HMS Repulse(1892): Key Ships Series 1, Ship 9
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 5 сен 2024
- Book
Tribals, Battles & Darings; The Genesis of the Modern Destroyer amzn.to/2H2yVvb
Support This Channel
Patreon: / acnavalhistory
Paypal paypal.me/ACHi...
Join this channel to get access to perks:
/ @dralexclarke
Ko-Fi (If you just want to buy me a bottle of Irn Bru) ko-fi.com/acna...
Spreadshirt Store: acnavalhistory...
Amazon Affiliate Store www.amazon.co....
Bilgepumps / Social Media Links
Bilgepumps: the-bilgepumps...
Discord: / discord
Twitter: / ac_navalhistory
Other Places to Find Dr Alex Clarke
Global Maritime History: globalmaritimeh...
Academia.edu: alexanderclark...
TV Agent: pastpreservers...
as someone who has lectured on the university and peer conference level as well, i just realized I am lucky enough to have stumbled upon having a drink during a talk apparently by complete accident. Excellent! Point taken and appreciated Dr. C.
I think that the term pre-dreadnaught has it's merits once you get into WW1, because in my mind it could categorise these battleships as a distinct group easily, but you are right, before that it doesn't make sence to call them by the P-word.
If nothing else, a ship can still be used to help train crews. A vital role in any navy as even a cursory glance at history will soon show.
Also, I can certainly get behind referring to the "pre dreadnoughts" as Royal Sovereign types from this point on as well.^^
I use the "take a drink" pause in interviews too, its a useful tip.
I don't know about anyone else, but I refer to all existing and previous vessels "Pre-Warp Drive" vessels. Technically correct is the best kind of correct.
Matilda 2 and Crommie on your tee shirt? How very terrestrial.
Another informative and entertaining presentation Dr. Clarke. Thank you
Dr Clarke: "20 minutes roughly"
me: looks down at the time to go.. 49 minutes. oh well more to enjoy!
Famous last words: “in roughly 20 minutes” 😉👍
I offer two sides of the Battleship temporal coin for your consideration: Pre and Post Bismarck. Hehehe.
It’s a bit unfortunate that the British didn’t stick with the 16.5 inch naval gun, if they had simply upgraded their infrastructure to allow for a larger ship, it wouldn’t have been hard to then build a ship with two twin 16.5 inch turrets. It would probably have allow for the later 8 and 9.2 inch guns to be more viable on battleships, as splashes between them would have been easily distinguishable as opposed to the later 12 inch guns. Also it would have been funny to see HMS Dreadnought size to handle similar amount of guns in 16.5 inch.
As the Family Axe had a joint where the head and shaft met, this joint must have remained the same shape to fulfill the same function.
Similarly all the Mk41VLS through the years must be usable in all versions and in all ships.
Shockingly, Admiral Fisher preferred to keep his flag on the faster ship "intended" for killing cruisers. Who would have guessed?
The ships of this period might be the best ones to call Steam Battleships with the previous being Ironclad Battleships. The French certainly were not patterning on the Royal Sovereigns after all, not sure what they were patterning after (Paris townhouses?) but they definitively were part of the period's developments. Due to the freeboard issues HMS Hood might be better considered the last of the old style battleships (whatever you call them) rather than a potential starting point for the next period, a throwback if you will.
A steam battleship is a pre-Gloire.
@@PaulfromChicago Agree, Steam Wooden Battleship
Matthew, if you can, pick up a copy of Andrew Lambert's Battleship in Transition. It covers the steam transition pre-Gloire period better than any other book, imo. It's an absolutely fascinating read.
@@PaulfromChicago Not much disposable income at the moment, but I have put that one on the list to get. The pre-Gloire Steam Ships of the Line are exactly that, Ships of the Line that have integrated steam power. There is a need to differentiate them from the more modern style of battleship as the role is somewhat different, thus retain one of the names for such ships (Line-of-Battle ship, Ship of the Line, Rate, etc.) for those. The "Pre-Dreadnought" type ships are the steam battleship come into its own but are not yet the more specialized sub-group that is type classified by HMS Dreadonught, hence Steam Battleship makes the most sense for these ships.
37:30 I think a clever CiC Med has a tendency to choose the best ships for being an admiral in, not the best at fighting. Like that large unprotected cruiser.
A British cic med of the long 19th century shouldn't worry themselves with prestige. They are the hype.
Any chance of a fancy edition with leather and gilt lettering for the expanded 3rd edition? I have a 1st Edition, but would definately buy a a Fancy 3rd Edition if you were to have them printed.
Pre Vanguards sounds good. Imagine telling someone from the US that the Iowas are really just pre Vanguards.
Rate of fire... 10" 12" guns although by no means quick firing will certainly out perform 13.5" particularly when the loading machinery is not as capable as it will become..
"Hit hadr hit first & keep hitting" no?
Thank you for the video Dr Clarke. Enjoyed it very much as always.
There rate of fire at the time was near enough Identical... & 13.5in packed a bigger punch... it actually comes down to speed of construction the 12in guns & turrets were ready to go thanks to the Lord Nelson class and Jackie Fisher didn't want to wait for anything as being first was such a powerful statement.
Pepsi has long been the sweet monkey on my historian's back.
I normally have too much blood in my pepsi stream...
the whole pre-Dreadnaught point, (which I agree on btw)
made me think, what do you do date wise? BC/AD
I always found that funny when they are like in 4 BC some roman dude said this or that. that so close to the 0 point that it sounds silly.
while if something is 3.000 BC it's become so abstract that I don't really care, it's just a big number.
*Maybe they should use the Roman year numbers for Roman events? Makes things nice and confusing, I like that :P
Excellent argument!
Ah yes the great calendar which isn’t always consistent and changes as people change their minds.
Louis CK has a funny bit about 'counting down' in BC/BCE times. People in those times freaking out "What's going to happen at zero?!?!"
@DrClarke was it her rate of fire or lesser number of men that he preferred with Renown then the “1st rates” ?
I've always heard that it was the speed and manuverability of Renown that he liked, but perhaps there were other things as well
i feel a disturbance in the force.
as if a thousand voices shoutet out all at once IRN
and then all went black and silent
I personally prefer the name "Sovereign type" over "Royal Sovereign type". Not a huge difference, but it sounds a little less clunky to me.
So would post-iron clade or evolved iron clade be better terms?
I have to admit that referring to pre Dreadnoughts as Royal Sovereigns" doesn't sit right wih me, the RS were barbette ships while many (most?0 of the later PDs) were turret ships. its also confusing to refer to (for example) HMS Canopus as a Royal Sovereign when she is a completely different class.
So what do you call them if, as you say, History/naming should look forward, so they can't be Pre Dreadnoughts? My answer to that is to ask "What did contemporary people, both Naval Officers and laymen, call them at the time?
From what I can see they were simply referred to as "Battleships", when you read some of the contemporary accounts of Tsushima for example you read of the fleets consisting of "xx modern battleships and xx older battleships"
So thinking about it, I'd propose the following naming convention:
Ironclads (divided into sub classes based on the gun/armour layout - Belt and battery, Box battery, Breastwork Monitor, Central Citadel)
Steelclads - when steel armour replaces Iron - again you can divide them into sub lasses based on the gun/armour layout
Battleships - the Pre Dreadnoughts, from Royal Sovereign on (how you treat the later vessels like the Lord Nelsons with large calibre secondaries is an interesting question - could you call them "Super Battleships", much like the later Dreadnoughts were referred to as "Super Dreadnoughts")
Dreadnoughts
Whoo first ....
I know you are a historian, but how about the term "pre-historic?"
It's always bugged me... but basically, it exists because some archaeologists & many historians like to try to draw lines in the sand
Is it not just the time before any written records remain for historians to read?
The trouble with that is it presumes that all historians do is read records to discern history... and we haven't been so limited ever really... which is just one of my issues with it
Since you asked.
Calling a vessel a "Royal Sovereign" type / applying that as a descriptor increases the bar of entry for the amateur naval enthusiast. I don't think that's who you are as a historian. Pre-Dreadnought is a better term as everyone knows it.
Lubrication..... for the throat... enjoy.
Asking the French not to be annoying? Not going to happen!