I would like to make a more general remark about how unbelievably disciplined someone has to be to achieve this number of episodes in this intensity - you have been part of my youtube for some years now and it never gets old, you never disappoint and you always find new or new aspects of subjects you either never covered or decide to elaborate on. Just amazing, and thank you.
I'm glad to see your successful YT channel represents not only your dedication to your craft, but a community of people who share an interest in naval history. As a former naval officer and history teacher, I find that very gratifying. Looking forward to your return to my home town of Philadelphia!
Yes, and those of us with only a distant overview of a war with maybe a few more detailed incidents here and there. Also the 1950 cut off means that comprehensive information is available for the ships, versus the dissatisfaction of very little data, which may or may not be accurate, available for the cold war and forward ships.
Trivia bit about the photo at 59:36, in the question about aviators and brown shoes: That pic was taken at NAS North Island during production of "Hell Divers" in September, 1931. From left to right: (actor) Cliff Edwards, Lt John Thatch, (actors) Clark Gable (before he grew his trademark mustache) and Wallace Beery, and Lt Herbert Duckworth.
@@michaelpiatkowskijr1045 yup. Thach earned his wings in early 1930. Apologies for misspelling his name with an extra "t". I took the names off of the caption for the pic on the site I looked at.
Another note on the jet powered torpedo bomber: prop driven aircraft are far more efficient and powerful relative to an equivalent jet aircraft at low altitude/high performance ops (such as dive or torpedo bombing). A prop (either turboprop or normal reciprocating) can give you that good low level performance and instant boost of power at low altitude, while a jet takes time to spool up but can go faster and higher in the long run
Loved the answer re evaluating sources at 39:00. I was a grad student in history before switching fields (I'm now a research attorney) and I've had discussions about how to go about weighing the relative value of historic and other claims with my students back then and nowadays with my own children. This all seems to come most naturally to my youngest, who is in high school but considering history as a profession.
On the topic of black shoes/brown shoes on U.S. Navy aircraft carriers, there is one other element you didn't mention: each group took pride in not being part of the other group & it helped with the rivalry and mocking the other group for each to have a difference in uniform that is recognizable at a distance.
Hah! ...yeah. Actually, over the last few years I've learned a lot about naval history in the post French-revolutionary and napoleonic-wars era, from Drach, (and others),and, now, I find that I can get a lot more out of some of his older vids which I re-watch. I was, pre-Drach, mostly a student of naval warfare and exploration in the Age of Sail, but have had my interests expanded by this channel (and some others, I suppose). ...but, Drach's content creation is so prolific that it is kinda hard to know what exactly I've seen. (And I give the vids a default 👍) Cheers!
I'm a huge sailboat nut and I love naval history (thanks to Drach!) so I've wondered for a long time; are you familiar with any naval vessels that were built using cold-molding techniques? Cold molding makes for an extremely high quality boat, but it's not used super frequently for production civilian craft (compared to fiberglass). It strikes me that it might be slightly outside the period the channel covers, but the fact that the PT boars of WW2 used a vaguely similar construction method and the landing craft of the war were made from plywood makes me wonder if any of the vessels that didn't require heavy armor might have used it?
already supposed i might not have gotten the full picture regarding dialects- We usually pronounced it as 'Lützau'. In hindsight now feeling a bit silly
38:57 Ah yes, good old OPVL (Origins, Purpose, Values, Limitations). I had that acronym and its use drilled into me in high school, and I've never forgotten it.
The last comment about the Titanic question, about water being able to pass through bulkheads meant to be watertight being a rather common (unfortunately) issue in ships, still felt today. Bulk carriers are the type of modern vessel I'm studying, with casualties ranging from 1969 (Bolivar Maru) to 2021 (Yong Feng), and you can see repeated cases of bulkheads not being completely watertight, allowing for progressive flooding into one of the bulker's compartments (be it the forepeak ballast tank, a neighboring hold, the engine room, etc). Even worse was when the bulker was an older design. Obviously wear and tear occurs on all ships inevitably, however bulkers were particularly vulnerable to such deterioration when flooding occurs at all. Incidents like Leader L, Cumberlande, Leros Strength, all suffered internal and external metal plating diminution to a great degree which exacerbated their sinking. For Cumberlande, lost June 12th, 1987, sank rapidly by the bow after the crew abandoned ship in high swells; just a handful of minutes it took when they went to the boats. Leader L's crew didn't even get the chance to board the boats on March 23rd, 2000, the ship sank by the head while they were still on the quarter deck when bulkheads failed forward (after suffering flooding when a chunk of side shell plating just fell off in moderate weather), taking a little over half her crew. Then Leros Strength, February 8th, 1997, sank with all hands. He had only discovered that his ship was in dire trouble and called in distress to Rescue Co-ordination Center Norway at 7:50 AM, then contact was abruptly lost just three minutes later. It is assumed the ship sank when contact was lost, and the wreck just disintegrated when hitting the ocean floor.
A major floating production unit I was involved with flooded and almost sank. We traced the flood water by the direction the cable penetrations popped out
I joined about a month ago, and I'm right with you. There are so many quality videos on navy battles, ship classification, individual ship design, and Q&A it's almost overwhelming. I love it, though.
I fall asleep to drach- I added two naps per daze - so I can take- in 3 hours a days..I feel very perky - and all my dreams ...the voice in my head - procedes slow-and has an English accent... ... ... Not a bad trade
Try not to listen at night. I fall asleep with drack in my ear regularly. And it is quite comforting. But there are many posts that I find that I have only listed to part of, because I fell asleep. But if you want to listen to every Video several times over, happy dream time.
Scuttling: I'm reminded of the strange history of DD 224 USS Stewart. Too damaged to be withdrawn during the ABCD campaign she was scuttled. But because the Japanese were desperate for ships they salvaged her and put her back into service.
Thank you for answering another question. ^^ If I lived at this time period, I think I'd keep a book of naval laws and treaties to be sure that whatever I choose to do isn't going to get me killed or getting me on the bad side of a belligerent.
On the subject of denying war materiel to the Allies post-WW2, there was a significant amount of co-operation from ex-Luftwaffe at least in the immediate post-war period. I have to imagine that the primary reason for that was pretty much everyone thought the Russians were going to kick off WW3 quite soon and Germany would be first against the wall when that happened.
36:21 - five hundred thousand yards of melee distance, those damn bronze cannons could be installed on carriers instead of airplanes :D I know, I know, but got me by surprise :D
@ 0:19:38. Another factor of the RMS Titanic's flooding that has been overlooked is the portholes a few feet above her waterline! Yes, they were closed, but I imagine a number of them had their glass cracked if not shattered by the impact of the iceberg and the hull distortion that was caused by the impact....
Regarding creating a ship simply for delivering ordinance: the US Navy publically indicates that conventional 16 inch shells weighed between 1900 and 2700 pounds for an IOWA class like USS NEW JERSEY. And that’s a good starting point- when i talk to guests (and as a restoration volunteer, not a tour guide) the mission of the ship is to 1) have large caliber guns for a fight 2) provide armor to protect these high value targets and 3) engineering support to get the guns to the fight. I like to say that crew accommodation comes at a much lower priority…like 10th or 12th. But when one adds all the responsibilities and requirements you’re not taking a 50k+ ton IOWA and there’s not magic to shrink down and create a 20-25k ton guns only ship.
57:00 I posit that another contributing factor is that USN ships tended to have more electronic sensors than other navies - multiple radio systems, air / surface / fire control radars for main and secondary guns, radars for AA directors - some ships had a radar for _every_ fire control director on the ship). The RN may have been a close second, but no other WW2 navy had such a wealth of sensors. Each of these sensors needs its own crew, and the aggregate demand on ship power requires a greater generating capacity, which requires its own crew …
1) How did Lutzow mansge to turn around in that narrow channel? 2) Age of sail ID - “I don't like the cut of his jib” 3) Army Guns - Six Landing Craft Gun (Medium) mounted the Army's standard AT un (towed, Archer SP, Sherman Firefly tank) the 76mm high velocity 17 pounder. Forty four mounted the Army's standard light artillery piece, the 25 pounder (towed. Sexton SP) in the bizarre caliber of 88mm.4) Jet Torpedo Bomber - Tu-14 Bosun “The Tupolev Tu-14 (NATO reporting name: Bosun)[2] (USAF/DOD reporting name: Type 35),[2] was a Soviet twinjet light bomber derived from the Tupolev '73', the failed competitor to the Ilyushin Il-28 'Beagle'. It was used as a torpedo bomber by the mine-torpedo regiments of Soviet Naval Aviation between 1952-1959 and exported to the People's Republic of China”.
I’ve definitely heard the first question somewhere. I remember the „bristling with guns” trop. Deja vu Drachique - the new phenomenon in psychological science!
00:29:51 A few 17pdr anti tank guns were used by Royal Navy most notably on Landing Craft Gun Medium, there are several good photos of LC G M 101 sinking during the Island of Walrechen in November 1944. LC G M carried two 17pdr in weather shields, forward gun offset to the starboard and rear most to the port, which probably says a lot for the margin of stability. Later 25 pdr gun howitzers replaced the 17pdr probably because of accuracy and longevity of the barrel, but by that time most opportunity for LC G M was markedly reduced although some may have gone to Far East for the Borneo / Malaya operations but the end of WW2 again reduced the need. Probably the reason for the LC G M was ability to go into shallows, although one would think a LC Gun Large (with 2 x 4 inch or 4.7 inch guns) might seem better the draught was adverse, compared to the LC G Medium, there is a big difference between the draught of a standard landing craft and one with a fixed battery. Really the standard 3 inch 12 cwt or 20 cwt piece as used on warships back into WW1 would have been a better choice than the 17pdr because like the 25 pdr, the 3 inch 20 cwt would be far less stressed, probably less stress on the gun crew too, certainly the US used a 3 inch deck gun probably a Mk 21 on their variant of the LC G M. Significantly the original plan for Normandy was to take a pair of 95 mm Howitzer armed Centaur tank and a Sherman 75 tank on a specially constructed raised deck frame in an LCT, but instability (who would have thought 90 tons of metal 5 foot higher than on the original deck, in a 400 ton craft would NOT have an adverse effect on stability) meant reconsideration had to be made but some-one came to the bright idea -maybe just landing the tanks on the beach to provide fire support might suffice.
The British prize crew on Pass of Balmaha hadn't been locked up; they borrowed clothes from the crew and were hiding below, waiting for the U-boat to release the vessel or for the ship to be rescued by a Royal Navy ship. The Germans didn't realize that there were seven RN sailors on board until Pass of Balmaha got to port. The usual story was used to compel the ship to sail to port - that a U-boat was (secretly) escorting it in.
Question related to the dual purpose gun answer. Why did the Royal Navy not just license the 5"/38? They should have lots of evidence of the quality of that gun.
@4353HUNVRTNG I've heard people make the same argument that the British Army for example; should have been entirely with M1 Garands in the same thought process. Although,fun fact. We did actually via Lend Lease send 38,000 M-1 Garands to the UK. Most never were issued however. Some Saw limited use in World War II and Korea.
10:40 the former pronunciation was correct 29:51 I was confused by the 17-pounder being a 3.7-inch gun. Turns out, the 17-pounder wasn’t a 3.7-inch gun. The 17-pounder was a 3-inch (76 mm) gun. The 17 pounder was also never used as an AA gun and was purely an anti-tank gun and seems to be commonly associated with the TOG II tank, which according to a few sources is incorrect and was actually a 28 pounder known as the QF 3.7-inch (94 mm) AA gun, which is what I think the asker was referring to.
A patrol ship rabbit hole ( one of my favorite little ships, PG Erie, to the related USCGS Treasury class to the Hamilton class, which were sometimes deployed with Cold War Carrier Battle Groups then back to other USCGS military service and WW2) has resulted in a few questions: 1. Battleship New Jersey has some videos on the Treasury class USCGC Taney, one of the aforementioned Treasury class. Have you toured the ship? Any plans to do so if not, and might there be a video if you have? 2. The US Coast Guard was heavily involved in WW2 operations in all theaters, not just in American waters. Was this unusual for a coast guard like organization? 3. Wednesday video idea the first: the US Coast Guard in WW2. 4. USCG in WW2 led me to Dorothy C. Stratton and the SPARS. Which leads to another Wednesday video idea, the role of the various women's auxiliary services (you've touched on the Wrens a few times) in the Second World War.
re: the 1917 battleship plan shown in the first section, which is for an 80,000 ton ship with fifteen 18 inch guns in five triple turrets: was a video done on this design? It looks like a proposal for an American Yamato, but done almost two decades before the Japanese design was chosen. Perhaps it could even be called a "Super Yamato", given that it has six more 18 inch guns, a 19 inch armor belt, a 90,000 EHP electric drive, and yet a projected maximum speed of 25.2 knots, I wonder if such a ship was actually feasible at the time on 80,000 tons. I also wonder if there was a drydock or slipway in the U.S. in 1917 big enough to build a ship that would have been almost 1000 feet long and 108 feet wide, nearly as big (at the waterline) as the 1040 foot length and 134 foot beam of a Nimitz class carrier.
@@CSSVirginia The aptly named Operation Starvation. At least one senior commander in the Japanese forces stated that if the US had started just a bit earlier and been a bit more serious about it, the war might have ended sooner. But I don't think that is what @bkjeong4302 is thinking about. I believe the concept is 'what if we slam down a whole bunch of sea mines around this bunch of people we dislike, so that even after the war is over they keep taking damage'.
I have asked over many years for a 5 minute guide on USS Narwhal SS 167, her sister USS Nautilus & near sister USS Argonaut. You had a list. 3 fine interwar boats that completed many war missions. My last request.
I think that given the extension of the damage, Titanic was pretty stable and durable. Having longitudinal bulkheads like Lusitania would have made the ship list to one side and made launching the lifeboats more difficult.
A cursory look on Wikipedia reveals only three jet powered torpedo bombers: the SNCAC NC.1071, the Il-28T, and the Tu-14T. The NC.1071 was only a prototype but the Il-28T and Tu-14T saw service. Surprisingly, they were not the last aircraft designed to conduct anti-ship torpedo attacks to see flight. That distinction likely goes to the Tu-91 (NATO reporting name Boot) which saw its first flight in 1955.
Drach, @55:25 you gave me an "hmm" moment. I jave always thought of a "gun crew" as all of the men in the turret or the tub (for AA guns) and not as "a sub-set of sailors PER gun at that location."
Regarding the spelling of Lützow- your second way of spelling it certainly sounds authentic and correct- No language botchering to yap about detected :D note: as a thuringian, i should probably not make too many assumptions about it either. Dialects sure are a factor to be considered there and there very well may be a rather ridiculous way of pronouncing it after all.
It might be a crazy question, but has there been an account of two opposing countries boarding the same ship at the same time? How would it go on if not? The merchant ship is still neutral so opposing ships couldn't really fight near the neutral ship without possibly hitting them.
Drach during the channels time coverage how big of a ship could they raise off the bottom intact( in a condition that would possibly allow it to return to service!) and how deep could it have been?
00:52:25 - Why did US ships tend to have more crew than other nations ships of a similar size/role/displacement in the interwar/WW2 period? Also mind the modern US Navy has always been invested in relatively lavish accommodations and fittings for their ships compared to many others; American ships tended to have more stuff onboard dedicated to making ship life more comfortable and so on to maintain morale. Bigger crew quarters, more plumbing and electrical wiring, larger tool rooms with more powered tools, bigger galleys with more kitchen conveniences, and the like required a sizable number of additional technicians to maintain those various systems. Put another way, those Ice-Cream Machines didn't run themselves, and God help the US Navy ship that failed to have ice cream ready on time.
Late to the party but... re the manning requirements, I had to check something. From examination of photos (I can't get hard data...) a 4x40mm mount required 11 men. An octuple pompom required 5-6... considering how many 40mm US ships had, this would acount for a lot of extra crew.
With regard to imperfect watertightness, at about 24:15 you mention USS Nevada, but a very contemporary case to Titanic is of course the loss of HMS Audacious in 1914; she was only 4 years old at that time, and had some significant similar issues with her internal watertight integrity. It would be a bit unfair to hold Titanic to some standard of perfection when a contemporary and essentially brand new battleship had similar issues.
Also, in terms of the Titanic, I think what all are referring to is the mysterious flooding of Boiler Room 4 before the water of Boiler room 5 started spilling over. There is a theory by Sam Halpern that this was caused by additional (and managable) iceberg damage. In any case, Titanic didnt sink because of it, so her going under was not caused by faulty watertight conditions.
For the 1st question ? The person who posed the query should look into HMS AGINCOURT & others like her. Should be illuminating, if they aren't already aware, that is.... 🚬😎👍
Well... if the writer claims an enemy warship was sunk during a battle he was in when it was, in fact, scrapped the same year he published his book, then you have every reason to take what he says with a grain of salt. That means you _Tameichi Hara!_
He or his editor needed a fact checker for sure. If I were writing a book about a battle he was involved with, I would use him as a source of local colour and reaction, but not as a definitive source when adding a new item of history to a well researched battle.
Going off of the armor question, what does it mean when a ship is called a timberclad, and how does that differ from a wooden ship like Constitution or Victory?
I should the think trying to lift heavy rounds repeatedly would cause unsustainable injuries. You could reasonably shovel coal in shifts but even that had it’s limits physically to the crew. The weight of the rounds required a mechanical solution simply to sustain combat effectiveness
I'm actually quite surprised at your conclusions regarding national ship recognition during the age of sail, specifically during the 17th century as English, Dutch, and French and to a slightly lesser extent Spanish, Swedish and Danish warship were highly distinctive, at least up until the 1690's and the only real ambiguity would have been in differentiating between the various prizes from each respective nation in the service of their captors.
Hey Alex, how many battleships/battle cruisers took part in Operation Neptune? If you feel inclined, could you identify each one? I know of a few of them-USS Texas, of course, and my favorite ship of all time, HMS Warspite, etc., but I was wondering just how many there were involved.
In order to actually use an airborne torpedo against a ship that is not in port, substantial range and reliability is required. The early jets were significantly lacking in both those qualities. I suppose that by the time jets gained those qualities, homing missiles had overtaken the effectiveness of torpedoes against anything other than submarines.
The destruction of abandoned tanks and artillery was very very important more so than most other equpiment because in most wars the other side will take any intel they can get from it and immediately hand it over to the army for use against its former owners or if it’s too hard to fix they can salvage parts to help fix other tanks of the same type that fall into their hands.
I think so. The only other ship classes that could have are the Fletchers. Maybe a Gato class submarine, but I'm not familiar with any sub attacks or submarine assistance during Guadalcanal. The only carriers to survive Guadalcanal were Enterprise and Sarasota. The North Carolina, Washington, and South Dakota were the only battleships involved in Guadalcanal.
@@michaelpiatkowskijr1045 US Subs were certainly operating in the waters near Guadalcanal: the Japanese Heavy Cruiser Kako was sunk by S-44 while returning to port after the First Battle of Savo Island, July 1942. There are two subs preserved as museum 'ships' that were operational in the Pacific during 1942 but I don't think either of them were directly involved in the Guadalcanal campaign (note that subs are usually referred to as 'boats' in US service, not 'ships', but 'museum ships' seems fine to me). These are: USS Silversides (SS-236, in Muskegon Michigan), and USS Drum (SS-228, in Mobile Alabama).
@@michaelpiatkowskijr1045 All the four surviving Fletchers date from 1943 or later, so they did not participate in the Guadalcanal campaign. Wikipedia has some nice lists of world-wide museum ships that can be sorted by date: look up "List of Museum Ships".
It still seems completely wrong that under the Cruiser Rules, a belligerent could seize a neutral ship like Pass of Balmaha (the future Seeadler). As far as I’m concerned, the crew would have been entirely within their rights to overpower said one-man prize crew, sail back to the US, and have him and the British tried and hanged for piracy.
@michaelimbesi2314 Legal codes often don't make a lot of sense. Part of this comes from human imperfection. Part of it comes from ethical conflict of interest on the part of legal professionals, often combined with influence from other wealthy special interest groups and 'might makes right' thinking. Historically, major naval powers had a vested interest in being able to blockade their enemies, so they influenced the law to support doing this, even when that led to double standards, legal ethics problems, and (in some cases) to very negative long term consequences for humanity. Government legitimacy is more a matter of perception than reality, and when the law doesn't make sense that weakens government legitimacy and leads to all manner of long term problems for a society and for humanity as a whole. A lot of what was accepted during the period the channel covers is no longer accepted today, since the blockade of food and medical supplies could result in starvation and medical problems - even death - to large numbers of innocents, including children. Some even consider certain historical blockades as a form of war crime. Unlike historical blockades, modern blockades we have seen over the past few decades allow food and medical supplies to pass.
One thing that I look at with extraordinary claims in any new book which contradicts accepted wisdom: Do the address the fact that their take is controversial and do they take the time to explain why they disagree with other authors in the field? Breezily asserting a new take on something, as if it should be so obvious that there's no need to explain it is a sign of poor research.
Sombody lost the sea of azures , last week , i hear rumors that u s. Is going to build build build ships ...history is fun , comrade - i need info to plan for today and tomorrow... apparently the future is in drone aircraft carrier s...
We have the money - we have the yards and dry docks - we dont have a common enemy - to motivate us to commit : a swarm of tiny bees , can move a hungry bear - off their turf , ...
Ok - new data - I didn't know of backlogs...yet ; Manitowoc , submarine "access" , - no action :: bay ship , sturgeon bay , 1000 foot dry dock , no action , marnette marine , litoral combate ships , they apparently arnt going to make any more , .so within 75 miles of green bay , 3 " underfunded" ship yards , ... P.s. 5000 skilled labor : left to rot over a union " troubles" : for 3-4 decades - they are old ,now , retired , crazy or worse. ..and america , makes the money - money is in dollars - any amount needed can be borrowed from the future and repaid ,cheaply ,in future dollars , ..unless say we lose a war , and then it doesn't matter , we repay in confederate dollars or yen , or franc's , ..
@@TomG-f4r I just did a little checking. There is a major infrastructure issue to your idea. It's called, the Saint Lawrence Seaway. They use a lock system to lift ships. Similar to the lock system in the Panama canal. A major reason not to use the yards your suggesting is the inability to fit through the St Lawrence seaway. For example, the standard ddg-51 Arleigh Burke destroyers have a draft of about 31 ft. Making them too deep to fit through. And while submarines were built in the past. I don't think they have the capability of building nuclear submarines up there?
I would like to make a more general remark about how unbelievably disciplined someone has to be to achieve this number of episodes in this intensity - you have been part of my youtube for some years now and it never gets old, you never disappoint and you always find new or new aspects of subjects you either never covered or decide to elaborate on. Just amazing, and thank you.
Being British helps.
Stiff upper lip
Here here
The humour may be British, but the consistency and discipline is decidedly Bolivian, right? 🤔
Agreed…
I'm glad to see your successful YT channel represents not only your dedication to your craft, but a community of people who share an interest in naval history. As a former naval officer and history teacher, I find that very gratifying. Looking forward to your return to my home town of Philadelphia!
Yes, and those of us with only a distant overview of a war with maybe a few more detailed incidents here and there.
Also the 1950 cut off means that comprehensive information is available for the ships, versus the dissatisfaction of very little data, which may or may not be accurate, available for the cold war and forward ships.
Philadelphia is a coastal city? Or estuarine maybe?
@@hazchemel It's along the Delaware River which empties into the Delaware Bay and the Atlantic.
@@JCT442 thank you.
Four Drydocks to 300.
5k subscriptions to 500k!!!
Which will happen first? There's a question
Trivia bit about the photo at 59:36, in the question about aviators and brown shoes: That pic was taken at NAS North Island during production of "Hell Divers" in September, 1931. From left to right: (actor) Cliff Edwards, Lt John Thatch, (actors) Clark Gable (before he grew his trademark mustache) and Wallace Beery, and Lt Herbert Duckworth.
Same Thatch as the one that created the Thatch weave?
@@michaelpiatkowskijr1045 yes that Thatch:)
@@michaelpiatkowskijr1045 yup. Thach earned his wings in early 1930. Apologies for misspelling his name with an extra "t". I took the names off of the caption for the pic on the site I looked at.
Thach was famous before he became famous.
Another note on the jet powered torpedo bomber: prop driven aircraft are far more efficient and powerful relative to an equivalent jet aircraft at low altitude/high performance ops (such as dive or torpedo bombing). A prop (either turboprop or normal reciprocating) can give you that good low level performance and instant boost of power at low altitude, while a jet takes time to spool up but can go faster and higher in the long run
Loved the answer re evaluating sources at 39:00. I was a grad student in history before switching fields (I'm now a research attorney) and I've had discussions about how to go about weighing the relative value of historic and other claims with my students back then and nowadays with my own children. This all seems to come most naturally to my youngest, who is in high school but considering history as a profession.
Drydock by Drach on Sunday morning, a truly great start to the day. Thanks.
On the topic of black shoes/brown shoes on U.S. Navy aircraft carriers, there is one other element you didn't mention: each group took pride in not being part of the other group & it helped with the rivalry and mocking the other group for each to have a difference in uniform that is recognizable at a distance.
Holy cow! Drach puts out so much quality content I give a thumbs up not only because I like it, but to mark the videos I have already watched
Yeah, 'The Drydock' sometimes seems like a dozen or two tall is!
Same
Hah! ...yeah. Actually, over the last few years I've learned a lot about naval history in the post French-revolutionary and napoleonic-wars era, from Drach, (and others),and, now, I find that I can get a lot more out of some of his older vids which I re-watch.
I was, pre-Drach, mostly a student of naval warfare and exploration in the Age of Sail, but have had my interests expanded by this channel (and some others, I suppose).
...but, Drach's content creation is so prolific that it is kinda hard to know what exactly I've seen. (And I give the vids a default 👍)
Cheers!
Still watch these every week, ever since like week 20
The Marines like to say "every Marine is a rifleman first". During WW2, in the USN every sailor was a Gunners Mate 1st.
I'm a huge sailboat nut and I love naval history (thanks to Drach!) so I've wondered for a long time; are you familiar with any naval vessels that were built using cold-molding techniques? Cold molding makes for an extremely high quality boat, but it's not used super frequently for production civilian craft (compared to fiberglass). It strikes me that it might be slightly outside the period the channel covers, but the fact that the PT boars of WW2 used a vaguely similar construction method and the landing craft of the war were made from plywood makes me wonder if any of the vessels that didn't require heavy armor might have used it?
That Yamamoto vid was an eye opener, what a career!
I never thought I would hear Drach talking about our beloved RMS Clickbait.
To be fair, she's part of a class that includes USS Iowa-clickbait, IJN Yamato-clickbait and KMS Bismarck-clickbait.
Bells used to be part of ships alarms, but why were drums left out? Where do the post age of sail alarms come from, especially for submarines ?
10:37 Lützow is pronounced with a long "o" just like you did, as in "crow"
already supposed i might not have gotten the full picture regarding dialects- We usually pronounced it as 'Lützau'. In hindsight now feeling a bit silly
38:57 Ah yes, good old OPVL (Origins, Purpose, Values, Limitations). I had that acronym and its use drilled into me in high school, and I've never forgotten it.
The last comment about the Titanic question, about water being able to pass through bulkheads meant to be watertight being a rather common (unfortunately) issue in ships, still felt today. Bulk carriers are the type of modern vessel I'm studying, with casualties ranging from 1969 (Bolivar Maru) to 2021 (Yong Feng), and you can see repeated cases of bulkheads not being completely watertight, allowing for progressive flooding into one of the bulker's compartments (be it the forepeak ballast tank, a neighboring hold, the engine room, etc). Even worse was when the bulker was an older design. Obviously wear and tear occurs on all ships inevitably, however bulkers were particularly vulnerable to such deterioration when flooding occurs at all. Incidents like Leader L, Cumberlande, Leros Strength, all suffered internal and external metal plating diminution to a great degree which exacerbated their sinking. For Cumberlande, lost June 12th, 1987, sank rapidly by the bow after the crew abandoned ship in high swells; just a handful of minutes it took when they went to the boats. Leader L's crew didn't even get the chance to board the boats on March 23rd, 2000, the ship sank by the head while they were still on the quarter deck when bulkheads failed forward (after suffering flooding when a chunk of side shell plating just fell off in moderate weather), taking a little over half her crew. Then Leros Strength, February 8th, 1997, sank with all hands. He had only discovered that his ship was in dire trouble and called in distress to Rescue Co-ordination Center Norway at 7:50 AM, then contact was abruptly lost just three minutes later. It is assumed the ship sank when contact was lost, and the wreck just disintegrated when hitting the ocean floor.
A major floating production unit I was involved with flooded and almost sank. We traced the flood water by the direction the cable penetrations popped out
Episode 296 and I just started at episode 1 a couple weeks ago... man it's going to take forever to catch up 😂
I joined about a month ago, and I'm right with you. There are so many quality videos on navy battles, ship classification, individual ship design, and Q&A it's almost overwhelming. I love it, though.
It will be worth it!
I started listening about Drydock 45!
Well worth the listen. I have been here since the robo-voice guides
I fall asleep to drach- I added two naps per daze - so I can take- in 3 hours a days..I feel very perky - and all my dreams ...the voice in my head - procedes slow-and has an English accent... ... ... Not a bad trade
Try not to listen at night. I fall asleep with drack in my ear regularly. And it is quite comforting. But there are many posts that I find that I have only listed to part of, because I fell asleep.
But if you want to listen to every
Video several times over, happy dream time.
Longitudinal is fore-to-aft. Transverse is the beam wise direction.
Scuttling: I'm reminded of the strange history of DD 224 USS Stewart. Too damaged to be withdrawn during the ABCD campaign she was scuttled. But because the Japanese were desperate for ships they salvaged her and put her back into service.
Thank you for answering another question. ^^
If I lived at this time period, I think I'd keep a book of naval laws and treaties to be sure that whatever I choose to do isn't going to get me killed or getting me on the bad side of a belligerent.
On the subject of denying war materiel to the Allies post-WW2, there was a significant amount of co-operation from ex-Luftwaffe at least in the immediate post-war period. I have to imagine that the primary reason for that was pretty much everyone thought the Russians were going to kick off WW3 quite soon and Germany would be first against the wall when that happened.
50:08- also in 1981, a British spy ship, the St. Georges, in the Ionian Sea was lost with her crew when she struck a mine left over from WW2. ;)
36:21 - five hundred thousand yards of melee distance, those damn bronze cannons could be installed on carriers instead of airplanes :D
I know, I know, but got me by surprise :D
@ 0:19:38. Another factor of the RMS Titanic's flooding that has been overlooked is the portholes a few feet above her waterline! Yes, they were closed, but I imagine a number of them had their glass cracked if not shattered by the impact of the iceberg and the hull distortion that was caused by the impact....
Regarding creating a ship simply for delivering ordinance: the US Navy publically indicates that conventional 16 inch shells weighed between 1900 and 2700 pounds for an IOWA class like USS NEW JERSEY. And that’s a good starting point- when i talk to guests (and as a restoration volunteer, not a tour guide) the mission of the ship is to 1) have large caliber guns for a fight 2) provide armor to protect these high value targets and 3) engineering support to get the guns to the fight.
I like to say that crew accommodation comes at a much lower priority…like 10th or 12th. But when one adds all the responsibilities and requirements you’re not taking a 50k+ ton IOWA and there’s not magic to shrink down and create a 20-25k ton guns only ship.
57:00
I posit that another contributing factor is that USN ships tended to have more electronic sensors than other navies - multiple radio systems, air / surface / fire control radars for main and secondary guns, radars for AA directors - some ships had a radar for _every_ fire control director on the ship).
The RN may have been a close second, but no other WW2 navy had such a wealth of sensors.
Each of these sensors needs its own crew, and the aggregate demand on ship power requires a greater generating capacity, which requires its own crew …
19:37
*door burst open* "Hello there, it's Mike Brady from Oceanliner Designs..."
Then there's Rex's Airplanes, too.
Our friend!
1) How did Lutzow mansge to turn around in that narrow channel? 2) Age of sail ID - “I don't like the cut of his jib” 3) Army Guns - Six Landing Craft Gun (Medium) mounted the Army's standard AT un (towed, Archer SP, Sherman Firefly tank) the 76mm high velocity 17 pounder. Forty four mounted the Army's standard light artillery piece, the 25 pounder (towed. Sexton SP) in the bizarre caliber of 88mm.4) Jet Torpedo Bomber - Tu-14 Bosun “The Tupolev Tu-14 (NATO reporting name: Bosun)[2] (USAF/DOD reporting name: Type 35),[2] was a Soviet twinjet light bomber derived from the Tupolev '73', the failed competitor to the Ilyushin Il-28 'Beagle'. It was used as a torpedo bomber by the mine-torpedo regiments of Soviet Naval Aviation between 1952-1959 and exported to the People's Republic of China”.
@0:57:11 One of the advantages of Naval Fire Support is that at 20+ knots the fire support can move to where it is. needed quickly!
A ww2 mine washed up near Port Lincoln in South Australia only a couple of years ago
A mine washed up on Gilligan's Island sometime in the 1960s.
I’ve definitely heard the first question somewhere. I remember the „bristling with guns” trop.
Deja vu Drachique - the new phenomenon in psychological science!
In essence I love QnA videos, but by God do they sometimes show that some people just don't pay any attention
It could also be that they haven't watched the entire backlog of videos or have forgotten that a question has been asked before.
00:29:51 A few 17pdr anti tank guns were used by Royal Navy most notably on Landing Craft Gun Medium, there are several good photos of LC G M 101 sinking during the Island of Walrechen in November 1944. LC G M carried two 17pdr in weather shields, forward gun offset to the starboard and rear most to the port, which probably says a lot for the margin of stability. Later 25 pdr gun howitzers replaced the 17pdr probably because of accuracy and longevity of the barrel, but by that time most opportunity for LC G M was markedly reduced although some may have gone to Far East for the Borneo / Malaya operations but the end of WW2 again reduced the need. Probably the reason for the LC G M was ability to go into shallows, although one would think a LC Gun Large (with 2 x 4 inch or 4.7 inch guns) might seem better the draught was adverse, compared to the LC G Medium, there is a big difference between the draught of a standard landing craft and one with a fixed battery.
Really the standard 3 inch 12 cwt or 20 cwt piece as used on warships back into WW1 would have been a better choice than the 17pdr because like the 25 pdr, the 3 inch 20 cwt would be far less stressed, probably less stress on the gun crew too, certainly the US used a 3 inch deck gun probably a Mk 21 on their variant of the LC G M.
Significantly the original plan for Normandy was to take a pair of 95 mm Howitzer armed Centaur tank and a Sherman 75 tank on a specially constructed raised deck frame in an LCT, but instability (who would have thought 90 tons of metal 5 foot higher than on the original deck, in a 400 ton craft would NOT have an adverse effect on stability) meant reconsideration had to be made but some-one came to the bright idea -maybe just landing the tanks on the beach to provide fire support might suffice.
The British prize crew on Pass of Balmaha hadn't been locked up; they borrowed clothes from the crew and were hiding below, waiting for the U-boat to release the vessel or for the ship to be rescued by a Royal Navy ship. The Germans didn't realize that there were seven RN sailors on board until Pass of Balmaha got to port. The usual story was used to compel the ship to sail to port - that a U-boat was (secretly) escorting it in.
Question related to the dual purpose gun answer. Why did the Royal Navy not just license the 5"/38? They should have lots of evidence of the quality of that gun.
You are adding even more complexity to the logistics. How many calibers of guns do you want in a fleet? Not to mention the ammunition?
@4353HUNVRTNG I've heard people make the same argument that the British Army for example; should have been entirely with M1 Garands in the same thought process. Although,fun fact. We did actually via Lend Lease send 38,000 M-1 Garands to the UK. Most never were issued however. Some Saw limited use in World War II and Korea.
10:40 the former pronunciation was correct
29:51 I was confused by the 17-pounder being a 3.7-inch gun. Turns out, the 17-pounder wasn’t a 3.7-inch gun. The 17-pounder was a 3-inch (76 mm) gun. The 17 pounder was also never used as an AA gun and was purely an anti-tank gun and seems to be commonly associated with the TOG II tank, which according to a few sources is incorrect and was actually a 28 pounder known as the QF 3.7-inch (94 mm) AA gun, which is what I think the asker was referring to.
A patrol ship rabbit hole ( one of my favorite little ships, PG Erie, to the related USCGS Treasury class to the Hamilton class, which were sometimes deployed with Cold War Carrier Battle Groups then back to other USCGS military service and WW2) has resulted in a few questions:
1. Battleship New Jersey has some videos on the Treasury class USCGC Taney, one of the aforementioned Treasury class. Have you toured the ship? Any plans to do so if not, and might there be a video if you have?
2. The US Coast Guard was heavily involved in WW2 operations in all theaters, not just in American waters. Was this unusual for a coast guard like organization?
3. Wednesday video idea the first: the US Coast Guard in WW2.
4. USCG in WW2 led me to Dorothy C. Stratton and the SPARS. Which leads to another Wednesday video idea, the role of the various women's auxiliary services (you've touched on the Wrens a few times) in the Second World War.
Just completed this one. Per usual I am saddened until the release of the next drydock….
re: the 1917 battleship plan shown in the first section, which is for an 80,000 ton ship with fifteen 18 inch guns in five triple turrets: was a video done on this design? It looks like a proposal for an American Yamato, but done almost two decades before the Japanese design was chosen. Perhaps it could even be called a "Super Yamato", given that it has six more 18 inch guns, a 19 inch armor belt, a 90,000 EHP electric drive, and yet a projected maximum speed of 25.2 knots, I wonder if such a ship was actually feasible at the time on 80,000 tons. I also wonder if there was a drydock or slipway in the U.S. in 1917 big enough to build a ship that would have been almost 1000 feet long and 108 feet wide, nearly as big (at the waterline) as the 1040 foot length and 134 foot beam of a Nimitz class carrier.
Yeah, it's Tillman IV-2, I did a 5 min guide on them
@@Drachinifel Well that certainly explains it! So in terms of feasibility, an emphatic "no".
Given the longevity of naval mines, I wonder if any navy tried using them as their version of a “salt the earth” campaign.
Didn't the US Army Air Corps do that to Japan late in the war?
@@CSSVirginia The aptly named Operation Starvation. At least one senior commander in the Japanese forces stated that if the US had started just a bit earlier and been a bit more serious about it, the war might have ended sooner. But I don't think that is what @bkjeong4302 is thinking about. I believe the concept is 'what if we slam down a whole bunch of sea mines around this bunch of people we dislike, so that even after the war is over they keep taking damage'.
@@CSSVirginia
For a blockade, not as an attempt to make the place uninhabitable by ships for decades.
I have asked over many years for a 5 minute guide on USS Narwhal SS 167, her sister USS Nautilus & near sister USS Argonaut.
You had a list.
3 fine interwar boats that completed many war missions.
My last request.
There are half a million other subscribers, so don't get too entitled unless you are a patron. Sadly Drach can't answer requests from even 1% of us.
I seem to recall that in 2020 a British fishing vessel was seriously damaged by a left over mine from WW2.
There was also that whole "accident" in Sandford, Gloucestershire back in 2007. 😜
I think that given the extension of the damage, Titanic was pretty stable and durable. Having longitudinal bulkheads like Lusitania would have made the ship list to one side and made launching the lifeboats more difficult.
A cursory look on Wikipedia reveals only three jet powered torpedo bombers: the SNCAC NC.1071, the Il-28T, and the Tu-14T. The NC.1071 was only a prototype but the Il-28T and Tu-14T saw service. Surprisingly, they were not the last aircraft designed to conduct anti-ship torpedo attacks to see flight. That distinction likely goes to the Tu-91 (NATO reporting name Boot) which saw its first flight in 1955.
Drach, @55:25 you gave me an "hmm" moment. I jave always thought of a "gun crew" as all of the men in the turret or the tub (for AA guns) and not as "a sub-set of sailors PER gun at that location."
You can look at it either way, but if you're working out the impact on the ship you have to consider the logistical tail to the magazines as well
@@Drachinifel Very true. I had simply never thought of it as a "per gun barrel" issue. 😄
Regarding the spelling of Lützow- your second way of spelling it certainly sounds authentic and correct- No language botchering to yap about detected :D
note: as a thuringian, i should probably not make too many assumptions about it either. Dialects sure are a factor to be considered there and there very well may be a rather ridiculous way of pronouncing it after all.
The Norwegian Battery Commander had maxxed out his Magic Points the night previous, i suppose.
It might be a crazy question, but has there been an account of two opposing countries boarding the same ship at the same time? How would it go on if not? The merchant ship is still neutral so opposing ships couldn't really fight near the neutral ship without possibly hitting them.
Drach during the channels time coverage how big of a ship could they raise off the bottom intact( in a condition that would possibly allow it to return to service!) and how deep could it have been?
00:52:25 - Why did US ships tend to have more crew than other nations ships of a similar size/role/displacement in the interwar/WW2 period?
Also mind the modern US Navy has always been invested in relatively lavish accommodations and fittings for their ships compared to many others; American ships tended to have more stuff onboard dedicated to making ship life more comfortable and so on to maintain morale. Bigger crew quarters, more plumbing and electrical wiring, larger tool rooms with more powered tools, bigger galleys with more kitchen conveniences, and the like required a sizable number of additional technicians to maintain those various systems.
Put another way, those Ice-Cream Machines didn't run themselves, and God help the US Navy ship that failed to have ice cream ready on time.
Shssss! Never interrupt your enemy when they are making a mistake ))))
How about covering the Destroyer? Joshua Slocum reported that delivering her to Brazil was his worst journey ever- except his last, I suppose
Late to the party but... re the manning requirements, I had to check something. From examination of photos (I can't get hard data...) a 4x40mm mount required 11 men. An octuple pompom required 5-6... considering how many 40mm US ships had, this would acount for a lot of extra crew.
With regard to imperfect watertightness, at about 24:15 you mention USS Nevada, but a very contemporary case to Titanic is of course the loss of HMS Audacious in 1914; she was only 4 years old at that time, and had some significant similar issues with her internal watertight integrity. It would be a bit unfair to hold Titanic to some standard of perfection when a contemporary and essentially brand new battleship had similar issues.
Also, in terms of the Titanic, I think what all are referring to is the mysterious flooding of Boiler Room 4 before the water of Boiler room 5 started spilling over. There is a theory by Sam Halpern that this was caused by additional (and managable) iceberg damage. In any case, Titanic didnt sink because of it, so her going under was not caused by faulty watertight conditions.
For the 1st question ? The person who posed the query should look into HMS AGINCOURT & others like her. Should be illuminating, if they aren't already aware, that is....
🚬😎👍
Well... if the writer claims an enemy warship was sunk during a battle he was in when it was, in fact, scrapped the same year he published his book, then you have every reason to take what he says with a grain of salt.
That means you _Tameichi Hara!_
He or his editor needed a fact checker for sure. If I were writing a book about a battle he was involved with, I would use him as a source of local colour and reaction, but not as a definitive source when adding a new item of history to a well researched battle.
New Jersey is in Dry dock Right now as we speak for another week or two icr exactly
Going off of the armor question, what does it mean when a ship is called a timberclad, and how does that differ from a wooden ship like Constitution or Victory?
I should the think trying to lift heavy rounds repeatedly would cause unsustainable injuries. You could reasonably shovel coal in shifts but even that had it’s limits physically to the crew. The weight of the rounds required a mechanical solution simply to sustain combat effectiveness
It has been suggested that Titanic also grounded on the iceberg and as a result the double bottom was damaged.
HI Drach. Ive been a subscriber for some time now, but I cant seem to find Episodes 1&2 on your page. Can you direct me to them?
🦁🦁🦁🦁🦁 THE LION WAS HERE 🦁🦁🦁🦁🦁 No. 1000
Only 296 ? what have you been doing ?, thanks a lot Leona.
Did the Titanic watertight compartments not have watertight tops?
I'm actually quite surprised at your conclusions regarding national ship recognition during the age of sail, specifically during the 17th century as English, Dutch, and French and to a slightly lesser extent Spanish, Swedish and Danish warship were highly distinctive, at least up until the 1690's and the only real ambiguity would have been in differentiating between the various prizes from each respective nation in the service of their captors.
Hey Alex, how many battleships/battle cruisers took part in Operation Neptune? If you feel inclined, could you identify each one? I know of a few of them-USS Texas, of course, and my favorite ship of all time, HMS Warspite, etc., but I was wondering just how many there were involved.
In order to actually use an airborne torpedo against a ship that is not in port, substantial range and reliability is required. The early jets were significantly lacking in both those qualities. I suppose that by the time jets gained those qualities, homing missiles had overtaken the effectiveness of torpedoes against anything other than submarines.
Pretty boats , .....im thinking of buying a sail boat , and putting a small engine on it....what is the most efficient ship. -0- $ail ?
drach, Sir, could you please expkain the development of the midshipmans dirk?, and was it an effective weapon?
Why did you choose HMS Splendid to be the ship of the sailor in the channel art? To which vessel bearing that name does he belong?
The destruction of abandoned tanks and artillery was very very important more so than most other equpiment because in most wars the other side will take any intel they can get from it and immediately hand it over to the army for use against its former owners or if it’s too hard to fix they can salvage parts to help fix other tanks of the same type that fall into their hands.
⚓️
Is USS North Carolina the only museum ship to have took part in the Guadalcanal campaign?
I think so. The only other ship classes that could have are the Fletchers. Maybe a Gato class submarine, but I'm not familiar with any sub attacks or submarine assistance during Guadalcanal. The only carriers to survive Guadalcanal were Enterprise and Sarasota. The North Carolina, Washington, and South Dakota were the only battleships involved in Guadalcanal.
@@michaelpiatkowskijr1045 Also USS Indiana from late November 1942, but she also wasn't preserved.
@@michaelpiatkowskijr1045 US Subs were certainly operating in the waters near Guadalcanal: the Japanese Heavy Cruiser Kako was sunk by S-44 while returning to port after the First Battle of Savo Island, July 1942. There are two subs preserved as museum 'ships' that were operational in the Pacific during 1942 but I don't think either of them were directly involved in the Guadalcanal campaign (note that subs are usually referred to as 'boats' in US service, not 'ships', but 'museum ships' seems fine to me). These are: USS Silversides (SS-236, in Muskegon Michigan), and USS Drum (SS-228, in Mobile Alabama).
@@michaelpiatkowskijr1045 All the four surviving Fletchers date from 1943 or later, so they did not participate in the Guadalcanal campaign. Wikipedia has some nice lists of world-wide museum ships that can be sorted by date: look up "List of Museum Ships".
Battlecruiser Lutzow.
When i bought your outer wear i wanted it for North Dea like conditions. i got North SEA weather. seen the U S weather lately.
"Are you suggesting sea mines migrate?"
It's Lützow
It still seems completely wrong that under the Cruiser Rules, a belligerent could seize a neutral ship like Pass of Balmaha (the future Seeadler). As far as I’m concerned, the crew would have been entirely within their rights to overpower said one-man prize crew, sail back to the US, and have him and the British tried and hanged for piracy.
@michaelimbesi2314 Legal codes often don't make a lot of sense. Part of this comes from human imperfection. Part of it comes from ethical conflict of interest on the part of legal professionals, often combined with influence from other wealthy special interest groups and 'might makes right' thinking.
Historically, major naval powers had a vested interest in being able to blockade their enemies, so they influenced the law to support doing this, even when that led to double standards, legal ethics problems, and (in some cases) to very negative long term consequences for humanity. Government legitimacy is more a matter of perception than reality, and when the law doesn't make sense that weakens government legitimacy and leads to all manner of long term problems for a society and for humanity as a whole.
A lot of what was accepted during the period the channel covers is no longer accepted today, since the blockade of food and medical supplies could result in starvation and medical problems - even death - to large numbers of innocents, including children. Some even consider certain historical blockades as a form of war crime. Unlike historical blockades, modern blockades we have seen over the past few decades allow food and medical supplies to pass.
HMS Defiant
One thing that I look at with extraordinary claims in any new book which contradicts accepted wisdom: Do the address the fact that their take is controversial and do they take the time to explain why they disagree with other authors in the field? Breezily asserting a new take on something, as if it should be so obvious that there's no need to explain it is a sign of poor research.
Lützo
Sombody lost the sea of azures , last week , i hear rumors that u s. Is going to build build build ships ...history is fun , comrade - i need info to plan for today and tomorrow... apparently the future is in drone aircraft carrier s...
We have lots of plans. NO money or yards to do the job really.
We have the money - we have the yards and dry docks - we dont have a common enemy - to motivate us to commit : a swarm of tiny bees , can move a hungry bear - off their turf , ...
@@TomG-f4r Actually, we don't. Which explains why we have a backlog of active duty ships and submarines waiting repair.
Ok - new data - I didn't know of backlogs...yet ; Manitowoc , submarine "access" , - no action :: bay ship , sturgeon bay , 1000 foot dry dock , no action , marnette marine , litoral combate ships , they apparently arnt going to make any more , .so within 75 miles of green bay , 3 " underfunded" ship yards , ... P.s. 5000 skilled labor : left to rot over a union " troubles" : for 3-4 decades - they are old ,now , retired , crazy or worse. ..and america , makes the money - money is in dollars - any amount needed can be borrowed from the future and repaid ,cheaply ,in future dollars , ..unless say we lose a war , and then it doesn't matter , we repay in confederate dollars or yen , or franc's , ..
@@TomG-f4r I just did a little checking. There is a major infrastructure issue to your idea. It's called, the Saint Lawrence Seaway. They use a lock system to lift ships. Similar to the lock system in the Panama canal. A major reason not to use the yards your suggesting is the inability to fit through the St Lawrence seaway. For example, the standard ddg-51 Arleigh Burke destroyers have a draft of about 31 ft. Making them too deep to fit through. And while submarines were built in the past. I don't think they have the capability of building nuclear submarines up there?
16th, 5 May 2024
2024May23: .