Seydlitz is clearly a cat. Refused to sink until she was comfortable, then after sinking the second time, refused to get up again.
@seeingeyegod5 жыл бұрын
Damn that guy that closed the red hot valves was an MVP
@ruVader4 жыл бұрын
@Old Iron Z21 Wilhelm Heidkamp actually served from 1939 to 1940, she was sunk during the 1st Battle of Narvik by British DDs.
@ΜιχάληςΝικολάκης-τ4λ3 жыл бұрын
Basically the guy that doesn't Allow his Fate to be written by others
@depth3863 жыл бұрын
He was just a seaman. He survived and suffered for a day or two in hospital after the ordeal. He was visited by.. I think Seydlitz’ captain? He was posthumously awarded and had a WW2 destroyer named after him.
@RedXlV6 жыл бұрын
Wilhelm II was often criticized for micromanaging the Imperial German Navy, but at times he really did have the right ideas. Keeping the Seydlitz well-armored even if it was at the expense of gun size was one of those times.
@connormclernon265 жыл бұрын
“Speed is armor” screw that, ARMOR IS ARMOR!
@hajoos.83605 жыл бұрын
Speed was fine with 28,1 knots. The engineer's design foresaw 63.000 horsepowers, but the engines made nearly 90.000 horsepowers. Some sources mentiond 29,1 knots max. speed for Seydlitz. So she was one of the fastest battle-cruisers in her era. And 11 inch guns were enough to knock out one of Lion's engine rooms. Blücher caused itself the battle of the Doggerbank with her low speed. Without Blücher we would have seen no battle or only a battle of 3 BCs against 3 BCs.
@theccpisaparasite88132 жыл бұрын
Heavier guns would have mattered positively
@pedrofelipefreitas2666 Жыл бұрын
Battlecruisers were... Complicated, in a doctrinal/tactical sense. At first their role was to be a scout and cruiser-hunter, but then some admirals had the brilliant idea that the less armored ships should be in the line of battle. The germans lacked battleships compared to the british, so they also needed their battlecruiser to be part of the battleline. Given the right angle and distance a 11-inch gun could still penetrate the less armored british battlecruisers, and maybe even the battleships, although that's VERY contentious. Having more armor, considering germany had less capital ships, made sense. It's much cheaper to repair than to build an entire ship.
@jmbrosendo6 жыл бұрын
Coming into port with no guns, no bridge, no engines, and finally sinking in the dock. Amazing.
@davidbrennan6605 жыл бұрын
Somethings gain a soul, it seems, they live rather than just exist.
@GeneralKenobiSIYE6 жыл бұрын
LOL Sometimes inanimate objects seem to have actual personalities of their own. Like the Seydlitz. She held on until she was safely in dock and "let go" and sank from exhaustion. hahaha
@pensiring71126 жыл бұрын
And then she refused to be raised again. As defiant in death as she was in life. Truly sad that nothing remains of her.
@Lazarus70005 жыл бұрын
It was common for B-17s and B-29s to do this upon landing after suffering the truly astonishing amount of battle damage they could absorb, they would crack in half as soon as they came to rest, the airframe having retained a C-hair's worth of structural integrity such that it was intact while flown gently, supported by the slipstream and longitudinal forces, but absent these forces and with the full weight resting on the landing gear, they fell apart like an old British convertible where you accidentally opened both doors at once.
@juno19153 жыл бұрын
As you would say in port. Another Happy Landing.
@s.31.l503 жыл бұрын
@@pensiring7112 Apparently her bell still exists, it is somewhere in Laboe naval memorial.
@steeltrap38005 жыл бұрын
I think we can all agree that serving in the rear turrets of SMS Seydlitz was not recommended for your health.
@AllThingsCubey4 жыл бұрын
Any of her turrets. Look at the front turret after Jutland. 15" shell blew the roof off and the 11" guns with it. Nobody could have survived that blast. Same for the bridge crew, all killed. I wonder, was Seydlitz the ship not sunk, with the most deaths aboard in history?
@535phobos4 жыл бұрын
@@AllThingsCubey The guns of the fore turret were removed in port to regain some amount of bouyancy by reducing weight in the bow. I dont know if the turret was still operational, but in the pictures of Seydlitz returning to port (at around 9:00 in this video) you can clearly see that the roof wasnt blown off. The turret even seems to have rotated between the shots, so I guess it was still operable.
@ralphkerr68093 жыл бұрын
@@AllThingsCubey USS Franklin was it, with 800 deaths.
@TheBimjo6 жыл бұрын
The valves were red hot. Flooded the magazines to save the ship. Amazing bravery and will to survive.
@hajoos.83605 жыл бұрын
Wilhelm Heidkamp
@edwardcnnell28535 жыл бұрын
Reminds me of an American bomber crewman Henry Erwin who when an ignited white phosphorous smoke marker blew back up it's launch tube and into his face. Blinded by the burning marker which burned off his nose and one ear he picked up the 1,000+ degree F device and carried it through the B29 to an open window behind the copilot and threw it out before collapsing. Groping blindly through the plane he held the marker between his arm and body burning away his flesh to the arm bones and ribs. He had left behind flesh from his hands on anything he had touched. Expected to die they approved and air expressed the Meal of Honer to him so he could be alive to receive it. He somehow survived and after two and a half year and over 40 surgeries regained his eyesight and the use of one arm. It is amazing the courage people find in themselves when saving the lives of their comrades is at stake.
@jamesricker39975 жыл бұрын
He had the choice either he burns his hands or he dies along with the rest of the crew
I have loved this ship since I was a child. Thank you for bringing her back to life if only for a moment.
@snakes34253 жыл бұрын
Seydlitz's Captain: STOP BLOWING HOLES IN MY SHIP!!!!
@mariebcfhs94914 жыл бұрын
turning red hot valves to save the ship this guy is god tier damage control
@marckyle5895 Жыл бұрын
YOU SHALL NOT PASS!! determination
@warrenlehmkuhleii84725 жыл бұрын
SMS Seydlitz’s captain must of had gold damage control.
@mach533x4 жыл бұрын
WEEB
@HighlanderNorth13 жыл бұрын
Yep, and you can also tell it's a German ship based on how many fires were started! You'll notice that the British ships never attempted to move to within 6.5km of the Seydlitz, because they knew about the top quality German secondary guns! They say that her captain had a Lyon that he wanted to use at Jutland. But he didn't have enough blueprints to upgrade it fully, and since he had spent all his gold on premium repair kits, he didn't have the 500 gold needed to retrain himself to the Lyon in time!😁
@TheNecromancer66663 жыл бұрын
His Spirit kept the USN afloat in WW2.
@xTheRealKestrelx3 жыл бұрын
Which flags and pennants d'you think he had flying to give him all those bonuses
@grandgao39842 жыл бұрын
SOVIET gold dmg control
@lindebr6 жыл бұрын
Thanks for the human voice. I HATE that computer generated voice.
@roybaker69026 жыл бұрын
Nah, the robot voice with lots of humor is much more entertaining.
@thhseeking5 жыл бұрын
I don't like it, either. It mispronounces words, runs them together and just makes it difficult to listen to. The humour sometimes sounds like Marvin the Paranoid Android (the original, and best, English one). OK, sometimes that's not so bad. But I do prefer the human voice.
@roybaker69024 жыл бұрын
Robot Lives Matter.
@kmnhypnotizeme4802 жыл бұрын
My Great Grandpa was on that ship, I have 3 Photos of him with the words SMS Seydlitz clearly visible in his navy hat. One of the photos is even on the ship. He also went to serve in the navy in 1944.
@willrogers37936 жыл бұрын
I know that I’m biased in their favor based on how much fun I have playing them in World of Warships, but even before I started playing that game, I always had a bit of a crush on the BBs and BCs of the Kaiserlich Marine. (Yes, this is including the Nassau class. I know you viscerally despise their design, and you have a valid point. But I look at their short, tubby design and think, “Aww, that’s so ugly it’s adorable!”) The earlier BBs I like because their lighter armament, balanced by impressive armor, gives them “underdog” status in my mind. Then there’s Koenig and her sisters, which are still under-gunned compared to the competition but are still very tough and some of the most attractive ships of the dreadnought era. Then there’s Bayern and her sisters, which keep the universal toughness of their predecessors but actually have an impressive main battery this time around. And as for the Battlecruisers, well...you’ve already described all the reasons why I like Seydlitz so much, and then there was the Goeben, which changed hands to the Ottoman Empire and refused to be sent to the big sea lane in the sky until the NINETEEN-SEVENTIES. Considering that (as far as I know) the only other ship of that era to survive that long was our USS Texas, and I’m pretty sure she was a museum ship by that point, well...let’s just say I nurse a very small grudge against the Turks for not giving the faithful old girl the same treatment. I don’t usually like Battlecruisers, but when I do, they tend to be German. Tough as old shoe leather, lightly armed but still scrappy in a fight, and they tend to be attractive to downright gorgeous in my opinion. (I consider the WWII-era Scharnhorst and Gneisenau to be the last German Battlecruisers, and they easily share a slot in my “Top 5 Most Attractive Ships” list.)
@michael141956 жыл бұрын
The Greek armoured cruiser Averof is another ship from that era that's still around as a museum ship :).
@RobotDCLXVI5 жыл бұрын
Is Seydlitz in WoWs? I don't recall a Seydlitz class cruiser. Or one in the battleship line (even though she's a BC).
@willrogers37935 жыл бұрын
RobotDCLXVI I was referring more to the Scharnhorst and Gneisenau, although in the couple of months since I left the original comment, they also added the Mackensen-class battlecruiser “Prinz Eitel Friederich” as an earnable premium ship. I do hope that Wargaming eventually adds at least the German and British battlecruisers to the actual tech trees; there certainly were enough different classes built to fill up several tiers.
@filipzietek51465 жыл бұрын
@@willrogers3793 Sad that world of warships is a rape on naval warfare
@mikeholton98764 жыл бұрын
of all the 20th century ships that aren't US Fleet ships, Seydlitz is my favorite. sad that one of the ships of her class doesnt exist today. she was as tough as they get
@geoffburrill98502 жыл бұрын
She took one hell of a beating and still got back home, what a ship!
@TonyAguilarFigure-atively4 жыл бұрын
My favorite ship from WW1. Definitely took a pounding and looked sleek and badass too. Not too fond of the painted funnel for ID though.
@mattblom39904 жыл бұрын
How the Seydlitz survived the horrific damage it incurred in the war is legendary.
@kapasvonkapas6 жыл бұрын
German battlecruisers were indeed ships of the line, unlike designs from other nations. They proved they could deal and absorb the punishment
@Drachinifel6 жыл бұрын
George Kapadoukakis British battlecruisers were also capable of taking a lot of punishment when their ammo handling facilities were operating properly :p
@michaelcoulter11146 жыл бұрын
George Kapadoukakis German ships (most of them) were not intended for long cruising missions worldwide as British capital ships were, enabling the German ships to be more heavily armoured as compared to British ships. Sleeping accommodations, food storage, fuel reserves, and crew comforts were sacrificed for heavier armour, and the results speak for themselves. The two navies were intended to serve different purposes, and while the German ships were better suited to battle, the British ships were better in rough seas, and had much longer ranges.
@kuhluhOG6 жыл бұрын
well Michael, also, the german battlecruisers were designed to fight alongside battleships if needed, unlike most british ones (results speak for themselves) the british sacrificed armor for speed compared to battleships, the germans sacrificed firepower
@trauko13886 жыл бұрын
I would contest that they didnt even sacrifice firepower,not until the Derfflinger at least, Von der Tann had the same caliber and broadside as the Nassaus and the Moltkes traded caliber for a larger number of barrels on the broadside compared to the Helgolands. Derfflinger had less guns than Kaisers and Konigs and the Mackensens a smaller caliber than the Badens so here the argument holds water but, as you can see, it can not be generalized.
@kuhluhOG6 жыл бұрын
@@trauko1388 von der Tann had 3 turrets usable per side, in a whole 4, Nassus had per side one turret more, in a whole 6 Moltke had 5x2 11" guns, 3 centerline, 1 on each side but with very bad firing angles to the other side (although that shouldn't have been such a huge problem in real life) (same arrangement as the Kaisers); Helgoland had 6x2 12" guns, 2 centerline, 2 on each side, technically better armed, practically not Derfflinger had less guns than Königs and Kaisers, as you said, Mackensens smaller guns than Bayerns (btw, it's the Bayern-class, not the Baden class, that is mixed up often, the Baden was ordered and begun earlier, but the Bayern was finished earlier and it was officially called Bayern-class)
@thhseeking5 жыл бұрын
I've had a soft spot for the Seydlitz ever since I got a copy of the Warship Profile on her some decades ago. She took a battering and lived. Just. The Imperial Germans knew how to build good ships.
@psour335 жыл бұрын
She managed to cross the British line not farther than 4000 yards between the 2nd et 5th battle squadron, Malaya saw her as Agincourt and Marlborough did but no one thought to open fire at her. What a lucky ship she was :) (at the same time Revenge had a full view on Westfalen engaging elements from the 4th Destroyer squad and stay silent thinking firing would betray the position of the battle fleet !!) .
@na30443 жыл бұрын
My favourite ship... needs more recognition. And she looks just great, really one of the most beautiful warships ever built.
@araarashinigami2 жыл бұрын
Congrats on joining the new Ironblood PvP meta, shikikan.
@AllThingsCubey4 жыл бұрын
Insert Sonic the hedgehog movie meme: British Grand Fleet: "How are you not dead?" Seydlitz: "I have no idea!"
@jehb89455 жыл бұрын
I remember seeing a photo of the ship immediately after the battle of Jutland senior year in high school back in 98 in my teachers copy of John Keegan's the price of admiralty and the damage that ship survived is just unfathomable. Ironically it seems like she put up just as big of a fight in world war 1 as warspite didn't world war II and when the attempted to scrap warspite
@michaelnaisbitt16395 жыл бұрын
Very interesting liked the human voice and the obvious amount of research that went into this clip. Thx for upload
@gneisenau895 жыл бұрын
I really enjoy this series of videos. One bit of friendly feedback: I notice the name of the ship "Derfflinger" is mispronounced. I have noticed this mistake by several British commentators. The correct pronunciation puts the emphasis on the first syllable: DARE-fling-er. Not Der-FLING-er. The latter pronunciation seems to mistake the the first syllable as the German masculine article "Der" (i.e. The Flinger). The ship was in fact named for a German military figure, Georg von Derfflinger, who fought in the Thirty Years War.
@antonrudenham32594 жыл бұрын
And known to RN sailors as the 'Dirt flinger'.
@dinnbach58706 жыл бұрын
Great video as always, man.
@Deevo0374 жыл бұрын
Germany's answer to HMS Warspite. Going down on her own terms.
@carpocolypsenow5 жыл бұрын
Quite the handsome ship
@Benepene6 жыл бұрын
Seydlitz is like a cat, when engaged blessed with 7 lifes, when sleeping (i.e. sunk) how dare you weak me up
@AnimeSunglasses3 жыл бұрын
Oh hey, great minds think alike!
@longlakeshore6 жыл бұрын
Armor is armor and speed is speed.
@Ftc.66 жыл бұрын
Best looking WW 1 Capital ship
@bkjeong43025 жыл бұрын
If any ship actually deserved to be called unsinkable this is the one.
@jonathanhill48924 жыл бұрын
yup - it only sank twice:) Seriously though she could take a deal of punishment and survive. For the last part of the journey home after Jutland she was steaming at about 4 knots and astern in order to have any chance of making it home. But she did!
@phillipneal92895 жыл бұрын
Very interesting and entertaining piece. Loving your work
@Diego-zz1df6 жыл бұрын
Also, please add the corvette ARA Uruguay. Its history is quite interesting, considering its role in the early years of antarctic exploration.
@williamcote4208 Жыл бұрын
Note: the executive officer who saved Seydlitz from exploding had the destroyer Z-21 named after him.
@johnparrish92156 жыл бұрын
World of Warships needs to add this one as a Tier 4 Premium ship. I would buy it.
@themadhammer33056 жыл бұрын
John Parrish I'm still holding out hope for a split BB line for Germany and Britain so we can have a proper battlecruiser tree. Germany and Britain would be the only 2 countries with a full line but it would still be cool to see
@johnparrish92156 жыл бұрын
@@themadhammer3305 I agree, but even if they didn't this old tub was soooooo tough that she deserves an honored place in my collection.
@themadhammer33056 жыл бұрын
John Parrish oh I absolutely agree. It does make me wonder how they decide on premium ships as they must have an enormous list that won't fit in the current trees but could still be competitive
@the_lost_navigator6 жыл бұрын
I concur, good Sir. Though, since Prinz Eitel Friedrich is already a Tier 6 'battlecruiser' - Seydlitz as a premium tier 5 with Moltke at Tier 4 and Von Der Tann at Tier 3? ;)
@themadhammer33056 жыл бұрын
@@the_lost_navigator I'm sure there were some post WW1 battlecruiser designs that could be used to pad put the line from 7 to 10. Possibly shuffle Gneisenau over for the level 7 or 8 (depending if they pull a Cleveland) and paper/laid down but not finished designs for the remainder
@Don_Camillo6 жыл бұрын
A real hot Battlecruiser !
@johnnycage36682 жыл бұрын
"Like In life and like in death, you will never get me.".........and don´t tell me that some ships don´t have a soul (like the Seydlitz and the American DD724- USS Laffey).
@KaletheQuick4 жыл бұрын
This is my favorite ship. I have been using it as a basis for a ship on a fantasy tabletop game I run. Slight modifications though, because it flies. Lol.
@George_M_4 жыл бұрын
Wow what a tough ship.
@hajoos.8360 Жыл бұрын
Seydlitz became at the Doggerbank the world-record-holder in fast reloading, after both stern-turrets blew up.
@ricksadler7975 жыл бұрын
One of the better ships Germany ever had
@snakes34254 жыл бұрын
British Battle Cruisers: WHY WON'T YOU DIE? Seydlitz: I'm just that good
@gordonwiessner63276 жыл бұрын
Stubborn to the end and even afterwards.
@jackroutledge3525 жыл бұрын
Offset wing turrets seems like a good idea to me - the same broadside as putting them on the centreline, but with more turrets available to fire forwards. What are the disadvantages? Why didn’t that become a standard feature of capital ships?
@karlthebarbarian98755 жыл бұрын
The overlapping sector forwards was so small as to be almost useless, you would essentially never get more than 4 guns firing forwards despite having a theoretical 6. It also meant the magazines of the wing turrets were close to the side of the ship, making them vulnerable to gunfire and causing difficulties in designing a functional torpedo protection. It was one of those, good in theory, not so good in real life ideas.
@davidbrennan6605 жыл бұрын
Weight, one that covers both sectors is better, if your Battle line is fighting both sides, your Command Complex or their Signal Officer is in need of replacing.... in a real sense.
@toddmoss16896 жыл бұрын
Incredible combat record! When can we expect to see profiles of SMS Lutzow and SMS Derfflinger?
@Drachinifel6 жыл бұрын
Some point next year :)
@toddmoss16896 жыл бұрын
Looking forward to them!
@davidkaminski6156 жыл бұрын
As stubbern a warship as Warspite!
@Diego-zz1df6 жыл бұрын
A floating monument to "WHY WON'T YOU DIE?!!!"
@philipzhou6493 жыл бұрын
The SMS von der Tann was actually 27kn fast and surpassed the requirements of 24kn
@thhseeking5 жыл бұрын
@ 01:56 - Cost restrictions? In Imperial Germany? Who'd have thought? Alfred, I think, would not have been pleased :(
@lancenorton11173 жыл бұрын
Look at the cost to Britain of the Grand Fleet. They were building ships faster than any other country causing ships they had built just a few years earlier to be completely obsolete. The price they eventually paid was they became a second rate nation because of the massive debt they created building the Grand Fleet.
@christianoutlaw2 жыл бұрын
The Seydlitz’s captain almost got a chance to beat Jack Sparrow by almost a century in being able to just step onto the dock as the ship sank in that famous scene that has been the subject of many memes.
@akessel92train2 жыл бұрын
*Imagines the captain and the crew standing a top in varying dress at attention as the ship goes to dock and sink while jack sparrow theme plays*
@Der-Stahlhelm3 жыл бұрын
My greatgreatgrandfather was an Maat on the Seydlitz. I still have the name band of his Marine cap
@g.waldmeister18514 жыл бұрын
The different ways the generated subtitles try to make sense of German proper names is pretty funny btw.
@lawrencelewis2592Ай бұрын
I have a nice 1/250 scale paper model of the ship. The crew were real sailors, bringing her in half sunk.
@panzerdeal872711 ай бұрын
One Stubborn ship....
@thomasjamison20503 жыл бұрын
The rationale behind scuttling the German ships is quite interesting. I used to think that the British thought it a good idea because it kept all those ships from going to foreign shores whence they might have later returned to the wrong hands. Now I wonder if the Germans did it just to end any bickering over the settlement of the German ships and thus legally end the war at Versailles. After all, the British blockade of Germany was still in place and by the time of Versailles, 500k Germans had already starved to death since the end of the actual fighting. The scuttling was no doubt a relief to many, and the British ended up with all the ships to scrap by themselves. Not a bad deal really, and one truly fitting for a country otherwise known in other circles as 'perfidious Albion."
@trauko13886 жыл бұрын
I strongly suggest you get Campbell's book on Jutland, it would prevent you from making the numerous mistakes you are now doing about the German ships.
@Drachinifel6 жыл бұрын
I have it and many others, and used it to make this video. What precisely do you think is wrong?
@trauko13886 жыл бұрын
In this particular video, the bit about the damage, this is how Campbell puts it: "On receiving Scheer's night formation signal Rear Admiral Mauve ordered the 2nd Squadron to reduce to half speed but he did not begin to take station astern until 2155, when the situation ahead had become clearer. Hipper boarded the Moltke at 2057 (also at 2105) and decided that the 1st SG would proceed towards the head of the line at 20kts. Only the Moltke and Seydlitz could comply as the Derf flinger and von der Tann were limited to 18kts, the former by the amount of water that entered forward at higher speed, and the latter by dirty fires which had to be cleaned. Hipper's increase of speed could be justified for the Moltke but not for the Seydlitz and it would have been better to have limited her speed to 18kts or less, for similar reasons to the Derfflinger's. ... The Seydlitz followed the Moltke, after Hipper had boarded the latter at about 2100, at a higher speed than was wise in view of the amount of water present in the forward part of the ship. At 2100 the total quantity of water in the Seydlitz was calculated to be 2636 tons with an increase in draught forward of 8ft 4in, a decrease of 3ft 3in aft, and a list of 2° 5' to starboard. This was in itself no very serious danger to the ship, and among other compartments the forward 11 in and 5.9in ammunition spaces and the broadside and bow torpedo flats were still unflooded. The large hole in the starboard side caused by the 15in shell at 1706, was however not far above the 2100 waterline, and the faster the Seydlitz steamed the greater would be the intake of water. " The reason for the increased flooding was the excesive speed used, same for Lützow, only that the latter had a justification since she had to withdraw under fire. Seydlitz on the other hand was unneccessarily pressed just to keep up with Hipper in his attempt to regain his position ahead of the fleet. "The Seydlitz's condition did not become dangerous until after she reached Horns Reef, and as previously noted, revolutions for 22 and then for 20kts were maintained. This was too high a speed for a ship with so much damage forward, and had soon to be considerably reduced. " The damage itself wasnt the problem, it was a potential one as long as the speed was kept reasonably low, Seydlitz should have been detached to join the battleline instead of almost sinking itself running around. Her absurd dash produced this: "The Seydlitz therefore continued astern under her own power, and fortunately the weather remained calm. At 1700 the starboard after wings were counter-flooded for a length of 57ft to combat the list to port, and at this time the Seydlitz's condition was probably at its worst with a calculated 5329 tons water aboard, giving a draught of 46ft lin forward and 24ft 4in aft. as against the pre-battle figures of 30ft 6in forward and 29ft Bin aft. The forward end of the keel line, where the draught was taken, was c65ft abaft the stem. The theoretical list to port was 2° 56', but the actual list was 8°. " As you can see, it was Seydlitz' captain who almost sank the ship, he caused the creeping flooding, he could have avoided that by staying with the other damaged GKs. And I dont seem to recall the Seydlitz sinking, running aground yes, but not sinking. I can, of course, be mistaken. There are other mistakes on other videos, off the top of my head the one about Huascar comes to mind since I wrote a long post detailing each one of them. And what can be called "difference of opinion" since I do believe the German GKs should be considered fast battleships due to 1. A 5 knot advantage over all contemporary BBs, 2. armor as thick as most contemporary BBs, 3. German BB caliber guns where RoF was prioritized over weight of shell. Best. Pd.: Re-watched this video, some observations: Doors in the turret were not left open as in the RN ships which, by itself, is a controversial statement: "In the Seydlitz a 13.5in shell struck the aftermost barbette, and burst in holing the 9in armour, driving in red hot armour fragments. These ignited 11in main and fore charges on the transfer rails in the working chamber. The flash shot up into the gun house and ignited the charges there, and down the lower hoists, setting fire to charges in them and in the handing room as well as to some in the magazine. The ignition of the charges was at first comparatively slow, as when the fumes of the burning charges in the working chamber began to penetrate to the handing room one deck below, the crew of the latter opened the bulkhead door, which opened towards the stern, to escape into the handing room of the after superfiring turret. At this moment the charges in the handing room ignited, and flash blew open the connecting door to the after superfiring turret, which opened towards the bows, and passing into this turret ignited charges in the handing room and some in the magazine, and the fire spread to the working chamber and gunhouse." The 2nd turret was lost due to the crew of the 1st trying to escape, and, the flash expanded through the hoists simple because THERE WERE NO HOIST DOORS. A commissioned recomended fitting them AFTER Dogger Bank. I dont get how the arrival of the 5th BS allowed Derfflinger and Seydlitz to concentrate on Queen Mary, something which by the way happened quite fortitously as Derfflinger had lost sight of its target in the smoke and switched fire to Queen Mary by pure chance. Regarding the removal of safeties in the BCF, too much has been made of very little, I suggest this page, it is very interesting: www.dreadnoughtproject.org/tfs/index.php/A_Direct_Train_of_Cordite Destroys some urban legends about the battle. Lion, btw, followed all the RN measures to the letter, it still suffered a cordite fire that would have destroyed the ship, had the magazine not been flooded earlier. That should dispell any belief that following RN procedure would have saved ships. You claim the Seydlitz was at some point "right on the edge of buoyancy" when later on and after she was done fighting, she had less than 3.000t of water and the flooding did not pose a threat to the ship. I would love to know the source for that since sounds more like propaganda than the evaluation of the ships crew. I really, really hope you are not using books by Massie, they are crap.
@Drachinifel6 жыл бұрын
First, thanks for taking the time to write out so much detail. With regards to the damage Seydlitz suffered at Jutland, the source for Seydlitz's condition after fighting 5th BS comes from the Royal Navy Museum, Portsmouth, and a lecture conducted there a couple of years ago by a panel of naval historians that I was able to attend and also from Tarrant's book on the German perspective of Jutland. By 2100 she'd had two hours to pump out water since the withdrawal from the BCF/5th BS fight, whereas her own crew attest that of the remaining unbreached sections of the ship, a hit that opened any single one would've doomed them c.1900-1930. It's condition was somewhat recovered by later in the battle due to damage control efforts. With regards to the Seydlitz sinking, it was brought back into port only with the assistance of other ships aiding in the pumping out. Once those ships left it settled in harbour, as it had been unable to keep up with the flooding on its own for quite a while. Thus it 'sank', albeit in a perfectly recoverable position. With regards to the damage sustained at Dogger Bank, Seydlitz did have anti-flash doors prior to the battle, but they were designed and added to in the aftermath. The video doesn't contradict Campbell's account and indeed is based on it. With regards to the BCF safeties being removed and their relevance to the loss of the ships, there was a full report made after Jutland apart from the train of correspondence you indicated, and that report goes into fair detail about the reasons for losses and the procedures that needed to be taken. Every formal report the RN made in regards to the matter is fairly consistent on this subject and as a weight of evidence is fairly convincing. Lion survived the battle, which in itself is a vindication of it's superior safety procedures, as no safety system is 100% proof against damage, but exist to mitigate the effects to a point where ultimate disaster can be averted. Additionally, the safety systems took the brunt of the original hit (similar to that which killed the other lost BC's) and preserved the ship in that circumstance, which vindicates the procedures when followed correctly. The later fire flare-up was an example of other procedures (surrounding the forward storage of ammo) not being followed correctly. As regards the concentration on Queen Mary, it was not the arrival of 5th BS that enabled this, I was simply noting that the concentration of fire occurred at around the time 5th BS arrived. As for whether the German BC's count as fast battleships, as you say, difference of opinion there.
@michaeldy31573 жыл бұрын
Good one
@NigelDeForrest-Pearce-cv6ek5 ай бұрын
Fascinating!!!
@Woolliscroft14 жыл бұрын
Having the darlek do part of it is even worse than having it do all of it.
@warrenlehmkuhleii84725 жыл бұрын
“Get some snhaps.” Drach I am 15, are you encouraging underaged drinking?
@blackdeath4eternity3 жыл бұрын
hes telling you not to watch for another few years ;) lol
@mikeholton98763 жыл бұрын
Drauf Seydlitz!
@russg18016 жыл бұрын
Just curious, those "11 inch guns" - were they the same as used on Graf Spee and her sisters? Not the same guns, just the same type, I mean. Though it wasn't unheard of for guns to be remounted - in fact the barrels themselves often went from ship to ship as they were relined.
@MrThebigch33se6 жыл бұрын
They had the same shell diameter but that was about it. The guns and projectiles on the GS were slightly longer and I have no idea if they could mix and match. Trying to retrofit the older guns on the GS would mean having to replace all of them since mixing guns with different barrel lengths and shell velocities really screws with aiming.
@Sodbusterrod5 жыл бұрын
Graf Spee guns were a 1928 design with 20% more weight and slightly greater muzzle velocity than the 1911 version.
@lawrencelewis81054 жыл бұрын
I have a nice model of the Seydlitz in 1/250th scale, made of paper.
@MaxCroat10 ай бұрын
I feel quite conflicted about the hypothetical ultimate naval battle between the British and the Germans at the tail end of the war. On one hand it feels very selfish to consider this, since thousands, possibly tens of thousands of sailors would have perished, but on the other hand it would be so immensely interesting to read and discuss about. It's probably just as well that the German sailors mutinied, that saved their own and British lives.
@wv2q4 жыл бұрын
Do you plan on covering auxiliary ships like the Haskell class attack transport (i.e. APA190 USS Pickens)?
@andrewclutterbuck19876 жыл бұрын
can you please do a segment on the battlecruiser hms tiger
@Drachinifel6 жыл бұрын
Yep
@bullreeves11096 жыл бұрын
Glorious! Can you please add Mikasa to you”re Video list?
@Drachinifel6 жыл бұрын
Yep
@valeriovita14424 жыл бұрын
Captain Von Egidy in command
@CheapSushi6 жыл бұрын
What are the diagonal pipes/lines on the outside?
@themadhammer33056 жыл бұрын
CheapSushi they are booms for anti torpedo netting while in Port. Of dubious usefulness which is why they went away after ww1
@Diego-zz1df6 жыл бұрын
YAAAAAY!!!! THANKYOUTHANKYOUTHANKYOU!!! :D
@lucassmith45246 жыл бұрын
Robot Voice gives me nightmares. I much prefer the Queen’s English coming from one of her subjects.
@coolconfuzer2 жыл бұрын
Based Seydiltz
@jasonz77882 ай бұрын
Thanks drach
@RayyMusik5 жыл бұрын
While I really enjoy your (partially hilarious) videos, it might be a good idea to spell this ship’s name ‘Ziedlits/Zydlits’ just for the benefit if correct pronunciation.
@MakeMeThinkAgain6 жыл бұрын
Reminds me of Mogami.
@mebeasensei6 жыл бұрын
please do the German commerce raider Korromon.
@arteleonard24056 жыл бұрын
how about the battleship maine, sunk in cuba
@TooLateForIeago4 жыл бұрын
What are those aft-leaning pipes lining the hull for?
@535phobos4 жыл бұрын
Its where the torpedo nets hang from. They swing out to have the nets at a distance from the hull
@TooLateForIeago4 жыл бұрын
@@535phobos thank you! I see them all the time and think, "That's a terrible place for plumbing."
@Kwolfx6 жыл бұрын
Do the IJN Shinano
@ForceSmart5 жыл бұрын
9:03 Woah!
@nnoddy81616 жыл бұрын
SMS Emden (1914)
@SpyLordDax6 жыл бұрын
Zombie status: Confirmed.
@mirrorblue1004 жыл бұрын
Tough ship.
@ROBERTN-ut2il Жыл бұрын
OH, NO ! NOT THE COMFY CHAIR !!
@richardputz32336 жыл бұрын
What the heck do you mean by “Super Firing”?
@Drachinifel6 жыл бұрын
It's the naval term that describes one turret the fires over another.
@Digmen16 жыл бұрын
Super Firing is a naval term for where two turrets are mounted one above the other. The top one is called a super firing turret. I don't know why, but there it is.
@Digmen16 жыл бұрын
Probably like the latin terms for sub and super scripts in typology.
@mcdura6 жыл бұрын
where has the robot gone?
@mcdura6 жыл бұрын
it is very distraction going back and forth. one or the other would be nice plz.
@Drachinifel6 жыл бұрын
We're working with robot into and outro and human voices in the for the actual ship history in future videos.
@Justin-rv7oy6 жыл бұрын
Why are you switching the voice? Stick to a single volume and turn up the human voice. You might want to redo this video. Good info as always though.
@Drachinifel6 жыл бұрын
Still working on the audio issues with my set-up :(
@mbryson28995 жыл бұрын
I enjoyed the mix of voices. It was like being educated by Zaphod Beeblebrox. :)
@sanuku5355 жыл бұрын
0:20. I have no shnaps.... halp...
@HUZAR305 жыл бұрын
The River Jade is pronounced Yar-der.
@MinhNguyen-ps8lo6 жыл бұрын
What a stud XD
@benlaskowski3574 жыл бұрын
Typically German. Fine looking ship. Why aren't these in World Of Warships?
@harryjacobs24623 жыл бұрын
Dogger Bank was not to be a raid on the UK coast.
@seanbigay10427 ай бұрын
I'm sorry, but as a "ship that wouldn't die" I find the SMS Sedylitz of World War I less impressive than the (second) USS Laffey of World War II -- perhaps because Seydlitz didn't beat her enemy the Grand Fleet whereas Laffey did beat the kamikazes.
@carsten88506 жыл бұрын
Love these videos...but please..... pronounce the german ships correctly....
@Drachinifel6 жыл бұрын
Working on that :)
@wojtekimbier4 жыл бұрын
9:18 wow that looks terrible
@DIEGhostfish6 жыл бұрын
The Der Flinger. Isn't der already The?
@Drachinifel6 жыл бұрын
It was named after a general with the family name, so isn't two separate words as far as the ship goes.