The Wreck of KMS Gneisenau - German Battleship Left To Rust

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 25 лис 2024

КОМЕНТАРІ • 152

  • @alephalon7849
    @alephalon7849 Місяць тому +39

    That last photo with Blyskawica passing the wreck of Gneisenau as the destroyer finally comes home is definitely a fitting one to conclude the video on.

  • @Blue-dt1yv
    @Blue-dt1yv Місяць тому +42

    Fun Fact, some of the armor plates scavenged from Gneisenau's belt were used in the construction of the cathedral in Katowice

  • @jaroslawharwich7624
    @jaroslawharwich7624 Місяць тому +9

    Gneisenau was sunk to block the main entrance to Gdynia,it was imperative to clear the wreck and open the port to much needed aid arriving from the West.There was entry to the port via the southern end of the main breakwater,which is still there an provides shelter for traffic from N’ly storms,however that entrance had limited depth to shipping so the aim was to get this scrap cleared and restore the main entrance.

  • @mikebaginy8731
    @mikebaginy8731 Місяць тому +3

    An interesting video with some rare photos. Thanks!
    In fact, a good friend lives in Gdynia (Gotenhafen during German occupation) where the Gneisenau was sunk. I visit often and think of that incident during each stroll through the harbour.

  • @carmenfoote7999
    @carmenfoote7999 Місяць тому

    Nice clip with some fascinating old photos of the ship. A sad end to a fine lady. Thanks for the post. Joe S

  • @derekheeps1244
    @derekheeps1244 Місяць тому +1

    If you look at Gydinia on Google maps , the two lighthouses marking the harbour entrance are still there and still operational with red and green tops to mark port and starboard . There are even pictures of Gneisenau posted if you click on the eastern lighthouse and scroll through the photographs .
    I have visited Gdansk , Gydina and Sopot many years ago , but that was in 1970 , so my memories of the place are somewhat faded . We were wary of taking photographs at the time as it was still part of the eastern bloc .

  • @christianandphillipa
    @christianandphillipa Місяць тому +5

    Gneisenau’s bow was removed in Gdynia, not Kiel. The ship sailed under her own power from Kiel to Gdynia in April 1942. The stern wasn’t removed at all, it was simply under water after the scuttling.

  • @Frank_Stendel
    @Frank_Stendel Місяць тому +13

    Hello from Germany!
    Thank You for Your video. About the photo at 07:00 what You called the cut at the stern is the rear structure in front of the barbette of the rear main turret.

    • @volkerjahns2489
      @volkerjahns2489 Місяць тому +5

      Absolutely correct. The stern is just under water, it wasn´t cut off. Imagine to replace the shafts and rudder, it isn´t feasible if you want to re-use the ship.- By the way, the bow wasn´t cut off in Kiel already, the forward turret ("Anton") was removed and the bow patched up, then the Gneisenau made her way to Gotenhafen under her own power. She was accompanied by the old battleship Schlesien and the icebreaker Castor. The bow was then cut off in Gotenhafen. Source: "Von der Emden zur Tirpitz", Siegfried Breyer/Gerhard Koop.

    • @TonyAscott-p9t
      @TonyAscott-p9t 19 днів тому

      Yes, it’s very informative but I wish the narrator could pronounce German & Japanese ship names better, he makes good names sound ugly

  • @ronaldhaave1406
    @ronaldhaave1406 Місяць тому +6

    My Father, who died in 2011, was a young second officer on a freighter carrying several hundred mules to be landed at Gdynia as replacements for destroyed farm equipment. Only he and the captain stood watch as the rest of the officers were inexperienced. They navigated through mine fields & my Dad insisted that this was the first commercial voyage to Gdynia at the end of the war. He photographed Gneisenau as block ship, but shorn of detail as he used his Kodak Brownie camera. He only told me this story along with others a few years before he died.

    • @SteelyPaw
      @SteelyPaw Місяць тому +1

      My dad died about the same year as your dad. My dad was a month away from his 90'th birthday. My dad was a gunnersmate 1'st class, on patroll of the north Atlantic via a destroyer. War dads have a lot of cool stories to tell of their service. He joined the navy in 1941 and was honorably discharged in late 1945.

  • @Tedjenkins55
    @Tedjenkins55 Місяць тому +6

    Fun fact you can easily tell gneisenau from her sister scharnhorst that been the placement of thier main masts gneisenau's was over her funnel scharnhorst's was further back.

  • @mickaleneduczech8373
    @mickaleneduczech8373 Місяць тому +4

    Gneisenau and Sharnhorst were originally designed to have the 3 twin 15" (38 cm) turrets, but Germany was still relearning how to make those, and they wouldn't be ready for a few years. But they had 6 triple 11in ( 28 cm) turrets for 3 planned but canceled pocket battleships, so they dropped those in until the larger guns were ready. Of course the first 15" turrets went to Bismarck and Tirpitz. With Gneisenau laid up for extensive repairs it was decided to upgrade the guns. But after the Kreigsmarine suffered several other loses, Hitler decided he didn't want any more resources spent on the surface fleet, and ordered all work stopped.

    • @Wolf-hh4rv
      @Wolf-hh4rv Місяць тому

      I am always confused by the idea that Germany had lost the expertise to fabricate bigger cannons. The Kaiser’s massive ship construction came to an end only about 15 years before these ships were designed/constructed. Every engineer had died by then? Please help me someone, makes no sense.

    • @mickaleneduczech8373
      @mickaleneduczech8373 Місяць тому +2

      @@Wolf-hh4rv Fifteen years is actually a long time. The whole German military complex was dismantled, the factories re-worked or torn down, and the workers moved on to other careers. Plus they didn't just want to pick up building guns where they left off, they needed to modernize them with all the new bells and whistles. That's alot of time to make up, when the British and Americans had been building and experimenting the whole time.
      The guns and turrets are the most complicated and time consuming part of a battleship to build.

    • @hajoos.8360
      @hajoos.8360 Місяць тому

      The decision to install 11-inch guns was made by Hitler, not to provoke the Brits.

    • @hajoos.8360
      @hajoos.8360 Місяць тому +2

      @@Wolf-hh4rv Several Kriegsmarine - officers voted against the conversion from 11 to 15 inch guns. The 11-inch guns had several advantages, faster reload, more shells in the air, more availabe storage for more shells in the magazines, longer lifetime of the barrels. The Scharnhorst-class 11-inch guns fired high verlocity shells, with more than 900 meters as per second, very fast. This high velocity balanced a little bit the lower shellweight. The 11-inch-guns of the Scharnhorst-class could penetrate every British- or Frenchie battle-ship. The Bismarck-class 15-inch guns were a new development, the Bayern-class 15-inch gun construction plans were lost by Blohm & Voss. The German enginneers were very fussy. Watch the Bismarck-class-turrets & You will see, that the distance of both barrels was increased in comparison to Bayern-class turrets, to avoid the explosion impact of the opponent barrel. But German turret-shapes of WWII ships were very unfavourable, a miscontruction, watch the 90 degree side-, back & frontwalls. The Germans built some 16-inch guns (40,6 cm) for the Atlantic-wall, 14-inch & 16,5 inch howitzers & train-based guns, 11-inch, 15-inch & 31,5 inch (80 cm), the famous Dora, with a crew of 2.000 men, and a shell-weight of 5,4 tonnes, only used at the siege of Sevastopol. The German at sea problem was not the gun-size, but the human problem. The German officers at sea were really bad, the SKLs competence unbearable. Only crews & technical officers were fine. The Germans had no maritime tradition.

    • @Wolf-hh4rv
      @Wolf-hh4rv Місяць тому

      @@hajoos.8360 German gunnery in WWI and WW2 was superior to the British navy

  • @Viking88Power
    @Viking88Power Місяць тому +4

    cool photos Ive never seen.

  • @UguysRnuts
    @UguysRnuts Місяць тому +15

    I've inherited a pair of Gneisenau's massive Zeiss binoculars from my Merchant Marine grandfather.

    • @JollySchwaggermann
      @JollySchwaggermann Місяць тому

      Which merchant marine was that-sailed for the Feuhrer ?

    • @JollySchwaggermann
      @JollySchwaggermann Місяць тому

      Good radar sets would have been more useful-

    • @UguysRnuts
      @UguysRnuts Місяць тому +2

      @@JollySchwaggermann Nein. He was Welsh. I don't know where he got them from. After the war he had German POW's under his command, whom, I'm told, he became friends with.

    • @UguysRnuts
      @UguysRnuts Місяць тому +1

      @@JollySchwaggermann Not to me. I still use the binos.

    • @fwinkler112
      @fwinkler112 Місяць тому

      Cool, How about a picture?

  • @logotrikes
    @logotrikes Місяць тому +1

    Very smart looking ships...

  • @leroysgamesandmore2226
    @leroysgamesandmore2226 Місяць тому +1

    The stern was removed up to turret 3’s barrette from some photos I’ve seen on an old website

  • @albertseifert6562
    @albertseifert6562 Місяць тому +1

    Great story

  • @KrzysztofGorecki-u2c
    @KrzysztofGorecki-u2c Місяць тому +5

    Mój śp. Dziadek, miał kawał deski z pokładu pancernika Gneisenau, którą wykorzystał jako kadłub do modelu trałowca, który wykonał. Model obecnie w posiadaniu mojego kuzyna.

  • @richardmeo2503
    @richardmeo2503 Місяць тому +1

    Krauts made nice looking ships.

  • @flywheel986
    @flywheel986 Місяць тому +18

    At one point, the Deutsche Kriegsmarine could field two large battleships, two large battle cruisers, two "pocket battleships, three heavy cruisers and 4 light cruisers, and dozens of destroyers. Total mismanagement of assets. Obviously the Reich had no business playing blue water navy.

    • @calvinnickel9995
      @calvinnickel9995 Місяць тому +3

      It was for propaganda purposes.
      Honestly a blue water navy is useless. The Japanese demonstrated that. Instead of building huge and ultimately useless battleships.. they should have built more destroyers and Kaibokan to defend its vital merchant fleet.
      This is what the British were forced to do.. combined with the Canadians and the American Destroyers for Bases the RN and RCN built a staggering number of escorts ranging from dumpy Flower Class corvettes which could be out run and out gunned by a surfaced U boat to massive Tribal Class destroyers. British capital ships were repeatedly put on hold or cancelled because of this.
      Only the Americans had the industrial capacity to build both capital ships and escorts.

    • @flywheel986
      @flywheel986 Місяць тому

      @@calvinnickel9995 If Germany had spent the money on submarines, tanks and aircraft, instead of their useless surface fleet,history might have been written differently. Sure glad Adolph was an ego maniacal military idiot

    • @TTTT-oc4eb
      @TTTT-oc4eb Місяць тому +5

      Bismarck was sunk before Tirpitz became operational, and Blucher was sunk before Prinz Eugen became operational. All these ships were part of the Z-plan which was scheduled to be ready by 1948, so KM was not prepared for a major war in 1939.

    • @flywheel986
      @flywheel986 Місяць тому +1

      @@TTTT-oc4eb Both vessels you mentioned were conducting their sea trials, and final fitting. Prinz Eugene was ready to accompany Bismark on it's star crossed first mission. The point is that Hitler was in love with bright shiny new things, and had no idea how to utilize them, resulting in doomed to fail operational orders.

    • @2ndavenuesw481
      @2ndavenuesw481 Місяць тому +2

      The German Navy caused a lot of headaches for the British, and with better luck (and more secure communications, or fewer communications) could have had more success. If Germany has no Navy their Baltic coast is defenseless, they are incapable of defending Scandinavia, etc. It's very tedious to always hear variations of "Germany shouldn't have bothered with X because they lost the war!" Every single video, the same people saying the same tedious, stupid things. Every major power needed a Navy, it shouldn't be necessary to explain this.

  • @voycressv460
    @voycressv460 Місяць тому

    How right you are.

  • @metalmadsen
    @metalmadsen Місяць тому

    After the war, Denmark made a seafort with cannon from one of s german Battleship/Chruiser.

  • @DaiElsan
    @DaiElsan Місяць тому +2

    How in the world did they get a turret and barrels all the way up to Norway?

  • @JeffreyWilliams-dr7qe
    @JeffreyWilliams-dr7qe Місяць тому +4

    Beautiful Naval Vessel.

  • @lukasito100
    @lukasito100 Місяць тому

    Some parts of Gneisenau are in the Navy Museum in Gdynia. Rangefinder , searchlight ?

  • @michaels.5878
    @michaels.5878 Місяць тому +1

    The lighthouses are still there btw. 😊

  • @RichardKroboth
    @RichardKroboth Місяць тому +1

    I believe the pronunciation of the ship is Neisenau, the G is silent.

    • @calvinnickel9995
      @calvinnickel9995 27 днів тому +1

      It is not silent. It’s pronounced softly.

  • @holymoly6829
    @holymoly6829 Місяць тому

    Interesting any ideas as to when it was finally cut up and recycled So many tons of top quality steel there ?

  • @BlackMaria61
    @BlackMaria61 Місяць тому

    The pic at 10.22 is like a Chris Foss illustration

  • @henriklind8423
    @henriklind8423 20 днів тому +1

    😢

    • @RiteKnight
      @RiteKnight 16 годин тому

      Don't get sad or despondent. The spirit behind it lives on; there's been enough proof in this year alone - it's something that agents in the 90s thought would be unthinkable!

  • @christophercripps7639
    @christophercripps7639 Місяць тому

    Any information on whether or not the Germans salvaged this ship’s armor belt? Something of the barbettes Bruno & Caesar remained but was this armor still extent when scrapped? This ship would’ve had several thousand tons of high quality armor steel in the belts and barbettes. Late in the war Germany had a shortage of certain alloying elements (No, Cr, Mo, …) needed to make quality armor plate. Late war panzers suffered for it. It seems an oversight to ignore several 1000 tons of quality steel.

  • @onehurtcowboy
    @onehurtcowboy Місяць тому

    where in denmark is the secondary gun located?

  • @jaycooper2812
    @jaycooper2812 Місяць тому

    Weren't her remaining turrets used as shore batteries in Norway? I have some pictures of one of them that my grandfather took shortly after the war ended.

    • @meanmichael6348
      @meanmichael6348 Місяць тому

      One of the turrets are in Austratt which is still operational (not firing operational) the other in Fjell Fortress located on Sotra island (They tore down the gun but left its armor plates on the island) And one that sits in the Netherlands (its actually been used in single barrels not its original battleship turret

  • @Kierenstanden-qz7eu
    @Kierenstanden-qz7eu Місяць тому +2

    It’s guns were put on the Atlantic wall in norway

  • @MattnessLP
    @MattnessLP Місяць тому

    At around 13:25, didn't you mean to say "Gneisenau remains recogneiseble"?

  • @sgttord
    @sgttord Місяць тому

    Funny this video comes up when im playing this ship in wows

  • @brucesim2003
    @brucesim2003 Місяць тому +2

    A sad end for a proud ship with a fine heritage.
    It could be argued that Scharnhorst had a better end for a fighting ship. Doing what she was built to do, and going down with colours still flying. It's a pity that the destruction of capital ships of that vintage resulted in such a large loss of life.

  • @anonymusum
    @anonymusum Місяць тому +1

    What a shame. Gneisenau was one of the most beautiful warships ever.

  • @Ka9radio_Mobile9
    @Ka9radio_Mobile9 Місяць тому +1

    🥰🥰🥰🥰

  • @tensaibr
    @tensaibr 26 днів тому

    I wish they had saved something, like the conning tower for example. Such a shame.
    I understand they had other priorities back then and not much love for anything that remembered about the German occupation but, still a shame nonetheless.

  • @3lullabies
    @3lullabies Місяць тому

    Thats a lot of wasted steel for early '43.

  • @tonydagostino6158
    @tonydagostino6158 Місяць тому +4

    Ooh, first comment. Enjoy your videos. BTW, the "G" is silent

    • @KalleKotelett
      @KalleKotelett Місяць тому +4

      Neisenau?

    • @tonydagostino6158
      @tonydagostino6158 Місяць тому

      @@KalleKotelett Ja

    • @calvinnickel9995
      @calvinnickel9995 Місяць тому +5

      Neisensau from Ermany.

    • @KalleKotelett
      @KalleKotelett Місяць тому +4

      Meinen Recherchen nach kommt es ganz darauf an wen mann gerade fragt und welche mondphase gerade ist .
      In der Deutschen Wochenschau wird das G jedenfalls sehr deutlich ausgesprochen .

    • @RayyMusik
      @RayyMusik Місяць тому +3

      The G is not at all silent! It would be if this were an English name, but it’s Erman … err … German. Anyway, I have never ever heard “Neisenau“.

  • @kittyhawk9707
    @kittyhawk9707 Місяць тому

    What a complete waste of resources and time .. Surely it wouldn't have been that hard to put her back into service .... Thankfully for us .. the Germans couldn't be bothered ..

  • @richardzeiders5496
    @richardzeiders5496 Місяць тому +57

    Adolf Hitler's true enemy was Hitler. His foolhardy impetuous psyche', lack of foresight, & short changing Germany's navy in terms of Aircraft carriers to provide air cover & strike ability on the open sea limited its effectiveness. Advancements in the tools of war changed strategies, a naval aircrafts reach of attack far outstripped the huge guns of capital ships & while not truly making them useless, limited their role in battle. If Hitler had the foresight & patience to wait at least 5 years, I might be writing this in German. Germany's hardwater scientists were not very far behind America's, obviously German rocket science coupled with atomic bombs would have eliminated the wasteful front in the East in a flash. Thank God Hitler was an impatient fool.

    • @williamdodds1394
      @williamdodds1394 Місяць тому +6

      Thats correct to leave capital ships with no aircover was suicide now you can see why the USN depends on them for there ships protection and cover .

    • @calvinnickel9995
      @calvinnickel9995 Місяць тому +8

      Carriers were a waste.
      Sure.. in the South Pacific they were indispensably because of the vast distances and lack of airfields. But in the North Atlantic other than for escort duties and anti submarine operations-neither of which Nazi Germany needed-they were rarely used and their few successes were lucky (like jamming Bismarcks rudder) and failures embarrassing (like Ark Royal and Courageous getting sunk by U Boats and Glorious being sunk by Scharnhorst-the only carrier to ever be sunk by a battleship).
      No.. Nazi Germany did not have the resources for a large navy. Its key to success was asymmetrical warfare with the U boat.
      Had Germany put nearly all of its effort into submarines, more and better submarines that were more capable.. better code technology and more robust security… Britain would have been starved into submission within two years.
      This would have happened because that’s exactly what the US did to Japan. It was the direct cause of their loss.
      But unfortunately all power ultimately derives from the masses-even a dictator’s. They needed the big huge battleships for propaganda purposes.. which is why they started with pocket battleships instead of cruisers.. smaller battleships instead of small carriers, and larger battleships instead of large carriers.. and then only had a few cruisers and like 8 destroyers.

    • @maxkennedy8075
      @maxkennedy8075 Місяць тому +12

      He did however redeem himself by killing Hitler

    • @williamdodds1394
      @williamdodds1394 Місяць тому +3

      @@calvinnickel9995 Bismark needed air cover that was lacking uk was not starved it survived hitler didnt really care for the ship just his ego .

    • @williamdodds1394
      @williamdodds1394 Місяць тому

      @@maxkennedy8075 You believe that he got away to argentina after all the elite do look after the elite.

  • @will8026
    @will8026 Місяць тому +6

    Just ignore the "G" when pronouncing Gneisenau. It should sound like "Nyz-e-now" otherwise it was a terrific video!

    • @reinercelsus8299
      @reinercelsus8299 Місяць тому +3

      No. That's like telling him to say "raft" if he said something like "caraft" whenever he means "craft". There is no silent "G" in German. It's Gneisenau, neither Ganeisenau nor Neisenau.

    • @jimtaylor294
      @jimtaylor294 Місяць тому

      ^ Nope. The first chap is right.

    • @KalleKotelett
      @KalleKotelett Місяць тому +5

      Even in the German newsreel from World War II in which the Gneisenau appears, the G is clearly pronounced. There is no silent g in the German language.

    • @riccardodececco4404
      @riccardodececco4404 Місяць тому +2

      no, the G is pronounced, though slightly...

  • @grahamgottard
    @grahamgottard Місяць тому +2

    The G isn't sounded.

    • @reinercelsus8299
      @reinercelsus8299 Місяць тому +6

      It certainly is, but shorter and not exactly how he says it, which sounds more like "Ganeisenau". There is no silent G in German.

  • @StuartAhrens-b4n
    @StuartAhrens-b4n Місяць тому

    Lovely Ship like most of them they got destroyed. Shame with the Bismarck and Sharnhourst Triypitz not sure if the spelling is correct but yeah my father was born into Nazi Germany 🇩🇪 in 1928 ended up in the Hitler youth and later the German army. But he told me that most people don't know what happened. Just the bad things.

  • @charlesturcotte4448
    @charlesturcotte4448 Місяць тому +1

    do not pronounce the G, rather, try 'nice-en-owe'

    • @ParanoidPsychosis
      @ParanoidPsychosis Місяць тому +7

      The G is pronounced, it’s a German name not an English one. You don’t call it a Erman warship, right?

    • @whiteheatherclub
      @whiteheatherclub Місяць тому +2

      @@ParanoidPsychosis It's strange how so many people saying that the G is not pronounced when other people are giving strong evidence that it is pronounced. Anyway, Enerals Manteuffel and von Thoma want their Gs back.

    • @charlesturcotte4448
      @charlesturcotte4448 Місяць тому

      just trying to assist. unfortunately that escaped you.

    • @ParanoidPsychosis
      @ParanoidPsychosis Місяць тому +2

      @@charlesturcotte4448 it didn’t escape me no worries. It’s just wrong and I was just trying to assist by correcting you but unfortunately that seems to have escaped you as well. Wasn’t trying to come of as rude man.

    • @brucesim2003
      @brucesim2003 Місяць тому

      @@whiteheatherclub If the 'Eneral Manteuffel' you are referring to is the former GOC Grossdeutschland division, he also wants his 'von' back.😏