History lovers welcome to my channel. This channel deals mainly with the history of the Second World War. Sit comfortably and I wish you a pleasant viewing.
Captain Langsdorff was a commander of the old school. A man of honor who valued the lives of his crew and felt that his duty required him to share the fate of his ship. He should be remembered!
The M10 left a trail of destruction in its wake? Has this bee taken from a college course in creative writing. A lot of descriptive words seems to trump actual history.
@@historytimechannel Don't publish with these kinds of errors. It does not bode well for your channel. Listen first! If you hear these AI errors, please reedit.
Sorry, but I'm not forcing you to watch. they are mainly watched by people who are interested in it, but obviously you are not one of them, which makes me very sad
I firmly disagree with one of my replies; despite all; "the Yamatos' were the most powerful." No; they never proved themselves. (i.e.) The Bismarck was a great ship; the Tirpitz was not. Have you ever bought a piece of shit car; and, someone else buys the exact same model & year; and, they love theirs. Unless something is 'proven': it's just a big hunk of steal.
Please explain the combat importance of the Yamato(s). They're like the Titanic: too much "hoo-ha" for having accomplished absolutely nothing. a. The battleships never fought a gun-duel with another of its kind. b. Just as the liner never made it completely across the Atlantic; not even once. I'm sick & tired of hearing so much of these two suj. ships.
"Big" doesn't mean a goddamn thing; what?! ..yeah, they were heavy; fat; and, sported not the highest caliber; but, the largest diameter guns. They too, were restrictive; both physically; and, by human. I got a lot of respect for all navies; axis' & allied alike; incl. the IJN & JMSDF. But, the Yamato(s) were held in the rear almost the entire war; hence "Hotel Yamato". I'll bet, the crews aboard the wartime Kongo(s) despised the crews aboard the 'biggest..'. Even today; like the RMS Titanic; they two get high praise; and, for 'absolutely' nothing.
In the context of the war as a whole, I agree with you. The Yamato class did very little to justify the expense of manpower and resources in their construction. That, however, is largely true of all of the post- treaty battleships- only three of which (King George V, Duke of York, and Washington) can be positively said to have sunk another capital ship. One of the reasons for this was the unexpected impact of naval air power on capital ship deployment throughout the war. Another was the reluctance of the senior leadership of some navies (the Imperial Japanese Navy being one) to commit irreplaceable ships to combat. All this being said, the fact still remains that the Yamato class battleships were- by far- the most powerful battleships ever constructed. No other capital ship adequately compares to them. They simply went unused to an appreciable degree- and that's not the fault of the design. Cheers...
Many of those pictures shown are actually of the M-46, an improved tank sharing much of the Pershing's components but with a more powerful 750 HP, engine.
What ships did Yamato sink? Yamato obtained three 1st- salvo 18" hits on U.S.S. Johnston from just over 20,000 yards. Johnston was fatally damaged by the hits and eventually sunk. Yamato also obtained one 1st- salvo 18" hit on U.S.S. Gambier Bay from just under 22,000 yards from a six- gun salvo which was aimed entirely by the ship's Type 22 radar because of a lack of a visual to the target until about a minute after opening fire. Gambier Bay was crippled from the hit and was slowed, leading to her sinking later. Yamato also dropped two 18" shells right alongside U.S.S. White Plains from just over 34,000 yards. One of them exploded and the damage took White Plains out of front- line service for the rest of the war. This was gunnery unequalled by any other capital ship during the war. By comparison, none of the Iowa class BBs ever obtained a main battery hit on any vessel of destroyer size or larger during WW2. U.S.S. Massachusetts was firing at a stationary target off Casablanca, U.S.S. Washington bombarded Kirishima from short right down to point blank range at 2nd Guadalcanal, and the vast majority of rounds from the U.S. battleline at Surigao Strait were straddles- and not hits as originally believed (the wrecks of both Fuso and Yamashiro have been explored. From a gunnery standpoint, both ships are essentially intact and were sunk primarily by torpedo attack from U.S. destroyers). Having said that, I agree with you that the construction of Yamato represented a net loss to Japan. That's largely true of all the post- treaty battleships in WW2, but of Yamato far more than the others.
What a drastic improvement over his earlier videos. Having a human voice instead of an AI narration makes such a difference. A little more veting of the photos to match the topic, and this channel is becoming way better.
The low power British engines available at the time led to the tank design, they had enough power to drive a light tank fast or a heavy tank slow, but would not drive a heavy tank fast! The A12 Matilda MkII was a very underestimated tank of its time. It was superior to all German and Italian tanks until the arrival of the Panzer IV Ausf F2 in mid-1942. Only the German 8.8cm Flak.36 used in the anti-tank role was a danger too it. It was the only allied that served continuously on the front line 1939-45.
the Comet tank is the one with the longer barrelled 17 pounder with the egg beater muzzle brake. The Comet has the gun mantle protruding out of the turret face. The Cromwell has a flat turret face which has 6 large rivets.cheers
Actually not that many, pictures tend to show the same tanks. Also there were not that many in service, the British had only about 2,000 tanks over 4 years. The USSR were supplied with about 1,000.
A great pity it was not fitted with a radio like all German tanks. This meant their commanders had little control over them on the battlefield. These tanks were not complex, they were so crude drivers had often to use a hammer to move the gears. The 76.2mm gun was similar to the 75mm on the Shermannot great at piercing armour after 1942.
@@historytimechannel It was a great idea, but had little effect on the war as they were only encountered in small numbers. They met a similar fate as the large French tanks in 1940. Soviet tactics changed and they became more effective, especially the improved IS series.
@@historytimechannel while your English is certainly serviceable, your subtitles suggest you didn’t provide them. Whoever was responsible for subtitles used either Whole or Hole for the term ‘Hull’. Punctuation is just about non-existent, and the use of the term ‘T 30 4s’ suggests a real unfamiliarity with the language.
