HMS Hermes, The World's 1st Purpose Built Aircraft Carrier. 

Thanks very much for this fascinating and tragic insight into your late Uncle.

Miracle

@@user-xp8no4ce5h Mitsuo Fushida, the Japanese pilot leading the attack that killed my uncle, had also led the attack on Pearl Harbour four months earlier. At the end of the war he interviewed many returning Japanese prisoners of war, expecting to hear tales of allied atrocities, but instead found that Japanese prisoners had been treated well. Some spoke of Peggy Covell, whose Christian missionary parents had been murdered by the Japanese, but who worked with Japanese prisoners as a nurse and helper. He found and talked with her, and was profoundly affected by the forgiveness she showed. She explained that she forgave them because God had forgiven her in Christ. He later met Jacob DeSchazer, who had been taken prisoner after the Doolittle raid on Tokyo, and had been very badly treated. He had hated the Japanese but had been given a Bible. He read it, trusted Christ's payment on the cross for his sin, and became a missionary in Japan, leading an estimated 30,000 people to Christ, including Mitsuo Fushida, and they became the greatest of friends as brothers in Christ.

@@kevanquinn9559 What a coincidence, I just finished a model plane of Mitsuo and also HMS Hermes on which your uncle has ever served, also touched by the spirit of forgiveness shown after the war, do you want to take a look at the pics of HERMES I made and may your uncle rip

Brilliant story & thank you for sharing.

You're welcome!

I served on this version of the Hermes in the '70s, but I thought that she was sold to the Pakistan navy who renamed her Virkaat, however wiki does say INS Viraat, so I am wrong.

Think I saw her in Kochi around 2009 +/- forget exactly when I was there for a telecoms job and went for a drive around with colleagues over the weekend, passed naval dock and thought a harrier carrier but did not realise which at the time.

Thanks for the correction Bob, you are indeed correct. A glaring oversight on my part.

Thank you very much!

Glad you enjoyed it

Hms dreadnought, hms invincible, first troppdo boat, first destroyer

Glad you enjoyed it

Glad you enjoyed it

You're welcome

Glad it helped!

@@TheNorthernHistorian Sadly I can’t send you the pics, it’s almost finished.

Thank you very much!

Thank you! Cheers!

The mysteries of the RU-vid algorithm! Do you have notifications turned on by pressing the bell icon? I have heard that YT doesn't always issue notifications.

@@TheNorthernHistorian I checked before commenting and yes I was subscibed and the ringing bell icon had been selected (last night on PC) This morning on reading your reply I ckecked again and lo and behold subscription was turned off! Work that out. I wish your channel all successs.

The Zealandic is an interesting story. She was purchased by the admiralty to be a decoy for HMS Hermes and disguised with flight deck and false island to resemble Hermes. She is not to be confused with the actual HMS Hermes though.

I live on Tyneside and was born just a couple of miles down river at Wallsend. This yard was just one of many on the river and Armstrong's would continue through various guises.

Its the second built. The first one was Hosho.

@@nighthawkentertainment Hermes was the first ship to be designed as an aircraft carrier. Hosho was originally designed as a seaplane carrier. The design was modified in April, 1919, after Japanese observers had seen HMS Argus.

Much appreciated!

Thank you very much!

Very true!

Seafire was available, a navalised Mk Vc Spitfire, but 2 months later.

Not well would likely be more than a little understated.

Probably like a CAC Wirraway aka no doubt terribly, Fulmars were outclassed by the A6M's like a lot of early allied frighters (naval/land based)/ stop gap fighters.

Furious would have carried two 18 inch guns. The likelihood of her even registering a target would have been remote.

She was the only warship ever built to carry an 18 inch guns (although the Japanese battleships Yamato and Musashi got close, carrying marginally bigger 18.11 inch guns)

I do tend to agree with you. I feel it could be a hot topic, Hermes was in the water first, but Hosho was out to sea first!

but your opinion is wrong :P just joking of course but it works fine as this way Hermes gets the notoriety of bing the first laid down and Hosho can say its first operational this way everyone gets some kind of prize lol

What's your opinion Mike? Hermes or Hosho?

@@mikepette4422 yeah, that's a good way to remember these ships.

No, I'm not Tony Robinson 😀

Argus was never intended to be a carrier and was a converted ocean liner, having been requisitioned by the admiralty well into her construction. All carriers at this point were conversions. The premise of this video was that Hermes was the first carrier to be designed and built always as a carrier.

She was slower than Repulse and Prince of Wales, so would have been a liability.

She was slower than both, and in addition her air group at the time consisted of twelve Fairey Swordfish.

This is an excerpt from my research notes. The RFC originally came under the responsibility of Brigadier-General Henderson, the Director of Military Training, and had separate branches for the Army and the Navy. Major Sykes commanded the Military Wing[3] and Commander C R Samson commanded the Naval Wing.[4] The Royal Navy however, with different priorities to that of the Army and wishing to retain greater control over its aircraft, formally separated its branch and renamed it the Royal Naval Air Service on 1 July 1914, although a combined central flying school was retained. You are correct that the RNAS were never in the RFC but wrong to say that the Naval Wing was separate to the Army wing. Thanks for your comments.

@@TheNorthernHistorian while you are correct that they came under the directorship of military training you fail to understand the nature of the organisation and it's colorful history first point it and a common mistake it was not part of the army and was a joint service board part of the aerial subcommittee of the committee of imperial defence and was comprised with members of both forces as well as select politicians set up by Asquith in 1908 that just happened to have an army head at the time a precursor to the modern chief of the defence staff with even more infighting, this is important as it these committee meetings that after almost 4 years of discussion created the Royal warrant that set up the RFC in 1912. The Royal warrant of 1912 founding the RFC and replacing the pre-existing system where the Royal Engineers had Thier own air corp and the Navy had been gifted some planes by the Royal Aero Club and various other groups had a hodgepodge of aviation capabilities specifically stated the the Naval wing was a separate organisation from the Military wing and although part of the aerial subcommittee was not part of the RFC.This is often missed when looking into it and led to the a common misconception still found on Wikipedia and in many books etc is that it was part of the RFC, it simply wasn't and was funded completely by the Admiralty and reported to the Sea Lords this was part of a compromise arrangement set up after significant debate in the Arial subcommittee. Although the Navy did withdraw from the Aerial subcommittee and significantly restructure it's air asset's and become much more independent when Churchill became the political head of the Royal Navy as he believed the organisation did not reflect the needs of the senior service and he was very keen on expanding his personal powerbase at the expense of some of his cabinet colleagues as seen by the establishment of the Royal Naval Armoured Car Service with the joint flying school being kept open as a wartime expedient. You may want to check out the work of Dr Alexander Clarke on RU-vid his PHD paper was on naval aviation. The foundation of joint training facilities was part of the drive towards improved coordination as a result of the lessons of the Second Boar war and operations in Sudan and Egypt but led to many weird compromises. Even if you were correct that between 1912 and 1914 what was renamed RNAS was part of the RFC it would be highly disengenuous to credit that organisation for ship borne aviation that did not start until later after the withdrawal and restructuring with the first sea plane tenders of the RN not being requisitioned until after the split let alone converted and pressed into service and the idea of flat deck carriers not coming until later still.

@@jonsouth1545 You clearly know your facts but you need to work on the tone of your presentation as you come across as someone who just likes to point out mistakes and it turns folks off from learning from your knowledge base. It’s negative sounding. NH has done a really good job and just throwing bottles from the back and trying to be ‘on the right’ isn’t helping anyone. NH is a big lad and I’m sure he can handle criticism and I’m sure you don’t mean to come over like that which is why I thought I’d mention it.

The Royal Navy was flying Hurricanes off carriers from 1941 and Spitfires from 1942. Take a look at the Supermarine Seafire and the Hawker Sea Hurricane.

It may not have been an officially 'declared' war but against the definition of war, noun or verb, it most definitely was a war. One thing it most definitely was not was an exercise. Appreciate your comment and viewpoint.

@@TheNorthernHistorian As a Falklands veteran, ( HMS Glamorgan ) I can confirm it was a shooting war.