5 of History's Greatest Warships

[@Bruin144]

All of the pictures Simon used of the USS Enterprise were pictures of the wrong ship. He used pictures of CVN-65 instead of the ship he was talking about CV-6, both named Enterprise and both famous in their own right.

[@tarn1135]

He did that in a couple of videos

[@seanbrazell6147]

Yes, but..... War Prius! Surely allowances can be made! 😉

[@stevenjlovelace]

They also used a picture of the NX-01 instead of the NCC-1701. 🤓🖖

[@TheGrrrudy]

this

[@rtwpsom2]

@@stevenjlovelace I mean, technically the first was OV-101, the space shuttle mockup.

[@abzzeus]

For Iron Clads, what about HMS Warrior, famously described as "she could sail up to every enemy fleet, steam right through them, sinking them, then sail home again"

[@nathansellars3757]

the first true iron ship as well

[@MoA-Reload...]

Yeah, Warrior was the Dreadnought of her day. Soon as she hit the water all other Warships were basically obsolete.

[@LordElpme]

Warrior and her sister ship didn't see any real combat but at the same time outclassed other ships so badly that they kept the peace by just sailing around the channel. The fact that Warrior still exists considering how abused her hull was after she was retired from front line service is amazing in itself.

[@51WCDodge]

@@LordElpme True. the best description of Warrior and her sister Black Prince is that they were the Stratigic Detterent of thier time. She is a worth a visit. especially as the Mary Rose , HMS Victory and all the other musuems are close by/

[@51WCDodge]

@@nathansellars3757 She is actually a composte wood iron hull.

[@DorkKnight99]

Any such discussion would be impossible without the Big E. Well done.

[@sibire8284]

My first thought seeing the thumbnail. "He better have done the Big E."

[@Craig-wp3pz]

Was hoping to see HMS Warrior

[@cleverusername9369]

Shame he never actually showed The Big E, CV 6, he only showed us CVN 65

[@pravineshdayal4489]

The god emperor?

[@Aelvir114]

Yeah, considering he neglected to even mention the most successful battleship ever put to water, HMS Warspite..

[@jasonwomack4064]

Those who question the effectiveness of battleships have never had one parked along their coastline, hurling explosive Volkswagen beetles inland.

[@bluelionsage99]

True, but only nations with completely pitiful airpower and missile resources will ever have to worry about a battleship managing to pull up along the coastline.

[@mgk920]

I still remember seeing video of Iraqi soldiers surrendering to a US Navy Iowa class battleship recon drone before the ship even began firing its big guns during Operation Desert Storm

[@Craig-wp3pz]

@@mgk920 to be fair, USN has a bit of history (WW2) with excellent shore bombardment and gunnery skills, and those guns look scary when you know you're 'in range'

[@Crashed131963]

@@bluelionsage99 Today your right. But in WW2 battleships were the only ships capable of weakening up a enemy shore line be for a beach landing. And they did a lot of Beach landings during WW2. They were far from obsolete in WW2 , they just did a different job.

[@toddlerj102]

Weaker nations yes. Now the hyper ballistic missiles are here battleships an carriers are fffffucked

[@FrankLloydTeh]

Thought this would be sponsored by World of Warships

[@collincovid6950]

I went ballistic when I found it was not.

[@MoA-Reload...]

Considering he speaks highly of CV's and mentions submarines, I am surprised WG didn't beg to sponsor it 😂

[@blueboats7530]

Even WoW would have insisted the photo of the USS Enterprise would have to be the correct photo

[@CAP198462]

Might have been worth it for getting Simon to try to pronounce “Gnevny” (гневный).

[@osoprimero9753]

The Enterprise was not the first ship to sink a Japanese boat (submarine) during WWII. A destroyer sunk a Japanese mini-submarine prior to the attack on Pearl Harbor.

[@stephenketcham4179]

The USS Ward.

[@osoprimero9753]

@keith moore I knew someone would point it out but it is akin to saying there was no damage or lost ships during the Japanese attack of Pearl Harbor prior to the declaration of war. I assume most veterans, especially those killed or wounded, would consider the war started with the first shots.

[@osoprimero9753]

@keith moore I understand but then the Korean War was just only a UN Police Action and many medals issued may not be valid! It is frustrating because the rules seem to be fluid at times. My view is that the Ward's action was not confirmed until years later and the Enterprise's proponents had better PR. My argument is really only based on the fairness to the Ward's veterans. Have a good day.

[@BatMan-xr8gg]

@keith moore Wrong about Goering. The International Military Tribunal charged Goering on all four counts (crimes against peace, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and conspiracy to commit crimes against peace, war crimes, and crimes against humanity). He was convicted (on all four counts) and sentenced to death.

[@ephennell4ever]

Yeah, but he did say "during the war", and that action was - technically - a pre-war defensive engagement ... just to split hairs!😉

[@eddietat95]

3:15 That's a pic of CVN-65, not the Yorktown-class CV-6

[@JohnBeebe]

I've seen that mistake made more than once

[@lovelessissimo]

The average idiot can't tell the difference. I should know, as I am an idiot.

[@karthikt5789]

nerd

[@saberdogface]

At least there wasn't a picture of NCC-1701 Enterprise.

[@twocvbloke]

@@saberdogface But there was footage of the NX-01 Enterprise... :P

[@laszlokaestner5766]

HMS Dreadnought was not the only battleship to sink a submarine. You are forgetting that the Grand Old Lady HMS Warspite amongst her many exploits sand a U-boat at Narvik, interestingly enough by using her float plane. It was also the first sub sank by a plane during WW2. ANY list of greatest warships is incomplete unless Warspite is mentioned somewhere!

[@johnscott107]

if the warspites floatplane sunk a submarine, then i would argue it was a submarine sunk by a plane, not a battleship. Although i agree the Warspite had an amazing career, and was a beautiful ship.

[@erika002]

Uhuh... I don't want to complain but the USS Enterprise part wasn't clarified, they only told the story of the WW2 USS Enterprise *[CV-6] which is fine as an example to represent carriers but they showed images of the nuclear powered one [CVN-65] which might confuse people unless they know some things about ships or naval history. Just a fun fact, there's already a third USS Enterprise [CVN-80] already being built by the US, the third ship of the new Gerard R. Ford class.

[@collincovid6950]

In space?

[@MoA-Reload...]

Slight minor correction, CVN designation is for Nuclear powered carrier. Big E was CV-6 😉

[@erika002]

@@MoA-Reload... Oh yeah I forgot about that designation

[@angelarch5352]

@@collincovid6950 Ford Carriers have laser guns, so maybe in space...

[@ph89787]

@@MoA-Reload... not quite The N designation was originally meant for night ops. Which the Enterprise (CV-6) conducted from the end of 1944 till May 1945.

[@peterblackburn5793]

HMS Glorious might disagree with the phrase, 'every time aircraft carriers and battleships met, the battleships lost.'

[@matthewmoser1284]

It's hard to pin down a specific warship that started the Age of Sail with regards to changing warfare, but I would suggest the HMS Mary Rose. One of the earliest purpose-built broadside battery, full-rigged ships made her style a staple of naval warfare for the following 3 centuries!

[@brianhansen5882]

"In the match ups between carriers and battleships the carriers won every time." 2:47 Ummmm tell that to HMS Glorious who was sunk by gun fire from Scharnhorst and Gneisenau, June 8, 1940.

[@grantjohnson5785]

Yep, there's always exceptions. Still, the ability to attack from WAY out of range (using planes) clearly put carriers on the top of the list in terms of overall versatility in WW2. Nowadays, though, with ballistic missiles launched from nuclear subs, there's strategic near-parity between subs and carriers... and definitely a tactical advantage to subs.

[@Irisishunter]

USS Gambier Bay also

[@Stevgar2]

I highly recommend @Drachinifel & @AC_Navalhistory for more warship history as well as the times upon which they were created . Keep up the great work Simon & crew .

[@cleverusername9369]

I would add to this the Battleship New Jersey channel, they likewise put out great naval content, mostly about WWII era ships, especially the Iowa class for obvious reasons, but they delve into other museum ship history as well.

[@Sherwoody]

I would like to see one of earlier vessels and their impact on trade in their age. Ships like triremes, galleons, and ships of the line (eg. HMS Victory) were every bit as technical in their day as 20th century warships.

[@51WCDodge]

It has been said , and I'd find it difficult to argue, that a Warship is always the cutting edge of technology. |Think of the skill set needed for every item on board , its boggoling.

[@Andyww08]

The aircraft carrier concept reached it's fruition in 1918 when the worlds first aircraft carrier HMS Argus, was commissioned in November 1918, and for 4 years, no other nation had an aircraft carrier. HMS Hermes was the first carrier designed from the ground up, although was not commissioned until 1922. Where the Japanese had already built their first ship built as a carrier

[@gannonwoods2456]

During the submarine section, "a great deal of success" was all that was used to describe the effects of U.S. subs against the Japanese. U.S. Submarines sunk more than twice as much tonnage than aircraft during the war (5,320,094 tons vs 2,333,597 tons). Submarines proved invaluable in WWII and were more instrumental in the downfall of Japan than any other vessel.

[@Crashed131963]

Only against the Japanese. In 1943 British mobile Radar and Sonar was so good it was suicidal for a U-Boat. Even surfaced U-Boats at night were bounced on by bombers with searchlights and depth charges out of nowhere. U-Boat losses were 80% or something crazy like that.

[@live2ride18]

@@Crashed131963 you’re losing a hell of a a lot of perspective. Had it not been for 1941 us coming , uBoats would have done there job. The time you speak of is that of when Americans were able to catch up with everything and close the trans Atlantic gap with longer range planes. Two countries meeting in the middle, but yes I’d like to thank the brits for all that, they fought the war so well Winston was basically a figurine at the negotiating tables throughout the war and at the end of the war when Stalin, Roosevelt, and the big wig cigar smoker met. Those transcripts are pretty funny if you read them. Then he’s yelling the French shouldn’t get a sector in Berlin. 🙄 He would of been in the same place if not for radar and being on and island... and the grace of the Germans at Dunkirk. Ok rant over. 😅 Anyway transatlantic route was 3300 miles long 500 miles in latitude on average depending on port of call. All boats to be sunk, on top and bottom, right there. Based out of France mind you. By Japan’s height they conquered over three million square miles of territory alone. I can’t find for the life of me how many square miles of sea that is for subs to be lurking but you get the idea. We were island hopping and if subs got to close someone let’s hope the spotter planes saw it. Around the end of 1944 the US subs LITERALLY ran out of anything to sink. One captain got bored and decided to take out a train with men rowing out to plant explosives. That’s a hell of a video. Your talking eggs and bacon errr what do brits eat.. ah fish and chips. It goes together, but it’s not the really the same thing.

[@CainamZiggy]

@@live2ride18 "One captain got bored and decided to take out a train with men rowing out to plant explosives." That was Captain Eugene B. Fluckey on the USS. Barb. One of 7 Submarine Captains to receive the Medal of Honor. The attack on the railroad (I believe) was the ONLY time U.S. troops actually set foot on the home Japanese island. Fluckey was an absolutely brilliant Naval tactician, to the point he is still remembered among the Submarine fleet.

[@Zarcondeegrissom]

U.S. subs against the Japanese... that was in spite of the Bureau of Ordnance and the mark 14 submarine suicide self-destruct device rrrr I mean torpedo, lol. kzbin.info/www/bejne/m4KYg6htj9qSZ6s

[@live2ride18]

@@CainamZiggy why do I need a history lesson just because I didn’t point out every minute detail? You missed the part where he shot 127mm rockets off a sub in the pacific. And much much more. Check out why a submarine came back more decorated than any ship in WW2 only the Gov. and crew know that because it’s still classified. Now go learn about the rest of them because I did. I don’t ‘think’ that’s the only crew to set foot on mainland Japan during ww2 either 😉 Have a good one yeah

[@dalefirmin5118]

The first submarine used in wartime was also named the Turtle--used in the Amerian Revolution in 1776. It was designed by David Bushnell. The one-man "people-powered" ship never made a successful attack but did make several attempts.

[@JohnSmith-nm8jz]

No mention of HMS Warspite? You disappoint me, Fact Boy.

[@bruceedwards539]

Anyone who claims Battleships did nothing during WWII has clearly not heard of HMS Warspite.

[@keeneye6274]

I was looking for someone who would mention the glorious HMS Warspite.

[@agwhitaker]

HMS Warspite had an attitude problem - she basically went rabid if anything German or Italian got in the way. If ANY R.N. ship surviving WWII was kept as a memorial.......

[@isaaclao2380]

Agreed, HOW DARE YOU LEFT OUT THE MIGHTY WARSPITE? CMON U GOT CV-6 AND YET WARSPITE IS NOT HERE?! Dude, it is one of the best ships along with the Enterprise.

[@LordElpme]

To hit the seas in WW1 and the ship class still be effective (In Warspite case become something akind to the sea going Boogyman) in WW2 is something to be celebrated to be sure.

[@seventhson27]

Two glaring omissions, the Trireme and the "Ship of the Line."

[@w8stral]

How can one possibly do a ship discussion without at least HMS Victory or the Trireme? I have no idea. Both more important than HMS Dreadnaught. USS Monitor showed the way more than HMS Dreadnaught. True, it was crude, but it showed the future. True it took a few more innovations(namely in power) but... HMS Dreadnaught gets too much praise. It was a minor stepping stone and obsolete before it left the drawing board. Everyone was doing the same thing.

[@Dori-Ma]

Galleons too.

[@AvoidTheCadaver]

Because ships of the line werent really ships that changed the nature of warfare per se. You would have to go way way bakc to when cannon started being mounted on decks, which is more accurately around the Spanish armada period, the mid 1500s. And if anything you would have to go all the way back to caravels. Ships of the line were merely the final incarnation of wooden warships where cannon were mounted on the sides.

[@Hyde_Hill]

Or Frigates and the like. There where 4 wars between the Dutch and English for mainly naval superiority with many famous ships.

[@1B1ueyedwo1f]

I love the account of a naval maintenance engineer stationed on the battleship USS Iowa. He said that, when the Iowa was upgraded with computers, repairing them was a PITA due to the fact that the ship's guns generated enough force to shake the computers from their placements every time they fired. Also, fun fact, the Iowa was the only ship in the US Navy with a sit down bathtub.

[@gregshimmin5334]

The battle of Jutland, that is a great example of both Decisive battle doctrine and the effectiveness of battleships in combat.

[@Kwidtheboredvid]

Tsushima as well is a great example of the decisive battle doctrine

[@fabilie8178]

Well, Jutland tried to be a decisive battle. Both sides suffered heavy losses, but they also had lots more to spare. Of course, the importance of the battle can not be questioned, but it was not capable of turning the favor of the war in either side. It only contributed to an already ongoing process and showed how bad of an idea it is to pack huge weapons on ships that are not capable of taking much punishment themselves, a lesson that modern navies seem to have forgotten.

[@AytonGang]

@@fabilie8178 Jutland was a perfect example of decisive battle doctrine. While both sides suffered big losses the Royal Navy could endure those losses so much more easily than the Germans, that the German fleet never tried to engage them again. This one battle won the entire naval theatre of surface ships for WW1 in the favour of the Royal Navy.

[@fabilie8178]

@Ty Vsd1337 Here, I have to intervene. In case you haven't noticed, between the battle of jutland and the building of first aircraft carriers, quite some time had passed. They were used in WWII and later, not in WWI. Before actually using them in combat, many people doubted the performance of carriers. And yes, while it is true that carriers outdid battleships in every aspect, that had nothing to do with the original post and carriers themselves are having an even harder time not becoming obsolete than battleships ever had. Who knows, they might have no use even now with naval strike rockets.

[@ignitionfrn2223]

1:35 - Chapter 1 - The carrier 4:05 - Chapter 2 - The battleship 7:30 - Chapter 3 - The turtle ship 10:05 - Chapter 4 - The ironclad 12:25 - Chapter 5 - The submarine 15:15 - Chapter 6 - The future of the sea

[@kirkbolas4985]

Simon, you mentioned in passing something to the effect of that there were no major battleship involved sea battles in WWI d/t the German and British navies not wanting to risk their “dreadnaughts”. What about the WWI sea battle of Jutland?

[@AtheistOrphan]

I remember going on a guided boat trip around Hamburg docks and the local guide pointing out where the Bismarck was constructed, referring to it as ‘the greatest-ever battleship’. I refrained from mentioning that we sent it to the bottom of the Atlantic.

[@allaboutcryptoinvestment7684]

For Bitcoin riches... and more guidance in Crypto currency investment message administrator

[@allaboutcryptoinvestment7684]

W.H.A.T.SA PP +1.4.8.0.6.3.0.5.8.3.5

[@lukehayward5455]

Could you do one for HMS victory or HMS warrior. Or any of the old HMS fleet. Would love to see that!!

[@thomasgentry9624]

Thank you for including iron clads. In hindsight, the CSS Virgina and the USS Monitor made the every other navy in the world obsolete. Even the illustrious HMS Victory. It was a turning point in naval history

[@HarryFlashmanVC]

Nope.. the Gloire class ocean going ironclad s were first launched in 1859, 3 years before Monitor and Virginia, launched in 1862. These were blue water iron ships of the line and made obsolete, overnight, the wooden ships. In 1860 HMS Warrior was launched and made EVERY other ship on the planet obsolete. Monitor in particular was a ground breaking design but the French and British were already wat ahead on ocean going ironclad warships.

[@thomasgentry9624]

@@HarryFlashmanVC Very true. The Virginia steamed around wooden warships with impunity for a day. The Monitor showed the rotating turret, instantly making ships with fixed guns obsolete, or, at the least, yesterday's news

[@HarryFlashmanVC]

@@thomasgentry9624 so your actual claim is that Monitor made every other warship obsolete because of its turret, so why did you claim Virginia made them obsolete? Furthermore, the earliest turreted warship was HMS Trusty which was laid down in 1859. Ericsson's turret had been rejected by both the British and French as an impractical design before he sold it to the Union. His turret design could only be used in dead calms or on river or lake water because it was not a true rotating turret. In order to turn it was jacked up by hydraulic ram, rotated and then dropped back into place, a copper ring being its bed. This meant that if the low freeboard was waterlogged the turret couldn't be used without risk of flooding the Hull. Monitor was a river boat, it was not a blue water warship and would have been blown out the water by Warrior or any of the French ocean going ironclads. It is a misconception that Monitor and Virginia were the first iron warships.. far from it, and Monitor wasn't a ship at all. They were rhe first armoured ships to slug it out...that is their importance. Ericsson's turret design was a technological dead end, the first modern, truly functioning turrets were on the Thunderer and Devastation, in 1871.

[@thomasgentry9624]

@@HarryFlashmanVC You got naval history down more than I do. My "obsolete" comment was that every navy in the world saw the value of a rotating turret afterwards. Broadsides with fixed guns were obsolete

[@jeffthompson9622]

My uncle Q.D. served on the CV-6 during WW2. I was glad to find a book about it and pass it on to him while he was still alive and could share it with my cousins. According to the book, that ship's officers, crew, and pilots destroyed 74 enemy ships and 912 enemy aircraft.

[@Aelvir114]

Also no mention of the Grand Old Lady HMS Warspite? Poor shame... On the sinking of Bismarck, Bismarck’s radars were knocked out during her engagement with Prince of Wales. And furthermore, And Bismarck had next to nothing of AA capabilities due to the guns she had were not fuel purpose but only given an AA Shell but had very low elevation. America got decimated at Pearl Harbor because most battleships at the time for America were only armed with two or AA guns. Here’s a quote from someone a few months before "In late-1941 the British ship Warspite tied up across from us (he was aboard the California) at 1010 dock. She had been in battle against the Germans and had some damage that was being temporarily repaired in preparation for going to Bremerton, Washington for permanent repairs. Some of the British sailors, I think about 20 or so, came over to the California to visit and tour and an equal number of us went over to the Warspite to visit and tour. I was lucky enough to be selected to go aboard her. I remember thinking that she was dirty, much dirtier than our ship and they served rum on board. However, we had great respect for the Brits as they had been in battle and we had yet to be tested. We spoke of many things but the one thing I remember was that they told me that US ships did not have enough anti-aircraft guns or protection. That did not really concern us at the time, but later it would prove prophetic. We all thought of the Warspite as a tough ship. The Warspite left Pearl Harbor on 4 August on her way to Bremerton." Bismarck wasn’t Great...she was heavily flawed in almost every way. She only sank Hood because she was not modernized and her playing had been terribly worn to due lack of maintenance and desperate need of an overhaul. Due to constant need of her services, she was only ever available for refits and any chances for overhaul were blocked by newer battleships coming into line of the King George V-class. You mention Gloire but show the successor, the 1900-built Armoured Cruiser of the same name... All that talk about ironclads and nothing about HMS WARRIOR?!

[@mikeoconnell4108]

If I’m not mistaken, the last active (wartime) combat tour completed by a battleship was in the first Gulf War where the USS Missouri (BB-63) fired Tomahawk Cruise Missiles and conventional fire from her nine 16” guns. If I’m not mistaken, before being decommissioned from the mothball fleet in the Susan Bay (north east of Oakland CA) the hulls of the remaining Iowa Class battleships were tagged for potential use as testing platforms for naval rail cannon development. Currently, I am only aware of the location of the USS Iowa (namesake of the class) in the Port of Long Beach where she has been restored to her WWII standard and is open to the public as a museum ship. Edit: the USS Missouri is also a living memorial moored in Pearl Harbor.

[@greg_mca]

The New Jersey is also an open museum ship but has I believe it has not been restored to its WWII configuration, or even changed from when it was decommissioned 30 years ago. At least from what I can see from its KZbin channel

[@EricDKaufman]

WHOA SIMON..... Mahan's work is legendary but the US congress completely dismissed the Navy and hardly funded them until after World War I out of necessity. While every other Imperial power took note of what Mahan was saying, the US only took a larger look at its naval assets when it was required, e.g. coming out of WW I the victor and thrust with the threat of an Anglo-American Atlantic conflict (Yes, Revolutionary War Part 3 or 4, depending on who is counting, was on the table). Thankfully, the naval treaties helped calm people down. Before WW I the US Navy was content to rest on parity, rather than dominance. and hell, it can be argued easily that the US Navy didn't achieve global dominance until the fall of the Soviet Union (I wouldn't argue that though... I would say we got our shit in gear around 1943/44 with the Fletcher and Essex swarms) Love your channels. Don't you ever change!!!!! But also very confused why you are talking about CV-6 and showing pictures of CVN-65.

[@chevyman8803]

I’ve been to the Korean War museum in Seoul where the turtle ship pictures are from. One of my favorite museums.

[@robertbeedy3536]

Nice touch of Blaze 🙂

[@jarink1]

Judging by the photos of Enterprise used, Simon thinks the movie "The Final Countdown" was a documentary.

[@isee7668]

Nice one.

[@bocadelcieloplaya3852]

It wasn't a documentary?

[@micheal49]

Got to love how very loud the intro and exit music are while the narration is about 60dB less. "sound engineer" isn't.

[@ZeroArmour]

The Turtle Ships were so effective that Japanese commanders were afraid at the mear mention of them.

[@RonaldReaganRocks1]

They would die if you just mentioned them.

[@sbam4881]

Way too much emphasis on the modern era, which in the scheme of things, is a minuscule part of overall history. Needed at least 1 from the age of oars and 1 or 2 from the age of sail (and maybe 1 in betweener - like the viking longship). e.g. The War Galley - from Ancient Greece to Carthage to Rome to Venice to the Ottomans - it was the ship that defined naval power for more than a thousand years. Meanwhile, we need to include the ship that was the symbol of power when navies truly became "Blue water navies" for the first 4 centuries and ultimately decided that English would be the world's global language rather than Spanish, Dutch, or French and that was the 1st Rate ship-of-the-Line like the HMS Victory.

[@jeffbergstrom]

RE: Battleships - They very much saw extensive use in WWII with the US in the Pacific. Not versus other ships but as floating artillery platforms. They would bombard enemy positions prior to landings by troops. Battleships were also floating machine-shops and were the most extensive and best floating hospitals at the time. All very handy when invading an island in the 1940s. Also, apparently getting shelled by a battleship is a special kind of bad. In the first Gulf War a US battleship would use drones as spotters for its guns. The Iraqis learned that when a drone showed up battleship shells would soon follow which led to at least one instance of troops surrendering to a drone (literally came out of their position and indicated to the drone that they were surrendering).

[@allaboutcryptoinvestment7684]

For Bitcoin riches... and more guidance in Crypto currency investment message administrator.

[@allaboutcryptoinvestment7684]

W.H.A.T.SA PP +1.4.8.0.6.3.0.5.8.3.5..

[@Otokichi786]

Simon, now you're swimming in "Drachinifel's" oceans.;) Aircraft Carrier. (The Kriegsmarine clashed with "Fat Herman.") Battleship. (From King of the Seas to shore bombardment component.) Turtle Ship. (Admiral Yi Sun-Sin outmaneuvered/humbled the Samurai.) Ironclad. (Wooden ships burn/sink, Ironclads just "ring like a bell.") Submarine. (Submarines hunt. Everything else is just a floating target.)

[@MrMcGreed]

08:24 YAS! YAS! LET THE BLAZE FLOW THROUGH YOU FACTBOY!

[@jonanderson4755]

You got CVN-65 and CV-6 mixed up. 2 different Carriers named Enterprise. The pictures in the video were of CVN-65, not CV-6.

[@steeljawX]

Simon going down the list. Me: "Simon's doing warships this time. He's been doing an awful lot of videos lately about the H.L. Hunley." Simon: "CV's. BB's. Turtleship. Ironclad. Submarines with H. L. Hunley!" Me: . . . . . . . . . . "It's interesting and all, but there's more Cold War stuff to cover, Blaze Boy." Also Blaze "Simon Whistler" Boy, I've suggested this many times already, just have a gander into it already. WWII Experimental weapons that never got past prototype staging. This could include the Panjandrum, T28/T95, A-39, the quite literally tested; documented; and archived US "Anti-tank Rock", (possibly one to catch your fancy) while never popular today and really boneheaded; the USSR tried "Anti-tank dogs". . . . . . . There's some really interesting things that are covered up by the Tiger tank and M4 Shermans, the Churchill VII's and Bismarck, Hood, Iowa, Yamato, and so forth. The successes definitely are outshining some of these absolute nutty, costly, and/or "seemed like a great idea at the time"/"WTF are you thinking" things that COULD have been on the front lines of WWII.

[@allaboutcryptoinvestment7684]

For Bitcoin riches... and more guidance in Crypto currency investment

[@allaboutcryptoinvestment7684]

W.H.A.T.SA PP +1.4.8.0.6.3.0.5.8.3.5

[@labbayekme]

Awesome! Loved it!! Keep doing what you’re doing, man. I really like your videos. Is there anything you can do about the 1971 liberation war between Bangladesh and Pakistan?

[@donaldmangel4732]

Simon, I watch all your different shows. All are an enjoyable way to learn new facts. You produced a show about the San Francisco building that was sinking and was suggesting you expand that idea to include how cities are sinking all over the globe. I saw a blurb about it somewhere else but thought it would be a good subject on one of your shows. Also, could you have a show about the renewed research on phages since we are experiencing problems with over use of antibiotics. Thanks!!

[@allaboutcryptoinvestment7684]

For Bitcoin riches... and more guidance in Crypto currency investment message administrator

[@allaboutcryptoinvestment7684]

W.H.A.T.SA PP +1.4.8.0.6.3.0.5.8.3.5.

[@abrahamedelstein4806]

7:19 As I also like to point out, in the first Battleship versus Aircraft carrier duel, the Carrier lost.

[@cdlord80]

When you spoke of the Enterprise during WWII, you showed a lot of pictures of CVN-65 which was the successor to the WWII Enterprise CV-6.

[@brandongaines1731]

To be fair, he also showed a video clip of NX-01 instead of NCC-1701, an understandable mistake given the fact that ENTERPRISE predates STAR TREK: TOS in the canonical timeline, but is a mistake nonetheless given that STAR TREK: TOS is, well, The Original Series.

[@robertalexander5892]

Who knows, with the arrival of rail guns the Battleship might see a resurgence. Can you imagine an Iowa class, with 16 inch rail guns, hurling something that weighs more than a vw at Mach 10+ speeds 250-1000 miles inland? That is someone's future nightmare.

[@kevinwhite9761]

The Turtle was designed during the Revolutionary War. It was used against the HMS Eagle without success. The Turtle was the first submersible weapon of war.

[@sidneysun5217]

probably can do a video on tanks too, where did the concept of the "main battle tank" evolve from

[@danielchipman8967]

I love everything Simon does and will always be a loyal viewer. But mis-identifying the Enterprise CV-6 with all three photos is an egregious enough error that I’d recommend re-cutting the video. The Big E was the greatest carrier of them all, and deserves the respect.

[@thecellulontriptometer4166]

The next generation of vessels will be unmanned underwater vessels(UUV) able to sit still for months resting on the bottom right outside of harbors, and able to effectively close a harbor when brought to action by firing rocket propelled missiles through the water to the underside of any ship that tries to leave or enter the harbor. They could also lurk on the bottom of the key shipping straits of the world effectively shutting down all world trade with a squadron of 10 vessels. Because they can be made small and flat(less than 50 feet long and 3 feet in height), and don't have to move or emit any crew noise, they would be almost undetectable blending in to the bottom.

[@BytebroUK]

This episode would segue quite nicely into a program about super-cavitating torpedoes, perhaps?

[@johannbuhr2868]

That was a nice shout out to the lucky E. You should do a segment on the gray ghost herself.

[@cleverusername9369]

I'm more than a little surprised USS Constitution wasn't included in this list. She was to the average British early 19th century frigate as the Dreadnought was to battleships a century later: revolutionary in design, bigger, stronger, faster, and more powerful.

[@N22S24]

Now that you got the WRONG ship, Simon SHOULD run a story about CV-6. So they get it right..........

[@gfodale]

if they're going to make videos for the mistakes, they have a months worth of material at least.

[@charlesmarino2027]

Suggestion: the US naval mining campaign against Japan in WWII, it was incredibly effective.

[@pamelamays4186]

Don't know if this is a Mega or Side, but, what about the USS Kittyhawk? Along those lines, what about NASSCO, the ship building company here in San Diego? Also, going way, way back, the tuna fishing industry in San Diego. Growing up I had friends whose parents worked in canneries and aboard tuna fishing boat. The Little Italy neighborhood in San Diego has strong ties to the tuna fish industry. There's a statue of a fisherman there that honors those who worked on the boats. And along those lines, Little Italy just might be an interesting Geographics.

[@manicmechanic448]

I'd like to see one of these about ships that did unusual things. Such as the U.S. sub that sank a train, or the Cutty Sark a British clipper that out ran a steamer.

[@Subpac_ww2]

A US submarine never sank a train. USS BARB sent four men ashore with two of her three scuttling charges and they blew up the tracks. It wasn't a deck gun, it wasn't a torpedo, it was men with demolition charges.

[@manicmechanic448]

@@Subpac_ww2 did I say it did? And in any case, it still counts as a kill for the boat. So yes it did.

[@Subpac_ww2]

@@manicmechanic448 i mean if you wanna get technical the only thing that counts as a "kill" for the boat is a vessel of over 500 gross registered tons. COMSUBPAC gave no official recognition for the train, there was none. It wasn't a sea going vessel of over 500 gross registered tons. Was it an impressive and unique feat? Sure. Technically the only invasion of the home island by US forces during the war. But it was nothing but an attempt at action, which they found, in light of a lack of torpedo targets at sea. Trains. Sampans. Trawlers. Those didn't go towards the boats final score in tonnage. Sorry. But it did decorate the battleflag 👍

[@manicmechanic448]

@@Subpac_ww2 did they blow up the fucking train or not? Yes! Alright then.

[@DidMyGrandfatherMakeThis]

How about the only submerged submarine that torpedoes and sinks another submerged submarine? RN officer in command and allegedly made all his calculations on the side of a chart. When told afterwards such a shot should have been impossible he merely replied that nobody had told him that so he thought it was worth a try.

[@deemariedubois4916]

Nothing worse than an unemployed samurai. You don’t want bored samurai.

[@JB-gd1lp]

That's a bad time for everyone

[@frankgesuele6298]

Ronins are trouble.

[@ephennell4ever]

In Japan, instead of 'going postal', is it referred to 'going samurai'? Seems like it might be appropriate!

[@danielallenbutler1782]

Yes, there IS something worse than an unemployed samurai. It's a pompous Limey twit named Simon who thinks he knows enough about warships to speak authoritatively on them, yet can't even put up photos of the correct carrier when he's talking about the USS Enterprise (CV-6).

[@Nipplator99999999999]

Wait what, did you just call a Prius beautiful? Do we need to find you a doctor, I think you might have broken your head...

[@benmccullough7820]

Technically the first American ship to sink a Japanese ship was the USS Ward. She sank a mini sub just outside Pearl Harbor on the day of the attack. The submarine was recently found confirming the reports from that day.

[@kyuven]

honestly i would've replaced the ironclad with the destroyer. The destroyer is very much the "If it ain't broke, don't fix it!" of modern naval warfare. While the battleship fell out of favor and numerous other classes of ships were deemed obsolete, the destroyer still has ships floating around today all over the world in active service. I think only submarines and corvettes have the longevity of the destroyer.

[@jonathanwigmore2323]

Battle of Jutland anyone? That was one of those major battleship engagements of WWI

[@angelarch5352]

I thought I even watched an episode of the Battle of Jutland as the last battleship on battleship battle, on one of Simon's channels. /shrug/

[@happalula]

hey Simon, how about a project about submarines in total? like the way they clean/create breatheable air, how they are built up (in general) and the like?

[@raitchison]

See Simon this is the kind of shoddy quality you get when you don't lock your writer and editor in the basement.

[@raitchison]

@@allaboutcryptoinvestment7684 Well OK then

[@raitchison]

@@allaboutcryptoinvestment7684 Looking at the pattern here I fear this is some sort of O.G.B.B. reference I'm not O.G. enough to get.

[@Trebor74]

And make them put the lotion on?

[@EllieMaes-Grandad]

It could be a vast improvement if the background music/noise were discontinued . . . . soon please.

[@michaeljohnston6856]

Dude this video is right up my alley

[@chadimirputin2282]

You forgot my paper boat, HMS soggy.

[@hectorsilva5376]

The last of the Dreadnoughts- The USS Texas, which is the only dreadnought still afloat. It is currently being refurbished in Galveston, Texas.

[@AndrewSmith-gn1nq]

USS Enterprise was not the first American ship to sink a Japanese ship in world war 2, that was the USS Ward. She sank a Japanese mini-sub a few hours before the raid began at Pearl Harbor as it attempted to follow a cargo ship into the harbor.

[@flavio_spqr]

Portuguese galleon São João Baptista, nicknamed Botafogo (free translation would be something like "fire-thrower"), which was the most powerful warship of it's day, with 1,000 tons, and over 200 guns (some sources say over 300).

[@gabesnooks3549]

There are/were 3 USS Enterprise carriers with the USN, the Yorktown CV-6, the Enterprise class CVN-65, and Ford Class CVN-80 is under construction.

[@allaboutcryptoinvestment7684]

For Bitcoin riches... and more guidance in Crypto currency investment message administrator

[@allaboutcryptoinvestment7684]

W.H.A.T.SA PP +1.4.8.0.6.3.0.5.8.3.5

[@lesflynn4455]

The strategic importance of submarines to any nation which runs them cannot be understated. To countries which don't have aircraft carriers (lol, just about all countries), they are the only means of projecting military power overseas.

[@florians9949]

Fun fact: in the earliest days of the ironclad, their armor was so superior to the available guns at the time that raming was the only way to sink them.

[@RedDeadRanger]

Remember - don't give your dogs grapes, they're not compatible.

[@daviddavidson2357]

No ship of the line? 50-60 cannons performing a rolling broadside would be terrifying.

[@jeffreybell4801]

Never mentioned the BB55-the USS NORTH CAROLINA! She was the only battleship to be in every major battle in the pacific theater. The only ship with more medals was CVN6-the USS ENTERPRISE which the NORTH CAROLINA was its escort.

[@Rupture_EX]

The most important ship is the one that brings the cocaine that fuels absolute legends like Simon (ALLEGEDLY)

[@mikegrazick1795]

Simon, this video sinks into detail. A life boat of detail!

[@thelemoncaymen640]

Simon: The French Guar is kind of beautiful in away. The fusion of sailing ships and modern technology. Drachinifel: *Wheeze*

[@owenshebbeare2999]

*Gloire

[@thelemoncaymen640]

@@owenshebbeare2999 I just went off of what the subtitles say

[@donaldkaspersen3768]

"Submarines are not going anywhere soon." Amusing.

[@thegreyghost5846]

Actually Simon, carriers didn't always win against battleships. The longest confirmed naval gun hit in history was scored by KMS Scharnhorst against the aircraft carrier HMS Glorious, and ultimately sank her

[@andreaslermen2008]

Wrong that the carriers win all the time The battleships Scharnhorst and Gneisenau sunk the HMS Glorious in the June 1940.

[@MoA-Reload...]

True but that was more down to a tactical blunder and lack of escort that resulted in her being caught. Also consider both Musashi and Yamato are on the bottom because of carrier strike groups and they made the Scharnhorst's look like Tonka toys.

[@graveperil2169]

the planes on a carrier outrange the guns on a battleship, HMS Glorious made the mistake of sailing into gun range

[@78.BANDIT]

The USS ENTERPRISE CVN-65. WAS its OWN CLASS and the ONLY 1 of that class. She was and still is WORLDS largest NAVY ship ever built. And the worlds 1st NUCLEAR POWER CARRIER. The NIMITZ class came after.

[@TheRedneckBudha]

Simon, was wondering if we could get a megaprojects on the IJN Mikasa the last surving pre-dreadnought in the world?

[@cosmicjack1215]

Visited the Mikasa last week funnily enough, it's closed for tours but the view was awesome.

[@timwf11b]

While there was a very strong trend in that direction, carriers didn't beat battleships every single time. There is the HMS Glorious. And of course quite a few confrontations where no ship was sunk.

[@dinomonzon7493]

A most informative video, but Simon didn’t cite that the Enterprise was later the name given to the US Navy’s first nuclear powered aircraft carrier. Nice touch, that shot of Capt. Jonathan Archer’s NX-01 SS Enterprise from Star Trek: Enterprise. 🖖

[@GrimmHades]

Bu dum dum ‘tis 👀 bringing in some blaze!

[@allaboutcryptoinvestment7684]

W.H.A.T.SA PP +1.4.8.0.6.3.0.5.8.3.5

[@allaboutcryptoinvestment7684]

Bitcoin riches... and more guidance in Crypto currency investment

[@GrimmHades]

@@allaboutcryptoinvestment7684 interesting fake side projects

[@KasFromMass]

Best list of its kind anywhere

[@mikebrase5161]

😂😂😂 Holy shit you are killing me. Glossing over Taranto raid which literally led the Japanese to get the balls to even try Pearl Harbor. I thought only us Americans hated ourselves. 😂🤣

[@emjackson2289]

Athenian Trireme at Salamis HMS Victory, Trafalger USS Monitor, Hampton Roads For sake of argument on the carriers, IJN Honsho, first proper aircraft carrier USS Forrestal, first super-carrier. Honourable mentions: Gloire, French iron-clad; the Yoshino, an IJN "Elswick Cruiser" from the Era of Tsushima; HMS Dreadnought, all big-gun battleship; Admirante Grau, Peruvian all-gun cruiser (and I believe the last all-gun cruiser in the World when decommissioned). Add to that the Gato and Balao class US submarines, U47, USS Nautilus and HMS Conquerer (of Belgrano sinking fame).

[@NAC_Exec]

You should do one on top craziest rescue missions done by the US.

[@AtheistOrphan]

Operation Eagle Claw?

[@allaboutcryptoinvestment7684]

For Bitcoin riches... and more guidance in Crypto currency investment message administrator

[@allaboutcryptoinvestment7684]

W.H.A.T.SA PP +1.4.8.0.6.3.0.5.8.3.5.

[@todo9633]

The HMS Victory probably could have a place on this list, it was ahead of it's time in design and remained relevant as a warship for nearly a century after being built. The East India Trading Company's Nemesis could probably have a place too. Turtle ships are a bit iffy since they were only really effective in their own area or operations, but context is important in judging anything so I guess it works.

[@allaboutcryptoinvestment7684]

For Bitcoin riches... and more guidance in Crypto currency investment message administrator

[@allaboutcryptoinvestment7684]

W.H.A.T.SA PP +1.4.8.0.6.3.0.5.8.3.5.

[@ar4040smith]

You might want to talk to your graphics department as the thumbnail for Enterprise is the nuclear successor of the original. Also, you showed a picture of a pre dreadnought instead of the ironclad Gloire.

[@angelitabecerra]

Helluva intro quote to start with

[@Subpac_ww2]

It's a little misleading speaking off CV-6 USS ENTERPRISE, a Yorktown Class CV from the late 30s, bur showing the CVN-65, the latest CVN to carry the name.

[@JPMadden]

When WW1 began, the Royal Navy was the largest in the world, approximately twice the size of the German Navy.

[@arthas640]

14:38 that's the sub base at Bangor, I took a tour of a (different) sub near there as kid and grew up not far away! The aircraft carrier my dad served on was not far away in Bremerton. Very pretty area, it's not far away from Forkes WA and ome of the few rainforests in north america call the Hoh rainforest

[@MadOgre]

You really need to hit on the USS North Carolina, nicknamed "The Showboat".

[@machinist44291]

Loving the beard! And the content of course.

[@timwf11b]

In WWI the Germans the the British were not relatively equal in terms of fleet power. The Royal Navy was more powerful. It wasn't so much more powerful that mistakes and bad luck couldn't lead to its defeat by the Germans but it had a clear superiority of force. At Jutland the Germans were trying to get in to a confrontation with only part of the RN without trying to go against the main battle line. For good reason. Not counting pre-dreadnaughts (which were obsolete) the British deployed 25 battleships and 9 battlecruisers at Jutland while the Germans deployed 16 and 5.