It’s truly a shame she went down, even more so that her wreck has been desecrated by Chinese scrappers, what a tragedy

I can't look at this video because I know what happened to Repulse. Also because she was the sister ship of HMS Renown the ship my late father served in. Japanese torpedo bombers trapped both Repulse and Prince of Wales off the coast of Sumatra from memory. Repulse went down with nearly all hands they had absolutely no protection from the air a ghastly blunder. Dad loved Renown she WAS a lucky ship and despite being badly damaged survived the war. She was 34 000 tons DW and had a speed to match. RIP Dad I miss you to this very day.

@kevinrby1982

2 жыл бұрын

Thank you for that storie, my grandfather was a USN Seabee in the Pacific Theatre. Because of him I have had a lifelong fascination with early twentieth century naval technology and warfare, inparticular the Battlecruisers of the Royal Navy. I have built a 1/350 scale model of HMS Hood and I am currently working on a 1/350 scale model of HMS Repulse. When HMS Repulse is finished I am going to build a 1/350 scale model of HMS Renown. Thank you again for sharing.

@jeffreygraham1273

2 жыл бұрын

Repulse & Prince of Wales sunk in South China Sea Dad served aboard Repulse , very proud of the ship & after being rescued by destroyer returned to Singapore: Later captured Banka Straits & POW on Sumatra till August 1945

@andreos2004

Жыл бұрын

Thank you sharing. We in the Indonesian Consulate General Houston Texas are now remembering what happened in these naval wars 81 years ago. May your father rest in peace

My great uncle "Sandy" went down with her, I am luck enough to have a picture of him sitting in front of the big guns on the front, he is the spitting image of my cousin.

To all those who have commented about the folly of sending these 2 ships out without air cover, HMS Indomitable was intended to provide that, and could at least have been flying standing patrols, which would have greatly helped to break up the Japanese attacks, there being no fighter cover of their own. How effective this would have been, will remain one of WW2s great unknowns. However, once Indomitable had gone aground in the Caribbean, the fate of Force Z was sealed. Tennant knew it, Leach knew it, and almost certainly Tom Phillips, too. Just want to add, this is a superb production, better than anything the terrestrial channels could put out, and can't wait for part 2.

@ArmouredCarriers

2 жыл бұрын

It more and more likely this was a post fact attempt to buck pass. No documentation survives indicating Indomitable was ever intended to go. Illustrious and formidable were to be sent January

@Chartdoc62

2 жыл бұрын

@@ArmouredCarriers Interesting! Isn't it the case that, whether intended or not, even if Indom hadn't run aground off Kingston Harbour on November 3, she wouldn't have completed her work-up and been able to join Force Z before PoW and Repulse were sunk.?

@ArmouredCarriers

2 жыл бұрын

@@Chartdoc62 Correct. She was going to go back to the UK to finish her working up (usually a long list of repairs and fixes after such an extended test run). At that point whe would enter the carrier "pool". But by then the Illustrious and Formidable would have been ahead in the queue in the availability stakes. Which is why they were the ships named as being contemplated as being sent in January.

@admiralbeez8143

2 жыл бұрын

HMS Indomitable wasn't available yet, but HMS Ark Royal was. Send her with Force Z and Ark's Fulmars will rip the unescorted Bettys to shreds. Though, we must remember than nothing happens in a vacuum, so if the RN have sent a carrier, the Japanese will send one too. They have eight or nine carriers and only six went to Pearl Harbour.

@ArmouredCarriers

2 жыл бұрын

@@admiralbeez8143 Ark had been allocated. But then she was sunk. And that's why the idea of carrier cover for Force Z remained little more than a Whitehall thought bubble ...

Great piece on an often unreported WW2 event. Well put together and interesting to hear from those who were there, Thanks for your efforts!

Sending these two magnificant ships to the Far East without adequate air cover was a failure in leadership as well as the collapse of the Singapore defenses soon after.

This was the best by far of several accounts Ive watched or listened to about Force Z. Thanks. Cant wait for part 2. Sure Ill learn much more about those tragic events. 👏👏👏

@HighlanderNorth1

2 жыл бұрын

🤔 Yep. Its so annoying when you hear about "stolen valor", where people falsely claim to have served in the military, or to dishonestly claim to have family members who heroically fought in famous wars, just to garner respect and sympathy! But I can tell that ^these guys were really there! I can tell, because my youngest grandson served on the HMS Repulse during this attack, and he told me all about it in 1943 when I next saw him! At 47 years old in 1941, my grandson was the oldest member of that crew.... 😁

I had a great uncle on the Repulse. He was a Commander in charge of either the port or starboard 4" AA guns. He survived the sinking and wrote a personal account, but died months later from damage to his lungs caused by the bunker oil in the water.

Brilliant episode again, Armoured Carrier. And sad. So sad that "Repulse" and "Prince of Wales" went off on a raid without air cover, and were sunk. On anti-aircraft guns, I read in "Battleship Sailor", a memoir of a USN sailor from "California", that "Warspite" stopped at Pearl Harbor during the summer of 1941 on her way to be refitted at the Bremerton Navy Yard. A "Warspite" sailor visited "California", where the author, Ted Mason, played host to a "Warspite" sailor. Mason was proud of the spick & span "California". The "Warspite" sailor looked around, and immediately said, "Not enough ack ack. Not enough by half".

Thank you so much for creating this video.Many people for years have wondered what happened to these fine gentlemen .

Richard Smith's observations regarding the general feeling about POW are interesting, and not something I'd come across before. If such was the case, then she had a rough deal. Put to sea against the Bismarck without being fully worked up, and plagued by the well-known technical problems with her quad turrets, she wasn't really in a position to continue action against 2 German capital ships, with her bridge wrecked, and half her main armament out of action. Likewise, the first Japanese torpedo hit on her port quarter was game over from that point on, and almost identical to the one which sealed Bismarck's fate. If anything, she was an incredibly unlucky ship.

@simonpitt8145

2 жыл бұрын

There is some merit in what you say. However the POW and the Hood were only up against one German capital ship ( Prinz Eugen was only a heavy cruiser and not a particularly good one at that ). Also POW was lucky in the Bismarck engagement as three of the four hits the German ship scored failed to explode, therefore causing much less damage. Poor German munitions industrial production there. Same thing happened when Scharnhorst scored two hits on Duke of York and countless U-boat torpedoes also failed - saving HMS Nelson. Also the POW was about to be torpedoed by the Prinz Eugen at the moment she disengaged and turned away. The German admiral decided not to pursue and thereby saved POW, which could count itself lucky to have survived that battle.

@waverleyjournalise5757

2 жыл бұрын

@@simonpitt8145 Prinz Eugen was the one who scored the hit on PoW's bridge and killed everyone but Captain Leach. Without Hood, the chances of only one ship against two are vastly decreased - it doesn't matter if only one is a capital ship if distances are closing and torpedoes are in the water. It doesn't sound as if Richard Smith's assessment was particularly fair - after all, despite PoW's malfunctioning guns, she managed to mission kill Bismarck (by holing her fuel tanks and damaging her generating capacity) and did in fact go back to engage Bismarck again (a while after the first engagement), although scoring no hits that time.

I have visited Kranji war cemetery in Singapore a couple of times. There are a few graves of sailors from HMS Repulse and HMS Prince of Wales there.

@mjlee5617

2 жыл бұрын

Interesting. 1 place I should visit one day

@riazhassan6570

2 жыл бұрын

The British were still in the ‘ gunboat diplomacy’ state of mind which had served them well in the nineteenth century. The idea was that aggressive patrolling with impressive weapons would be enough to frighten off relatively backward nations. But, of course, Japan was actually better than any other power for the first year or so in the Pacific region. This was one of the many miscalculations and blunders of that war

@midnightteapot5633

2 жыл бұрын

@@mjlee5617 It is beautifully kept . Walking distance from Kranji MRT too but my god its hot there in the afternoon!

unforgivable to send these ships to far east without air cover.

What amazing footage and interviews. Great video!

This channel is amazing!! Thank you very much!!

Excellent work. I know this is a labor (labour?) of love, and it's much appreciated.

@ArmouredCarriers

2 жыл бұрын

If you mean hard work, then yes. It is quite time consuming. But there is plenty of satisfaction in hearing these words, weaving them into a narrative, and finding as appropriate footage as possible to match.

@fantabuloussnuffaluffagus

2 жыл бұрын

@@ArmouredCarriers Thanks for the hard work! I love hearing the voices of the men who were there. The film you overlay is the icing on the cake.

@Redhand1949

2 жыл бұрын

@@ArmouredCarriers Your channel is great. You deserve MANY more subscribers.

Looking at my model of HMS Repulse while listening. What a great surprise to see this uploaded.

Well done indeed. Thank you for creating these videos

Being told that the Japanese would be a pushover was a mistake as when Repulse was in South Africa the head of Government Smutz told those assembledthat the Japanese having been at war for many years against the Chinese were a formidable enemy & that many aboard would not return : Prophetic words indeed! My dad was on Repulse & survived only to be captured later in the Banka Straits, POW on Sumatra till wars end :

My mother’s school donated hurley sticks to this ship. Many of the crew were from Cork, Ireland and liked to play hurley while ashore. They also wrote letters to the crew. They were heartbroken when they heard of the sinking.

Great video. As always. I should just cut and paste my comments, really. I actually just read the ‘Engage the Enemy More Closely’ chapter on force Z. A bit out of date as a history but pretty much gets it right. Tends to. blame absolutely everything on pre war disarmament and Geddes Axe. I doubt tat even a refit and upgrades to the AA suite would have saved them, though. One thing I got a strong sense of from ETEMC was the constant meddling of Churchill especially with the Navy rather than leaving it to Pound and ‘their Lordships’. Churchill seemed to think he always knew better. Consequently he lost the navy a lot of men and ships. Maybe necessary in the bigger picture but I doubt that was it. Anyway, great to hear these voices.

@ArmouredCarriers

2 жыл бұрын

There are two extremely good recent books covering the context of these events (with the advantage of time-locked document releases etc). One is "The Royal Navy In Eastern Waters". The other is "Rising Sun, Falling Skies".

@geordiedog1749

2 жыл бұрын

@@ArmouredCarriers I’ll check them out. Ta:)

@iainharris3611

2 жыл бұрын

@@ArmouredCarriers Both books ordered - they look excellent - many thanks for the recommendation. I've always been fascinated by the loss of these ships and the fall of Singapore.

Few people remember that Captain "Bill" Tennant was the beach master (I think that's what it was called), responsible for the successful Dunkirk Evacuation. As Vice Admiral Tennant he was also later in charge of amphibious landings on the South West coast of Madagascar, which served to prepare the RN for the later Normandy landings.

One can see these old films and get a sense of awe, but to hear the stories which I assume are the sailors themselves not voice actors makes it hit home. As a young man I imagine this world of been a exciting and terrifying real life and death experience. As a father now of 2 sons how proud and scared to send them off to war. Never knowing if they would come back.

@ArmouredCarriers

2 жыл бұрын

Yes, these are Imperial War Museum interviews with the veterans - recorded mostly in the 1970s through to the 2000s.

I saw a report that an hour after the Japanese planes had started their attack the captain of Repulse asked what signals had been sent from the flagship. He was told none. So he radioed Singapore asking for air support. Fighters were on standby, got there within the hour by which time both ships were sinking. Had they been called initially they could have attacked the bombers before either ship was hit. Phillips always claimed aircraft were no menace to a well handled ship , but learned otherwise.

@tvgerbil1984

Жыл бұрын

The battleships of Force Z were the first two maneuvering capital ships ever sunk by air power alone. Admiral Phillips probably was not the only senior officer in the Royal Navy who did not fully understand the threats in the air at that early stage of the war.

@chitlika

Жыл бұрын

Good luck stopping 200+ japanese aircraft with a few next to useless Brewster Buffaloes the real problem for the RN was they didnt have any decent aeroplanes the seafire not being generally available until early 1942 it was only with the arrival of new American aircraft the RN had a fighting chance

When the Royal Navy Admiral thought He could go alone with No Air Cover. Poor Men ...

Great accounts, fascinating to hear. Thankyou.

I read a very detailed account of this story in Martin Middlebrook's excellent book 'Battleship'. I never thought I would see and hear such footage.

These two warships were lost out pure leader incompetence and a lack of appreciation of Japan's airpower. Why sacrifice two battleships for a colony on the other side of the world from Great Britain? Leaders knew full well how easy it is to lose a capital ship without balanced airpower. Reminds me of the one-way mission of the Yamato.

One of the biggest blunders Churchill made, next to Gallipoli, two beautiful ships of the Royal Navy with thousands of lives, went to die in the ocean because the High Command was too arrogant to listen.

@aivinni9838

2 жыл бұрын

if you're talking about the ships themselves dying, I would like to remind you that the HMS renown was scrapped following WW2

@aceapache4914

2 жыл бұрын

@@aivinni9838 I know about both of the ships quite well, and while I do firmly believe that most ships should be turned into museums, I understand why Renown and all of the other ships of the Royal Navy (save for Belfast) was sent to scrappers torch.

@aivinni9838

2 жыл бұрын

@@aceapache4914 yeah, the things you do when you're broke...

@aceapache4914

2 жыл бұрын

@@aivinni9838 Indeed, especially after you;ve been through a world war and spent your money building weapons of war

Thanks for this 👍

Should have had Hermes and a dozen folding Martlets along. the IJN bombers from FIC had no fighter escorts and would have been torn apart by any monoplane fighters. The FAA received its first folding Martlets in the spring of 1941. Hermes' lifts were too small to fit the Fulmar or non-folding Sea Hurricanes, so the first folding Martlets should have been rushed to South Africa where Hermes was located autumn 1941. If Hermes wasn't to be sent, Phillips should have at least told RAF Malayan Command where he was going so that RAF Buffaloes could be sent, which according to Bloody Shambles he omitted to do.

My dad Harry Warburton was on the repulse, but ended the war on Minesweeper Salamander

Walrus vs Swordfish w/floats. A flying boat as opposed to a float plane I think.

Indomitable was not available, but Hermes was. Although it could carry only 20 planes and most of them were Swordfishs Hermes could have made a significant difference. It also would have been possible to embark Buffalo fighters as they were available as well. And that could have prevented most of the damage. Those two capital ships were lost due to poor leadership, nothing else.

@ArmouredCarriers

2 жыл бұрын

Hermes could carry about 12 aircraft at this stage. And the RAF Buffalo fighters were not the naval variant (arrestor hooks etc not being built into them).

@red.5475

2 жыл бұрын

@@ArmouredCarriers Was Hermes capable of handling Fulmars?

@idonthavealoginname

2 жыл бұрын

Absolutely correct on the poor leadership.Britain was led by Etonian idiots who lived in the past which caused poor leadership, poor training and disastrous outcomes for the British fighting men.

@michellebrown4903

2 жыл бұрын

@@idonthavealoginname some things never change eh ?

@anonymusum

2 жыл бұрын

@@ArmouredCarriers Thank you. I read that Hermes could carry 21 to up to 25 planes by deck parking. And that didn´t change, but the carrier had only 12 Swordfishs at that time due to a plane shortage. - Yes, the hook is a point I forgot - shame on me! But stil, the Buffalos were deployed on the Malayan Peninsula. They also could have been embarked, started on Hermes and landed on their airfields. I mean, Adm. Philipps received the news about Pearl Harbor and he must have realized that this could be a suicide mission that required unusual methods.

It was a purely political decision to send Force Z to the Far East, but it was planned they would eventually link up with US and Australian ships. A Carrier HMS Indomitable, was assigned to Force Z, but it ran aground and needed repair causing it to arrived late. The ships were attacked by 60 Japanese Medium Bombers, though the ships put up a gallant fight, without air cover their fate was inevitable.

@admiralbeez8143

2 жыл бұрын

T'was another of Churchill's interfering mistakes. The military wanted to send 500 fighters and a proper fleet to Malaya, but WC said no.

@marcusosmaston411

2 жыл бұрын

Indomitable was never going to be out there by early December, the grounding may have delayed her but she was meant to join in the Spring of 1942 at the earliest. Given the date of the grounding and location off Jamaica, even if she'd been meant to leave the next day it's almost impossible to physically steam there in time for December 7. The balloon was expected to go up, but not so soon - just days before the sinking Repulse had been sent then hastily recalled from a 'show the flag' cruise down to Australia.

@billballbuster7186

2 жыл бұрын

There were no 500 fighters available to be sent to Malaya. Also the Royal Navy was fully deployed in the Atlantic and Mediterranean. It was the worst possible time for Britain after fighting the Germans and Italians alone since the start of the war. The were no spare resources to properly defend Malaya, Australia and New Zealand once Japan entered the war.

@jjhantsch8647

2 жыл бұрын

While the Prince of Wales had a respectable AA protection suite of armaments, the Repulse and the four destroyers had virtually none. They were sitting ducks.

@billballbuster7186

2 жыл бұрын

@@jjhantsch8647 That is true, PoW was a modern ship. The othes in the force were old ships the RN did not have time to modernize.

*interesting video, liked & subcribed!!!*

My father in law was color Sargent major Royal Marines and served on repulse, Jack Allen ,he was on shore leave when she was sunk .

How the Navy personnel thought the Japanese Navy would be a walkover....very much the same sentiments in 1982 with Argentina. When they talk of needing an Aircraft Carrier - HMS Hermes was in Ceylon at the time with HMAS Vampire...She was equipped with Fairey Swordfish though. Despite her anti aircraft shortcomings HMS Repulse put up a valiant fight against the Imperial Japanese Air attack and only when they attacked from multiple different vectors simultaneously did she get hit with torpedo's that would sink her...she had dodged and evaded plenty of bombs and torpedo's before going down. Very impressive all things considered. Its not surprising HMS Renown survived the war...clearly a very good class of ship with a fine crew

@charleslyster1681

2 жыл бұрын

Not sure what your point is about Argentina? I don’t think they were underestimated at all; they were taken very seriously (hence the sinking of the Belgrano) but were eventually beaten.

Many thanks for this. Very enlightening to hear the survivor accounts. I never realized the ships were in action in harbour during the bombing of Singapore! Also, had to smile at the story of Captain Tennant being the superior officer to Catpain Leach, with PoW being ordered to form astern of Repulse, to the chagrin of Admiral Phillips' staff. Wonder why he wasn't flying his flag? Did Tennant not know he was aboard?

@ArmouredCarriers

2 жыл бұрын

The Admiral flew from Colombo to Singapore, and also to Manila, to meet with all the other regional commanders and "get up to speed" before his command arrived. And yes - it's those little pieces of context such as the rivalry between ships that make the story much more complete. And human.

@michaelevans205

2 жыл бұрын

Phillip's staff were aboard Prince of Wales but he himself was not; he had flown out, I believe, and joined Force Z on it's arrival in Singapore. There's a well known photo showing the Admiral, (derogatarily referred to as 'Tom Thumb' due to his lack of stature and rather self important manner, by the navy as a whole) greeting PoW as she approached the dockside.

@ArmouredCarriers

2 жыл бұрын

@@michaelevans205 He also flew to Manila to confer with General Macarthur and Admiral Hart. The fall of the Philippines is the other half of this story.

LOVES THE SOUND OF HIS OWN VOICE

From what I've read on line (so usual caveats) PoW had been equipped with extensive AA radar, but by the time it reached Singapore, it was no longer functional. RAF personnel were tasked to repair everything but it would take a week, and Phillips wasn't prepared to wait that long. Phillips should ofc have requested air cover once the ships had been spotted. As Hermes, I doubt it could operate fighters, only Swordfish, due being slow and small.

@ArmouredCarriers

2 жыл бұрын

Her air warning radar was functional. Not her AA guidance radar. After deploying, Phillips received several "aircover impossible" messages from Singapore. That could explain why he didn't bother to call for the support he had prepared before leaving.

@maladroit5376

2 жыл бұрын

@@ArmouredCarriers thx for the clarification.

The Prince of Wales only bought time when she escaped further damage and possible destruction at the hands of the Bismarck and Prinz Eugen, due to German Admiral Lütjens breaking off the pursuit. She was commissioned in January 1941 and was sunk less than a year later. Lessons learned from the Bismarck showed the vulnerability of ships with inadequate! armament against aircraft and the destruction of Force Z demonstrated this again because of insufficient amount of AA defense of both ships and not enough screening destroyers.

Repulse and Renown had been Sister-ships. That's why an exchange can be pardoned.

Renown and Repulse were the best-looking ships in the Royal Navy. Capt. Tennant, 'Dunkirk Joe', invented the torpedo beat in this tragic affair, dodging some twenty torps before finally being hit. And yes, in my opinion Repulse's AA armament was inadequate. Badly. Capt. Leach of the Prince of Wales felt awful after the Bismarck affair, feeling his ship was a bad-luck boat, especially after being roasted for 'not displaying enough aggression against the enemy' versus the Bismarck. He went down with the ship when it sank. 😞 The whole point of this stupidity was Churchill believed the two ships' presence would overawe the Japanese, in the same manner that Bismarck had done. But the Japanese were not phased by this. Churchill very badly underestimated them, as they had total air dominance by the time Force Z had arrived. AND the Japanese had their whole Navy there too. If what happened to the Bismarck was any indication, Churchill didn't see it.

@jandejong2430

2 жыл бұрын

fazed

@benlaskowski357

2 жыл бұрын

@@jandejong2430 ?

@redskindan78

2 жыл бұрын

Not the entire Japanese Navy, but enough. The IJN's "strike force" went to Pearl Harbor. The IJN must, as well, have had some ships available to deliver invasion troops to the Philippines, plus small forces to Guam and Wake. The Japanese were very active in the first two weeks of December, 1941.

@benlaskowski357

2 жыл бұрын

@@redskindan78 Very true. And I assume they thought their strategic air assets would handle anything else. What IJN assets did they have in that area? The BC Kongo is mentioned.

1941 was a tough year for the Royal Navy loosing the veterened Repulse ,the brand new Prince of Wales and the world famous Hood

The attitude of the politicians and the officer elite concerning the quality of the Japanese forces made it certain we would get a pasting. Lucky the Indian forces saved our bacon

@ArmouredCarriers

5 ай бұрын

I think you'll find racism was rife at all levels of society, then as now.

This Battlecruiser was not a Lamb, "Qui tangit frangatur"... was her Motto and later was Japon really breaking...(!)

Rice paper. I remember watching a documentary and a Force Z vet said, "they ain't made of no rice paper."

Apparently both wrecks/war graves have been desecrated by pirates scavenging for valuable metals. Disgusting.

@asterixdogmatix1073

2 жыл бұрын

Yes and Battle of the the Java Sea wrecks.

Very simple. They should have never been sent in the first place.

@johnfrancis2215

2 жыл бұрын

Seem to think Churchill was to blame if I remember correctly

@model-man7802

2 жыл бұрын

@@johnfrancis2215 Being first sea lord he knew ships.I think his fault was underestimating the Japanese and their Capabilities.

@nnoddy8161

2 жыл бұрын

They should have been sent them in the early-mid '30s like Britain had promised. That may have deterred the Japanese from their expansion-ism.

@ 2:43 the bow has a cargo? net draped across it. Is that an anti-fowling measure? I've not seen that before. Was this fitted whilst transiting known minefields and subsequentialy removed?

@ArmouredCarriers

2 жыл бұрын

Parvanes. Torpedo-shaped drogues connected to the bow by wires. These are designed to catch mines and deflect them away from the ship.

I believe the ships were attacked by land based Japanese aircraft. Had there been a British carrier present then the Japanese bombers would have been vulnerable and likely at least driven off with some losses. RN aircraft at that time were not modern and would have been no match for aircraft from a Japanese carrier. Such a terrible waste of life and two fantastic ships.

Pom poms were no good apparently due to dodgy ammo maybe more Bofors?

@ArmouredCarriers

2 жыл бұрын

Pom Poms were in mass production since the early 1930s. Bofors plans had only been smuggled out of Sweden in 1940. Some were in use. But mass production hadn't geared up. Even the US didn't get large numbers of them until 1943, as is evidenced by their AA loadout and performance in 42.

@roybennett9284

2 жыл бұрын

@@ArmouredCarriers ah I see,well the quad 0.50 would be useless , and as said the pompoms had bad ammo,all so the information I've read suggests.

@ArmouredCarriers

2 жыл бұрын

@@roybennett9284 Yes, the ammo problem thing is interesting. It seems to have mainly afflicted Prince of Wales. Repulse gun crews report nothing out of the ordinary ... The ammo may have been an old batch (some of it at this stage was WW1 vintage). But PoW also had terrible ventilation, so perhaps it had deteriorated under the heat and humidity.

This is about Repulse but they are showing the Renown at 1:30

@ArmouredCarriers

2 жыл бұрын

I had hoped it would fit the context where they compared Renown's rebuild with the condition of Repulse.

@bigwerve

2 жыл бұрын

They were sister ships and were pretty much the same before the renown refit

Wonder how it'd of gone if Hermes or Indomitable had been there? Not much different I'm sure, but having a few hurricanes in the sky might have helped.

@ArmouredCarriers

2 жыл бұрын

The best comparison would be the convoys to Malta. It was often a similar scenario - a handful of Fulmars/Martlets/Hurricanes up against large numbers of torpedo and high-altitude bombers.

@geordiedog1749

2 жыл бұрын

Penned a reply and then saw AC had beaten me to it. Anyway, what he said!

It all very well to point fingers at Churchill & play the blame game but the UK Government at that time was a Wartime Coalition Government. Strategic decisions were made following advice & the Cabinet was advised by the Admiralty that The Repulse & Prince Of Wales could do the job. As usual with armchair warriors armed with hindsight all their battles end up with victories & losses are someone else's fault. Try to put things & events into perspective. It may help the hindsight warriors understand how things happen & how things go wrong.

Nice ship - Wrong war ? 😪

@siegfriedkr6975

2 жыл бұрын

Mit 4 Worten wurde alles gesagt ! 🙂

Lots of this footage shows her with a pretty low/wet foredeck. Pretty common among fully loaded and fueled capitol ships of that time I’m guessing.

@ArmouredCarriers

2 жыл бұрын

That, and the RN - right up until HMS Vanguard - insisted that ships should be able to fire their guns forward at flat elevations ... That meant no bow flare.

@admiralbeez8143

2 жыл бұрын

Good point. If you look at HMS Nelson and Rodney you can see their very high freeboard in contrast.

Brave souls balls of Steel

Excellent vid. Will there be a follow up vid on the Prince of Wales?

@ArmouredCarriers

2 жыл бұрын

Eventually. I have the material. But I'll probably do it about this time next year. To keep variety in the mix.

@Boatswain_Tam

2 жыл бұрын

@@ArmouredCarriers Looking forward! Keep up the good work. These docus are excellent!

@ArmouredCarriers

2 жыл бұрын

@@Boatswain_Tam Very time consuming, though. As it's a hobby, I'll rarely be able to put out more than one a month.

@conradwood6700

2 жыл бұрын

I remember tape recording the memories of one Captain Arthur MN who was in the carrier that went aground in the West Indies , Kingston Roads, and never made it to Malaya. See IWM collection. Hope my recollection of this is correct.

We not only fought the enemy, we also fought our own inept, class heavy war dept. the mistakes, the bungling, the biggest disgrace in British military history( Singapore), fighting with bi planes whilst japan had real fighter planes, not enough deck armor on the Hood, not enough air defense on our ships, poor equipment etc. etc. To sacrifice 2 capital ships to make a point is insanity, we very nearly lost the war thanks to our inept upper class idiots, a lot more must have been covered up!

@davidrowsell4603

2 жыл бұрын

Hood was not sunk because of lack of deck armour. The Japanese were at least as class ridden as us! Difficult to imagine any government would prioritise Malaya over home defence. We would definitely have lost the war without Churchill and Monty, who were both as upper class as possible!

@davidgalbraith7367

2 жыл бұрын

@@davidrowsell4603 you would have lost the war without the Americans, you bunglers.

@MarkFarrington-hb2ne

5 ай бұрын

Absolutely spot on and we had a political leadership prior to the outbreak of war that was ok with Hitler if he didn't interfere with their colonial investments

What’s everyone’s thoughts about the “what if there was a fleet carrier with the ships” ? The Japanese bomber, it seems, had no fighter cover of their own. Would it have made a difference, or would it have resulted in an aircraft carrier laying on the bottom along with the POW and Repulse?

@ArmouredCarriers

2 жыл бұрын

The closest parallels are the various Malta convoys. Often one carrier versus Italy and Germany's long-range bombers, with little or no fighter cover (until they got close to Sicily and Sardinia).

@redskindan78

2 жыл бұрын

These Japanese bombers had no armor. That allowed Butch O'Hare to shoot down five or six that were closing in on USS Lexington in February, 1942, and to chase away the other four or five Japanese. However, the Japanese sent many more than ten aircraft against Force Z, and had even more they could have sent. I keep wondering about this. Ark Royal was built without an armored flight deck, perhaps (Drachinifel says "certainly") to fight in the Pacific. Maybe with aircraft from Ark Royal, Repulse and PoW could have survived. That could have made a difference unless someone squandered Force Z in another action in January or February, 1942...

Did not stand a chance what the hell

We went into the war with no tanks capable of beating what the Germans had. We built new Battleships that were treaty based. While our enemies couldn't give a toss about treaties. We were lucky the Germans didn't have more Bismarck type Battleships.

@dovetonsturdee7033

2 жыл бұрын

Except, of course, that the King George V class battleships were superior in design to the Bismarcks.

@YARROWS9

2 жыл бұрын

@@dovetonsturdee7033 Whit are you on big/yin.

@dovetonsturdee7033

2 жыл бұрын

@@YARROWS9 Simply posting a few facts. Bismarck had thinner armour, laid out to the outdated, incremental, pattern ( the KGVs and Nelsons had All or Nothing armour), a lighter weight of broadside, and an outdated, low angle, secondary armaments of 5.9 inch guns. Furthermore, four twin turrets added unnecessarily to the length and displacement of the ship.

@YARROWS9

2 жыл бұрын

@@dovetonsturdee7033 Bismarck seen off two British capital ships with it's shit guns. Bismarck couldn't be sunk by two British Capital ships and a few cruisers with it's shit armour.

@dovetonsturdee7033

2 жыл бұрын

@@YARROWS9 Bismarck sank a 20 years old warship, was so badly damaged by a new but semi-operational battleship, that her admiral to was obliged to abandon his mission. Prince of Wales, by the way, received minor damage only. Three days later, a 15 years old battleship reduced Bismarck from a battleship to a helpless target in about 20 minutes, after which two battleships left her a blazing, immobile, listing, charnel house, slowly sinking by the stern. Whilst this was taking place, Bismarck achieved precisely no hits on either Rodney or King George V. You should read a few book on Operation Rheinubung.

If Force Z had an aircraft carrier with them, they would never had been sunk.

@miwky406

2 жыл бұрын

Thank you! Too many people overvalue the power of a carrier on it's own merit, with absolutely no understanding for context. Edit: I made this comment when the above comment hadn't been edited-- The original comment evidently misspoke the OP's opinion, first being worded in a way that sounded like they were stating any attending carrier would have also been sunk. My comment was predicated on that error. My above comment still stands, however without the "thank you", as I see the OP and I actually DO NOT agree after all XD

@alexanderleach3365

2 жыл бұрын

@@miwky406 you're welcome

@andrewvanatta1569

2 жыл бұрын

The newly built carrier HMS Indomitable was supposed to have been part of Force Z, but she hit a reef near Jamaica shortly before she was scheduled to sail to Singapore.

@alexanderleach3365

2 жыл бұрын

@@andrewvanatta1569 That ultimately sealed the fate of Prince of Wales and Repulse

@abbush2921

2 жыл бұрын

The only difference would be the aircraft carrier would have joined them at the bottom of South China Sea .

Well this is fun... :)

Again this shows the Brits were not fully committed to defend Malaya or rather they underestimated the Japanese military.

@ArmouredCarriers

2 жыл бұрын

Option 3, they were over-extended after already fighting in the Atlantic and Mediterranean for two years. Option 4, a combination of all three above.

@evo5dave

2 жыл бұрын

Definitely underestimated the Japanese. The fall of Malaya was a devastating blow to the British. It was already known that air defence was crucial for any fleet but this certainly ended any doubts. There were those who already suggested basing a carrier in Singapore. A single carrier could have made all the difference. It wasn't a lack of commitment: it was a lack of competence.

@SvenTviking

2 жыл бұрын

There was a fully developed air defence plan for the two capital ships, even with Brewster Buffaloes would have had a field day with the unescorted Japanese bombers and Torpedo planes. But the commanding Admiral did not bother to tell the RAF they were sailing.

@evo5dave

2 жыл бұрын

@@SvenTviking Incompetence from start to finish

@redskindan78

2 жыл бұрын

@@SvenTviking I don't know if RAF Brewster Buffaloes could have blocked waves of Japanese bombers from hitting Force Z. Maybe, but the Buffalo might not have had enough endurance to cover Force Z long enough. The Japanese had more aircraft than just these. But maybe several squadrons of Buffaloes could have kept the Japanese dodging as Force Z ran for Singapore. However, as one of the Repulse sailors say, the Japanese might have bombed Repulse and PoW in the harbor. Force Z ideally would have withdrawn quickly toward Ceylon or Australia if they had gotten back to Singapore, but could the RN leave Malaya while the army was fighting the Japanese down the Malay peninsula? Even better if the army had been evacuated rather than staying to be cut off and forced to surrender.

Vídeos interessantes

Japanese - Best trained and equipped fliers no one ever heard of ? 🤨

@derekyuen4773

2 жыл бұрын

They were heard of. Chinese National Airforce and US Flying Tiger mercenary pilots told of how well experienced and dangerous Japanese pilots and their aircraft were. Sadly no one really listened to them or took their reports seriously until it was too late. Carelessness and heavy handed underestimation hurt the Allies in the early part of the Pacific war.

@jasonsmith1143

2 жыл бұрын

@@derekyuen4773 a

@riazhassan6570

2 жыл бұрын

They were just about the best in the eastern theatre during the early months. The Allies had a fair run before they could catch up and eventually surpass them

@jaybee9269

2 жыл бұрын

Look up Saburo Sakai. I think he even wrote a book.

3:14 "The war scuppered that".............rofl

Surely there would have been a copy of Jane's warships floating around to give an indication that Japan was not sending junks and rubbish out to see.

Too many push button historians with huge hindsight

Often wonder what contribution Force Z would have made, had they survived the Fall of Singapore in the other battles - Java Sea, Sunda Strait, Coral Sea etc. The USN had no BBs in early '42 in the Pacific (courtesy of Peal Harbour). Java Sea would have been very interesting had PoW or Repulse been around.

@ArmouredCarriers

2 жыл бұрын

The contingency was they would go to Pearl to join up with the US Pacific Fleet. I guess that could still have happened, as fast carrier escorts.

Part 2 ??????

What is confusing: the German Fleet was tiny at best

@ArmouredCarriers

4 ай бұрын

Yeah. Makes more sense to put Force Z at Scapa Flow and the Home Fleet in Singapore ... But politics and patriotism.

@ArmouredCarriers

4 ай бұрын

Also, Italy was still a factor in 1941.

As was the Hood - A beautiful Inspiration to see - But not modern enough ? 🤔

@alfieroe2915

2 жыл бұрын

Hood was modern enough for ww2. She was sunk in a battle she should never have been sent to in the first place. She wasn't designed to go toe-to-toe with a battleship.

@toveychurchill6468

2 жыл бұрын

she lack the badly needed repair and refit by the time she went to Denmark strait

@vincebenson1215

Жыл бұрын

Sabotaged

A captain went with the ship it was tradition but I don’t think a captain would want to outlive his crew , what a burden

The Japanese were brilliant at hitting stuff , you could not fault them

Perfect theme music! What is it?

@clazy8

2 жыл бұрын

@@Antares2F Thanks!

@conradwood6700

2 жыл бұрын

Georges Bizet: the farandole from the opera L' Arlesienne

@clazy8

2 жыл бұрын

@@conradwood6700 thanks! Someone else had answered, but I forgot, and now their answer is gone. A+

Fog - Fog and more Fog rather Smoke Gernades but I'm sure they tryed it !

So if Ark Royal had not been lost just a short time before would she have been the carrier sent with Prince of Wales and Repulse? Of all the RN carriers she had by far the biggest air group capacity, not that she would have had her full complement at that time. Might she have made a difference, or would it have been the case of one more for the bottom of the South China sea? Would it have been any different if the classic Force H had been sent instead; Renown, Ark Royal and Sheffield reinforced by Prince of Wales and with Somerville in charge not Phillips.

@ArmouredCarriers

2 жыл бұрын

"What if" is such a difficult question ... If Ark Royal was sent, the Japanese would have known. So they would have had to divert a carrier or two from the attack on Pearl, or risk their bombers against unopposed fighters ... as the Italians and Germans had been doing in the Med.

@JuergenGDB

2 жыл бұрын

I Believe you're talking about HMS Indomitable (January 8th ferried 48 Hawker Hurricanes to Sumatra) was to be attached to Force G. Redesignated as Force Z. She had run aground in Jamaica. Needed repairs, a smaller carrier Hermes (20 aircraft) was enroute to Force Z Singapore but was slow. Either way the Japanese held Islands would play havoc to ships without Air cover. 48 Hawkers would have severely done some damage if they had time etc. Interesting enough though if the Carrier was there, the Japanese still had ample forces. x2 Older but massively armed BattleCruisers, x3 Cruisers which ended up spotting the ships with their float planes, and x8 Destroyers. Say the Indomitable was there with their 48 Hawker Hurricanes, Repulse, POW, x4 Destroyers. The Japanese would still have known about the two BB, and the Carrier, as the Japanese had diplomats in S. Africa... which reported to IJ Intel or whoever. That being said, even had the ships been crippled and not sunk, they would have to still repair, and the Japanese had sent the above mention ships to intercept which was probably more powerful than Force Z. It would also be joined later by Cruiser Divison 7 (x4 Mogami Hvy Cruisers), a Light Cruiser, x4 Destroyers of DD group #3 and the Flagship Cruiser Chokai with VA Okawa. Needless to say, that was a suicide run.

@jjhantsch8647

2 жыл бұрын

In 1941 the Ark Royal's fighters were Fairey Fulmars. Their max speed was 438 km/hr. The Japanese G3Ms (level bombers) were capable of 375 km/hr and the G4Ms (torpedo bombers) of 428 km/hr. The Fulmars would have had difficulty intercepting the G3Ms and the G4Ms, with their tail cannon would have allowed single pass attacks and been quite lethal foes in the air. Even a squadron of Fulmars would have had difficulty defending three capital ships with only one having more than a modicum of AA ability. In comparison a Seafire squadron (578 km/hr max speed) would have been much more capable, but they weren't available.

@ArmouredCarriers

2 жыл бұрын

@@jjhantsch8647 This was the same problem faced in the Mediterranean. It was mitigated by the development of radar-based fighter direction techniques. The speed problem was one that would not be overcome before the Corsair, Hellcat and Seafire IIC entered service in any great numbers - another two years away.

@redskindan78

2 жыл бұрын

Illustrious and Formidable had been bashed early in 1941. They were at the US Navy shipyard at Norfolk being repaired...much to Hitler's fury. The RN's fleets in the Mediterranean were short on carriers in late 1941. Thinking about it, the USN flyers were surprised when they met the Zero. Leaders like Jimmy Thach, Butch O'Hare, and Jimmy Flatley eventually worked out tactics that avoided anything like dog-fighting. One was "boom and zoom", by which USN Wildcats would dive on a Japanese formation for a firing pass, recover to regain altitude, and dive again. The other was the "beam defense", by which a section -- a pair of Wildcats -- scissored at the Zeroes. The plane under attack turned and dove while its wing-man turned to fire broadside at the Japanese; then the first plane peeled over its partner to fire again. I imagine it as like crossing your fingers. However, it took until Midway for this to be proven. Ark Royal flyers in 1941 would not have had the experience against the Japanese to develop anything like the "beam defense". As best I can tell, from reading Wikipedia about the Malaya Campaign, the few experienced RAF pilots used tactics they had learned against Germans and Italians, and which failed against the Japanese Army and Navy air services.

It must be noted that Britain and the US pushed JPN too far at that time, putting heavy embargoes on all essential trade to that country. People then observed the sad consequences just like "a cornered mouse will bite the cat" literally. Interestingly my cousin told me JPN has always respected British culture, though. Presumablly, amid the regions being colonized by Western powers, she had to struggle to preserve her independence, desperately!

@ArmouredCarriers

2 жыл бұрын

The embargoes were in response to the invasion of China. And Japanese occupation was not regarded to be liberation by most of Southeast Asia. That came post war, with the collapse of the imperial Dutch, British and American dominions. But there is no doubt that the economic pressures of the sanctions forced the Japanese government to choose between fighting and backing down.

@bobstride6838

2 жыл бұрын

Absolute BS! Japan was intent on subjugation of the East no matter what. It took a long time for them build the forces necessary to achieve this, a lot longer than your timeline would suggest.

@drakron

2 жыл бұрын

@@bobstride6838 Not entirely, Japan was given two choices ... either capitulate to have the sanctions lifted or seize the oil fields. How it got there is a long series of events starting with over 60 years before, this is not a excuse of Japan actions but its not they got to that point without influence of other nations actions, Japan simply got lucky in the sense Western powers focused on screwing China and they modernized and industrialized so they werent such a easy target for bullying, too bad they did exactly the same as western powers towards their neighbors.

@NashmanNash

4 ай бұрын

Oh no,how dare some nations impose embargos on a country that was already making a name for itself by using prisoners and civilians as target practice and roadfill...What is often forgotten..."The japanese" were probably the most racist nation during WWII...in some regards atleast as horrible as the most infamous germans like Mengele

those were desperate days and the japanese had very impressive shipyards.........kudos to the british for not giving up

@yellowpete79

Жыл бұрын

the Americans and Australians saved the Pacific. the Brits did give up.

@thesupremepizza6893

Жыл бұрын

@@yellowpete79 The British fought in Burma, at one point massing over a million soldiers against them. They deployed a further 3 carriers and 5 battleships into the indian ocean, and they even lent HMS Victorious to the US after FDR asked for help where it served as USS Robin. You know things like Radar, it was given to the US in the Tizzard project. The foundations of the Manhatten Project, given to the US in the Tizzard Project. Half the technology the US used was given to them by the UK. The BPF even saw action of Okinawa, where our carriers were hit by Kamikazes, just like US ones. The only difference being our carriers were designed to take damage. It took an hour to repair our carriers after Kamikaze hits, where it took the US over a year in drydock.

@yellowpete79

Жыл бұрын

@@thesupremepizza6893 They sent their ships In late 1944 or 1945, a bit late. Even without radar, you cannot deny it was the US and Australians. Even in Burma, the useless theatre.

Squadron Leader Tim Vigors had his squadron of Brewster Buffalo fighters on standby from the time the two Battleships left Singapore Harbour. Squadron Leader Vigors was waiting for the call from Captain Tom Phillips of The Prince of Wales and it never came. Captain Tom Phillips never believed any aircraft would actually be able to sink a battleship with bombs or torpedoes and his pig headed stupidly sank two of our best battleships trying to prove it. General Percival the General who led the defense of Singapore had previously written a book proclaiming that Singapore was completely indefensible ........... and so it was...

@ArmouredCarriers

2 жыл бұрын

That's the general narrative promoted by those who were still alive and able to defend their reputations. That squadron was there as it had been organised by Phillips. But once at sea, Phillips repeatedly received warnings from Singapore that "air cover was impossible". These transmissions are on record. So, chances are, he thought air cover was impossible and didn't ask accordingly. (Singapore meant air cover was impossible at Singora as it was out of the Buffalo's range from Singapore as forward airfields had already fallen - but didn't specify that detail)

All this air power stuff it was so early ,what would they use swordfish?

@johntudek

10 ай бұрын

Because they performed well at Taranto Bay?

@jimbolxvi6428

9 ай бұрын

Actually the carrier fighter was the Fairey Fulmar and the Grumman Wildcat was entering service with the RN in Fall 1941 but the Force was revised after Indomitable ran aground and that took the carrier air cover away. Sadly they never requested air cover from land bases either which could have made a huge difference.

Maybe if the British government had held off declaring war on Germany they would fitted AA......

luckily the western allies had deep pockets and plenty of natural resources

The UK and the crew of HMS Indomitable should count themselves lucky that she did not make it into theater in time, or else she would probably have been lost too. Armored decks don't stop torpedo's.

@ArmouredCarriers

2 жыл бұрын

It's now apparent she was never even considered to be sent. It seems the tale of her supposed allocation was part of a post disaster attempt to salvage the reputations that sent Repulse and PoW out alone. It sounds better to blame the captain of a carrier that grounded, than blaming the Admiralty or Churchill.

@chaptermasterpedrokantor1623

2 жыл бұрын

@@ArmouredCarriers Why am I not surprised? Shit always flows downhill.

@admiralbeez8143

2 жыл бұрын

@@ArmouredCarriers Indomitable was sent, arriving off Singapore in January 1941 with a load of RAF Hurricanes.

@ArmouredCarriers

2 жыл бұрын

@@admiralbeez8143 Yes. But while there is documentary evidence of the effort to try and find a carrier to send with Force Z, none name Indomitable. At no time was she ordered to join that force. She was brand new. Acting as a ferry carrier was the only service option she had before March 42. Her crew needed time to get familiar with a new ship, train, drill etc. She was younger than the inexperienced PoW. It seems HMS Formidable and Illustrious were the ones closest to being assigned - and they would not have arrived before January. Then they rammed each other.

The walkover was by the Japanese. They understood airpower while the British had old pressurized water reactor mentality not understanding molten salt thorium reactors were cheaper, safer and better than their old armored battlewagons.

@waverleyjournalise5757

2 жыл бұрын

Following this school of thought, I'd love to know what you think of the Yamatos

@toveychurchill6468

2 жыл бұрын

you tell that to two German cruisers, Bismarck, Italian ships in Taranto all sank with or with the assist of British aircraft. The British was focusing and prioritising on the war in the west, could barely spare more ships or aircraft to the east

Britain's most overlooked mistake was doing all it could to help create carrier aviation for the IJN in Sept. of 1921 with the Sempill Mission. They sent 30 instructors to Japan for a year and a half. Why arm a potential enemy especially one without democratic roots? They were obviously a very warlike feudal society. Also how could the Royal Navy think the IJN was useless when at the Battle of Tsushima in 1905 they all but completely destroyed a Russian naval force of 38 ships! I think hubristic overconfidence and racism was a big factor.

@Aubury

2 жыл бұрын

Was not Sempill later found to be passing on secrets to the Japanese?

@TheDkeeler

2 жыл бұрын

@@Aubury Yes I see Sempill should of been charged with passing on secrets to the Japanese but was off the hook because of his ties to royalty.

@hisdadjames4876

2 жыл бұрын

Wise enough but, apart from ex colonies, most of UK’s allies are, or have been, warlike feudal societies without democratic roots! We just wanted Japan on our side, as they had been previously and to which they returned subsequently. Maybe they were part of the strategic check on Russia? For sure racism and hubris played their part. 👍

@TheDkeeler

2 жыл бұрын

@@hisdadjames4876 Right another example the enemy of my enemy is my friend.

@seanmoran6510

2 жыл бұрын

We were allied to Japan until America threatened a naval arms race against us if we didn’t leave that alliance as part of the Washington Treaty. America didn’t want us and the Japanese in the pacific together

British arrogance at its finest.