Honestly the fact that lessons learned from the Leo were used in the heroic effort in Pearl some 20-ish years later is probably more than enough reason to remember the ship. There's always a 'first'.
It's been long enough since your original video on da Vinci that I re-watched it again for comparison. Your new one is definitely a big improvement thanks to its refined presentation that I, for one, enjoy more.
It is kind of a dishonor to Leonardo da Vinci legacy to name the ship after him... Leonardo da Vinci, would have designed a ship that would not sink...
It's funny you mention the concept of the Da Vinci being converted into an aircraft carrier. I can't quite recall it now, but I did read somewhere that had that been the option pursued, there were some broad concepts being considered ranging from a flush decked flat top like Argus and Langley, to a stepped deck design something akin to Imperial Germany's Project I carrier concept, or like how Akagi/Kaga were originally built. Poor candidate or not, it's still sad that her ultimate fate was simple scrapping.
It's nice that you and Central Crosser are reviewing Regia Marina ships/incidents at the same time with a similar release cadence. Is this just a coincidence or did you guys plan this out?
Coincidence, really. I do have a schedule I follow, but I decided to redo Leo here to bring her more in line with Cavour and Cesare. (Especially Cesare, after I covered her sinking and her service back to back)
It's possible that it was a spontaneous powder explosion. During WWI and II four battleships (Vanguard, Leonardo da Vinci, Imperatritsa Mariya, and Mutsu) exploded while in port. All four of them used British style powder. It has also been theorised that the composition of her powder was a contributing factor to the loss of Hood. It is also possible that spontaneous explosion was responsible for the loss of Novorossiysk (former Giulio Cesare).
Not necessarily it depends on how you design the ship. A magazine explosion will take the path of least resistance. If the deck armor is weak enough relative to the side armor then that energy is going up, not out. Hence the ship remains in one piece. Derflinger during Dogger Bank is an example of a magazine cook off where the ship was in one piece afterwards.
Titanic was twice as large, with twice the horsepower, one less shaft, and could still outrun this vessel...21.5 knots for a warship is pathetic, even for 1911. Edit: yes, I realize that many large warships traveled around this speed.
You've got to remember Titanic was an ocean liner she was designed to travel in open ocean. Da Vinci was designed to operate in the Mediterranean/italian waters due to the size of the med speed was less of a factor then it was for Titanic
The real thing is that battleships, of the time, were rarely designed for speed. It’s not just a matter of raw power or size. Hull form is the big factor. An ocean liner, be it Titanic or Lusitania or such, will have a looooooong and lean hull form. The length to beam ratio is designed for speed. You also see this with battlecruisers, to varying extents. A battleship is generally designed to be shorter and stouter. To better support the armor and firepower. To survive better and be a more stable gunnery platform. This is why you can shove as much power in a warship as you want, but the hull form is an inherent limiter on speed. Why both the Italian BB and Japanese Kongou refits needed to lengthen and change hull form to get more speed. And even then… (For reference: Titanic: 882 feet (269 meters) long. 92 foot (28.2 meter) beam. Leo: 577 feet (176 meters) long, 91 feet (28 meter) beam. Titanic is a good three hundred feet longer, on the same beam. That makes a difference.)
21 kts was considered fast for a Battleship at that time. Prior to Dreadnaught the standard top speed for a Battleship was 18 kts. Despite what some games would have you believe (WoWS) almost all Battleships prior to the Queen Elizabeth's were 21 kt or slower. That's why they had Battle Cruisers.
![Megan Thee Stallion - Mamushi (Remix) [feat. TWICE] [Official Audio]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/5c0_u9PsrsQ/mqdefault.jpg)
Honestly the fact that lessons learned from the Leo were used in the heroic effort in Pearl some 20-ish years later is probably more than enough reason to remember the ship. There's always a 'first'.
It's been long enough since your original video on da Vinci that I re-watched it again for comparison. Your new one is definitely a big improvement thanks to its refined presentation that I, for one, enjoy more.
Extremely ingenious engineering as regards her refloating . 👍🏻🏴
In that regards the ship was perfectly named.
As usual , a very good video. Keep up the good work.
It is kind of a dishonor to Leonardo da Vinci legacy to name the ship after him...
Leonardo da Vinci, would have designed a ship that would not sink...
It's funny you mention the concept of the Da Vinci being converted into an aircraft carrier.
I can't quite recall it now, but I did read somewhere that had that been the option pursued, there were some broad concepts being considered ranging from a flush decked flat top like Argus and Langley, to a stepped deck design something akin to Imperial Germany's Project I carrier concept, or like how Akagi/Kaga were originally built.
Poor candidate or not, it's still sad that her ultimate fate was simple scrapping.
Leonardo davinchi himself would be proud of the physics involved
another interesting gem..ty
Very interesting topic keep it up the great content
It's nice that you and Central Crosser are reviewing Regia Marina ships/incidents at the same time with a similar release cadence. Is this just a coincidence or did you guys plan this out?
Coincidence, really. I do have a schedule I follow, but I decided to redo Leo here to bring her more in line with Cavour and Cesare.
(Especially Cesare, after I covered her sinking and her service back to back)
Coal dust explosion in the bunkers, like USS Maine. Probably...
It's possible that it was a spontaneous powder explosion. During WWI and II four battleships (Vanguard, Leonardo da Vinci, Imperatritsa Mariya, and Mutsu) exploded while in port. All four of them used British style powder. It has also been theorised that the composition of her powder was a contributing factor to the loss of Hood. It is also possible that spontaneous explosion was responsible for the loss of Novorossiysk (former Giulio Cesare).
It was the French!! I can smell the garlic from here.🤣
Also snail shells.
The Leo.
👍🏻🏴
Dont mag expolsions blow the ships in two ?
Not necessarily it depends on how you design the ship. A magazine explosion will take the path of least resistance. If the deck armor is weak enough relative to the side armor then that energy is going up, not out. Hence the ship remains in one piece. Derflinger during Dogger Bank is an example of a magazine cook off where the ship was in one piece afterwards.
I always thought that more ships should have been salvaged and repurposed rather than sold for scrap
Titanic was twice as large, with twice the horsepower, one less shaft, and could still outrun this vessel...21.5 knots for a warship is pathetic, even for 1911. Edit: yes, I realize that many large warships traveled around this speed.
That's not true at all, especially for the Mediterranean. And comparing a warship to the Titanic is... misguided
You've got to remember Titanic was an ocean liner she was designed to travel in open ocean. Da Vinci was designed to operate in the Mediterranean/italian waters due to the size of the med speed was less of a factor then it was for Titanic
@@lord_crush777 Also Titanic doesn't have to deal with stuff like Heavy Armour and Naval Guns which would limit her engine space.
The real thing is that battleships, of the time, were rarely designed for speed. It’s not just a matter of raw power or size. Hull form is the big factor.
An ocean liner, be it Titanic or Lusitania or such, will have a looooooong and lean hull form. The length to beam ratio is designed for speed. You also see this with battlecruisers, to varying extents.
A battleship is generally designed to be shorter and stouter. To better support the armor and firepower. To survive better and be a more stable gunnery platform.
This is why you can shove as much power in a warship as you want, but the hull form is an inherent limiter on speed. Why both the Italian BB and Japanese Kongou refits needed to lengthen and change hull form to get more speed. And even then…
(For reference:
Titanic: 882 feet (269 meters) long. 92 foot (28.2 meter) beam.
Leo: 577 feet (176 meters) long, 91 feet (28 meter) beam.
Titanic is a good three hundred feet longer, on the same beam. That makes a difference.)
21 kts was considered fast for a Battleship at that time. Prior to Dreadnaught the standard top speed for a Battleship was 18 kts. Despite what some games would have you believe (WoWS) almost all Battleships prior to the Queen Elizabeth's were 21 kt or slower. That's why they had Battle Cruisers.