As mentioned in other comments below, HMS Vanguard was designed to use supercharges. These guns were also capable of firing the same projectiles while using these supercharges which gave a maximum range of 37,870 yards (34,630 m) i.e. over 21 miles. Regarding saving a battleship as a museum ship, I would have preferred to save HMS Warspite as that had our best battleship history and HMS Vanguard never fired its guns in anger, not even in the Korean war as also mentioned below. Great review, thanks
Yes, Warspite would have been the better pick for a museum ship, but Vanguard had a much higher chance of surviving long enough, like the Iowa's, to be turned into one.
One thing to note about those guns is they are almost the exact same 15” B.L. Mk. I guns that the Queen Elizabeths, Renowns, Repulses, Hood and a few monitors had. The only difference being the ability to supercharge, or ram more powder in the breech. This gave the guns more range but also severely reduced the barrel quality. The ability was hardly even used during training exercises.
Sorry, but 37,870 yards is not 21 miles. Naval gun ranges are measured by comparison to nautical miles not statute miles. 37,870 yards is slightly over 18.5 nautical miles. A nautical mile is 2000 yards. Iowa class 16 inch guns had a range of over 40,000 yards or 20 nautical miles.
@@LongboardJesus For Vanguard they actually also improved the gun elevation in the turrets, so the guns had a longer range on her even without the super charges.
HMS was the most advanced and best built of its Age, that's why some say she should've been saved. She was around long after Warspite, but I agree that Warspite would've been amazing to keep as well. HMS Vanguard as Britain's honorary Warship to show the end of a Naval Era for Great Britain would've been just as great for historical significance.
Vanguard’s 40mm AA gun system was pretty cool: There were 6 autoloading barrels per mount and each mount had its own local radar director. They were serious about AA after the disaster of Repulse and Prince of Wales, although the former dodged (or “combed”) about 12 aerial torpedoes, which was a magnificent display of ship handling.
Yeah I would say that the AA fit was better than the Iowa's thanks to the auto-loading, advanced stabilisation, and variety of directing options of those 6-barrel mounts.
Maybe Vanguard's 8 × twin 5.25" dual-purpose guns firing shells with proximity fuses were its true main AA. Proximity fuses were not available at the time when Repulse and Prince of Wales were sunk. Radar was also not as reliable at that early stage of WW2 but improved a lot by the time Vanguard was launched.
As a five year old my father took me to see her aground outside the Still and West pub at The Point in Portsmouth Harbour. Gutted and sitting high in the water on her way to the breakers yard, she looked utterly enormous to my child's eyes.
I lived my whole life around Portsmouth harbour until 36. Its great for ship spotting obviously, but some of the old ones like the 82 look pretty sad 😔
Great video, thanks for taking the time to produce. My dad served on HMS Repulse and was on board when it was sunk in December 1941. Battleships and battlecruisers were magnificent feats of engineering but emerging technology (such as guided missiles) made them obsolete in modern times.
My father took us on board HMS Vanguard as she was being stripped in Portsmouth Harbour. We had just been on board HMS Victory. My dad saw a hole in the fence next to the dock. So in we went. It was not long before we were spotted. The duty officer challenged us so My dad got out his WW2 RNVR documents that he carried all the time. So we were honored and taken to the forehead under the 15 inch turrets. Then we went up top to the bridge to gaze forward. It was the most amazing visit ever as a young boy and we were so proud of my dad, who served all the days of WW2. True story promise.
It is hard to deny the Iowa class 16" guns were some of the best and most powerful every built. Posters keep mentioning the 15" supercharge. By most accounts, the supercharge was developed for older 15" gun British warships that did not have their gun mount elevation increased during refit. The supercharge was intended to increase range on older ships as an emergency measure, not to increase firepower. It was very hard on the guns, and according to most sources, supercharging was not used on new/refitted ships like Renown, Vanguard, or the Queen Elizabeth's. Vanguard overall is one of the best battleships to be built, and one of the best looking. While the 15" was not the most powerful gun in service by WW II, it was rugged, reliable, and accurate. In other words, well proven and superbly battle worthy. Some have called it the finest heavy battleship gun built by the Royal Navy. It makes some claim to being one of the best of all time, despite not being the most powerful.
I believe that the 50 cal 16 inch fish was the third, arguably second best naval gun ever built. It’s possibly more powerful than the 40 cal 18 inch gun, but that’s debatable, and could very well only be less powerful than the 18.11 inch guns of the Yamato
The turret substructure of Vanguard's guns was strengthened specifically to cope with firing supercharges. Though the ship never used them in practice.
☹️ Yeah, The British govt chose not to preserve ANY capital ships, because WW2 left UK in very poor financial shape. 👍 But IMO they could've paid for it using the following 2 concurrent strategies: 👉1). Store the preferred ships in mothballs, while awaiting the govt's financial situation to improve. 👉2). Raise private funds, and offer special incentives for people who donate a certain amount(£250, £500 or £1,000+). ✳️The incentives could include: ✓ Donors' names engraved on a large memorial plaque. ✓ Have an overnight holiday celebration with food and festivities(donated by local restaurants), and allow the £250+ donors to spend the night on the ship.
Thank you for this video. I grew up in a home behind Portsmouth Harbour and saw Vanguard in the distance many times. We children cried our eyes out when she was sent for scrap, and many former sailors had an unexpected need for a handkerchief.
@@ramal5708 - Correct, I had migrated prior to that. I did see the big cruiser Newport News leave Portsmouth and marveled that she weighed about the same as HMS Dreadnought.
She came back to the Clyde and was broken up at Faslane which is now the nuclear sub base. At that time there was a breakers yard next to the R N base which then of course was diesel boats only. My Aunt had a caravan at Rosneath so from 1961 until we sold the van in 1963 I saw many of the Navy's comings and goings on the Loch as a kid. In fact it was the Navy that brought my late dad to Scotland as he was originally from Devonport. I well remember the Vanguard, to a kid of that age she seemed enormous,and there were many ships on the Clyde in those days. One of the most elegant ships I have ever seen. Fitting however sad that she came back to the Clyde, as she was built in John Brown's in Clydebank. The yard,birthplace of the Queens also, is now Clydebank college and a massive health centre. The young nurse who attended me on a recent visit did not know there had ever been a shipyard there. That and Singers up until the 1970s was Clydebank. The old man used to chat to the then Admiralty coppers guarding the former U S destroyer base at Rosneath. Rosneath mansion apparently used to partially plan the D Day landings. I also saw the Battlaxe brought in under tow,written off after a collision,and dreadnought,Britains first Nuclear Submarine.Vanguard was gone after two years however.
Fun fact one of the 15” guns from the legend herself, HMS Warspite, was put aboard Vanguard. Sadly when she was scrapped, they scrapped the gun and the rest of them too. I personally think at least one of Vanguard’s guns should have been on display in front of IWM, instead of HMS Resolution’s.
The RN 15" shell had a 50% larger bursting charge than the USN 16" super heavy shell. IIRC the USN estimated less than 3% chance of hits on a non-manoeuvring battleship sized target at maximum range of the 16" 45.
If we're talking about Mark 7 16"/50 then its a different thing, both late war British and US GFCS could fire their main guns over horizon in all weather and time of day conditions. As far as I know Iowas still retain their analog GFCS for the main guns from WWII up until Desert Storm because of their effectiveness regarding computing target data though other types of war ships during Desert Storm uses computer and digital fire controls. Imo the Mark 38 fire control is the best GFCS for a battleship
I know Vanguard didn't fight in WW2, but come on UK... you could have saved this ship. Last British battleship ever build, low mileage, no battle damage, etc.
It was Vanguard or the 3 Tiger class cruisers. The tigers had the advantage of being in more places at once, much more aa firepower and the politicians liked them.
Britain was bankrupt after 5yrs of war & there was no money to be had for preserving old battleships. Vanguard survived as long as she did by being made a NATO flagship & receiving contributions from other countries.
Great video, just to add a few points. The reason the Royal Navy steered away from armoured conning towers was because in practice it was found the crew would often use the secondary 'open' bridge in combat to gain better visibility. This is also reflected in the conning towers of the KGVs, Nelson/Rodney and the refits of Warspite, Queen Elizabeth, Valiant and Renown. It was just dead weight so the armour was cut back. As for her main battery, many place too emphasis on the fact the guns were of WW1 vintage and didn't cut it in WW2. The reality is with super charges (David K Brown's book Nelson to Vanguard states the work was carried out to fire at 30 degrees elevation with super charges but were never issued because the war was over) Vanguard had a theoretical range of over 35,000 yards, but as you point out the chances of hitting at that range is doubtful even for modern battleships like Vanguard or Iowa. The 15 inch shell was still capable of penetrating any armour of any ship at 'realistic' engagement ranges. Her fire control was second only to Iowa and she would of been a formidable oppenent to even the Yamato in poor visibility/weather and at night.
Spot on. those who have doubts about World War 1 ordanance should research D Day. Many of the guns employed by the Germans on The Atlantic Wall were in fact French or Skoda of world war 1 vintage. It the Germans with their technical expertise saw fit to use them,one need say no more. I met many men of several nations in the past who were at D Day. No one ever said the German coastal guns were lousy,or inaccurate. These men have the final word in my view. They faced them.
Her turrets were from Courageous and Glorious, the guns were from the stocks of 15 inch guns, some of which had been mounted in other ships, the Royal navy had extra gun barrels,so that guns could be taken out in refits and overhauled,being replaced by barrels from reserve stocks. These weapons were then overhauled and fitted to other ships as required.Also, Vanguard was intended to reinforce the far eastern fleet, originally, however , the need for escorts took priority for obvious reasons. The desire for a battleship with all the lessons of the second world war was the main reason she was continued and completed. Problem was, she was a ship without a war to fight in an era when the battleships time had passed.
I am sad that the UK didn't turn the Warspite and the Vanguard into museum ships. The UK might have been strapped for cash at the time, but you can mothball a ship for a long time, until you have the cash.
The US relies on the states or fundraiser if they really want to preserve or make the decommissioned ships as museum ships for their states or normal museum ships in their cities
Unless I am mistaken, the squared off stern was called the “transom” stern and actually added hydrodynamic “length” to ship at higher speeds. This effectively increased the length to width ratio (finesse?) and permitted higher speeds for less power. Conversely, at lower speeds the transom actually slowed the ship down
Some armour from the Vanguard was used in the British Steel River Don Works apprentice shop as the floor, I was an apprentice in the early 70s don't think I ever damaged it.
@@GG-ir1hw Sheffield River Don works, through gate no 2 on Brightside Lane go through the north Planer Shop, the Appentice shop is now the site of Mike Brewe Motors
@@GG-ir1hw British Steel Sheffield, go through no 1 gate on Brightside Lane, past the canteen, through the North Planer shop. The Apprentice Workshop was where Mike Brewer Motors is now,
Dear old Vanguard... I was near the end of my apprenticeship as a shipfitter (fitter and turner) in HM Dockyard, Portsmouth when they paid her off. I went on board as they were stripping her of anything useful and went to the engineers' workshop where I found some 1/4" and 3/8" HSS cobalt tool bits. I grabbed them as a souvenir and they are now in my shed where I sometimes take one to grind a new tool. She didn't want to leave Pompey Harbour and swung towards the Still and West pub as she neared the Round Tower. Thank you for the information/comparison and the video footage of Vanguard. Unfortunately the UK was still paying for WWI and with the added debt of WWII she had to go.🇦🇺
Quite fair and measured analysis that makes clear that Royal Navy battleships were based on a lot of battle and sea experience across the totality of two world wars, and it is far from clear cut that the Iowa’s were superior. Therefore issues such as crew training, experience and the nature of how any meeting took place would likely be the decisive factors. Thank God the RoyaL Navy since 1815 has not had to fight the US Navy and it’s incredible resources which would always be decisive and that USA and Uk remain the closest of friends and allies.
Great series, thank you. I am glad you quote "on paper" as the realities of battle mostly disregard statistics; who would have thought that two 6" cruisers and and 8" cruiser could have forced an 11" panzerschiff into running way?
Well 3 to 1 odds doesn't exactly promote staying and slugging it out. As I recall one of those cruisers sustained considerable damage during the engagement.
@@patrickgriffitt6551 Hi, my point was about 'statistics'. On paper Langsdorf should have kept well out of range and hammered Exeter (8"), Achilles and Ajax (6") with his 11" guns. As the old saying goes, 'no plan withstands first contact with the enemy'.
@andybelcher1767 I think your oversimplification is a bit disingenuous. Think of it more like keep away. Imagine one player has the ball, and trying to avoid 3 other players attempting to take the ball away. Any half way decent navy would have been able to corner one ship in, just as the RN did. It wasn't a matter of just sailing away for the german, it was to not get caught by 3 ships working together to force an engagement.
The other thing the RN found with Conning Towers, was that the senior offices tended not to use the conning tower even if there was one. You can see in the design of the Nelson class how the Conning Tower was a small almost afterthought.
That and there was some research that if an armoured conning tower was hit by a shell it might survive intact but the occupants would be turned to jelly by the pressure waves created of essentially being inside a bell when struck.
The armoured conning tower on Bismarck was penetrated numerous times and even an 8in cruiser shell made its way inside through a damaged door. I think an eyewitness survivor moved through the conning tower late in the action and everyone inside was dead.
@@urseliusurgel4365 In some literature lightly armored conning tower is treated as a fault (arguing that on PoW's bridge almost entire staff was killed by shot from Bismark) but in reality armored conning tower also would turn out deadly for occupant. Anti splinter armor was enough as direct hit would always kill occupants.
Perhaps if Britain had not been under such economic duress, post-1945, the Royal Navy (and Captain Hindsight) could've maintained her (not mothballed) until such time as anti-air weapons had caught up with the jet age; imagine 1982 and a Seawolf-armed HMS Vanguard, rocking-up of East Falkland, for the shore-bombardment gig, "Eh, Amigo, escucho un tren expres, viniendo!
The Tiger class cruisers would arguably have been perfect for the falklands conflict, and only taken out of service a few years before. Automatic 6” and 3” guns would have been extremely useful in ‘bomb alley’ and NGFS
I was a little surprised at the omission of any discussion of Vanguards radar, gun direction or command spaces/capabilities (beyond the bare statements about the 40mm and 5.25 inch batteries.) I would been interested to learn about Vanguards capacities in these areas.
Drachinifiel goes into it in some detail. In summary - Vanguard had excellent gunnery, with significant redundancy of radar and directors down to the 40mm AA guns.
Fun FACT: in the movie, 'Sink the Bismark', the British capital ship gun loading scenes were taken from practice exercises in a 15" turret of HMS Vanguard.
My Ex GF's grandad was on a RN Destroyer during that exercise and storm and told me about it about 10 years ago before he died. He said that alot of the smaller ships had to go back alongside or to shelter where possible, but he remembered seeing Vanguard at sea before his ship 'escaped'. He said that as everyone else slowed or ran, Vanguard sped up and ploughed into it with no dramas at all...except the damage that most ships suffer during heavy seas! I was on a few RN Destroyers and in heavy seas it was normal if we lost all of our upper deck fittings and stantions and all that jazz and things were bent. I know of a storm that bent a 4.5 inche gun barrel and another than moved the turret in it's housing. The worst was our QD ladder was completely buckled when we came through the Bay of Biscay! That was a nasty nasty storm and when a Ship goes over 30 degress plus, it gets scary as every time it does, it feels like you aren't coming back up. I did think that with the more modern warships, that Radars and things were supposed to fall off at 45 degrees plus, so if IOWA was going over to 50, then that must have felt horrendous and been really scary on board. You don't know how scary heavy seas are until you have been in a few!!! Great Video. All of your videos like this are superb. You are a guy that really knows his stuff. Just take more than one torch with you haha.
Due to its Atlantic Bow, Scharnhorst could actually have outrun all its enemies in the heavy weather up there at The Battle of North Cape. She was trapped in close though.
A battleship as a yacht?! Now, that's what I call one heck of a yacht! Good video Ryan. Did you ever do a video on when the Iowa served as transport for President Roosevelt to the Tehran Conference in 1943?
According to Oscar Parkes “British Battleships” Iowa was Rolling 26° each way while Vanguard rolled 15° each way. One thing to remember is Vanguard was displacement limited and was carrying very little ammunition for her guns.
@@darrinslack1269 it would depend on the seas. Hood would roll massively in quartering seas. One crewman recalled being able to walk on the walls. Probably an exaggeration, but if i remember correcting it was north of 20° each way. While regarded as wet, the Iowa’s were not considered poor seaboats. We also have to consider the USN BB was actually battle ready but Vanguard tonnage was so restricted she could either carry ammo or fuel, not both. Aft turrets were rendered inoperable or preserved for the conversion to royal yacht and never returned to service according to NavWeaps. As the flag of reserve fleet she often gave up fire control directors to ships in active service that had breakdowns. She was taken in hand for weight reduction and to have 6 mains and half secondary armament put back to full operation and be able to carry ammo for them and fuel, but decommissioned instead.
@@darrinslack1269 I've always thought that the Iowas were/are too narrow in the beam. In the Arctic or North Atlantic they would have struggled in an engagement with a Yamato or Bismarck which were massive in the beam and therefore much steadier gun platforms. Perhaps the American ships were better suited for the calmer waters of the Pacific. I'm not saying the Pacific can't be rough, but generally speaking the Artic and North Atlantic are ALWAYS rough.
In theory, Vanguard’s gun’s aren’t as anemic as they first appear. According to British naval historian D.K. Brown, Vanguard was built to accept “supercharges” for its 15”/42 guns. These increased powder charges increased muzzle velocity by a couple hundred FPS, increasing the range and striking power to very close to more modern 15” guns. These were never actually issued to Vanguard because it was never in a war and the charges increased barrel wear, but they were issued to the Revenge class during WWII to make up for their 20 degree elevation. Again, these charges didn’t make the 15”/42 comparable to the 16”/50 or even 16”/45, but it did get them within spitting distance of the guns on Bismarck or Richelieu.
The BL 15”/42 also had a larger bursting charge then the Iowa’s 16”/50 so if one gets through it has a higher potential damage as well. The Vanguard also has better fire control redundancy than the Iowa which would be beneficial when shells start landing.
@@stevenmcgee9588 You are correct about the larger bursting charge, although I'm not sure it would have been enough to make a huge difference. The Mark 8 16" shell had a 40.9 lb charge, whereas the shells for the 15"/42 had a 48.5 lb charge. I'm not sure whether Vanguard had better fire control redundancy, although I think it's safe to say that both were pretty good in this department.
The only British built battleship to end up as a museum piece is the "Mikasa" in Japan. At least one of the "King George V" should have been saved and moored on the Thames. What were these people thinking. Eight of the US battleships were retained as museum pieces.
Well normal civillians could fundraise and buy the warships before they were scrapped or when they're decommissioned just like what they did with Texas and North Carolina. It only take just few people to pool money together to purchase retired battleships before they were scrapped
@@ramal5708 We owed all our money to the Yanks for winning the war for them because they turned up two and a half years to late. Next big war I bet they will be a year to early.
New to the channel but have watched several of your videos. Keep up the good work. I've never been on an Iowa but I have been on board the USS North Carolina BB55 several times as I'm from North Carolina. That being said I would like to see possibly a North Carolina Iowa comparison, and possibly a comparison with the South Dakota class. I have heard and I think I may have also read it somewhere that the navy discovered that the armor layout of the North Carolina class was actually better from a protection standpoint than the Iowa's. Don't know how true that is but I think it would be neat to see a comparison between the two. Again keep up the good work.
Do you have anymore information about the Iowa's bows being replaced with vanguard styled bows? I've never heard anything about it before, and it's quite fascinating.
Two things I'd like to see. I'm not sure if the fully complete 1950s/60s Jean Bart was done during thr Richelieu video but that would be interesting. In a non comparison video I think it would be fun to talk about the last battle cruiser ever in service (unless you count the Kirovs) the Yavuz
A cutaway picture, a full colour center piece included in the English Eagle magazine, more a paper really, designed to be bought and read by young lads allover the British Commonwealth included HMS Vanguard. I collected each centre piece from the Eagle and thumb tacked these onto my bedroom walls.
Wonderful talk as usual, I really like this series. I should point out that the Iowa's use high-pressure boilers which give more power but are more complicated and hard to repair. The British used standard boilers which were simple and easy to repair if battle damaged, it was a deliberate choice.
The fact that with the click of a button I get to tune in to a thoroughly educational video the likes of this & other Battleship New Jersey productions is what makes UA-cam great.
Have you read the naval institute press book on the vanguard ? It explains why the American battle ships had better range because is double reduction gears for the props in US ship of WW2. It also stated US 17” inch armor was equal to British 16 “ inch , British Armor was a thought to be a little better. The US armor was was harden 50% of its thickness to counter a new nose cap shell the had super penetration do you know any thing on this ?
HMS Vanguard is my second favorite Battleship right after Iowa. And I believe that Vanguard is actually heavier than Bismarck and only lighter than Tirpitz by less than 500 tonnes. I am actually surprised by her sea-keeping ability. Had she been finished prior to 1943, she would have been the queen of the Atlantic Ocean. Great video!
Interesting point, HMS vanguard costed 11.5 million pounds, USS Iowa where around 100 million each. With the exchange rate being around 2.3 ish at the time the British could have build almost 4 vanguard per Iowa..... impressive!
The design was originally designed to use new 16in guns in a 3 gun layout with 3 turrets, but war pressures and delays resulted in those not being made, so the ship design was revised to take spare 15in guns/mounts/turrets instead.
There’s an interesting newsreel of Exercise Mainbrace where Vanguard is seen operating in tandem with USS Wisconsin.The 15” gun turrets of the Courageous-class were modified and modernized to fit the standards for Vanguard. She was launched by Queen Elizabeth II.
You can tell Ryan just walked in from chipping paint somewhere, sat in a chair and did all this with no prep, no script, no prompts, etc. Gotta give the guy some credit here, and maybe at least a comb!
He's balding, which accounts for the flyaway locks. Soon he will have a landing strip, later a calm bare sea. Male pattern balding is one of the most exclusively masculine of all possible differences between male and female, yet rather than being looked upon with pride, women disdain it and and men fight against it for too long, a la Ruddy Guliani of New York. Ryan should have no problem vis a vis most women, though, as on first impressions they may not notice his vanishing dead cells - as long as they meet standing up.
What an awesome video. Thank you for providing it. My last year and a half in the US Navy, I was privileged to serve aboard the U. S. S. John R. Craig DD 885, a Gearing class tin can, and it was my dream assignment. When I was rotating stateside at the end of my year in NAVSUPPACT Da Nang, I put destroyer San Diego on all 5 lines. I was a QM 3. In answer to what comparison I'd like to see, could you please make a comparison video of a Gearing, say, the John R. Craig, both before and after FRAM vs. whatever the equivalent RN tin can was? That would be late WW 2, early post war. Since my service was in Vietnam, perhaps emphasizing on something from that time period?
One thing I've always wondered is: Were the "big guns" on battleships originally intended for shore bombardment, or for ship-to-ship combat? Or were they intended for both? Which were they used more for? I know that depends on the battle and the setting.
I wish my dad could have seen this video. The Vanguard was his first and only ship. He left school as early as possible in 1944 to join the Royal Navy and served as a radar man on her maiden voyage, the tour of South Africa with the Royal family, etc. I thought I saw him lying on the deck, sunning himself with his fellow matelots, but on closer inspection the guy looks too old. My dad would have only been a teenager.
This was the last ship my grandfather served aboard, he was in the Cameron highlanders during ww1 in the trenches and at the out break of ww2 he joined the Royal Navy and served onboard a minesweeper not sure about the name though as my grandfather passed away in the 1970s so I never had the pleasure of knowing him but I do know my grandmother not got him home until the 1950s when he finally said goodbye to his military service for good, he served all over the world and contracted malaria during his time in the navy whilst serving in Asia somewhere, I think it might have been Malaysia but not sure, I would have loved to have heard about his military days
Another great vid. Just wondering if it was 108 ft wide, same as the Iowas, because of the width of the Panama Canal at that time, which I think was 110 ft wide. I can't find out for sure what width Suez was, but logically it must have been at least 110 ft and most likely the 200ft-ish recorded for 1956. It kind of assumes that the UK would keep a rosy enough relationship with the Americans that they'd be able to use it, even in wartime.
An amazing video as always, but I would note that Vanguard was larger than Bismarck at standard displacement. I’m pretty sure that battleships are not measured at deep load, and by going by that, Vanguard was about 4000 tonnes heavier.
15:38 I love that ship photo, seems to feature the then Royal Family including the late HM Queen Elizabeth the II with the crew of HMS Vanguard. Wonderful memory
Great comparison, wished they had updated her by removing the aft turrets and giving her missiles, considering the size of a Sea Slug, this would have made sense. Now complete fantasy, a Falklands conflict with Ark Royal with Buccaneers and Vanguard, Blake and Tiger, facing off the Belegano.
Belgrano was originally an American light cruiser. Despite some occasional modernisations, it would’ve been outmatched by pretty much every warship in the Royal Navy in any sort of surface engagement.
I have a book about British Battleships and it says that had Vanguard been finished earlier enough they were going to offer it to the Royal Australian Navy to fight in the Pacific but Australia didn’t have to people to man it.
Doubtful. Vanguard would have served in the British Pacific Fleet if WW2 had continued long enough. The British had a large force in the Pacific in 1945, itself more powerful than the Kido Butai of 1942, operating alongside the US Navy. The combined armada was likely the largest in naval history, even bigger than the Grand Fleet of 1918.
Great video. At 17:00 you see Vanguard moving down the Clyde and passing SS Queen Elizabeth, which is being repainted from her wartime troop-ship grey to Cunard's house colours, in anticipation of her starting passenger liner service. At the time, Queen Elizabeth was the largest ship in the world. Both ships were built at the same yard - John Brown's Clydebank yard, back up the river. Regarding the 15" gun on the Vanguard - I'm sure the US Navy did a report on the efficacy of all the main armaments of battleships, and the 15" came out favourably compared to other weapons. It was something I saw referred to, but I can't find the actual report anywhere on the web.
One of the key features of tank armour is to have it sloped to deflect incoming shells. The gun turrets are somewhat sloped but why aren't the sides of warships sloped?
lots of warships have sloped armor belts. its normally referred to if they do. (FYI- when tehy do the belt isnt the first outside layer of steel, its internal armor..)
One simple question. If vanguard basically had the same Armour as the KGV class, which you said would make an even fight with an Iowa class, how can you say Iowa would defeat the Vanguard?
The Iowas had a much larger immunity zone vs Vanguard than Vanguard had against the Iowas. Vanguard’s belt armor was 1in thinner than on the KGVs. About 14in over the magazines and 13in over the engineering and was Not angled. Also only 13in on the face plates of the turret. In truth, the ships were relatively even defensively, it’s just that the 16 inch 50 Cal‘s on the Iowas were monsters. Their penetrating power was kindkinda ridiculous.
Interesting info re crew survivability in an armored conning tower. Did New Jersey have an alternate or backup con from which the ship could be maneuvered?
Vanguard's bridge superstructure is quite pronounced compared to the Iowas. In other words, it's quite blocky and has a lot of surface area. Was there any advantages to this design? You see this characteristics in the King Georges too.
Yes. There was a lot more space for offices, electronics and so on, which were proliferating on battleships. Traditional superstructures had nowhere near as much space. When the Iowas were upgraded in the 1980s all the fire control equipment for the new weapons had to be installed in the (unarmoured) admiral's accommodation because there was no spare space anywhere else.
Funny thing about HMS Vanguard If HMS Hood hadn't sunk at Denmark Strait, Vanguard's stuff would have gone to Hood but Vanguard might have ended up as an Aircraft Carrier
My father served on Vanguard's first commission, including the Royal Tour of South Africa. And my sister-in-law's grandfather was Commander (ie Executive Officer) for a time in the late 1950's.
My Dad took my two big brothers to look at the old girl at Faslane, we moved into the area soon after as my pop was a newly trained MOD Plod and the base was expanding for Polaris.
Always had the opinion that Vanguard was somewhat of a "budget battleship." Glad to see it still seemed to perform very well with what it had to work with - with sensible and smart design choices.
H M S Hood, was known as 'Britains Big Bullsh - - - - -ing B - - - - - - Built in Brown's' to the men of the Pre War Navy, so had they faith in her capability.
Great video Ryan! But Queen Elizabeth ll didn't christen her. Princess Elizabeth did😉 I didn't know that till your footage here. How lovely they both look!
One of these guns holds the record for a hit on a moving target at sea. 26400 yards. That is the maximum practical range of the rangefinder due to the curvature of the earth. Radar is needed for longer ranges.
Just a correction , the largest european built capital ship , when considering length , was the HMS Hood and not the Bismarck. While the german ship had a slight higher maximum displacement, Hood was about 10 meters longer.
@@johnholt9399 Actually if we consider the present time, the largest european built military vessel is the the Admiral Kuznetsov with 305 meters , vs the 284 of the QE carrier
@@johnholt9399 they are pretty close in all honesty due to creeping weight issues on the russian ship, most recent info put both around 70000 tons max displacement, even if originally Kuznetsov was intended to have max of 65000
3:12 "Some people called them Large Light Cruisers". By "Some People" of course you mean to say that it was their official designation by the Royal Navy from the start of their design until they were placed in reserve in 1919.
The guns were beefed up to fire supercharges which meant they could fire alot further plus a higher velocity, however the supercharges would ruin the guns alot quicker so they decided to only use during war time, as she never seen a naval war then she never fired them. Vangaurd was very good in rough seas due to her bow, she was better than the iowa's at high speed through rough waters. I think alot of people see the Iowa's as the best battleships ever built but most will have the later changes in mind which modernised them right upto to the 90's, im sure the Iowa's and Vangaurd were alot closer when these 2 class of ships were actually designed and built in the mid to late 40's, one thing is for sure though and both were great looking ships.
Great video about a very special ship. It ended up more as a super-size taxi for the British Royal family, doing the rounds (no pun) after WW2 visiting South Africa, Australia etc showing the flag to the then Empire & Dominions. I'm sure on paper it would have done what it was designed to do, but it looked dated, obsolete? Probably not comparing apples, with apples etc but for example the Bismarck, the Yamamoto to name 2 (enemy) ships just have sleeker profiles, not forgetting the Missouri (non enemy) No matter how big these ships were, their enormous guns, thickness of armour etc, a lucky hit, one torpedo, a salvo from the other side, they break up and sink, in double quick time, with disastrous consequences. (RIP for all those crewmen.) I wonder how the Vanguard would have fared in battle? Years ago 'Cher' made a video, on board the the 'Big Mo (?)' I sometimes wish I could 'un-see' it, but it looked like the officers & ratings on Missouri had a lot of fun, oogling 'Ms Cher.'
The longest moving battleship on battleship hit was HMS Warspite against Italy’s Guilio Cesare in July 1940 at 26,000 yards, that’s over 14 miles. I doubt we will ever see naval battles like that again.
Good morning , I do believe the French battleship Jon Bart was not finished by 1950’s. The Repluse was the best ship in the fleet when it came to gun duals. She was able to stratal faster then every other big gun ship. If she was given the upgraded as the Renown prior to the sacrifice in Singapore.she would have had the anti-aircraft guns, she survives and even saved PoWales. It was also known that if she survived the torpedo attack, the Japanese didn’t have any more torpedos and she would have returned to Singapore along with the damaged PoW where battle damage would be repaired enough to join the US fleet in Hawaii. This was thrown around in the Admiralty at the time as fleet in the south was cruising to their sacrifice. There is a web sight called to “Armoured Carriers”. On this sight you will hear the recorded voices of the survivors of the “British Fleet”. I believe you will find this enjoyable as the voices of the fleet come alive. Forever in His service
As mentioned in other comments below, HMS Vanguard was designed to use supercharges. These guns were also capable of firing the same projectiles while using these supercharges which gave a maximum range of 37,870 yards (34,630 m) i.e. over 21 miles. Regarding saving a battleship as a museum ship, I would have preferred to save HMS Warspite as that had our best battleship history and HMS Vanguard never fired its guns in anger, not even in the Korean war as also mentioned below. Great review, thanks
Yes, Warspite would have been the better pick for a museum ship, but Vanguard had a much higher chance of surviving long enough, like the Iowa's, to be turned into one.
One thing to note about those guns is they are almost the exact same 15” B.L. Mk. I guns that the Queen Elizabeths, Renowns, Repulses, Hood and a few monitors had. The only difference being the ability to supercharge, or ram more powder in the breech. This gave the guns more range but also severely reduced the barrel quality. The ability was hardly even used during training exercises.
Sorry, but 37,870 yards is not 21 miles. Naval gun ranges are measured by comparison to nautical miles not statute miles. 37,870 yards is slightly over 18.5 nautical miles. A nautical mile is 2000 yards. Iowa class 16 inch guns had a range of over 40,000 yards or 20 nautical miles.
@@LongboardJesus For Vanguard they actually also improved the gun elevation in the turrets, so the guns had a longer range on her even without the super charges.
HMS was the most advanced and best built of its Age, that's why some say she should've been saved. She was around long after Warspite, but I agree that Warspite would've been amazing to keep as well.
HMS Vanguard as Britain's honorary Warship to show the end of a Naval Era for Great Britain would've been just as great for historical significance.
It's a shame that the British never saved the HMS Vanguard, it's so wonderful that all for Iowa's in the class were saved and are still with us..😊
The greatest shame is the scrapping of Warspite, just glad she made it difficult to do!
@@xxparan01axx11 Classic Warspite....defiant to the last
@@loganmarriott514 one of the things I'd love to do if I came into an obscene amount of money would to make a replica and donate it lol
@@xxparan01axx11 replicas are never the same though...
@@loganmarriott514 better than nothing though!
Vanguard’s 40mm AA gun system was pretty cool: There were 6 autoloading barrels per mount and each mount had its own local radar director. They were serious about AA after the disaster of Repulse and Prince of Wales, although the former dodged (or “combed”) about 12 aerial torpedoes, which was a magnificent display of ship handling.
Yeah I would say that the AA fit was better than the Iowa's thanks to the auto-loading, advanced stabilisation, and variety of directing options of those 6-barrel mounts.
Maybe Vanguard's 8 × twin 5.25" dual-purpose guns firing shells with proximity fuses were its true main AA. Proximity fuses were not available at the time when Repulse and Prince of Wales were sunk. Radar was also not as reliable at that early stage of WW2 but improved a lot by the time Vanguard was launched.
It always brings a smile to my face when I hear of a warship breaking loose on the way to the scrappers. As if to say, not without a fight mate!
As to range , the British had not developed at-sea refueling
And to attempt an escape to a pub, not once, but twice.
@@phil4483 Always looking for a fight and finding one. Taking out the tugs taking her to the scrappers, you can't make this stuff up.
As a five year old my father took me to see her aground outside the Still and West pub at The Point in Portsmouth Harbour. Gutted and sitting high in the water on her way to the breakers yard, she looked utterly enormous to my child's eyes.
Probably still pretty big to an adult as well I first saw an aircraft carrier as an adult and couldn't believe how big it was
Man, what a sight... must've been great, seeing such a Warship around right before it was erased from this world. A tragic beauty...
I lived my whole life around Portsmouth harbour until 36. Its great for ship spotting obviously, but some of the old ones like the 82 look pretty sad 😔
Great video, thanks for taking the time to produce. My dad served on HMS Repulse and was on board when it was sunk in December 1941. Battleships and battlecruisers were magnificent feats of engineering but emerging technology (such as guided missiles) made them obsolete in modern times.
My father took us on board HMS Vanguard as she was being stripped in Portsmouth Harbour. We had just been on board HMS Victory. My dad saw a hole in the fence next to the dock. So in we went. It was not long before we were spotted. The duty officer challenged us so My dad got out his WW2 RNVR documents that he carried all the time. So we were honored and taken to the forehead under the 15 inch turrets. Then we went up top to the bridge to gaze forward. It was the most amazing visit ever as a young boy and we were so proud of my dad, who served all the days of WW2. True story promise.
Great video! If nothing else HMS Vanguard was with a doubt one of the most beautiful battleships ever made.
Not gonna lie, her design was sexy sleak.
I like to think of her as a successor to Hood. Very similar lines
I dunno. With those turrets, she always reminds me of a classical Greek statue. Amazing physique but lacking size in a certain area.
Roma takes the cake but I love the Vanguards elevated barbets.
@@evo5dave Brilliant.
It is hard to deny the Iowa class 16" guns were some of the best and most powerful every built.
Posters keep mentioning the 15" supercharge. By most accounts, the supercharge was developed for older 15" gun British warships that did not have their gun mount elevation increased during refit. The supercharge was intended to increase range on older ships as an emergency measure, not to increase firepower. It was very hard on the guns, and according to most sources, supercharging was not used on new/refitted ships like Renown, Vanguard, or the Queen Elizabeth's.
Vanguard overall is one of the best battleships to be built, and one of the best looking. While the 15" was not the most powerful gun in service by WW II, it was rugged, reliable, and accurate. In other words, well proven and superbly battle worthy. Some have called it the finest heavy battleship gun built by the Royal Navy. It makes some claim to being one of the best of all time, despite not being the most powerful.
I believe that the 50 cal 16 inch fish was the third, arguably second best naval gun ever built. It’s possibly more powerful than the 40 cal 18 inch gun, but that’s debatable, and could very well only be less powerful than the 18.11 inch guns of the Yamato
The turret substructure of Vanguard's guns was strengthened specifically to cope with firing supercharges. Though the ship never used them in practice.
It's surprisingly easy to deny... keep waving the flag for a class of ships that did absolutely nothing.
Thanks for this. It's a sin my country never had the for sight to preserve this beautiful ship as you guys have done!
She should have been preserved. A tragedy.
☹️ Yeah, The British govt chose not to preserve ANY capital ships, because WW2 left UK in very poor financial shape.
👍 But IMO they could've paid for it using the following 2 concurrent strategies:
👉1). Store the preferred ships in mothballs, while awaiting the govt's financial situation to improve.
👉2). Raise private funds, and offer special incentives for people who donate a certain amount(£250, £500 or £1,000+).
✳️The incentives could include:
✓ Donors' names engraved on a large memorial plaque.
✓ Have an overnight holiday celebration with food and festivities(donated by local restaurants), and allow the £250+ donors to spend the night on the ship.
Would have LOVED to see HMS Warspite and HMS Vanguard if they had only been preserved. Vanguard also made a break for freedom!
Why should our ruling class save these ships for the nation, when most of them dislike the uk with a vengence,
No point saving a ship that never did anything. Save Warspite and Rodney before this would make sense?
Some have said when Vanguard broke free, it was an act of defiance to escape her fate. Rather sad really
Warspite never made it to the breakers yard.
@@michaeltruett817 Indeed, those pictures of her grounded at Prussia Cove are amazing.
It’s extremely sad and disgusting that they scrapped our history
Thank you for this video. I grew up in a home behind Portsmouth Harbour and saw Vanguard in the distance many times. We children cried our eyes out when she was sent for scrap, and many former sailors had an unexpected need for a handkerchief.
You probably haven't seen the Iowa enters the Portsmouth harbor in 1989 while few sailing boats were around her
@@ramal5708 - Correct, I had migrated prior to that. I did see the big cruiser Newport News leave Portsmouth and marveled that she weighed about the same as HMS Dreadnought.
She came back to the Clyde and was broken up at Faslane which is now the nuclear sub base. At that time there was a breakers yard next to the R N base which then of course was diesel boats only. My Aunt had a caravan at Rosneath so from 1961 until we sold the van in 1963 I saw many of the Navy's comings and goings on the Loch as a kid. In fact it was the Navy that brought my late dad to Scotland as he was originally from Devonport. I well remember the Vanguard, to a kid of that age she seemed enormous,and there were many ships on the Clyde in those days. One of the most elegant ships I have ever seen. Fitting however sad that she came back to the Clyde, as she was built in John Brown's in Clydebank. The yard,birthplace of the Queens also, is now Clydebank college and a massive health centre. The young nurse who attended me on a recent visit did not know there had ever been a shipyard there. That and Singers up until the 1970s was Clydebank. The old man used to chat to the then Admiralty coppers guarding the former U S destroyer base at Rosneath. Rosneath mansion apparently used to partially plan the D Day landings. I also saw the Battlaxe brought in under tow,written off after a collision,and dreadnought,Britains first Nuclear Submarine.Vanguard was gone after two years however.
Fun fact one of the 15” guns from the legend herself, HMS Warspite, was put aboard Vanguard. Sadly when she was scrapped, they scrapped the gun and the rest of them too. I personally think at least one of Vanguard’s guns should have been on display in front of IWM, instead of HMS Resolution’s.
The RN 15" shell had a 50% larger bursting charge than the USN 16" super heavy shell.
IIRC the USN estimated less than 3% chance of hits on a non-manoeuvring battleship sized target at maximum range of the 16" 45.
Thats right Vanguard fired the 15inch supercharge round not the 15" common.
If we're talking about Mark 7 16"/50 then its a different thing, both late war British and US GFCS could fire their main guns over horizon in all weather and time of day conditions. As far as I know Iowas still retain their analog GFCS for the main guns from WWII up until Desert Storm because of their effectiveness regarding computing target data though other types of war ships during Desert Storm uses computer and digital fire controls. Imo the Mark 38 fire control is the best GFCS for a battleship
The Iowa could fire nuclear round, Vanguard couldn't, no cap
3% is one hit out of every 3 salvoes. That's not too bad at 20 miles.
@@ramal5708 Neither ship ever did. Your point is irrelevant.
I know Vanguard didn't fight in WW2, but come on UK... you could have saved this ship. Last British battleship ever build, low mileage, no battle damage, etc.
One owner Battleship, low mileage. NO LOW BALLERS!!! I know what I got
If there was one we should have saved it was HMS Warspite. :'(
If any battleships should have been saved, it was H.M.S. Warspite, precisely because of the history and consequent battle damage..
It was Vanguard or the 3 Tiger class cruisers. The tigers had the advantage of being in more places at once, much more aa firepower and the politicians liked them.
Britain was bankrupt after 5yrs of war & there was no money to be had for preserving old battleships. Vanguard survived as long as she did by being made a NATO flagship & receiving contributions from other countries.
Great video, just to add a few points. The reason the Royal Navy steered away from armoured conning towers was because in practice it was found the crew would often use the secondary 'open' bridge in combat to gain better visibility. This is also reflected in the conning towers of the KGVs, Nelson/Rodney and the refits of Warspite, Queen Elizabeth, Valiant and Renown. It was just dead weight so the armour was cut back. As for her main battery, many place too emphasis on the fact the guns were of WW1 vintage and didn't cut it in WW2. The reality is with super charges (David K Brown's book Nelson to Vanguard states the work was carried out to fire at 30 degrees elevation with super charges but were never issued because the war was over) Vanguard had a theoretical range of over 35,000 yards, but as you point out the chances of hitting at that range is doubtful even for modern battleships like Vanguard or Iowa. The 15 inch shell was still capable of penetrating any armour of any ship at 'realistic' engagement ranges. Her fire control was second only to Iowa and she would of been a formidable oppenent to even the Yamato in poor visibility/weather and at night.
Spot on. those who have doubts about World War 1 ordanance should research D Day. Many of the guns employed by the Germans on The Atlantic Wall were in fact French or Skoda of world war 1 vintage. It the Germans with their technical expertise saw fit to use them,one need say no more. I met many men of several nations in the past who were at D Day. No one ever said the German coastal guns were lousy,or inaccurate. These men have the final word in my view. They faced them.
Come on Ryan, you know the only battleship that could take an Iowa is Warspite!
I concur, I can only speculate but there is some force of nature that would hand victory to Warspite.
@@abrahamedelstein4806 That force of nature is God himself
only cos Warspite learned god mode cheat ;) So sad she is not here as a museum ship.
Yeah, Warspite would sail circles round an Iowa....
Warspite had the best type of armour, plot armour!
Her turrets were from Courageous and Glorious, the guns were from the stocks of 15 inch guns, some of which had been mounted in other ships, the Royal navy had extra gun barrels,so that guns could be taken out in refits and overhauled,being replaced by barrels from reserve stocks. These weapons were then overhauled and fitted to other ships as required.Also, Vanguard was intended to reinforce the far eastern fleet, originally, however , the need for escorts took priority for obvious reasons. The desire for a battleship with all the lessons of the second world war was the main reason she was continued and completed. Problem was, she was a ship without a war to fight in an era when the battleships time had passed.
Those guns are better than the Iowas 16" right?
@@ramal5708 Did you watch the video? Those guns couldn’t even come close to an Iowa’s guns.
@@Iwillfigureoutanamelater what does that mean? Is Iowa gun worse?
@@ramal5708 No. The Iowa had much better guns than the Vanguard. Iowa shot bigger diameter, heavier shells much farther than the Vanguard.
I am sad that the UK didn't turn the Warspite and the Vanguard into museum ships.
The UK might have been strapped for cash at the time, but you can mothball a ship for a long time, until you have the cash.
Politicians were just as short sighted back then as they are today, unfortunately.
Still require a lot of maintenance and money when they are moth balled.
The US relies on the states or fundraiser if they really want to preserve or make the decommissioned ships as museum ships for their states or normal museum ships in their cities
"The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money" - Margaret Thatcher.
Sadly this stupidity in the uk continues with hms illustrious being recently sent for scrap despite efforts to stop it.
Unless I am mistaken, the squared off stern was called the “transom” stern and actually added hydrodynamic “length” to ship at higher speeds. This effectively increased the length to width ratio (finesse?) and permitted higher speeds for less power. Conversely, at lower speeds the transom actually slowed the ship down
Some armour from the Vanguard was used in the British Steel River Don Works apprentice shop as the floor, I was an apprentice in the early 70s don't think I ever damaged it.
Which factory was it in?
@@GG-ir1hw Sheffield River Don works, through gate no 2 on Brightside Lane go through the north Planer Shop, the Appentice shop is now the site of Mike Brewe Motors
@@GG-ir1hw British Steel Sheffield, go through no 1 gate on Brightside Lane, past the canteen, through the North Planer shop. The Apprentice Workshop was where Mike Brewer Motors is now,
Dear old Vanguard... I was near the end of my apprenticeship as a shipfitter (fitter and turner) in HM Dockyard, Portsmouth when they paid her off. I went on board as they were stripping her of anything useful and went to the engineers' workshop where I found some 1/4" and 3/8" HSS cobalt tool bits. I grabbed them as a souvenir and they are now in my shed where I sometimes take one to grind a new tool. She didn't want to leave Pompey Harbour and swung towards the Still and West pub as she neared the Round Tower. Thank you for the information/comparison and the video footage of Vanguard. Unfortunately the UK was still paying for WWI and with the added debt of WWII she had to go.🇦🇺
Quite fair and measured analysis that makes clear that Royal Navy battleships were based on a lot of battle and sea experience across the totality of two world wars, and it is far from clear cut that the Iowa’s were superior. Therefore issues such as crew training, experience and the nature of how any meeting took place would likely be the decisive factors. Thank God the RoyaL Navy since 1815 has not had to fight the US Navy and it’s incredible resources which would always be decisive and that USA and Uk remain the closest of friends and allies.
Great series, thank you. I am glad you quote "on paper" as the realities of battle mostly disregard statistics; who would have thought that two 6" cruisers and and 8" cruiser could have forced an 11" panzerschiff into running way?
Well 3 to 1 odds doesn't exactly promote staying and slugging it out. As I recall one of those cruisers sustained considerable damage during the engagement.
@@patrickgriffitt6551 Hi, my point was about 'statistics'. On paper Langsdorf should have kept well out of range and hammered Exeter (8"), Achilles and Ajax (6") with his 11" guns. As the old saying goes, 'no plan withstands first contact with the enemy'.
@andybelcher1767 I think your oversimplification is a bit disingenuous.
Think of it more like keep away. Imagine one player has the ball, and trying to avoid 3 other players attempting to take the ball away.
Any half way decent navy would have been able to corner one ship in, just as the RN did.
It wasn't a matter of just sailing away for the german, it was to not get caught by 3 ships working together to force an engagement.
"...if they were in the right place..."
Halsey throws a hissy-fit.
Lee throws his ships into position.
The other thing the RN found with Conning Towers, was that the senior offices tended not to use the conning tower even if there was one. You can see in the design of the Nelson class how the Conning Tower was a small almost afterthought.
That and there was some research that if an armoured conning tower was hit by a shell it might survive intact but the occupants would be turned to jelly by the pressure waves created of essentially being inside a bell when struck.
The armoured conning tower on Bismarck was penetrated numerous times and even an 8in cruiser shell made its way inside through a damaged door. I think an eyewitness survivor moved through the conning tower late in the action and everyone inside was dead.
@@urseliusurgel4365 In some literature lightly armored conning tower is treated as a fault (arguing that on PoW's bridge almost entire staff was killed by shot from Bismark) but in reality armored conning tower also would turn out deadly for occupant. Anti splinter armor was enough as direct hit would always kill occupants.
Perhaps if Britain had not been under such economic duress, post-1945, the Royal Navy (and Captain Hindsight) could've maintained her (not mothballed) until such time as anti-air weapons had caught up with the jet age; imagine 1982 and a Seawolf-armed HMS Vanguard, rocking-up of East Falkland, for the shore-bombardment gig, "Eh, Amigo, escucho un tren expres, viniendo!
It would have scared the crap out of the argies. 👍
The Tiger class cruisers would arguably have been perfect for the falklands conflict, and only taken out of service a few years before. Automatic 6” and 3” guns would have been extremely useful in ‘bomb alley’ and NGFS
I was a little surprised at the omission of any discussion of Vanguards radar, gun direction or command spaces/capabilities (beyond the bare statements about the 40mm and 5.25 inch batteries.) I would been interested to learn about Vanguards capacities in these areas.
Drachinifiel goes into it in some detail. In summary - Vanguard had excellent gunnery, with significant redundancy of radar and directors down to the 40mm AA guns.
Fun FACT: in the movie, 'Sink the Bismark', the British capital ship gun loading scenes were taken from practice exercises in a 15" turret of HMS Vanguard.
Went aboard HMS Vanguard during her last Navy Day, before she was decommissioned.
My Ex GF's grandad was on a RN Destroyer during that exercise and storm and told me about it about 10 years ago before he died. He said that alot of the smaller ships had to go back alongside or to shelter where possible, but he remembered seeing Vanguard at sea before his ship 'escaped'. He said that as everyone else slowed or ran, Vanguard sped up and ploughed into it with no dramas at all...except the damage that most ships suffer during heavy seas! I was on a few RN Destroyers and in heavy seas it was normal if we lost all of our upper deck fittings and stantions and all that jazz and things were bent. I know of a storm that bent a 4.5 inche gun barrel and another than moved the turret in it's housing. The worst was our QD ladder was completely buckled when we came through the Bay of Biscay! That was a nasty nasty storm and when a Ship goes over 30 degress plus, it gets scary as every time it does, it feels like you aren't coming back up. I did think that with the more modern warships, that Radars and things were supposed to fall off at 45 degrees plus, so if IOWA was going over to 50, then that must have felt horrendous and been really scary on board. You don't know how scary heavy seas are until you have been in a few!!! Great Video. All of your videos like this are superb. You are a guy that really knows his stuff. Just take more than one torch with you haha.
Due to its Atlantic Bow, Scharnhorst could actually have outrun all its enemies in the heavy weather up there at The Battle of North Cape. She was trapped in close though.
@@PalleRasmussen Superior tactics in the dark by British and Norwegian sailors.
A battleship as a yacht?! Now, that's what I call one heck of a yacht!
Good video Ryan. Did you ever do a video on when the Iowa served as transport for President Roosevelt to the Tehran Conference in 1943?
There are few people who served in WW2 and who sailed on HMS Vanguard and are still alive.
One of them is HM Queen Elizabeth II.
HMS Vanguard, the battleship armed with 'her Great-Aunt's teeth'.
Oh my, an Iowa rolling 50 degrees, that's scary
I’d hate to be in the rangefinder n top of the forward superstructure in that weather. You’re being thrown many feet sideways
According to Oscar Parkes “British Battleships” Iowa was Rolling 26° each way while Vanguard rolled 15° each way. One thing to remember is Vanguard was displacement limited and was carrying very little ammunition for her guns.
@@drittal so basically in heavy sea battle the iowas were sitting ducks
@@darrinslack1269 it would depend on the seas. Hood would roll massively in quartering seas. One crewman recalled being able to walk on the walls. Probably an exaggeration, but if i remember correcting it was north of 20° each way. While regarded as wet, the Iowa’s were not considered poor seaboats. We also have to consider the USN BB was actually battle ready but Vanguard tonnage was so restricted she could either carry ammo or fuel, not both. Aft turrets were rendered inoperable or preserved for the conversion to royal yacht and never returned to service according to NavWeaps. As the flag of reserve fleet she often gave up fire control directors to ships in active service that had breakdowns. She was taken in hand for weight reduction and to have 6 mains and half secondary armament put back to full operation and be able to carry ammo for them and fuel, but decommissioned instead.
@@darrinslack1269 I've always thought that the Iowas were/are too narrow in the beam. In the Arctic or North Atlantic they would have struggled in an engagement with a Yamato or Bismarck which were massive in the beam and therefore much steadier gun platforms. Perhaps the American ships were better suited for the calmer waters of the Pacific. I'm not saying the Pacific can't be rough, but generally speaking the Artic and North Atlantic are ALWAYS rough.
In theory, Vanguard’s gun’s aren’t as anemic as they first appear. According to British naval historian D.K. Brown, Vanguard was built to accept “supercharges” for its 15”/42 guns. These increased powder charges increased muzzle velocity by a couple hundred FPS, increasing the range and striking power to very close to more modern 15” guns. These were never actually issued to Vanguard because it was never in a war and the charges increased barrel wear, but they were issued to the Revenge class during WWII to make up for their 20 degree elevation. Again, these charges didn’t make the 15”/42 comparable to the 16”/50 or even 16”/45, but it did get them within spitting distance of the guns on Bismarck or Richelieu.
The BL 15”/42 also had a larger bursting charge then the Iowa’s 16”/50 so if one gets through it has a higher potential damage as well. The Vanguard also has better fire control redundancy than the Iowa which would be beneficial when shells start landing.
@@stevenmcgee9588 You are correct about the larger bursting charge, although I'm not sure it would have been enough to make a huge difference. The Mark 8 16" shell had a 40.9 lb charge, whereas the shells for the 15"/42 had a 48.5 lb charge. I'm not sure whether Vanguard had better fire control redundancy, although I think it's safe to say that both were pretty good in this department.
@@stevenmcgee9588 Yup its a thing the Royal navy is famous for massive bursting charges they reckon even the 14" were as powerful as 16" heavy shells
The only British built battleship to end up as a museum piece is the "Mikasa" in Japan. At least one of the "King George V" should have been saved and moored on the Thames. What were these people thinking. Eight of the US battleships were retained as museum pieces.
well we had half of London to rebuilt at the time so paying to keep a obsolete warship was not on the top of anyones list
Well normal civillians could fundraise and buy the warships before they were scrapped or when they're decommissioned just like what they did with Texas and North Carolina. It only take just few people to pool money together to purchase retired battleships before they were scrapped
The US is a MUCH richer country that the UK.
@@ramal5708 We owed all our money to the Yanks for winning the war for them because they turned up two and a half years to late. Next big war I bet they will be a year to early.
No British battleship would be able to fit in the Thames without dredging.
New to the channel but have watched several of your videos. Keep up the good work. I've never been on an Iowa but I have been on board the USS North Carolina BB55 several times as I'm from North Carolina. That being said I would like to see possibly a North Carolina Iowa comparison, and possibly a comparison with the South Dakota class. I have heard and I think I may have also read it somewhere that the navy discovered that the armor layout of the North Carolina class was actually better from a protection standpoint than the Iowa's. Don't know how true that is but I think it would be neat to see a comparison between the two. Again keep up the good work.
Check this out: ua-cam.com/video/i_hcXuGIKuU/v-deo.html
@@BattleshipNewJersey Cool I had not seen those on your channel. I will definitely check them out thanks again.
If you're into the comparisons, we have a whole Playlist devoted to them, so we recommend that too!
Do you have anymore information about the Iowa's bows being replaced with vanguard styled bows? I've never heard anything about it before, and it's quite fascinating.
Two things I'd like to see. I'm not sure if the fully complete 1950s/60s Jean Bart was done during thr Richelieu video but that would be interesting. In a non comparison video I think it would be fun to talk about the last battle cruiser ever in service (unless you count the Kirovs) the Yavuz
I love these comparison videos. Great job guys!
A cutaway picture, a full colour center piece included in the English Eagle magazine, more a paper really, designed to be bought and read by young lads allover the British Commonwealth included HMS Vanguard.
I collected each centre piece from the Eagle and thumb tacked these onto my bedroom walls.
Wonderful talk as usual, I really like this series. I should point out that the Iowa's use high-pressure boilers which give more power but are more complicated and hard to repair. The British used standard boilers which were simple and easy to repair if battle damaged, it was a deliberate choice.
Vanguard was my Uncle Martin's last ship. His first ship Was Ajax. He was at the River Plate.
My dad's last battleship having served on Duke of York till the wars end then served on Amythest in the Korean war.
The fact that with the click of a button I get to tune in to a thoroughly educational video the likes of this & other Battleship New Jersey productions is what makes UA-cam great.
Have you read the naval institute press book on the vanguard ?
It explains why the American battle ships had better range because is double reduction gears for the props in US ship of WW2.
It also stated US 17” inch armor was equal to British 16 “ inch ,
British Armor was a thought to be a little better.
The US armor was was harden 50% of its thickness to counter a new nose cap shell the had super penetration do you know any thing on this ?
HMS Vanguard is my second favorite Battleship right after Iowa. And I believe that Vanguard is actually heavier than Bismarck and only lighter than Tirpitz by less than 500 tonnes. I am actually surprised by her sea-keeping ability. Had she been finished prior to 1943, she would have been the queen of the Atlantic Ocean. Great video!
Interesting point, HMS vanguard costed 11.5 million pounds, USS Iowa where around 100 million each. With the exchange rate being around 2.3 ish at the time the British could have build almost 4 vanguard per Iowa..... impressive!
The design was originally designed to use new 16in guns in a 3 gun layout with 3 turrets, but war pressures and delays resulted in those not being made, so the ship design was revised to take spare 15in guns/mounts/turrets instead.
There’s an interesting newsreel of Exercise Mainbrace where Vanguard is seen operating in tandem with USS Wisconsin.The 15” gun turrets of the Courageous-class were modified and modernized to fit the standards for Vanguard.
She was launched by Queen Elizabeth II.
You can tell Ryan just walked in from chipping paint somewhere, sat in a chair and did all this with no prep, no script, no prompts, etc. Gotta give the guy some credit here, and maybe at least a comb!
He's balding, which accounts for the flyaway locks. Soon he will have a landing strip, later a calm bare sea. Male pattern balding is one of the most exclusively masculine of all possible differences between male and female, yet rather than being looked upon with pride, women disdain it and and men fight against it for too long, a la Ruddy Guliani of New York. Ryan should have no problem vis a vis most women, though, as on first impressions they may not notice his vanishing dead cells - as long as they meet standing up.
Iowas are pretty. The prettiest of all battleships. Vanguard was handsome. The most handsome of all battleships.
chin-chin
You must have never laid eyes upon the Scharnhorst klasse.
@@F-4E-58-MC Scharnhorst was more of a pretty ship due to her tiny slender feminine 11" girly guns :)
@@doccyclopz They really do make her a bit... Top heavy... 🤣 Well, not historically, but you get the point :)
Not as good as the mighty Warspite though
What an awesome video. Thank you for providing it. My last year and a half in the US Navy, I was privileged to serve aboard the U. S. S. John R. Craig DD 885, a Gearing class tin can, and it was my dream assignment. When I was rotating stateside at the end of my year in NAVSUPPACT Da Nang, I put destroyer San Diego on all 5 lines. I was a QM 3. In answer to what comparison I'd like to see, could you please make a comparison video of a Gearing, say, the John R. Craig, both before and after FRAM vs. whatever the equivalent RN tin can was? That would be late WW 2, early post war. Since my service was in Vietnam, perhaps emphasizing on something from that time period?
One thing I've always wondered is: Were the "big guns" on battleships originally intended for shore bombardment, or for ship-to-ship combat? Or were they intended for both? Which were they used more for? I know that depends on the battle and the setting.
I wish my dad could have seen this video. The Vanguard was his first and only ship. He left school as early as possible in 1944 to join the Royal Navy and served as a radar man on her maiden voyage, the tour of South Africa with the Royal family, etc. I thought I saw him lying on the deck, sunning himself with his fellow matelots, but on closer inspection the guy looks too old. My dad would have only been a teenager.
This was the last ship my grandfather served aboard, he was in the Cameron highlanders during ww1 in the trenches and at the out break of ww2 he joined the Royal Navy and served onboard a minesweeper not sure about the name though as my grandfather passed away in the 1970s so I never had the pleasure of knowing him but I do know my grandmother not got him home until the 1950s when he finally said goodbye to his military service for good, he served all over the world and contracted malaria during his time in the navy whilst serving in Asia somewhere, I think it might have been Malaysia but not sure, I would have loved to have heard about his military days
Good lord, a 50 degree roll must have been absolutely terrifying!
Another great vid. Just wondering if it was 108 ft wide, same as the Iowas, because of the width of the Panama Canal at that time, which I think was 110 ft wide. I can't find out for sure what width Suez was, but logically it must have been at least 110 ft and most likely the 200ft-ish recorded for 1956. It kind of assumes that the UK would keep a rosy enough relationship with the Americans that they'd be able to use it, even in wartime.
An amazing video as always, but I would note that Vanguard was larger than Bismarck at standard displacement.
I’m pretty sure that battleships are not measured at deep load, and by going by that, Vanguard was about 4000 tonnes heavier.
The Iowas are beautiful ships, but the Vanguard is a beauty too. Other than the Warspite, the Vanguard is the battleship I wish England had kept.
Iowas, Vanguard, Littorios, North Carolinas, all beautiful battleships. South Dakotas and KGV, not so much.
15:38 I love that ship photo, seems to feature the then Royal Family including the late HM Queen Elizabeth the II with the crew of HMS Vanguard. Wonderful memory
Great comparison, wished they had updated her by removing the aft turrets and giving her missiles, considering the size of a Sea Slug, this would have made sense. Now complete fantasy, a Falklands conflict with Ark Royal with Buccaneers and Vanguard, Blake and Tiger, facing off the Belegano.
Belgrano was originally an American light cruiser. Despite some occasional modernisations, it would’ve been outmatched by pretty much every warship in the Royal Navy in any sort of surface engagement.
@@Cailus3542 Maybe, but could imagine the panic of the Argies if a Task Force which included these three major ships started to approach the mainland?
I kind of miss these long format videos their packed full of knowledge
Thanks much, I've enjoyed your videos and finally subscribed. I missed the link to the gofundme page?
Is there already a video of the Iowa class versus the Sverdlov class?
What I like about this guy is he looks like the kind of guy you’d see as a crew member of a large cargo ship. He just looks like a sea man.
Fantastic!. Its a great looking ship.
I have a book about British Battleships and it says that had Vanguard been finished earlier enough they were going to offer it to the Royal Australian Navy to fight in the Pacific but Australia didn’t have to people to man it.
Doubtful. Vanguard would have served in the British Pacific Fleet if WW2 had continued long enough. The British had a large force in the Pacific in 1945, itself more powerful than the Kido Butai of 1942, operating alongside the US Navy. The combined armada was likely the largest in naval history, even bigger than the Grand Fleet of 1918.
Great video. At 17:00 you see Vanguard moving down the Clyde and passing SS Queen Elizabeth, which is being repainted from her wartime troop-ship grey to Cunard's house colours, in anticipation of her starting passenger liner service. At the time, Queen Elizabeth was the largest ship in the world. Both ships were built at the same yard - John Brown's Clydebank yard, back up the river.
Regarding the 15" gun on the Vanguard - I'm sure the US Navy did a report on the efficacy of all the main armaments of battleships, and the 15" came out favourably compared to other weapons. It was something I saw referred to, but I can't find the actual report anywhere on the web.
One of the key features of tank armour is to have it sloped to deflect incoming shells. The gun turrets are somewhat sloped but why aren't the sides of warships sloped?
lots of warships have sloped armor belts. its normally referred to if they do. (FYI- when tehy do the belt isnt the first outside layer of steel, its internal armor..)
One simple question.
If vanguard basically had the same Armour as the KGV class, which you said would make an even fight with an Iowa class, how can you say Iowa would defeat the Vanguard?
The Iowas had a much larger immunity zone vs Vanguard than Vanguard had against the Iowas. Vanguard’s belt armor was 1in thinner than on the KGVs. About 14in over the magazines and 13in over the engineering and was Not angled. Also only 13in on the face plates of the turret. In truth, the ships were relatively even defensively, it’s just that the 16 inch 50 Cal‘s on the Iowas were monsters. Their penetrating power was kindkinda ridiculous.
My uncle served on HMS Vanguard, including the Royal Tour in 1947. Shame they scrapped it, would have loved to have seen her up close.
Excellent video and presentation…thank you
"**if they were in the right place**". Epic.
I believe the color film of the vanguard next to the house is when she broke free on the way to the scrappers.
Interesting info re crew survivability in an armored conning tower. Did New Jersey have an alternate or backup con from which the ship could be maneuvered?
Vanguard's bridge superstructure is quite pronounced compared to the Iowas. In other words, it's quite blocky and has a lot of surface area. Was there any advantages to this design? You see this characteristics in the King Georges too.
Yes. There was a lot more space for offices, electronics and so on, which were proliferating on battleships. Traditional superstructures had nowhere near as much space. When the Iowas were upgraded in the 1980s all the fire control equipment for the new weapons had to be installed in the (unarmoured) admiral's accommodation because there was no spare space anywhere else.
the same 15-inch guns that in the Warspite scored the longest hit from a moving ship to another moving ship?
Funny thing about HMS Vanguard
If HMS Hood hadn't sunk at Denmark Strait, Vanguard's stuff would have gone to Hood but Vanguard might have ended up as an Aircraft Carrier
TBH, the name Vanguard sounds more like for a Carrier than for a Battleship.
I love how unique vanguard’s hull is amongst battleships, the flat back looks so aggressive… it almost makes me think of a scaled up modern cruiser
Biting the bullet, Vanguard was a mistake. Extra fleet carriers would have perhaps been a better investment..
I wonder which one would last longer in a fight. Vanguard. Or Iowa battle ship
My father served on HMS Vanguard and took part on the exercise mentioned here Ex Mariner in 1953
My father served on Vanguard's first commission, including the Royal Tour of South Africa. And my sister-in-law's grandfather was Commander (ie Executive Officer) for a time in the late 1950's.
@@simongleaden2864 My father was a signaller
I've been wondering which country developed the better torp protection. US or UK?
My Dad took my two big brothers to look at the old girl at Faslane, we moved into the area soon after as my pop was a newly trained MOD Plod and the base was expanding for Polaris.
How about a review on HMS Nelson versus Bismark, 1 v 1 combat. Who would win?
Always had the opinion that Vanguard was somewhat of a "budget battleship." Glad to see it still seemed to perform very well with what it had to work with - with sensible and smart design choices.
H M S Hood, was known as 'Britains Big Bullsh - - - - -ing B - - - - - - Built in Brown's' to the men of the Pre War Navy, so had they faith in her capability.
Should do a comparison Iowa vs h. Class ships
Great video Ryan! But Queen Elizabeth ll didn't christen her. Princess Elizabeth did😉 I didn't know that till your footage here. How lovely they both look!
One of these guns holds the record for a hit on a moving target at sea. 26400 yards. That is the maximum practical range of the rangefinder due to the curvature of the earth. Radar is needed for longer ranges.
My father served on the Vanguard in '52/3, his favourite ship he was always proud to say. It still shocks me to watch the video of it being cut up :(
Just a correction , the largest european built capital ship , when considering length , was the HMS Hood and not the Bismarck. While the german ship had a slight higher maximum displacement, Hood was about 10 meters longer.
Queen Elizabeth carriers are bigger than either, by some measures are largest warships ever built o/s of US
@@johnholt9399 Actually if we consider the present time, the largest european built military vessel is the the Admiral Kuznetsov with 305 meters , vs the 284 of the QE carrier
@@Solrac-Siul not by displacement though which is the usual key measure of size
@@johnholt9399 they are pretty close in all honesty due to creeping weight issues on the russian ship, most recent info put both around 70000 tons max displacement, even if originally Kuznetsov was intended to have max of 65000
@@Solrac-Siul ok not that the Russia ship is operational or ever likely to be again
Thank you, this was wonderful, interesting.
One thing not mentioned is the Vanguard had a real world much faster and more reliable shell loading system.
Great footage of her refusing to leave Portsmouth on the way to the breakers.
3:12 "Some people called them Large Light Cruisers". By "Some People" of course you mean to say that it was their official designation by the Royal Navy from the start of their design until they were placed in reserve in 1919.
It truly is a shame that no British battle cruisers or battleships were ever saved from the scrap yard.
H.M.S Belfast survives as a museum ship on the river Thames in Central London.... She opened the naval bombardment on D day 6th June 1944
The guns were beefed up to fire supercharges which meant they could fire alot further plus a higher velocity, however the supercharges would ruin the guns alot quicker so they decided to only use during war time, as she never seen a naval war then she never fired them. Vangaurd was very good in rough seas due to her bow, she was better than the iowa's at high speed through rough waters. I think alot of people see the Iowa's as the best battleships ever built but most will have the later changes in mind which modernised them right upto to the 90's, im sure the Iowa's and Vangaurd were alot closer when these 2 class of ships were actually designed and built in the mid to late 40's, one thing is for sure though and both were great looking ships.
Great video about a very special ship.
It ended up more as a super-size taxi for the British Royal family, doing the rounds (no pun) after WW2 visiting South Africa, Australia etc showing the flag to the then Empire & Dominions.
I'm sure on paper it would have done what it was designed to do, but it looked dated, obsolete?
Probably not comparing apples, with apples etc but for example the Bismarck, the Yamamoto to name 2 (enemy) ships just have sleeker profiles, not forgetting the Missouri (non enemy)
No matter how big these ships were, their enormous guns, thickness of armour etc, a lucky hit, one torpedo, a salvo from the other side, they break up and sink, in double quick time, with disastrous consequences. (RIP for all those crewmen.)
I wonder how the Vanguard would have fared in battle?
Years ago 'Cher' made a video, on board the the 'Big Mo (?)'
I sometimes wish I could 'un-see' it, but it looked like the officers & ratings on Missouri had a lot of fun, oogling 'Ms Cher.'
The longest moving battleship on battleship hit was HMS Warspite against Italy’s Guilio Cesare in July 1940 at 26,000 yards, that’s over 14 miles. I doubt we will ever see naval battles like that again.
Good morning ,
I do believe the French battleship Jon Bart was not finished by 1950’s. The Repluse was the best ship in the fleet when it came to gun duals. She was able to stratal faster then every other big gun ship. If she was given the upgraded as the Renown prior to the sacrifice in Singapore.she would have had the anti-aircraft guns, she survives and even saved PoWales. It was also known that if she survived the torpedo attack, the Japanese didn’t have any more torpedos and she would have returned to Singapore along with the damaged PoW where battle damage would be repaired enough to join the US fleet in Hawaii. This was thrown around in the Admiralty at the time as fleet in the south was cruising to their sacrifice. There is a web sight called to “Armoured Carriers”. On this sight you will hear the recorded voices of the survivors of the “British Fleet”. I believe you will find this enjoyable as the voices of the fleet come alive.
Forever in His service