[Music] [Music] so the long waited part two of the destroyer development video series and today we're looking at the interwar destroyer development so we've already looked at the run-up to World War one from the time the Destroyers were first developed up to the end of that conflict but World War one leaves destroyers in a very different place to where they've been 20 years before but in the next 20 years which we're going to look at today that takes us from the end of one world war to the start of another and sees numerous developments which are going to leave the destroyer entering the next global conflict as a completely different ship again from the ships that were present in 1919 now happily for fans of other navies we now are forced to expand our view out past the Royal Navy with occasional contributions from others since each major Navy would now develop its own distinct destroyer design traditions and some would even end up with multiple design lineages so we have to consider each of them so in this video we're going to broadly look at the development of destroyers in each Navy with occasional comments given when developments in one Navy or another crossed over to affect other navies I'm going to start by saying that two navies that take part in World War two the Russian and the German are going to be initially ignored as because of reasons of internal revolution and treaty restrictions respectively they contributed relatively little to the development of destroyers until the latter part of the interwar period which is where we'll pick them up on later in the video so in 1919 the navies that could look forward to developing destroy designs are further in any great numbers were of course the British Royal Navy in the United States Navy the marine Nationale of France the Regina marina I don't even know how that's pronounced of Italy and the Imperial Japanese Navy it's worth looking at where each Navy walls with destroyers at the start of the interwar period before we look at their individual lineages so your average 1919 destroyer comes in at a standard displacement of a between a thousand and 1,200 tons with the lower end of the bracket held by the Imperial Japanese Navy whose current destroyers are still in the high hundreds of tons and will only break a thousand tons at full load the heavier end of things was occupied by the French who'd been forced to build or by a number of small destroys during the war but whose first venture into new destroyers as the war came to a close was the bore asked a class I think which was already pushing the 1300 tonne standard and hit nearly 2,000 tons fully loaded this set a bit of a theme which we'll cover later in French ship it's the average speed of a destroyer was between 32 and 35 knots and armament was generally four single four inch or 120 millimeter guns with an anti-aircraft gun or two thrown in there from morale purposes and an average of about six torpedo tubes although these parried being in some nations twin mounts and in other nations triple mounts the Japanese and French Navy's used larger four-point-seven and 5-inch guns respectively although Japanese Navy ships carried fewer guns and torpedoes than average overall owing to their smaller size whilst the large French designs used the extra displacement simply to have heavier guns and a slightly larger than average anti-aircraft battery range was around three and a half thousand nautical miles with notable exceptions being the Italian ships which were designed for much shorter ranged Mediterranean operations and the American ships which had to deal with operating in the Pacific practically every destroyer had some ability to carry depth charges and all mines in varying numbers notable amongst all these as 1919 drew round to 1920 as a standout design we have to look at the United States Navy's clemson-class at just over 1200 tons standard and around 1,300 tons fully loaded it was on the heavier end of the average displacement band but it was fast at just over 35 knots in a calm sea and had a very long range destroy at just under 5,000 nautical miles for triple torpedo launchers and for single 4-inch guns also meant its armament was on the heavier end there were a few disadvantages two of the guns were wing-mounted which meant that they only had a three gun broadside this would leave them a disadvantage in a gunnery duel with most destroyers who's for single map mounts were all on the centerline but they're unusually heavy torpedo armament was also made up of wing mounted launches now this did give an individual broadside of torpedoes that was no greater than average but they were able to deliver a second torpedo broadside simply by turning around however with this said the design was a very capable of taking modification with four of the ships being upgraded to 5-inch guns instead of the four-inch weapons and two of them even being fitted with twin 4-inch mounts in place of each single for a total of eight guns and a well above average six gun broadside whilst perhaps not the most efficient layout of weapons they're still a leading design for the period the Washington Naval Treaty was primarily concerned with the limitations on battleships and some regulation of cruisers so whilst destroyers were discussed the final treaty - not particularly affect their design amongst the larger navies of the Royal Navy and the United States Navy there was something of a pause on destroy construction in the early to mid 1920s as the last of the wartime programs were wound down and the vast numbers of destroyers built during that period were rationalized with the best retained for the future fleet in America in particular the vast rafts of for stacker flush deck destroyers appeared as congressional funding predictably plummeted in the aftermath of the Washington treaty and the US Navy aimed to build first a modern cruiser fleet thus addressing one of its biggest current weaknesses and thus taking his eye off the destroyer ball for a while the Italian Japanese and French continued with incremental development of their various designs until 1926 when the Imperial Japanese Navy began work on the for buki class which would set a whole new standard and cause a radical shift in destroy design across the board various destroyers up to this point possessed relatively easily quantifiable strengths and weaknesses some would clearly superior gunboats others were clearly better torpedo craft some were faster and others were slower etc etc the Fubuki x' completely upended this paradigm with a standard displacement about 500 tons greater than the previous average their capabilities were without equal at least on paper their main battery of six guns in three twin mounts were of a fairly heavy 127 millimeter or five-inch calibre which gave them firepower superior to any gun focused destroyer to date and three triple torpedo launchers each with a reload also gave it a spread of heavy anti-shipping weapons greater than any torpedo focus destroyer at the time comfortably capable of at least 35 knots although again as destroyers this would have been enough calm they hadn't sacrificed speed for this equipment either the main guns were also ostensibly dual purpose giving the ships an unprecedented Lee heavy anti-aircraft battery as well of course behind all the flashy statistics there were issues the dual purpose bounty of the guns had a somewhat slow rate of fire for anti-aircraft work and various improvements and changes were incorporated into the second and third groups of abou keys that were constructed still they were a huge improvement over the previous destroy standard more importantly their appearance galvanized action in pretty much everyone else over the next few years however responses were limited by a curtailment of destroyers in the London Naval Treaty a few years later to no more than one thousand eight hundred and fifty tons of standard displacement and 130 millimeter or 5.1 inch calibre guns in the Italian Navy where Destroyers had been on something of the small side their response was influenced as much or more by developments of their rivals in France as it was by the appearance of the Pookie's nevertheless their destroyer evolution is quite interesting a number of small s+ ball oratory Leggero or scouting cruisers had been built in addition to their small destroyers during and immediately after the first world war and these would now gradually be reclassified as destroyers as it was clear that their weaponry in size was now below the upper end of destroyer designs currently in service and the smaller earlier destroyers would eventually be largely reclassified as torpedo boats due to their sub 1000 ton displacement and use of lighter weight to torpedoes the curtatone a class of the early 1920s had shown the start of a trend with the ship moving from single mounts to a pair of twin mounts so still retaining four guns but in a few amounts these would become a signature feature of Italian destroyers of the interwar period albeit with gun size heading up from the 102 millimeter or 4 inch guns of that particular class to 120 millimeter or 4.7 inch guns in the following Leon necklace which were themselves originally more exploratory reclassified during construction to destroyers the next few classes the seller sorrow and turbine a classes all carried this main gun layout of two twin mounts plus two sets or triple torpedo launchers however they would grow progressively larger and faster with more and more anti-aircraft weapons added since the Italians were especially conscious above many other nations that in their Mediterranean operations the Navy would almost certainly be in constant range of land-based aircraft by the time of the navigator e-class in the late 1920s the second Italian signature was in place ispeed with the previous classes having raised speed in increments from 33 knots these destroyers were now hitting 38 9 although they were also the largest Italian destroyers of the interwar period at just over 1900 tonnes standard load this being just before the London Naval Treaty it should also be noted at this point that due to their large size these destroyers would be the only Italian in TOR destroyers to be armed with six guns with an additional twin mountains and subsequent classes would drop back down to the lower end of a four figure displacement before inevitably gradually creeping back up the standard of main battery torpedo battery and speed that was set by the naviga Tories would remain essentially unchanged for the rest of Italian destroy construction up to the start of the Second World War just across a rather narrow part of the Mediterranean Sea French destroy design as mentioned earlier was already taking a route towards the large and powerful before the Fubuki showed up with two lines of development identified the smaller tor pelea de scarborough was designed primarily to attack enemy ships with torpedoes and get into melee with similar enemy attack craft while the larger variant the contra tor peeler it was as the name suggests supposed to provide primary scouting capacity and defend the fleet from any remaining incoming attackers in many ways this may sound somewhat familiar as it's a very similar division of roles to that in the late 19th century that had developed during the era of torpedo boats and torpedo gunboats before the advent of the all-in-one destroyer the Barska was an example of the former and despite being slightly larger than the average falsely destroyer of the time but only the follow-on la boîte class followed down this particular line of development in the latter half of the 1920s it would not be until almost the start of the Second World War that a in third class of this type would be built instead most development of French destroyers immediately before and after the fubuki 's focused on the much larger contra Tapia type since the French saw that they couldn't build as many destroyers as potential rival powers with the possible exception of the Italians and so they instead focused on getting as much out of each individual ship as possible at least that was the theory the first effort in this regard post-war had been the shakaal class at just over 2100 tonne standard and just under 3,000 tons fully loaded they were considerably larger than any other destroyer afloat including the student to come for bougie's indeed fully loaded their displacement was closer to that of some small like cruisers of the time and then it was to the average li destroyer nonetheless it was the Fubuki that pointed the way forward as comparatively speaking the French ships had one less gun carrying 5 130 millimeter guns in single mounts the torpedo launchers and now on board reloads 60% of the range and approximately equal speed despite the extra 300 tons or so of stand displacement and nevertheless the French pressed on with this concept with the next class of contra to Opilio built after the Fubuki x' began to appear retaining the two triple torpedo launchers but added another 300 tons to displacement with a larger hull which supported the same 5 single gun layout only now at 5.5 inch caliber along with a slight increase in speed anti-aircraft armament was changed from a couple of 3-inch guns to for smaller 37 millimeter weapons the eggless then brought back one of the 3 inch anti-aircraft guns and another half not in speed for 36 knots in exchange for another 100 tons of displacement the follow-on of Oakland class were effectively repeats simply adding a single extra torpedo launching tube this tranche of development would end with the elephant esque class which added just over another hundred tons of displacement for about two and a half thousand tons displacement standard and up to three thousand four hundred tons fully loaded and this was on a late 1920s early 1930s destroyer this brought generally the same gun battery as previous ships but upgraded the torpedo array to nine tubes of our three triple launchers and a truly absurd a design speed of 45 knots although 40 knots was more practical as a top operational speed the Italians actually ended up having to bring back the exploratory concept and ended up ordering a bunch of full-on small like cruiser classes as counters and their displacement was barely more than the almost unpronounceable French destroyers this line of destroy development was not without its problems the London Naval Treaty now appeared to cut the idea off at the knees with its displacement limit the large guns proved somewhat slow to fire and unwieldy to man generally and especially hard to manage at speed problems with the supply choice for the shells didn't help and time and again he this period various navies would discover that the wait involved in any shell above five inches was generally just a bit too much to expect a crew to rapidly and consistently handle in a prolonged engagement leading to exhaustion and mistakes made in short order the French ships also sacrificed structural elements to keep the hulls light enough to gain their high speed which would lead to a number of rather interesting issues operationally especially given the battering the hulls were subjected to when the ships were tearing around at full pelt with the aforementioned treaty temporarily stopping construction of more of these absurdly large destroyers French shipbuilding took a temporary diversion with a single class of what were really torpedo boats the melpomene tahminae which clasp which dropped back to under a thousand tonnes with a relatively minimal gun battery and a mere six torpedo tubes however article 24 of the London Naval Treaty meant the destroyer tonnage limits were initially only binding on the US the UK and Japan with these obligations being brought in for Italy and France on a later agreed date the French shortly thereafter took a look at this situation and effectively went well yes but actually no and so after a few delays related to negotiations with Italy they recommenced their large destroy construction with the Mogador class in late 1934 these ships would add yet more displacement and coming in at just under 3,000 tons standard and 4,000 tons fully loaded taking them directly into small like cruiser territory this bought an over fifty percent increase in range a thirty nine not top speed a main battery of eight five point four or 138 millimeter guns in twin turrets along with ten torpedo tubes in a pair of triple and a pair of twin launchers although once again issues with the guns and the weight of the shells meant the rate of fire was considerably less than designed they also suffered issues with carat patient on the propellers and a marked lack of agility the Dunkirk class battle cruisers that they were supposed to be escorting could in fact out turn them on the plus side they were much more strongly built and despite some top weight issues with stability were generally regarded as decent sea boats and on trials actually proved capable of exceeding their 39 knot nominal top speed for improved versions generally known as the Kleber class were under construction at the outbreak of the Second World War which pulled down the curtain on French destroy development for the period we're looking at one final note on French destroy development would come with one last class of tour per year discard throw as mentioned earlier at the end of the 1930s the lahardee class designed with the rising numbers of powerful destroyers in mind despite being the smaller half of the French destroy fleet they were still substantial ships at 1800 tons standard and over two and a half thousand tons fully loaded their armament of a half-dozen hundred and thirty millimeter guns in three twin turrets made them more heavily armed than many fleet destroyers and at 37 knots with seven torpedo tubes their speed and anti-shipping capacity was also considerable although again issues with the guns and loading reduce their practical fighting capacity as compared to their paper stats Japanese destroyer development from the immediate post-war mummy class to the fubuki 's had been a relatively logical progression through the Minicozzi waka taki kamikaze and mutsuki classes aside from the smaller Wakita case the rest had settled on a general almond - for single 120 millimeter or four inch guns and six torpedo tubes albeit with a change from three twin - to triple launchers as time went on displacement rose through a range of about 150 tonnes up to about 1,300 tons standard load and a top speed that varied but was around 37 knots give or take or not until the coming of the foo keys the fubuki subclasses improved on the dual purpose use of the main guns and introduced the innovative torpedo turret which allowed for relatively safe reloading of torpedo tubes in action and also protected them against some incoming fire and splinters a feature that would become somewhat more important with the oxygen fuelled long lance that was later introduced in most Imperial Japanese surface ships that carried the heavy 24 inch torpedo launchers however a secondary clause to the London Naval Treaty meant that only a percentage of the three major powers destroyer fleets were allowed to reach the 1850 ton a displacement limit the follow-on hatsue horrors were therefore ordered with the designers tasked with getting everything that a Fubuki had but on 350 tons less displacement as a 1500 ton limit had been agreed for general destroy design for the bulk of the three and powers destroy fleets as it turned out somewhat unsurprisingly this was impossible and the ships would have the three twin mounts reduced by one gun leaving them with two twin mounts and a single the hatsue horrors were not faster but had only 80% of the range and initially would retain the three triple torpedo turrets but even these compromises weren't enough and the ships proved to be very unstable and incredibly lightly built and thus fragile after storms damaged and sank a number of similarly lightly built Imperial Japanese warships they needed rebuilding to strengthen them this involved amongst other things relocating the single gun mount and removing the third torpedo turret leaving the ship with two for a total of six torpedo tubes these and other changes also resulted in the ship speed dropping from just over 36 knots to around 34 knots the second run of hatsue Hera's were therefore reordered to a modified design as the sharat tzuyu class although technically still bound by the terms of the London Naval Treaty the Japanese decided as they would with many other classes of warship though they were building at the time to simply lie and complete the ships at almost 1,700 tons standard displacement these ships would retain the hatsue Hera's modified 34 not top speed and five gun main battery but would upgrade the torpedo armament to a pair of quadruple torpedo turrets Japan then decided to duck out of the Naval Treaty system entirely and the esashi o class would see a rise in standard displacement to just under 2,000 tons with a fully loaded displacement of nearly 2,400 tons this would buy them another knot of top speed for 35 knots a near doubling of operational range and the return of the six main gun battery in three twin mounts along with the retention of the Sharat soyuz pair of quadruple torpedo turrets the class also saw the introduction of sonar to the imperial japanese destroyer fleet the follow-on Keg arrows were broadly similar using the same hull but learning from the previous class main and torpedo armament was the same with slightly more beam added for stability this pushed to the overall displacement up slightly and Japanese thinking would now diverge with designs being produced for what was effectively a gigantic torpedo boat another design for an upgraded general-purpose fleet destroyer and a third design for a dedicated fleet protection destroyer but these designs would all be built during the world war ii period and so the cog arrows are where we leave imperial japanese destroy development for now American destroy development was on a rather different path since whilst almost everyone else was either trying to replace war losses or modernize a fleet that was consisting mainly of older smaller and obsolete vessels the US Navy had so many Clemson and wix class destroyers that even the Honda Point disaster where over half of destroyer squadron 11 managed to run aground in fog was easily compensated for simply by reactivating additional reserve Clemson's they indeed did not need to construct additional Clemson's as a result no new destroyers were built for the US Navy during the 1920s outside of wrapping up the last of the Clemson contracts at the start of the period 12 years after the last Clemson's had been accepted into service though and things had changed the fubuki 's and everybody else's responses to them were now in service and technological advances meant the vast swarm of Clemson's were beginning to show their age and approach block obsolescence as one of the nations abound at this point by the limits of the London Naval Treaty the new design could not be substantially larger than the Clemson's indeed they couldn't actually even match the Fubuki 's for a widespread class of fleet destroyers they had to squeeze as much improvement as possible into a 150 ton displacement increase to just over 1,300 tons standard displacement although in theory they could have gone up to 1,500 tons they've chose for some reason to go for 1,300 however whilst completing somewhat top-heavy the resulting Farragut class showed significant promise with being able to reach 37 knots in top speed again assuming a flat calm and despite their top-heavy nature they were still somewhat more stable their main battery firepower was significantly increased with five guns instead of four an increase in caliber to five inches and critically all the guns were now mounted on the centerline resulting in a five gun broadside instead of three the guns were also dual purpose and marked the introduction of the 5-inch 38 caliber gun to us destroyers although the shorter barrel meant a lower muzzle velocity compared to the older guns these new weapons fired a far more destructive shell at a considerably faster rate and were also fully dual purpose weapons suddenly modern US destroyer designs shifted from the bottom of the pile in a surface action to near the top whilst torpedo armament dropped from 12 tubes to eight all eight were again mounted on the centerline in a pair of quart launchers thus actually increasing the torpedo broadside by two whilst reducing the overall weight of the torpedo armament the ship's main deck was also much higher than the Clemson's meaning they took less water over the barrels in moderate seas and could therefore keep up their speed in higher sea conditions compared to the older ships I also managed to squeeze another 450 nautical miles of range out of improved machinery and extra fuel storage with the Farragut's starting construction in 1933 the only real downside to this was that compared to the Clemson swarm only eight of them were ordered but there was more to come however before we cover that line of development its briefly worth mentioning that the US Navy did try to fill its allocation of 15% of total destroy displacement which could be built at up to one thousand eight hundred and fifty tons of displacement with the US Navy having watched the Royal Navy's destroy a leader concept and other similar larger destroyer strains developing during the 1910s and 1920s and so the immediate follow-on to the Farragut's were not impact successes but were the porter class their general capabilities were broadly the same as the Farragut's except for guns with a heavier anti-aircraft battery something largely ignored in this analysis on the dual grounds that into war destroy anti-aircraft batteries can almost universally be described as barely even suitable for self-defense outside of ships with dual purpose main battery guns and even on the best of them the total number and capability of the guns is still quite pitiful when compared with what the realities of war would force on them in fairly short order anyway the other major change with the porter's was the main battery with an extremely heavy armament of four twin five-inch 38 caliber mounts for a total of eight guns laid out like a heavy cruiser or battleship in two sets of super firing mounts fore-and-aft however to save weight these guns were placed in mounts that were limited to surface action only as built leaving them to rely on secondary 1.1 inch and 50 calibre weapons for anti-aircraft defense leaving the smaller Farragut's actually better protected in the anti-aircraft department although the porter's surface-to-surface firepower was now considerable it was not however quite king of the gun fighting ring as the odd choice of using expressly dual purpose 5-inch 38 caliber guns instead of a longer barrel gun when you're going to restrict the gun to surface action only would mean that a few other heavily armed destroyer designs of the period would possess superior main batteries when it came to surface to surface action at range a couple of years down the line and the other flotilla leader type of built by the US Navy started construction the summers class were based on the porters but we're both Farragut's and porters had used modern machinery to cut the number of funnels from four to two the summers were able to go a step further from two funnels to one with space given over to the primary other change from the porters a third quadruple torpedo launcher which increased the torpedo broadside to 12 the largest single torpedo salvo of any US Navy destroyer like the Farragut's both of these classes were somewhat top-heavy and proved difficult to upgrade later on as a result now returning to the main line of destroy development in the u.s. Navy classes began to appear thick and fast 1934 would see the start of construction on the 1st of 18 Mahan or Mahan class destroyers they improved on the Farragut class design with a new and more efficient set of machinery which retained the same top speed and main gun battery on a slightly larger but treaty compliant 1,500 tons standard displacement torpedo armament was increased to 12 with the addition of another quad launcher but since the ships were somewhat smaller than the Sommers class would be this would see a reversion to wing mounts with one quad launch on the centerline and the other two mounted on the wings on either side resulting in the same eight torpedo maximum salvo but with the ability like the Clemson's to wheel about and deliver a follow-up attack the May hands also reduced the top heaviness of USN destroyer design partially as a side effect of trying to clear away unnecessary superstructure to provide better fields of fire for anti-aircraft engagements the next year came the grid Lee's which like the porters saw improving machinery dropped the number of funnels from two down to one these varied with a pattern established by the previous two regular destroy classes by sacrificing one of the main guns reducing the main battery down to four with the weight savings from the improved machinery and the loss of one of the guns going into yet another quad launcher for a total of 16 torpedo tubes albeit by reverting to a Clemson style arrangement with two launchers on each side limiting the salvo to eight at a time some thought was given to using gyro settings to allow the ship's to fire all sixteen in a forward spread but whilst a theoretical possibility a gyro set turns of any particular severity and angle were rather unpopular in naval circles due to torpedos rather distressing habit of sometimes forgetting to stop turning and thus coming back around at the launching ships this heavy torpedo battery was partially as a result of a decision that had been taken to no longer include torpedo tubes on u.s. Cruiser designs and gradually removed them where possible from existing cruisers this would reduce the overall torpedo strike power of the fleet compared with the Royal Navy and the Imperial Japanese Navy which retained cruiser based torpedoes unless other ships happen to take up the burden in the event these changes undid some of the good work that had been done on the may hand class and top heaviness returned to a degree in this particular variant the change is an improved machinery brought the speed up by just over not to just over thirty eight knots but also took displacement to nearly 100 tons over the treaty limits next up and built at the same time were the Begley and Bentham classes which carried identical armaments to the grid Lee's but differed in machinery the Begley's using less powerful engines and being configured for longer ranged operations whilst the Ben Holmes tried to combine the grid Lee's advanced high-pressure powerplant with a range similar to the Begley's and as a result both classes would tip in at just over 1600 tons again treaty breaking Bert by Bert the mid 1930s as such a relatively minor violation was rather easily overlooked given some of the other shenanigans being got up to by navies across the world 1937 saw the start of construction on the Sims class by this point the second London Naval Treaty had actually dropped destroyer displacement limits in favor of a general category of warships defined as having guns not exceeding six point 1 inches and not above 3,000 tons of displacement however the Sims class were not any greater in displacement than their predecessors reverting to the may hands one centreline and two winged torpedo launchers and reintroducing the fifth 5-inch gun whilst retaining the new single funnel arrangement below decks they kept the benhams high pressure long range machinery and perhaps most critically introduced the excellent mark 37 fire control system dramatically improving the lethality of the guns in the kind of swirling malade that destroyers would be expected to fight in unfortunately issues with top heaviness and the stability continued to plague the US destroyer designs and the Simms class was coming in at about 10% overweight and thus dangerously unstable this prompted first a rebuild which dropped one of the quad torpedo launchers and moved the second it will be a launcher to the centreline which allowed them to retain an eight torpedo broadside but without a secondary follow-up capability it also meant losing the fifth gun and prompted the start of a process that would eventually see the bureau of engineering and the Bureau of construction and repair merged into the Bureau of ships within the next three years since poor communication between the two departments was blamed for most of the problems without the treaty restrictions 1938 s project the Bensons would come in at 1620 tons saw the return of two funnels and v gun again this time without massive stability issues range improved by a thousand nautical miles to six and a half thousand nautical miles and a neutral pedo layout was introduced with a pair of quintuple centerline mounts for a total salvo of ten torpedoes machinery was also alternated to avoid the loss of all power to a single hull breach in parallel the Gleaves class was also under construction originally these were simply more Bensons the only real difference being some minor changes to machinery types and the fact that the Bensons funnels had flat sides and the Gleaves funnels were round due to their construction period overlapping the start of the Second World War larger numbers would be ordered to bring up the size of the modern US Navy destroyer fleet however as with almost every US Navy 1930s destroyer design it saved the mayhans their stability as a result of top weight was not ideal it wasn't as bad as many of the other classes but about adequate is hardly a ringing endorsement and the needs of war would see almost every destroyer class including these ones having to almost immediately lose either some primary gun weaponry or a torpedo launcher in order to upgrade the light and medium anti-aircraft batteries without compromising the ship's survivability since remaining upright is generally seen as a good thing amongst most ships the lessons learned however were taken on board for the next class of destroyer which falls outside the scope of this examination of interwar designs but which would prove to be even more numerous than the Clemson class for that future ship would be the remarkable Fletcher class and now before a brief look at the Soviets and the Germans we come to the Royal Navy whilst the Royal Navy also came out of World War one with large forces of modern destroyers collectively generally put into the v and w classes due to war losses and a few other issues it didn't quite have the sheer numbers of the u.s. a Clemson swarm presented and it had its own rather unique design philosophies to experiment with with budgets reduced in the 1920s and the VN w's along with a couple of early classes providing enough strength for the moment the early to mid 1920s in the Royal Navy were occupied mainly with playing around with the destroyer leader as a class similar to larger destroyers built in other navies that had split their destroy design lines compared to the VN W's for guns which were variously 4 or 4.7 inch weapons depending on exactly which subclass you were looking at and two triple torpedo launchers there were the Shakespeare and Scot classes of destroy leaders whose construction had begun in the last days of the first world war but was continued after the end of the conflict these ships displaced 4 to 450 tons more than a standard V or W class clocking in at around 1,500 tons standard give or take 50 tons depending on the ship this brought a significant increase in speed from between 32 to 34 knots to just over 36 knots in service and 38 knots on trials along with a considerably longer operational range both classes carried a 5 single 4.7 inch guns and kept the to triple centerline torpedo launchers but the cost of the ships and some death dissatisfaction with their capabilities would see the Royal Navy dropped the idea of entire classes of large flotilla leaders reverting instead to the previous practice of ordering destroyers in flotillas with each flotilla having a flotilla leader built for the class specifically generally essentially as a stretched version of that particular class with that particular line of development wrapped up it would be another six until in the mid 1920s the Royal Navy issued another call for destroyers this resulted in two prototypes HMS ambushed Cade and HMS Amazon built by the two Great destroyer firms arrow and Thorneycroft with the idea that these ships would form the basis of subsequent destroy design both vessels retained the for single 4.7 inch guns of the later W class and the two triple torpedo tubes on the centerline but were able to offer considerably greater speed for barely any increase in tonnage mostly thanks to improvements in machinery with both making over 37 knots on trial compared to approximately 32 knots on their predecessors although as with all destroyers from all nations the practical in service speed was lower than the trial speed using the lessons learned over a couple of years of operation with these ships and watching the debut of the Pookie's the Royal Navy's first full post-war destroyer class was the A&B class made up of two flotillas one with all the names starting with a and the other with all the names starting with B plus two additional ships for the Canadians and of course a flotilla leader being built of each flotilla compared with the two prototypes the a and B class carried about a hundred and fifty tons more displacement for a standard displacement of 1,350 tons and for this they achieved a significant range boost to 4800 nautical miles which was actually competitive with American destroyers whilst accepting a drop in speed to 35 knots the main battery remained for single 4.7 inch guns but torpedo armament was improved from - tripled - to quadruple launchers on the centreline the two flotilla leaders were slightly different HMS Codrington the leader of a flotilla was almost two hundred tons heavier which bought flotilla leader accommodations almost three knots more speed and a fifth gun whilst HMS Keith's leader of B flotilla was only about a hundred tons heavier than the average B destroyer and carried no extra weapons as unlike Codrington she used an identical hull to the regular or private ships as they were called in the Royal Navy it simply just had more superstructure the latter approach was not seen as a great success as it turned out there was something of a lack of space the other major differences in the classes were that the A's carried minesweeping gear whilst the bees carried sonar and depth charges lastly HMS Acheron of a flotilla was fitted with experimental high-pressure machinery a few years ahead of the US Navy and some other navies but it was so played with by mechanical breakdowns that the Royal Navy decided to revert to lower pressure machinery for the rest of the interwar destroyers with higher pressure machinery only showing up again in the middle of World War two some 10 years after the US Navy had managed to get the system working in their own designs in the early 1930s the next design starting construction in 1930 would be the C and D class these were a few tons heavier are not faster and had almost 6,000 nautical miles range otherwise main battery and torpedo armament was as per the previous class with flotilla leaders Kempenfelt and duncan comprising a middle ground between Codrington and keith they used the same hull and layout as the regular private ships but with smaller flotilla staff for facilities the class also introduced to the 3-inch and he aircraft gun to supplement the light AAA armament since the 4.7 inch weapon on the main battery was a surface action only weapon the E and F class was ordered three years later and once again displacement went up now at just over 1,400 tons although main and torpedo armament remained unchanged with most of the displacement going into more fuel as the range crept up to a considerable 6350 nautical miles at 15 knots the main guns also increased their elevation to 40 degrees which allowed a degree of theoretical anti-aircraft used to defend other ships although this would be more by sheer volume of fire annoying hostile aircraft since there was not actually any anti-aircraft fire control system installed going back to HMS Codrington approach the flotilla leaders HMS Exmouth and HMS Falkner were about 80 tons heavier and lengthened to allow for considerably more superstructure and a fifth gun on both ships the Royal Navy would tend to assign entire flotillas as-built to certain stations and duties so generally ships of the same starting letter would have similar operational careers at least until wartime losses degraded flotillas enough to force merges the next year 1934 would see the GNH class along with eventually the havend class which were a modified version built for brazil and then bought back at the outbreak of war these were slightly lighter than the preceding ships with a similar displacement to the C and D class and commensurately had a similarly reduced range once again retaining the same four gun 4.7 inch main armament and to quadruple launchers on the torpedo battery with the exception of HMS glowworm which tested quintuple launchers called pentad launchers in the Royal Navy instead of the quadruple ones as with the E and F class HMS Granville and HMS Hardy the flotilla leaders would be longer variants with an additional gun and more superstructure whilst HMS Hara would one of the private ships would test an experimental duel 4.7 inch mount these were followed in 1937 by the AI class which were marginally heavier repeats of the G and H class with the exception of adopting glowworms quintuple or pentad launchers increasing the torpedo broadside to 10 machinery advances also saw them make 36 knots compared to the 35 of earlier classes and HMS Engel filled the flotilla leader once again went with the extra main gun on a slightly longer hull the AI class also introduced the lightly armored wedge-shaped bridge superstructure that would characterize Royal Navy destroyers from this point until the end of the Second World War whilst this quiet production of gradually incrementing destroyers in relatively large numbers was fine for most of the 1930s two major factors now intervened the fur booties and their successes plus the various large destroyers in u.s. French and Italian navies plus now all the German fleet were beginning to cause a little bit of concern the Royal Navy had plenty of destroyers but small ships were so numerous in all navies that an edge in numerical superiority may not be as decisive as it would be in the realms of battleships and cruisers the result was a major and radical shift in Royal Navy design in 1938 this started with the construction of the tribal class at about 1850 ton standard displacement they've represented an almost 400 ton jump in destroy displacement in the Royal Navy torpedo armament plummeted to a single quad launcher and speed remained unchanged at 36 knots although we've considerably more powerful engines due to the larger hull and displacement which also served to increase the range a bit so we're who asked it all the weight go it went into a massively increased battery of eight 4.7 inch guns in four twin mounts double that of previous Royal Navy destroyers they also had a dedicated anti-aircraft fire control system although this was limited in usefulness by the continued 40 degree elevation limit on the guns which again meant they could protect other ships but not themselves with their main battery something that will come back to haunt them later Australia and Canada will also water tribal class ships and their power in surface engagements would see them sent in to many of the hottest actions of the Second World War although again that's a story for another time due to their much larger size of the flotilla leaders HMS Afridi and HMS Tata were not any larger than the rest of the class although the Royal Navy and Commonwealth navies now had a ship arguably capable of winning a surface action with any other destroyer on the planet at least as far as gun fights were concerned this had been achieved at the cross cost of the smallest torpedo armament on a British destroyer since the start of the first world war and they were very expensive ships so the next class built the JK an N class would change things up again this class retained a powerful main battery but this was reduced to six guns in three twin mounts lessons learned from the tribals saw new machinery layouts bow forms and structural elements allowing the ship's to drop about 150 tons of displacement which was considerably more than just losing one turret and in exchange they regained the second torpedo mount and the return of the quintuple or pentad launcher restoring the 10 torpedo broadside in addition to the heavier gun armament the only downside was that the main battery was still limited to 40 degrees elevation upon completion once again flotilla leaders HMS Jervis Kelly and Napier did not substantially differ from their fellow destroyers the last class of pre-war Royal Navy fleet destroyers would be the L and M class at 1920 tons are they displaced even more than the tribals the gun armament however remained six 4.7 inch guns in three twin mounts but these were now fully enclosed gained an additional ten degrees of elevation to fifty degrees and a more lethal heavier shell although still not as good as the twin 5-inch 38 mount in the anti-aircraft department the new mount was reasonably capable especially when compared to almost any access destroyer torpedo armament dropped back to eight torpedoes in two quart launchers and in the event construction during wartime would lead to a number of these ships completing with four twin 4-inch mounts instead this slightly lessened their anti-surface firepower but dramatically improved their anti-aircraft firepower as the smaller twin mounts were capable both of firing much faster and also capable of tracking and elevating much more rapidly in surface actions their individual lack of lethality was somewhat compensated for by the rather worryingly hull of firepower they could sustain theoretically on a good day capable of pumping a hundred and sixty rounds a minute in the direction of whichever unfortunate soul was at the other end of the target sites all subsequent fleet destroyers of the Royal Navy would be wartime builds and thus out of the scope of this video however the last destroyer class of any sort that bears mentioning at this point is the hunt class these were part of the Royal Navy's program of escort building in 1939 that also gave us the flower class the Hunts being larger escort destroyers and thus not intended for fleet work they reverted to a much smaller 1,000 ton displacement and a lower top speed of just over 27 knots which was more than enough for convoy escort an anti-submarine work a much shorter range of 3,500 nautical miles was also accepted as they would be operating mainly in coastal areas or near ports or else on somewhat of the more direct convoy routes as designed they were supposed to carry three twin 4-inch mounts like a few AAA guns and plenty of depth charges and their launchers no torpedoes were deemed necessary since their targets would be submarines and aircraft unfortunately the first ships were badly overweight and had to drop one of the twin mounts the next wave corrected this and retained all six guns followed by another batch destined for the Mediterranean where encounters with Italian surface vessels considered far more likely and so a pair of torpedo tubes were fitted at the cost of one of the gun mounts taking guns back down to for two of the last hunt class which were classified as type 4 hunt class were somewhat different ships built by thornycroft and as a result at almost 200 tons heavier carried a significantly heavier arm that included all six main guns three torpedo tubes and a boost in anti-aircraft armament that brings us to an end of destroy development amongst the major navies of the world with continuity in design across the interwar period now Germany was left with almost a joke of a navy by the Versailles Treaty and so their destroy development some unsurprisingly came to a screaming halt however the Germans had developed the torpedo boat concept as an ancillary to larger destroyers during World War one and the small craft would continue development post-war as they were allowed to build ships of this type up to an 800 ton displacement limit annoyingly Germans would label most of their craft as the insert here-here type but this reflected the start of the design period rather than the actual build or Commission dates early on so the first two classes developed in the 1920s the type of 1923 and type 1924 torpedo boats didn't actually start construction until 1925 and 1927 respectively with the bulk of the classes coming into service about two years after the hull was begun the type in 1923 worked off the last high seas fleet designs and was generally slightly larger for better sea keeping but otherwise similar in specification with an average if technically slightly treating very breaking 850 ton standard displacement giving them a ship capable of between 32 to 34 knots in a calm sea and rather pedestrian main battery of three single 100 and 500 meter guns alongside a pair of triple torpedo launchers range was extremely limited at only 1,800 nautical miles overall they were actually approaching the size and displacement of some of the smaller legacy destroyers present in some of the other navies but were significantly less capable the follow-on type 1924 were supposed to be generally similar but with 127 millimeter or 5-inch guns somewhat ambitious on a ship that was still over just only just over 900 tons standard displacement ambert word engine actually receive improved 105 millimeter guns notably these ships also use the slightly smaller 500 millimeter or 19.7 inch torpedoes as opposed to the standard 21 inch and heavy 24 inch torpedoes that we used by most other navies the effects of the Great Depression hit Germany extremely hard and so it should be little surprised that the late 1920s and early 1930s were somewhat lacking in destroy development torpedo boat development only picking up again in the late 1930s with the type of 1935 torpedo boat which helpfully began construction in 1938 this vessel was actually smaller than its predecessors at just over 150 tons standard displacement it was nonetheless slightly faster at 35 knots but carried effectively nothing in the way of main armament being equipped with a single 105 millimeter gun and a few anti-aircraft guns it retained the two triple torpedo tubes now using the more standard 21 inch torpedo and could also carry quite a few mines these were accompanied in the same year as by the related type in 1937 which were generally similar but had slightly more range and sea keeping in exchange for a few dozen tons more displacement both classes featured new high-pressure boilers which proved somewhat temperamental to say the least but with their lack of any real gun armament they were perhaps the truest throwback to the four decade old torpedo boat concept and would still see service in the Second World War the next class the type 1939 or Alban class would follow the inevitable design trend of most destroyer types and actually be competitive with many smaller and older destroyers despite theoretically being a torpedo boat but as their construction started in 1940 they will be in the next video on this subject complicated high-pressure machinery with a tendency to spontaneously disassemble itself unless the machine spirits were properly appeased would also feature frequently in the main line of German fleet destroy development the development of these ships would kick off in the mid 1930s with the primary expected opponent at the time being France which of course had gone down the route of very large destroyers or small light cruisers with a very poor disguise as such the type of 1934 destroyer which thankfully actually started construction in 1934 immediately clocked in at just over 2,200 tons standard displacement and over 3,100 tons of fully loaded only slightly less than contemporary French vessels somewhat unsurprisingly for a design that was both a bit of a rush job and the first fleet destroyer that Germany had built in almost two decades they had several floors aside from the engines there seakeeping was poor thanks to a knife style bow that let a lot of water over the fo'c'sle at high speeds or in moderate seas and their range was relatively poor as well at under 2,000 nautical miles as a result of having to retain about a third of their fuel as ballast after some stability issues showed up in service to the extent of use all your fuel and there's a very good chance you're returning to port upside-down however they could reach 36 knots and their primary armed of five single 127 millimeter or five inch guns would put them in the upper bracket of gun based destroyers now respectable - quad torpedo launchers maintained a decent anti-capital ship capacity and their anti-aircraft armament was also unusually heavy for a pre-war destroy design with 437 millimetres cannons in a pair of twin mounts and six single 20 millimeter cannons the next year would see the type 1934 A's begin construction these were January similar with almost all changes aimed around improving stability and seakeeping in this regard the efforts were only partially successful owing to several measures contradicting each other and improved bowel shape was offset by modifications to the Stern which were designed to improve the turning radius and raise the stern deck somewhat higher than water surface level and but also had the effect of forcing the bow lower again which negated much of the benefit from the improved bow shape these counteracting lifting forces also then exerted significant rotational force on the ship's hull at mid ships which would in turn then require further reinforcement as cracks began to develop in service one ship the z8 Bruno Hyneman would also test the 150 millimeter or 5.9 inch guns that were intended for later German destroyer classes given the chance for a clean slate designed to address the issues surrounding the previous two classes German designers would next submit to the type at 1936 which again was helpfully actually built in 1936 they increased standard displacement to just over 2,400 tons with full load being about a thousand tons above that boss the temperamental machinery was still present range also increased a bit creeping over 2,000 nautical miles for the first time and the armament was also left alone most of the changes made compared to their predecessors were again in the hull cutting down on top weight and radically changing the shape of the bow as well as widening the beam slightly these changes in design finally gave the Germans a destroyer that wasn't either trying to tear itself apart simply by moving or immediately trying to join the u-boat Corps at the first sign of a wave and so could be considered to be the first generally successful German into war fleet destroy design of course having finally made something that worked they had to go and ruin it and they did this with the type of 1936 a or Narvik class which would start construction in 1938 and 1939 displacement went up again to around 2,600 tonnes standard and nearly 3,700 tonnes fully loaded speed remained at around 36 knots whilst range increased to about 2,600 nautical miles and anti-aircraft batteries and torpedo batteries were initially the same as previous so where's the floor you ask well they decided to arm these ships with the 150 millimeter or 5.9 inch guns they tested earlier with the aimed mount - in a twin turret forward with three single guns and mid ships and aft in the event the twin turret wasn't actually ready in time and the first ships were generally complete with a single gun forward instead unfortunately whilst the twin turret when present had a limited dual purpose use that thanks to a 65 degree elevation this heavy armament undid most of the work they previously put in to improving stability and seakeeping with the bow twin turret especially when installed making the ships are very wet helped only slightly by the fact that at least the turret was fully enclosed so everybody else got damn socks inside of the turret crew this feature rather unsurprisingly limited their speed in any kind of significant sea State and made them somewhat less than ideal gun platforms and their rate of fire was also somewhat lacking thanks to the rather large shells needed albeit that the gun as a whole weapon system didn't have quite as many issues apart from weight of shell as compared to French Super destroyer guns so the rate of fire was still at least better than that the next class of destroyers planned was cancelled by the outbreak of world war ii and a modified version of the Narvik s' would be the first German ships are built during the Second World War it bears mentioning at this point that as gun sizes crept up in destroyers across various navies one often unmentioned point is how the guns were aimed at the start of the interwar period this was often done by hand with minor assistance from various mechanisms during this period powered training and elevation mechanisms were introduced which allowed the gun to be turned and the barrel raised respectively with significantly less effort needed from the crew and in most cases significantly faster movement which would improve combat capability the two systems had different rates of development and a number of classes of destroyer would have one but not the other with one final aspect developed being power assisted loading full introduction of these three systems was first seen commonly in the US Navy with the French and German Navy's notably being somewhat behind in this regard despite their use of the largest guns for destroyers of the period the Soviet Navy is the loss that we will cover and like the Germans had to start fleet destroy design in the 1930s albeit thanks to the country catching a bad case of communism and the associated civil war symptoms and so they hadn't built much of anything in the 1920s not even torpedo votes much like the Germans the Russians were quite impressed with the on paper abilities of the French contra to appeal years their Lodge destroyers and likewise sought to match them with the Leningrad class these ships had a much narrower loading margin at just over 2,300 tons standard there was only about a 300 ton difference between that and full load as with the German ships their range was limited albeit slightly greater than the time 1934 's turned out with a Leningrad capable of traveling 2,100 nautical miles on such large ships there on paper stats were impressive forty knots where along with five single hundred and thirty millimeter or 5.1 inch main guns a pair of quad torpedo launchers and numerous mines and depth charges as well as quite a decent for the time anti-aircraft battery the idea was something of a hybrid and they weren't supposed to be a type on their own like the French ships they were actually supposed to be flotilla leaders but unlike the British approach of slightly larger variants of the flotilla class itself this approach was somewhat similar to the US Navy's with the class being designed to be split across numerous lesser flotillas as leaders albeit that the Leningrad's were infinitely superior to the somewhat geriatric collection of Czarist era destroyers that they were nominally in charge of given that they were trying to go from zero to a hundred even faster and more radically than the Germans it's perhaps unsurprising that these ships came with a laundry list of issues starting with the fact of that the Soviet shipyards had never actually built a destroyer let alone one of this size and so they had a somewhat optimistic view of their ability to actually construct them so they combined some of the worst flaws that were found in everybody else's designs they had stability issues due to being extremely top-heavy and they were badly weighted so the bow was always trying to head down to meet nearby submarines and the whole structure couldn't withstand the firing of the main battery oh and they'd also start to provide free massages to the crew in the form of whole hull vibrations when they tried to get up to top speed the fun didn't end there with main battery made up of five single 130 millimeter or 5.1 inch guns and they were given extremely powerful charges for their shells to try and replicate the ballistic performance of earlier even longer guns and as a result the guns would wear out very quickly had an absolutely vicious recoil and as a result also pretty terrible accuracy fixing even some of these problems took so long that the guns only began to arrive four years after the construction of the ship's themselves had started in 1932 on the plus side the torpedo battery of two quad launchers presented comparatively few issues and at least in trials the ships were able to exceed even the ambitious design speed of 40 knots reaching a high point of 43 knots albeit at the cost of having converted a warship into the world's fastest and most expensive group therapy massage chair oh and of course there were production issues with the turbines which meant that the hulls were actually pretty much complete before either the propulsion or the main armament were delivered both of which are rather important components to a warship it should therefore not come as any kind of shock Virts when it came to the next class of destroyers of the Soviets went looking for help but they'd end up returning to the Italians this would also bring about two lines of design the main development path for Soviet destroyers henceforth and a couple of single experimental ships which we'll have a look at a little bit later the next class the convenien also known as project seven was started in 1935 a year before the guns for the Leningrad's would actually show up compared to their massive predecessors they were much less ambitious at 1,600 tons standard and just over 2,000 tons fully loaded indeed they took an existing Italian design the Volga rays and modified it unfortunately for them the Italian ships were only ought just on the acceptable side of stable and the modifications would add weight in places it really wasn't needed when your primary interests include not swimming in the Arctic Ocean design speed dropped to only 37 knots although many would prove faster on trials and the main battery was reduced by one gun to for single 130 millimeter guns the torpedo battery likewise dropped from two quad launchers to to triple launchers as they were using the same guns as the Leningrad they had broadly the same issues with rate of fire on the guns dropping considerably from the initial aims to something more along the lines of the rate of fire of a light cruiser rather than a destroyer range was also relatively short but not terrible at 2,600 nautical miles albeit that this distance could be traveled at a somewhat higher than average cruising speed compared to most other destroyers 19:36 saw the start of work on the Stasi voice which as project seven knew were generally repeats in terms of armament with most of the work going into fixing the issues in the previous run of destroyers this meant a stronger hull more redundant machinery and rearranging the layout of the anti-aircraft battery that all saw displacement creep up to just over 1,700 tons standard and just under two thousand three hundred tons fully loaded but also saw top speed tipped back over 40 knots again which was nice the problems with seaworthiness and stability that were experienced with all of these classes which was especially a problem when water coming over the bow wasn't just annoying but a genuine and immediate threat to life when you're in the freezing cold the characterized much of the Soviet Navy the operational area all led to the project 30 or Okinawa class which started construction in in 1938 the hull was much enlarged at just over two thousand one hundred tons standard and over two thousand eight hundred tons fully loaded which helped with stability as total armament didn't increase but the guns were now fitted in a pair of twin turrets instead of four open mounts somewhat in the Italian style the extra mass of the turrets plus an even stronger hull and more height to the main deck level saw speed dropped back to just over 36 knots with the project 30 K variant coming in slightly heavier as a result of increased anti-aircraft armament and other small changes that came about as a result of wartime experience since many of the class was still under construction at the time of the German invasion and thus would not be completed until after the end of the Second World War the next class the Kiev's started construction just after the outbreak of world war ii and so will be looked at in the next video on the subject the other two destroyers mentioned earlier were the 1935 OPD knee I think which was built as a testbed to compare Soviet ideas with the Italian guided project sevens predictably after the Leningrad's a pure Soviet design destroyer was a bit of a disaster we've added German high pressure machinery to help along with the ship and against the 1700 tons of distant displacement was supposed to carry three twin turrets using that question of 130 millimeter gun plus to quadruple torpedo tubes and knew it and the new engines what they got was a ship with almost no range at about 1,400 nautical miles a speed of only 35 knots and so many problems with stability and turret weight that the ship ended up with three single guns instead which left it a very poorly armed fresh if of this size Italian help was quite sensibly enlisted for the other ship the destroyer leader tashkent which came in at an eye-watering 2800 ton standard and 4,100 tons displacement when absolutely everything was aboard packing in over a third again more engine power than you'd find in a town class cruiser and the ship was designed at top 42 knots sail for over 5,000 nautical miles and carry three twin hundred and thirty millimeter turrets nine torpedo tubes in three triple launchers as well as many mines and depth charges it was intended to build this design as a class but issues with soviet shipyards meant that only Tashkent would be built and she would be built in Italy problems with putting the 130 millimeter in a twin turret in the late 1930s meant that she would initially complete with three singles instead although she would eventually get the designed main guns however apart from the construction issues themselves she was also too big and expensive to ever form a justifiable line of destroyers even destroy leaders given that they were coming in to the same weight and size or a category as a number of contemporary like cruisers but with nowhere near the combat power and that brings us to the end of the interwar destroyer period for the main navies that would go on to fight in world war ii the main highlights really being that almost everyone ended up trying to do far too much on to smaller hull and ending up having stability problems as a result with a number of European navies also ending up building hulls far too light and guns are far too large for effective use we're the special shout out to the Germans for innovations in the field of self consuming machinery and ships that truly believed that they identified as pretzels with all that said the race started by the Fubuki is back in the mid-1920s would eventually result in a number of excellent designs once all the lessons had been learned it was just something of a shame that most of the classes that fully realized the various nations design visions only started construction at the end of the 1930s just as the Second World War broke out the conditions of which would leave many navies unable to complete their ambitions either through reprioritization of resources or the minor fact that they'd been occupied with all that said most of these ships and their soon-to-be successors would now be thrown into the crucible of war an environment where the fact that you could float move and shoot was always important issues like stability and rate of fire tended to take something of a backseat to simply being available and on paper statistics became practically irrelevant all that and more to come in a few months when we'll wrap up this line of videos with destroyer development during the Second World War which is pretty much the apotheosis of destroyed development as a concept that starts back when Queen Victoria was still in charge that's it for this video thanks for watching if you have a comment or suggestion for a ship to review let us know in the comments below don't forget to comment on the pinned post for drydock questions
I would pay good money for Drach, Chieftain, and MHV to do a monthly podcast
Really interesting thanks for sharing