Thanks Tik. My Grandfather was in this battle. He was on the HMS Onslow. He spent most of the battle, keeping the Onslow floating and functional. He was a petty officer in the engineering department. All cheers to the crew of HMS Onslow.
the loss of the Hipper as an operational asset was far greater than simply "one cruiser". The Kreigsmarine was already far less of a threat to the RN in terms of numbers, but also capability. As no new cruisers were on the way, the loss of even one was significant. This battle essentially eliminated the ability of the KM to operate meaningfully in the Arctic area. The later sinking of Scharnhorst at the Battle of North Cape was a direct result of the Battle of Barents Sea. While not decisive in itself, this battle shaped the operational area in such a way as to force Germany to send additional resources to northern Norway, depriving them of those resources in the Baltic.
More decisive than what was lost was what was not lost: All the merchants. If that convoy would have suffered significant losses, it would not only mean this freight didn't arrive in Murmansk, but also a lot more hesitation in sending future convoys, weakening the Red Army for months.
What is interesting here is how badly both sides were commanded. The British admiral had his entire screening cruiser force mostly headed in the wrong direction for nearly all of the battle. But the Germans were no better, allowing themselves to be chased off by a handful of old destroyers and corvettes which they outgunned enormously. Whatever he was, Kummetz was obviously no Teutonic version of Horatio Nelson or John Jellicoe. Remember, this was the fellow who blundered blindly into a Norwegian fixed coastal defense and got Germany's newest big cruiser the Blucher sunk by a land based torpedo battery manned by a gang of reservists. Kummetz had an identical task force, one heavy cruiser and a pocket battleship, and got the cruiser sunk almost immediately with huge loss of life. They were not 'cleared for action' with water-tight doors closed, etc. The fact that Kummetz ever held a major flag command again is astonishing and speaks to the incompetence of the Kriegsmarine. Some considerable allowance can be made for both sides that this battle was so confused and badly handled. They were 70 degrees north latitude in December with daylight lasting much less than eight hours. But there is little excuse for the dismal failure to communicate and report. It reminds one of Beatty's appalling conduct during the Battle of Jutland in 1916.
@@benwilson6145 Blücher's captain requested to make a high-speed dash past the coastal defences, which Kummetz refused. He shouldn't have relied on faulty intelligence. Always base your actions on what the enemy could do, not what he probably would do.
My Dad's father ( My grandad ) was a Petty Officer on HMS Achates and was unfortunately killed , my father was told some years later that he had a chance of getting off the ship but chose to stay looking after the injured . This left my father an orphan at the age of 2 as a couple of years before his mother died during an air raid of the Naval docks at Chatham . His father had left HMS Ajax to join Achates as the money was slightly better . We still have the letter at home written to my dads grandmother from , Lieutenant Loftus Peyon-Jones after the battle , these are small links to the past to a man we never knew . I think when we talk about ships being lost it's hard to factor in the personal stories of all those that lost their lives .
This battle reminds quite of the naval battles of Guadalcanal in that the outcome of the battles largely comes down to who screws up the least and the individual in-the-moment actions of a couple of ships ships more than any brilliant top-level operational plan.
After temporary repairs at Murmansk, Onslow returned to Britain as part of Convoy RA 52 at the end of January 1943, then was repaired at a commercial shipyard in Kingston upon Hull, rejoining the fleet at the end of April that year.
My maternal Grandfather was a Canadian merchant sailor in WW2 and was sunk 3 times by U-boats on Arctic convoy runs from Scotland to Murmansk or Archangel. All 3 times in pitch dark in the middle of the night and with Arctic storms howling. All 3 times he made it up from below deck and into a lifeboat, then through the bodies, debris and burning oil on the surface to “safety” and the hope of rescue, but many, many of his friends didn’t. He was mentioned twice in dispatches to the King. My Mum has copies of the pages of the London Gazette with his name in them. During one of his his sinkings he carried multiple crew mates up from below deck and into a lifeboat, including his best friend who had had both arms blown off in an explosion after they were hit. He hated the war and was unapologetic about that. He would have nothing to do with any remembrance of it for the rest of his life. The one good thing about it was he met my Granny in Edinburgh and came back, married her and settled here when it was over. Otherwise I wouldn’t exist. He passed when I was a teenager and he didn’t talk to us kids about the war, but I overheard him speaking to my Dad about it a couple of times after a few drinks. The one bit of wisdom he did pass on directly to me and my brothers was while we were horsing around on a walk along the beach near where he and my Granny lived: “Never, ever, ever turn your back on the sea, boys. It’s not your friend and will take you in a second.” I’ve never forgotten that.
Admiral Hipper being effectivly lost was a pretty major blow because it left Lutzow as the last German heavy cruiser. Germany had a severe lack of capital ships so losing any was a major loss.
@@TheImperatorKnight In a way. Or they should just not have had capital ships in the first place? The battle of North Cape is a good sequel to this, I hope to see you cover it one day.
@@TheImperatorKnight Following your logic and arguments from your various economy videos, Germany's surface fleet was entirely a waste of time and resources even in the beginning of the war. The only thing it achieved was the surprise invasion of Norway, and that was something of a disaster because most of the Kriegsmarine was out of action for half a year and it lost most of its skimpy destroyer force at Narvik. So the serious question is; other than the invasion of Norway, did the surface ships of the Kriegsmarine serve any useful purpose whatsoever during the war? Or did it exist purely as a play-toy to keep the naval officers happy and as a propaganda tool for the Reich? I would be very interested in your answer, as you have a good grasp of the internal politics of the Reich.
Sorry, but you are wrong. There still were the Prinz Eugen and the Admiral Scheer. Had the Germans concentrated all their remaining heavy units (Tirpitz, Scharnhorst, Prinz Eugen, Lützow, Admiral Scheer) into one single task force, the outcome of the Battle of the North Cape might have looked quite different. But that's not what happened of course.
@@colinhunt4057 You might have a look at Drachinifel's channel. He explains many details of the naval construction policies, ship designs and operational doctrines.
One of the biggest problems I can see with this battle was the lack of aggressive action by the German destroyers. They were also equipped with torpedoes, so they could have made runs at the convoy, which would have created a major dilemma for Sherbrooke and the convoy commander. Instead they just tagged along with Hipper and Lutzow, contributing little to the battle. To me the lack of action by the German destroyers was crucial.
One major problem German destroyers had throughout the war was their weak(ish) hulls and bad design for heavy weather...In Barents Sea the weather was deeadful
Biggest problem was lack of training in Kriegsmarine. They could not identify enemy, they could not hit the enemy. Looks like they got worst recruits (especially surface fleet) as Heer and Luftwaffe had an advantage in getting better men.
@@aleksazunjic9672 best German marine recruits were on Bismarck and in U-boat fleet. They were top. But by 1942 KM surface force was not important anymore compared to Luftwaffe, Panzerwaffe and so on.
09:21 What's notable though is that the trio of RN Cruisers at the *Battle of River Plate* did Mission Kill the Graf Spee. The damage incurred made returning to Germany essentially impossible without repairs in a friendly port... of which there were none. The volume of damage was in part because the class of ship had very thin armour relative to its size and armament, and a FC Director system that could only target one opponent at a time, making a multi vector fight with three smaller ships surprisingly deadly. Graf Spee's C/O also was under the impression - while in port - that a force headed by *HMS Renown* - a ship that outclassed his cruiser in every way, even when she was undamaged - was heading to Uraguay as well. Knowing that following his orders from Berlin would only result in: A. Running out of fuel mid ocean, being caught and sunk. B. His ship being trapped in a *Battle of the Falkland Islands* 'esque action where surrvival was impossible ...he took the third option; defy the letter of his orders to save his crew from a pointless slaughter, but ensure his ship also didn't fall into allied hands. (which it probably would have, had he stayed in the nuetral port past the deadline, and been inturred for the rest of the war)
Thanks for this magnificently detailed and informative video! As a sailor, i especially enjoy naval content and hope to see more of it from you, as other narrators just cannot compare to the dedication you put into your vids!
Geography had a big hand in the battle, too. This was above the Arctic Circle so during the months long polar night, with occasional twilight when the sun was south of the horizon. The Barents Sea is also a rough sea, with the northern Atlantic being particularly rough, compared to the Mediterranean.
And RN got much more experience in sailing and shooting in such conditions. RN didn't use the torpedoes because they knew that hitting, when the sea is so rough, is almost impossible, especially on longer distances.
Well done doing a naval history vid TIK! The German navy was nearly always timid. From the first The Battle of the River Plate the Graff Spee was defeated by 6inch and 8inch gun cruisers.. Ships he should have blown out of the water.. Then in Norway Scharnhorst and Gniesenau fled from the elderly Battlecruiser HMS Renown..Hipper got clobbered by HMS Gliworm and the German destroyers got savaged by an inferior force at 1st Narvik... Not only were the Germans timid/hesitant BUT the Royal Navy were highly aggressive and would take on any enemy despite the difference I size!! A good demonstration of "The fight in the dog not the dog in the fight!!"
I don't want to show any disrespect towards fighting men, and it is also clear that the British Navy is far more numerous and experienced compared to the German one. But, there is a number of cases where what you say is fully true: timid and hesitant on the German side. The British are more aggressive, confident, seem willing to sacrifice more, and simply desire victory more than the Germans. The best example is not even Barents, it's the River Plate. The Brits are still using a damaged light cruiser to fight, by having each turret firing individually, and making a human chain of command from the damaged bridge all the way to the engine room and rudder. Meanwhile, the Graf Spee has lost some anti aircraft guns, the water processing plant, everything else is functional, and decides to retreat. Yes, its captain was a civilized gentleman, but being a gentleman will not win you any wars.
@@Serby665 _everything else is functional, and decides to retreat_ Graf Spee is thousands of miles away from port. Even trivial damage can be mission ending; unlike the Royal Navy, it doesn't have the luxury of control of the seas nor a myriad of resupply and repair bases.
@@Edax_Royeaux Landgsdorf thought initially he was fighting destroyers and because of the aggressive nature of the British tactics he thought they were sheilding more powerful units...Harwood (The British Admiral ) couldnt understand why Graff Spee didnt stand off and sink his ships in detail...The Germans fluffed it 100%!
@@VRichardsn true, I didn't take that into account. Unfortunately, this handicaps the ship. It means the ship should have been deeigned from the start to only engage ships that don't fire back, and avoid any battle all together, due to het handicap with regard to repair facilities.
@@Edax_Royeaux I knew they expanded a lot of ammo, but was not aware they were almost dry. This means they would have spent all the ammo and would have been unable to sink any of the enemy ships. Leaving a Graf Spee without ammo, and 3 enemy ships, damaged, but capable of shooting also counts as a harsh defeat, in my books, at least.
1:10 The map you use there doesnt show finish-soviet line correctly, as Finland by this point in the war had territory up to Onega lake, Petrozavodsk and Svir river.
My great grandfather died on bramble, he did 12 years of service. Aged 23-35 he died New Year’s Eve, he devoted his life to it being gone 3 years a time sometimes he left behind a wife and two daughters who never recovered. My great grandmother died in Plymouth over looking the memorial hoping to finally get to be with him again he was love of her life to her death bed she always talked of her love for him and how he was the only one. My aunt and Nan never got other the loss and it impacted them deeply, both my nan and aunt sadly past away and my nan recently and her last few days were of her wishing to hopefully be with her dad again. My son now carries William Fernley wackley name. He was a milk man who became chief stocker. Victory or not our family suffered terribly and the heartache doesn’t just go away for people who had loved ones on board. My aunt married but never went on to have kids as she suffered terribly from it with anxieties, my Nan had terrible ptsd she had to move to America and became a church minister. Not only that my great grandmother had to for a while give her children up due to not having enough income after their dad died , she had to remarry just to be able to get her kids back they never supported the families. My Nan was a fighter and she lived to nearly 90 and my great grandmother lived into her 90s. I hope they finally got to be together again.
Seriously though thank you for this video and everything else you've done. Every video you post to youtube is further proof that society needs trained historians to be successful
So Hyderabad was like an evil twin of Kamchatka? Kamchatka didn't see torpedo boats but reported them when Hyderabad saw them but didn't reported them. Brilliant.
Were really good. Now, when there are more admirals than ships and those ships are distressingly sub-par in many areas, not so much. Today's RN is yesterday's Kriegsmarine.
As the battle was fought so far north in December how much daylight did they have during the battle? Combined with rough seas and poor weather would have made it difficult just to sail in a group let alone fight a battle.
I've wargamed the engagement out. Both the Hipper and Lutzow took damage from the cruisers, but were sunk by multiple torpedo hits from the destroyers escorting the convoy.
Come on folks, instead of the usual 10% (ish) giving TIK a thumbs up let's get it up to about 50%. Consider it a birthday present for the man. If it's too late this week, then next week. As usual Mr. TIK, absolutely superb presentation.
Thanks (TIK) For sharing this Informative Video about a certain Naval Battle ..It seems to Me British Navigation crews had Much more Practical experiences & talents ,they controlled their Firepower successfully
Not an expert, however I have heard that the performance of the RN destroyers is at least partially down to a hull design that is better optimised for high sea-state than the German destroyers. To say nothing of crews that had been escorting convoys for over a year at that point and were used to the environment.
Market Garden, North Africa, Baltic, Eastern Front... and now even at sea...no battleground left undiscussed by TIK. Well done! The old gag of "Kilroy was here" pops into mind, but more like in a few years "yup, TIK did a video about that!"
Amazing how the Royal Navy scrapped by without incurring far more casualties after making so many silly mistakes. Luckily the two British cruisers managed to arrive in time to save the day. It's hard to imagine just how miserable and difficult it is to be at sea in such cold and stormy conditions.
I think you need to look beyond hindsight. This action occurred in Artic water in mid winter, very little light, poor visibility, with gale force plus winds. There was no real ability to accurately find your vessels position. The only real criticism was the poor use of radio to pass on sighting information.
Tik doing naval history too now? Keep it up, Tik, & also some aviation history from WW2 would be nice also, you narrate well after your time spent researching heavily :) Understand time constrains you, however
Hi TIK. I love your work. Can I ask how historians put quotes from the time period into context? We often hear quotes from primary sources in your video but if my troops were getting encircled at Stalingrad and beaten back in Africa my patience may have been thin. Can we really take quotes at the time to reflect the individuals opinion or just their emotions? I guess this is the debate of history.
@TIKhistory Good to see some naval history for a change. In theory, the German 'pocket battleship' with 11 inch and 5.9 inch guns and the German heavy cruiser with 8 inch guns were more powerful than the two British 6 inch light cruisers and the six German destroyers also carried 5.9 inch guns I believe, to the the British destroyers 4.7 and 4 inch guns. The Royal Navy actually did very well indeed.
It's not as one-sided as you make it out to be, although I agree that odds favored the Germans. Lützow's crew was severely lacking, as demonstrated by her not hitting anything despite expending quite some ammunition. Also, not all of the German destroyers had 150mm guns, only 3 out of 6, IIRC. Now, the British cruisers did carry 6inch guns, and although both German cruisers did have some protection against this caliber, they could certainly be hurt by them. And the British cruisers had 24 rifles between them.
@@michaelkovacic2608 All of the German ships also carried torpedoes and that did not put off the British cruisers (that also carried torpedoes) at all. Having just re checked all six German destroyers carried 5.9 inch guns, five in the case of the named ships and four in the case of the 'Z' ships. I can recommend the channels Drachinifel and Dr Alexander Clarke for those interested in naval history.
@@99IronDuke I frequently watch both of these channels. Torpedoes are greatly overrated in such a heavy sea, and given that ships can't reload their tubes once they are fired means that most commanders won't throw them away easily. The Germans had the disadvantage of being commanded by probably the worst admiral in the Kriegsmarine, Oskar Kummetz. He was just as determined to lose the battle for his side as Kurita was at Samar. They should have put him in jail for criminal incompetence back in 1940 when the brand-new Blücher was lost on his watch.
@@99IronDuke My point is that while the German force looks very impressive on paper, it had several handicaps and was thus below paper strength. The British fought very bravely, I don't want to deny that, but it wasn't exactly a victory against all odds. Hipper was the only heavy hitter on the German side, and did admirably well, using radar-controlled highly accurate fire to sink a minesweeper and a destroyer in almost complete darkness and badly mauling 2 more, but her effort was ruined by Lützow being a complete paper tiger and the heavy sea limiting the destroyers.
The German navy was accurately assessed by G.K. Chesterton: "Germany is a powerful, beautiful and fertile inland country, which can only find the sea by one or two twisted and narrow paths, as people find a subterranean lake. Thus the British Navy is really national because it is natural; it has cohered out of hundreds of accidental adventures of ships and shipmen before Chaucer's time and after it. But the German Navy is an artificial thing; as artificial as a constructed Alp would be in England." --G.K. Chesterton, "The Barbarism of Berlin"
@@Edax_Royeaux It isn't that the Germans were not capable of a good navy, it is that they were not a seafaring nation the way the British, Dutch, Spanish, Portuguese etc. were who relied heavily on trade and navy thus being naturally better at commanding ships. German commanders seemed to have an innate fear of challenging the British navy because they knew how tough and fierce the British fought on the seas. A similar fear crept over the German army whenever American planes flew over. The point Chesterton made is that naval power was natural for Britain being an island and not-natural for Germany which was largely an inland nation with only a few ports mostly on the Baltic which is not like the open seas of the Atlantic. Chesterton's point about building an Alp in Britain is apt. You could build a tall mountain in England like one in the alps but it would not be natural. It would have a presence, of course, formidable even, and there would be climbers but they would not be experienced at climbing as the Germans who have the Alps, for instance. England is renowned for its bravery and prowess on the open seas; Germany not so much largely, as Chesterton pointed, due to geography. When I saw Tik's video, how the Germans were so skittish at engaging a few destroyers, Chesterton's "Barbarism of Berlin" immediately came to mind.
@@Edax_Royeaux I concede that you have made valid points causing Chesterton's quote to be superficial and unfounded, inapplicable to the 2nd World War and from your post, even the 1st World War. I was relying on impressions from a stereotype that the British navy had the Germans intimidated to such a degree they were nearly paralyzed to act. Looks like I was wrong.
Oscar Kummetz seems to be a relatively incompetent (or unlucky?) officer. He also commanded the Blucher when it was destroyed by obsolete Norwegian defenses at Drøbak Sound
One ship was scrapped, at least. One of hte Gneisenau turrets formed the basis fo the coastal defence fort at Austrått at the mouth of the Trondheim Fjord. You can visit it today.
A good resource Admiral Samuel Eliot Morrison USN naval history of WWII. It is 15 volumes, but volume 1 is the battle of the Atlantic. Thank you Lewis.
considering the oil situation just as you mentioned previously, every german fleet operation is very valuable and costly. Therefore, the loss is very deadly for german navy and german since such kind of operation can not be put into action for only limited times.
After returning to Altafjord, emergency repairs to Admiral Hipper were effected, which allowed her to return to Bogen Bay on 23 January 1943. That day, Admiral Hipper, Köln, and the destroyer Richard Beitzen left the Altafjord to return to Germany. The three ships stopped in Narvik on 25 January, and in Trondheim from 30 January to 2 February.[After resuming the voyage south, the ships searched for Norwegian blockade runners in the Skagerrak on 6 February before putting into port at Kiel on 8 February. On 28 February, the ship was decommissioned in accordance with Hitler's decree. By the end of 1944, the ship was due for another overhaul; work was to have lasted for three months. The Soviet Army had advanced so far, however, that it was necessary to move the ship farther away from the front, despite the fact that she had only one working turbine. On 29 January 1945, the ship left Gotenhafen, arriving in Kiel on 2 February. She entered the Germaniawerft shipyard for refitting. On 3 May, RAF bombers attacked the harbor and severely damaged the ship. Her crew scuttled the wrecked ship at her moorings at 04:25 on 3 May.
Barents Sea is an action that’s illustrative of the respective navies surface warfare doctrines. One: if you attack British destroyers, be prepared to suffer greater casualties than you anticipated and/or failing to achieve your objective. Two: the constant hampering of your fleet with orders to avoid taking losses and fuel shortages restricting time for exercises results in extremely timid commanders and lack of effective co-ordination between ships, let alone small task groups.
First! You know, I hadn't ever considered the English Civil War before. I think you're the first person to ever suggest it. People have wanted me to cover the American Civil War though
The german surface fleet high command was the most incompetent part of the Third Reich except Wilhelm Marschall who got promptly side lined once showed actual talent for command.
@@georgea.567 They sent out Scharnost&Gneisenau to raid merchantships. Battlecruisers doing cruisers,submarines job. Also kept them in France where RAF bombed them 0-24. Sacrificing most of their destroyers in Norway for no reason. Not hunting down Prince of Wales immiedatly after Hood sank,and not returning back to Germany and the list goes on.
@@vindicare9636 Them keeping Scharnhorst and Gneisenau in France I don’t think was actually that bad of an idea. It kept them as a threat to the Atlantic shipping routes putting more strain on allied capital ships. Also most of the RAF bombs came nowhere near the ships while bomber command took horrendous casualties on those missions. And also the Bismarck not following Prince of Wales makes sense to me as well. The Germans really could not afford to lose Bismarck. They had sunk Hood already so might as well leave while ahead. Plus the Bismarck had already been hit by Prince of Wales’ fire. They were happy to leave instead of risking more damage.
@@georgea.567 All of Prince of Wales main guns jammed in the fight,she was hit multiple times from Prinz Eugen,Bismarck, hunting her down was easy task,also she was illuminated by Hoods wreckage.. Germans should have sink her,call it a day and return to Germany instead of follow through the mission. As for Scharnhost and Gneisenau:How can they raid convoys when allies knew 0-24 their postions from air,french resistance. Bombing them also kept them in their docks. Which meant no convoy raiding at all was off the table. The germans ships sat in their dock doing "fleet in being" or even less.
Point about the man who had his legs blown off and was worried he'd only be given aspirin (11:22) : "Petty Officer Cook" would appear to be a rank in the RN and not the man's name. I would be interested to know if this man's identity could be tracked down.
I'd like to know what happened to the captain of the Hyderabad. He should have been cashiered. At the least he should never have been given another command.
Very interesting. It didn’t help that in 1941 the km sent the Bismarck into the NA with a single heavy cruiser the Prinz Eugene. And it didn’t help that Tirpitz was either stuck in Norway or was still being trained.
If I've learned anything from RUclips naval videos, it's that you better not underestimate WWII Royal Navy destroyers. Their commanders and crews were skilled par excellence and often fanatically brave. Just look at HMS Glowworm for another example.
There's very little on RUclips about this battle. Thanks for making a video about it. In your honest opinion if WW2 hadn't broken out in Sept. 1939 could Germany have pulled off PLAN Z in its entirety? And how would all the other European powers like UK, France, Italy and USSR have responded?
Nazi Germany’s economy couldn’t support Plan Z. It was largely bankrupt by Sept 1939, why Germany invaded Poland to plunder its resources. Even the major naval powers in WW2 with the infrastructure such as Britain and the US couldn’t meet their planned naval expansion. The US made none of its planned Montana class battleships.
Perhaps, but the British would have outbuilt them even harder than before WW1. Germany going for battleships before WW2 was a grave strategic error. Without control of the sea, battleships are nothing more than useless, although extremely fascinating products of a country's engineering ability.
1) The Z-plan required many more years, like only planned to finish in 1948 or something 2) Germany sustained it prewar war economy through debt, a debt that threatened to become unsustainable. Germany had to conquer new territories from 1938-1939 onwards to sustain its war economy through a "plunder economy". So probably no Plan Z without plunder and conquest. 3) If Germany really started to build up a high seas fleet, other powers (mainly Great Britain) would ramp up their fleet building as well, so even when Plan Z is finally finished, it doesn't guarantee naval superiority.
Dear tik; hello from Pittsburgh pa. Non related but. I hope you'd do something on American companies involved or investing in hitlers war machine. I'm a die hard Ford fan and have heard lots of things that state henry directly supported hitler,then again I found all he did was give Porsche a faulty turret ring design (yet Ford built 50% of all bombers for the allies ) any input would be great. Even if it breaks my heart
Nice report. Please go on in this new area of TIK sea and hopefully also air reports during WW2. To be honest, after a some of the Stalingrad episodes, I lost my interest. For me 5-10 of the usual well documented TIK episodes per topic, would be enough to keep me interested for a next episode.
One thing to add is I believe the Battleship HMS Anson was at sea in the Arctic during this battle, although too far away to intervene. I don’t know if the Germans m were aware of her presence but that may have added to their caution.
Tik great video, if you considering more naval battles in the future it would be awsome I'd you did a collaboration with Drachinifel he's a fellow youtuber who has a naval history channel and if I'm not mistaken is also based in the UK.
Along with Dr Alex Clarke, who has done a substantial amount of primary source archival research on the RN (particularly with regard to the destroyer force).
![BLACK BAG - Official Trailer [HD] - Only in Theaters March 14](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Du0Xp8WX_7I/mqdefault.jpg)
Thanks Tik. My Grandfather was in this battle. He was on the HMS Onslow. He spent most of the battle, keeping the Onslow floating and functional. He was a petty officer in the engineering department. All cheers to the crew of HMS Onslow.
the loss of the Hipper as an operational asset was far greater than simply "one cruiser". The Kreigsmarine was already far less of a threat to the RN in terms of numbers, but also capability. As no new cruisers were on the way, the loss of even one was significant. This battle essentially eliminated the ability of the KM to operate meaningfully in the Arctic area. The later sinking of Scharnhorst at the Battle of North Cape was a direct result of the Battle of Barents Sea. While not decisive in itself, this battle shaped the operational area in such a way as to force Germany to send additional resources to northern Norway, depriving them of those resources in the Baltic.
Yes, but as TIK implied, if the loss of just 1 cruiser is crippling to your navy, your navy never had a chance to begin with
More decisive than what was lost was what was not lost: All the merchants. If that convoy would have suffered significant losses, it would not only mean this freight didn't arrive in Murmansk, but also a lot more hesitation in sending future convoys, weakening the Red Army for months.
What is interesting here is how badly both sides were commanded. The British admiral had his entire screening cruiser force mostly headed in the wrong direction for nearly all of the battle. But the Germans were no better, allowing themselves to be chased off by a handful of old destroyers and corvettes which they outgunned enormously. Whatever he was, Kummetz was obviously no Teutonic version of Horatio Nelson or John Jellicoe.
Remember, this was the fellow who blundered blindly into a Norwegian fixed coastal defense and got Germany's newest big cruiser the Blucher sunk by a land based torpedo battery manned by a gang of reservists. Kummetz had an identical task force, one heavy cruiser and a pocket battleship, and got the cruiser sunk almost immediately with huge loss of life. They were not 'cleared for action' with water-tight doors closed, etc. The fact that Kummetz ever held a major flag command again is astonishing and speaks to the incompetence of the Kriegsmarine.
Some considerable allowance can be made for both sides that this battle was so confused and badly handled. They were 70 degrees north latitude in December with daylight lasting much less than eight hours. But there is little excuse for the dismal failure to communicate and report. It reminds one of Beatty's appalling conduct during the Battle of Jutland in 1916.
@@colinhunt4057 Kummetz had been informed that the coastal defence was antique and not in use.
@@benwilson6145 Blücher's captain requested to make a high-speed dash past the coastal defences, which Kummetz refused. He shouldn't have relied on faulty intelligence. Always base your actions on what the enemy could do, not what he probably would do.
My Dad's father ( My grandad ) was a Petty Officer on HMS Achates and was unfortunately killed , my father was told some years later that he had a chance of getting off the ship but chose to stay looking after the injured . This left my father an orphan at the age of 2 as a couple of years before his mother died during an air raid of the Naval docks at Chatham . His father had left HMS Ajax to join Achates as the money was slightly better . We still have the letter at home written to my dads grandmother from , Lieutenant Loftus Peyon-Jones after the battle , these are small links to the past to a man we never knew . I think when we talk about ships being lost it's hard to factor in the personal stories of all those that lost their lives .
I know next to nothing about this Battle. Really appreciate you covering it TIK!
@jay Jayson there is a new Osprey Campaign book out on this battle..Worth a look!!
@@jamesbeeching4341 thank you for the recommendation! I've been looking for a good history book to read.
Another fine high quality effort. TIK is well worth watching.
This battle reminds quite of the naval battles of Guadalcanal in that the outcome of the battles largely comes down to who screws up the least and the individual in-the-moment actions of a couple of ships ships more than any brilliant top-level operational plan.
After temporary repairs at Murmansk, Onslow returned to Britain as part of Convoy RA 52 at the end of January 1943, then was repaired at a commercial shipyard in Kingston upon Hull, rejoining the fleet at the end of April that year.
The Germans: Do anything
That one corvette captain: "I'm gonna pretend I didn't see that."
My maternal Grandfather was a Canadian merchant sailor in WW2 and was sunk 3 times by U-boats on Arctic convoy runs from Scotland to Murmansk or Archangel. All 3 times in pitch dark in the middle of the night and with Arctic storms howling. All 3 times he made it up from below deck and into a lifeboat, then through the bodies, debris and burning oil on the surface to “safety” and the hope of rescue, but many, many of his friends didn’t.
He was mentioned twice in dispatches to the King. My Mum has copies of the pages of the London Gazette with his name in them. During one of his his sinkings he carried multiple crew mates up from below deck and into a lifeboat, including his best friend who had had both arms blown off in an explosion after they were hit.
He hated the war and was unapologetic about that. He would have nothing to do with any remembrance of it for the rest of his life.
The one good thing about it was he met my Granny in Edinburgh and came back, married her and settled here when it was over. Otherwise I wouldn’t exist.
He passed when I was a teenager and he didn’t talk to us kids about the war, but I overheard him speaking to my Dad about it a couple of times after a few drinks.
The one bit of wisdom he did pass on directly to me and my brothers was while we were horsing around on a walk along the beach near where he and my Granny lived:
“Never, ever, ever turn your back on the sea, boys. It’s not your friend and will take you in a second.” I’ve never forgotten that.
Admiral Hipper being effectivly lost was a pretty major blow because it left Lutzow as the last German heavy cruiser. Germany had a severe lack of capital ships so losing any was a major loss.
So really, the decisive factor was the fact that the Germans had a limited number of ships to begin with
@@TheImperatorKnight In a way. Or they should just not have had capital ships in the first place? The battle of North Cape is a good sequel to this, I hope to see you cover it one day.
@@TheImperatorKnight Following your logic and arguments from your various economy videos, Germany's surface fleet was entirely a waste of time and resources even in the beginning of the war. The only thing it achieved was the surprise invasion of Norway, and that was something of a disaster because most of the Kriegsmarine was out of action for half a year and it lost most of its skimpy destroyer force at Narvik. So the serious question is; other than the invasion of Norway, did the surface ships of the Kriegsmarine serve any useful purpose whatsoever during the war? Or did it exist purely as a play-toy to keep the naval officers happy and as a propaganda tool for the Reich? I would be very interested in your answer, as you have a good grasp of the internal politics of the Reich.
Sorry, but you are wrong. There still were the Prinz Eugen and the Admiral Scheer. Had the Germans concentrated all their remaining heavy units (Tirpitz, Scharnhorst, Prinz Eugen, Lützow, Admiral Scheer) into one single task force, the outcome of the Battle of the North Cape might have looked quite different. But that's not what happened of course.
@@colinhunt4057 You might have a look at Drachinifel's channel. He explains many details of the naval construction policies, ship designs and operational doctrines.
One of the biggest problems I can see with this battle was the lack of aggressive action by the German destroyers. They were also equipped with torpedoes, so they could have made runs at the convoy, which would have created a major dilemma for Sherbrooke and the convoy commander. Instead they just tagged along with Hipper and Lutzow, contributing little to the battle. To me the lack of action by the German destroyers was crucial.
One major problem German destroyers had throughout the war was their weak(ish) hulls and bad design for heavy weather...In Barents Sea the weather was deeadful
@@jamesbeeching4341 But rugged and seaworthy compared to the Italian ships which had been designed for the balmy and calm Mediterranean.
Biggest problem was lack of training in Kriegsmarine. They could not identify enemy, they could not hit the enemy. Looks like they got worst recruits (especially surface fleet) as Heer and Luftwaffe had an advantage in getting better men.
@@aleksazunjic9672 best German marine recruits were on Bismarck and in U-boat fleet. They were top. But by 1942 KM surface force was not important anymore compared to Luftwaffe, Panzerwaffe and so on.
@@IrishCarney which Italian ships? I thought all of the destroyers were German.
Fantastic video as always! So much great details and solid commentary. No doubt the best history channel on RUclips.
I agree with your assessment of Tik being the best history channel . At least military history anyways .
09:21 What's notable though is that the trio of RN Cruisers at the *Battle of River Plate* did Mission Kill the Graf Spee. The damage incurred made returning to Germany essentially impossible without repairs in a friendly port... of which there were none.
The volume of damage was in part because the class of ship had very thin armour relative to its size and armament, and a FC Director system that could only target one opponent at a time, making a multi vector fight with three smaller ships surprisingly deadly.
Graf Spee's C/O also was under the impression - while in port - that a force headed by *HMS Renown* - a ship that outclassed his cruiser in every way, even when she was undamaged - was heading to Uraguay as well.
Knowing that following his orders from Berlin would only result in:
A. Running out of fuel mid ocean, being caught and sunk.
B. His ship being trapped in a *Battle of the Falkland Islands* 'esque action where surrvival was impossible
...he took the third option; defy the letter of his orders to save his crew from a pointless slaughter, but ensure his ship also didn't fall into allied hands.
(which it probably would have, had he stayed in the nuetral port past the deadline, and been inturred for the rest of the war)
Thanks for this magnificently detailed and informative video! As a sailor, i especially enjoy naval content and hope to see more of it from you, as other narrators just cannot compare to the dedication you put into your vids!
Geography had a big hand in the battle, too. This was above the Arctic Circle so during the months long polar night, with occasional twilight when the sun was south of the horizon. The Barents Sea is also a rough sea, with the northern Atlantic being particularly rough, compared to the Mediterranean.
And RN got much more experience in sailing and shooting in such conditions. RN didn't use the torpedoes because they knew that hitting, when the sea is so rough, is almost impossible, especially on longer distances.
Biggest problem was poor training and frankly poor recruits that Kriegsmarine got.
Petty Officer Cook seems like the kind of guy who I would’ve got on with, that sense of humour is gold
This was a great video. Delivered with your usual attention to detail. Well done mate.
Great job Tik, you are on top of of your game, on land and sea. Thanks.
Very nice video. Thanks for the in depth coverage.
Well done doing a naval history vid TIK!
The German navy was nearly always timid. From the first The Battle of the River Plate the Graff Spee was defeated by 6inch and 8inch gun cruisers.. Ships he should have blown out of the water.. Then in Norway Scharnhorst and Gniesenau fled from the elderly Battlecruiser HMS Renown..Hipper got clobbered by HMS Gliworm and the German destroyers got savaged by an inferior force at 1st Narvik...
Not only were the Germans timid/hesitant BUT the Royal Navy were highly aggressive and would take on any enemy despite the difference I size!! A good demonstration of "The fight in the dog not the dog in the fight!!"
I don't want to show any disrespect towards fighting men, and it is also clear that the British Navy is far more numerous and experienced compared to the German one.
But, there is a number of cases where what you say is fully true: timid and hesitant on the German side.
The British are more aggressive, confident, seem willing to sacrifice more, and simply desire victory more than the Germans.
The best example is not even Barents, it's the River Plate.
The Brits are still using a damaged light cruiser to fight, by having each turret firing individually, and making a human chain of command from the damaged bridge all the way to the engine room and rudder.
Meanwhile, the Graf Spee has lost some anti aircraft guns, the water processing plant, everything else is functional, and decides to retreat.
Yes, its captain was a civilized gentleman, but being a gentleman will not win you any wars.
@@Serby665 _everything else is functional, and decides to retreat_
Graf Spee is thousands of miles away from port. Even trivial damage can be mission ending; unlike the Royal Navy, it doesn't have the luxury of control of the seas nor a myriad of resupply and repair bases.
@@Edax_Royeaux Landgsdorf thought initially he was fighting destroyers and because of the aggressive nature of the British tactics he thought they were sheilding more powerful units...Harwood (The British Admiral ) couldnt understand why Graff Spee didnt stand off and sink his ships in detail...The Germans fluffed it 100%!
@@VRichardsn true, I didn't take that into account. Unfortunately, this handicaps the ship. It means the ship should have been deeigned from the start to only engage ships that don't fire back, and avoid any battle all together, due to het handicap with regard to repair facilities.
@@Edax_Royeaux I knew they expanded a lot of ammo, but was not aware they were almost dry.
This means they would have spent all the ammo and would have been unable to sink any of the enemy ships.
Leaving a Graf Spee without ammo, and 3 enemy ships, damaged, but capable of shooting also counts as a harsh defeat, in my books, at least.
1:10 The map you use there doesnt show finish-soviet line correctly, as Finland by this point in the war had territory up to Onega lake, Petrozavodsk and Svir river.
Excellent presentation!
My great grandfather died on bramble, he did 12 years of service. Aged
23-35 he died New Year’s Eve, he devoted his life to it being gone 3 years a time sometimes he left behind a wife and two daughters who never recovered.
My great grandmother died in Plymouth over looking the memorial hoping to finally get to be with him again he was love of her life to her death bed she always talked of her love for him and how he was the only one.
My aunt and Nan never got other the loss and it impacted them deeply, both my nan and aunt sadly past away and my nan recently and her last few days were of her wishing to hopefully be with her dad again.
My son now carries William Fernley wackley name.
He was a milk man who became chief stocker.
Victory or not our family suffered terribly and the heartache doesn’t just go away for people who had loved ones on board.
My aunt married but never went on to have kids as she suffered terribly from it with anxieties, my Nan had terrible ptsd she had to move to America and became a church minister.
Not only that my great grandmother had to for a while give her children up due to not having enough income after their dad died , she had to remarry just to be able to get her kids back they never supported the families.
My Nan was a fighter and she lived to nearly 90 and my great grandmother lived into her 90s.
I hope they finally got to be together again.
I just want to say Thank you as I have learned so much from your channel, also the comment section has a lot of great information too. Thanks again.
Very excellent analysis as always
Lewis always presenting the best content good job TIK
I must say I’m impressed, as someone interested in naval history. I especially appreciate the maps.
The Royal Navy was very aggressive. Brilliant and the Nelson Touch.
I really enjoyed this one TiK, your episodes on sea battles is really interesting... Like everything else haha
Thank you, TIKhistory.
Thanks again for your video and work ! Always a pleasure to learn new things
Seriously though thank you for this video and everything else you've done. Every video you post to youtube is further proof that society needs trained historians to be successful
So Hyderabad was like an evil twin of Kamchatka? Kamchatka didn't see torpedo boats but reported them when Hyderabad saw them but didn't reported them. Brilliant.
I see a man here who knows the story about this awesome ship…
As poor as Hyderabad performed, they'd have to work an awful lot harder to compete with Kamchatka's display of incompetance. 😅
I have read Dudley Pope’s’ The black ship ‘ but his novels are wonderful as well.
You gotta hand it to the Royal Navy. They are just really good at naval power.
Thinking of the worst places to be In WWI, the arctic gotta be in the top five.
Were really good. Now, when there are more admirals than ships and those ships are distressingly sub-par in many areas, not so much. Today's RN is yesterday's Kriegsmarine.
Another good job Tik. Thank you.
As the battle was fought so far north in December how much daylight did they have during the battle? Combined with rough seas and poor weather would have made it difficult just to sail in a group let alone fight a battle.
Now we can say... Hey TIK stick to ships! Great work as always
Love seeing your versatility TiK
Very good indeed. Well detailed. Thanks.
Fantastic video Tik. My favorite yt history channel by a (nautical) mile! Please consider doing more Naval videos in the future?
I've wargamed the engagement out. Both the Hipper and Lutzow took damage from the cruisers, but were sunk by multiple torpedo hits from the destroyers escorting the convoy.
Awesome Tik
That was quite good for your first naval battleground. Not sure if you should stick to tanks or stick to ships now... maybe do both
🤣🤣🤣
In my opinion u r the best history RUclipsr
Oh my a TIK video about navy stuff? My dream come true!
Thank you. My Great Uncle Kitchener Lane was lost on the Achates.
again, not a mention for the enigma encryption.... professional as always
Come on folks, instead of the usual 10% (ish) giving TIK a thumbs up let's get it up to about 50%. Consider it a birthday present for the man. If it's too late this week, then next week.
As usual Mr. TIK, absolutely superb presentation.
A great story and well told.
Tik if you had to serve in the navy during ww2 what kind of ship would you have liked to serve on?
Preferably one that didn't get hit or sunk and was nowhere near the action
@@TheImperatorKnight Well said!
@@TheImperatorKnight Soo RMS Queen Mary and RMS Queen Elizabeth.
@@legiran9564 As a toilet blockage technician 3rd class ... I'd rather take my chances on HMS Campbeltown
I’m expecting some ship nerd to comment
“Stick to land warfare”
Already happened! But they were joking. Nobody has said it seriously... yet... but it wouldn't surprise me
Thanks (TIK) For sharing this Informative Video about a certain Naval Battle ..It seems to Me British Navigation crews had Much more Practical experiences & talents ,they controlled their Firepower successfully
Not an expert, however I have heard that the performance of the RN destroyers is at least partially down to a hull design that is better optimised for high sea-state than the German destroyers. To say nothing of crews that had been escorting convoys for over a year at that point and were used to the environment.
I've just finished your Hitler was a Soacialist video, very good quality video and very hard to argue with. Secondly naval warfare since when?
I'm glad you enjoyed that video! A nice follow-up is the Fascism Defined video. And naval warfare since my Patreons/SubscribeStars are asking!
@@TheImperatorKnight probably do the mediterranean sea as a stepping stone between the fall of Axis Africa and the Sicily invasion.
Time to get popcorn.🍿 *Waits*
Market Garden, North Africa, Baltic, Eastern Front... and now even at sea...no battleground left undiscussed by TIK. Well done!
The old gag of "Kilroy was here" pops into mind, but more like in a few years "yup, TIK did a video about that!"
Amazing how the Royal Navy scrapped by without incurring far more casualties after making so many silly mistakes. Luckily the two British cruisers managed to arrive in time to save the day. It's hard to imagine just how miserable and difficult it is to be at sea in such cold and stormy conditions.
I think you need to look beyond hindsight. This action occurred in Artic water in mid winter, very little light, poor visibility, with gale force plus winds. There was no real ability to accurately find your vessels position. The only real criticism was the poor use of radio to pass on sighting information.
10++++ ) you are very, very good!!! I discover your site 1 week a go and i see non-stop your video. Fantastic!!! ( sorry, my eng. is bad)
nice one. hang on what happent stick to tanks? is it now stick to warships?
Tik doing naval history too now? Keep it up, Tik, & also some aviation history from WW2 would be nice also, you narrate well after your time spent researching heavily :)
Understand time constrains you, however
Finnally Naval stuff!
Yeah, this it technically the first time I've set out a proper naval battle before, although I do have a video on the Battle of the Atlantic
Hi TIK. I love your work. Can I ask how historians put quotes from the time period into context? We often hear quotes from primary sources in your video but if my troops were getting encircled at Stalingrad and beaten back in Africa my patience may have been thin. Can we really take quotes at the time to reflect the individuals opinion or just their emotions? I guess this is the debate of history.
@TIKhistory Good to see some naval history for a change. In theory, the German 'pocket battleship' with 11 inch and 5.9 inch guns and the German heavy cruiser with 8 inch guns were more powerful than the two British 6 inch light cruisers and the six German destroyers also carried 5.9 inch guns I believe, to the the British destroyers 4.7 and 4 inch guns. The Royal Navy actually did very well indeed.
It's not as one-sided as you make it out to be, although I agree that odds favored the Germans.
Lützow's crew was severely lacking, as demonstrated by her not hitting anything despite expending quite some ammunition. Also, not all of the German destroyers had 150mm guns, only 3 out of 6, IIRC.
Now, the British cruisers did carry 6inch guns, and although both German cruisers did have some protection against this caliber, they could certainly be hurt by them. And the British cruisers had 24 rifles between them.
@@michaelkovacic2608 All of the German ships also carried torpedoes and that did not put off the British cruisers (that also carried torpedoes) at all. Having just re checked all six German destroyers carried 5.9 inch guns, five in the case of the named ships and four in the case of the 'Z' ships. I can recommend the channels Drachinifel and Dr Alexander Clarke for those interested in naval history.
@@99IronDuke I frequently watch both of these channels.
Torpedoes are greatly overrated in such a heavy sea, and given that ships can't reload their tubes once they are fired means that most commanders won't throw them away easily.
The Germans had the disadvantage of being commanded by probably the worst admiral in the Kriegsmarine, Oskar Kummetz. He was just as determined to lose the battle for his side as Kurita was at Samar. They should have put him in jail for criminal incompetence back in 1940 when the brand-new Blücher was lost on his watch.
@@michaelkovacic2608 I don't disagree with any of that. I love naval history myself.
@@99IronDuke My point is that while the German force looks very impressive on paper, it had several handicaps and was thus below paper strength.
The British fought very bravely, I don't want to deny that, but it wasn't exactly a victory against all odds. Hipper was the only heavy hitter on the German side, and did admirably well, using radar-controlled highly accurate fire to sink a minesweeper and a destroyer in almost complete darkness and badly mauling 2 more, but her effort was ruined by Lützow being a complete paper tiger and the heavy sea limiting the destroyers.
I think this unexpected foray into naval history gives new meaning to the meme 'stick to tanks'. 😉😁
Do you have plans for a video on the Falaise Pocket?
The German navy was accurately assessed by G.K. Chesterton:
"Germany is a powerful, beautiful and fertile inland country, which can only find the sea by one or two twisted and narrow paths, as people find a subterranean lake. Thus the British Navy is really national because it is natural; it has cohered out of hundreds of accidental adventures of ships and shipmen before Chaucer's time and after it.
But the German Navy is an artificial thing; as artificial as a constructed Alp would be in England."
--G.K. Chesterton, "The Barbarism of Berlin"
@@Edax_Royeaux It isn't that the Germans were not capable of a good navy, it is that they were not a seafaring nation the way the British, Dutch, Spanish, Portuguese etc. were who relied heavily on trade and navy thus being naturally better at commanding ships. German commanders seemed to have an innate fear of challenging the British navy because they knew how tough and fierce the British fought on the seas. A similar fear crept over the German army whenever American planes flew over.
The point Chesterton made is that naval power was natural for Britain being an island and not-natural for Germany which was largely an inland nation with only a few ports mostly on the Baltic which is not like the open seas of the Atlantic.
Chesterton's point about building an Alp in Britain is apt. You could build a tall mountain in England like one in the alps but it would not be natural. It would have a presence, of course, formidable even, and there would be climbers but they would not be experienced at climbing as the Germans who have the Alps, for instance.
England is renowned for its bravery and prowess on the open seas; Germany not so much largely, as Chesterton pointed, due to geography.
When I saw Tik's video, how the Germans were so skittish at engaging a few destroyers, Chesterton's "Barbarism of Berlin" immediately came to mind.
@@Edax_Royeaux I concede that you have made valid points causing Chesterton's quote to be superficial and unfounded, inapplicable to the 2nd World War and from your post, even the 1st World War.
I was relying on impressions from a stereotype that the British navy had the Germans intimidated to such a degree they were nearly paralyzed to act. Looks like I was wrong.
Quite a great video.
German "fleet in being" was defeated by British "torpedoes in being".
Am I watching a Drachinifel video here or is it my Britbong-Dyslexia acting up again?!
Great video as always LazerPig... TIK!
Great; now I think I'll ask Drachinifel about a potential Stalingrad breakout, sea if he can do as good a job.
Oscar Kummetz seems to be a relatively incompetent (or unlucky?) officer. He also commanded the Blucher when it was destroyed by obsolete Norwegian defenses at Drøbak Sound
That might have effected his confidence.
He decided he didn't like cold water.
One ship was scrapped, at least. One of hte Gneisenau turrets formed the basis fo the coastal defence fort at Austrått at the mouth of the Trondheim Fjord. You can visit it today.
A good resource Admiral Samuel Eliot Morrison USN naval history of WWII. It is 15 volumes, but volume 1 is the battle of the Atlantic. Thank you Lewis.
considering the oil situation just as you mentioned previously, every german fleet operation is very valuable and costly. Therefore, the loss is very deadly for german navy and german since such kind of operation can not be put into action for only limited times.
Huge Pope fan. I agree 73 North.
After returning to Altafjord, emergency repairs to Admiral Hipper were effected, which allowed her to return to Bogen Bay on 23 January 1943. That day, Admiral Hipper, Köln, and the destroyer Richard Beitzen left the Altafjord to return to Germany. The three ships stopped in Narvik on 25 January, and in Trondheim from 30 January to 2 February.[After resuming the voyage south, the ships searched for Norwegian blockade runners in the Skagerrak on 6 February before putting into port at Kiel on 8 February. On 28 February, the ship was decommissioned in accordance with Hitler's decree. By the end of 1944, the ship was due for another overhaul; work was to have lasted for three months. The Soviet Army had advanced so far, however, that it was necessary to move the ship farther away from the front, despite the fact that she had only one working turbine. On 29 January 1945, the ship left Gotenhafen, arriving in Kiel on 2 February. She entered the Germaniawerft shipyard for refitting. On 3 May, RAF bombers attacked the harbor and severely damaged the ship. Her crew scuttled the wrecked ship at her moorings at 04:25 on 3 May.
Barents Sea is an action that’s illustrative of the respective navies surface warfare doctrines. One: if you attack British destroyers, be prepared to suffer greater casualties than you anticipated and/or failing to achieve your objective. Two: the constant hampering of your fleet with orders to avoid taking losses and fuel shortages restricting time for exercises results in extremely timid commanders and lack of effective co-ordination between ships, let alone small task groups.
Was Dan Pinaar captain of the Hyderabad?
TIK why did the 6th army incircle starlingrad and the sufer less casualtys and would prevent the six army from being in circled and capture Zhukov
"Austen's Orwell", what a literary combination of Captain and shipname. If this was not real, one would think it was made up.
First! Also, will there be a video on the English Civil War?
First! You know, I hadn't ever considered the English Civil War before. I think you're the first person to ever suggest it. People have wanted me to cover the American Civil War though
Hey TIK, will you talk about the nazis that escaped to Argentina someday? Thank you for the content, I really learned a lot.
It was exactly scenarios likes this where it badly hurt the KM that they didn't have a single useful light cruiser.
Aye. Their nearest thing thereto, was too fragile for operations in the North Sea nor Atlantic, and comically vunerable to... basically anything XD.
I get angry when some of my Russian acquaintances claim lend lease didn't take off until 1943. Don't they know of the casualties in the Arctic Ocean?
Does the sun even rise above the horizon in those waters at this time of the year?
The german surface fleet high command was the most incompetent part of the Third Reich except Wilhelm Marschall who got promptly side lined once showed actual talent for command.
Were they really that bad or were they just so outnumbered by the allies?
@@georgea.567 They sent out Scharnost&Gneisenau to raid merchantships. Battlecruisers doing cruisers,submarines job. Also kept them in France where RAF bombed them 0-24. Sacrificing most of their destroyers in Norway for no reason. Not hunting down Prince of Wales immiedatly after Hood sank,and not returning back to Germany and the list goes on.
@@georgea.567 They were indecisive,rigid hated any sort of creativity and lacked iniative
@@vindicare9636 Them keeping Scharnhorst and Gneisenau in France I don’t think was actually that bad of an idea. It kept them as a threat to the Atlantic shipping routes putting more strain on allied capital ships. Also most of the RAF bombs came nowhere near the ships while bomber command took horrendous casualties on those missions. And also the Bismarck not following Prince of Wales makes sense to me as well. The Germans really could not afford to lose Bismarck. They had sunk Hood already so might as well leave while ahead. Plus the Bismarck had already been hit by Prince of Wales’ fire. They were happy to leave instead of risking more damage.
@@georgea.567 All of Prince of Wales main guns jammed in the fight,she was hit multiple times from Prinz Eugen,Bismarck, hunting her down was easy task,also she was illuminated by Hoods wreckage.. Germans should have sink her,call it a day and return to Germany instead of follow through the mission. As for Scharnhost and Gneisenau:How can they raid convoys when allies knew 0-24 their postions from air,french resistance. Bombing them also kept them in their docks. Which meant no convoy raiding at all was off the table. The germans ships sat in their dock doing "fleet in being" or even less.
I was really confused when I heard Force R. I thought I might have clicked on the wrong video, lol.
Point about the man who had his legs blown off and was worried he'd only be given aspirin (11:22) : "Petty Officer Cook" would appear to be a rank in the RN and not the man's name. I would be interested to know if this man's identity could be tracked down.
TIK! You've developed new talents! Sea warfare! Great job!
Ah, Tirpitz had just finished being overhauled and wasn't ready for action yet. She missed all the fun. Bismarck's sister couldn't catch a break :)
I'm sorry... I must of missed the part about Tiger Tanks. What the hell is going on??
I'd like to know what happened to the captain of the Hyderabad. He should have been cashiered. At the least he should never have been given another command.
Very interesting. It didn’t help that in 1941 the km sent the Bismarck into the NA with a single heavy cruiser the Prinz Eugene. And it didn’t help that Tirpitz was either stuck in Norway or was still being trained.
If I've learned anything from RUclips naval videos, it's that you better not underestimate WWII Royal Navy destroyers. Their commanders and crews were skilled par excellence and often fanatically brave. Just look at HMS Glowworm for another example.
There's very little on RUclips about this battle. Thanks for making a video about it.
In your honest opinion if WW2 hadn't broken out in Sept. 1939 could Germany have pulled off PLAN Z in its entirety?
And how would all the other European powers like UK, France, Italy and USSR have responded?
Drach on RUclips has a video about Plan Z
Nazi Germany’s economy couldn’t support Plan Z. It was largely bankrupt by Sept 1939, why Germany invaded Poland to plunder its resources. Even the major naval powers in WW2 with the infrastructure such as Britain and the US couldn’t meet their planned naval expansion. The US made none of its planned Montana class battleships.
Perhaps, but the British would have outbuilt them even harder than before WW1. Germany going for battleships before WW2 was a grave strategic error. Without control of the sea, battleships are nothing more than useless, although extremely fascinating products of a country's engineering ability.
No! The Germans would never have sufficient assets or fuel to complete with the British.
1) The Z-plan required many more years, like only planned to finish in 1948 or something
2) Germany sustained it prewar war economy through debt, a debt that threatened to become unsustainable. Germany had to conquer new territories from 1938-1939 onwards to sustain its war economy through a "plunder economy". So probably no Plan Z without plunder and conquest.
3) If Germany really started to build up a high seas fleet, other powers (mainly Great Britain) would ramp up their fleet building as well, so even when Plan Z is finally finished, it doesn't guarantee naval superiority.
Dear tik; hello from Pittsburgh pa.
Non related but.
I hope you'd do something on American companies involved or investing in hitlers war machine.
I'm a die hard Ford fan and have heard lots of things that state henry directly supported hitler,then again I found all he did was give Porsche a faulty turret ring design (yet Ford built 50% of all bombers for the allies ) any input would be great. Even if it breaks my heart
Nice report. Please go on in this new area of TIK sea and hopefully also air reports during WW2. To be honest, after a some of the Stalingrad episodes, I lost my interest. For me 5-10 of the usual well documented TIK episodes per topic, would be enough to keep me interested for a next episode.
One thing to add is I believe the Battleship HMS Anson was at sea in the Arctic during this battle, although too far away to intervene. I don’t know if the Germans m were aware of her presence but that may have added to their caution.
Could you revisit the Dodecanese campaign of 1943? Apparently the last strategic victory for the Germans.
Tik great video, if you considering more naval battles in the future it would be awsome I'd you did a collaboration with Drachinifel he's a fellow youtuber who has a naval history channel and if I'm not mistaken is also based in the UK.
Drachnifel doesn't include politics in his video's i believe. Considering TIK's earlier video's about that topic, they might collide.
Along with Dr Alex Clarke, who has done a substantial amount of primary source archival research on the RN (particularly with regard to the destroyer force).
@@TimDutch Think Drachinfel is more likely to continue with his collaborations with Alexander Clarke and the Operations Room..
@@dogsnads5634 Indeed. I don't see how collaborating with TIK would benifit him.
The crew of the Hyderabad are clearly reincarnated crewmembers of the Kamchatka.