How Has The Warship Evolved Throughout Military History? | Warships | Timeline

[@maelgugi]

I know the times have changed, but for me the big bad battleships with their huge three gun turrets are the best.

[@lknanml]

Back in the 80-90s we had a sailboat at the Long Beach Naval base. (Father was in AF Space Command for 22 years testing new ICBMs during the hottest days of the cold war) At the time the Missouri and New Jersey were stationed there. Sailing up to them they were big. Those guns indeed looked big. But let me tell you. Passing them on the water from the front or rear. Let me tell you the term WIDE gets redefined. I have never seen anything like it to this this day. Seeing them underpower sailing next to them as they left for good was an amazing day and a sad one. (On different dates)

[@HoshikawaHikari]

True ^^ Now guided missiles are all too boring

[@oldsguy354]

I agree that 3 big three gun turrets on a battleship is impressive, but 5 big two gun turrets on a little older battleship was nothing to sneeze at. ;) The one surviving example of such a machine (The USS Texas) was launched 1.1 centuries ago. To put that in perspective, Abraham Lincoln's son Robert Todd Lincoln could have seen her sail (and likely did), plus Texas was only 30 years old when Joe Biden was born. She was already an antique, being the 3rd or 4th oldest capital ship in the entire US Navy during April and May of 1945 when she engaged in the last combat operation of her service to toss over 3 million pounds of munitions on Okinawa, most of which went down the barrels of her 10, 14" 45 caliber main guns, mounted 2 each in 5 turrets. I mean, not too bad for the 'old lady' on the scene. She's the only surviving battleship that served in both World Wars, and the only surviving Dreadnought battleship (at sea level or above) on Earth. She's currently in dry dock at Galveston Texas being prepared for her next hundred years. In 1912, she cost American tax payers $6 million dollars (plus armor and armament-no small sum), but I think it's safe to say that we got our monies worth out of her. Her current repairs will likely exceed 6 times what she cost new. Texas tax payers are in for $25 million, and Battleship Texas Foundation is working on having the other $10-$12 million and the need for extended maintenance funds will likely never go away, so please take the tour and check her out when she is ready to receive guests again. Sorry for the long story;)

[@fl00fydragon]

@@lknanml There's one technology that might bring them back, railguns.

[@MrOiram46]

@@fl00fydragon That’s only half, battleships are also defined by their immense protection, and at this age, nothing short of protection that can withstand against direct nuclear explosions (literally exploding a nuke right onto the battleship) with the crew unharmed would really justify bringing them back.

[@GlamorousTitanic21]

Nautical history has always been one of my guilty pleasures.

[@celtic69]

What is there to feel guilty about?

[@xRoRox]

@@celtic69 yeah, it’s not like my nautical guilty pleasure….SpongeBob roleplay

[@pissiole5654]

For me it's meth

[@c0rnp0p80]

Heroin is mine.

[@brandonduarte6757]

And with that flag in your name so is nazis

[@MostlyPennyCat]

If you ever visit Portsmouth, England, come see HMS Warrior. A revolutionary warship that obsoleted every other warship afloat, soon to be Admiral 'Jacky' Fischer was a gunnery officer. The father of the modern warship, he ushered in an age of all metal warships with turreted guns. Torpedo destroyers And most significantly, he was the creator of the all-big-gun fast battleship, HMS Dreadnaught. It's also the most beautiful warship you'll ever see.

[@widodoakrom3938]

Should be 2000 years old warships history

[@doodskie999]

Moskva probably is the most advanced warship. It evolved into a submarine in 1 day

[@wensenthorsager6910]

i was about to say you where wrong and that it wasnt even that good until i saw the bottom part.

[@mlrs6293]

@@wensenthorsager6910 Yeah why is some Russian tub in the thumbnail

[@voalex5165]

Overrated ship. Destroyed and sank by either from its own crew or by Ukrainian missile

[@fredbeach2085]

When the Charles de Gaulle was laid down it had a glass hull it allowed the modern French Navy to see the old French Navy ships.

[@hughgordon6435]

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣👍👍👍👍

[@Tedkelvin]

I see what you did there sir...😆😆

[@jeffersonchau7171]

Bro why the narrator sound like the guy from World of Warships channel?

[@Ent1610]

He's probably the same guy

[@Darthbaldmouse]

I am pretty sure the last time the US used a battleship was in the 90-91 gulf.

[@robertmuellerbillcallsmeBob]

Mighty Mo

[@simonhardman5759]

Not sure if they sent cruise missile in 2003 in to baghdad

[@saloperez5255]

The Korean war goofy

[@robertmuellerbillcallsmeBob]

@@saloperez5255 nope, Desert Storm..goofy

[@emuhunter1]

@@saloperez5255 that’s incorrect

[@josephvandyck5469]

The 1 big issue I have with this program is it is French centric. Only the English share a positive light, sort of. Sweden is mentioned with tha Wasa. Not in a good light. US only with Pearl Harbor. Another shade thrown. What about the battle between the CSS Virginia and the USS Monitor, first rotating gun turret ever. What about Taronto Harbor? The Brits sank the Regia Marina with biplane torpedo bombers? The Brits also avenged HMS Hood with the same planes as Taranto Harbor. Just saying that the French did not invent everything naval like this episode suggests.

[@darracqboy]

I agree, the video seems to focus on specific things instead of major event in naval history, and they focus too much on pre-20th century ships even though I would say most of the change happened in the 20th century.

[@naixguy]

If they really wanted to show the advance in naval warships they would've used the US Gerald Ford Class aircraft carrier.

[@DavidLucas-oz1vz]

That's because it's a programme made by the French...

[@BamaScarface]

Let the frech have at least one moment in the sun bro. ....this show is that moment!!!

[@justthereed5593]

@@darracqboydude, the 20th century did not have the most advances. Almost all of what we do today was, at its core, developed well before the 1900s.

[@NCMA29]

This was an interesting and well thought out documentary. It was particularly interesting getting the history of the warship from the French perspective, valuable given the importance of French Naval design in the past. However, there were a few items I took some issue with: 1. At 49:10 there is an expert who claims that the design of the GLOIRE was so revolutionary that it put French Naval design ahead of the British for the next twenty years. Not true. The very next year, 1860, the Royal Navy launched HMS WARRIOR which combined all the characteristics of the French ship, but added a superior all-iron hull and armoured citadel in direct response, which immediately rendered the GLOIRE and every other warship in the world obsolete, for many years afterwards. Despite the fact that WARRIOR is now preserved in Portsmouth, there was no mention of her. 2. HMS DREADNOUGHT was laid down in 1905, but she was launched and commissioned in 1906. Her rapid construction was almost as revolutionary as her design. 3. It is stated that the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbour demonstrated the eclipse of the battleship by Naval aircraft, but this statement utterly ignores that the British conducted an identical raid on Taranto, destroying much of the Italian fleet a year earlier in 1940. In fact, the Japanese got the idea for Pearl Harbour from the attack on Taranto. I also have a question - why did the filmmakers not show any images of the HERMIONE? She is an incredibly fine recreation of a 18th century 32 gun French frigate and in my opinion the most beautiful ship presently afloat. HERMIONE would have been a splendid example of a French warship at the height of French shipbuilding and design in the age of sail. Curious...

[@stephenpowstinger733]

I think we can detect a French bias to this narrative.

[@hashtagunderscore3173]

It’s good to know that we Americans aren’t the only ones with selective memories 😢.

[@davidmickelson]

Replying to your third point. It is a classic example of one person saying something. Then the next person says "but..." and then proceeds to say something irrelevant to the first point. Yes the British bombed the Italian fleet at Taranto. That does not mean this documentary is wrong to say that the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor demonstrated the eclipse of the battleship by naval aviation. In fact there was a process for strategists at the time and it took multiple examples for the military planners of that generation to believe that the battleship was no longer the queen of the seas. Taranto started the process for many, but most took it as an example of Italian incompetence and British naval prowess. Churchill, for instance, in his war memoirs, repeatedly referenced that the Italian navy was just a paper tiger. Pearl Harbor opened many more eyes, but even that attack did not settle the issue. For instance, even after the Pearl Harbor attack, HMS Prince of Wales and Repulse continued into the Indian Ocean without air cover, and records show the men aboard those ships were supremely confident of success. It was one thing to attack battleships peacefully docked and caught at unawares, but it was believed to be an entirely different thing for planes to attack a ship at sea on high alert. The sinking of those ships did more than anything to shock the world into awareness of the power of aircraft carriers. "Never in the war did I receive a more direct shock" Churchill recalled on hearing news of their sinking. Even as late as 1944 the Japanese were still planning a naval showdown or "decisive battle" along the lines of Trafalgar or Tsushima in which they expected their super battleships the Yamato and Musashi to play leading roles.

[@NCMA29]

@@davidmickelsonMind you, the sinking of REPULSE and POW came mere days after the attack on Pearl Harbour, so not much chance for the RN to absorb any lessons that might have been learned. My point about Pearl Harbour stems from the fact that many historians seem to get blindsided by how the Americans tend to focus entirely, and very loudly, on their own history, utterly ignoring the rest of the world. For example: "The battle between the MONITOR and the MERRIMAC changed the course of Naval warfare for all time." Putting aside that she was named VIRGINIA at the time, the launch of the deep sea-going WARRIOR a year or so earlier had a much more significant impact on Naval warfare than an inconclusive engagement between two small coastal craft during the American Civil War. But you'll find many non-US historians finding it easier to jump on the standard tropes coming out of America. Neglecting Taranto and focussing on Pearl Harbour is just another example of this.

[@jamesdavis8542]

How do you know the pronouns the ships used ?

[@markaxworthy2508]

One has to ask why Britain had more sailors and ships in the 17th and 18th Centuries, given that France had three or four times the population. Britain had more sailors because it embraced freer trade than the French, which meant it had more experienced merchant sailors who could be drafted into the navy. The British blockade also meant that French naval sailors got little sea experience by comparison. To a great extent the British had more warships because they captured so many off their opponents. As French and Spanish ship design was often better than that of the British, the Royal Navy was not only keen to put the captures into its own service but often copied their lines for its own construction.

[@kovona]

Or maybe the French needed to prioritize funding to their army, since unlike the British, they shared land borders with their rivals and enemies. The British on the other hand, could afford to dump most of their money on a navy.

[@widodoakrom3938]

Not really french need to fund their land military base and Spain busy with the ottoman in the Mediterranean sea

[@markaxworthy2508]

@@widodoakrom3938 Certainly France had to concentrate on its army, but Spain was decreasingly diverted by the Ottomans. In 1790 Spain had probably the best fleet it ever possessed, almost none of it directed at the Ottomans. However, Spain required about 80,000 men to man it, but the country only had about 60,000 sailors, including coastal and river fishermen, As a result, its warships had high proportions of inexperienced landsmen in board. The French had a similar, but lesser problem. By contrast the British had two and a half times as many experienced merchant sailors alone as they needed to man their navy, which required about 125,000 men. The reason why the British had this advantage was that they embraced free trade, thereby expanding their merchant fleet much more than the more mercantilist French and Spanish.

[@bconni2]

the French and Spanish ship designs you're referencing, were knock- offs of 15th century Portuguese caravels & carracks. don't forget, the Portuguese spearheaded the age of discovery, innovating almost every major technological advancement in maritime exploration, ship design & ship building and naval warfare almost a century before Columbus first set sail. let's not forget, around the time CC first sailed west, the Portuguese had the most powerful, technologically advanced naval force on earth, with the most seasoned and experienced sea captains in Europe. the Spanish didn't innovate anything, they bought all the technology and mariners the Portuguese curated for more than a century and made it their own.

[@markaxworthy2508]

@@bconni2 Nope. The original Portuguese contribution was two or three centuries earlier. I talk above specifically about the 17th and 18th Centuries.

[@RetiredSailor60]

I served on Tin Cans, Auxiliary, and Gators during my 21 years of Naval service; USS Semmes DDG 18 1983-84, USS Cape Cod AD 43 1984-86, USS Kinkaid DD 965 1987-89, USS Whidbey Island LSD 41 1993-96 and USS Wasp LHD 1 2000-03...

[@SkinE-Vadee-Veechee]

Very intriguing to see the history of the battleships. I think you need to do one on the military gear like bullet proof vests and the evolution of how night vision and equipment that is worn has evolved. Great work tho

[@dpraptorP]

Such a Great documentary on sailing! Cant imagine the insane horror of having cannonballs smashing into your hull, sending shards all over the place. And the choking smoke in a hot cramped area. So many brave (and probably a little crazy) men who endured all that and fought on. My favorite sea battle was the 1905 Battle of Tsushima Straits, where the Japanese destroyed a fleet of Russian ships. The Borodino being my favorite. Timeline is really a great channel, so few good ones out there.

[@bconni2]

so you enjoy the steam powered ships. ? not so much the age of sail

[@hogweedblitz8739]

@@bconni2 Actually I enjoy both. I have built a number of wooden model sailing ships. They have a very rich history as well. I just have a special place in my heart for the early 1900 warships.

[@jeffdittrich6778]

The number of cannon was not the greatest factor in the early 18 hundreds. The training of the crews to load and fire those guns rapidly in the heat of battle made a key advantage. Ships that stayed in port most of the time were at a disadvantage to those that stayed at sea and practiced and drilled often. See Trafalger

[@getssmith112]

Practice makes perfect. That's why US never stops a military drill, coz they know anytime is a war.

[@ravex24]

Look at the famed Tiger tanks of WW2. Were far superior in tech analysis in every big aspect but it was the small things that made other tanks better. Look at the stats. The biggest on the block didn't win the fight as much as we think, based on reputation.

[@SStupendous]

They mentioned that.

[@jeffdittrich6778]

@@SStupendous Yes. I started writing too soon.

[@SStupendous]

@@jeffdittrich6778 No worries.

[@briantaylor9285]

Man, I can not imagine being on deck of a ship of the line during a battle. Cannonballs may not explode, relying on their weight and kinetic energy to do damage, but, getting creamed by a 36 pound ball of solid iron moving at Mach 1 or more is a H O R R I B L E way to go. 👀

[@heynsenene]

The guy in the boiler room goes down with the ship everytime. I'd take my chances and be near the deck so I can abandon ship and feed the sharks. Wait..nevermind

[@briantaylor9285]

@@heynsenene lol

[@davidkinsey8657]

There were many horrible ways to die on a warship in the age of fighting sail. Besides being directly hit by a cannonball, sailors were killed by large splinters blown from the hull, or falling masts, yardarms and other debris. Drowning was common as many sailors of the era did not know how to swim. Fire was perhaps the death sailors feared most. Other combat deaths came from daggers, cutlasses, boarding pikes, belaying pins, grenades, pistols, muskets, etc. during close combat. This doesn't include the many horrible diseases brought on by poor nutrition nor the many capital offenses which could get a sailor lashed to death, keelhauled or simply hung.

[@averagejoe9040]

It would certainly be fast though. Assuming it didnt hit your legs or arms.

[@helioselexandros]

Admiral Nelson's second in command was cut in half by a cannonball on deck right beside him during a battle

[@NotAMartian-1]

When I was a teenager, I was in sea cadets in Canada. We had the opportunity to go to the USA and train on one of their navel bases for 2 weeks. Norfolk Virginia is where I was. I can say with certainty that the French aircraft carriers have got nothing on americas and I’m not even American. The amount of sheer firepower on that base was jaw dropping. From nuclear subs, to battle ships to aircraft carriers so big you can’t even begin to imagine it without setting foot on the deck yourself.

[@felixcat9318]

Seeing this video was quite a surprise for me because a few days before I found myself thinking about the old sailing ships wih their gun decks and gun ports and wondered what their crews would make of a modern warship! The interviewee that said that modern warships are the largest 'things' made by man was incorrect, the world's largest vessel is a LNG processing plant permanently moored off the Australian coast. It has a lower deck area which is 60 metres length of open space, intended as a safety area between the dangerous bits and the accommodation and control areas.

[@romykoppert842]

Modern estimates suggest 30-150 individuals died when the Swedish Warship Vasa sunk, not over 1000 as stated in this documentary.

[@jansundvall2082]

The Wasa is to small for a compartment of 1000 men.

[@hkonhelgesen]

Fully manned, the Vasa had 400 men.

[@kevinchristochanel6345]

the real mighty battleship era has fallen. but i really admiring that era

[@Jon.A.Scholt]

As an American, yes, I love our super carriers. But there is something about the de Gaulle that I love as well. Also, the new French carrier under design looks amazing.

[@colinstewart3699]

Wow

[@daviddevlogger]

Everyone has a story, true success takes time. I pray every hardworking person reap the fruits of their labor.

[@ryanjones5133]

Nothing better than a 17th and 18th century sailing ship.

[@CraigJukes]

Wow this narrator never seizes to amaze me, he's everywhere. No wonder WOWS hired him to do their history subjects.

[@groomlake51]

Sir Philip Anthony Hopkins! From Silence of the lambs

[@vonnegutshot]

The documentary barely touched on the Vasa... but a few things about it: 1. The Vasa was not HMS, it was Swedish. 2. The documentary was EXTREMELY wrong when stating that 1000 of the sailors died, only 30-40 died (it was still in Stockholm Harbor when it sank, shallow and easy weather.) 3. The ship sank when, during the maiden voyage, it sailed past the King's Palacial Residence on the Stockholm waterfront and as it passed, it saluted the King of Sweden with a mighty firepower salute which utilized every cannon on each deck. The sailors did not close the portholes after the salute, and a large gust of wind made the ship list gently to one side, but the list was enough with the lower portholes open to flood the entire lower deck with seawater, and the Vasa sunk IN LESS THAN FIVE MINUTES.

[@khangkt1721]

"The Charles de Gaulle is the ONLY surface ship with a nuclear propulsion" - 4:00 Every USN aircraft carrier after CVN-65, USS Long Beach (one of many examples nuclear-powered cruiser), Kirov battlecruiser, and many other vessels: "And I took that personally" Joke aside, I assumed this documentary is cratering toward the French population since most of the examples are from the French Navy POV, but the mentioned statement is one of many poor research or words of this video.

[@thatsmrharley2u2]

It is my understanding that as of now, EVERY US Navy ship commissioned is nuclear powered.

[@studioarc517]

The Charles de Gaulle is the ONLY surface ship with a nuclear propulsion (in the french navy) just not mention but it's probably what they are talking about in this context

[@jarcher5626]

I know the Russian cruiser on the tile for this has evolved into a submarine.

[@Rob_F8F]

Amusing that the Moskva submarine was put on the video cover.

[@sshray1115]

🧡❤️🧡❤️❤️. Thanks a lot for this fusion- contemporary topic - past to future. Try more of this. ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐

[@noreavad]

Awesome dubbing, translating well the intensity and intonations of the original voice. Instant like.

[@jambajuice2408]

US Navy Vet. A Aviation Ordnanceman, lived on the USS Carl Vinson for 4 years…. Battle wagons are still my favorite, and I still think we should bring them back! They wasn’t decommissioned because they was outdated, they were inhuman. 😈

[@henrybryant4380]

Agree, we are at the point were carriers need something to clear a path to the enemy

[@shivampaliwal8162]

were* X2

[@lknanml]

This was a FANTASTIC documentary!!!

[@ITekAZ]

Talking about the evolution of warships and not mentioning that Portugal invented the galleon and that it dominated the oceans for more than 100 years shows how much professional competence went into this. The most powerful warship of the XVI century was the Portuguese Galleon “São João Batista” also known as “Botafogo” with 366 canons, more than 50 meters long with a crew of around 1200 men. Most of the warships of the time that were mentioned here are but a mere replica of the greatness of the “Botafogo”

[@curtiswebb8135]

World class....BADASS. Thank you from Anderson, CALIFORNIA U.S.A..

[@haroldcnyberg3094]

I am happy the French have their own aircraft carrier and a fleet of warships. In a future conflict the United States may need them.

[@ДжереміСалазар]

Nice to watch a military documentary that is not centered on American Military might.

[@momo90865]

Amazing documentary about naval history. I also love that it is from the point of view of French propaganda for a change. This is refreshing after loads and loads of US propaganda.

[@nkl7345]

Brits reporting on French naval power haha

[@ngokhaihd]

Thank you! What a super useful information video! I learned a lot ❤

[@mathersdavid5113]

Did he say Gloire made 30 knots? Try 13. Ironclads had given way to pre-dreadnaughts, dreadnoughts and super-dreadnaughts well before WW2.

[@LaneLibra]

As much as I absolutely LOVE warships and documentaries like this... As an American it's genuinely impossible for me to take this seriously because they're using the French navy as the centerpiece... "the carrier group can have a minimum of 6 ships" .... wow... I can't not giggle when they show the footage of the carrier group all full-steam-ahead! it's like ... yeah! You go little guy you can do it! 😅

[@samuel10125]

It's funny because I would argue the US and Royal Navy are the biggest players on the world stage especially giving the amount of Operations both our nations are joined on and given the history of Navel warfare Britain and America have contributed to it the most particularly the Royal Navy so using the French and not RN and the US Navy for a doc like this seems a bit counter intuitive and the bias is very clear. Also that point and nuclear propulsion was straight up false.

[@sir_humpy]

yet americans wonder why their entitled attitude is not appreciated elsewhere

[@heynsenene]

@@sir_humpy oh snap

[@heynsenene]

Giggle.

[@mglenn7092]

@@sir_humpy yes, we have an attitude, and we're probably too arrogant. But, the US Navy is the most powerful navy in the world at the moment, and has been since 1942... no real challengers since we finished crushing the Imperial Japanese Navy in WW2. A US Navy carrier task force is the premiere war-fighting naval formation. No, a French Navy carrier task force isn't very competitive to that, although I'm pretty sure it's better than what the Chinese and the Russians could put in the water now, and it may be better than what the British Royal Navy is currently putting to sea. Fortunately for the French (and us), we're allies. And yet they make the French Navy the center-piece of this show, and a French carrier task force. Does miss the point, when the show focuses on a navy that is second string at this time. It seems to be more a documentary about the evolution of the French Navy rather than a documentary on the evolution of warships in general, and in that regard it's not too bad. I did initially wonder about the emphasis on galleys into the 17th century, galleys with cannons, but when you understand it as a doc on French naval forces it makes a lot more sense - because the French were using cannon-armed galleys as main warships in the Mediterranean that late in their history. If this doc focused on the evolution of naval warships using the British Royal Navy as the example, we wouldn't be talking about galleys after the Greco-Roman period.

[@wesleyford7709]

Hi from Australia Looking forward to many hours of watching this fascinating site!

[@keithmoriyama5421]

If you've ever heard one of these guns go off, even a small single cannon out doors it's deafening. Can't imagine 30 of these going off together in a small confined area.

[@allangibson8494]

The wooden hull isolates the gunners from the blast (which is another reason for making the gun ports as small as possible). Tank gunners have a similar effect - they get more blast from the tank next to them than their own gun.

[@JS-te2vj]

I think, what's often glossed over is how the Japanese in WW2 were pivotal in the shift towards so called "Carrier Strike Groups". The Washington treaty forced the Japanese to get rid of battleships, retrofitting them into carriers - and their airborne groups were pivotal in Pearl Harbour, as well as the sinking of HMS Repulse and Prince of Wales off Singapore; what Churchill admitted was one of the biggest shocks of his lifetime. Just ironic though, how Japan would revert to huge gunships like Musashi and Yamato - enough steel to build 2000 or more aircraft

[@jonhildahl9982]

The model ships were amazing. What incredible craftsmanship that would have taken. Big or small.

[@neutralino1905]

An amazing documentary on the history of warships. Why does it focus on France, though?

[@jeffdittrich6778]

Overall an excellent video.

[@MelkorPT]

This is excellent. 👍

[@fogbattleshipyamato9173]

Is it just me, or does one of the narrator sound like he narrates short documentaries for WoWs too?

[@hollow_9476]

Imagine taking an advanced warship from our time back to the 1600's ..

[@Nanobot_123]

love it!. I like it because your using the French Navy its always the US in some videos/documentries

[@jen-a-purr]

Iowa Class will always be the most badass

[@rolandoscar1696]

Great docce. I always wondered why frigates had no windows/portholes on the sides. l thought it was to minimise damage, not as a ploy to fool radar.

[@DaniilVodopian]

The editing makes it impossible to stay awake while whatching this

[@svampen7782]

HMS Vasa was very tragic. If i remember correctly it was miscommunication that played quite a big role in its construction. Id have to get my info updated but i faintly remember it being something like that. It would have been the most powerful ship ever, well was for a few minutes.

[@Skreezilla]

Sweden watches the Mary Rose.. "oi Oskar, Hold my Vodka! We are going to show these English how it is done"

[@hkonhelgesen]

@@Skreezilla The Mary Rose was almost 40 years old when it went down. The Vasa lasted only 1 km.

[@Skreezilla]

@@hkonhelgesen exactly, the Swedish wanted to show how it is done

[@kovona]

The master designer of the Vasa (a Dutchman) fell ill, so he delegated the work to a inexperienced subordinate at the shipyard.

[@justinholmes1737]

a question....werent Galleys more of an ancient and medieval thing?....i thought Galleons (ships with bigass sails and cannons) were more popular since the 16th century onwards

[@theloniousm4337]

Like they said in the program, galleys ruled the seas for 2 millennium but were rarely used in the front lines after 1680 because they couldn't carry enough cannons. The development and perfection of the cannon (ones that didn't self destruct and take the ship with it) was the inflection point that was the end of the galleys and oar power.

[@justinholmes1737]

@@theloniousm4337 ohhhhh i see sorry missed that tnx! :)

[@jzeerod]

@@justinholmes1737 well ask a question and remain a fool for the next two minutes, dont ask a question and remain a fool forever.

[@justinholmes1737]

@@jzeerod lol agreed......when learning something its ALWAYS necessary to empty the cup..and keep the ego down...guess im quite old fashioned in this!

[@Mossyz.]

Fantastic 🌹

[@davidmawer4550]

I suspect that the CERN system is bigger, more expensive and more complex than any warship. It is certainly required more precision and scientific knowledge.

[@spaceempire]

I'm pretty sure the narrator of this documentary was the same voice behind many naval videos posted by World of Warships...

[@GustavoLadeira42]

23:15 One thousand sailors onboard the Vasa? It had less than 500 crew, and only 30 died. If such a simple fact was so grotesquely exaggerated, I wonder what else in this documentary is a lie... =/

[@donaldcarey114]

Most everything extolling the actual strength of the French navy.

[@jamesbugbee6812]

CVN de Gaulle has always been too small. It would have been nice 2 show a picture of the WW2 cuirasse Richelieu; she was stunning, as was Jean Bart 💜.

[@sv3351]

What battleship is that tipping over in the intro? Pretty unreal footage!

[@johnhejhejjohn]

might be hms barham

[@ivancaraig1715]

Eversince when I was a kid, Im fascinated with ships starting with sailship and then Titanic and warships. Submarine is my favorite type and Yamato is my favorite BB

[@embreis2257]

27:05 ship costs in the late 18th century equivalent to 300kg of gold. you won't get an impressive warship today for just $18m. not even for 3tons of gold

[@sir_humpy]

The purchasing power of gold today and then has to be very different. Possibly because, Spain aside, gold was pretty scarce in Europe.

[@embreis2257]

@@sir_humpy the [Spanish] _price revolution_ had continental wide repurcussions, but it is widely understood its effects already ended in the first half of the 17th century

[@widodoakrom3938]

True

[@michaelhall9339]

Thanks!

[@bconni2]

during the age of exploration, the Portuguese were the ones who innovated almost every major technological advancement in maritime exploration and naval warfare . just thought i'd mention that historical fact, being that these documentaries never do.

[@bigchunk1]

"I would like a ship of the line." "Do you have 300 kilos of gold?"

[@jailcatjones3250]

I've always wanted to see a man of war ship

[@coreywilliams2005]

You should go to the Vasa Museum in Stockholm, one of the coolest museums I have been to

[@tk9839]

No mention of the Turtle ship, considered the first ship to possess metal-clad plating...

[@donaldcarey114]

The U.S.S. Monitor was all metal and had a turret.

[@tmmy2ootuff843]

Welp, now I'm totally in the mood to play some "Ultimate Admiral: Dreadnoughts".

[@herochristin4254]

Great!

[@robertmcnearny9222]

Why are we learning about Frances tiny aircraft carrier? The way it presented it was supposed to be about the history of the warship.

[@Yen00491]

very nice

[@sir_humpy]

It was, of course, not 900 km/h but rather 900 m/s. 900 km/h is slower than a pre-US civil war revolver bullet.

[@flashladderacrobat]

Wonderfull museum in Stockholm , absolutley first class. When you walk in and see the Vasa for the first time , it's magic.

[@javiermartinezjr8849]

A Spanish galleon was found deep in the ocean in the gulf of Mexico by Yucatan I believe, but the gold found on it was made into centenarios worth about fifty bux at the time in there weight in gold,but because of the history and the ovious small amount made there like between 3k -11k apiece now,people still find them rarely,but some say they are cursed many who horde them die,superstition?yes,Montezuma's curse maybe ,cool story absolutely great work I love this vid

[@themanythingspodcast8173]

If you like history/ interesting facts podcast, try mine please: kzbin.info/www/bejne/g4fNd32rmdVrh80

[@syrea793]

Nobody's saying it, so I will: France was, throughout the entirety of naval warfare up to the modern age, second best. This documentary claims France invented the most technologically advanced ships and trained the best ship builders in the world. They didn't. They trained the second best 👍🏿 Britannia ruled the waves 🇬🇧

[@robertheaton6862]

I'm lucky enough to live around 10 miles from the historic dockyard in Portsmouth, if anyone has the chance to go I would highly recommend it, the Mary Rose museum, Victory and Warrior just a few minutes walk from each other as well as other interesting attractions all within a active military and commercial port! Unfortunately entry is quite expensive unless you buy a season pass.

[@stephenpowstinger733]

The gun turret was invented in 1869 in France? What about the Civil War Monitor in 1861?

[@katherinecollins4685]

Very interesting

[@vincentlavallee2779]

The title of this video is very misleading. It is more about the French progression over the years from about 1600 to WW II, with a very brief mention of their only WW II battleship, and then later their mention of their one and only aircraft carrier (post WW II). This was not really a story about warships in general over the centuries, but rather It was a way to have a very French oriented documentary. The main problem of this is that the French in general did not drive the evolution of warships because that was done by the English, up until WW II, when the Americans took over completely. So, given this, there is almost no real documentation here of the battleship, and the later arrival of the aircraft carrier, nor even how the battleship came to be called that! However, it did briefly point out the demise of the age of the battleship due to air power, inferring that this was due to the aircraft carrier, which in reality was only one of the ways airplanes were and could be used to destroy battleships.

[@TheOtherBradBird]

It is the little brother's perspective. I enjoyed it, especially the segment covering Mediterranean galleys. That entire naval subtopic was unknown to me.

[@lino222]

yeah...no! Portuguese Caravels, Carracks and Galleons changed the way ships were built...among many things Portuguese introduced broadside cannons... kzbin.info/www/bejne/pqHNlp6gp6umj9k

[@mings6491]

The "Richelieu" in the documentary was not the richelieu; in fact it was never shown.

[@turcenoarthurjamil4364]

ahhh yes, As a seafarer myself I am really loving this

[@stephenwills980]

super awesome

[@jzeerod]

yes always love those tallship war and old school naval warfare novels. just cant find them too often that are well written and knowledgeable. what is this genre called?

[@Miguel-bd1hp]

Historical fiction I believe

[@b26t4]

You should read the Patrick O Brian series. Best historical fiction.

[@johnelliott7375]

You told me that you were going to call when you were ready. Morning around 10 get a hold of me. TTYL

[@stardaggerrihannsu2363]

Subs are warships, everyone else is a TARGET!

[@johnedwards3621]

John Ericsson and the USS Princeton, later followed by Ericsson's USS Monitor.

[@kurtkuczynski]

If you are going to mention Richelieu, don't show the Colbert.

[@fuzzyhair321]

Gallay was just a tribune ships with cannons and better sails amazing how little changed over 2000yrs

[@slavkovalsky1671]

Oh but why are you showing the wrong ship when discussing the Richelieu, the pinnacle of French battleship construction (with its unique 4-gun turrets...)

[@SydWaters1776]

Great video! Soon enough we will find out how many hyper sonic ship killers it will take to take down a modern aircraft carrier or if they will be capable of defending from a large barrage of incoming missles. I believe aircraft carriers have had their day and will go much the way battleships did in ww2. Obsolete! We shall see soon enough

[@PABeaulieu]

The future may be in submersible ships carrying missiles and drones.

[@javiermartinezjr8849]

A modern war craft carrier is so dangerous,I know of people who have PTSD not from combat but from what they have seen as far as accidents etc,they say on that deck,if your a few inches to the left right,you stand while you should crouch your dead,the man said he saw 6 gruesome deaths on his carrier and heard of another 11 on that ship in just one tour,that's a moving city,precision and awareness on a carrier is often not mentioned

[@hankhillsnrrwurethra]

My dad was a corpsman on the USS New Jersey in WW2. He never recovered. Died young an alcoholic with physical disability and head full of PTSD. He was proud to have served but HATED THE NAVY. When I wanted to drop out of college to join the Air Force he flipped out. I finished the degree.

[@larsrons7937]

Very interesting, very indepth. Brilliant work. 52:40 _"The incredible resistance of today's ships..."_ *Russian cruiser "Moskva",* Black Sea, april 2022: _"What did we miss?"_

[@gusgone4527]

Nothing is more amusing than listening to the french talking about their version of naval history. Please see Sir Francis Petit Smith, SS Archimedes of 1839 and The Ship Propeller Company of London.

[@Mujangga]

Thanks for the upload. I wonder if anyone knows where I could find the original French language version without English dubbing?

[@mikrobixmikrobix]

i like your thumbnail with russian submarine Moscov 😄😄😄😄

[@NorthSea-xb7jk]

Подбор крейсера конечно эпичен :))

[@Asad-2166]

It's amazing how ships have advanced 🇬🇧🇧🇩🙀

[@bayeuxx]

The triangular sails are called stay sails and the rectangular ones are called square sails

[@Kawasaki_King]

Weird how the French were so good at building ships, yet the English just kept defeating them in theirs? X-D