HMS Gloucester - Guide 296
Вставка
- Опубліковано 10 лют 2025
- Today we look at HMS Gloucester, last of the regular Town class.
Sources:
www.amazon.co.uk/British-Cruisers-World-Wars-After/dp/1848320787
www.amazon.co.uk/British-Town-Class-Cruisers-Southampton/dp/1526718855
www.amazon.co.uk/Town-Class-Cruisers-Neil-McCart/dp/1904459528
www.amazon.co.uk/British-Cruiser-Warfare-Lessons-1939-1941/dp/1526747634
Want to support the channel? - / drachinifel
Free naval photos and more - www.drachinifel.co.uk
Model ships of many periods - store.warlordga...?aff=21
Want a shirt/mug/hoodie - shop.spreadshi...
Want a poster? - www.etsy.com/u...
Want to talk about ships? / discord
Want to get some books? www.amazon.co.uk/shop/drachinifelDrydock
Pinned post for Q&A :)
The Illustious and Essex class carriers were known for their durability due to their armored decks, but how much damage would a german glide bomb, such as a Hs 293 or a Fritz X do to them?
@@themightynanto3158
G'day,
That might be a question which only an actual Test, of both Glide Bombs and Shells, against an Armourplate Steel Target..., could answer...
The Artillery Shell will arrive with higher Terminal Velocity, but the Glide Bombs may pack more weight of Explosives - and Shaped-Charge Warheads were in the Luftwaffe's Inventory - as used on the pilotless JU-88s which were used in conjunction with a piloted FW-190 A-8, mounted on Struts, above the Junkers' Centre of Gravity - "Mistel" (Misteltoe) I think the Program was called - they used it in combat, trying for Bridges and/or Ships.
So, a Guided Glide-Bomb like the Henschel could get there, but with Smoke-Flare tracking by Eyeball, the Impact would be wherever the Bombardier could manage to hit...
Whereas the Fritz-X had a TV Camera in the Nose, did it not ? And it was big enough to carry a Shaped Charge a couple of feet in diameter ; and with the TV/Radio Control Links, the Fritz-X could recieve Terminal Guidance to go straight down a Funnel - if the Operator was feeling particularly ornamental...
Or so it seems, to me ; but all that is to be divided by the general unreliability of WunderWeapons being pushed into Combat prematurely, due to the exigencies of fighting a War from an unwinnable position, and being too bloodyminded to quit.
Such is life,
Have a good one...
Stay safe.
;-p
Ciao !
In such an event where the entire bridge crew is killed, but the rest of the ship is relatively intact. Was there a designated officer to take charge, or would there be a prolonged period Of confusion while everyone tried to find the senior surviving officer?
I learned recently on a visit to HMS Belfast that royal marines were responsible for operating the Admiralty Fire Control Table on board that ship and I would assume other ships of the town class. I also learned they had a number of other trades on board specifically reserved for them including the ships butcher.
Can you give a few more details about the royal marines role on board major RN surface war ships pre 1960 in addition to providing raiding and boarding parties?
Specifically I'm curious what was the legacy relationship with the Napoleonic era Royal marine artillery?
Were these men on Belfast manning the AFCT regular royal marines who had specialized in gunnery or were they recruited and trained specifically for this role and a separate gunnery 'wing' of the RM with no other role?
Would they have been expected to potentially pick up a rifle and join boarding parties and shore raids or was their role restricted to ship operations?
When did the Royal Marines cease providing personnel in these roles? I believe they transitioned to an entirely green beret commando force around 1946-46 but obviously the town class ships served a lot longer.
if the soviets had been able to Stalin's desired surface fleet (or simply inherited a much more built up imperial navy) how would this have effected the Kreigsmarine's efforts? would the Kreigsmarine be unable to leave port or would they be able to fight the soviet navy?
The HMS Gloucester suddenly being able to outpace her ally ships fleeing the Italian force makes me think of a cartoon-type scenario when all the forest animals are running from a hunter or some other danger, and surprisingly, the tortoise is the one overtaking the lead of the pack of fleeing animals.
British ships can lift their skirts and run.
And she does this after reporting should could only make in the 20's of knots. Bit like Rodney, Gloucester just decided she could go a lot faster than she was supposed to be able to.
I suppose that's friendlier imagery than the FAT KID, COMIN' THROUGH that comes to my mind...
I was thinking that also but mine slanted towards the wearing of Running Shoes cos you only had to run faster than the other guy. 🙂
HMS Bombur
God bless the Fighting G, and all those gallant souls lost with her. What a tragic way to go, out of ammunition, and defenceless. A bloody brave ship.
@JZ's BFF I'm sure they would have jumped at the chance to restock, but a bit difficult when your ship is at sea, moving from action to action, and the opportunity to put ashore in Alex is a mere pipe dream. It all came down to communication, with her sitrep not in the right hands until it was too late.
@JZ's BFF If you listen to Drach's account, the rear admiral responsible issued a recall order once he was made aware of Gloucester's ammunition situation, but by then it was too late. The "fault", and Gloucester's ultimate fate, may well lie with a mere radio operator.
@JZ's BFF as the forces consolidated, the new commander checked on everyone's AA ammunition stocks, so was aware of the situation. But then that consolidated force amalgamated with another to form the whole, and the Rear Admiral in charge if that force didn't get the information or gather it himself until it was too late.
@@Drachinifel I have to question the structural rigidity in the chain of command that the Captain wouldn't send a message indicating his ships incapacity to fulfill those orders. Instead just assuming the information was properly in hand and considered and accepting the task. How long would it have taken to encode, xmit, decode, deliver and confirm those orders? 30 minutes? 2 hours?
the whole fight around Crete was intense and brutal: I know HMS Orion came back to Alexandria with only 10 tons of fuel and 2 shells aboard the whole ship.
I recall that the circumstances surrounding the sinking of Gloucester and Fiji prompted a doctrine change in the Royal Navy requiring all ships to notify the officer in command and to return to port when the AA ammo stocks became low and not continue operations.
My uncle, James Porter, my mother's older brother, was onboard. He was just 17 years old and did not survive. My grand parents, my mother and younger brother were devastated. I'm named after him.
RIP to the crew of this gallant ship
dude spoilers! lol
@JZ's BFF WTF is your problem?
@JZ's BFF
Arnold 👈😑
@JZ's BFF And so? Better than no f***ing empathy whatsoever. What's your problem?
@JZ's BFF Totally agree. Cheap sentiment from a weeb that probably has never been to the army is pathetic.
My Uncle was a Royal Marine AA gunner on the HMS Gloucester, and one of the very few to be rescued by the Brits. His troubles were only just beginning as he was put ashore at Crete.
I've actually seen two of the flags of previous HMS Gloucester in Gloucester cathedral. All Gloucester's have a little plaque in one of the corners of the cathedral.
Good on Fiji for dropping off those life rafts. Given their dire situation I wouldn't know if I would have done the same.
As I remember, Fiji was also sunk on the same day
Yeah, it's in the video. Fortunately most of her crew were rescued.
3:30 My mind suddenly went "Scotty we need more power!" "I cann'ae do it captain. I'm giving her all she's got"
A great summary of the short career of one of what I think were the best looking cruisers in the RN. I am sure that the ship featured at 2:26 is not Gloucester but Belfast Look at the gap between the bridge structure and the fore funnel, the mainmast is forrad of the after funnel, and the number of twin 4" mounts.
Her Type 42 namesake also
distinguished herself in the Gulf
destroying a Iraqi silkworm on
course for the USS Missouri
Would the Missouri even notice a silkworm? Not to take anything from their intention, effort, or success, mind you. Intercepting a missile back then was exponentially more difficult back then, and success is an absolute badge of badassery, and members of the brotherhood of Surface Warfare Giga-chads.
@@charlesparr1611 Silkworm would hit center of target. So likely somewhere in the superstructure. So a large warhead and a lot of unspent rocket fuel bruning up half the superstructure.
Yes they would have noticed. A lot. Like put out of action for a couple days at least a lot.
@@InLoveWithCities Battleships were literally designed to take hits like that and keep fighting. Damage yes, but everything essential was designed to be protected, look at the amount of damage Yamato took, or Bismark, before they were destroyed.... A silkworm is NOTHING compared to a Salvo from a BB, and such salvoes themselves will not always mission kill such a vessel even if they all strike. Armour works, and it works very well against weapons that are not specifically designed to deal with it. A silkworm isn't an armour piercing system, simply because when it was designed, armoured ships were obsolete.
The situation we speak of here is one in which a nation has a weapon designed to put massive overpressure and heat onto a flimsy and flammable target full of fuel and ammo and containing structural aluminum. Too bad for them, because they are faced with a target designed to shrug off precisely that attack, a target which carries all it's fire and control infrastructure behind armour the modern missile was not designed to face. As for loss of life, while I am sure some poor bastards have jobs to do outside of that armour, given the American design philosophy which places men above materiel, I would bet they don't have to sit outside that armour until those jobs need doing. They will still have to run out onto the decks for damage control, but the missile has already arrived, in this scenario, they will not be taking fire while fighting fire, as it were.
Even the superstructure is probably not going to be badly damaged by a modern missile. While unarmoured by the standards of a ww2 battleship, a BB superstructure is made of thicker heavy steel, and features armoured sections within it where the important things like fire control cables and power supplies to radars and such are run. And then those systems are all triple redundant, and often have redundant older systems as well. If you lose all the radar, you still have optical, and then the turrets have their own sighting systems, less effective but they do work... Sending a silkworm at a ww2 battleship was a silly choice, in fact Gloucester would have been a far more intelligent target, as she would likely be sunk by such a missile, as she was after all the exact kind of target Silkworms were designed for.
This is not to say that BBs are somehow not obsolete. They are obsolete in the face of modern technology, because it has become impossible to armour a ship so well that the protection is effective. That may change again, some day, and shortly after that we would see the return of asrmour. For the moment, at least, we will not see ships designed to shrug off the wrath of the enemy. Nowadays every vessel is at best a glass cannon, armour must be replaced by stealth, by mobility, by defence in depth, and most of all by the constant race for the ability to strike the enemy from further away than they can strike you. Increasingly, of course, its become possible to almost routinely intercept missiles, and they're trying to do the same for projectiles (maybe already can to some extent), but this is really the closest thing to armour that still works, and it's really more analagous to a shield, or perhaps to parrying with your own sword in a duel, than it is with armour.
I don't imagine anything in the current inventory would have much effect on a BB.... For the sake of interest, hmmmmm.... I assume submarines can still detonate torpedoes under a ships keel, of course, so that would do it. I would guess that bunker buster munitions would be at least somewhat effective against BB armour. They proved shockingly durable when nuked, and we 'd rather not go there, but all this is true only because nobody needs such munitions. It's mature technology when it comes to penetrating many feet of steel, as are all the other ways the BBs were dealt with. The great battle wagons were sitting ducks by the middle of ww2, and with no more armoured floating fortresses in any condition for reactivation, it's a certainty that long before a modern BB could be built and deployed, it too would be vulnerable in the face of missiles and bombs already waiting (eagerly) in the hulls of the ships waiting for it, brand new weapons needing no more than 40s tech.
But if you could materialize something like New Jersey in the middle of a carrier group, say five miles to the port of the flagship without warning... I know carriers are big and hard to sink, but I suspect that a salvo into each reactor and one or two more about twenty feet forward of the tower and if it wasn't in two pieces, it also would not be able to run flight ops, or damage control, so if it wasn't plummeting towards the seabed, its hard to imagine it being in any way repairable pretty much just wreckage held up by a few watertight compartments.
Now assuming the sub could sink a BB, the question would be whether modern torps could snap it, and of course how long the BB could keep firing before that happened. I doubt any other vessel carries anything that would keep a BB from continuing to fire, so essentially by targeting the furthest vessels first and working in, well, could an Arleigh Burke survive two rounds of 16" HE? Seems unlikely, so two or three rounds on each, as they flee...or is the travel time for the shells long enough that the ships (presumably taking hard evasive courses) might dodge fire? In which case target the nearest first.... No matter how you slice it, any ship a BB hits would be an almost certain goner, I would think. They would have to run, and leave the sub to deal with it. Depending on where the sub was at time of materialization, that might be a good few ships. Assuming late ww2 tech, and carefully planning materilization in constricted waters, you might have the whole fleet in range.... Good thing the whole idea is not even a really dumb movie plot. Oh wait. Lol.
I wonder if a sub launched tomahawk would do much to a BB, are any of those bunker busters? can they be targeted on a moving ship on a momants notice?
@@charlesparr1611
Battleships are warships. Any warship needs to have the ability to damage other warships (or other enemy assets), or it is just a target. Armor is heavy, and the superstructure of most battleships had very little armor, which means that high explosive warheads can, in fact, do a lot of damage.
South Dakota at the Second Naval Battle of Guadalcanal was lucky in that it did not suffer any citadel penetrations. However, South Dakota's main contribution to the battle was as a shell magnet. Most accounts suggest that it did not hit any Japanese ship, in part because of inexperience, but in larger part because its radar and fire control systems were knocked out by high explosive shell hits.
WWII heavy shells had explosive charges of 10 to 80 kg of high explosive. Heavy anti ship missiles like Silkworm have warheads of 500 kg or more. An explosion of that size is likely to destroy or incapacitate the fire control equipment and radar on a battleship. Once that happens, the battleship's guns are effectively decorations, with little if any ability to harm an opponent. In addition, although the Tomahawk launchers added to the Iowa class battleships had some armor, it is likely that a nearby hit of a missile with a 0.5 metric ton warhead would result in secondary explosions that would result in further damage to the unarmored and lightly armored parts of the ship.
Sinking a ship makes the history books. Mission killing a ship is at least as useful for a given battle, and it is likely that one or two Silkworm hits to the superstructure would mission kill any Iowa-class battleship. If South Dakota had taken on Kirishima alone, a modern third generation ship would almost certainly have lost the battle to a modernized pre-WWI battlecruiser. South Dakota survived because Washington was able to find an opportunity to engage Kirishima by surprise (and both US battleships survived because the large numbers of Japanese Type 93 torpedos all missed).
Battleships in WWI and WWII were designed to take on other battleships, but all of them were vulnerable to damage to the superstructure. In its last action, Bismarck straddled Rodney on its third salvo. It probably never came closer to hitting its opponents than that, because damage to the fire control systems after that meant that the guns could keep firing but had little, if any, chance of inflicting damage.
Fixating on "the ship is difficult to sink" is missing the point. A few hits from a Silkworm (or Sandbox or Shipwreck or Kingfish or . . . ) would convert a battleship into a spectator to a battle. If the battleship owner's fleet wins the battle, the battleship might have survived, and possibly been repaired at great expense. If the battleship owner's fleet loses the battle, the winner can decide if it is worth the effort to actually sink the battleship, and if so, has plenty of time in which to do so.
My Great Grandfather served on the Gloucester right till the end, thank you for this video and keeping their souls alive🫡🫡🫡
Yet again, it all comes down to logistics. In this case AA ammo.
It was miscommunications that effectively sunk her. Had the admiral incharge known her AA ammo levels she would probably have been sent back to Alexandria and definitely wouldn't have been detected with Fiji.
I'm not sure even perfect logistics would have helped any ship survive an attack by 50 Stukas. It's like the Yamato and Musashi in the Pacific. With that much air power directed against you, any ship is going to go down.
Thankyou for this, one of my best friends' great uncle was a stoker on board and lost his life, and so this video is very informative.
That escape with the damaged propulsion system would make a hell of a film or at least part of one.
Thank you Drach for reviewing the Gloucester 🤗
Watching you’re videos calms my soul!!
Please make a video on HMS Vanquisher. Having such a long career, and taking part in so many actions, combat and otherwise, I think it would be quite worthy of a dedicated video.
Thank you, Drachinifel.
HMS Gloucester was apparently familiar with the old saying, "I don't have to be the fastest, I just can't be the slowest" Tragic end to a beautiful ship.
Drach... is that you stirring some tea at @1:46
Damn! Sea warfare is no joke, it's as serious as deep desert warfare, one mistake is all it takes.
The difference is you are dealing with a 360 degree battlefield. You got threats above, below, and not only surface threats but the Mother Nature can be both your friend and your enemy
the town and county cruisers were damn good looking ships in my opinion. its a shame to lose one for want of ammunition , though certainly not valour!
Fantastic video as ever.
You should really do something on Crete, it's an interesting battle
This is easily my favorite UA-cam channel...
I love the story about Gloucester. Only taken out because the minute chance she might pull through was taken from her.
Thank you for another great video! But, please forgive me, I hate to be that guy, but @4:43 HMS Dido is pronounced 'Dai-doh' not 'Dee-doh'. Keep up the great work - your channel is one of the best things on youtube.
I'm pretty sure that in the latin original (the Aeneid) it is pronounced "Dee-doh".
@@untruelie2640 Not in the RN. Never, ever, EVER pronounced that way. This has been pointed out repeatedly.
@@iansadler4309 Ok
The music give me chills lol
Gloucester the ship fighting as bravely and tenaciously as her name sake regiment in the Army, Glorious Glosters !!!
Thanks for the context!
I am always humbled about Warship casulties from a sinking in that the proportion is so great.
That was a fine-looking ship.
Thanks again
I'm picturing the conversation in the engine room like an episode of star trek. "I cannot give her anymore!"
I served on the previous Fighting G and had the honour of marching through the city to the cathedral
3:20
15 inch splashes turned turttles into hares
And as usual Jerry spoiled everyones Fun.
Good looking ship.
You forgot about when glouchester and another town-class attacked the Tobruk Port but where repelled by the RN San Giorgio armored cruiser.
Your discorses on RN ships are very informative. Would you be able to create a Guide to the CO class destroyers, one of which was HMS Comas, my fathers ship during the Korean War. Bombed or hit a mine and, on the way to Japan, was "buzzed" by friendly American aircraft.
Sadly, my father passed away in 2014 but did recount some, shall we say "entertaining" events in his time in the RN.
Regards
Running out of ammunition was always a concern for the destroyers put on radar picket duty off Okinawa. Reminiscent of Jutland, many of the DDs stored extra ammunition in any jury rigged space below decks they could find. in those conditions, the proper answer to the question of "Run out of 5 inch or store shells insecurely" was very easy.
Ammo stowed outside of magazines? What could possibly go wrong?
@@CorePathway A Kamikaze between the fire rooms and the engine rooms might ruin your day, too.
"Fair Winds and Following Seas" Brothers on your eternal patrol.
Intersting video
Y'know, you ought to have a guide on how to pronounce the British Town & County classes for us 'Murracuns!
I know people who live in Gloucester County, New Jersey, so I know how to pronounce it just fine.
@@RCAvhstape
I know Simkin 😑
light cruisers are handy I suppose
Nice video, would love to see hmnzs Gambia or porter class destroyers
Was wondering (trying to remember) which class were the RAN light cruisers ... aaaand Drach tells me as i thought it...
Theoretically Phaeton or Amphion class, HMAS Sydney having been first commissioned as HMS Phaeton. Two funnels not trunked to one because of an improved mahinery layout, but otherwise more or less as per Leanders and often called Leanders
@@iansadler4309 sweet Im an airforce bloke ..i dont understand my fascination with warships. I knew one of the cooks from HMAS Hobart when i was a kid. Had a pic of him with his head in the shell hole in the funnel... wonder what happend to that...
How horrible it must be to receive new tasking orders before you have even removed the blood and body parts from whatever is left of the bridge after the first bombing.
Horrible survival rate after she went to the bottom too.
Why I wonder, did they not get over the side early enough, secondary explosions, what happened?
probably all of the listed options, not getting far enough from the Wreck before she sank, not having enough places for crew in the water to hang on to causing people to drown once exhaustion came over them, sailors unable to swim would also be quite unfortunate and quite Ironic though not uncommon enough, also the fact it where the Germans to pluck them out means nobody on the allied side was able to undertake S&R for the survivors which would imply that it's likely that they've been in the drink for hours before help arrived,
Drach made a good overview of the hazards of a ship becoming disagreeable,
Because no British ships were available for rescue.
"Sir! We fought the cretins in Germany!"
"Sir! I mean the Germans at Crete!"
LOL!
Bless those young men.
I watch and will continue as this is perfect content when I’m building model ships, can you recommend a channel covering modern fleet ships?
What is it with the county of Gloucester that led to its namesake units finding themselves in situations where they were forced to fight impossible battles, that led to the destruction of both the HMS Gloucester and the 1st Batallion of the Gloucestershire Regiment (during the Battle of the Imjin River during the Korean War)?
Would you consider doing a video on the history of Shemara? This vessel was apparently involved in WWII. Thank you.
Better to do the yachts in general, perhaps such as her and Philante?
How about a flower class corvette.
HMS Aubretia was involved with HMS Bulldog in securing an enigma machine from U110. I believe she got a first hit but little credit.
Most enjoyable 6 minutes, cheers.
Very sad. She seemed to be well on her way to an almost Warspite level of battle actions and honours. Bloody Stuka's.
She and her crew carried out their duty, an honourable ship and men.
Memory eternal!
This channel is the one to ask; is there any way to find out information about DE-708 USS Parle?
Sending ships back when they have already used a good part of their aa ammo was a waste of 2 useful warships
How?
Hindsight is 20/20.
@@TheArchaos from what I can tell the ships weren't even sent back as they were just about making it to the fleet as they were sunk
Shit happens.
Without them there you've basically just got a variety of destroyers with limited AA armament in the area. The CLs were needed. Cunningham later said that the fella in charge at the time of sinking wasn't aware of their low ammunition reserves too. Of course it was all an issue that was the making of failures on land. Losses were inevitable in the environment the navy was forced into around Crete.
Proof that even the best of ships with the ablest of crews can, in the wrong circumstances, become mere targets for aircraft.
Sorry to be a pedant but the pic at 2.33 mins is either Belfast or Edinburgh -- 3 X 4.5 secondaries and set-back first funnel tell tale featurs of the larger ships.
2:50 - Are you sure that's Gloucester? Looks more like Belfast or Edinburgh
Sorry, one slipped through the net :)
@@Drachinifel the smartalec response would be "that was a test to see who was paying attention " :)
Gosh golly, almost five minutes!
Why does the photo a 1:00 have Spanish civil war neutrality bands on B and X turrets.
Drachnifel! Have you done a video on any of the Australian 1960s Perth Class Missile Destroyers?
No as that is beyond the channel timeframe
I believe drac came to the conclusion of 1956 is the channel cut off point, all I know for sure is that he will cover the navel aspects of the Korean war at some point down the road
If a ship or class was commissioned into service before the 1950's and it's still in service to this day Drach may cover it and all of its post-1950's service but if it wasn't in service before 1955 that is beyond the scope of what Drach wants this channel to be as beyond 1950 there is still the chance of stuff being classified and also he does historical stuff not modern-era naval stuff.
@@GoldPicard also as Jack has mentioned on several streams I believe he doesn't really care for missiles they're much harder to quantify especially in the mid to late 50s so as missiles become more prominent as the fifties go on and turn into the 60s drac just cares less and less about that era
In 30 years when he has covered all ships up til 1956 he can probably move the limit up to 1983..
Slightly off the subject, but as a 7 yr old boy in 1958/9 I remember seeing a Colony class cruiser parked up out of use in Marssoloxx Creek behind Manoel Island, Malta. Does anybody know which ship she was?
Not this one but she was the first warship I set foot on fthat was in service
Do a video on the uss Henley dd391
From the Peter Principle: "When I was a boy, I was taught that the men upstairs knew what they were doing."
...Assuming they were idiots served me well -- jaded, but still alive.
And what is the moral of the story children?
Children: Always make sure you have enough ammunition when you sortie.
I’m from Gloucester…. Massachusetts
Was scrolling through Drach's playlists and I saw "Ben Turner" things on two playlists. What are them?
Also I'm surprised that you haven't done on Furutaka yet. Gotta wait for her then.
Which playlists?
@@Drachinifel sorry 3 actually. in Naval engineering, Battles at Sea and Age of Sails.
Brave ship, brave men.
If a dislike thumb appears in your feedback Drach, ignore it please. Very unintended. I merely missed the like thumb button, "by that much!" Channelled my inner Maxwell Smart it seems
Can you do a review video on the Emmy winning film the Fighting Lady (1944 or 1945)? It's about the Yorktown of the Essex class fleet carrier.
Gotta say I do like Gloucester cheese
Edit
And I love the outro
Great call by the rear admiral 👈🙄
It was. He made decisions based on info available. He ordered a recall when the ammo status finally made it up the chain, did he not?
@@CorePathway
Seems like he made his fucking call based on questions he didn't ask 👈😑
Great video, but I wish you would pronounce HMS Dido the way the Royal Navy did (dye-doh, not dee-doh)
Umm... a typically British fate!
(they always "overlook" something that that at a time becomes a mayor/fatal flaw)
They were very busy and working under a lot of stress. Unfortunately the enemy didn't account for this by allowing time-outs for well-being, mindfulness etc.
Sad end. She was busy during the war.
85 men out of a crew of 807 survived. Most of the crew survived the sinking but feelings were running high amongst the Germans following the destruction of defenceless invasion convoys heading for Crete by the Royal Navy so the Luftwaffe machine-gunned the crew in the water.
What utter tosh. The germans didn't need an excuse for machine gunning anybody.
what is your evidense of this warcrime?
@@thomasbaagaard Well written historical history. Try doing some research instead making moronic comments.
Running low on AA ammo was the result of short shortsightedness prior to the war in which "experts" thought a ship could scare off fighters and bombers with the minimum of AA guns. In the same way Billy Mitchel thought that sailors would desert their guns when under attack. Both presumptions proved wrong, and in the RN it was disastrously wrong. The average US cruiser carried twice as much AA ammo as RN ships at the beginning of the war but later the amount was doubled for both navies. In the later years of WW2 in the Pacific US ships carried extra AA ammo in non armored storage compartments in the the stern and bow which had to be used first. And they still ran out in the face of fanatical Kamikaze attacks!
@@alasdairmmorrison74 As did the US Navy, on destroyers they replaced torpedo tubes with more Bofors, on cruisers they removed float planes and on battle ships they removed an ice cream machine. Okay, I made that up, but the top heavy cruisers were the hardest to upgrade, while the main concern for the battleships was submerging the armor belt.
Each time I see a Town Class, I am struck by how they seem to lack any sort of an air of menace or intimidation. Warships normally look like predators, but the Towns, at least to me, feel more like sheepdogs than wolves, protectors instead of killers. I've been fascinated lately bythe esthetic design choices made by those who manufacture the weapons of war. I think a lot of people assume such choices are entirely functional, but I am not so sure.
If nyone knows of any writings on this topic they could direct or link me to, I would appreciate it.
I have a book purchased at the French Musée Naval in Paris ‘Esthetique Naval’ by Andre Lambert, Editions de Gerfaut 2009 - French text, mainly beautiful illustrations of what is frankly admitted to be naval fashion in design. Recommended.
@@glennsimpson7659 Thank you very much, i will look into it. Have you seen some of the early torpedo boat designs? Streamlined, designed to be almost submarines, they look more like spaceships than boats and are completely different to any other naval vessels I have ever seen.... mayn of the ones I've happened across were french and most of the rest of the really graceful ones were Italian. Contrasted to the pre-dreads and to the dreads these things look more like 1918 elvish navy than anything else...
Also Turkey seems to be making for both the export market and for their own use sop very attractive frigates and patrol boats, it's hard to tell which are real and which are renderings at times, but they do appear to be functional warships. I think it's because stealth means mostly that angles and clutter both tend to be very good at reflecting radar back. Honestly though, I would think the best stealth especially for such small vessels would be to be either submarines, or EXTREMELY low freeboard, but it may be that these smaller vessels exist largely for intercept speed. Some of them are essentially heavily armed speedboats on titannic scales, 120ft jetboats capable of 75 knots.... Perhaps at the kind of ranges these vessels will do their work, stealth and such speeds are just not very compatible, so the appearance comes from a desire to be a stealthy as poissible whilst putputputting around, and when they jump out fo the hole on (and I thihk this is an actual figure, but its from memory) 24000Hp in a 90ft hull, and hit 75knots they know that nobody needs radar to reflect of the ship since the 300ft roostertail and the blood seeping out the ears of every sonar operator in the bosporus means they will be noticed immediatly
@@charlesparr1611 Yes cavitation is a big problem with high speed craft, likewise the rooster tail. And I guess increased radar reflectivity is not a big issue when you are most likely to be shot at by machine guns or Stinger missiles. Naval aesthetics is a very interesting area, but early torpedo boats had turtle decks for very practical reasons - such low freeboard means they were, as you suggest, semi-submersible at times. Hard to keep the boilers lit! There definitely still seems to be national ‘styles’, even in modern DDs and FFs where radar cross section is a defining design constraint. Haven’t see the Turkish ships but my area of interest is really pre-1950. In any case, surface ships these days are just meat on the table for submarines, in my opinion. Good for showing the flag and peacetime work, but I wouldn’t want to ship out on a modern warship protected by no armour and with only a Gatling gun for defence against sea skimming missiles and only decoys against torpedoes.
@@glennsimpson7659 And yet they have radar now that turns the ocean to glass, or so I am told, and I think it's a satellite thing but still... I don't think that total stealth is possible, not anymore.
The goal used to be to be so undetectable that you could close, and attack with impunity. Like the early and middle age of the nuclear attack boats, they could follow a missile boat five hundred feet back for days. Still can, if its Yanks on Russians, but the American Attack guys cannot hide from each other, not any more. They used to be able to, now it takes specialized circumstances, careful use of terrain, the platform itself is not magic anymore. The race was neck and neck, but it does seem as though things are as quiet as they can be, and yet ears keep getting better?
Then it switched to BVR, and has likely switched again to something heavily classified....
But the other thing is these little boats would not act alone, not against a high technology foe. They would be like A10s flying in disputed airspace: Doomed, while still highly effective in less hazardous skies.
There are ways to fool detection systems, which gain much of their incredible performance fro sophisticated filtering and predictive algorithms into glitching specific things into nothingness. I've seen examples of how systems can be written that will simply not see any person wearing a specific symbol. If thats a real thing, how much better might be the highest tech systems at exploiting (or resiusting exploitation, who knows)
And the torpedo boats had to be sleek, but they did not need to be beautiful, and yet they certainly were, which I like. I miss the days of ships like Royal Soveriegn or Vasa, or the sleek gilded galleys of Athens and Carthage. The carved gunwales of Viking Dragons, the intricate teakwork of Proas with their bronze cannon cast in the shapes of mythical monsters. They re expensive, and hopefully used seldom. they should be a delight to us when not employed in their butchers trade....
still havent seen my IJN Yubari review :P
Prolly won’t with that attitude 🤷🏼♂️🤣😘
Part genius, part luck ... God Bless ship designer's
What a mess and a tragedy. A little confusion and lack of communication and all those lives plus a decent ship lost..The reality of war.
👍
WG needs to add her
It's scary to think what could have happened if the Stuka became carrier-born...😳
Why woud it be scarier than an SBD or a Val? The SBD was the best dive bomber of the war.
After the debacle of the Bismarck, the German surface fleet really did not have the capability of extended operations in the Atlantic. Logistics would have made it a very short career, they did not have a network of friendly ports on both sides of the Atlantic and having unrep ships traveling with the carrier would have been a liabilty with their slow speed.
The forces that would have been gathered to hunt it down would be huge compared to what was done to hunt down the Graf Spee and the Bismarck.
If in the possibility it made it back to the French ports, Bomber Command would have spent more resources going after it then they did the Scharnhorst and Gneisenau when they were there.
Did I detect a hint of anger at the end there?
“Until they were picked up, by the GERMANS?” lol jk
Lack of communication doomed her
My nans uncle served and went down with the fighting G. He couldn’t swim.
Don't know why the navy did not mandate swimming lessons for all future crew. This is not the first time I have hard of such things. A salute to your brave great uncle.
heard
I’ve been motoring around the Mate now for about five years , I can’t swim either .
I’ve only fallen in once fortunately that was in the marina although that might of had something to do with the amount of wine I’d drunk . That was actually in Calabria and thanks to a few Italian lads to drag me out I managed to survive
@@Boric78 some believed for a while if you fell in it was less effort to just drown than struggle for a while waiting for the ship to turn back. Whether that was still a thing during WW2 idk.
@@steveosborne2297 You know it would only take a couple of weeks to learn ?
How tragic.
Grim...being attacked and having no ammo to at least put a defense and then ending up in German POW-Camps (note: I am German and frankly my ancestors weren't great people over all...sure some later saw the "light" so to speak, like my great grandfather who deserted, he was a motorcycle-courier, so he made a run for it from Stalingrad and survived, still that they signed up for this en masse in the first place (I am people did vote for the Nazi-Party) is shameful IMHO!)
Don't sweat your nation's history. You have no control over it.
There's not a single nationality in the world that's squeaky clean. Just worry about yourself and your family. The people you meet will remember that they met some really nice Germans and realize that they can't judge an entire nationality for something that happened before most people alive today were even born.
I could not have said it better myself.
its just one bad time period in your ancestry. before that your country helped by training 27th Jäger Battalion, mostly finnish which then helped finnish civil war and then WW2.
which i'm greatfull, so i don't speak rusky.
You can't look at your's country's pre-war history through the lens of Allied wartime and post-war propaganda.
WWI was meant to end the way WWII did.
That ship looks like a Japanese cruiser.
Dear God, only 85 men...
Bloody Mary time…
Bomb ???
10% of the crew... argh.
68th, 13 August 2022