Drachinifel Is there any particular one of the Late 1930s-40s battleships that you wish were around in WWI so they would actually be able to live up to their reputation and engage peer opponents?

Which crew position would you least like to occupy on a WW1 or WW2 capital ship? Mine would be stoker.

Did anyone in the USN think that Battleships would still be used in their intended role post war or did everyone just accept that from now on Battleships would just be used for costal bombardment?

Are you able to do a video on the first Vanguard? There’s a limited number of sources regarding the ship, so it’s hard to grasp what happened.

I have a question. Why are you still using a 30 second intro? Cut it down 25 seconds please.

Kevin Kennelly The absolute closest any battleship has ever come to being a floating hotel. And that includes the French predreads and Yamato.

It was not the first time the RN's Flagship was used as a Royal Yacht.

Ah yes, reviewing the Empire. As one does when one is able!:-) 🖖

That sounds rather British actually.

Impressive, yes; beautiful? Well, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. My Dad, who served on Vanguard's first commission, said he thought the "KG V s" as they called them were better looking ships.

Simon Gleaden Well, it’s if you don’t mind her transem stern. Plus I do believe the bow on her was WAY better than the KGVs.

I agree actually. I like her forward superstructure, I love her bow.

I never knew Vanguard hosted school field trips, i heard in other old school timers of their experience on the vanguard battleship as from Fleet Week uk version or former crews/sailor on vanguard. If i got a time machine to spend 5 hrs is on the sport where vanguard is. (born Gen Z/2000s kid here)

if i were to go to England & visit Portsmouth one day, i'll check that pub for a meal. (then visit Belfast and other sights)

KlipsFilms Melbourne Vanguard also played Bismarck in that film. All three ships are of similar size (Vanguard being the largest) and have the same turret arrangement (two 15” forward, two aft).

@@bkjeong4302 both ships did have 8 guns barrels

KlipsFilms Melbourne And same-sized guns.

Jeez, had to read that a few times

@@bkjeong4302 The Vanguard turret loading was used, but I think the actual ships were models.

My dad was on the ship but not sure on dates, he jioned in 1947 he was a stokerx

Gordon Hammett served on her

Is that why the Hood in that movie looked oddly new and more impressive to me when I saw the movie at a young age? I just thought these movies were using some impressive models when I saw the movie the first time...

I agree it was very short sighted and a real disservice to future generations. Warspite at least should have been saved. Ideally Rodney too.

The reality as is often discussed is that the U.K. was broke & so were concerned with keeping departments and services running, which is logical but how I would love to be able to see ships like Warspite (or any QE-class) and Vanguard for myself...

WG uses some projects of warships that were not constructed to fill some of the empty slots on their tech trees. I like it, it's a good example of "what if"

Sorry buddy. Vanguard was the last British battleship.

@@MaskedVengeanceTV the last to be completed and launched AS a battleship yeah

@@1IbramGaunt truth. Nor was it the last active duty battleship ever. I'm pretty sure that distinction goes to one of the Iowa classes, I dont remember exactly which one, which served in Korea, Vietnam and desert Storm.

@@MaskedVengeanceTV all 4 of them were in commision in the 80s and 90s, New Jersey was the last put in reserve and atleast 2 of them were in reserve till the late 2000s early 2010s

til you sailed near Somalia, and found pirates brazen enough to attack naval ships and finding your heavily armed yacht being boarded one night and a general melee breaks out on the deck when the intruders are inevitably found...

ghk364 Last to be launched as well.

At least it could easily be a van guard

..lol HMS Rearguard..

@@user-ol5lw3md3h you making me think of HMS Carguard…

Blah blah

after 1 min of uploading you have seen the whole video?

@@doe_maar365 I have never seen one that was subpar.

@@joeford860 that's true, but it's always good to watch first and comment afterwards

The Fletcher class were amazingly stable, it took cramming in more aa that was in a prewar cruiser to cause them issues

The American North Carolina class battleships didn't have stability problems with the addition of more and more antiaircraft guns. They sat rather lower in the water, and weren't built with large super structures. In heavy seas though, their main deck could become rather wet.

Once you get to those kinds of speed each knot needs huge increases in power. Also, thanks to the transom stern and a few other features Vanguard was somewhat better designed for efficient movement at high speed.

I guarantee Iowa class battleships did more than 33 kts. Sealand built 950 ft container ships with 2 x 60,000 shaft HP that can do 38 kts (32 kts declared) at the same draft and weight as the Iowa's. Unfortunately they burn over 600 mt of fuel per day. The US Navy never tells the true speed of any of their ships.

@@mastermariner7813 I’m not sure but my great grandpa was on Iowa and my family has a book from him that says Iowa could reach 39.7 knots a full emergency power but idk

carney malone Given that postwar testing found even an Iowa’s AA defences to be no substitute for having your own fighters, that’s debatable. Yes Bettys were infamously delicate, but still.

@@bkjeong4302 Point taken.But it is irrelevant. We are discussing the defensive power of a battleship--not an entire fleet. However, tell a Japanese pilot that he wasn't shot down by USN AA. Especially by the South Dakota at the Battle of Santa Cruz during late October where she was credited with 26 Japanese destroyed. Even allowing for exaggeration and halving this number, 13 planes destroyed is still a good show. .www.navysite.de/bb/bb57.htm (Please provide a citation for the study you refer to.)

carney malone Actually South Dakota’s AA killcount at Santa Cruz (and of the entire US force present) has been found to be seriously overestimated by historian John Lundstrom’s analysis. American CAP was responsible for the majority of Japanese plane losses. Even during the Battle of Okinawa fighters claimed far more Japanese aircraft than AA, and that’s after proximity fuses and effective AA formations were a thing for the Americans.

Re: Iowa-class AA not being invincible, found this link on Iowa's AA actions; some of these involved kills or fend-offs, but other planes did get past the AA and had to be downed by fighters or other ships. www.navweaps.com/index_tech/tech-107_Anti-Aircraft.pdf

@@bkjeong4302 Did you read my post at all? I discounted South Dakota''s reported performance at Santa Cruz by 50%. Second who is John Lindstrom? I could not find any books by this author on Amazon. Third, I never denied the importance of fighters in defending a fleet. I didn't mention it since it is of no importance in evaluating a warship's air defense capability. It is stating the obvious that shooting down your enemy is preferable before he is in a position to damage you. Finally, the Betty was as cumbersome as it was flammable, It was 64 feet long and had a wingspan of 81 feet. The Kate, the standard IJN torpedo bomber during a large part of the war, was 33 feet long and had a wingspan of 50 feet. Large targets are easier to hit than smaller targets as any shooter knows.

Can almost picture an exocet bouncing off the hull without anyone noticing.

Modernised 5.25" mounts and goalkeepers would make short work of the argi A-4s and etendards.

general belgrano probably Wouldn't Have sunk since i doubt with vanguard in the task force belgrano Would ever get as close as it did i think it Would Have just stayed in port for most of the war

Getting rid of her guns and reconstructing the whole things (which would have been a major engineering challenge) could have made her a lethal missile cruiser.

@@bkjeong4302 No no. Replace the super firing 5.25" mounts with sea wolf and a handful of sextuplet 40mm with Goalkeeper. Britain had no dedicated AShM at the time so the main battery would serve in the anti surface role.

I blame it on the dark magical arts practiced during wartime and sometimes in peacetime... ^.^ ;P

I have a feeling that if Vanguard was sentient she would have fired on the people who ordered her construction out of spite for her miserable existence...

Why either or? It's clearly BOTH :D

@@bkjeong4302 Well.. to me if she exist.. She was the luckiest Battleship to never seen the horrors of the sea/war battle (sure she may seen the blitz on the construction and is accompanied by other ships also in construction like HMS Implacable, Howe,etc) But her Service is So unique & amazing she Starred in various movies & Newsreels, Literally the SHip that hosted the royal family & even chistened by the young princess now grand old immortal Queen Elizabeth (there's even a film where the sailors and royal family played sports & do shooting at sea). she had the best life before seeing the worse of the Cold war brewing in the background & Britain still Rationing & having Steel Shortages & Big Cost of Upkeep to her done her end, She is Lucky enough not to Experience Imperial Japanese Bombings & Kamikazes and the post war horrors discovered there. or at the Atlantic Got Torpedoed by a Uboat unlike Carriers whom are top priority that the Age of battleships are over, yet she defied it all by making her "Battles" in Cinema & the Public Mind to mark her Legacy. i seen comments on Quora and even a Website of a former Vanguard crew memeber similar Young & Carefree. they sailed around the world while their elders still reeling from the horrors of war and they make optimistic plans, Drink alot of Rum (before the abolishtion of the Tot ration in the 1970s-80s?) and many more. Please Remember Construction of ships are a Hard work, from planning to workers getting hard labor moving & welding parts, I'll Say she would be thankful to even Exist & sail to the Ocean unlike the Poor USS Kentucky (constructed yet unfinished & was going to get scrapped she sailed herself out), to Tirpitz who got nonstop bombing & just stuck on port & lonely and many more ships who dint see the light of day or got the worse endings (Pearl Harbor or get operation crossroads tested in a atomic bomb) i Wont be surprised that if She, some people were to ineviably die they wont first a Good drink/meal to chug & eat into (on 2018 there was a hawaii missile inbound alerm & people panick in the morning of a nuclear strike and the rest dig into their premium cold beers & looked into the sunset, chilling in the beach). She too would thank her predecessors & honor their sacrifice of the war (after all the loss of Pow & Repulse helped continued vanguard's Green light to construction & the lessons learned) and Recreated Warspite's Last stand against the Breakers to me memorable.if there is a battleship i could chose to expereince a life in, It would be Vanguard (the Experinces she had & is Airconditioned, i wont mind the Yacht & acting on a movie), sucks she cant have the Survival of the Iowa class, from vietnam to gulf war & later favorite ship to star in Hollywood Movies (latest Kong vs Godzilla, the Last ship, and even Political Ads i seen one time starred her). if vanguard somehow exist would she have gone on the falklands war? gulf & maybe an museum for british to see what it felt like & the engineering & knowledge she had, she is no hotel she served & got a peaceful retirement with a cold one drink.

@@disunityholychaos7523 She existed for no reason. One would think that would leave a major mark on a sentient ship….

Nonsense, we all know she runs on 9 Volt batteries! (Sorry I couldnt resist! XD)

9V batteries - I like it - very droll.

The thing is that you don’t need a big expensive BB to do shore bombardment or escort. So the fact they could be used in those roles doesn’t change the fact they are obsolete, because they were superceded by carriers in their intended role and other warships could do AA escort or shore bombardment with greater cost-effectiveness.

USS Texas had at one point 100 AA guns, so no the ship isn't quite there yet... (It also explains why strike groups tend to vanish when they got near the Texas in WoWs...)

Iowas had in the 140s.

Der Alman'ach Or the reverse. After all Vanguard was bigger and better protected. That said, the two ships do look strikingly similar.

@@bkjeong4302 After all the Vanguard was younger and this makes her more modern but they have the same gun caliber and similar speed.

But it doesn’t look anything like the Bismarck

Christopher Darker Already done. With a tour of the ship included as well.

That was a refit, a massive refit with completely overhauling every inch of the rusty bird, then hiding it with surface rust to keep da Gami from noticing... At the same time I'd like to note they could have just built a scratch standard issue hull with alterations to the overall design just like the british did tinker with their ship before during and after constructing them...

Retired before any operational SAMs were developed for the royal navy.

Vanguard should never have been constructed in the first place. Total waste of resources.

@@simonpitt8145 Vanguard was pointless even by WWII-gen battleship standards.

@@bkjeong4302 I suppose it could be argued by battleship proponents, that the Vanguard's degree of obsolescence was mitigated by the fact her main armament was already in existence anyway. To me this is a bit thin, as it was still one hell of a ship to build just for the convenience of utilizing four WW1 vintage gun turrets that just happened to be lying around the dockyard. Ironically, by the time Vanguard was laid down Britain herself had by then proved the futility of the battleship at Taranto, the Bismarck pursuit and Matapan, but insisted on the ship's construction anyway!! Even after Pearl Harbour and the Prince of Wales/Repulse sinkings, by which time Vanguard's building would still have been only at its inchoate stage and as such could have been cancelled without much repercussion, *we still* went ahead with it. Surely it would have been better to land those guns to reinforce a shore battery at one of Britain's many overseas interests instead. Gibraltar, Malta or Singapore perhaps. If at the last named, may be we could have even had them facing inland rather than out to sea for a change!!

I was thinking a New Orleans. Or play it safe, a USN heavy cruiser ;)

Something something no money something something no political will

I really don't blame the British at that time, their economy was so low they had to cut budgets especially in terms of resources particularly Steel. Battleships in particular as time goes by are very expensive to maintain and modernization is out of the question, much less turning them into a museum ship. Great Britain really has a lot of financial debts especially to United States which they only paid the remaining sum of that debt in the early 2000's.

Unlike the Iowa the Vanguard wasnt a legend... it didnt really do anything particularly noteworthy in its extremely short career.

@@FallenPhoenix86 If we were to save any battleships, Warspite would likely be the one to keep if at all possible.

FallenPhoenix except the Iowa’s weren’t particularly noteworthy either

The U.K. didn't want to keep her any longer, not people took interest in her being a museum ship

Better AA too, but yeah not the most efficient design. Especially since Vanguard was larger than the German ship. Still, one of the more powerful surface combatants ever built (albeit obsolete on launch)

The twin turrets had been in storage since their removal from Courageous & Glorious after their conversion to aircraft carriers. They were used because triple 16 inch turrets would have taken a long time to manufacture. Even using readily available turrets, however, Vanguard wasn't completed in time for WW2.

She was in reserve in the home fleet at time of Suez and thus her crew was not at full strength. By the time that conflict broke out, there was not enough time to work her up to full strength (assuming there was money to do so). Korea - Americans provided 4 battleships to the conflict which was adequate and London again felt no need to work her up to full strength for a conflict that effectively stalemated from 51 onwards.

Well I don't

@Nguyen Johnathan doesn't mean we despise them

@Nguyen Johnathan well no but he did

WOULD*

Hugo HOM What’s a “dady”?