During my time in the German Navy I was also based at the Naval Arsenal Kiel. And I parked my car on the parking lot which is today above Admiral Scheer.
Mein Freud. You served in the German Navy. I served in the RAN. Our forebears fought each other as professionals in their respective forces. Today we are brothers
Awesome to see a video on my Great Grandfather's ship, he was an officer on board during the 1940-41 Atlantic cruise. He spoke very highly of her. Have pictures from her during the Atlantic cruise when he was aboard. Nice to see her getting a spotlight as she was the most successful of the German Navy's surface warships.
Awesome to see a video about _my_ great grandson's ship. (Just kidding). These ships would've been far more effective if the war has begun in the mid 1930s, before the advent of fast battleships that could fairly easily run them down.
Two interesting books: "Big Guns in the Atlantic", by Angus Konstam "Pocket Battleship-The Story of the Admiral Scheer", by Theodore Krancke and Jochen Brennecke Note that Theodore Krancke was in command of Admiral Scheer, during the 1940-41 cruise.
Another great video Skynea! Admiral Scheer is probably my third favorite German Warship behind Tirpitz and Scharnhorst so its good to see her getting some love.
Topic burried ships: not far away is the Ostuferhafen Kiel. There was a submarine pen. During an air attack at the end of the war the docked sub U 4708 sank with personal on board and was never raised. After the surrender the bunker pen was blown up and then in this century filled in for construction of the current port facilities. Before that I was able to visit it.
Hey. Do you know that there is an recent paper about a geoelectrical survey of Kieler scientists? They give a short history about the ship and it’s current situation. If you are interested I could send you the paper.
@@heikot.3843 I believe I've read that report, which found that the wreck was partially cleared after the war, with the bow removed up to the forward engineering spaces and the stern removed to the beginning of the armor belt, with the remaining midships section cleared down to the waterline and subsequently buried. I have heard that at least one of her main battery turrets was removed, as well as some of her machinery, but a fair bit of the Admiral Scheer should still be buried there in Kiel under 3 to 5 meters of dredge spoil including at least her after main turret. Interestingly, a drainage ditch over the site today was rumored to follow the outline of the capsized hull, which the survey shows to be accurate.
@@doktorjohann4883 Yes, that's exactly the perfect summary of the article. Unfortunately, I don't know any more about the condition of the wreck or a report on the scrapping. Or rather, I don't think there's much about it. However, I can imagine that there might be the possibility of newspaper articles from Kiel newspapers in the archive, for example.
The diesels were used for their fuel efficiency, giving the ship long range and reducing the need to refuel. And the reason for it's relatively slow speed. The KM light cruisers used a conbination of diesel engines for economical power and steam engines for high speed. But they were too lightly built for open ocean use.
You can see exactly where she lies. There is a line of brush that runs in an irregular ditch that is almost exactly her length of 186 meters. It is broken only by a helipad. This area shows very well in Google Earth. N54.320991 E10.163313
People may be interested that when she engaged Jervis Bay, the later was under the command of CAPT Fogarty Boyd Fegan VC. The ship was named after a bay on the NSW coast where the RAN Naval College is ( yahwohl I was). Fegan had been the College Captain..
if you're looking at HX 84, be careful of the legend surrounding the "beaverford". as gallant as that action would have been, no mention of it was made in "scheer"'s log
The thing with Commerce Raiding in WWII - was Aircraft. The Raiders carried them themselves but they made finding them by their enemies much more likely. .
Raider attack operation of Admiral Scheer at WWII is the best sea operation after raider attack of Turkish cruiser Hamidiye at WWI.Both of raider attack operations very successfull
There were enormous problems with the diesel engines in this class of ship. The vibration was such that it often upset the calibration of the optical sights of the guns.
Jervis Bay was never going to win, but the RN and RAN tended to have a humour in these areas. I remind you of Armidale, Yarra and others. Sydney. Kormoran out thought her. I will not comment her.
The Kormoran was a German merchant ship armed for raiding and she sustained an amazing battle in the Indic ocean with an Australian cruiser, the Sydney. Even though the odds were against the Kormoran, she succeeded in sinking the warship. Unfortunately all hands went down with the Sydney, and the Kormoran herself was badly damaged so the crew decided to scuttle her and they reached the Australian mainland.
@walterseaman2556 Let's alter that. Kormoran was an Armed Merchant Cruiser almost as heavily armed as Sydney and in the circumstances of the action better placed. Her primary advantages were her secondary armament which swept Sydbey's decks preventing the tubes, 4-inch and A/A plus the torpedo tubes. Her initial direct hits on the bridge, wireless room and gun direction also turned the tide. Oh, and a very professional CO in Dettmers who dis everything right.
@@andrewstackpool4911 - All things considered, the Sydney was a real warship, whose armor was thicker than that of a raider...You mention as an advantage the kormoran's secondary armament, but what about the cruiser's ? It couldn't be inferior to the enemy's....The only possible excuse might be to concede that the Germans had better gunners so their broadsides were more effective.
@@walterseaman2556 Sydney couldn't use it as Kormora 's 20mm and machine guns sprayed thecdecks literally killing every man there. They also took.out the aircraft, starting fires there The four-inch secondaries on Sydney were open not in turrets as were her A/A. And her armour was certainly not strong enough to resist 6-inch HE rounds at point blank range. Look at the damage to Graf Spee from 6-inch rounds. Plus nothing would withstand a 53cm torpedo. She was turned into an inferno below deck of fire, smoke, water ingress and noxious gas. And note both forward turrets were taken out early. It was only the after guns that finally struck Kormoran. The Germans' accounts of the dying cruiser are horrific. At the end, a flickering light on the horizon that went out.
@@walterseaman2556The Germabs got the first salvoes away with Sydney boresighted. Their first rounds took out the bridge, wheelhouse, wireless and director. That would also have taken out other vital areas. A and B turrets soon after and then just a mayhem with every weapon they had. Meanwhile the torpedo destroyed the fo'c'sle area. The bow was found broken off.
If the Germans had instead built four more Admiral Hippers with eight eight inch guns they would have had a fleet of fast cruisers capable of thirty two plus knots and with a decent anti-aircraft armament they would have been a formidable force. Sending two at a time out into the Atlantic they would have done more damage and been a bigger threat to Britain's merchant marine. The eleven inch guns only numbered six and their slow rate of fire was a big disadvantage. In the battle off Brazil two cruisers could have possibly sunk one or two of the British light cruisers. They would have outgunned the two light cruisers and their better armor would have allowed them to escape damage. The stupidity of Germany building the Sheer class was a huge mistake!
Convoys were often protected by older battleships or battle cruisers such as HMS Renown. Scharnhorst, a far more capable ship, declined combat with a convoy so equipped, she even scuttled off when HMS Newcastle, a light cruiser appeared. So more German cruisers in the Atlantic would make no real difference. The German navy were outnumbered in all classes.
@@NashmanNash The decision to over ride the Washington Naval Treaty and use the eleven inch gun was made after the design board rejected the cruiser design that became the Hipper.
@@bullettube9863 No. Germany was not bound by the washington naval treaty anyway.That's why there were no caliber restrictions There was some thought given to a vessel with 8 21cm guns(this having NOTHING to do with the Hippers),before the decision came down to either a coastal battleship with 38cm guns,or the design that later became the Deutschland. Design work on "Washington compliant" cruisers was not something the Reichsmarine saw any real point in
@@NashmanNash Sorry but Germany was bound by the Washington Treaty because the other countries signing the treaty ordered Germany to follow it. Of course the weight limits were not followed because Germany resented being told what to do. I know many people think it was Hitler and the Nazies who began the military buildup but it all began before the Nazies took over.
During my time in the German Navy I was also based at the Naval Arsenal Kiel. And I parked my car on the parking lot which is today above Admiral Scheer.
Mein Freud. You served in the German Navy. I served in the RAN. Our forebears fought each other as professionals in their respective forces.
Today we are brothers
Crikeyb,poor old bugger must have been a wee bit uncomfortable.
Awesome to see a video on my Great Grandfather's ship, he was an officer on board during the 1940-41 Atlantic cruise. He spoke very highly of her. Have pictures from her during the Atlantic cruise when he was aboard. Nice to see her getting a spotlight as she was the most successful of the German Navy's surface warships.
Awesome to see a video about _my_ great grandson's ship. (Just kidding). These ships would've been far more effective if the war has begun in the mid 1930s, before the advent of fast battleships that could fairly easily run them down.
Two interesting books:
"Big Guns in the Atlantic", by Angus Konstam
"Pocket Battleship-The Story of the Admiral Scheer", by Theodore Krancke and Jochen Brennecke
Note that Theodore Krancke was in command of Admiral Scheer, during the 1940-41 cruise.
@@Thorr-kl6jl Have Pocket Battleship, amazing book probably the closest thing I read that I felt I understood what my Great Grandfather did on Scheer
Thanks! My father served on Admiral Scheer in 1944-5.
You're always teaching me; thank you! I had no idea that _Admiral Scheer_ had been so extensively refitted and to such a different appearance.
Another great report!
Of course we've come to expect that!
Excellent report and great rare photos of the Scheer.
Such a beautiful but equally versatile ship! Not only a great commerce raider, but also a wonderful subterranean Submarine!
Another great video Skynea! Admiral Scheer is probably my third favorite German Warship behind Tirpitz and Scharnhorst so its good to see her getting some love.
Great photos ! Congrats.
Topic burried ships: not far away is the Ostuferhafen Kiel. There was a submarine pen. During an air attack at the end of the war the docked sub U 4708 sank with personal on board and was never raised. After the surrender the bunker pen was blown up and then in this century filled in for construction of the current port facilities.
Before that I was able to visit it.
Amazing how much Adacity They had.
Hey Skynea, did you happen to come across any good sources on the scrapping of the ship? I recently did a video on that and barely could find any.
Hey. Do you know that there is an recent paper about a geoelectrical survey of Kieler scientists? They give a short history about the ship and it’s current situation. If you are interested I could send you the paper.
@@heikot.3843 I believe I've read that report, which found that the wreck was partially cleared after the war, with the bow removed up to the forward engineering spaces and the stern removed to the beginning of the armor belt, with the remaining midships section cleared down to the waterline and subsequently buried. I have heard that at least one of her main battery turrets was removed, as well as some of her machinery, but a fair bit of the Admiral Scheer should still be buried there in Kiel under 3 to 5 meters of dredge spoil including at least her after main turret. Interestingly, a drainage ditch over the site today was rumored to follow the outline of the capsized hull, which the survey shows to be accurate.
@@doktorjohann4883 Yes, that's exactly the perfect summary of the article. Unfortunately, I don't know any more about the condition of the wreck or a report on the scrapping. Or rather, I don't think there's much about it. However, I can imagine that there might be the possibility of newspaper articles from Kiel newspapers in the archive, for example.
Thanks guys!
The diesels were used for their fuel efficiency, giving the ship long range and reducing the need to refuel. And the reason for it's relatively slow speed. The KM light cruisers used a conbination of diesel engines for economical power and steam engines for high speed. But they were too lightly built for open ocean use.
Beautiful ship!
...as all of the Kriegsmarine big ships were....Their designers had exquisite taste.
You can see exactly where she lies. There is a line of brush that runs in an irregular ditch that is almost exactly her length of 186 meters. It is broken only by a helipad.
This area shows very well in Google Earth. N54.320991 E10.163313
People may be interested that when she engaged Jervis Bay, the later was under the command of CAPT Fogarty Boyd Fegan VC. The ship was named after a bay on the NSW coast where the RAN Naval College is ( yahwohl I was).
Fegan had been the College Captain..
if you're looking at HX 84, be careful of the legend surrounding the "beaverford". as gallant as that action would have been, no mention of it was made in "scheer"'s log
Oh dear. "Anytime sooned" right at the end. Gotcha! Moment 😂
are you drunk or what is your problem?
What a beautiful ship. How sad
The thing with Commerce Raiding in WWII - was Aircraft. The Raiders carried them themselves but they made finding them by their enemies much more likely.
.
I know practically nothing about the “Admiral Scheer”, I am curious
Way to go Scheer! Awesome ships was part of Task Force Thiele!
An other great German ship, a real warrior.
Raider attack operation of Admiral Scheer at WWII is the best sea operation after raider attack of Turkish cruiser Hamidiye at WWI.Both of raider attack operations very successfull
Thanks
You always hear of a war ship being sunk, or scrapped. This is the only one to be buried,... Interesting
SMS Moewe: "You're adorable!"
There were enormous problems with the diesel engines in this class of ship. The vibration was such that it often upset the calibration of the optical sights of the guns.
Aircraft are faster than any ship.
You must be very intelligent.
Wasn't the world wide Great Depression still raging? How on earth did Germany and Japan are themselves such as this? Did anyone notice? What happened?
Jervis Bay was never going to win, but the RN and RAN tended to have a humour in these areas.
I remind you of Armidale, Yarra and others.
Sydney. Kormoran out thought her.
I will not comment her.
The Kormoran was a German merchant ship armed for raiding and she sustained an amazing battle in the Indic ocean with an Australian cruiser, the Sydney. Even though the odds were against the Kormoran, she succeeded in sinking the warship. Unfortunately all hands went down with the Sydney, and the Kormoran herself was badly damaged so the crew decided to scuttle her and they reached the Australian mainland.
@walterseaman2556 Let's alter that. Kormoran was an Armed Merchant Cruiser almost as heavily armed as Sydney and in the circumstances of the action better placed.
Her primary advantages were her secondary armament which swept Sydbey's decks preventing the tubes, 4-inch and A/A plus the torpedo tubes.
Her initial direct hits on the bridge, wireless room and gun direction also turned the tide.
Oh, and a very professional CO in Dettmers who dis everything right.
@@andrewstackpool4911 - All things considered, the Sydney was a real warship, whose armor was thicker than that of a raider...You mention as an advantage the kormoran's secondary armament, but what about the cruiser's ? It couldn't be inferior to the enemy's....The only possible excuse might be to concede that the Germans had better gunners so their broadsides were more effective.
@@walterseaman2556 Sydney couldn't use it as Kormora 's 20mm and machine guns sprayed thecdecks literally killing every man there. They also took.out the aircraft, starting fires there
The four-inch secondaries on Sydney were open not in turrets as were her A/A.
And her armour was certainly not strong enough to resist 6-inch HE rounds at point blank range. Look at the damage to Graf Spee from 6-inch rounds.
Plus nothing would withstand a 53cm torpedo.
She was turned into an inferno below deck of fire, smoke, water ingress and noxious gas.
And note both forward turrets were taken out early. It was only the after guns that finally struck Kormoran.
The Germans' accounts of the dying cruiser are horrific. At the end, a flickering light on the horizon that went out.
@@walterseaman2556The Germabs got the first salvoes away with Sydney boresighted. Their first rounds took out the bridge, wheelhouse, wireless and director. That would also have taken out other vital areas.
A and B turrets soon after and then just a mayhem with every weapon they had.
Meanwhile the torpedo destroyed the fo'c'sle area. The bow was found broken off.
If the Germans had instead built four more Admiral Hippers with eight eight inch guns they would have had a fleet of fast cruisers capable of thirty two plus knots and with a decent anti-aircraft armament they would have been a formidable force. Sending two at a time out into the Atlantic they would have done more damage and been a bigger threat to Britain's merchant marine. The eleven inch guns only numbered six and their slow rate of fire was a big disadvantage. In the battle off Brazil two cruisers could have possibly sunk one or two of the British light cruisers. They would have outgunned the two light cruisers and their better armor would have allowed them to escape damage. The stupidity of Germany building the Sheer class was a huge mistake!
Convoys were often protected by older battleships or battle cruisers such as HMS Renown. Scharnhorst, a far more capable ship, declined combat with a convoy so equipped, she even scuttled off when HMS Newcastle, a light cruiser appeared. So more German cruisers in the Atlantic would make no real difference. The German navy were outnumbered in all classes.
The hippers were not even considered by the time the 3 Deutschlands were build
@@NashmanNash The decision to over ride the Washington Naval Treaty and use the eleven inch gun was made after the design board rejected the cruiser design that became the Hipper.
@@bullettube9863 No.
Germany was not bound by the washington naval treaty anyway.That's why there were no caliber restrictions
There was some thought given to a vessel with 8 21cm guns(this having NOTHING to do with the Hippers),before the decision came down to either a coastal battleship with 38cm guns,or the design that later became the Deutschland.
Design work on "Washington compliant" cruisers was not something the Reichsmarine saw any real point in
@@NashmanNash Sorry but Germany was bound by the Washington Treaty because the other countries signing the treaty ordered Germany to follow it. Of course the weight limits were not followed because Germany resented being told what to do. I know many people think it was Hitler and the Nazies who began the military buildup but it all began before the Nazies took over.
##éééééééeéeéé