Just popped up in my suggested. My great gran along with her sisters were on the Flying Kestrel. She did a few interviews about it throughout her life and the story has passed down to us so this is a very interesting visual to go along with it.
@@Dreyer1916 You'll likely have come across her then. She was Margaret although only known as Peggie or Peggy (different publications have different spellings) Gibson. There are a few pieces that were in the Orcadian and there are tapes of her telling the story that were recorded by family members which they keep meaning to dig out to be converted and I also believe there was at least one documentary she was interviewed in but I've never seen it. There are quite a few things that pop up online about her if you google her name and the scuttling of the German Fleet.
@@danielgdrever In fact I quoted at length from her interviews. In my book I actually say they got the name wrong by calling her Margaret (my mistake!). I'll see if I can find the documentary. It might have been the one with Ludo Kennedy.
I remember this battle being so split. The side with least deaths, the side with least total casualties, the side with least lost irreplaceable crews, the side with most total immediate war power lost, the side with most morale lost, etc. were a mixture of Germany and Britain. I think the seagulls won the real ancient battle.
The Brits tricked its fool of a captain to do a Leroy Jenkins. While the fool is under fire, the enemy ship types and mentality could be guessed. Of course, the experienced captains on the other "side" also knows about this "survival of the fittest" naval tactic. Welcome to naval warfare.
One of those ships that escorted the High Seas Fleet into the Firth of Forth is the U.S.S. Texas, which is berthed just down the road from where I am now in Texas. Magnificent ship.
The top of Q turret of HMS Lion was not blown off - rather, one corner was bent back by the shell impact. In the photo shown the damaged plate has been removed as part of repair work. This mistake is an old one.
The British objective was met, but the German objective wasn't so i myself would call it a British victory. It's sort of like the battle of the Coral Sea. The Japanese failed there objective to cut Australia off from the United States, but inflicted heavier losses on the US than what the US inflicted on them. Or like Stalingrad, in which the Germans inflicted heavier casualties on the Soviets but failed to achieve there objectives, where as the soviets achieved there's. Inflicting heavier losses on your opponents doesn't always mean victory.
@@haouribi That's not a Pyrrhic Victory. It's just a flat out loss for the Germans. The British achieved their goals of keeping the Germans bottled up, and bruised their capital ships so badly that the Germans never challenged them again - the British fleet was sailing again in a few weeks at full strength, while the Germans would take far longer to repair their vessels. The Germans failed to break the blockade. The British lost more ships because of Beatty's idiocy, but Germany lost.
Truly an excellent documentary and an instant favorite. The amount of research and editing must have been huge. My only problem is that there are only this and the video about the German navy scuttling their remaining ships in Scappa Flow at the end of WW1, and I wish there were more. Ridiculously good videos! Cheers!
Churchill as the 'First Lord of Admiralty' famously said that 'Jellicoe is the man who could lose the war for Britain in one day' ! Strategically as long as Britain could continue to enforce the sea blockade on Germany, Britain would win the war and she did !
The issues with the British battlecruisers was not primarily a design issue. It was primarily down to poor ammunition handling practices instigated by Admiral Beatty and the decision to use the ships in a role they were not designed for. The first 2 classes (which included Invincible and Indefatigable) were not designed to fight capital ships, they were intended as cruiser killers. They were originally termed Dreadnought Armoured Cruisers. In this role they performed admirably - the Battle of the Falklands for example. The loss of the Queen Mary was almost certainly caused by the poor ammunition handling practices instigated by Beatty. By contrast, the captain of HMS Tiger largely ignored Beatty and as a result Tiger survived Jutland in good fighting order despite taking multiple hits.
I’m stunned that the German navy lowered the flag in honor of Jellicoe when he died- 1935 is right in the middle of the nazi era. Perhaps hitler was in one of those moods when he was convinced the British would “come to their senses” and recognize their German-ness and fight along side them once he started the war…
There WAS something wrong with their bloody ships that day - the preening, incompetent boob standing on the compass platform of the Lion, and the even more incompetent boob he put on her flag deck.
Scapa Flow! Die Rohre leer, die Kammern leer, so zogen wir hin, ein entwaffnetes Heer, und brachten unsere Schiffe mit eigener Hand, nach Scapa Flow! Dort liegen wir so manchen Tag, doch komme, was kommen mag! Zerbrochen die Macht, doch nicht unser Stolz, wir sind geschnitzt aus zähem Holz, wir Deutschen! Autor: Karl Heidebrunn, Torpedoboot (Zerstörer) B 110, Kaiserliche Deutsche Hochseeflotte, Internierungsverband Scapa Flow, 1919 Scapa Flow! The tubes empty, the chambers empty, so we went, a disarmed Army, and brought our ships with our own hands, to Scapa Flow! There we lie many a day, but come what may! Broken is our power, but not our pride, we are carved from tough wood, we Germans! Author: Karl Heidebrunn, Torpedo boat (destroyer) B 110, Imperial German High Seas Fleet, Scapa Flow internment unit, 1919 ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-vDdez8gU3PU.html
Beatty was a jerk both during and after this battle. Jellicoe was brilliant. Scheer avoided destruction because of a skillful and difficult u-turn, and also use of the battlecruisers and torpedo attacks to enable the escape. Also, the battle started late in the day, thereby limiting the time available. WWI navies did not have night fighting capabilities to continue the fight.
@@Dreyer1916I too am at a loss at to what hyperbole hoodoo is referring too.? This the most detailed, and fact based videos I have seen on Jutland , thank you.
may god bless the British people for sacrificing to much in both world wars they were at the start and the middle my country the good old us of a was the finisher
@@memadmax69 country's are puppets now and days when the day we took the power away from kings and queens today's kings and queens are puppets authoritarianism is the new king and queens of today
@@memadmax69 WW1 was caused by the assassination of ferdinand, and the domino affect of military alliances WW2 was caused by hiltars invasion of poland. the germans were the aggressor in world war 2.
@@datcheesecakeboi6745 Why did hitler attack poland in the first place, kicking off WW2? Cause a certain polish general was running around killing ethnic germans living in former german territory. That polish general was given the go ahead to kill germans by a certain british government... I'll let you figure it out the details with your own research... "History is written by the victors"... The bad guys won WW2....
Thank you for such a nice comment. I hope there will be more but - as always - these aren^'t cheap to produce. My new book on the Submarine War 1914-1918 is coming out in October. I'd love to see that subject as the third animation (the second was made for the centenary of the scuttling of the High Seas Fleet in Scapa Flow)
@@Dreyer1916 no Americans at Jutland , not even observers , now that would been intresting. But England admitting that the US helped in anything is like pulling teeth with a pair of cup holders . I been hearing that " US never really helped in both World Wars , i heard the same crap when i got to Baghdad and ran into a group of Royal Marines that was leaving country. I said " What you fellows doing here ?" .. the officer said " Teaching the Yanks how to Fight " ... i said " Like Dunkirk ? , you did a great job there" So i been hearing it since the 1980's , UK as a whole hates the US , I been to UK and treated with a bit of arrogance in their manners. Quickly they forget that we took the blunt of all combat actions from late 1942 onward
@@jeffblacky Admiral Jellicoe's words when DD-8 arrived in Queenstown as the first American USN units to enter the war in 1917: "My dear Taussig, I retain very pleasant and vivid recollections of our association in China, and I am indeed delighted that you have been selected for the command of the first force which is coming to fight for freedom, humanity and civilization. We shall have our work cut out to subdue piracy. My experience in China makes me perfectly convinced that the two nations will work in the closest co-operation, and I won’t flatter you by saying too much about the value of your help. I must say this, however. There is no navy in the world that can possibly give us more valuable assistance, and there is no personnel in any navy that will fight better than yours." The submarine war could not have been won without American help. The British simply did not have enough destroyers to implement Convoy.
@@jeffblacky by 1917 the royal navy has already defeated the germans, by the time the americans came in ww2 the luftwaffe was basically already defeated, and so too was there navy and tanks, sure they still has soldiers.. but thats all americans faced american soldiers were basically of no help in both world wars, both wars were already decided by that point.
@@datcheesecakeboi6745 laugh , lend lease , american merchant shipping in 1940 , yeah right dude , please keep drinking your tea and read some church hill
It would have been an interesting sight to see Derfflinger on the bottom of Scapa, along with the battleships Markgraf, Konig, and Kronprinz Wilhelm. If she had not have been raised before the outbreak of WWII, she would have been one of the last German battlecruisers on the sea floor today, alongside her sistership, Lutzow.
History The narrow sand tombolo of Agger Tange connected North Jutland Island to the Jutland Peninsula between c. 1200 and 1825. The area became an island again due to a storm on 3 February 1825, when the North Sea broke through the Agger Tange in its far southwest, separating the area from mainland Jutland and creating the Agger Channel.[3] The current separator is the Thyborøn Channel, created slightly further south by a flood in 1862. The original Agger Channel filled up with sand in 1877. The system was a medieval sub-division regarded as the oldest type of administrative unit in Denmark, having existed since before the Middle Ages. The land of the North Jutlandic Island was divided into two of these: Thysyssel (including Hanherred) and Vendsyssel vide more www.wikipedia.org
Again that stupid Myth of stock piling charges outside the magazin.first the speed of firing is determined by theSHELL hoists! thats a insult to all brave sailors who died calling them suicidal idiots! the myth was created to save Churchill . after the Doggerbank battle it was evident british and german flashproof doors were faulty designs.the germans made investigations and no cordite explosion happend on german shipsagain Mr Churchill forbade any investigation, he wante a unquestioned victory. than happened Jutland. something had to be done to save his career.the new myth had two benefits. no no no not the germans could not sink our flawless ships our turret crews did it while trying to perform best! the british sources can be found anywhere outside the Imperial War Museum(Ihad often visited) bot must of you will prefere to ignore them. at last did HOOD SUNK again by leaving doors open??
Well there did seem to be an obsession with RoF since Nelsons day, so who can say at this distance in time. PS Churchill did leave a trail of disaster and death in his wake.
The shame of it was that the later intelligence was incredibly good but Room 40 was worried that passing raw intelligence on too quickly would compromise its sources and decryption abilities.
For all the smack I've talked about Beatty over the years, both senior British commanders had a very hard job to do and it was, ultimately, a thankless one. Keeping the lid on the jar just isn't enough for the public when it takes such a toll to do so. - Also fascinating to see, yet again, the truth of how effective a guerre de course is, in terms of how much damage the raider needs to inflict to have the desired effect. To clarify, I've had discussions where I've been told that - for example - the British East Coast convoys of WW2 were "hardly 'mauled' by S-boats ('E-boats')" because the total figures of losses to successful sailings was 'so low'. In fact, this misses the point entirely - one which is made plainly by the WW1 U-boat campaign's effect in 1917 - that it is not so much a case of successful total sailings over a protracted period (although that is vital), but the successful sailing of *every single convoy* without excessive loss which counts: Much as a human may draw many breaths in a year, so going without breath for an hour is fatal. A convoy, as an essential logistical link in a fully-strained wartime economy, need only suffer a 5% loss of tonnage - and thus delivered essential supplies for the moment in question - to put immense pressure on the whole enterprise of maintaining the nation and prosecuting the war. A 10% loss is a disaster, where surplus is not present. A sustained 5% to 10% loss rate for just a short succession, or that loss rate to a few convoys in a concentrated time period, is enough to bring everything to breaking point. Convoy warfare was never as sure a thing, in the face of a determined enemy offensive, as the results of the two World Wars in the Atlantic - or the East Coast - would suggest to the casual observer. These maritime supply lines were an essential chain which, if broken just the once, could not be allowed to go unrepaired for even a moment.
Eine äußerst wichtige Aufgabe der deutschen Flotte war es einen Einbruch der britischen Flotte in die Ostsee nicht zuzulassen. Diese Aufgabe wurde erfüllt.
The only two entrances were either in German hands (the Kiel canal) or was heavily mined (Neutral Denmark controlled). Even if they could get in, they would be operating without supplies. The british had even given up the baltic plan about a year before this. The key aim of the British in this battle was to hold the naval blockade already in place. Germany's was to break it.
@@thesupremepizza6893 - Natürlich würden die Briten in der Ostsee Vorräte nachschieben können denn sie hätten ja die entsprechenden Seestraßen zwischen Schweden und Dänemark schon in Besitz, wie sollten sie sonst in die Ostsee gelangen? Worum ging es dabei? Mögliche Landungen an der deutschen Ostseeküste UND Verbindung mit Rußland für Unterstützungslieferungen. Warum haben die Briten den Ostseeplan aufgegeben? Wegen der deutschen Flotte. Stattdessen iniziierte der verrückte kriminelle menschenfeindliche Churchill seine Dardanellenoperation. Die deutsche Flotte KONNTE die Seeblockade nicht brechen denn sie war Kohlebetrieben und hatte nicht die Reichweite dorthinzu, Höhe der Blockade, kommen. Außerdem wäre es für die Briten leicht möglich gewesen die Blockade auf eine Linie weiter im Norden zu verlegen oder gar auf die Linie färöer-island-grönland zurück zu gehen. Selbst dann wäre der Handel mit Norwegen weiter möglich gewesen, denn die deutsche Flotte hatte nicht die Reichweite diesen zu unterbrechen.
First mistake at around 38 seconds. “Hitlers battle fleet”. He was at the time a corporal on the Western Front and fighting very valiantly winning the Iron Cross. He didn’t have a navy of his own until he came to power as Fuhrer in 1934. Oops………
