HMS King George V | Royal Navy documentary (1942)

This Ministry of Information documentary was made to be "a comprehensive picture of life on board for the 1500-strong complement" of the battleship HMS King George V.
Released in October 1942, it takes viewers on a tour of the warship's various departments - including the engine room, administration, post office, command bridge and specialist workshops. It shows the workings of a 14in turret and the ship's Walrus amphibian aircraft and catapult. Daily life includes issuing of the rum ration, the mess and wardroom, recreational activities, and the slinging of hammocks.
ARCHIVES REMASTERED
► KZbin Channel - @ArmouredCarriers
► Website - www.armouredcarriers.com/
► Twitter - @ArmouredCarrier
RELATED CONTENT
kzbin.info/aero/PLJ... ► More Archive Remasters
• The Fight for the Sky ... ► The Fight for the Sky
• Naval Operations | War... ► Naval Operations 1939-1941
SEO hashtags
#documentary #military #ww2 #navy #war #history #warthunder #worldofwarships #memories #airplane #aircraftcarrier #warships

[@andrewseamans1419]

I wish they saved a KGV class. I'd love to spend time looking around and comparing to the USN South Dakota Class.

[@robertgautreau4573]

They should of saved her. She helped sink the Bismarck, and was the last British battle ship to fire her main guns during WW2.

[@micheleedwin4004]

They should have saved Warspite, the most decorated ship in the RN

[@alfatejpblind6498]

Britain sadly didn’t have the imperial infinite money glitch after ww2, rather the americans managed to pull that one off

[@ianbeeston2881]

My Grandad was sent to work at Cammel Laird ship yard during the war and used to tell us of the ships he had helped build and worked on, KG 5 as he called it was one, he was a boiler maker by profession and helped sort out a problem with its boilers one weekend which he got paid treble time for, great to see the actual boilers that he worked on all those years ago 👍

[@canopus101]

I think the narrator should have said "16 5.2 inch guns as secondary armament." They were not pom poms.

[@HighlanderNorth1]

I think what he was trying to say was: "16 inch guns with 5.2 inch long barrels". They are basically snub nosed cannons with really short barrels.. That makes the most sense! 🙃

[@stevehartley621]

I think there should have been a comma in there that he missed out - 10 x 14", 16 x 5.25", multiple pom-poms, etc. That would have been accurate but he's just reading it out rather than understanding it. I can't remember watching any naval documentary ever, where they give an accurate portrayal of what they're talking about.

[@canopus101]

Very true.@@stevehartley621

[@davidjames879]

@@stevehartley621 That's correct , I noticed it too. PomPoms were multi-barrelled rapid-fire 40mm weapons, primarily for Ant-Aircraft use.

[@AnonNomad]

Genuinely fantastic, I couldn't find footage or photos of crew accomodations or decks before this. I would love to know what the interior of an Illustrious class looked like.

[@HighlanderNorth1]

Speaking of "crew", I'm trying to figure out what's causing the sailor seen just after 13:53 to shake like crazy while laying in his hammock(??) Is he having a seizure ?

[@TheAzureFox01]

​@@HighlanderNorth1 being woken up by someone shaking him.

[@andybrown9427]

The commentator didn't say "Innit" once, awfully well done.😂

[@user-py9cx1mb1x]

This was during britains posh accent

[@anthonygreen2100]

Did you notice the Royal Marine badge on the 14" main armament breech block? That turret was obviously the Bootneck crewed one. Admiral Sir Henry Leech of Falklands War fame was a main armament turret office on a sister ship, the Duke of York, at the Battle of North Cape on Boxing Day, 1943, when the Scharnhorst was sunk. His father, Captain John 'Jack' Leech, was the Commanding Officer of HMS Prince of Wales, another KG5 sister at the Battle of The Denmark Strait when the Hood was sunk. Captain Leech was lost with his ship off Malaya three days after Pearl Harbour. Jorge Anaya, the Argentine senior admiral who pressed for the Falklands invasion talked a good fight but had never been in one unlike the above duo. Finally, the KGV class should have been the KGVI class as it was customary to name the first class of new capital ships commissioned after at the start of a new reign after the new monarch but George VI insisted on naming them after his father, George V, who had given his name to the KGV 13.5" super Dreadnoughts before WW1.

[@rvail136]

An aside...KGVI served in the RN in WW1 and fought at Jutland! I'd say he earned the right to decide the names of RN vessels. Richard Vail, LCpl USMC (Ret)

[@WilliamWalls-iz2rv]

I was just thinking the same thing about the ship's name. It should have been named KGVI -- I understand the King's sentiment but I think it was excessively modest and following the tradition actually would have been more becoming of a monarch.

[@hmskinggeorgev7089]

Thank you for the great upload.

[@robinmilford2426]

Good to see this; my great-uncle Herbert Pengelly was the Constructor responsible for their construction.

[@well-blazeredman6187]

Biggest surprises? That print-shop and the buckets of grog.

[@givenfirstnamefamilyfirstn3935]

The booze was a decent 1/8 of a real 568mL pint too, not the U.S. 473mL small pint. Thats 71mL of rum before the 1 + 2 dilution, a fair glassful presuming it was 40%/70 degrees proof. Perhaps when they went to the Pacific they would have preferred the American style ice cream instead?

[@iskandartaib]

Wasn't that surprised by the grog, they're been carrying out the same ceremony since before Nelson. All those people around the barrel are there as witnesses. I think they started adding lemon juice to it at some point in the 18th century, to prevent scurvy. I wonder if they still begin the morning by scrubbing the decks. They obviously don't remove all the bulkheads when beating to quarters any more, of course...

[@user-rx4mv6jx9o]

Love king George

[@cecilwilson5442]

My grandfather was on the KG5 and with it in Tokyo bay at the Japanese surrender,,1936 ,1948 Royal Navy,, from Belfast,, Northern Ireland ☘️☘️☘️,,

[@teago2]

So was my Grandad too, Chief Stoker on kgv from 1940 to 1946.

[@user-ls3fm5cg7r]

My grandfather was also aboard the KGV from 1942 he was on the Russian convoys.

[@YARROWS9]

That ship should have been kept for the nation. Bismarck engagement, Atlantic and Mediterranean theatres. Pacific War against the Japanese.

[@Drivenfast999]

That was brilliant

[@paulgreen6980]

To all below “pom pom” is not a type of gun it’s the sound of rapid fire so most high angle guns were known as pom pom even 5.25 as I’ve been informed by a “Royal “ of the 1950/60 here on a hospital ward with me

[@iancarr8682]

Great detail. Wet ships the KGvs' with their low bow.

[@PJ-pj8lr]

Tried the rif-raf food, now its off to the officers mess, what-what.

[@NesconProductions]

Great watch while drinking my own rum 🍺 ration 😋 (don't think the modern British Navy has kept this tradition though 😕). Have to appreciate the sacrifices those sailors made 😶‍🌫. Spending weeks at a time at sea working 12+ hour shifts was/is no picnic. Conditions on smaller warships were/is even more spartan & cramped.

[@Bruce-1956]

The rum ration was stopped in 1970.

[@javiergilvidal1558]

There is NO modern British Navy!

[@geoffreyrichardson8738]

Ahhh the good old days

[@joeschenk8400]

Very interesting. Is the narrator Cedric Hartwicke?

[@paulkirkland3263]

A boiler clean - such fun. 😂

[@johnmartlew]

1:14 He’s got steel “half moons” on his heels. Hear him banging down the deck from stem to stern! 1:53 £15,000.00 cash on board! I heard modern war ships carrying up to $5M cash.

[@heuhen]

The value of money have changed drastically since back then. £15,000 in 1941 (year after KGV was commissioned) is today around £622,000. For example milk in the 40's would go at four-pence a pint. today it's around 43p a pint. The average price of populare cigarette brands in UK 1940 11 and 1/2 of the old penny for a 20 pack. Today it's around £12-13 pound (Note there is 240 old pennies in the pound) (2021 calculation: One old penny = 0.417 new pence.)

[@mflashhist500]

Wow I would have loved to see those 5.25” Pom poms in action 😂

[@secretagent86]

What amazes me is the inefficient loading of the supplies

[@WilliamWalls-iz2rv]

Keeping them busy and out of trouble.

[@rvail136]

American Marine here. I'm shocked ya'll were still using hammocks on ships built as late as this. I don't know why I'm surprised, but I am.

[@ArmouredCarriers]

The hygiene of the era wasn't quite up to the hot-bunking concept. And the consequences were the cause of much mirth among the Avenger crews of "USS Robin" while serving with USS Saratoga in '43... kzbin.info/www/bejne/qHeWqnucetd3ibs

[@WilliamWalls-iz2rv]

KGV was, I believe a very good battleship but not a great one because it was a bit slow for the firepower (which was adequate, as was its speed, but not great) and the quad turrets DID cause a good deal of trouble. However, her protection was outstanding, her firepower was good enough for anything this side of a Yamato, and she was quick and economical to build. Her battle record, whilst not without its downsides, is overall quite solid for some very hard-working ships. Should have been named KGVI though. I understand the King's sentiments, but I think that sticking with tradition in this case would have been more becoming of a monarch than excessive modesty.

[@alfredbernasek6761]

SEHR INTERESSANT

[@bolas1939]

Is that a fire burning on the deck of the aircraft carrier at 15:13? Looks like flames..

[@ArmouredCarriers]

Steam from the steam powered catapult. Probably looks worse than it is because of cold weather

[@tomorowneverknows]

Wie kann ein 356 mm Geschütz treffen, wenn das Schiff so heftig rollt? Wird der Wellengang zeitlich aufgezeichnet und der Schuss dann auf die Lage im Wasser abgestimmt? Dienten die vier Rohre als Streumunition? Meiner Kenntnis erlitten diese Mannschaften ein ähnliches Schicksal, wie dem Schlachtschiff Bismarck.... Was lehrt uns ihr Untergang?

[@lilboy3102]

Which enemy battleship and 2 cruisers were spotted during this time ?

[@britishpatriot7386]

Bismarck? Just guessing or the ship I can't remember the name beginning with the letter S and was a major problem to the British and Russians when supply convoys were sunk etc North of the North Sea around Scandinavia etc so the royal navy sent battleships and cruisers with the convoys and eventually stopped the German ships and so Russia got the supplies urgently needed. I'm probably wrong so if you could enlighten me I'd be grateful.

[@lilboy3102]

Scharnhorst was the ship ...right ? 😅

[@lilboy3102]

How old are you ? In which city do you stay ? Just asking❤

[@JoshBuns]

Who narrated this?

[@kylelee9474]

[@menotyou7762]

love those cottons covers on the loaders/gunners heads. Catch fire quite quickly I would imagine

[@Snowdog2711]

Not plain cotton but cotton treated with borax (a flame retardant)...the same principle used even to the present day though with a different retardant

[@photoisca7386]

It is a good idea to find out what something is used for, before showing your ignorance.

[@lawrenceparker2315]

They were not cotton but asbestos, long before it was known to be dangerous.

[@fredericksaxton3991]

I still have somewhere in my possession my fathers Anti-flash hood. He was in the gun crew of the single 4" gun on HMS Asturius. It is just a Balaclava type tight head cover.

[@grahamthebaronhesketh.]

Who's turn in the barrel tonight?

[@VIDEOVISTAVIEW2020]

I am more interested on the food 😋

[@Ah01]

British cuisine in the galleys 😂. (Equal to that are only french technology and german humour)

[@theonlymadmac4771]

All 3 are traditionally underestimated 😂

[@Ah01]

@@theonlymadmac4771 At least germans have the hilarious detective Nick Knatterton.. 😄

[@kristelvidhi5038]

Why was this ship named after Britain's greatest leader if it didn't have as much fire power, or armor? They should've given her 4 quadruple tourrets with 16 inch guns.

[@squirepraggerstope3591]

Tbh, why the KGVs were all armed with a main battery of 10 x 14"/45 cal guns and not, say, a heavier battery of 9 x 16" weapons like the earlier UK Nelson Class ships or the KGVs own direct US counterparts, the North Carolina Class (then all later US battleships, too), is quite a long, involved story. Even so, they were still among the best designed, most effective and most powerful WW2 capital ships and on the other point, their armour protection, you're totally wrong. The KGVs carried heavier armour protection than virtually any other WW2 Battleship class in any navy, with the single exception being the giant Japanese Yamato Class vessels.

[@kristelvidhi5038]

@@squirepraggerstope3591 in short?

[@squirepraggerstope3591]

@@kristelvidhi5038 Why the KGVs ended up with the very good but rather small Mkvii 14"/45cal gun firing an APC that weighed only about 1,600lbs? "In short"?? OK, though "short" isn't really possible. So, anyway, the cause was our dim London establishment elite's unrealistically naive hope of securing a London Treaty reduction in permissible max capital ship std. displacement AND main battery gun size from 16" to 14". Thus, yet more stupidly, they also refused to develop a any new weapon of greater size. Say, the proposed mkii 15"/50 cal or much needed, improved 16" gun (the eventual mkii, iii, and iv 16"/45cal weapons))... ...and therefore (Surprise! Surprise!) when it 1) -became clear the Japanese had zero intention of agreeing, even nominally, to still tighter limits. 2) -inducing the Americans (who'd been sanely cautious enough about reaching agreement to continue developing excellent new 16" weapons anyway) to invoke the treaty's escalator clause re their nascent North Carolina Class ships. So were able just in time, to swap out the originally intended 12 x 14" armament in three quad turrets for 9 x 16" guns in three triple turrets instead, on a modestly heavier vessel. While given the lead time needed to develop a major caliber weapon, no such solution was feasible for the KGVs... which were consequently stuck with a 14" main battery if they were to be ready in anything even approaching the envisaged timespan.

[@givenfirstnamefamilyfirstn3935]

5 point 2 5 multiple pom-poms, really?

[@well-blazeredman6187]

Comma needed in that script!

[@Peorhum]

yeah, I noticed that too.

[@Pvt_Badger0916]

Yeah really!!!! the 5.25 secondary batteries were dual purpose guns ... the Australians and British army artillery used it as well 😳😳 ... shocking right ??

[@givenfirstnamefamilyfirstn3935]

@@Pvt_Badger0916 …… really is that the depth of your contribution? The pom-pom was a 40mm automatic anti aircraft gun typically in four or eight gun mountings on British WW2 warships.

[@Pvt_Badger0916]

@@givenfirstnamefamilyfirstn3935... what he was saying that the 5.25 was also a anti aircraft gun because it was a pom pom / dual purpose gun used in both roles as anti surface and anti air roles .. also forefilled the same role in the British and Australians artillery units... you think the only use for pom pom means a 40mm anti-air gun of multiple barrels ? ... that's cute also means a British person to the Australians , south African and New Zealanders. ... its also what cheerleaders have in their hands ? Yet pom pom was also used for the earlier 37mm 1 pounder pom pom developed by maxim for anti aircraft and infantry roles in the 1890's.... because pom pom means anti aircraft gun because the of the sound it makes when firing...

[@thehumancanary131]

Waste of money - scrapped within 20 years of construction - sister ship sunk of the coast of Malaya because it lacked air cover!

[@Anakin_Sandy_High_Ground]

The KGV class were probably the best value for money battleships ever built by any nation. The best workhorses the Royal Navy ever had, quick to build, and didnt break the bank.

[@thehumancanary131]

One of the main problems of the King George V class was their comparatively short range, caused in part by the way that oil storage was built in to the anti-torpedo systems. This led to unexpected wastage, compounded by the fact that their propulsion system was not economical. When steaming in company with North Carolina in 1942, the King George V was found to use 39 percent more fuel than the US vessel.@@Anakin_Sandy_High_Ground

[@Anakin_Sandy_High_Ground]

@@thehumancanary131 don’t care, that’s american

[@ronaldschultenover8137]

Obsolete when it was built

[@Anakin_Sandy_High_Ground]

The KGV class were probably the best value for money battleships ever built by any nation. The best workhorses the Royal Navy ever had, quick to build, and didnt break the bank.

[@stargatecommand714]

​@@Anakin_Sandy_High_Groundnah, that'd be the South Dakota-class 🇺🇲 USA baby! 🇺🇲

[@Anakin_Sandy_High_Ground]

cringe @@stargatecommand714

[@britishpatriot7386]

​@@stargatecommand714it's a draw then 😂

[@britishpatriot7386]

Obsolete ships were very common in both world wars and most that were considered obsolete actually went on to be quite successful. WW1 destroyers were used in ww2 all the time and they proved still a match against the new ships. Imo its who is at the wheel that makes a ship successful. The Bismarck was destroyed mostly due to obsolete planes ( Swordfish) and obsolete ships mostly too as were most German battleships which were all new and great ships so imo it's the driver and his passengers who are the main factor for success at sea. But yes it was obsolete when in action.

[@TrueSonOfOdin]

Although impressive looking ships, the KGVs were monumental lemons. Like the French for Dunkerque and Strasbourg battle cruisers - I don't know about Richelieu and Jean Bart - the 4-gun turrets chronically and irremediately broke down after not many salvos. This was true even in the 26 December 1943 sinking of German battle cruiser Scharnhorst. Look at Table 6 at the back of A.J. Watts' excellent little Loss of the Scharnhorst. And yet! it was an extreme range Hail Mary! plunging shot from Duke of York that heavily damaged Sch's power plant so that torpedo-carrying cruisers and destroyers - Norwegian destroyer Stord got the closest - could take her down. Similarly, earlier, in the May 1941 Battle of Denmark Strait, hardly commissioned Prince of Wales scored telling hits on Bismarck, although she too had turret breakdowns ... and this is intriguingly alluded to in the still excellent/definitive feature film Sink the Bismarck! I've accused a Royal Navy architect and wargaming friend of mine of the British having "homing shells!" - the accuracy of their gunnery was so incredible during the war. 😊 Much was expected of the dual-purpose 5.25" secondary guns (also mounted on the Dido light antiaircraft cruisers), but I've read they were disappointing and couldn't compare to our own 5"DPs which were standard secondary armament on our capital ships and cruisers. Overall, the old World War I Queen Elizabeth class ships were far more reliable, and their 4x2 eight 15" guns were (embarrassingly) mounted on Britain's final battleship, Vanguard. The real Royal Navy capital ship standouts were the armoUred flight deck carriers which took and survived incredible punishment in the Mediterranean and then in the final months of the Pacific war, when the vaunted kamikazes had little effect on them.

[@teddywoo83]

Monumental lemons? They really weren’t.

[@Snowdog2711]

‘Broke down after not many salvoes’. Some truth in that until the early teething troubles were ironed out and then became a decent turret. Duke of York fired 52 broadsides at Scharnhorst in just under 2 hours…hardly shoddy and still managed to deliver a crucial hit (your so called Hail Mary) at 21000 yards. There is no doubt that Duke of Yorks escorts helped 'take down’ Scharnhorst but I’m far from convinced this would have been achieved quite so effectively had Duke of York not silenced the majority of Scharnhorst’s main armament. Prince of Wales was fresh out of the builders yard and had not even had an opportunity to work up when she engaged Bismarck so it’s hardly surprising that she suffered technical issues. Nonetheless she still managed to achieve critical hits during the Denmark Strait battle. The AA performance of 5.25” dual purpose were rather ordinary…there’s no disputing that, but they had good surface performance. You state that the QE’s were more reliable but what do you base this statement on? They only took part in one battleship on battleship engagement in the Second World War (I’m not counting Mers-el-Kebir as the French were sitting ducks) . Warspite of course landed, what you would no doubt refer to as a 'Hail Mary', on Guilio Cesare at 26000 yards but they were never truly tested against similar opponents in WWII. The KGV’s were an excellent balance of speed/armament and their scheme of protection was almost unmatched through WWII They were anything but lemons. BTW The 15” guns mounted in Vanguard may well have been the same barrel/breach but there was nothing embarrassing about their use…The gunhouses were designed to allow a 30 degree elevation (rather than 20) and the guns used supercharges which gave them a range of over 37000 yards and they could be radar controlled.

[@teddywoo83]

@@Snowdog2711 someone who actually knows what they are taking about. Scharnhorst only lasted as long as she did because she did a (very good) job of running from a far superior DoY. DoY fired more salvos than the entire American battle line at surigoa straight. The KGV were tested throughout the war more than any other class of battleship and they performed well.

[@photoisca7386]

There is always somebody like you in the comments slagging off anything British.

[@TrueSonOfOdin]

@@photoisca7386 If you raised the issue of our torpedo scandal, would I be so close-minded as to accuse you of slagging off anything American? (No.) You'd make a good Inspector Clouseau indeed.

[@chaptermasterpedrokantor1623]

What a waste of resources the battleships turned out to be in WW2 for every navy that owned any.

[@teapott-caddyman]

At the time you needed a Battleship to counter a Battleship.

[@givenfirstnamefamilyfirstn3935]

The _Glorious_ disastrous shambles was the only time battleship/s defeated a fleet carrier.

[@moley3109]

Hmm. There are many eminent historians who say that the strength of the Royal Navy's capital ship fleet (15 big gun ships) was probably the main deterent that prevented Hitler's invasion of Britain, Plus it is kown that even an old Revenge class battleship with it's very effective eight 15 inch guns could be enough to dter much more modern Germa battlecruisers from attacking convoys.

[@Aubury]

Certainly the Vanguard was a waste of money, labour, and a purpose, save a royal yacht.. fleet carriers my have been a better investment,

[@chrismerrick]

Though the nations with the most battleships won

[@crazyd4472]

"16 5.25 multiple pom poms" ... I think you mixed up some of your armament there mate!!!

[@wor53lg50]

No he means 5.25 inch quick firing all 16 of them, the pom poms are 2lb'rs or 40mm...he describing The Anti Aircraft armament, basically the heavy ack, ack and medium ack, ack...

[@crazyd4472]

@@wor53lg50 Yes, yes ... I already know this. I was just pointing it out that fact. 5.25" guns are never referred to as pom poms, as this described the Vicker 2 pounder weapons.

[@wor53lg50]

@@crazyd4472 i dont think he ment the pom, poms as 5.25 inchers, he was explaining the gun sizes from top to bottom...

[@crazyd4472]

@@wor53lg50 I get your point but the narrator made no pause or comma when mentioning "16 5.25 inch multiple pom poms" like he did for the main armament and "other anti aircraft weapons". He inferred that the 5.25 inch and pom poms were the same thing, which we both know to be utter rubbish.