Comments by "" (@walterkronkitesleftshoe6684) on "Military History Visualized" channel.

  1. ​ @mhern57  Hahahah complete bollocks. How can a gun such as Bismarck's 38cm SK C/40 with a circular error probability (CEP) of 100 meters radius (that means it has a 50% chance to land ANYWHERE within a 200 meter (660ft) wide circle, the other 50% chance is it lands even FURTHER away from the aiming point outside of the 200 meter circle) at the range of the Denmark Strait engagement (that is 8-9 nautical miles), be targetted at a specific point on a ship I.E Hood's 4in HA magazine? As for the "luck" of the Fleet Air Arm strike on Bismarck's rudders, it was only a repeat of what the Fleet Air Arm had already done to the Italian battleship Vittorio Veneto at the battle of Cape Matapan 3 months earlier, and the same as a Japanese torpedo bomber did to HMS Prince of Wales 7 months later. Wehraboo much?
    4
  2. Never intended to invade. Hahahaa.... just sacrificed the creme of their airforce, assembled 30 divisions in North Eastern France and stripped their inland waterways of over 2000 barges for conversion to troop transports "for a laugh" I suppose?
    3
  3.  @MarkHarrison733  Of course the barges were unsuitable.... didn't stop the nazis from massing then in the channel ports and their planning of Seelöwe though. As for second sentence, just more delusional BS not worth a reply "Mark".
    3
  4.  @MilitaryHistoryVisualized  Thank you for your kind reply. Excellent video of Stalin's prewar terror btw.
    3
  5. "Obsolete"? Are you sure about that?
    2
  6.  @kevin32435  I understand what you were saying originally, I was just highlighting that nothing happens in a vacuum, if the Germans had mounted a larger Atlantic offensive, then if necessary Britain would have stripped her other fleets to shore up the Atlantic, as it was THE number one most important piece of oceanic real estate in her global trade network, and then having done that (redeploying more of her ships closer to home), the geo-military / political "what ifs" REALLY increase massively.
    2
  7. The truth of the matter is if the lucky shot doesn't penetrate Hood's magazine, Hood closes in on Bismarck for a well balanced close in "knife fight" which probably sees both Hood & Bismarck crippled or sunk south of Iceland.
    2
  8.  @looinrims  Read again, there are no question marks in either post. They're both STATEMENTS that do not require an answer. Basic English comprehension really.
    2
  9.  @looinrims  By you typing "Who Asked?" it is implicit that you believe someone has asked a question. As I stated above, NEITHER of the statements is a question, are you still following? (btw that WAS a question). There was no asking, and therefore no answer was required.... The OP made a statement, and I followed with a contextual statement, its clear to EVERYONE but thickhead you that no question has been asked at all. Read the OP, and then read my response, and then use your planet sized intellect to understand the context & meaning of my statement. Buddy. Hahaha. P.S I'll give your planet sized intellect a gentle nudge to help it along..... my response has used mimicry and transposition. Does that help? Now do you understand? No?... ah well, there's no helping some people, is there? (Sorry if I overloaded you with questions in my last few sentences.)
    2
  10. We didn't have a Westminster full of corrupted globalist stooge puppets in 1940.
    2
  11.  @elliotchinneryhinks8554  The Germans while being superb engineers (well at least they used to be, not quite so sure now) really didn't have a good grasp of logistics, organisational management and economics. Lower numbers of massively over engineered but beautiful weapons, that required large amounts of highly skilled maintenance on the battle field that ended up being used by untrained kids, Vs Mass produced, easily repaired and skeletonised weapons wielded by armies that just got stronger and more capable as the was dragged on.
    2
  12.  @elliotchinneryhinks8554  Always good to talk with polite and well informed commenters like yourself Elliot. All to often such discussions can end up with ill informed angry kids flaming in their own ignorance. All the best from the UK.
    2
  13. NOT at "the government's expense" but at the expense of the UK taxpayer.
    2
  14.  @Boppy-B-B  I'm with you on the "too slow" ... It's nonsense. A good starting point is wikipedias entry for the "Stabilisierter Leitstand" which were the dome headed AA fire directors onboard German warships.
    2
  15. Wrong.
    2
  16. If you really want to get a taste of some WW2 north Atlantic naval strategy why not look at "board gaming" options? Yes it requires a player to learn the rules, but so do the likes of HOI. "Atlantic Chase" by GMT gaming, would not be a bad starting point.
    2
  17. Simplified generalisations only satisfy the "goldfish".... those who seek some deeper knowledge demand a little bit more "nourishment".
    2
  18. Will their be an accompanying video cataloging the crimes against humanity of the Soviet NKVD? I like people to realise that political murderers come in all colours and creeds.
    2
  19. The Proximity fuse was designed by the BRITISH and the plans were handed to the US as a part of the Tizard Mission in 1940.
    2
  20. Interesting, but the outcome would never be in doubt. A major loss for the kriegsmarine. The British empire could withstand the loss of its colonies (as it did after the war) if it really had to. RN assets from the Indian Ocean and far east would have been withdrawn to protect any "en masse" attack at the North Atlantic, which was Britains No1. priority. At NO point in the war did the Kriegsmarine have the potential to seriously challenge the RN. The Germans were very much primarily a land force, Britain by the very nature of her empire was primarily a naval superpower.
    2
  21. Guess what was first western tank to knock out the over engineered Tiger I with its peashooter......and did it FRONTALLY as well?
    2
  22. "Most recent", does NOT necessarily mean "most advanced". Bismarck had MANY outdated design choices which came back to haunt her during her failed Atlantic mission.
    2
  23. Sigue soñando.
    2
  24. Kept within its post WW1 borders would have been a good start.
    2
  25. Not watched the whole video yet, but if it suggests there was "No defeat of either protagonist" then its completely wrong. Nazi Germany sought to knock Britain out of the war....and failed. Simple as that. Nazi Germany unquestionably suffered its first strategic defeat, and in doing so damaged its cadre of combat pilots which it would sorely miss during "Barbarossa".
    2
  26. Another fool who thinks the rest of "the west" hasn't EQUALLY been flooded with the brown tide. I suggest you look at the weekly riots that have been racking Paris for the last 5-6 years, or the middle eastern rape festival that happens every so often in Germany.
    2
  27. And gave them free housing, clothes, cars and everything !!!!
    2
  28. All of what you suggest was indeed possible, but do you think it would have happened in a vacuum? Don't you think that British planning would have meant an even greater number of ships built and deployed in the north Atlantic if Graf Zeppelin had been completed? There was NEVER a cat in hells chance of the Kriegsmarine seriously challenging the RN.
    1
  29.  @mystikmind2005  You're creating an alternate history (Tirpitz and Graf Zeppelin sortie with Bismarck), and I'm correctly suggesting that if there was the potential for that to happen, the British could have easily outbuilt the Kriegsmarine due to Britain's MUCH larger ship building capacity, and the Royal Navy operations division would have also redeployed further assets from other fleets to counter the threat to her North Atlantic "jugular artery".
    1
  30.  @mystikmind2005  "we are talking about one specific mission"... yes with an aircraft carrier that was never completed, and if it had been the British Government & Royal Navy would have planned accordingly. Ships aren't pulled out of hat like a magician's raabit y'know? Of course if the Germans had more ships they'd have had more strategic options, but what I originally said still stands.... if Germany had built more ships Britain had FAR greater ship building capacity and would have bankrupted itself even earlier to keep its unquestionaed naval superiority, The Lion class battleship program would certainly have gone full steam ahead for a start.
    1
  31.  @mystikmind2005  "the strategic value of an aircraft carrier was not widely recognized in those times"? Maybe by some. The Nazis, French with their decrepit Bearn, and Italians (though the Italians weren't so in need of them as a large part of "their sea" (the Med) could be covered by land based aircraft). But do you think Britain wasted millions building SEVEN aircraft carriers before the outbreak of war were unaware of their importance? The Kriegsmarine was impatient as you say, and much more could have been achieved with the coordinated use of all of the Kriegsmarine's meagre assets, but they were under pressure to produce results quickly against Britain, before the opening of Barbarossa, to prove their worth to the "land-lubber" Hitler, and guarantee his future support for their service before the war in the east took Hitler's mind completely away from them, hence their rush to get an inadequate force to sea now, than a more capable force to sea later.
    1
  32. The "ball-shaped Anti-Aircraft-turrets" I think you're referring to, are 4 meter wide rangefinders for the 10.5 cm SK C/33 anti aircraft guns. They were designated as SL8 rangefinders. "SL" stood for "Stabilisierter Leitstand" or "stabilised command post". They were known as "Wackeltopf" literally "wobbly pot" due to their "wobbling" stabilising motion when at sea.
    1
  33. Yes seeing as one of them got trounced in 6 days.
    1
  34.  @madman026  Kriegmarine ran out of ships while RN hardly broke sweat. chill
    1
  35.  @madman026  "Saved our asses"? Oh, you mean the US hanging back out of the war bleeding her no 1 global competitor dry? Looks like its gonna be a good show for the rest of us, seeing the US get its ass handed to it by China, as your defunct society continues to collapse. Welcome to the new world.
    1
  36.  @madman026  "Send our whole Atlantic fleet", yes if you've got the numbers it would be stupid not to use them. The "whole fleet" wasn't needed to sink the mediocre 1930s nazi tub (HMS Rodney did most of the work herself) what it was needed for was to find and corral the "nazi needle" in the 41 million square mile North Atlantic "haystack".
    1
  37.  @percyprune7548  Lt Comm Eugene Esmonde who led HMS Victorious' swordfish attack on Bismarck on the 25th May 1941, also flew against the German ships in the channel dash, and along with the majority of his 6 crews from 825 Sqd FAA were as you say lost during the incredibly brave, but doomed attack.
    1
  38. Though if Germany had continued beefing up its navy, Britain, which had far greater ship building capacity, would have outstripped any increase in German naval power.
    1
  39. Not forgetting that the longest ranged hit in battleship history was achieved by HMS Warspite, using the Mk VII Admiralty Fire Control Table to direct her fire.
    1
  40. It wasn't that Bismarck was a "behemoth" that needed 60 ships to destroy it, but the fact it was part of a small but powerful task force that could strike at will and then hide in the vastness of the north Atlantic at a time when there were large areas unreachable by search aircraft, no satellite surveillance and only rudimentary short range radar. In the end 2 battleships and 2 heavy cruisers put Bismarck on the ocean floor. Just the same as if you carry out a manhunt for an escaped lunatic in a large forest, it will take hundreds to corral the loony, but only a small number to put him in chains.
    1
  41. Tanks are abandoned when in retreat. Hence why the Germans recovered so few tanks after 1942.
    1
  42. The fictional shooting down of the swordfish were included in the film to raise the "jeopardy" factor of the hunt, as was the sinking of the fictitious "HMS Solent".
    1
  43. Tell me how RAF bombers are used in defending Britain againsts massed luftwaffe air raids?
    1
  44.  @AnthonyBrown12324  So no direct effect on defending against German air raids then. That's cool.
    1
  45.  @AnthonyBrown12324  No bomber command flew offensive operations over France, but took no part in the defensive air battles over the UK, hence the "battle of Britain", and not the "battle of Britain & France"..
    1
  46. The Swordfish rolled a "20"? What on earth did Bismarck roll when if fired at HMS Hood?
    1
  47. The mixture of SL6 and SL7 AA fire directors and of different mounts for the heavy AA guns themselves fitted on Bismarck were not so much "outdated" as incompatible with each other.
    1
  48. If Prof Avery said all that the he is partly wrong... there very much WAS a "loser" of the battle of Britain. NO if's or but's about it !!!!
    1
  49.  @MilitaryHistoryVisualized  0:20 You have quoted Professor Richard Overy, and near the end of the quote he says "(battles) usually end with the defeat of one protagonist or the other...(this) cannot be said of the Battle of Britain". Hence my "there very much WAS a "loser" of the battle of Britain"... the loser being the luftwaffe... who were tasked with the destruction of the RAF south of the Thames, they completely failed in that task and lost a few thousand first class aircraft and aircrew in the process.
    1
  50.  @MilitaryHistoryVisualized  Are you mistaking the word "destroyed" for "defeated" The luftwaffe were clearly assigned a task and CLEARLY failed in achieving it. A bit like the wehrmacht during Operation citadel in July Aug 1943.... they set out with a task... completely failed in it but the German army still existed afterwards.... was "Citadel" also "not a defeat"?
    1
  51.  @MilitaryHistoryVisualized  The Professor's quote lists a number of defining factors that he says characterise a battle and finishes with "usually with the defeat of one protagonist or another" then "none of these things can be said about the battle of Britain". While I agree with the first of his first three defining factors, the final point saying that neither protagonist was defeated is most certainly NOT true. The Luftwaffe completely failed in its assigned offensive mission, I.E a defeat.
    1
  52. Like to hazard a guess at the first western tank to knock out the overrated tiger I, and did it FRONTALLY as well?
    1
  53. There were TWO u-boat traps as you suggest incorporated into operation Rheinübung. One was positioned south of Greenland, the other a few hundred miles to the west of Brittany. The major problem with that is again the slow speed of U-boats. If the planned route for the surface ships has to change (for instance because you get hit in an excahnge of gunfire and lose a large proportion of your fuel, and have to head back to France), then the assembled u-boat line will find it near impossible to relocate in time to cover the new track of the surface ships.
    1
  54. The reason Lütjens hesitated was due to his desire to avoid action with the Royal Navy, he was hoping to be able to keep out of gun range and speed past into the open Atlantic. It was specified in his orders that he was to avoid engaging RN heavy units if at all possible, but as for your other points, all correct. Mistakes evident in hindsight were made by BOTH sides, and NOT just the RN as the uninformed like to believe.
    1
  55. "US & German strategies"? I suppose that Great Britain had no vested interest in developing strategies for the Atlantic.....
    1
  56. The Kriegsmarine had a section called "B-Dienst" whose role was to listen to the electronic airwaves, in an effort to intercept & decode any Royal Naval transmissions, and pass such information to the German naval high command for transmission to its ships at sea (what is nowadays known as SIGINT.... SIGnals INTelligence). B-dienst completely failed during rhine exercise to gave Lütjens in Bismack ANY warning of the approach of Hood / PoW. The realisation that he was effectively blind to the RN's dispositions in the north Atlantic would have completely rattled Lütjens. So as well as not having the necessary speed to engage the withdrawing PoW due to the damage that PoW had inflicted on her, Lütjens was too frightened to chase PoW eastwards as he knew that there was liable to be more RN heavy units unknown to him, racing to support PoW from the direction of Scapa flow.
    1
  57. That would have indeed been a factor especially with the two quadruple 20mm "Flakvierling" AA guns situated high up on Bismarck's forward superstructure.
    1
  58. Bismarck had spent from September 1940 to February 1941 "working up" in the Baltic. HMS Prince of Wales hadn't even fully completed her initial sea trials. Another problem with Bismarck's AA gunnery system that is hardly ever mentioned is that her fore and aft main AA guns had different mounts. It was intended to have 8xAA turrets all with the same mounts and which could all be directed by any of her "wackeltopf" AA fire control directors. As part of the Nazi / Soviet non aggression pact, the Germans had agreed to supply various items of military hardware to the Soviets, amongst which was a number of the very AA mounts that had been assigned to Bismarck (The Soviets intended to use the AA mounts on their own battlecruiser "Kronstadt", which was never completed). The Germans (for once) honoured the agreement, and as a result of this Bismarck''s aft AA guns were fitted onto "last gen" mounts which were partly incompatable with the rest of her AA fire control system.
    1
  59.  @TTTT-oc4eb  Where have you read that regarding Bismarck's AA crew training? Bismarck had spent months in the Baltic training her crew. If the Germans weren't bothered with crew training, then why did they choose not to sortie Tirpitz with Bismarck? After all she had been completed in February 1941? The reason was that Tirpitz's capt Karl Topp advised Erich Raeder that her crew was not yet properly combat trained.
    1
  60.  @TTTT-oc4eb  Well thank you very much for that information TT TT, I will look further into that.
    1
  61. How many people would you need to corner a greyhound racing around on the open prairies of the mid west? once cornered how many would be needed to wrestle it to the ground?
    1
  62. U-81
    1
  63. That being a result of the RN's preeminence in naval power over 300 years, against Germany having almost zero ships older than 15 years old.
    1
  64. That was 825 Sqd onboard HMS Victorious. HMS Ark Royal's Swordfish of 810, 818 & 820 Sqd FAA were all highly trained aircrews.
    1
  65. If you'd like to see a visual representation of the outcome of the battle of Britain, type into the YT search box "Cocky fighters who were humbled". That'll give you the general idea.
    1
  66. And mission killed by a Churchill.
    1
  67. Why would Lütjens waste time trying to catch HMS Prince of Wales when: 1. His speed was reduced by the damage previously inflicted by HMS PoW, PoW meanwhile was still capable of steaming at full speed. 2. Having received NO previous warning of the approach of Hood/PoW from the German radio listening service "B-dienst" Lütjens knew he was effectively blind to Royal Navy dispositions in the Atlantic. 3. He correctly assessed that further Royal Navy heavy units would be attempting to intercept him from the direction of Scapa Flow, the very direction that a chase after PoW would have led him. Decisions at sea, clouded by the "fog of war" & when there are potentially the lives of 3000 German sailors depending on your choices are a lot harder than when sitting at your keyboard at home.
    1
  68. "Obsolete"? Are you sure?
    1
  69. They actually scuttled a 51000 ton mountain of sinking, flaming scrap metal. All guns silenced, her superstructure devastated, her command staff obliterated, internally aflame from end to end, her stern and port gunwales already underwater and hundreds of her crew already in the water behind her.... All the scuttling did was to sink her a few minutes earlier than was already happening.
    1
  70. Not to mention the subjugation of Yugoslavia by Germany after its government elected to not co-operate with the nazis. The German response "Operation retribution" delayed the start of Barbarossa by 5 weeks.
    1
  71. The German general staff also appear to have completely overlooked the fact that as they pushed further & further eastwards, that as well as logistical lines being stretched, the length of the actual front line also hugely increases due to the basic geography of the land acting as an outward funnel, at the same time the numbers of your combat troops is reducing in quality if not in numbers due to attrition. The dilution of her fighting forces reached such proportions that during "fall blau" in 1942, 10s of miles of front would be held by battalion and sometimes company sized units and occasionally no troops at all.
    1
  72. All through your anti British rant, you ever so slightly forgot to mention how Nazi Germany had been continuously & illegally sailing through NEUTRAL Norwegian coastal waters for months in their attempts to bypass the RN blockade of the North sea. First infringement to the nazis I think you'll find.
    1
  73. "Hesitate to say" is NOT the same as "definitely say"
    1
  74. Germany would have lost her as well.
    1
  75. "bad weather conditions made proper aiming nearly impossible"... if it made it hard for the crew of the notably stable Bismarck, imagine what the weather was doing to the poor men flying the "stringbags" !!!
    1
  76.  @stevenmoore4612  Agreed Steve. Piloting through North Atlantic storms towards 2 fire spitting steel mountains was certainly a test of nerve, but when you say "extremely lucky", while obviously some luck was involved, the rudders/propellors were prime targets for the FAA as it was known that most capital ships had torpedo defence systems amidships that would easily absorb the energy of an 18in aerial torpedo, Obviously it was difficult to achieve, but they did also put one into the rudders of the Italian battleship Vittorio Veneto at Cape Matapan. All the best.
    1
  77. Learn to avoid adverts.
    1
  78. Or "VT fuse". Another UK invention handed to the US in the "Tizzard Mission".
    1
  79. Quite simply Seelöwe was the nazi attempt to intimidate Britain to the peace treaty table, ready for a future of nazi puppet acquiescence. The "preparations" for the "planned landings" were part of the ratcheting up of the pressure, but unfortunately for Hitler, The majority of Brits weren't up for being nazi puppets. With our spineless right-wing aristocracy side-lined, Hitler and the luftwaffe were forced to make good on their threats, which led to them being humiliated by a resolute cornered opponent.
    1
  80.  @konradinkappler6768  Of COURSE the Luftwaffe overclaimed !!!! Under estimating production and over estimating losses was the reason why "Beppo" Schmit and Luftwaffe intelligence believed that RAF fighter Command was down to less than 100 aircraft by the beginning of Sept 1940.... so imagine the HORROR of the bomber crews on 15th Sept 1940 when they launched their so-called "knock out blow" against London and literally HUNDREDS of RAF fighters rose to welcome them.
    1
  81. The German Abwehr (Military Intelligence) had a section called "B-Dienst" whose role was to listen to the electronic airwaves, in an effort to intercept & decode any Royal Naval transmissions, and pass such information to the German naval high command for transmission to its ships at sea (what modern armed forces call SIGINT, or "SIGnals INTelligence"). B-dienst completely failed during "Exercise Rhine" to gave Lütjens in Bismack ANY warning of the approach of Hood / PoW this was due to the RN's awareness for radio silence (Something Lütjens himself seemed totally oblivious to). After Bismarck's victory at Denmark Strait, Lütjens was made painfully aware that he was effectively blind to the rest of the RN's dispositions in the north Atlantic. So as well as not having the necessary speed to engage the withdrawing PoW due to the damage that PoW had inflicted on her, Lütjens was too frightened to chase PoW eastwards as he knew that there was liable to be more RN heavy units unknown to him, racing to support PoW from the direction of Scapa flow.
    1
  82. The obsevations listed above made by the SKL were based on operations that had taken place immediately before the technological giant strides then being made by the British, such as more and more reliable and efficient radar sets being fitted to more and more RN ships (This had been commented upon by Lütjens in his "after action" report on his experiences during "Operation Berlin", and was again recognised by him early on during "Exercise Rhine"), as well as an increase in the number of "Y service" listening stations to give more precise radio location of enemy units in the vast swathes of the Atlantic, in addition to the slightly later introduction of shipborne high frequency Direction finding (Huff-Duff) equipment. The ever increasing numbers of RN aircraft carriers was also largely overlooked, and proved decisive as was demonstrated in "Rhineübung". And all of this is even before we start talking about "ULTRA" and the British breakthroughs made into Kriegsmarine radio encryption which saw the destruction of Germany's network of surface supply ships shortly after the failure of Exercise Rhine. The door had been slammed in the face of the KM surface fleet by early to mid 1941...... they just hadn't recognised it yet. That all changed on 27th May 1941.
    1
  83. Thank god it was the RAF & Royal Navy alone that stopped that train of events. The world owed Britain SO much but has quickly forgotten about its debt of honour.
    1
  84. The Fairey Swordfish were designed & built in Britain from 1935 onwards, originally for the Greek navy, But when trialled prior to delivery they were seen to be so capable that the Royal Navy bought them instead. They were biplanes for a very good reason. At the time they were designed existing aircraft engines were of relatively low power (especially for the British fleet air arm which was ALWAYS low down on the engine & aircraft "priority list") so to enable a carrier aircraft to carry aloft heavy loads needed a large wing area. Their biplane wing area was SO great that they could take off fully loaded WITHOUT the use of a carrier's catapult. This meant that in the stormy North Atlantic where the Royal Navy mainly intended to operate them, instead of being forced to take off at the carrier's bows (where the catapults are) and which is the part of a ship that rises and falls by the greatest amount in heavy seas, the Swordfish could take of from the middle of the carrier's decks close to the bridge where the pitching and rolling was the least. It was for this reason in May 1941 that they were able to take off from HMS Ark Royal to attack Bismarck when the Ark Royal was struggling through an Atlantic gale in MOUNTAINOUS seas, with her bows rising and falling by nearly 60ft !!! Try to imagine how terrifying it must have been for the brave young crews flying them in those conditions. Those weather conditions would have prevented all other allied carrier aircraft of the era from flying and instead seen them safely lashed down inside the hangar deck. They were also incredibly adaptable and throughout WW2 they were modifed to carry, bombs, depth charges, torpedoes, extra fuel tanks and even eight anti ship rockets as well as the world's very first naval airborne radars (that's the reason why they were nicknamed "stringbags" it was said they could carry ANYTHING). They are widely regarded to have ended the war as the aircraft with the GREATEST amount of enemy shipping tonnage sunk, and were HUGELY loved by their crews. They WERE to have been replaced mid war by a succesor, the Fairey Albacore, but the "stringbags" were so ubiquitous that they outlasted the Albacore in service.
    1
  85. Far from it.
    1
  86. Yes, Bismarck carried out her gunnery and sea trials in the Baltic during 1940 BEFORE her FuMo 23 radars were fitted in Kiel in late 1940. The first time that Bismarck fired her main forward guns with the FuMO23 radars fitted was when she opened fire on HMS Norfolk on the morning of 22nd May 1941.... and as Bismarck fired her guns they damaged her newly installed forward radars so seriously they were put permanently out of action. Superb German engineering at its best !!!
    1
  87. They did send U-boats... in fact is was one of those uboats (U-74) that caused the Royal Navy to call off the rescues of the Bismarck survivors.
    1
  88. The Fairey Swordfish were designed & built in Britain from 1935 onwards, originally for the Greek navy, But when trialled prior to delivery they were seen to be so capable that the Royal Navy bought them instead. They were biplanes for a very good reason. At the time they were designed existing aircraft engines were of relatively low power (especially for the British fleet air arm which was ALWAYS low down on the engine & aircraft "priority list") so to enable a carrier aircraft to carry aloft heavy loads needed a large wing area. Their biplane wing area was SO great that they could take off fully loaded WITHOUT the use of a carrier's catapult. This meant that in the stormy North Atlantic where the Royal Navy mainly intended to operate them, instead of being forced to take off at the carrier's bows (where the catapults are) and which is the part of a ship that rises and falls by the greatest amount in heavy seas, the Swordfish could take of from the middle of the carrier's decks close to the bridge where the pitching and rolling was the least. It was for this reason in May 1941 that they were able to take off from HMS Ark Royal to attack Bismarck when the Ark Royal was struggling through an Atlantic gale in MOUNTAINOUS seas, with her bows rising and falling by nearly 60ft !!! Try to imagine how terrifying it must have been for the brave young crews flying them in those conditions. Those weather conditions would have prevented all other allied carrier aircraft of the era from flying and instead seen them safely lashed down inside the hangar deck. They were also incredibly adaptable and throughout WW2 they were modifed to carry, bombs, depth charges, torpedoes, extra fuel tanks and even eight anti ship rockets as well as the world's very first naval airborne radars (that's the reason why they were nicknamed "stringbags" it was said they could carry ANYTHING). They are widely regarded to have ended the war as the aircraft with the GREATEST amount of enemy shipping tonnage sunk, and were HUGELY loved by their crews. They WERE to have been replaced mid war by a succesor, the Fairey Albacore, but the "stringbags" were so ubiquitous that they outlasted the Albacore in service.
    1
  89. Whilst losing their overrated tiger I's to it.
    1
  90. The "cupboard" of the Kriegsmarine was bare witrh relation to surface ships. Luckily for the world, Britain & France declared war on Germany before it had completed its "Z plan" fleet.
    1
  91. Seeing as all the ships you name were unavailable at the time of Rhineübung, how STUPID was the German OKM to allow the operation to go ahead at all !!!
    1
  92. What do you think all the encirclement battles & Guderian's thrust southwards towards Kiev in August 1941 were about?
    1