🎮 Get a 7-day free trial and 25% off Blinkist Annual Premium by clicking here: www.blinkist.com/oceanlinerdesigns 🚢Did you enjoy this video? 🏆Why not SUPPORT OUR WORK on Patreon at; www.patreon.com/oceanlinerdesigns OR join as a TH-cam member for cool badges and emojis!; th-cam.com/channels/sE8PTncfn2Vga48jH46HnQ.htmljoin Supporters on Patreon and TH-cam enjoy perks like early access and behind the scenes and bloopers! MORE OCEANLINER DESIGNS; How Ocean Liners Used Technology to End The Golden Age of Sail th-cam.com/video/8GXi-vIVDM0/w-d-xo.html Did a Coal Fire Sink the Titanic? th-cam.com/video/Ry-PmtX_wtc/w-d-xo.html The Avoidable Tragedy of Britain's Hindenburg; the R101 Story; th-cam.com/video/ZxlV_GGU5YQ/w-d-xo.html How did Titanic's Crew Keep the Lights Burning During the Sinking? th-cam.com/video/3yQPgsJi96Y/w-d-xo.html
Mike, you forgot to mention the SIXTH worst warship in history. She was the H.M.S. VICTORIA. She was top-heavy, had too low a freeboard, and had a massive main gun turret; which caused the ship to sink in minutes.
I'am actually impressed with knowledge and the work you put in the video....and i know what i'am talking about, becouse i was marine engineer for 8 years and fisherman until today. But i also have slovenian bestseller book. Novel about life and contraband in the 80s on the merchant ship. So, good work, keep it real and greetings from Slovenia, brother.....
The kamikaze pilot missed the William D Porter, and yet, still managed to sink the ship with the explosion? If that’s not the finest example of the saying “Task failed successfully”, then I don’t know what is.
A correction regarding the section on HMS Captain. The ship was being built by a private yard according to the instructions of it's designer, the admiralty had already pointed out the ships many flaws and had no interest in building such a ship themselves but Coles was an influential man and was allowed to use a private yard to build the ship for the navy despite his lack of experience. HMS Captains loss proved that this was a mistake and future ship construction would be fully controlled by the admiralty.
I believe it was well noted that HMS Captain was sailing with other ships that also encountered the same storm, all of which came through relatively unscathed. Just a truly tragic and awful ship all around.
With the HMS Captain, you skipped over the whole crucial piece of the story; its designer Cowper Coles. He designed the ship, fought with the Admiralty for years, got the press on his side and moved forward with a design that was dangerous. The Admiralty wanted a less revolutionary design. They feared the ship would sink, and when Coles refused to make the necessary design changes they approved it, but only with the understanding that if the design was failure it would be the responsibility of Coles and the builders
Also, before the development of Captain began Coles was arguing against the issues Captain was most problematic for; excessive topweight, low freeboard, and minimal stability Thus he designed his perfect ship, with extremely low freeboard and dangerous levels of instability. Captain being the last royal navy warship built without Admiralty oversight and engineering.
A line from the Navy court marshal over the sinking of the HMS Captain says it all. "the Captain was built in deference to public opinion expressed in Parliament and through other channels, and in opposition to views and opinions of the Controller and his Department" Basically they just told the British Government "We told you this was a bad design, you didn't listen, stop trying to meddle with the navy's business."
He did cover that part....He just didn't name Coles or go into the fight details as much. But covered the basics for the most part. He could've added the detail of the PRESS being weaponized to push the ships construction more clear admittedly.
Agree. Read David Brown's account on "Warrior to Dreadnought", pages 47 to 51. Naval Officers opposed her, Edward Reed (Chief Constructor) opposed her, but the government bowed to public opinion and press. As usual. Brown wrote: " There was tremendous public pressure to adopt Coles' system and this was entirely backed by politicians. There was also a press campaign supporting Coles, perhaps the first time such influence had been applied in a technical matter". (p. 47).
Just a small issue, the construction of HMS Captain was actually opposed by the Admiralty, it was her designer which made a list of stupid decisions, the Admiralty actually had a competing design and refused to take the Captain after she was constructed, but parliament forced them to take her.
Strong breeze and down she goes... only good bit is that the area where she settled kept her remarkably well preserved allowing for her to be salvaged.
A sistership to Vasa actually did have a long career before it was deliberatly sunk nearby Vaxholm to prevent the russians to get in to the harbour of Vaxholm.
I'd like to throw in an honorable mention for IJN Mogami which had a rather interesting service life. A notable story of firing 6 torpedoes at USS Houston, all of which missed, but 5 did hit, and sink, friendly targets of the Japanese fleet, including one carrying Lieutenant General Imamura
Don't forget that she also had rammed her sister IJN Mikuma in which made both of them have to reduce speed and this lead to a bombing raid carried out by USS Enterprise where Mikuma was sunk
It was one of those strangely beautiful ships, even after being rebuilt as a half carrier/half cruiser. Also, a floating example of how "multi-role" typically translates as "not particularly good at anything".
Something interesting about the use of the word "terrible": at the time British warships still used the word, its definition was more akin to how we'd use the word "terrifying" today than to describe something as bad. The French actually used and continue to use the word in this vein: two different French warships (a large destroyer and a ballistic missile submarine) have used the name Le Terrible.
The thing about the HMS Captain was that it had little to no support from the Royal Navy. They didn't like the design, and it was only built and put into service because the designer Cowper Phipps Coles managed to get public support for his design. When the ship sank, the Royal Navy instituted a policy which ended outside interference in ship designs; everything would be "in house" from then forward.
My former university lecturer is currently leading an effort to find the 'Captain', and the latest report says they're fundraising for an ROV expedition to look at a promising lead.
Furious, Courageous's half sister was even weirder. Instead of four 15 inch guns, she was to be armed with just two 18 inch guns, which were the largest that the British ever put on a ship. Half way through construction though they removed the forward gun for a small flight deck and just kept the rear one. A while later they removed the rear one as well and added a flight deck as well. But it was not connected, superstructure was still there, and only when the rest of her sisters were converted to carriers did she get a proper flight deck.
And became the ugliest carrier of the war. Even moreso when she got the 4” guns and tiny island. Still Males me wish Wargaming chose Courageous/Glorious instead of Furious for the mid-tier carrier
@@christopherhill4438 Spurious, Uproarius and Outrageous I believe. HMS Furious was temporarily the most heavily armed aircraft carrier in the world. One 18" gun and a flight deck. Insanity but experimental insanity. I have a lot of time for the early conversions. They taught a lot of lessons.
There's an old book I picked up recently that I think you would find quite interesting, Mike. It's called 'The Noronic is Burning' and is about the fire aboard the Great Lakes cruise liner SS. Noronic, and the subsequent investigation into what happened. As far as I can tell, 'The Noronic is Burning' is the only book that was ever written about the event.
@@charlestaylor253 The Noronic and the Naronic are 2 different ships. SS. Noronic burned in Toronto Harbour in 1949, and SS. Naronic sank in a storm in the North Atlantic in 1892.
The battlecruiser concept actually worked quite well when deployed in it's intended role. During the battle of Falkland Islands, British battlecruisers HMS Invincible and HMS Inflexible absolutely destroyed entire von Spee's cruiser squadron. Unfortunately, the battlecruisers were more often used as cheaper battleships, which proved to be quite deadly.
Battlecruisers worked well at the tactical level when used correctly, but at the strategic level they just cost too much to be justifiable for their role of cruiser killers. It’s only once battlecruiser designs intended to kill other capital ships came along that they really became sensible at all levels.
@@bkjeong4302 You are right, also the role of cruisers as merchant raiders have been increasingly taken over by submarines diminishing the need to for 'cruiser killers'.
@@misarthim6538 Very true. They suffered because of misuse, they were supposed to follow the doctrine of outgun anything you cant outrun and outrun anything you cant outgun. Instead they were being used as ships of the line....
@@lawv804 That was actually a roughly even match, partly because Hood was a battlecruiser specced like an unusually fast fast battleship, and Bismarck was a partly obsolete battleship (well, even more obsolete than the entire battleship concept already was) for WWII standards meaning that the two ships actually had a similar amount of speed, firepower and protection.
I remember the Porter's story from a Sam O'Nella video, and still love the way it was mentioned as the kamikaze plane suddenly finding itself under the ship and going "oh yeah, *clears throat violently* banzai! :D" (followed by explosion)
Its stupid, but I had a hard day full of mean heartless peoples. Hearing "its your friend Mike" really moved me. Thanks for the quality content. This nice video took me out of my day and made me relax a little.
I would have loved to have heard the board of inquiry for the Porter. "So, would you care to explain why you fired a live torpedo towards a friendly ship that also just happened to be carrying the President of the United States?" 😂😂
The Porter's story was even more amusing than you say. "Ordered ... for a full inquiry" is an understatement. In actuality, the whole ship's crew was told to consider themselves under arrest until that inquiry was finished. (Legend says they were arrested and chained, but even the real thing is already over-the-top).
Arrested is a little over the top but the crew was detained until it could be worked out who was actually at fault. Marines did come aboard to guard the the crew and the weapons to make sure no one tried to tamper with the evidence.
@@Isolder74 My point. Reality = "nobody leaves the ship until all is shorted out". Legend = "whole crew is sent to the jail". A classic example of tall tales growing on retelling. What I can't conceive is how someone would need that THIS particular tale wasn't alñready tall enough! 🤣🤣🤣
@@notfeedynotlazy It is fun to see it as a case study in how legends and myths can develop. As with all myths, there is always a kernel of truth at the root of them.
The Captain took its designer with her and the Admiralty (which had never exactly approved of the Captain) resolved never again to allow a private individual to build a RN vessel. I pity the poor matelots who had to suffer.
Ah yes, because the problem was TOOOTALLY that it was built by a "private individual". Who do you think the royal navy employs to design ships? Soldiers? Civilian engineers of course. Let's not act like the ship sunk because "muh incompetent civvies". It sunk because the people who ordered it never actually wanted it, took no serious part in the design, and didn't provide crucial input into the design. You get what you pay for. Don't blame others because the people you employed to design a ship couldn't read your mind.
@horvathbenedek3596 it is to my understanding that cowper philpps coles was a captain in the royal navy who happened to be an inventor but was never actually hired to design the captain he did it his account.
I agree, you would think that a ship that hardly made it out of the port before sinking because of slight breeze to be on this list. I visited the Vasa museum this summer, it was ming boggling to see the huge ship that spent over 300 years in the bottom of the ocean preserved in whole, with skeletons and facial reproductions of the deceased found on board.
Looking at The Captain I thought, this is brilliant! Since the waters around England are known to be so calm and easy this design will surely never be in danger of being overwhelmed by waves. 😁
She actually sunk in the Bay of Biscay, a notoriously stormy stretch of sea. There appears to have been some sort of political in-fighting between the professionals in the Admiralty [ who opposed building the ship] and politicians responding to a publicity campaign run by Cowper Coles. One of the officers lost was the son of a politician who had insisted he serve aboard to prove his support of Coles was right.
My great uncle served aboard the USS Missouri. Saturday nights, after a few pints, he'd tell us kids random war stories and remarked how he and the crew would just wish the Wille D would just run aground somewhere.
Hi Mike, really enjoyed this. Something worth mentioning about the Courageous class is that their lightweight construction was a result of a desire to end the stalemate on the Western Front by attacking Germany via the Baltic sea, shallow draught being a necessity for this work. Unfortunately, this resulted in such flimsiness that Courageous took significant structural damage to her foredeck and hull whilst running at speed in a heavy head sea. They really were just glorified high- speed monitors, which, predictably for the RN, still found themselves in the battle line, though fortunately for the crews, without seeing any significant action.
Competing with Willy Dee as an extrenely unlucky ship, I present to you the heavy cruiser Mogami. To make it short... She's suspected to have sunk up to 5 friendly ships after missing her original target with a spread of torpedoes (either by herself or combined with Fubuki's torpedoes as well). Next, she rammed her sister ship Mikuma during the battle of Midway, and last but not least, during the battle of Surigao Strait she rammed another heavy cruiser, the Ashigara-class Nachi: that collision caused issues like a fire that, a while later, reached her loaded torpedo tubes and making them explode.
Friendly I think you mean, as 'allied' is a descriptor of their opponents in that war. In Mogami's case I think luck had less to do with it than competence.
@@mandowarrior123 the only incompetence was the helmsman (and possibly the captain). But other than that she did ok and had a hand in sinking enemy ships. But in terms of the level of incompetence, I wouldn't put her ramming her sister ships above almost sinking the US pride battleship with the president on board and the depth charge incident. The only "bad luck" part about the Willie D was the kamikaze she shot down still managing to sink the goddamn ship even in death.
When your only good quality is that you're good at shooting down aircraft, and you're sunk by an aircraft that's exploding *below you*, that's not bad luck, that's a bad joke.
Weird that your section on the Captain skips the whole drama regarding the ships design and construction to begin with - namely that it was the pet project of an influential British dude and that the navy didn't actually want it anyway, but the designer had so many connections he forced it through anyway.
I don't think you can say that Jutland disproved the battle cruiser idea. All it proved was that if you try to use battle cruisers against battleships, while also going against just about every best practice when it comes to ammunition handling, then they're going to have a bad time. I think a better representation of being used for their intended purpose, was the battle of the Falkland Islands.
I've always thought of it, as people trying to use a fine knife as a screw driver, or good adjustable wrench as a hammer. They can work very well for their intended purpose, but if you try using them for something their not made for, they'll not work well and you'll probably end up ruining them.
The battlecruisers of both sides were never intended to fight battleships, nor did they do so voluntarily. It's an old myth that battlecruisers were meant to be part of the battle line. At Jutland, the British and German battlecruisers engaged each other, not the battleships.
@@Cailus3542 Firstly, we shouldn't just say "battlecruisers" as a whole as there are at least 3, if not 4 generations of battlecruisers. What's true for 1st gen battlecruisers (eg Invincible & Indefatigable) is not nessasarily true for 2nd or 3rd gen ones. Okay, during a fleet battle (like Jutland) the battlecruisers were meant to scout for the fleet and engage the opponents cruiser (or battlecruiser) screen, allowing your destroyers etc freedom of action for when the battleships engage. But once you've sunk the enemy cruisers and the battleships are engaging, you've got a bunch of ships with battleship calibre guns, what are they going to do, go home then? No, the intention was for the battlecruiser squadron engage the enemy battleships, adding their weight of fire, while not receiving much in return because they should be firing at the battleships, then to accelerate out in front of the rest of the battle line and cross the T of the enemy. But then by the time you get to 3rd gen battlecruisers (eg Hood, the "basically a fast battleship" stage), they definitely were being thought of as being used to go toe to to with battleships when the need called for it.
Thanks for another awesome video. A small notice, yes, the Courageous class was officially build as Baltic sea focused ships, but I've read in several books that it was apparently a disinformation to fool German command, and their actual function was "finishing off" enemy ships after large naval battles, similar to quirky Arrogant-class "ramming cruisers", albeit being a way more bigger than them. P.S. I recommend to read about Peresvet-class pre-dreadnaughts, basically they're the russian version of Powerful-class cruisers. A good candidate for one of the worst ships.
The Willie D also was transferred to the Pacific fleet after the whole "oops almost blew up the President's boat" incident, with a new captain. When it was there, moored in an Alaskan harbor, several drunk crew members decided to fire the 5 inch. It just so happened the shell hit the yard of the base commander, while he was hosting a reception. Funny enough, that was her last mistake. She participted in the Philippines campaign, and then was sunk as described in the battle of Okinawa. The crew did manage to keep it together after tanking that hit for 3 full hours, and no one was killed while abondoning ship, so in that sense it was rather lucky.
Mike, as entertaining and fascinating as the normal kinds of content is that you regularly provide, the funny quips and smile that sarcastically said "what could go wrong?!" we're absolutely priceless. I loved it!
Really enjoy these videos you put together Mike. Well produced, nice range and mix of old film clips and images, and on some...really well done animations. Been subbed for a while, and recommended this channel as nice, light easy to digest viewing...while still being interesting and informative. Just wanted to say thanks for doing them!
I've been searching for the ship Hms Captain and her story of her poorly designed low freeboard for some time now, and stumbled upon your video. Thanks for the relief!
The fact that the William D. Porter was able to inflict significant damage upon the enemy and sank with no loss of life is in my opinion the very definition of lucky.
Your take on the Willie D's luck reminds me of Roscoe Turner. Race pilot Roscoe Turner was well in the lead of one race and just about set to win it when his engine came apart in his face. Through sheer skill, guts and luck, he managed to make a safe landing. (He didn't even crash!) As he staggered away from his plane an onlooker came up to him and said, "Gee, Roscoe, what bad luck that you lost the race!" "BAD luck?" Roscoe boomed. "Boy, when something like that happens to you and you walk away from it, that's GOOD luck!"
The Fletchers only had shooting enemy warships as a secondary purpose, after all. Their primary purpose was to add their battery of five 5" guns to the carrier's.
TBF, at the time, "terrible" would have been more commonly used in the sense of "causing terror, alarm or fear" when that HMS Terrible (the 6th or 7th ship to bear the name) was launched, much like "awesome" used to mean "inspiring a feeling of reverantial respect combined with fear or wonder".
There was also the part about the Porter stationed in Alaska (after the Iowa incident), where a shell was fired into the base commander's yard during a party. As if the ship or its crew needed another black mark. I did almost expect the Vasa to be on the list, as the rest of the ships were on for boneheaded designs, but she never really got to be a warship given that she outdid the Captain in waterline armament and being under-ballasted, so the first cannon salute toppled her. On top of that, the design just didn't work right and the port/starboard sides were asymmetrical due to different countries' definition of "one foot".
No mention of Vasa (enough said), HMS Indefatigable (a ship designed to kill cruisers that could easily be killed by those same cruisers), Surcouf (why not to combine subs, cruisers and aircraft carriers on a single ship), Duquesne (a cruiser with virtually no armour that could easily have been beaten into a burning wreck by almost any contemporary destroyer, let alone another cruiser) or the French floating abominations/predreadnoughts? William D. Porter doesn’t deserve to be on this list, and I’d argue HMS Powerful doesn’t either. The loss of Glorious was even stupider than the design of her class. She was sunk literally because her captain was too stupid to check where the enemy was (even though he easily could have); if he hadn’t been that stupid, Glorious would have found out where the German forces were before the Germans even knew she was there and simply gotten out of the way.
The Duquesne-class gets a bit of unfair treatment. Alex Clarke did a good video last year looking into what that class were intended to be and why they were what they were. There was logic behind it, not bad design.
Also: - I-400 class submarine and aircraft carrier hybrid. After Admiral Yamamoto died no one knew what to do with them - KMS Graf Zeppelin, again a ship no one knew what to do with it. Wasn't even completed - SMS Lützow, only lasted 3 months before getting sunk at Jutland - IJN Ise class battleship after being converted into battleship-carrier hybrid - KRI Irian, basically a big f*ck you to Dutch aircraft carrier
Love your channel! I learn so much every time I watch your videos. Recently, I got to see the titanic! Wow, just wow. To see a piece of the hull and touch a piece of steel from her was just an amazing experience. To see the engine telegraph and everything else that museum had to offer. It makes it so real again great channel. It would be immensely fun if you did like a meet and greet Titanic/ship seminar here in America. maybe like Duluth.
I listened to Sapiens audio book many years ago. It was narrated by the author. If you are interested in history, anthropology, archeology; you won't be disappointed with this book. It was incredibly fascinating and educational for a layman.
my grandfather served for 2 years on a gearing-class destroyer (a second upgrade/successor to the fletcher), the Newman K. Perry which was nicknamed the "Bloomin Newman" due to the amount of collisions it had and its participation in "Operation Crossroads" the 1946 atomic bomb test.
My next door neighbor was the commanding officer of the Newman K Perry. CDR Curtis Christopher Davis. He and my father were good friends. Everyone called him Skip.
I’ve been listening to Clive Cussler’s Dirk Pitt books again recently, so far I’d only read the first 10 so I have 16 more that I’m just now discovering for the first time.
Another interesting posting Mike, however I would add another ship to the list: the Russian "Novgorod", a circular monitor! While not being totally uncontrollable as sometimes described, they did have a tendency to spin unless very carefully handled. The "Powerful" and "Terrible" were successful in that they met the intended criteria, but those criteria were based on faulty intelligence of the capabilities of the Russian cruisers. They introduced watertube boilers saved weight and could produce the high output levels of steam to make their top speed. Like much new and unfamiliar technology the crew took time to learn to handle the boilers efficiently, but the ships proved good steamers and the high freeboard enabled them to maintain speed in a seaway. Unfortunately there was not a real role for them in the late Victorian Navy. One point: I do not like the use of "The HMS ...", members of the RN would never use "the" and "HMS" together. Say it in full and it sounds rather ridiculous: "The Her/His Majesty's Ship...". On the other hand "The USS" is quite permissible.
In historical sinkings, even when there were no casualties, I always think of the ship's cat(s). I'm sure their survival was rare. Rest in peace, feline comrades ❤️
I'm not so sure, as animals often senses danger before humans do. If the rats are the first to leave, the ship's cat would probably follow shortly after.
@blondbraid7986 Sensing danger is different from being able to escape it. And while cats are agile and generally good at looking out for themselves, a sinking ship is a fraught place. As they submerge, cavernous spaces fill with water and anything nearby can get sucked inside. You can fall through air pockets too, and if it's a military ship, burning oil floating on the water is often a danger as well. Good hearted people might think of the cat, but wouldn't necessarily want to risk being trapped inside the ship trying to catch the wiley critter. In general, animal suffering wasn't a high priority in times past.
I'm reading Polish book about the history of battleships and H.M.S. Captain's building history is presented there as something very convoluted and interesting. Apparently the designer, Cowper Phipps Coles, was pushing RN for turreted warships to be build. At the beginning they weren't that interested in something this new, but he apparently was a colorful and savvy guy, that managed to get acquainted with influential people and also used press to sway public opinion toward his ideas. Thanks to that he managed to get two test turreted ships built, and after turret tests being successful he got green light to build turreted ocean going warship of his design. Unfortunately the admiralty couldn't accept some of the features he wanted, mainly the low free board (he was pushing it, because he thought that lowering ship's profile is the best defense a la Monitor). Couldn't reach compromise, admiralty bid him farewell and started building their own ship - H.M.S. Monarch - basically Captain with conservative sides, which apparently was pretty successful. Because Coles couldn't let go, he again used his influence and press to sway public opinion towards him (including the First Lord of the Admiralty). He was so effective that he got his wish (and funding) and was allowed to build the Captain as he liked it, and it was build at the same time as the Monarch. This is probably mostly why inquiry put blame on public opinion. This is also the reason why Admiralty refused to have anything to do with it and give any oversight. This is also why J. Reed's concerns were ignored by many, because both teams competed so fervently that any criticism was put down as trash talk to discredit the competition (especially because apparently both sides were trash talking each other for that reason). Also, the masts were positioned too high, because whoever designed them, confused actual deck (the level of the free board) with the deck connecting the conning towers (the one above the turrets) and placed their base there apparently.
Aww you do long form videos too?!! I've only ever seen your titanic shorts until this popped up in my recommended and when I clicked I recognized you immediately! Awesome, I like long form so much better. You got a new subscriber
Question, mainly for the people here. Oceanliner designs + central crossing + skynea history + maybe drachinifel = the naval history squad. Could it happen? Should it happen? On a better note, i think it would be cool to see a list of the some of the most let down ships in history. Ships that set out to achieve great things only to be let down by a mix of bad decisions, bad luck, poor construction or design flaws among other factors.
@@andrewp8284 A colab on armed merchant cruisers / raiders would be an obvious choice. The UK - Austraila time difference might make it a bit difficult though
OT: What a great choice of background music! the Divertimento n° 138! My post are sometimes critical but, all in all, your videos are a pleasure to watch! Thank you Mike! 👋👋👋
Hi Mike 👋 I have been subscribed to your channel for a while now, and I have to say that I'm truly enjoying your content:) So much history and facts that I learn from:) Personally, my heart is with Titanic ❤️ In my opinion, nothing comes close to her:) Tragic story nevertheless, but she has always fascinated me:) I just wanted to say thank you for what you do, and keep these videos coming:) Best regards, Nikki from Norway
Where is Indefatigable? the Dreadnought armored cruiser that could have it's armor beaten by armored cruisers, ships that (A) she was intended to dominate, and (B) her predecessors (the Invincible class) could easily withstand as seen at the Battle of the Falkland Islands, even the Indefatigable's sisters were better protected than her, and I'm not even talking about the skirt and pendant
I expect Mike is trying not to clone a recent(ish) video that Drachinifel made on some poor engineering choices on warships, including some different vessels as well.
You didn't mention the Swedish warship Vasa, which was so top-heavy she sank at the dock before ever getting to sea at all. (The Swedes somehow managed to raise her, and she now enjoys a happy and successful career as a tourist attraction in a museum.)
Just your usual excellent job, my friend. An interesting aside to Courageous and Glorious: after being removed when the ships were converted, the 15 inch guns and turrets were placed in storage. They were later mounted on HMS Vanguard, arguably the handsomest battleship ever built.
Honestly I don’t think the Willy D deserves to be on this list. Bad luck? Perhaps. But in combat she and her crew performed their duty til the end and that’s something worth remembering.
That was cool. Thanks my friend Michael. Ok, here we go. Have you ever considered a retrospective of USS Indianapolis? I realize it wasn't the ship's fault but it IS a fascinating story of naval history none-the-less.
HMS Furious is my personal favorite of the Courageous class, she was finished with an aft mounted turret sporting a single 18-inch gun while forward of her superstructure was a flight deck for launching and recovering aircraft making her the most heavily armed aircraft carrier ever commissioned. Landing procedures for aircraft was also hilarious, you would fly your aircraft into the exhaust smoke from her funnel and at the last second swing around to dodge the superstructure and funnel hopefully bleeding off enough speed to come in to a graceful landing on the flight deck and not hitting the only appreciably armored part of the ship: the conning tower.
Read of the Captain many years ago. In St Flannan's Cathedral in Ballina Co Clare on the banks of Loch Derg there is memorial plaque on the wall inside the cathedral to someone lost on the Captain.
Mike, I don't know how familiar with the game "Stormworks", but several people have built ships in it similar to the HMS Captain shown. And, much like the Captain, they also tend to flounder in rough weather😂
I don't think I've ever commented on an ad before, but I've read "Sapiens" and consider it a watershed book in describing human development. I'm now reading the sequel, "Homo Deus" which is just as interesting.
I've found your channel just a couple days ago and I'm delighted! Thank you for the content you're creating, it's really awesome and binge-worthy (I'm in fact trying to pace myself, lest I run out of videos to watch lol)
Given that most Yamato videos bash her for being pointless and wasteful without considering that this is a problem with all contemporary battleship designs (most of which aren’t called out for it to nearly the same extent), I’d rather not.
Furious was one hell of a half-sister though. She was designed to have just two guns, each in their own turret, one fore, one aft. But these guns were 18.1 inch monsters, yup, the same size as those on the Yamato class 30 years later. Amusingly she had one turret removed while being built and replaced with a landing deck for seaplanes. Before too long, her other turret was removed and she was fully converted into an aircraft carrier. The enormous gun was put into a Lord Clive class monitor, HMS General Wolfe, the two additional guns which had never been used likewise finding a home in two more monitors from the same class, Eugene and the lead ship Lord Clive. Although Furious had, somewhat ironically, never fired her gun in anger, they would eventually see action. In cooperation with Allied forces attacking on the coast of Belgium, the monitors were used on a protracted shore bombardment. General Wolfe was anchored parallel to the coastline, and opened fire with her single enormous gun on the railway bridge at Snaeskerke, four miles south of Ostend ... which was 36,000 yards (32,918 m) from her position. She therefore fired the heaviest shell, from the largest gun, at the longest range up to that time, and at the longest range any Royal Navy ship has fired in action.
🎮 Get a 7-day free trial and 25% off Blinkist Annual Premium by clicking here: www.blinkist.com/oceanlinerdesigns
🚢Did you enjoy this video?
🏆Why not SUPPORT OUR WORK on Patreon at; www.patreon.com/oceanlinerdesigns
OR join as a TH-cam member for cool badges and emojis!; th-cam.com/channels/sE8PTncfn2Vga48jH46HnQ.htmljoin
Supporters on Patreon and TH-cam enjoy perks like early access and behind the scenes and bloopers!
MORE OCEANLINER DESIGNS;
How Ocean Liners Used Technology to End The Golden Age of Sail th-cam.com/video/8GXi-vIVDM0/w-d-xo.html
Did a Coal Fire Sink the Titanic? th-cam.com/video/Ry-PmtX_wtc/w-d-xo.html
The Avoidable Tragedy of Britain's Hindenburg; the R101 Story; th-cam.com/video/ZxlV_GGU5YQ/w-d-xo.html
How did Titanic's Crew Keep the Lights Burning During the Sinking? th-cam.com/video/3yQPgsJi96Y/w-d-xo.html
Could you make a what if Oceanic 3 was built I think it would be interesting
Mike, you forgot to mention the SIXTH worst warship in history. She was the H.M.S. VICTORIA. She was top-heavy, had too low a freeboard, and had a massive main gun turret; which caused the ship to sink in minutes.
Do you plan on meeting up with Drachinifel during his trip to Australia?
I'am actually impressed with knowledge and the work you put in the video....and i know what i'am talking about, becouse i was marine engineer for 8 years and fisherman until today. But i also have slovenian bestseller book. Novel about life and contraband in the 80s on the merchant ship. So, good work, keep it real and greetings from Slovenia, brother.....
Sapient was a great interesting and enjoyable book
The kamikaze pilot missed the William D Porter, and yet, still managed to sink the ship with the explosion? If that’s not the finest example of the saying “Task failed successfully”, then I don’t know what is.
Great video from Sam O Nella
Asians win even in failure
@@cpt_nordbartthat's all I could think about.
That's failure with flying colors!
Miss the ship's hull. Bomb explode under the ship. Creates a gigan bubble that lift the ship over theceater thus snapping it.
A correction regarding the section on HMS Captain. The ship was being built by a private yard according to the instructions of it's designer, the admiralty had already pointed out the ships many flaws and had no interest in building such a ship themselves but Coles was an influential man and was allowed to use a private yard to build the ship for the navy despite his lack of experience.
HMS Captains loss proved that this was a mistake and future ship construction would be fully controlled by the admiralty.
It is probably lucky that Captain Coles went down with HMS Captain...
It’s a safe bet that at least one man in the Admiralty privately thought ‘Oh thank God’ when hearing that Cowper Coles was no longer around.
I was just about to post the same point myself. Not good that such an omission of fact happened on a channel normally so good for accuracy...
@@johncunningham6928 , was going to say, he wouldn't have been very popular had he survived.
I believe it was well noted that HMS Captain was sailing with other ships that also encountered the same storm, all of which came through relatively unscathed. Just a truly tragic and awful ship all around.
With the HMS Captain, you skipped over the whole crucial piece of the story; its designer Cowper Coles. He designed the ship, fought with the Admiralty for years, got the press on his side and moved forward with a design that was dangerous. The Admiralty wanted a less revolutionary design. They feared the ship would sink, and when Coles refused to make the necessary design changes they approved it, but only with the understanding that if the design was failure it would be the responsibility of Coles and the builders
Also, before the development of Captain began Coles was arguing against the issues Captain was most problematic for; excessive topweight, low freeboard, and minimal stability
Thus he designed his perfect ship, with extremely low freeboard and dangerous levels of instability. Captain being the last royal navy warship built without Admiralty oversight and engineering.
A line from the Navy court marshal over the sinking of the HMS Captain says it all.
"the Captain was built in deference to public opinion expressed in Parliament and through other channels, and in opposition to views and opinions of the Controller and his Department"
Basically they just told the British Government "We told you this was a bad design, you didn't listen, stop trying to meddle with the navy's business."
He did cover that part....He just didn't name Coles or go into the fight details as much. But covered the basics for the most part. He could've added the detail of the PRESS being weaponized to push the ships construction more clear admittedly.
Nerds lol much love
Agree. Read David Brown's account on "Warrior to Dreadnought", pages 47 to 51. Naval Officers opposed her, Edward Reed (Chief Constructor) opposed her, but the government bowed to public opinion and press. As usual. Brown wrote: " There was tremendous public pressure to adopt Coles' system and this was entirely backed by politicians. There was also a press campaign supporting Coles, perhaps the first time such influence had been applied in a technical matter". (p. 47).
Just a small issue, the construction of HMS Captain was actually opposed by the Admiralty, it was her designer which made a list of stupid decisions, the Admiralty actually had a competing design and refused to take the Captain after she was constructed, but parliament forced them to take her.
I think the Vasa takes the cake as the most efficiently-bad warship. Not a minute of wasted time in proving itself.
Inspiring, really.
I'm surprised she didn't make the list, but it's also nice to learn about ones I hadn't heard about before.
Shinano: "I was sunk at my test-drive"
Vasa: "Hold my crispbread"
the English "grace dieu" might be up there in bad design
Strong breeze and down she goes... only good bit is that the area where she settled kept her remarkably well preserved allowing for her to be salvaged.
A sistership to Vasa actually did have a long career before it was deliberatly sunk nearby Vaxholm to prevent the russians to get in to the harbour of Vaxholm.
I'd like to throw in an honorable mention for IJN Mogami which had a rather interesting service life. A notable story of firing 6 torpedoes at USS Houston, all of which missed, but 5 did hit, and sink, friendly targets of the Japanese fleet, including one carrying Lieutenant General Imamura
Don't forget that she also had rammed her sister IJN Mikuma in which made both of them have to reduce speed and this lead to a bombing raid carried out by USS Enterprise where Mikuma was sunk
Ouch!
It was one of those strangely beautiful ships, even after being rebuilt as a half carrier/half cruiser.
Also, a floating example of how "multi-role" typically translates as "not particularly good at anything".
Well, given the rivalry between the Japanese navy and army I'd say it managed to kill one enemy. ;)
@@timtheskeptic1147 the f35 would like to have a word about multirole, as the multirole aircraft is most capable fighter aircraft ever ;)
Something interesting about the use of the word "terrible": at the time British warships still used the word, its definition was more akin to how we'd use the word "terrifying" today than to describe something as bad. The French actually used and continue to use the word in this vein: two different French warships (a large destroyer and a ballistic missile submarine) have used the name Le Terrible.
Like Tsar Ivan the Terrible?
The thing about the HMS Captain was that it had little to no support from the Royal Navy. They didn't like the design, and it was only built and put into service because the designer Cowper Phipps Coles managed to get public support for his design. When the ship sank, the Royal Navy instituted a policy which ended outside interference in ship designs; everything would be "in house" from then forward.
Yeh apparently Michael has decided to ignore that massive and we'll known part of the story to get a few cheap comments and likes...
My former university lecturer is currently leading an effort to find the 'Captain', and the latest report says they're fundraising for an ROV expedition to look at a promising lead.
Drachinifel just posted a video about this
Furious, Courageous's half sister was even weirder. Instead of four 15 inch guns, she was to be armed with just two 18 inch guns, which were the largest that the British ever put on a ship. Half way through construction though they removed the forward gun for a small flight deck and just kept the rear one. A while later they removed the rear one as well and added a flight deck as well. But it was not connected, superstructure was still there, and only when the rest of her sisters were converted to carriers did she get a proper flight deck.
I believe they were nicknamed "Spurious and Outrageous" but I can't think of the last one!
@@christopherhill4438 perhaps Inglorious?
@@christopherhill4438 "Laborious/Uproarious" (Glorious) and "Curious" (Furious)
And became the ugliest carrier of the war. Even moreso when she got the 4” guns and tiny island. Still Males me wish Wargaming chose Courageous/Glorious instead of Furious for the mid-tier carrier
@@christopherhill4438 Spurious, Uproarius and Outrageous I believe.
HMS Furious was temporarily the most heavily armed aircraft carrier in the world. One 18" gun and a flight deck. Insanity but experimental insanity. I have a lot of time for the early conversions. They taught a lot of lessons.
There's an old book I picked up recently that I think you would find quite interesting, Mike. It's called 'The Noronic is Burning' and is about the fire aboard the Great Lakes cruise liner SS. Noronic, and the subsequent investigation into what happened. As far as I can tell, 'The Noronic is Burning' is the only book that was ever written about the event.
Fires aboard passenger ships would indeed make a good video. The Morro Castle, the Scandinavia Sun, the Dona Paz, Nironic, and others.
The ship's name was spelled S.S. 'Naronic'. Get your facts together.
@@charlestaylor253 The Noronic and the Naronic are 2 different ships. SS. Noronic burned in Toronto Harbour in 1949, and SS. Naronic sank in a storm in the North Atlantic in 1892.
@@charlestaylor253 ouch that’s gotta hurt
@@chuckaddison5134 not trying to be "that guy" but i think you mean the Scandinavian Star? (unless you mean another ship and i'm just very wrong)
The battlecruiser concept actually worked quite well when deployed in it's intended role. During the battle of Falkland Islands, British battlecruisers HMS Invincible and HMS Inflexible absolutely destroyed entire von Spee's cruiser squadron. Unfortunately, the battlecruisers were more often used as cheaper battleships, which proved to be quite deadly.
Battlecruisers worked well at the tactical level when used correctly, but at the strategic level they just cost too much to be justifiable for their role of cruiser killers. It’s only once battlecruiser designs intended to kill other capital ships came along that they really became sensible at all levels.
@@bkjeong4302 You are right, also the role of cruisers as merchant raiders have been increasingly taken over by submarines diminishing the need to for 'cruiser killers'.
@@misarthim6538 Very true. They suffered because of misuse, they were supposed to follow the doctrine of outgun anything you cant outrun and outrun anything you cant outgun. Instead they were being used as ships of the line....
Like HMS Hood trying to go head to head with the Bismark.
@@lawv804
That was actually a roughly even match, partly because Hood was a battlecruiser specced like an unusually fast fast battleship, and Bismarck was a partly obsolete battleship (well, even more obsolete than the entire battleship concept already was) for WWII standards meaning that the two ships actually had a similar amount of speed, firepower and protection.
I remember the Porter's story from a Sam O'Nella video, and still love the way it was mentioned as the kamikaze plane suddenly finding itself under the ship and going "oh yeah, *clears throat violently* banzai! :D" (followed by explosion)
Its stupid, but I had a hard day full of mean heartless peoples. Hearing "its your friend Mike" really moved me. Thanks for the quality content. This nice video took me out of my day and made me relax a little.
I would have loved to have heard the board of inquiry for the Porter. "So, would you care to explain why you fired a live torpedo towards a friendly ship that also just happened to be carrying the President of the United States?" 😂😂
"I didn't vote for him. Sir." 😊😂
"He's a democrat sir"
@@rain8767Don’t shoot we’re Republicans!
Legend Mikey. Loved the empress video. Can’t wait for the live stream
Mike's dipping into Drachinifel territory with this one.😀
The Porter's story was even more amusing than you say. "Ordered ... for a full inquiry" is an understatement. In actuality, the whole ship's crew was told to consider themselves under arrest until that inquiry was finished. (Legend says they were arrested and chained, but even the real thing is already over-the-top).
Arrested is a little over the top but the crew was detained until it could be worked out who was actually at fault. Marines did come aboard to guard the the crew and the weapons to make sure no one tried to tamper with the evidence.
@@Isolder74 My point. Reality = "nobody leaves the ship until all is shorted out". Legend = "whole crew is sent to the jail". A classic example of tall tales growing on retelling. What I can't conceive is how someone would need that THIS particular tale wasn't alñready tall enough! 🤣🤣🤣
@@notfeedynotlazy It is fun to see it as a case study in how legends and myths can develop. As with all myths, there is always a kernel of truth at the root of them.
wasn't there a legend that the bottle didn't break at its christening?
been loving your most recent videos! i love the "bad ship makeover" videos! please do more
The Captain took its designer with her and the Admiralty (which had never exactly approved of the Captain) resolved never again to allow a private individual to build a RN vessel. I pity the poor matelots who had to suffer.
Ah yes, because the problem was TOOOTALLY that it was built by a "private individual".
Who do you think the royal navy employs to design ships? Soldiers?
Civilian engineers of course.
Let's not act like the ship sunk because "muh incompetent civvies". It sunk because the people who ordered it never actually wanted it, took no serious part in the design, and didn't provide crucial input into the design.
You get what you pay for. Don't blame others because the people you employed to design a ship couldn't read your mind.
@horvathbenedek3596 it is to my understanding that cowper philpps coles was a captain in the royal navy who happened to be an inventor but was never actually hired to design the captain he did it his account.
Hello there, Mr. Brady! Great to have a new video!
As a guy from Sweden I´m kind of suprised of not seeing the royal ship Vasa not in the video. It´s the ship that don´t really have a good record so.
+1 yet another ship that should have been on this list.
I agree, you would think that a ship that hardly made it out of the port before sinking because of slight breeze to be on this list. I visited the Vasa museum this summer, it was ming boggling to see the huge ship that spent over 300 years in the bottom of the ocean preserved in whole, with skeletons and facial reproductions of the deceased found on board.
Looking at The Captain I thought, this is brilliant! Since the waters around England are known to be so calm and easy this design will surely never be in danger of being overwhelmed by waves. 😁
'British ridiculousness' has kept the World laughing at a respectful distance up to this very moment!
Exactly! What in the world could possibly go wrong!?
She actually sunk in the Bay of Biscay, a notoriously stormy stretch of sea. There appears to have been some sort of political in-fighting between the professionals in the Admiralty [ who opposed building the ship] and politicians responding to a publicity campaign run by Cowper Coles. One of the officers lost was the son of a politician who had insisted he serve aboard to prove his support of Coles was right.
Yeh except the story told here wasn't true, so...
Britannia rules the waves. So waves will do as Britannia says and stay calm.
Another great video! If you haven't covered the story before, I think you should make a video on the disastrous journey of the Kamchatka.
My great uncle served aboard the USS Missouri. Saturday nights, after a few pints, he'd tell us kids random war stories and remarked how he and the crew would just wish the Wille D would just run aground somewhere.
Your greeting these days never fails to make me smile - so good to know we have a friend out there.
You forgot how the Willie Dee’s crew got drunk and fired a 5 inch shell into the base commanders front lawn while he was holding a party
Hi Mike, really enjoyed this. Something worth mentioning about the Courageous class is that their lightweight construction was a result of a desire to end the stalemate on the Western Front by attacking Germany via the Baltic sea, shallow draught being a necessity for this work. Unfortunately, this resulted in such flimsiness that Courageous took significant structural damage to her foredeck and hull whilst running at speed in a heavy head sea. They really were just glorified high- speed monitors, which, predictably for the RN, still found themselves in the battle line, though fortunately for the crews, without seeing any significant action.
Competing with Willy Dee as an extrenely unlucky ship, I present to you the heavy cruiser Mogami.
To make it short... She's suspected to have sunk up to 5 friendly ships after missing her original target with a spread of torpedoes (either by herself or combined with Fubuki's torpedoes as well). Next, she rammed her sister ship Mikuma during the battle of Midway, and last but not least, during the battle of Surigao Strait she rammed another heavy cruiser, the Ashigara-class Nachi: that collision caused issues like a fire that, a while later, reached her loaded torpedo tubes and making them explode.
+1 Another great example of a ship that should have been on this list.
Hey, atleast she has a hand in sinking ships.
Friendly I think you mean, as 'allied' is a descriptor of their opponents in that war.
In Mogami's case I think luck had less to do with it than competence.
@@mandowarrior123 the only incompetence was the helmsman (and possibly the captain). But other than that she did ok and had a hand in sinking enemy ships.
But in terms of the level of incompetence, I wouldn't put her ramming her sister ships above almost sinking the US pride battleship with the president on board and the depth charge incident. The only "bad luck" part about the Willie D was the kamikaze she shot down still managing to sink the goddamn ship even in death.
@@mandowarrior123the
Imaging being a ship so goofy your own torpedo wants to sink you
Kamchatka!!!
Unfortunately some WW2 US submarines were lost to their own torpedoes which circled back. Don't remember if they were Mk 14's.
@@jerryw6577 They were. Just one of a host of Mk 14 ISSUES
When your only good quality is that you're good at shooting down aircraft, and you're sunk by an aircraft that's exploding *below you*, that's not bad luck, that's a bad joke.
Weird that your section on the Captain skips the whole drama regarding the ships design and construction to begin with - namely that it was the pet project of an influential British dude and that the navy didn't actually want it anyway, but the designer had so many connections he forced it through anyway.
That was weird, the British Admiralty really was forced unto this
Strange that, it's almost like this video was pandering to a particular audience.
@@rustlemyjimmyswhich one?
Love ya Michael doin a great job!☺️
Good timing Mike 😁 just in time to watch while I count inventory
Happy counting!
Inventory of what
@@goosehubtheshipnerd Cannabis 😶🌫️😆
@@NealBones right…
Love the fancy suit. Great video as always. Love the tie
I don't think you can say that Jutland disproved the battle cruiser idea.
All it proved was that if you try to use battle cruisers against battleships, while also going against just about every best practice when it comes to ammunition handling, then they're going to have a bad time.
I think a better representation of being used for their intended purpose, was the battle of the Falkland Islands.
I've always thought of it, as people trying to use a fine knife as a screw driver, or good adjustable wrench as a hammer. They can work very well for their intended purpose, but if you try using them for something their not made for, they'll not work well and you'll probably end up ruining them.
I second this statement. When used to bully smaller ships like they are intended, Battlecruisers are really good at killing other cruisers.
The battlecruisers of both sides were never intended to fight battleships, nor did they do so voluntarily. It's an old myth that battlecruisers were meant to be part of the battle line. At Jutland, the British and German battlecruisers engaged each other, not the battleships.
@@Cailus3542 Firstly, we shouldn't just say "battlecruisers" as a whole as there are at least 3, if not 4 generations of battlecruisers. What's true for 1st gen battlecruisers (eg Invincible & Indefatigable) is not nessasarily true for 2nd or 3rd gen ones.
Okay, during a fleet battle (like Jutland) the battlecruisers were meant to scout for the fleet and engage the opponents cruiser (or battlecruiser) screen, allowing your destroyers etc freedom of action for when the battleships engage.
But once you've sunk the enemy cruisers and the battleships are engaging, you've got a bunch of ships with battleship calibre guns, what are they going to do, go home then?
No, the intention was for the battlecruiser squadron engage the enemy battleships, adding their weight of fire, while not receiving much in return because they should be firing at the battleships, then to accelerate out in front of the rest of the battle line and cross the T of the enemy.
But then by the time you get to 3rd gen battlecruisers (eg Hood, the "basically a fast battleship" stage), they definitely were being thought of as being used to go toe to to with battleships when the need called for it.
Again a really good video from the friendliest ship yt channel out there.
Thanks for another awesome video. A small notice, yes, the Courageous class was officially build as Baltic sea focused ships, but I've read in several books that it was apparently a disinformation to fool German command, and their actual function was "finishing off" enemy ships after large naval battles, similar to quirky Arrogant-class "ramming cruisers", albeit being a way more bigger than them.
P.S. I recommend to read about Peresvet-class pre-dreadnaughts, basically they're the russian version of Powerful-class cruisers. A good candidate for one of the worst ships.
The Willie D also was transferred to the Pacific fleet after the whole "oops almost blew up the President's boat" incident, with a new captain. When it was there, moored in an Alaskan harbor, several drunk crew members decided to fire the 5 inch. It just so happened the shell hit the yard of the base commander, while he was hosting a reception.
Funny enough, that was her last mistake. She participted in the Philippines campaign, and then was sunk as described in the battle of Okinawa. The crew did manage to keep it together after tanking that hit for 3 full hours, and no one was killed while abondoning ship, so in that sense it was rather lucky.
Mike, as entertaining and fascinating as the normal kinds of content is that you regularly provide, the funny quips and smile that sarcastically said "what could go wrong?!" we're absolutely priceless. I loved it!
Really enjoy these videos you put together Mike.
Well produced, nice range and mix of old film clips and images, and on some...really well done animations. Been subbed for a while, and recommended this channel as nice, light easy to digest viewing...while still being interesting and informative. Just wanted to say thanks for doing them!
I've been searching for the ship Hms Captain and her story of her poorly designed low freeboard for some time now, and stumbled upon your video. Thanks for the relief!
th-cam.com/video/NofUhqh-S7U/w-d-xo.html
Here's a slightly more in depth video from a naval historian
HMS captain started the fine British tradition of proving privatization doesn't work. 😮💨
The fact that the William D. Porter was able to inflict significant damage upon the enemy and sank with no loss of life is in my opinion the very definition of lucky.
Same I also think if they shot down planes, they did thier jobs. Planes that were probably bombing larger ships in a formation they were escorting
Your take on the Willie D's luck reminds me of Roscoe Turner.
Race pilot Roscoe Turner was well in the lead of one race and just about set to win it when his engine came apart in his face. Through sheer skill, guts and luck, he managed to make a safe landing. (He didn't even crash!)
As he staggered away from his plane an onlooker came up to him and said, "Gee, Roscoe, what bad luck that you lost the race!"
"BAD luck?" Roscoe boomed. "Boy, when something like that happens to you and you walk away from it, that's GOOD luck!"
@@jasonstanley7326 Running AA picket was an important role for US Destroyers.
The Fletchers only had shooting enemy warships as a secondary purpose, after all. Their primary purpose was to add their battery of five 5" guns to the carrier's.
TBF, at the time, "terrible" would have been more commonly used in the sense of "causing terror, alarm or fear" when that HMS Terrible (the 6th or 7th ship to bear the name) was launched, much like "awesome" used to mean "inspiring a feeling of reverantial respect combined with fear or wonder".
There was also the part about the Porter stationed in Alaska (after the Iowa incident), where a shell was fired into the base commander's yard during a party. As if the ship or its crew needed another black mark.
I did almost expect the Vasa to be on the list, as the rest of the ships were on for boneheaded designs, but she never really got to be a warship given that she outdid the Captain in waterline armament and being under-ballasted, so the first cannon salute toppled her. On top of that, the design just didn't work right and the port/starboard sides were asymmetrical due to different countries' definition of "one foot".
No mention of Vasa (enough said), HMS Indefatigable (a ship designed to kill cruisers that could easily be killed by those same cruisers), Surcouf (why not to combine subs, cruisers and aircraft carriers on a single ship), Duquesne (a cruiser with virtually no armour that could easily have been beaten into a burning wreck by almost any contemporary destroyer, let alone another cruiser) or the French floating abominations/predreadnoughts?
William D. Porter doesn’t deserve to be on this list, and I’d argue HMS Powerful doesn’t either.
The loss of Glorious was even stupider than the design of her class. She was sunk literally because her captain was too stupid to check where the enemy was (even though he easily could have); if he hadn’t been that stupid, Glorious would have found out where the German forces were before the Germans even knew she was there and simply gotten out of the way.
The Duquesne-class gets a bit of unfair treatment. Alex Clarke did a good video last year looking into what that class were intended to be and why they were what they were. There was logic behind it, not bad design.
Also:
- I-400 class submarine and aircraft carrier hybrid. After Admiral Yamamoto died no one knew what to do with them
- KMS Graf Zeppelin, again a ship no one knew what to do with it. Wasn't even completed
- SMS Lützow, only lasted 3 months before getting sunk at Jutland
- IJN Ise class battleship after being converted into battleship-carrier hybrid
- KRI Irian, basically a big f*ck you to Dutch aircraft carrier
Fascinating information! As always great video Mike!
Love your channel! I learn so much every time I watch your videos. Recently, I got to see the titanic! Wow, just wow. To see a piece of the hull and touch a piece of steel from her was just an amazing experience. To see the engine telegraph and everything else that museum had to offer. It makes it so real again great channel. It would be immensely fun if you did like a meet and greet Titanic/ship seminar here in America. maybe like Duluth.
Somewhere in the North Sea, HMS Indefatigable is breathing a sigh of relief at not being included.
Not the Indie! 😂
I love that show!
@Tenacious Rodent I honestly don't know what show you mean. If my comment is a reference to a show that's totally coincidental.
@@bo7341 Hornblower.
@@bo7341 I think it was more in reply to my comment which was yes....a Hornblower reference!
Then there’s USS Galena - an ironclad that was so bad at being an ironclad that it’s armor was stripped off.
I listened to Sapiens audio book many years ago. It was narrated by the author. If you are interested in history, anthropology, archeology; you won't be disappointed with this book. It was incredibly fascinating and educational for a layman.
my grandfather served for 2 years on a gearing-class destroyer (a second upgrade/successor to the fletcher), the Newman K. Perry which was nicknamed the "Bloomin Newman" due to the amount of collisions it had and its participation in "Operation Crossroads" the 1946 atomic bomb test.
My next door neighbor was the commanding officer of the Newman K Perry. CDR Curtis Christopher Davis. He and my father were good friends. Everyone called him Skip.
I’ve been listening to Clive Cussler’s Dirk Pitt books again recently, so far I’d only read the first 10 so I have 16 more that I’m just now discovering for the first time.
Another interesting posting Mike, however I would add another ship to the list: the Russian "Novgorod", a circular monitor! While not being totally uncontrollable as sometimes described, they did have a tendency to spin unless very carefully handled.
The "Powerful" and "Terrible" were successful in that they met the intended criteria, but those criteria were based on faulty intelligence of the capabilities of the Russian cruisers. They introduced watertube boilers saved weight and could produce the high output levels of steam to make their top speed. Like much new and unfamiliar technology the crew took time to learn to handle the boilers efficiently, but the ships proved good steamers and the high freeboard enabled them to maintain speed in a seaway. Unfortunately there was not a real role for them in the late Victorian Navy.
One point: I do not like the use of "The HMS ...", members of the RN would never use "the" and "HMS" together. Say it in full and it sounds rather ridiculous: "The Her/His Majesty's Ship...". On the other hand "The USS" is quite permissible.
+1 that's atleast 4 other ships mentioned in the comments that deserved to be on this list over some of the entries.
The Novgorod wasn't the only one, there was a sister ship 'Popov' too, named after the ships designer Vice Admiral Andrei Popov.
In historical sinkings, even when there were no casualties, I always think of the ship's cat(s). I'm sure their survival was rare. Rest in peace, feline comrades ❤️
I'm not so sure, as animals often senses danger before humans do. If the rats are the first to leave, the ship's cat would probably follow shortly after.
@blondbraid7986 Sensing danger is different from being able to escape it. And while cats are agile and generally good at looking out for themselves, a sinking ship is a fraught place. As they submerge, cavernous spaces fill with water and anything nearby can get sucked inside. You can fall through air pockets too, and if it's a military ship, burning oil floating on the water is often a danger as well. Good hearted people might think of the cat, but wouldn't necessarily want to risk being trapped inside the ship trying to catch the wiley critter. In general, animal suffering wasn't a high priority in times past.
Oscar/Unsinkable Sam, survivor of the Bismarck, HMS Cossack, and HMS Ark Royal: "Weakness disgusts me."
@remkirkthegamer1157 sure, there are some. Most weren't so lucky.
You should definitely do a collab with Drachinifel
I'm reading Polish book about the history of battleships and H.M.S. Captain's building history is presented there as something very convoluted and interesting. Apparently the designer, Cowper Phipps Coles, was pushing RN for turreted warships to be build. At the beginning they weren't that interested in something this new, but he apparently was a colorful and savvy guy, that managed to get acquainted with influential people and also used press to sway public opinion toward his ideas. Thanks to that he managed to get two test turreted ships built, and after turret tests being successful he got green light to build turreted ocean going warship of his design. Unfortunately the admiralty couldn't accept some of the features he wanted, mainly the low free board (he was pushing it, because he thought that lowering ship's profile is the best defense a la Monitor). Couldn't reach compromise, admiralty bid him farewell and started building their own ship - H.M.S. Monarch - basically Captain with conservative sides, which apparently was pretty successful. Because Coles couldn't let go, he again used his influence and press to sway public opinion towards him (including the First Lord of the Admiralty). He was so effective that he got his wish (and funding) and was allowed to build the Captain as he liked it, and it was build at the same time as the Monarch. This is probably mostly why inquiry put blame on public opinion. This is also the reason why Admiralty refused to have anything to do with it and give any oversight. This is also why J. Reed's concerns were ignored by many, because both teams competed so fervently that any criticism was put down as trash talk to discredit the competition (especially because apparently both sides were trash talking each other for that reason).
Also, the masts were positioned too high, because whoever designed them, confused actual deck (the level of the free board) with the deck connecting the conning towers (the one above the turrets) and placed their base there apparently.
You so need to make a video about the Russian Baltic Fleet in the Russo-Japanese war.
Actually, there are two very good videos about the 'Voyage of the Damned' on Drachinifel's channel
That was what inspired IJN doctrine during WW2, focusing on a single decisive battle
Aww you do long form videos too?!! I've only ever seen your titanic shorts until this popped up in my recommended and when I clicked I recognized you immediately! Awesome, I like long form so much better. You got a new subscriber
Lmao - the WDP was so goofy it's kind of charming. Thanks for another smashing doc, Mike!
It reminds me of a friend who was a Naval Architect statement " The path to progress, is paved by over the path of failure"
Question, mainly for the people here.
Oceanliner designs + central crossing + skynea history + maybe drachinifel = the naval history squad.
Could it happen?
Should it happen?
On a better note, i think it would be cool to see a list of the some of the most let down ships in history. Ships that set out to achieve great things only to be let down by a mix of bad decisions, bad luck, poor construction or design flaws among other factors.
I’d love to at least see an Ocean Liner Designs + Drach collab!
@@andrewp8284 A colab on armed merchant cruisers / raiders would be an obvious choice. The UK - Austraila time difference might make it a bit difficult though
OT: What a great choice of background music! the Divertimento n° 138! My post are sometimes critical but, all in all, your videos are a pleasure to watch! Thank you Mike! 👋👋👋
Hi Mike 👋 I have been subscribed to your channel for a while now, and I have to say that I'm truly enjoying your content:) So much history and facts that I learn from:) Personally, my heart is with Titanic ❤️ In my opinion, nothing comes close to her:) Tragic story nevertheless, but she has always fascinated me:) I just wanted to say thank you for what you do, and keep these videos coming:)
Best regards, Nikki from Norway
Thanks so much Nikki!
Ha - a great idea for a video, and brilliantly presented again. You are SO entertaining and fun to listen to.
Where is Indefatigable? the Dreadnought armored cruiser that could have it's armor beaten by armored cruisers, ships that (A) she was intended to dominate, and (B) her predecessors (the Invincible class) could easily withstand as seen at the Battle of the Falkland Islands, even the Indefatigable's sisters were better protected than her, and I'm not even talking about the skirt and pendant
I expect Mike is trying not to clone a recent(ish) video that Drachinifel made on some poor engineering choices on warships, including some different vessels as well.
@@oriontaylor or spare the repeated beatings the Invincible and Indefatigable classes.
Great video buddy..I wish you'd had a compares chart showing all the ships so we could tell their size difference and shape better..
Admiral Kuznetsov probably is not considered old enough to be present on the list.
Hope you get to meet Drachinifel when he tours Australia...
Talking about courageous class. We shouldn't have miss the JMS Furious's 18 inch guns. Really the biggest glass cannon ever.
That was fun! Very informative and enjoyable to watch.
Subscribed.
You didn't mention the Swedish warship Vasa, which was so top-heavy she sank at the dock before ever getting to sea at all. (The Swedes somehow managed to raise her, and she now enjoys a happy and successful career as a tourist attraction in a museum.)
Indeed, as a Swede, I'm borderline offended she wouldn't make the list.
Rainy Sunday morning and a new video to enjoy from our friend Mike Brady? Let's go!!
Should research the Russian circular war ship for another completely useless warships
Just your usual excellent job, my friend. An interesting aside to Courageous and Glorious: after being removed when the ships were converted, the 15 inch guns and turrets were placed in storage. They were later mounted on HMS Vanguard, arguably the handsomest battleship ever built.
Honestly I don’t think the Willy D deserves to be on this list. Bad luck? Perhaps. But in combat she and her crew performed their duty til the end and that’s something worth remembering.
Most of her screwups also never happened (the torpedo incident, however, is real).
Wasn't there a sailor that survived the willy d, the lusitania, and the titanic?
OUTRAGIOUSLY COOL STUFF !! esp old timey warshipes , keep em comming ol boyo
That was cool. Thanks my friend Michael. Ok, here we go. Have you ever considered a retrospective of USS Indianapolis? I realize it wasn't the ship's fault but it IS a fascinating story of naval history none-the-less.
Extremely surprised Vasa isn’t on this list lmao
Point of order: the actual worst warship in history didn't make this list. No ship can ever top the Russian Armed Auxiliary ship Kamchatka.
I can see torpedo boats... 🤪
Real success is finding your lifework in the work that you love.
HMS Furious is my personal favorite of the Courageous class, she was finished with an aft mounted turret sporting a single 18-inch gun while forward of her superstructure was a flight deck for launching and recovering aircraft making her the most heavily armed aircraft carrier ever commissioned. Landing procedures for aircraft was also hilarious, you would fly your aircraft into the exhaust smoke from her funnel and at the last second swing around to dodge the superstructure and funnel hopefully bleeding off enough speed to come in to a graceful landing on the flight deck and not hitting the only appreciably armored part of the ship: the conning tower.
Read of the Captain many years ago. In St Flannan's Cathedral in Ballina Co Clare on the banks of Loch Derg there is memorial plaque on the wall inside the cathedral to someone lost on the Captain.
Us Sam O’ Nella Fans know ALL about the Willy D!
Mike talking about the Willie Dee...lol I can't believe that I'm just now finding out about this ship.
Surprised that the VAASA was not on the list, if not number 1.
Just discovered your channel via the algorithm today. Fantastic content, and by looking at the catalog, I will greatly enjoy watching them all.
Mike, I don't know how familiar with the game "Stormworks", but several people have built ships in it similar to the HMS Captain shown. And, much like the Captain, they also tend to flounder in rough weather😂
HMS Commodore by GBDanny96 is an example
I don't think I've ever commented on an ad before, but I've read "Sapiens" and consider it a watershed book in describing human development. I'm now reading the sequel, "Homo Deus" which is just as interesting.
The admiralty wanted nothing to do with Captain; it truly was public and parliamentary pressure that got her built.
The William D. Porter is allways my favourite story to go.
Yay another great video
I've found your channel just a couple days ago and I'm delighted! Thank you for the content you're creating, it's really awesome and binge-worthy (I'm in fact trying to pace myself, lest I run out of videos to watch lol)
I love watching your videos
This was just the most sheer FUN I've had with your episodes...and I thought I had a lot of fun with all the others, too. I just loved it! Mahalo!
Do the Yamato pls.
Yamato is beautiful, she deserves a dedicated video on her
Given that most Yamato videos bash her for being pointless and wasteful without considering that this is a problem with all contemporary battleship designs (most of which aren’t called out for it to nearly the same extent), I’d rather not.
Furious was one hell of a half-sister though. She was designed to have just two guns, each in their own turret, one fore, one aft. But these guns were 18.1 inch monsters, yup, the same size as those on the Yamato class 30 years later. Amusingly she had one turret removed while being built and replaced with a landing deck for seaplanes. Before too long, her other turret was removed and she was fully converted into an aircraft carrier. The enormous gun was put into a Lord Clive class monitor, HMS General Wolfe, the two additional guns which had never been used likewise finding a home in two more monitors from the same class, Eugene and the lead ship Lord Clive.
Although Furious had, somewhat ironically, never fired her gun in anger, they would eventually see action. In cooperation with Allied forces attacking on the coast of Belgium, the monitors were used on a protracted shore bombardment. General Wolfe was anchored parallel to the coastline, and opened fire with her single enormous gun on the railway bridge at Snaeskerke, four miles south of Ostend ... which was 36,000 yards (32,918 m) from her position. She therefore fired the heaviest shell, from the largest gun, at the longest range up to that time, and at the longest range any Royal Navy ship has fired in action.
This video has some of the best editing of any Oceanliner Designs vid so far