Comments by "Jim Taylor" (@jimtaylor294) on "SMS Lutzow - Guide 230" video.

Seydliz would probably of thought "Are you kidding me? I've taken far more damage than that!" ... though it'd come out as "ub glub urble burble", as she sank to the harbour floor shortly after making it into port XD.
4
More of an own goal for the Kaiserlichemarine really; as the RN outnumbered them by more than three to one, and had more than four times the industry backing them. With that in mind; any Capital Ship lost - apart from the hopeless Nassau's - was a disaster for the Germans. Jutland saw the entirity of their Battlecruiser force rendered unseaworthy for over a month (and one sunk), whilst the British still had six Battlecruisers (not counting the Renowns'), of which most were still operational.
3
Err nope. Prince of Wales tried to re-engage Bismarck twice, which the Germans ran from. PoW only left the hunt for the Bismarck after running low on fuel. That; and it was three rounds from the same ship, that mission killed the Bismarck in the first place, causing the latter's run for France. (unlike the Prinz Eugen; which managed to escape out to sea, conduct some limited role in Operation Rhine, and make it into port thereafter) Lutsow is kind of similar though; in that she struck lucky in sinking one ship, only to get sunk herself. (a terrible exchange, when for the Germans to win they'd have to sink as many as four warships of similar value for every one lost)
2
Kind of like a hollywood film character that is mortally wounded, yet deliver the killing blow on their adversary in the process. Lutsow was a greater loss for Germany than Invincible was for GB though.
2
If the postwar trend the RN adopted of Keep the most modern and heavily armed ships, and work from oldest to newer as to what we keep and strike off been the same for the Germans... the class would've outlasted most of the Battleships with the same armament (due to their greater speed), but only for so long. As Germany's nearest naval rivals were France and Russia though, that might have protracted it for a while, as neither of said countries had a great deal to measure up thereto, until the 1930's. (and the Russian's never completed theirs)
1
The Lions' and Renown duo would dispute that ;-) .
1
^ Completely false. The Lions and Queen Mary weren't even the same class. QM is classified as a one ship class, as was Tiger. You ignore also that Lion was pounded, yet didn't explode. The Renown's were also far from vunerable, once the teething troubles were worked out, and comfortably outgunned anything the Germans had in their speed range. Ultimately the German concept for Battlecruisers didn't contribute much if anything, as British and US Capital Ships had already made the first steps toward the Fast Battleship, before Jutland had even been fought. (the US had been first to All or Nothing Armor [a concept the Germans never adopted] whilst the British had stepped toward it with the Revenge class; the British had possessed four screws on all capital ships and made speed of importance in various designs, the list goes on...) The Battlecruiser (British concept) became the Fast Battleship; Germany being amusingly the last to build Battlecruiser'ish vessels, with the undergunned and ever mechanically unreliable Scharnhorsts. (which were famously chased off by a single Renown class; more than three times their age but vastly superior in firepower & accuracy in bad weather)
1
As an addendum: no; the G3's had thinner armour than several ships in development at the time, though made particularly good use of what they did have, due to lessons the British had learned from decades of prior R&D. (as mentioned the switch from distributed to all or nothing armour had started before Jutland, on both sides of the Atlantic) The Germans by contrast learned little, for they repeated many of their WWI mistakes in warship design, in WWII. (triple screws on Battleships & lack of all or nothing armour for instance)
1
^ That makes no sense at all as a reply 😮‍💨😴
1
@GG-ir1hw Err nope; Tirpitz's main aim was to outsize the French. The Germans knew they couldn't outbuild the British, as the latter had proved to the French back in the 1860's. (Napoleon III's lot built a single ocean going Ironclad... GB responded with a duo of Iron Built Warships with vastly greater capabilities... the French got the point quite quickly XD)
1
@GG-ir1hw Except that the "Fleet in Being" bit came later. Germany's natural adversary was France, and war with the UK was not inevitable, as the UK was under no obligation to intervene for France, unlike Belgium. The Germans also took note of British designs more because they were the standard setter of the time, whereas France had been in a perpetual position of catchup for over half a century. As it was the concept didn't work anyway; as the Germans lost every major engagement with the RN, and were contained in port for most of the war. In WWII it worked even less well, with only one Cruiser and a few smaller ships surrviving the war in usable condition.
1
@GG-ir1hw Well you've stated your conclusion, as have I. As we each seem to have drawn contrasting conclusions from the same information*, I think agreeing to differ is best; as I don't agree with your conclusion, and doubt you will with mine either. *We for instance concur on the Germans using the British as a yardstick for warship designs, though we evidently disagree on why.
1
An attractive ship is good and all... but it doesn't win wars as a feature. If looks did have a military value; Uma Thurman would be a weapon of unparalleled destructive power :D .
1
@redram5150 True; though I chose that name more for the meme value ;-) . (that; and as a Stargate fan the "celestial body" clip still makes me laugh)
1
@glenchapman3899 Actually they do; though surrendering (striking the battle ensign) was rare, and against some opponents entirely futile.
1