The only thing I would add is to mention that by the time of the Channel Dash, Iceland was under the control of the US, and had been since July of 1941. Of course, the British and Americans both flew long range patrol aircraft out of Iceland regardless of who controlled it, so it does not change anything...it is just a factoid that a lot of folks are not aware of.✌
@@ExploringMilitaryHistory LOL I tried to post something about FDR's undeclared war, and I included a link...sometimes you can actually share information on YT...but not this time...LOL deleted instantly.
4:29...Mate you do great content but I'm not sure about your maths. You say that two out of the three judging criteria make Scharnhorst & Gneisenau battleships and not battle-cruisers but surely if they were 1)- fast & 2)- lightly armed (vs heavily armoured) that is definitely two to one in favour of them actually being batte-cruisers? 🤔
The Iowa class was fast, 16 inch guns, and battleship armor. The Scharnhorst was Fast, had battleship armor, but had 11 inch guns 2/3. Also yes I'm just dumb sometimes.
@@ExploringMilitaryHistory Not quite sure why you brought up the Iowa but here we go: Big guns & heavy armour (BS×2) vs High speed (B-C×1) ...so that proves it's definitely a battleship by 2 to 1 whereas the Scharnhorst as stated was: Small guns & high speed (B-C×2) vs Heavy armour (BS×1) ...a battle-cruiser by 2 to 1.
@@eddhardy1054 Just going to chime in here but if the Scharnhorst class can attain high speed without compromising its armour like Battlecruisers, it fits the Fast Battleship concept. Now Fast Battleship was an informal concept compared to the official classification of a Battlecruiser which is the why the British referred to them as that. Where you can really debate the Battlecruiser classification vs Fast Battleship designation is the Kongou Class Battlecruisers after their 1930's refits.
The only thing I would add is to mention that by the time of the Channel Dash, Iceland was under the control of the US, and had been since July of 1941. Of course, the British and Americans both flew long range patrol aircraft out of Iceland regardless of who controlled it, so it does not change anything...it is just a factoid that a lot of folks are not aware of.✌
Including me!
@@ExploringMilitaryHistory LOL I tried to post something about FDR's undeclared war, and I included a link...sometimes you can actually share information on YT...but not this time...LOL deleted instantly.
4:29...Mate you do great content but I'm not sure about your maths. You say that two out of the three judging criteria make Scharnhorst & Gneisenau battleships and not battle-cruisers but surely if they were 1)- fast & 2)- lightly armed (vs heavily armoured) that is definitely two to one in favour of them actually being batte-cruisers? 🤔
The Iowa class was fast, 16 inch guns, and battleship armor.
The Scharnhorst was Fast, had battleship armor, but had 11 inch guns 2/3.
Also yes I'm just dumb sometimes.
@@ExploringMilitaryHistory Not quite sure why you brought up the Iowa but here we go:
Big guns & heavy armour (BS×2)
vs
High speed (B-C×1)
...so that proves it's definitely a battleship by 2 to 1 whereas the Scharnhorst as stated was:
Small guns & high speed (B-C×2)
vs
Heavy armour (BS×1)
...a battle-cruiser by 2 to 1.
@@eddhardy1054 Just going to chime in here but if the Scharnhorst class can attain high speed without compromising its armour like Battlecruisers, it fits the Fast Battleship concept. Now Fast Battleship was an informal concept compared to the official classification of a Battlecruiser which is the why the British referred to them as that. Where you can really debate the Battlecruiser classification vs Fast Battleship designation is the Kongou Class Battlecruisers after their 1930's refits.