G3 Class

Comments · 164

• ER

  @EricDKaufman · 5 years ago

  Drach said it best... Imagine Sir Jackie Fisher seeing Yamato, and then realizing it was from 1940.  WHAT HAVE YOU BEEN DOING ALL THIS TIME?!?!?!!?

  122

• LU

  @lukedogwalker · 5 years ago

  Transom stern. Very modern feature for the 20's that wouldn't make it into reality on a battleship hull until Vanguard was built.

  39

• MR

  @MrRandomcommentguy · 3 years ago (edited)

  G3 and N3 were 30 years ahead of their time in terms of warships as 100% pure functional industrial products lacking any consideration of aesthetics or artistic flair on the part of the naval architects.

  14

• MR

  @MrOhdead · 3 years ago

  Regards firing angle, I think it was referenced in the book "Nelson to Vanguard", the admiralty said "we can not foresee a situation where we would be trying to run from a fight"

  6

• YE

  @yes_head · 5 years ago

  Thx, Ryan. Awesome vid as usual, but I got a chuckle at "Inda-fa-tee-ga-bul". It's like when Drach tries to pronounce things like Des Moines.

  40

• BR

  @brettmitchell5229 · 7 months ago

  The Royal Navy was forced to retain the clearly inferior R class and Nelson class, rather than benefiting from the G3 class.

  2

• PI

  @pitman4121 · 4 years ago

  One important thing to note about these Gx and Nx series are the two main designers.  Stanley Vernon Goodhall and E. L Attwood were both innovators in their approach to design.  With both were working together they were able to "bounce" ideas off of each other.  Thus they pushed the innovation envelope even further.

  8

• TE

  @terenfro1975 · 5 years ago

  You mentioned the naval treaty.  The British empire and the US went through a period of declining relationship in the 20’s and 30’s.  In fact, the war department developed a plan to invade Canada and to fight the empire in the 20’s.  Several bases were built along the northern boarder to support the plan.  It wasn’t till the royal family visited Roosevelt that the relationship between the two improved.

  11

• JO

  @johnpayne5404 · 4 years ago

  Both are (would have been) great ships. &nbsp;If we are trying to look at G3 as built vs NJ as built, then NJ should certainly be the better ship as it was designed 20 years later with the benefit of tech development during that time. &nbsp;More interesting would be a G3 as rebuilt vs NJ as built. &nbsp;Add some radars, swap the heavy AA with 5.25&quot; or 4.5&quot; as Renown. &nbsp;Head to head you can&apos;t control sea states, so speed may or may not be an issue. &nbsp;NJ has the gun range advantage but hits at extreme range are exceedingly rare. &nbsp;Teething troubles Rodney experienced were largely due to weight saving attempts and were sorted by 1939 as Bismarck learned. &nbsp;The question comes down to what happens when 16&quot; shells start coming aboard the G3 and NJ. &nbsp;The G3 is better armored than the NJ, particularly up front where the magazines are. &nbsp;I&apos;m a fan of both ships and thankful for the USN and RN sailors that this match up never occurred. &nbsp;<br><br>The second thought I&apos;d like to share is to point out how much more powerful these G3s were compared to the Admirals (Hood), their predecessors. &nbsp;Night and day. &nbsp;Hugely innovative. &nbsp;Comparing NJ to SD or NC, yes they are better ships but not a quantum leap like G3. &nbsp;Hats off to the G3 design team.<br><br>The third thought is to consider a G3 in WWII. &nbsp;G3 at Denmark Straight instead of Hood or Prince of Wales? &nbsp;G3 in the Med vs Italians? &nbsp;They would have been potent.

  14

• BR

  @brucesim2003 · 5 years ago

  The Japanese didn&apos;t really &apos;lose&apos; at Washington, even though they thought they did. The treaty basically formalised the balance of power that would have resulted in an unrestrained building race. The Japanese industry simply couldn&apos;t match the USA or UK industry.

  18

• JO

  @jonrolfson1686 · 5 years ago

  A Battle Cruiser / Fast Battleship squadron comprising Invincible, Inflexible, Indomitable and Indefatigable &nbsp;would, almost inevitably, have been call the ‘Bəls,’ as in: ’’Then the four Bəls suddenly hove into view, coming over the horizon.’

  17

• SE

  @sergarlantyrell7847 · 4 years ago

  He makes it sound like these were only invented to bargin with at the Washington naval conference. And as for &quot;paper ship&quot; John Brown &amp; Company (one of the 4 shipbuilders these were ordered from, and the one who built Hood) had already cut steel for the first G3 &amp; was working on laying the keel when they were cancelled by the naval treaty.<br><br>We might not have any (surviving) photos of her keel laid down, but we have invoices for the work done up to the point when they were cancelled so we know that 1 was at least started, so I don&apos;t think it&apos;s fair to be quite so dismissive of them as &quot;paper designs&quot;.

  2