Bruships 206: Naval History Questions Answered Live...

Roughly 2,000 in a typical year, but retention, deployments, and planned growth can move the requirement substantially.

Because shallow water makes rocket-delivered depth charges practical and effective.

Start with training and real maintenance, then expand sound frigate and submarine designs and develop credible air-defense ships and flagships.

It was probably a Japanese mine; the hit caused secondary magazine explosions that rapidly destroyed Petropavlovsk.

They were governed chiefly by visibility and immature fire control, not the guns' theoretical maximum range.

Build for sea denial around the coastline retained: submarines, uncrewed systems, small attack craft, light amphibious capacity, and a strong reserve model.

The panel argues that unreliable statistics, labour exemptions, corruption, and attempts to preserve a peacetime economy narrow the manpower actually available to Moscow.

No. They appear designed with space for roughly sixteen cells, but the launchers are not fitted.

It would likely raise the permitted fleet to roughly twenty ships or prevent agreement, while encouraging more British 16-inch construction.

Yes technically, but Treasury funding and the Ten Year Rule made continued development unlikely.

Yes when they carry substantial VLS capacity, giving a budget-conscious littoral navy a quiet conventional strike and deterrence asset.

Four ballistic-missile and four cruise-missile Vanguards would preserve both nuclear and conventional submarine responses.

Development costs planned for nine to twelve hulls make a six-ship class appear far more expensive per destroyer than the follow-on ships would have been.

No; according to the panel, it had been retired before a conflict could employ it.

Probably not soon, because mature 57, 76, and 127 mm systems already occupy the useful market niches.

Schemes for an inland Australian sea and Atlantropa's Gibraltar dam stand out for their scale and far-reaching maritime consequences.

Start with a good Jane's reference or the more affordable Warships International Fleet Review, supplemented by current online material.

Judged by wartime rather than postwar hype, Tirpitz or possibly Hood is a stronger answer than Yamato.

The historical raid by Illustrious was the reduced form of a plan for Eagle, Illustrious, and potentially more carriers with a much larger Swordfish force.

The decisive pressure was explosive shellfire, which made wooden hulls increasingly untenable for every major navy.

Tentatively, submarine radar detection and countermeasures, including warning, spoofing, or cluttering an attacking radar picture.

Nearby ships are destroyed, while a dispersed formation still suffers heat, pressure, water shock, and radioactive seawater without suitable defenses.

Radar and radio direction finding lead the list, alongside the Admiralty Fire Control Table and British night-carrier landing systems.

World War II was their last major period of viability; missiles quickly displaced them afterward.

Not sensibly; her age and hard service meant another reconstruction would cost too much for the capability returned.

Probably SSNs and disguised armed merchant ships, not scarce SSGNs committed to routine merchant hunting.

HMS Repulse, because effective modern air defense might let both Repulse and Prince of Wales survive as Force Z.

Existing ASW shells, depth charges, and helicopter guns can address many current threats, though larger deeper UUVs may renew demand for specialized rockets.

The main contenders are the Mk 45 and OTO Melara 127 mm; for the Royal Navy, he would choose the Italian system.

Japan is portrayed as advancing shipboard railgun trials by accepting a reachable first-generation requirement rather than the more ambitious American threshold.

Yes; Vickers actively pursued large-warship exports, and British strategic interests would support a paying Baltic customer.

Anti-ship missiles offered much greater range and removed the need to fly into close-range radar-guided defenses.

Its patrol-heavy fleet fits constabulary work, but it needs modern Atlantic-suited frigates to cover its large zone and act as a regional naval power.

They are broadly comparable rocket-assisted torpedo systems, and both offered a useful long-range ASW capability.

Probably the German Hs 293, if radio-guided glide bombs are included, because it was produced and used operationally in substantial numbers.

It is sensible because a larger ship offers greater staying power and room for the expanded missions Sweden now faces.

From his own shipboard experience, the Italian Navy, especially for food and overall habitability.

Special accommodations and a trusted steward help keep the oldest, most burdened decision-maker rested, informed, and capable of commanding the ship.

It depends on fuel and warhead, but most practical modern systems are about 300 mm or larger because they must carry a useful depth-charge payload.

Often an institutional choice: even automated systems may retain large authorized teams, increasing lifetime personnel cost.

To an extent, yes, but the panel gives no further detail about the training.

It is a sensible lower-tier complement to Type 26-level ships, provided Australia buys enough hulls to support a rule-of-four rather than another fragile pair.

Probably little, because railways already provided a cross-Mexico connection and the proposal would largely duplicate it.

Population, political incentives, health care, pensions, housing, education, and hiring advantages help the United States recruit and retain the manpower behind crew-heavy practice.

Barrel length cannot be compared cleanly across eras or navies because metallurgy changes what is practical and equal calibers can serve different design priorities.

A somewhat larger 27,500- to 28,000-ton design would be better and could plausibly reach about 25 knots, though a full Renown hull implies a battlecruiser trade.

Yes, provided the parties disclosed the sale and published the ship's treaty-relevant details.

Mostly with the Reform Act of 1832, which disenfranchised fifty-six boroughs; modern uses of the label are looser analogies.

About six, depending on how subsidiary and specialist component sites are counted.

Because the noun forms better fit Royal Navy naming practice, while prestigious names also cannot be reused until they are available.

Extremely important; its skilled lifeboat crews rescued many people in many places.

The French Navy, chiefly because it lost far more experienced officers and NCOs.

Yes; the splice created a serviceable destroyer, however odd, and even distorted German estimates of Royal Navy strength.

Probably during mid-nineteenth-century experimentation, but differing definitions and privately funded installations make the first ship uncertain.

A recalled 1920s French aircraft used propeller bolts about 9.27 mm wide and 92.7 mm long, dimensions that were not neat in inches either.

Yes, but accepting continued ship losses would undermine U.S. credibility and its claim to great-power status.

It remains a usable anchorage, but its geography suited a massed historical fleet better than the infrastructure needs of a modern base.

Technically well before the 1920s, since its principal machinery already existed before World War I.

They were considered from the Napoleonic era onward, and wartime blackouts could extinguish lights and remove buoys as well as conceal the coast.

The 1913 French concept traded armor from an earlier 340 mm design to carry eight 370 mm guns without increasing its 27,500-ton displacement.

Because winning could still leave the German ships crippled, unable to catch the convoy, and unlikely to reach home.

Britain depends on seaborne food, energy, goods, and exports, while naval presence helps deter conflicts before they become wars.

Fleet tugs were normally kept in the nearby support force so a purpose-built vessel could recover damaged ships when required.

Its work on extra-large uncrewed undersea vehicles is a strong candidate, especially because the service publicizes projects cautiously.

They were fairly widespread as expedient weapons, but purpose-built bombs were usually more effective.

Yes, likely through Captor-like smart mines that classify signatures and may seek remote human authorization before attacking.

Yes, but doing so requires a different Guadalcanal strategy, so the wider campaign changes before the later carrier battle.

The panel says expectations of a peaceful unipolar order made the expensive cruiser appear unnecessary, and that the Navy later regretted the decision.