right and left feed versions) could take the place of a Bofors or Vickers well, including single, double and quad mounts. Oerlikon alternatives? The low velocity M4 37mm, as used in the P-39 weighed 213lbs, light enough for the PT guys to use on a free mount. Fires the same 1.34lb HE round, but at only 2000fps, vs the 2600 of the M1. Range 8,875yds (that is what Navweaps says, but that is the same as the M1 and I question it due to the lower muzzle velocity, The Army manual does not give a range for the M4) vs 4,800 for an Oerlikon. 125rpm, much slower rate of fire than an Oerkilon, but hit a plane with that size shell, he'll know it. Or, there is another alternative. The Wickes class DDs were originally supposed to have a 1lb Maxim/Nordenfelt/Vickers gun as AA armament. I have seen pix of early production Wickeses with one Maxim mounted behind the #1 4" mount and another on top of the aft deckhouse, and they were on free mounts. The USN switched to the 3"/23 because they could not get enough Maxims. An update of the 1pounder Maxim could provide that last ditch firepower, but, with the M4 already in production, I don't know why they would bother with the Maxim. Wiki says the 1 pounder weighed 410lbs and only had a range of 4,500 yards. So, there you have USN medium and light AA: M1-M9 37mm in single, twin and quad mounts for midrange, and free mounted 37mm M4/M10 for last ditch.
    1
  6.  @dogsnads5634  you are right, I had not thought of, or even heard of, either of them. From the information I can find, they both seem to have performance comparable to the Vickers 2 pounder, with a muzzle velocity below 2000fps.
    1
  7.  @RedXlV  I have the exact numbers in my notes, somewhere, wrt how much was spent on da Vinci and how much more it would cost to complete Caracciolo. The amount spent on the salvage op, as far as it got, was far short of the cost to complete the new ship. A lot of what was spent on da Vinci would have been spent to clear the wreck anyway. As with Oklahoma, an air pressure bubble was created in the hull and crews worked inside to remove the fuel, ammo and guns, and cut away the superstructure to lighten the hulk. Because the inverted hull drew more water than the ship did upright, a channel had to be dredged to the drydock. I have read that the RM preferred the Pozzuoli guns, which were designed by Armstrong. The Ansaldoes were a monobloc design by Schneider, which were a lot lighter than the wire wound guns from the other two companies. In the back of my mind is the thought the RM gave seven Ansaldos to the army because they didn't quite trust them. The best reassignment of guns I can think of is to put two of the Ansaldoes that the army did not use in the first shore battery at Brindisi. The second battery at Brindisi was not finished until after the war, so install the two Ansaldoes from the monitor Faà di Bruno in that battery. That frees up four Pozzuolies. Cancel the four small monitors that were not completed until after the war, which frees up four more Pozzuolies. That leaves two Pozzuolies that were installed in improvised monitors during the war as spares. The other two Pozzuolies were on the monitor that sank. With four Ansaldoes installed at Brindisi, that leaves 1 new gun as a spare, and the four that were used as railroad guns during the war. Historically, all seven of the army Ansaldoes appear to have spent WWII in the armory at La Spezia. The next problem is spares, for when the original set of guns need to be relined. Either spend a lot of money making up another eight, or be content for the ship to be laid up for a couple months while it's one set of guns is overhauled. As for the armor, I have seen a speculative drawing of added armor at the main deck level. I have also seen a photo of the incomplete hull just before work stopped during the war. In the photo the decking only covers part of the hull, and I can see that there are no builkheads beneath the decking, I appear to be seeing the top of the turtleback and the decking being installed is temporary, to keep the weather out, until work is resumed. If that is the case, it would be easier to add armor directly on the turtleback before completing the ship.
    1
  8.  @RedXlV  Looked up the info on the salvage cost of da Vinci: 135,000 GB Pounds. Caracciolo was about the size of a Queen Elizabeth, so complete cost would have been in the neighborhood of 3M pounds. Given her state when canceled, it probably would have cost in the neighborhood of 1M+ GB Pounds to complete her.
    1
  9.  @dagdom1280  Frank and I have been doing a deep dive into the Browning M1 and M9 in the comments section, as well as the 37mm M4 and M10 that were used in aircraft and PT boats.
    1
  10.  @WALTERBROADDUS  Brig and Brigantine are different animals. On a Brig, both masts are square rigged, with a gaff rigged spanker. On a Brigantine, only the foremast is square rigged. The main has a gaff rigged mainsail, and, maybe a square rigged topsail.
    1