HMS Hood - Guide 009 (Human Voice)

The Mighty Hood's career is in the spotlight today.
Want to support the channel? - / drachinifel
Want to talk about ships? / discord
Music - / ncmepicmusic

[@tnbspotter5360]

Re-designed to prevent catastrophic explosions, eh?

[@Drachinifel]

Well, it didn't die for the same reasons as the ones that blew up at Jutland did. It suffered a catastrophic explosion for entirely different reasons :p

[@oceanhome2023]

Drachinifel We would call that a high order sympathetic explosion of the warheads overpowering any low order powder kick off .

[@Silamon2]

@TJ Bowman I think you missed the joke man...

[@navnig]

@@Silamon2 Yeah. 2,000 men dying is somehow a joke to some people, apparently.

[@navnig]

@TJ Bowman Barham's magazine wasn't hit. She exploded as she rolled over after a torpedo hit.

[@vancemarin8022]

I have a picture of the Hood that my dad took when she was in harbour in Iceland and about two hours before she left to confront the Bismarck !!! He was on troopship of Canadian soldiers who were part of the Icelandic invasion force...

[@bkjeong4302]

Vance Marin Holy shit. That may be one of the last pictures ever taken of her.

[@wamyx8Nz]

Get that copied or digitized and sent to the library of congress or Smithsonian. It's probably the last picture of her.

[@vancemarin8022]

The digitized picture is in the Canadian War Museum in Ottawa ,Canada.

[@wamyx8Nz]

@@vancemarin8022 Yeah I suppose that is the more appropriate place with her being a British ship and all. Still I hope both countries share such documents for redundancy and backup.

[@manz7860]

@@vancemarin8022 those Canadians were pretty badass in wwii

[@robinsonsstudios]

clearly Holland forgot to equip his ship with the juliet charlie signal!

[@s.31.l50]

Robinson K 🤦‍♂️👏👏👏

[@MaxwellAerialPhotography]

Juliet Charlie?

[@robinsonsstudios]

@@MaxwellAerialPhotography its a world of warships flag that prevents detonation

[@robinsonsstudios]

@@dutchthespitfire3204 .....you clearly missed the joke...

[@robinsonsstudios]

@@dutchthespitfire3204 well he was in command

[@Rjm231]

Thanks for this mate, my great grandad was among the crew on the HMS Hood the day it was sunk. If this ship didn't get sunk though my grandad would never have been an orphan and left his City, and in turn i would never have been born.

[@FiveSkitsAtFreddys]

You have a great ancestor, he lived with pride and dignity to be on that ship, god bless.

[@Arthion]

I've gotta say the line drawing of the modernized Hood looks really good

[@bairdrew]

When I've got money spare I am going to kitbash a refit Hood out of a Hood and PoW/KGV or Warspite kit (if i can find one).

[@BlackHearthguard]

@@bairdrew Trumpeter make the Hood and DMLand Academy make a Warspite, Tamiya make KGVs.

[@bigships]

Very nice

[@danschneider9921]

Even as a full blood German (my Grandfather served in the Kreigsmarine on the Schleswig-Holstein, Admiral Scheer and minesweepers at the end) I can say without doubt the Hood was the most beautiful ship ever built. Damn sexy and graceful

[@madwolf0966]

Hood's beauty is really debatable but her personality would be that of a lady!

[@jasonirwin4631]

Sorry but I gotta disagree with you. The best looking ships of the war is a tie in between the Yamato and Iowa.

[@thecoolestcorgi4991]

I have some relatives that served on the Roma. I’m not sure where they fit in my family tree, but it is really interesting that my grandfather on my father’s side fought in the US army during the war, but some of my other relatives fought in the Regia marina

[@thecoolestcorgi4991]

Jason Irwin Nah, its a tie between RM Roma, or USS Atlanta

[@avoryford8450]

Gracefully split and half and sunk to the bottom of the Ocean

[@frasermcburney270]

WE WILL ALWAYS REMEMBER THE HOOD R.I.P.

[@TDavis-ml6kl]

BOOM!! There she went!

[@highlypolishedturd7947]

Twenty five years after Jutland, and there's STILL something wrong with our bloody ships today.

[@michaelpielorz9283]

It`s that nasty german habit to shoot at british ships! DO NOT MENTION A "Bismarck"in the comment section!!

[@bkjeong4302]

Ironically, the ship that sank her had the exact same problem of horrible deck armour....

[@robinsonsstudios]

thats debatable at best

[@Deevo037]

@@robinsonsstudios It was less about the Bismark's armour than the layout of her armour. Her fire and steering control centers were vulnerable to Rodney's shells and it was her inability to effectively fight combined with her steering damage that ultimately destroyed her.

[@robinsonsstudios]

@@Deevo037 I can agree with that

[@aristosachaion_]

It's not debatable, it's a fact. Bismarck was designed for close range engagements, which is why the RN would have sunk her quicker if they had stayed further back.

[@bkjeong4302]

@@aristosachaion_ Provided they could hit her enough times; at longer ranges even radar fire control was a lot less effective than often assumed. As an example, even though the 16"/50 gun was literally designed to engage at distances beyond 30,000 yards, live-fire tests showed that this wasn't feasible in practice because even radar fire control couldn't hit capital ship-sized targets reliably at those ranges. That said, Bismarck's armour scheme was bad enough that it put her at a disadvantage even in close quarters, because it made for a thinner belt, and meant that she could literally be sunk without having her citadel damaged at all (because of lack of reserve buoyancy)

[@andrewdrabble8939]

The late Jon Pertwee served on the Hood during the war and had just transferred off when she was sent after Bismarck

[@BearwoodWestYard]

As did my great grandfather, also transferred off before the Bismarck scramble! He was a stoker by the name of Hardy.

[@andrewclayton4181]

My uncle was taken off with appendicitis just before she went after Bismarck. Family didn't know, and thought he'd gone down with it.

[@timothycook2917]

In 1921, the Hood was the most badass ship in 'da hood ⚓⚓

[@penkagenova7073]

Yeah but bismarck did end it all of a sudden

[@bkjeong4302]

Until the late 1930s (which saw things like the KGVs coming online and, more importantly, the ascendance of naval aviation), she was the most capable capital ship in the world.

[@metaknight115]

@@penkagenova7073 Then yamato came and stole the title away from bismark

[@bkjeong4302]

@@metaknight115 Littorio had easily taken that title away from Bismarck (and Hood by extension) before Bismarck was even in service.

[@metaknight115]

@@bkjeong4302 But Littorio's guns were horrifically inaccurate, and her armor scheme was questionable.

[@thegaminggecko1255]

HMS Hood; failing to survive detonation jokes since 1941.

[@titanicww2345]

That is what happens when you sacrifice armor for speed.

[@charlesdewitt8087]

@@titanicww2345 "Speed is armour!" An idiot.

[@Solrac-Siul]

@@titanicww2345 in a way true but at the same time somewhat imprecise : when it was commissioned it as armored as the most armored ships in the royal navy, something that Drachinifel even mentions so it did not really sacrificed that much armor when it had essentially the same armor as its contemporary british batteships.

[@vanguardactual1]

Gaming Gecko greatest line ever!!! LMAO

[@royalteluis623]

Kevlar is you want speed and amour just make your ship longer . Length=speed . That’s why the Iowa and Montana where built long and slim whilst well armored . I do believe the Iowa was the fastest battleship and still is one of the fastest warships of all time

[@michaelsnyder3871]

I have spent over forty years playing naval simulations from "Action Stations" to the NWS mod of "Fighting Steel". I have yet to replicate the destruction of the HMS Hood. This implies that her loss was nearly a random event, or as some American combat pilots call it, "the Golden BB", a hit that does unpredictable damage. A point to remember is that the RN's tactical doctrine after 1930 defined "effective battle range" as around 15,000-16,000 yds. The protection of the "King George V" class was designed around this doctrine, giving up gunpower to meet the protection requirement. This doctrine also explains why the tower bridge with lower (height above WL) fire control stations was acceptable. Consider that the effective sight horizon at 100 feet is ~24,000 yds. If 15,000-16,000 yds was the optimal engagement range, then fire control directors did not need to be higher than 70" or so. It is ironic that one of the longest range hits on an enemy ship was made by a modified "Queen Elizabeth" with a tower bridge. This is in contrast to both Japanese and US naval tactical doctrine that sought to engage at 30,000 yds (even 35,000 yds with the Japanese) with aerial spotting, requiring the seizure of air supremacy. The RN recognized this, and it hoped torpedo attacks by aircraft and destroyers would so slow the enemy battle line that the British could charge through the "danger zone" to reach their optimal engagement range. Naval simulations with the IJN destroying or damaging the British carriers, conducting night over the horizon torpedo attacks, eventually lead to the British battle line facing an enemy that refused to close until they were no longer able to resist the coup de grace. But the British designed their "fast" battleships with North Sea and Med engagements, despite Japan being the most likely enemy from 1921 to 1938. But the RN wasn't the only navy with confusion and contradiction in strategic planning, tactical doctrine and ship design.

[@kevinjohnbetts]

Interesting. I refought the action using the old 'Dreadnought' board wargame and on a tabletop using rules from a magazine (maybe 'Military Modelling'). Both times Bismarck sank Hood within several salvos. Lucky hits certainly and iirc Bismarck suffered heavier than historical damage from the RN. What happened to Prinz Eugen is lost to my memory. I must give the battle a go using 'Atlantic Fleet' at some point soon.

[@tonyb1223]

@@kevinjohnbetts PE survived the war and became a test ship in the Atomic bomb tests.... a sad end tbh

[@kevinjohnbetts]

Cheers Tony. I meant in my games not in real life. But yes I agree that it was a most undignified end for the ship. I'm hoping Drach will do a video on the Kriegsmarine operations in the Baltic during 1944 and 1945 because the heavier units, such as Prinz Eugen, played an important role supporting and evacuating German troops pinned near the coast.

[@seeingeyegod]

What is a good current game like that?

[@kevinjohnbetts]

@@seeingeyegod You mean board game or computer game? If the former 'Avalanche Games' have a whole slew of naval board wargames although availability outside the USA seems very limited. If computer games I'd suggest 'Atlantic Fleet'. NWS do some detailed stuff (the aforementioned mod for 'Fighting Steel' is nice) but they're not cheap and the graphics tend to be horrible. If you want to go WW1 'Stormpowered' have a nice set of games centered on Jutland. They are getting a bit old and they could do with being discounted but there is nothing else like them on the market right now. stormpowered.com/stormcloud/store/index.asp

[@Solrac-Siul]

Interestingly while chasing Strasbourg,, both Hood and Strasbourg, had similar machinery issues. With Strasbourg essentially losing a turbine. In fact had Hood continued the chase , it would have gotten the french ship since'- quoting from memory- Hood was still able to make almost 25 knots while Strasbourg was not able to exceed 23

[@BearwoodWestYard]

I don't expect a reply but I found this incredibly useful. My great grandad was a stoker on board the mighty Hood during World War II, by the last name of Hardy. All I know from my grandad is that a change of crew or having been re-assigned to another vessel when in port, no less than a few days and no more than a week before the Hood was scrambled to intercept the Bismarck is what set my great grandads fate aside from the brave men who encountered the Bismarck that day. Unfortunately he passed away well in excess of 15 years before I was born (2000YoB), and as such the stories of his Naval career were lost with him. My Grandad said he never really used to talk about the war, so its a mystery to my whole family. We have his medals still, of which I'm tracking down what ones they are and what they were awarded for. Thank you for providing myself and family with some insight into the mighty Hood's wartime activity, sharing the fact he may well have taken part at Mers el Kebir.

[@leftcoaster67]

RIP crew of the HMS Hood. One of the most beautiful ships ever.

[@charlesbaker7703]

You probably know this already but you were "mentioned in dispatches" (that is, recommended) over on MH(not)V with the expanded WWII ship classes video. Congrats!

[@Drachinifel]

Huzzah!

[@westcoaststacker569]

Thank you for sharing, I don't believe we can underestimate the shock the United Kingdom felt at the ships loss at that time.

[@hannahskipper2764]

Today marks 79 years since the Hood's loss. God bless those sailors. Just three survivors. Wow.

[@tomhutchins7495]

For anyone confused about or wanting more detail on the different theories, I strongly recommend William Jurens' 1987 article, which is available for free at the end of a Google search. It is also worth pointing out that the most likely impact really was incredibly unfortunate: in the big refit that changed the secondary armament, the secondary magazine was extended aft. The very end of this extension was not fully covered by the extra armour over the magazines. It is most likely that Bismarck managed to put a shell in this spot, which at the relative angles required hitting a 1x3m patch of Hood. Outside of this patch, the shell would have been bounced by armour or ended up off the ship.

[@admiraltiberius1989]

Love your videos, always awesome when my notifications tell me you have uploaded something. Hearing Mr Ted Briggs talk about the sinking always chilled me to the bone. As did the thought that only 3 men survived the sinking. My brain has a hard time understanding how more men didn't get off before she went down. Mainly those in top side stations. I can imagine a wall of fire swept through the lower decks, blowing open water tight doors and flash cooking everything.

[@oceanhome2023]

Admiral Tiberius Only 3 survived because the the water was about the temperature of melted ice . Can you imagine yourself in that water that would explain that

[@admiraltiberius1989]

@@oceanhome2023 With the Bismarck 70 percent of the survivors were left in the water by the British.

[@UnintentionalSubmarine]

Based on the accounts of the survivors, Hood's deck crew had suffered tremendous losses in a number of hits from Prinz Eugen, one hit supposedly hitting exactly where a lot of them were huddled (near the base of the superstructure). Another hit from Bismarck took out the spotting top, resulting in a macabre shower of bodyparts onto compass bridge. And finally yet another hit resulted in Robert Tilburn seeing his mates get killed and had to relieve his stomach over the side, and when he looked up again the ship was in the process of blowing up (thus it is likely that it was a second hit in the same salvo that set off the magazine, as Tilburn was on the port side of the ship thus not in the way to the magazine). Briggs' account does seem to indicate that considerably more people got off the ship, but the quick sinking must have dragged a lot of them down, and yet others probably didn't make it in the bad weather and cold waters, as Tilburn felt himself losing the fight near the end. It really is sobering to read these accounts, and it is equally tough to consider that Dundas never spoke of the sinking, privately or publicly. No wonder, considering the accounts from Tilburn and Briggs. By the way, and this might sound somewhat macabre to suggest, but there are some really powerful accounts from the Battle of Jutland as well. One of them from a crewman in a turret that got hit (and then had the magazine explode beneath him, and being stuck in the turret as the ship went down). I find these men's stories to be important, because all too often we are left unaware of the last terrible moments, sometimes leaving us without comprehension of just how bad it must have been.

[@admiraltiberius1989]

@@UnintentionalSubmarine Thank you for that reply....it was awesome.

[@UnintentionalSubmarine]

I am glad you appreciated it.

[@lucassmith4524]

Didn’t know they recovered her Bell...May she Ever Rule the Waves.

[@TDavis-ml6kl]

Killed many more Frenchmen than Bismarck.

[@Matt-fx1ur]

"Showing your citadel, that's a paddling" ~German commander

[@claypidgeon4807]

Honestly, if you don’t go into never-finished ships, Hood may well be the most notable of the “she deserved a more glorious career and fate” category...

[@bkjeong4302]

Clay Pidgeon Really, most big-gun ships fit in that category. Battleship engagements were just too few and most of them (at least in WWII) weren’t necessary Hood is almost a foreshadowing of what was to come with battleships two decades later; in retrospect she was the first of the huge, fast, heavily armed capital ships that everyone would start building in the 1930s, and like all of them, she would be ill-fated to never live up to her reputation.

[@bkjeong4302]

Chris George Her career in WWII isn’t actually that notable once you get into the details; everything she did, non-battleships could have done more efficiently.

[@bkjeong4302]

Chris George The longest-range hit happened in a battle where battleships were unnecessary (carriers would have been a better option there). Surviving a Fritz X hit does not equal actually doing her job. By your logic, a soldier that survives serious injuries but fails all his/her objectives is a good soldier.

[@metaknight115]

Yamato:Am I a joke to you

[@JevansUK]

We rememberall who served in HMS Hood on the anniversary of her loss. RIP

[@robertewing3114]

Renown collided with Hood, the communication process in Hood concluded, Renowns coming inboard!! The controversy is well worth an episode from Drach.

[@lonelystrategos]

This is a certified Hood classic.

[@ceutermark8271]

And that's why you always use the juliet charlie signal in WOWS just to be on the safe side.

[@adamtruong1759]

So, Hood was fighting with one arm tied to her back, slowly deteriorating, and not properly maintained despite being the pride of the royal navy. Now that I think of it, Hood existed only because she was the only member of her class to reach sufficient progress in construction which saved her from scrapping. So, she basically had almost no right in serving the royal navy, if you know what I mean, which is honestly quite sad.

[@bkjeong4302]

One of those ships really screwed over by their own nations.

[@Scoobydcs]

Most beautiful ship ever built

[@kevinjohnbetts]

She was lovely. 'Tiger' shades it for me, at least among British capital ships. Whisper it quietly though because I have a thing for the WW2 era 'Scharnhorst' and 'Gneisenau'. I think it's the high prow and the single smokestack amidships that make it look better side on. Looking at 'Hood' and 'Scharnhorst' from the front I'd be hard pressed to pick my favourite.

[@Jin-Ro]

@keith moore You're entitled to your wrong opinion. Only joking, the Iowas are indeed beautiful ships.

[@kevinjohnbetts]

@keith moore Warships are strange things to regard as 'appealing' given their purpose. Beautiful and terrible. When 'Hood' was flagship of the RN and was 'flying the flag' in full glory she was supposedly a very impressive looking vessel. Sadly we don't have colour photos or film of her like that. Perhaps if we had we'd regard her differently.

[@kevinjohnbetts]

@keith moore I can understand that. I have similar feelings about 'Scharnhorst'. I prefer single smokestacks so she gets it over the 'Iowa' but otherwise the two ships/classes are very similar ('Iowa' being larger, obviously) in terms of looks.

[@Al.J_02]

@@kevinjohnbettsI know this is late, but here's a pretty great one: kzbin.info/www/bejne/pnLXmXasoJp6qNE

[@barrylucas505]

I get my nerd-love-info-big-WWII-ship fix from this site. Please keep it up!

[@adamdubin1276]

Had she been modernized I imagine her fight with Bismarck may have ended very differently.

[@whateverthisis389]

If they let her keep her Armor,they might have won

[@CarterWills1]

The hood thought the Prinz Eugen was the Bismarck as the Start so the Bismarck could have still easily sank the hood. The Bismarck took hundreds of shells from the Royal Navy fleet so one ship wouldn’t have been able to sink the Bismarck.

[@B52Stratofortress1]

@@CarterWills1 it might have stayed afloat for a while but after the first few broadsides from KGV and Rodney the Bismarck was completely crippled and unable to fight back at all. It basically became target practice for the Royal Navy

[@aristosachaion_]

This. They pummeled that ship for a solid hour or so, but she was effectively neutralised long before that. You don't fuck with 16 inch shells.

[@aristosachaion_]

I don't know about "easily". She would have the advantage of first blood if her shells hit, but no amount of speculation can determine who might have definitively won the battle.

[@wilsthelimit]

Grim Reaper: It’s time to go Hood: Was I a good Battlecruiser? Grim Reaper:No, I heard you were the best

[@wilsthelimit]

Chris George Exactly! She deserved a refit more than any other

[@wilsthelimit]

Chris George Agreed, it was a death sentence to send her out with her deck armor being so weak

[@francisc.howlandjr.4845]

Thank you! I very much enjoy your videos. I have been a history "Buff" since the first book I remember reading was about The Monitor and the Merrimac and the great Engineer & Inventor:John Ericsson. My mother gave it to1 me for my eight birthday in 1955. I am a twice retired US Army Metrology technician with my last duty station in uniform and as civilian was The US Army's armored vehicle rebuild center at the Anniston Army Depot. One of my duties before my final retirement in 2013 was the certification of the turret ring and target board used for the final assembly alignment of the 120mm main gun and the 7.62mm coax MG on the M1A1 Abrams MBT. At 4.72 inches the gun is near to size of the secondaries on most Battleships. I have read/listened to R. Massie's books: "Dreadnought..." and "Castles of Steal" also Tull's: "Battle of Surigao Strait" along with going over many a "Jane's Fighting Ships" in many Post Libraries" over the years I keep a copy of Mr. Millers: "Illustrated Directory of War Ships..." to hand. I have toured BB60 USS Alabama and my Uncle Robert Swiggum served as a gunners mate on BB64 The USS Wisconsin in one of , as you have noted, plethora of 20 or 40mm Bofors cannons, He told me it was one of the fantail mounts. Well enough of my blather, as I am also a Civil War "Buff", I would like to request of you one of your excellent Video's about The Patuxent Class of twin turret Monitors, I believe they served in South American navies until the late 1800's. Thank you again. Yours Truly; Francis C. Howland Jr. Msg USA Ret. Oxford on the Choccolocco, Alabama

[@timmy3822]

In other words, the Germans had hella good RNG that day, much to the HMS Hood’s detriment. Such a beautiful vessel, the likes the world has never seen since. After my HMS Nelson build I’ve got a lovely 1:700 Tamiya kit of Hood that needs to be built. Can’t wait.

[@ironstarofmordian7098]

Robo Voices are for memes. Glad you are now using your real voice.

[@musanix1212]

Hood attacked Dunkerque -> sank by detonation Barham attacked Richelieu -> sank by detonation WoWS anti team kill system by fun & engaging OP plz nerf

[@OscarGKing]

Your history isn't very good, because the Hood attacked the Bismark and Prinz Eugen and was sunk.

[@wingcommanderbob8268]

@@OscarGKing Both of them attacked French battleships and were later sunk... the point he is making is not that the French sank Barham and Hood...

[@reymiguelperez6643]

@@OscarGKing You didn't get the joke?

[@OscarGKing]

@@reymiguelperez6643 No, because i don't play computer games, i usually have better things to do.

[@Aelvir114]

I absolutely have to give an honourable mention here to the late Ted Briggs. The only of the three survivors who was actually willing to talk about the sinking and was the lust survivor of Hood’s sinking. I personally met him a little over a decade ago and was very good man. A little fun fact, the memorial plate with the names of the crew on it that was placed there during the first attempt at the Bell’s retrieval was in fact placed by Briggs.

[@titanicww2345]

We will always remember the HMAS Sydney.

[@garyhill2740]

It is interesting that people often concede Hood's characteristics were such she fit the description of a fast battleship. But because there were more powerful guns in service by WW II, that made her a battlecruiser by then? Japan's Nagato class were from Hood's era also. Because their armor was not as proof against 1940's guns as it was against guns in the 1920's when they were built, does that make them a different kind of ship circa 1941? They remained battleships because that is what they were built to be. Side note: Given that Hood was officially a battlecruiser, but that post Jutland the Royal Navy revised the battlecruiser role to encompass the ability to stand in the battle line and be able to withstand heavy gunfire, it could be argued that post Jutland the term "battlecruiser" referred to essentially the same type of ship as what was meant by "fast battleship". The issue was clouded by the fact that Hood was the only post Jutland "battlecruiser" built to these revised criteria, and remained in service alongside older battlecruisers of the the pre-Jutland variety. In any case, being an earlier model fast battleship does not mean that the ship changes type as technology progresses. Just that the ship required modernization to meet modern standards, such as was done to several of the Queen Elizabeth's. Or the American Tennessee/West Virginia ships.

[@williambradley9419]

Nice write up Gary. Unfortunately it won't dissuade the stupids from believing she was equivalent to a WW1 "invincible" class.

[@garyhill2740]

@@williambradley9419 Lol. I know. I tried... Don't confuse them with facts. They just want to repeat the mantra/myth that Hood 'Sploded cause she was a thin armored battlecruiser. Even though every big gun ship pre-1925 had 3 inches of deck armor at best.

[@edwarddemouy1468]

I value your evaluation of the causes of the loss of the Hood. Thanks!! Ship [class] Suggestion: HMS Apollo [protected cruiser]?!

[@falloutghoul1]

Looking forward to seeing the upcoming Derfflinger-class video soon!

[@davidlovsin]

WE WILL ALWAYS REMEMBER THE BISMARCK R.I.P.

[@BlackHearthguard]

@Doge Maverick The Kreigsmarine sailors are just as deserving of remembrance, even if they were the enemy at the time.

[@ricksadler797]

Doge Maverick must be from that nation who needs help for just about everything

[@ricksadler797]

Doge Maverick was referring to Britain 🇬🇧 who is always in situations they need/ coerce help from America to get out of If they liked war so much why could they not fight for themselves instead of some trickery to have others finish it for them??

[@ricksadler797]

Doge Maverick kriegsmarine could have been better if better supported at home. But it’s just hard to live down the Lusitania episode

[@darrentaylor1644]

Well the hms hood and Bismarck were beautiful ships but sunk.

[@WowplayerMe]

I cried for weeks after she was sunk. :(

[@davidnash1220]

Really good- what a beautiful ship and a sad end

[@adamdubin1276]

To any World of Warships player who purchased the Hood, you all know her propensity to attract those rare golden bbs that result in you suddenly have your entire health pool drained or exploding.

[@sirtoast4502]

I was once asked what was so special about the Bismark. I said it may not look like much but it really blows them out of the water once you get under the Hood.

[@Bruce-1956]

To the boy sailors and and men of Hood who never returned. #wewillrememberthem

[@Aubury]

Had Admiral Holland placed Prince of Wales as the leading ship, matters might have gone otherwise. Speculation as to the cause has a fascination, and seemingly without resolution. The Hood enigma ...

[@cliveholland7846]

The Prince of Wales was unworked up, and still had dockyard mateys trying to sort out things in the gunnery systems. Hood was fully commissioned and worked up. After Hood sank, POW correctly withdrew. Churchill wanted Captain Leach court martialled. The CinC Admiral Tovey, (I think) said if he was, he, Tovey would resign and defend Captain Leach. I am an Royal Naval officer, albeit 83. The RN, does not differentiate between Retired and Serving unless necessary, such as writing to the newspapers. I am on the Retired List of the Royal Navy, but am able to use RN after my name. Doesn't cut much ice really, but I love it. Sadly I am no relation to Vice-Admiral Holland. As a Signal Officer I did meet Ted Briggs, but he was bored out of his skull talking about the Hood.

[@robertewing3114]

@@cliveholland7846 The signal officer who brought the signal to Tovey Hood blown up was asked to calculate if the signal was actually something else. Toveys opinion was that the boat deck fire was the root cause of the explosion, and he lamented Holland had not headed straighter in to minimise the target further.

[@bigblue6917]

If the turn had been made just 30 seconds sooner the result would have been totally different.

[@nimay13]

Yeah detonation amidship then.

[@ISIO-George]

A friend of mine's father served on HMS Hood in the late 1930s. Shortly before the war began his girlfriend (fiancé?) ran off with another man to Australia. Shortly thereafter she had regrets and contacted him. He deserted and went to Australia to bring her back to England. He was court martialed and so was not in service when the Hood sank. As the war progressed, because of the need for experienced sailors, he was allowed to re-enter the service. He served for the rest of the war into the 1950s and retired as a chief petty officer. He married the woman who ran off, and my friend was born in 1941. She told me that at night she would say goodnight to daddy, directing her words to a picture of the ship on which he was deployed. If she told me what ship that was, I do not remember, except I think it was another battleship.

[@klipsfilmsmelbourne]

hood visited australia melbourne port phillip bay

[@dugclrk]

A lovely ship.

[@Celebmacil]

@Drachinifel A couple of ships that would be nice to see would be the 1889 Greek ironclad Hydra and the 1907 Japanese armored cruiser/battle cruiser Ibuki.

[@Drachinifel]

I know the Hydra's are down for a video at some point.

[@AlejandroFlores-Ibarra]

Here are my suggestions for future videos HMS Neptune (1909) HMS Campania HMS Jervis Bay SMS Graf Von Goetzon USS Texas (1892) USS Oregon (BB-3) USS Allen (DD-66) Battle of Rio de Oro (SMS Kaiser Wilhelm Der Grosse VS. HMS Highflyer) Battle of Trindade (HMS Carmania VS SMS Cap Trafalgar) Admiral class pre-dreadnought battleship Tennessee class armored cruiser Tsukuba class "battlecruiser" Satsuma class "semi-dreadnought" battleship

[@arohk1579]

Very cool video, I always wondered where on the Hood my uncle was. There is very little info I have.

[@Drachinifel]

Do you know his rank and/or department?

[@arohk1579]

I don't know his department but here is the info from the Hood association. Ordinary Seaman John Robert Gillis, Service Number: P/JX 212482 I tried contacting one place the Hood association recommended, which I can't remember but never heard back. Any help would be great, I am building a model of her and would like to add some info about him. I wanted to also see if there were any models awarded to the crew posthumously so I could add photos of them as well. Thanks Larry

[@Drachinifel]

@@arohk1579 I'll see what I can find, there is also a government form where you can't request a relatives service record (for this period of history) if you are the closest living relative, otherwise you'll need said relatives signature, but either way that's a good route to go down.

[@arohk1579]

That's one thing to look at, not sure who that might be. I guess since my mom and bio dad got recorded and he died it wouldn't be her, however it could be my brother. Thank you for all your help, I really do appreciate it. Larry

[@darrentaylor1644]

Well when Hoods bow was in the air it's very front turret fire's a final defiant salvo before slipping into the dark water.

[@samdodsworth9480]

GOD DAMNIT, BISMARCK!

[@jamesarronmartinmartin7262]

Love the videos keep up the amazing work. 3 videos in 1 day?

[@Dondolini94]

Seems like a shell plunged down trough the deck because of the ship rolling to bear the rear turrets on the Bismarck, setting off the 4.5inches ammo which were stored directly beside the 15 inches frontal turrets magazine. Proof is the wreck, that shows the frontal part of the ship was shredded upwards because of a big explosion, occured between under the front turret and under the command bridge( where the 4.5 magazines were located) So this was indeed the unluckiest shot for the poor brit sailors.

[@michaelfuller2153]

A nice presentation! Years ago I read Ludovic Kennedy's book "Pursuit" about the action against the Bismarck. A good read. Admiral Tovey ALMOST ordered Admiral Holland to take up station astern of Prince of Wales, thinking the Bismarck might open on the lead ship. Kennedy said, "...he was to wish profoundly that he had". I believe (as you mentioned) Admiral Holland was trying to race in and close the gap to protect Hood's weak deck armor from plunging, long range shot. Terribly tragic day. A Drydock question might be: Was the "stable vertical" gyro device the key to making Hood's light deck armor obsolete?Thanks

[@richardcutts196]

Largest warship when built (and thanks to naval treaties close to largest, if not, when sunk) but most powerful... I'd say the 9 16" on Nelson class, the 8 16.1" on Nagato class, and the 8 16" on Colorado class were more powerful.

[@richardcutts196]

As for being the most powerful, that's debatable. You could argue that 12 14" guns could be considered at least as, if not more powerful than, 8 15". One thing you may not be considering when commenting on the speed of US BB's is that the vast majority of the world's Battleships were in the 21-23 kt range (despite what World of Warships would have people believe).

[@richardcutts196]

The 15" were guns used on Vanguard because they were in storage (having been removed from Courageous and Glorious after they were converted to aircraft carriers) and thus the only way the RN could get a new battleship in a somewhat timely fashion.

[@bkjeong4302]

Hood could simply outrun all of these ships....she’s honestly a foreshadowing of what was to come in the 1930s and early 40s, except unlike those ships she didn’t have to face seas ruled by carriers upon launch.

[@myevilplans]

Fletcher class destroyers, I dad served on several but never really talked about the war or his sea service, I'd like to learn more.

[@deathbypoi4557]

Dang the last time I was so early the British still had an Empire.

[@Simonsvids]

We still have, and you are part of it, except many of you do not realise that. Its called the Anglosphere. We are the grandpa now, and one of the kids has taken over the day to day running of the family business, but we are still a substantial shareholder, and are the link that keep the family together.

[@deathbypoi4557]

@@Simonsvids I know about the Commonwealth of Nations, it's just a cringy joke that you could use for almost every country, ie. the German, French, Spanish, Portuguese and Dutch colonial empires. Just when it's about a British ship choosing the nation that the mentioned ship belongs to makes way more sense, if you want to make a quick joke :)

[@arpitakodagu9854]

Murfly, your time in the sun is also drawing to a close. Enjoy it while you can.

[@GeneralKenobiSIYE]

SECOND!! Okay. Here is my opinion on what happened to Hood. I don't believe Bismarck killed Hood. I believe Hood and her crew killed Hood, and here is why I think this is what happened. Bismarck's shells were coming in at too flat a trajectory. From 11 degrees to a maximum of 15 degrees at the range they scored hits to Hood. At the almost head on angle Hood was toward Bismarck and Prinz Eugen penetration of the main belt armor would have been improbable at best as Hood had only a half inch thinner armor than Bismarck. At 11-15 degrees of shell fall at that range made penetration of Hood's deck armor equally improbable as a main belt penetration. The hits seen near the mainmast at those angles would have made it *IMPOSSIBLE* to penetrate Hood's deck! It's easy to work out that said shell would have absolutely wrecked the area around the Admiral's Cabin if not passing right through the Admiral's Cabin itself and exited either around the stairs up to the Admiral's Cabin and into the water just off Hood's quarter deck or it would have exited the port side below the boat deck, through the back of the 5 inch belt at 11 degrees, or through the bottom of the 5 inch belt and skipped off the top of the 7 inch if not the top of the 7 inch belt. Now it was reported that the hit to the area around the mainmast that Hood was straddled, and it was either two short and one just over or one short and two just over. I believe it was two short and one just long. The problem with the shot that went "long" was seen at almost the same moment Captain Leach saw the hit to the boat deck and wondered what the effect would be and at the angle of fall of Bismarck's shells would have made it impossible to have gone long as he believed was the splash just off Hood's port quarterdeck. In order to get a shot "long" so close to Hood's port side it could only have done so if it had penetrated out of the 5 or 7 inch belts, which were well above the water line and no where near the armored deck. According to the German's own gunnery charts for the 15 inch guns used on the Bismarck class was essentially "off the chart" at those angles. So Hood had enough deck armor for the situation. Admiral Holland was right about Hood being out of danger from plunging fire. 11 to 15 degrees is not what one could ever fall plunging fire. To continue, Ted Briggs said the first shot to hit them knocked them all off their feet up on the compass platform. When a crew member (I forgot his name) took a look at the Hood's boat deck, he reported the deck was on fire. Ready use ammunition began cooking off. And that was just an HE hit from Prinz Eugen. From that far back a hit from an 8 inch gun knocked them off their feet. Then Ted Briggs said there were body parts falling above which means the spotting top was hit without shell detonation. If an 8 inch HE shell from a heavy cruiser, the very type of vessel Hood was intended to hunt and kill could cause everyone on the compass platform to be knocked off their feet, the detonation of a 15 inch shell would have been far more noticeable. None of the survivors testified they thought Bismarck's shell detonated either inside or outside of the hull. Now I'm of the opinion that Bismarck's shells were defective as Bismarck landed several hits on Hood and Prince of Wales without any of them detonating (IIRC). They caused a lot of damage as they passed through the PoW's conning tower (I believe. That or the Bridge), but none detonated. The hits from Prinz Eugen were the ones causing the most damage. If it had been the conning tower that had been hit, the armor was more than sufficient to trigger the shell's fuse which would have wiped out everyone in the conning tower. PoW's bridge armor and the armor of the super structure in general was supposed to be enough against cruiser fire, like Hood's spotting top was as it had the range finders and she was supposed to be a cruiser killer, not a main battle-line capital ship. Hood had begun her 20 degree turn and PoW followed even though the signals were never lowered which meant that they couldn't lower the signals or there was no one left alive to lower the signals as that area where the signalmen were, was hit by another HE shell from Prinz Eugen. At this point Prinz Eugen was the ship wreaking havoc with its gunnery. Now, all the hits to Hood were seen and a penetration of the main belt armor would have been very obvious, even if one landed just short, the impact with the sea would have activated the fuse as well as caused the shell to just about start tumbling under water, which was found to have snuffed out the fuse of the 15 inch shell that landed short of PoW's starboard side below the main armor belt, pitched up and into an auxiliary machine room. As Hood was making a turn of only 20 degrees, she would have heeled a bit, but not enough to increase risk and actually would have not exposed her whole belt and bit of unarmored hull under it. Such a thing would have ensured the belt and hull were submerged rather than exposed as it was found happened when Hood was "hauling ass" in a straight line. So, no belt armor hits seen, no shells landing short but close enough to dive under Hood's 12 inch belt armor, the flat trajectory of Bismarck's shells making a deck penetration all but impossible, and even if Bismarck managed to hit Hood's 12 inch armor would not have penetrated as Hood was at an oblique angle to Bismarck and the angle of flight of her shells which only increased the "effective armor thickness" even further along with the 12 degree off vertical angle of all three belts, again, making belt penetration virtually impossible. Improbable at best. Also even a hit that did not penetrate the 12 inch belt would have been seen a either a ricochet or the shell shattering. The "vulnerability" of Hood's armored deck slopes can also be ruled out in this case because the shallow shell angle. The mock-ups done that found the narrow window where a shell could sneak in just above the 12 inch belt, hit the armored deck slope and penetrate into the magazines where done with the shell fall of Hood's own guns at 13,500yards which would have been 20 degrees. At 16 degrees the shell would have actually still have a high probability of ricocheting back up as the shell would be hitting the armored deck right where it begins to bend down and it increases in thickness on the slope, making that spot even harder to penetrate. I figure 16 to 17.5 degrees the shell would hit the actual bend downward that also thickens (basically like sloped armor, the bent increases the "effective thickness") which increases the chance of ricochet up if it isn't shattered or slowed enough for it to detonate above the splinter deck. I'd have still been ready to flood that magazine if the magazine's own armor had been penetrated by splinters. The magazines were also armored enough to at least be able to catch splinters that the splinter deck could not stop. Above 17.5 degrees, without the additional deck armor that would have extended the deck to more or less the top of the 12 inch main belt armor and a shell could sneak in above the main belt in a very narrow vulnerability and whatever area the shell penetrates into, there would be heavy if not catastrophic damage. Any angle below 11 degrees would actually skip off the top of the 12 inch belt and up a bit, still hitting the deck at a very flat angle and probably would have detonated somewhere above the center line (keel) of the ship and above it's armor. So, now that I think I've gotten that all out of the way, I can get to what I think killed Hood. Her age, the instability of older British main battery cordite. Pretty sure that much if not most of Hood's propellant was beyond the "safe" date as happens all the time in war especially in WWII because well, you know. Ted Briggs had always been of the opinion that Hood was destroyed due to flash through the floor of an aft turret gun house. Just prior to Hood leaving Scapa Flow a trawler (HMS Celia) lying alongside Hood in Scapa Flow just before she sailed to her destiny, reported that they heard noises from the aft gun hoists which could've indicate problems, according to the HMS Hood Association web-page. So Hood could have been forced to intercept Bismarck's little squadron with dodgy ammunition hoists. Then prior to Hood and PoW preparing to engage, X Turret (I believe) was seen move with turret Y to starboard in preparation, then return to center line for a short time then proceed back to the starboard firing position. That along with the testimony by the crew of the HMS Celia about the noises heard from Hood's aft turrets and the possibility that Hood was having ammunition hoist troubles tells me that the unusual movement of X Turret could indicate that the safety interlocks had to be over ridden because of the ammunition hoist problems. Hood had been in almost constant service for 20 years at that point and she was badly in need of a major engine overhaul the very least. This and that "strange discharges" seen coming from the barrels of X-turret just prior to the massive column of burning cordite just before X-turret was blown clear from its armored barbette tells me that the culprit of her demise was likely spontaneous combustion due to over-ram and the possibility the propellant was even more unstable because of its age as well. So in the end, I believe Hood was lost very much due to the same issues that led to the disaster of the Battle of Jutland that saw three British Battlecruisers lost with nearly all hands on all three, just as Hood, except it was not the detonation of an enemy shell penetrating deck armor, nor was it plunging fire into the gun house tops. Plunging fire did not kill Hood. Her age and poor condition made her a ticking time-bomb.

[@GeneralKenobiSIYE]

@Eric Fapton No. I had written this comment in another video about HMS Hood a couple of years ago, so I just went back to that video, copied my comment and posted here. I didn't feel like typing it all out again just in case Chrome crashed halfway through. Edit: It is frustrating AF when you've typed out so much and are almost done when your browser crashes. Now as a Jedi, I can control my frustration and not throw a tantrum with my lightsaber like CRY-LO Ren aka J.P. from Grandma's Boy

[@LuqmanHM]

That was interesting and very constructive...sadly i dont have enough knowledge to say anything more...what do other people think of this???

[@Compcube]

3 BCs sunk for cause A. Redesign the new BC to counter cause A. Still got sunk from same cause. Sad conclusion.

[@GeneralKenobiSIYE]

@@LuqmanHM There are those douchebags who have their own theories that are in line with the official Royal Navy conclusions. They usually get quite hostile when I talk about this other possibility. The problem is that they act like they KNOW FOR SURE and that no other scenario is possible and that my theories are full of rubbish. I mean they get VERY hostile. I've been kicked out of warship facebook groups because of it. I debate, they insult and they usually kick me out and ban me when they run out of arguments and I still have plenty more. They always say, "It's obvious you are just here to troll and create a hostile environment... etc etc blah blah." When not ONCE did I ever resort to throwing childish insults as they do. There was one asswipe that didn't even know WHAT he was arguing against. I put forth that the Hood Association said the angle of shell fall did not exceed a maximum of 15 degrees so could not penetrate the deck, and the guy called me a moron and said the shells hit Hood at 11 degrees so I was obviously wrong. I was like.... "What....?" Then he claimed that Bismarck's shell went JKF Magic Bullet when it hit the 7 inch middle belt (No impact with the belt armor was seen and would have been obvious even to those on PoW) and that the shell (i forgot what word he used.. over corrected? I dunno) and magically went from 11 degrees to over 20 degrees angle and penetrated the slope. So he thinks that a shell suddenly made a 15 degree hard pitch down as soon as it hit the 7 inch armor and penetrated to the magazine. Then I posted a picture of Hood's cross section and i added three lines to represent three different trajectories; 11 degrees, 15 degrees and 20 degrees. with the lines getting as close to the top of the 12 inch belt as possible and only the 20 degree line could have ever hit the slope. I also read up on the mock up the Royal Navy had done that revealed the "weakness" and they had use the angle of shell fall of Hood's own 15"/42 caliber MkI guns at 13,500 yards. He claimed I was full of shit that I made that up so I found the picture that shows the RN's mock up and it CLEARLY says 20 degrees trajectory at 13,500 yards. I even drew a red line under the range, angle and shell used. More insults came. I do not like when some one acts like they KNOW for a fact how Hood was destroyed when there is no way to actually know. My theory is just as sound as any other and is in fact more plausible to his magic shell BS. The sad part is that he was actually saying a lot of what I was saying. He was mad and called me an idiot that Bismarck's shells did not come straight in as Hood was at an angle, to which I said, "THAT'S WHAT I'VE BEEN SAYING THIS WHOLE TIME!" and that with such angles penetrating the side armor was almost impossible! I was banned immediately after that. I still don't get what the hell he was arguing with me about.... Does any of that ^ make sense? SMDH

[@GeneralKenobiSIYE]

@@Compcube Yep. Leaving safety doors open for rate of fire. In the heat of battle chances of over-ram go WAY up.

[@tommykaung5882]

It's official. Hood is Drachinifel's best girl.

[@skullship5351]

For the Q&A: What if the roles of the Scharnhorst, Bismarck and H classes of Battleships were swapped with the Graf Zeppelin, with the former three being designed as Carrier's from the start, and the latter designed as a Battleship?

[@carlosleon312]

Do you think that an armor distribution, on the line of the all-or-nothing scheme, would have made less possible the explosión? On the other hand, i not quite sure if am right on this thought ( correct me if not) but i would bet that if the 3 losses at jutland had not ocurred, the battlecruiser, as Fisher wanted, in all likehood would have replace the battleships all over the world, or at least in the royal navy as the expected money-saving, fast response vessel that he wanted for the protección of the empire

[@stevevalley7835]

Everything I read about the Lexingtons, and their, what, 3rd or 4th design, says they were inspired by the Hood. Yet, before the Lexingtons were laid down, the Admiralty decided it didn't want any more ships like the Hood, scrapped the other three Admirals on the ways, after spending some 1.6M Pounds on them, and went back to the drawing board. The USN pressed on with the thin skinned Lexingtons regardless. Another case where the Washington Treaty probably saved the USN from making another mistake. The flaw in the thinking behind the battle cruiser is there are some situations where running is not an option. The US forces off Samar Island in 44, known as "Taffy 3" were wildly outmatched, but running was not an option. They had to stand and fight.

[@Ornithocherius]

You asked for ideas, I have a few: HMAS Sydney (i) and SMS Emden, HMAS Sydney (II) and the Kormoran, The Japanese attack on Sydney Harbour, the actions of AE-2 and the 107 year old mystery of AE-1 (only recently found).

[@TheOmegagoldfish]

I've always wondered: would the WW1 Kriegsmarine (1914) win in a fight against the WW2 Kriegsmarine (1939)? No U-Boats, but everything else is allowed. Ships commissioned afterwards are commissioned on schedule for the sake of this thought experiment.

[@TheDOWfan]

Without a doubt

[@omgdwayne1565]

I would like to echo several others by saying how much better these videos are without the roboVoice. I've binge watched a ton of your videos, and your own voice is the way to go. Anyway I would like to suggest a video on IJN Chikuma. I'm just starting to build a model of this ship. I really like the weirdness of the layout. Also, what is that music you're starting your videos with? It sounds super familiar.;

[@bkjeong4302]

Given that Hood was very well-armoured for her time, should she be called the first real fast battleship?

[@USS_Grey_Ghost]

I have a request you do a video on USS Samuel B. Roberts DE 413 and or a battle between Bismarck vs Post 1942 planned large repair/refit HMS Hood

[@allgood6760]

Thanks for this 👍

[@greenseaships]

@ 2:43- Aaaand ironically they went and built another capital ship destined to be destroyed in a 'catastrophic explosion' -_-

[@reallifescottsterling1471]

Thanks for posting it right after

[@OddHunter5504]

The modernization scheme looks good but just my twocents is to keep the tripod mast on top of the bridge and the conning tower. Its just one of those things thats so unique to Hood

[@davidgoggin1427]

Hi, my Dad served in the RN from 1927 -1949. Could you cover H.M.S. Afridi . He served on this Destroyer from when she was commissioned & operated in the Med. until she returned to N/E England. This was to prepare for the evacuation of the troops in Norway 1940, his last day was helping to oversee resupply. Then, he left to join another ship & despite many sailors feeling uneasy they set sail & she met her demise.

[@jimtalbott9535]

Suggestion: German E-Boat S-130, or it's class, from WW2. :)

[@alanmcclenaghan7548]

2:50 What an absolute looker!

[@drby0788]

Awesome stuff man! Subbed!

[@1987jkilla]

That is actually the Bismarck firing at 08:10

[@whyus2000]

I just decided to give in and watch the text to speech one last night >:[ (good vid though)

[@longlakeshore]

It was well know that deck armor was the weak point of battleships. The large number of 12 inch mortars employed by the US and Britain in coastal defense batteries proves it as does the explosion of Hood and Arizona when penetrated by 15" and 16" armor piercing rounds respectively.

[@thegaminggecko1255]

Arizona? I think you're getting confused by that one the Arizona was sunk at pearl harbor by AIRCRAFT.

[@longlakeshore]

@The Gaming Gecko Arizona was sunk by a 16" armor piercing naval round modified to be dropped by aircraft.

[@thegaminggecko1255]

@@longlakeshore well i gotta say i didn't know about that, my apologies.

[@longlakeshore]

@The Gaming Gecko No problem. It's thought that Arizona was hit by four of these babies but only one stuck and exploded in just the right place--very much like Bismarck's "lucky" hit on Hood.

[@tommckinley111]

@@thegaminggecko1255 the Japanese were using modified 16 in AP shells dropped by Kates from 10,000 ft. They knew the armor weakness on our older battleships as well as Germans knew Hood's.

[@denysvlasenko9175]

The Hood is a curious case of a "battlecruiser" which is longer and heavier than all battleships ever fielded by RN. Also, only two RN ships (of the gun era, before missiles) were more heavily armed. How exactly was this beast a "battlecruiser"? Because it could achieve 32kn??

[@bkjeong4302]

Basically. The British also called the G3s battlecruisers, even though they had better armour than most battleships.

[@davy1458]

I'm American so I'm partial to the Iowa's and Dakota class but I have to admit....the hood sure was a handsome ship.

[@nickrollstuhlfahrerson8659]

Now that’s a critical hit if I’ve ever seen one.

[@gabeeg]

You really need to do a bibliographic video someday, to review some of your best source materials.

[@BOORAGG]

Actually, at the time of Hood's launching the Japanese battleship Hyuga was in service and was considerably more powerful (although armed with 14" guns, there were 12 of them). Also, the difference between battleship and battlecruiser is not in thickness of armor, but the percentage of armor and placement to the displacement of the ship. In actuality the German battlecruisers came very close to actual light battleships.

[@beetrooot1137]

Love that battle ship RIP

[@alexlupsor5484]

Good evening, I was wondering what condition the Hood’s 15” cannons were in? We’re they at the end of their lives and maybe needed replacements, did they have linings that were off in dia.”, or were they half life? I ask this because they were tracking the ships in probable positions before actually for firing? Were the gun crews having a bad morning because it took them a rather longer time to range the enemy. It took PoWales was quite accurate in comparison. Hood had problems in hitting Prince Eugene and then when they changed ships, I don’t remember if she even got close to Bismarck? She did have allot of fire missions prior to being sacrificed in the Bismarck affair? Forever in His service

[@chrishopwood6938]

What diffrences where there between the hood and the rest of the planned admiral class.

[@darrentaylor1644]

The hms hood was my favorite warship. Now it's a the bottom of the denmark strait.

[@remtanic2617]

nice. i actually just fineshed a model of it and am planning to make a video on it once i paint it.

[@PaperSmiles]

How bloody ironic. Laid down on the same day a bunch of battlecruisers exploded, changed so it wouldn’t explode, then blown apart by Bismarck :(

[@dovetonsturdee7033]

No. Laid down on 1 September, 1916.

[@BlackHearthguard]

Any thoughts on whether the Hood was lost due to the fire that was raging in the secondary ready use lockers rather than a single shot to magazines? To my mind the length of time and location that that fire was active makes a compelling counter theory to her loss.

[@sheldonlesser8972]

The hood was sunk on this day by the German battleship Bismarck RIP for all who sail on hood

[@kyletimmons421]

Questions: How would Hood have fared against Bismarck if she got her refit on time? Second question: If the Lexington was completed as a Battle Cruiser how would these two ships compare?

[@bairdrew]

1:-Hood certainly would not have exploded as she did IRL. The refit would have included the rearrangement of some of her armour and her magazines along with improvement of compartmentalisation. In particular she would have been afforded a single thicker deck plate that was lower down in the ship than the upper deck armour was historically. This would mean that she wouldn't suffer a conflagration spreading from magazine to magazine as Drach posits in the video, and that any 15" shell that would be landing at the ranges involved would, even if it penetrated the relatively thin upper belt as is the current consensus, would have been deflected upwards by the deck armour and away from the vital internal spaces due to a mixture of the angle and thickness of the renovated scheme. That said, she still wouldn't have been truly equal to Bismarck, mainly due to her age. Even post refit she wouldn't have been as fresh as she was when built and her vertical armour couldn't be modified without her being laid up for much longer than even the preferred refit would allow. 2-As for Lex - I'm fairly sure they could, in purely statistical terms based on displacement, design etc... kill each other fairly easily. Hood would have a very small immunity zone if any at all against 16" shells if they hit, but Lex herself would be completely vulnerable to the 15" rifles Hood was armed with. Lex is also considerably more vulnerable to disabling hits that would wreck her turrets, casemates, engineering spaces and so forth, whereas Hood has superior armour in almost every respect (and equal thickness and quality where she isn't markedly superior). Which leads to soft factors. British seamanship and gunnery was markedly better than American practice and ability at the time and the Lex would be subject to more rapid and accurate fire than she could return even with her theoretically superior engagement range. This would only be exacerbated by her comparatively poor handling and she wouldn't be able to dictate the range in any meaningful sense as she would only be slightly faster than Hood was. Of the two, I'd say that barring any statistically improbable occurances Hood is far, far more likely to win such an engagement than Lex would be (assuming she was commissioned as she would have been prior to conversion)

[@danzervos7606]

If the Hood had been retrofit, it probably would have reached the Denmark Strait before Bismarck and would have crossed the German battleship's T as opposed to having her T crossed. She probably would not have wasted her first several volleys shooting at Prinz Eugen and likely would have scored a hit or two on Bismarck.

[@bairdrew]

@@danzervos7606 Whilst I wouldn't agree that she could have reached the Strait before Bismarck - not when she was travelling with PoW - she certainly would have found the range and engaged Bismarck much sooner, which would have evened the odds dramatically.

[@Calum_S]

You forgot the Invergordon Mutiny.

[@Drachinifel]

Only so much I can fit in a summary video :)

[@Calum_S]

@@Drachinifel true. I was just being flippant. Keep up the good work.