Aircraft Carriers - The Fleet Aircraft Carrier in WW2 (1939-1945)
Вставка
- Опубліковано 4 лют 2025
- Today we look as the second phase of carrier development, from the conversions of the Washington Treaty to the start of the Second World War.
Previous videos:
Early Types to the end of the 1920's - • Aircraft Carriers - Fr...
1929 to 1939 - • Aircraft Carriers - Th...
Sources:
"What Value the Dark Blue Sky" - Dr Alexander Clarke
www.amazon.co.uk/Kaigun-Strategy-Technology-Imperial-1887-1941/dp/159114244X
www.amazon.co.uk/Nelson-Vanguard-Warship-Development-1923-1945/dp/1861762895
www.amazon.co.uk/British-Aircraft-Carriers-Development-Histories/dp/1848321384
www.amazon.co.uk/American-British-Aircraft-Carrier-Development/dp/1591143802
www.amazon.co.uk/Imperial-Japanese-Navy-Pacific-War/dp/1472801466
www.amazon.co.uk/Aircraft-Carrier-Victorious-Detailed-Original/dp/1526737345
www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/8364596527
Naval History books, use code 'DRACH' for 25% off - www.usni.org/p...
Free naval photos and more - www.drachinifel.co.uk
Want to support the channel? - / drachinifel
Want a shirt/mug/hoodie - shop.spreadshi...
Want a poster? - www.etsy.com/u...
Want to talk about ships? / discord
'Legionnaire' by Scott Buckley - released under CC-BY 4.0. www.scottbuckley.com.au
Pinned post for Q&A :)
Considering that the thing that really killed the battleship was lack of offensive capability in an airpower-dominated environment due to a lack of sufficient range from their main guns, do you feel that capital ships built with guns or other equivalent range-limited weapons make far more sense in a setting with FTL travel where such vessels could pretty much teleport into firing distance of enemy forces?
if the Bismarck broken out into the Atlantic after fighting the battle of the Denmark straight what type of measures would the British take with their convoy escorts how much damage with the Bismarck and flicked on Atlantic shipping and what type scram of battles the Bismarck fight 181
Q&A: Had the Australian Federal Government not bowed to pressure to the RAAF in the mid-1920s and allowed the RAN to continue developing its own Fleet Air Arm. What impact could it have on RAN, RN and, if need be, USN Naval Air ops during World War 2?
Could you talk a little about how the different major navies handle joint development and procurement of weapons, aa, aircraft, equipment, etc with other services. Did anyone have particularly good systems or bad systems (besides the obvious Japanese rivalry). Are there any standout successes or failures of inter services development? I can imagine thered be situations where a compromised middle ground could result in equipment suiting neither service.
Since WW2 carriers were of the STOBAR variety, why wasn't the ski-ramp seen on STOBAR and STOVL carriers today tried earlier?
Every time I hear Drach say "That's a subject for another video", I'm happy.
so am I. Any excuse.
Yup yup!!! I am a great fan!!!
so am I. Any excuse.
I think Drach can keep going well into his next lifetime. And that's fine with me.
I think Drach can keep going well into his next lifetime. And that's fine with me.
The Germans being eager to build a carrier despite having no idea of what to use it for.
The Italians being reluctant to start building a carrier despite having plenty of ideas (kindly providedbby the RN) about what would have been good for.
Rather like the Soviet/Russian and Chinese concept of carrier operations: you may be able to build one, but have little ability to actually use them as effective weapons systems. There's always the Casino option to fall back on!
@@gregedmand9939 Nobody does when they build their first Aircraft carrier. The US had their first Aircraft Carrier in 1920. US spent the next 23 years and 8 carriers more before they figured out how to use them.
@snagletoothscott3729 That was when the whole concept of military naval aviation was brand new. Other countries like Canada, India, Spain and France have operated carriers since WW2. Successfully. Apparently neither the Russians or China are capable of doing so.
@@gregedmand9939
>Chinese
>Incapable of using them as effective platforms
What.
@@gregedmand9939 The Chinese are definitely working on it. They're untried, but that doesn't mean that they lack capability.
02:32 Kriegsmarine
12:34 Regia Marina
22:22 Nihon Kaigun
39:47 US Navy
59:34 Royal Navy
Thank you , press on comrade !
Because the carriers didn't work out, would it have been effective for Germany to disregard the V-1 and V-2 projects and instead hasten development of guided anti- shipping munitions like the Fritz X to add a long- range air component to their submarine blockades? It seems like that compensates for their lack of aircraft carriers for long- range naval strikes and had a greater impact than the high-tech fires development they focused on IRL.
thank you
@@randomwarehouse4702 long range naval air strikes was tried, but failed because of the escort carriers. FritzX and Hs293 had the disadvantage that you have to fly over the target or in sight of the target. Good luck with the fighters. as they were radio-controlled they could be jammed.
@@marting1056 Precision bombs are still more efficient than iron bombs or V1 raids and it gives the convoy a second thing to worry about.
There can also be fighter escorts- again, because of guided munitions you need fewer bombers to survive and probably don't need to assign as many fighter escorts as if you were conducting a land bombing.
In addition, assuming they're spending more effort on this they'd develop better munitions sooner, possibly including longer- ranged weapons.
Feel like that is how it usually is "we are building XZY on the cheap and we expect to replace it within the next 5 years if not sooner" then stays in service for very long time (bus, trains, ships, etc...)
Be careful of "temporary" answers, they remain a very long time.
classic british attitude to most things, also massively overbudget
From my experience as an Army officer, there is nothing as permanent as a "temporary" or "interim" item. We were still using WW2 era temporary buildings (5 year projected life) into the Eighties and the Stryker was bought to equip the "Interim Brigade Combat Team"
@@ROBERT-p5d8rI used WW2-era barracks on Fort Drum in 2008. Some things just don't go.
1:12:34 for those curious.
Perfect for a morning the busses are canceled because of snow so I'm not waking my kid up just gonna sit here and drink coffee.
I'm impressed you kept this to an hour and half
(22:4c5) Japanese Carrier Tactics : using two carrier fleets, with overlapping defensive coverage,
should allow heavier fleet air cover and defensive recon flights.
The same result might use light, expendable escort carriers sent ahead as recon and forward fleet defensive screens.
(22:4c5) Japanese Carrier Tactics : using two carrier fleets, with overlapping defensive coverage,
should allow heavier fleet air cover and defensive recon flights.
The same result might use light, expendable escort carriers sent ahead as recon and forward fleet defensive screens.
The Essex carriers are just beautiful examples of high modernist industrial design. I walked past the Intrepid every day. Just a magnificent ship.
What was amazing about the Essex carriers was that they were all built to a specific standard, meaning that all the parts were interchangeable for easy maintenance. And on top of that, the air crews were also interchangeable.
The Japanese carrier fleet by comparison were different types of ships with different parts. What fit on one carrier would not fit on another. Same goes for the air crews also.
Yeah living in Charleston I love seeing the Yorktown parked out in the harbor especially when it’s lit up at night
Yes, and I get to volunteer every single Saturday, for 27 years, restoring the Hornet.
What was amazing about the Essex carriers was that they were all built to a specific standard, meaning that all the parts were interchangeable for easy maintenance. And on top of that, the air crews were also interchangeable.
The Japanese carrier fleet by comparison were different types of ships with different parts. What fit on one carrier would not fit on another. Same goes for the air crews also.
Yes, and I get to volunteer every single Saturday, for 27 years, restoring the Hornet.
I have been waiting for this for a long while, glad it finally came!
The British navy seems to have taken ""penny wise and pound foolish" to an extreme for their carriers. Then you have the financial shenanigans on modernization, though we in the US can't crow too much (see: the Littoral combat ships). This was a very well done overview and certainly lives up to your reputation.
I have waited so long for this video and to have it posted the right after my last exam is just perfect
I was JUST about to ask Drachs Discord if this video was completed after watching "destroyer development" when I saw this.
You must have bribed him 🤣🤣.
@ yeah, i offered him a tiny boat
My late father served aboard The USS Franklin Delano Roosevelt CV-42 in the late 1950's when his squadron, VF-101 (Which took it's lineage from the famous VF-10) was assigned to her. Many of The Grim Reapers Pilot's qualified in carrier take-off and landings during this time, as VF-101 was then designated as a training squadron. He also spent a few weeks as an exchange sailor aboard HMS Ark Royal in 1957, during a NATO cruise. The USS Saratoga CV-60 and the Ark Royal exchanged some fighter squadrons to learn how to operate on each others carriers. He was a plane captain (Navy version of the crew chief) to F4D Skyray 107, of which a photograph can be viewed in a Wikipedia article about VF-101. I have actually seen this image in the 8mm film footage he made at the time. He liked being aboard HMS Ark Royal, but couldn't seem to adjust to Royal Navy chow: Mutton and Kidney Beans especially...LOL. He did appreciate the daily rum ration however, as this was taboo in the US Navy. I know this is a bit of a rabbit hole, but thought some might find it interesting. My Dad was very proud of his short Navy service.
My dad served as chief navigator on the Hornet. The stories he would tell after a couple of beers
My dad also served on carriers specifically the Nimitz for 2 deployments and the teddy roosevelt during the gulf war since he was a nuclear plant operator most of his stories come from his port calls since he was always trapped deep in the belly of the ship in a sleep deprived state when they were underway
I remember as a kid going to Mayport with my Dad and seeing the Ark Royal at dock. At least I believe it was the Ark Royal, this was in the mid to late 70’s .
@@devjaxvid It must have been lovely to go aboard the venerable lady. Nice of you to reply.
Given their numbers. Where does the Essex Class fall? Is it a spam? A horde? A mini-boss squad? A lot of lemons?
US's new obsession with big boat after the Great White fleet, I would imagine.
More like tsunami, because that how it felt to Japanese.
It’s when you put in the cheat code for the corvette with the rocket launcher a couple of dozen times in Age of Empires.
An excess of _Essex_
Boss spam via industry cheatcode 😂😂😂
The Presidential naming scheme for US Carriers was definitely a step in the wrong direction. We should return to the WWII naming scheme and always keep a list of names in play.
100%
These are our capital ships. They should have names to match.
War of independence battles, and scary bugs all the way.
I think they should be named after Oakland Raiders who made the HoF.....
😉
Politicians ≠ worthy ship names.
@@F-Man Yeah, unless you are KIA, receive a MoH, or are acting tactical command of a significant campaign/really key battle I don’t think your name belongs on a ship, vehicle, or class of either.
Presidents already got to be presidents. They don’t need more honor. Besides, we nailed this with our first 6 frigates: just name one USS President if you really gotta honor the office
In the early 1980s, amid the heady talk of Reagan's "600 ship navy", there were serious proposals to bring some Essex class carriers back into USN service, with Oriskany being mentioned most often. The proposal was to turn them into a "light attack carriers", operating air groups of USMC A-4 Skyhawks plus Sea King ASW helos. The idea wasn't that they'd operate independently, rather they would operate _alongside_ a supercarrier, which would enable the latter to replace it's A-7 Corsairs and Sea Kings with more A-6 Intruder heavy strike aircraft, thus giving it a greater punch.
Wow. An hour and a half. A great way to start the day.
Unless like me you have a crappy meeting in 20 minutes 🤣😂🤣.... Will say them I have a critical task to attend 😁
I continue to be so impressed by how you research, construct, record and deliver this amazing content. Bravo!
Ship, ship, hooray!! Drach has a new carrier video out
Aayyyyeeee Wednesday posting. Thanks for your hard work Drach! You made my day
I remember thinking it would take a year for the next one to come out when the last one was released, glad to finally see this:)
Wonderful work per usual!
First we get the finale of destroyers and now the third part of carriers? I feel like ive been absolutely spoiled the last month.
@30:00 I've always found IJN CV's very interesting. Especially the story of how Japan's war planers treated the returning sailors of the Midway disaster. Not to mention how they kept secret all of the deaths, reporting instead KIA numbers over the course of a long period of time and they even lied about where their loved ones had even died in the first place. Compounding Japan's desire to mislead the public about the way the war was going after Midway, surviving sailors were basically not allowed to leave the base and were looked down on by other sailors all because they had the misfortune to be present when Japan's war planers miscalculated the order of battle at Midway.
Authoritarianism: those in power cannot ever be mistaken.
どこから知り得た情報なのかな？間違った知識で発信してはいけませんよ。
Authoritarianism: those in power cannot ever be mistaken.
@@日本の正義-e8pdo some research. It’s pretty evident in Shattered Sword.
@AgentTasmania That isn't just authoritarianism. There's the usual leadership BS we all suffer from and then East Asian culture added on to of that.
Best video for me...ever...thank you for putting things into perspective...
Wonderful conclusion to the aircraft carrier series. This will be one to watch and watch again.
I love the return to the classic Drach intro music!
No, this is the low horns Scott Buckley tune he's been using ever since somebody complained about the OG string-and-bass-drum tune he'd been using for years... I dunno. The Buckley tune has kinda grown on me... It *does* set the right tone...
I am working to catch up with your previous video's, but some are so good, I go back and watch again, or sort them into their group to watch. Please be patient. Recently saw you on Unauthorised History of the Pacifi. War. What a trezt5. Yes, catching up with those as well.😊
Bravo Zulu.All that information in under 90 minutes.Well done Drach,thank you.
I don’t know if this will be seen or not but I would love a video on the IJN Zipang, it was a crazy insane idea for an ultra dreadnought in the early 1910’s that I discovered recently, and since you did the Tillman ships a while back, this would be pretty cool too. Thanks for the great content!
Good luck landing a BF109 on a carrier. I am sure that Seafire pilots would have given the Germans some advice.
Oh god, the survivors of either aircraft would be alcoholics by the end of the war, sharing stories with each other. 😅
@@TheEDFLegacy”the trick is drinking enough courage to make the attempt without blacking out behind the controls”
109 T has bigger wing then the normal BF 109s and flaps was redesign too, so it had lower stall speed then a normal 109, but I don't that we much more about the T variants maybe worked yout maybe not. But yeah with normal wings I don't think they can land.
@@pdehun6234the main issue was the narrow landing gear track, which made landing on land a bit finicky and was not being changed in the T.
Mainly "Try to find a runway on some nearby land."
26 seconds after upload, no comments, and here I am with nothing clever to say.
," divide In Half: an attack both ways !"
At least you didn't just moronically say "first!" Lol
Well think of carriers with the same hanger height as the diameter of some aircraft propellers.
Just gotta carry the carrier comment section
The best first comment I have seen.
My Navy career in the fleet began in Japan with an Fa-18 squadron aboard Kitty Hawk and boy, did I ever hear a LOT of stories about “Midway Magic”. So years later me and my buddy Jim were out in El Centro and we went down to San Diego to get Yoshinoya and we went to see Midway. So I get there, used to Kitty Hawk and Nimitz class carriers and we are shocked by how small this ship is. So I text my old LPO from way back in the day and say “Slick how exactly in the hell did you Jack a Hornet in this Hangar bay?” He told me there were only 2 spots and the vertical stabs had to go between the beams of the overhead. So, tall Hangar deck is kinda relative.
When covering the Escort carriers, It would be nice to cover the (many) proposed conversions for the Kriegsmarine; Jade, Elbe, and Europa in a sort of mega episode, considering they were all never converted. Either way, I do look forward to some of the more overlooked ship types like frigates, sloops and cutters, escort carriers, and varying auxiliaries.
WELCOME BACK DEVELOPMENT OF CARRIERS
Been waiting since Kite Carriers 😞
Fr
Its a real shame that RN Aquila wasn't completed and or wasn't kept arround ethier way, in my opinion its the best looking aircraft carrier of the Second World War period
It would have looked great, but probably broken down with alarming regularity. Like all Italian machines ;-)
Thanks for making this!
Thanks largely to your channel, I'm gradually becoming able to tell fhe difference between a battleship and other kinds of 20th century ships with big guns on the centreline.
Am still struggling a bit with all British carriers looking the same to me though. Baby steps.
I now have to go back and watch your video on the HMCS Bonaventure.
You make a whole bunch of really good stuff.
Thanks for your work, Drach. Like most of us, you're paid a fraction of what you're worth. Those Breda 6x20mm mounts on RM Aquila are so cool.
27:52
Albacore: Hi best buddy.
Taiho: Ahhhhh!!!
I feel bad for that guy who dove his plane into one of the torpedo, he kinda died for nothing 💀💀💀
I understand this reference!
@@Saber0931that was in Midway if I remember correctly
@@nothernstar2576 nope. Warrant Officer Sakio Komatsu kamikazed the torpedo.
Good video, Alex! I always wondered about the British aircraft carriers. I knew most of the Japanese carriers (save for the fine details of Unryo and Amagi); of course, American carriers are well recorded, and since [excluding Midway] there was really only the one type after the Yorktowns, but it seemed that the Royal Navy had a wider assortment.
I’ve been waiting for this one since the second video was released
I was listening a really noisy room, but I was truly surprised when Drach announced a special on-Sports carriers, I know the Midway holds gaming tournaments but a whole special on the modern use of old carriers was surprising.
Time stamp 49:58 shows USS Oriskany. My father served on her 1972 to 1975 while homeported at NAS Alameda.
I have a picture of the underside of the Golden Gate Bridge while laying on my back on the flight deck during a dependents cruise.
Excellent work, informative & enjoyable
Lets goooo. Drachinifel, you’re literally the plug. Keep up the good work great content.
Oh boy! An intelligent post to start my morning. Thanks Drach, it’s gonna be a great day!
Great documentary i now understand a bit more.
Really recommend the fleet air museum in yeovilton for the ark royal exhibition. It really makes more sense now.
Thanks for your work
There are few things more costly than politicians trying to 'save money'.
The surviving Essex's like the Hornet are well worth the visit, even if that particular ship is a mess of poor funding and poorly thought out tourist alterations (eg the perenially broken full size escalator rammed through several decks to make the flight deck marginally more accessible). Midway meanwhile is in great condition. And has the Taffy 3 menorial right outside.
The Hornet has always had funding issues as well as administration issues and I have been there 27 years to see it all. I've spent thousands of my money like another $800 last night. Discussion are now underway about a possible move to San Francisco. As to our elevators and am familiar with all three, with two fully functional, while L3 needs new cables courtesy the Navy cutting them. I'm just a volunteer who supposedly knows nothing. As always money equals what in real estate is called location, location, location.
finally more about the coolest kind of ships!
Main reason why RtW3 is better than Ultimate Admiral Dreadnaught!
It has carriers.
What, UAD doesn’t have carriers???
So glad I can only run RTW3
Hooray ! I've been waiting for this.
I never realized the tremendous degree of advances integrated in the Taiho. Genuinely quite similar to the Essex's - Japan just lacked the general industrial capacity to mass produce them.
I've been waiting for this.
oooh I really needed this right now! 90 min of naval stuffff
Great job, very informative. Thanks Drach
A decidedly out there request: but would love a reaction video to Montemayor midway video
Very interesting Drach, thanks for the info.😊
I would like to see a video on auxiliary carriers, especially from the perspective of the concept of use.
Bull Halsey, Chester Nimitz, Ernest King,...WWII produced some of the greatest admirals.
The Graf Zeppelin, for all its innovations, was still Germany's first ever aircraft carrier. Given how flawed each nation's first ever carriers were, it was pretty much doomed to be an inefficient ship from the very beginning and there was no way she could have compared to the Japanese and US carriers. That being said, it really didn't carry that many less aircraft compared to the british carriers, except Ark Royal and the Illustrious class (the latter after their 1944-45 refit), and especially for 1940, the year itwas originally going to be completed and commissioned, if it had been completed in time to take place in the Norwegian campaign, i'm sure that it could have potentially done a LOT of damage to the Royal Navy.
@themightynanto3158 it's single biggest weakness IMO was the catapult system. A 40-50 strong air group would be fine, if a little inefficient at that ships size, except for not even being able to launch half the air group before having to wait for catapult recharge.
Because the carriers didn't work out, would it have been effective for Germany to disregard the V-1 and V-2 projects and instead hasten development of guided anti- shipping munitions like the Fritz X to add a long- range air component to their submarine blockades? It seems like that compensates for their lack of aircraft carriers for long- range naval strikes and had a greater impact than the high-tech fires development they focused on IRL.
@@Drachinifel if they had of stuck to the fi 167 instead of the stuka then they would have only needed the catapult for the me 109s. the me 109t was also capable of conventional take offs when the catapult was not available. Germany only really needed a carrier for task force recon and defense. Graf Zepplin would have been pretty effective in this role.
The irony though @@Drachinifel was that for all its inefficiencies, the british carriers of the time except for Ark Royal, Courageous and Glorious all carried LESS aircraft than Graf Zeppelin (yes, Even the Illustrious class, which only carried 36 versus Graf's 42.). And even then, only Ark Royal, with her 56 aircraft significantly surpassed Graf since Courageous and Glorious carried 48, not that much more than Graf.
That was kinda the thing about the Royal Navy of the time, despite being the largest navy of the world, most of its Capital Ships were WW1 and 1920s vintage. Thus, inefficient as the german warships were compared to later allied designs built during the war, i'd say that they compared quite well to most Royal Navy ships by 1939, that is.
@themightynanto3158 GZ was bigger than most, so it's to be expected, although in terms of displacement she's roughly on a par with the Implacable's, which have a much greater air capacity, although not carrying a couple of light cruisers worth of guns probably helps in that regard 😀
For a carrier that never sailed an Inch on its own power and ended up being a colossal waste of resources the Graf Zeppelin sure has generated a ton of interest and video footage.
I was wondering, what are the naming conventions for ships in the Royal Navy? There doesn't seem to be any kind of system or pattern, not in my eyes at least. The USN names their carriers after former presidents, the Kriegsmarine named their battleships after great field commanders/generals etc. With the RN it's like opening the Oxford Dictionary and pointing at a random word: "Eagle, that's a great name!" "And her sister ship?" flipflip "Hermes!"
Anyway, thank you for a great channel, and YES! Drachinifel is coming to Denmark to have a look at Fregatten Jylland (Frigate Jutland) 😁
This is perfect, I'm playing world of Warships and driving my Essex while listening
Nice one, Drach!👍
In carriers with armored flight decks, did this include the elevators? Seems like a lot of weight to add when you're also trying to keep up with heavier aircraft and the desire for speedy operation.
In the four RN Illustrious-class WW2 armored carriers, there was an armored door between the hanger 'armor box' and the elevators, and there was 1 elevator at either end of the hanger. This isolated the elevators from the armored box of the hanger.
As you suggested, the elevator itself was not armored to allow it to work as quickly as possible, and was a point of greater vulnerability, especially if it had an armed aircraft on it when it was hit. The flight deck armor also thinned out on the ends near the elevators, going from 3 inches max at the center to ~1 inch. The 3 inch thickness puts it at about the thickness of total vertical protection for WW1 RN battleships (except over the magazines), even a bit more than some, but far less than WW2 battleships.
Having only two elevators also definitely limited the speed of flight operations, but perhaps not as much given the relatively small number of aircraft that could be carried on these ships due to hanger size limitations. The elevators were pretty small, also, and that would become a problem as aircraft got bigger.
The two Implacable-class ships could carry more aircraft and generally improved on the original design.
The Essex Class has to be one of the most robust warship designs ever built. As initially designed the fighter aircraft had a MTW of 7900lbs and a top speed of 320mph. The last fighter to serve on the ship had a MTW of 34000lbs and a top speed of Mach 1.8. The design could still carry 70+ aircraft modern jet aircraft.
Addition: Hancock and Oriskany were both decommissioned a year before the Roosevelt. Hancock was commissioned over a year before so she was in service slightly longer. Oriskany was retained in reserve until 1989, outlasting FDR by 12 years.
Drach, can you please do a video on the evolution of AA in different navies.
Ahhh yes, never failed to be late when Drachinifel posted a new vid, love all your vids good sir! your facts and information are awesome to learn
Children have grown up and left home…. But at last more Drach series in motion.
Great! I think 'Ark Royal' and the 'Illustrious' class ships were the last that Drach mentioned ....quite some time back.
You are great.
But I want to annoy you, bear with me. I'm Italian, so I dare to suggest you the following.
Taranto is pronounced with the accent on the first "a", not the second.
The i in Marina sounds like the i in "italy" and is accented.
Please notice that this is not intended as criticism: your channel is by far my favorite and I listen to your videos every day and at night too.
Your work is outstanding and your knowledge, wit and precision are incredible. Thank you for your relentless work.
I love the 1942 Design Light Fleet Carrier design as they are Pocket fleet carrier unlike the the independence class light carrier of the US or the IJN carriers.
great video!
That intro music! Always have to crank it up
Question about Anti-Aircraft weapons:
The Royal Navy's Quick Fire 2 Pounder (aka Pom-Pom) had 8 barrel, 4 barrel, and single barrel versions.
> Any idea why there was never a twin/double barrel version of this weapon? Your guess if it was going to be a Side by Side or an Over/Under mount... Since it would be basically half of a Quad gun mount I can see it being either one.!
At 51:45 I heard you say Yorktown became a museum ship and did a double take before realizing you were speaking about CV-10, not CV-5.
It makes sense because you were speaking of Essex carriers, but it still threw me for a bit of a loop.
Thanks Drac
This is just in time to make my day!
And now I have the image of a 'sad and confused fighter' stuck in my head.
I've been hooked on Sea Power: Naval Combat in the Missile Age for the last few months, and I'm very much looking forward to the addition of the Midway class and the Royal Navy. I'm tempted to make a kitbash Malta by putting RN Phantoms, Buccaneers and Gannets onto the USS FDR model, slap a Sea Dart launcher somewhere and give her a white ensign. Hopefully someone more talented than I has the same idea.
Drach finishes his series on carrier development. Oversimplified History finishes his series on Hannibal. All my Christmases have come at once.
If a month late and at the wrong map reference.
Fascinating!
I feel like the Saipans should have been included. Built from the keel up as carriers, laid down at the same time as the Centaurs and commissioning before the first Centaurs are launched.
Can’t believe this series has come to end. How about the development of submarines, cruisers, battleships and everything else naval ships related too 😅.
I have a question: If the slipway is on a slope, how do people get sections of the ship level and square? Seems like it would throw off every single action and be a pain in the posterior
Like the carrier in the 1st pic on this video, In regards these carriers that have upper decks that don’t go all the way to the bow, stopping significantly short of the bow, being way shorter than the lower deck cum hanger; do the planes, say using a catapult, take off from the lower deck / hanger & then land on the upper deck?
Is it correct that the Midway class also had a 2 inch armored hanger deck, which made it the strength deck, while british carriers had the flight deck as the strength deck?
Great video!!
That initial picture you had of Italian warships, would that happen to have been the "Giuseppe Miraglia" in the far background?
Good morning, Drach. Now for some learning.
That was well worth that wait 🫡
Hi Drach, why didn't the US navy implement a submarine cordon and sea mine barrages down the Solomon island's slot of the Guadalcanal campaign?
Had the Implacable class gone with the large single hanger, how many aircraft could it have realistically carried?
Additional, what would a modernised Implacable look like? Would it just be a larger victorius?
You mentioned the lengthening of the hull forward. re those the ships noted as "long hull" versions?
For the Essex class, the 'long bow' versions can be distinguished by the pair of 40mm mounts right forward in WW2 configuration
@ Because the carriers didn't work out, would it have been effective for Germany to disregard the V-1 and V-2 projects and instead hasten development of guided anti- shipping munitions like the Fritz X to add a long- range air component to their submarine blockades? It seems like that compensates for their lack of aircraft carriers for long- range naval strikes and had a greater impact than the high-tech fires development they focused on IRL.
@@randomwarehouse4702The pinned post-and not every comment-is for drydock questions.
@ 1984
Looking forward to the escort carrier episode,, just the 3 years to wait! 😁😆
The carrier in time stamp 1:02:20, is Vancouver harbour at CPR (Canadian Pacific Railway Pier A, with the CATES tugs assisting. This was after the war (@1946/47), bringing soldiers etc back to Canada. I believe that is HMS IMPLACABLE.
Drach, I expect more rum in my ration. I'm parched!
🤣👍
now there's one for me finally! make it longer. 8 seasons like Seinfeld!
I have asked before, but how about a Video on HMS Icarus, and it Captain?
Good overall video Drach. But I have one gripe. At timestamp 01:40 you state a fleet carrier must have at least a 30 knot speed. But the Colossus class had a top speed of 25 knots. Majestic class the same or slower. Plus the fact that the Colossus/Majestic's were unamored and built to commercial construction standards should those aircraft carriers nor be placed in the escort carrier class?
Yessss, this is gonna be good 🤩