World of Warships - Know Your Ship #22 - Scharnhorst Class Battlecruiser

[@dkramerstein]

“Gentlemen, the battle against the Scharnhorst has ended in victory for us. I hope that any of you who are ever called upon to lead a ship into action against an opponent many times superior, will command your ship as gallantly as the Scharnhorst was commanded today." Admiral Bruce Fraser

[@MihaiVH]

In one on one battle british would never won ...

[@justinharvey1355]

The Scharnhorst and her partner in crime Gneisenau were very impressive ships for their time. During her engagement with the HMS Glorious, the Scharnhorst achieved one of the longest range navel gunnery hits on record at 26,400 yds, a remarkable achievement keeping the ship's armament of nine 11in guns in mind.

[@seannel2005]

KaijuDirectorOO7 I believe there was an Italian ship which hit a minesweeper at a similar distance...

[@dylanwight5764]

Of similar note, there was a frigate (River-Class) which registered a hit on a surfaced U-Boat at over 13,000 yards. Phenomenal for a 4" gun.

[@kurtveldeman9291]

Just bought an RC Scharnhorst scale 1/100, so 234cm long, must be really impressive in true scale, it's the length of my entire street!

[@Schimml0rd]

@@kurtveldeman9291 IN STEEL!! WITH GUNS!! :DD sry

[@賴紀衡-l2t]

Finally, the Scharnhorst class is now actually coming :D

[@dougreimer2912]

A surprising sensitive closing that brought a tear to my eye.

[@seannel2005]

God, that was heartbreaking...

[@danielwallace1187]

Well with the Scharnhorst Class there needs to be a few things noted. First the German concept for Battlecrusiers was building a ship that was identical in terms of armor and secondary armament to a battleship but used smaller guns to save weight. Second the Scharnhorsts guns would have been surprisingly effective in a line of battle as the Revenge Class Battleships,the Hms Valiant and not to mention the 3 English battlecrusiers hadn't been upgraded in terms of machinery and armor since their initial construction during WW1. So against those ships at say 15k yards they would have lasted and likely won as their rate of fire in combat conditions was close to 3 rounds a minute vs the 45 sec reload of the 1950 lbs 15 inch shells. The key would have been weather, assuming that this happened between June and July 1941,which is the only time the Germans would have been able to field their fleet with all capital ships the rough composition of each side would have been 4 German Battleships vs 7 British Battleships, this account for the repairs and deployments of all units away from the English Channel and the North Sea. So this leaves the Mediterranean and Far East Squadrons out, lets say Bismarck had done the sensible thing and had run back the way she came after The Battle of the Denmark Straight which claimed the Hood and knocked out the Prince of Wales for months of repairs. It would have pitted the Bismarcks and Scharnhorsts against Renown,Repulse,4 Revenge class battleships and the King George V. The deciding factors would be 4 things, 1 would Hitler give the Kriegsmarine the leeway to fight as they see fit and not order them to run in the face of superior numbers,2 would the U-Boats in ww2 succeed at thinning the Royal Navies numbers prior to the fight (something tried but failed before Jutland),3 could the German Commander of the force utilize the over all speed advantage of his ships to cross the T on the royal navy and bring the Pocket Battleships into the fight before the bulk of the fleet was to badly mauled at range? And lastly like I said earlier the sweet spot for the German fleet was 15k Yards to be really effective,due to the Royal Navies heavier 15 inch guns it was more like 18k yards,so weather would be the biggie. Radar back then didn't handle bad weather very well, it wasn't until 1942 when the English developed an amplification system that could compensate somewhat for foul weather

[@tim8431]

I don't understand your optimism of the Scharnhorst and Gneisenau against British capital ships. Both Scharnhorst and Gneisenau tried to gang HMS Renown (which had been upgraded since WW1) and lost badly. In fact the 2 Kriegsmarine Battle cruisers had to run so hard they damaged themselves in the process. Also Bismarck would need as much repairs after the Denmark Strait as POW did. Most of POW problems were self inflicted.

[@Snag97]

Bad weather did play a part in the fight between Scharnhorst & Gneisenau against HMS Renown. The Renown was more seaworthy as the Scharnhorsts had a much lower fo'c'sle, or fore-castle (I've seen it spelled different ways depending on the source material) than Renown & the chop of the sea caused problems with the German battlecruisers performance. Of course this had always been a problem for German ships even in the first world war. Admiral Tirpitz, creator of the German High Sea's fleet of WWI even said at it's end that the Germans simply didn't understand the sea as the British did, mostly due to Germany being a more land based nation while Britian had over 200 years of naval experience and thus knew far more about warship design. At least the Germans didn't sacrifice armor protection on their battlecruisers, choosing instead to give up a little firepower for speed. How many British battlecruisers blew up at Jutland? The Scharnhorst would have faired better had they had greater freeboard & bigger guns, although I still feel that only six 15 inch guns was an insufficent number for a captial ship of WWII. Perhaps nine 14 inch or even some improved 12 inch guns would have put these ships on better terms.

[@bofoenss8393]

I am afraid you have it upside down. The British invented the battlecruiser as a class of hunting and destrying protected cruisers. This meant capital ship armament (same as battleships) to defeat the armour of the cruisers yet being fast enough to catch and intercept them. The trade off was less armour (the fundamental weakness of the type). In fact all battlecruisers but the Scharnhorst and Gneisenau were built with equivalent main gun calibers as the contemporary battleships. Jst look at Jutland - it was weak armour that defeated the battlecruisers yet they all sported the same guns as the battleships and therefor were expected to trade shots with them. In the interwar years all battlecrusiers had their armour upgraded and some reclassified as battleships. The Scharnhorst class can't truly be classified as battlecruiser or battleship since they fit none of the criteria. Yet had they been upgunned they would have been fast battleships like the Iowa class. Instead they ended up being between heavy cruisers and battleships somehow with no clear tactical purpose except commerce raiding.

[@Snag97]

I think the Germans handled the battlecruiser concept a bit better than the British, keeping with the idea that a ship should be protected against it's own firepower & giving up some firepower (be it smaller guns or less guns) for speed resulting in a more balanced ship. SMS Derrflinger had stats that were more akin to fast battleships of WWII and one could say she was sort of an 'early' version or prototype of the fast battleship instead of being a battlecruiser. Of course the British had to learn the hard way at Jutland. Speed does not equal armor & there was something wrong with their bloody ships. Indefatiguable, Queen Mary & Invincible all blew up after being hit only a few times while the German battlecruisers recieved many hits from both the British battlecruisers & battleships, including the famous Queen Elizabeth class. Only one, the Lutzow, was lost while the rest limped back to port with serious damage. Seydlitz was probably the luckiest to survive, she was such a wreak when they towed her into port. I'll have to check my sources again but I think the Germans initially ran her aground to keep her from sinking.

[@bofoenss8393]

Daniel Gans Yes you are right - I believe she was run aground too but not sure. It is interesting to note how experience is forgotten... The British battlecruisers lost at Jutland were in at least two of the cases because of improper ammunition handling and storing for faster firing. So when a turret filled with ready ammunition was hit the flaming shock wave reached the magasines without delay and blew up. The same thing happened with the Hood. To my knowledge it was not the famous plunging shot from Bismarck that blew her up, it was a preceding shot that ignited the readily stored secondary ammunition which caused a chain reaction down to the magaine. The range between Bismarck and Hood at the time she blew up was actually so short that it was off the charts for plunging fire effectiveness. A note of interest is that when the risk of capital ship engagements declined the practice of storing huge amounts of ready secondary and tertiary ammunition was taken up be the Americans to increase the rate of fire against kamikazes.

[@Tormentor]

I am actually baffled by the comment of the British sailors towards the end. Would not have been the only case where German sailors were left to drown though.

[@paulsalmon5928]

Scharnorst never stood a chance against Duke of York. Was doomed almost right away. Fabulous shooting by the Duke. Some of the best in Naval warfare history.

[@bellator11]

28.3 cm guns were actually powerful enough to penetrate the armour of most Battleships at the range where the hits took place during the Battle of the Denmark strait, and they were arguably most accurate naval guns of the war.

[@Acme633]

Quite wrong. An 11 inch shell weighed only 600-700 pounds, in other words about one-third the weight of a 15-inch shell (about 2,000 pounds). So no wonder the Scharnhorst was shot to pieces by the 14-inch guns of the Duke of York. The video is right in saying it lacks any punch against a real battleship. A 16-inch shell (Nelson and Iowa classes) weighs about one ton.

[@jayillingworth1301]

The German 11inch shell weighed in at 670 pounds, giving the class a broadside weight of 12,060 pounds. In 1940, Scharnhorst AND Gneisenau were confronted by HMS Renown, a rebuilt WW1 battlecruiser. She mounted 6 15inch guns, with a broadside of 11,520 pounds, very nearly matching the two German ships on her own. In the ensuing confrontation, a shell from the Renown destroyed the Gneisenau’s main fire control, after which the German ships ran for cover. They failed to cause any damage to the Renown. The eleven inch main armament was not as good as people think. If you want to mount the best axis naval rifle of WW2, then you need the Italian 15inch guns of the Littorio class. A magnificent artillery piece, let down by its ammunition.

[@Strothy2]

37:40... do not cry...

[@jonathandunn730]

A force of Bismarck, Tirpitz, Scharnhorst, Gneisenau and Prince Eugen would have been a hugely powerful force no doubt about it. However in WWII the Germans had still failed to recognise what had been demonstrated in WWI - That they could not outbuild and overtake the numerical supremacy of the Royal Navy and break our dominance of the sea. A core goal of the Great War was never achieved, but Hitler continued with it into WWII until late in the war before switching to all out submarine warfare. It would have been a powerful strike force, but the Royal Navy could have put up a force of 4-5 battleships like King George V class supported by WWI heavies like Warspite and Renown, with massive cruiser and destroyer support that would have overwhelmed them. Bismarck met exactly that fate, unable to fend off sheer numbers despite her size and quality, hunted down and blown to pieces by the Royal Navy.

[@MrFrazer5800]

Holt1718 they never needed a carrier, they always started wars with nations right beside them so they could use airfields, and their planes were able to attack london from germany, there was absolutly no need for a carrier, it would have been a waste of ressources

[@MrFrazer5800]

Holt1718 you dont get my point. if their planes were able to reach london and fly back they were able to aircover their ships from land, there was no need for a carrier, you just send planes with your fleet and you send 1 squad to the fleet before you return another one for refueling, the fact how good that worked defending the tirpitz against bomber runs for years, there was no point in building a carrier! not a single one accept it! germany were able to air cover the entired sea up to britain, so it was way cheaper to just build more and more planes launching them from the mainland

[@EpicThe112]

Jonathan Dunn excellent analysis those ships should have required the Graf Zeppelin aircraft carrier ( World of Warships tier 8) for air support since the Royal Navy would have used their own aircraft carriers escort their battleships

[@mikhailiagacesa3406]

In sim i used a combined KM fleet(including Gniesenau and Scharnhorst) to try and hold Narvik. Brits hacked me up. Before that they came off second in a battle with Dunkirque and Strasbourg. Did better when I got them the 15" guns. But I take to heart what Adm. Fisher said. "Don't use a Battlecruiser like a Battleship." Best use; commerce raiding. Good Vid!

[@mikhailiagacesa3406]

Oh...just remembered that my german BCs did sink the Warspite off Norway...but only after it had been torpedoed by German bombers.

[@teargass1849]

Mikhailia Gacesa i wich game?

[@mikhailiagacesa3406]

Grand Europa - board game - sorry about the long comeback.

[@thheNO]

Also, it is amazing to watch the difference between English and German crews and American ones in terms of humanity. Don't know if it's intentional or not, but every time a ship gets sunk, both the Germans and Britishs crew is sympathetic to their adversary. The Americans (in some of the footage at least) is more bragging.

[@ichasegaming]

Vogel I agree, in many cases the British and German sailors all show a certain degree of humanity when talking about sinking an enemy ship.

[@johndous1970]

Humanity? If your ship was sunk by a European (Axis or Allied), or American warship, you could expect to be treated humanely. What do you think the Japanese did with survivors of ships that were sunk, or air crews of the aircraft that they had shot down, and managed to pick up? For example, Ensign Frank W. O'Flaherty and his radio-gunner Bruno P. Gaido had ditched their plane in the sea after it had run out fuel. They were spotted in their life raft by the crew of the Japanese destroyer IJN Makigumo. They were fished out of the water and taken prisoner. These two men were interrogated brutally for some time, and when the Japanese were finished, O'Flaherty and Gaido were tied up with chains that had weights attached to them, and were thrown overboard to drown. How would you feel about the enemy after hearing about this? This kind of treatment was also reported by British, Australian, and other Allied service people at the hands of the Japanese. Americans bragging about sinking a ship? You must enjoy painting American servicemen as cold, heartless, warmongers, right? We're just in it for the sheer pleasure of slaughtering innocents.

[@ichasegaming]

John Dous We are not denying that the Japanese weren't cold heartless bastards during the war. I think what Vogel was pointing out is that in a lot of the US made documentaries, the tone after sinking an enemy ship is quite different. Although, I do believe that a lot of it is just history channel trying to spice things up.

[@thheNO]

John Dous I didn't see anywhere that I painted the americans as warmongering, cold-hearted, bloodthirsty....etc. I merely stated an opinion that the Americans in some of the clips was more proud/bragging after they ha sunk a ship, whereas the German/British that have been interviewed show sympathy. Last time I checked, bragging does not mean that you are taking joy in fighting. It just means that they are proud of that they were the ones to sink ship X. Late in the War, German submariners (especially those commanded by SS officers) were reported or heavily suspected of firing small-caliber arms upon the crew in lifeboats after sinking a merchant vessel. So it wasn't all good and dandy in the Atlantic as well.

[@mikhailiagacesa3406]

Vogel I agree. But Americans are the nervous newcomers. ;-)

[@Norilius]

I think the guns on Scharnhorst are juuuust right, 283mm rapid firing 3x triple turrets that could probably fire 4-5 rounds per minute compared to the 2 rounds per minute on the King George V-class which means that Scharnhorst can score more hits, giving better odds for Scharnhorst to do damage + the German range finding system and don't forget Scharnorst's 26.700 yard hit on the Glorious. (Scharnhorst was probably more than 40.000 tons with deep load)

[@yogistanu55]

Chase can you find some Classic Kriegsmarine music for your intro...great informative video and look forward to playing WOW when it finally gets released.

[@ichasegaming]

Matthew MacMillen I changed it with the next episode and have pretty much stuck to that ever since

[@zach8269]

Matthew MacMillen you know that Kriegsmarine just means War Navy? So just call it german navy

[@axef2946]

Matthew MacMillen it's released dood

[@niko5015]

The New intro is awesome i subscribed you few weeks ago ( 34subs ) and now over700 keep on doing those great videos chase!

[@ichasegaming]

Niko Karau Thank you :) and welcome to the fleet :D I had to revise the intro a bit, here's the one I'll be using from now on New Intro for Know Your Ship Videos [TEST]

[@niko5015]

iChaseGaming np love the new new intro it is even better than the ather one

[@zche083]

The new introduction of the video is excellent! 😃

[@TBB59c]

that intro was awesome

[@Terrathrax]

Nice work compiling the story of the German battlecruisers. It's sad about the fate of sailors of the Scharnhorst. They should have tried to rescue more of them, but I wasn't there so maybe they British command folks had a hatred for them after what they had done to the convoys.

[@Acme633]

A force of all the German heavy ships working together (as some users suggested) never happened because Admiral Raeder was under explicit order from Hitler not to expose the capital ships to unnecessary risks (since they were so few in number). This "minimum risk" condition of course in most cases prevented any action altogether. Hitler was quite angry about the loss of the Bismarck and after that the surface forces were used largely just as a potential threat.

[@Sinaimedve007]

yes, the new intro is indeed marvelous. And your ship's series are very interesting.

[@arleedstanto]

after 2 years, finally we get to see the German BB line!!

[@MichalSoukup1995]

do you think we will get choice between 28 cm, and 38 cm guns?

[@arleedstanto]

+MichalSoukup1995 idk tbh, WG might make it as an optional upgrade, or a premium ship option altogether..

[@MichalSoukup1995]

arleedstanto But I think that even with 38 cm guns it still be best for clubbing seals (I mean cruisers...)

[@larryspiller6633]

Excellent work again. Your trade mark we have come to greatly appreciate. Once again thank you.

[@ichasegaming]

Larry Spiller Thank you :) Glad you enjoyed it ^^

[@SIG442]

The Scharnhorst class is based up on the Dutch Battlecruiser 'Design 1047 battlecruiser'. which was better in most parts, which had 4 tripple 18.3 cm guns in it's design. Would have been delivered with her both sister ships, it would have been a serious problem for the Japanese ships

[@eplekake3870]

As the Kriegsmarine realized that their "pocket battleships" had certain limitations, especeially as new British and French capital ships were built / scheduled, the Kriegsmarine only built 3 (Deutschland, Scheer, Graf Spee) of the planned six "pocket battleships". Therefore six triple 28 cm (11 inch) turrets were available and these were used for two larger ships, the Scharnhorst & Gneisenau. These vessels were better suited for commerce raiding and with more speed, armour and firepower they could not be fought by cruisers.

[@Raz0rking]

kind weird "only" 11" guns for a tier 7 battleship while the japanese tier 7 has 9 16" guns. To balance that the germans have to have good DPM an/or good accuracy...

[@GravityTrash.]

Raz0rking yup

[@Akm72]

Raz0rking They will probably allow it to be fitted with six 15" guns when fully upgraded. Still light on firepower compared to other tier 7 battleships though.

[@dylanwight5764]

In the event, Scharnhorst has been introduced as a premium 3x3 11" "battlecruiser" with Gneisenau being introduced as the tech tree counterpart armed with the planned 3x2 15" cannons. Having played both, I can say that they are both extremely tough and durable ships for their tier, easily capable of carrying games when bottom tier. However, the strengths of the sisters are completely different. Gneisenau feels like a true battleship, and despite her relatively few cannons for her tier, she is surprisingly accurate and her shells carry an excellent punch. Scharnhorst on the other hand doesn't fare nearly as well against heavily armoured targets, instead being a phenomenal cruiser-kill. So one must play the ships to their strengths. Fortunately, both are very strong ships that have defined roles which retain enough potency to be able to carry a game in their own right.

[@KaiserHabsburg]

Raz0rking dont use inch. it makes you sound like a phesent.

[@stevendowns1268]

dillan mcdaniel. A bird.....lol.

[@Panzerdeal]

Nice battle-cruiser class for commerce raiding. Had they deployed along side battle ships, they'd more than pulled their weight in keeping cruisers at bay, and scaring battleships with the torpedo armament. I wonder about the 15 inch conversion myself. Wonder if the Pocket battleships of the Spee class were slated for 15's as well..

[@MrToho9000]

Thank you. You have done the best job, we love it. I seen ever one you did. I lot to take in. all good keep up your good work.

[@BlackeyeLP]

It was an battleship and will always be it ^^

[@Snag97]

Ahhh the Scharnhorst, an improved Admiral Graf Spee. I've always had a fascination with WWII naval history for as long as I can remember & dispite being some of the smallest capital ships in terms of firepower Scharnhorst & Gneisenau have always been my favorite. Even though they remained under-gunned throughout the war their armor protection was on par with other modern battleships including Bismarck & KGV. Of course the Germans always preferred to sacrifice firepower for speed in their battlecruisers while the British chose to sacrifice armor protection. As the Battle of Jutland proved in WWI, big guns don't matter if your ships are blowing up after recieving a few hits. All in all I feel the Scharnhorst design was far more modern than Bismarcks. Little known historical fact is that the Germans based the Bismarck design on the WWI Baden design & even though Bismarck was considered the most powerfull battleship of her day the gun layout was more of a throw back to the dreadnoughts of WWI. By the outbreak of WWII the worlds major navies were building battleships with triple & quadruple turrets but since the Germans hadn't built a real battleship for over 20 years they had little experience to go on & had to rely on their last battleship design of the first world war (Baden). Say what you want about being under gunned I still think the triple turret was the way to go. Too bad the Germans didn't research & invest in the 14 inch gun like the British did in their KGV's, or even a modern 12 inch gun. Scharnhorst upgraded with nine 12 inch or 14 inch guns would have been far better I think than with only six 15 inch guns, more on pair with British battleships. Of course they would have had to sacrifice some speed and/or ammunition stock for that, but there are no 'free lunches' when designing warships now is there.

[@Snag97]

Quick note, like the Bismarcks the Scharnhorsts were based on a WWI design (but the film does mention this). Still they incorporated more modern ideas, mostly I think cause they were also intended as improved 'pocket battleships' the likes of Graf Spee & Scheer.

[@jessedierksheide]

I saw at the beginning you were you had the video part for a World of Warships music video play that's like my favorite song

[@amaraffan1024]

Scharnhorst and bismark classes are the most elegant ships of their day

[@ronbishop1068]

I do love that pleasantly modulated English commentary, in the first instance I mean.

[@strechinpick]

Fuso, love the Pagoda

[@ianli3027]

The Scharnhorst-Class may not have the most powerful guns, but they did have a fast rate of fire; firing 3.5 rounds per minutes.

[@cowboyf2504x4]

I believe if there was a surface fleet consisting of Scharnhorst, Gneisenau, Bismarck, Tirpitz, Graf Spee, Admiral Scheer, Prinz Eugen, Admiral Hipper various light cruisers and destroyers the Royal Navy would've ceased to exist fairly rapidly. Just my opinion though.

[@danblake2930]

You mentioned combining the German fleet. With the success of the U boats in the Atlantic. Why didn't they take the entire surface fleet in the channel dash and secure and protect supplies in the Mediterranean for Rommel? Also taking about Navel battles its hard to find or hear about ships maneuvering especial small ships.

[@Roeno]

What the documantery didn't mention, was that the scharnhorst had verry much bad luck. 1 shell disabled the number 1 turret, and destroyed the fentilation sistem for the 1 and 2 turrets. so it got cripled pretty damd hard(with only 3 out of 9 guns in working order). and that lucky shot from the hms duck of york came right in a aromore hole/ weak spot. thrue the thunnel hole if i remember right. note i am not english below it is in mu languige wat de documentaire niet vertelde was dat de scharnhorst veel pech had. 1 kogel stelde de nummer 1 turret buiten dienst, en het ventilatie systeem van de nummer 1 en 2 turrets. dus het schip was al best wel kreupel(met maar 3 van de 9 kanonen werkend). en dat gelukschot van de hms duck of york kwam door een panser gat/ zwake plek.en als ik het goed heb door het schoorsteengat. roeno1997

[@ichasegaming]

Rein Stradmeijer Indeed, her luck in the last battle was terrible. Her radar was knocked out by a cruiser making her blind, and then at extreme range the Duke of York hit the engine and cut her speed down. The Scharnhorst's end was rough :( Your English is good enough for me to understand you, don't have to apologize :)

[@Roeno]

iChaseGaming thx

[@Roeno]

Rein Stradmeijer keep up the good work roeno1997

[@ichasegaming]

Rein Stradmeijer Thank you :D

[@babalonkie]

Rein Stradmeijer A shot that damages a ship is not lucky... Its a matter of factors (Technology, Crew Capability, Wind variation, Range, Location and the biggest factors of all Naval battles... Skill), its like saying Bismark sinking the Hood was just lucky... No it wasn't. It was caused by factors. Hood never had a chance even if some of those factors changed as there was too many other factors. Bismark was a BB and Hood was a BC, Bismark had a good crew and Hood had mainly recruits and deckhands. There is ZERO luck. Luck dosnt exist. If the royal navy hit a vital part its purely because of mechanical and natural factors... and is defined by any Sailor at the time as... nothing other than "A good hit". Just like the hit on Hood... was a "Good Hit". Rounds are not 'fired randomly into the ocean intentionally for love'... They are fired at key parts of ship for damage... Your comment is like saying "Your punch in my face causing my nose to break was just lucky".

[@benadam7753]

The Scharnhorst Class were Battleships! The misconception of the Battlecruiser tag comes from they only carried 11 inch guns. They were intended to have 15 inch guns but logistics and politics limited them to 11 inch guns! The Scharnhorst Class tonnage and armour were equal or greater than any capital ship launched between 1910-1935!

[@HostlerProductions]

I like your new intro the music matched the video it reminds me of the old navy commercial from back in the day. And for your question if all the Kreigmarine capital ships had been formed into a fleet and if the Sharnhorst class had been given 15" guns i think it would have changed the cores of the war on a dime. Remember it took half the British navy to find and sink her and in the end the British could not claim the kill because the Germans had scuttled (sunk) her to prevent her from being captured by the British. So if they formed a fleet like admiral Lutjens hoped for it definitly would have change things. Also what the man said at the end sailors don't hate other sailors we all get sea sick and we all want to return to port safely.

[@ichasegaming]

FreakinBOOM I modified the intro a bit more, shorter with different music (darn copyright problems!). But yeah, a fleet like that would most certainly have put up a significantly bigger fight, but also potentially the loss of many more lives. I still wish there wasn't a war...

[@HostlerProductions]

yeah. I'm not saying a like that would have won the war over night but it would have forced brittan to move it's forces from all across the map to sink that fleet and would have given the axis the opportunity to counter attack. Also do you think you could do a video of the German aircraft carrier Graf Zeppelin?

[@jerrywang4516]

If they were refitted and the entire surface fleet sailed, the only that could stop them was the us pacific fleet

[@littlenick7295]

The intro is awesome keep up the great videos

[@ichasegaming]

Little Nick Thank you :)

[@tammyscott2088]

if the sturnhurst battlecrusier went with a hole fleet like pocket battleship i think that it would have been the most deadly fleet afloat

[@ichasegaming]

Tammy Mueller I think they would have certainly put up a better fight against a British fleet

[@peterson7082]

So many 11in guns

[@harrisonblake1978]

sounded like the U.S. Navy Band. And the G is silent Gneisenau.

[@Holiday48000]

The KMS SCHARNHORST was a beautiful Battlecruiser, it is a shame it is now rusting at the bottom of the Atlantic Ocean.

[@MammothPaige]

Great video. Thanks

[@Kardia_of_Rhodes]

I'm guessing in WoWs this ship will make a good support ship for BB's with larger guns. Other than that it should be good for hunting Cruisers and fending off Destroyers.

[@timbersdad08]

I would like to see a program on the Tribal class destroyer. It served with the Canadian and UK navys in ww2 up untill the present.

[@shield_sniper084]

Can you do a video on the Pennsylvania class battleship

[@Shadx27]

It will be interesting if World of Warships has the 15inch guns as an upgrade.

[@ichasegaming]

Shadx27 Hmmm...would be interesting, that's for sure

[@MrFrazer5800]

iChaseGaming it would be premium thats for sure :D

[@jjayyoung7335]

Weren't the German ship's fire control radars really vulnerable to enemy fire. Like the Bismarck's main armament knocked out her own radar. Also the British Navy disabled Scharnhorst's main fire control radar quickly in the Battle of the North Cape or wherever the Battle was in that freezing Artic water, the Duke of York did in Scharnhorst didn't she?

[@fooman2108]

Didn't Scharnhorst have an engineering casualty during operation Cerberus (the channel dash) that put her dead in the water for something like half an hour?

[@2000spqr]

1979 REISSUE avalon hill game "Bismarck" : Had the Kriegsmarine deployed SHRNHRST, GNSNAU, BSMRK, TRPTZ, in one taskforce... the Royal navy would not been able or capable to deal with it. However it is very interesting that "IF" the RN changed the paradyme of BB taskforces to CA, CL, DD, and CV taskforce attack groups I personally think the UK could deal with that Nazi task force and quickly.

[@klausweling9559]

Very great video, and I love your know your ship series. Anyways what was the marching song played at the beginning?

[@jorgelimon328]

As regards a german combined fleet, if, hypothetically, the germans could link up after say tirpitz was built and they hadn't used their ships, they would have a sizable fleet. They would have had the 2 powerful true battleships, bismarck and tirpitz, scharnhorst and gneiseneau, heavy cruisers prinz eugen, admiral hipper, and blucher, as well as some destroyers. While this was sizable, the british would have been able to concentrate against the concentrated germans, and the british outclassed the germans in numbers and experience. While the germans had some very good ships, many were under armed, and most of the destroyers were under armored and unseaworthy. The british would have probably won.

[@ichasegaming]

jorge limon In terms of sheer numbers, I would have to agree, especially since the British did have carriers as well. But at least the Germans would have been able to put up a considerably better fight

[@jorgelimon328]

definitely, yes. but in the end, they would have lost. While the germans didn't do it in the correct way, they did make the right decision in using their ships as commerce raiders. They should have waited until tirpitz came out, then created 2 separate, strong, fast battle groups for commerce raiding.

[@mikhailiagacesa3406]

jorge limon I agree but keeping the fleet(KM) whole while waiting for the Z-plan to be completed is -sigh- difficult in the extreme;became easier to keep the fleet in being after the CVs Peter Strasser and Europa were fitted out. ;-)

[@mikhailiagacesa3406]

Mikhailia Gacesa In my WW2 Sim, of course... :-P

[@DoddyIshamel]

iChaseGaming They would have lost, badly, in an afternoon. With no fleet in being to oppose the Royal navy could then have concentrated on the U-boats and deployed forces to help the Americans in the Pacific, probably shortening the war considerably. It might have been flashier and less frustrating for the German navy but it would have been a disaster.

[@maygayming5275]

If the Germans deployed all of their surface ships, 2 battleships, 2 battlecruisers, 3 light capital ships and a handful of light and heavy cruisers, they would have been able to cause substantial damage to the Royal Navy, however they would be outnumbered at least 3-1 in capital ships if the RN deployed 100% of their forces against, plus the RN had aircraft carriers. Against US or Japanese fleets, they would never have fired a shot being sunk by air attack, US had 6 fleet carriers Lexington, Saratoga, Ranger, Yorktown, Enterprise, Hornet, and possibly Wasp. The Japanese Kido Butai had the Akagi, Kaga, Soryu, Hiryu, Zuiho, Hosho, Ryujo, Taiyo, Shokaku, and Zuikaku in 1941, while Germany had 2 unfinished carriers and unsuitable aircraft that lacked appropriate range for naval operations, also Yamato>all other battleships. Aircraft carriers aside, they may have been able to cause damage to the US battleship fleet the same as the Royal Navy due to higher speed, but against the superior range and firepower of the Japanese battleships, with or without Yamato, and the Kongos to lead faster fleets to give chase, and better night fighting capabilities along with better trained crews in general, I don't think they would be effective against the entire Japanese navy. Now if we combined the German and Italian navies, then maybe they would stand a chance, but realistically they had no airpower, and optimistically, they had 4 light carriers at best and aircraft with inferior range to US and Japanese naval aircraft, unescorted Stukas at the edge of their range against Zeroes and Hellcats with twice the operational range would not fare well.

[@RedXlV]

Deploying 100% of their forces in return would've never been an option for the Royal Navy, because they had to commit assets to the Indian and Pacific Oceans as well to oppose Japan. But even taking that into account, it would've been unrealistic for Germany to ever hope to match the Royal Navy's power, thanks to Britain's massive head start in shipbuilding. The only possible way to present an even match would've been if the Kriegsmarine had the Italian ships incorporated into their fleet but also if they successfully seized the French Navy. Which of course the French sailors proved at Toulon they would never allow. But of course airpower would still be the problem, unless Germany and Italy either completed their carriers and developed proper air wings, or did all their fighting close to friendly coastline.

[@refhat1]

I love this video. I used to watch this kind of documentary in history channel (great blunders in history) BTW can you tell me where did you get this from I would really appreciated.

[@davidncw4613]

excellent! TY

[@wildntheyoung7814]

Can you do a segment on the Buckley class Destroyer

[@wildntheyoung7814]

Yes I'm very late to the party

[@bg147]

I am not sure why Hitler built the larger capital ships unless he thought he could combine them with the Italian Fleet and potential, captured French ships. It seems that focusing on U-boats, E-boats and destroyers would have made more sense.

[@dmitryjachmenev8027]

Awesome! thanx!

[@gloriatanmasokhua3756]

Like the intro! Awesome!

[@Dumb-Comment]

I must buy this ship!

[@randyjohnson805]

You need to edit your HMS Glorious information. You have unknowingly reported the propaganda information that the British Navy released. You need to find all current information on the HMS Glorious and you will be shocked how and why the carrier sank.It would make an outstanding video

[@aproclis]

Chase, do you think this class should've been one of the german tier 9 or tier 10 cruisers? The Roon and Hindenburg are obviously both fake but this ship existed and is capable of being t9 or t10.

[@RedXlV]

In short, the Channel Dash was successful because of RAF incompetence.

[@narahyabyrne378]

We like your new intro!

[@Maddog3060]

Ahh, paper battleships. If you do, don't forget the paper battleships that were on the drawing boards when the Washington Naval Treaty was signed; some of those were interesting, like the original version of the Lexington-class, or the follow-ups to the Colorados. The British had some big Super Dreadnoughts as well that looked neat on paper. Heck, you could even do an episode about the carriers before they were carriers. XD The Akagi, Kaga, Lexington, and Saratoga, for instance. Not to mention the Furious, Courageous, and... dammit, I know there was a third of those weird, Fisher-supported battlecruiers, but I can't remember her name. / looks up / Right, Glorious. Also, do the Alaska-class? I know there's probably not much on them, but I just love those girls so much. I guess I'm a hopeless romantic who likes the fact that America did finally build a couple of battlecruiers. XD (In all but name.)

[@ichasegaming]

Maddog3060 It'll probably be a multi part episode like the Yorktowns :P

[@Maddog3060]

iChaseGaming Yes yes, but, the Alaskas? ;p

[@ichasegaming]

Maddog3060 will try my best =]

[@frostysimon101]

The third your missing was HMS Glorious I believe...

[@peterson7082]

iChaseGaming Maybe the Graf Zeppelin?

[@davidabney7700]

Those 11-inch guns of Scharnhorst were NOT weak, and not only not weak, but a much faster reload/fire capability than all of the big gun battleships of Britain, USA, and France. I hear the weak gun criticism ad nauseum by arm chair admirals and it holds no merit! Where the Scharnhorst real weakness was at was the radar system of Scharnhorst. The Germans were behind us in radar technology and the antiquated system Scharnhorst had at North Cape spelled her doom. Not her 11-inch guns! The British cruisers hit on the radar of the German Battlecruiser in the beginning stages of battle, made Scharnhorst blind, and that sealed her fate. Scharnhorst had qualities of ww1 design, coupled with the best radar system the Germans had at the time.

[@sagesheahan6732]

Yeah, Im glad you changed the music. Haha. Good intro though.

[@TheNightWatcher1385]

Nevada-Class Battleships if ya got the time!

[@ichasegaming]

***** Added onto to-do list

[@TheNightWatcher1385]

iChaseGaming Sweet!

[@JOINTBAW]

can you do one on the german cruisers hipper class?

[@ichasegaming]

***** I'll add it to my to-do list :)

[@michaelbuckler]

I love the intro, and I love the extended intro in this episode. Modern CG output is excellent, and better than much actual footage.I didn't like the rumpty tumpty music though. Too un-serious,

[@ichasegaming]

michaelbuckler I fixed the intro in like the next episode :)

[@michaelbuckler]

iChaseGaming Thanks. Before the new computer-game thingy started there was a trailer, about 1 min. 20. It featured a South Carolina class BB, which morphed I think into a japanese cruiser, etc. Where has that gone, I can't find it anywhere. This had enormous realism, and is genuinely awesome.

[@furious_wrath7079]

Um probably already said but this class were battleships, there is awhole channel and videos dedicated to naval ship design and history on Drachinifel YT channel. You cant just classifiy a ship solely based off its guns. Besides her main guns she was every bit a BB this class was supposed to get 15in guns but technology at the time couldn't do it, since the documents on twon 15 turrents and guna were lost after ww1 sms bayern and sisters had 15in which would latter be installed on Bismarck class BBs. Diffrent types.

[@furious_wrath7079]

So fleet wise they would've been nicely gunned but its one small fleet persay if compared to what the British had. You would've had 4 battleships 2 or 3 heavy cruisers around 6 to 8 light cruisers bunch of small and larger destroyers for sake of argument add AC Grapf Zeplin. All at at once you have a nice formidable task force or small fleet.. now a better comparison for argument is if the Kreigsmarine couldve finished Plan Z then you have something comparable to the old High Seas Fleet and some competition to the Royal Navy Grand fleet i forget what it was called in ww2..

[@televisionblitz]

I suppose in WoWs these will be rated as cruisers because of their tiny guns right?

[@ichasegaming]

televisionblitz Nope, maybe lower tier battleships lol

[@KaiserFranzJosefI]

iChaseGaming tier 7 isn't low tier.

[@televisionblitz]

Kaiser Franz Josef I how do you know what their this ship is gonna be i game already?

[@KaiserFranzJosefI]

the video description

[@Kardia_of_Rhodes]

There are also mods for it.

[@Maddog3060]

I think the G in Gneisenau is silent, so it should be just "neisenau".

[@ichasegaming]

Maddog3060 Ooops :P

[@Maddog3060]

iChaseGaming I'll "oops" you! / shakes fish / ;p

[@swift9417]

Maddog3060 iChaseGaming the G in Gneisenau isn´t silent ;) and actually the Scharnhorst-Klasse is not a Battlecruiser it is a Battleship :D I like your "Know your ship" series very much keep up the good work :)

[@ichasegaming]

Resurrected Eagle Thank you :) Glad you like it ^_^

[@peterson7082]

Resurrected Eagle well it's a battleship or a battle cruiser depends on the source

[@xianderthest8014]

If you want a paper design ship to talk about why not the Iceberg Carrier from Project Habakkuk?

[@battlefleetstudios7205]

Can you please do the Nagato class?

[@ichasegaming]

Calvin Burnett On my to-do list

[@battlefleetstudios7205]

Thank you!

[@brankomilicevic6904]

Love this stuff! Great job and thank you for this series!

[@ichasegaming]

Branko Milicevic You're very welcome :D Stay tuned, as I am making more

[@jagsdomain203]

I know I am late to the discussion but if there is still a won't I would like to discuss this idea

[@TheNecromancer6666]

Actually the Scharnhorst class were considdered fast Battleships not Battlecruisers.

[@peterson7082]

TheNecromancer6666 depends on the source

[@TheNecromancer6666]

Nathan Peterson I think the German navy knew best what it was, and in the navy register it was listed as a fast Battleship. Also it had full scale battleship armour but smaller guns then most battleships, a battlecruiser eould have had light armour and battleship guns, also it had a fighting not an reconessence role. So it is by any deffinition a battleship not a battlecruiser. Any source saying something else is just wrong.

[@peterson7082]

TheNecromancer6666 The Alaska(s) had armor comparable to the Japanese battleships of WWI (Fuso, Nagato, etc.) which varied (on the Japanese ships) from 5-10, and 4-12 (inches) and the Alaska(s) with 4-9 inches of armor. and had larger guns than the Scharnhorst and later became defined as a "Large cruiser" rather than a Battleship or even a Battle-cruiser. The Scharnhorst had slightly thicker armor at 4-13 inches than the Alaska's 4-9 inches but carried a similar armament. So here are two conflicting thoughts... I'd just leave it to say it's an opinion depending on who you ask

[@TheNecromancer6666]

Nathan Peterson Well the Alaska design was 10 years younger and ships got bigger with the times. Also classification by the use of the ships isn't working either because every German battleship in WW2 fought like a cruiser, attacking convoys without escort... I think it's really up to the navy who build the ships to define what thry were ...

[@mikhailiagacesa3406]

TheNecromancer6666 I cordially disagree. Calling a BC a BB does not make it so. Witness HMS Hood. Also, I hate the term 'Pocket Battleship'. If its over 10000 tons and has 11in. guns, its a BC.

[@killerhk5297]

i hope WOWS will pull in more Germany Warship in the game....

[@shellslinger222]

what is the name of the song for your intro because i love it lol?!

[@JOINTBAW]

how you think the yamato battleships would have fared against merchant raideing in the Pacific and how would you think the allies would have try ed to sink her?

[@ichasegaming]

***** I think the Pacific is a bit too big for raiding, probably wouldn't have been that successful. Plus the Japanese didn't really use their submarines as effectively so the overall effectiveness would have been pretty low. Still the US probably would have bombed the Yamato to death, kinda like what they did at the end.

[@DoddyIshamel]

There would have been no point. The only real channel to cut was the USA-USSR supply lines post Barbarosa and Japan was not at war with USSR until the last 2 weeks. The only other option would be to raid the USA-Australia route which was a huge area to find traffic in except near the coasts which would have air cover. Commerce raiding near the US Pacific coast would have been suicidal, many many planes. Now the Japanese commerce raiding the Indian Ocean, that would have been interesting. Japan didn't have the fuel for it anyway.

[@Panzerdeal]

Nice intro.

[@baron_von_orange9093]

Love the intro :)

[@undeniablelogic1963]

There was a Super Yamato? I like the new intro, but maybe you should try some dramatic music instead.

[@ericbiscuit2248]

No, it was designed but never built.

[@undeniablelogic1963]

Well I know that, but I never knew that the Japanese even thought of a Super Yamato.

[@stigjohnsen5556]

intro's great :)

[@ichasegaming]

Stig Johnsen Thanks :)

[@jackstanislow8051]

Scharnhorst was a battleship

[@CorrectUser]

The reason it was referred to as a battleship was for German propaganda. It was clearly a battlecruiser. Guns are not battleship-like.

[@BlackeyeLP]

+Adriel Jose the guns are the only battlecruiser thing on the scharnhorst class. it is clearly a battleships because of the weight

[@Cragified]

+Adriel Jose That argument makes no sense. Otherwise you'd have to call the Hood a Battleship...

[@lorenzoholt5053]

+Cragified Hood was classed as a battle cruiser because of armor. Gneisenau was same displacement as a battleship but had smaller guns than a typical battleship, leaving it to be classified as a battle cruiser

[@Cragified]

Lorenzo Holt Uh no. Gneisenau was a battleship, plain and simple. Designed as a battleship and not as a battle cruiser. The Kriegsmarine itself even classed it as "Schlachtschiff" which means battleship. The reason they were armed with 28.3cm inch guns was simple, they where available and ready. 38cm turrets and mounts were not.

[@221b-l3t]

I´m not convinced 11" guns are that much inferior. Real life is different to games, you don't suddenly pen with 15" and bounce with 13" you simply have a higher chance of penetrating the armor. Real life penetration is more probabilistic, where say a 15" gun has for instance a 99% chance to pen a certain armor thickness, an 11" gun might have a 60% chance of penning the same armor. But it won´t just bounce like in the game. Also as to the energy of a shell speed if more important than weight. The energy on impact is E = 1/2(m x v²). So speed is significantly more important than weight. A lighter shell will usually be faster and thus somewhat make up for it. So an 11" gun would IMO certainly cause significant damage to a ship designed to take 15" inch guns. The difference being that it might withstand a 15" gun for two hours of continuous bombardment while it might take 6 hours of 11" fire. A 1 ton shell crashing into the side of the ship at close to 3 times the speed of sound will do massive damage, if it weighs 0.95 tonnes, 1.15 tonnes or 1.25 tonnes. It is a tremendous amount of energy that has to be absorbed. And will deform and damage the armor reducing it´s structural integrity. It might take more hits but eventually the armor will weaken. Of course there are limits to this and a 3" shell will bounce on a battleship. But even then only if it hits at an angle and it would still do enough damage, that the affected part would eventually have to be serviced even if it is still functional as a piece of armor.

[@kleintimmmy]

my opinion on german Fleet fighting as one ?: RIP royal navy homefleet

[@420slaughter]

You rock dude and intro is cool. Love your vids i have watched them all. And hey will there be subs in wowships?

[@ichasegaming]

420slaughter Right now, the devs have said no subs for warships :)

[@Schimml0rd]

@@ichasegaming hahaha

[@cavernoide]

I realy liked the new intro but definenitle not the music.

[@ichasegaming]

Carlos Emilio Delgado Yeah, I fixed the intro already :) shorter with different music

[@marylgonzales4878]

What about the post ww1 German battle ships

[@rhinehardt1]

Your new beginning sounds like it should be for a college football broadcast.

[@frederickgates4349]

Sir,for personal reasons i'm very interested

[@LostBeaver]

What would happen if Germany created a fleet out of it's battleships and cruisers is the following: The Kriegsmarine would know better than to send their ships against the royal navy and so they would instead get them to do convoy raids. When you actually think about it, the Royal navy got lucky with their sinking of the Bismarck and so they would have trouble dealing with the fleet. Britain would have to devote more resources to convoy protection and that would mean that they would have to waste manpower and resources on keeping their battleships running. It would most likely put a serious drain on Britain's morale and might have even won the war for Germany. Of course, if USA had entered the war none of this would matter because the massive air fleet that they had would destroy Germany's fleet before it left port. In this scenario, it also wouldn't matter if the Scharnhorst or Gneisenau hat 15 inch guns as merchant ships had no armour whatsoever.

[@dubsy1026]

I'm sorry, but Bismarck was not luck. Hood was luck, but not Bismarck. the royal navy still had 50 14 inch guns, 18 16 inch guns, and 64 15 inch guns in its battleship fleet. Germany had 16 15 inch guns, and 18 11 inch guns. they were never going to win

[@LostBeaver]

Dubsy 102 If you think back to how the Bismarck was sunk and you see that the only reason that the RN managed to sink it was that they got a lucky torpedo hit on the rudder which jammed the rudder. If they hadn't gotten that lucky hit then the Bismarck would have been able to get to safety in one of the french atlantic cost ports

[@dubsy1026]

+The Lost Beaver there was only one big enough fort. and the RN bbs coming up from the Mediterranean could of intercepted. as for the torpedo, in a sustained series of attacks (as planned), it was bound to have happened

[@LostBeaver]

The swordfish attack that crippled the Bismarck's rudder was a last ditch effort before she reached the air cover of german occupied France and the fighters based in France would have picked the RN's carrier based planes apart.

[@dubsy1026]

The Lost Beaver but RN battleships could have easily denied Bismarck the opportunity of docking, as at that point, very few German aircraft were equipped with torpedoes. The area was in range of RAF fighters that could be called upon to hold off the few German air raids and defend the swordfish

[@MrLinkkid]

what music is that in the beginning?

[@rickhoughtellingjr2797]

Without fleet air cover they would of look good but been easy pickings for air attacks....just like the Brits found out