Comments by "doveton sturdee" (@dovetonsturdee7033) on "Drachinifel" channel.

  1. 68
  2. 67
  3. 45
  4. 41
  5. 40
  6. 35
  7. 32
  8. 30
  9. 26
  10. 18
  11. 16
  12. 14
  13. 13
  14. 13
  15. 13
  16. 11
  17. 11
  18. 11
  19. 10
  20. 10
  21. 10
  22. 8
  23. 8
  24. 8
  25. 8
  26. 8
  27. 8
  28. 8
  29. 7
  30. 7
  31. 7
  32. 7
  33. 7
  34. 7
  35. 6
  36. 6
  37. 6
  38. 6
  39. 6
  40. 6
  41. 6
  42. 6
  43. 6
  44. 6
  45. 6
  46. 6
  47. 6
  48. 6
  49.  @eriktrimble8784  'The RN built exactly ONE aircraft carrier after WW1 ended and before WW2 started: the Ark Royal.' That wasn't what I wrote. I wrote 'The Royal Navy actually only built 6 battleships after 1928, whereas they built a large number of aircraft carriers.' In any case, you are wrong. Eagle was converted from a battleship building for Chile into an aircraft carrier, Courageous, Glorious, & Furious were all converted from light battlecruisers into fleet carriers between the wars, and Hermes was launched in 1919. After 1928, the RN built 6 Illustrious class carriers, 1 maintenance carrier, and 7 light fleet/maintenance carriers were also built before the end of the war, and a further 11 light fleet carriers were laid down from 1943. The light fleets, by the way, were not primarily intended for ASW work. With a capacity of around 50 aircraft, they were intended to operate with the main fleets, but built quickly and expected to have short service lives. The carriers intended for ASW duties were the escort carriers and, later, the MAC ships. THE RN built/converted 19 MAC ships and 6 Escort Carriers before US built Archer, Attacker, and Ruler class escort carriers from the United States. These, rather than the larger fleets and light fleets, were the vessels which were involved in the Atlantic sea war. As to Battleships being ' pretty much useless' in the Atlantic, wasn't it battleships which which sank the Bismarck & the Scharnhorst, and deterred Scharnhorst and Gneisenau from attacking convoys by their very presence? Also 'In the Mediterranean, they were more substantially important. But still VERY much second fiddle to the CV, ' wasn't it, in fact, rather the other way round? A Carrier played a subsidiary role at Matapan, and they were important providing the defence of Pedestal from air attack, but wasn't it the presence of Rodney & Nelson during the same operation which deterred an attack by the Italian surface fleet? Finally, what technology did the RN ignore ? Radar, asdic, all or nothing armour, centimetric radar, hedgehog, squid, HF/DF, Fighter Direction Rooms, dual purpose secondary armament in capital ships, the creeping attack, Blackett's Theory of Convoy Defence? Compared to the Scharnhorsts & Bismarcks, with their low angle secondary armament and their outdated incremental armour, even the Nelsons were a generation ahead, and the KGV, were almost out of sight. Agreed, the RN was short of Atlantic escorts in 1940 and early 1941, but this was because of the unexpected collapse of France. Pre-war assumptions had expected the French Fleet to play a prominent role alongside the RN in the sea war, but in the event the RN was obliged to find sufficient ships to retain control of the Atlantic and, in the latter half of 1940, to retain around 60 destroyers in home ports for defence against invasion. The RN was not woefully unprepared for ASW operations. Agreed, like every other navy, they had probably overestimated the effectiveness of asdic, but they could hardly have been blamed for not foreseeing the failure of France. Finally, Britain did not come close to being strangled in 1939-40. That is, simply, a myth. As to this :- 'They chose to focus on trophy ships that were obsolete, rather than the ships that would actually be needed in a new war' between 1935 & the outbreak of WW2, the RN launched 4 aircraft carriers, 22 cruisers, 59 fleet destroyers, and 40 sloops/corvettes, but only 2 'trophy' battleships.
    6
  50. 6