Comments by "HaJo Os." (@hajoos.8360) on "HMS Indefatigable - Guide 116 (Extended)" video.

This is not a miracle. The noble french captains or admirals were killed by the french revolutionary freemazons. Viceadmiral Villaret-Joyeuse was a post-captain before the war. There was no educated french officer corps, so in the total the education of french naval forces suffered, and bottled up in harbours, moral was drownded. Additionally Boney made often a bad choice appointing fleet-commanders, he appointed complete losers as Villeneuve. Additionally Boney lacked the technical understanding. So this imperial fool sent Robert Fulton away. And before the Napoleonic wars, there was no real political will to beat Britain. During the war of independence, France and Spain had the opportunity to conquer Britain. Both nation's fleets were superiour against the Royal Navy at this time.
17
Since admiral Byng was shot, court-marshalled, on his quarterdeck no British officer dared not to attack. This motivates more than prize-money.
13
@taggartlawfirm Jackass-frigate Jack is a clever swashbuckler .... Hornblower is a cultivated thinker. Both have nothing to do with Nelson, the profit-taker of Duncan, more with Cochrane and Sidney Smith.
7
@taggartlawfirm .... Hornblower, too. He managed (in the novel) the funeral of Nelson as a post-captain and commanded a sloop of 22 9pounders. I think we are too much influenced by the films with Russel Crowe, Gergory Peck or Ioan Gruffudd. Duncan was a giant, he could win against every able seaman in a fist-fight. Nelson, Cochrane, Sidney Smith, Suffren, Surcouf never looked like hollywood heroes. This is the point of view, Forester wanted to express, in my eyes.
5
@jaredmiller9021 after the industrial revolution continental middle-class was in % bigger than Britain's. Paul Kennedy wrote in his famous book "The Rise and the Fall of the Great Powers", that Germany could stand in 2 WWs such a long time against an allied x-times superiority by the better education of it's soldiers.
4
@KroM234 This is not only your and my opinion. Numbers are obvious. To evalue the history we have to check political intentions. The Brits, incorporated by the RN, followed the real imperial strategy (copied from the Romans) to destroy all enemy forces. Till today, continental forces, at this time the Frenchies and Spaniards, except the admirals Suffren and de Bazán, saw warfare at sea more as a political instrument, as a noble hobby, and comparable to the Germans in WWI and II. The fatal error was to underestimate the brutal atrocity of anglo-american policies of permanent warfare, which was fairly copied from Augustus, who was famous for his pax romana, but who waged permanent war in reality. The big french fleet, which gave the US independence, ruined the french economy, which led to the French revolution with it's well known outcome. What guys as de Grasse never understood was, with a sunk Royal Navy the brit colonies would had become automatically french ones. The deGrasse' made useless enterprises and adventures instead to bottle up the RN in british ports and to kill John Company.
4
@peterblood50 seen over 3 centuries you are right. The Frenchies were always inflicted with unnecessary troubles on the continent which were useless, because France is relatively secured, if do you watch the map of Europe. So all continental engagements disturbed those guys who supported the colonial development. But, Peter, we find several historical points, where the Brits scratched the bottom. For example during the Independence War the Franco-Spanish Allies failed with a lack of political will to finish off the Brits forever and to wipe these pirates northeast of Ushant out. The Homefleet at this time had only around 35 ships of the line against 70 Franco-Spaniard manowars. The Brits would have had no chance to avoid an invasion and to lose everything.
3
@taggartlawfirm He ran off his own wife. But Sir Hamilton was always present, when Nelson visited them till his death. And Greville a former Lover visited her often, too. And Britain was never obliged about her, a housemaid. And Emma spent a lot of money, more than Hamilton or Nelson bequested. And Nelson's demand for public support was not noted. So she became a drunkard and died.
3
@mikebronicki6978 Kennedy is not the only good source. But he is a fine one. Time to read is a luxury, but important to get more points of view.
2
74s were longer in relation to the width, so they were faster and drifted less to lee. At Copenhagen 64s were better to use by their lower draught. But Nelson himself was better in propaganda as a self-made-man as a seaman. So his love to Agamemnon was not suited by facts. Agamemnon spent more time in refitting than on sea.
2
@sawyerawr5783 concerning the Constitution (old ironsides) vid of Drach, the question occurs, whether Razee-constructed ships would have been the better ships of the line or not. 2 or 3 deckers had obviously more drift and slower speed. And stability enforced small calibers on the upper gun-decks.
2
Yes, but the Brits had never a countable middle-class. So the shares of prize-money and trading success reached only a small part of the British population.
1
Yes, Richard Bolitho experienced the worse situation in the war of independence and mentioned it. In this time Britain survived by the political inability of the french and spanish kings. The Royal Navy would have fought without any chance to win a battle in the channel against a combined allied fleet at this time. And Nelson era it is called. But during the Napoleonic wars there were no real opponents, every british post-captain could have led the Brits into battle, so this was not Nelson's performance, he stole only the tactics from Duncan and sold it as his own. It was the performance of British seamen and officers who made it. When Nelson met a real opponent, as at Tenerife, he lost easily and foolish. And Nelson's envy against more talented officers, as Sidney Smith, ruined the reputation of those officers and caused a loss for Britain. In reality Nelson was only a lucky poser.
1
@jacktattis The only real victory of Nelson was the battle of Copenhagen, there were no other tactics available. The formation at Trafalgar was invented by Duncan at Camperdown in 1797 & at Trafalgar & the Nile he defeated frenchie amateurs, because Boney promoted the wrong flag-officers. At the Nile Brueys sent half of his crews to fetch water, knowing that Nelson was searching for him. He should have demand water delivery by the army. Brueys anchored only with bow-anchors at Aboukir, instead to order springs. During the battle was enough time for the idiot Villeneuve, who commanded the rear, to bring a spring on 2 ships, what would have been enough to destroy one British ship after another firing full broadsides into British bows. Or he could have sent crews to improve the the reload time of engaged ships. But bonehead Villeneuve did nothing, except to escape. When Nelson met pros at Land f.e. at Tenerife he failed pitiful, losing an arm & an eye-sight.
1
The RN is done for, now.
1
Yes, the good times are gone, and the empire wasted by the alc-master Churchill himself. Against Villeneuve or Bruys every british midshipman would have been able to lead the brits into battle. At this time actors acted as french sea-officers.
1
@vipertwenty249 Churchill was one of those politicians in the 19th century who promoted "Made in Germany", Lloyd George was not even better in his statement, a war could be cheaper than to compete in the markets. I am not a friend of the Nazis, but how do they came to power? Both wars Britain inflicted, destroyed or weakened Europe and it's prime position on the planet in favour of the US. Now Europe, including Britain, is depraved to a poor vasall status. So European naval forces are facing desaster. Miserable British carriers, miserable destroyers/frigates and good german submarines nearly all out of action. And those Scandis could not even steer a frigate without GPS. And for your info, the new Poland (1919) attacked every neighbor-state and developed into a military-dictatorship in 1926. The german invasion of Poland caused the declaration of war against Germany by France and Britain, but not against the invading Sovietunion. So moral standards were obsolet.
1
@vipertwenty249 I beg pardon for my miserable english. Hope, you will understand me.
1
@mk_gamíng0609 I do not think so. German ships were faster and not to sink via artillery. German shooting was in average better till 1943. The turret-shape of British ships was superiour to German turrets. It was easier to knock out German turrets. The Frenchies built better 4-gun-turrets. The Brits needed 3 years to solve the 4-gun-turret-problems of the KGV-class. German gun crews were more efficient, have a look to SMS Seydlitz at the Doggerbank.
1
@BonsaiBlacksmith Why do You wagged Your history lessons in school? Except in the post-revolutionary France, most times nobles were the officers in the European military. Watch the Richard-Sharpe-series, easy schooling for You. All those noble officers were members of Freemazon-lodges. And since the age of enlightenment they accepted bourgois members. In the net are dokus of Maria-Theresia's (of Austria/Habsburg) freemazon gardens beside her palaces, check it, You uneducated subject. The 100-days-emperor Frederik III of Prussia (II. German Reich) was a freemazon lodge member in Bad Homburg, where he used to stay at his health spa. One day he wanted to see his personal lodge file, but he could not get it, as the German crown-prince or emperor. So he forbade his sons, mainly William II, after him emperor, to become a lodge-member. You see, I did not wagged my history lessons & I expanded them by my own reseach. Usually You must pay me for decreasing the misery of Your eduction, balancing Your useless parents. But this is the last time for free, prole.
1
Cutty Sark, a clipper, is waiting for your visit. And there are 2 replicas of the Golden Hind of Francis Drake. And it is very expensive to conserve an old ship. Will you pay it? The Royal Navy is now done for and has not enough money caused by fatal political invenstments. Aircraft carriers with no planes and destroyers/frigates which cannot sail in warm waters.
1
If the French would have had more Suffrens your opinion might differ.
1
@peterblood50 Suffren served before the french revolution and he waged war without a real base in the Indian ocean for 2 years, a top performance. It is less a question of seamanship and more a question of attitude. Suffren, unlike his subordinated captains or officers, fought like staying under the same verdict of John Byng as his british opponents did it. And Suffren let fire his artillerie into the british ships, not in their masts. He was more british than Hughes.
1
As in the video mentioned Droits de l'Homme was a failed construction. Her lower gunports could rarely been used even in fair weather. But as always the major mistake was done by the french captain. He had to win luv into the atlantic away from the Brits. And with his draught this should have been no problem.
1
Camille Desmoulins .. Forester himself was a thinker. And he gave us another point of view. Kent and others made Hollywood heroes.
1
@caringancoystopitum4224 A major point is, that at this time, the Frenchies had killed all competent sea-officers, some fled. So it was not so difficult to become a hero. And the circumstances in Spain were desolated.
1
@kimj2570 Yes, of course. The Brits had the best officer-staff available. But in sea-warfare at this time, individual characters were still recognizeable. The best British seamen of all times were obviously Cochrane & Sidney-Smith. Nelson was a brutal slaughterer, a character sphincter, an uncivilised officer, as we can see, how he handled the fate of Admiral https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francesco_Caracciolo The Frenchies and the Spaniards had the chance to defeat the Royal Navy for once and forever during the War of Independence. But there was a lack of political will in Spain and France to do it.
1