It's like Netflix for history... Sign up to History Hit the world's best history documentary service with code 'WARSTORIES' for a huge discount! bit.ly/3Aibq94
I was naval surgeon in the Royal Navy serving on several of our British warships for 30 years, including HMS Ark Royal during which we escorted French and American warships. Prior to my service I was a doctor at St Thomas' Hospital in London before deciding an officer's career. I found your documentary very interesting, and enjoyed it immensely. I look forward to viewing more. Thank you so much - Wendi, Lt Cdr (Retired) Royal Navy.
It's interesting to watch how the French scholars try to explain their ancestors' failure towards the English at sea: the British Navy aimed at our sailors, while we just wanted to disable their ships' combat ability.
yeah, and Portugal being the ones that started the discoveries, made Caravels, Carracks and Galleons, had cannons on the broadside for the first time, cause the way the ships were built allowed it... Lack of knowledge breeds these videos!
Portugal was dominant from 1450s . Spain from 1480s I think. The Netherlands from 1550s. Shortly after France and England. The big five colonial powers. Others didn't play a role until the 18th or 19th century
Interesting how nearly the full might of the French Fleet projected is about the same as one MEU (Marine Expeditionary Unit) which the US has 7, not including the Nimitz and Truman class carriers (11 with more being built) which are two and half as large with almost three times as many aircraft carried.
Or the Dutch to mention !! Probably forming the basis of great progression in the Age of Sails being to turnout the most copied / spied on/ double foul {by conspiracy/and betrail} played, MARITIME / NAVAL INVENT&INOVAT-ORS Mainly or maybe especially in the 16 & 17th. century
@@stephenstowe9711 I doubt they can use many of those 'American carriers'. Would the US carriers not sink them? What if the USN had zero operational carriers? What then? What if the sailors onboard are so badly educated that ... they cannot end sentences? And they hide behind fake names like cowards? What if ROH's had nothing to do with any 22 years to be refueled? Wait ... not a single word you typed is real? Oh my!
They day you meat a US citizen you will be in serious trouble as an American. If you are even a real American. A secret organisation hiding behind fake names like cowards pretending to have a nationality that literally does not exist. Entire US military and all 300+ US citizen who took the pledge, ''oh really now?''. Annual NSA report to US Congress .... Commie anti US trollers spout lies, BS and they hide behind fake names. Really? No 50 cents for you today. US Constitution says, ''No!''.
@@the_inquisitive_inquisitor Something your teachers told you in first grade where you learned to ... end sentences? Da comrade? Got to love the NSA right? As if Russia or China know about grammar, lol!
Great documentary! However, you said somthing about a certain nuclear powered aircraft carrier that only needed refueling every 7 yrs. That great,but it isnt unique, like you say, because other nuclear powered aircraft carriers, can go go far longer than 7 yrs ,atleast I think
Two reactors drive two turbine generators and then three electric motors powering the propellers, producing 60 MW propulsive power. Refuelling cycle quoted at 6-7 years, or at 65% capacity factor refuelling is every 7-10 years, overhaul at 20 years, over a 60-year operating lifetime.
@@kevinmccarthy8746 Its not the ships propulsion that is the limiting factor however. The advantage of a Nuclear powerplant is NOT that it does not need refuelling for 25 years but the fact that it generates a huge amount of power. That is the TRUE advantage. Nuclear Carriers STILL have to refuel as aircraft do not run on pixie dust. They still need to take on board food and other supplies for the crew. They need to take on spares and weapons for the aircraft, and so on. A Nuclear carrier despite its propulsion still has to spend 6 months of the year in dock partly to take on supplies, partly to allow crew R and R, and partly for normal maintenance cycles, and believe me, a Nuclear powered ship requires MORE maintenance than a Conventionally powered ship, you do NOT want something going wrong with those reactors after all!! What that Nuclear Carrier has that conventional Carriers lack is the energy production ability to run a moderately sized town. This essentially means a Nuclear Carrier can run at Flank Speed literally permanently as it has no need to drop down to a more conservative Cruising Speed to conserve fuel. It also gives a metric s**t ton of spare power for future upgrades in weapons and electronics capability. Oh, and do you know how LONG it takes to refuel a Nuclear Carrier? Literally YEARS. The old fuel has to be carefully removed and stored, the reactor then decontaminated, in depth check and maintenance/rebuild, then and only then is the new fuel added. For this reason those refuelling periods tend to be used to also deep refit the Carrier. If the thing is going to be out of commission for 5 years you may as well strip everything out and rebuild the electronics, weapons etc etc....
@@alganhar1 Very good explanation! Thoughtful and informative, yet easy for a 'layman' to take in. I regret that these long-form comments have become an endangered species. Same holds for nuclear submarines as well. The ultimate limit of all these pieces of military hardware will always be those of the human operators that drive them.
The Dutch were the fastest ship builders in the world!! Thanks to the invention of the windmill saw we could saw timber at increased efficiency of 3000%!!
The first practical windmills were in use in Sistan, a region in Iran and bordering Afghanistan, at least by the 9th century and possibly as early as the mid-to-late 7th century.
@@MrFlatage read! I never said we invented windmills, but we did invent wind powered sawmills. "The importance of the the wind-powered sawmill taking off in the Netherlands cannot be understated. Wood production didn't double, triple or quadruple; it grew by a factor of thirty, or 3,000%. It was all in the time savings: Using the pit-saw method, sawyers could process 60 logs over a span of 120 days. Using a wind-powered sawmill, they could break down 60 logs in four or five days. What used to take four months now took less than a week."
The wonderful British Navy! Over 500 years of the most superlative seamanship in the history of the world. We your prodigal sons love and Esteem you. Thank you, and God bless you, from the USA.
you hit your own father when you grew up. He nurtured you from a baby to a healthy full grown man and this is the thanks he gets. Ungrateful. Shame on you.
@@onebritishboi9892 With the invention of things like exploaive shell, steam, iron armor, etc, obsolescence occured more and more rapidly. HMS Dreadnought was supremely revolutionary and state of the art in 1906, yet 8 years later was considered very much second rate. She was refitted in 1916 and dispite that was decommissioned after the war, being only 13 years old.
This video should be named 'The French Naval History' since that is really all it is about. The French are doing here what British historians typically do almost everywhere, talking up (making their 'stuff' or events look more important than they are) their small navy and small aircraft carrier There is almost no general naval history, and almost all we see in the modern fleet scenes is the one and only French ACC, always in foreground so it does not look so small next to any of the US carriers in the background. But the video quality is excellent!
That dude said that frigate was the baddest in the world and it’s close in protection is a sailor in a Death Star helmet firing a deck mounted .50 cal machine gun! Rofl
The Charles Degaulle allows the French Navy to project force anywhere, except when it isn't down for repair/maintenance, which happens more than you might think. Thats why you need more than one CVN to ever really make that claim. The USN. has 10. Id take the Brits 2 HMS QE and HMS P of W over the Charles DeGaulle any day.
How you start history with Galley ships when we have so many naval batles and many tipes of ships thousand years before.. ? Persian Fenicians Greeks Roman ships disappear ?
Yes, the French had bad tactics all throughout the Age of Sail. That's part of why their naval history is so devoid of victories compared to other powers.
I know they are French people. I don't have to hear their voices distracting me as if it adds something instead of detracts. Sorry can't watch. One voice at a time please. Even quieter voices suck. I you were speaking quietly in the background while I was talking I would tell you to shut up.
@@ashleygoggs5679 Funny how only me, in my lands of the free flying the great flag, our mighty red, white and blue can ... use capital letters. You know? Just saying. Now only a real man stands for his words and with his flag ofcourse. Which comes with Onus Probandi. Words must be proven. th-cam.com/video/UYF08jJi9Hg/w-d-xo.html As proven ... clueless. Ofcourse they did not come to the British but were conquered, oppressed, hunted down and made infertile. Educated people who can pass a 1st grade exam all already know this history. Just saying.
Or the reason for the French failed against the English was due to the French revolution which caused the loss of skilled commanders. English crossed the T tactics rull the air, land, & sea.
Deeply amusing to hear the French historians claim that La Gloire gave them superiority over the British for almost 20 years, when HMS Warrior, faster, heavier, larger and better armed, was launched only a year after La Gloire, swiftly removing any ideas of naval domination that the French may have had. SUCH a biased documentary.
Yeah small ragtag of colonists the British Navy and the British army and a retreat back to their little Island what is a little bit of help from the French not much
OK. 1) The American Continental Army at its height numbered 80,000 men trained in the Prussian style. At its height, the British Army in what is now the US numbered no more than 44,000 troops, most of which came from 2nd Line Regiments. 2) The French and Spanish Combined Navy won the US War for Independence. Period. It was THAT Navy that countered the British ability to move troops and supplies. Without the French and Spanish Navies the Americans would have lost the war for Independence. 3) The British were fighting the other two large Superpowers of the day AT THE SAME TIME. Those superpowers being France and Spain. The most important Battles that determined who would win the War of Independence were not even fought in the America's. In other words, both statements I have seen you make thus far have been PROVEABLY wrong. The British fought the Rebels with 2nd rate troops whilst fighting the two other great superpowers of the day, and while the Rebels won, the French and Spanish did NOT..... Given that THEY were the real threat as far as the British were concerned, not the American Rebels, they felt rather less 'humiliated' than idiots like you try to make out they should be.
Nah, the French and British were building their ironclads at the same time, not afterwards, and they were not ocean going like the Gloire or Warrior was capable of
@@bikes02 They were kind of, but the final design of the ironclad was indeed copied by the english from the french, its mentioned in a very good book - Empire of the Deep, its the most comprehensive deep dive into the history of the Royal navy and before i have read, def recomend it.
@@ClawsTM Warrior was designed from the keel up as an iron ship, Gloire was not, she was a true Iron Clad, a wooden hulled warship then clad in iron, the iron was armour but not structural, Warrior was Iron Hulled, which meant her structure as well as her armour were iron (though Warrior did also have teak lining it was part of the armour system and not structural). While you could certainly argue that the Gloire hastened the design and building of Warrior the technology and methods that went into Warrior were already being looked at by the Royal Navy prior to her keel being laid down. Gloire gave the RN the kick up the backside to build her, but everything was already in place for that to happen anyway, and even without Gloire would almost certainly have happened within a few years if maybe on a smaller scale.
Actually no, Gloire and Warrior were BOTH completed before either the US or the Confederacy completed Ironclads. The British were also experimenting with turrets at the time, though they were looking at the far superior Cole Turrets. Gloire was completed August 1860, Warrior was completed October 24th 1860. USS Monitor was laid down the day after Warrior was completed, October 25th 1861, and completed 30th January 1862. CSS Virginia was ordered July 11th 1861 and completed March 7th 1862. So no, the first Ironclads were NOT during the US Civil war. A basic look through Wiki will show you that, the dates the ships were laid down and completed are all there. USS Monitor was not even started until after HMS Warrior and Gloire were completed and commissioned into their respective navies, and both ships were nearing completion (and had been launched) when CSS Virginia was ordered....
Actually that's not quite true as other people posted here the British and French are already designing iron class before the United States however, the Confederate ironclad and the union ironclad were the first two ironclads to engage in any significant navel combat.
Failure!! Drop the original background commentaries - it is extremely annoying!! They serve no purpose, as they make both languages blurry and headache-inducing!! I switched to another channel after giving this one a try, and headache was gone!
huge number of inovations weren't French at all !! Another issue, at least ! Left out , just like that,... insult {realy) to the Netherlands / Holland Or the Dutch to mention !! Probably forming the basis of great progression in the Age of Sails being to turnout the most copied / spied on/ double foul {by conspiracy/and betrail} played, MARITIME / NAVAL INVENT&INOVAT-ORS Mainly or maybe especially in the 16 & 17th. century!
I hate to say it the friendship that's a small carrier for the United States that's smaller than the Enterprise that's half the size of the Enterprise USS Enterprise
That's not a aircraft carrier. The French one carrier dont they always surrender? UK one carrier. Come over to the USA let us show you some REAL aircraft carriers and a real Navy.
AHAHAHAH They start off talking about the French navy in the modern world. Like what? The entirety of the French navy is like a single strike force of the US Navy. Even China has a stronger navy than France and it’s still operating pre WW2 vessels lmao. I think it’s kind of arrogant/ignorant to spotlight the “French navy” when referring to modern times in place of the US Navy or literally any other more competent Navy nowadays lmao. Especially since I don’t think there’s been a time in history where the French navy was the reigning superpower given the UK held that title throughout history before the US became the worlds superpower during WW2.
The best Navy in the world USA Navy not any other Navy in the world France's Navy is like the 4th down in the list when you got from France you have England Russia China then America
Again wrong, I have indicated to you the dates of completion of the HMS Warrior, Gloire, USS Monitor and CSS Virginia. Monitor was not even laid down until AFTER both Warrior and Gloire were completed and commissioned. Both Gloire and Warrior were laid down before Virginia and Monitor were even designed. A very brief look at actual dates would have informed your idiot self of this..... The ONLY firrst is that Hampton Roads was the first Ironcland on Ironclad battle, and that is ALL that is unique about those two ships. Nothing else. The Royal Navy were experimenting with turrets at the same time but were using the superior Cole Turrets over the Timble turrets the USN used. The USN threw them into service immediately simply because they needed the ships NOW, whereas the Royal Navy tested them first, got them working and then built a ship around them later. That ship was HMS Devastation, which was the first mastless Ocean Going warship as well as the first fully turret armed Ocean Going Warship. Get this through your idiot head, Monitor was USELESS for Ocean Going Navies. She literally sank under tow in seas that Warrior or Gloire could have handled easily. Monitors like USS Monitor simply did not have the freeboard for ocean going, they were too easily swamped, as proven BY USS Monitor. The Monitor and Virginia were basically River Boats, not sea going warships.
I understand you're using metric you are the French you're talkin about cuz he got started that stupid measurement system cuz you don't have to use math to understand it I'm like the imperial measurement of the king of England sad part about the modern Queen is gone lazy and went to the metric system left your ancient ancestors measurements they called it the imperial measurement system
![TEEDEE TADA - DIAMOND NARAKORN X LEGO LYKN [Special Dance Performance]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/QgtZedFeumA/mqdefault.jpg)
It's like Netflix for history... Sign up to History Hit the world's best history documentary service with code 'WARSTORIES' for a huge discount! bit.ly/3Aibq94
pqqquouutet
yoongkongkiew
p.ei
😎👍
Not sure if getting compared to a Netflix is a good advertisement... :D
@@GandziaxBG Ahaha, yeah an update might be in order!
I was naval surgeon in the Royal Navy serving on several of our British warships for 30 years, including HMS Ark Royal during which we escorted French and American warships. Prior to my service I was a doctor at St Thomas' Hospital in London before deciding an officer's career.
I found your documentary very interesting, and enjoyed it immensely. I look forward to viewing more. Thank you so much - Wendi, Lt Cdr (Retired) Royal Navy.
Do you know about Drachinifel’s channel?
It's interesting to watch how the French scholars try to explain their ancestors' failure towards the English at sea: the British Navy aimed at our sailors, while we just wanted to disable their ships' combat ability.
Is the best way to stop a ship’s combat ability not to kill the sailors?
Edit. I get it now I just got further into the documentary.
"The fastest way to board and enemy ship is by ramming your ship inside theirs"
~Some Warhammer 40K Admiral, probably
Lol the french are a total joke
@@RumblesBettr always have been
John 3:16 NIV
For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. 🙏!
I like how they only mention England and France, while for a pretty long time the Dutch had something to say about ruling the seas.
True lol. The English and French tried to do something about em too which, failed.
@@gordonilaoa1275 failed? like napoleon failed to annex holland? like the brits failed to win the last anglo dutch war?
yeah, and Portugal being the ones that started the discoveries, made Caravels, Carracks and Galleons, had cannons on the broadside for the first time, cause the way the ships were built allowed it...
Lack of knowledge breeds these videos!
Portugal was dominant from 1450s .
Spain from 1480s I think.
The Netherlands from 1550s.
Shortly after France and England.
The big five colonial powers.
Others didn't play a role until the 18th or 19th century
The who? Dutch.. lol
This feels like a "special" 1-hour episode of Naval Legends.
Man, it started off with a guy speaking some weird foreign language. I had to shut it off.
@@khaldrago911 The video is dubbed in English dude. Do you have so little patience that you didn't wait 5 seconds for the translator? lol
Well it basically is its using some of world of Warships voice overs plus the narrator himself it may as well be a long W.O.W.
@@khaldrago911 too bad u didnt wait the voice over started at 6 seconds in.
the Narator is the same guy that narates the "Naval Legends" series of World of Warships
Wonderful! Didn't want it to end.
Interesting how nearly the full might of the French Fleet projected is about the same as one MEU (Marine Expeditionary Unit) which the US has 7, not including the Nimitz and Truman class carriers (11 with more being built) which are two and half as large with almost three times as many aircraft carried.
I served on the now de-commed Kitty Hawk cv-63. That's a super-cute "carrier" France! Couple of jets and a some Hawkeyes buzzing around.😂
Drachnifel.
Danke schön.
Excellent documentary
Just don't mention the Royal Navy victories against the French Navy🤣
No one expects the french inquisition...
not enough time.
This whole “documentary” is hilariously bias lmao. Like it starts off mentioning the FRENCH NAVY in modern times instead of the US Navy lmao.
Or the Dutch to mention !! Probably forming the basis of great progression in the Age of Sails being to turnout the most copied / spied on/ double foul {by conspiracy/and betrail} played, MARITIME / NAVAL INVENT&INOVAT-ORS Mainly or maybe especially in the 16 & 17th. century
You could do a documentary on French post napoleonic military and Naval battle victories? I got 2 extra minutes to watch it.
Very good. Worth watching for 1 hour. Thanks.
'
thanks, also, for the lowvolume background moosick noise. Nice.
Lol "the Charles de gaule is the only nuclear powered surface ship"
Me, an American, from a military family, "oh really now?" 🤔
I know I thought that was funny too, like they just casually ignore the 11 nuclear powered American carriers that wait 22 years to be refueled
@@stephenstowe9711 I doubt they can use many of those 'American carriers'. Would the US carriers not sink them? What if the USN had zero operational carriers? What then? What if the sailors onboard are so badly educated that ... they cannot end sentences? And they hide behind fake names like cowards?
What if ROH's had nothing to do with any 22 years to be refueled?
Wait ... not a single word you typed is real? Oh my!
They day you meat a US citizen you will be in serious trouble as an American. If you are even a real American. A secret organisation hiding behind fake names like cowards pretending to have a nationality that literally does not exist.
Entire US military and all 300+ US citizen who took the pledge, ''oh really now?''.
Annual NSA report to US Congress .... Commie anti US trollers spout lies, BS and they hide behind fake names.
Really? No 50 cents for you today. US Constitution says, ''No!''.
@@MrFlatage Lmao that went from zero to Alex Jones real fast
@@the_inquisitive_inquisitor Something your teachers told you in first grade where you learned to ... end sentences? Da comrade?
Got to love the NSA right?
As if Russia or China know about grammar, lol!
The paintings of the ship battles are actually beautiful, id hang one up forsure
Cool to see the French version of naval history.
🐸🏳
Subtitles work better than talk overs.
You're supposed to turn the original audio DOWN when you do a voiceover. This is unwatchable, it's like two people trying to talk to you at once.
Yea, especially if you understand both language
Great documentary! However, you said somthing about a certain nuclear powered aircraft carrier that only needed refueling every 7 yrs. That great,but it isnt unique, like you say, because other nuclear powered aircraft carriers, can go go far longer than 7 yrs ,atleast I think
Two reactors drive two turbine generators and then three electric motors powering the propellers, producing 60 MW propulsive power. Refuelling cycle quoted at 6-7 years, or at 65% capacity factor refuelling is every 7-10 years, overhaul at 20 years, over a 60-year operating lifetime.
Hello, Hi, yes I heard the FORD CLASS is 25 amazing years
@@kevinmccarthy8746 Its not the ships propulsion that is the limiting factor however. The advantage of a Nuclear powerplant is NOT that it does not need refuelling for 25 years but the fact that it generates a huge amount of power. That is the TRUE advantage.
Nuclear Carriers STILL have to refuel as aircraft do not run on pixie dust. They still need to take on board food and other supplies for the crew. They need to take on spares and weapons for the aircraft, and so on. A Nuclear carrier despite its propulsion still has to spend 6 months of the year in dock partly to take on supplies, partly to allow crew R and R, and partly for normal maintenance cycles, and believe me, a Nuclear powered ship requires MORE maintenance than a Conventionally powered ship, you do NOT want something going wrong with those reactors after all!!
What that Nuclear Carrier has that conventional Carriers lack is the energy production ability to run a moderately sized town. This essentially means a Nuclear Carrier can run at Flank Speed literally permanently as it has no need to drop down to a more conservative Cruising Speed to conserve fuel. It also gives a metric s**t ton of spare power for future upgrades in weapons and electronics capability.
Oh, and do you know how LONG it takes to refuel a Nuclear Carrier? Literally YEARS. The old fuel has to be carefully removed and stored, the reactor then decontaminated, in depth check and maintenance/rebuild, then and only then is the new fuel added. For this reason those refuelling periods tend to be used to also deep refit the Carrier. If the thing is going to be out of commission for 5 years you may as well strip everything out and rebuild the electronics, weapons etc etc....
@@alganhar1 Very informitive and interesting. Thank you.
@@alganhar1 Very good explanation! Thoughtful and informative, yet easy for a 'layman' to take in. I regret that these long-form comments have become an endangered species. Same holds for nuclear submarines as well. The ultimate limit of all these pieces of military hardware will always be those of the human operators that drive them.
The Dutch were the fastest ship builders in the world!! Thanks to the invention of the windmill saw we could saw timber at increased efficiency of 3000%!!
The first practical windmills were in use in Sistan, a region in Iran and bordering Afghanistan, at least by the 9th century and possibly as early as the mid-to-late 7th century.
@@MrFlatage read! I never said we invented windmills, but we did invent wind powered sawmills.
"The importance of the the wind-powered sawmill taking off in the Netherlands cannot be understated. Wood production didn't double, triple or quadruple; it grew by a factor of thirty, or 3,000%. It was all in the time savings: Using the pit-saw method, sawyers could process 60 logs over a span of 120 days. Using a wind-powered sawmill, they could break down 60 logs in four or five days. What used to take four months now took less than a week."
@@drpepper3838 K so post your Onus Probandi.
Course no one says anything on a textbased comment section, lol!
@@MrFlatage we forgot to mention effectivly efficient etc.
The wonderful British Navy! Over 500 years of the most superlative seamanship in the history of the world. We your prodigal sons love and Esteem you. Thank you, and God bless you, from the USA.
Shove it
you hit your own father when you grew up. He nurtured you from a baby to a healthy full grown man and this is the thanks he gets. Ungrateful. Shame on you.
@@PoliticalGangster what did he do? i’m so confused
@@rykerhaggmark9575 ahhh man it's to heinous to even discuss. I'm feeling to sick and disgusted even thinking about it. Just...forget it.
@@PoliticalGangster i’m still confused but it’s all good have a nice night man
What i love is that the British accidentally made EVERY warship in the world obsolete before ww1... Including their own.
It wasn't by accident. Naval architecture was already moving in that direction. The Brits under Fisher just happen to get there first.
@@robertmoore6149 no i know, just saying how momentus it is that at an instant naval warfare changed
@@onebritishboi9892 With the invention of things like exploaive shell, steam, iron armor, etc, obsolescence occured more and more rapidly. HMS Dreadnought was supremely revolutionary and state of the art in 1906, yet 8 years later was considered very much second rate. She was refitted in 1916 and dispite that was decommissioned after the war, being only 13 years old.
Can't wait till "boarding torpedoes" are a real thing
This video should be named 'The French Naval History' since that is really all it is about. The French are doing here what British historians typically do almost everywhere, talking up (making their 'stuff' or events look more important than they are) their small navy and small aircraft carrier There is almost no general naval history, and almost all we see in the modern fleet scenes is the one and only French ACC, always in foreground so it does not look so small next to any of the US carriers in the background. But the video quality is excellent!
Was this channel Absolute History?
Best way to view the French navy is to get your deep water scuba license
Hahahaha
That dude said that frigate was the baddest in the world and it’s close in protection is a sailor in a Death Star helmet firing a deck mounted .50 cal machine gun! Rofl
what's the name of the ship at 51:04?
Space tech makes ships sitting ducks. No place to hide from the eye in the sky.
The Charles Degaulle allows the French Navy to project force anywhere, except when it isn't down for repair/maintenance, which happens more than you might think. Thats why you need more than one CVN to ever really make that claim. The USN. has 10. Id take the Brits 2 HMS QE and HMS P of W over the Charles DeGaulle any day.
It's accompanied by: you forgot to say a US Arleigh Burke Class Aegis Destroyer....LOL
Men and Machines
That escort seems very close. I would have thought that with the range of missiles and torpedoes today, the escort would probably be on the horizon.
if you add Indonesian subtitles, your channel will definitely increase in viewers....!
"... two enormous paddle wheels...." shows very small paddle wheels lol
Two people talking at the same time, makes this video unwatchable.
good documenter not by view of American or even British dominated history and technology, but view from French
Portugal had a ship ,the " Bota Fogo " ,with 366 guns .
What's the point of having many different types of ship? Destroyer, light & heavy cruiser, battleship, and others?
Comparable to the conquest of space? As our species has barely scratched the surface of space the analogy seems a bit.....french.
France has 1 aircraft carrier in service and the USA has 11 in service.
but the French won't die for not having money to go to the hospital...
Rockets are boring. Return to Artillery 😎
What in God's sweet name is boring about a Saturn V??
@@cleverusername9369 I meant small rockets as weapons. Space rockets are beyond awesome! 😂
From The Depths players where you at? Anyone can design for 3D warfare?
How you start history with Galley ships when we have so many naval batles and many tipes of ships thousand years before.. ? Persian Fenicians Greeks Roman ships disappear ?
Time restrain? Limited budget? There's plenty of reason why someone didn't include something in a video.
Isn’t the plural of cannon, cannon?
This video could do with more graphics, more narration and A LOT FEWER talking heads.
Yes, the French had bad tactics all throughout the Age of Sail. That's part of why their naval history is so devoid of victories compared to other powers.
the monitor had turrets in 1864. so ill asume that was said from the perspective of the french
The French Navy🙄
"That's adorable" -Admiral Horatio Nelson
First of all the French nuclear carrier is not the only nuclear carrier
In the world
I'm assuming the rest of the sentence was "in its battlegroup"
I know they are French people. I don't have to hear their voices distracting me as if it adds something instead of detracts.
Sorry can't watch. One voice at a time please. Even quieter voices suck. I you were speaking quietly in the background while I was talking I would tell you to shut up.
this WoWS Naval Legend is getting weird xD
Where u are there..
What have been u saw?
How about the ship..
41:48 It was because of over bureaucratising the state
I need intelligence data!!
Set a smoke screen!
NOT the largest high tech machine built by man by far........umm the super collider 🤔
even if size indicated sophistication, which it doesn't.
The projector that puts the "moon" hologram in the sky.
The thumbnail is from a Russian admiral gorshkov class frigate.
Funny, the aussies dont agree regarding the french subs.
Aussies are clueless about subs, lmao!
@@MrFlatage I think the nuclear option is better than the the french noise tubes.
@@MrFlatage the aussies know best, that why they came to the british... just saying.
@@BenState I think using grammar is best. Mandotory under a democratic constitution even.
@@ashleygoggs5679 Funny how only me, in my lands of the free flying the great flag, our mighty red, white and blue can ... use capital letters. You know? Just saying.
Now only a real man stands for his words and with his flag ofcourse. Which comes with Onus Probandi. Words must be proven.
th-cam.com/video/UYF08jJi9Hg/w-d-xo.html
As proven ... clueless. Ofcourse they did not come to the British but were conquered, oppressed, hunted down and made infertile. Educated people who can pass a 1st grade exam all already know this history. Just saying.
The lady who said that war ships are the biggest objects made by humans is incredibly incorrect. They're big, but we've built huge objects.
Or the reason for the French failed against the English was due to the French revolution which caused the loss of skilled commanders. English crossed the T tactics rull the air, land, & sea.
The brits built the empire on Indian made ships
Only 139k views
French navy 😂😂😂
Hey...,
It's not yours..!??
🙄🙄😭😁
what a huge task force? not! lol
Deeply amusing to hear the French historians claim that La Gloire gave them superiority over the British for almost 20 years, when HMS Warrior, faster, heavier, larger and better armed, was launched only a year after La Gloire, swiftly removing any ideas of naval domination that the French may have had. SUCH a biased documentary.
Yeah small ragtag of colonists the British Navy and the British army and a retreat back to their little Island what is a little bit of help from the French not much
Yawn
Put the bottle down and go to bed, your embarrassing yourself.
OK. 1) The American Continental Army at its height numbered 80,000 men trained in the Prussian style. At its height, the British Army in what is now the US numbered no more than 44,000 troops, most of which came from 2nd Line Regiments.
2) The French and Spanish Combined Navy won the US War for Independence. Period. It was THAT Navy that countered the British ability to move troops and supplies. Without the French and Spanish Navies the Americans would have lost the war for Independence.
3) The British were fighting the other two large Superpowers of the day AT THE SAME TIME. Those superpowers being France and Spain. The most important Battles that determined who would win the War of Independence were not even fought in the America's.
In other words, both statements I have seen you make thus far have been PROVEABLY wrong. The British fought the Rebels with 2nd rate troops whilst fighting the two other great superpowers of the day, and while the Rebels won, the French and Spanish did NOT..... Given that THEY were the real threat as far as the British were concerned, not the American Rebels, they felt rather less 'humiliated' than idiots like you try to make out they should be.
Hi
Greetings!🕷️
🤔🤔
French! Really now? French military documentary?! I Give Up season 1
The first ironclads were actually during the US Civil War then the French and English saw the usage of it I started doing the same
Nah, the French and British were building their ironclads at the same time, not afterwards, and they were not ocean going like the Gloire or Warrior was capable of
@@bikes02 They were kind of, but the final design of the ironclad was indeed copied by the english from the french, its mentioned in a very good book - Empire of the Deep, its the most comprehensive deep dive into the history of the Royal navy and before i have read, def recomend it.
@@ClawsTM Warrior was designed from the keel up as an iron ship, Gloire was not, she was a true Iron Clad, a wooden hulled warship then clad in iron, the iron was armour but not structural, Warrior was Iron Hulled, which meant her structure as well as her armour were iron (though Warrior did also have teak lining it was part of the armour system and not structural). While you could certainly argue that the Gloire hastened the design and building of Warrior the technology and methods that went into Warrior were already being looked at by the Royal Navy prior to her keel being laid down. Gloire gave the RN the kick up the backside to build her, but everything was already in place for that to happen anyway, and even without Gloire would almost certainly have happened within a few years if maybe on a smaller scale.
Actually no, Gloire and Warrior were BOTH completed before either the US or the Confederacy completed Ironclads. The British were also experimenting with turrets at the time, though they were looking at the far superior Cole Turrets.
Gloire was completed August 1860, Warrior was completed October 24th 1860. USS Monitor was laid down the day after Warrior was completed, October 25th 1861, and completed 30th January 1862. CSS Virginia was ordered July 11th 1861 and completed March 7th 1862.
So no, the first Ironclads were NOT during the US Civil war. A basic look through Wiki will show you that, the dates the ships were laid down and completed are all there. USS Monitor was not even started until after HMS Warrior and Gloire were completed and commissioned into their respective navies, and both ships were nearing completion (and had been launched) when CSS Virginia was ordered....
Actually that's not quite true as other people posted here the British and French are already designing iron class before the United States however, the Confederate ironclad and the union ironclad were the first two ironclads to engage in any significant navel combat.
Boy, 'someone' in the comments section has developed a serious case of "Diarrhea of the Keyboard".💩😝
The French don't know how to fight a war just lose one lately
Failure!! Drop the original background commentaries - it is extremely annoying!! They serve no purpose, as they make both languages blurry and headache-inducing!! I switched to another channel after giving this one a try, and headache was gone!
105
All people who are playing World Conqueror 4, Glory of Generals 3, European War 6 can relate this Navy DOCS movie.
huge number of inovations weren't French at all !! Another issue, at least ! Left out , just like that,... insult {realy) to the Netherlands / Holland
Or the Dutch to mention !! Probably forming the basis of great progression in the Age of Sails being to turnout the most copied / spied on/ double foul {by conspiracy/and betrail} played, MARITIME / NAVAL INVENT&INOVAT-ORS Mainly or maybe especially in the 16 & 17th. century!
The frogs alwsys loose...
I hate to say it the friendship that's a small carrier for the United States that's smaller than the Enterprise that's half the size of the Enterprise USS Enterprise
Ah the historic French Navy, or as it was known during the Age of Sail "The Reserve Fleet of the United Kingdom of Great Briton"
That's not a aircraft carrier. The French one carrier dont they always surrender? UK one carrier. Come over to the USA let us show you some REAL aircraft carriers and a real Navy.
AHAHAHAH They start off talking about the French navy in the modern world. Like what? The entirety of the French navy is like a single strike force of the US Navy. Even China has a stronger navy than France and it’s still operating pre WW2 vessels lmao. I think it’s kind of arrogant/ignorant to spotlight the “French navy” when referring to modern times in place of the US Navy or literally any other more competent Navy nowadays lmao. Especially since I don’t think there’s been a time in history where the French navy was the reigning superpower given the UK held that title throughout history before the US became the worlds superpower during WW2.
China has a large navy, not a competent navy.
The best Navy in the world USA Navy not any other Navy in the world France's Navy is like the 4th down in the list when you got from France you have England Russia China then America
Hey man, you wrote a whole bunch of comments and not one of them makes sense. Don't drink and TH-cam comment.
And a Russian sub undetected under each ship
It’s alright, Russian sub in general sink by themselves, no need to actually detect them
@@patrickols sorry to my comrades, but...😆😆😆😆
@@patrickols that's hilarious 😆
@@patrickols Easy to detect you Ruski's. 1st graders can end a sentence. You commie's cannot, lmao!
Just look at you all.
Lots of croaking in the comments. LOL
🐸🏳
3rd to comment on this.
lol let's hope they have white flags ...... LOL and sail backwards !
The ironclads the metal boats came about those cannonballs were worthless the first one was in the Civil War the US history
Again wrong, I have indicated to you the dates of completion of the HMS Warrior, Gloire, USS Monitor and CSS Virginia. Monitor was not even laid down until AFTER both Warrior and Gloire were completed and commissioned. Both Gloire and Warrior were laid down before Virginia and Monitor were even designed. A very brief look at actual dates would have informed your idiot self of this.....
The ONLY firrst is that Hampton Roads was the first Ironcland on Ironclad battle, and that is ALL that is unique about those two ships. Nothing else. The Royal Navy were experimenting with turrets at the same time but were using the superior Cole Turrets over the Timble turrets the USN used. The USN threw them into service immediately simply because they needed the ships NOW, whereas the Royal Navy tested them first, got them working and then built a ship around them later.
That ship was HMS Devastation, which was the first mastless Ocean Going warship as well as the first fully turret armed Ocean Going Warship.
Get this through your idiot head, Monitor was USELESS for Ocean Going Navies. She literally sank under tow in seas that Warrior or Gloire could have handled easily. Monitors like USS Monitor simply did not have the freeboard for ocean going, they were too easily swamped, as proven BY USS Monitor. The Monitor and Virginia were basically River Boats, not sea going warships.
I understand you're using metric you are the French you're talkin about cuz he got started that stupid measurement system cuz you don't have to use math to understand it I'm like the imperial measurement of the king of England sad part about the modern Queen is gone lazy and went to the metric system left your ancient ancestors measurements they called it the imperial measurement system
if you used the metric system you would have more free time to learn how to write
Lol