Thank you all for watching! Videos until early September will be from my recording setup at home. I’ll let you all know when I’ll be recording up at school.
This series would be better Titled as 'Innovations of the Royal Navy', as it was at the forefront of Naval development. The Aircraft Carrier, Angled Flight Deck, Mirror Landing System, First Propeller powered Aircraft to take off & land from a moving ship, First Jet powered Aircraft to land & take off from a moving ship, Radar, breach loaded guns, Dreadnought battleships etc, etc. The world's Navies learned the lessons from this development, from mistakes made & from the perfecting of ideas.
Thank you! I think in the next installment (of Royal navy ships) we’ll take a look at M-2 in greater detail. An aircraft carrier submarine is too weird not to!
A suggestion I have for a future entry is the 1917 HMS Zubian; a WWI Tribal Class destroyer that was constructed from HMS Zulu and HMS Nubian, both of which had suffered major damage, so the RN built one good destroyer from the remains of the damaged two. She had a decent career as well and survived WWI. And the WWII HMS Eskimo might be a worthy offering as she somehow survived losing her bow three times during her career.
Thanks; nice presentation. The WW1 aircraft catapult ship 'Slinger' would be worthy of coverage in the next one. There were many hugely unusual warships in the WW2 amphibious flotilla, but my new favourite, I think, is the *amphibious assault bakery* - or rather, the Landing Barge, Kitchen. A modification of the most unwieldy of all small landing craft operated by the RN, it was armed with ovens and fridges, and bristled with a fearsome array of stovepipes. They joined the amphibious assault force and beached alongside them, firing up their ovens and baking bread & cooking hot meals for the hundreds of landing vessels' crews and any Army chaps who came aboard. They did this while under enemy artillery fire as well!
My Grandfather served as a CPO on the Argus. He had resposibility for the ships painting at sea. I hope he wasn’t responsible for its famously gaudy camoflage scheme.
My stepfather brought HMS Girdleness, over from the US just as the war ended. A number of years later I got chatting to a motorway service station maintenance engineer who had served on her when she was a test bed for Seaslug missiles. Small world
To be fair the French did it also and possibly did it better. The FS Surcouf was a purpose built submarine mounting twin cruiser guns at the front of the conning tower and a float plane hangar at the back of the conning tower. Some design proposals that may have been incorporated into the as built design suggested the ship also had a destroyer style torpedo launcher fitted towards the front that sunk to be level with the deck. This torpedo launcher could rotate to fire torpedoes sideways in addition to the conventional fixed forward torpedo tubes. Until the construction of the Japanese I400 class of carrier submarines the Surcouf was the largest submarine in the world. It did have a terrible dive rate and had to wait 10 minutes before it could submerge after firing it's guns but was an interesting creation. To this day the fate of the Surcouf is unknown with the sub going on patrol and never being heard from again. It's wreck is also still missing.
Well you say that, but when torpedoes had much shorter ranges and reliability problems; while being damn costly (easily forgotten, but a big deal) and also more space-hungry, the gun starts looking like a sound idea. We have to also remember that using guns to sink shipping was a common thing into ww2 for uboats/subs. Considering how weak such boats are themselves, there's also a logic behind having one big, powerful shot that you fire off, then dive to load (where you're safe from surface fire). Also, the big gun opens more of a window for trying to shoot up land targets. If torpedo ranges somehow didn't get longer, I'd say the idea would have stayed around. That being said, one could maybe say that it was pretty obvious that torpedo ranges would get much better over time
The M-Class have fascinated me since I was a kid. All three were genuinely innovative boats that did exactly what they were designed to do, even if it was just to learn the lessons as with M3. And I do think the M1 and M2-refit designs could have been relatively successful, although in a very specialist roles.
Greetings and salutations, I do wonder what weird and wacky warships never got past the design stage. I'm sure there was some seriously scary suggestions that were too radical in their day or even now. I sincerely thank you for another fine effort.
The Kearsarge class battle-carrier is an interesting case, a ship designed by the United States for the Russians. Another interesting one never built, was a series of ships known either as the Tillman or Maximum battleships, the IV-2 was perhaps the most insane
A good video... If you reaally want 'Weird and Wacky', some of the battleships built between 1860 and 1890 or thereabouts spring to mind. And some, like HMS Captain, were downright dangerous...
Certainly! I don't remember if I said it here or in a community post, but I'm working on a list of French sources when I have a little more disposable income :)
I wouldn't call these ships weird or wacky, but just experimental and in the case of the Argos ground breaking. Changing technology is always a time of uncertainty while ideas are tried, rejected and better ideas take hold. You have to admit, the British were not as hidebound as some people claim, and in fact were actually leaders in innovation!
Absolutely correct! I am a recreational poker player, and anyone with even a childish understanding of the strategy therein will id the Brits approach: have courage, try something unexpected, bluff your ass off, go " all in " with a junk hand..... perfect. For supposedly clever folk,, the Axis powers never got the memo.
HMS Furious is worth a programme of its own. Not just as the first operational aircraft carrier (converted) but as carrying out the first carrier strike ('Operation F7' on the Tronheim Zeppelin base 1918), which was tactically and strategically very successful.
The M1 was sunk by the Vidar, dislodging the main casing to the gun forward of the bridge. ,She rolled immediately, after taking on water with the case falling away and sank quickly plowing to the seafloor where she still lies today. The barrel of the main gun was torn away and the wreck of the vessel has been extensively surveyed and is now a preserved site of interest.
Look up the interest history of HMS Rorqual N74 Grampus Class Min Laying Submarine. First she is the only Royal Navy Submarine, to serve from before and to the end of World War 2. For example, all her sisters of the Grampus Class, were lost in action. Second she served in All Theatres, during World War Too, against the German, Italian and Japanese Navies too. Third two Brothers were among her Captains or Commanding Officers, one of them had a very interesting naval history too. As one Brother served as the Captain of the Submarine twice, also was relived of his command it seem, due to injuries only to be replaced by his brother. Then his brother gave up command, to let his brother return to be Captain again too. One of my partners own Uncles served on HMS Rorqual, during most of WW2 in fact it was the only Submarine my partners uncle served on too. HMS Rorqual naval history, is one of the most interesting, many have no idea about. It would or could make a basis for a great naval WW2 war movie too, but no one would believe it's a true story though.
I always love hearing about the M class, and any cruiser sub design in general. Argus storing fuel in 2 gallon containers was a shock. I know the British army was terrible with fuel transport for a very long time, using the horrible 4 gallon “flimsy” cans, but I never would have imagined the navy would be so bad. Besieged the inefficiency in transferring the fuel, the additional weight of the cans had to be a bad penalty.
Wow, in my young life being a Radio Controlled real life battleship operator is something that I would have worked hard to achieve . Now days with the headset and drone assistance being able to switch between cameras and what not sounds fun.
I like this video here's a possible suggestion project ships are not widely known about because of the limited knowledge about what they are but they're a bottomless pit when it comes to how many there are
Much of the rationale behind the M-class was the vulnerability of monitors, particularly in the Dardanelles. Imagine the effect on morale of a submarine surfacing, firing off a 12" shell at Constantinople and then disappearing.
I believe HMS Speedy, a hydrofoil,was tested by the RN,would she be of interest? And what about HMS Wilton the first 'plastic' warship or HMS Meteorite an ex - German U-Boat 🤔
I'm American and we've had a few beauties in our navys shorter but still interesting history, but it was a time of innovation and all countries were trying all kinds of bizarre designs...a few were affective, some even with distinction, but there have been more in Britains way longer navy history, there is no ally this old American trusts more, well, and the Canadians, and the Aussies, and the the Kiwis, and the Philippines, and I think France in a pinch, maybe a few others, now I'm being silly, I meant it about the ones I mentioned to....
The big gun on the submarine was a poor effort at making a stealth battle ship. They would have been better with the small vessels like he American PT boats with torpedoes.
Thank you all for watching! Videos until early September will be from my recording setup at home. I’ll let you all know when I’ll be recording up at school.
This series would be better Titled as 'Innovations of the Royal Navy', as it was at the forefront of Naval development. The Aircraft Carrier, Angled Flight Deck, Mirror Landing System, First Propeller powered Aircraft to take off & land from a moving ship, First Jet powered Aircraft to land & take off from a moving ship, Radar, breach loaded guns, Dreadnought battleships etc, etc. The world's Navies learned the lessons from this development, from mistakes made & from the perfecting of ideas.
Argus was an essential and important development platform that informed future designs for all navies. Thanks for another great doco 👍🏽👏🏽
Thank you! I think in the next installment (of Royal navy ships) we’ll take a look at M-2 in greater detail. An aircraft carrier submarine is too weird not to!
Argus is nothing compared to the Bigus Dickus!
A suggestion I have for a future entry is the 1917 HMS Zubian; a WWI Tribal Class destroyer that was constructed from HMS Zulu and HMS Nubian, both of which had suffered major damage, so the RN built one good destroyer from the remains of the damaged two. She had a decent career as well and survived WWI.
And the WWII HMS Eskimo might be a worthy offering as she somehow survived losing her bow three times during her career.
Thanks very much! Wonderful stuff - I look forward to your production on the submarine 'cruiseer', X-1.
The M class submarines are fascinating!
Thanks; nice presentation. The WW1 aircraft catapult ship 'Slinger' would be worthy of coverage in the next one.
There were many hugely unusual warships in the WW2 amphibious flotilla, but my new favourite, I think, is the *amphibious assault bakery* - or rather, the Landing Barge, Kitchen. A modification of the most unwieldy of all small landing craft operated by the RN, it was armed with ovens and fridges, and bristled with a fearsome array of stovepipes. They joined the amphibious assault force and beached alongside them, firing up their ovens and baking bread & cooking hot meals for the hundreds of landing vessels' crews and any Army chaps who came aboard. They did this while under enemy artillery fire as well!
First time visitor to your channel and I'm well impressed. Thanks, facinating stuff.
Thank you!
My Grandfather served as a CPO on the Argus. He had resposibility for the ships painting at sea. I hope he wasn’t responsible for its famously gaudy camoflage scheme.
My stepfather brought HMS Girdleness, over from the US just as the war ended. A number of years later I got chatting to a motorway service station maintenance engineer who had served on her when she was a test bed for Seaslug missiles. Small world
sure, putting battleship guns on a sub, was never going to work...but I am SO happy they did it anyway
To be fair the French did it also and possibly did it better. The FS Surcouf was a purpose built submarine mounting twin cruiser guns at the front of the conning tower and a float plane hangar at the back of the conning tower. Some design proposals that may have been incorporated into the as built design suggested the ship also had a destroyer style torpedo launcher fitted towards the front that sunk to be level with the deck. This torpedo launcher could rotate to fire torpedoes sideways in addition to the conventional fixed forward torpedo tubes. Until the construction of the Japanese I400 class of carrier submarines the Surcouf was the largest submarine in the world. It did have a terrible dive rate and had to wait 10 minutes before it could submerge after firing it's guns but was an interesting creation. To this day the fate of the Surcouf is unknown with the sub going on patrol and never being heard from again. It's wreck is also still missing.
Well you say that, but when torpedoes had much shorter ranges and reliability problems; while being damn costly (easily forgotten, but a big deal) and also more space-hungry, the gun starts looking like a sound idea. We have to also remember that using guns to sink shipping was a common thing into ww2 for uboats/subs. Considering how weak such boats are themselves, there's also a logic behind having one big, powerful shot that you fire off, then dive to load (where you're safe from surface fire). Also, the big gun opens more of a window for trying to shoot up land targets. If torpedo ranges somehow didn't get longer, I'd say the idea would have stayed around. That being said, one could maybe say that it was pretty obvious that torpedo ranges would get much better over time
The M-Class have fascinated me since I was a kid. All three were genuinely innovative boats that did exactly what they were designed to do, even if it was just to learn the lessons as with M3.
And I do think the M1 and M2-refit designs could have been relatively successful, although in a very specialist roles.
Greetings and salutations,
I do wonder what weird and wacky warships never got past the design stage. I'm sure there was some seriously scary suggestions that were too radical in their day or even now. I sincerely thank you for another fine effort.
Funnily enough, in the next installment we discuss some Russian battleships that we’re too radical. Thank you for your support!
The Kearsarge class battle-carrier is an interesting case, a ship designed by the United States for the Russians. Another interesting one never built, was a series of ships known either as the Tillman or Maximum battleships, the IV-2 was perhaps the most insane
Thanks.
A good video... If you reaally want 'Weird and Wacky', some of the battleships built between 1860 and 1890 or thereabouts spring to mind. And some, like HMS Captain, were downright dangerous...
My copy of British Battleships of the Victorian Era by Doctor Friedman will come in handy for that!
The French submarine Surcouf has always fascinated me - possible future video?
Certainly! I don't remember if I said it here or in a community post, but I'm working on a list of French sources when I have a little more disposable income :)
The return of "Battlefleet Studios"?
Sorry, no. Had to Google who you were talking about. Very similar I do have to say.
USS Vesuvius - dynamite cruiser!
Great idea!
One suggestion - check out the R-class submarines of WW1, which were the forerunners of the modern hunter-killer submarine.
No matter how many times I've heard about it, I will always watch a video that has the m class in it
I wouldn't call these ships weird or wacky, but just experimental and in the case of the Argos ground breaking. Changing technology is always a time of uncertainty while ideas are tried, rejected and better ideas take hold. You have to admit, the British were not as hidebound as some people claim, and in fact were actually leaders in innovation!
Absolutely correct!
I am a recreational poker player, and anyone with even a childish understanding of the strategy therein will id the Brits approach: have courage, try something unexpected, bluff your ass off, go " all in " with a junk hand..... perfect. For supposedly clever folk,, the Axis powers never got the memo.
HMS Furious is worth a programme of its own. Not just as the first operational aircraft carrier (converted) but as carrying out the first carrier strike ('Operation F7' on the Tronheim Zeppelin base 1918), which was tactically and strategically very successful.
You sir are in luck! I've made a video on Furious! th-cam.com/video/ChwDvTb5eSY/w-d-xo.html
The M1 was sunk by the Vidar, dislodging the main casing to the gun forward of the bridge. ,She rolled immediately, after taking on water with the case falling away and sank quickly plowing to the seafloor where she still lies today. The barrel of the main gun was torn away and the wreck of the vessel has been extensively surveyed and is now a preserved site of interest.
Any chance of an indepth look at HMS Argus?
Cool Video I also have a video of a British ship called Albemarle who tried to colonize a map called "Hotspot"
You may mention the Ice Cream Barges used by USN in the Pacific Theater during WW2.
Look up the interest history of HMS Rorqual N74 Grampus Class Min Laying Submarine.
First she is the only Royal Navy Submarine, to serve from before and to the end of World War 2.
For example, all her sisters of the Grampus Class, were lost in action.
Second she served in All Theatres, during World War Too, against the German, Italian and Japanese Navies too.
Third two Brothers were among her Captains or Commanding Officers, one of them had a very interesting naval history too.
As one Brother served as the Captain of the Submarine twice, also was relived of his command it seem, due to injuries only to be replaced by his brother.
Then his brother gave up command, to let his brother return to be Captain again too.
One of my partners own Uncles served on HMS Rorqual, during most of WW2 in fact it was the only Submarine my partners uncle served on too.
HMS Rorqual naval history, is one of the most interesting, many have no idea about.
It would or could make a basis for a great naval WW2 war movie too, but no one would believe it's a true story though.
Hahaha thanks for that. I should have scoffed a few drinks though, if only I had considered the nightmare of a plane and hangar atop a submarine.
You forgot to mention the British also had a historical NEED for a Navy due to its empire and continental enemies.
A suggestion would be the Swedish cruiser Gotland
I always love hearing about the M class, and any cruiser sub design in general.
Argus storing fuel in 2 gallon containers was a shock. I know the British army was terrible with fuel transport for a very long time, using the horrible 4 gallon “flimsy” cans, but I never would have imagined the navy would be so bad. Besieged the inefficiency in transferring the fuel, the additional weight of the cans had to be a bad penalty.
Best thing the British Army did in the way of fuel transport was to copy the German "Jerry can"!
@@mahbriggs Without a doubt. Even then it’s shocking how long they kept up manual fueling of vehicles in the field instead of using fuel trucks.
Wow, in my young life being a Radio Controlled real life battleship operator is something that I would have worked hard to achieve .
Now days with the headset and drone assistance being able to switch between cameras and what not sounds fun.
I like this video here's a possible suggestion
project ships are not widely known about because of the limited knowledge about what they are but they're a bottomless pit when it comes to how many there are
Much of the rationale behind the M-class was the vulnerability of monitors, particularly in the Dardanelles. Imagine the effect on morale of a submarine surfacing, firing off a 12" shell at Constantinople and then disappearing.
I am very glad for the inventions of the British Navy. The US Navy has certainly benefited.
I believe HMS Speedy, a hydrofoil,was tested by the RN,would she be of interest? And what about HMS Wilton the first 'plastic' warship or HMS Meteorite an ex - German U-Boat 🤔
I'm American and we've had a few beauties in our navys shorter but still interesting history, but it was a time of innovation and all countries were trying all kinds of bizarre designs...a few were affective, some even with distinction, but there have been more in Britains way longer navy history, there is no ally this old American trusts more, well, and the Canadians, and the Aussies, and the the Kiwis, and the Philippines, and I think France in a pinch, maybe a few others, now I'm being silly, I meant it about the ones I mentioned to....
Great Eastern, Dreadnaught, Turbina, Hood, Warspite, Vesuvius, the list of unique RN technology is longer than Britain's invasion anniversary list.
Can you do more Japanese ships pls
USS Cannonade.
Oh man, yeah that's going on the list! Thank you!
The latest Ohio class submarine s carry 156 cruise missiles, range, 100/miles plus. Pinpoint accuracy.
nothing pertinent to add.
merely feeding the maws of the algo-deities of the tube'y'all.
Hopefully they open up on this video lol
🐯🐯🐯🐯🐯🐯🐯🐯🐯🐯1200
The big gun on the submarine was a poor effort at making a stealth battle ship. They would have been better with the small vessels like he American PT boats with torpedoes.
They had those as well, in both world wars, and in the Baltic against the Bolsheviks after WW1. D
Narration by Bart Simpson.
I’ll take this over someone telling me to off myself because of my voice.
Far to American for me.
so sorry it’s not worshipping the almighty Britannia 🙄