Margaret Cox was travelling in Second Class with her infant son Desmond, who was 17 months old at the time. She had been born in Ireland and had immigrated to Canada in 1912, where she had been living with her husband Samuel. The two were headed for Dublin to visit a friend of Margaret, and both survived the sinking, returning to Canada sometime towards the end of the war.
18 Minutes....that poor mother losing her baby: the suffering so many people went through, lasting long after the initial tragedy. That photo of the baby in the coffin is heartbreaking- such similar features to my youngest son as a baby. War- good for absolutely nothing except making armaments manufacturers and their investors even richer.
War is profitable for the war pigs, with that said its a miracle the Germans were defeated. Van Braun said they had help from aliens. I kind of believe it. The narrator sounds like Spock from star trek.
@@Master_Blackthorne Just got hooked on this. I'm a conspiracy theorist and smell a conspiracy. Do u think this was planned by the US to get us into war?
I get so distraught thinking about these beautiful early 20th century steamers dead and rusting on the bottom of the ocean. They were so elegant and sophisticated,and they truly characterized their time and its culture by not only reflecting it, but emulating it. It's a shame that man's arrogance continues to counteract, and destroy the fruits of its own labor.
Thank you for this documentary enlightening the fact of the British Admiralty's failure to safe guard the loss of the ship and the needless loss of life.
M great grandfather Captain Dow was captain of this ship.He tried to warn Cunard Line,as he had already dodged two torpedoes. They put him on shore leave. Soon after it sank.He went on to command the Mauritania.He lived in Blundellsands,i used to visit the house when i was young.
Chris massey-lynch ... That is awesome. Turner was captain when it sank. Dow is noted in the book Dead Wake. Dow got sick of the B.S. maybe. They didn't even warn Turner that the U-20 was in the area even though Room 40 was tracking it and it had been sighted 5 times on May 5 and it had sunk a small ship then. Churchill wrote in a note that they wanted the ship traffic by neutral countries and if "some of it gets into trouble, better still." Dead Wake, pages 268 & 269. Based on several things, my opinion of Churchill is quite low. These include the Boer War, WWI and his bombing of Dresden or shall I say terror bombing of it.
@@kenzeier2943 Churchill was not a soldier in the Boer War. He was a reporter. Churchill did nothing wrong in WWI. Dresden was bombed because it was war. Just as London, Coventry, and Rotterdam were bombed by the Nazis. Plus many other atrocities committed by the filthy Nazis.
I agree with the Expert's analysis and explanation that the Boilers when hit with the chilled water of the sea at the levels of water that rushed through compartments the explosion would have been, and was catastrophic. Anyone that has a Metal background, or say a Machinists' knows what happens when you immerse molten metal or extremely hot metal in water! In Silversmiths I believe they produce 'Silver Shot' using as similar method, by pouring the molten silver from a specific height as not to over-cool the material, or pour to closely and have it hitting the water overheated. The explosion without a doubt in my mind was clearly caused by a German U-Boat attack, questionably launched, and the fatal catastrophic results of the boilers getting doused with cold water. I do however find it very interesting that in the Hardcover Book - Robert Ballard's "LUSITANIA" printed edition of 2007 makes it quite clear, without doubt that 6 of these same said Boilers were not in operation at the time of this sailing, due to Cunard's cost to run on full boilers because the costs of Coal, stating that due to this "absolute and documented fact" the Ship was unable to reach anywhere near the known 22-24 knots top speed? Was it the calm ocean effect of that instant, that allowed Her to cut through the water at speeds used in the calculations? Could easily be, I am not a Sailor by trade. I do have the referred to text in Hand and have been studying it for the past few days. It seems to me to be a collision of terrible incidents, ie. portholes allowed open, electric compartment doors, unable to operate, similarly the failure of any hand operation of the elevator. Or the Captain refusing to use any zig-zag patterns, because he was told that, the passengers that pay $4,000 US to sail One Way First Class, at the time when an average US worker made $20 a WEEK, did not take kindly to being tossed about, nor did they take kindly to being delayed arriving, causing missing appointments, trains, family connections at the other end, they expected to get there on time. Much like they were all aboard a Railway Train? They must get there in a timely manner! In summation I would like to Thank Sir Robert Ballard for his effortless work on behalf of those souls that were, and are lost at Sea and the telling of "Their" stories. The Book is wonderfully done and so much more in depth in many ways, both technical and humanistic seeing some of the footage tonight was emotional.
my boyfriend is irish and his great-great grandmother had a brother who was a fireman on the lusitania's last voyage. he was lost in the sinking. he says the irish never forgot about the lusitania.
Everyone talks about WWII which I understand because it’s more recent, but few ever talk about the war that lead to it; WWI. This is an example, because few people ever talk about the Lusitania. It was a precursor to how horrible maritime warfare would be during both World Wars. RIP. 😢
Only a fraction of the bodies were found. some drowned.... most were entombed in the Lusitania as she sank. She sank so fast and at a sharp starboard angle, it was impossible for many to get topside before the final plunge. Disturbing way to die........
Juan Longoria:Totally agreed I to miss those great beautiful true ocean liners from over 100 years ago unlike today ships it looks ugly it appear look like ugly floating boxes floating in the water or coffen boxs.
"Dead Wake", by Erik Larson, 2015, Broadway Books, is a fantastic, non-fiction read about the last Atlantic crossing of the Lusitania. A true pager-turner that is nearly impossible to put down.
@@GuyFromTheSouth I can. His Leadership during WWII, while worth every bit of praise & honour, covered a lot of sins during those WWI years. You don’t have to do much digging to find that out either. He was a Member of the Spencers on his Mother’s Side. Yes, that Spencer Family, the one that gave us Princess Diana. Anyway...I’ve seen a few Interview where the current Earl, Diana’s Brother, has talked about his Memories of Churchill visiting & they were not pleasant ones & he knew his Father dreaded them too. To say he “lorded it over them’ is only scratching the surface. He was exactly what was needed in WWII, but....Yeah.
It really is an interesting documentary about the LUSITANIA. She was a beautiful liner. It really is sad that she was sunk by a German u-boat. I'm also interested to know, what was the boat or ship used as the LUSITANIA in this documentary seen at 8:54, 21:00, 23:17, 24:56, 25:18, 26:44 & 30:23? I'm sorry if I am being rude, I'm just curious to know what the name of the vessel is as a classic Ocean liner fan. Please leave a like and comment. Please and Thank You.
I heard the ship wreck had been investigated by diver not so long ago and concluded that it was a war vessel and not a cruise liner. In any case there is an article in the daily mail quoting the Germans warning not to board the ship as it will be sailing right through a war zone. yet our government was happy to take that risk (almost certainty) because they needed almost excuse to get involved.
joe jones ... Britain, as part of a loan $$$ deal with Cunard required that Lusitania be built structurally so that it could be converted to military use.
You “heard”? From whom? What diver ‘not long ago’ because not long ago there wasn’t much discernible left of the Lusitania to conclude much about it, especially the fact that it was a war vessel. How ridiculous do you sound? Over 100 children and 400+ women on a war vessel? I swear some people on the internet should have their heads examined.. And the government can’t stop a civilian ship from proceeding on its voyage. They warned them plenty enough of the danger. They weren’t ‘happy enough’ to take any risk when the risk wasn’t theirs.
Lucy Taylor was travelling in Third Class with her husband Harold. They were both English born and had met in England, Lucy came to the US with her family in 1913, and Harold followed sometime later, and the two had married on April 29, 1915. Both survived the Sinking and the couple remained in Britain for 7 years before returning to the United States in 1922.
U20 had sunk alot of ships without one life lost. They thought if it sunk it would take hours. U Boats up until Briton started putting guns on Merchant ships. The Lusatania had installed gun mounts under her decks but they had not installed the guns yet. Also Germany only sunk ships in Declared Waters. Also, Ireland was only 11 miles away and if not for the second explosion. It's if anyone was not killed by the Torpedo explosion every one would have survived. The Ammo or a steam explosion is what doomed the Lusatania.
If you shoot a torpedo at an obvious passenger ship, you are responsible for whatever happens. Same is if I took a 'harmless' model rocket and launched it near an airport and an airplane somehow crashed because of it. Think the police would let it slide?
I recall observing this documentary when I was a child. Considering what was discussed with Winston Churchill and of how he appeared intent upon somehow spurring America to enter WWI, it somehow arouses my curiosity whether he considered the victims of the Lusitania as disposable.
Some of the men in the U-Boat wanted to do the right thing, and NOT sink it. Why? A few said there were hundreds of women and children. I can already see Churchill riding the torpedo ever so happily, like Major Kong in Dr.strangelove just a its a torpedo and he's not screaming. The evil man.
Yes I read the same thing & I watched those men talking about how they tried not to shoot off the torpedo when they were in some sort of a documentary & the way they were getting extremely upset & just incredibly emotional talking about how there were women & children on the ship & how they honestly didn’t want to send the torpedo out well it was EXTREMELY OBVIOUS THAT THEY WERE VERY BROKEN-HEARTED OVER HAVING TO DO THAT HORRENDOUS ACT TO THOSE INNOCENT PEOPLE ESPECIALLY THE CHILDREN THAT THEY KNEW WOULD CERTAINLY DIE BY THEIR OWN HANDS BY SENDING OFF THE TORPEDO 😞.I just wish they would’ve killed their officer who was demanding for them to literally MURDER THOSE INNOCENT ADORABLE PRECIOUS CHILDREN.The women & the men could at least have some sort of chance to survive but the children especially those babies couldn’t do nothing but rely on their mothers & fathers to get them to safety somehow or another 😢.And there’s no darn way that I would’ve ever gotten out of that water if my child died or was lost in the water because I would’ve made myself drown before I could’ve ever gotten out.
For many years after WWI, the Germans insisted that the second explosion (which doomed the ship) was caused by exploding ammunition (which was being carried in violation of the Neutrality Act.) Has anyone ever proven the claim? Also, the Admiralty did not want a full inquiry-there were lots of secrets about the ship that they did not want to come out. I can understand this, as at the time of the sinking, British Naval Intelligence could read the German Naval Codes.
42:03 just so everyone knows, Schwieger wasn’t in command of U-20 when he was killed in 1917. He was in command of U-88 at the time. U-20 had beached in November 1916 after her torpedoes exploding before even firing out of her bow caps. The submarine was dismantled soon after
As with most everything in life, things are never black and white. Direct responsibility for the sinking of the Lusitania lies with the German U-boat, but neither the British or US governments were blameless. R.I.P all those poor souls that perished.
Please read the book Dead Wake by Erik Larson if you are interested in some very interesting information about the LUSITANIA, what it was carrying, and what Churchill had up his sleeve. Some people have posted comments that seem to indicate that they would rather accept the standard explanations despite the facts and that they like to rant and rave at people who point out that the Allies were wicked and their motives and methods evil. I have read 5 books on WWI and I can see that the way it was run was part madness (running up the body count because of bad leadership, some called it pure murder of their own British soldiers) and Britain, France and the U.S. were deep in deception and out right deceit. For example, many said that if the British public actually knew how ineptly the war was being run and how their sons were simply being slaughtered they would have demanded an end to the war. Britain made sure that people did not know what exactly was going on in the insane trench warefare. Sen. Hiram Johnson of Calif. said that the first casualty of war was the truth. The U.S. punished dissidents even for speaking the truth during it mobilization of the country into one big fighting unit. What is amazing is that there are so many people who make comments that are negative ad hominem attacks just because people don't talk the party line. This forum provides a platform for people to express themselves intelligently or otherwise. If you want to show me that I am wrong then read 5 books and provide a coeherent argument. But if you simply want to attack like a senseless animal then don't waste your time.
Bravo, Ken Zeier! Both sides killed civilians and broke the "rules" of war when it seemed advantageous to do so. The difference is that the Allies won.
Totally agree with the OP. Question who the real enemy is. WW1 was a useless murderous war that accomplished nothing but to entench the victors more firmly, enrich the war profiteers and make the whole world a much more dangerous place by orders of magnitude. It's only the people without power who ever suffer the real consequences of war. The only just war is protecting ourselves from our leaders and that's the war that will never be allowed to be fought.
What ‘party line’ are you referring to? I can find no such common theme here? It’s as if you’re projecting vigorous counter-arguments when most just watched the video(which was not generous to leadership) and commented on the tragedy this was. Maybe you should take a debate course somewhere where you can crystallize what you’re saying? I don’t understand the basis of your angst.
RMS Titanic is still my favorite ship design of the early 20th century! Titanic was gorgeous inside and out! Absolutely mind blowing how beautiful Titanic truly was!
Yea the Aquatania or even the Normandy, hell the Queen Mary is nicer than the Titanic was.. Ur proly just a Titanic movie lover and think its the end all be all of ocean liners. Hell the Empress of Ireland was almost asnice as the Titanic. Let me guess. U think the Titanic disaster was the biggest loss of life on a ship disaster too ??. Empress of Ireland 2 yrs later had more, General Slocum, Sultana . Lot of people dont know about the three. German refugee ships that was sunk by Russian Submarines..... The Wilhem Gustloff had over 6000 die on it..the other two was some where close to that number as well
Contrary to conspiracy theorists, Churchill did nothing to cause the sinking. He was not even at the Admiralty in the days leading up to the event. Indeed the Lusitania had been warned of submarine activity in the area. Mistakes were certainly made by her captain, William Turner. But there was no conspiracy to put her in danger. Quoting from Myth and Reality: The “Admiralty War Diary” in this melodramatic paragraph appears nowhere else in Simpson’s book, not even the bibliography. No historian has found it; nor a record of the Admiralty meeting. Nor was it Churchill’s role to make operational decisions. The chief cause of Lusitania’s loss was Captain Turner’s decision, after sighting the Irish coast, to proceed northward at reduced speed to “make the tide” at Merseyside, as he would have in peacetime. At his normal cruising speed, chances of a successful torpedo attack would have been greatly reduced. Alternatively, since he had the time, he could have headed out to deeper waters, maintaining speed and further reducing the danger. There was no advantage and every danger in slowing down. It might be argued that the Admiralty set up the liner by refusing a destroyer escort. But destroyers were the one class of warships in short supply. Lusitania historian David Ramsay noted that many destroyers, instead of guarding merchant shipping, were involved in the Dardanelles operations. Ramsay, writing in 2004, confirmed the findings of historians Thomas Bailey, Harry Jaffa, Stephen Roskill and David Stafford, “who are at one in rejecting any conspiracy, by Churchill or anyone else.”
Of the 1,962 passengers and crew aboard Lusitania at the time of the sinking, 1,198 lost their lives. Most died from drowning or hypothermia. They were only able to launch 6 of 48 lifeboats as she sank fast On Titanic, 1,500 lost their lives when she sank
Davin Peterson ... The crew of the Lusitania was not the best. Many good sailors had been siphoned off for the war. There was little practice on using the life boats.
She was only 10 miles off the coast of Ireland... why did it take 3 hours for a rescue boat to reach them????? So many more lives could have been saved!
The only boats in Kinsale village at that time would have been small inshore fishing vessels. The riverboat tenders from Cobh (Queenstown) had to get the word from Kinsale (30 miles over land), get the crew together, sail out Cork Harbour and west along the coast to south of the Old Head of Kinsale - about 25 Nautical Miles. These riverboats were working against the prevailing Atlantic current. The fact that they arrived in 3 hours is itself a feat for boats back in those days.
Was the Lusitania really armed with cannons as the video claims it was at 15:47? I have found no other source that makes this claim. Also, I think this video gives too much weight to Churchill's "ramming order". First of all, the order only says ramming should be done if a sub comes up close in front with hostile intent, meaning the sub is about to sink your ship. It doesn't say subs should be rammed if they approach from a distance and let you surrender. Second of all, civilian passenger liners were under no obligation to obey Churchill's order. Really to them, it was nothing but a recommendation. I have not found a single example of any civilian passenger liner ramming a German sub in world war I.
TheStapleGunKid lusitania was designed to carry 12 6" guns that were fitted in april 1913 a month before this crossing. Records exist at the Royal Admiralty Museum from what i recall reading many years ago. I remember it well because the book had photos of different documents it sourced and i found it interesting to see photos of the memos from and to Churchill and Roosevelt (then secretary of the navy), president Wilson and his Sec of State, as well as the plans for the ship. Wish I could remember the books name.
The British government had provided the Cunard Line with the subsidies necessary to build both the 'Lusitania' and 'Mauretania'. As a result Cunard had to agree to certain specifications, such as handing the ships over to the government in time of war. Both ships were built for easy conversion into armed merchant cruisers( such as building the coal bunkers along the hull to protect the boiler rooms from battle damage and gun mounts hidden on deck). The Royal Navy even named both ships in its list of ships.
Olympic (Titanics Sister ship) is the only passenger ship to have ever rammed and sank a submarine. although she was working as a troopshi pat the time
turner turned into scapegoat by british govt. --a heinous coverup led by scoundrel churchhill --they didn't want anyone to know that ammunition (though not part of sinking) was on board. they sacrificed the ship or washed their hands of it.
+windstorm1000 It was a deliberate attempt by the English to pull America into war. Who put that cruel idea into the minds of the British - to make Luisitania to ply into the Atlantic waters that too, even after the warning had been put on papers by the Imperial German Army ? And let 123 Americans to travel in the passenger ship . An exact play back later dramatized in the Pearl Harbour, 9/11 and Vietnam war. Vandals and Satan !
I know sunk ships cannot be brought to the surface, because of something to do with pressure or something like that. Can someone give me a non-douchebag or troll answer as to specifically why this is?
It's essentially what you said as far as I can tell. Adding the corrosion that occurs due to being under icy Atlantic water for decades and being seen as a war memorial, raising the Lusitania, or the Britannic for that matter, would be ludicrously expensive and in terrible taste. Apologies for the runoff sentence BTW. Hope this helps :)
+Lexi Vorce I would like to believe that it may be due to moving tonnes of water through the wreck would destroy it further, but i'm not into physics, so I wouldn't not write my answer off as being absoulutely mad.
Lusitania sank in the middle of the day only eight miles from Queenstown. What possible explanation could there be for rescuers taking four hours to reach her?? This seems like a crime almost as heinous as the one that sank her!
People always say it caused America to join the war but America joined WW1 on 6 April 1917, this was 7 May 1915 whether that motive is true or not, it wasn't a knee jerk reaction. Passengers and crew knew they were sailing into a war zone, guess they thought a passenger ship was "safe"? The more we learn about any truth in history however, are we surprised that decisions made at higher levels, i.e carrying munitions, are made putting people at risk? When it comes to war, sadly there is no honour at these higher levels, just the sad death of the innocent. Show less
The latest theory, and one which is most plausible, is that the torpedo hit in an area containing high pressure steam lines. It is suspected that the secondary explosion was caused by the rupture of the steam line. That could explain why Captain Turner would not stop the engines. Also, the Lusitania had four turbines, each driving one of the four propeller.
One which is ‘most’ plausible to whom? What expert or experts made this claim and where is their basis? (Cite please) Acute cold water in a confined boiler space makes a ton more sense!
@@m.williams4971 HI..Remember that this theory was proposed in one of the books on the Lusitania that I read. May have been either "Lusitania" by Dianne Preston or "Dead Wake" by Erick Larson. There was also another book titled "The Lusitania", but I do not remember the author. The theory made sense because Capt. Turner could not control the speed or direction of the nengines after the second explosion.
The Germans were completely in the wrong blowing the Lusitania up, as the Geneva Convention stated that ships either troopship (HMT Olympic) or hospital ship (HMHS Britannic) had a colour code, if they were not in the specified code then they knew it would've been just a casual passenger liner.
Nope! The expert in this film said frankly the condensation would have caused the dust to settle. Not a factor. Cold ocean water pouring into a boiler room in a confined space is what caused the second explosion.
why did it take three hours for rescue just off the coast of Ireland? they were so close. 11 miles. it should not have taken an hour for rescue ships to arrive, much less three. what the hell were they waiting for? Three hours. just off the coast.
The only boats in Kinsale village at that time would have been small inshore fishing vessels. The riverboat tenders from Cobh (Queenstown) had to get the word from Kinsale (30 miles over land), get the crew together, sail out Cork Harbour and west along the coast to south of the Old Head of Kinsale - about 25 Nautical Miles. These riverboats were working against the prevailing Atlantic current. The fact that they arrived in 3 hours is itself a feat for boats back in those days.
Joshua Plotkin After the disaster of the Aboukir, no Navy vessels r allowed to assist as a submarine may still be present waiting for the rescuers to reach the wreck, that destroying them too
RIP to All those men women & Children who Died in the Sinking of this Beautiful Ocean Liner its So Sad, its wrong that, The passengers weren't Alerted, & That they chose to Ignore the Warnings its wrong.
@@JeffWarren47 no and that’s completely ridicules and if it was then that’s ANOTHER atrocity the US has committed which believe me is a pretty long list.
@@JeffWarren47 it not being the first time is about the worst reason I have ever seen for this conspiracy theory. I’ll give it this though: it’s better then ANY of the Titanic theories.
British navy sank the Lusitania. she was designated an 'armed merchantman' by the British Navy, that meant a U-Boat did not have to risk surfacing to shoot at her. Ireland held the copies of her records (the British admiralty still have them locked away) .She was also told to slow down in a water where the Admiralty knew there was a u-boat. It had been spotted by fishing boats and had attacked a nearby ship. The first lord of the Admiralty oversaw this - he was a war monger Winston Churchill. Like the twin towers or Putin blowing up flats of people and blaming chechin, its all about gaining more power for you next move. As Goebells said 'Tell the people they are being attacked and they will do anything you ask.'
The pictures of those dead babies were horrible. But now, knowing the whole story. Of ammunition, suppressed and ignored information, etc. With who or where did the blame really lie? Germany, Britain, both?
There's a lot of Churchill bashing on here based on not very much evidence. To be fair to Germany they had warned that ships entering British waters were liable to come under fire. There was no specific evidence indicating that Lusitania was a definite target. She was sailing under the Red Cross to mark her out as an illegitimate target. It became admiralty practice to arm some merchant ships to defend against U-Boats. Due to this policy, many U-Boats from that point on no longer surfaced to issue a warning. It was just an escalation of force, as happens in all wars. Was it an deliberate attempt by the British Government, not just Churchill, to get America in to the war? I don't believe so. If it was it backfired for nearly 2 years. It was nearly over by the time US forces arrived on the Western Front. The naval blockade of Germany was already having the desired effect. Widespread mutinies in the German Armed forces, riots in Kiel due to lack of food. and other resources. Escorts may not have been available, or unable to reach Lusitania in time before her estimated arrival. It is up to the ships master to decide what precautions to take. It is not up to the Admiralty to micromanage civilian captains. The standard method of countering a potential submarine is to Zig-Zag, altering course from port to starboard at random intervals. It is up to the ships captain to decide when to alter course if he feels necessary. The only time the Admiralty will intervene is if the vessel in question is part of a convoy under the command of the Royal Navy, in which case the convoy commander in one of HM Ships will decide the precautions best to take . Personally, I think Turner was lucky not have been assigned blame for the sinking as it seems to me he did not take any precautions at all, despite the warnings received. As an aside, I'm amazed that Lusitania did not have the system of automatic floats that the Olympic class steamer had. If she had done, she probably would have survived. For those who are unaware, the Olympic Class steamers had floats fitted to the watertight doors. This meant that if water reached a certain level, the doors would close automatically sealing the compartment.
I agree - too much Churchill bashing. I can see the Germans and their alias trying to rewrite history. However the fact remains that the German military leadership changed the long accepted rules of war - which forbade the willful targeting and killing of civilians. Hence , the airship bombings of English civilians and the use of mustard gas on the front were a violation of of wartime behavior.
One precaution by the captain of the Lusitania, steering a zigzag course, would not have worked. The captain of the Japanese submarine that sunk the cruiser Indianapolis commented afterwards. He said steering such a course would not have saved the Indianapolis. Also, the Lusitania could not have increased her speed. Wartime shortages necessitated shutting down one of her boilers. Some retired members of the US Navy have stated no one believed the Germans had the capability of sinking fast moving ships such as the Lusitania. Consequently, no one took the warning seriously.
Auto floats didn't help the Titanic and any self-respecting U-boat Captain would simply fire off more torpedoes or surface and finish the job with deck guns until the vessel sank. The only thing that would have saved the Lusitania would have been the timely arrival of Anti-Submarine vessels or aircraft. The Lusitania's only real advantage over U-boats was speed.
I place the blame squarely on Wilson's head. He should have made it illegal to transport any war material on US passenger ships and loudly proclaimed it to the combatants.
The fact that the British were tempting tragedy does not excuse the fact that Schweiger fired a fucking torpedo at an obvious passenger ship. Unforgivable. He got exactly what he deserved!
I do not defend the attack on the the ship. However the commander of the u boat only expected to give her a bloody nose. Every other less sophisticated ship and smaller ship had required several torpedoes and admiralty regulations were changed so it was too dangerous to follow the prize rules customs of the sea. The u boat commander could not have anticipated she would sink
yet winston churchill is still praised a hero to this day, yet its him who really dragged the united states into war by goating the lusitania to its own demise, technically churchill was the one who was responsible for the deaths on board and the sinking of the ship.
that is murder Churchill. What you did there was murder. I have lost all respect for you, the "saviour of Great Britain". sacrificing civilian lives for political reasons. this isn't like letting a city get bombed to prevent the enemy from learning you have hacked their codes and thus give you their battle plans without even knowing it.
+Joshua Plotkin If you're referring to Coventry, that to is myth. It wasn't sacrificed. It was of many potential targets in the Midlands that night. It is extremely possible that attempts to jam the homing beams used by the Luftwaffe was responsible for the success of the attack on that city.
that would have made sense. what happened with Lusitania did not. Destroyer escorts recalled at the last minute, no warning to Lusitania of a Uboat that had sunk three merchant ships or notification she would be making the crossing alone. he sacrificed civialans to save sailors. isn't it supposed to be the other way around.
***** No escorts were available. Lusitania received warnings of U-Boat activity. It said so in the bloody documentary for one thing. She made the crossing alone because she was fast enough to evade U-Boats. Same went for the Queen Mary and Queen Elizabeth in WW2.
It received a warning from a CIVILIAN SOURCE and by then it was too late. Everyone in Britain knew that three merchant ships had been lost. A wireless message was sent to Lusitania from an ordinary citizen, NOT the Admiralty. There was a destroyer assigned to protect Lusitania for the final leg of the journey. HMS Juno. After U20 claimed its third kill, the Admiralty considered it too dangerous and order her to retreat. No one informed Lusitania that Juno would not make the rendezvous. HMS Juno was deemed more valuable than RMS Lusitania, so the later was sacrificed to protect the former.
***** What are you talking about. There was no escort assigned to Lusitania. She didn't need it because she was faster than any submarine. The Admiralty sent out a warning that morning alerting her to the presence of a U-Boat. It was thought unlikely she would be attacked, but it was up to the ships Captain as to what countermeasures he took. The ship was not under Admiralty control so they could not dictate to Lusitania what to do. Any captain receiving word of U-Boat activity starts to zig-zag. For some reason Lusitania did not. He also did not increase speed. Those measures alone would have been enough to evade a submerged submarine.
Churchill was utterly negligent. He had two weeks to send just 1 destroyer out to stalk U-20. And they spent the two weeks doing absolutely nothing to protect their finest passenger ship. It's just sickening
It sank in 18mins because there were munitions on board which triggered a second explosion. The Germans sank it within reasonable proximity to the shore with the expectation the passengers would get off in time, it sank so quick because it was carrying a lot of artillery shells and gun carriages, as British documents declassified in 2014 proved. Essentially the Germans were right, it was an armed merchant vessel carrying civilian meat shields through a designated war zone
Well, no one knows for sure what the exact cause of the second explosion was, but it was really more likely caused by coal dust in the Lusitania’s boilers. That second explosion happened pretty quickly after the torpedo hit and those munitions weren’t exactly being stored close to where the torpedo hit occurred.
Odd, then, that no trace of these munitions has ever been found by any of the numerous subsequent dives on the wreck, isn't it? Or, indeed, anything at all which wasn't on the manifest approved by US Customs? Even odder that no such declassified documents exist. Had they done so, don't you think someone, just possibly, might have noticed? 'The Germans sank it within reasonable proximity to the shore with the expectation the passengers would get off in time.' Bullshit. Schwieger sank her where he found her. Haven't you even heard of the German policy of Unrestricted Submarine Warfare, which had recently been introduced? Indeed, apart from your obvious prejudices, do you actually know anything at all about the sinking?
I don't think that this actually worked out for the people who tried to draw others into the war. Things like these seem like they would work out but they don't. And on some occasions actions like these might actually convince your enemies that you are pathetic, hopeless and submissive to them enabling them to crush you.
I like the lusitania but i have to remind you that the olypmic was more luxurious than the lusitania and the Olympic also was bigger than her the britannic was also bigger than the lusitania
What’s there to investigate it was fkn hit by a torpedo and sank was a no brainer . And the people took the warnings as a joke cuz that’s some joke being told a ship is going to be torpedoed and a bunch of people are going to be killed for Christ sake . Those poor innocent people and just a couple years after so many died a horrific death on the titanic had to die and go thru it too but it only 18 minutes And the people trapped in the elevator cage my god horrific . I never knew about this ship until now
Margaret Cox was travelling in Second Class with her infant son Desmond, who was 17 months old at the time. She had been born in Ireland and had immigrated to Canada in 1912, where she had been living with her husband Samuel. The two were headed for Dublin to visit a friend of Margaret, and both survived the sinking, returning to Canada sometime towards the end of the war.
18 Minutes....that poor mother losing her baby: the suffering so many people went through, lasting long after the initial tragedy. That photo of the baby in the coffin is heartbreaking- such similar features to my youngest son as a baby. War- good for absolutely nothing except making armaments manufacturers and their investors even richer.
War is profitable for the war pigs, with that said its a miracle the Germans were defeated. Van Braun said they had help from aliens. I kind of believe it.
The narrator sounds like Spock from star trek.
😂😂😂😢😢😮😅😅😅😅🎉🎉🎉
@00tonytone This is WW1 not WW2 😅😅😅😅 Best comment 😅😅😅😅
The Lusitania was amazing, beautiful ship! What a horrible tragedy the ship, passengers, and crew endured.
@James Henderson A very lame excuse.
@@Master_Blackthorne Just got hooked on this.
I'm a conspiracy theorist and smell a conspiracy.
Do u think this was planned by the US to get us into war?
Thanks for sharing. My Great Granddad was a helmsman and just went off shift and below deck when the ship was hit.
Wasn't his brother on watch at the time of the torpedoing when he rushed down below to warn him?
+Rufus Burne mine too
***** funny
***** u
***** go sink the pink
I get so distraught thinking about these beautiful early 20th century steamers dead and rusting on the bottom of the ocean. They were so elegant and sophisticated,and they truly characterized their time and its culture by not only reflecting it, but emulating it. It's a shame that man's arrogance continues to counteract, and destroy the fruits of its own labor.
I agree, but some ship sinkings were just unavoidable
Well said.
Distraught over the beautiful ships at the bottom of the ocean but not all the people who died for nothing ?
Thank you for this documentary enlightening the fact of the British Admiralty's failure to safe guard the loss of the ship and the needless loss of life.
Just got hooked on this.
I'm a conspiracy theorist and smell a conspiracy.
Do u think this was planned by the US to get us into war?
M great grandfather Captain Dow was captain of this ship.He tried to warn Cunard Line,as he had already dodged two torpedoes. They put him on shore leave. Soon after it sank.He went on to command the Mauritania.He lived in Blundellsands,i used to visit the house when i was young.
Chris massey-lynch ...
That is awesome. Turner was captain when it sank. Dow is noted in the book Dead Wake. Dow got sick of the B.S. maybe. They didn't even warn Turner that the U-20 was in the area even though Room 40 was tracking it and it had been sighted 5 times on May 5 and it had sunk a small ship then. Churchill wrote in a note that they wanted the ship traffic by neutral countries and if "some of it gets into trouble, better still." Dead Wake, pages 268 & 269.
Based on several things, my opinion of Churchill is quite low. These include the Boer War, WWI and his bombing of Dresden or shall I say terror bombing of it.
Chris oh yeah but ur great grandfather was a great captain driving me ur new friend - mauertania
@@kenzeier2943 Churchill was not a soldier in the Boer War. He was a reporter. Churchill did nothing wrong in WWI. Dresden was bombed because it was war. Just as London, Coventry, and Rotterdam were bombed by the Nazis. Plus many other atrocities committed by the filthy Nazis.
Chris can you stop making up stuff
Chris I just saw a comment just like this
I agree with the Expert's analysis and explanation that the Boilers when hit with the chilled water of the sea at the levels of water that rushed through compartments the explosion would have been, and was catastrophic. Anyone that has a Metal background, or say a Machinists' knows what happens when you immerse molten metal or extremely hot metal in water! In Silversmiths I believe they produce 'Silver Shot' using as similar method, by pouring the molten silver from a specific height as not to over-cool the material, or pour to closely and have it hitting the water overheated. The explosion without a doubt in my mind was clearly caused by a German U-Boat attack, questionably launched, and the fatal catastrophic results of the boilers getting doused with cold water.
I do however find it very interesting that in the Hardcover Book - Robert Ballard's "LUSITANIA" printed edition of 2007 makes it quite clear, without doubt that 6 of these same said Boilers were not in operation at the time of this sailing, due to Cunard's cost to run on full boilers because the costs of Coal, stating that due to this "absolute and documented fact" the Ship was unable to reach anywhere near the known 22-24 knots top speed? Was it the calm ocean effect of that instant, that allowed Her to cut through the water at speeds used in the calculations? Could easily be, I am not a Sailor by trade. I do have the referred to text in Hand and have been studying it for the past few days. It seems to me to be a collision of terrible incidents, ie. portholes allowed open, electric compartment doors, unable to operate, similarly the failure of any hand operation of the elevator. Or the Captain refusing to use any zig-zag patterns, because he was told that, the passengers that pay $4,000 US to sail One Way First Class, at the time when an average US worker made $20 a WEEK, did not take kindly to being tossed about, nor did they take kindly to being delayed arriving, causing missing appointments, trains, family connections at the other end, they expected to get there on time. Much like they were all aboard a Railway Train? They must get there in a timely manner!
In summation I would like to Thank Sir Robert Ballard for his effortless work on behalf of those souls that were, and are lost at Sea and the telling of "Their" stories.
The Book is wonderfully done and so much more in depth in many ways, both technical and humanistic seeing some of the footage tonight was emotional.
I've read the Robert Ballard book Exploring the Lusitania it's tremendously fascinating.
my boyfriend is irish and his great-great grandmother had a brother who was a fireman on the lusitania's last voyage. he was lost in the sinking. he says the irish never forgot about the lusitania.
I had a high school teacher whose maternal uncle’s great great grandfather was steward aboard, I think? Who cares?
I read somewhere a woman dropped her baby while boarding a boat, the baby sank into the ocean... R.I.P to everyone who lost their lives
My great great grandfather helped give the Lusitania’s steam pipes the repairs they needed shortly before it launched and got Torpedoed.
They were warned several times and looked at it as a joke. Such a shame that a beautiful ship and many innocent lives were lost.
Everyone talks about WWII which I understand because it’s more recent, but few ever talk about the war that lead to it; WWI. This is an example, because few people ever talk about the Lusitania. It was a precursor to how horrible maritime warfare would be during both World Wars. RIP. 😢
Only a fraction of the bodies were found. some drowned.... most were entombed in the Lusitania as she sank. She sank so fast and at a sharp starboard angle, it was impossible for many to get topside before the final plunge. Disturbing way to die........
DeathScab MortSkab 死亡疤痕 Having your body destroyed by the water pressure must have felt beyond pain.
@@Nephalem2002 they Would have drowned way before the water pressure got that high.
Yes, God bless their souls.
Juan Longoria:Totally agreed I to miss those great beautiful true ocean liners from over 100 years ago unlike today ships it looks ugly it appear look like ugly floating boxes floating in the water or coffen boxs.
"Dead Wake", by Erik Larson, 2015, Broadway Books, is a fantastic, non-fiction read about the last Atlantic crossing of the Lusitania. A true pager-turner that is nearly impossible to put down.
I FOUND IT FASCINATING, EXCELLENT BOOK.
Schuyler Johnson ...
I am reading it now.
Adam Knight Yeah, highly recommend it!
I am as well.
The captain was thought to be the scapegoat but I am glad he was exonerated
Cant believe Churchill would do that
@@GuyFromTheSouth I can. His Leadership during WWII, while worth every bit of praise & honour, covered a lot of sins during those WWI years. You don’t have to do much digging to find that out either.
He was a Member of the Spencers on his Mother’s Side. Yes, that Spencer Family, the one that gave us Princess Diana. Anyway...I’ve seen a few Interview where the current Earl, Diana’s Brother, has talked about his Memories of Churchill visiting & they were not pleasant ones & he knew his Father dreaded them too. To say he “lorded it over them’ is only scratching the surface.
He was exactly what was needed in WWII, but....Yeah.
@@GuyFromTheSouth
He could, and he did. He had a tendency to use people as canon fodder to further his ambitions.
It really is an interesting documentary about the LUSITANIA. She was a beautiful liner. It really is sad that she was sunk by a German u-boat. I'm also interested to know, what was the boat or ship used as the LUSITANIA in this documentary seen at 8:54, 21:00, 23:17, 24:56, 25:18, 26:44 & 30:23? I'm sorry if I am being rude, I'm just curious to know what the name of the vessel is as a classic Ocean liner fan. Please leave a like and comment. Please and Thank You.
I heard the ship wreck had been investigated by diver not so long ago and concluded that it was a war vessel and not a cruise liner. In any case there is an article in the daily mail quoting the Germans warning not to board the ship as it will be sailing right through a war zone. yet our government was happy to take that risk (almost certainty) because they needed almost excuse to get involved.
joe jones ...
Britain, as part of a loan $$$ deal with Cunard required that Lusitania be built structurally so that it could be converted to military use.
Yes this true. Horrible leadership.
You “heard”? From whom? What diver ‘not long ago’ because not long ago there wasn’t much discernible left of the Lusitania to conclude much about it, especially the fact that it was a war vessel. How ridiculous do you sound? Over 100 children and 400+ women on a war vessel? I swear some people on the internet should have their heads examined..
And the government can’t stop a civilian ship from proceeding on its voyage. They warned them plenty enough of the danger. They weren’t ‘happy enough’ to take any risk when the risk wasn’t theirs.
Lucy Taylor was travelling in Third Class with her husband Harold. They were both English born and had met in England, Lucy came to the US with her family in 1913, and Harold followed sometime later, and the two had married on April 29, 1915. Both survived the Sinking and the couple remained in Britain for 7 years before returning to the United States in 1922.
U20 had sunk alot of ships without one life lost. They thought if it sunk it would take hours. U Boats up until Briton started putting guns on Merchant ships. The Lusatania had installed gun mounts under her decks but they had not installed the guns yet. Also Germany only sunk ships in Declared Waters. Also, Ireland was only 11 miles away and if not for the second explosion. It's if anyone was not killed by the Torpedo explosion every one would have survived. The Ammo or a steam explosion is what doomed the Lusatania.
If you shoot a torpedo at an obvious passenger ship, you are responsible for whatever happens. Same is if I took a 'harmless' model rocket and launched it near an airport and an airplane somehow crashed because of it. Think the police would let it slide?
Um, we already got all of that information from the video.
Expedition: *Finds and brings up American-made munitions from the Lusitania wreck*
British government: "Oh...you weren't supposed to find those..."
Same day as my birthday it happened...Lord be with all the innocent lost lives... God bless 🙌🙏❤💖
Must Read 'Dead Wake' by Erik Larson - the fantastic true story of the sinking of Lusitania
moral of the story don't travel on ships or planes during war time!!!
Yeah stay at home and wait to be nuked
@@stronkserbia444 Or rather just go to where the least violence is occurring.
Winston Churchill and the English Admiralty do not come out of this looking well, do they?
John Berger- British* Admiralty.
@@WORLD8NSH5KNIGHT1 Anyway, you lost to the US (Federal Reserve Bank) to ;)
Yeah hahaha I think it's funny old Fatboy Churchill try to put it on the captain he resigned out of Shame never did like that a******
This show sucks really he's no tom sellack
@@jodyburke203 Germany is to blame in my eyes they broke the rules of war and sunk an innocent passenger liner
12:15. Good ol Winston. Tries to get the U.S. into WW-1 and 24 years later gives it another go.
I recall observing this documentary when I was a child. Considering what was discussed with Winston Churchill and of how he appeared intent upon somehow spurring America to enter WWI, it somehow arouses my curiosity whether he considered the victims of the Lusitania as disposable.
Some of the men in the U-Boat wanted to do the right thing, and NOT sink it. Why? A few said there were hundreds of women and children. I can already see Churchill riding the torpedo ever so happily, like Major Kong in Dr.strangelove just a its a torpedo and he's not screaming. The evil man.
PC Studios they probably had no choice. If they didn't they could have been charged with treason against germany
Just got hooked on this.
I'm a conspiracy theorist and smell a conspiracy.
Do u think this was planned by the US to get us into war?
Yes I read the same thing & I watched those men talking about how they tried not to shoot off the torpedo when they were in some sort of a documentary & the way they were getting extremely upset & just incredibly emotional talking about how there were women & children on the ship & how they honestly didn’t want to send the torpedo out well it was EXTREMELY OBVIOUS THAT THEY WERE VERY BROKEN-HEARTED OVER HAVING TO DO THAT HORRENDOUS ACT TO THOSE INNOCENT PEOPLE ESPECIALLY THE CHILDREN THAT THEY KNEW WOULD CERTAINLY DIE BY THEIR OWN HANDS BY SENDING OFF THE TORPEDO 😞.I just wish they would’ve killed their officer who was demanding for them to literally MURDER THOSE INNOCENT ADORABLE PRECIOUS CHILDREN.The women & the men could at least have some sort of chance to survive but the children especially those babies couldn’t do nothing but rely on their mothers & fathers to get them to safety somehow or another 😢.And there’s no darn way that I would’ve ever gotten out of that water if my child died or was lost in the water because I would’ve made myself drown before I could’ve ever gotten out.
@@Taylor-xj1xf That's so sad.smh.😥
For many years after WWI, the Germans insisted that the second explosion (which doomed the ship) was caused by exploding ammunition (which was being carried in violation of the Neutrality Act.) Has anyone ever proven the claim? Also, the Admiralty did not want a full inquiry-there were lots of secrets about the ship that they did not want to come out. I can understand this, as at the time of the sinking, British Naval Intelligence could read the German Naval Codes.
My grandmother came to America on this ship a year or two before this.
So did thousands of other forefathers.
Wow! Amazing video!I love this ship!This ship was construction in 17 august,1904.(1915)...LIKE THIS VIDEO!!!!!
What was the ship they used for the on-borad, jumping and sinking shots for the LUSITANIA in this documentary? I'm curious to know.
42:03 just so everyone knows, Schwieger wasn’t in command of U-20 when he was killed in 1917. He was in command of U-88 at the time.
U-20 had beached in November 1916 after her torpedoes exploding before even firing out of her bow caps. The submarine was dismantled soon after
Lusitania sank because of a torpedo and the Britannic sank because of a mine
As with most everything in life, things are never black and white. Direct responsibility for the sinking of the Lusitania lies with the German U-boat, but neither the British or US governments were blameless. R.I.P all those poor souls that perished.
I’m not sure the US bears any responsibility because they did warn the Americans who boarded.
sad story, Thanks for posting.
4:39 I really like the animation it kind of reminds me of roblox….by the way it’s my favorite game too you know
Please read the book Dead Wake by Erik Larson if you are interested in some very interesting information about the LUSITANIA, what it was carrying, and what Churchill had up his sleeve.
Some people have posted comments that seem to indicate that they would rather accept the standard explanations despite the facts and that they like to rant and rave at people who point out that the Allies were wicked and their motives and methods evil. I have read 5 books on WWI and I can see that the way it was run was part madness (running up the body count because of bad leadership, some called it pure murder of their own British soldiers) and Britain, France and the U.S. were deep in deception and out right deceit. For example, many said that if the British public actually knew how ineptly the war was being run and how their sons were simply being slaughtered they would have demanded an end to the war. Britain made sure that people did not know what exactly was going on in the insane trench warefare.
Sen. Hiram Johnson of Calif. said that the first casualty of war was the truth. The U.S. punished dissidents even for speaking the truth during it mobilization of the country into one big fighting unit.
What is amazing is that there are so many people who make comments that are negative ad hominem attacks just because people don't talk the party line. This forum provides a platform for people to express themselves intelligently or otherwise.
If you want to show me that I am wrong then read 5 books and provide a coeherent argument. But if you simply want to attack like a senseless animal then don't waste your time.
Bravo, Ken Zeier! Both sides killed civilians and broke the "rules" of war when it seemed advantageous to do so. The difference is that the Allies won.
@supernumery You are a simple minded fool
Who started the was A-Hole
Totally agree with the OP. Question who the real enemy is. WW1 was a useless murderous war that accomplished nothing but to entench the victors more firmly, enrich the war profiteers and make the whole world a much more dangerous place by orders of magnitude. It's only the people without power who ever suffer the real consequences of war. The only just war is protecting ourselves from our leaders and that's the war that will never be allowed to be fought.
What ‘party line’ are you referring to? I can find no such common theme here? It’s as if you’re projecting vigorous counter-arguments when most just watched the video(which was not generous to leadership) and commented on the tragedy this was. Maybe you should take a debate course somewhere where you can crystallize what you’re saying? I don’t understand the basis of your angst.
RMS Titanic is still my favorite ship design of the early 20th century! Titanic was gorgeous inside and out! Absolutely mind blowing how beautiful Titanic truly was!
Jonny Cat you mean Olympic design
Yea the Aquatania or even the Normandy, hell the Queen Mary is nicer than the Titanic was.. Ur proly just a Titanic movie lover and think its the end all be all of ocean liners. Hell the Empress of Ireland was almost asnice as the Titanic. Let me guess. U think the Titanic disaster was the biggest loss of life on a ship disaster too ??. Empress of Ireland 2 yrs later had more, General Slocum, Sultana . Lot of people dont know about the three. German refugee ships that was sunk by Russian Submarines..... The Wilhem Gustloff had over 6000 die on it..the other two was some where close to that number as well
Mee too
@@Firefighter_303 Just got hooked on this.
I'm a conspiracy theorist and smell a conspiracy.
Do u think this was planned by the US to get us into war?
@@JeffWarren47 not one bit
Contrary to conspiracy theorists, Churchill did nothing to cause the sinking. He was not even at the Admiralty in the days leading up to the event. Indeed the Lusitania had been warned of submarine activity in the area. Mistakes were certainly made by her captain, William Turner. But there was no conspiracy to put her in danger.
Quoting from Myth and Reality:
The “Admiralty War Diary” in this melodramatic paragraph appears nowhere else in Simpson’s book, not even the bibliography. No historian has found it; nor a record of the Admiralty meeting. Nor was it Churchill’s role to make operational decisions.
The chief cause of Lusitania’s loss was Captain Turner’s decision, after sighting the Irish coast, to proceed northward at reduced speed to “make the tide” at Merseyside, as he would have in peacetime. At his normal cruising speed, chances of a successful torpedo attack would have been greatly reduced. Alternatively, since he had the time, he could have headed out to deeper waters, maintaining speed and further reducing the danger. There was no advantage and every danger in slowing down.
It might be argued that the Admiralty set up the liner by refusing a destroyer escort. But destroyers were the one class of warships in short supply. Lusitania historian David Ramsay noted that many destroyers, instead of guarding merchant shipping, were involved in the Dardanelles operations. Ramsay, writing in 2004, confirmed the findings of historians Thomas Bailey, Harry Jaffa, Stephen Roskill and David Stafford, “who are at one in rejecting any conspiracy, by Churchill or anyone else.”
Stop.
No one believes that.
Of the 1,962 passengers and crew aboard Lusitania at the time of the sinking, 1,198 lost their lives. Most died from drowning or hypothermia. They were only able to launch 6 of 48 lifeboats as she sank fast
On Titanic, 1,500 lost their lives when she sank
Davin Peterson ...
The crew of the Lusitania was not the best. Many good sailors had been siphoned off for the war. There was little practice on using the life boats.
She was only 10 miles off the coast of Ireland... why did it take 3 hours for a rescue boat to reach them????? So many more lives could have been saved!
The only boats in Kinsale village at that time would have been small inshore fishing vessels. The riverboat tenders from Cobh (Queenstown) had to get the word from Kinsale (30 miles over land), get the crew together, sail out Cork Harbour and west along the coast to south of the Old Head of Kinsale - about 25 Nautical Miles. These riverboats were working against the prevailing Atlantic current.
The fact that they arrived in 3 hours is itself a feat for boats back in those days.
Also another documentary said no one was in a hurry to take another ship/target into a submarine area.
Davin Peterson and Britannic only 30, Costa Concoardia, Also only 30 ish.
Was the Lusitania really armed with cannons as the video claims it was at 15:47? I have found no other source that makes this claim.
Also, I think this video gives too much weight to Churchill's "ramming order". First of all, the order only says ramming should be done if a sub comes up close in front with hostile intent, meaning the sub is about to sink your ship. It doesn't say subs should be rammed if they approach from a distance and let you surrender.
Second of all, civilian passenger liners were under no obligation to obey Churchill's order. Really to them, it was nothing but a recommendation. I have not found a single example of any civilian passenger liner ramming a German sub in world war I.
TheStapleGunKid lusitania was designed to carry 12 6" guns that were fitted in april 1913 a month before this crossing. Records exist at the Royal Admiralty Museum from what i recall reading many years ago. I remember it well because the book had photos of different documents it sourced and i found it interesting to see photos of the memos from and to Churchill and Roosevelt
(then secretary of the navy), president Wilson and his Sec of State, as well as the plans for the ship. Wish I could remember the books name.
The British government had provided the Cunard Line with the subsidies necessary to build both the 'Lusitania' and 'Mauretania'. As a result Cunard had to agree to certain specifications, such as handing the ships over to the government in time of war. Both ships were built for easy conversion into armed merchant cruisers( such as building the coal bunkers along the hull to protect the boiler rooms from battle damage and gun mounts hidden on deck). The Royal Navy even named both ships in its list of ships.
Olympic (Titanics Sister ship) is the only passenger ship to have ever rammed and sank a submarine. although she was working as a troopshi pat the time
@@KXXULADavidOC Was it carrying troops or war material at the time it sank the sub?
@@TheStapleGunKid Just got hooked on this.
I'm a conspiracy theorist and smell a conspiracy.
Do u think this was planned by the US to get us into war?
Wonder how things would be if Lusitania had thirty minutes before it sank completely
turner turned into scapegoat by british govt. --a heinous coverup led by scoundrel churchhill --they didn't want anyone to know that ammunition (though not part of sinking) was on board. they sacrificed the ship or washed their hands of it.
+windstorm1000
It was a deliberate attempt by the English to pull America into war. Who put that cruel idea into the minds of the British - to make Luisitania to ply into the Atlantic waters that too, even after the warning had been put on papers by the Imperial German Army ? And let 123 Americans to travel in the passenger ship . An exact play back later dramatized in the Pearl Harbour, 9/11 and Vietnam war. Vandals and Satan !
I know sunk ships cannot be brought to the surface, because of something to do with pressure or something like that. Can someone give me a non-douchebag or troll answer as to specifically why this is?
It's essentially what you said as far as I can tell. Adding the corrosion that occurs due to being under icy Atlantic water for decades and being seen as a war memorial, raising the Lusitania, or the Britannic for that matter, would be ludicrously expensive and in terrible taste. Apologies for the runoff sentence BTW. Hope this helps :)
+Lexi Vorce I would like to believe that it may be due to moving tonnes of water through the wreck would destroy it further, but i'm not into physics, so I wouldn't not write my answer off as being absoulutely mad.
+Lexi Vorce the gravitational force of your fat ass tears it apart
+cloudftw113 It does, thank you! :)
+Atlas Fugged Wow. Butt hurt much?
I think that that's why so many people didn't escape. Because they were trying to find family members and the power for the elevators went out.
Lusitania sank in the middle of the day only eight miles from Queenstown. What possible explanation could there be for rescuers taking four hours to reach her?? This seems like a crime almost as heinous as the one that sank her!
Sinking a ship carrying war munitions was no crime.
@@markharrison2544 Munitions to defend their own sovereignty? When women and children are aboard. Thank goodness you don’t write laws.
People always say it caused America to join the war but America joined WW1 on 6 April 1917, this was 7 May 1915 whether that motive is true or not, it wasn't a knee jerk reaction. Passengers and crew knew they were sailing into a war zone, guess they thought a passenger ship was "safe"? The more we learn about any truth in history however, are we surprised that decisions made at higher levels, i.e carrying munitions, are made putting people at risk? When it comes to war, sadly there is no honour at these higher levels, just the sad death of the innocent.
Show less
Reply
I'm your 1000 suber
War games with people as pawns.
Only 18 minutes? Am surprised there weren't more casualties.
Had she not been as close to shore as she was there would've been far more casualties still. Possibly even total given how fast she went down.
There probably would have been had not some people been on deck and the lookouts seen the torpedo as it came.
Malcolm Nicoll almost 2,000 isn't enough for you?
More than 1100+? Huh?
EXCELLLENT DOCUMENTARY...
The latest theory, and one which is most plausible, is that the torpedo hit in an area containing high pressure steam lines. It is suspected that the secondary explosion was caused by the rupture of the steam line. That could explain why Captain Turner would not stop the engines. Also, the Lusitania had four turbines, each driving one of the four propeller.
One which is ‘most’ plausible to whom? What expert or experts made this claim and where is their basis? (Cite please) Acute cold water in a confined boiler space makes a ton more sense!
@@m.williams4971 HI..Remember that this theory was proposed in one of the books on the Lusitania that I read. May have been either "Lusitania" by Dianne Preston or "Dead Wake" by Erick Larson. There was also another book titled "The Lusitania", but I do not remember the author. The theory made sense because Capt. Turner could not control the speed or direction of the nengines after the second explosion.
The Germans were completely in the wrong blowing the Lusitania up, as the Geneva Convention stated that ships either troopship (HMT Olympic) or hospital ship (HMHS Britannic) had a colour code, if they were not in the specified code then they knew it would've been just a casual passenger liner.
Tyler Madelin same geneva convention says starving innocent civilians also a crime
Ammo , coal dust , torpex a highly flammable combo
Nope! The expert in this film said frankly the condensation would have caused the dust to settle. Not a factor. Cold ocean water pouring into a boiler room in a confined space is what caused the second explosion.
Having trouble hearing the survivors speak, because the music is loud when they speak. Is there anyway to balance my sound in settings?
32:00 What is ICC water please I'm doing an essay about the Lusitania
+Anita June ...Icy Sea Water
why did it take three hours for rescue just off the coast of Ireland? they were so close. 11 miles. it should not have taken an hour for rescue ships to arrive, much less three. what the hell were they waiting for? Three hours. just off the coast.
The only boats in Kinsale village at that time would have been small
inshore fishing vessels. The riverboat tenders from Cobh (Queenstown)
had to get the word from Kinsale (30 miles over land), get the crew
together, sail out Cork Harbour and west along the coast to south of the
Old Head of Kinsale - about 25 Nautical Miles. These riverboats were
working against the prevailing Atlantic current.
The fact that they arrived in 3 hours is itself a feat for boats back in
those days.
Joshua Plotkin After the disaster of the Aboukir, no Navy vessels r allowed to assist as a submarine may still be present waiting for the rescuers to reach the wreck, that destroying them too
Anybody know who made this video?
RIP to All those men women & Children who Died in the Sinking of this Beautiful Ocean Liner its So Sad, its wrong that, The passengers weren't Alerted, & That they chose to Ignore the Warnings its wrong.
Fastest munition carrier in the Cunard fleet plus in had paying passengers.
The boiler in boiler room 1 exploded not the amunition
nice anachronism at 34:37 they've got a 50-star flag. in 1915 the US only had 48 states.
Cool vid
Sadly it was carrying ammunition in violation of international law..... that makes it a legal target.
@supernumery yes they did supernumery yes they did
Guess this would also be why the government didn't request Lusitania's formal assistance in the war like they did with Mauretania and Aquitania
Kinda hard to do that when it’s at the bottom of a ocean
@@Rebelheart1985 Just got hooked on this.
I'm a conspiracy theorist and smell a conspiracy.
Do u think this was planned by the US to get us into war?
@@JeffWarren47 no and that’s completely ridicules and if it was then that’s ANOTHER atrocity the US has committed which believe me is a pretty long list.
@@Rebelheart1985 Thats the reason I don't believe it was the Germans. Wouldn't be the first time US govt has lied ..
@@JeffWarren47 it not being the first time is about the worst reason I have ever seen for this conspiracy theory.
I’ll give it this though: it’s better then ANY of the Titanic theories.
Damn I hate my teacher
British navy sank the Lusitania. she was designated an 'armed merchantman' by the British Navy, that meant a U-Boat did not have to risk surfacing to shoot at her. Ireland held the copies of her records (the British admiralty still have them locked away) .She was also told to slow down in a water where the Admiralty knew there was a u-boat. It had been spotted by fishing boats and had attacked a nearby ship. The first lord of the Admiralty oversaw this - he was a war monger Winston Churchill. Like the twin towers or Putin blowing up flats of people and blaming chechin, its all about gaining more power for you next move. As Goebells said 'Tell the people they are being attacked and they will do anything you ask.'
The pictures of those dead babies were horrible. But now, knowing the whole story. Of ammunition, suppressed and ignored information, etc. With who or where did the blame really lie? Germany, Britain, both?
Room forty. The British equivalent of area fifty one.
There's a lot of Churchill bashing on here based on not very much evidence. To be fair to Germany they had warned that ships entering British waters were liable to come under fire. There was no specific evidence indicating that Lusitania was a definite target. She was sailing under the Red Cross to mark her out as an illegitimate target. It became admiralty practice to arm some merchant ships to defend against U-Boats. Due to this policy, many U-Boats from that point on no longer surfaced to issue a warning. It was just an escalation of force, as happens in all wars. Was it an deliberate attempt by the British Government, not just Churchill, to get America in to the war? I don't believe so. If it was it backfired for nearly 2 years. It was nearly over by the time US forces arrived on the Western Front. The naval blockade of Germany was already having the desired effect. Widespread mutinies in the German Armed forces, riots in Kiel due to lack of food. and other resources. Escorts may not have been available, or unable to reach Lusitania in time before her estimated arrival. It is up to the ships master to decide what precautions to take. It is not up to the Admiralty to micromanage civilian captains. The standard method of countering a potential submarine is to Zig-Zag, altering course from port to starboard at random intervals. It is up to the ships captain to decide when to alter course if he feels necessary. The only time the Admiralty will intervene is if the vessel in question is part of a convoy under the command of the Royal Navy, in which case the convoy commander in one of HM Ships will decide the precautions best to take . Personally, I think Turner was lucky not have been assigned blame for the sinking as it seems to me he did not take any precautions at all, despite the warnings received. As an aside, I'm amazed that Lusitania did not have the system of automatic floats that the Olympic class steamer had. If she had done, she probably would have survived. For those who are unaware, the Olympic Class steamers had floats fitted to the watertight doors. This meant that if water reached a certain level, the doors would close automatically sealing the compartment.
I agree - too much Churchill bashing. I can see the Germans and their alias trying to rewrite history. However the fact remains that the German military leadership changed the long accepted rules of war - which forbade the willful targeting and killing of civilians. Hence , the airship bombings of English civilians and the use of mustard gas on the front were a violation of of wartime behavior.
One precaution by the captain of the Lusitania, steering a zigzag course, would not have worked. The captain of the Japanese submarine that sunk the cruiser Indianapolis commented afterwards. He said steering such a course would not have saved the Indianapolis. Also, the Lusitania could not have increased her speed. Wartime shortages necessitated shutting down one of her boilers. Some retired members of the US Navy have stated no one believed the Germans had the capability of sinking fast moving ships such as the Lusitania. Consequently, no one took the warning seriously.
Auto floats didn't help the Titanic and any self-respecting U-boat Captain would simply fire off more torpedoes or surface and finish the job with deck guns until the vessel sank. The only thing that would have saved the Lusitania would have been the timely arrival of Anti-Submarine vessels or aircraft. The Lusitania's only real advantage over U-boats was speed.
I place the blame squarely on Wilson's head. He should have made it illegal to transport any war material on US passenger ships and loudly proclaimed it to the combatants.
Justin Lee Considering I don’t even think Churchill was in office in WW1.
Your subtitles say may 7, 1950, it is May 7, 1915 that the ship sank. You may want to correct that.
Divers found a way into boiler room number 1 and have take video and photos of the boilers. The story might have to be rewritten.
The fact that the British were tempting tragedy does not excuse the fact that Schweiger fired a fucking torpedo at an obvious passenger ship. Unforgivable. He got exactly what he deserved!
Good documentary but very annoying loud music!
well done documentary.
Complete story? Really? Readers and or viewers, be aware.
I do not defend the attack on the the ship. However the commander of the u boat only expected to give her a bloody nose. Every other less sophisticated ship and smaller ship had required several torpedoes and admiralty regulations were changed so it was too dangerous to follow the prize rules customs of the sea. The u boat commander could not have anticipated she would sink
Stop giving him an out. Doesn’t matter what was required to take down smaller ships. He fired the torpedo that killed over 1000 people, period!
Last month was lusitania's 100 year anniversary... R.I.P
1915 + 100 = 2017?
32:08 max ur volume
yet winston churchill is still praised a hero to this day, yet its him who really dragged the united states into war by goating the lusitania to its own demise, technically churchill was the one who was responsible for the deaths on board and the sinking of the ship.
that is murder Churchill. What you did there was murder. I have lost all respect for you, the "saviour of Great Britain". sacrificing civilian lives for political reasons. this isn't like letting a city get bombed to prevent the enemy from learning you have hacked their codes and thus give you their battle plans without even knowing it.
+Joshua Plotkin If you're referring to Coventry, that to is myth. It wasn't sacrificed. It was of many potential targets in the Midlands that night. It is extremely possible that attempts to jam the homing beams used by the Luftwaffe was responsible for the success of the attack on that city.
that would have made sense. what happened with Lusitania did not. Destroyer escorts recalled at the last minute, no warning to Lusitania of a Uboat that had sunk three merchant ships or notification she would be making the crossing alone. he sacrificed civialans to save sailors. isn't it supposed to be the other way around.
***** No escorts were available. Lusitania received warnings of U-Boat activity. It said so in the bloody documentary for one thing. She made the crossing alone because she was fast enough to evade U-Boats. Same went for the Queen Mary and Queen Elizabeth in WW2.
It received a warning from a CIVILIAN SOURCE and by then it was too late. Everyone in Britain knew that three merchant ships had been lost. A wireless message was sent to Lusitania from an ordinary citizen, NOT the Admiralty. There was a destroyer assigned to protect Lusitania for the final leg of the journey. HMS Juno. After U20 claimed its third kill, the Admiralty considered it too dangerous and order her to retreat. No one informed Lusitania that Juno would not make the rendezvous. HMS Juno was deemed more valuable than RMS Lusitania, so the later was sacrificed to protect the former.
***** What are you talking about. There was no escort assigned to Lusitania. She didn't need it because she was faster than any submarine. The Admiralty sent out a warning that morning alerting her to the presence of a U-Boat. It was thought unlikely she would be attacked, but it was up to the ships Captain as to what countermeasures he took. The ship was not under Admiralty control so they could not dictate to Lusitania what to do. Any captain receiving word of U-Boat activity starts to zig-zag. For some reason Lusitania did not. He also did not increase speed. Those measures alone would have been enough to evade a submerged submarine.
When Mr.H sends you to watch yet another video
15:00 Hold on, submarines gave warnings to the ships they were about to sink?
Churchill was utterly negligent. He had two weeks to send just 1 destroyer out to stalk U-20. And they spent the two weeks doing absolutely nothing to protect their finest passenger ship. It's just sickening
It’s almost as if they didn’t it on purpose ?
@rhysnichols8608 it's so hard to know but stranger things have happened, I guess.
Lusitania was going to war it was part of World War I it was loaded with weapons
Water hits hot boilers which are still pressurized and 💥 boom there's your explosion
Divers have found a way into boiler room 1 and they are intact, there's video and photo.
It sank in 18mins because there were munitions on board which triggered a second explosion. The Germans sank it within reasonable proximity to the shore with the expectation the passengers would get off in time, it sank so quick because it was carrying a lot of artillery shells and gun carriages, as British documents declassified in 2014 proved.
Essentially the Germans were right, it was an armed merchant vessel carrying civilian meat shields through a designated war zone
Well, no one knows for sure what the exact cause of the second explosion was, but it was really more likely caused by coal dust in the Lusitania’s boilers. That second explosion happened pretty quickly after the torpedo hit and those munitions weren’t exactly being stored close to where the torpedo hit occurred.
Odd, then, that no trace of these munitions has ever been found by any of the numerous subsequent dives on the wreck, isn't it? Or, indeed, anything at all which wasn't on the manifest approved by US Customs?
Even odder that no such declassified documents exist. Had they done so, don't you think someone, just possibly, might have noticed?
'The Germans sank it within reasonable proximity to the shore with the expectation the passengers would get off in time.' Bullshit. Schwieger sank her where he found her. Haven't you even heard of the German policy of Unrestricted Submarine Warfare, which had recently been introduced?
Indeed, apart from your obvious prejudices, do you actually know anything at all about the sinking?
It said 3 turbines but, there were actually 4.
Timestamp
Why would you load munitions onto a passenger ship? That's just asking for trouble.
I don't think that this actually worked out for the people who tried to draw others into the war. Things like these seem like they would work out but they don't. And on some occasions actions like these might actually convince your enemies that you are pathetic, hopeless and submissive to them enabling them to crush you.
I like the lusitania but i have to remind you that the olypmic was more luxurious than the lusitania and the Olympic also was bigger than her the britannic was also bigger than the lusitania
All going out of date.
Does anyone know who is the narrator?
+TheAprilraine1 Will Lyman
The ship was illegally carrying war munitions.
U-boats in World War 1 are often overlooked.
Warning: SAIL AT YOUR OWN RISK
The Lusitania wasn't refitted a thick hald and compartments lower honey come steel and clay plates in and out of the Ship
What’s there to investigate it was fkn hit by a torpedo and sank was a no brainer . And the people took the warnings as a joke cuz that’s some joke being told a ship is going to be torpedoed and a bunch of people are going to be killed for Christ sake . Those poor innocent people and just a couple years after so many died a horrific death on the titanic had to die and go thru it too but it only 18 minutes And the people trapped in the elevator cage my god horrific . I never knew about this ship until now
Yeah sadly a lot of people couldn't make it up top because of the heavy list to starboard. Awful way to meet your end
I have a book called 7 days 2 disaster which is the true story of the sinking