IJN Mutsu - Blown Apart in A Safe Harbor
Vložit
- čas přidán 9. 10. 2023
- Battleships, during their heyday, had an unfortunate tendency to randomly blow up in port. This was almost always down to poor powder handling or just unstable powder, in general. A couple exceptions from brave frogmen aside.
The Japanese battleship, Mutsu, is probably the most infamous of them all. Generally assumed to be a suicidal crewman lighting a fatal fire, we don't really know for sure. And never will.
It's a shame that this is all she's remembered for, but not terribly surprising, in that regard.
Further Reading:
www.amazon.com/Conways-Worlds...
www.amazon.com/Warships-Imper...
www.amazon.com/Imperial-Japan...
www.combinedfleet.com/Mutsu.htm
I’ll note that I didn’t forget Maine. She’s in a weird spot, both predating most other examples…
…and stretching the definition of a ‘battleship’ a tad. Since sources will differ and disagree on if she’s an armored cruiser or a battleship.
Plus, well, she wasn’t blown up in an American port.
I always thought she was more of a armored cruiser than a battle ship. The guns are the right size for a 2nd class battle ship but her belt and size just don't seem very battle ship to me. But I call sharnhorst and her sister a battle cruiser so take my opinion with a grain of salt. 11 Inch fast raider is more battle cruiser than line of battle battle ship in my book.
Damn, I got out of naval history for a while when researching how to take care of your corn snake, and checking back on stuff now it's crazy how big your channel has grown. I remember when you had like 2,000 subs and was averaging a few thousand views per video. Been around since your video on the Satsuma class.
Have you done videos on the Japanese heavy cruisers Haguro and Chokai, the British battleships Resolution and Valiant, or any of the Russo Japanese war Japanese pre dreadnoughts? All awesome and underrated warships.
@@robertstone9988 During that time period the definition of a battleship wasn't well defined. Any large capital ship was generally called a battleship.
@@WardenWolf yeah mane was almost as powerful as BB0 Texas (I'd argue Texas was completely useless) so I'd say 2nd class battle ship but when the Indianas and the Olympia launched they definitely became a 3rd rate or even 4th rate in the usn of the early 20th century.
why would you call it maine, when it really exploded somewhere else? you would think, that the navy could handle a simple operation like this.
When dealing with explosives an expert once told me "Setting them off is easy, making sure they only do it when you want is hard."
That second half is the mk 14 torpedos in a nutshell
Several years ago I read an article that stated that Mutsu was destroyed by a new type of ammunition which had been recently loaded aboard. This was an anti-aircraft round for the 16 inch guns. Fragmenting at a preset altitude, it was supposed to deal with enemy aircraft formations. The rounds were relatively thin-skinned, and fused with an external, time-sset fuse on the nose. The fuses had proved problematical as they were a bit fragile for the machinery that handled 16 inch rounds.There had been several premature blasts when tested at sea as the G-forces of being fired were too much for the fuses. The IJN's classified investigation determined that the blast originated in the special magazine where these rounds were stored, and then, of course, spread to the rest of the 16 inch ammo. The IJN quickly withdrew the AA 16 inch rounds from service after Mutsu.
The loss of 101 visiting aviation cadets was more damaging to war effort than the loss of Mutsu
a point that makes sabotage a viable theory
@@thecursed01 You are very correct, and not a clown, unlike the comment of Bobo Rohan. 101 cadets and their instructors presents a massive security risk if every single one of them hadn't been vetted down to the finest detail. There were so many attacks and killings carried out on American troops in Afghanistan by Afghani recruits to army and police being trained by Americans, because such vetting and information did not exist for these individuals. Thousands of migrants illegally entering the U.K each year, have amongst them some that are later arrested for serious crimes, and are found to simply not exist, owning either false details or no real identity to this day, as they toss all identification into the English Channel before entering the country. So since it is 2023 and these things are always happening (errrrr hello pilots training before 9/11 is a big one) then, yes, it is by no stretch of the imagination, and I've said so in a thorough comment myself. So I don't know why on earth Bobo here, would have been so rude to you, for simply offering 'viable'. Say sorry Bobo, you anti-social dick. Discussion is just that, since there is no definitive answer that has ever been solidified, then we are in Schrödinger's cat territory. Unless there is 100% and conclusive proof, and there is not, then no theory or speculation can be completely dismissed. Assuming Bobo is American, I just don't get how people have become, when political dumbness has hit the country so hard that only the very most extremes are allowed to be taken. Tell me again how the left aren't totalitarian oppressors?? (Call them just like Nazis and they don't get it. They still think Hitler was far right, which would have made Stalin a Liberal??!!)
You might add that the sailor accused of blowing up the gun turret on the Iowa was cleared in a subsequent investigation.
That would actually be a fair shout 👍🏻 There was a 15yr old German boy in 1942 called Walter Schmidt that apparently confessed to the arson and sinking of the S.S Bremen. He didn't even get a hearing. He was straight up executed. The Gestapo weren't so hot on human rights and fair trial. Just like the Japanese didn't take humiliation so well at the time, whilst the atrocities they carried out did just that. Beheading British P.O.W's and the R*** of Nanking speak for themselves. War seems to allow for gross double standards.
The rush to blame sabotage for the loss of Mutsu is all too reminiscent of the "investigation" of the USS Iowa's number two turret explosion.
I'm an American, and I think the Pagoda Mast is a thing of beauty and wonder. IJN MUTSU was too beautiful to live in this world all alone.
Love,
David
The Pagoda mast would have looked better if there was a slight rake instead of straight up.
It is a perfect mix of East Asian urban sprawl and over complicated gundam art. It’s ugly alright, but in a way that feels both nostalgic and in a way that it always keeps your eyes moving
@@johnny.3693 I agree!
@@TheWizardGamez Well put!
If I accidentally cut it out:
The point in bringing up the Iowa explosion was to emphasize that it was another case of ‘blaming a man who couldn’t defend himself’.
Not that it *was* caused by aforesaid man. Which it definitely wasn’t, in that case.
They always try to blame a “disgruntled” sailor so that the higher ups don’t face consequences. I recall they did that when an Iowa class had a gun explode.
Not surprised that they tried to cover up the incident. Most Navies seem to want to ignore flaws with their ships. The US Navy suggested that powder charges stored outside the powder room were responsible for the loss of USS Arizona. Not buying it.
Wow, I’m pretty read on WWII and have never heard of this incident.
If that was internal sabotage, whoever did it did one helluva job without being caught.
Oh they were probably caught. In the explosion.
I had the good fortune of seeing Mutsu's 16" gun at the Museum of Maritime Science during my trip to Tokyo many years ago. Your video brings back that good memory.
I’ve always had a particular interest in the IJN BB Mutsu. It was the very first ship model I ever built years ago.
I never could find a satisfactory amount of information about the ship and when I did look in reference books it seemed all the books had the same very brief “cookie cutter” data, as if the publications were just copying each other’s information.
Your video is by far the most comprehensive documentary I’ve found so far. Very well done. I would guess there still remains a ton of interesting data in Japanese naval archives that has yet to be translated into English.
"Distant cover" was something the japanese did a lot in early WW2 which was probably holdover from WW1 combat but never resulted in any active engagements for that distant cover due to combat being too fast paced for the distant cover to get involved.
Used up lots of oil though.
Here's something I wonder; presuming Mutsu was completed to the A-125 design prior to the Washington Naval Treaty, and even with all the arguments made by the japanese to save her, would she have still been allowed to be preserved despite having a massive broadside of 10 guns?
I have read that elements of the imperial Japanese army shot survivors trying to make it to sure on the grounds that they had deserted their ship.
Because the Pacific War evolved quickly into an aircraft carrier war, the Japanese battleships got relatively little use. Without air cover a battleship is a target. With air cover the American battleships wore out their big cannons shelling Japanese held islands.
Shore bombardment isn’t why battleships got built (too big an investment to be justified only by a supporting role). Battleships on both sides of WWII failed as a whole at their actual job, which was to serve as capital ships.
Without air cover, a battleship is a durable yet helpless target.
With air cover, a battleship is a pointlessly gigantic and expensive CLAA/destroyer/monitor.
Neither option makes battleships viable strategically.
Wow, and it looked like a safe harbour.
This video makes me extra happy. Years ago there was a channel called "Maritime Horrors" that was starting out but had some potential. As an early subscriber of Drachinifel, I tried to connect them for a collab special, and they had planned on doing this story of Mutsu's explosion but it never happened because apparently a few weeks before recording, Maritime Horrors lost his passion and stopped making further videos sadly (wish he had told us so I could cancel my patreon earlier =/ ) You did a great job running with this story!
Man, crappy to hear about Maritime Horrors. The dude had a solid channel. And yeah, Drach is the king.
Wait didn't he post a video 6months ago? So he quit?
@@amogusenjoyer I reviewed his channel just now,. and you're correct, he posted a few more videos after I unsubscribed from his channel and Patreon with an approximate 3 months between release dates. Not sure if you include his 2-3 minute shorts? I guess that's cool, but I would still have cancelled my Patreon for such a slow release schedule and he did abandon the collab with Drach.
North Carolina and Mutsu: Don't scrap us, Please think of the children.
The military of every nation is certainly capable of covering up negligence that results in those responsible not getting punished.
Even one magazine goes off that is pretty much the death below to any ship. No amount of salvage can bring them back. You’re better off just building another ship.
Great job as usual. Thank you for your hard work on this.
thank you for covering... Keep up the great work!
The explanation for all the magazine explosions are shrowded in doubt, simply because the force of the explosion destroys the very evidence to needed to establish a definite cause!
The best explanantion is that there were multiple causes, ranging from defective ammunition, poor ammunition handling, coal bunker fires, and sabotage.
Another outstanding video thanks for sharing it your the man looking forward to the next one
Great video as always!
It's such a shame they didn't keep one turret. I can understand the time. But would have been cool to see. Good video 👏
Cool to sea also.
Holy moly! Was this ship the answer to the old “Joke” : ‘ It will be a great day when schools have all the money they need and the navy has to hold a bake sale to buy a battleship?’
Amen brother.
Putting Mutsu back in service is in the same ballpark as Arizona
Would have been cool to seen either of them returned to service and extensively upgraded
@@helicoptersauce the USN had plenty of standards, and the ijn didn't have the capacity to do it
The most practical thing might have been to build a monitor using the aft turrets from Arizona
There wasn’t enough left of their ship to make this option practical.
blaming a disgruntled sailor...yep, just happened 'bout 2 yrs ago in San Diego. didn't explode but burned til beyond economical repair. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ sailor was acquitted.
Yeah ... that type of things is the norm and why I couldn't ever watch NCIS ...
_"You may as well confess because we SAW you do it."_
.
Seems like a damn shame, and a sad way to lose a perfectly good modern capital ship and 1200 men!
His channel is underrated
Great video.
Not only did the IJN use their submarines incorrectly, they used their battleships just as poorly. It's what happens when you allow a group of old foggies to run your navy.
There WASN’T a way for the IJN to use their battleships properly. Every single thing they could have done with their battleships would have resulted in the battleships not being able to provide sufficient return on investment.
Which is what ended up happening with every other navy of WWII as well regardless of how active their battleships were. Frankly the only really correct move would have been to stop battleship construction in the 1930s, which absolutely no navy managed to figure out until it was way too late.
Wouldn't a cargo ship do better for carrying supplies for a relief effort?
On the subject of torpedo tubes on a BB: Simply put, a battleship has no business being close enough to a enemy ship that torpedoes become a useful weapon.
Thats what they have escorts for after all.
Unless your Germany and don't have the ships to escort anything, has to be a reason tirpitz had them.
I take your point but that’s not quite the way I’d look at it. If you were in an American or British battleship with modern radar during WWII having the option to sneak up on an enemy and hose him down in CQB was sometimes worth the risk. Most navies got rid of torpedo tubes on their BBs & BCs because their nominal combat value was lower than the added risk they brought to their ship & crew. Rodney’s believe to have scored a hit on Bismarck with one of her 24.5” torpedos while the Brits were finishing off the German battleship. This was the only time during either World War when a battleship was believed to have hit ANYTHING with a torpedo.
At some point in the 1920's, the forward stack is trunked rearward. When and why did that happen?
The most likely and most believable explanation I have seen for Mutsu is that somebody looked funny or breathed too close to one of those utterly terrifying and stupid Type 3 San Shiki main gun "Beehive" 16.1" Anti Aircraft Shells. By all reports they were dangerously unstable and impossible to properly store in a magazine as you could never really put them in a safe state. The sub munitions were always volatile and at risk of an unplanned activation. All the Captains wanted them off their ships after Mutsu went boom. But were forced to keep them because to refuse them would be to dishonor the elderly and incompetent Admiral in charge of the IJN Department of Naval Ordinance or somesuch. This was a common theme within the Navy and High Command. To even question whether the American's had broken the Japanese Naval Codes was to bring dishonor on the most senior Admiral who had led a decade long effort to create the worlds most secure and unbreakable codes. So even following Midway and the Death of Yamamoto the mid tier officers in the Naval Intelligence Division could not even voice the possibility that the American's might be reading their communications. To ask such a question was itself an outrage. I suspect it was much the same thing with the San Skiki shells. They might have been worse than the US Navy's Criminally Corrupt Department of Ordinance and the Mark VII Torpedo.
I wonder why she was disturbed being a war grave.
I highly doubt there was much if any remains found in the turret after 30 years, not to mention being able to identify them & what are the odds that it was the one man in over a thousand they were looking for.
I don't think she & Nagato were held back in 1942 because they were too valuable per se - they were held back, along with the 2 Fuso's & the 2 Ise's because they were too slow. Without constant air cover the Japanese were unwilling to risk sending slower ships down "the Slot" to Guadacanal so the Kongos got the short straws.
Japanese Navy: ALL OUR SHIPS KEEP BLOWING UP!
Yeah, so what do you want? Wait for them to be torpedoed by Mogami?
😂
@@mikearmstrong8483 Or rammed by it, we're not picky.
@@tremedarthey could also try sinking enterprise, that could've helped, their carriers anyways
@@dragonmaster3030 You say that like they *_didn't_* try sinking it. They threw everything including the kitchen sink at that ship, which was why the repair ship Vestal was pretty much assigned exclusively to Enterprise.
Ultimately the best they could do was a lucky kamikaze strike that yeeted the forward elevator skyward and into the pacific while making the whole ship look sideways at them for their audacity. Then she had a nice long rest in Bremerton.
Pagoda bridge tower makes the ship look unstable.
Imagine if the Japanese actually used their powerful naval forces
They would have all been sunk
There was a little matter of fuel and speed.
The Kongos were the only capital ships that could keep up with the carriers and not deplete fuel stocks.
@@jamesricker3997 Interesting fact... Kongo was built in Glasgow UK. they were on our side then.
Imagine of Yamato and Musashi were sent to participate in the battle of Guadalcanal instead of Hiei and Kirishima. USS South Dakota, USS Washington, and numerous American cruisers and destroyers would have been sent to the sea bed.
@@metaknight115how do you know that would have been the outcome???
You should do a video on the USS Maine, or even the explosion in USS Iowas turret
Yes😊
fortunately today we know of the USS Iowa explosion that it was mismanagement in the turret and of the captain and not a disgruntled sailor for that explosion. An attempt at a shooting record to impress a visiting admiral cost all those lives, such a tragic shame.
For a time when money was tight, the Mutsu seems to be going in for overhauls. A design or build flaw?
Not sure if you covered it but if not although it was due to mishandling of ordnance, at Pearl Harbor in west loch in May of ‘44, a huge explosion followed by secondary ones and fire ripped through bunch of large transport ships, few smaller ones, killing well over 160. It was classified until 1960s. Cause of explosion was never officially discovered but likely from a dropped mortar or something. About six LST were sunk, only one was left there and still can be seen today since it’s half way out of the water, or large section of the bow anyway. The coordinates are (21.3572586, -157.9966408)
What are you referencing here?
@@DaveSCameron In hindsight, another incident in a safe harbor. This case, second incident at same harbor, largely forgotten or not known about.
@@Ro6entX Yes thank you but which craft? Excuse my ignorance I've only just landed on this channel.
@@DaveSCameron The incident involved group of transport/cargo ships, some land craft ones as well. The Navy was getting things (supplies) ready for upcoming operation. The partial sunken hull that remains in the harbor is the LST 480
@@Ro6entX San Francisco too.
Un beau navire ...
02:35 The Americans would never have succeeded in getting rid of Mutsu as the Japanese would not accept being outnumbered 3 to 1 on 16" armed battleships and then there is the elephant in the room that being the British Empire who has not a single 16" armed ships as their own have not even been laid down yet
Yeah if the Americans don't let the Japanese keep Mutsu, Japanese walks out of the negotiations and if the Americans don't let the British Empire have what it wants, they walk and the treaty dies right there and then
The Americans have no choice but to let the British get the Nelrods while ignoring the hilariously over the limit Hood and let the Japanese keep Mutsu as Settsu was going to be scrapped anyway
I bet Bismarck wished HMS Rodney hadn't been built lol.
In a nutshell, ship bored to death
What was the idea behind the ridiculous looking mast ? It looks like something from a ship of the line .
Perhaps to keep the height equal to the rear one. (Over the horizon view). Just guessing
The pagoda mast became a thing because it turned out there wasn’t enough space in the original superstructure to add all the important new equipment (this is also why the Queen Anne’s Mansion on British capital ships became a thing). Because there wasn’t enough space to expand the superstructure horizontally, the Japanese built their masts upwards.
This issue only got fixed with the Yamato-class (which was designed with far more superstructure volume and a different mast design from the start to accommodate everything) but by then the entire battleship paradigm was outdated.
@@bkjeong4302 I was talking about the rear mast 👍
A suicidal crew member, seams like a bit of a stretch. Many Japanese service men committed suicide. To avoid surrender, dishonere or to destroy the enemy. This would be an extremely unusual way for a Japanese service man to do so. More like to be some kind of accidental ingnition.
Definitely a propellant explosion.
What is left of her upgraded turrets pulled out of the shallow waters in the 1970s?
I believe one is on display at the JMSDF Academy. I want to say there's another one displayed else where, but can't remember at the top of head. I do believe a couple gun barrels are displayed elsewhere, including Yokusuka.
@@yamato-zi7yk the one at the academy has been there since the '30s because it's the old one, removed for the upgraded turrets (pulled out of the water) of which i don't know the whereabouts 😢
One more time!!!!
The most famous example is, without a doubt, the Maine.
The difference between the 1920s and now is that we have way too few ships in our navy if we get into a major war again we don’t have the infrastructure to mass produce ships like we did back then
“Join the Imperial Navy” and see the bottom of the Pacific Ocean 1945
The first rule of crime scene investigation is to identify anything or anyone within the scene that is out of place or shouldn't be there at all. This would be made harder in wartime with propaganda playing a part, and for this reason the truth was most likely covered up anyway. With only the information available from this video, I know what would have been my suspicion, with many onboard that day that would not ordinarily be part of the ship. The students and indeed instructors would have been far more thoroughly investigated. Many American Japanese had to be interred within the United States for fear of treason, despite no allegiance being shown to Japan by way of being American immigrants in the first place. Famously, those held prisoner included Pat Morita of Karate Kid fame, and George Takei of Star Trek, who were very young at the time. The OSS (Office of Strategic Services), which would transform into the C.I.A post WWII, could have quite possibly recruited some anti Japan immigrants, who then went back to Japan. They could have been given a mission to carry out such an act. Something of this nature would have been extremely embarrassing to the IJN, and they most likely would not have admitted such a thing. I must add, that despite the C.I.A being well known today for keeping deep secrets, you would expect that the United States would have made propaganda headlines of their own by claiming responsibility at the time. Certainly, in the years that have passed since WWII?
This is all very reminiscent of the S.S Normandie fire and sinking in New York harbour in 1942, plus another very similar and mysterious fire also, on a ship that had been berthed next to Normandie in 1942 shortly before that liner was destroyed, the German luxury liner S.S Bremen. In that wild tale, a 15yr old 'disgruntled' cabin boy apparently confessed to destroying the massive ship by arson whilst docked in Bremerhaven (Bremen's home port), just because he wasn't given a mattress to sleep on?! If that motive doesn't seem plausible, the penalty for the confession was much worse, especially if this boy had been coerced into giving a confession, because the poor lad was summarily executed, so would never live to be questioned again. After Pearl Harbour, and especially in 1942, ships not directly engaged in battle did surely keep spontaneously burning and blowing up.
For sure, I would be surprised if the actual reason for the catastrophic explosion in Japan was ever known by many at all, and a cover-up was established to save face. This is the same IJN after all, that whitewashed over the total disaster of Leyte Gulf by claiming absolute victory, and reporting that more American naval vessels had been destroyed than in fact had really befallen Japanese warships. Surely the second most false battle statement of all time, behind that of Comical Ali of Iraq (Muhammad Saeed al-Sahhaf). In 2003, during the invasion of Iraq, he claimed that all American forces had been wiped out during their assault on Baghdad, and couldn't have therefore gotten close to Baghdad Airport as was being reported. He gave this statement on TV, as American troops were literally live in the background hoisting an American flag at that very airport. When propaganda goes wrong, it can be even more embarrassing than the truth.
All's fair in war, and many secrets are created, and die with those who kept them. There was a greater sense of loyalty and honour back then. Today, these stories would have been given up for clickbait in days.
0:38 wait there was a Japanese battleship which also exploded in WW2 ? I thought it was just WW1
Was there a reason for Mutsu to not see any “action” she was host to the Emperor but did the commander do something to the high command to warrant it??? I’m kinda confused by that
Look up the Destroyer USS Turner that mysteriously blew up in New York Harbor. My Father donated blood to the Survivors at Sandy Hook. His blood was flown from the Brooklyn Navy Yard by Bell Helicopter to the Hospital there.
- There really wasn’t a way for Japan to use its battleships in a way that would have justified the fuel expenditure and expense (even the Kongos never really proved their worth in spite of how active they were). This is frankly a problem with battleships in general during WWII (especially the newly built ones) than with Japanese battleships, however.
- the Nagatos were just too slow for a lot of missions, especially the Solomons campaign.
- the Nagatos (but NOT the Yamatos, contrary to popular belief) were the prestige symbols of the IJN
@@bkjeong4302yamatos didn't really do anything. Musashi was sunk by a small group of really angry destroyers and small carriers, yamato I'm not sure and shinano was not only converted but wasn't even complete when sunk. Yamatos didn't do much but use up all their oil really
@@dragonmaster3030 Musashi was sunk by carrier strikes, she never even saw an American vessel.
You’re thinking of Yamato at the Battle off Samar, except that a) that battle was actually also decided through American airpower and not by a group of really angry destroyers as commonly assumed, and b) Yamato wasn’t sunk or even damaged in that battle. Yamato was sunk the next year, once again in a massed airstrike.
And WWII-era battleships IN GENERAL didn’t do much of anything and just used up fuel. The only real difference was that the Allies ones were mostly wasting fuel at sea without doing anything instead of doing so in port.
Boomer and Ex Snipe here:
Militaries and contractors are quick to blame operator error. It's the go-to defense when federal inquiry eyes turn your way. "It isn't procurement's fault. It's those underachieving boots on the ground that f*cked up." Sometimes the accusation falls right on target. The infamous Saber Dance was PIO, though how could a pilot know until afterward? Capital ships have a history of unfortunate events. Burst breeches, ruptured barrels, jammed rudders, the main battery blowing the RaDAR antenna over the side, unexpected magazine detonations . . . it's all in the literature.
"There seems to be something wrong with our bloody ships . . ." -Admiral David Beatty.
Hood's sad fate seems to have been the same as that of certain HMS individuals at Jutland . . . poor splodey hygiene. Leaving scuttles open for ventilation when they should be closed zebra . . . but automatically blaming disgruntled sailors for every catastrophe* is inelegant at best and biting the hand that feeds you at worst. Sometimes its an official lapse in procedural judgement. In a hurry, do it now, reputations to protect, and all that.
Battleships are complex amalgams of ideas, evolution of application, and often changing/upgrading hardware. Every crew is a moment in time for general orientation and proficiency in rate. Of course things can go wrong.
Even so, it's sometimes the procurers who keep powder until it destabilizes, sweats crystals, exceeds its shelf life, to coin a phrase. Old propellants, barrels and breeches past their prime. This is a budgeting tragedy not under control of those oft-blamed black shoes on the nonskid.
* "Damn weather prognosticators lied to my face!" - Admiral Halsey during Typhoon Cobra
Reminds me of mk 14 toros and their producers insistence on user error for years
Mutual being funded & saved by school children is and the fact there of is/should still be a fact of pride. Like Alabama being preserved by the school children of Alabama, but prior to decommissioning.
algo
Careless smoking maybe
What a waste
Don't forget USS Maine.
The Iowa explosion being referenced in here as a possible disgruntled sailor is kind of annoying. After all the investigations were done by both the navy and independently it was originally determined that the wwII powder bags were at fault due to their age/bad storage leading to their ease to being over rammed.
But in true government fashion they decided to try blaming the man. Trying to say everything from him being suicidal over being gay (which if i recall correctly he wasn't), to saying things like he was in debt or anything else they could come up with. Its just my opinion and people are obviously free to disagree but i feel adding that was disingenuous.
I was referencing it as an example of a navy blaming an explosion on a sailor. Not saying that’s what actually happened with Iowa.
(Hence ‘blaming it on a man who couldn’t defend himself’
Unless I cut that out by accident. I don’t think I did…)
If the Japanese had of used the NAGATO, MUTSU, YAMATO, and MUSASHI for the purpose for which they were built, the war may have had a different ending.
This! If they'd of just parked one or two of them in the waters off Guadalcanal shortly after the landings....... Their captains were just a bunch of frightened old men. The real warriors were all in the destroyers.
If Yamato and Musashi were sent to partake in the battle of Guadalcanal instead of Hiei and Kirishima, they would have blasted through the cruisers and destroyers of the first surface engagement. The 8-inch shells that crippled Hiei would have dented Yamato or Musashi, and a few 18.1-inch shells instead of a few 14-inch shells would have outright sank USS San Francisco instead of just almost sinking her. Once they turned their attention to other cruisers, I doubt Helena or Portland would have survived the battle.
In the battleship engagement, South Dakota would probably go to the sea bed. In battle, within 3 salvos she was hit by two 14-inch shells from Kirishima, a single ship with less accuracy and fire control capabilities. Yamato and Musashi would have at least crippled her to be finished off by destroyer or cruiser torpedoes, and with a little bit of luck have just outright sank her via gunfire damage. Against USS Washington, Yamato and Musashi with their improved fire control capabilities could have just spotted Washington from the beginning and blast her to bits, but assuming she could commit to the same sneak attack she used on Kirishima, she would probably cripple, but not sink one of them with twenty 16-inch shells, while the other would blast Washington with gunfire, crippling or sinking Washington. One of these ships, with a full escort, would go one to bombard Henderson field.
So a successful mission, two battleships, and numerous cruisers and destroyers sunk vs an unsuccessful mission, two cruisers, and seven destroyers sunk.
Hahahahaha no it wouldn't. Absolutely nothing the Japanese could have done would change the outcome of the war. You try telling me how 4 battleships and 6 carriers(2 of which are battleship conversions) are going to hold off 32 Essex class carriers and 6 or so Iowas/Montanas in addition to probably a thousand destroyers and several hundred cruisers?
Japan was *FUCKED* the minute they attacked the US. It was never a question of would the US win, but when.
They COULDN’T have used them for their intended purpose. Why do you think battleships were proven obsolete during WWII? Because it turned out that nobody could use battleships as capital ships when naval battles had become a game of rocket tag played out across distances too far for any battleship gun to fire across.
The Japanese army did it.
Joe Biden swam up to it and put a mine on it.
Perhaps you could name the battles where American battleships fought ANY other nation's battleships. Shore bombardment doesn't count. I can't find ONE. I must be mistaken, all that armour and millions of dollars just to re-arrange some enemy flora.
There was Kirishima vs South Dakota and Washington off Guadalcanal. Though how much you consider the Kongou-class to be ‘battleships’ at that point varies between different people.
The other example being Surigao Strait. Though one could call this less a ‘battle’ and more ‘Standards bullying Yamashiro’.
Either way, the Pacific War was one fought largely by airpower. For better or worse.
When a warship is present the enemy will change their plans, that's usually how it works. They don't actually need to sink a smaller ship to prove they're capable of doing so.
@@rohanthandi4903 right, that's why the entire British Airforce and Navy were almost solely focused on Bismark and Tirpitz for the better part of the war...
@@rohanthandi4903 from 1939 until 1941 is about half the war, not from an American perspective but from a European perspective.
Tirpitz was sunk in late 1944, the active assets the Brits had to keep in the north sea just for this one vessel had a big effect on other theaters.
@@rohanthandi4903 i don't know if you've watch drach's videos on this subject, I could recommend a few classics if you want :)
Anyone else who’s here because of azur lane?