The Battle of Flamborough Head - Nice Ship, I'll Take It 

Edinburgh and Cleveland Which one is better at being light cruiser

Drachinifel what would have happened if the Argentine Navy had come out in force and were somehow in a position to fight the British Navy? Would they sink the British task force or would they be wiped out? Say this takes place before the Belgrano got sunk.

The Norwegians ordered the Bjørgvin Class costal defense battleships in 1912, however they were “purchased” by the Royal Navy in 1914. What effect would they have had if they were returned to Norway after the war and specifically if they had been sent instead of the Eidsvold class at the first battle of Narvik? Assuming the problem with the hms glatton was fixed.

Why was the konigsberg so horrendous at sea keeping?

What does the future of naval warfare look like and where is it likely to occur?

As do I.

Motion to change the naming convention in our history text books, say aye.

@@bificommander7472 Aye

@@bificommander7472 Aye

As far as New England goes, that makes perfect sense (Puritans vs Anglicans).

There are countless historical occasions in which downtrodden and outgunned revolutionaries resorted to weapons discarded as obsolete or surplus by the "powers" to fight off the yokes of oppression.

Yes but the yanks were not oppressed.

@@KristerAndersson-nc8zo Not true at all. The rich smugglers were being oppressed by the English. Their rebellion set a long precedent of rich criminals being in charge of the country, with the occasional Washington, Lincoln, or Roosevelt doing a rather decent job of running the ship to distract from the various embedded corruption in the upper echelons. Oddly enough, we yanks have a good and well-deserved reputation for being rather hard to corrupt... excepting any elected office. And any office appointed by those elected.

Was there a reason Jones didn't test fire the guns?

@@garzooma powder was difficult to produce in quantity, not only that but at least in the British Navy a budget was set for each Warship before it sailed, from this the Caption had to provision the stores including gunpowder & hire the crew, in short there wasn't a lot of money left over to buy extra powder & shot this meant that most gun crews never got to live fire their guns in "training" before actual battle.

Then runs him through with a sword 😂

My question is was the captain of the Kamchatka related to the captain of the Alliance?

It is 1797. The raiding fleet is off the Eastern coast of Scotland. The Alliance sends the signal "under attack from Japanese torpedo boats" ....

Captain of the Pallas: “What’s a torpedo?”

But had the Alliance gone anywhere near Madagascar?

Icarus what are the Japanese

There's something wrong with our bloody ships today, Chatfield...

bazinga

Good one sir

An often repeated death of ships of all class an many wars.The result of a bomb through the deck shell through the hull the magazine being the end of all.

Rather an unsettling pattern, wouldn't you agree?

A beloved and unofficial axium of the US military

"If everyone does their own thing, they can never predict us!" There is a shocking amount of truth to this in how our military works.

Yes, studying our official battle doctrine doesn't help if we ignore it ourselves!

Jeffrey Root Battle doctrine is not a step-by-step manual, it’s a basic guideline of what to do and when. If you follow doctrine religiously you won’t be able to seize an opportunity when it presents itself.

@@grandadmiralzaarin4962 And a longstanding tradition - some of the worst defeats, but many of the greatest victories in US history...

To be fair we all know the contributions of the French to our victory. And every ship involved in this battle either did nothing or actively tried to kill John Paul Jones. So all those other ships add nothing.

I actually hadn't heard of Bonhomme Richard until I tried to join the Navy. My naval history up until that point came from my dad telling me the adventures of various submarines.

I learned of John Paul's full history in elementary school.

My school never told me about John Paul Jones

Neither did mine either

When salvos were timed in minutes and distance was measured in 10's of yards and at most a couple hundred other than very long ranging ranging fire where you only hoped to hurt their rigging a little bit .... =-)

Yes,and the captains get the so called "glory" for sacrificing their crews...

@@david9783 Moron, war is not pretty

@@david9783 what's changed?

@@TheLiverTea not much.

Kurtis Boyer I think HMS Invincible takes the cake for having a wrong name

@@deeznoots6241 You certainly have a point. I can't disagree.

@@deeznoots6241 At least Invincible wasn't a Team-Killing Fucktard XD

"Oxymoron" would have been better.

Be named Alliance... be an enemy to everyone.

talk about scoring a clutch critical hit while loosing the bout!

Look up Edward Stack, US Marines during the battle, DD-406 named after him. He "likely" had a role in the grenades.

Also rumoured to be the inspiration for the end of a fairly famous space opera....

🐍No step on snek🐍

Indeed.

dont

I usually call it "The American Mutiny", but perhaps I'm just being grumpy?

I love mortifying my american friends by referring to it as 'that minor colonial insurrection'.

I refer to them as 'you damned traitors' which they find slightly bewildering lol

There's actually two countries between Canada and Mexico - Retardistan in the north and Inbredistan in the south - technically the unofficial border runs along the Mindless-Dickwit line. "Whut we got here, is uh failure to realise she's your sister..." Seriously they actually asked Inbredistanis what they thought about the species Homo Sapiens going extinct and the general consensus was pretty much "they had a good run..." And these people have M134 miniguns... What could *possibly* go wrong?

​@@rosiehawtrey If you're a conservative you know that we've become soft as a species and frankly deserve to be wiped out, if you're a liberal it's about the best thing you could possibly do for the environment. So doesn't really matter where you stand on the political spectrum, one thing we should all be able to agree on is that the extinction of the human species would be a good thing.

As with every good true story,

@@zekbaker4727 What are the Colonies called now?

@@zekbaker4727 Depriving the enemy of two warships at the cost of a merchantman upgunned with scap metal is a victory.

True quote though.

I got a pretty good chuckle out of that, too.

He usually ends with a good quip in summation.

Whatever he was lacking in "people skills", he surely wasn't lacking in witty one-liners.

@@michaelt.5672 as someone who personally lacks "people skills"... It's about not being able to say the right thing at the right time. It's not easy to be a silver tongued-devil. I personally can't do it.

Sar Jim thanks for the book recommendation!

@@jagerbombasstic You're welcome. I read it just after it came out in the early 90's, and it was a real page turner for me. I've read several other biographies about Jones with those similar titles and, while they weren't bad, they weren't as historically complete as Callo's book.

@@stanleyrogouski I don't know about the last time, but Jones was in command of a force in the Russo-Turkish war when kept the Turkish navy near Ochakov on the run and provided shore bombardment for the invasion of Kinbern and laid siege to Ochakov. He was under Admiral Potemkin's command, and Potemkin and other Russian admirals feared Jones was going to rise in command, given his known abilities and the rumor that he and Catherine II had more than a professional relationship, if you catch my drift. Potemkin was constantly sending back action reports with filled with lies about Jones's supposed cowardice in the face of the Turks. He was finally recalled to Moscow under the pretext of being transferred to the Baltic Fleet when, in reality, he was put in a staff position Potemkin knew he would hate. Even though Jones was awarded the Order of St. Anne in June, 1788, he knew he was being forced out, and returned to Paris just before Christmas of the same year. He learned his lesson about serving in a foreign fleet from this, turning down the offer of command of the French revolutionary fleet in 1790.

@@stanleyrogouski He was actually 45 in 1792, the year of his death. You might be thinking of his age when he was in Russian service. Jones had pretty much burned all his bridges in the US Navy and knew he had no chance for promotion there. His Russian service was strictly a business proposition, much as his service in the US Navy had been. Jones wanted tow things - to be in a fight and be in command of a fleet. I've read of Kościuszko's advice to Jones about foreign service. It's not clear why he turned down the French offer, but I suspect he didn't want to choose what might be the losing side in another civil war. I think Spain was also interested in Jones, but he had developed the reputation, using an American football metaphor, of being a top quarterback, but not being much of a team player and hard to work with. His chance of a top command in a stable navy was just about zero, even with his acknowledged talent. Sad end to what could have been a very successful career as admiral of the fleet somewhere.

@@stanleyrogouski Jones was certainly no believer in democracy, and he did run his ships like an absolute monarchy. Nelson was 47 at the time of Trafalgar, and Jones would have been 58. Both Jones and Nelson would have been considered elderly at a time when the average life expectancy was 34. The last thing Jones wanted to do was die peacefully in bed, so I imagine he would have envied Nelson's death if he had still been around.

hope you can swim

The best

Sums up most of the US victories honestly

Now I want a 1700 game mode for world of warships lol. Would fit with the game better than modern naval fights anyway

@@themadhammer3305 You know damn well how that would end. Every game would run out of time as they entered the doldrums and lost all momentum.

@@themadhammer3305 Man I'd play the hell of that game. If only to watch the butthurt that begins to flow as a 1st rate is taken down by a couple of sloops because the guy in control "plays for fun" aka is complete ass at boats.

This is my favorite comment.

@@themadhammer3305 What you want is the game 'Naval Action'

I'm thinking more a cross between Flasheart and General Melchett. The 'Adders didn't have that soupcon of sociopathy.

That explains where he got his blatant disregard for his officers. I could see John Paul Jones killing a British officer's favorite messanger pigeon and serving it in the officer's mess.

Yes, this is supposed to be the inspiration for a rather famous scene featuring that chap.

I took American history in the late 50's up to my graduation in 1964. It may be the period I took history compared to later times, but we were taught all about commanders like John Paul Jones, David Porter, and Oliver Hazard Perry. Given the size of the Continental Navy, and the rather pitiful force we put together in 1812, we didn't have a lot of early American naval heroes, so our history lessons spent some time on them. I credit Mr. Harrison's seventh grade history class, with his riveting tales of John Paul Jones, as being responsible for the start of my lifelong interest in naval history.

We were essentially taught the highlights. He “beat” the Brits in their own waters and gave a cool action hero line. This was late 90s early aughts and the early days of standardized testing results being directly tied to school funding. So we were being taught to pass a test at the end of the year so the school wouldn’t be defunded. I didn’t get that sort of in depth class experience until college.

@@whatsoperadoc7050 I was long before the days of standardized testing. It seems like the goal now is for students to know a little about more things but not learn any one thing in depth. Back then, teachers made up their own tests, and teachers like Mr. Harrison's tests went into a lot more detail about naval history because he really liked naval history. He probably taught less about the other military phases of the Revolutionary War and War of 1812, but I like the idea that teachers were allowed to teach about what they liked best. It made the classes a lot more interesting when the teacher was invested in the subject rather than helping the students pass a standardized test.

I've come to understand my fortune- I attended public schools as well, but I had some of the best teachers ever. I learned most of this, somehow. The detail and presentation make it seem new, though. Thanks, Drach.

@@williammurdoch468 My first ten years were in Catholic schools, back when they had the deserved reputation offering a superior education, at least to those planning to go to college. Public schools back then still offered a good education, just not expecting students to perform at the same levels demanded by the nuns. I was lucky to have Mr. Harrison, a "lay" teacher and a navy vet, as my history teacher for two years. If he was around today, God rest his soul, I suspect he'd be doing the same sorts of videos as Drach. They would have been a heck of a collab.

Still ended up in Madagascar in a better condition than the 2nd Pacific Squadron. Is it wrong that my phone aurocorrect now automatically picks up 2nd Pacific Squadron... 😁😁

Holy shiznitte.

I wonder how rare it is for the same ship to be ammo-racked twice.

@@wesleygay8918 SMS Seydlitz would like to have a word :D

@@NashmanNash Well, Seydlitz got the honor? of contributing one of her guns to Kormoran... which was still installed when Kormoran fought Sydney. So... part of Seydlitz was on board Kormoran when Kormoran's mine hold explosion blew the back half off the ship.

A very ugly truth. The U.S.NAVY does seem to attract the very best, and the most despicable that the same time. How my Father dispied the U.S.Navy in WWII, for petty and low things done. He was 1st MARINE DIVISION from Cape Gloucester to Peleliu.

To be fair it's kinda hard not to hit your own men when you are all intermingled with the enemy in one gigantic Death mosh pit. Seriously the whole "Fire on my position!!" Trope exists for a reason.

AE - it isn't *that* difficult. I live in a UK army town and the general consensus of the squaddies is that their Inbredistani counterparts couldn't hit a barn door from inside the barn. They had to paint recognition symbols on the Abrams tanks despite the fact that an Abrams looks completely different from a Russian tank, the Americans invariably managed to shoot at their own side, usually with DU FSDS rounds. They're also highly notable at being able to hit bright white UN vehicles with unerring accuracy while completely missing the enemy forces currently pasting said UN vehicles and proceeding to comprehensively slaughter maim and injure the only embedded veteran journalists within 200 clicks. The spirit of the Kamchatka is alive and well and flying an F16, probably thought Landrover had brought out its new Torpedo Boat 110. Still,at least when they're about we don't have to use the SA80.

@@rosiehawtrey the reason the US usually shoots at in tanks is because they keep confusing them with bunches of imperial storm troopers, some one has to be vigilant when it comes to the Galactic empire.

😂😂😂😂😂

So, what does that say about the Royal Navy? I mean, if Jones was so bad, how did he keep defeating superior British vessels?

I feel so bad for the captain of the Serapis, ngl

@@stanklepoot Professionals know "HOW THINGS ARE DONE" usually for good reason, can sometimes be outmatched by fools with no concern for "Proper" methods.

@@stanklepoot foppery and whim can be the best foil to elegance and discipline.

@@Vaderi300 Another way to look at things is "adapt and overcome." Cochrane wasn't exactly a by the book kind of guy. I'm sure some of his attacks would have been considered lunacy by more than a few of his peers. "Proper" methods are typically a good place to start, but they can end up being chains that bind the more innovative mind, or a crutch for those hesitant to put their reputations on the line. If you lose, but do everything by the book, your reputation tends to remain intact.

That second quote is from 1812

@@nukclear2741 Yup. Quote from the captain of the Guerriere.

@@MrWaalkman Good 'Old Ironsides' Most American ship ever built, not in name, but the ability to become an invincible juggernaut.

@@rebelgaming1.5.14 I'm not sure what the USS Constitution has to do with John Paul Jones. The latter having died 5 years before the former was launched. But no matter... I don't know about invincible, but I do know that she was damn lucky when she was being chased by five British warships. The wind dropped down for two and a half days, and her crew "towed" her from boats using kedge anchors, and also by wetting the sails to catch whatever little wind there was available. This went on for 57 hours before the British gave up the chase. When it comes to a strategic retreat, some say that "Discretion is the better part of valor". I say that it is the better part of good sense. But she was (and is) a tough old girl, and had come out of a few knife fights in pretty good shape. And she actually came out of retirement to fight in the war of 1812. Having been discounted as "too slow" (she just needed a good cleaning) for active service. She had made her debut in the Quasi-war in 1799, and then fought again in the Tripolitan war. But as before, she benefited from luck in both of these engagements when her rigging became entangled with the Guerriere, and then same thing happened with the Java, which effectively held both of them at bowpoint to her (making the bow guns the only guns that the British ships could bear down on the Constitution), while the Constitution was able to fire her broadsides "To great effect" as they say. It could have easily gone the other way around. But was this luck? Not hardly, you don't outrun five of your equals just on luck. And the Constitution showed superior seamanship in holding the Guerriere and the Java at bay while pounding the hell out of them. And don't think for a moment that the British didn't try everything that they could think of to get free. In all three of these engagements she had the better trained crew, and was better prepared (with the exception of the Shannon's gun crew. Which gunnery-wise, was simply the best ship on the planet at the time). So while "Fortune favors the bold", it also smiles upon the well-prepared. One of the great books (from the American point of view) on the fledgling American Navy is "The Naval War of 1812", by Theodore Roosevelt, and is available for free at Project Gutenberg: www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/9104 Roosevelt's argument is that the American crews were better trained. This has some truth to it, since during the slow motion chase (kinda like the OJ chase, only slower), the Constitution was being fired upon by the Brits but they couldn't hit her. So if your target is effectively being towed across the ocean, and you still can't hit it, you've got a serious gunnery problem. Our navy also favored longer ranged guns (go figure), that threw a greater weight (good thinking there, too), and declined the invitation to get in close enough to their targets to make things "sporting" (just practical thinking if you ask me). So while not reading the British point of view, I understand it that their take is that we were crafty devils that didn't fight fair. And if you take Teddy's point of view, we were just good clean American kids who could shoot straight. I suspect that it's somewhere in between. In any case, "The Naval War of 1812" is a great book. and is extremely readable and enjoyable. At one time a copy of it was included with every new ship built. Kind of like floor mats at the car dealership. And for those that might say that "at best" we ended up in a tie. I don't agree. We went into the war with the demand that the British stop impressing our sailors and stealing our ships (Roosevelt makes a great argument that the victory at Trafalgar was as much an American victory as it was a British one because of all of the Americans that fought in the battle). During the negotiations for the treaty of Ghent, we wanted concessions from the British, and saner heads prevailed. The Brits wanted concessions (land) as well. To this, Wellington famously said, and I paraphrase, "you really ought to take some territory first before demanding it". But after the war of 1812, impressment of our sailors, as well as the impounding of our ships, stopped entirely. Much of this was because the Brits (as well as our unlucky Yanks) finally defeated Napoleon and they didn't need the large navy as before. But a large part of it was they got their nose seriously bloodied by an upstart navy. As to the foundation of our navy we were more than a little lucky. We had the French and the Tripolians convincing John Adams that we had to have a navy at just the right time. We had an outstanding captain in Stephen Decatur (the loss of the USS President notwithstanding), as well as his BFF Thomas Macdonough. Decatur's contribution was in building great warships, as well as fighting them. Should have stayed out of dueling however... Macdonough's contribution was creating his own navy from scratch in the backwoods of New York. Beating the British while being outnumbered and out-gunned in a brilliant recreation of a French tactic that didn't work out so well for the French. All the while stopping a major British invasion in the process. Which helped in a large part making any British demands for land in the treaty of Ghent rather moot.

@@MrWaalkman I might try to find it and pick a book up. Naval History, at least just below the surface level of it, has been my thing. Schools teach shit about the War of 1812, except for the fact that USS Constitution took down Guerriere, and that cannonballs bounced off the timber she was made of. Thank you for the enlightenment that American schools ignore. I did kinda figure out that the American Navy popped into Existence pretty much overnight when the Revolutionary War started, using privately owned scoolners (the class of ship's name is confusing to spell) and a larger number of Sloops and Cutters. I never knew who actually pioneered the US's Standing Dedicated Navy. Thank you for that as well.

Love from scarborough N Yorkshire

Ben Franklin managed to once, with a straight face, say " "If all monarchs ruled with your benevolence, republics would never be formed." He said this to _King Louis XVI of France,_ who was at that point his ally fighting the British and who was about six years removed from being the direct target of the French Revolution and beheaded for being an out of touch ultramonarch. Ben Franklin was the _King of Bullshit._

@@InchonDM Indeed! As he told Adams; flattery will get him further in France's court then bluntness. Lets face it, if it hadn't been for old Ben France never would have helped us gain our independence!

Napoleon never had a plan he just when in and reacted to the situtation :)

I wore out crippled merchantmen using scrap weapons kicks the snot out of a first-class British ship of the line and you say that the Americans are incompetent what the hell does that make the British then?

Bill Smith It was mostly the British kicking the crap out of the bonhomme richard until some of those good ol fashioned Americans with their guns rained hot lead on their deck and killed most of the rigging crew until they got close enough to drop a grenade into the powder magazine. Not to discount the story, honestly one of the better pre ironclad engagements I’ve heard about, but for the solid majority of the fight the Americans were on the back foot, especially against the Serapis

Damn skippy!

According to another comment I saw, yes on the way back home his officers came to the conclusion that he was insane and removed him from command. Later a comity would deem him unfit for command and he was discharged.

@@edwardteach3000 Wasn't he an already a disgraced ex-officer to begin with? Bringing him along in the first place was as bad of an idea as getting the cannons from a scrap yard.

@@CThyran What were Jones' alternatives? I mean, he could have set sail with 6 pounders that clearly weren't up to the task. Jones basically had two options: set sail with the equipment and personnel that he had, or not set sail at all. Given the results, I'm sure the British would have preferred the latter. Since Jones actually wanted to sail into harm's way, he chose the former.

@@stanklepoot Cottineau called him a coward afterwards (but lost the resulting duel). He then bullshitted his way back into command of the Alliance, somehow managed to make even more of a mess of being a Captain than Jones had (to the point of arresting his marine corps Captain and nearly murdering the man who'd helped him get command back over taking the first slice of pork), and was finally relieved of command by force in the middle of the Atlantic. When the ship arrived in America and was met by its new Captain (Barry), he locked himself in the Captain's quarters and had to be forcibly removed. He was put on trial and removed from the continental navy afterwards (as was the Lieutenant who'd commanded for the second half of the journey across the Atlantic - not sure why, since he seems to have done a reasonably good job during the brief period he was in command).

looking at how elaborate that is... i'm not sure why it isn't called a sarcophagus...

@@marhawkman303 yeah it’s definitely something. Incredibly ornate

JagerBombasstic please tell me it’s the Gadsden flag and not our atrocious new naval jack. Our old 19th/20th century naval jack was so classy.

As of 2019 we've gone back to the stars-on-blue-feild jack. The Snake-on-Stripes is *probably* inaccurate anyhow as a representation of the first naval jack, being mainly based on an British Illustration of the 19th century. The first naval jack was most probably simply the stripes of the stars and stripes. I think that looks better, anyhow. The Snake-on-Stripes is still flown by the USS. Constitution and the Whitby Island, being the oldest service ships in the fleet, which were to fly the first naval jack under the 1980 regulations, before the "temporary" war on terror order made it the jack for all ships. Still shouldn't have that snake on it, though! I used to like the Gasden Flag, but then it came to have rather modern political connotations I don't care for. I actually think that the proper 1st Naval Jack (13 Red & White stripes) is actually a superior jack design since the stripes aren't added to every time we get a new state (well since like 1812 anyways, 15 stars & stripes was when we all collectively decided "yeah, no") so the jack could be used longer.

@@menschman1464 Good news for you. We went back to the 50-star Jack back in June.

Christopher Blair I didn’t know that we had switched back neat

Why did you even feel the need to say anything...?

You're kidding, right? You call THAT lucky?

@@stanklepoot what about the whole event strikes you as not lucky? sure, a crap ton of it was bad luck, but there certainly wasn't much skill involved on the American side of things.

@@Vaderi300 OK, first of all, you're just being disingenuous. When someone uses the term lucky, they're referring to good luck, and you know it. Secondly, you might want to be careful of falling into the trap of insulting the opponent...especially if the opponent ended up winning. I mean, Jones started out with an "ally" that was more likely to shoot at a friend than a foe, and some cannon that self-detonated, and the British still lost. Seriously, just how pathetic is the Royal Navy? They didn't just lose, but were captured, under those circumstances? See how easy that was?

the angry... drunken father...

Well you have to get the valuable freeing information in their brains early or they might start thinking problematic things, right? If people don't get told what to think as children, they might start reading history as it is and start thinking the wrong things and we wouldn't want that now. That might unravel the story

I feel like I'd remember being taught this if that were the case.

@@mysss29 Indeed. Today is the first time I heard of this battle, these ships, and this guy.

@@tommeakin1732 As Livy said, the purpose of history is to inspire the nation and provide examples for the current generation; without a useful narrative, history is just a set of dry and irrelevant observations. Why would anybody teach something contrary to the national interest?

Costa Keith Because they’d be lying by omission to indulge in nationalism.

Just read the article you kindly supplied; Captain Landais seems to have been a utter madman. I am quite puzzled that he never "accidentally" fell over board.

Johnny Horton made naval warfare cool.

If I were member of his crew, I might have well shot him myself!

@@WALTERBROADDUS And also extremely historically inaccurate in just about evreyway possible. I blame the U.S school system.

@@edwardteach3000 Hey you try making a historicaly good country song that charts? It's like making Scientific Gospel... 🤔

Drachinifel gives the wrong impression of Landais' strategy. He wasn't betraying Jones, he was just taking advantage of Jones, and it was Pearson's acceptance of that fact which ultimately led to his surrender. Without Landais, Jones would have lost, though his squadron could still have won.

@Mike Markwell Thing is the way they taught us about him in school was basically that his ship was heavily damaged, the British captain told him to surrender, he said he hadn't begun to fight and then turned the whole fight around. They left out all the embarrassing stuff so he came off as a witty underdog.

@Mike Markwell You learn something every day.

How are you a complete screw up when you win? He may have been a real SOB, but the rest was pretty much a factor of him serving in a rebel navy with next to no resources. He sailed with defective cannons because they were the only ones he could afford that were theoretically suitable to the task. He set sail with privateers and a French captain with a questionable mental state because that was what was available to him.

@@stanklepoot Even keeping the captain of the Alliance so angry that he stayed with the fleet to kill Jones rather than sail off shows he learned from his earlier desertions. Without the Alliance firing in all directions likely the Brits don't strike.

Well, that and a little scrap in up state New York. Thank you gentile man Johnny.

Nice men marry, Scoundrels live fast and hard, And keep pretty maids awake at night.... Easy choice, Third generation U.S. MARINE.

Yeah, the biggest advantage the US had was RANGE, the Brits had to build and supply ships.. THEN sail across. The US just built stuff.

Truly the French Pre-Dreadnaught of sarcophagi.

Haven't watched that movie in a long while

He was quite the guy.

Well, he hasn't played with Led Zep in some time, but fortunately Junior is coming of age before the other boys in the band are too senile to remember how to play the songs.

A naval version of Benedict Arnold. Jones to his credit, didn't switch sides.

Our captain was an ass, but he did not give any stupid orders that got Marines killed. Social niceties are not a priority in a firefight, but those who have never been near a firefight would not know that...

We don't really have any other navy heroes of the era. Also most of the ships in the u.s navy was well converted merchants

@@chrisbruce5711 Umm...yeah, we sort of do. There's Bainbridge, Hull, Oliver Hazard Perry...

Sawyer AWR, Thank You for this Information.

It's a time honored tradition that apparently took until the German Empire to find out it's folly.

Michael Blaszkiewicz and popular with the women

There's harsh captains, and then there's having your own crew petition to have you removed. Jones was a rock-hard leader in battle, but by all accounts he was a bad captain of men even by the standards of the period.

Where in the world? If I had to guess, probably the UK, or somewhere under allegiance to it :P

@@randomguy-tg7ok you know it's kind of funny, every Englishmen I know actually has a great sense of humor.

Tyranny? Wow. Britain was the most liberal country in the world at the time. I'm not British, but I've always been shocked at the propaganda the Yanks put out about the United Kingdom in defence of their outrageous mutiny against their rightful king

Have American's always been such absolute drama queens? You constantly make it sound like no other people have ever "faced such terrible oppression" or something. You make it sound like, during this war, that you were being oppressed by the most evil empire in history that invaded you or something. This "war" was an internal issue and from what I can tell, the British empire was one of the least morally reprehensible empires the worlds ever seen. As someone who's payed attention to American politics over the course of it's history, the American talk of "being free from oppression" is completely delusional. All that was achieved from this war was the people that are oppressing you got closer to home (but fair enough though that you want those accountable to you to be closer and hypothetically more responsive). Your government today is *huge.* You are no freer than residence of most European states, now or during your conception. The one thing I can really say Americans have taught me is that if I cry and scream enough, and repeat the same shit that I want to believe enough times, I'll actually get somewhere and other people who feel the same way as I do will start converging to me, regardless what reality actually looks like. Poor Brits having a child like America. America patriots are by far the most delusional patriots

To be fair, the Americans did have a proper reason to rebel. They were a _bit_ mistreated (Stamp Tax, for example) and when they tried to negotiate, they were basically told "f*ck you". Which, I think, would've caused at least a small-scale uprising practically anywhere that could.

If we tossed aside the memory of captains and admirals that were assholes, Drach would have no content left on his channel

Phil Harding made a cannon like that on an episode of Time Team.

I do believe you have that backwards, cannon of banded construction came before cast cannon and are significantly inferior in almost every way. And banded cannon would not be in use by the time of this battle, or at the time any of the ships involved where built.

I think you are speaking of Carronades (nicknamed "smashers"). Not made in strips though. They were like sawed off shotguns, so a small ship could fire a huge cannonball a short distance - while they couldn't fire a regular cannon due to weight and recoil. In the right circumstances they could be a difference maker. There was quite a fad for them until a ship with only carronades came up against a smaller ship with long guns and lost, being peppered from long range without reply.

In the case of the Serapis the ship was "opened up" - gunports open, hatches open, decks cleared for action so much less clutter and the overpressure of the powder (which is what kills) detonation was dissipated. If she'd have been "shut up for sea" and some bright spark had dropped a grenade into a magazine the blast pressure would have killed every one below decks and probably seriously compromised the hull - the implication is also that the grenade was dropped into a "ready to use charge magazine" so this may not have been the main magazine(s) - if the flame front had propagated into main magazines the biggest part left floating would have been about the size of an inflatable lilo... Think the British ships at Jutland or the Hood. The crew would have been reduced to something anorexic plankton would have considered an acceptable portion size..

@@rosiehawtrey Good point about possibly not even the main magazine. And yes, the overpressure was the killer. Most crew were "lucky" they were on gun deck or above, being shot at; doubt anyone in the hold survived. "anorexic plankton" lol Then the Hood - "new, improved, with iron supplements." By any chance a Patrick O'Brian fan? I recall the HMS Mars (fictional 50 gun version) blew up "like a volcano," taking two enemy ships with her, her only useful contribution.

That was his story and he was sticking to it

@@Drachinifel You mean sticking with it.

I was cleaning my sword and it went off!

@@thekinginyellow1744, That's what she said.....

Well, your honor (your worship, in those days?) I was showing him the nice point on the sword, and the fool leaned forward to take a closer look at the hilt...

You thought wrong. With _Alliance_ effectively undamaged and free to fire at will, while _Serapis_ was firmly lashed to the sinking _Bonhomme Richard,_ everybody on Pearson's ship and Jones's ship was likely to be killed by Landais' indiscriminate broadsides.