Comments by "David Elliott" (@davidelliott5843) on "Military History Visualized" channel.

  1. It wasn't obsolete. It was built that way because that's what got the job done.
    10
  2. Financial mis-management was an additional factor in US Civil War. Cotton was the Confederate’s main money earner. When the war began they put up prices which initially gave them a boost. But the high prices allowed cotton competition to come in and prices collapsed. That loss of income took them out of the war.
    9
  3. Swordfish was no obsolete. It was a heavy lifting STOL aircraft that could fly in heavy weather and launch a torpedo into heavy Atlantic swells without breaking the weapon. Germany was foolish to ignore them. Probably because they had nothing equivalent and assumed that biplane meant old tech. In reality, that particular biplane was the perfect tool for the job.
    5
  4. The British had a similar AA gun but its mounting was not built for horizontal firing. It could be done but soon failed. The Brits never adapted their AA gun because the 57mm Six Pounder AT gun was so effective. Bring smaller the crews were smaller and they needed less logistical support. Big enough did the job.
    4
  5. The Japanese planners loved a complicated plan. Almost like more is always better
    4
  6. Von Braun and team were kept at arms length because the usual suspects said they could build working rockets. Their failures allowed the Russian Germans to beat USA into space. Von Braun was eventually allowed to get going and he basically developed the Saturn 5.
    3
  7.  Tony Wilson  Ark Royal carried Swordfish, because in 1941, they were the only type that could fly from a carrier running on the North Atlantic swells. Even if Germany had built an Altlantic, carrier their aircraft would have been similar as nothing else could take off and land in those sea conditions. Britain's "luck" was to have an opponent who considered a few very powerful battleships were more important than (to him) ugly flat tops.
    3
  8.  @paoloviti6156  The Fairey Swordfish flew throughout WW2. Not bad for something so "useless" and "obsolete". Under Atlantic sea conditions it was the ideal tool for the job.
    3
  9.  @jerrysmooth24  It did the job it was designed to do and anything much faster could well have broken the torpedoes by hitting the water too hard.
    3
  10. Check out TIK (YouTuber) on the same subject. He explains the uncomfortable truths with regard to Hitler.
    2
  11. Bismarck was a huge overkill for destroying merchant convoys. As lecture says, it’s very power made it a clear target, which would tie up British ships. However, one (or even two) capital ships against the whole British Royal Navy was always going to lose. Air power even slow biplanes proved pivotal.
    2
  12. Ditto British soldiers.
    2
  13. The Fairey Swordfish was no way obsolete in 1941 - they were the only way to get the job done. the type was introduced in 1936 and continued throughout WW2 so was actually a very successful design. It was built to operate from carrier decks in the heavy swells of North Atlantic while carrying a heavy torpedo. It had to be a STOL aircraft which demanded a biplane type.
    2
  14.  @daneelolivaw602  Blind luck was always a factor with shooter and target moving and the shooter rolling and heaving on Atlantic swells. Bismark was also the newest ship with the very latest fire control systems. Germany's mistake with ships, as it was with heavy tanks, was not having enough of them. The Allies won by force of numbers.
    2
  15.  @daneelolivaw602  The British had the numbers to get the job done. The roles were reversed in the early years of U boat wolf pack attacks where Germany had the numbers to get the job done - almost.
    2
  16. @Derp Inshmurtz 14 Swordfish attacked and 2 torpedoes hit home. That's the same odds of a hit as the shells fired by both sides. Not luck at all.
    2
  17. When $billions of battleship can be stopped by a few sticks and string biplanes, it’s pretty obvious that battleships are not a good idea. Soon after, the Japanese rubbed it in when they sank two British battleships. One was less than a year old.
    2
  18. The Swedish song was about another British military victory.
    2
  19.  @Its_shiki_time4876  During early WW2 the Red army was all but leaderless due to Stalin's purges. Anyone with any ability was seen as a threat to be removed. Hitler's huge error was being sidetracked into Western Europe and then persecuting the Russian people who had already had enough of Stalin.
    2
  20. Driving off the rear axle sprocket will puts track slack along the top return. This keeps the loaded track under tension so less likely to ride off the wheels. The Panther drives from the front axle. The track slack can be clearly seen in the tank museum films. That risks it riding off but also risks higher shock loads in the transmission as back-lash is taken up.
    2
  21. Germany desperately needed to take control of the Caucasus oil fields and the Russian grain Steppes. Hitler failed for two main reasons. In 1939, he chose to take on The West when he should have simply ignored Chamberlain. What was Britain to do if Germany failed to rise to the bait?. He went on to treat the Russian people badly. They hated Stalin and would have happily followed Hitler, but if the invaders are persecuting you as badly as your own leaders, then you'll just stay with the devil you know.
    2
  22. V2 was a complex construction. Using separate fuel tanks wrapped in aerodynamic skin. Those tanks could have done the job directly with a simple cone on top. The best part is no part. The turbo pump was stunning but over engineered in typically German ways. It was required to run for about 30 seconds yet it could have run for hours. Its said that solid fuel was not used because liquids were easier to supply. I suggest that solid fuel could have been developed far more quickly than a turbopumped liquid fuel system.
    2
  23. The Brits had and under spec battleship in HMS Hood (weak deck armour and questionable design of magazines) and under spec torpedo bombers. At least one important weapon was till up to the task. The huge stress on British flight crews - they would have known their torpedoes were unlikely to cause serious damage to such a well armoured ship so were flying into almost certain death on a useless mission. But they did their duty and luck favoured the brave. The point about rudder only turns after dropping the weapon makes sense in more than on way. Simply pulling back the stick would expose the plane's belly to AA.  Aileron turns also demand more height to avoid hitting the water with a wing tip. Keeping low and doing a slow rudder only turn made a lot of sense. Saying all that. The later plight of the German crew was truly horrific as the ship was bombarded into submission. The British were noted for standing off and using their big guns. It's my belief they should have stopped shooting after Bismark failed to reply. But what do I know? What do any of us know on questions like that?
    2
  24.  @slehar  My point is the British continued to hammer the Bismark long after if had stopped shooting back. Bismark scuttled itself to stop the slaughter. How anyone could do what the British Swordfish crews did is beyond belief. They had little idea that their low speed was such an advantage.
    2
  25. Ukraine is hitting and running. Otherwise meaning they Disperse, dig deep or move fast.
    1
  26. We don’t know the accuracy of Russian materiel storage records. Were there ever 3000 T80 in storage? We also don’t know how many were sold around the world. Then there’s the gas turbines. Did they actually work at all?
    1
  27.  @TheEulerID  The Japanese studied Taranto before they hit Pearl Harbor.
    1
  28.  @mrdojob  CIWS would take out a few incoming big gun shells then the ammo would run out. But sea launched cruise missiles would destroy any older ship before it could get close enough.
    1
  29.  Tony Wilson  The Taranto raid showed the best way out after dropping the torpedo was a side-slip turn on rudder only. That presented the smallest target to the ship's gunners. 14 planes attacked in heavy seas and two torpedoes hit home. Not bad going considering the conditions.
    1
  30.  @threepot5874  In 1941, a 14 years old battleship was in mid life. 1 in 7 shells hit the target. 14 Swordfish went in to attack and two torpedoes hit the ship. Amazingly similar numbers.
    1
  31. @Jack the Gestapo Germany put far too much effort into it's tanks. They were hugely over-built so they simply could not make enough of them. Anything better than good enough is a waste of effort.
    1
  32.  @monty5692  The sad fact (for Germany) is that its engineers could have built "good enough" tanks in large numbers while at the same time developing the huge land ships that kept Hitler happy. They chose to do the fancy stuff because engineers can't resist making things "better".
    1
  33. The war will be over by the time Germany has finished faffing about with its decision making. But no matter Ukraine is killing Russian tanks at a great rate. They don't need heavy tanks of their own.
    1
  34. The Fairey Swordfish was one of the few aircraft capable of flying from the heaving deck of an aircraft carrier rolling in the Atlantic swells. These planes were that good that the type was still in use at the end of WW2. The British also had experience from the Taranto raid against Italian battleships. The very raid studied by Admiral Yamamoto before he hit Pearl Harbor. planes which climbed away after dropping their torpedoes were far more vulnerable to AA hits. Running skid turns or pulling over the target ship at the last moment was the safest(?) way to escape.
    1
  35. Lindybeige has an excellent account of British 57mm six pounder anti tank guns at the second battle of El Alamein. The German Panzer IV tanks were taken out time and again by this small but highly effective field gun. They were light and easily deployed by a small crew and delivered a repeat performance after D-Day. What they lacked against the thickest tank frontal armour they made up for by remaining hidden and hitting them in the side. One gun crew took out two Tiger 1 tanks (actual tigers that is).
    1
  36. The British 57mm Six Pounder was a potent tank killer. In 1942, during the second battle of Tobruk, a brigade of six pounders took out at least 100 German tanks including Panzer IV. In 1944, one Six Pounder took out two Tiger tanks. It did not have the impact of the German 88mm but it was far easier to use and needed a smaller crew and less logistical support. What it lost in brute hitting power it made up with rate of fire and being easy to hide.
    1
  37. The British 57mm Six Pounder AT gun was brutally effective against Panzer III and Panzer IV. The smaller carriage, smaller crew made it easier to support than Flak 88. The British gun was much easier to hide than Flak 88 but It’s hard to believe the more sophisticated Flak 88 was so inaccurate that it needed 25 rounds for each tank kill. Were the crews not as well trained as we are led to believe?
    1
  38. The tanks did not break down. They simply could not move across the stony shingle beach - just like any other tracked vehicle. Who knows why the Brits never bothered to test any tank on a shingle beach before they organised the raid.
    1
  39. Think about what they had to do - Take off from a heaving ship in bad weather. Drop a torpedo low and slow enough that it doesn't break on impact. Fly level in all weather conditions so you have a chance of aiming correctly. Land on a ship without smashing the aircraft. Add that lot up and you end up with a biplane with a powerful engine. At the time it was unlikely that anyone had anything that could do all of that any better than the Swordfish.
    1
  40. The bigger question is why does the original missile hit not set off the Russian reactive armour? Is their armour actually reactive or are those blocks just filled with sand?
    1
  41. The tanks sent to Assad were the best they could find from the rusting junk they have in the scrapyards (sorry) storage. There is now nothing worth having but at least they don’t need new tyres like the have on trucks and APCs.
    1
  42. In pre war years the British 37mm Two Pounder was an effective anti tank gun. An 88mm would be massive overkill against tanks of the day. The British upscaled to the 57mm Six Pounder with the lower velocity 25 Pounder as a stop gap. The Flak 88 got its new role because it could be used for direct fire. However the British Six was far more useful. Easier to hide, with smaller crew and less logistical support. It’s solid very high speed round was devastating. In 1944, one gun stopped two (genuine) Tigers.
    1
  43.  @dulls8475  British furniture makers (and Canadian) built the Mosquito, probably the most versatile aircraft of WW2. But even if they had big enough carriers they'd have struggled to operate in the North Atlantic. They need STOL abilities to get off the deck in one piece.
    1
  44. The British Six Pounder 57mm anti tank field gun was a potent weapon used throughout WW2. It could easily take out the Panzer 4 and Panther. One gun actually destroyed two Tigers. Flak 88 was clearly more powerful but the Six was easily hidden with a smaller crew and easier logistics.
    1
  45. Tigers were not used in Africa. The Six pounder was especially effective at the second Battle of El Alamein against Panzer 3, Panzer 4 and Panthers.
    1
  46. A Allied daylight bombing campaign was highly successful in depleting the Luftwaffe. Goering sent few aircraft because he had few planes, no skilled pilots and minimal fuel.
    1
  47. The Swordfish has a powerful engine for the aircraft size. It was built fly from small carriers heaving about in Atlantic swells. Nothing else of the time could do that AND carry a useful offensive load. The planes was a steel tube structure with doped canvas over the top. Short take off and landing with good lifting capacity. And easy to repair.
    1
  48. Fuel is always an issue for armies. The huge task of moving enough fuel to the front line massively outweighs any cost of the fuel itself.
    1
  49. Tanks are best suited to undulating open country with trees for cover. Hard work steering out there is not much of an issue. However following roads means big problems for drivers as the route is cluttered.
    1
  50. The Flak 88 was a powerful tank killer but only when the crews had time to find a hiding place and set it up ready. It also needed a big backup to move ammunition and manage the gun. The a British 57mm Six Pounder was considerably less powerful but was easy to hide and could get many more rounds away with a smaller crew. On Six pounder stopped two Tiger tanks proving that more than enough is just a waste of effort.
    1