The Ship All Axis Powers Were so Afraid Of

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 28 січ 2025

КОМЕНТАРІ • 410

  • @RetiredSailor60
    @RetiredSailor60 9 місяців тому +60

    Your stories of Naval ships, crew, aircraft, etc tugs at my heart being a retired Navy Sailor. Thanks for your videos.

    • @DavidJones-me7yr
      @DavidJones-me7yr 9 місяців тому +2

      Thank you for your service! 👍

    • @jarretthuffin
      @jarretthuffin 9 місяців тому +2

      I gotta give it to you sailor. This was the GOLDEN AGE of naval warfare and basic seamanship. The levels of toughness, dedication, and overall monumental effort put into everything was astounding to see, read, and hear about. Thank YOU, good sir, for braving the sea and her waves and making our world safe.

    • @alaricgoldkuhl155
      @alaricgoldkuhl155 8 місяців тому +1

      I salute you good sir. My grandfather served on the HMAS Melbourne, Australia's disaster aircraft carrier. He was chosen as one of the personal bodyguards of Queen Elizabeth ii when she came to Australia.

  • @QuakeDragon
    @QuakeDragon 9 місяців тому +45

    I have no idea how you find all this vintage footage, but I'm here for it!

    • @bulldawg6259
      @bulldawg6259 9 місяців тому

      Not all the footage is Accurate

    • @QuakeDragon
      @QuakeDragon 9 місяців тому +4

      @@bulldawg6259 Thanks. I'm a long time dark skies/seas/docs watcher, so I am well aware of that fact and do see the same footage in some of the other videos, but I like the content and story details. The vintage video footage brings it to life for me, regardless of the incident:footage accuracy disparities. I suppose you could say I'm a fanboy of the content creators format.

    • @bionicgeekgrrl
      @bionicgeekgrrl 9 місяців тому +1

      @@QuakeDragon A lot of it is archive footage from various sources or war film footage and documentary recreations.

  • @gdok6088
    @gdok6088 9 місяців тому +42

    The British Royal Navy comes up with some wonderful names for their ships; HMS Implacable being a good example. Thank you for this well researched, illustrated and narrated video.

    • @Mark0003260
      @Mark0003260 9 місяців тому +2

      Probably names carried throughout history from the days of wooden ships similar to what the US has done in some cases. There have been more than one USS Enterprise and some carriers sunk at the beginning of WWII passed their names onto Essex class carriers.

    • @jasonhesson1030
      @jasonhesson1030 9 місяців тому +2

      More to do with going through the alphabet tbh.
      If the first ship in the class is named with a word beginning with the letter 'I', all the other ships will follow suit.
      Not always a 'gold standard' though!
      The Invincible class Ark Royal was supposed to be named 'Indomitable' but was named Ark Royal instead.
      And the Audacious class ship HMS Eagle was originally supposed to be named HMS Audacious alongside the Ark Royal.

    • @davewolfy2906
      @davewolfy2906 9 місяців тому +2

      ​@Mark0003260 the RN had HMS Enterprize, at the same time the USN an Enterprise.

    • @jasonhesson1030
      @jasonhesson1030 9 місяців тому +2

      @@davewolfy2906
      Correct
      But the USN spelt theirs wrong!😂😂😂

    • @peterblake4837
      @peterblake4837 9 місяців тому +1

      There's only one Royal Navy, doesn't need "British" tacked on

  • @BuddyMcNugget
    @BuddyMcNugget 9 місяців тому +121

    So sad how few of Britain's many warships were never saved for posterity.

    • @Wolvieonepunch
      @Wolvieonepunch 9 місяців тому +2

      That is so true

    • @agolftwittler1223
      @agolftwittler1223 9 місяців тому +1

      Indeed.

    • @robertx8020
      @robertx8020 9 місяців тому +5

      It's very expensive to 'save' ships and in the post-war time other things were more important
      At least 'we' have Belfast, Cavalier and Wellington

    • @robertx8020
      @robertx8020 9 місяців тому +4

      @dougaldouglas8842 There are some other countries too..but yes, the US saved some ships but if we look at percentages (how many ships they had in ww2 and how many got saved ) then the number is still pretty low and some of the 'heroes' are missing sadly

    • @joecorrigan7848
      @joecorrigan7848 9 місяців тому +2

      Cavalier was pushed from Brighton, the Clyde, Newcastle before it was taken in at Chatham. Next move the scrapyard.

  • @williamlott7612
    @williamlott7612 9 місяців тому +21

    Love my British brothers-in-arms. Darlington, SC, USA

  • @allenhammond7853
    @allenhammond7853 9 місяців тому +125

    The Brits knew how to design, refit, and fight! I'm so proud of them! The HMS Implacable seemed to be a battleship disguised as an aircraft carrier! But...what do I know. I never got to serve. Regardless, that generation impresses me greatly!

    • @DavidJones-me7yr
      @DavidJones-me7yr 9 місяців тому

      That generation was very impressive indeed! But no one should have to worry about today's generation,, we have so many new and improved types!? We have male and female soldiers,, and including new and improved hybrids, such as trans, cisgender, plus many many more, armed with new and improved pronouns!?! So do not worry about our future! Can't you just feel the rainbow?? So there's no confusion, this is sarcasm!😮😂😂😂😂😂😂😊. P. S. If you're not already, it might be a good idea to arm yourself?!😢

    • @blairg378
      @blairg378 9 місяців тому

      If the Brit’s knew so much why did they have rely on the US/Canada to come to their rescue or Hitlers Germany would have kicked their ass!

    • @DrivermanO
      @DrivermanO 9 місяців тому +6

      HMS Implacable, not The HMS ...... This seems to be a common error. The Her Majesty's Ship is nonsensical.

    • @allenhammond7853
      @allenhammond7853 9 місяців тому +3

      @@DrivermanOHey, how's it going? Thanks for the correction.

    • @michaelgarrett1959
      @michaelgarrett1959 9 місяців тому +1

      And they would have fallen if America didn't help them with the radar

  • @jackgonzalez3176
    @jackgonzalez3176 3 місяці тому +1

    These videos are jewels. Thank you! The quality is great.

  • @simonchandler9601
    @simonchandler9601 9 місяців тому +16

    During WW2 a P-class destroyer, HMS Porcupine, was split in two amidships and the two halves were towed to Devonport. They were converted into accommodation hulks, the fore section was informally known as HMS Pork and the aft HMS Pine.

  • @rattlehead890
    @rattlehead890 9 місяців тому +54

    Thanks for not forgetting the Royal Navy and Britain. In this modern age you'd think Britain was not a part of WW2.........

    • @secretagent86
      @secretagent86 9 місяців тому +6

      And Canada. We have one of the largest shipping # of ships in the world then

    • @francislutz8027
      @francislutz8027 9 місяців тому +2

      US schools are at fault.
      They didn't teach history, they told Our story.
      I am 42 and was taught the Pacific theater was US 99% with a few Canadian and Australian troops. And that the British were in Europe the entire time. But that the US had an equal force in the Pacific as in Europe.
      The truth is much different but that's how they taught it

    • @mathewfullerton8577
      @mathewfullerton8577 9 місяців тому +5

      ​@@francislutz8027Making blanket statements is not prudent. I was taught about all of the Allies and their contributions in both theaters including the British involvement. And I attended school in the U.S.

    • @falkeholz1459
      @falkeholz1459 9 місяців тому

      @@mathewfullerton8577depends on the school rlly and state ig

    • @jarretthuffin
      @jarretthuffin 9 місяців тому +3

      Idk bout that. They fought tooth and nail not to get overwhelmed by Germany. Then made every inch of lost ground cost a high price in blood all over the Empire.
      The way modern era views France during the war is downright wrong, though. Made them look like they just gave up at the first sight of a German flag.

  • @conradnelson5283
    @conradnelson5283 9 місяців тому +3

    Sounds like a great ship. I always admired their steel decks.

  • @itwoznotme
    @itwoznotme 9 місяців тому +21

    gotta love the names of british ships.

    • @BuddyMcNugget
      @BuddyMcNugget 9 місяців тому +1

      Absolutely.

    • @TheGermanNamedJames
      @TheGermanNamedJames 9 місяців тому

      Ikr

    • @sirblank2384
      @sirblank2384 9 місяців тому

      The u.s. names some of their ships as taunts like iwo jima class, the midway class, ect

    • @ddoubleg
      @ddoubleg 5 місяців тому

      @@sirblank2384 no its not taunts.

    • @sirblank2384
      @sirblank2384 5 місяців тому

      @ddoubleg yes its is the biggest ship in the u.s. navy after ww2 just so happened to be the midway i dont thing that was coincidence

  • @bobbys4327
    @bobbys4327 9 місяців тому +24

    Always cracked me up that the ship builders were strictly adhering to the displacement size as by treaty. Like if one is in war who the hell would give a s*** about treaties?

    • @jasonservary477
      @jasonservary477 9 місяців тому +1

      The treaty covered the interwar period between WW1 -WW2

    • @davidgifford8112
      @davidgifford8112 9 місяців тому +3

      Almost a century later, it seems ridiculous that the RN and ship designers adhered strictly to navel treaty rules but I think it was a matter of pride to come up with credible naval ship designs within those rules.

    • @moodogco
      @moodogco 9 місяців тому +4

      The ships were designed b4 the war & was well along when ww2 broke so if they'd started after the war started we'd not given a shit & done woteva but at the time the project started on design of the ships one the things we didn't do was predicting the future so did was we'd signed up to with the treaty

    • @Mark0003260
      @Mark0003260 9 місяців тому +6

      They were in an expensive arms race before the treaties. There was even a lot of friction between the US and Britain as the US with its large advantage in manufacturing capacity was likely to pass the British navy. The treaty stayed in place until the Japanese decided they didn't like the fact they had to be in third place forever. Then it was a free-for-all again.

    • @johngjesdahl-xx2gb
      @johngjesdahl-xx2gb 9 місяців тому

      In the Pacific , one imperial power fighting another.

  • @chrishelt4389
    @chrishelt4389 9 місяців тому +7

    Thank you, the video was entertaining, although the title is a bit overdramatic. I was also wondering about the video clips you selected: while excellent, many don’t match the Implacable. For instance, you show a lot of clips of the the Vought Corsair, but that fighter did not fly from the Implacable, as the 14 foot hangers were to short to accommodate even the clipped-wing version used by the Royal Navy. I also noticed that while talking about her anti-aircraft armament, several clips were of the American 5”/38 twin mounts, not the 4.5”/45 actually mounted.
    Again, I enjoyed the video, I just think that using clips of the correct hardware, even if they were taken aboard different ships, would give the vast majority of viewers a more accurate picture of the Implacable.

    • @akashiseijuro5216
      @akashiseijuro5216 9 місяців тому +1

      The answer is simple. Looking for known actual recordings would be hard as is as during this time the clips were to be represented with would be nigh impossible seeing as it was the era of war. Hence, other nearly related clips would be used, acting as the template.

  • @tomredaintdead9575
    @tomredaintdead9575 9 місяців тому +6

    Always interesting and well written and narrated 👍

  • @DMS-pq8
    @DMS-pq8 9 місяців тому +8

    The British Pacific fleet also included the Aircraft carriers Formidable, Illustrious, Victorious, Indomitable and Indefatigable several light and escort carries and Battleships as well as ships from Canada, Australia and New Zealand

    • @robertx8020
      @robertx8020 9 місяців тому

      Yes, and your point is? ....

    • @DMS-pq8
      @DMS-pq8 9 місяців тому

      @@robertx8020 The point is don't be a dick Robbie

    • @bravo2zero796
      @bravo2zero796 9 місяців тому

      ​@robertx8020 I believe his point was that after Great Britain and her commonwealth allies finished up in the European theatre, they were able to divert a very powerful force to the far east to give the japs a hard time.

    • @MrSummerblade
      @MrSummerblade 9 місяців тому +1

      @@robertx8020Suppose the obvious implication is that it was a (HMS) Formidable fleet 😊

    • @robertx8020
      @robertx8020 9 місяців тому

      @@MrSummerblade 🤣nice pun
      But I wonder if it was needed? (that fleet being there I mean )

  • @joetilman7227
    @joetilman7227 9 місяців тому +4

    Have you considered covering some amphibs? I am partial to the Iwo Jima class (LPH) carriers, but would love to see any amphibs.

  • @larrydecoursey8056
    @larrydecoursey8056 5 місяців тому

    Never knew about this carrier at all. And Bravo on the design 🎉

  • @nicholasmoore2590
    @nicholasmoore2590 9 місяців тому +7

    The Kriegsmarine were never a threat to the Royal Navy for one very good reason. The Kriegsmarine was too small and the RN was still the biggest navy in the world. What was worrying though was the U-boats, especially when France fell and Germany gained access to Atlantic ports.

    • @PeteOtton
      @PeteOtton 9 місяців тому

      Not once the various sub hunters started to show up in numbers. If Hitler had started his war 2 years later, he would have lost his subs even faster.

    • @WilfredIvanhoe
      @WilfredIvanhoe 8 місяців тому

      @@PeteOtton The idea was to not to start the war until 1945 or 1947. By then, according to the plan, Germany would have had a much more powerful navy.

    • @PeteOtton
      @PeteOtton 8 місяців тому

      @@WilfredIvanhoe And Britain wouldn't have expanded even faster? They had more slipways and drydocks and already had plans on expanding their carriers and had started corvette and escort program before the war started. Germany would never have the navy to challenge the Royal Navy without stealing the French Navy and the Italian Navy was too dysfunctional as a whole.

    • @WilfredIvanhoe
      @WilfredIvanhoe 8 місяців тому

      @@PeteOtton Having more slipways and drydocks won't help if you lack the rest of the resources: money, materials and industrial capacity. Britain already had trouble with producing enough guns for its new King George V class battleships fast enough.
      Plus it's likely that advocates of appeasement policies would have either opposed, delayed or nullified attempts to build up the military fast enough.
      While Britain might have still possessed superior numbers in naval power, most of its capital ships would have been badly outdated by 1947.

    • @PeteOtton
      @PeteOtton 8 місяців тому

      @@WilfredIvanhoe I think that with the complete take over of Czechoslovakia Chamberlain's government was in trouble and the war hawks were starting to get the ascendancy. The build up of the navy and airforce might have bankrupted the country but they would have been build up and there was no way Germany with it's economy being raided to pay for the public deception works was going to compete with Britain in any longterm cold war build up of arms.

  • @Dedelblute3
    @Dedelblute3 9 місяців тому +2

    For some reason, I have always found the scrapping of ships from WW1 or WW2 sad. Yeah, you can't keep every destroyer or torpedo boat, but for larger countries, they actually have the space to make most battleships and carriers into things like tourist ships. The number of cool ships I've seen that were intentionally destroyed instead of keeping them for the sake of history is MASSIVE, a lot of which come from the nuclear testing done to see how ships would fare against nuclear weaponry. (while writing this I realized I've NEVER ACTUALLY SEEN the definition of "sake" and I'm slightly concerned lmao)

  • @SeauxNOLALady
    @SeauxNOLALady 9 місяців тому +2

    I just watched a video from Warographics, one of Simon Whistler’s channels, about the dire state of the Uk’s armed forces and how it’s dangerously unprepared for any kind of serious military conflict without the assistance of the rest of NATO, especially the United States. As an American, who is also from a military family, I’m used to the notion of a powerful and capable military with a large number of personnel, one and a half million actually, so hearing that the UK only has just over one hundred thousand military personnel… I was shocked! I know they’re a much smaller country, if you don’t count the many territories under the British commonwealth, but that seems like a small number of active duty troops. They also are very lacking in equipment and vehicles. From tanks, aircraft, armored personnel carriers, ships, and even the military housing is astoundingly below standard. They don’t even do their own recruiting anymore. It’s contracted out to a civilian company that doesn’t even have a face to face meeting with potential recruits, only on the phone. The glory days of the British empire and military might are long gone now.

    • @ddoubleg
      @ddoubleg 5 місяців тому

      What does that have to do with the video? also Britain has been like that for a long time, they never have lots of soldiers during peacetime but during war it shoots up. also its all about quality over quantity, British technology is much better than US, and the British soldier is much better trained than an American. for example Royal Marines Commandos force US Marine Corps troops to surrender in training exercise a few years ago. Falklands war Britain was outnumbered but won. USA may have the largest military but they've got to be the worst fighting force in the world. their soldiers are so undisciplined. look at Vietnam and Afghanistan both 20 year long wars against farmers with AKs both resulting in a lose. USA clearly over compensates for something and its pathetic. UK is so small and has wayyyy less people than usa and china but still has the 3rd best navy and is ranked number 1 in most professional and trained navy. its just lack of funding and size.

  • @joegordon5117
    @joegordon5117 9 місяців тому +1

    I'd imagine the crew were grateful for the decision to up her armour level, especially when she went to the Pacific

  • @josephjuno9555
    @josephjuno9555 9 місяців тому +3

    HMS Battle Axe had a Helicpter named Hatchet!

  • @z06cowboy72
    @z06cowboy72 9 місяців тому +5

    She only lasted 10 years. How sad.

  • @scinanisern9845
    @scinanisern9845 8 місяців тому

    What is so awesome is that this was on standard fuels. No nukes. A real guzzler.

  • @mad_max21
    @mad_max21 9 місяців тому +3

    Absolutely nothing suggest the Axis were afraid of this exact ship.

  • @MrJJuK
    @MrJJuK 9 місяців тому +5

    The USS Johnston doesn't exist, apparently. 🤔🤷🏼‍♂️

  • @sheilatruax6172
    @sheilatruax6172 9 місяців тому +17

    The Brits got the Corsairs before our troops. Our folks thought they had too many glitches. So, Britain ironed out the problems and then US picked them up again

    • @g8ymw
      @g8ymw 9 місяців тому +2

      Same with the Chrysler multibank engine fitted to some Sherman tanks.
      Not to mention dropping Merlin engines into Mustangs

    • @mikeholland1031
      @mikeholland1031 9 місяців тому +1

      Are you peddling that incorrect myth that the UK showed the yanks how to land them on a carrier?

    • @g8ymw
      @g8ymw 9 місяців тому

      @@mikeholland1031 How do you come to that conclusion?

    • @sheilatruax6172
      @sheilatruax6172 9 місяців тому

      @mikeholland1031 Thought it had to do with performance problems and general mechanical weirdness. Never heard about any landing problems.

    • @mikeholland1031
      @mikeholland1031 9 місяців тому

      @@g8ymw facts

  • @jimcat68
    @jimcat68 9 місяців тому +1

    I would have said "the Essex Class Carrier", but you make a good case here.

    • @sirblank2384
      @sirblank2384 9 місяців тому +1

      The enterprise is a good threat to that. older but still better and more stars lol

    • @richardcline1337
      @richardcline1337 3 місяці тому

      @@sirblank2384 Correct! The Japanese feared the USS Enterprise so much that they actually had a bounty on her. She had been reported "sunk" by so many pilots that the Japanese never knew where she was. Then, the idiotic Americans did what the Japanese never could do, destroy her!

  • @robertx8020
    @robertx8020 9 місяців тому +3

    Great video ..but I feel the title is a bit oiver the top.. as I don't think (or see no evidence ) that Japan was more 'afraid ' of Implacable than any of the other 100 carriers of the US navy!
    Sinking Implacable would have changed nothing ..nor would 'not sinking' her .

    • @ddoubleg
      @ddoubleg 5 місяців тому

      it was the strongest carrier, unlike weak us carriers this one could take many bombs and kamikaze attacks.

    • @robertx8020
      @robertx8020 5 місяців тому +1

      @@ddoubleg Still the US almost lost non of their ' weak' fleetcarrriers after midway
      Do you know the best way to protect a carrier?
      To make sure planes and ships can't even get close ..
      Btw the British lost some of their carriers too ..does that mean they were 'weak' too?

    • @andythoms8130
      @andythoms8130 2 місяці тому

      Do some research , a lot more damage would have been done to us carriers if they had been used instead of the armored deck british ones. One kamikaze could disable a US carrier through its wooden flight deck, why you being so dense.

  • @garygone5234
    @garygone5234 9 місяців тому +7

    You need to use feet and inches as well as meters and kilometers and millimeters in your descriptions. Thank you

    • @DavidJones-me7yr
      @DavidJones-me7yr 9 місяців тому +2

      You're right Giving haul thickness and deck thickness in millimeters makes it sound like it's made out of tin foil and newspaper!😢😂😊

    • @keithshackleton3173
      @keithshackleton3173 9 місяців тому

      The whole world works in metric but not the USA and two small countries. ​ The rest of us undetstand @@DavidJones-me7yr

    • @jamesathendune9026
      @jamesathendune9026 9 місяців тому +1

      These days everything should be measured in both Imperial and Metric and announced as such. One measurement should not be favoured over the other. Lefties love Metric!

    • @keithshackleton3173
      @keithshackleton3173 9 місяців тому +2

      @@jamesathendune9026 the whole world is metric but the USA and two small countries. Cope with it or change to metric. Who stuffed up the Mars space craft because they used imperial not metric? Metric is the world standard, imperial is history.

    • @mikeholland1031
      @mikeholland1031 9 місяців тому +1

      ​@@keithshackleton3173that was a cover story. It wasn't a conversion issue.

  • @robertx8020
    @robertx8020 9 місяців тому +1

    A few questions ...
    1) Can someone tell me which carrier is shown at 5:37? It's not HMS Implacable, seems more like a Essex class (note the side elevator! ) and guntowers in front of the bridgestructure)
    2) Why would Germany 'fear' a ship that was only in action when Germany didn't care about it's fleet anymore? If they feared anything it had to be the Russians

    • @VIDEOVISTAVIEW2020
      @VIDEOVISTAVIEW2020 9 місяців тому +2

      And why would Japan fear about this ship when Japans navy and war fighting capability is already taken by the US navy

    • @robertx8020
      @robertx8020 9 місяців тому

      @@VIDEOVISTAVIEW2020 Right?
      It would me like you beating me up to near death and them me 'being afraid' of the person that spit on me 🤣

    • @bravo2zero796
      @bravo2zero796 9 місяців тому +2

      ​@@VIDEOVISTAVIEW2020The British pacific fleet were there too you know included six fleet carriers, four light carriers, two aircraft maintenance carriers and nine escort carriers (with a total of more than 750 aircraft), four battleships, 11 cruisers, 35 destroyers, 14 frigates, 44 smaller warships, 31 submarines, and 54 large vessels.. the royal navy had shit going on literally everywhere in the world

    • @VIDEOVISTAVIEW2020
      @VIDEOVISTAVIEW2020 9 місяців тому +1

      @@bravo2zero796 of course, the Royal navy has been there in the pacific even before ww2. All I am saying is that the US navy destroyed the cream of the Japanese navy's fighting force in the battle of Midway, the Battle of the Philippines, the Battle of Leyte. After all of these battles, the Japanese is finished as a major threat, all that is left is mapping up operations of whatever remains of their fleet and that is where the Royal navy did helped.

    • @robertx8020
      @robertx8020 9 місяців тому

      @@VIDEOVISTAVIEW2020 True

  • @mattmiller4613
    @mattmiller4613 9 місяців тому +40

    USS ENTERPRISE Was the greatest most killing most feared ship of the War.💪

    • @Axonteer
      @Axonteer 9 місяців тому +2

      ok

    • @MSimmonsAZ
      @MSimmonsAZ 9 місяців тому +11

      Yes about the Big E, but this is titled all Axis Powers. Enterprise was Pacific only.

    • @Axonteer
      @Axonteer 9 місяців тому +2

      @@MSimmonsAZ How about the Enterprise D?

    • @mattmiller4613
      @mattmiller4613 9 місяців тому

      @@MSimmonsAZ agreed😌

    • @mattmiller4613
      @mattmiller4613 9 місяців тому

      @@Axonteer oh hell yes

  • @Whalewraith
    @Whalewraith 9 місяців тому

    I'm not good at science so it always amazes me that these carrier's float. Sure I can see the maths working in benign circumstances but in rough weather? Guess I'm just a bit thick.
    Such a shame they scrap these iconic ships.

  • @kellyschram5486
    @kellyschram5486 9 місяців тому +1

    The greater strength longer range to hit the enemy. At the loss of defiance at close range

  • @jameswaterfield
    @jameswaterfield 9 місяців тому

    HMS Implacable, featured in many Hollywood war movies

  • @sheilatruax6172
    @sheilatruax6172 9 місяців тому +1

    All those Corsairs!

  • @visionboard1783
    @visionboard1783 9 місяців тому +1

    Gotta give them there 🌹

  • @jonathonhass4178
    @jonathonhass4178 9 місяців тому +3

    Implacable didn’t see the pacific war until July of ‘45 and Japan by that time had little to no fighting ability left and would capitulate 2 months later.
    Royal Navy presence by that time in the pacific was basically of little real value and they were there for ally credibility.
    Early in the pacific war, brit ships were of no value against the IJN as they were either outright sunk or heavily damaged and chased away. Brit troops in the pacific were horribly mismanaged by their commanders and hadn’t received the weapons/supplies needed to do much of anything of value.

    • @davewolfy2906
      @davewolfy2906 9 місяців тому

      Where were British troops in the Pacific? Apart from being overrun in Hong Kong.

    • @robertx8020
      @robertx8020 9 місяців тому

      @@davewolfy2906 The closest British troops would be in India

    • @davewolfy2906
      @davewolfy2906 9 місяців тому

      @@robertx8020 Burma I think, next door.

    • @robertx8020
      @robertx8020 9 місяців тому +1

      @@davewolfy2906 You're right ..but close enough I think

    • @bravo2zero796
      @bravo2zero796 9 місяців тому

      ​@@davewolfy2906are you serious?

  • @salamonrobert2584
    @salamonrobert2584 9 місяців тому +1

    Helicopters were available early 1945.Why didn't they reach the carriers?

  • @junk9636
    @junk9636 9 місяців тому

    Understood that this is a British vessel but for purposes of comparison and context in future vids please also throw in a few US customary units?

    • @danielweisgerber8569
      @danielweisgerber8569 9 місяців тому +2

      do some math bruh ain't that hard

    • @mikeholland1031
      @mikeholland1031 9 місяців тому +2

      Why don't you guys join the rest of the world?

    • @davewolfy2906
      @davewolfy2906 9 місяців тому +1

      I agree only because these ships were not Metric.
      HMS Sheffield, that was lost in 1982 was the RNs first metric ship.

  • @paxwallace8324
    @paxwallace8324 9 місяців тому +1

    What year did the British receive the F4U Corsair? I mean it'd also be more than a match for anything Germany had.

    • @josephjuno9555
      @josephjuno9555 9 місяців тому

      I have never heard the Brits got Corsairs? Was this in the Pacific?

    • @sirblank2384
      @sirblank2384 9 місяців тому

      1944 right after the u.s. made it easier to land them on carriers

    • @alecblunden8615
      @alecblunden8615 9 місяців тому

      ​@@sirblank2384the turning approach for Corsairs was an innovation of the Royal Navy, NOT the USN

    • @sirblank2384
      @sirblank2384 9 місяців тому

      @alecblunden8615 the royal navy had nothing to do with corsairs until after the us fixed them to land on carriers so the royal navy did nothing

    • @alecblunden8615
      @alecblunden8615 9 місяців тому

      @@sirblank2384 the USN did NOT use corsairs on carriers until after the RN developed the turning approach method.The USN gave them to marines for ground use until then.. Look it up.

  • @jamiecampbell1981
    @jamiecampbell1981 9 місяців тому

    Those those planes arecorsairs right

  • @georgeyarbrough88
    @georgeyarbrough88 9 місяців тому +3

    At the end of world war II the Japanese told everybody what ship they were most afraid of and it was the Lexington because they thought they sent it three times they called it the Ghost ship.

    • @sirblank2384
      @sirblank2384 9 місяців тому

      Yorktown they said they sunk the Yorktown 3 times once in the coral sea, and twice at midway the Lexington was sunk in the coral sea

    • @georgeyarbrough88
      @georgeyarbrough88 9 місяців тому

      @@sirblank2384 yes that is true, but it was Lexington that received the name of the Ghost ship from the Japanese. Who constantly reported her sinking. Yorktown did not receive this name from the Japanese.

    • @sirblank2384
      @sirblank2384 9 місяців тому

      @@georgeyarbrough88 enterprise was grey ghost from the japanese

    • @georgeyarbrough88
      @georgeyarbrough88 9 місяців тому +1

      @@sirblank2384 you don't know Japanese history do you. The most feared airplane was the Corsair, the ghost ship was the Lexington. And the Americans called the Enterprise the gray ghost not the Japanese. I know my history extremely well. Now you can sit here and try to argue with me but you definitely need to do the research to back up what you say. And when you do you'll discover that I'm right. But you can believe what you want that's the right you have. But I'll stick with my historical degree and knowledge.

    • @sirblank2384
      @sirblank2384 9 місяців тому

      @@georgeyarbrough88 the americans called the iowa the grey ghost lol

  • @nomercyinc6783
    @nomercyinc6783 8 місяців тому

    the allies didnt fear aircraft carriers at all. they feared those big ass axis battleships

    • @theloneranger8725
      @theloneranger8725 8 місяців тому

      That's a rather ridiculous comment when you consider what the Japanese did at Pearl Harbor on 12/7/41 with nothing but carriers, unless by "axis" you are referring only to Germany. With just a little more luck, Japan could have won that war early with their carriers, but they made too many mistakes and miscalculations. Germany had only one carrier, and it was never completed. Hitler was a fool for not understanding the important role they would play in WWII. When he was building all those battleships before the war began, he should have been building carriers instead.

  • @josephjuno9555
    @josephjuno9555 9 місяців тому +2

    If Japan realized that the US wud have 100 Aircraft carriers by fhs end of the war ? They might have reconsidered their future? Maybe we shud try to get along? The US aas trying to stay Neutral until Japan Attacked Pearl Harbor? Oh, it ON NOW! You started this, WE will Finish it!

    • @sirblank2384
      @sirblank2384 9 місяців тому

      They were lucky if the japanese didn't surrender our largest ship at the time was going to be heading their way

  • @kenmcdougal97
    @kenmcdougal97 9 місяців тому

    She should have been saved as a museum ship😢

  • @AndreVanDiggelen-wl3fx
    @AndreVanDiggelen-wl3fx 9 місяців тому

    Need a giant slide in magazine system that can be custom loaded by a re supply ship

  • @quietdignityandgrace
    @quietdignityandgrace 9 місяців тому +5

    Why doesn't Dracinifel, Operations Room, Animachy and the like ever cover Britain's Pacific role? They never mention, or rarely mention Australia accept in a support role.
    I guess, USA Number 1 Joe?

    • @JohnKoenig-db8lk
      @JohnKoenig-db8lk 9 місяців тому +2

      Your rant belies your screen name.

    • @tltc191
      @tltc191 9 місяців тому +4

      Maybe because the first battle group the UK sent got folded up like lawn chairs.

    • @quietdignityandgrace
      @quietdignityandgrace 9 місяців тому

      @@JohnKoenig-db8lk Have you seen the scene that it comes from? Ranting is the point. Get it out of your system, move forward.

    • @quietdignityandgrace
      @quietdignityandgrace 9 місяців тому +1

      @@tltc191 If they did a piece on it, maybe I'd know that. We'd know that. Sorry, I got a bit selfish there.

    • @JohnKoenig-db8lk
      @JohnKoenig-db8lk 9 місяців тому +1

      @@quietdignityandgrace Sorry, Britain had a role other than "Bloody Shambles?"

  • @darrensmith6999
    @darrensmith6999 7 місяців тому

    Wow we could really build cool stuff in those days....what the hell happened to us?

  • @garyharris629
    @garyharris629 9 місяців тому +8

    I remember watching a documentary about the war in the pacific, and an American sailor was saying that the bomb’s bounced off the decks of the British aircraft carrier’s, while they went through the decks of the American carriers!

    • @carlharris2808
      @carlharris2808 9 місяців тому +2

      America had wooden flight decks.

    • @chrismason7066
      @chrismason7066 9 місяців тому +5

      Yep. Britain had armored flight decks. We. the us. Did not. Armored flight decks are awesome at the cost of less planes. It's a give and take.

    • @garyharris629
      @garyharris629 9 місяців тому +3

      @@carlharris2808
      Yes, I remember he said that, your comment reminded me. The American carriers had more planes though, and more carriers in the Pacific while British carriers were mostly in the Atlantic, Mediterranean, and the North Sea.

    • @g8ymw
      @g8ymw 9 місяців тому +2

      @@garyharris629 I think that was the reason for the armoured flight decks.
      We were too close to multitudes of land based aircraft

    • @garyharris629
      @garyharris629 9 місяців тому

      @g8ymw I never thought of that, good point!

  • @patricks9401
    @patricks9401 9 місяців тому

    Hey, I know your not from the UK but you wouldnt actually say 2pdr you would say 2 pounder thats what it means pdr = pounder, it would be like saying the letters I N for inches, you wouldnt say 2 I N you would just say 2 inches.

  • @williampaz2092
    @williampaz2092 9 місяців тому

    If only the Hawker Sea Fury was readily deployable when the British Pacific Fleet was activated….

  • @davidstepeck2644
    @davidstepeck2644 5 місяців тому

    Scrapped in 1954 after only ten because Britain had no use for her? 14:40
    I'm sure that ship cost the British taxpayers a mint. I don't understand how they could've just scrapped the aircraft carrier; 10 years is almost brand new.

  • @bulldawg6259
    @bulldawg6259 9 місяців тому

    How come I see Corsair’s land on a British carrier

    • @johnsheldon4880
      @johnsheldon4880 9 місяців тому

      The Brits were flying them off the carriers first. Our navy nixed tehm so they were sent to GB as partof the lend lease prgm. They solved the landing problems that the US navy couldn't. They figured to come in at an angle to land where the US Pilots flew straight to the landing, Hence the gift to GB. Once the Brits solved the problem, The US Marines yelled , gimme gimme we'll use them and they got them and the Japs regretted it. The Brits also used them in North Africa as fight/bombers and in Sicily also.

    • @mikeholland1031
      @mikeholland1031 9 місяців тому +1

      Because you have eyes.

    • @sparky4878
      @sparky4878 9 місяців тому +1

      Because the Royal Navy had them. In fact I believe they were using them on carriers before the US marines and USN, who originally used them from shore bases.

    • @sirblank2384
      @sirblank2384 9 місяців тому +1

      ​@sparky4878 the brits used the corsairs in early to mid 1944 the americans used them on carriers right before them in early 1944 but also used them earlier than that on the land bases since 1942

    • @ddoubleg
      @ddoubleg 5 місяців тому

      @@sirblank2384 no.... cope littel boy cope.

  • @briankorbelik2873
    @briankorbelik2873 9 місяців тому

    And during the *entire* Pacific War, US Pacific Fleet was Where?

    • @ddoubleg
      @ddoubleg 5 місяців тому

      bro what?

  • @williamdodge5123
    @williamdodge5123 9 місяців тому

    USS FORRESTAL CV-59 82-84

  • @larrymead151
    @larrymead151 9 місяців тому +8

    Another ridiculous title.

    • @robertx8020
      @robertx8020 9 місяців тому +1

      I haver to agree

    • @Kellethorn
      @Kellethorn 9 місяців тому +1

      Yeh, I have to go into these videos expecting them to not be 100% watertight on their details/facts, but entertaining and generally in the right ballpark nonetheless.
      Plus their library of archival footage is quite nice.
      If nothing else, the stories give me good inspiration for DnD scenarios/plotlines 😂

    • @robertx8020
      @robertx8020 9 місяців тому +1

      @@Kellethorn Some creators seem to think that extreme titlels lure more ppl in and while that might be true at first, after being 'fooled' long enough, ppl might never return..so it's a risk IMO

    • @Kellethorn
      @Kellethorn 9 місяців тому +1

      @@robertx8020 yeah I agree on that 100%

  • @AvenValkyr
    @AvenValkyr 5 місяців тому

    Scrapped after only 10 years?? Wtf????

  • @PaulMcCartExperience
    @PaulMcCartExperience 2 місяці тому

    How did the Nazis ever expect to have a navy without an aircraft carrier?

    • @Luftpvp
      @Luftpvp 2 місяці тому

      You do realize aircraft carriers didn't become the end all be all until during the war right?

  • @dognute2746
    @dognute2746 9 місяців тому

    USS Nimitz

  • @johnbrobston1334
    @johnbrobston1334 9 місяців тому +2

    A fine point, but Operation Inmate took place 4 months after 4 US carrier battle groups had pounded Truk to scrap.

  • @PepeK62
    @PepeK62 9 місяців тому

    The war in Europe was over by July, 1945.

  • @Mike-tg7dj
    @Mike-tg7dj 9 місяців тому

    I guess the Brits don't have a sense of keeping up older ships. Who knows maybe that's why they like to visit the older ships when they visit the states. Who knows.

    • @Pedallingfuriously
      @Pedallingfuriously 9 місяців тому

      HMS Victory. Launched 7th May 1765. Still in service . Flagship of the First Sea Lord.

    • @ddoubleg
      @ddoubleg 5 місяців тому

      us ships are pathetic.

  • @JamesWestVideo
    @JamesWestVideo 9 місяців тому

    I love seeing Americans get all upset. A country that was late to both world wars.

    • @sirblank2384
      @sirblank2384 9 місяців тому +1

      And saved the day in both world wars saving the british twice with 2/3 of all vehicles for the allies in ww2 were american

    • @JamesWestVideo
      @JamesWestVideo 9 місяців тому

      @@sirblank2384 any country that sits back for a few years and spins up their industry is gunna do well. Oh and make a lot of money too. Strange that.

    • @sirblank2384
      @sirblank2384 9 місяців тому

      @@JamesWestVideo we wanted to follow the founding fathers plans stay out of foreign affairs but no the brits having to beg us and the japanese had to touch our boats

    • @JamesWestVideo
      @JamesWestVideo 9 місяців тому

      @@sirblank2384 an American talking about staying out of foreign affairs is beyond laughable.

    • @sirblank2384
      @sirblank2384 9 місяців тому

      @@JamesWestVideo after ww2 idk y but the us was made a police force of the planet

  • @DavidBrown-zn8pd
    @DavidBrown-zn8pd 9 місяців тому +1

    Please remember a great deal of your followers don’t know the metric system. So please include standard measurements in your description. Thank you

  • @johnhopkins6260
    @johnhopkins6260 9 місяців тому

    Ummm... Britain taking revenge for Japan colonizing British colonies??

  • @KayBarnett-v4y
    @KayBarnett-v4y 13 днів тому

    My Dad served on her

  • @deejaysyn420
    @deejaysyn420 9 місяців тому +2

    please. Big E is the real ship everyone was afraid of jeez

    • @mikeholland1031
      @mikeholland1031 9 місяців тому

      Only in the pacific

    • @davewolfy2906
      @davewolfy2906 9 місяців тому

      The Germans were not afraid of it.
      You do know that the Germans were in the war?

    • @robertx8020
      @robertx8020 9 місяців тому +1

      TBH I don't think there was a single ship everyone was afraid of ..even not Enterprise ..is she had been sunk after 43 it would have made no difference1

    • @deejaysyn420
      @deejaysyn420 9 місяців тому

      @@robertx8020 very true

    • @ddoubleg
      @ddoubleg 5 місяців тому +1

      no, us ships where trash in the Atlantic, British ships where good in both.

  • @philipinchina
    @philipinchina Місяць тому

    The "music" got on my tits so much I logged out.

  • @tml721
    @tml721 6 місяців тому

    It was too bad so many of these great ships were scrapped after their use was done. I get it, it was about cutting costs but museums could have been made of a few of them for future generations

  • @nationalzero269
    @nationalzero269 9 місяців тому +6

    At the war's end, the US had 103 aircraft carriers (23 fleet carriers) and a 1,000-plus-fleet navy. The HMS Implacable was irrelevant in the Pacific War.

    • @ddoubleg
      @ddoubleg 5 місяців тому +1

      just like usa was irrelevant in the whole war.

  • @johnnaugle5762
    @johnnaugle5762 9 місяців тому

    Tuff ass CVs for sure

  • @dougmoore4326
    @dougmoore4326 9 місяців тому +3

    I’m sorry… a carrier does not “burst” into launching aircraft “without warning”,… less hyperbole in the narration please

  • @josephjuno9555
    @josephjuno9555 9 місяців тому

    Princess Elizebeth! Future Queen!

  • @ETicketM
    @ETicketM 9 місяців тому +1

    32 knots is 37 MPH, not 59 MPH. 59 would be insane.

    • @dgflater
      @dgflater 9 місяців тому

      Kilometres per hour not mph.

    • @ddoubleg
      @ddoubleg 5 місяців тому

      KMH

  • @steveshoemaker6347
    @steveshoemaker6347 9 місяців тому

    🇺🇸

  • @thomaslinton5765
    @thomaslinton5765 9 місяців тому

    Romania was doubtless terrified. Your titles are a joke.

  • @zascreamer100
    @zascreamer100 9 місяців тому +2

    You’re getting extremely lazy. Talking about the great British aircraft carrier but you show stock footage of American Corsairs- 1944? , and American carriers firing 5” guns.

    • @andynct
      @andynct 9 місяців тому +3

      Corsairs did serve on British Pacific Fleet carriers. Just not on Implacable.
      The US guns - no excuse.

    • @pashby3
      @pashby3 9 місяців тому +3

      you're candor seems incongruous in regards to this good content creator ..maybe you're factual indulgence could be better worded to convey discord..

    • @johnbrobston1334
      @johnbrobston1334 9 місяців тому +1

      Not nearly as bad as the one that showed a nuclear powered cruiser.

    • @zascreamer100
      @zascreamer100 9 місяців тому +1

      @@pashby3
      I don’t doubt his talent and watch all his videos. He’s an informative historian. However, lately the stock footage is a huge distraction that demeans the hard work and effort I’m sure he puts into it.

    • @sparky4878
      @sparky4878 9 місяців тому

      Royal Navy did fly Corsairs, they had them carrier certified before the US marines and USN, who originally flew them from land bases.

  • @vwalsh63
    @vwalsh63 9 місяців тому +2

    The british had ruled the seas for 300 years, yet they still needed our help to prevent their total destruction.

    • @davehodgson9260
      @davehodgson9260 9 місяців тому

      But you needed your arse kicked by tiny Japan before woke up to the threat

    • @jamesknight3070
      @jamesknight3070 9 місяців тому

      No, by the time America decided to get off it's metaphorical ass the tide had already turned against the Third Reich.
      In the end, America and the Soviets became best of pals, making secret backroom deals sealing the fates of countries such as Poland...GG-WP!

    • @douglascampbell4993
      @douglascampbell4993 9 місяців тому +4

      Sure… that’s why they lent the US a carrier during the war is it? Because they needed help and were running out of ships? 🤣

    • @JamesWestVideo
      @JamesWestVideo 9 місяців тому +2

      Shame it took you guys so long to get the courage to help.

    • @entropy5431
      @entropy5431 9 місяців тому +2

      When you have ruled the seas for 300 years you can laugh. Only up to about 75 years so far.

  • @davidsoldiron
    @davidsoldiron 9 місяців тому

    If you are going to discuss American and British ships, drop that metric crap...

  • @blrenx
    @blrenx 9 місяців тому +1

    Gee thanks England for all the help after 5 years of being a no show

    • @tgamron
      @tgamron 9 місяців тому +1

      No kidding.

    • @andynct
      @andynct 9 місяців тому +3

      Lent US an aircraft carrier, USS Robin, and was very busy in the Indian Ocean theatre against the Japanese where the US was largely absent.

    • @davewolfy2906
      @davewolfy2906 9 місяців тому +2

      Time for your milk I think.

    • @truthhurts9241
      @truthhurts9241 9 місяців тому +3

      Clearly not a student of History.

    • @blrenx
      @blrenx 9 місяців тому +1

      @@truthhurts9241 Is that right? Do me a favor, Tell me one.. Just one time, The Limeys won a battle in WW2? The battle of Britain was defensive, North Africa you couldn't win without Canada doing the fighting for you. And some limited help from the USA. Oh and then you have the battle of Caen that held up the D Day advancement for a month. All the other armies were begging Monty to by pass because of the casualties. and don't forget your little stroll through holland to take some bridges of zero strategic value..

  • @rescuecaptainbob8564
    @rescuecaptainbob8564 9 місяців тому +1

    The Ship All Axis Powers Were so Afraid Of = The USS Enterprise

    • @mikeholland1031
      @mikeholland1031 9 місяців тому +1

      In the pacific only

    • @ddoubleg
      @ddoubleg 5 місяців тому

      no... why tf would Germany care. use your brain kid British ships where in the Atlantic and Pacific.

  • @jamielacourse7578
    @jamielacourse7578 3 місяці тому

    As usual you don't know what you're talking about.