Comments by "Steve Valley" (@stevevalley7835) on "Carrier Night Actions in WW2 - What you can't see can still hurt you" video.

@brendonbewersdorf986 The first thought that comes to my mind, would a Japanese designed ship have enough interior room for tall Germans? I'm barely 6', and there were places in the Lex where I did not have a huge surplus of headroom below the ducts, pipes, and conduits, hanging from the overhead. Are Japanese ships designed for smaller people? Second issue is the timeline. Even if Germany and Japan signed their treaty earlier than September 40, the Graf was laid down in December 36, while Zuikaku was laid down in May of 38. Would the Germans break up the Graf on the slipway, and start over? We would need to push the timeline for the alliance back to 34, when Japan gave notice it was dropping out of the treaty system, a year after the Nazis came to power, and are preparing a naval building program, and coincident with the rebuilds of Akagi and Kaga, so that IJN officials could provide advice to the Nazis, before the Graf was laid down. But, even in that fortuitous set of circumstances, Nazi leadership would be the same, so I suspect that even a Graf of sound design would end up exactly the same as the historical one.
2
@gary_stavropoulos I don't know if it was intent, or pilots attacking the nearest target, but in Wiki's list of US ships damaged by Kamikazes, most are DDs, with a smattering of DEs, CLs and BBs.
1
@rkarnes6304 quite possibly. From the data on Wiki, Yorktown had about 50% more range than Ark Royal or the Graf. Yorktown was apparently thinner skinned, as Wiki does not have a spec for deck armor. An Essex had deck armor close to that of Graf, and a lot more range. When the US was starting to work on carriers, there was a lot of information sharing by the British, but carrier development went in different directions anyway.
1
@rkarnes6304 There was much more variation in accuracy of mechanical watches, then there is today between a Timex with a quartz movement, and something costing ten times as much, with a quartz movement. I bought a mechanical Omega watch in 1975, for about $300, that was accurate within 2-3 minutes per month. It replaced a Caravelle (cheap Bulova) that cost $36 in 1971, and gained 5 minutes a week. The Caravelle replaced a Timex I paid $12 for, in 1968. that gained 5 minutes per day. Another feature of better watches was "anti-magnetic" design, either an iron case that conducted magnetic fields around the movement, or making the critical parts of the movement from non-ferrous metals.
1