No video :(

Invasion of Norway & Denmark - Operation Weserübung

Подписаться 771 тыс.

Просмотров 245 тыс.

50% 1

Operation Weserübung was the German Invasion of Norway and Denmark in April 1940. It involved troops from the Army, Kriegsmarine and Luftwaffe. It involved the ships Scharnhorst, Gneisenau, Blücher, Lützow, Admiral Hipper on the German side and HMS Glowworm, Warspite and Glorious on the British. Although it was an operational success, strategically it wasn't.
Military History Visualized provides a series of short narrative and visual presentations like documentaries based on academic literature or sometimes primary sources. Videos are intended as introduction to military history, but also contain a lot of details for history buffs. Since the aim is to keep the episodes short and comprehensive some details are often cut.
» HOW YOU CAN SUPPORT MILITARY HISTORY VISUALIZED «
(A) You can support my channel on Patreon: / mhv
(B) You can also buy "Spoils of War" (merchandise) in the online shop: www.redbubble....
» SOCIAL MEDIA LINKS «
facebook: / milhistoryvisualized
twitter: / milhivisualized
tumblr: / militaryhistoryvisualized
» SOURCES «
Germany and the Second World War. Volume II.
Das Deutsche Reich und der Zweite Weltkrieg. Band 2.
Potter, E.B.; Nimitz, Ch. W.: Sea Power - Naval History
Potter, E.B.; Nimitz, Ch. W.; Rohwer, Jürgen: Seemacht - Von der Antike bis zur Gegenwart.
Dildy, Douglas C.: Denmark and Norway 1940.
Amundsen, Steinar: STRATEGIC DECISIONS AND IMPLICATIONS OF THE GERMAN ASSAULT ON NORWAY IN 1940
Lindemann, Timothy F.: JOINT OPERATIONS CASE STUDY WESERÜBUNG NORD: GERMANY’S INVASION OF NORWAY, 1940
Blair, Clay: Hitler’s U-Boat War - The Hunters 1939-1942
en.wikipedia.o...
uboat.net/fates...
Cambridge History of the Second World War. Volume I.
Faulkner, Marcus: The Kriegsmarine and the Aircraft Carrier: The Design and Operational Purpose of the Graf Zeppelin, 1933-1940. In: War in History, Vol. 19, No. 4, 11.2012, p. 492-516
» TOOL CHAIN «
PowerPoint 2016, Word, Excel, Tile Mill, QGIS, Processing 3, Adobe Illustrator, Adobe Premiere, Adobe Audition, Adobe Photoshop, Adobe After Effects, Adobe Animate.
» DATA CHAIN «
Made with Natural Earth. Free vector and raster map data @ naturalearthdata.com.
Made with GeoHack Data. tools.wmflabs.... - License: creativecommon...
» CREDITS & SPECIAL THX «
Song: Ethan Meixsell - Demilitarized Zone

Опубликовано:

6 фев 2017

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист

Посмотреть позже

Комментарии : 548

@lomax343 7 лет назад

One strategic effect of the German invasion of Denmark which you don't mention was that it turned Denmark into an Allied power. This allowed Britain (and, later, the US) to legitimately site air and naval bases in Iceland and Greenland (Danish protectorates), which was a great advantage during the Battle of the Atlantic.

@MilitaryHistoryVisualized 7 лет назад

good point, forgot about Iceland in this case.

@lomax343 7 лет назад

OK, a "Cloak of legitimacy." Either way, it couldn't have happened without the German invasion of Denmark proper in 1940.

@norwayitalo 7 лет назад

Military History Visualized they took iceland for strategisk reson protect the convois to USSR

@norwayitalo 7 лет назад

Charles McCarron and they only lasted 4 hours .. Norway 3 mnds!? thats 2.5 mnds longer then france we are only then 4 million

@norwayitalo 7 лет назад

Yes part true Churchill had plan take controll of iron malm so only that point in sweden

@jeffreymcfadden9403 7 лет назад

during the narvik occupation, a young german soldier became romantically involver with a young norweigan woman. he left for germany, and the woman was told he died on his way back. later, she found that she was pregnant. the woman had a daughter named Anni-Frid. the woman and daughter moved to sweden after the war, where the woman died and the young girl was raised by her grandmother. Anni-Frid became Frida,of ABBA. In 1976 a young german fan of ABBA read a story of Fridas life and the father of Frida was mentioned, he had the same name of her LIVING uncle. So, in 1976, Frida met her father for the first time.

@edlaprade 7 лет назад

Jeff - Almost right. Anni-Frid's mother died in Norway. She was taken to Sweden by her grandmother.

@johndesohn7973 7 лет назад

The Stoned Videogame Nerd I guess Norwegians more lighter than Germans.

@JDahl-sj5lk 5 лет назад

jeffrey mcfadden I didn’t know she was a “tyskerunge”, learn something new every day. (The term is derogatory, even though it just literal translates to GermanKid/young) So i understand why she moved to Sweden, we weren’t especially kind to them after the war; which is a shame. Shaving the heads of women that had been romantically involved with Germans; while the people that got rich often got away with it.

@andraslibal 5 лет назад

Unlike in many other countries, in Norway, German soldiers were encouraged intermixing with Norwegian women as they considered them racially pure. Here is a paragraph from Wikipedia: During the five-year occupation, several thousand Norwegian women had children fathered by German soldiers in the Lebensborn program. The mothers were ostracised and humiliated after the war both by Norwegian officialdom and the civilian population, and were called names such as tyskertøser (literally "whores/sluts of [the] Germans"). Many of these women were detained at internment camps such as the one on Hovedøya, and some were even deported to Germany. The children of these unions received names like tyskerunger (children of Germans) or worse yet naziyngel (Nazi spawn). The debate on the past treatment of these krigsbarn (war children) started with a television series in 1981, but only recently have the offspring of these unions begun to identify themselves. Fritz Moen, the only known victim of dual miscarriage of justice in Europe, was the child of a Norwegian woman and a German soldier, as was ABBA member Anni-Frid Lyngstad.

@JDahl-sj5lk 5 лет назад

Andras Libal I knew there were quite a few yes. We treated them horribly, even heard rumors of Tyskerrunger that were taken from their mothers and placed in institutions for no good reason.

@MakeMeThinkAgain 7 лет назад

My favorite result of Operation Weserübung was the UK's deciding they needed a mountain division for situations like that. So they spend most of the war training the 52nd Division to fight in mountains and then deployed it on the flooded polders of Belgium. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/52nd_(Lowland)_Infantry_Division#Second_World_War

@MilitaryHistoryVisualized 7 лет назад

lol mountain lions degraded to swamp rat duty, I guess they got a bit angry :D

@MakeMeThinkAgain 7 лет назад

Did you read the Wiki section? After all the mountain training they were trained to support airborne operations and then they didn't do that either. Military planning at its best. And now I'm remembering there was a Panzer Division on garrison duty in Norway for most of the war. When the Eastern Front was collapsing, they were sent to Poland to meet their new Panthers and fight the Soviets, only the Soviets got there first.

@looinrims 4 года назад

MakeMeThinkAgain is there a primary source as to why the Norwegian occupation force had a damn Panzer division assigned to it? Those resistance fighters man hardly able to patrol without getting HE’d by a Matilda II

@MakeMeThinkAgain 4 года назад

@@looinrims I'm only speculating here but you can cover more ground with a panzer division than with several infantry divisions. Also, the Allies went to some trouble to make the Germans think they might attack in Norway or in Greece so that German forces were stretched as thin as possible everywhere. It was the German equivalent of the armored units in Burma still equipped with M3 medium tanks in 1944.

@Liam8015 3 года назад

@@looinrims There was plans to invade Sweden, and the Germans had some concerns about the Swedish potentially declaring for the Allies, or deciding they wanted to rule Norway again. Also the USSR was, like, right next door to Norway, so maintaining a more significant occupation force might've made sense for the purpose of responding to the USSR launching a counter attack through Norway. Also also, there would be the potential for a raid by either the Western Allies or the USSR against Narvik, and destruction of the port there would cause quite a lot of damage to the Germans ability to manufacture... pretty much anything. Then again, this being the Nazi's we're talking about, it could well just be that the commander of the occupation was real buddy-buddy with Hitler and so when he asked real nice like for his very own "My First Panzer Division Playset", Hitler just couldn't say no to his puppy dog eyes.

@gavinweber9091 7 лет назад

A fact about the gloworm is that the German commander of the hipper wrote a letter to the British after the battle saying that the commander of the gloworm should get the Victorian cross for his bravery which was the final rat Victorian cross given out in ww2

@trauko1388 5 лет назад

Another fact is that the sole bridge survivor Lt. Ramsay doesnt record any order to ram and declared the rudder and wheel to beunmanned and damaged...

@cybertronian2005 2 года назад

never heard that expression, 'rat VC'

@MrJohanBD 7 лет назад

Note the HMS Glorious is the only carrier ever sunk by Battleships witch is kinda cool fact

@MilitaryHistoryVisualized 7 лет назад

how glörious :D

@MrJohanBD 7 лет назад

Military History Visualized ^^

@MrJohanBD 7 лет назад

***** No she didn't. Some say Yamato hit the escorts carrier Gambier Bay but many also protest that ever happening. What we do know however is that Gambier Bay got into range of the Japanese cruisers and the fatal blow was an 8 inch cruiser shell that fucked up the forward engines caused the carrier to slow to a crawl witch made her an easy target and caused flooding that would finally sink her. So yes the Glourius is still the only carrier ever sunk in action by battleships alone

@uegogeta 4 года назад

Also that the shot from Scharnhorst is the longest hit on moving vessel (along with Warspite's hit on Giulio Cesare)

@coling3957 2 года назад

Glorious was evacuating RAF Hurricanes - who'd landed on carrier without carrier training - and was not operating her own patrol aircraft. if they been able to they'd have spotted the German force and been able to avoid it. Glorious was an old carrier and couldn't outrun the 2 battle-cruisers .. the heroic destroyers caused considerable damage and sent their foe limping home , very low in the water at the bow.

@williamlydon2554 7 лет назад

I'd like to see a video on Operation Dragoon (D-Day's forgotten brother landing in the south of France)

@dzejrid 7 лет назад

I just googled that. I had completly no idea such operation had taken place, it was never mentioned in any of my historical references. Thanks for the tip!

@williamlydon2554 7 лет назад

dzejrid I saw a film on it a few years ago (Saints and Soldiers: Airborne Creed) and was the same as you, supprised to find id never heard of it.

@lx_phx 7 лет назад

william lydon whats the name of the film

@jonathancarshow9573 7 лет назад

Rain (It's in between)

@martinlaird4738 7 лет назад

It was a terrific demonstration of the powerhouse the free French army. I think Dragoon was their debut as the 1st French Army.

@GenghisVern 7 лет назад

"It seems like the approach of not offending crazy people didn't work back in 1940.. either"... lol

@mohamedaboelenein7727 4 года назад

It had nothing to do with offending though ... It's all about strategy ...

@dannya1854 4 года назад

@@dadoogie He was talking about Denmark, get your borderline racist opinions out of history.

@dadoogie 4 года назад

@@dannya1854 "Borderline" so not racist then?

@frother 2 года назад

I disliked the video because of that single absolutely garbage take. Appeasing literal Nazis is not the same thing as asking you to be considerate of other people.

@logiconabstractions6596 2 года назад

Yeah I found that quote pretty funny too;

@photo7779311 7 лет назад

"The approach of not offending crazy people didn't work in 1940, either..." LOL, great quote, and adding a bit of humor to history! Keep it up, love your work!

@irishrapture67 7 лет назад

Criminally underrated RU-vid channel I hope it grows and achieves the respect it deserves :)

@Vikinger119 7 лет назад

French Troops represented as baguettes...

@christofferjeffers8460 6 лет назад

funny as hell!!

@kaiserwilhelmii1827 5 лет назад

Talk about historically accurate

@abhaymishra30 7 лет назад

another great video by MHV. keep up the good work

@tommyscaletta 7 лет назад

Erwin Rommel You watched in 2x speed?!

@abhaymishra30 7 лет назад

Eating Flashbang I knew that was coming. ;)

@tommyscaletta 7 лет назад

Wasn't it obvious?

@humboldt777 7 лет назад

Although he has a very heavy German accent! :-D

@Baltahfeek 7 лет назад

Straight forward, logical and indisputable historical recount with actual evidence...thanks Military History Visualized!

@quentinsanchez8088 2 года назад

I'm so happy I had the opportunity to travel to Norway in December of 2020 to March of 2021. I visited many famous landmarks and museums, such as the industrial museum in Vemork, Norway. Just a few minutes away from Rjukan, it was a very surreal feeling looking at the pictures of the norwegian resistance fighters. Along with their personal stories of their daily jobs and what their responsibilities were within the norwegian resistance. Especially learning about the Sabotage mission norwegian resistance carried out on the heavy water factory in February of 1943 destroying vital equipment the Germans were using to create the heavy water compound necessary for an atomic device. All sacrifices from the British and norwegians shall never be forgotten and will continue to live on through Norway's freedom they have to this day, thanks to their selfless sacrifice.

@sondrecalmeyer8659 7 лет назад

You missed out on the battles in Bagn, Norway. This is the first time the Germans met real resistance during WW2. Two German battalions were held back for several days, and the battles there were actually very chaotic. Both sides tried to flank, at the same time. This led to 27 civilians being caught in the crossfire at a farm way up in the mountainside. They were locked in a room of 8 square meter, laying on top of each other to try to evade gunfire from three machine guns firing at the old house. A kid in the room was crying, his mother tried to give him his pacifier, and it was shot in two, just as she put it in his mouth... A lot of interesting war history happened there, at Bagn, at Bagnsbergatn and in Gråbeinhølet.

@BigboiiTone 3 года назад

I know it was probably very unrealistic but I loved the Trondheim sub-pen mission in MOH:AA. Very cool to see a correct video on this topic.

@testhamster123 7 лет назад

IMO this is one of your best videos. Please make more like this.

@SuprAtheAceofSpades 7 лет назад

Great video! I was already familiar with the operation but the way you analized the events from operational vs strategic standpoints won me over. Very well put together. Looks like you have a new subscriber. :)

@hoegild1 7 лет назад

Excellent work! You just keep on producing high quality videos on complicated and often misunderstood subjects!

@justinpyke1756 7 лет назад

Great video mein dude!

@MilitaryHistoryVisualized 7 лет назад

:D you will love the next one, it even mentions you in name again :)

@Arcexey 7 лет назад

If my name was Hitler I would be mentioned in every of your videos!! =) my fucking parents didn't think ahead

@dzejrid 7 лет назад

Adolf was also quite popular name in Poland before the war. Afterwards... not so much.

@Henskelion 7 лет назад

Thanks for making this video, this answers the question I've always had as to why Germany was so hesitant/unable to use its surface navy throughout the course of the war.

@rorythecomrade4461 7 лет назад

Thanks for this video, I am currently writing a book that has to do with ww2 in Scandinavia and your videos are helping with my book effort. Keep up the good work on these videos!

@rorythecomrade4461 7 лет назад

the book is a fictional scenario by the way but it uses many historical events and tactics.

@graemesydney38 7 лет назад

A good final summary. Norway is probably the classic example of 'win the battle and lose the war'. The resources lost took operation Sealion from marginal to a 'no go'. Also an example of the confused, if not non-existent, Hitler/Germany strategic thinking or planning. Norway was a long war strategy, GB was a short war strategy. Trying to do both was strategic confusion and fatal.

@ScawerGaming 7 лет назад

Interesting facts: First: The Gneisenau turrets were disassembled in Norway and built in what you germans called "Festung Fjell", still preserved today. Second: The Battleship Tirpitz (Bismarcks sistership) became a "fleet in being", and was stationed in Norway indefinitely until it was sunk in 1944 by the RAF. Third: The Blücher was first shot by Oscarsborgs 28cm cannons (ironically made by Krupp) from a range of 1,5-2 kilometers. The two first shots (and the only two shots from the 28's) hit around the bridge and made a huge inferno. The next shot was a direct hit by the 15cm armstrong cannons on the rudder connection between the rudders and the Bridge. By this point, Blücher was doomed. Torpedoes or not. BUT torpedoes came anyways and both hit and made the final killing blow to the ship. The invasion fleet, seeing the torpedoes hitting Blücher, assumed it was mines and turned around. The fort was still able to heavly damage the Cruiser "Lützov". The capture of Oslo was delayed, the Royal family escapes, Luftwaffe bombs the fort for a whole day (even while there was 550 german survivor prisoners there). And the fort finally surrendered after seeing it was effortless to continue fighting, and after the luftwaffe threatened to bomb Oslo if they did'nt give up (This might be a myth). I could go on, but the reason I wrote this is just to illustrate that it was'nt just two torpedoes from an unknown location. But several crippling hits from a large island fort. Today the Blücher still rests were it was sunk, and last time I was there, it was possible to scubadive to see the wreck but I think they changed that recently. Thanks!

@hansvonmannschaft9062 7 лет назад

Forgot to say that the torpedoes were also, ironically, German, too, and 40 y/o, shot from a base built at the beginning of the century by... also the Germans! haha and the Norges didn't really know whether the torps were going to work or not... which makes us wonder how proud of German engineering was the Führer that day...

@georgenygaard9636 7 лет назад

Scawer

@hedgehog3180 7 лет назад

Scawer Considering Germany most definitely threatened to bomb Copenhagen to rubble I doubt it's a strech to imagine they would also bomb Oslo.

@DebatingWombat 7 лет назад

Nope, the torpedoes weren't German but actually aging Austro-Hungarian Whitehead torpedoes, invented by an Englishman and produced in what is now the Croatian city of Rijeka in 1900 when it was one of the Austria-Hungarian Navy's most important ports, mainly inhabited by Italians and known as Fiume. Thus, the sinking of the Blücher in the Drøbak Sound is almost a microcosm of links to European history from the late 19th century to today.

@kjellg6532 Год назад

Gneisenau A turret was splitt in three and reused at Hoeck van Holland. B-turret complete was installed at Fjell, West of Bergen. The complete C-turret was reinstalled as costal battery at Austraat, West of Trondhjem

@kalamaroni 7 лет назад

I really love this map-based visualization. Just a tiny note which I'm sure you already noticed: the text sometimes does not fade in time before the map starts moving, which creates a bit of a weird effect.

@Fluffy1877 7 лет назад

French troops represented by baguettes. Love it. Great lesson as always, thanks for your work!

@JonathanB00K3R 7 лет назад

Great video! really deepened my understanding of the situation in Norway :]

@LEEboneisDaMan 7 лет назад

Wait wait wait. Great video but you kind of skimmed over something there. Two ships meet at the beginning of the battle. They're in the freezing Northern Waters and they BOTH come to the conclusion of "Yeah ramming that ship seems like a good idea" I mean what?! I'm sure it made sense to them, but out of context it just seems sort of strange that that's the course of action they would chose to take

@eternaltwilight2574 7 лет назад

LEEboneisDaMan It has logic because what's funnier than ramming another ship?

@aquila4460 7 лет назад

If i remember correctly they tried to fight normally first, and after the glowworm had taken several hits and was burning their captain decided that fuck it, he would take the germans with his. And the Germans seeing that the glowworm was closing in fast and that they would probably not be able to sink them in time tried to counterram to minimize damage on their ship.

@martinseguicotano7346 7 лет назад

From Wikipedia: While steaming off the Norwegian coast, Admiral Hipper was ordered to divert course to locate the destroyer Bernd von Arnim, which had fallen behind Group 1. In the mist, the destroyer encountered the British destroyer HMS Glowworm; the two destroyers engaged each other until Bernd von Arnim's commander requested assistance from Admiral Hipper.[15] Upon arriving on the scene, Admiral Hipper was initially misidentified by Glowworm to be a friendly vessel, which allowed the German ship to close the distance and fire first. Admiral Hipper rained fire on Glowworm, scoring several hits. Glowworm attempted to flee, but when it became apparent she could not break away from the pursuing cruiser, she turned toward Admiral Hipper and fired a spread of torpedoes, all of which missed. The British destroyer scored one hit on Admiral Hipper's starboard bow before a rudder malfunction set the ship on a collision course with the German cruiser. The collision with Glowworm tore off a 40-meter (130 ft) section of Admiral Hipper's armored belt on the starboard side, as well as the ship's starboard torpedo launcher.[17] Minor flooding caused a four degree list to starboard, though the ship was able to continue with the mission.[15] Glowworm's boilers exploded shortly after the collision, causing her to sink quickly. Forty survivors were picked up by the German ship.

@trauko1388 7 лет назад

Please... "Lieutenant Ramsay, the senior surviving officer, told his rescuers that neither the helm nor the emergency rudder were manned when the ships collided so the destroyer's turn towards Hipper was probably accidental." We are a bit old for fairy tales and propaganda... whats next? Ghost archers at Mons? Ha!

@trauko1388 7 лет назад

So are stories by one guy claiming to have been there, in clear contradiction of what the officer that was there said... www.rna-10-area.co.uk/files/vanguard/Vanguard_Apr_09.pdf Only Ramsay survived from the birdge personnel so the people claiming a ram order simply made up a cute story during their boring imprisonment. And the source is at the end of the paragraph, took me 5 seconds to google it aswe ll: books.google.com.ec/books?id=pNw7BAAAQBAJ&pg=PA421&lpg=PA421&dq=glowworm+captain+ram+ramsay+rudder+helm&source=bl&ots=q0QYM9jqQJ&sig=oskn_HGWpO5kRhNhTlj9EjkcHas&hl=es-419&sa=X&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=glowworm%20captain%20ram%20ramsay%20rudder%20helm&f=false Ghost archers, ramming captains, magical, carrots, paratrooper massacres at Crete, Stuka massacres at the BoB...

@christyler9007 7 лет назад

Thank you, very much. I am grateful for your enlightening, informative and wry videos. Please, keep up your excellent productions. May, I please request directing your well developed skills towards conflicts post WWII. Again, thank you, very much.

@raylast3873 7 лет назад

"BLÜCHER!" *pause* *horses neighing*

@maximinomorgado2150 7 лет назад

Im a student of history of La Plata Argentina, near the sinking place of Admiral Graff Spee. I love your videos, your accent and the music! Keep it up! I would love to see some North África campaign videos in your channel.

@torharaldols 7 лет назад

Great video!

@VisciousPhishes 7 лет назад

Great Video. That map-work was solid!

@chaostheory6954 7 лет назад

Funny how I got notified of this video when doing the "Operation Weserubung" mission in "Glory of generals"....

@MilitaryHistoryVisualized 7 лет назад

perfect timing is crucial in warfare

@dariusniederer856 7 лет назад

Military History Visualized If only the Americans had known that...

@josemiguelcaballerorestrep2101 6 лет назад

And here I thought barely anyone played it (I also play it).

@Malcalore 7 лет назад

Your norwegian pronunciations are near perfect, keep up the great work!

@ScawerGaming 7 лет назад

Wellll some of them. Would'nt say "perfect" :P

@Malcalore 7 лет назад

That's why i said near, nobody outside scandinavia has a chance at perfect pronunciations of our language.

@ScawerGaming 7 лет назад

That's also debatable. But you said near, and I did'nt see that. My bad

@svenstajduhargaming5999 6 лет назад

but his german pronunciations are hideous

@Mars_junior 7 лет назад

Always great to start my day with one of these.

@eternaltwilight2574 7 лет назад

Last time i was so early,Germany was preparing the invasion of Norway

@abhaymishra30 7 лет назад

Eternal Twilight lol

@StarFox514 7 лет назад

Good comment, have a like lad

@StarFox514 7 лет назад

Erwin was the shit, man

@elliotwagstaff8685 7 лет назад

StarFox514 Unfortunately much of Rommel's fame is myth and propaganda.

@eternaltwilight2574 7 лет назад

StarFox514 Yeah,Kaminski Brigade's commander was the smartest guy of the Third Reich

@878SurvivorFM 7 лет назад

Would love to see you do one on Gallipoli and Beersheba

@mikhailiagacesa3406 7 лет назад

there were still over 200,000 troops in Norway in 1945; they could have been better used elsewhere.

@mikhailiagacesa3406 7 лет назад

Definitely of the same mentality. 'We'll link up with the troops in Kurland when we counter-attack!' But the troops in Norway were just sitting on there butts, relatively speaking.

@SNIperofDARKness02 7 лет назад

I think some of the soldiers stationed there preferred it.

@mikhailiagacesa3406 7 лет назад

I'm sure they did. ;-)

@TheHammerDedicated 7 лет назад

Thats the thing, resistans in norway were just waiting for their time to come. Only way to hold a country as stretched out and with as rugged a terrain as norway is with a massive force big enough to scare any thought of resisting. In retrospect it was quite a waste indeed.

@UGLEIV 7 лет назад

Where did you get the number 200 000 from? I have read anything from 350 000-500 000, with most accounts puttingthe number at around 380 000, 11 division,5 brigades and support+Kriegsmarine and Luftwaffe. In total almost twice your estimate. While many of these troops were decidedly rear echelon troops, there were a significant portion of combat troops as well, not only mountain divisions but also a panzer division, its equipment was the basis for both the post war Norwegian as well as finnish armies armoured components.

@HerrmannThompson 7 лет назад

If you ever decide to do on location filming in Norway, I'd like to suggest you check out Gneisenau's C turret installed as a coastal battery at Trondheim.

@JasperKlijndijk 7 лет назад

keep up the good work! enjoying ur videos a lot :)

@tommy-er6hh 7 лет назад

Kudos on another clear video lesson!

@aryan4264 7 лет назад

Loving the new videos!Keep it up!

@TaoQiBao 6 лет назад

The Element of Surprise. Best ever at 3:30 :D

@anderskorsback4104 5 лет назад

As far as I know, the purpose of Denmark not mobilizing was to make sure that if they got invaded, it'd be over quickly and with as little harm done to them as possible. I doubt Denmark would anyway have lasted more than a few days even fully mobilized. The way it played out, Denmark had successfully opted out of having to do any fighting, while not paying any diplomatic price for it due to feigning having been taken by surprise.

@Litany_of_Fury 7 лет назад

We asked for more Naval stuff and we got it!

@HojozVideos 7 лет назад

I like how you said mining while talking about the exploding type of mines, and mines when talking about the resource gaining ones

@StarFox514 7 лет назад

Another great video, keep it up

@podprogowikandydaci4858 7 лет назад

those baguettes icons are amazing :D

@binaway 7 лет назад

After the evacuation from Skaanland the convoy carrying (troops of 151 Battery 51st City of London AA) was spotted by a long range patrol aircraft in the North Sea. The sailors told the soldiers they would soon be attacked by the Luftwaffe. Fortunately a thick fog rolled across a calm North Sea and completely hid the Convoy. Those on the ships could hear engines from above but were unable to see anything and conclude the aircrew would likewise not be able to see them. The aircraft dropped their bombs into the fog where they must have assumed the ships would be. Men in the Convey could hear the bombs exploding around them, some not to far away but fortunately none were hit. If not for the weather allied losses would have been much heavier.

@preshlock 7 лет назад

Very good video. I understand you were providing an overview of Weserubung. But I would suggest adding comments about Sweden during the battle of Narvik. The Germans were able to pressure Sweden into permitting the use of Swedish rail lines and harbors. This was instrumental in the Germans being able to supply the defensive position around Narvik. Prior to Barbarossa the battle of Narvik was the longest sustained action of the German army.

@PettX2k 7 лет назад

dont forget the use of human shields, during the opnening weeks of the battle german soldiers where sorrounded by Norwegian soldiers in a small fjord close to narvik. Here they used captured Norwegian soldiers from the Telemark Bataljon and civiliance as human shields trying to brake out.

@DerDitchwater 7 лет назад

As a norwegian, that fact is a source of animosity between us to this day. Even now there are politcal voices calling for reperations for this betrayal.

@Leaffordes 6 лет назад

Sweden didn't permit Germany to send fighting troops towards Narvik. Every request by Germany was denied. Sweden however agreed upon transporting medical supplies and personal among other things (could be ammo also, I'm not completely sure) which the Germans requested. Thing was that the Germans sent troops in that train, dressed as medical personal etc which made the Swedes kinda upset. The Swedish-German relation got worse and worse as Sweden denied German requests over and over again, and shot down a few German planes in Swedish airspace and hacked the German communication line over Sweden to Norway, twice. People think that Sweden did whatever Germany demanded from them but it's not true, therefore invasion plans of Sweden were created but never executed

@AnonyMous-ql9nj 4 года назад

@@Leaffordes True, however the transports etc was only a long time after Norway had surrendered. The troop transports everyone talks about aswell were only when it came to Finland as "totally unbiased Sweden" let the germans pass to support finland in the winter war.

@AnonyMous-ql9nj 4 года назад

Thats not true, i understand you hear these rumours alot so its kinda understandable that you think it happened but history says it didnt. So simply, No.

@baldviking1970 7 лет назад

Landing with an initial force of some 10,000 men, making a surprise naval attack on so many different cities despite the threat from a superior, naval enemy interfering, handeling the alien nature and lack of infrastructure of Norway, I would call this a very sucessful operation. And the germans did not even have an unified command as that was not invented yet in those times: General von Falkenhorst, Admiral Boehm and Leutnant General Geisler were coordinating on a operational and sometimes ad hoc level. It was bold like a grand bluff in a poker game and so typical for many german victories in 1939 and 40.

@HaakonTheViking 5 лет назад

Interesting take on the invasjon of Norway and Denmark, but I'd love to see more about the actual land-war in Norway. Why did this take so long considering the vast german advantage?

@leftcoaster67 7 лет назад

The effect of not trying to offend crazy people didn't seem to work in 1940. LOL.

@brandonalsop1281 7 лет назад

I know this episode is a bit old at this point but I think you are overlooking the importance of Norway and Denmark to the German war effort. The naval implications especially for the U-boat effort since the naval bases, where both closer to and more Northernly than any ones Germany had access to. Controlling Denmark and Norway also cut down on the available bombing baths for allied counter bombing campaigns. It also made it much harder for the allies to supply the USSR, but its hard to know if this was a planned effect at the time. Also, Don't forget the heavy water supply in Norway. Norway was the closest source that Germany could get heavy water from to continue their Nuclear research. Also capturing Norway shut off the strait for the rest of the war and made it safe for German merchant traffic to bring in the large quantities of steel from Sweden. It also kept the royal navy and red navy from combining, although once again hard to say if that was an intended effect at the time. Taking denmark was more about controlling the strait and removing a easy "neutral" staging area like Greece became for the entente in WWI. The biggest question of the war other than why did Hitlar invade the Soviet union when he did ( I think he would have eventually) is why did Germany invade the Netherlands? The Dutch supply line was vital the the German war effort in WWI and keeping it open would have allowed, at least for a while, rubber and rare metals to continue to come into Germany, not to mention oil. It would have been imo, much more difficult for the Allies to have used the Netherlands as a forward staging area than denmark. This isn't even talking about the potential ability to launch strategic bombing runs out of norway and take advatange of the "over the pole" route against scotland and northernengland. Or the potential for launching a northern invasion prong as part of sealion. Or for that matter a northern paratrooper invasion combined with a naval invasion. Norway just opened the door to too many opportunities in material, logisistics and strategy to Germany to ignore it and they couldn't take Norway with out taking Denmark.

@MyLateralThawts 7 лет назад

Norwegian neutrality had already been violated by the Allies (Altmark incident, February 16 1940). Along with the violation of Belgian and Dutch airspace by armed RAF bombers flying to Germany, the claim by the Germans that Denmark had to be seized as a preventative measure isn't as insane as presented. That is especially the case in light of Allied plans to to occupy parts, if not all of Sweden. Furthermore, one would be very hard pressed to find anyone in the world who thought Germany, in the summer of 1940, would manage to seize the iron ore producing region of France (not to mention the conquest of France) or that France upon losing their iron ore mines, would fail to at least damage it making it next to useless to the Germans.

@hedgehog3180 7 лет назад

Christian Unger I think we would have preferred it if Germany didn't invade.

@markkringle9144 2 года назад

I read a book which said the the Brits were attempting to invade Norway when they heard the German fleet was out in force. Their task force reversed out to sea to engage the German fleet which they didn't find (with notable exceptions) because German fleet headed in to invade Norway. This is why the Brits just happened to have an expeditionary force they could land to "defend Norway".

@stannisvonhapsburg6883 7 лет назад

If anyone is interested in this look up "The Battle of Drobak sound" on youtube, there is a cool scene from a Norwegian film of the Heavy Cruiser Blucher being sunk

@threeone6012 6 лет назад

Great upload!

@Powerofriend 7 лет назад

It's interesting how the naval losses and casualties were similar on both sides, yet the Germans were still able to achieve their planned objectives.

@Laudrengen 7 лет назад

The humour around 7:10 got you my like :)

@ironmaidenforever665 7 лет назад

I remember having read about the german ship "aviso grille" running into a danish boat full of pigs before the invasion, this damaged the hull so badly that it could not join the invasion.

@danielhall6354 7 лет назад

really good video - very interesting

@cervandante9021 6 лет назад

When you watch the operations Timeline Documentary and the names Scharnhorst and Gnisenau are forever in your memory.

@joacimandreasenberthelsen8967 5 лет назад

I think I'm a bit late but here goes. According to a book writhen with the assistance of the Norwegian defence forces titled "Norsk forsvarshistorie 1905-1940" which is translated to "Norwegian defence forces history 1905-1940" by Rolf Hobson and Tom Kristiansen claimes that a total of 8 submarines of the German navy were sunk in the Norwegian campaign, their names were: U-1, U-13, U-22, U-44, U-49, U-50, U-54 and U-64.

@esbendit 7 лет назад

It is worth mentioning that the germans also gained total control of the acces to the baltic and control of the danish agriculture.

@AndresRodriguez-pj3xj 5 лет назад

just got this in my class

@eedwardgrey2 3 года назад

10:05 Of course the German didn't expect to capture Lorraine that easily and were still thinking of WWI when they were cut of the Swedish ore by the British blockade.

@michellepeoplelikeyoumurde8373 2 года назад

Were not cut off from Swedish ore,check again

@QALibrary 7 лет назад

Not sure these two points are important but Norway had fish possessing linked to chemical factories that help feed and make explosive (a part of fish was an ingredient of making explosive) that why the royal marine commandos had a number of raided upon the plants to stop production. Also Norway had a number of ore mines and supply which would be important to the German war machine eg tungsten ~ a part of making armour piercing shells - where the allies could improve armour piercing penetrations shells with more ingredients etc the Germans always had issues of short supply.

@maciejniedzielski7496 7 лет назад

one of best vidéos in your chaîne

@Logotic 6 лет назад

I love the icon for Surprise Attack...

@monophthalmos9633 7 лет назад

I don't know whether this has already been mentioned, but conquering Norway made it easier for the Germans to attack supplies for the Russians via the northern route. One suggestion: could you maybe do a video about Polish forces after the Polish surrender? Nationalist Poles still seem to think they played an important role in the war in Europe and I don't know how it really was, a flaw that many people share, I guess.

@UGLEIV 7 лет назад

The British did pretty much everything, they provided the shipping, the artillery, the aircover and supplies, and about 1/4th of all troops involved. All allied troops in the narvik campaign lacked ski's except the Norwegians, this was because of some screwup when they offloaded the Troops in the UK to fight a great naval battle that never happened.

@Artur_M. 7 лет назад

Gerhard Thiel I liked your comment, even though it's phrasing rubs me the wrong way a little, because I would really love to see such video. I don't view myself as overly nationalistic, but I do think that Polish contribution in WWII is generally overlooked/underappreciated. As far as I know the most comprehensive books on this subject in English are No Greater Ally by Kenneth K. Koskodan and The Eagle Unbowed by Halik Kochanski. Also technically there was no "Polish surrender", as Poland never capitulated.

@ewokrothaar8434 7 лет назад

+Artur M. I think that it is stupid to not capitulate, when you have lost your whole country.

@Artur_M. 7 лет назад

Ewok Rothaar No, it is not. Especially as long as you have the means to continue fighting abroad alongside your allies and the war is going one.

@ewokrothaar8434 7 лет назад

+Artur M. The french capitulated and they still fought against the Germans (as far as I know under a general named Charles de gaule)

@rickj895 7 лет назад

good video make more in this way!

@craigfazekas3923 Год назад

For truly in depth reading on this subject ? Pick up Geirr Haarr's book, "The German Invasion of Norway, April 1940". This volume mainly concentrates on the naval aspects of the invasion, but also covers the political end as well as air & ground actions. He truly researched this as well as anyone could possibly do; and it's well written and very readable- very intriguing !! Well worth the purchase, especially where the Kriegsmarine is concerned. 🚬😎

@Duececoupe 6 лет назад

Love these videos....they're bloody brilliant! 👍👌👏 How about a video on Germany's plans to invade Sweden....if they had, when, where, how and which units... Keep up the excellent work!

@FTWNorwayFTW 2 года назад

Here before the movie "The Battle of Narvik" comes out

@and15re1 7 лет назад

Could you make later videos about what-if operations, like Sealion, Tannerburn or Downfall or about the "elephant" of the USN, the Alaska-class cruiser?

@arsenal-slr9552 7 лет назад

You're the best man

@sgtspiffywiffy5799 7 лет назад

have you ever considered doing a Binkov's Battlegrounds stile of videos on planed operations that never got past planing, like operation Sealion or Downfall?

@95spades 7 лет назад

Just some trivia, not entirely on topic, but concerning norway and the german occupation; my grandfather was a "fjälljägare" (kind of winter/mountain special forces-ish) in the swedish military during the war and took part in operations to smuggle american model weapons, ie thompsons, M1s and whatnot, secretly bulit by husqvarna (swedish metal industry) to the norweigian resistance. Which is a bit funny considering Swedens official stance as a neutral nation (that was alsokind of cozy with the jerries.)

@ph5832 7 лет назад

The Allies used the fear of invading Norway and Sweden to great effect as a deception to tie down key resources (ie Divisions). This diverted several divisions away from the European mainland. Perhaps a video on Military Deceptions of WWII? May I recommend an book called 'The Deceivers"

@fremewer6487 5 лет назад

Could u please write the names of the ships i sometimes dont understand german names.

@1987MartinT 6 лет назад

The Danish military fought the Wehrmacht for a total of 4 hours, even though the Danish government had surrendered long before. The reason for this was that the Danish communication network was very primitive, and the German invasion managed to cause it to break down completely, so they Danish government was unable to inform the majority of their military about the surrender.

@wookeye 7 лет назад

my grandfather was a gebirgsjäger stationed in narvik.

@oddballsok 7 лет назад

9:50 nonsense..both an operational and a strategic success: 1) Had germany NOT invested in this invasion; then britain WOULD have invaded Norway (at least Narvik; the Ore line...the french mines were not at all certain!) and Southern Norway to guarantee its AIRFIELDS. And thus strangle any german KM attempt to get out of North Germany. A free reigning RAF bombercommand from Oslo would harass the germans much sooner (Hamburg!). Churchill especially was much more focussed and paranoid about the German navy capabilities than e.g. France or USA. Bombarding Hamburg/Kiel and nearby Berlin was much more appealing than the Ruhr in 1940 for Churchill. 2) All the convoys to Murmansk were now also in reach of german air attacks (convoys had to take a larger detour= cost = time). Without Norway, the support for Stalin would be more and more frequent. The perhaps reduction of Norse shipping in the convoys is less of an advantage than the impossibility of not striking at the british convoys at all. 3) Norse cargo vessels would be able to bring goods to the UK even if Norway were to be neutral (and make a huge profit of it!)...so that argument ("all the norse cargo vessels ran for the allies") is indifferent. They might only not run to deliver military goods to/from Uk and to/fro USSR. 4) The Norse cargo fleet was large , but also not that extreme large: any convoy between Murmansk and Britain saw only a couple of Norse ships (4 out of 30). 5) All the occupying men and artillery guns at the Norwegian coast (yes..it is large) would, if not occupied by Hitler, be needed to defend North Germany (and North Holland) to avoid a direct allied invasion there. The amount of concrete bunkers put in Norway was not exactly a lot. The "atlantic wall" in Norway was " a joke"..but how risky is an invasion on rocky fjords anyway ? So that argument of "wasted investments" is silly. 6) You forgot to mention the Heavy Water for nuclear purposes.VERY strategic importance; both in getting it, and in preventing it to fall in british hands.

@cdmon3221 7 лет назад

On some of your points, you're being overly optimistic about the potential of a British position in Norway. As Military History Visualized notes, it is questionable whether the British could hold the position after the fall of France, when German efforts would be directed towards the UK. And I doubt Britain would have a substantial military presence in Norway for defence. Also, Finland, Sweden and the USSR would be hostile to a British occupation. After all, Britain had invaded their neutral neighbour. A 'less-frantic', Dunkirk-style evacuation of Norway would be the likely conclusion.

@brrebrresen1367 7 лет назад

and even if Norway was far more Allied than Axis what the Brithish had done 150 years before in Norway still was in people's mind so an invasion from Britain could have been bad decision from London. Oddball, while the Notraship fleet (or norse fleet if you want to call it that) might not been the largest it was still far over 1000 ships at peak and 1.2 million ton cargohold. almost 35% of all the oil for the Great Britain was transported by the Norwegian trade ships. so its maybe not the biggest, but way bigger than just "a large fleet" and think its from a country that more or less every single state in the US is bigger than in population. and also it was not a great success for the Germans because they missed 2 of the most important things under the invasion of Norway. they missed the Royal family, all of em. and they also missed the vault of the bank of Norway. so all Gold and the Royal family was shipped out of Norway to Allied side.

@oddballsok 7 лет назад

America de facto and britain in support occupied Iceland, for good allied strategic reasons...but still. Iceland objected. But no oppositions heard from Sweden about it.. So that is never a cause for concern. regarding fleet; I want to point out that it is no point of strategic influence; A neutral Norway would NEED income from transport and thus deliver goods to the highest bidder:In war, that would be UK, And as Germany would not attack neutral fleet (in this assumption) the Norse fleet would transport food and coal and even oil to the UK (say 60% fleet: 600 ships) , thereby alllowing UK ships to focus on transporting military goods. So the UK is good. With an attacked Norway under nazi occupation the 1000 ships would sail for the allies..civilian goods but also military..but now would come under attack of nazi uboats and airplanes. Given x years of Norway neutrality (600 ships sailing unhindered) or 2 years Norway and fleet under attack (1000 ships losing 20 ships a month and less frequent sailing under convoy) one can find the time switch point where transported tonnage is deteriorating (x = less than 2 years). So only in the earliest stage is there a cargo HOLD advantage for the allies..but what good is space, if you have NOTHING to fill it ? By the time your (UK) production is rolling, the combined cargo hold is dwindling. (Until better asdic, destroyers, aircover , etc..). The gold of the national banks..is a missed booty, but not a major strategic objective. Neither is the capture of royals. Capturing Norway is a form of "securing the flanks". Capturing it offered extra benefits, but losing it would also mean no disaster. What is the danger of an enemy (or partisan) land army control inland of Trondheim ? The most important strategic advantage is acquiring airfields. to control that part of the world and denying the enemy to use the same airfields. And hoping it adds to the isolation feeling of the british and accept peace talks.

@kayami07 7 лет назад

You're forgetting one thing, even if UK was able to get Norway's airfield, will they be able to hold it? Remember the Air Battle of Britain? Even if the British had the home field advantage, the Germans still held the numerical superiority over the skies. What more if they have to also defend Norwegian airfields? The thing is, they won't be able to. Norway is in close proximity of German airfields from its core territories allowing for more missions to be conducted by the Luftwaffe against the RAF in Norway compared to UK. Besides, the RAF will have to split its air fleet to accommodate both the defense of Norway and UK which will be a strenuous work as the Germans' already numerical superiority over UK will increase thus allowing for more German bombers to enter British airspace which is unacceptable as the British population is already suffering from low morale. Plus, UK will have to keep resupplying the RAF planes staying in Norway which will be hard to do as Germany has many U-Boats lurking around the seas of the British Isles.

@nordicnostalgia8106 7 лет назад

@Renz Mora Holding Norway is a great advantage if the British Isles are not facing near defeat, as what the case historically in 1940. Simply holding Norway with troops is a good advantage as the terrain makes it easily defendable. If Sweden allows German troops to pass through then a good amount of that advantage is lost, however. There is still one part that I wonder about and this video didn't cover it that well. Holding Narvik. Narvik had a pretty high strategic value and is also very defendable due to terrain. Holding the Narvik area alone wouldn't require too much troops from Britain and a offence would be costly. North-Norway were partly mobilized since January and with a stream of Norwegians rallying to Narvik from occupied territories would save Britain manpower. Sending men and supplies by ships is also less risky than South-Norway due to the distance. The Allied could hold the northern islands such as Svalbard as a step to Narvik or lands north of Narvik. Svalbard is also a source for coal. With a part of Norway not having fallen would also put pressure on Sweden as they would be seen as betrayers of their northern brothers.

@Scattman101 7 лет назад

There was also one more important reason why the Germans wanted control of Norway. Norway had a very large 'heavy water' storage facility that was vital to the Germans if they wanted to make Atomic bombs.

@kjellg6532 Год назад

Heavy water are probably not used in any atomic bomb, but important for nuclear research.

@homebrandrules 4 года назад

Execellent thankyou

@tiscotisa9731 7 лет назад

Finally. Thanks.

@williamgunderson7365 6 лет назад

Thank you for the video and the sources attached underneath. I think that Douglas Dildy's book is probably a must for an English-speaker investigating the details of the Norwegian campaign. I have to check out the Dildy book when I can.

@amsfountain8792 2 года назад

I think the invasion of Crete was a mini Sea Lion. Better to draw comparations from there than the Norway Campaign.

@dl4350 6 лет назад

the survivors of the German destroyers in Narvik formed a further 5 battalions to Deitl's 139th Gebirgs-Regiment, and I think I am right in saying that the 138th Gebirgs-Regiment was given a brief parachute training, and then flown to Narvik.

@erikbutterfield8341 6 лет назад

My grandfather was 11 living outside Oslo when the Germans invaded, he then served in occupied Germany after the war

@rajj8074 2 года назад

The things at 7:03 Is very wrong, Because the Prime Minister of Denmark, wouldn't let the Jutland division forces get to position, as he knew the invasion was gonna happened. And the war did last 2 hours, at least on sealand, but on Jutland, they fought for 6 whole hours. But they also had time to prepare, as the first forces that was engaged, was laid a couple of kilometers away from the german pact, and so the Danes did have time, And all Seargants & over, did know it would happen.

@steinelgaaen 5 лет назад

Lutzow was hit by coastal artillery not a torpedo

@prussiankingdom7840 7 лет назад

you should do a video on the magnot line (if you did it i haven't found it)

@eisscrat5667 7 лет назад

Will u also made a longer Video about the Battle of France, Operation Barbarossa etc. how they work and what was the most importent moves and units for Example the 7. Panzerdivision (Gespensterdivision)?

@MilitaryHistoryVisualized 7 лет назад

could be, right now it seems my operation videos are rather not well received, just about 10 % of my audience watched this one. This is extremely low. Although France and definitely Barbarossa are more popular. There will be definitely more Eastern Front videos.

@lucius1976 2 года назад

2:28 The pronounciation of Stavanger in Norwegian is more like the German one "Stahwanger"

@Flapjackbatter 7 лет назад

The torpedoes that sunk the Blûcher was 40 years old and had been fired over and over again through the years.

@kjellg6532 Год назад

And the torpedoes that sank ARA General Belgrano during the Falkland war was 55 yrs. German G7 torpedos, invented in about 1930, was in use in the Norwegian navy up til about 1995,

@larza333 7 лет назад

The Allied vicotry in Narvik, i belive it the first vicotry the allies had agains the Germans in WW2. :)

@johnlansing2902 7 лет назад

In regards to Norway the book BY Joseph P Farrell reich of the black sun opens a new line of thinking about why a lot of troops and material were in this country at the closing of the war when they were needed desperately elsewhere

@rhylsaldar 7 лет назад

By the scale, and before Overlord, this was considered has the most well and huge op. of all the war. the distance was that huge ships were at the maximum of their range. This was a masterpiece plan considering germans did not play at their advantages (naval, amphibous landing etc...) In UK field.