Graf Zeppelin (wreck)

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 1 лис 2024

КОМЕНТАРІ • 65

  • @mattblaster1470
    @mattblaster1470 7 років тому +34

    This ship must be studied more, as it had a unique design that was different from other carriers of that era.

    • @markschneider8815
      @markschneider8815 7 років тому +7

      Mattblaster 14 That's more or less the way the Langley was built. The difference being the USN used an existing ship and decked it over whereas the Germans had a purpose-built hull. The main carriers the US had were built the same way, but the USN converted Liberty ship hulls that were not nearly as expensive. These "jeep" carriers served in tge Atlantic to provide air cover for conveys once they passed out of range of land-based aircraft. This spoiled the German U-Boats' hunting ground and lead to a marked increase in cargo and supplies making it to England.
      In the Pacific the jeep carriers saw less combat than their big brothers. Often times they were used to ferry aircraft to replace combat losses or equip the airstrips built in great numbers on the islands and atolls in the Pacific.
      So there is really nothing special about the Graf Zeppelin. The only thing I noticed was that the Graf Zeppelin's hull was taller and narrower then was the norm for US carriers being built.

    • @markschneider8815
      @markschneider8815 7 років тому +1

      Mattblaster 14 That's more or less the way the Langley was built. The difference being the USN used an existing ship and decked it over whereas the Germans had a purpose-built hull. The main carriers the US had were built the same way, but the USN converted Liberty ship hulls that were not nearly as expensive. These "jeep" carriers served in tge Atlantic to provide air cover for conveys once they passed out of range of land-based aircraft. This spoiled the German U-Boats' hunting ground and lead to a marked increase in cargo and supplies making it to England.
      In the Pacific the jeep carriers saw less combat than their big brothers. Often times they were used to ferry aircraft to replace combat losses or equip the airstrips built in great numbers on the islands and atolls in the Pacific.
      So there is really nothing special about the Graf Zeppelin. The only thing I noticed was that the Graf Zeppelin's hull was taller and narrower then was the norm for US carriers being built.

    • @williwass6837
      @williwass6837 7 років тому +3

      MARK SCHNEIDER!if you compare the GZ with the langley,you dont know nothing about the GZ,sorry!And even the Convoy carriers of the USN where different from the GZ!So your statement is false!

    • @sirboomsalot4902
      @sirboomsalot4902 5 років тому +1

      Didn't the GZ have catapults?

    • @LURKTec
      @LURKTec 4 роки тому

      Lol it was a shit design

  • @lonewulf44
    @lonewulf44 10 років тому +11

    Wow ... amazing footage. Thanks for posting.

  • @BryanMagsayo
    @BryanMagsayo 8 років тому +26

    poor zeppelin

  • @secretagentviper8382
    @secretagentviper8382 3 роки тому

    You got some great vids, that Goya sent chills down my spine, Davy Jones locker is real

  • @josephwood4160
    @josephwood4160 2 роки тому +1

    Damn, it takes guts to dive there

  • @nikolaibelyk6648
    @nikolaibelyk6648 2 роки тому +1

    The Graf zeppelin was captured after the Germans tried to scuttle her in port. Soviets later used it as a target in training exercises and its final resting place is somewhere in the Baltic

  • @rivco5008
    @rivco5008 7 років тому +19

    I did not know the wreck of Graf Zeppelin was accessible to divers.

    • @dakotajokoty7983
      @dakotajokoty7983 6 років тому +1

      It's not. It's illegal.

    • @sirboomsalot4902
      @sirboomsalot4902 4 роки тому +22

      Dakota Jokoty Yes it is, diving Graf Zeppelin is completely legal. She isn’t a war grave

    • @kamalalasucksbigly
      @kamalalasucksbigly 3 роки тому

      @@dakotajokoty7983 why is it illegal to dive on her ?

    • @itsrockyiv8209
      @itsrockyiv8209 3 роки тому +1

      @@kamalalasucksbigly It ain't illegal, like the guy above you said, its not a war grave

    • @kamalalasucksbigly
      @kamalalasucksbigly 3 роки тому

      @@itsrockyiv8209 Maybe you should pay closer attention to the comment content. I asked him why it was Illegal, as I wanted to hear why HE felt it was Illegal. And isn't sounds far better then ain't

  • @EpicThe112
    @EpicThe112 2 роки тому +1

    In Russian Navy terminology this would have been called an Aircraft Cruiser because Graf Zeppelin has aeroplanes and Anti Ship Guns. However a royal Navy and United States Navy intelligence report see Graf Zeppelin as an Aircraft carrier

    • @christianklerx8109
      @christianklerx8109 2 роки тому +3

      She was a true Aircraft Carrier. The 150 mm guns she carried in casemates were just for self defence. A lot of carriers between WW1 and WW2 were equipped with guns for selfdefence.For example the famous USS Saratoga with eight 203 mm guns in twin turrets which were later replaced by 127 mm AA guns.

  • @k956upg
    @k956upg 4 роки тому +4

    How deep

    • @kufel61
      @kufel61  4 роки тому +3

      90 on bottom 70on deck

  • @456swagger
    @456swagger 9 років тому +6

    I thought that the Graf Zeppelin was scrapped and the metal used for the War effort.

    • @PRR5406
      @PRR5406 8 років тому +10

      +456swagger You're confusing two vessels. The "Graf Zeppelin" we have fonder memories of was the rigid airship. Goering ordered it scrapped for the aluminum content. There was an attempt at a ocean going ship, an aircraft carrier, also called "Graf Zeppelin" . This is the wreck you are viewing.

    • @melloangelwolf8611
      @melloangelwolf8611 7 років тому

      same here?

    • @BClarkSC
      @BClarkSC 6 років тому +5

      There were 2 Graf Zeppelin class aircraft carriers.
      "A" is the one that was commissioned, but never finished, then used as target practice by the USSR after the war.
      "B" was scrapped for the metal before getting close to commissioning.

    • @richardcline1337
      @richardcline1337 6 років тому +5

      Hitler lost the war all by himself by being so short sighted that he did not build up the U-Boat fleet, the surface fleet or commission any aircraft carriers. Then he does the unthinkable by attacking Russia before he is even anywhere near close to settling the British question. He also listened to fat pig Goering and never built any long range four engine bombers. They did attempt to use the Condor but that plane was never designed for combat but was just a modified commercial airliner. Kind of like trying to turn a Boeing 747 into dive bomber. And how much man power, materials and money did he squander on Himmler's death camps? He was his own worst enemy.

    • @oswarz5294
      @oswarz5294 4 роки тому

      One is an airship one is an aircraft carrier

  • @panzerofthelake1623
    @panzerofthelake1623 4 роки тому +9

    MEIN WAIFU

  • @李子栗子梨子
    @李子栗子梨子 4 роки тому +1

    How depth? 90 meters?

  • @nowheretohideit
    @nowheretohideit 3 роки тому

    From other video, it said it is hard to be sinked..

  • @landerrodrigues2692
    @landerrodrigues2692 11 років тому +1

    legal!

  • @jamesricker3997
    @jamesricker3997 6 років тому +8

    The Gaff Zeppelin would have been an overweight escort carrier lacking any suitable aircraft. Her combat career would have been remarkably short

    • @endmysuffering4211
      @endmysuffering4211 5 років тому +1

      Word.

    • @noelblack8159
      @noelblack8159 2 роки тому +1

      …There were 3 and more Aircraft Types that we’re suitable???
      And it wasn’t overweight, the engines that were planned just weren’t ready (because the ship was heavy, but not Overweight).

  • @adimor9317
    @adimor9317 8 років тому +8

    To ten największy wrak na dnie bałtyku?

  • @michaelmcclellan6944
    @michaelmcclellan6944 Рік тому

    One of those great IFs of WWII.....what IF Nazi Germany had developed a creditable naval aviation force without actually building that foolish naval" Plan Z " ---( with those silly H class battleships and the O class battlecruisers --- yes they both were impressive to look at and carried equally impressive armaments--- they were also gas guzzlers that would have needed frequent refueling or they would have short range)....with those carriers the Nazis might have won the battle of the Atlantic...

  • @Winch-jq3tb
    @Winch-jq3tb 7 років тому +11

    if the Germans had finished their carrier program and learn how to use them battel of Britain would have ended different

    • @MechaWolf0
      @MechaWolf0 7 років тому +2

      I agree.

    • @fazsum41
      @fazsum41 6 років тому +8

      No i dont think it would of. Yes there would of been more bf109’s in the air for a longer time but the carrier would of been detected and under constant attack air attack or under constant attack by the navy. Maybe with the rest of the german navy, would of done more damage against places like coastal parts of africa, italy, spain etc... but not britain. Especially the battle of britain when practically every raid was getting detected

    • @fazsum41
      @fazsum41 6 років тому +2

      CSM101 the US was not the soul supplier to Britain. We had a huge amount coming from the middle east and Mediterranean, the mainly supplied our forces in places like Burma etc... but the ships bringing the fuel over here were not only US ships. British merchant ships, and many died bringing the oil to britain during the war by U-Boats and luftwaffe bombers. Wether this aircraft carrier was put into service or not, britain would of got its fuel and still would of been able to fight off the luftwaffe. In fact the carrier would cause just as much hassle for the US alone as much as it would for the british. And not only that just like the bismark, graf spee etc... it would of been hunted down to the point it would not of even been able to affect the battle of britain.

    • @thaddeuskyle572
      @thaddeuskyle572 6 років тому +1

      +CSM101 To add on to what kieran said, the British also had their own supply of oil, as well. You see, Egypt was a British colony, as well as Israel and Jordan. So that meant Britain had partial control of the Middle Eastern oil supply. As a result, Britain had a decent amount of oil, but of course limited, as well. And another thing, saying that we should have let the Nazis win is essentially saying "We should have let democracy get wiped away from Europe completely and lost our only remaining European ally. We should have allowed a fascist dictatorship to rule Europe instead of protecting freedom and democracy." Oh, also, the Battle of Britain (July 10 - October 31, 1940) was before the Lend-Lease Act had been passed (March 11, 1941), so Britain was buying all of that oil, not getting it for free.

    • @YUSKHAN
      @YUSKHAN 3 роки тому

      It would have ended different if Hitler hadn't backed of at Dunkirk

  • @KANKORD79
    @KANKORD79 3 роки тому

    Погугли небыло такого корабля с таким названием не считая немецкого недостренного авианосца ,поясни что за корабль на видео?????

    • @noelblack8159
      @noelblack8159 2 роки тому

      It’s the Graf Zeppelin, it was never finished and was scuttled, wich is the wreck you see.

  • @alfiecowan9165
    @alfiecowan9165 4 роки тому +1

    It's not the Graf zeppelin carrier but it might be reply back to tell me so I know for sure